CA COURSE Chapter 10 Capillary Pressure V2013

Application of Core Analysis
In Reservoir Description &

Characterisation
1
CHAPTER SUMMARY
Introduction 1
Preliminary Core Characterisation 2
Reservoir Geology and Sedimentology 3
Storage Capacity and Conductivity 4
Hydraulic Unitisation and Characterisation 5
Formation Resistivity Measurements 6
Density Characteristics 7
Acoustic Properties of Rocks 8
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance 9
Capillary Pressure 10
Rock Compressibility/Rock Mechanics 11
Relative Permeability 12
Wettability 13
Formation Damage 14
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 10: CAPILLARY PRESSURE
Capillary Pressure Equation 4

Capillary Pressure Theory 5
Fluid Distribution 8
Test Methods 21
Porous Plate or Restored State Cell 22
Centrifuge 26
Mercury Injection 32
Factors Affecting Results 40
Conversion of Pc to Equivalent Height 44
Fluid Distribution 50
Use of Pc Data to define Fluid Distribution 51
Saturation–height function resulting from Pc data 60
Imbibition Pc curve 62
Core-Log Integration Examples 67
3
Capillary Pressure Equation
• The magnitude of water saturation retained is proportional to the

capillary pressure -- which is controlled by the rock-fluid system
Sw  f Pc 
Fluid Property
2  Cos  Rock - Fluid

Pc  Property
r
Rock Property (k
& f)
Idealized Water Film
Surrounding Sand Grains
4
Capillary Pressure Theory

 Cos 
• Capillary pressure exists whenever two r

immiscible phases are present in a fine bore tube,
and is defined as the pressure drop across the

curved liquid interface
Pc  Pnw - Pw
• Capillary pressure in a tube can be calculated if
the fluid interfacial tension, rock-fluid contact
angle, and the tube radius are known
2 Cos
Pc 
r • Capillary pressure can also be expressed as a
hydrostatic head. It is equal to the product of the
height of the liquid rise, the density difference of
Pc   g h the two liquids, and the gravitational constant
5
 At Equilibrium: Force Up = Force Down
 Cos  Force Up  2  r   Cos 

Force Down   r 2  h   W  H   g
r
Capillary Pressure = Force / Unit Area
Pc = Force Up /  r2 = Force Down /  r2

h Pc  2  r   2Cos  
2 Cos 
r r
 r 2  h   W - H   g
and Pc   h   W - H   g
r 2
Pc 2 Cos 
h  
 W - H   g r   W - H   g
6

Pc 2 Cos 
 Cos  h 
 g r  g
r

• The height at which a wetting liquid will stand above
a free level is directly proportional to capillary
pressure
h
• Height is therefore proportional to interfacial tension
and cosine of the contact angle
• Height is inversely related to the tube radius and
fluid density difference
7
Fluid Distribution in RESERVOIR ROCK
FACTORS AFFECTING
Fluid distribution affected by:
• HEIGHT ABOVE FREE WATER LEVEL
• PORE GEOMETRY
(Texture, Pore Size Distribution)
• SATURATION HISTORY
(Drainage vs Imbibition)
• WETTABILITY
(Contact Angle)
• INTERFACIAL TENSION
• FLUID DENSITY DIFFERENCE
8
A series of examples follows that compares the
effect of the preceding factors on RESERVOIR
SATURATIONS.
The base-case RESERVOIR CONDITIONS are:
• Water-Wet
• Moderate Interfacial Tension (e.g. 30 dynes/cm)
• Drainage Capillary Pressure
• Moderate Oil-Water Density Difference (e.g. 0.15
g/cm3)
HEIGHT Effect
Rock-type A
Zone of Swir for “A”
• Reservoir water saturation decreases with

Height Above Water Level
increased height above the Free Water Level.
• A “minimum” or “irreducible” value is reached if

enough closure and hydrocarbon column
A exists. A formation containing irreducible water
produces only hydrocarbons.
• The zone of varying water saturation is called

0 Water Saturation 1
Transition zone for “A” the transition zone. Formations located in this
zone will produce both water & hydrocarbons.
10
PORE GEOMETRY Effect
• Pore size and distribution influence the magnitude of irreducible water
and the height of the transition zone.
• Smaller pores mean lower permeability and higher Sw
“Rock-type” A “Rock-type” B
11
PORE GEOMETRY Effect
• As hydrocarbons accumulate, the largest pores are drained first.
• Smaller pores are drained as the HC column (height or pressure)
increases
12
SATURATION HISTORY Effect
• “Drainage & Imbibition” refer to the wetting phase, typically
water.
• At same system pressure, or height, saturations are
Drainage dependent on saturation history or direction of saturation
change

Drainage
Imbibition
WP A
NWP
Imbibition
13
WETTABILITY Effect
• Contact Angle is measured through the more dense phase.
• As Water Wettability decreases, capillary control of Sw decreases
• Oil Wet rocks have a reduced or negligible transition zone and may contain
lower irreducible saturations
 < 90o  = 90o  > 90o

A 3 A 1
Water Wet Neutral Oil Wet
1 2 3
14
INTERFACIAL TENSION Effect
• Holding other factors constant:

Higher Tension  Higher IFT extends the

transition zone
Lower Tension  Lower IFT reduces the
transition zone
A
• Here,  was held constant at

0 1 0.15 g/cm3 while IFT was
Water Saturation
adjusted from 30 to 72 and 10
dynes/cm
15
 DENSITY Effect
• Holding other factors constant:

Small Density Difference

(e.g. Water-Heavy Oil)  Small density difference
increases the transition zone
Large Density Difference
(e.g. Gas-Water)  Large density difference
suppresses the transition
A zone
• Here, IFT was held constant at 30
dynes/cm while  was adjusted
from 0.15 to 0.05 and 0.40 g/cm3
16
Capillary Pressure and
FLUID PRESSURE GRADIENTS
Well Pressure 
Gas pressure
gradient
Cap Rock Gas GOC
Oil pressure
 Depth
gradient
Oil
Pc = Po - Pw = g x h x (w-o)
Reservoir Rock
Pc = Po - Pw = 0
h
Water pressure
gradient
Water Free Water Level
Static pressures in a homogeneous reservoir
17
Fluid Distribution
in a HC Reservoir
Well
HC, water-free
Irreducible Water Saturation

Top Transition Zone
D
HC and E
Mobile Water P
Transition Zone T
H
Observed HC-WC
(Pc = Pce)
Free Water Level

(Pc = 0) 0 Swir 100%
Sw
18
Capillary Pressure
REVIEW & DEFINITIONS
Height above FWL or Capillary Pressure

IMBIBITION DRAINAGE
Sw “Irreducible”
Sw remains a decreasing
function of increasing Pc
Pc
Pc
Pd, displacement pressure;

Drag Hysteresis Sw Transition nwp 1st becomes continuous
Oil (Gas)-Water
NW Phase pressure (Pc)
Contact increases, Sw remains 1
Free Water Level 0 until 1st entry to pore
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 system
Water Saturation
Trapped nwp saturation is a function of Swi; can
be analogous to water wet trapping of oil or gas Start: Sw=1; Pc=0 = FWL
upon wetting phase advance Trap Hysteresis
19
CAPILLARY PRESSURE: Applications
• Predict Sw DISTRIBUTION in reservoir

(compare with log data, initialize simulator)
• Predict FREE WATER LEVEL
• Predict ROCK QUALITY (e.g. permeability)
• Assist in interpretation/calculation of RELATIVE
PERMEABILITY
• Calculate PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
20
Capillary Pressure
TEST METHODS
• Porous Plate
– Also known as: Semi-permeable
membrane, porous disk, cell,
restored-state
• Centrifuge
• Mercury Injection
• Water Vapor Desorption
– aka: WVD, Kelvin Pc
21
Capillary Pressure Methods
POROUS PLATE - CELL
RESTORED STATE CELL
CAPILLARY PRESSURE
 Clean, dry samples are evacuated and pressure saturated with simulated
formation brine.
 Multiple samples can be run in “ambient” cells, while samples held at
overburden pressure are tested individually.
 Each pressure point requires several days for equilibrium; and 6 – 8 data
points are normally recorded.
 Test samples must cover rock type, permeability and porosity.
 Air-brine, oil-brine, and air-oil fluid combinations can be used.
 Electrical properties can be run in conjunction with air-brine and oil-brine
displacements.
 Application of data to oil wet reservoirs must be approached with caution.
 Different plates/membranes have different “threshold” pressures beyond
which they cannot be used.
22
POROUS PLATE - CELL
Non-Wetting Fluid Under

Constant Pressure at Each of
Several Pressures Yields Pc vs Sw
Closed Cell
to Hold Pressure
of Non-wetting Phase
100% Water-Saturated
Sample (Initially)
Tissue Paper & Diatomaceous

Earth Beneath Core for
100% Water-Saturated Capillary Contact
Porous, Semi-Permeable
Plate Water Moves From Core
Through Contact Material
& Outside Cell
23
Porous Plate At Reservoir Stress
Pressure-Controlled Non-
wetting Phase
(non-conductive tubing)
To Resistivity Meter
Power Electrode:
• Steel tube
• Steel plate Oil Cap
• Perforated silver membrane
Potential Electrode: Vw

• Viton sleeve
• Silver wire (rings)
Porous Disk:
Hydrostatic Core Cell:

• Net Confining Stress to 10000 Insulated Bushing
psi
• electrically insulated
To Resistivity
Meter
24
• Ambient or at Net Stress
POROUS PLATE METHOD: • 6-10 pressure points
• max A-B Pc ~150-200 psi
Advantages Limitations
• Most straight-forward process & • TIME

calculation
– CAN TAKE WEEKS-MONTHS to get 6-10
• Qv effects accounted for if points
equivalent Fm Brine used – dependent on drainage relative

•
permeabilty characteristics
Sw at uniform distribution for each
step (ideal for Rt or prep for other
– may not be practical below ~10 md ka
test such as relative permeability – optimum geometry, SHORT, not amenable
to other tests (Rt, krel)
• Apparent equilibrium can be deceptive

CENTRIFUGE
CENTRIFUGAL CAPILLARY PRESSURE
 Capillary pressure in this system is proportional to the square of the RPM,

and 6 – 8 data points are normally recorded.
 The centrifuge remains in motion throughout the test, with each selected
RPM held constant until no additional fluid is expelled from the core. Water
out is read with a stroboscope…with the centrifuge in motion.
 Several samples can be processed simultaneously in centrifuges.

Saturations are determined volumetrically.
 Samples can be run at ambient or overburden conditions. Unconsolidated

samples best run stressed as grain rearrangement may occur at ambient
conditions.
 This technique is often preferred for unconsolidated core mounted in metal

sleeves. There are no contact problems as there are with porous
plate/membrane methods. There are RPM limitations to prevent
sample/sleeve failure and samples can be CT scanned for potential damage
before and after loading from the centrifuge.
26
CENTRIFUGE
Constant RPM at Each of

Several Selected RPM's
100% Water-Saturated
Sample (Initially)
Water Spun From

Sample Read Here With
Centrifuge in Motion
27
Centrifuges for
Capillary Pressure
28
Example Sw Profiles in Core Plug
at equilibrium / RPM during Drainage Pc
Reported Pc-Sw data
relate to INLET FACE
458 23 4 conditions
Top,
INLET FACE 2.5
2 4 = Pc Face
Plug Height, cm
6
12
1.5
23
59
1
119
236
0.5 458
Bottom, OUTLET 0
FACE 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw Outlet end remains at
Pc = 0; Sw = 1
throughout test
29
CENTRIFUGE
Comparison Data Set

from very early days of
Centrifuge Capillary
Pressure
Field in Equity Dispute

– Standard Oil, wanted
to confirm PC
centrifuge data with
traditional Porous-
Plate (disk method).
30
CENTRIFUGE METHOD: • 6-10 pressure points

• max A-BPc AMB ~1300psi
• max A-B Pc NCS ~150 psi
• Moderate timing (7-10 days) • Pressure & saturation profiles exist
• 3-6 samples tested simultaneously

throughout
(rotor-dependent) • Calculations based on assumptions:
• Qv effects accounted for if – uniform pore geometry

equivalent Fm Brine used – Outlet: Pc=0, Sw=1
• Demonstrated equivalent to other – continuous acceleration (not “stop & go”)
methods regardless of calculation
complexity
• Sample length must match rotor bucket
limitations (varies with rotor)
• Testing low k samples feasible
(~0.005 md)
MERCURY INJECTION
MERCURY INJECTION
CAPILLARY PRESSURE
 Clean, dry samples are run singly. Test times are rapid compared to the
other techniques.
 The technique is suitable for low permeability samples. Pressures up to

2,000psi are used in the “low-pressure” system and pressures of 50,000psi
can be used in the “high-pressure” system.
 Upwards of twenty to thirty data points are measured on each core yielding
good curve definition.
 Irregular shaped samples may be tested.
 Tests may yield erroneously low water saturations in shaly sands.
 Vuggy samples require special precautions because of large surface pores

penetrated at zero capillary pressure.
32
MERCURY INJECTION
• Manual System
3. & 6 Window to set
Reference Mercury Level
Removable Cap
• 20 + Pc‟s, 0 psia to Pc max (Pc
4. N2 Pressure Introduced
Here at Constant, But max ~2000-5000 psia)
Various Levels, Yields Pc
• 0 Stress typically
1. Clean, Dry
• Net confining stress up to 8000
Evacuated Sample
(Initially)
psi possible
5. Mercury Injected
• Ideal for achieving target initial
and Volume Metered Shg to test for residual
2. Sample of Known Pore
Volume Held Under
Mercury by Pins
• Large sample possible; system
may be more suitable for low
porosity or heterogenous
material than high pressure
Mercury Injection Cell
system
33
HIGH-PRESSURE MERCURY INJECTION
Sample • Automated
• Selectable pressure
schedule
Penetrometer • Very small samples feasible
• Rapid, accurate
Hg • at 50,000 psia, radius of

investigation is 0.002mm
Oil pressure
34
Mercury Injection Instruments
Manual High Pressure

35
Relationship of Pore Throat Size, Pore Space
and Cap Pressure
2  cos Pore Space Controlled by

r Small Pore Throat Radii
Pc
Mercury Enters the

Largest Pores First Surface Vugs
36
37
Frequency
0
0. - 0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
00 .0
2 0
0. 5 - 25
00 0
5 .0 0
0. - 0. 5
00 00
7 5 75
0. - 0
01 .0
1
sub-nano
0. - 0.
02 02
5 5
0. - 0
05 .0
- 5
nano
0. 0.0
07 75
5
0. - 0.
1 1
-0
0. .2
25 5
Pore Throat Size Distribution
sub-micro
0. - 0.
5 5
0. .7
-0 micro
75 5
-
1. 1.0
0
-
meso
2. 2.5
5
-
5. 5.0
0
-7
7. .5
5
-1
macro
Pore Radius, microns (1/4 decade bar)
10 0
-2
25 5
-5
50 0
-
75 75
-1
00
>1
00
super-macro
Mercury Injection
PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Pore Space Controlled by Pore Aperture Radius
10
A
B
Pore Aperture Radius, microns
1
C
D
E
F
G
0.1
H
I
J
Recognize petrophysical rock K
0.01 types L
M
N
O
0.001
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
Pore Space Fraction
38
• 10’s of pressure points
MERCURY INJECTION METHOD:
• max Hg Pc AMB ~60000 psi
• max Hg Pc NCS ~2000 psi
• Rapid; hours on a prepared sample • Qv effects NOT INCLUDED; data may
• Preparation has 1 less step than

be optimistic if sample is „shaly‟
other methods • Sample-destructive
• Best for pore-size - pore-throat • Saturations (1-Hg) < ~5% may be

calculations optimistic in all cases
• Ambient method can test very • True wetting phase not present
small, irregular samples
• Some conversion factors (e.g. to A-B)
• Testing low k samples feasible found to be lithology-dependent
(caprock)
• Always provides “W W*” results

* Representative results on altered wettability sample
Factors Effecting
CAPILLARY PRESSURE Results
• Clay-Bound Water
If the combination of Qv & Salinity make CBW an issue
– Test with appropriate brine (air-brine or oil-brine)
– Correct air-oil or air-mercury for Qv and Salinity or validate with
comparison to air-brine – oil-brine
• Net Confining Stress
– When stress-Pc data not available, correlate results with k-f at same
conditions as Pc test; enter correlations with k-f at NCS; ambient
data useful if handled correctly
– Testing at NCS important for unconsolidated, weakly cemented
sediments
• Wettability (affects Imbibition curve not drainage)
– Native wetting alteration is a post-drainage process
– Initial Sw distribution controlled by water wet conditions
– Caution due when core may have altered wetting
40
Mercury Injection
Effect of Clay damage due to Drying
Data-set from an Argillaceous

Sandstone.
Oil brine centrifuge Swi is 50% on

fresh samples. After extraction and
drying gave HPMI Swi around 10%,
Samples contained fibrous illite and
kaolinite. In argillaceous rock HPMI
can give low apparent water
saturations.
Can see similar effects in SE Asian

shaly sands.
Work from Omoregie, SPE 15384

41
ADJUST Air-Hg Pc
for Clay Bound Water - Qv & Salinity Effect
f ef f ectiv e
 1  (0.6425 * S 0.5  0.22) * Qv
Air-Brine & Hg Pc f total
Juhasz Correction
3000
f ef f ectiv e
A-B Pc Snw*  Snw x
f total
Equivalent Air-Brine Pc, psi
2500
Hg
HgPc*, 1-Snw*
2000
0.5
 f ef f ectiv e
1500 Pc*  Pc x  
 f total 
1000
Sample Properties
500
Qv, meq/ml 0.30
0 Salinity, g/l 194
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
phieff:phitot 0.92
Sw
42
Capillary Pressure: Effect of NCS
• Historical Solution of using an ambient Pc model and entering

with Stressed rock property was appropriate for the cemented
sand of Example 1 and perhaps for the more friable rock of
Example 2.
• Pc at Stress will provide a representative data set
• Pc at Ambient for most cemented rock types will probably
provide data representative of reservoir if modeled with
ambient rock property and model entered with rock property
at stress
• More stress-sensitive rock types such as friable to
unconsolidated sands should be tested at stress or the effect
of stress vs no stress should be studied
43
Conversion of Lab Pc to Reservoir Height
above FWL
 Cos  L
Where: h = Height in feet above free water
PcL level corresponding to Zero

PcR  Cos  R Capillary Pressure
PcR = Capillary Pressure at Initial
Reservoir Conditions, psi
 Cos  R
PcL = Capillary Pressure in Laboratory,
 Pc R  PcL
 Cos  L
psi
 (Cos )R = Interfacial tension x cosine of
contact angle (Initial reservoir
conditions)
 (Cos )L = Interfacial tension x cosine of
PcL
 Cos  R contact angle (Laboratory)
h
PcR

 Cos  L W = Water gradient in psi/ft at initial
reservoir conditions
 W - H   W - H  H = Hydrocarbon gradient in psi/ft at

initial reservoir conditions
 = Interfacial tension, dynes/cm
 is density gradient difference, psi/ft
44
Pc – Height Equation
Height above FWL, ft =
  cos θ Reservoir 
PcLab   
  cos θ Lab 
Δρ Reservoir  0.433
 is density difference, g/cm3
Where:
Pc = Capillary Pressure, psi  = Density Difference, g/cm3
 = Interfacial Tension, dynes/cm Lab = Lab Conditions
 = Contact Angle, degrees Reservoir = Initial Reservoir Conditions
45
Typical Interfacial Tension
and Contact Angle Values
 
Contact Cosine Interfacial
System Angle
1
Contact  Tension  Cosine 
Laboratory
2
Air-Water 0 1 72 72
Oil-Water 30 0.866 48 42
Air-Mercury 140 0.766 480 368
Air-Oil 0 1 24 24
3
Reservoir
4
Water-Oil 30 0.866 30 26
5
Water-Gas 0 1 50 50
1 Contact angle to apply to Pc data is the receding angle;
likely to be 0 or very low for combination pairs of oil, water, and gas.
2 Air-Brine interfacial tensions are weakly to moderately dependent on salinity
3 Reservoir values listed are typical; given here as examples
4 Crude oil - Brine IFT range from ~10 - 45 at reservoir conditions
5 Gas - Brine IFT ranges from ~30 - 60 depending on temperature, pressure,
gas composition, salinity 46
Air-Brine IFT
Effect of Salt Type & Concentration
Air-Brine IFT at 20 C
as a Function of Compound Concentration
Chemical Handbook (CRC) 1989-90
88
86
%NaCl
84 %KCl
%MgCl2
IFT, dynes/cm
82 %MgSO4
Na2CO3
Na2SO4
NaCl
80
78
76
74
72
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Wt % Solute 47
Crude Oil - Water & Brine IFT
Literature Values
Crude Oil - Water & Brine
INTERFACIAL TENSION vs API Gravity
Published Data: Livingston AIME1938; Firoozabadi & Ramey JCPT1988
45
Livingston: 34 Crudes & Brines (Texas);
ambient conditions
40
Firoozabadi & Ramey : 20 Crudes & water at
elev T&P. Actual API range of 25.4-50.2. API
35 values not given but estimated for plotting here
IFT, dynes/cm
(Mobil research)
30
25
20
P = bubblepoint
P > bubblepoint
15
P ~ STO
Livingston 70 F
10
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
API Gravity (estimated for F&R) 48
Methane - Water IFT
Literature Values
Methane-Water INTERFACIAL TENSION
AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE
Measured Data of Jennings & Newman, SPEJ, June 1971
80
74 F 74 F Measured
INTERFACIAL TENSION, , dynes/cm
70
212 F Measured
350 F Measured
60
212 F
50
350 F
40
30
20
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
PRESSURE, psia
49
Fluid Distribution RECALL
in a HC Reservoir
Well
HC, water-free
Irreducible Water Saturation

Top Transition Zone
D
HC and E
Mobile Water P
Transition Zone T
H
Observed HC-WC
(Pc = Pce)
Free Water Level

(Pc = 0) 0 Swir 100%
Sw
50
Use of CAPILLARY PRESSURE to Define
Initial Reservoir FLUID DISTRIBUTION
•
San Andres Dolomite
In carbonates, Pc curves often trend with 1000 200
porosity. Lower irreducible Sw 20% 8% 6% 4%
Height Above Free Water Level, ft

23 md 1 md 0.5 md 0.2 md
800 160
accompanies higher porosity
Capillary Pressure, psia

•
(Air-Mercury)
600 120
Permeability is sometimes a better Porosity and Permeability
correlating parameter. A combination of 400 80
perm and porosity is sometimes required to 200 40
correlate Pc information
•
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Pc characteristics of these two dolomite Wetting Phase Saturation
formations reflect varying pore geometry.

4% porosity in the Pennsylvanian dolomite 1000
Pennsylvanian Dolomite
200
is pay -- it is not in the San Andres unless
Height Above Free Water Level, ft

large closure exists 800 20% 8% 6% 4% 160
Capillary Pressure, psia

192 md 11 md 2.5 md 0.74 md
•
(Air-Mercury)
Swir is the same for both formations at 20 600 120
Porosity & Permeability

% porosity; however, the transition zones 400 80
vary
200 40
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Wetting Phase Saturation 51
Use of CAPILLARY PRESSURE to Define
Initial Reservoir FLUID DISTRIBUTION
•
Miocene Sand
40 80
Capillary pressure-saturation curves for
sandstone formations typically correlate
32 64
with permeability
3650 md
28.4 %
105 md
26.7 %
1.5 md
22.8 % • The high water saturation in the low
permeability rock reflects high retentive
Capillary Pressure, psig
Height Above FWL, ft

24 48
forces in the pore space

(Air-Water)
16
Permeability & Porosity
32
• Large pore spaces characterize the high
permeability sample, and water retentive
forces are low. A negligible transition zone
8 16 would be expected in a formation of this
type as long as the oil-water density
difference was moderate
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw
• No generalized capillary pressure-saturation relationship exists for all formations.

The variety of pore geometry requires measurement of these relationships within
and for each formation
52
Capillary Pressure
CORRELATING RESULTS
• Capillary Pressure, Sw, & Rock Quality are often

correlatable; knowing 2 terms allows prediction of
the third
• The Rock Quality term may be k, f, or a
combination, such as RQI
(RQI=0.0314*(k/f) 0.5 )
• Many methods have been published to determine
saturation height function
53
Leverett J Function
dynes/cm
J = 0.2166 * Pc * (k/f)0.5 / Cos 

psi md fraction degrees
• Leverett combined the pressure scaling and the rock

quality parameter into “J”
• J vs Sw plots often result in scatter due to variations
in irreducible Sw
• A modified approach correlates J to a reduced, or
normalized Sw, “Sw*”
Sw* = (Sw-Swir)/(1-Swir)
Source: Leverett, AIME Trans 1942 54
Capillary Pressure Data
for Modeling Examples
Productive Formation
AIR-BRINE, POROUS PLATE METHOD
180
54 md 8.4 md 3.1 md 0.25 md
160 16.0 % 11.5 % 9.7 % 6.6 %
Four of six samples
displayed
140
Capillary Pressure, psi
120
Calculate J for each point:
100
J = 0.2166 * Pc * (k/f)0.5 / Cos
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw 55
J vs Sw Example
J vs Sw
9
8
7
6
5
J
4
3
2
1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw
• J vs Sw plots often result in scatter due to

variations in irreducible Sw
• Calculate Sw* for each test point, plot J vs Sw*
56
J vs Sw*
reduced water saturation
10
Laboratory Pc vs Sw
data for 6 samples.
Sw converted to Sw*
1
-1.11195
J = 0.08691(Sw*)
(-1/-1.11195)
Sw* = (0.08691/J)
J
0.1
• Sw* at Pc max (140 psi) = 0, therefore not plotted on log scale

• Correlate Sw @ Pc max vs Rock Quality parameter (e.g., RQI)
• Determine J from interval k, f, Pc (or Height above FWL); Predict Sw*
• Predict Swir (140) for Rock Quality of interest; de-normalize Sw*
0.01
0.01 0.1 1
Swir = Sw at max Pc of
Sw*, (Sw-Swir)/(1-Swir) test; in this example,
max Pc = 140 psi
57
J vs Sw*
Correlate Swir @ Pc max
Sw vs Rock Quality (RQI) vs Pc (Ht)
10
• Only Pcmax correlation

used in example method
here (140 psi)
• Data at other pressures 2 psi
suggest other Pc modeling 4
methods would also work 8
Sw
1 15
35
60
140
-0.493
Swir 140 = 0.127(RQI)
0.1
0.01 0.1 1
RQI, mm, [0.0314*(k/ f) 0.5
] 58
J vs Sw*
Model Results
1
Predicted Sw=
(0.08691/J-1/-1.11195*(1-Swir140 )+Swir140
0.8
J = (0.02167*Pc*(k/f)0.5)/(Cos)
J = (0.08691 (Sw*)-1.11195
Sw, Predicted
0.6
Swir140 = 0.127 (RQI)-0.493
0.4
0.2
y=x
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw, measured at Pc
59
Relationship of
Reservoir Saturations
• Capillary Properties
Relationship of Reservoir Saturations to: • Calibrated Log Response
HEIGHT IN RESERVOIR ABOVE FWL

CAPILLARY PRESSURE
B Sealing Fault
B A
OWC
A
A
OWC OWC
FWL
0 Sw 1
Rt
Sw Profile in Wellbore Logged Interval
60
(After Brown, AAPG Development Geology Reference Manual 1992)
Capillary Pressure Model
for Sw Distribution
Rock Type A B C Sw from Wireline
C Sw trace
Capillary Pressure or Height Above FWL
B
Sedimentary Sequence
C OWC
B OWC
A OWC
FWL
0 1 0 1
Sw Sw
61
IMBIBITION CAPILLARY PRESSURE:
Applications
• To determine Residual Oil or Gas Saturation (Sor

or Sgr) in reservoir
• Compare Sor/Sgr data from capillary pressure
measurements with flood data
• Predict Sor or Sgr in the body of the reservoir
where capillary forces dominate
• Centrifuge technique most common, safety issues
and time with porous plate technique
62
SATURATION HISTORY Effect
• “Drainage & Imbibition” refer to the wetting phase, typically
water.
• At same system pressure, or height, saturations are
Drainage dependent on saturation history or direction of saturation
change

Drainage
Imbibition
WP A
NWP
Imbibition
63
Drainage and Imbibition
Drainage is a decrease
in water saturation
during oil or gas
emplacement)
As we move to
production wetting
phase (water) saturation
may increase as a
function of reducing
capillary pressure.
An imbibition process
64
Spontaneous and Forced Imbibition
As water advances
capillary pressure
decreases to zero
follows an
Spontaneous
Imbibition Curve.
In some situations
water phase pressure
may increase i.e. Pc
becomes negative and
a forced imbibition
curve results
65
Drainage and Imbibition--Centrifuge
Black Squares 1st

cycle drainage and
imbibition.
Triangles are 2nd cycle

drainage
Sw on 2nd cycle is far

easier to drain (drains
at lower capillary
pressure) why?
66
CORE-LOG INTEGRATION EXAMPLES
(1) Density Log Porosity
Grigsby & Langford, AAPG Bulletin, 1996
Neuman, JPT, 1980
Gidman et al, SCA 9411, 1994
(4) Vshale
Reedy & Pepper, SPE 36506, 1996
(5) Resistivity Log Sw
Woodhouse, The Log Analyst, May-June 1998
(6) Resistivity Log Sw
Rathmell et al, SPE 53718, 1999
67

CA COURSE Chapter 10 Capillary Pressure V2013

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

CA COURSE Chapter 10 Capillary Pressure V2013

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Application of Core Analysis

In Reservoir Description &

CHAPTER 10: CAPILLARY PRESSURE

Capillary Pressure Equation 4

• The magnitude of water saturation retained is proportional to the

2  Cos  Rock - Fluid

• Capillary pressure exists whenever two r

 At Equilibrium: Force Up = Force Down

 Cos  Force Up  2  r   Cos 

• Reservoir water saturation decreases with

increased height above the Free Water Level.

• A “minimum” or “irreducible” value is reached if

• The zone of varying water saturation is called

Height Above Water Level

Height Above Water Level

 < 90o  = 90o  > 90o

Height Above Water Level

• Holding other factors constant:

Higher Tension  Higher IFT extends the

• Here,  was held constant at

• Holding other factors constant:

Small Density Difference

Water Free Water Level

Static pressures in a homogeneous reservoir

Irreducible Water Saturation

Free Water Level

Height above FWL or Capillary Pressure

Pd, displacement pressure;

• Predict Sw DISTRIBUTION in reservoir

Non-Wetting Fluid Under

Tissue Paper & Diatomaceous

• Perforated silver membrane

Potential Electrode: Vw

Hydrostatic Core Cell:

• Most straight-forward process & • TIME

equivalent Fm Brine used – dependent on drainage relative

• Apparent equilibrium can be deceptive

 Capillary pressure in this system is proportional to the square of the RPM,

 Several samples can be processed simultaneously in centrifuges.

 Samples can be run at ambient or overburden conditions. Unconsolidated

 This technique is often preferred for unconsolidated core mounted in metal

Constant RPM at Each of

Water Spun From

Comparison Data Set

Field in Equity Dispute

CENTRIFUGE METHOD: • 6-10 pressure points

• Moderate timing (7-10 days) • Pressure & saturation profiles exist

• 3-6 samples tested simultaneously

(rotor-dependent) • Calculations based on assumptions:

• Qv effects accounted for if – uniform pore geometry

 The technique is suitable for low permeability samples. Pressures up to

 Irregular shaped samples may be tested.

 Tests may yield erroneously low water saturations in shaly sands.

 Vuggy samples require special precautions because of large surface pores

Hg • at 50,000 psia, radius of

Manual High Pressure

2  cos Pore Space Controlled by

Mercury Enters the

Pore Radius, microns (1/4 decade bar)

Pore Space Fraction

• Rapid; hours on a prepared sample • Qv effects NOT INCLUDED; data may

• Preparation has 1 less step than

other methods • Sample-destructive

• Best for pore-size - pore-throat • Saturations (1-Hg) < ~5% may be