Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Summary
Alternating polymer flooding has achieved great attractions recently in oil industry, however, the research of
pressure analysis in alternating polymer flooding reservoir is rare. This work presents a numerical pressure analysis
method of three-zone composite model for formation evaluation. A new numerical pressure analysis model
(three-zone composite model) is established by considering diffusion, convection, shear, and inaccessible pore
volume, which is based on the rheology experiments. Based on this model, the type curves are then developed
and sensitivity analysis is further conducted. The type curves have seven regimes in three-zone composite
model. The characteristic is the obvious upturn of pressure derivative curve in transient regime between low
concentration and high concentration polymer solution. Formation parameters can be interpreted by history
matching and formation evaluation can be conducted based on this model. As an important part of formation
evaluation, formation damage as a result of adsorption of polymers in porous media is evaluated by comparing
the interpreted permeability with the original value before polymer flooding. The field test data proves that this
proposed method can accurately evaluate reservoir characteristics in alternating polymer flooding reservoirs,
which emphasizes the potential application of this method in petroleum industry.
Keywords: Alternating polymer flooding; Three-zone composite model; Pressure analysis; History
matching
percolates in reservoirs. Whereas the adsorption by reacting polyacrylamide with sodium and sodium carbonate. Table 1
interaction between the polymer and shows the brine’s composition, containing NaCl, MgCl2, CaCl2, and Na2SO4.
the reservoir rocks, such as diffusion
and convection, is ignored by using As explained previously, the power law model25 or Carreau model26 cannot
the constant power exponent viscosity precisely illustrate rheological behavior of the polymer when percolating in
model. Meanwhile, polymer solution reservoirs. In this study, the Meter equation was used to analyze the polymer
adsorption in the porous medium viscosity distribution27:
results in inaccessible pore volume
(IPV)24, which should also be taken
into account. These studies do not meet
our study’s practical demands, but they (1)
nonetheless lay a solid foundation for
Where μ0p is the viscosity of polymer solution at very low shear rate (nearly zero),
our work. Besides, it is necessary to
mPa×s, which is calculated by modified Flory-Huggins equation28:
consider the polymer flooding process
to establish a pressure analysis model.
(2)
Generally, offshore oilfield reservoir
In Eq. (2), the fitting numbers of A1, A2, and A3 need to be confirmed, so the
conditions have thick layers,
relationship between the viscosity of polymer solution and its concentration
heterogeneity, high-viscosity crude
was measured in our experiments. The polymer solutions were prepared with
oil, and high salinity brine. These
mechanical agitation at 70 °C to simulate the reservoir temperature, because
characteristics often result in high
temperature significantly affects the polymer’s rheological behavior; pressure has
concentration polymer flooding
a negligible effect on polymer viscosity compared to temperature. The polymer
problems, for example, high injection
concentrations for the experiment varied from 200 mg/L to 4000 mg/L, and the
pressure and formation damage where
low and high polymer concentration in oilfields are 800 mg/L and 2800 mg/L
polymer solutions blocks up in porous
respectively. A Haake RS6000 rheometer (Germany) was used to take the
medium when percolating in reservoirs.
polymer rheological measurement. Then, the relationship between the polymer
Accordingly, alternating low (less than
solution’s viscosity and concentration was obtained by rheological measurement
1000 mg/l) and high (more than 2500
at 70 °C. The fitting parameters of A1, A2, and A3 can also be achieved by matching
mg/l) concentration polymer flooding
experimental data, as shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. The measurements were
has been proposed and applied in
performed under a shear rate of 0.01 s-1.
some offshore oilfields to improve
polymer flooding efficiency. In these
processes, high concentration polymer In Eq. (1), Pa and γ1/2 are functions of μ0p; the equations were provided by CNOOC
solutions are injected, followed by based on their former research.
low concentration polymer solutions.
(3)
However, thorough research on this
alternating polymer flooding method
(4)
has not yet been conducted.
Wang29 studied the relationship between effective shear rate and percolation
This paper provides a three-zone velocity, as shown in the following equation:
composite model and discusses the
validation and application of this model
based on low and high concentration (5)
polymer alternating flooding in offshore
reservoirs. Moreover, formation
evaluation is developed according to (6)
the interpretation results.
Table 1. Synthetic brine composition
2. RHEOLOGICAL MODEL Total salinity NaCl MgCl2 CaCl2 Na2SO4
The proprietary HPAM used for 4.3 wt% 3.43 wt% 0.19 wt% 0.65 wt% 0.03 wt%
alternating polymer flooding was Table 2. Polymer solution characteristics
obtained from CNOOC. The HPAM had
μw, (mPa⋅s) A1,(g/L)−1 A2, (g/L)−2 A3, (g/L)−3 𝐷, (cm2/s)
a molecular weight of 4000 and 5.3%
0.5 0.621 0.186 0.915 0.0246
hydrolysis degree, which can reduce
By considering IPV, Equation (5) is Figure 1. Relationship between the polymer viscosity (μ0p) and polymer
changed to: concentration (Cp)
(7)
(8)
3. NUMERICAL PRESSURE
ANALYSIS MODELING
By considering the problems caused by
high concentration polymer solution
injections in offshore oilfields, the
alternating flooding of low and high
concentration polymer solution has
been applied in some offshore oilfields.
The zone surrounding the injection well crude oil is considered a Newtonian fluids. Based on the rheological model and
was displaced by low concentration hypotheses discussed above, our study establishes the non-Newtonian- non-
polymer solution as the first zone; the Newtonian- Newtonian three-zone composite model by considering diffusion,
zone beyond the flooding front of the convection, shear, IPV, wellbore storage effect, and skin factor, which can be
first zone spread by high concentration used in alternating polymer flooding.
polymer solutions was the second zone;
the crude oil was distributed in the Percolation equations:
third zone, as shown in Figure 2. Our
hypotheses are as follows: (1) The fluids
The first zone:
of the first zone and the second zone are
polymer solutions, while the fluids in the
third zone are crude oil; (2) reservoir
rocks and fluids are compressible; (3)
(9)
gravity’s effects are negligible; (4)
reservoir temperature is constant; (5) The second zone:
the pressure drop is ignored at interface.
(20)
4.2.1 Initial Concentration of
HPAM
(21) The influence of the initial
concentration on type curves in
three-zone composite model is shown
(22) in Figure 4. When the initial polymer
concentration of high concentration
polymer is constant, the higher initial
(23) concentration of low concentration
polymer solutions cause higher
polymer viscosity and more flow
resistance in the first zone, which Figure 3. Type curves of pressure analysis in the three-zone composite model by
results in greater upturn amplitude alternating polymer flooding
of the pressure derivative curve in
intermediate flow section (II) and the
first radial flow regime (III) as shown
in Figure 4a. Regime I, IV, V, VI, VII
cannot be influenced.
Figure 5. Effect of the first zone radius on type curves 4.2.3 The Second Zone Radius
Figure 6 shows the influence of the
second zone radius on type curves
by alternating polymer flooding.
The second zone radius indicates the
duration of high concentration polymer
flooding and the volume swept by a
high concentration polymer solution.
When the first radius is constant,
a larger second zone radius results
in a longer duration of the second
radial flow regime (V), and a high
concentration polymer solution-oil
transient regime (VI) appears later.
However, the pressure derivative
curves converge over time in the first
radial flow regime (III), the transient
regime form low concentration section
to high concentration section (IV), and
Figure 6. Effect of the second zone radius on type curves the third radial flow regime (VII).
4.2.5 IPV
Figure 7. Effect of crude oil viscosity on type curves
Figure 8 represents IPV’s effect on
type curves by alternating polymer
flooding. The pressure and pressure
derivative curves move upward
slightly with the increase of IPV.
Higher IPV means lower effective
porosity and flow difficulty, which
leads to a higher pressure derivative.
However, IPV has a low effect on type
curves. Moreover, the IPV caused by
alternating polymer flooding is usually
less than 0.2, so IPV’s effects can be
negligible during pressure analysis.
Unlike other parameters, IPV’s effects
on typical curves are listed here only
for theoretical analysis.
5. FIELD TESTS Figure 9 shows the history matching of the individual zone permeability
INTERPRETATION of theoretical curves and oilfield test and flooding front are significant
data. Table 4 shows the interpretation for oilfields because they affect oil
Based on basic oilfield properties, the results. The permeability and skin companies’ development plans.
reservoir conditions are appropriate factor obtained by interpretation
for alternating polymer flooding; were consistent with geological data,
moreover, relatively low formation 6. CONCLUSIONs
indicating that our model can accurately
salinity is good for maintaining interpret field test data and evaluate This work established a three-zone
systematic viscoelasticity. Pressure formations. The interpretation results composite model for alternating
analysis was developed based on the
pressure fall off test, and CNOOC
provided the field test BHP data. The Figure 8. Effect of IPV on type curves
injection well conducted polymer
flooding from Apr 1, 2011 to Apr 17,
2012. The polymer solutions were
injected into reservoirs with an initial
concentration of 2800 mg/L in April
1, 2011. In January 5, 2012, low
concentration polymer solutions with
an initial concentration of 800 mg/L
were injected into the formation, then
the well was shut and the BHP was
measured. It took three days to do the
pressure measurement, and polymer
flooding was carried out again on Apr
20, 2012. Table 3 shows the basic
parameters of the well and reservoir.
Figure 9. History matching of field test data and type curves
Bourdet’s method31 was used to smooth
the pressure derivative curve of the field
test data; BHP data was drawn with
respect to time in log-log scale. It is
feasible to interpret the BHP data and
perform history matching of type curves
to calculate the average formation
pressure, first zone permeability,
second zone permeability, third zone
permeability, first zone radius, second
zone radius, skin factor, and wellbore
storage coefficient. Then, the formation
evaluation can be applied based on the
interpretation results. We calculated the
reservoir parameters using polymer
pressure analysis software that we
developed to solve the problem that Table 3. Basic parameters of well and reservoir
more than one solution existed in the Injection rate Q(m3/d) 100
interpretation. First, the homogeneous Porosity Ф 0.3
model was employed to analyze the Crude oil viscosity μo (mPa·s) 53.8
wellbore storage coefficient and skin Total compressibility Ct (1/MPa) 0.0014
factor. Then, the composite model was Volume factor B 1.1
used to estimate the internal radius. Permeability before polymer flooding μm2 1.24
Finally, the new model presented in this Skin factor before polymer flooding - 0.23
paper was used to calculate significant Well radius rw (m) 0.1
parameters. *provided by CNOOC
Table 4. Interpretation results of field test data 4. Yu H., Kotsmar C., Yoon K.Y., et al.
Transport and Retention of Aqueous
Average reservoir pressure MPa 17.8
Dispersions of Paramagnetic
The first zone permeability μm2 1.03 Nanoparticles in Reservoir Rocks.
The second zone permeability μm 2
0.96 The 17th SPE Improved Oil
The third zone permeability μm2 1.21 Recovery Symposium (IOR ’10),
SPE paperno.129887, Tulsa, Okla,
The first radius m 54.5 USA, (2010).
The second radius m 135.6 5. Zhang T., Murphy M.J., Yu H., et
Skin factor - 1.45 al. Investigation of Nanoparticle
Wellbore storage coefficient m3/MPa 2.71 Adsorption During Transport in
Porous Media. The SPE Annual
Technology Conference and
polymer flooding reservoirs. Type the initial value before alternating Exibition, SPE paperno.166346,
curves of pressure transient analysis polymer flooding. If interpreted New Orleans, La, USA, (2013).
were achieved, and history-matching permeability is not much lower 6. Wang D., Hou Q., Luo Y., et al.
was conducted. Also, field test data were than initial permeability, there Stability Comparison between
further fitted. The main conclusions are is no need to employ additional Particle-Stabilized Foams and
as follows: techniques to reduce formation Polymer-Stabilized Foams . Journal
damage . Moreover, the first zone of Dispersion Science & Technology,
36, (2013), 453-461.
1. Rheological behavior of the radius and second zone radius,
which indicates the flooding front 7. Ren G., Sanders A.W., Nguyen Q.P.
proprietary HPAM polymer
and alternating polymer flooding New Method for the Determination
obtained from CNOOC was studied of Surfactant Solubility and
and the three-zone composite efficiency, should be taken into
Partitioning Between CO2 and Brine
model was developed based on this account when adjustment plans are . Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 91,
rheological model by considering made. (2014), 77–83.
shear rate, diffusion, convection, 8. Wyatt N.B., Gunther C.M.,
IPV, wellbore storage effect, and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Liberatore M W. Increasing Viscosity
skin factor. The authors thank the CNOOC for in Entangled Polyelectrolyte
providing geology information, flow Solutions by the Addition of Salt .
2. The remarkable feature in the Polymer, 52, (2011), 2437–2444.
type curves was the obvious rates and BHP data. We also gratefully
appreciate financial support from 9. Escobar,F.H., Martinez J.A. and
upturn in the transient regime Montealegre-M.M. “Pressure
between low concentration and National Natural Science Foundation
and Pressure Derivative Analysis
high concentration polymer of China (No. 51304223), National for Injection Tests with Variable
solution (IV). Sensitivity analysis Science and Technology Major Temperature without Type-Curve
was carried out to investigate Projects (No. 2016ZX05009-004, No. Matching”. CT&F – Ciencia,
the influence of different factors 2016ZX05013002-005). Tecnología y Futuro, 4, (2008), 83-
91.
on type curves, including initial
concentration, the first zone radius, 10. Escobar F.H., Martinez J.A., and
REFERENCES
the second zone radius, crude Bonilla L.F. “Pressure and Pressure
1. Zhang Weihua, Hou Xiaohuai. Derivative Analysis Different of
oil viscosity and IPV. The initial
Plasma‐Initiated Aqueous Type-Curve Matching For Thermal
concentration of high concentration Recovery Processes”. CT&F, 4,
Solution Polymerization of
polymer solutions had great Acrylamide. Polymers for Advanced (2011), 23-35.
influence on the type curves, but the Technologies, 10, (1999), 465-467. 11. Escobar F.H., Martinez J.A. and
effect of IPV could be negligible. 2. Bera A., Mandal A, Guha B.B. Bonilla L.F. “Pressure and Pressure
3. The field test data were history- Synergistic Effect of Surfactant and Derivative Analysis for a Three-
Salt Mixture on Interfacial Tension Region Composite Reservoir”.
matched and interpreted with the
Reduction between Crude Oil and Journal of Engineering and Applied
presented three-zone composite Sciences, 7, (2012), Nro. 10.
Water in Enhanced Oil Recovery.
model, which suggests that the Journal of Chemical & Engineering 12. C.U. Ikoku, H.J. Ramey Jr. Transient
model can accurately interpret Data, 59, (2013), 89-96. Flow of Non-Newtonian Power-
field test data and describe Law Fluids in Porous Media. SPE
3. Manrique E.J., De Carvajal G.G.,
the dynamic characteristics of Anselmi L., et al. Alkali/Surfactant/ Journal, 19, (1979), 164-174.
reservoirs. Formation evaluation Polymer Use at VLA6/9/21 Field in 13. Lund O., Ikoku C.U. Pressure
can be conducted by comparing Maracaibo Lake . Journal of Petroleum Transient Behavior of Non-
the interpreted permeability with Technology, 53, (2001), 51-52. Newtonian/Newtonian Fluid
Composite Reservoirs . Society of 23. Zhang H., Challa R.S., Bai B., et γ1/2 = the corresponding shear rate when
Petroleum Engineers Journal, 21, al. Using Screening Test Results to apparent viscosity of polymer solution
(1981), 271-280. Predict the Effective Viscosity of is the average of μ and μ0 p, s-1
14. Song Kaoping, Wang Lei, and Ji Swollen Superabsorbent Polymer
Bingyu. Well Test Analysis of a Particles Extrusion through an Open γ = effective shear rate, s-1
Compound Reservoir with Non- Fracture. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, 49, (2010), Pa = fitting parameter (1.0 < Pa < 1.8)
Newtonian and Newtonian Fluid
Flow. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 17, 12284–12293. μ0p = viscosity of polymer solution
(1996), 82-86. 24. Liu J.X., Guo Y.J., Hu J., et at very low shear rate (almost zero),
15. Song Kaoping. Well Test Analysis al. Displacement Characters mPa×s
for a Compound Reservoir with Non of Combination Flooding
Newtonian Power Law Fluids Flow. Systems consisting of Gemini- A1 = fitting parameters achieved from
Acta Petrolei Sinica, 18, (1997), 78-83. Nonionic Mixed Surfactant and experimental data, (g/l)-1
16. Escobar F.H., Martínez J.A., and Hydrophobically Associating
Polyacrylamide for Bohai Offshore A2 = fitting parameters achieved from
Montealegre-M.M. “Pressure
Oilfield . Energy & Fuels, 26, experimental data, (g/l)-2
and Pressure Derivative Analysis
for a Well in a Radial Composite (2012), 2858-2864.
A3 = fitting parameters achieved from
Reservoir with a Non-Newtonian/ 25. P.L. Bondor, G.J. Hirasaki and M.J. experimental data, (g/l)-3
Newtonian Interface”. CT&F, 4, Tham. Mathematical Simulation
(2010), 33-42. of Polymer Flooding in Complex Cp = polymer concentration, mg/l
17. Martinez J.A., Escobar F.H., and Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum
Engineers Journal, 12, (1972),
Cp1 = initial polymer concentration of
Montealegre-M.M. “Vertical Well
369–382. low concentration polymer solution,
Pressure and Pressure Derivative
Analysis for Bingham Fluids in a 26. Carreau P.J. Rheological Equations
mg/l
Homogeneous Reservoirs”. Dyna, from Molecular Network Theories . Cp2 = initial polymer concentration of
78, (2011), 21-28. Journal of Rheology, 16, (1972), 99- high concentration polymer solution,
18. Escobar F.H., Zambrano A.P, Giraldo 127.
mg/l
D.V. and Cantillo J.H. “Pressure and 27. Meter D.M., Bird R.B. Tube
Pressure Derivative Analysis for Flow of Non-Newtonian Polymer CSP SEP = effect of salinity and
Non-Newtonian Pseudoplastic Fluids Solutions: PART I. Laminar Flow hardness on polymer viscosity
in Double-Porosity Formations”. and Rheological Models . AIChE
CT&F, 5, (2011), 47-59. Journal, 10, (1964), 878–881. n = power law index ranging from 0 to 1
19. Martinez J.A., Escobar F.H. and 28. P.G. Flory, Principles of Polymer C’ = tortuosity coefficient;
Cantillo J.H. “Application f the Chemistry, Cornell University Press,
TDS Technique to Dilatant Non- New York, NY, USA, (1953). r = radial distance, m
Newtonian/Newtonian Fluid 29. Wang X.. Determination of the Ф = porosity
Composite Reservoirs”. Ingeniería e
Main Parameters in the Numerical
Investigación, 31, (2011), 130-134. K = permeability, m2
Simulation of Polymer Flooding.
[20. Yu H., Guo H., He Y., et Petroleum Exploration & Q = flow rate, m3/s
al. Numerical Well Testing Development, 3, (1990), 69–76.
Interpretation Model and h = reservoir thickness, m
30. J. Wang. Physic-Chemical Fluid
Applications in Crossflow Double-
Mechanics and Application in V = Darcy velocity, m/s
Layer Reservoirs by Polymer
Chemical EOR, Petroleum Industry
Flooding . The Scientific World
Press, Beijing, China, (2008). Фp = effective porosity, Фp = Ф (1 −
Journal, (2014), 890874-890874.
31. Bourdet D., Ayoub J.A., Pirard Y.M. IPV)
21. Yu H., H. Guo S. Cheng et
Use of Pressure Derivative in Well
al. Numerical Well Testing Cp0 = initial polymer concentration,
Test Interpretation . SPE Formation
Interpretation Method of Composite mg/l
Evaluation, 4, (1989), 293-302.
Model and Applications in Offshore
Reservoirs by Polymer Flooding. D = diffusion coefficient
Asian Journal of Chemistry, 26, NOMENCLATURE pi = initial pressure, MPa
(2014), 5783-5788.
22. Veerabhadrappa SK, Trivedi JJ, μp = apparent viscosity for polymer pwf = bottom hole pressure, MPa
Kuru E. Visual Confirmation solution, mPa×s
Ct = total compressibility, MPa-1
of the Elasticity Dependence of
Unstable Secondary Polymer μ = polymer solution viscosity at
C = wellbore storage coefficient, m3/
Floods . Industrial and Engineering the condition of infinite shear rate,
MPa
Chemistry Research, 52, (2013), mPa×s, which equals water viscosity
6234-6241. and satisfies the demand in this study B = volume factor