Society ot Petroleum Engineers

SPE 30295
Experimental and Numerical Simulations of a Novel Top Down In-Situ
Combustion Process
R. Coates, S. Lorimer', J. Ivory, Alberta Research Council
'SPE Member
Copyright 1995, Sooiety of Petroleum Engineers, Inc,
This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Heavy Oil Symposium held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 19-21 June1995,
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s), Contents of the paper, as presented,
have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subjected to correction by the author(s), The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the
Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members, Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words, illustrations may not be copied, The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom
the paper is presented, Write Librarian, SPE, P,O, Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U,S.A. (Facsimile 214-952-9435),
ABSTRACT
Anew in-situ combustion strategy, the top down process, is currently
under detailed laboratory study. The process, aimed at overcoming
some of the problems that have restricted the successful application
of in-situ combustion in oil sand and heavy oil formations, involves
the stable propagation of a combustion front from the top to the
bottomof a reservoir, exploiting gravity drainage of the mobilized oil
to a lower horizontal well.
Operational parameters that have been investigated and presented
here include: air injection flux, degree of pre-heating, internal steam
flood pre-heating and injection of normal air versus injection of
oxygen enriched air.
To compliment the experimental investigation, the thermal numerical
simulator STARS has been applied to the in-situ combustion process
by incorporating reaction kinetics for Athabasca oil sand. A
successful history match of an experimental test is presented
accompanied by a discussion of application of the model to field
scale.
INTRODUCTION
In-situ combustion has long been recognized as having the potential
for being an economical thermal oil recovery process in heavy oil and
oil sand deposits. The energy required to supply heat to the reservoir
compares quite favourably with steam. The estimated cost! to place
References and illustrations at end of paper
1 GJ of energy in a 7 MPa reservoir is $2.6-$4.4 using steam and
$1.0 for in-situ combustion using air (assuming $2/GJ fuel cost,
capital cost not included). In-situ combustion is not compromised by
large heat losses to overburden and underburden in thin formations
or by high heat losses from the well bore to the overburden in deep
formations as is the case with steam injection. Also in-situ
combustion theoretically has important applications in reservoirs
containing bottom water and as a follow up process to waterflooded
and steamflooded forrnations
2

Previous in-situ combustion field projects, however, have been less

successful than steam, primarily because of the difficulty in
controlling the combustion front advancement. The customary in-situ
combustion operation of the past involved the injection of an oxygen
containing gas into a central vertical injection well surrounded by a
number of vertical production wells (typically as part of a larger
pattern of injection and production wells). Combustion was initiated
near the injection well and horizontally propagated radially outwards,
aiming to drive the mobilized oil towards the production wells. The
problem frequently encountered was that the combustion fronts
tended to advance erratically with the vertical sweep constrained by
gravity override of the displacing gas and the areal sweep reduced by
preferential flow to one well of the pattern. Injected oxygen,
overriding the combustion zone, created problems at the production
end and the overriding hot steam and combustion gases did little to
heat the formation ahead of the burn zone. The displacement
geometry of the process requires that the mobilized oil be displaced
ahead of the combustion front into the colder immobile oil,
increasing oil saturation and further reducing mobility , with the
limited producibility of the vertical production wells unable to
alleviate the situation.
487
2 EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF
A NOVEL TOP DOWN IN-SITU COMBUSTION PROCESS SPE 30295
Incorporating horizontal wells into an in-situ combustion operation
creates new prospects. Horizontal wells have higher producibility
than vertical wells and should not restrict the displacement of the oil
ahead of the front, providing improved sweep efficiency. This
premise was convincinglydemonstrated in the laboratory by Greaves
et al
3
,4 and field tests
5
,6 with horizontal wells placed in existing in-situ
combustion operations, have shown promising results.
Some of the most successful applications of in-situ combustion have
been in the Suplacau de Barcau7,8 field of Romania, in reservoirs that
contain a slanted orientation. The combustion front is initiated
through gas injection at the top of the slant and the front advances
down slope. Production wells, placed at the lower end of the incline,
collect the mobilized oil. Adaptation of this burning down concept to
oil sand and heavy oil deposits is the premise behind the top down
process assessed in this paper.
The conceptual strategy of the top down in-situ combustion process
involves the stable propagation of a high temperature combustion
front from the top to the bottom of a heavy oil or oil sand reservoir.
Combustion is initialized and maintained by injection of an oxygen
containing gas at the top of the reservoir, with mobilized oil draining
to a lower horizontal producer well. Most of the injected oxygen is
consumed in the high temperature combustion reactions at the
combustion front. Oxygen that passes unreacted through the front,
reacts in lower temperature reactions to produce a layer of coke
which is subsequentlyburned as the combustion front moves through.
Hot combustion gases and thermally cracked light ends mix with the
oil ahead of the high temperature front, heating, upgrading and
driving the oil by a top down gas drive. Gravitational forces help
drain the oil to the horizontal producer.
Although the top down process holds great promise, there are
potential problems which must be addressed before it can be
considered for the field. The high bitumen saturation and viscosity of
virgin heavy oil reservoirs must be overcome to obtain initial
injectivity. Methods to obtain injectivity need to be assessed as does
the ability to successfully apply the process to reservoirs that have
alreadybeen partiallydepleted by a previous recovery operation. The
stable advancement of the combustion front through the reservoir and
the efficient draining of the mobilized oil to the producing wells both
need to be proven.
3-D EXPERIMENTS
The top down in-situ combustion process is currently under
investigation at the Alberta Research Council using a combination of
3D physical simulation in combination with numerical modelling.
Experience gained from previous 1D combustion experiments and
numerical model predictions were used to design the 3D experiments
Results from the seven 3D experiments are presented in this paper.
Experimental Setup
Schematics of the experimental set up and cylindrical test packs are
shown in Figures 1 and 2. The cylindrical oil sand pack, 29 cm in
diameter and 40 cm in height, was prepared by manually tamping
Athabasca oil sand into a stainless steel sheath. Each end of the pack
was sealed bywelding a stainless steel end cap to the sheath. All tests
except Test 2, incorporated a water soaked central frac sand
communications path extending from the top to the bottom of the
pack. Table 1presents details of each test pack.
Thermal measurements within the pack were obtained with an array
of thermocouple rods inserted throughout the pack. A series of
electrical guard heaters, cemented in place around the stainless steel
sleeve, reduced heat losses during the experiments. The electrical
heaters were also used in Tests 1 to 4 to pre-heat the pack.
Measurements from the thermocouple array were displayed in real
time on a computer screen as a colour animation, enabling direct
determination of the progress of the experiment.
Injection fluids (water, steam and gases), at a controlled rate and
temperature, were injected through a slot (0.6cm long x 0.3 cm
wide) representing a vertical injection well, in the middle of the top
end cap. An electrical igniter was located next to the gas injection
point.
Production was from the bottom through a 22 cm long, 0.8 cm wide
screened slot, representing the horizontal well. The produced fluid
flowed through a back pressure regulator maintained at 1.9 MPa
before entering a low pressure (0.3 MPA) separator. Gas from the
separator was cooled to remove any condensable components and
then flowed through an on-line gas chromatograph for analysis.
Liquid from the separator was collected in jars and analyzed for
%bitumen, '%water, and %solids. Properties such as asphaltene and
saturate concentrations, and bitumen density and viscosity were
determined for selected samples. The pH of produced water samples
was also measured.
Beginning in Test 7 a controlled flow of cooling water was circulated
through the production well to maintain the produced fluids below
150 cC. This was to keep the produced fluids below the low
temperature oxidation range, a condition which had previously caused
premature plugging of the production well.
The sealed oil sand pack was enclosed within a steel pressure vessel
that was filled with an insulating material. Nitrogen gas pressure,
applied to the annular region to simulate overburden pressure, was
maintained at a constant 1.0 MPa above the injection pressure by a
regUlating/relief system. The pressure vessel was heated by
surrounding steamcoils and additional thermocouples attached to the
inside and outside of the pressure vessel aided heat loss estimation.
488
SPE 30295 R. COATES, S. LORIMER, J. IVORY 3
Experimental Procedure
All the tests had a period of pre-heating prior to commencing air
injection. Tests 1 through 4 were heated by the external electric
heaters and Tests 5 through 7 were pre-heated by injection of steam
into the pack. During the pre-heating phase of Tests 1 to 4, helium
gas was passed through the pack to maintain open communication.
Once air injection was started, the electrical igniter was turned on at
approximately 180 watts and turned off when a temperature of 400C
was observed in the pack. This was considered as the start of ignition.
Tests 1through 5 had normal air (21 % 02) injection and Tests 6 and
7 had oxygen enriched (50%00 air injection. The injection flow rate
was continually adjusted depending on state of the combustion front
and the composition of produced gases. Monitoring of the computer
animation of temperatures indicated if combustion was decreasing
and more oxygen was necessary. Experiments were continued until
either the pressure drop became prohibitively high (plugging) or
oxygen composition of produced gases became high (gas channelling
and combustion front extinguishing).
A summary of the ultimate operating strategy for each test is
presented in Table 2.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Tables 3, 4 and 5 summarize the experimental results obtianed from
the tests. Details of the results are discussed in the following text.
The degree offormation pre-heating, required to obtain rapid ignition
was investigated in Tests 1 to 4 by varying the amount of heat
supplied by the external guard heaters. Figure 3 displays the general
trend obtained by the investigation, with the degree of pre-heating
represented by the average temperature of the top 10 cm of the pack.
The time required to obtain ignition increased dramatically as the
temperature decreased, with an average temperature near 200 cC
required to produce rapid ignition. Note that the data point displayed
for Test 3 is an estimation. In the actual test, when ignition was not
attained after several hours, air injection was stopped and pre-heating
was continued. Several attempts were made to recommence air
injection. However ignition was not obtained until an average
temperature of about 200 cC was obtained.
The air injection flux is an important operational parameter in the top
down process. The flux must be sufficient to supply the oxygen
required to sustain combustion. However too high a flux may
jeopardize the stabilizing effect of gravity which is desired in the top
down process. Test 1used an air (normal, 21 %oxygen) injection flux
of 5 std. m
3
/m
2
/h. At this injection flux, ignition was achieved, but
after approximately 4 hours the combustion front began to extinguish
as shown in temperature contours of Test 1 at 1hours, 4 hours and 8
hours after commencing air injection (Figure 4). Air is injected into
the formation through a slot and as the combustion front expands
outward radially, the injection flux needs to be continuously increased
to supply sufficient oxygen to sustain the combustion. For the
experimental configuration the outward progress of the combustion
front is limited by the radius of the pack and it was determined in
subsequent tests using normal air, that a flux of approximately 10 std.
m
3
/m
2
/h was required. In the field, the continual increase of the
required injection flux will be more pronounced as the combustion
zone expands radially. The outward limit of the combustion zone is
a subject of interest for the numerical model and will ultimately
determine the vertical interwell distance.
The importance of supplying a communications path to assist in
initial injectivity was assessed, in Test 2, by air injection into a pre-
heated pack that had no communications path. Air injection flux
started at 10 std. m
3
/m
2
/h and although ignition was obtained, the
pressure drop across the pack increased to an extremely high value
of2.4 MPa.. The high pressure drop, caused by the creation of an oil
bank ahead offue combustion front, ultimately caused fue combustion
front to become unstable and channel through to the production well,
(Figure 5). The presence of the channel enabled injected oxygen to
pass unreacted through to the production well. High oxygen
concentrations combined with temperatures near 200C, caused low
temperature oxidation of the oil and resulted in plugging the
production well.
Figure 6 presents the final recoveries obtained from the external
electrically preheated tests. Test 1 had the lowest recovery because
of insufficient oxygen supply. The absence of a communication pafu
in Test 2 resulted in significant oil (11 %) being produced during the
pre-heat which contributes to a high final recovery. Test 3 exhibits
a very slow production rate because of the low pack temperature
throughout the test. The significant increase in production rate upon
co-injection of water in Test 3, at approximately 17 hours, shows that
this mode of operation may have important potential to improve
recovery efficiencies. Although having initial slow oil production
rates, because of a low initial temperature, Test 4 produced the best
final oil recovery during the in-situ combustion period. The
combination of suitable injection flux and communication path
created conditions giving a fairly stable advancement of the
combustion front and drainage of the mobilized oil. Co-injection of
water in Test 4 did not show the large jump in production rate as in
Test 3. This mode of operation may only show an advantage when
commenced in a formation that has not been significantly depleted.
Figure 7 presents the viscosities measured for selected production
samples from fue tests. It is apparent that the experimental top down
combustion process produces an oil with a viscosity reduced by about
a factor of four from the native oil. Note that steam injection during
fue pre-heat period of Tests 5, 6 and 7 created an initial produced oil
of much higher viscosity than the native oil. However this also
eventually decreased as the combustion period progressed. Analysis
of the produced fluids indicated that the reduced viscosities were
related to decreased asphaltene and increased saturate content.
The purpose of Tests 5 to 7 was to examine combustion achieved in
489
4 EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF
A NOVEL TOP DOWN IN-SITU COMBUSTION PROCESS SPE 30295
a reservoir that has been previously depleted and pre-heated by a
steamprocess. Steaminjection was continued into the packs of Tests
5 to 7 until the average temperature of the top IOcm reached
approximately2QO C. At that time air injection was commenced and
the igniter turned on. Time to attain ignition is longer with steam than
with the external electricalpre-heating(Figure 3). This is likely due
to the increased water saturation caused by the steam injection.
Despite significant depletion from steam injection (oil recoveries
prior to air injection were 6%, 25% and 13% for Tests 5, 6, and 7
respectively), enough fuel remained to sustain combustion. Athabasca
oil sand contains an initial solid hydrocarbon component (up to 1.8%
of total oil sand weight in the oil sand used, given in Table I as initial
coke) which may remain behind after a steam process. This initial
solid material can account for as much as 50% of the fuel reported for
combustion of Athabasca oil sand. Lighter oils may not contain this
component and may not exhibit the same behaviour.
To minimize the pressure drop during the steam pre-heat it was
decided to increase the permeability of the communication path for
these tests. The permeabilityof the communications path used in Test
5 , 135 11m2, proved to be too high. Heating during the steam
injection was prirnarilyin the region closely surrounding the path and
once combustion was achieved, the front moved rapidly through the
communications path to the production well. Figure 8 displays a
temperature profile of the Test 5 pack, showing the high temperature
zone reaching the production well within 2 hours after commencing
air injection.
Lower permeability communication paths, 19.5 11m2, used in Tests
6 and 7, produced improved areal heating and did not result in the
front rapidly advancing through to the production well. However,as
the experiments progressed, the combustion front in each test,
ultimatelypreferentially advanced down one side of the pack (Figure
9). Pre-heating of the pack by steam injection appeared to promote
the channelling of the combustion front. This is evidenced in the
steam tests by the higher percentages of injected oxygen passing
unreacted through the pack (Table 4).
Despite channelling and extensive oil depletion during the steam pre-
heating period, additional recoveries, shown in the insert of Figure
10, were obtained during the combustion period of the Tests 6 and 7,
that are comparable to Test 4, the best of the externally pre-heated
tests. Additionally the ratio of cummulative injected oxygen to
bitumen produced during combustion also approach similar values,
shown in Figure 11 for Tests 4 and 7. Starting ratios differ because
the oil is already being produced at the commencement of air
injection in the steam case whereas little oil is being produced in the
external electric case.
Tests 6 and 7 also utilized enriched (50% O
2
) air to obtain a lower
overall injection flux (4 std. m
3
/m
2
/h) but at an equivalent oxygen
injection flux used in previous tests. The use of enriched air had no
detectable effect on the oil production. However, use of enriched air
showed evidence of greater oxygen consumption in low temperature
oxidation (LTO) reactions. The apparent hydrogen/carbon (HlC)
ratios, which are an indication of the degree of LTO and should be
approximately 1.5 for the burning of Athabasca bitumen, were
slightly higher during combustion for Tests 6 and 7 than other tests.
Values of 1.1-1.7 (Table 4), were obtained for normal air tests and
values of2.4-2.7 were obtained for enriched air tests. High values for
apparent HlC ratios were also observed for all tests prior to ignition
and when the unreacted oxygen had channelled through to the
production well.
For all the tests reported in this paper the viability of the top down
process is threatened by the eventual channelling of the combustion
front through to the production well. Channelling can be clearly seen
in the temperature profiles as well as the post run pack profile, shown
in Figure 12 for Test 7. The degree of channelling was affected by
overall injection gas flux, the permeability of communication path
and bydepletion byprevious steaminjection. Channelling of the front
through to the production well results in large amounts of the it*cted
oxygen passing unreacted through the pack, leading to uneconomic
O/bitumen ratios and potential problems at the production end.
If the mobilized bitumen does not efficiently drain away from the
combustion zone, stable advancement of the combustion front will
not occur, negating the conceptual advantage of the process.
Evidence that the oil is not being displaced from the burn z o ~ 1 e is
encountered in the excessively high (compared to published values
9
)
fuel loads obtained in the experiments (Table 1). Literature values
quote the fuel loads in the range of 24-48 kg fueVm
3
reservoir,
however experimental values were greater than 100 kg/m
3

Additionally, a material balance of the oil and coke, shown in Table

6 for Test 7, indicates that a sizable amount of initial oil is being
converted to coke and being burned, in this case 19% of the original
bitumen was converted to coke of which 75% was burned. Similar
values were observed in other tests. The large amount of oil being
consumed in the combustion process further leads to uneconomical
0
2
/bitumen ratios. Because the experimental packs were composed
of actual Athabasca oil sand and the height of the pack was only 40
cm, capillary forces within the pack were comparable to the
gravitational forces. It is hypothesised that this equivalency was
responsible for the mobilized oil not efficiently draining away from
the combustion zone, ultimately leading to the channelling. In the
field, where gravitational forces are more dominant, it is anticipated
that with proper operating strategy, channelling will not be caused
from this situation. To test the hypothesis, future experimental
simulations are planned where the gravitational forces will be scaled
to be dominate over the capillary forces.
NUMERICAL SIMUIJATIQN
Numerical simulations of the experimental tests were performed
using the CGM model STARS by incorporating a reaction model for
490
SPE 30295 R. COATES, S. LORIMER,' 1. IVORY 5
in-situ combustion of Athabasca bitumen compiled by Belgrave et
al.
lO
The reaction model is a consolidation of individual kinetic
studies on thermal cracking
l
!, low temperature oxidation (LTO)12 and
high temperature oxidation (HTO) of coke
13
and uses a pseudo
component approach to characterize the oil. In the model the
following reactions are proposed:
Thermal Cracking :
(1) Maltenes .... 0.327 Asphaltenes
(2) Asphaltenes 83.223 Coke
(3) Asphaltenes 37.683 Gas
LTD:
(4) Maltenes + 3.439
2
.... 0.473 Asphaltenes
(5) Asphaltenes + 7.588
2
.... 101 .723 Coke
HTO:
(6) 0.811 Coke + 02.... 0.811 Gas + 0.46H
2
0
Stoichiometric coefficients for the above reactions are determined
from estimates of the molecular weights of the pseudo components
(Table 7).
The rate of material conversion in the above reactions can be written
as:
where:
C
t
=Concentration of reactant I
C
2
= Concentration of reactant 2 ( if it exists)
k = Rate constant
n,m =reaction orders
When oxygen is a reactant, its concentration and reaction order are
defined in terms of the oxygen partial pressure. The rate constant, k,
which is a function of temperature, follows Arrhenius Law:
where:
A, =Arrhenius constant (reaction frequency factor)
E =Activation energy
R = Universal gas constant
T =Temperature
Values for the parameters n, m, A, and E, were derived in the
individual experimental investigations and consolidated by Belgrave.
The values quoted are reproduced in Table 7, converted to units
appropriate for input into STARS. Also given in Table 7 are heats of
491
reaction for each reaction, as well as gas/liquid k values, component
heat capacities and component densities in units required for input
into STARS.
The reaction model suggested by Belgrave recognized that chemical
changes in the oil would results in changes to its density and
viscosity. Changes in the density were obtained by inputting different
densities for each pseudo oil component and changes in the oil
viscosity were derived within STARS based on the mixing rule:
Individual pseudo component viscosities were input into STARS as
a temperature-viscosity table (Table 6), and STARS interpolated
within the table according to the exponential correlation:
!!j= a exp bff
Additionally it was recognized that the formation of the solid coke
component in the pore spaces would produce a restriction to fluid
flow. This plugging mechanismwas accommodated in STARS by the
calculation:
R= 1+ rrstx(Ccoke- so!idmin )
where:
rrst =plugging factor =.00374
Ccoke =Coke concentration (mole/m
3
pore volume)
solidmin =Minimum coke concentration for plugging to
occur = 5350 mole/m
3
pore volume
The mobility of each flowing fluid is reduced by the factor R. Values
for rrst and solidmin were obtained from history matching earlier air-
steam experiments (unpublished).
For the numerical simulation, the cylindrical pack was approximated
bya Cartesian geometryshown in Figure 13. This geometry produced
a model having a similar external surface area to the physical model,
arequirement that was found necessary to closely match heat losses.
A constant pressure producer runs through a bottom central row of
blocks and aconstant volume injector is located in a top centre block.
The igniter is modeled by constant addition of heat to the injection
block and the communications path is characterised by adjusting the
permeability of the central column of grid blocks.
Results of the history match of Test 5 are presented in this paper.
History matches of other tests have been previously reported
l4
Test
5 had a period ofsteam injection prior to commencing air which is
also included in the numerical simulation. Initial conditions for the
simulation were:
Absolute permeability =0.5 11m2
6 EXPERIMENTAL AND NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF
A NOVEL TOP DOWN IN-SITU COMBUSTION PROCESS SPE 30295
Water saturation =0.15
Oil saturation = 0.85
Initial temperature = 33 DC
Initial coke concentration =2200 gmole/m
3
pore vol.
Pressure =2100 kPa '
Communication Path Permeability:
Test 5 = 135 J.Ull2
Figures 14 to 17 summarized results of the history match. Recovery
andpressure drop predictions are very comparable. Predictions of the
temperature profile are not as good. Although the simulation displays
the rapid channelling down the communications path observed in the
experiment it does not duplicate the progression ofa high
temperature zone through the pack. Fine tuning of the
characterization of the communications path in the numerical model
(relative permeabilities and capilary pressure data) could provide a
better match. The outcome of the numerical simulations proved to be
quite sensitive to these parameters.
Formation of coke' ahead of the combustion front, which is an
important aspect of the reaction model, can be observed in Figure 17.
Areas of high contour density in the figure indicate regions of high
coke density. The maximum coke density is on the order of 25000
gmole/m
3
of pore volume. These regions of high coke density occur
ahead front of the advancing high temperature front, a behaviour
which is also evidenced in post run pack appearance, Figure 12,
where coke bands appear along the edge of the burnt channel.
Discussion of Field Scale Simulation
The purpose of history matching experimental tests is so that an
acceptable reaction scheme and other operational parameters can be
obtained for the field scale simulations which will ultimately predict
process performance in the field. However the results obtained from
history matching experimental simulations cannot be used directly for
field scale simulation. The size of grid blocks used in the
experimental history matching are comparable to the actual size of
the combustion front, however field scale grid blocks can be several
magnitudes larger. In the numerical model, temperature is the average
temperature over the entire grid block. It may adequately represent
the temperature in the reaction zone in the experimental case but is
inappropriate to represent the peak combustion zone temperature in
the field case. Because the kinetic reaction model is temperature and
time dependant, application of it in situations with large grid blocks
will not produce reliable results.
The challenge for the researcher is to apply a technique that can
assess the controlling mechanisms of in-situ combustion without
being impaired by fine grid requirements and numerical dispersion.
Several solutions have been offered that consist of either, simplifying
the reaction model
15
, modifying the kinetic parameters
16
or altering
the grid block temperaturesI? The ideal combustion simulator would
incorporate a method ofdynamic localized grid refinement that would
track the advancing combustion front. Although this technique has
been introduced
l8

19
it has yet to be developed to a stage where it can
be used in a commercial simulator.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Employing a suitable air injection flux'is essential to obtaining a
gravity stable combustion front. The injection flux must be
sufficient to supply enough oxygen to initiate and sustain
combustion but not too high as to lead to channelling. As the
combustion zone grows radially, the injection flux must be
progressively increased until outward advancement has reached
its limit.
2. The time to reach ignition after commencing air injection is highly
dependent on the degree of pre-heating. If pre-heating is
accomplished by steam injection, ignition time will take longer
because of the increased water saturation in the formation.
3. After a steamprocess in an Athabasca formation, there is enough,
fuel remaining to initiate and sustain an in-situ combustion
process. Additional recoveries achievable by in-situ combustion
in a formation partially depleted by a steam process, were
comparable to recovery by in-situ combustion process in an
undepleted formation, however the partial depletion of the pack
during the steam pre-heat promoted channelling of the
combustion front through to the production well.
4. Wet combustion shows the potential to increase production rate if
it is commenced before pack has become depleted.
5. The combustion front can be maintained at a lower overall gas
flux with the use of oxygen (50%) enriched air with no effect on
bitumen production. However the use of enriched air shows
evidence of increased oxygen consumption in low temperature
oxidation reactions.
6. The top down in-situ combustion process produces bitumen with
a lower viscosity than the original native bitumen.
7. Provision of a vertical communication path aids in establishing
initial injectivitry, however selecting the proper path permeability
is of utmost importance, as a combustion front can rapidly
advance along a high permeability path.
8. Use of an actual oil sand in the experimental pack, resulted in
capillary forces that were equivalent to the gravitational forces
and as a consequence, mobilized oil did not drain away from the
combustion front. This condition produced high fuel loads, an
excessive amount of fuel being burned and eventually unstable
advancement of the front.
492
SPE 30295
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
R. COATES, S. LORIMER, 1. IVORY
Journal of Petroleum Technology, pp 1154-1164, Oct., 1962.
7
The authors wish to thank members of the ADOE (formally
AOSTRA)-ARC-CANMET-Industry Research program for
permission to present this material. In addition, they wish to thank
Gurdeep Purewal and Kerry Scott for their assistance in conducting
the experiments.
REFERENCES
1. Butler, R. M.: Thermal Recovery of OIL and Bitumen, Prentice-
Hall inc., pp 416-417, 1991.
2. Farouq Ali, S. M.: "Redeeming Features of In Situ Combustion,"
presented at DOEINIPER, Symposium on In Situ Combustion
Practices-Past, Present and Future, Tulsa, OK, USA, April 21-
22,1994.
3. Greaves, M., Tuwill, A A, Field, R. W.: "Horizontal Producer
Wells In In Situ Combustion (ISC) Processes," presented at
CIMIAOSTRA Technical Conference, Banff, Alta, Can. April
21-24,1991.
4. AI-Shamali, 0., Greaves, M.: "In Situ Combustion (ISC)
Processes: Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Horizontal Wells,"
Chemical Engineering Research and Design (UK), Trans
IChernE, Vol. 71, Part A, May, 1993.
5. Morgan, R. J.: "Can Horizontal Wells Inject Life Into an Old
Combustion Project?," presented at 5
th
Petroleum Conference of
the South Saskatchewan Section, Regina, Sask., Can., oct. 18-20,
1993.
6. Ames, B. G., Grams, R. E., Pebdani, F. N.: "Improved Sweep
Efficiency Though the application Of Horizontal well Technology
In Mature Combustion Project, Battrum Field, Saskatchewan,
Canada," presented at SPE/CIM/CANMET International
Conference on Recent Advances in Horizontal Well Applications,
Calgary, Alta., Can., March 20-23, 1994.
7. Aldea, G., Turta, A, Zamfir, M.: "The In Situ Combustion and
Industrial Exploitation of Suplacu De Barcau Panonian Field in
the Socialist Republic of Romania", 4
th
International Conference
on Heavy Crude and tar Sands, Edmonton, Alta., Can., Aug. 7-12,
1988.
8. Carcoana, A, Machedon, V. c., Pantazi, I. G., Petcovici, V. c.,
Turta, A. T.: "In Situ Combustion - An Effective Method to
Enhance Oil Recovery in Romania," 11
th
World Petroleum
Congress, London, UK, 1983.
9. Alexander, J. D., Martin, W. L., Dew, J. N.: "Factors Affecting
Fuel Availability and Composition During In Situ Combustion,"
10. Belgrave, J. D. M., Moore, R. G., Ursenbach, M. G., Bennion, D.
W.: "A Comprehensive Approach to In-Situ Combustion
Modelling," Paper SPEIDOE 20250 presented at SPEIDOE 7
th
SyrnposiumonEnhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa, OK, USA, April
22-25, 1990.
11. Hayashitani, M., Bennion, D. W., Donnelly, J. K, Moore, R. G,:
"Thermal Cracking of Athabasca Bitumen," OIL Sands of
Canada-Venezuela, CIMSpecial Volume 17, pp 233-247, 1977.
12. Adegbesan, K 0., Donnelly, J. K., Moore, R. G., Bennion, D.
W.: 'LowTemperature Oxidation Kinetic Parameters for In-Situ
Combustion Numerical Simulation," paper SPE 12004 presented
at 58
th
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San
Francisco, CA., USA, Oct 5-8, 1983.
13. Thomas, F. B., Moore, R. G., Bennion, D. W.: "Kinetics
Parameters for the High-Temperature Oxidation of In-Situ
Combustion Coke," J. Can. Pet. Tech., pp 60-67, Nov.lDec.,
1985.
14. Ivory, J., Lorimer, S., Redford, D., Nzekwu, B.: "Development of
a Top-Down Combustion Process," presented at the AOSTRA
Conference"Oil Sands- Our Petroleum Future", Edmonton, Alta.,
Can., April 4-7, 1993.
15. Kumar, M.: "Simulation of Laboratory In-Situ Data and effect of
process Variations," paper SPE 16027 presented 9
th
SPE
Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, San Antonio, Tex., USA,
Feb. 1-4, 1987.
16. Marjerrison, D. M., Fassihi M. R.: "A Procedure for Scaling
Heavy-Oil Combustion Tube Results to a Field Model," paper
SPEIDOE 24175 presented at SPEIDOE 8
th
Symposium on
Enhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa, OK, USA, April 22-24, 1992.
17. Coats, K H.: In-Situ Combustion Model," Soc. Pet. Eng. J., pp
533-554, Dec., 1980.
18. Onyekonwu, M. 0., Pande, K, Ramey, H. J., Brigham, W. G.:
"Experimental and Simulation Studies of laboratory In-Situ
Combustion Recovery," paper SPE 15090 presented at the
California Regional Meeting, Oakland, CA., USA, April 2-4,
1986.
19. Ewing, R. E., Lazarov, R. D.: "Adaptive local Grid Refinement,"
paper SPE 17806 presented at SPE Rocky mountain Regional
meeting, Casper, WY., USA, 1988.
493
8
Table 1. Experimental Pack Details
Test Pack Composition! Est. Saturation Communication path
# Mass Bit. Wat. Coke
2
So Sw Sg Dia. Sand Perm.
kQ
% % % cm mesh um.
1 52.5 12.65 1.45 1.5 0.79 0.09 0.12 0.6 20-40 50
2 52.7 12.30 1.95 1.8 0.77 0.12 0.11 N.A. N.A. N.A.
3 50.8 12.90 1.05 1.3 0.80 0.07 0.13 0.6 20-40 50
4 53.7 12.60 1.50 1.5 0.79 0.09 0.12 1.0 20-40 80
5 50.9 15.13 0.90 0.57 0.90 0.05 0.05 1.3 20-40 135
6 50.8 15.30 1.49 0.32 0.89 0.09 0.02 1.3 60-70 19.5
7 48.5 15.48 0.71 0.28 0.89 0.09 0.02 1.3 60-70 19.5
I-The packs for Tests 1-4 were prepared from a different batch of oil sand than Tests 5-7.
2_A solid material initially present in oil sand that is not soluble in toluene but contributes to fuel load by burning at high temperature.
Table 2. Experimental Test Operating Strategies
est 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Total Run Time (11) 32.8 44.2 30.5 46.2 11.2 28.4 32
ypeof Pre.heat Electric Electric Electric Electric Steam Steam Steam
f'!'e.heat Period (11) 5.6 22.6 9 29.1 6.6 8.6 10
op Temperature at Start of
208 212 129 164 178 198 207
f\ir Iniection (OC)
lr'imeTo Obtain Ignition (11) 0.08 0.17 8 3.2 1 1.45 2
bxveen in Injection Gas (%) 21 21 21 21 21 50
1\verage Gas Injection Rate 0.4 0.46 0.63 0.68 0.32 0.42 0.39
kg/h) (Target) (0.4) (0.8) (0.8 (0.8) (0.35) (0.35) (0.35)
puration Of Gas Only
27.2 21.6 11.1 12 4.6 10 12
lliection (h)
Puration Of Gas.Steam
. .
10.4 5.1
.
9.8 9.3
njection (11)
Table 3. Oil Production
Irest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Final Recovery (%) 34.8 48.2 59.3 51.6 11.0 67.0 57.7
at End
5.2 11.0 2.8 0.0 5.7 25.0 13.0
bf Pre-heat (%)
Bit. Recovery
2 4 13 5 2 5 6
Rate (% OOIPIh)
Max. Bit. Prod.
0.13 0.26 0.85 0.34 0.15 0.39 0.46
Rate (ke!h)
otal Bitumen
2.3 3.13 3.88 3.49 0.85 5.21 4.33
Production (kg)
Pinal Cum. OiBi!.! 1.10 0.74 0.88 0.78 0.44 0.69 0.92
Pinal Cum. 1.36 0.96 0.92 0;81 1.23 1.11 1.21
1 _ Includes bitnmen produced during preheat - Based on cumulative 02
injected
2_Does not include bitumen produced during pre-heat Based on
cumulative O
2
injected
Table 4. Produced Gas
Irest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Max. CO
2
(mole %) 16;6 17 20.7 16.2 11.4 34.8 33
Max. CO (mole %) 2.5 2.4 3 5.3 6.1 7.5 6.9
7.2 9.6 >10 9.4 6.3 7.4 6.5
1\vg. CO
2
/CO 5.7 7 8.1 6 2 4.7 5
I\vg HlC Ratios' 1.65 1.76 1.10 1.09 4.54 2.68 2.40
njected O
2
unreacted
15.1 11.5 6.07 14.4 30.8 18.0 19.8
%O.ini,)
njected O
2
forming CO
2
57.5 67.8 86.6 64.9 35.5 50.6 41.3
nd CO(% O
2
inj.)
Reacted O
2
forming CO
2
67.6 83.3 92.1 75.8 51.3 60.0 63.0
nd CO(% O
2
reacted)
'-Average dnring the distinct high temperature combustion period
Table 5. Combustion Parameters
Test 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Burnt Volume
0.0053 0.0079 0.0121 0.0073 0.013 0.0097
m
3
)
-
BumtVolume
20.0 29.9 45.8 27.7 49.0 37.0
(%ofTotal)
.
!Fuel COllSUmed
0;68 0.68 1.20 0.77 0.07 0.81 0.98
ke)
lFuel Content
128 86 99 105 62 102
(kg/m
3
)
.
O
2
Requirements!
2.8 2.5 2.1 2.6 3.7 3.3 3.0
std. m
3
/ke fue))
O
2
Requiremene
2.3 2.2 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.4
(std. m
3
/kg fuel)
, - Based on injected oxygen
2_Based on reacted oxygen
494
Table 6. Bitumen and Coke Material Balance Test 7
9
Bitumen Coke
Initial (kg) 7.51 0.14
Produced (kg) 4.60
1
0.98
2
Final (kg) 1.51 0,33
Difference (kg) 1.40
3
-1.17
4
1 _ Includes an estimated 0.27 kg from produced gas condensate (20% oil)
2 _ Fuel consumed
3 _ Mass of bitumen that was converted to coke
4 _ Mass of coke formed
Table 7. Component Properties For Input Into STARS
Component Water Asphaltene Maltene No Gas (COy) 0
0
Coke
Molecular Wt. 0.Q18 1.0928 0.406 0.028 0.043 0.032 0.01313
(kg/gmo1e)
Liquid Density [1] 1052 2410 - - - -
(gmole/m
3
)
Solid Phase Den. - - - - - - 1.05x10'
(gmole/m
3
)
LiQ. Compres. (kPa-') [1] 9.47xlO- 9.53x10- - - - -
Coef. of Thermal [1] 4.5x10-
4
5.85x10'
4
- - - -
Expansion (OC
I
)
Critical Pres. (kPa) 22107 792 1478 3394 7176 5046
-
Ctitical Temp. (0C) 374 904 619 -146.95 22 -119 -
Vapor Heat Capacity = epg1 + cpg2 x T+ cpg3 x T' +c Ig4 x T" where T = temperature in OK (JIgmoleOC)
cpg1 [1] - 9.92x102 [1] 19.8 28.1 -
cgp2 [1] - 0 [1] 7.34xlO'" -3.68x10-
o
-
CPjl,3 [1] - 0 [1] -5.6x10-' 1.74x10-' -
cpg4 [11 - 0 [1] 1.71x10- 1.065xlO-" -
Vaporization Enthalpv = hvr x (Tcrit - no.
3M
(JIgmo1e)
,
hv!' [1] - 1.03x104 - - I - I -
Liquid Viscosity - Interpotaion of the following table based in corelation:
U=aexpDI urn")
30 DC
r1l 1x10' 960 - - - -
300 [11 6.5 0.22 - - - -
500 1] 1.0 0.1 - - - -
GaslLiQuid k-values = (kv11P + kv2 x P + kv3) x exp(kY 1(1- kY'))
kv1 [1] - 1.888x10
-
- - -
kv2 [11 - 0.0 - - - -
kv3 1] - 0,0 - - - -
kv4 11 - -6562.3 - - - -
kv5 11 - -79.98 - - - -
[1]- Values used from STARS mternal properties table
Table 8 Reaction Model Parameters
Reaction # Reactant A,. E (J/gmole) m n Enthalpy (J/gmole)
1 Maltenes 7.86x10
d-
2.347x10' 1.0 - 0.0
2 Asphaltenes 3.51xlO'
d-
1.772x10' 1.0 - 0.0
3 Asphaltenes 1.18x10
J4
d' 1.763xl0' 1.0 - 0.0
4 Maltenes 11.1xlO" (d- kPa-
L
) 8.673xl0
4
1.0 0.425 (O?) 1.296xl0"
5 Asphaltenes 3.58xl0" (d- kPa") 1.856x10' 1.0 4.57 (O?) 2.857xl0"
6 OXVl!en 150.2 (d- kPa-
l
) 3.476xlO 1.0 (0,) 1.0 3.5xl0'
495
!JI <:ommunlclllcn
_Poth...-__-1:
:00 !ljilll
li::i:i!
PRODUC ION
..
30 an
HORIZONTAL WELL
PRESSURB
/Vl'8SIlL
COOLING
WATER.
or
IlNIUCHED AIR
PRODUCI'lON
SAMPLE
Figure 1. 3-D Combustion Facility Figure 2. Test Pack
TIME TO IGNITION
Telt 1 - 1 h. Telt 1 - 4 h. Test 1 - 8 h.
Sleam Pre-heat
Eleclrloal Pre-heal
125 150 175

200

150 0
10 10 150 0
150
0 0 0
0 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 10 20 30
Figure 4. Temperature Profiles - Test 1
TOP TEMPISRATURE ("C) Recovery
Figure 5. Temperature Profiles - Test 2
,..,.-,------.".---, 40,..,.---------,
Figure 3. Time To Attain Ignition
30 20 10
- -Tul 1LowGalFlux
- - TuI 2-Hlgh Gal Flux, No C.P.
-- Tell 3,-Hlgh Gas Flux, Low Temp
. - T8I1 4-Hlgh Gas Flux

Start Co-lnjecUon of _ 0.4 02 --

Waler (Tell _ _ _ 0l../
..... '\( -".. - - ,/
/ ..... y / 01
/' ./ ------.".,-
..... /
"" c/ -- .\ Start Co-Injection of
................ _ ---- Waler (Telt 3)
--/
Run Time (h)
Figure 6. Recoveries of Electric Pre-heat Tests
100
80

80

j
40
20
0
0
20 10
T8812- 8 h.
20 10
Teat 24 h.
20 10
Te8t 21 h.
10
20
496
VISOOSITY OF PRODUOED FLUIDS Teat 5 0.5 h. Teat 51 h. Teat 5 - 1.5 h.
Figure 8. Temperature Profiles - Test 5
20 15 10
l.. ...
.......
START OF
JI' AIR INJEOTION
01:'----............----......-------.....-----'
o 5
200 ............
600r--..... ..................
,'
./ " __ EXTERNAL ELEOTRIO PREHEAT
'I .. -. STEAM INJEOTION PREHEAT
',,' _ ORIGINAL
}, ," .... L...- ....I
, \ , ,,\
, \"A"
, --,
, ,
, ,
, ,
RUN TIME (h)
Figure 7. Viscosity of Produced Samples
Recovery
30 20 10

- - Till 4-Electric Pnt-heat
-- Till S-Staam Pre-h.at
40

- - - Teet ll-Steam Pre-heat
......
- - Till 7-Steam Pnt-h.at
"I
20 ",
OS

I?OS
...... -
0
0
10
", ... ..9
7
20 ... 30 ___04
./ ... -
Start of ,. ... / : ......
Air In).... '" / "I"
I ... ",'" " /
... / /
"
/
I,.-
OS L
/'"
...
o
o
40
80
20
80
100
Teat 712 h. T.at 78 h. T.at7 - 2 h.
Figure 9. Temperature Profiles - Test 7
Run Time (h)
Figure 10. Recoveries of Steam Pre-heat Tests
Oummulative Oxygen/Bitumen Ratio
1.6.............--.,....--.........,...----..---.....
LEVEL 5
17.5 em)
BOTTOM
(40 om)
LEVEL 4
(1205 em)
LEVEL 0
(37.5 em)
LEVEL 3
(1.5 em)
LEVELS
(3205 em)
LI:VEL 2
(2.5 em)
LEVEL 7
(27.5 om)
VISUAL APPEARANCE OF
TOCO? POST RUN PACK
LEVELS
(22.5 em)
LI:VEL 1
(0.0 em from top)
000
25 15 20
'Ooe8 not Include bitumen
produced during pre-heat.
to
- EXTERNAL ELEOTRIO PREHEAT
- - STEAM INJEOTION PREHEAT
0 ....-...4- - '-"---'- ......
o
0,4
Run Time (h)
Figure 11. Injected 0iProduced Bitumen Ratio -
Comparison of External Electric and SteamPre-heat

BLAOKANo DARKAND
CONSOLIDATl!O BOFT
llANO OILllAND
Figure 12. Post Run Pack - Test 7
497
Figure 13. Numerical Simulation Grid Configuration
20 r--.--...,.....---.----,,...--.....---....,.....--.--.....,---.
3 2 o -1
Test 5
-2 -3 -4
15
e
~
~
10
8
~
5
Run Time (h)
Figure 14. Bitumen Recovery - Comparison of Numerical
and Experimental Results - Test 5
v
v
v
V .clem
V
V
V
L-
V
HorixoIItol
ProductionWell
BIo<b (:1:9,6,1)
1;'1.11
k-ol,9 I.L::
1=1,11
Test 5
- Experimental
- - Numerical
750
650
1?
550
lL
~
Q.
450
2
0
P!
:J
'"
'"
P!
lL
-4 -3 -2 -1 o
Plugging 0
P r o d u c ~ o n
Well ~
2 3
Run Time (h)
Figure 15. Pressure Drop - Comparison of Numerical and
Experimental Results - Test 5
Test 5 - 1.5h. Test 5 - 1.5 h;
Figure 16. Numerical
Temperature Profile- Test 5
13 26
498
40...----
30
20
10
13 26
Figure 17. Numerical Coke
Concentration Profile -Test 5