Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoir PDF

RelativePermeability of Reservoirs Petroleum
Authors
Mehdi Honarpour
of PetroleumEngineering AssociateProfessor Departmentof PetroleumEngineering Montana College of Mineral Scienceand Technology Butte, Montana
Leonard Koederitz
of PetroleumEngineering Professor Departmentof PetroleumEngineering University of Missouri Rolla. Missouri
A. Herbert Harvey
Chairman Department of PetroleumEngineering University of Missouri Rolla, Missouri
@frc')
CRC Press,Inc. Boca Raton, Florida
PREFACE
In 1856 Henry P. Darcy determinedthat the rate of flow of water through a sand filter could be describedby the equation q - : K A h , - h .
L
where q representsthe rate at which water flows downward through a vertical sand pack headsat hydrostatic areaA and length L; the terms h, and h, represent with cross-sectional Darcy's experiments of the sandfilter, and K is a constant. the inlet and outlet, respectively, with were confined to the flow of water through sand packs which were 1007osaturated water. determinedthat Darcy's law could be modified to describethe flow Later investigators of fluids other than water, and that the proportionalityconstantK could be replacedby k/ p, where k is a property of the porous material (permeability)and p is a property of the fluid (viscosity).With this modification,Darcy's law may be written in a more generalform
AS
l-P g o s - d s l u':*L
where S v Z p
g D
dz
dPl
dP dS
Distancein direction of flow, which is taken as positive a unit areaof the porousmedium in unit time along Volume of flux across flow path S Vertical coordinate,which is taken as positivedownward Density of the fluid Gravitationalacceleration gradientalong S at the point to which v. refers Pressure
The volumetric flux v. may be further defined as q/A, where q is the volumetric flow rate to the lines of flow. areaperpendicular and A is the averagecross-sectional It can be shown that the permeabilityterm which appearsin Darcy's law has units of fluid with length squared.A porousmaterialhas a permeabilityof I D when a single-phase the pore spaceof the medium and will flow through a viscosityof I cP completelysaturates area under a pressure cross-sectional it under viscous flow at the rate of I cm3/sec/cm2 gradientof 1 atm/cm. It is important to note the requirementthat the flowing fluid must the porousmedium. Sincethis conditionis seldommet in a hydrocarbon completelysaturate reservoir,it is evident that further modificationof Darcy's law is neededif the law is to be appliedto the flow of fluids in an oil or gas reservoir. A more useful form of Darcy's law can be obtained if we assurnethat a rock which containsmore than one fluid has an effective permeabilityto each fluid phaseand that the The effective saturation. effectivepermeabilityto each fluid is a function of its percentage is equal to the absolute saturated permeabilityof a rock to a fluid with which it is 1007.o permeabilityof the rock. Effective permeabilityto each fluid phase is consideredto be to be immiscible. are considered independent of the other fluid phasesand the phases permeIf we define relativepermeabilityas the ratio of effectivepermeabilityto absolute ability, Darcy's law may be restatedfor a system which containsthree fluid phasesas tirllows:
Vo.:T(0.,*K-*)
V*.:*(o-'13-t)
Vo,:H(o-r#-k)
oil, gas' and water, respectively'Note that k,,,' o, g, and w represent where the subscripts saturations at the respective threefluid phases the to k.", and k,* arethe relativepermeabilities of the phaseswithin the rock' of fluid flow within a hydrocarbon Darcy's law is the basis for almost all calculations the relative permeabilityof determine to necessary is reservoir. In order to use the law, it must be made throughout determination this phases; the reservoirrock to each of the fluid involved in measuring problems The encountered. will be that the rangeof fluid saturations A summary investigators. many by studied been and predictingrelative permeabilityhave chapters' following the in presented is of the major resultsof this research
THE AUTHORS
professorof petroleumengineeringat Dr. Mehdi "Matt" Honarpour is an associate the MontanaCollege of Mineral Scienceand Technology,Butte, Montana. Dr. Honarpour from the Universityof Misengineering his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. in petroleum obtained and core in the areaof reservoirengineering souri-Rolla.He has authoredmany publications engineer,consultant, analysis.Dr. Honarpourhas worked as reservoirengineer,research organizations, and teacherfor the past 15 years. He is a member of severalprofessional of AIME, the honorarysocietyof Sigma Xi, including the Societyof PetroleumEngineers Pi Epsilon Tau and Phi Kappa Phi. Leonard F. Koederitz is a Professorof PetroleumEngineeringat the University of M i ssour i fr omt heU ni vers i t yof M .S ., a n d P h .D .d egrees H ere ce i ve d B .S ., Mis s ouri-Rol l a. previously served as Department and for Atlantic-Richfield has worked Dr. Koederitz Rolla. severaltechnicalpublicationsand two Chairmanat Rolla. He has authoredor co-authored reservoir engineering. related to texts A. Herbert Harvey receivedB.S. and M.S. degreesfrom Colorado School of Mines and a Ph.D. degree from the University of Oklahoma. He has authoredor co-authored numerous on topicsrelatedto the productionof petroleum.Dr. Harvey technicalpublications is Chairman of both the Missouri Oil and Gas Council and the PetroleumEngineering Departmentat the University of Missouri-Rolla.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authorswish to acknowledge the Societyof PetroleumEngineers and the American PetroleumInstitutefor grantingpermission to usetheir publications.Specialthanksare due J. Josephof Flopetrol Johnstonand A. Manjnath of ReservoirInc. for their contributions and reviews throughoutthe writing of this book.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I Measurement of Rock Relative Permeability . Introduction.. . I. Methods.. . Steady-State il. Method Penn-State A. Dynamic Method Single-Sample B. Methods Fluid Stationary C. HasslerMethod. D. Hafford Method E. DispersedFeed Method . F. StateMethods UnsteadyIII. IV. Capillary PressureMethods V. Centrifuge Methods VI. Calculation from Field Data . ... R e f e r e n c e.s Chapter 2 Two-PhaseRelative Permeability Introduction... I. Rapoportand Leas II. III. Gates,Lietz,andFulcher... a n dB u r d i n e . F a t t ,D y k s t r a , IV. a n d Ga rd n e r. W y llie, S pra n g l e r, V. C o re y,a n d Jo h n so n T imme rman , VI. Wahl, Torcaso, and Wyllie VII. VIII. Brooks and Corey XIIX. Wyllie, Gardner,and Torcaso. . . a n dB o a t m a n . . . L a n d ,W y l l i e , R o s e ,P i r s o n , X. Knopp, Honarpouret al., and Hirasaki XI. References..... Chapter 3 Factors Affecting Two-Phase Relative Permeability Introduction... I. Curves RelativePermeability Two-Phase il. S ta te s n. Effec t sof S a tu ra ti o n Effectsof Rock Properties IV. o f W e tta b i l i ty. V. Definiti onan d C a u se s DeterminationofWettability.... VI. A. ContactAngle Method ImbibitionMethod. B. Bureau o f M i n e sM e t h o d C. D. C a p i l l a r i m e t rM i ce t h o d . . . FractionalSurfaceAreaMethod.. E. Method Dye Adsorption F. D r o p T e s tM e t h o d . . G. Methods o f B o b e ke t a l . H. Method MagneticRelaxation I. Methods ResidualSaturation J.
I I 1 I 2 4 4 5 5 6 8 9 10 t2
...... 15 .......15 .. ' 15 .....16 ...... 16 . . . . . ' . 19 . . . . . . 20
27
. . . .27 .... . .29 ...... 30 . . . . . .37 ........41
.... 45 .......45 ....45 . . . . . . 49 .... ... 50 . . . . . . . . 54 .......58 ... 58 .......60 .......63 ......63 ....64 ' ...... .64 .. ...64 ........64 ...64 .. .65
P e r m e a b i l iM t ye t h o d. . . . W a te r-P e rm e a b i l iM tye th o d Conna te M e th o d.... Re lati v e Pe rme a b i l i ty Method Su mma ti o n P e rm e a b i l i ty Re lati v e R a ti oMe th o d P e rm e a b i l i ty Re lati v e Method Waterflood Method Pressure Capillary a. M e th o d In d e x Res is ti v i ty R. Evaluation Wettability FactorsInfluencing VII. Flow Multiphase on VIII. Wettability Influence H i s t o r y . . . . Effects of Saturation IX. .. Pressure Effectsof Overburden X. P e rm e a b i l i ty ... and K ) ( I . E f f ec t sof Po ro s i ty Effectsof Temperature. XII. XIII. Effects of InterfacialTension and Density .;.... . .. of Viscosity XIV. Effects Saturation XV. Effectsof Initial Wetting-Phase XVI. Effects of an Immobile Third Phase XVII. Effects of Other Factors References..... K. L. M. N. O. P. Chapter 4 Three-PhaseRelative Permeability Introduction... I. DrainageRelativePermeability... il. A. Leverettand Lewis and Wyllie Henderson, B. Corey, Rathjens, Reid. C. Snell. D. and Dean Donaldson E. Sarem F. S a r a fa n d F a t t G. WyllieandGardner... H. P e rm e a b i l i ty ... I m bibit ionRe l a ti v e m. Caudle,slobod,andBrownscombe A. N a a ra n dW y g a l . . . . . B. Land. C. D. SchneiderandOwens.... Spronsen E. ProbabilityModels IV. V. E x per im enta l C o n fi rm a ti o n U\/I . Labor at ory Ap p a ra tu s ... for LaboratoryTests PracticalConsiderations VII. VIII. ComparisonofModels References""' Appendix Symbols.
....... 65 ....... 66 .... 66 ........61 ........67 ....... 68 .... . 68 ... . ... 68 .. . 68 . . .72 ......'74 ... ' .. 78 ......79 . .. .82 . . .82 . .. ' ' 83 ... 89 . '. 90 . . .92 ..-.....97
... f 03 ......103 ..'.104 ... ' . . 104 .. 105 .. 107 .. l0g .. . . I l0 .......113 ..... I 15 .'ll5 ...117 .......117 ....I 17 .. 120 .....123 .'..123 . .123 .....126 ..127 .... ' 132 ...'133 """'134
....... 137
Chapter I MEASUREMENT OF ROCK RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
I. INTRODUCTION The relative peffneability of a rock to each fluid phasecan be measuredin a core sample "unsteady-state"methods.In the steady-state method, a fixed by either "steady-state" or ratio of fluids is forced through the test sampleuntil saturation and pressure equilibria are established.Numerous techniqueshave been successfully employed to obtain a uniform saturation.The primary concern in designingthe experimentis to eliminate or reducethe gradientwhich is causedby capillary pressure saturation effectsat the outflow boundaryof the core. Steady-state methodsare preferred to unsteady-state methods by someinvestigators wettability,' althoughsomedifficulty hasbeenreportedin applying for rocks of intermediate the Hasslersteady-state method to this type of rock.2 ln the capillary pressure method,only the nonwettingphaseis injectedinto the core during the test. This fluid displacesthe wetting phaseand the saturations of both fluids change throughout the test. Unsteady-state techniquesare now employed for most laboratory measurementsof relative permeability.3 Some of the more commonly used laboratory methods for measuringrelative perrneability are describedbelow.
METHODS II. STEADY-STATE

A. Penn-State Method This steady-state method for measuringrelative perrneability was designedby Morse et and Geffen and Yuster,6Caudleet a1.,7 al.a and later modified by Osobaet aI.,5 Henderson et al.8 The version of the apparatuswhich was describedby Geffen et al., is illustrated by Figure l. In order to reduce end effects due to capillary forces, the sample to be tested is mounted between two rock sampleswhich are similar to the test sample. This arrangement also promotes thorough mixing of the two fluid phasesbefore they enter the test sample. The laboratory procedure is begun by saturatingthe sample with one fluid phase (such as water) and adjustingthe flow rate of this phasethrough the sampleuntil a predetermined pressure gradientis obtained.Injection of a secondphase(such as a gas) is then begun at differential low rate and flow of the first phaseis reducedslightly so that the pressure a is reached, the two flow After an equilibrium condition system remains constant. acrossthe phase is percentage within the test sample saturation of each rates are recordedand the procedure weighing it. This from the assernbly and determined by removing the test sample introducesa possible sourceof experimental error, since a small amount of fluid may be that the core be gas evaporation. One authorityrecommends lost because of expansionand problem same of liquid film on the of obtaining the amount wgighedunder oil, eliminating weighing.3 the surfaceof the core for each by measuringelectric resistivityis a fasterprocedure The estimationof water saturation obtained by a resistivity than weighing the core. However, the accuracyof saturations measurement is questionable, sinceresistivitycan be influencedby fluid distributionas well as fluid saturations. The four-electrode assemblywhich is illustratedby Figure I was used when flow equilibriumhas been water saturation distributionand to determine to investigate of fluid saturation attained.Other methodswhich have been used for in situ determination neutron nuclearmagneticresonance, in cores include measurement of electric capacitance, scattering,X-ray absorption,gamma-rayabsorption,volumetric balance,vacuum distillation, and microwavetechniques.
RelativePermeabilin of PetroleumReservoirs
El-ectrodes Inlet
Outl-et
Differential Taps
FIGURE l.
Pressure
Inlet
Three-section core assembly.8
After fluid saturationin the core has been determined,the Penn-State apparatusis reassembled,a new equilibrium condition is established at a higher flow rate for the second phase, and fluid saturationsare determinedas previously described.This procedureis repeated sequentially at higher saturationsof the second phase until the complete relative permeability curve has been established. The Penn-Statemethod can be used to measurerelative permeability at either increasing or decreasingsaturationsof the wetting phaseand it can be applied to both liquid-liquid and gas-liquid systems.The direction of saturationchangeused in the laboratoryshould correspondto field conditions. Good capillary contactbetweenthe test sampleand the adjacent downstream core is essential for accurate measurements and temperaturemust be held constantduring the test. The time required for a test to reach an equilibrium condition may be I day or more.3 B. Single-Sample Dynamic Method This technique for steady-state measurement of relative permeability was developedby Richardsonet al.,e Josendal et al.,ro and Loomis and Crowell.ttThe apparatus and experimental procedure differ from those used with the Penn-Statetechnique primarily in the handling of end effects. Rather than using a test samplemountedbetweentwo core samples (as illustrated by Figure 1), the two fluid phases are injectedsimultaneously through a single core. End effects are minimized by using relatively high flow rates, so the region of high wetting-phase saturationat the outlet faceof the core is small. The theorywhich was presented by Richardson et al. for describing the saturationdistribution within the core may be dethrough a horizontallinear veloped as follows. From Darcy's law, the flow of two phases systemcan be describedby the equations -d P* , : Q*, F*,dL k*, A (l)
and Q.i ^ Fr" dL ,n -d Pn:=
Q)
where the subscriptswt and n denotethe wetting and nonwettingphases,respectively.From the definition of capillary pressure,P", it follows that
1.0
\o \.o
>{ -i- ^ -o-
o
Theoretical saturation gradient
fnf low face
1>
0 5 10 15 20 25 Distance from Outflow Face, cffi

FIGURE 2. Comparison of saturationgradientsat low flow rate.e
dP.:dP.-dP*, These three equationsmay be combined to obtain
(3)
qP.
dL
_ 9"U=\ / o : /Q*, Fr,*,

\ k* , kn //
(4)
where dP"/dL is the capillary pressuregradient within the core. Since
dP. : dP. ds*, dS*, dL dL

it is evident that dS*, dL
(s)
: A |\
/Q*, Fr*, - Q"p.\
k*
L" /op.rus*
(6)
Richardson et al. concluded from experimentalevidence that the nonwetting phase saturation at the dischargeend of the core was at the equilibrium value, (i.e., the saturation at which the phase becomes mobile). With this boundary condition, Equation 6 can be integrated graphically to yield the distribution of wetting phase saturationthroughout the core. If the flow rate is sufficiently high, the calculation indicates that this saturation is virtually constant from the inlet face to a region a few centimetersfrom the outlet. Within increases to the equilibriumvalue at the outlet face. this region the wetting phasesaturation Both calculations and experimental evidence show that the region of high wetting-phase saturationat the discharge end of the core is larger at low flow rates than at high rates. Figure 2 illustrates the saturationdistribution for a low flow rate and Figure 3 shows the distribution at a higher rate.
Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs
1.0
't o I -o-o- -o--o-- :- -- : - J
Theoretical saturation gradient
I n fr o wr a c "
a>l
10
15
20
25
Distance from Outflow Face, ctrl

FIGURE 3. Comparison of saturationgradients at high flow rate.e
Although the flow rate must be high enoughto control capillary pressure effects at the dischargeend of the core, excessiveratesmust be avoided. Problemswhich can occur at very high rates include nonlaminarflow. C. Stationary Fluid Methods Leas et al.12 described a technique for measuring permeabilityto gaswith the liquid phase held stationarywithin the core by capillary forces. Very low gur flo* ratesmust be used, so the liquid is not displaced during the test. This technique was modified slightly by Osoba et al.,s who held the liquid phasestationary within the core by meansof barrierswhich were permeable to gas but not to the liquid. Rapoportand Leasr3employeda similar technique using semipermeable barrierswhich held the gas phasestationary while allowing the liquid phaseto flow. Corey et al.ra extendedthe stationaryfluid methodto a three-phar.ryri.. by using barrierswhich were permeable to water but impermeable to oil and gas. Osobaet al. observed that relative permeability to gas determinedby the stationary liquid method was in good agreementwith values measuredby other techniquesfor some of the cases which were examined. However, they found that relative permeability to gas determinedby the stationary liquid technique was generally lower than by other methodsin the region of equilibrium gas saturation. This situation resulted in an equilibrium gas saturation value which was higher than obtained by the other methods used (Penn-Siate,Single-Sample Dynamic, and Hassler). Saraf and McCaffery consider the stationaryfluid methods to be unrealistic, since all mobile fluids are not permitted to flow simultaneouslyduring the test.2 D. Hassler Method This is a steady-state method for relative permeability measurement which was described by Hasslerrsin 1944. The technique was later studied and modified by Gates and Lietz,16 Brownscombeet ?1.," Osoba et al.,s and Josendalet al.ro The laboratory apparatusis illustrated by Figure 4. Semipermeable membranesare installed at each end of the Hassler test assembly.Thesemembranes keep the two fluid phases separated at the inlet and outlet of the core, but allow both phasesto flow simultaneously through the core. The pressure
FLOWMETER
FIGURE 4.
Two-phase relative permeability apparatus.r5
barrier. By adjusting through a semipermeable in each fluid phaseis measuredseparately gradients in the two phases can be made the flow rate of the nonwettingphase,the pressure at the inlet and outlet of the core. This procedure equal, equalizingthe capillary pressures throughoutthe length of the core, even at low is designedto provide a uniform saturation flow rates, and thus eliminate the capillary end effect. The techniqueworks well under conditionswhere the porousmedium is stronglywet by one of the fluids, but somedifficulty wettability.2'r8 has been reported in using the procedureunder conditionsof intermediate The Hasslermethod is not widely used at this time, since the data can be obtainedmore rapidly with other laboratorytechniques. E. Hafford Method technique was describedby Richardsonet al.e In this method the nonThis steady-state wetting phase is injected directly into the sample and the wetting phaseis injected through a disc which is impermeableto the nonwetting phase.The central portion of the semipermeable disc is isolated from the remainder of the disc by a small metal sleeve, as illustrated by Figure 5. The central portion of the disc is used to measurethe pressurein the wetting fluid at the inlet of the sample. The nonwetting fluid is injected directly into the sample and its pressureis measuredthrough a standardpressuretap machined into the Lucite@surrounding the sample. The pressuredifference betweenthe wetting and the nonwetting fluid is a measureof the capillary pressurein the sample at the inflow end. The design of the Hafford apparatusfacilitates investigationof boundary effects at the influx end of the core. The outflow boundary effect is minimized by using a high flow rate. F. Dispersed Feed Method method for measuringrelative permeability which was designedby This is a steady-state dynamic methRichardsonet al.e The techniqueis similar to the Hafford and single-sample
GAS
G A S P R E S S U R EG A U G E
PRESSURE
PRESSURE GAS METER
OIL BURETTE FIGURE 5. Hafford relative permeability apparatus.e
ods. In the dispersedfeed method, the wetting fluid enters the test sample by first passing through a dispersingsection, which is made of a porous material similar to the test sample. This material does not contain a device for measuringthe input pressure of the wetting phase as does the Hafford apparatus. The dispersingsectiondistributes the wetting fluid so that it entersthe test samplemore or less uniformly over the inlet face. The nonwettingphaseis introduced into radial grooves which are machined into the outlet face of the dispersing section,at thejunction betweenthe dispersingmaterialand the testsample.Pressure gradients used for the tests are high enough so the boundary effect at the outlet face of the core is not significant.
III. UNSiuoo"-STATEMETHoDS
Unsteady-state relative permeability measurements can be made more rapidly than steadystate measurements, but the mathematicalanalysisof the unsteady-state procedureis more difficult. The theory developed by Buckley and Leverettre and extended by Welge2ois generally used for the measurement of relative permeabilityunder unsteady-state conditions. The mathematicalbasis for interpretationof the test data may be summarizedas follows: Leverett2rcombined Darcy's law with a definition of capillary pressurein differential form to obtain
'*;h(*-eApsino)
f*z
r + In.&
k* Fo
(71
where f*, is the fraction water in the outlet stream;q, is the superficialvelocity of total fluid leaving the core; 0 is the angle between direction x and horizontal; and Ap is the density
7 difference between displacing and displaced fluids. For the case of horizontal flow and negligible capillary pressure,Welge2oshowed that Equation 7 implies
S*.u, S*z : f.r, Q*
( 8)
is the average 2 denotes water saturation; the outlet end of the core, S*.ou wherethe subscript in pore volumes.SinceQ* and S*.,ucan and Q* is the cumulativewater injected,measured experimentally,f", (fraction oil in the outlet stream)can be determinedfrom be measured By definition the slope of a plot of Q* as a function of S*,ou. l,z:q,,/(q,,*q*) By combining this equationwith Darcy's law, it can be shown that f,,r: t * I
I1.,/K..,
(e)
'
tlOt
tr/.,* Since p" and pw are known, the relative permeability ratio k.o/k.* can be determinedfrom Equation 10. A similar expression can be derived for the caseof gas displacingoil. The work of Welge was extendedby Johnsonet a1.22 to obtain a technique (sometimes calledthe JBN method) for calculatingindividual phaserelativepermeabilities from unsteadystate test data. The equationswhich were derived are k.. :
.(#) /,(a
f,,, t.z ttr. injectivity
(Il)
and
k.o: ltoo,,,
where I,, the ?elative injectivity, is defined as I,:
(12)
initial injectivity (q*,/Ap) (q*,/Ap) at start of injection
(l 3 )
A graphical technique for solving Equations 1l and 12 is illustrated in Reference L3.. Relationships describing relative permeabilities in a gas-oil system may be obtained by "w" with "g" in EquationslI,12, and 13. replacing the subscript In designingexperimentsto determinerelative permeabilityby the unsteady-state method, it is necessarvthat:
l. 2. 3. 4.
gradientbe large enoughto minimize capillary pressure The pressure effects. The pressure differential across the core be sufficiently small compared with total operatingpressureso that compressibility effects are insignificant. The core be homogeneous. The driving force and fluid propertiesbe held constantduring the test.2
Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs Laboratory equipment is available for making the unsteady-state measurements under simulated reservoirconditions.2a In addition to the JBN method, several alternative techniquesfor determining relative permeabilityfrom unsteady-state test data have been proposed.Saraf and McCaffery2developed a procedurefor obtainingrelative permeabilitycurves from two parameters determined by least squaresfit of oil recovery and pressuredata. The technique is believed to be superior to the JBN method for heterogeneous carbonatecores. Jones and Roszelle25 developed a graphical technique for evaluation of individual phase relative permeabilities from displacementexperimentaldata which are linearly scalable.Chavent et al. described a method for determining two-phaserelative permeability and capillary pressurefrom two sets of displacementexperiments,one set conductedat a high flow rate and the other at a rate representative of reservoir conditions. The theory of Welge was extendedby Sarem to describerelative permeabilities in a systemcontainingthree fluid phases.Sarememployed a simplifying assumptionthat the relative permeabilityto each phasedependsonly on its (particularly own saturation, and the validity of this assumption with respect to the oil phase) has beenquestioned.2 Unsteady-state relative permeability measurements are frequently used to determine the ratios k*/ko, ks/k", and kr/k*. The ratio k*/k" is usedto predict the performanceof reservoirs which are produced by waterflood or natural water drive; kr/k" is employed to estimatethe production which will be obtained from recovery processes where oil is displacedby gas, such as gas injection or solution gas drive. An important use of the ratio k*/k* is in the prediction of performanceof natural gas storagewells, where gas is injectedinto an aquifier. The ratios k*/ko, kg/ko,and kr/k* are usually measuredin a systemwhich containsonly the two fluids for which the relative permeability ratio is to be determined. It is believed that expeciallyin sandstones the connatewater in the reservoirmay have an influenceon kg/k.,, which contain hydratableclay minerals and in low permeabilityrock. For these types of reservoirsit may be advisableto measurek*/k.,in cores which contain an immobile water saturation.2a
IV. CAPILLARYPRESSURE METHODS

The techniqueswhich are usedfor calculatingrelative permeabilityfrom capillary pressure data were developedfor drainagesituations,where a nonwettingphase(gas) displacesa wetting phase(oil or water). Thereforeuse of the techniques is generallylimited to gas-oil or gas-watersystems,where the reservoiris producedby a drainageprocess.Although it is possibleto calculaterelativepermeabilities in a water-oil systemfrom capillary pressure data, accuracyof this techniqueis uncertain;the displacement of oil by water in a waterwet rock is an imbibition processrather than a drainageprocess. Although capillary pressure techniques arenot usuallythe preferredmethodsfor generating relative permeability data, the methodsare useful for obtaining gas-oil or gas-waterrelative permeabilitieswhen rock samplesare too small for flow testsbut large enough for mercury injection. The techniquesare also useful in rock which has such low permeability that flow testsare impractical and for instanceswhere capillary pressuredata have been measured but a sampleof the rock is not availablefor measuringrelative permeability. Another use which has been suggestedfor the capillary pressuretechniquesis in estimating kr/k" ratios for retrogradegas condensate reservoirs, where oil saturationincreasesas pressuredecreases, with an initial oil saturationwhich may be as low as zero. The capillary pressuremethods are recommendedfor this situation becausethe conventionalunsteady-state test is not designed for very low oil saturations. Data obtainedby mercury injection are customarilyused when relative permeabilityis estimated by the capillary pressure technique.The core is evacuated and mercury(which is
9 pressures. Approxat increasing increments the nonwettingphase)is injectedin measured to yield the complete testdesigned imately 20 datapoints are obtainedin a typical laboratory relativepermeabilityby the methcurve, which is requiredfor calculating capillarypressure ods describedbelow. for estimatingrelative permeabilityfrom have developedequations Severalinvestigators presented the equations data. Purcell2e capillary pressure
fs*i
k.*, :
l,
fl
dS/pi
(l4)
t
and
dS/Pi
JSo i
I' ds/p!
fl
k.n*,:
(l 5 )
J,
dS/pi
where the subscriptswt and nwt denotethe wetting and nonwettingphases,respectively, developedsimilar equationswith n equal to and n has a value of 2.0. Fatt and Dykstra3o 3.0. developed by Burdine3l A slightly different result is obtainedby combiningthe equations The resultsare with the work of Purcell.2e
(l6)
(l7)
where S, is the total liquid saturation.
METHODS V. CENTRIFUGE
Centrifuge techniquesfor measuringrelative permeability involve monitoring liquids produced from rock sampleswhich were initially saturateduniformly with one or two phases. to the rock sampleholdersand production tubesconnected Liquids are collectedin transparent is monitored throughout the test. Mathematicaltechniquesfor deriving relative permeability are describedin References26, 27, and 28. data from these measurements have not beenwidely used,they do offer someadvantages methods the centrifuge Although methodsare substantiallyfaster than the steadyThe centrifuge techniques. over alternative statetechniquesand they apparentlyare not subjectto the viscousfingering problems which On the other hand, the centrifuge measurements. sometimesinterfere with the unsteady-state problems and they do not provide a means for end effect capillary subject to methods are phase. invading permeability to the relative determining describean automatedcentrifuge which employs a photodiodearray O'Mera and Lease28 to image and identify liquids producedduring the test. microcomputer with a in conjunction
t0
Relative Permeabiliy of Petroleum Reservoirs
CAMER CENTRIFUGE
COMPUTER
o z
LIQUID PRODUCTION
LIJ
o U'
IJJ
o o uJ
LIJ
tr o o
J
oa)
TROBE
CONTROLLER
SPEEDDISK SPEED SET POINT
FIGURE 6.
Automated centrifuge system.28
Stroboscopiclights are located below the rotating tubes and movement of fluid interfaces is monitored by the transmitted light. Fluid collection tubes are square in cross section, since a cylindrical tube would act as a lens and concentrate the light in a narrow band along the major axis of the tube. A schematicdiagram of the apparatusis shown by Figure 6.
VI. CALCULATION FROM FIELD DATA

It is possibleto calculaterelative permeability ratios directly from field data.23Inmaking the computation it is necessaryto recognize that part of the gas which is produced at the surface was dissolved within the liquid phasein the reservoir. Thus; (produced gas) : (free gas) * (solutiongas) (18)
If we consider the flow of free gas in the reservoir, Darcy's law for a radial system may be written kh P.- P -w (r./r*) ln FrB,
9g.fr""
?.09-E-e
(l9)
ll
FIGURE 7.
Calculation of gas-oil relative permeability values from production data.
Similarly, the rate of oil flow in the same system is
(20)
where r* is the well radius and r" is the radius of the external boundary of the area drained by the well. B" and B, are the oil and gas formation volume factors, respectively.The ratio of free gas to oil is obtained by dividing Equation 19 by Equation 20. lt we expressRo, cumulative gas/oil ratio and R,, solution gasioil ratio, in terms of standardcubic foot per stock tank barrel, Equation l8 implies
*'* *. R o : s . 6 t s l ube
Ko ltrs
(2t)
Thus, the relative permeability ratio is given by k" _ ( R o- R . ) & - ! !

ko
5.615 B. F.
(22)
to this relative permeabilityratio may be determined The oil saturationwhich corresponds we assumethere is no water influx, no water production, no from a material balance. If gas cap, the materialbalanceequationmay be written fluid injection, and no
S.: (t- too,) *,t-
s*)
(23)
where minor effects such as changein reservoirpore volume have been assumednegligible. In Equation 23 the symbol N denotesinitial stock tank barrelsof oil in place; No is number of stock tank barrels of oil produced;and B", is the ratio of the oil volume at initial reservoir conditions to oil volume at standardconditions. If total liquid saturationin the reservoir is expressedas
s,:s*+(r-s*)(\})
(*)
(24)
then the relative permeability curve may be obtainedby plotting kr/k" from Equation 22 as a function of S,- from Equation 24. Figure 7 illustrates a convenientformat for tabulating the data. The curve is preparedby plotting column 9 as a flnction of column 6 on semilog paper, with k/k" on the logarithmicscale.The techniqueis useful even if only a few highliquid-saturation data points can be plotted. These kr/k" values can be used to verify the accuracyof relative permeability predicted by empirical or laboratory techniques. Poor agreementbetween relative permeability determined from production data and from may include laboratory experiments is not uncommon. The causesof these discrepancies the following:
t2
l. 2.
Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs The core on which relative permeability is measuredmay not be representative of the reservoir in regard to such factors as fluid distributions, secondaryporosity, etc. The techniquecustomarily used to compute relative permeability from field data does not allow for the pressureand saturationgradientswhich are presentin the reservoir, nor does it allow for the fact that wells may be producing from several strata which are at various stagesof depletion. The usual techniquefor calculating relative permeability from field data assumes that Ro at any pressureis constant throughout the oil zone. This assumptioncan lead to computational errors if gravitational effects within the reservoir are significant.
3.
When relative permeability to water is computed from field data, a common source of elror is the production of water from some source other than the hydrocarbon reservoir. These possible sourcesof extraneouswater include casing leaks, fracturesthat extend from the hydrocarbon zone into an aquifer, etc.
REFERENCES
l. Gorinik, B. and Roebuck, J. F., Formation Evaluation through Extensive Use of Core Analysis, Core L a b o r a t o r i e sI,n c . , D a l l a s ,T e x . , 1 9 7 9 . 2. Saraf, D. N. and McCaffery, F. G., Two- and Three-Phase RelativePermeabilities: a Review, Petroleum Recovery InstituteReport #81-8, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1982. 3. Mungan, N., PetroleumConsultants Ltd., personalcommunication,1982. 4. Morse, R. A., Terwilliger, P. L., and Yuster, S. T., Relative permeabilitymeasurements on small samples, Oil GasJ., 46, 109, 1947. 5. Osoba, J. S., Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A., and Blair, P. M., Laboratoryrelative permeabilitymeasurements, Trans. AIME, 192, 47, 1951. 6 . H e n d e r s o n ,J . H . a n d Y u s t e r , S . T . , R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y s t u d y , W o r l dO i l , 3 , 1 3 9 , 1 9 4 8 . 7. Caudle, B. H., Slobod, R. L., and Brownscombe, E. R. W., Further developments in the laboratory determination of relative permeability,Trans. AIME, 192, 145, 1951. 8. Geffen, T. M., Owens, W. W., Parrish, D. R., and Morse, R. A., Experimental investigation of factors affecting laboratory relative permeability Teasurements,Trans. AIME, 192, 99, 1951. 9. Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A., and Osoba, J. S., Laboratory determination of relative permeability,Trans. AIME, 195, 187, 1952. 10. Josendal, V. A., Sandiford, B. B., and Wilson, J. W., Improved multiphaseflow studiesemploying radioactive tracers, Trans. AIME, 195, 65, 1952. I l. Loomis, A. G. and Crowell, D. C., RelativePermeability Studies:Gas-Oil and Water-Oil Systems,U.S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin BarHeuillr, Okla., 1962,599. 12. Leas, W. J., Jenks, L. H., and Russell, Charles D., Relativepermeabilityto gas, Trans. AIME, 189,
65,r 9s 0.
13. Rapoport, L. A. and Leas, W. J., Relative permeabilityto liquid in liquid-gassystems,Trans. AIME, 1 9 2 ,9 3 , l 9 5 l . 14. Corey, A. T., Rathjens, C. H., Henderson, J. H., and Wyllie, M. R. J., Three-phase relativepermea b i l i t y , J . P e t . T e c h n o l . ,N o v . , 6 3 , 1 9 5 6 . 1 5 . H a s s l e r , G . L . , U . S . P a t e n t2 , 3 4 5 , 9 3 5 , 1 9 4 4 . 16. Gates, J. I. and Leitz, W. T., Relative permeabilitiesof California coresby the capillary-pressure method, Drilling and Production Practices, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C. 1950, 285. 17. Brownscombe, E. R., Slobod, R. L., and Caudle, B. H., Laboratory determination of relative perrnea b i l i t y ,O i l G a s J . , 4 8 , 9 8 , 1 9 5 0 . 18. Rose, W., Some problemsin applying the Hasslerrelativepermeabilitymethod,J. Pet. Technol.,8, I l6l, 1980. 19. Buckley, S. E. and Leverett, M. C., Mechanismof fluid displacement in sands,Trans. AIME, 146,107, 1942. 20. Welge'H.J.rAsimplifiedmethodforcomputingrecoverybygasorwaterdrive,Trans.A|ME , 5,91, 19 1952. 21. Leverett, M. C., Capillary behaviorin poroussolids, Trans. AIME, 142, 152, 1941.
13
22. Johnson, E. F., Bossler, D. P., and Naumann, V. O., Calculationof relative permeabilityfrom displacementexperiments,Trans. AIME, 216,310, 1959. 23. Crichlow, H. B., Ed., Modern ReservoirEngineering- A SimulationApproaclr, Prentice-Hall,Englewood Cliffs, 1977, chap. 7. 24. SpecialCore Analysis, Core Laboratories, Inc., Dallas, 1976. 25. Jones, S. C. and Roszelle, W. O., Graphical techniquesfor determining relative permeability from displacement experiments, J. Pet. Technol., 5, 807, 1978. 26. Slobod, R. L., Chambers, A., and Prehn, W. L., Use of centrifugefor determiningconnate water, residualoil, and capillary pressure curvesof small core samples,Trans. AIME, 192, 127, 1952. 27 . Yan Spronsen, E., Three-phase relative permeabilitymeasurements using the CentrifugeMethod, Paper SPE/DOE 10688presented at the Third Joint Symposium,Tulsa, Okla., 1982. 28. O'Mera, D. J., Jr. and Lease, W. O., Multiphaserelativepermeability measurements using an automated centrifuge,PaperSPE 12128presented at the SPE 58th Annual TechnicalConference and Exhibition, San Francisco.1983. - their measurement 29. Purcell, W. R., Capillarypressures usingmercuryand the calculation of permeability therefrom, Trans. AIME, 186, 39. 1949. 30. Fatt, I. and Dyksta, H.,,Relative permeabilitystudies,Trans. AIME, 192,41, 1951. 31. Burdine, N. T., RelativePermeability Calculations from Pore Size DistributionData, Trans. AIME, lg8, 7t,1953.
l5 Chapter 2 TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
I. INTRODUCTION to determinerelative permeabilityof porous rock has Direct experimentalmeasurement literature.However, empirical methodsfor deterpetroleum related in recorded been long more widely used, particularlywith the advent becoming are permeability relative mining of digital reservoirsimulators.The generalshapeof the relative permeabilitycurves may k.* : A(S*)'; k.., : B(l - S*)"'; where A, by the following equations: be approximated B. n. and m are constants. Most relative permeability mathematicalmodels may be classifiedunder one of four categories: that a porous medium consistsof a Capillary models - Are basedon the assumption path lengthlongerthan the sample. fluid with a diameters various of tubes of capillary bundle porous media and frequentlydo not nature of interconnected the ignore models Capillary provide realisticresults. Statistical models - Are also basedon the modeling of porous media by a bundle of distributedrandomly. The modelsmay be described capillary tubes with various diameters to the axes of as being divided into a large number of thin slicesby planesperpendicular Again, randomly. reassembled and rearranged be to imagined are The slices the tubes. statisticalmodels have the same deficiencyof not being able to model the interconnected natureof porous media. describingexperiEmpirical models - Are basedon proposedempirical relationships haveprovi{ed the most successful and in general, relativepermeabilities mentallydetermined approximations. Netwoik models - Are frequentlybasedon the modelingof fluid flow in porousmedia using a network of electric resistorsas an analogcomputer.Network models are probably fluid flow in porousmedia'r'aa the best tools for understanding The hydrodynamiclaws generallybear little use in the solutionof problemsconcerning fluid flow through porous media, let alone multiphasefluid flow, due to the single-phase complexity of the porous system. One of the early attemptsto relate severallaboratoryThis equation equation.2 parameters to rock permeabilitywas the Kozeny-Carmen measured the permeabilityof a porousmaterialas a function of the productof the effective expresses throughwhich path lengthof the flowing fluid and the meanhydraulicradiusof the channels the fluid flows. Purcell3formulated an equation for the permeability of a porous system in terms of the the curve of that systemby simply considering desaturation porosity and capillary pressure porousmedium as a bundle of capillary tubesof varying sizes. and Purcellto the by Kozeny-Carmen adaptedthe relationsdeveloped Severalauthorsa-r6 modelson the basisof the assumption They all proposed of relativepermeability. computation that a porous medium consistsof a bundle of capillariesin order to apply Darcy's and Poiseuille'sequationsin their derivations.They used the tortuosityconceptor texture paas opposedto the concept rametersto take into accountthe tortuouspath of the flow channels of capillary tubes. They tried to determinetortuosityempirically in order to obtain a close approximation of experimentaldata.
AND LEAS II. RAPOPORT

to the wettingphase. for relativepermeability presented two equations Rapoportand Lease
16
Theseequationswere basedon surfaceenergyrelationships and the Kozeny-Carmen equawere presented tion. The equations as defining limits for wetting-phase relativepermeability. The maximum and minimum wetting-phase relativepermeabilitypresented by Rapoport and Leas are
k.*,(max) :
fs*
(l)
t'ot Jr*,
(tj)(T#)'
.['*'
fs-
,['*'
P. dS
and P. dS
fS*,
: (ti k,*,(min) - j; )'
(2)
P . d s +|
' J
R.as
whereS- represents the minimum irreduciblesaturation of the wetting phasefrom a drainage capillary pressure curve, expressed as a fraction;S*, represents the saturation of the wetting phasefor which the wetting-phase relativepermeability is evaluated, expressed as a fraction; P. represents the drainagecapillary pressure expressed in psi and S represents the porosity expressed as a fraction. III. GATES. LIETZ. AND FULCHER Gatesand Lietzsdeveloped the following expression based on Purcell'smodel for wettingphaserelative permeability:
t. K.*r
_ -
ru I$
(3)
Fulcher et al.,ashave investigated the influenceof capillary number (ratio of viscousto capillary forces)on two-phaseoil-water relativepermeabilitycurves.
IV. FATT, DYKSTRA,AND BURDINE

Fatt and Dykstrarr developedan expression for relativepermeabilityfollowing the basic methodof Purcell for calculatingthe permeabilityof a porousmedium. They considered a lithology factor (a correction for deviation of the path length from the length of the porous medium) to be a function of saturation.They assumed that the radius of the path of the conductingpores was relatedto the lithology factor, tr, by the equation:
\ : -
a
ro
(4)
L7 Table I CALCULATION OF WETTING.PHASERELATIVE PERMEABILITY BASED ON THE FATT AND DYKSTRA EQUATION
S*, Vo
P", cm Hg
l/P"'], (cm Hg)-t
Area from 0 to S*, in.2
k.*,, Vo
100 90 80 '70 60 s0 40 30 20 ' "
4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.7 7.s 8.7 13.0
0.0156 0.0110 0.0080 0.0060 0.0046 0.0033 0.0024 0.00 15 0.0005
n.25
7.88 5.54 3.80 2.49 t.50 0.75 0.30 0.20
100.0 70.0, 49.2b 33.8 22.1 13.3 6.1 2.7 0.4
7 . 8 8 / 1 1 . 2x 5 1 0 0: 7 0 . 0 . x5 l 0 O : 4 9 . 2 . 5.54111.2
where r represents the radius of a pore, a and b represent material constants,and }, is a function of saturation. The equationfor the wetting-phase relativepermeability, k.*,, reported by Fatt and Dykstra is
ft*'
t
ds
-
K.*, :
Jn
P2(l
+ b)
* b) Jo P2(|
l.r
dS
(5)
Fatt and Dykstra found good agreementwith observeddata when b : Equation 5 to
r/r, reducing
TF
ft*' ds Jo P:
(6)
They statedthat their equation fit their own data as well as the data of Gatesand Lietz more accuratelythan other proposedmodels. The procedurefor the calculation of relative permeability from capillary pressuredata is illustrated by Table I and the results are shown in Figures I and 2. Burdine'3 reportedequationsfor computing relative perrneabilityfor both the wetting and nonwettingphases.His equationscan be shown to reduceto a form similar to thosedeveloped by Purcell. Burdine's contribution is principally useful in handling tortuosity. Defining the tortuosity factor for a pore as L when the porous medium is saturatedwith only one fluid and using the symbol tr*, for the wetting-phasetortuosity factor when two phasesare present, a tortuosity ratio can be defined as
T tr.*,: ;
(7)
l8
RelativePermeabilitvof PetroleumReservoirs
9 I | 7 Pol (cm Hg) 6 5 4 3 2 I
oo' lo 20
FIGURE 1.
40 50 60 70 80
Sw+
as a function of water saturation. Capillary pressure
then
/'*' {^,*,)'ds/(\)'(P.)'
kr*,
(8)
/'0r,1^;'1r.y'
If tr is a constantfor the porous medium and tr,*t dependsonly on the final saturation,then
fS*'
k.*t :
(tr.*.)' rl
ds/(P.)r
(9)
t ds/(p")l
In a similar fashion, the relative permeabilityto the nonwetting phasecan be expressed tortuosity ratio, tr,,*,, utilizing a nonwetting-phase
fl
JS*t
k.n*,:
(trrn*,)'
I dst1e.)'
(l0)
J"
Burdine has shown that
-
ds/(P.)2
S*,- S1 - S -
Arwt
(lt)
l9
r60 r50 r40 r30 t20

l l
roo
90
t
70 60 50 40 30 20
Pc3 | (CmHqi3
to
o5
lo 20 30 40 50 60 70
Sw -+
of water pressure)r as a function of (capillary Reciprocal il,;yul}: curve. the minimum wetting-phasesaturationfrom a capillary-pressure where S- represents nonwetting The saturation. at this zero The relative perrneability is assumedto approach phasetortuosity can be approximatedby . Sn*t-- S' \ -r^n . .w ,.: t l-s*-s" (12)
where S. is the equilibrium saturationto the nonwetting phase. The expressionfor the wetting phase(Equation 9) fit the data presentedmuch better than the expressionfor the nonwetting phase (Equation 10).
AND GARDNER V. WYLLIE, SPRANGLER,

Wyllie and Spranglertz reported equations similar to those presentedby Burdine for computing oil and gas relative permeability. Their equationscan be expressedas follows:
fs" J os"rp;
k,,,: (iil'
(l 3 )
/' or",rl
Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs
A I a
o WYLLIE ond SPANGLER
GATESond LIETZ
i l | | t l
B E R E AN O . 4
o.
FIGURE 3. data.rT
Reciprocalof (capillary pressure)r as a function of saturationfor normalized
k,* (r-r+" _ S*,/ )' !Y or",r3

/'
(t4l
where S- representsthe lowest oil saturationat which the gas phase is discontinuous:S: (l - S " . ) . The above equations for oil and gas relative permeabilities may be evaluated when a reliable drainage capillary pressurecurve of the porous medium is available, so that a plot of llP"2 as a function of oil saturation can be constructed. Obviously, reliable valuesof Sand So.are also neededfor the oil and gas relative permeability evaluation. Figure 3 shows some examplesof llP.2 vs. saturation curves.rT Wyllie and GardnerrTdeveloped equationsfor oil and gas relative permeabilitiesin the presenceof an ineducible water saturation, with the water consideredas part of the rock matrix:
k,.:(H), +*
k,, (*)' f*
Jr*, Pi
ft'ds*
.s;
'6)
Jr*,Pi
f' ds*
where Sl represents total liquid saturation.Note that theseequationsmay be applied only when the water saturationis at the irreduciblelevel.
VI. TIMMERMAN,COREY,AND JOHNSON

Timmermanr8 suggests the following equations basedon the water-oil drainagecapillary pressure, for the calculationof low valuesof water-oil relativepermeability.
2l
DrainageProcess: Wetting-Phase
k.o :
S.
LTFI
f[Hl"
[l'"H 1"
fl'"H.1"
Injection Curve
(t7)
Injection Curve
InjectionCurve (l8)
k.* :
S*
LrFl
LTFj
[[H]"
lnjection Curve
Imbibition Process: Wetting-Phase Injection Curve
kro
So
(le)
Injection Curve
Curve Trap-Hysteresis
k.o :
So
Lrsl
(20)
Injection Curve
Coreyrecombined the work of Purcell3and Burdiner3into a form that has considerable for its simplicity. It requireslimited input data (sinceresidual utility and is widely accepted neededto developa set of relativepermeabilitycurves)and is the only parameter saturation it is fairly accuratefor consolidatedporous media with intergranularporosity. Corey's equationsare often used for calculationof relative permeabilityin reservoirssubjectto a was derivedfrom capillary process or externalgasdrive. His methodof calculation drainage a linear function pressure and the fact that for certaincases,l/P"2is approximately concepts i.e. , llP"2 : C [(S" rangeof saturations; over a considerable of the effective saturation greaterthan S.,,.On the S".)/(1 - S",)] where C is a constantand S" is an oil saturation the natureof the tortuosityconcerning and the findingsof Burdiner3 basisof this observation were derived: function, the following expressions saturation
(2r)
(22)
\o: k,o
[S'
Lr - s * J
- S'*lo
(23)
22
where S'- is the total liquid saturation and equal to (l - Sr); S- is the lowest oil saturation (fraction) at which the gas phaseis discontinuous; and Sr* is the residualliquid saturation expressed as a fraction. Corey and Rathjens2o studiedthe effect of permeabilityvariationin porous media on the value of the S- factor in Corey's equations.They confirmed that S,,,is essentially equal to unity for uniform and isotropic porous media; however, values of S,, were found to be greaterthan unity when there was stratificationperpendicular to the direction of flow and less than unity in the presence of stratificationparallel to the direction of flow. They also concludedthat oil relative permeabilities were less sensitiveto stratificationthan the gas relativepermeabilities. The gas-oil relative permeabilityequationis often used for testing, extrapolation,and smoothingexperimental data.It is also a convenient expression that may be usedin computer simulationof reservoirperformance. Corey's gas-oil relative permeabilityratio equationcan be solved if only two points on the k,r/k,.,vs. S* curve are available.However, the algebraicsolutionof the k,g/k.., equation when two points are availableis very tediousand the graphicalsolution that Corey offers in his original paperrequires lengthygraphical construction aswell asnumericalcomputation. Johnson2r has offered a greatly simplified and useful methodfor determination of Corey's constant. Johnsonconstructed three plots by assumingvaluesof Sr*, S,,, and k.s/k.., by calculating the gas saturation,(1 - S,_), using Corey's equations.The calculationwas carriedout for variousSr* and S- combinations and for k.s/k,o valuesof l0 to 0.1, 1.0 to 0.01, and 0. I to 0.001. Johnson'sgraphs may be used to plot a more completek.g/k,,, curve basedon limited experimental data. The spanof the experimental data determines which of the three figures should be selected. The suggested procedure for k.g/k.,calculation,basedon Corey's equation,is as follows: l. 2. Plot the experimentalk.r/k," vs. S, on semilog paper with k,*/k,oon the logarithmic scale. From the experimentaldata determinethe gas saturation at k.r/k,oequal to 10.0 and 0. 1, 1. 0 and 0 .0 1 , o r 0 .1 a n d 0 .0 0 1 .(T h e l i stedpai rsof val ues correspond to Fi gures 4,5, and 6 of Johnson's data, respectively, and the rangeof the experimental data dictateswhich figure is to be employed.Note that if the data do not span the entire permeabilityratio intervalof 10.0 to 1.0, Figure 4 may not be employedfirst; instead Figure 5 with the k,*/k.ointerval of 1.0 to 0.01 or Figure 6 with the k.*/k,.,interval of 0. 10 t o 0. 00 1 ma y b e u s e dfi rs t.) Enter the appropriateFigure (4,5, or 6) using the gas saturations corresponding to the pair of k.r/k.ovaluesselected in step 2. Pick a unique S.* and S- at the intersection of the gas saturation values;interpolate if necessary. Using these S.* and S- values and employing the two other figures of Johnson, determinetwo more gas saturationvalues and the k,*/k," ratio indicatedon the axes of each figure. Add thesepoints to the experimental plot for obtainingthe relativepermeabilityratio over the region of interest.
3.
4. 5.
6.
This procedure providesvaluesof gas saturation at k.*/k.o ratiosof 10.0, 1.0, 0.10, 0.01, and 0.001, which are sufficient to plot an expanded k.s/k.o curve. It should be noted that if the data cover a wide range of permeabilityratios, multiple determinations of Sr* and S- can be made. If the calculatedvaluesdiffer from the experimental data, the discrepancy indicatesthat thereis no singleCorey curve which will fit all
23
o tl I o) J
I
o) U)
20
S n , % k r g / k r o = 0 . 1O
FIGURE 4.
Corey equationconstants.2l
the points; an averageof the values for each constantshould yield a better curve fit. Figure 7 illustratesthe graphicaltechniqueof Johnson. Corey's equationsfor drainageoil and gas relativepermeabilities and the gas-oil relative permeabilityratio in the simplestform are as follows: k.o : (s".)o
(24)
k.r:(l-S".)2x(l-S3") and they are related through

I
(2s)
k.. k. : (S * X - (l - S; y
(26)
where So.representsthe lowest oil saturationat which the gas tortuosity is infinite; S". is defined as (S" - S",)/(l - S".). Corey's equationsin the presenceof irreducible water saturationtake the following form:
k,o : (s*)o
(27)
Relative Permeabilitv of Petroleum Reservoirs
q
tl -t
o)
-g
(U aQ o) U)
Sg, %, at krn /kro=0.01

FIGURE5. Coreyequation constants.2t f S 1 2 I t ;---""-^ | " )--)*iJ L
: k,n '
fl
S*)2
(28)
where S- is a constantrelated to ( I - S*") and as a first approximationS- can be assumed to be unity. This is a good approximation, sinceS*"is lessthan5Voinrocks with intergranular porosity. In theseequations,S* : S"/(l - S*,) and S" is the oil saturation represented as a fraction of the pore volume of the rock; S*, is the irreduciblewater saturation,alsoexpressed as a fraction of the pore volume. Theseequationsare linked by the relationship
+;-q*: | + (s*), (l - s*),
(zs)
Corey et al. plotted severalhundredcapillary pressure-saturation curves for consolidated rocks and only a few of them met the linear relationship requirement. However, comparison of Corey's predicted relative permeabilitieswith experimentalvalues for a large number of samplesshowed close agreement,indicating that Corey's predictedrelative permeabilities are not very sensitiveto the shapeof the capillary pressurecurves. Equation 24 may be employed to calculatewater relative permeability if the oil saturation and the residual oil saturationare replacedby water saturationand irreducible water satu-
)< 0.9
o o o
J
o) .:< (U Ae o U)
Sg, %, at krg/kro of O.O01

FIGURE 6. Corey equationconstants.2l
ration, respectively.The exponentof Corey's water relative permeabilityequation is apon the size and arrangement somewhat rocks, but depends proximatelyfour for consolidated of the pores. The exponent has a value of three for rocks with perfectly uniform pore size distribution. Severalother authorshave proposedsimilar water relative permeabilityequations with different exponentsfor other types of porous media. Values of 3.022and 3.521 sands with a single grain structurewhich may not be were proposedfor unconsolidated absolutelyuniform in pore size but should have a nalrow rangeof pore sizes. Corey compared the calculated values of oil and gas relative permeabilities for poorly values and obtainedgood results. However, consolidatedsandswith laboratory-measured sandstone. Corey for consolidated his resultsshowedsome deviationat low gas saturations concludedthat the equationsare not valid when stratification,solutionchannels,fractures, or extensiveconsolidationis present. Application of Corey's equationpermits oil relative permeabilityto be calculatedfrom are easily made while of gas relative permeability.Since k., measurements measurements are made with difficulty, Corey's equationis quite useful. The procedure k.o measurements of gas relative permeability at severalvalues of gas saturationin involves the measurement performing the following steps: then and an oil-gas system 1. h P r e p a r e a n a c c u r a t e p l o tt o f e f u n c t i o n k . r : ( l - S " " ) 2x ( l - S . " ' ) b y a s s u m i n g arbitrary values of So., the effective saturation,which is defined as
26
o
l<
o) .:.
o n<perj-nental Xustirated Data Data of Vlelge points
--
o.lo
o.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 Sg

Example of the use of the Corey equations.rl
FIGURE 7.
2. 3. 4.
5. 6.
Preparea tabulation of k., vs. So" for values of k,, ranging from 0.001 to 0.99 in stepwisefashion. Determinevaluesof So"for eachexperimental valueof k., by usingthe above-described tabulation. Plot these values of So. againstthe values of S" coffespondingto the k., values on rectangular coordinatepaper. The plot should be a straightline between50 and 807o oil saturation. Construct a straight line through the points in this range and extrapolateto S.* : 0. The value of S" at this point corresponds to S".. (SeeFigure 8.) Employ Equation 24, k,o : (So")o and the value of S.,.obtainedin the previousstep to calculatek,o valuesfor assumed valuesof S".
Corey-typeequations for drainagegas-oilrelativepermeability(gasdrive) in the presence of connatewater saturationhave been suggested as follows: k ." : (l - S )u
(30) (31)
k.,
s3(2- s)
where S represents (Sr)/(l - S*,). Corey's equationsfor the drainagecycle in water-wet sandstones as well as carbonate formations are as follows:
, l-l - s*1r K - . - : l - l
Ll - S*,1
(32)
27
60
50
a
o o
@
ro
Sor
ob
20
40
So,
60
o/o
80
roo
on effective based oil saturation of residual FIGURE8. Determination oil saturation. k.*: (S**)o
(33)
VII. WAHL. TORCASO. AND WYLLIE

the use of the following equationfor drainagegas-oil relative Wahl et al.2asuggested reservoirs: of sandstone permeabilityratios basedon field measurements
: +(o.o43s .l,) + o.4ss6
(341
- C); Sr. is the critical gas saturation as a ( I - S*. - S. - Sg.)/(S,, where rf represents to 0.25. equal constant is a C and pore space; fraction of total by Corey's Torcasoand Wylliett comparedgas-oilrelativepermeabilityratios calculated This water saturations. irreducible various for al. et Wahl equationwith thoseobtainedfrom values with it since agreed sound, was theoretically work that Corey's suggested comparison by Wahl et al. (seeFigure 9).t^ obtainedfrom field measurements VIII. BROOKS AND COREY modified Corey's original drainagecapillary pressure-saturation Brooks and Corey26'27 relationshipand combined the modified equationwith Burdine's equationto develop the for any pore sizedistribution: relativepermeability that predictsdrainage following expression
28
roo
50 30
9 y y ;= o ' 3
to
o
.g
5 3
o,
J
to o.5 o.3 o.l o.03 o.ol o.oo5 L o.oot
o.
20
40
60
80
roo
FIGURE 9' Comparison of relative permeability calculations at three irreducible water saturations.25
: (l)^ s**
for P. i Po
(3s)
where tr, and Po are constants characteristicof the media; ), is a measure of pore size distributionof the media, and Po is a measureof maximum pore size (minimum drainage capillary pressureat which a continuousnonwettingphaseexists). Using this relationship, two-phaserelative permeabilities are given by
2 + l A r
,
"rwt
- / S * l
\vw
(36)
and
k . n * ,:
(l -'t**)' [t
- (S**)
,.l J
(37)
where k.*, and k-*, are wetting and nonwettingphaserelative permeabilities respectively. The valuesof tr and Po are obtainedby plotting (S* - S*,)/(l - S*,) vs. capillary pr.rrur.
29 on a log-log scaleand establishing a straightline with L as the slopeand Poas the intercept at (S* - S* i) /(l - S * ,) : 1 . Theseequations reduceto Equations24 and 25 for \ : 2. Theoretically\ may have any value greaterthan zero, being large for media with relative uniformity and small for media with wide pore size variation. The commonly encountered rangefor L is betweentwo and Talash28 obtainedsimilar equationswith somewhatdifferent four for various sandstones.2t exponents.
IX. WYLLIE, GARDNER, AND TORCASO

Wyllie and GardnerrThave presentedthe following expressionsfor the drainage wateroil relative permeability:
k,.:(H)'H
'
(38)
ds*/P.' Jr*,
k,.:(5;)'$i11
Relative permeability to wetting phase(k,* and k,"). Nonwetting phaserelative permeability(k,r). Irreduciblewater saturation. Total liquid saturation: (l - Sr).
(3e)
/' or*,1r";'
More general expressionsfor any wetting and nonwetting relative permeability may be written where
kr*r k.n*, S*i SL
(40)
(41)
Wyllie and Gardner have also suggested the following equationfor relative permeability to water or oil when one relative permeability is available:
k.* : (S**)' k,o (S**/(1 S**))'
(42)
where S**, which is defined as (S* - S*,)/(1 - S*,), is the mobile wetting-phase saturation in a water-wetsystem. water Basedon the linear relationbetweenl/P"2and S"/(l - S*,), they obtaineda drainage relative permeability equation for water-wet rocks with intergranularporosity as follows:
k,* : (s**)o
(43)
Togpaso and Wyllie2s suggestedthe following equation for calculation of gas-oil relativepermeabilityof water-wetsandstone, where l/P.2 is approximately a linear function of effective saturation.Their derivationwas basedon the relationdevelopedby Corey:
\=: k.,,
( l - s * ) ,( l - s * , )
(s*)o
(44)
where S* represents effectiveoil saturation and is equalto S.,/(l - S*,). Obviously, a reliable value of irreduciblewater saturation, S*r, needsto be known to calculate the gas-oilrelative permeabilityratio. X. LAND, WYLLIE, ROSE, PIRSON, AND BOATMAN
Land2e reportedthat an appreciable parameters adjustment of experimental was required to avoid a discrepancy betweenexperimentaland calculated two-phaserelative permeabilities. A large numberof the relativepermeabilitypredictionmethodsare basedon derivation of pore size distribution factors from the saturationand drainagecapillary pressurerelationship. Some authors3o believethat the employmentof capillary pressure relationships for the prediction of relative permeabilityis not advisable,since capillary pressureis derived from experimentsperformed under static conditions, whereasrelative permeability is a dynamic phenomenon. McCaffery3rin his thesisarguesthat the surfaceor capillary forces are ordersof magnitudelargerthan forcesarisingfrom the fluid flow and thus, predominate in controllingthe microscopicdistributionof the fluid phases in many oil reservoirsituations. Brown's32results from the measurement of capillary pressureunder static and dynamic conditionssupportMcCaffery's argument. Severalrelative permeabilityprediction methodswhich are basedon drainagecapillary pressure curves assumethat pore size distributioncan be derived from thesecurves.These proposedmodels can only be applied when a strongwetting preference is known to exist. Additionally, relativepermeabilitycalculations from capillarypressure dataare developed for a capillary drainagesituationwhere a nonwettingphase,suchas gas, displaces a wetting phase(oil in a gas-oil system,or water in a gas-water system).They are developed primarily for gas-oil or gas-condensate relative permeabilitycalculations; however, water-oil relative permeabilitycan be calculatedwith a lessercertainty. Wyllie in Frick's PetroleumProduction Handbook33 suggested simple empirical gas-oil and water-oilrelativepermeabilityequations for drainage in consolidated and unconsolidated sandsas well as oolitic limestonerocks. Theseequations are presented in Tables 2 and3. The oil-gasand water-oilrelativepermeability relations for varioustypesof rockspresented in Tables 2 and 3 may be usedto producek.g/k.o curvesat various S*, when k., measurements are unavailable. It should be noted that the k,.,/k.* values obtainedapply only if water is the wetting phase and is decreasingfrom an initial value of unity by increasingthe oil saturation.This is contrary to what happensduring natural water drive or waterflooding processes; however, Figures l0 through l4 also apply to preferentiallyoil-wet systemson the drainagecycle with respectto oil if the curves were simply relabeled. Rose6developeda useful method of calculatinga relative permeabilityrelationshipon the basisof analysisof the physical interrelationship betweenthe fluid flow phenomena in porous media and the static and residual saturationvalues. The equationsfor the wetting and nonwetting relative permeabilitesare
3l Table 2 OIL-GAS RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES (FOR DRAINAGE CYCLE RELATIVE TO OIL)33

Type of formation sand, well Unconsolidated sorted sand, poorly Unconsolidated sorted oolitic Cementedsandstone, limestone,rocks with vugular porosity" k"o (S*)' (Sxlt : (S*)' (l k.e 5x;r 5x's) 5x:1
( l - 5 x ; :( l 0 sx), (l -
Note: In theserelationsthe quantity Sx :
S,,/(l - S*,).
Application to vugular rocks is possibleonly when the size of the vugs is small by comparisonwith the size of the rock unit for which the calculation is made. The unit should be at least a thousandfold larger than a typical vug.
Table 3 WATER.OIL RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES (FOR DRAINAGE CYCLE RELATIVE TO WATER)33

Type of formation Unconsolidated sand, well sorted U n c o n s o l i d a t es da n d ,p o o r l y sorted Cemented s a n d s t o n eo ,olitic limestone (l - S**)' (l (l S**)' (l S**;z (l S**'') 5"x:; k"o k.*
(s**)'
(S**)tt (S**)o
Note'. In these relationsthe quantity S** : (S* S*, is the ineducible water saturation.
S"i)/(l -
S*,), where
k*=
-s* -) l 6 si (s* -s* _)t(l

t2si(2- 3s*.) + 3S*S*-(3S*. 2) + S**(4 5S*,,)1'
(4s)
(46)
k-:
- S"-)'(I -,lr* - S.-) l653*,(5"*, -2rlt*+ S,-(l - r!*X4-,lr* - 5S".)]' S"-(3S 3S.-)+ 3S"*, n -2* 2,lr*) [253*,(2
as respectively, expressed wetting and nonwettingsaturations, where S* and Sn*,represent valuesattained minimum wetting and nonwettingsaturation fractions;S*- and S.- represent of as fractions;they are the dynamic equivalents under dynamic flow conditions,expressed an immobile wetting-phase S*, and S". obtainedfrom statictests.The symbol qr* represents saturationexpressedas a fraction. It is that part of the wetting-phasesaturationwhich does not interfere with the nonwetting phase mobility and it is the maximum wetting-phase saturation at which the nonwetting relative permeability is unity. Note that Equation 46 reducesto Equation 45 for r.|l* : 0. The minimum wetting saturation,S**, dependson flow relationship of S*- : (1/86.3) conditionsand may be obtainedby the Brownell and Katz3a gravity, g to o is the interfacial where is the acceleration due o dP/dx]-o264 cos 0) [V(g gradient. tension, 0 is the contactangle, k is the permeability,and dP/dx is the pressure of both phases The principal disadvantage of Rose'smethodis that the residualsaturation must be known fairlv accuratelv.
32
o
j
o)
.Y
20
40
Q vr
60
L
80
too
FIGURE 10. Wyllie curves for water-wetcementedsandstones, oolitic limestones, or vugular systems.rl
Pirson3s derived equationsfrom petrophysicalconsiderations for the wetting and nonwetting phaserelative permeabilities in clean, water-wet,granularrocks for both drainage and imbibition processes. The water relativepermeabilityfor the imbibition cycle was given
AS
k.*, : later modified to k,*t : and
(S**)"'
(R.,/R,)3/2
(41)
(S**)t"
(R"/R,)3/2
(48)
k.*, :
(S**)t"
Si
(4e)
Water relative permeability for the drainagecycle was given by k .* , : (S * * )t" Si
(s0)
33
o v o)
l<
st
tt i*Ylt brine saturation expressed electricalresistivityof the test core at l00%o where R.,represents as ohm-meters; electricalresistivityof the test core expressed R, represents as ohm-meters; water saturationas a and S* represents saturation; irreduciblewetting-phase S*, represents fraction of pore space. The nonwetting phase relative permeabilityin clean, water-wetrocks for the drainage cycle was found to be
k**, : or k-*, : which was later modified to k,n*, : (l S**Xl S**t/4 Su2)tt2 (53) (1 S**) (l -S**r/4 Sr/2)2 (l S**) [1 S**r'4(R"/R,)r'4]2
water-wet unconsolidated for poorly sorted Wylliecurves
( s1 ) (s2)
The nonwetting phase relative permeability in an imbibition cycle given by
krn*, : [t
S* - S*,
l-s-,-s*J
l'
(54)
(S* -S*,)/(l - S*,) and S.*, represents the irreduciblenonwetting where S** represents phasesaturationas a fraction of pore space.Pirson also derived equationsfor the wetting
I,OOO Swi
roo
ro
o
J
o) jo.l
0.ol
o.ool
o.0ootoL
20
40
60
80
loo
s, L
FIGURE 12. Wyllie curvesfor well-sorted water-wet unconsolidated } cores. and nonwetting phase relative permeabilities in clean, oil-wet rocks for both drainase and imbibition processes: kr., : (S.r")"' S:
(5s1
where S.* is defined as (S" - S.,.)/( I - S".) and S.. represents irreducibleoil saturationand is the equilvalentof of ( I - S*') for a clean,water-wetrock; S" represents total oil saturation obtainedby differencesfrom (l - S*). The nonwettingphaserelativepermeabilityin clean,oil-wet rocksfor the imbibition cycle was found to be
So So,
krr*,
[' L
l-S..-S*,
t'
(s6)
and for the drainagecycle was found to be

krn-, : (
l --
s,.)u , - s:,.-sl,,.l'
(s7)
35
3
.Y
o ra
Well--Sorted
Grarns
e -w
FIGURE 13. Wyllie curves.I
by Albert and Butault's which is determinable saturation, trapped-water whereS*, represents curve be obtainedeither suggested that a capillary-pressure These investigators method.36 with a wetting fluid or with a nonwettingfluid such as mercury to obtain irreduciblenonphasesaturation nonwetting that the irreducible They alsoestimated wetting phasesaturation. of radii smallerthanthe most common is two thirds of net pore volume madeup of capillaries the wetting phase. capillary size, when the nonwettingphasedisplaces Pirson suggesteda method to determine the in situ trapped nonwetting phase saturation by meansof microresistivitylogging devices,which respondto the flushed zone arounda well bore: Sn*r:1-(1/0) (R-,/R*.,)"t (58)
where $ representsthe porosity of the reservoir rock and R-r/R^. is the ratio of the mudfiltrate resistivityto flushed zone resistivity. water and gas relative permeabilityequationsin terms of core pesuggested Boatman3T trophysical propertiesobtained from laboratory data:
k,* : S**t'' (R"/R,)3'2
(se)
36
3
L
l<
o L
l<
20
40
60
80
roo
e -w
FIGURE 14. Wyllie curvesfor water-wetcemented sandstones, oolitic limestones, or vugular systems.33
and where
k,, :
(1 -
S**t/4 Swt/2)t/2
(60)
e * - S * - S * i \'w I - S*,, Pirson et aI.38proposed equations for oil and water relative permeabilities as follows: k,* : (S**)"t (R"/R,)2 (61)
and k^, : (l - S*-)' (62)
where S*- represents (S* - S*,-)/(l - S*,., - S.,.);S** represents (S* - S*,*)/(l - S*,,,). Thornton5proposedthe following equationfor wetting-phase relative permeability: k.*, : Sl (PD/P.)2 (01)
where P"/P. represents the ratio of displacement pressure to drainagecapillary pressure. Ros e and Wyl l i e T ' 3 e p ro p o se da p e tro p hysi calequati onfor w etti ng-p hase r el at i ve permeability: k.*, : (Ir/2) (64)
where I represents resistivity index, R,/R". proposedmathematical Jonesao relationships for water-oil and water-gas relative permeabilities as function of S* and S*,, where S* may be determinedfrom well logs, S*, may be estimatedfrom an S* - $ crossplot,and d may be determined from well logs:
k.* : (s**)'
(6s)
(66)
k,-:[8H]'
XI. KNOPP, HONARPOUR ET AL., AND HIRASAKI
Knoppa' developeda correlation from 107 experimentallydeterminedgas-oil relative permeabilityratios of Venezuelan core samples.The core samples were from consolidated as well as poorly consolidated reservoirsof high porosity and permeability;the sandstone Welge gas-floodprocedurewas used for k.r/k.odetermination. A single correlationwas established on the basisof the restored-state water saturation as a correlatingparameter. The correlationis shownas a family of most probablek.s/k,., curves in Figure 15. Comparison of Knopp's correlationwith experimental valuesis more promisingwhen the geometricmeanof the suiteof k,s/k,o curvesfor a given reservoir or samplegroupis compared with the corresponding most probablecurves for the correlation.Knopp also suggested a procedurefor developing similar correlationsfor various other formations. A comparisonof Knopp's correlations with the correlationof Corey and Wahl et al. on the basisof l5%owater saturationis shown in Figure 16. Honarpour et al.a2 developed a setof empiricalprediction for water-oilimbibition equations relative permeability and gas-oil drainagerelative permeability from a large number of experimental data. Their resultsare presented in Tables4 and 5. Symbolsusedin thesetwo tables are defined as follows: : ku : ko : ko(s*i) : k., air permeability,md oil permeability,md oil permeability at irreducible water saturation,md gas relative permeability,oil and gas system,fraction k,e(so,):gas relative permeabilityat residualoil saturation, fraction k,o,* : oil relative permeability,water and oil system,fraction : water relative permeability, water and oil system, fraction k* k.o., : oil relative permeability,oil and gas system,fraction
38
roo.o
Restored State Water Saturation
o
f-
.Y
o,
f-
.Y
ooorb
24 30 36 42 48 54 60
ss
FIGURE 15. Knopp's correlationof most probablerelative permeability ratios.or
: gas saturation,fraction Ss S*. : critical gas saturation,fraction : oil saturation,fraction S. S..* : residualoil saturation to gas, fraction S..* : residual oil saturation to water, fraction : water saturation,fraction S* S*, : irreduciblewater saturation,fraction : porosity, fraction 0 The data which were usedas a basisfor the study by Honarpour et al. were derivedfr.m oil and gas fields locatedin the continental U.S., Alaska,Canada, Libya, Iran, Argentina, and the United Arab Republic. Alt of the laboratorytestswere made at room temperature and atmospheric pressure'No attemptwas madeby the authorsto group the data according to laboratorytechniques usedin measuring relativepermeability,sincethis informationwas not availablefor many of the data sets.Each set of relativepermeability data was classified
39
o l.Y
\
o.ol
tooo,o
o) l.Y
o.ool
roo.o
o.oool
ro.o
o.ooool
t2 t 8 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
r.o
s g 'o/o
FIGURE 16. Comparisonof relative permeabilitycorrelations.*'
"carbonate" or "noncarbonate", but the informationwhich was availablewas not as either sufficientfor more detailedlithologic characterization. "carbonate" or "noncarbonate", a further of data setsas In additionto the classification classificationwas made on the basis of wettability. This rough classificationwas made accordingto the following arbitrarycriteria: l. in an to be strongly water-wetif k,,,at high oil saturations The rock was considered gas-oil saturations, in system at the same greatly k,o a exceeded oil-water system k,* in an oil-water systemat or near providedk.* in a gas-oil systemgreatlyexceeded water-flooding. after residualoil saturation to be oil-wet when k,o in the oil-water systemwas approxThe rock was considered imately equal to k,., in the gas-oil system, provided k,* in the gas-oil system was approximatelyequal to k.* in the oil-water system.
2.
Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs Table 4 EQUATIONS FOR THE PREDICTION OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY SANDSTONE AND CONGLOMERATE
(s* - s"') k... : 0.035388 - S * , - S , , , * -) o.olo874x (l 't"r- t"':' -S S * *,) (water-wer) f . , - S " ,. l" + o.sos56(S*)rn( S,,,")l Ltt k . , .: -'s*' (s* - s"'*) r.5814 [s* l ' " ' - 0 . 5 8 6 1 7 - s * , - S , , ,** ) (l ll-s", I (S" - S*,) - 1.24846( I - S*,)(S* - S*,) (intermediately wet)
(68)
IN
(61)
'\-s,r. r \/l - s 'l s"/ k,,,*:0.760671 - t-" s,,,*J ': l'" '- s,,,* [ s*, t', t-" = L I
+2.63180(l S , , . * ) ( S,, S",*) (any wenability) (69)
t,,=- t,,,,: , k n ' ,: 0 ' 9 8 3 7(l 2 + weuability) l. (any - t-, ). L [ | - s -, - s,,r: ] k .*: l o ? 2(H )' u ,* ,,,,. ., + 2.i i g4*
(70)
\+
(anY k'g's,,,r' wettabilitY)
(71 )
Table 5 EQUATIONSFOR THE PREDICTIONOF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY IN LIMESTONE AND DOLOMITE

k* : 0.002oszs \f - 0.05r371 (s* - S*,) (i)"" (warer-wet)
(72)
k*: o2eer. (H)
- otztot (ffi;)'(13)
(S*-S*.)*0.4|325g(*).(intermediate|ywet)
k..* :
1.2624 (H:)
(*)'
(anywettablity)
(74)
: 0.s37s2 k*,e (jil'(ff-o'*: 'sossffik'gts,,,*t

-
,_)'
(any wettablity)
(75)
+ 8'oo53x
r S . , S , l r S . . . .-r : -T-l= o'o258eo {s. - S..)x
(#)'.
- t")' ' - t" (' (t)"' _ i:: (any wettab'ity)
(76)
4r
3. wettability when it did not clearly meet to be of intermediate The rock was considered criteria. either the water-wetor the oil-wet classification
After the data sets had been classifiedaccordingto lithology and wettability, stepwise the which would approximate analysiswas employedto developequations linear regression permeability, and fluid saturations, from such factors as relative permeabilities measured porosity. of oil by water and the oil-gassystem refer to displacement All water-oilsystemequations in consolidated data were measured All experimental refer to drainageprocesses. equations rocks. The equationsthat were developedby Honarpouret al. have not yet been extensively tested.However, most of the testswhich have been made indicatedthat the equationsare which correlations of publisfred with laboratorydatathan the predictions in closeragreement were used as a basisfor comparison. et al., any calculated by Honarpour suchas thosepresented In usingempiricalrelationships to 1.0. If a relative equal relative permeability which exceeds l 0 should be assumed permeability curve may be the relative permeabilityvalue is known at any water saturation, shifted to match the known data point. Hirasakia3has suggesteda relative permeability correlation for fractured reservoirs as follows: S*:
Su So.
l-s*-So"
(77) (78)
k,a : K,o(S*)" k,, : k:" (l - S*)' where S* Sd So" So. k.a ko.o k,o k".. n
(7e)
Normalizedsaturation. Displacingphasesaturation. Immobile displacingphasesaturation. Residualoil saturation. Displacingphaserelative permeability. Displacingphaserelative permeabilityat residualoil saturation. Relativepermeabilityto oil. Relativepermeabilityto oil at immobile displacingphasesaturation. for shapeof relativepermeabilitycurves, said to be equal to Exponentparameter one in fractured reservoirs.
: : : : : : : : :
-..\
,_ trt
l) rr",/J-
'i i" ,tY
REFERENCES
tdpullien, F. A. L., Ed., Porous Media: FluidTransport and Pore Stucture, Academic Press, New York, 'r,l4lg. Akad. Wiss. Wien. Math. Naturwiss. 2. Kozeny, J., Uber Kapillare Leitung desWassersimBoden, Sitzungsber. KL., Abt. 2A, 136,2'll, 1927. - their measurement using mercury and the calculationof permeability 3. Purcell, W. R., Capillary pressures therefrom.Trans. AIME, 186.39, 1949.
42
4. Rose, W. D. and Bruce, W. A., Evaluationof capillary characterin petroleumreservoir rock, Trans. .AIME, t86, 127, t949. 5. Thornton, o. F., valuation of relative permeability,Trans. AIME, 1g6,329, lg4g. 6. Rose, W. D., Theoreticalgeneralization leadingto the evaluationof relativepermeability,Trans.AIME, 186,1il , 1949. 7. Rose, W. and Wyllie, M. R. J., Theoreticaldescriptionof wetting liquid relarivepermeability Trans. , AIME, 186,329, t949. 8. Gates,J.I.andLeitz,W.J.,RelativepermeabilitiesofCaliforniacoresbythecapillarypressuremethod, paper presented at the API Meering, Los Angeles,california, May ll, 1950, 296. 9' Rapoport, L. A. and Leas, W. J., Relative permeabilityto liquid in liquid-gassystem, Trans. AIME, 1 9 2 ,9 3 , l 9 5 l . 10. Wyllie' M. R. J., Interrelationship betweenwetting and non-wettingphaserelativepermeability,Trans. A I M E , 1 9 2 ,8 3 , 1 9 8 1 . ll. Fatt, I. and Dykstra, H., Relativepermeabilitystudies,Trans. AIME, 192,249, lg5l. 12. Wyllie' M. R. J. and Sprangler, M. B., Application of electricalresistivitymeasurements to problems of fluid flow in porous media, Bull. AApG, 36, 359, 1952. 13. Burdine, N. T., Relative permeabilitycalculations from pore size distributiondata, Trans. AIME, lgg, 7t,1953. 14. Naar, J. and Henderson, J. H., An imbibition model- its application to flow behaviorand the prediction o f o i l r e c o v e r y ,T r a n s .A I M E , 2 2 2 , 6 1 , 1 9 6 1 . 1 5 . N a a r , J . a n d W y g a l , R . J . , T h r e e - p h a s e i m b i b i t i o n r e l a t i v e p e r m e a b i l i t y , T r a n s . A I M E , 2 21 29 ,2 65 l .4 , 16. Land, C. S., Calculation of imbibition relative permeabilityfor two- and three-phase flow from rock properties, Soc. Pet. Eng. J., 6, 149, 1968. 17. Wyllie' M. R. J. and Gardner, G. H. F., The generalized Kozeny-Carmen equation,its applicationto problemsof multi-phaseflow in porous media, World Oit, 146, l2l, 1958. 1 8 . T i m m e r m a n , E . H . , B d . , P r a t ' t i L ' aR l e s e r t , o iE r n g i n e e r i n gP , e n w e l lp u b r . , r 9 8 2 , l 0 l . 19. Corey, A. T., The interrelation g a s a n d o i l r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t i e s between P,r o d . M o n . , 1 9 , 3 8 , 1 9 5 4 . 20. Corey, A. T. and Rathjens, C. H., Effect of stratification on relativepermeability,Trons.AIME,20j, 358,1956. 21. Johnson, C. E., Jr., Graphicaldetermination of the constants in the Corey equationfor gas-oil relative permeability r a t i o , J . P e t . T e c h n o l . ,1 0 , l l l l , 1 9 6 8 . 2 2 . l r m a y , S . , O n t h e h y d r a u l i cc o n d u c t i v i t y o f u n s a t u r a t es do i l s ,T r a n s .A G U , 3 5 ( 3 ) , 4 6 3 , 1 9 5 4 . 23. Averganov, S. F., About Permeabilitl, ofSubsurfuc'e Soils in Case of IncompleteSaturation, Engineenng Colfection, Vol. 7, 1950, cited by Polubarinova-Kochina, P, in The Theory of Ground Water Movement, E n g l i s ht r a n s l a t i o n b y D e w i e s t ,R . J . M . , P r i n c e t o n Univ. Press, P r i n c e t o nN . .J.. t962. 24. Wahl, W. L., Mullins, L. D., and Elfrink, E. 8., Estimationof ultimate recoveryfrom solution gas drive reservoirs,Trctns.AIME, 213, 132, 1958. 25. Torcaso, M. A. and Wyllie, M. R. J., A comparison of calculated k.r/k,,, ratios with field data,J. pet. Technol., 6, 57, 1958. 26. Brooks, R. H. and Corey, A. T., Hydraulic Properties of Porous Media, Hydrology papers, No. 3, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, Colo., 1964. 27. Brooks, R. H. and Corey, A. T., Propertiesof porous media affecting fluid flow, "/. Irrig. Drain. Div.. 6.6t. 1966. 28. Talash, A. W., Experimentaland calculatedrelative permeabilitydata for systemscontaining tension additives,Paper5810, Societyof PetroleumEngineers,Dallas, Tx., 1976. 29. Land, C. S., Calculation of imbibition relative permeability for two- and three-phaseflow from rock properties,Soc. Pet. Eng. J., 6, 149, 1968. 30. Bear, J, Ed., Dynamics of Fluids in porous Media, Ersevier,Amsterdam, 1972. 31. McCafferY, F. G., The Effect of Wenability of Relative Permeabilityand Imbibition in porous Media, Ph.D. thesis,Universiry of Calgary, Alberta, Canada,1973. 32. Brown, H. w., capillary pressure investigations,Trans A.I M E , 1 g 2 , 6 7 , l g 5 l . 33. Frick, T., Ed., PetroleumProductionHandbook,Vol. 2, Societyof Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Dallas, Tx., 1962.25. 34. Brownell, L. E. and Katz, D., Flow of fluids through porous media, Chem. Eng. prog., 43(ll), 603, 194'7. 3 5 . Pirson, S. J., Ed., Oil ReservoirEngineering,McGraw Hill, New york, 195g. 36. Albert, P. and Butault, L., Etude des Characteristiques Capillaries du Reservoir du Cap don par La M e t h o d eP u r c e l l ,P e t . A n n . C o m b u s .L i q . , 1 ( 8 ) , 2 5 0 , 1 9 5 2 . 37. Boatman, E. M., An Experimental Investigation of Some Relative Permeability-RelativeConductivity Relationships, M.S. thesis,University of Texas, Austin, 1961. 38. Pirson, S. J., Boatman, E. M., and Nettle, R. L., Predictionof relativepermeabilitycharacteristics of intergranular reservoirrocks from electricalresistivitymeasurements,Trans. AIME, Z3l,564. 1964.
43
evaluationof relatedto quantitative considerations 39. Wyllie, M. R. J. and Rose, W. D., Some theoretical physicalcharacteristics of reservoirrock from electricallog data, Trans. AIME, 189, 105, 1950. , , ll5l,1966. 4 0 . J o n e s , M . A . , W a t e r f l o o dm o b i l i t y c o n t r o l :a c a s eh i s t o r y ,J . P e t . T e c ' h n o l .9 41. Knopp, C. R., Gas-oil relative permeabilityratio correlationfrom laboratorydata,J. Pet. Technol.,9, llt1,1965. two-phase for estimating 42. Honarpour, M. M., KoederitzrL. F., and Harvey, A. H., Empiricalequations rock, Trans. AIME, 2'73,2905, 1982. relativepermeabilityin consolidated by Water or by History Matching Oil Displacement 43. Hirasaki, G. J., Estimationof ReservoirParameters E n g i n e e r sD , a l l a s ,T e x . , 1 9 7 5 . G a s , P a p e r4 2 8 3 , S o c i e t yP e t r o l e u m 44. Kopli.k, J. and Lasseter, T. J., Two-phaseflow in random network modelsof porous media, Sot'. Pet. Eng.J., 25, 89, 1985. on two45. Fulcher, R. A., Ertekin, T., and Stahl, C. D., Effect of cappillarynumberand its constituents phaserelative permeabilitycurves,J. Pet. Technol., 2,249, 1985.
Chapter 3 FACTORS AFFECTING TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
I. INTRODUCTION flow of multiple fluid phases the simultaneous The first publishedinformationconcerning "relative permeability" had not yet been coined was probably by Hassleret al.r The term of the gas phaseas a function of and Hassleret al. studied only the flow characteristics conceptwas first postulated rocks. The relativepermeability in consolidated fluid saturation systems. Darcy's law to two-phase of extending Their work consisted by Muskat and Meres.2 For oil reservoirs,the relevanttwo-phasefluid combinationsare water-oil and liquid-gas (usually thought of as oil-gas). Gas-waterrelativepermeabilitycurvesare used to describe reservoirs. and gas-liquidcurvesare usedfor condensate of gas reservoirs the performance II. TWO.PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY CURVES
Water-oil relative permeability is usually plotted as a function of water saturation,as (S*.), the water relativepermeability shownby Figure l. At the irreduciblewater saturation is zero and the oil relative permeabilitywith respectto water is some value less than one. by the presence At this point only oil can flow and the capabilityof the oil to flow is reduced of connatewater. The effect of connatewater in reducingoil flow rate is illustratedschematically by Figure 2. Note that data to the left of the irreducible water saturationare not useful for predicting lessthanS*" arenot encountered. sincewatersaturations reservoirperformance, hydrocarbon and the oil relative the water relative permeabilityincreases As water saturationincreases, A maximum water saturationis reachedat permeability(with respectto water) decreases. zero. Obviously, aquifer becomes and the oil relativepermeability the residualoil saturation by a relative permeabilityto water of unity, which occurs at a conditionsare represented of l00%o. water saturation Unfortunately,there is an alternatedefinition of relative permeabilitycurrently in use. This terminology(illustratedby Figure 3) definesthe oil relativepermeabilityat irreducible permeabilityas the effective as having a value of one, and definesabsolute water saturation are identical with The effectivepermeabilities permeabilityat irreduciblewater saturation. readily convertedto may be of values one set permeability and relative of both definitions (k,r) to both the oil and permeability applies of relative definition This second the other. phases. water Thesealternateor normalizedvaluesof relative permeabilitymay be convertedto standard valuesby
k.srn : k,2 ku./kusrD
(l)
where k.. : k"o at S*" the waterrelativepermedefinition of relativepermeability, Also note that underthis second definition, with this alternate ability in an aquiferhas a value greaterthan unity. Essentially, relative permeability is normalized to the value at irreducible water saturation. Gas-oil relative permeabilityand gas-liquidrelative permeabilityare similar in concept to water-oil relativEpermeability. The preferredrelative permeabilityvalues are those taken with connatewater presentat the ineducible saturationvalue.
46
Relative Permeability of PetSoleum Reservoirs
I I I
\ oil
W a te r I
/ /
ftret
Swc 0
Sorw
Svrr-+ (-s o-
FIGURE l.
W a t e r - o i lr e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y curves.
,'t Rock ) oif-
;Water
L
(
-.*-t
Rock \
FIGURE 2.
of water. Oil flow reductiondue to the presence
with respect to gasdecreases; increases, the oil relativepermeability As free gas saturation however, until the critical gas saturation(Sr") is reached,the gas relative permeabilityis is the point at which the gas bubblesbecomelarge enough zero. The critical gas saturation increases, the to break through the oil and away from the rock surface.As gas saturation gas relative permeabilityincreases a value of unity at l00%cgas. and theoreticallyreaches A gas-oil relative permeabilitycurve is illustratedby Figure 4. sand procedureto determinerelativepermeabilityin an unconsolidated An experimental of injectinga combination was first described by Wyckoff and Botset.3 Their work consisted conditions.Their resultsare shown througha sampleundersteady-state of liquids and gases in Figure 5, where k.. and k,, are relative permeabilityto oil and gas, respectively.The of figure is typical of wetting- and nonwetting phase relative permeabilities,regardless whetherthe systemis oil- or water-wet. Figure 5 shows differently shapedrelative permeabilitycurvesfor the two phases.The oil relativepermeabilitycurve is concaveupward while the gas relativepermeabilitycurve at the irreducible has an "S" shape.This figure also showsthat the oil relativepermeability
47
k r e l
Sw
FIGURE 3. Normalizedwater-oil relativepermeabilitycurves
\ \
\1
Gor
oil I K rcl
I I
, ,
SwcSorg O - S L 4
Sg. |
t
FIGURE 4.
+-SG
Gas-oil relative permeabilitycurves'
at the ineducible oil (or critical) gas saturationis less than the gas relative permeability apply to water-oil observations general same saturation.Leverett,sworka shows that the permeability relative water the oil, of presence relative permeabilitydata. That is, in the is concave or curve permeability relative curve takes on the shape of the wetting-phase upward. 5 indicatesthat, for a small The shapeof the oil relative permeabilitycurve in Figure permeabilityto oil' This relative in decrease reductionin oil saturation,there is a sizeable by the gasphase'Figure paths flow or pores of larger rapid declineis due to the occupation
Relative P ermeability of t etroleumReservoirs
ftrel
kts
l't:.:':)'/,.
A
SL
FIGURE 5.
Relative permeabilitycurves for an unconsolidated sancl.r
5 alsoindicates a steepincrease in the gasrelativepermeability as the gassaturation increases abovepoint "A", which is the saturation at which relativepermeabilities to the oil and gas phases becomeequal. For this unconsolidated sand,the oil relativepermeabilityat 59Vo orl saturationis equal to gas relative permeabilityat 4l%o gas saturation.The gas relative permeabilityreaches nearly l00%o at a gas saturation lessthan l007o, which 1n.un,that part of the interconnected pore spacedoes not significantlycontributeto the gas permeabilityof the porousmedium. This figure also showsthat the gasrelativepermeability remainsat iero until the gas saturation reaches the critical gas saturation, point "B". The gas phaseis not mobile at a saturationless than the critical value, but this immobile gas impedesthe flow of oil and reducesoil relative permeability.As oil saturationis increased from an initial value of zero, the oil relative permeabilityremainszero until the oil forms a continu.us phaseat the critical oil saturation, which is represented as point C in Figure5. In a solutiongas-drivereservoir, often the water saturationis small and immobile. Therefore,relative permeabilityvaluesare frequentlyplottedagainst the liquid saturation ratherthan the wetting saturation.Under such a condition, point "C" is the summationof the irreduciblewater saturation and the residualoil saturation,as previouslyindicatedin Figure 4. The sum of the relative permeabilitiesfor all phasesis almost always less than unity because of interference amongphases sharingflow channels. Thereare a numberof reasons for this interference.One of these reasonsis that part of the pore channelsavailablefor flow of a fluid may be reducedin sizeby the other fluids present in the rock. Another reason is that immobilized dropletsof one fluid may completelyplug someconstrictions in a pore channelthrough which anotherfluid would otherwiseflow. Also, somepore channels may becomeeffectively plugged by adversecapillary forces if the pressure gradientis too low to push an interface through a constriction. A fourth reason is the trapping of a group of globules that are clustered together and cannot be moved, since the grain configuraiion allows fluid to flow around the trappedglobules without developinga pressuregradient sufficient to move them. This is the phenomenon that has been referredto as the Jamin effect.
of Nowak and Kruegerstestedtwo coresin which the permeabilityto oil in the presence forsynthetic permeability to single-phase greater than was considerably interstitialwater basedon the resultsof mation water. Yuster6and OdehTboth found the samephenomenon oil is that the distribution permeability to high for the possible explanation work. A other variationsin the area cause water saturation in variations and the rock within varies of clay of clay swelling may degrees increasing Thus, minerals. clay water and between of contact of clay minerals. larger amounts of hydration the due to water saturation higher occur at the distributionof and fluid saturation the both upon is dependent permeability Relative is directly related This distribution porous network. the of interstices in the fluids the various phepressure give rise to capillary in turn which rock, of the characteristics to wettability curves; pressure-saturation in capillary exists hysteresis that known It is well nomena. curvescan also be expected.Thus, in relative permeability-saturation therefore,hysteresis in a rock that is measured permeability relative the saturation, given wetting-phase for a rock is draining. while the measured as that phase the same is not imbibing the wetting overburden as temperature, factors such functions of may be values permeability also Relative phaseequilibria,ro' etc. pressure, III. EFFECTS OF SATURATION STATES
Saturationis a term used to describethe relative volume of fluids in a porous medium. of the fluid that preferentiallytends to wet the grains of a rock, the At low saturations rings aroundthe grain contactpoints. Theseare called phase forms doughnut-shaped wetting with each other and pressurecannot be not communicate rings do pendular rings. The such a distributionmay occupy Sometimes another. pendular ring to transmittedfrom one upon the nature and shape depends The amount pore space. of the fraction an appreciable cementation. of and type well as degree as grains, distribution, of individqal saturation,the wetting phaseis mobile through a tortuous Above the critical wetting-phase the wettingsaturationincreases, as the wetting-phase and pressure differential path under a in distribution saturation wetting-phase The well. as permeability increases phaserelative wetting permeability to the point, relative the to a up funicular and this region is called force phaseis lessthan the relativepermeabilityto the nonwettingphasedue to the adhesion path for of the flow greater tortuosity and the fluid, wetting between the solid surface and pores range within this larger the through phase moves nonwetting the wetting phase.The of saturation, but as the saturationof the wetting phase further increases,the nonwetting phase breaks down and forms a discontinuousphaseat the critical nonwetting phase satusaturation. ration. This is called an insular stateof nonwetting-phase through flow simultaneously fluids immiscible when that Fluid flow studieshave shown for path. flow network changes This flow own its a porous medium, each fluid follows network the phase reduces, saturation nonwetting the different ranges of saturationand as the remainingstationaryislandsof for this phasebreaksdown and becomesdiscontinuous; in hydrocarbon gradients encountered pressure at the nonwetting phasecanrnt be displaced phase saturation. Similarly, nonwetting residual as a This conditionis refened to reservoirs. phase breaks flows which this network through the as the wetting phasesaturationdecreases, wettingas an ineducible referred to This is and immobile. discontinuous down and becomes phase saturation. sandsthe permeability that for strongly water-wetunconsolidated It has been showns-rr (i.e., a plot of k.* as a saturation, solely upon its own to the wetting phaseis dependent pore contains gas space or not the of whether function of S* has the same shaperegardless somequite small'2''3 and some as well as oil). However, in the petroleumrelatedliterature, publicationsr4'15 rocks. Some large deviationsare seenfrom thesefindings for consolidated indicate that the nonwetting phaserelative permeability dependson the wetting as well as
50
Relative Permeability of P,etroleum Reservoirs
average
o
J
o)
Y 1
minimum
.9 (u
TE
-o o
(u
E
o o. o .=
-01
(u
o (r
0.5
1.0
S L,
FIGURE 6. R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y r a t i o sf o r s a n d sa n d s a n d s t o n e s . r s
the nonwetting phase saturationfor strongly water-wet systems.In preferentiallyoil-wet systems, the oil phase relativepermeability is found to be strictlya functionof oil saturation,r6 while in water-wet rocks, the oil phaserelative permeabilityis found to dependon both water and oil saturation. Donaldsonand Dean'7havepointedout that undertwo-phase flow, relative permeabilityto water was increased when oil, ratherthan gas was the nonaqueous phase,indicatingthat water relativepermeabilityis not solelya functionof water saturation.
IV. EFFECTS OF ROCK PROPERTIES

Relativepermeability-saturation relationsare not identicalfor all reservoirrocks, but may vary from formation to formation and from one portion to another of a heterogeneous formation. Arps and Roberts'8have presentedplots of gas-oil relative permeabilityratios for 16 consolidatedsandstones and 25 dolomites, cherts, and limestones,all with l57o connate water saturation.These plots are presented as Figures 6 and 7. The maximum curve in Figure 6 seems to be typical of unconsolidated sandstone, while the minimum curve appears to be more representative of highly cementedsandstones. The averagecurve can be consideredtypical of the averageconsolidatedsandstone. The minimum curve in Figure 7, which seemsto be the steepest and most unfavorable, is from a fracturedchert core; at the other end of the range, no well-definedmaximum case is apparent.Curve #23, adapted from Bulnes and Fitting's workrerepresenting26 samples of west TexasPermiandolomite, appears to be the bestmaximum curve. The curve selected as "average" on Figure7 appears to be typical of vugular limestones. Bulnesand Fitting as well as Stone2o have shownthat the fluid flow behaviorin uniformporositycarbonate samplesis similar to fluid flow behaviorin consolidated sandstones, but the differencebecomespronounced as the rock heterogeneity increases.
5l
10
o
-g
ma x im um
.\
a verage
nrmum
o)
. Y l
\ \
\ \
o
(!
tr .:
-o
I
(u o E
q,
oo
.: (! .01
tr
. o o1
0.5
s,
L
1.0
FIGURE 7. cherts.r*
r a t i o sf o r l i m e s t o n e sd R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y . olomites, and
Various workss''e'2r have shown that the gas-oil relative permeability of consolidated sand sandstone is qualitativelysimilar to the gas-oil relativepermeabilityof unconsolidated to oil at high oil of the two relativepermeabilities and there is a very close coffespondence sand, the wetting-phase relative permesaturation.It has been found that for consolidated ability drops sharply and the nonwetting phase relative permeabilityrises steeply as the However, Naar et aI.22 have shown that there are both wetting-phase saturationdecreases. qualitative and quantitativedifferencesbetweenrelative permeabilityof consolidated and thatpackingasmodifiedby cementation unconsolidated sands.Owensand Archerrrindicated to the wetting phasebut has a negligible and consolidation affectsthe equilibrium saturation of the nonwettingphase.Nind23statedthat an increase effect on the equilibrium saturation the nonwettingphaserelativepermeabilityin a gas-oil in degreeof consolidationincreases rangefor a mobile fluid phase have noted that the saturation system.Severalinvestigators rock than in consolidated rock. is wider in unconsolidated on drainagegas-oil relative Corey and Rathjens2a studiedthe effect of rock heterogeneity permeability.They investigated the flow paralleland perpendicular to obvious stratification in anisotropicBereasandstone coresand concludedthat the relativepermeabilityat a given value for flow persaturationfor flow parallel to bedding was greaterthan the analogous pendicularto the bedding plane, as shown in Figures 8 and 9. Huppler2s found that the when the sections water-oil relativepermeabilityof compositecore changes appreciably are arrangedin different orders. Johnsonand Sweeney'o also studiedthe effect of rock heterogeneityon the gas-oil relative permeabilityratio. changein the positionof the relativepermeabilityLeveretta found a small but systematic
52
o
J
c oo
FIGURE8. Relative permeability measurements from

sandstone.ra
an anlsotroprc
O O O O
- kro - porpondicul!r - kro - trg
to boddinO
- parEllol to baddlng - p.rpondlculr. to b.ddinc
- krg - p!..llol
to boddlng
o
l(
so
FIGURE 9. Relative permeability measurements from a Berea sandstone.2a
53
Time 1
Time 2
E
Time 3
otL
WATER SAND
M I
FIGURE 10. The formation of residualoil by the blocking process.
saturationrelationship due to the employment of different sizes of sand grains in his experiments.Botset2r confirmed Leverett'sfinding and concludedthat the effect of grain size distributionwas not negligible either on the relationship betweenrelativepermeabilityand saturationor on the value of the equilibrium saturation.It was found that the shape" (sphericity),roundness"(angularity),and orientation2a of the grainstendedto influenceboth the shapeof the relative permeability curve and the critical gas saturationvalue in gas-oil systems. Leverettapointed out that the relative permeability of an unconsolidatedsand to an oilwater mixture is relatedto the sandpore size distribution.Muskat et a1.27 suggested that it is necessary to know the pore geometry of a reservoir rock before fluid movement through it can be analyzed. Morgan and Gordon2sfound that pore geometry and surface area per unit volume influencedwater-oil relativepermeabilitycurves.They have shown that rocks with large pores and correspondinglysmall surfaceareashave low irreducible water saturations and therefore have a relatively large amount of pore spaceavailable for the flow of fluids. This conditionallows high relativepermeability end pointsto exist and allows a large saturation changeto occur during two-phase flow. Correspondingly, rocks with small pores have larger surface areasper unit volume and they have irreducible water saturationsthat leave little room for the flow of hydrocarbons.This condition createsa low initial oil relative permeability as well as a limited saturationrange for two-phaseflow. Gorring2e demonstrated that oil in a larger pore can be surroundedand blocked off when it is encircledby smaller pores which imbibe the displacingwater by capillary forces. He concluded that both pore size distribution and pore orientation have a direct effect on nonwetting residual equilibrium saturation, as shown by Figure l0; therefore, a perfectly uniform packing of spheres shouldgive a residualsaturation nearzero.Gorring also identified the size of channelsoccupied by the nonwetting phase as an important factor influencing relative permeability. Crowell et al.30indicated that higher initial water saturationyields a higher probability for the nonwettingphaseto be in larger channelsso-thatit can b9 recovered efficiently during wetting-phaseimbibition. Botset2' mentioned as early as 1939 that the relative perrneability-saturation relation depends on the degreeand the type of interconnections of the pores.Fatt,3rDodd and Kiel,32 and Wyllie33 also concluded that the relative permeability of porous media is a direct consequence of the network structureof the media. Pathaket al.3aconcludedthat the ratio of pore size to pore throat is a factor which controls the snapping-off of droplets of the
54
nonwettingphase,with a high ratio leadingto a high trappedoil saturation. Other workers have investigated the possibilityof describingporousmedia as a network of interconnected pore bodies and pore throats. Postdepositional alterations can form more than one type of reservoirrock from a single original rock type. Alteration may reducepore sizes,thus causinghigher irreduciblewater saturation and a natrow rangeof saturation changeduring two-phase flow. The presence of grains such as feldspar, when partially dissolved,improvesthe reservoirrock quality by forming pores larger than the pores betweengrains not containingfeldspar.This alteration causeshigher relative permeabilityvalues and a larger saturationrange during two-ph4sg flow.tt Reference35 describesalterationsin pore geometry which can occur due to the introductionof reactivefluids in the rock. Land and Baptist36 indicatedthat when a reservoirsandstone containsmontmorilloniteor mixed-layer clay mineralscontainingexpandable layers,the watersensitivity of the sandstone is not necessarily a result of pore blockagedue to the increased volume occupiedby the swollen montmorillonite.Some sandstones containingtrace amountsof clay mineralsmay exhibit sensitivityto water resultingfrom dispersionand subsequent transportation of clay mineralsto pore constrictions.Thus, permeabilityreductionmay occur in formationsthat do not contain expandableclay minerals;however, all formationscontainingexpandable clays are probably water-sensitive due to the easeof dispersionand expansionof this type of clay. Permeabilityreductionin sandscontainingsodiumclays is likely to be higher than the reductionin sandscontainingcalcium clays. Somerock properties that influencerelativepermeabilityvariations are readily observable with a binocular microscopeor even more clearly under a scanningelectronmicroscope. Therefore,microscopiccore examination can be highly usefulfor evaluating relativepermeability characteristics. Once the significantrock propertyvariationshave been identified, a reservoir can be subdivided into appropriatereservoir rock types. Within each of such reservoirrocks types, relative permeabilitycharacteristics are usually similar, varying only slightly for rather large changesin air permeabilityor mediangrain size.
V. DEFINITIONAND CAUSES OF WETTABILITY

"Wettability" is a term usedto describethe relativeattractionof one fluid for a solid in the presence of other immisciblefluids. It is the main factor responsible for the microscopic fluid distribution in porous media and it determinesto a great extent the amount of residual oil saturationand the ability of a particular phaseto flow. The relative affinity of a rock to a hydrocarbon in the presence of water is often described as "water-wet", "intermediate", "oil-wet". or Examplesof formations with strongly water-wet, strongly oil-wet, and intermediatewettability are the Spraberry formation in west Texas, the Black Bradford sand in Pennsylvania, and the Fairbanksand in south Texas, respectively. Wettability may be represented by the contact angle formed among fluids and a flat solid surfaceor the angle formed betweenthe fluids' interfaceand a glasscapillary tube, as shown by Figure I l. The angle is measured throughthe denserfluid. The wettability of a porousmedium is determined by a combinationof all surfaceforces. A sketchis shown in Figure 12, wherein two liquids, oil and water, are in contactwith a solid. The force exerted by water to spreadlaterally and displaceoil (interfacialtension betweenwater and oil) is opposedby the resultantof the solid and liquid forces (solid-oil and solid-waterinterfacialtensions). This difference in opposing forcesis calledthe adhesion tension:
A, : o.o or* : o*o cos 0*o Q)
This relationship is referred to as the Young-Dupre equation, where A, is the adhesion
55
WATER-WET
OIL-WET
INTERMEDIATE
e<goo
FIGURE I L
g >goo
g=9Oo
_w;, ='-Kfig==
,l I\
Ttrp Vian of a Drop of VJater on a Solid Surface in the Presence of Oil Ttrree
and in capillarytubes. Wettability conditionson flat surfaces
Dirrensional
Sdrernatic
View
FIGURE 12. Forcesat a water-oil-solidinterface.
tension;oso,o,*, and o*o, respectively,are solid-oil, solid-water,and water-oil interfacial tensions(usually measuredin dyne/cm); 0*" is the contact angle betweenwater and oil measured through the denserliquid phase(usually water). tensionmeansthe contactangleis lessthan 90' and the solid A positivevalue of adhesion surfaceis preferentiallywater-wet. A zerovalue of adhesiontensionindicatesthat the contact angle is equal to 90'; this is intermediatewettability. A negativevalue of adhesiontension meansthe contact angle is greaterthan 90' and that the solid surface is preferentially oil wet. There is no practical laboratory method for meaquantitieswhich can be used to suring trsoor o.*. However, o*o and cos 0 are measurable evaluate the wettability of a solid surface. A fluid is referred to as wetting or nonwetting to a surfacedependingon whether the contact angle is less than or greaterthan 90". Understandingthe causesof wettability requires a study of the chemistry of the fluids, the polarity and molecular weight of reservoir hydrocarboncompounds,and the occurrence at the solid-fluid interfaces. of surfacechemical processes experimentally found that the contact angles vary directly with Stegemeierand Jensen3T Figure l3 showsthis variation molecularweight for liquids with similar chemicalstructures. for the normal paraffin seriescompounds.
56

50 n-ct n-cl n-cl
o o o o)
40
r,u J o z o z o
< F z
F
30
n-C^ t'
n-c6 10
I 50 100
150
200
MOLECULAR WEIGHT
F I G U R E 1 3 . C o n t a c ta n g l ea s a f u n c t i o no f m o l e c u l a r weight.ri
83o -
Silica
Surface
fsooctane
fsooctane +
Isoqrinoline
Naphthenic
5.7E Isoquinoline
Calcite Sr-rrface FIGURE 14. Interfacialcontactangles.38
Benner and Bartell38 examined various multi-liquid systemsin contact with silica and calcite surfaces.Figure l4 illustratessomeof the findings of this study. It was reportedby theseinvestigators that when water and iso-octane are used, the silica and calcite surfaces are preferentially wet by water; but when water and naphthenicacid are used, water wet the silica but oil wet the calcite surface.The experimentof Benner and Bartell illustrated the effects of chemical as well as fluid compositionof phaseson wettability of a porous medium. Contact angles as low as 30o and as high as l58o were observedwhen various chemicalswere employedin the study. Salathiel3e discoveredthat the wettability of mineral surfacesmay be altered not only by adsorbedmonolayersof surface-active polar compounds,but also by much thicker layers of depositedorganic materials. Severalother workers have reportedthe formation of stable films on solid surfaces when the surfaces standin contactwith certaincrude oils. Reisberg and Doshelo described the deposition on glass or quartz surfaces of highly stable and appreciablythick films of strongly oil-wet material from Ventura crude oil. Early experimentersthought that all oil-bearing formations were strongly water-wet be-
i7 causean aqueousphasewas always the fluid initially in contactwith reservoirrock; furthermore, silica and carbonatesare normally water-wet in their clean state. Subsequent studies suggestedthat many oil reservoirsare not strongly water-wet and that the presence or wax type material agents,suchas asphaltic of crudeoils containingnaturalsurface-active by solid-liquid interfaces,can render the solid surfaceoil-wet.arOther readily adsorbable may cover a broad spectrum. studiesprovide evidencethat reservoirrock wetting preference One criticism of the idea of reservoirrock surfaces becomingmodified by the adsorption or depositionof polar organicmaterialfrom the oil phaseis that suchmaterialsshouldhave been eliminatedduring migration from the sourcerock to the reservoir.On the other hand, geochemists processes which affect are now finding substantial evidence of variousalteration crude oils subsequent to their accumulationin reservoirs.[n a discussionof natural gas deasphalting, Evanset al.a2 suggested a reasonable hypothesis that the more gas a crude has in solutionthe more of its heavyendshave come out of solution,plating out on the reservoir rock. It may be noted in this respectthat Salathiel'sstrongly oil-wet film depositionon quartzand porous rocks from a mixture of evacuated crude oil and heptanewas also probably process. the result of a deasphalting Despite uncertaintyas to the causesof reservoir wettability, much evidencehas been presented in recentyearsto suggest that many oil reservoirsare not stronglywater-wet.In particular,there are the many brine/crude oil contact-angle measurements of Treiber et aI.62 and the conclusionsof Salathielwith regard to the apparentwetting characteristics of the Woodbine reservoirin the East Texas Field. Nuttinga3 as early as 1934indicatedthat some reservoir rocks are oil-wet. Leach et al.aadescribeda reservoir believed to be oil-wet. Munganasstudied fresh carefully preservedcores from a reservoir and concluded that the formationwas oil-wet. Schmida6 hasshownthat stronglywater-wetcoresbecamelesswaterwet when equilibratedwith some crudes.Kusakov et al.a1 studiedthe thicknessof a water film left on a quartz surfaceunder crude oil drops and found that for two of the crudes, the film will rupture, bringing the crude oil into direct contactwith the quartz surface;the surface can then be describedas water-wet at some spots and oil-wet at others. Also, Craigas suggested that most formations are of intermediatewettability with no strong preferencefor to suggest that water may not alwayscompletely eitheroil or water. There is recentevidence wet reservoirrock in gas-waterflow following solvent injection. Soil scientists concerned with airlwater/soilsystemshave reportedsituations in which thereis incompletewetting by phase.ae the aqueous Authors such as Holbrook and Bernard,so and Fatt and Klikoffs' assumedthat wetting of rather than uniform. Holbrook and Bernard measured reservoir solids was heterogeneous fractional wettability by dye adsorption. Brown and Fatts2defined fractional wettability as the fraction of surface area in contact with water. This may not be a constantvalue since the water and oil saturations changeas a reservoiris produced.Schmida6 showedby means of capillary pressure-saturation data, that in preservedcores the fine pores were water-wet while the large pores were much less water-wet. This type of wetting is often referred to as "spotted", "dalmation", or "fractional". That heterogeneous wettability is a normal conby Salathiel,3e Iwankow,s3Brown and Fatt,s2 dition in oil sandshas also been suggested have suggested Gimaludinov,s4 and McGhee and Crocker.ss Severalof theseinvestigators that the wetting phasecompletely occupiesthe smaller pores of a reservoir rock in addition to the rock surface of the larger pores, while the nonwetting phaseprimarily occupies the insular regions of the larger pores. Evidence suggeststhat some oil reservoirs are partly preferentiallywater-wet and partly preferentiallyoil-wet. Such a condition could arise if someporesare lined with one type of mineral and other poresare lined with anothermineral. The existence of different minerals in porous media can create differences in surface chemistry of the grains, so all grain surfacesdo not have the sameaffinity for surfaceactive compounds. For instance, a tertiary sand reservoir in Alaska contains quartz and siderite minerals which are strongly water-wet and calcite which is strongly oil-wet. The overall
58
Relat iv e P ermeabi I i ty of Petro leum Re'rervoirs
necedi-ng l^later di spLaced by oi1 Water Static conditrlon displacing oil
|st
Advancmg
ti.
tubes. FIGURE 15. Advancing and recedingcontactanglesin capillary
siderite surfacesin rock system is water-wet, probably due to the presenceof quartz and of some channels flow the in gypsum or anhydrite of presence the main flow channels.The waterstrongly a create to found are minerals These carbonaterock may alter its wettability. conditions' reservoir under oil-wet probably are rocks wet system, while many carbonate they are present in the Heavy metal sulfides are known to render a surface oil-wet when media' flow channelsof Porous is covered by a Wagner and Leachs6stated that in some oil reservoirsthe rock surface would be preferentially bituminousor other organiccoating. Such surfaces firmly attached of oil and water composition.Boneau of oil and water, regardless oil-wet in the presence reported that the oil-wet characterof the North Burbank reservoir is due to and Clampitt.tt77o of the quartzsurface' a coating of chamositeclay which coversapproximately
OF WETTABILITY VI. DETERMINATION

qualitatively' or estimated experimentally The wettabilityof a rock can be eitherevaluated However' laboThere is no satisfactorymethod to determinein si/a reservoirwettability. in situ wettability.Many of the widely wettabilityhasbeenusedto evaluate ratory-measured rock or the used experimentalmethodsof wettability evaluationutilize either the reservoir shouldbe related wettabilityevaluation reservoirfluids, but not both. Therefore,a laboratory to actual reservoirconditionsusing a greatdeal of caution. A. Contact Angle Method has received the technique The contactangle methodis usedby a numberof laboratories; measurement' methodof wettability attentionin the literatureas a quantitative considerable a drop of pure liquid restingon that 0 angle contact the measuring of consists The method solid forms when immersedin nonporous,homogeneous a smooth, flat, incompressible, the solid surface the contactangleformedbetween anotherfluid. In most iractical situations, than a single and the water-oil interface is found to exhibit two limiting values rather contactwith into brought equilibrium value. The value of the contactangle when water is "advancingcontactangle"' oil on a solid surfacepreviouslyin contactwith oil is calledthe into contact with water on a solid surface The value of contact angle when oil is brought "receding contactangle". previouslyin contactwith water is called the in a capillary Figure l5 shows a comparisonof advancingand recedingcontactangles to as referred is tube. The fact that advancing and receding contact angles are not equal roughness, and and it is usually attributedto surfaceheterogeniety contactangle hysteresis and rate of fluid movement. As the materialsss of surface-active presence the as as well providedthe the contactangle will further increase, of a rock increases, surfaceroughness if the however, contact angle measuredon the smooth surfaceof the rock is above 90o; roughness surface in is lessthan90o,the increase on a smoothsurface contactanglemeasured surfacecontactangle is found to increasein smooth The angle. the decrease further would in receding,on the rough surfaceover most of the 0 to l80o contact advancingand decrease angle range.tn at the solid-fluid materialsin the fluids may causeadsorptionprocesses Surface-active with a smooth, even interfaceswhich give rise to appreciablecontact angle hysteresis angle hyscontact line of contactincreases solid. Motion of thl three-phase homogeneous teresisas the rate of movementincreases'
59
It4ineral Flat ter plate
#1
/or,
Flat
Mineral
plate
#2
FIGURE 16. Schematrc measuremen otf c o n t a c ta n g l e s . 5 o
't20
Oil-wet
o o o
. "
a
Equilibrium tContact Angle
3 8 0
!
o o,
8 E 4 0
o
Water-wet
20
40
60
Time (hours)
FIGURE I7
Influenceof aging on laboratory-measured contactangle.18
Advancingand recedingcontactanglescan be shownin a capillarytube for oil displacing water(receding angle)and waterdisplacing oil (advancing angle).The procedure to determine the contact angle using a contact angle cell is describedby Wagner and Leachs6 and is illustratedschematically by Figure 16. Briefly, samples of polishea,Rat platesof the mineral which is the main constituentof the reservoirrock are immersedin a sampleof formation water. A drop of reservoiroil is held betweenthe two flat samples of the mineral and the two plates are moved horizontally so that the water advances on the surfaceof the plate initially coveredby oil. The contactangleformedbetween the interface and the newly wateroccupied surfaceof the mineral is a measureof the water advancingcontact angle. The advancingcontactangle is the one that is customarilymeasured and often reportedwithout being identified as advancing. The contact angle measuredin the laboraotryis often influencedby aging. It has been shown that contactangle increases with age of the oil-solid interfaceuntil an Lquilibrium is reached.This may require severaldays and it is one of the disadvantages of the contact angle method.a8 Figure l7 shows this effect. Reliable wettability measurement requiresthat both the reservoirrock and the fluids be free from contaminants. Uncontaminated reservoirrocks can probably be obtainedif the coresare recovered with coring fluid containingno surface-active additivesor with reservoir oil that has not been exposedto oxygen. It has been reportedthat exposureof coresto air could result in alterationfrom water-wetto intermediate wettability. Uncontaminated reservoir water and oil are easierto obtain than unalteredreservoirrock. Since contactangle measurement can be donewithout a sample of (uncontaminated) reservoir rock, it hasbecome a widely used method for determiningwettability. Zismanmand other investigators studiedcontactanglesunder controlledconditionsand
60
expressed varying opinions concerningthe method's usefulness. Melrose and Brandner6r believed that the contact angles provides the only direct and clear specificationof the wettability property characteristic of a given oil-water-rocksystem.Treiber et a|.62 found that the water-advancing well with other wettabilityindicatorswhile contactanglescorrelate water-receding anglesdo not. Brown and Fatts2 questioned the ability of the contactangle methodto provide a reliable scale for determiningwettability and suggested that the conceptof a contact angle representation of wettability of reservoir rock be abandonedand that this method be replaced with a "fractional surfacearea" method. Morrow et al.63also observedthat severalfactors cast doubt on the utility of the contact angle method. Mungans describedsome of the limitations and pitfalls of contactangle measurement as follows:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The mineral chosenfor the contactangle measurement is the principal constituentof the reservoirrock. For the purposeof contactangle measurement, silica or quartz is usedto represent a sandstone; calciteis usedto represent a carbonate or reef reservoir. Laboratorymeasurement of contactangle or mineral surfacesmay not simulatetrue reservoircontactangle. The contact angle at the water/oil displacement front is "advancing" while at the "receding". leading edge of the oil bank it is Thesevalues sometimesdiffer by as much as 50o. This variationcan be on the sameorder of magnitudeas the laboratorymeasured contactangle. Contactangle measurement shouldbe done when the solid surfaceand a fluid remain in contact for an adequate time before the secondfluid is introducedover the surface. This is referredto as pre-equilibriumtime and it is of different length for each crude oil-water system.Without adequate pre-equilibrium time, a stablecontactangle is not reached. In somecases it hasbeenreported that a stablecontactangleis neverobtained if the solid surfacecomes into contactwith some types of crude oils. Contact angle measurement is frequentlytime consuming. Contact angle measurement should be performedwith actual reservoirfluids, since they are in equilibrium and solubility effectsare negligible;otherwise,the fluids must be equilibratedwith one anotherso that the solubility effectsbecomenegligible. Contactanglemeasurement preferablyshouldbe donewith bottom-hole fluid samples; however,because of the time and expenses involved, flow line samples are often used. Fluid samplestaken from the storageor treating facilities are not reliable, due to the possibleaccumulation of asphaltenes. When produced water is not available,synthetic brine is commonly used. Contact angle measurements should be made under controlledconditionsso that the oxidation of crude oil can be prevented. Contact angle measurement requiresextremecare to assure cleanliness and inertness of the apparatus.
B. Imbibition Method An imbibition test is a reliabletechniqueof wettability determination providedunaltered reservoir fluids are available. The method consistsof the measurement of rate of flow of a wetting fluid spontaneously imbibed into a core and replacinga nonwettingfluid by the action of capillary forces alone. Imbibition testsmay be performedat standard conditions or at reservoir conditions.Figures 18, 19, and 20 illustrateequipment that is usedfor conducting the testsat ambientconditions. The imbibition test at standard conditionsmay be performedas follows: l. A cylindrical plug of reservoirrock I to I tlrin. in diameteris cut with water as a coolantin the cuttingprocess.
6l
Capillary Tube
M e t a l l i cS a m p l e H o l d e r
Tef lon
F I G U R E 1 8 . I m b i b i t i o nc e l l .
2. 3. 4. 5.
6. 7.
The sample is placed under water in a beaker and evacuatedto remove trapped gas. The sampleis flushed with water to reducethe oil saturation to residuallevel. The core plug is placedin an imbibition cell underoil and oil imbibition is monitored. The drained water is measured; it is equal to the amount of imbibed oil. Sufficient time should be allowed for the systemto reachequilibrium; this may take severaldays dependingon the permeability of the plug. The plug is then saturatedwith oil to reduce the remaining water to the ineducible level. The sampleis placedin an imbibition cell underwater and water imbibition is monitored by the amount of oil being drained. The fluid that imbibes into the sample (oil or water) is the wetting phase.
The imbibition test under reservoir conditions is more complex. Irreducible water saturation is establishedby flushing the core with live oil and the imbibition tests are made at reservoir pressureand temperature.
62
to Water Reservoir
)7
F I G U R E 1 9 . I m b i b i t i o nc e l l
Accumulated
Rubber Stopper -----+
FIGURE 20.
Imbibition cell.
Amott6s developed a quantitative techniquefor defining the degreeof water-wetnessof the degreeof water wetness by a water index, which he defined as the cores. He expressed imbibed into a core to the total volume of oil ratio of the volume of water spontaneously of oil by water). Similarly, an oil index displacedby a water drive (forced displacement was defined at the ratio of the volume of oil spontaneously imbibed to total water displaced
63 by an oil drive (forceddisplacement of water by oil). Amott's test consists of the following steps:
l 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Flush the reservoirsamplewith water to reducethe oil saturation to its residuallevel. Immersethe samplein water and evacuate to remove gas. Immersethe samplein kerosene(or reservoiroil) and measurethe volume of water displacedby imbibition of oil after 20 hr. Measure the volume of water displacedwhen the sampleis centrifugedunder oil. Immersethe samplein water and measure the volume of oil displacedby water after 20 hr. Measure the volume of oil displacedwhen the sampleis centrifugedunder water.
Oil index is the ratio of the volume of fluid measuredin step 3 to the volume of fluid measuredin step 4. Water index is the ratio of fluid volume from step 5 to fluid volume from step 6. The preferential wettabilityof a rock is determined by the magnitude of thesetwo indexes, i.e., strong wettability is indicatedby values approaching one and a weak preferencein indicatedby valuesapproaching zero. A water index of one indicatesa strongly water-wet surfacewhile an oil index of one indicates a stronglyoil-wet surface.Valuesbetweenthese two extremes or a value nearzero for both ratioscover the rangeof intermediate wettability. Amott's testof wettabilityof porousmediareceived high marksfrom Razaet aI.66, although Moore and Slobad,67 Bobek et aI.,68 Killens et al.,6e and RichardsonTo have indicated that the imbibition rate cannot be entirely attributedto the wettability of the core, but that it is also influencedby rock porosity, permeability,pore structure,and pore size distribution,as well as viscosityand interfacialtensionof the fluids involved in the experiment.Donaldson et al.7' tried to eliminateextraneous effectsfrom the wettabilitymeasurement by comparing the volumes of fluids imbibed into preservedreservoircores with the volumes of fluids imbibed in the same cores after extractionand resaturation. Although the use of the same core would appearto offer identicalpore size distributions, the changein fluid distributions gained. causedby the cleaningprocessmay have offset the advantage MunganT2 reportedthe use of an imbibition test to evaluatethe wettability of native-state cores. Emery et a1.73 used an imbibition test after incubationof cores for up to 1,000 hr with gas-saturated oil under pressure; water was the first phaseto contactthe rock in the test. Kyte et al.7a imbibition testsconducted described at reservoirtemperature and pressure. C. Bureau of Mines Method The U.S. Bureauof Mines methodof wettabilitydetermination of a porousrock, commonly referredto as the "Centrifuge Method", is basedon the assumption that an elementalarea of the internal surfaceof the porous medium is either wettableor nonwettableby one of the fluids involved. The problemis one of determining the fractionof the internalsurfacewetted by each fluid. A methodof measuring wettabilitybasedon the abovetheory was suggested by Gatenby and MarsdenTs and was later developedby Donaldson.Tr These investigators made use of the areasobtained from the drainageand imbibition cycles of the capillary pressure curve to producea numericalrepresentation of wettability. The Bureau of Mines method is quite rapid and it can be employedwith reservoirfluids. D. Capillarimetric Method Johansenand DunningT6 recognizedthe importanceof the liquid used in determining wettability of a rock-liquid-brinesystemand suggested the use of a capillarimeterwhich joins the two liquid phases,oil and water, through a small diameterglasscapillary tube, with a capillary pressureacrossthe interfacejoining the two phases.Adhesion tensionor
64
energy, was calculatedfrom the differencein height of the two liquids in the displacement in densities, and the acceleration due to gravity. the difference two armsof the capillarimeter, forces with either an advancing or receding measuring interfacial is capable of The instrument reservoir rock are the exclusion of as a factor of this method Major limitations interface. influencingwettability and lack of provision to preventoil from oxidizing. E. Fractional Surface Area Method This method, developedby Brown and Fatt,s2 usesmixturesof untreated sandand sand rendered vaporsto obtainwettingconditions rangingfrom completely oil-wet by organosilane water-wetto completelyoil-wet. Wettability is represented by the fraction of solid surfacemade artificially oil-wet. Although use of the method to evaluatefield behavioris not in evidence,the conceptof a fractionally wet surfacehas been presented in the work of other writers.3e F. Dye Adsorption Method This method,developed is basedupon the ability of reservoir by Holbrook and Bernard,-50 rock to adsorba dye suchas methylene blue from aqueous solution,while rock surfaceareas covered by contaminantsfrom the oil phase remain unaffected.The test is based on a comparisonof the adsorptioncapacity of the test samplewith that of an adjacentsample similar to thoseof extractedby chloroform and methanol.This methodmakesassumptions Brown and Fatts2in their "fractional surface area" method. G. Drop Test Method This method is often used to confirm rock wettability. The procedureinvolves placing drops of oil and water on the surfaceof a fresh break in the core. The fluid that imbibes is the wetting phasewhile the fluid that forms a ball and doesnot wet the surfaceis nonwetting. misleading. The drop test is a qualitativedetermination and is sometimes H. Methods of Bobek et al. proposeda laboratorytestto ascertain preferentialwettability in a qualitative Bobek et aI.68 fashion. The techniqueconsistsof determiningwhich fluid will displacethe other from a rock sampleby imbibition. The resultsof this imbibition test are comparedwith thoseof a referenceimbibition test on the samecore sampleafter it has been heatedto 400'F for 24 hr to remove any organic materialsand to make it more water-wet. The assignmentof qualitativewettability designations is basedon the relativeamountsand ratesof imbibition in the two tests. material is In the same paper a method for estimatingthe wettability of unconsolidated slide. The oil discussed. A thin layer of the unconsolidated sandis spreadon a microscope content of the sand is increased by adding a clear refined oil. Droplets of water are then placedon the surfaceof the sandgrains and the fluid movementis observed.If the sand is water-wet, the added water will displace oil from the surfacesof the sand grains and the oil will form spherical droplets, indicating that oil is the nonwetting phase. A similar procedureis used to test for oil wettability. I. Magnetic Relaxation Method for determiningthe portionsof A nuclearmagneticrelaxationtechniquewas suggesteds2 the rock surfacearea that are preferentiallywater-wetor oil-wet. A rock sample is first exposedto a strong magneticfield, then to a much weakerfield. The magneticrelaxation rate- that is, the rate at which the initially imposedmagnetism is lost - is then measured. In sandpacks containing known mixtures of oil-wet and water-wet sand grains, a linear relationship was observedbetween the relaxation rate and the fraction of the surface area
65
0.5 Fraction of Dri-Filmed Sano
.t
FIGURE 21.
for sand mixtures.sr Interstitialwater saturation
that is oil-wet. Though the authorsreportedno studiesusing naturalcores, they proposed a testingprocedure.Their techniquerequiresspecialized equipmentnot normally found in petroleumlaboratories in the literature and thereare no indications that the methodhasfound routine use. J. Residual Saturation Methods reported between residual McGheeet al.,ssLorenz et al.7e and Rezniket al.80 a correlation oil saturationand wettability. Treiber et al.62 reportedthat the connatewater saturationin be usedas an indicationof formationwetting preference. They a native core can sometimes found that oil-wet formation have much lower connatewater saturations than the water-wet in a stronglyoil-wet reservoirwas found to ones. In addition, the connatewater saturation permeability, of the sample while in reservoirs of other wettabilities be constantregardless with increasein permeability.Iwankow53 the connatewater saturationdecreased also desandwettability in terms of a fraction of drifilmed sand. scribedthe effect of heterogenous (See Figure 21.) Drifilm is a solution commonly used in the laboratoryto make sands preferentiallyoil-wet. Coley et al.8r were not successsful in using the ratio of the wetting relationships to the nonwettingresidual saturationfrom relative permeability-saturation as preferential however, found a rock wettability indicator; they that the volume of mobile valuesof a relativepermeability fluid shown by the spreadbetweenthe residualsaturation curve appears to decrease as the oil wettability increases. K. Permeability Method of wettability of a samplefrom permeabilitydata is accomplished The determination by with the oil permeability comparingthe ratio of water permeabilityat residualoil saturation at connatewater saturation.If this ratio is less than 0.3, the sample is consideredto be water-wet,while a value near unity indicatesthat the sampleis oil-wet.82 The relationship permeability water saturation has been frequently mentioned betweenabsolute and connate petroleum literature the relationship between connate water saturation in the and and rock wettability has been discussed. Rocks with low connatewater saturation are considered to water saturation be weakly water-wetto oil-wet, while rocks with high connate are normally as water-wet. designated
Relative Permeability of P etroleum Reservoirs
(Water-wet)
ft rel
Sw
(Oit-wet)
krel
Sw
FIGURE 22. Schematicwettability effecrs on relative permeabilitycurves.
L. Connate Water-Permeability Method A correlationof absolutepermeabilityas a function of water saturation in corescut with oil-base mud hasbeenusedfor qualitative identification of corewettability.6s Watersaturation is measured in freshly cut coresand absolute permeabilityis determined after extractionand drying. A plot of water saturation as a function of absolute permeabilityto air is prepared. The curve will have a gentle slope over a large saturation interval for water-wetsystems, while it will exhibit a nearlyverticalslopeover a narrowsaturation rangefor oil-wet systems. This technique is applicable primarily to thick hydrocarbon reservoirs with sufficientvariation in permeability and water saturationso the required plot can be prepared. M. Relative Permeability Method For a given water saturation, the water relativepermeabilityof a water-wetrock is lower than that of a comparable oil-wet rock. For the systemsstudiedby Owens and Archern it was found that an increase (at constant in oil wetness water saturation) producedan increase in k,* and a decrease in k,.,. Treiber et aI.62 concludedthat water-wetconsolidated porous media normally have a water relative permeabilitylessthan l5Vo at residualoil saturation, while oil-wet porous media show a 50Voor higher relative permeabilityto water at floodout. Craigas offers the following heuristicguidelines,which are illustratedby Figure 22:
67
Water-wet
S*i
. k,* -- t[r.* k,* at S.,*
Oil-wet < l 1% a,usual l yl 07o @ S*<507o > 0.5, approachi ng 1.0
>20 to 25Va @ S*>507o <0.3
block the easy flow In a water-wetrock, residualoil globulesin the large flow channels of water and causea low water relativepermeability;however,the oil in an oil-wet system occupiessmaller flow channelsand coatsthe walls of the largerones, causinga minimum disturbance to water flow and a higher water relativepermeability.ttThis is why an oil-wet rapid increase reservoirwill waterfloodpoorly, with early water breakthrough, in water cut, and high residualoil saturation. cores under steady-state The water-oil relative permeabilityrelationshipof native-state pointed Keelan82 conditionsis one of the best indicatorsof the rock wettability preference. changeaccompanied out that a sharpdrop in oil relativepermeabilityover a small saturation by a rapid rise in relative permeabilityto water, to a terminal value in excessof one third oil wetness. Careful sampleexamination the initial oil relativepermeability,often indicates or cracked samplesyield relative is essentialin using this technique,for heterogeneous permeabilitydata similar to the data obtainedfrom oil-wet cores. with the Water relative permeabilitycurves in water-oil systemsshow good agreement testsin a strongly oil relativepermeabilitycurve obtainedduring gas-oilrelativepermeability water-wet core.62'63'84 This effect does not exist under any other wetting condition. In a strongly water-wet core, the water relative permeability curve of a water-oil system also shows good agreementwith the water relative permeabilityof a gas-watersystem in the presence This agreement will occur, even though the directionof of residualoil saturation. the changein saturationmay not be the samein the two systems.In the same manner, in systemis comparable to stronglyoil-wet cores, the gas relativepermeabilityof a gas-water of residualoil saturation.8a systemin the presence the gasrelativepermeabilityof a gas-water The point of intersection of the water and oil relative permeability curves has been suggested as an indication of rock wettability. Owens and Archerrr have shown that the relative permeability intersectionpoint moves toward higher values of water saturationand lower values of relative permeability in a water-oil system as the sample wettability is changedfrom oil-wet to water-wet. As illustratedby Figure 22, a relative permeability intersectionpoint on the left of 507o water saturationindicatesthat the system is oil-wet, while an intersectionto the right of this saturationsuggests that the system is water-wet. N. Relative Permeability Summation Method The summation of relative permeabilitiesto the water and oil phaseat fixed saturations also gives some insight into the immiscible flow processes.McCafferysenoted a trend in of samplesaccordingto their the minimum values of the sum of relative permeabilities preferential wettabilities. O. Relative Permeability Ratio Method If the ratio of displacing to displacedphaserelative permeability is plotted as a function of the displacing-phase saturation,the shapeof the plot is related to preferentialwettability rock.66 It has of the been shown that the water-oil relative permeability ratio shifts to a higher value as the rock becomesmore oil-wet; furthermore, a semilog plot of water-oil and gas-oil relative permeability indicatesthat the gas-oil relative permeabilityratio curve moves from under to over the water-oil relative permeability ratio curve as the rock becomes preferentially water-wet.sr The water-oil relative permeability ratio curves of rock with variousdegrees of intermediatewettability are found to be practicallythe samein the presence
68
of constantinitial water saturation.85 Imbibition water-oil relativepermeabilityratio curves in the absence of initial water saturations show higher valuesof residualoil saturationas the cores become more oil-wet.8sSteady-state relative permeabilitymeasurements should be usedfor determination of wettability. Unsteady-state methodsmay not allow equilibrium to occur during the flow test; therefore,they may indicatemore oil wettnessthan actually exists. P. Waterflood Method Severalattemptsto find a single correlationof wettability with waterfloodoil recovery for different porous media have failed, even though the tests were carried out under a standardset of conditions.6s However, the waterflood performance of a native-state core under carefully controlled laboratory conditions has been used as an indication of rock preferentialwettability. It is found that in a strongly water-wetsystem,a large fraction of the oil is producedprior to water breakthrough and very little additionaloil is recovered after breakthrough. For the test to be reliable,an equilibriumwetting conditionmust prevail prior to the passage of the flood front through the core. Q. Capillary Pressure Method Both displacement pressure and the ratio of drainage to imbibition displacement pressure have beenproposedas qualitativeindicatorsof preferential wettabilityof porousmedia. An increasein displacementpressureor in the ratio of drainageto imbibition displacement pressuresignifies a tendencyof the core to becomemore oil-wet. The above techniqueis applicablewhen oil-water capillary tests are made on native-state cores. However, most capillary pressure testsare either of the mercury injection or air-brinetype, which provide little information concerningwettability.8l R. Resistivity Index Method Formation resistivity obtainedfrom electric logs can be used as a qualitativetechnique for wettability identification. Resistivity index is defined as the ratio of true formation resistivityto resistivityof the formation when 1007a saturated with formationwater. A high value of resistivity index indicatesa low water saturation or a discontinuous water phase, which characterize an oil-wet system.A knowledgeof the water saturation in the rock may yield sufficient information to make a judgementabout rock wettability. There is considerable uncertaintyconcerningthe natureof the wettability characteristics of reservoir rocks in situ. Tests of wettability made on cores taken from reservoirsare not necessarily valid indicatorsof subsurface conditions, since the coring processitself may alter wettability. Cores cut in oil-base mud, for example, are often renderedentirely or partially preferentiallyoil-wet. Thereforespecialprecautions must be observed during both coring and transportingto minimize the danger of altering the true wettability of the rock. In the absence of convincingevidenceto the contrary(for example,abnormallyhigh resistivity index) the assumption of preferentialwater wettability has been frequentlyused.86
VII. FACTORS INFLUENCING WETTABILITYEVALUATION

It has been suggestedthat four factors may influence the results of experimental determination of rock wettability.8T One of thesefactors is core recoveryand preservation. In the processof core recovery from a reservoir, heavy hydrocarboncomponentsof crude oil become less soluble as the oil loses its associated solution gas (as a result of pressure reduction).The heavy hydrocarboncomponents can precipitate on the rock grains, leading to less water-wetor even oil-wet core behavior.8s-m Drilling fluid containingsurface-active materialsmay drasticallychangea core wettability, but it has been shown that bentonite
69 and carboxymethylcellulosehave no observable effect on rock wettability when they are used in the coring fluid.7aWeatheringand contamination of coresduring preservation and storage are alsofound to influencecore wettabilities.er Stronglywater-wetcoresmay become less water-wetas a result of air exposure,while cores with intermediate wettability show no significantchange.6s Oil-wet cores also may becomewater-wetupon exposureto air.72 It has been suggested that alterationdue to air exposurecan be minimized and native-state wettabilitycan be restored by incubation of the core in reservoir oil for two weeksat reservoir temperature.2s Crude oil is probably the best coring fluid for preservingwettability and maintaining native interstitialwater saturation;e2 however,useof the wetting phaseas a coring fluid may preserve the rock properties properly.2s NaCl brine containingCaCO, powder with no other additivesis considered a good fluid for cutting cores.e3 Care must be taken to avoid contaminationof the coring fluid with air, sediments, etc. The useof crudeoil as a coring fluid is likely to introducea fire hazardinto the coring operation,especiallyif a high API gravity oil is us ed. Native state wettability of cores is obviously the most desirablecondition, and the best techniquefor obtainingcores in this condition is by employing a pressure core barrel. The method allows coresto be cut and retrievedat reservoirpressure. At the surface,the cores are frozen, cut into sections, and sentto the laboratory.ea Although early attempts at pressure coring met with limited success, recentdevelopments indicate a success ratio of 80 to90Va. Cores that have been cleaned, dried, and restoredto some saturationand wettability condition are known as "restored state" cores.a8 This techniquehas been employed for many yearsand it is an established procedure; unfortunately, quite frequently,the coresare not restoredto their native stateand the useof thesecoresinvalidates resultsobtainedusing sophisticated measurement techniques. Put very simply, restoredstatecores are not. Factorsthat influencethe core wettability evaluationincludethe laboratorycore cleaning and preparationprocedure.Mungane2 statesthat the cleaning procedureneither changesthe pore size distributionnor the quantity of kaolinite and illite in the core. He concludesthat the changein fluid flow behavioris basicallydue to wettabilityalteration.Salathiel3e reasons that the extractionof a core with strongsolvents dissolves the stronglyoil-wet surface coating of heavy organic moleculesand therebyaltersfluid displacement behaviorof many fresh or preserved cores, as shown in Figure 23.28 Jenning'se5 resultsshow a small but measurable changein the water-oil relative permeability ratio curve after toluene extractionof a variety of core samplesfrom oil-bearing sandstones and limestones. The changes are not thoughtto be caused by significantchanges in wettability. The resultsof Richardson et al.ershow a higherrateof imbibition and a lower ineducible water saturation when East Texas Woodbinecoresare extractedby hexaneand methanol.Morgan and Gordon's28 resultsshow that the effect of cleaningprocedure on core wettability may be minimized if reservoirfluids are used as testing fluids. Richardsonet al.et believe a changein fluid flow behavioroccursas a result of repeated flooding of East Texas Woodbine cores. This change appearsas a decreasein irreducible water saturation and as an increasein residualoil saturation.Furtherwork is necessary for betterunderstanding of this problem. A third categoryof factorsthat influencecorewettabilityevaluation is the testingcondition. Stainless steel wettability can be alteredby pressure increase in a methane-water system.e6 In spite of decrease in interfacialforces, the oil-water-solidsystembecamemore water-wet with temperatureincreasesin a clean unconsolidated Houston sand and a natural unconsolidated California oil sand.eT One explanationfor the effect of temperatureon displacement behavior is that polar componentsof the crude oil may not be adsorbedas readily on the grain surfacesof a rock at elevatedtemperature,so the flow behavior becomesmore waterrA'g1.7+'9a
229 md. air p e r m e a b i f i t y : o Fresh A Extracted
kto
6
j
0'5
kr*
-:i -'
sw
il:|':?"il,,'t:Hiil:iJT11',:' permeabi'itv same data rrom the
A fourth category of factors that influence the core wettability evaluation is the type of surfactant compounds fluid used in the test. Carbonates are very sensitiveto nitrogeneous possess percentages of silica large containing containing sulfur and oxygen.arSandstones with paraffins inactive are inert and normal acid type surfaces.38'er Crude oil containing with more active and aromatics are porous while napthene regard to the surfacesof media, containingoxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and porous surfaces.Heterocyclicsand asphaltenes and Doschelo have metallic atomsare active with regardto the acid or basicsites.Reisberg proportions of these compounds probably have different indicated that different crude oils of surfaces. wettability characteristics for the responsible which are believedto be with for oil increases increasing concentragas and that saturation decreases The critical polar the concentration of compounds polar increasing substances.ee Furthermore, tions of and cumulativeoil productionto in oil causesthe cumulativewater productionto increase in laboratory tests. decrease to modify the wettabilityof porousmedia. The Oxidation of crude oil frequentlyappears of oxidizablepolar compoundsin contact the amount of modification depends on degree have and Cuiece8 Morgan and Gordon28 wettability be reversed.e8 with air and may even permeability. Mungane2 on relative handling fluids and laboratory investigated the effect of saturatedan extracted core with reservoir fluid and let it sit at reservoir temperaturefor 6 relative permeabilityvalueswere identicalto those days. He discoveredthat the measured preserved he used purified fluids in place of reservoirfluids a of freshly cores; but when was developed,as indicatedin Figure 24. core more water-wetcondition in the water alkalinityand hardness,ee in a core,s salinityalteration,eo The initial fluid saturation preferential wettability of a core. Wagner can influencethe as well as the aging processe' wet sample of have shown that the wettability of an oil- or intermediately and Leach-'6 or carbonatecan be changedto a more water-wetcondition by the addition of sandstone chemicalssuch as hydrochloricacid, sodium hydroxide,and sodium chloride. They inves-
7l
0.9
Sw
FIGURE 24.
o.7
Effect of fluid and laboratoryhandlingon relativepermeability."l
tigatedthe influenceof water pH on wettability of a quartzsampleand useda n-octylamine treatedsyntheticoil to producean oil-wet quartz surface.Their resultsindicatedthat lower pH solutionstend to producewater-wetsurfaces under controlledsalinity conditions.This effect is shown in Figure 25. Bradleyroo has shown that a basic 57oNaCl solutionspontaneously decreases the contact angleof oil-wet coresand as a resultincreases the amountof imbibition. Theseeffectswere reported to be most pronounced on coresof intermediate wettability.Morrow et al. ,63 Wagner and Leach,s6 and McCaffery and Munganror have shownthat wettabilityof typical reservoir rocks can be easily changedto any desireddegreeby adding polar compoundssuch as aminesor carboxylic acids. Bradleyrmfound that carboxylicacidssuch as stearicacid CH., (CHr)16 COOH at concentrations greaterthan 10-6 moll( alteredthe wettabilityof a waterdodecane-calcite systemtoward more oil-wetnessand stearicacid with a concentration of approximately 5 x l0-3 mol/f causedstronglyoil-wet surfaces. He found that stearicacid causedno wettability alterationwhen quarlzsamples were used. Bradley found that amines such as octadecylamine CH. (CHr),, NH, alter the wettability of both quartzand calcite toward oil wetness,especiallyat concentrations greaterthan 5 x l0-a mol/{. It should be noted that polar compoundswhich alter wettability of a given rock type may not alter the wettability of anotherrock type.
72
o a c
O.O 25,000 50,OOO
ppm NaCl WATER PHASE
a C) O o
r30
uJ J
OIL_WET
z o
F
z
(J
90
z z o (r
uJ F
I
70
50
WATE R- W E T
6 WATER_PHASE PH
FIGURE 25.
Contactangle as a function of pH.so
VIII. WETTABILITY INFLUENCE FLOW ON MULTIPHASE

The microscopicdistribution of fluids in a porous medium is greatly influencedby the degree of rock preferentialwettability. The fluid distribution in virgin reservoirsunder strongly water-wet and strongly oil-wet conditionshas been describedby Pirson.ro2 In a pores,in smallcapillaries, stronglywater-wetreservoir,most of the waterresides in dead-end and on the grain surface.In strongly oil-wet reservoirs,water is in the centerof the large poresas discontinuous droplets,while oil coatsthe surfaces of the grains and occupiesthe sm aller c apillar i e s . Under strongly water-wetconditionsthe effective permeabilityto the nonwettingphase at irreduciblewater saturationis approximatelyequal to the absolutepermeabilityof the rock. On the other hand, in strongly oil-wet systems,the effective permeabilityto oil at irreduciblewater saturation is greatlyreduced by the waterdropletsin the largerpores.Raza et aI.66 statedthat in someoil-wet reservoirs, water occupiessomeof the finer poresand is trapped as droplets in the larger ones. Raza et al. analyzedthe displacementof oil by advancingwater and the trappingof the residualoil as shown in Figure 26. In strongly water-wetreservoirs,water traps oil in the larger poresas it advances along the walls of the pore, while in strongly oil-wet reservoirs,water moves in large pores and oil is trappedclose to the walls of the pores.66 The petroleumindustry has long recognized that the wettability of reservoirrock has an important effect on the multiphaseflow of oil, water, and gas through the reservoir.API Project 27 at the University of Michigan was initiated in l92l to study this problem. The
73
Oil-Wet Sand
FIGURE 26.
The trappingprocessof oil by advancingwater'n"
---
TEST
1 waler
wet
TEST 2
weter
wel
... ... TEST 3
oil
wet
\\ \\ \
E 5 0
j
oi1
Brine
25
50 B R I N ES A T U R A T I O N
75
100
FIGURE 27.
Effect of wettability on flow behavior''r
dissymmetryof relative permeabilitycurvesis attributedlargely to the preferentialwettability As illustratedby Figure 27, Geffen et al.r2 and Donaldsonand of reservoir rock.te'es'ro3 Thomas'oahave shown the effect of fluid distributions brought about by rock preferential relationship.As the degreeof rock prefwettability on the relative permeability-saturation the oil relative permeabilityat a given saturation erential wettability for waier decreases, while the water relative permeabilityincqeases. decreases recognizedthe fact that rock type appearsto have less influence Schneiderand Owenssa However, this may not be the case than doesrock wetting preference. on flow relationships rocks or mixed wettability systems.Owens and Archerrr also confirmed for heterogeneous the importance of preferential wettability on multiphaseflow in porous media. have found that relative permeabilitybecomesprogressivelyless Some investigatorsno favorable to oil production as a rock becomesless water-wet. The residual oil saturation as a rock becomeslesswater-wet.Othershave shownthat weakly water-wetcores increases have more favorable relative permeability curves and lower residual oil saturationsthan since strongly water- or oil-wet rocks. Conceptually,this latter behaviorseemsreasonable
74
S P L A C E OP H A S E S
/l
4 t/
Ni troqen Dodecane llitrogen Dioctyl HepLile
displacrng or bio.tyl displacing Ether
Heptile, eti... Water Nrtrogen
up
to l08o I3Io
49c
displacing Nitroqen
displacing
above
l38c
.8
Displaced
phase
Saturation.
pV
rt il:,yrT..
Relative permeability for fluidpairs withvarious contacr
the capillary forces in strongly water-wetcores are strong. The oil may be bypassed and trappedin larger poresby the tendencyof a water-wetcore to imbibe water into the smaller capillaries.The bypassed oil in the large poresis then surrounded by water and is immobile exceptat very high pressure gradients. The saturation intervalfor two-phase flow underthis condition is probably short. As the capillaryforcesare reducedby reductionin preferential water-wettability of a rock, the tendencytoward rapid imbibitional trappingof oil in large poresby movementof water throughsmallporesshouldalsodiminish. The zoneof two-phase flow shouldbecome broader and oil displacement to a lower residualsaturation shouldbe possible.If other factorsremain constant, higherflow ratesand lower interfacialtensions areconducive to higheroil recovery; theseare changesthat diminish the ratio of capillary forcesto viscousforces. Stegemeier andJensen3T and McCafferyand Bennionr05 reported that wettabilityalterations over a relatively wide rangeproducea negligibleeffect on the relativepermeabilitycurve, as shown by Figure 28. However, other workers did not confirm this finding. Treiber et aI.62 found that relatively small variationsin wettabilityproduceconsiderable effectson the relative permeability curve. Figure 29 shows the effect of contact angleson relative perrneability curves for a Torpedo sandstone.
IX. EFFECTS OF SATURATION HISTORY

The relative perrneability-saturation relation is not a unique function of saturationfor a given core, but is subjectto hysteresis for porous systemswith strong wetting properties.
75 100
"Nt
\ \ 10
\ .
'/
ATER
I..
o
l<
Contact
Ancrle ô nro
. . . . . . 9 0 o . -ô " ^ô
.1
20
40
60
80
100
sw
FIGURE 29. permeability Imbibitionrelative with various contact angles."l
depends That is, the relativepermeabilityof a porousmediumto a fluid at a given saturation it from a higher value or a lower one. on whetherthat saturation is obtainedby approaching processwhere the wetting-phase saturationis approached from a lower In a displacement value, the resulting relative permeabilitycurve is referred to as an imbibition curve (an are the injection of water increase in the wetting phase).Examplesof imbibition processes mud. On the otherhand, during waterfloodingand coring a water-wetrock with a water-base processwhere the wetting phasesaturation is approached from a higher in a displacement value, the resultingrelative permeabilitycurve is referredto as a drainagecurve. Examples of oil by expansion during primary depletionof of drainageprocesses are the displacement in oil and gasreservoirs; of hydrocarbons anotherexample a reservoirand the accumulation would be waterfloodingan oil-wet reservoir. Terwilligeret &1. Josendal et al.,r07 Geffenet al. ,r2Osobaet al.,r3Levine,'oo ,'n' andColey phenomenonand verified that both water-oil and gas-oil et al.8' describedthe hysteresis relativepermeabilityratio curvesas well as individual wetting and nonwettingphaie relative may exhibit hysteresis.rr'22'ro7'roe permeability formations of both sandstone and carbonate is moreprominentin relativepermeability to the nonwetting In a two-phase system,hysteresis ro' I roThe hysteresis in wetting-phase phasethan in relativepermeabilityto the wetting phase. difficult to distinguish relativepermeabilityis believedto be very small and thus, sometimes from normal experimental error, as indicatedin Figure 30. The drainagecurve shown in Figure 30 is a primary drainagecurve which is applicable only when drainageoccurs before imbibition. When a drainageprocessoccurs after imbidrainagecurve exists, as shown in Figure 31. bition, a secondary
D r a in a g e lmbibition
Sw (Water-Wet System) FIGURE 30. Primary drainage permeability relative curve
Water
e W (water-wet system) D
,t :t":rYXt Thesecurves describerelative permeabilitywhen the flow reversaloccursat one of the saturation end points. The effect of flow reversal at an intermediate saturation value is illustratedby Figure 32. As shown in Figures30 and 31, the water (wetting phase)relativepermeabilitycurve is essentially the samein stronglywater-wetrock for both drainage and imbibition processes.rr However, at a given saturation, the nonwettingphaserelativepermeability of a consolidated rock is usually less for an imbibition cycle than for a drainagecycle.t2.t3.22.to6 For an unconsolidated rock, the nonwetting phaserelative permeabilityin an imbibtion cycle is usually greaterthan the corespondingnonwettingphaserelativepermeabilityin a drainage cycle. Naar et aL.22 reportedthat relativepermeabilityrelationships for poorly consolidated formations tend to resemblethose for unconsolidated formations. Figure 33 shows the imbibition and drainagerelative permeabilities of a consolidated rock. It can be seen that the residual nonwetting phase saturationis much greater for imbibition than for drainage.That is, the nonwettingphaseloses its mobility at a higher saturation in imbibition than it does in drainage.Figure 34 showsthat the imbibition cycle k.o may lie abovek.. on the drainagecycle for some systems. This relationship probably is not typical of petroleumreservoirs. Secondary drainage curve: end-point flow
77
Secondary drainage
o
.Y
Sw (water-wet system)
FIGURE 32. reversal. Secondarydrainase curve: intermediateflow
160
.=
-o
$
L
140
E
o o. o
120
100
o
.9 =
o o oo
80
be o v
60 Water 40
20 Water 0 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 80 100
Brine saturatiofi, o/o

FIGURE 33. rock.12 Oil-water flow characteristics of a consolidated

1.O 1.O
--Drainage lmbibition
o . 5
l<
X*'n
\ --+---r --,^,'
.5
9.5
ta*- *rn .--Y \ t.',
/*-) r o
l(
ro
a
'
1.0
.5
1.0
so
Consolidated Sand
so
Unconsolidated Glass Spheres
FIGURE 34.
Relativepermeabilitycurves for consolidated sandsand unconsolidated glassspheres.rr
The amountof trappedoil in water-wetporousmedia is given approximately by the area betweenthe drainageand imbibition oil relative permeabilitycurves.rr2 It is believedthat the occurrence of hysteresis is possiblyrelatedto the pore size distributionand cementation of a rock. As water is progressivelyimbibed into oil-filled pores of different sizes, oil is ejected from them. The ejectionprocess continues as long ascontinuous pathsthrough escape poresstill containingoil are available.Theseescape pathsappearto be lost at oil saturations which greatly exceedthose which occur at the onset of continuity of a nonwettingphase, (e.g.,gas) on the drainagecycle. Thus, the residualoil saturation which resultsfrom waterfloodinga water-wet rock is much greaterthan the critical gas saturationthat characterizes the samerock. Apparentlyoil is trapped on the imbibition cycle. A similar behavior is observedif a preferentially water-wet rock containing free gas is waterflooded. The imbibition and drainagewetting-phase relative permeabilities of a consolidated or unconsolidated rock are retracedunder a succession of imbibition and drainagecycles;in a reversalof the saturationchangefrom drainageto imbibition, a distinct path is traced by the nonwetting phase relative permeability curve (as shown in Figure 32) to a residual nonwettingphasesaturation. This path depends on the saturation established in the drainage cycle. Also, the nonwettingphaserelativepermeabilitycurve in a drainage cycle following an imbibition cycle retracesthe imbibition curve until the previousmaximum nonwetting phasesaturationis reached.This effect is illustratedby Figure 35.22'13
X. EFFECTS OF OVERBURDEN PRESSURE

Wilsonila reportedthat a 5000 psi laboratorysimulationof overburdenpressure at reservoir temperaturereducesthe core effective permeabilitiesto oil and water by about the same extentas it reducesthe single-phase permeabilityof that core. Consequently, the water and oil relative permeabilityof a naturalcore, under 5000 psi overburden pressure,show only a moderatechange from the relative permeability measuredunder atmosphericconditions, as shown in Figure 36. Wilson alsopointedout that an overburden pressure that can produce over 5Voreduction in porosity of a core can also producea sufficiently large changein pore size distributionto affect the relative permeabilityof the core. In contrastto the work of Wilson, Fatt and Barrettrrsconcludedthat variation of rock overburdenpressuresin the range of 3000 psi does not produce any changeon gas relative permeabilityin a sandstone gas-oil system.Figure 37 shows the gas relative permeability
79
100
*\.
10
AIR
\\
b a
I
o
l.
' - air-brine system
l\
80 100
.1
.01 40 60
B r i n e s a t u r a t i o r ' ,V o
FIGURE 35. stone.r2 Air flow behaviorin two-phasesystems,Nellie Bly sand-
with and without the laboratory simulation of overburdenpressure.Similar results were reportedby Thomasand Ward"6 for a gas-oil systemin a low permeabilityrock. Geffen et al.'2 have shown that the residualgas saturation in a liquid-gassystem,under atmospheric conditions,is similar to the resisdualgas saturationmeasured under a 5000 psi laboratory simulationof overburdenpressure. Merliss et al.r17 concludedthat the effect of overburden pressure on relative permeabilitywas primarily due to changes in interfacialtension.
XI. EFFECTS OF POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY

Wyckoff and Botset3 as well as Leverettand Lewis8investigated the influences of porosity and absolute permeability on relative permeability and found them to be insignificant. Dunlaprrs usedunconsolidated sandpackshavingpermeabilities of 3.0,4.5, and 8.0 D and found no indication that the relative permeability-saturation relationshipis a function of specific permeabilityof the sand. Stewart et al.rre found that variationsin permeabilities ranging from 8.5 to 300 mD and porositiesfrom I 5 to 22Voin limestonecores with intergranularporosity, causedrelative permeabilitycurves to shift up to a maximum of 2Voof gas saturation.These investigators employeda solution gas drive, gas-oil relative permeability measurement techniquein their study. They also reportedthe relative permeability curvesto shift up to a maximum of 47o of gas saturation when fracturedlimestonecoresof variousporositiesand permeabilities were employed. Botset2r found that absolute permeabilities rangingfrom 17 to 260D had negligibleeffects
80
100
a
o)
L
.Y
40 s*
FIGURE 36 system.rra
60 ' o/o
100
Effect of overburdenpressureon relative permeabilityof an oil-brine
1.0
.8
OBP = 0 psig OBP = 3OOO psig
.6
o)
.Y
.4
.2
20
40
60
80
100
so
FIGURE 37. pressure permeability.rr5 Effectof overburden on gasrelative
81 1.0
o
J
40
s*
FIGURE 38. Effect of absolutepermeabilityon relativepermeability.ro
on the gas-liquidrelativepermeability-saturation relationship of a consolidated Nichols Buff sandstone. Botset'sresultswere in agreement with the findingsof Leverett,a who usedsands with permeabilities ranging from 1.04 to 6.80 D. Morgan and Gordon28 conductedtestson four sandstone samplesfrom a reservoirrock with permeabilities ranging from 109 to 213 mD. No clear effect of permeabilityon oilwater relativepermeabilitycurveswas observed. Crowell et al.30 studiedfour differentsands with absolutepermeabilities rangingfrom 3.0 to 8.0 mD and found no correlationbetween permeabilityand gas relativepermeabilityin a water-gas absolute systemas shownin Figure 38. Keelanr20 observedsatisfactorycorrelationsof sandstone air permeabilitycorrectedfor slippage and the irreducible water saturationsas well as end-point relative permeability valuesof gas-water systems. Leas et al.r2rnoteda correlation betweenabsolute permeability and gas relativepermeabilityin particularcases,but believedthis relationship not to be true in general. Felsenthalr22 tested300 sandstone cores and noted that the gas-oil relative permeability curves becameless steepas specific permeabilityincreased. This trend was also reported by McCord.'23In Felsenthal'spaper an effect of porosity on gas-oil relative permeability ratio was also noted. This effect was not generally discerniblein the study of relative permeability datafor a given reservoir but became apparent whendatafor sandstone reservoirs of similar lithology but differing averageporosity were compared.For example,a definite trend was observedin a comparisonof argillaceous and/or calcareous sandstones from I I reservoirsranging in averageporosity from l4 to 28Vo,indicatingthat for a given permeability, the gas-oilrelativepermeability ratio curvesbecame lessfavorable,(i.e., k1k., increased)
82
RelativePermeabiliryof PetroleumReservoirs
from as porosity increased.A similar trend was observedfor a group of clean sandstones permeability, and rangingin porosityfrom 15 to2lTa.For a given porosity five reservoirs ratio curves gavemorefavorablegas-oilrelativepermeability cleansandstones comparatively gasfavorable least The or chert reservoirs. sandstones and/or calcareous than argillaceous sandand sandstones, shaly oil relative permeabilityratio curves were for conglomerates, in three catethen classifiedsandstones stonescontainingcarbonateinclusions.Felsenthal class. The for each ratio gories and found a correlation of gas-oil relative permeability which type, sandstone and used in the correlationwere porosity, permeability, parameters be characterized may geometry are all relatedto pore geometry. On the other hand, pore by the pore size distribution and Felsenthalfound a correlationbetweengas-oil relative pl.-.uUitity ratio and pore sizedistribution.He found that the morefavorablegas-oilrelative with a pore sizedistributioncurve having permeabilityratio curveswere generallyassociated a sharppeak among the large pore sizes.
OF TEMPERATURE XII. EFFECTS

with inindicatedthat ineducible water saturationincreased Severalearly studiesr2a-r28 temperature; with increasing decreased saturation oil and that residual creasingtemperature process.Difficulties in evaluating all of these studiesemployed a dynamic displacement procedure,rro the core-cleaning to due changes wettability these results include possible migration.t24't2'7't2'1 clay and permeability, in absolute changes possible that the indicated by Lo and Munganr2e measurements relativepermeability Steady-state were unafbut oils, white when using temperature-dependent were relative permeabilities results with the agrees finding this tetradecane; using when changes fected by temperature to viscosityratio. Sufi et in resultshavebeenattributed Other variations of Edmondson.'r. error due to the significant have may results previous of the some that out pointed al.r30.r3r that suggested and temperatures elevated at permeabilities relative measuring difficulty in and difficulties measurement of a combination from result possibly t.*p..uture effects cores). short in (i.e., effects end phenomena, laboratory-scaling at elevatedtemperaexperiments performeddynamic displacement Miller and Ramey,32 that changes indicated results Their core. Berea a and packs sand tures on unconsolidated in the flow changes that but changes, permeability relative cause not do in temperature etc. pore structure, in change interactions, to clay due are temperatures capacityat elevated irreducible at permeability relative in oil increase an was observed they The only changethat is relatively unimportantfor predictingtwo-phaseflow water saturationand this parameter and Chen et al-r67 Counsilr33 relativepermeabilities, steam-water measuring behavior.In effects. of temperature also noted the absence XIII. EFFECTS OF INTERFACIAL TENSION AND DENSITY
for retention are responsible The interfacialforces at fluid-fluid and fluid-solid interfaces a small described Leverett4 and Botset3 and Wyckoff media. porous in of residualsaturation relative on dyne/cm 72 27 to of range the within tension interfacial of but definite effect also identified the interfacial tension of permeability. (See Figure 39.) Lefebvre du Preyro3 the relative permeability and residual influencing factor as a sample consolidated fluids in a in interfacialtensionof a waterreduction a that found et al.30 values. Crowell saturation in residual gas saturation. decrease a and gas recovery in increase produced an air system within the rangeof 27 to tension interfacial the possibility that the discounted IV1uskatr3a concludedthat interArcher" and Owens permeability. relative influence 72 dynelcmcan of a water-wet permeability relative water-oil the either on influence no facial tension has water relative that found They core. oil-wet of an permeability relative gas-oil core or the
83
1.0
points: o -5 \ o \ o\oo \ o o / l i n e sI o -- 24-g4 dynes/cm / o'/ / dyne/cm
/ /
o
l<
o r l \ \ .
\ o o \
./
" /
o / wArER
\ "
\1." /
;eCo
*/,')**
0
aw "
FIGURE 39. Effect of interfacialtensionon relativepermeability.a
1.0
permeabilityof the water-wet core and oil relative permeabilityof the oil-wet core were coincident. of a waterreporteda reductionin waterfloodresidualoil saturation Moore and Slobod6T relativepermestatedthat drainage wet core at lower valuesof interfacialtension.Pirsonr02 of the interfacialtension,but imbibition relativepermeabilityis senability is independent found that a reduction in interfacial sitive to interfacial tension. Bardon and Longeronr35 tension reducedoil relative permeabilityat constantgas saturationin an oil-gas drainage formation.(SeeFigure40.) The effectof liquid densityon relative cycle of the Fontainebleau permeability has beenfound to be insignificant.-''r2
OF VISCOSITY XIV. EFFECTS

the effect of viscosityvariationof an oil-water mixture on Leverettet al.a'8investigated with 417oporosityand 3.2to 6.8 D of sands relativepermeability of artificiallycompacted variation in relativepermeabilitywhen the absolutepermeability.He found no systematic oil viscosity was varied from 0.31 cp (hexane)to 76.5 cp (lubricatingoil) and the water phaseviscosity was varied from 0.85 to 32.2 cp. Viscosity ratios employed in the study of Leverettet al. were performedunder steadyrangedfrom 0.051 to 90. The experiments state flow at low pressuregradients.Figures41 and 42 show the effect of viscosity ratio variation on water and oil relative permeabilitycurves. of the fluid phasesin Wyckoff and Botset3found that moderatevariationsin viscosities rangingfrom 3 .2 to 6.0 D failed to produce sandpacks with permeabilities unconsolidated any changein the relative permeabilityvalues.In their experimenta mixture of water and between0.9 and 3.4 cp by carbondioxide was employedand water viscositywas adjusted addition of a susar solution to the water.
84

1.0
o = .0O1 mN/m
O
J
.5
ss
FIGURE 40. Effect of low interfacialtensionson gas-oil relativepermeability.r15
1.0
O MEgO. 1.80 a D 0.35 * 0.057
3
.Y
o sw
1.o
FIGURE 41. Effect of viscosity ratio (M) on water relative permeability.a
Richardsonr36 found that the water-oil relative permeability ratio is independentof fluid viscositywhere the oil viscosityvaried from I .8 to I 5 I cp (seeFigure43). Johnson et al . r37 confirmed theseresults for displaced/displacing viscosity ratios up to 37. Leviner38 found
85
1.0
o M = 9 0 o o v 1.8 .35 .057
o
-Y
r\'
%\o
s*
1.0
FIGURE 42. Effect of viscosity ratio (M) on oil relative permeability.a
that the relative permeabilityof a sandstone samplewas independent of viscosity ratio in the rangeof 1.92 to 22.6. Craigr3e reportedthat the gas-oil relative permeabilityratio of a Nellie Bly sandstone sample with 824 mD permeabilityand 28.l%oporosity showed no significantvariation with oil viscositiesin the rangeof 1.4 to 125 cp. Resultsof this study are illustrated by Figure 44. Sandberg et al.'aofound that oil and water relativepermeabilities of a uniformly saturated core are independent of the oil viscosity in the range of 0.398 to 1.683 cp. Donaldsonet al.'o' and Geffen et al.ta2 alsoconcluded that relativepermeability is independent of viscosity as long as the core wettability is preserved. Wilsonrrafound that a 5000 psi fluid pressure which caused kerosene viscosityto increase from I .7 to2.l cp and waterviscosityto increase by 17odid not produceany significanteffect on water and oil relativepermeabilityvalues. Muskat et al.27reported that the effect of viscosity on relative permeability of an unconsolidatedsand was very small and within the limits of experimental accuracy. Krutter and Day'43used methaneand air as the nonwettingphasein a two-phasesystern of oil and gas. The gas was injectedinto cores saturated with oils with viscositiesranging from 2 to 100 cP. They found that the air relative permeability values were slightly less than those for methane. Saraf and Fattroapplied Darcy's law to each of the phases of a multi-phasesystemand concludedthat relative permeability is independent of viscosity. The Saraf and Fatt equation is basedon the assumptionthat different phasesflow in different capillariesand do not come in contact with each other. Yuster,6however, concluded that relative permeability values for the systemshe studied were markedly influenced by variation in viscosity ratio, increasingwith an increaseof the ratio. This conclusionwas later supported by the work of Morse et al.r44 Odehr45 expanded Yuster's work and concludedthat the nonwetting phaserelative permeability increases with an increasein viscosity ratio. He found that the magnitudeof the effect on relative perrneability decreases with increasein single-phase perrneability. Odeh found that the deviation in nonwetting phaserelative permeability is increasedas the nonwetting phasesaturationis increased, with the deviationreachinga maximum at the nonwettingphaseresidualsaturation. He also concluded that the wetting-phaserelative permeability is not affected by variation in viscosityratios. Figure 45 showsthe effect of viscosityratio variationin the rangeof 0.5
86

60
o
; 4 1
3
j
q+6i.li'-qla+6
! j
ncp,eri-nent Waterflood using 151 cp. oil using
A waterflood Kerosene
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
sw
F I G U R E 4 3 . C o m p a r i s o n o f s t e a d y - s t a t er e s u l t s w i t h f l o o d i n g performance.r36
to 74.5 on water and oil relativepermeabilitycurves.Odeh statedthat the effect of viscosity ratio on relativepermeabilitycould be ignoredfor samples with single-phase permeabilities greater than lD. Yuster'sand Odeh'sresults have beencriticizedby other investigators.ra6 Downie and CraneraT reportedthat oil viscosity could influencethe oil effective permeability of somerocks. Later, they qualified their statement by sayingthat once an increased relativepermeabilityis obtainedby employmentof high viscosityoil, it may not be lost by replacingthis oil with one of a lower viscosity.They explained this phenomenon qualitatively in terms of the movementof colloidal particlesat oil-water interfaces. Hassler et al.r found that lower gas relative permeabilityvalues were associated with lower oil viscosity in a Bradford sand. However, they expressed doubt that the variationin relative permeabilitycould be describedby a single factor varying with oil viscosity. Pirsonro2 stated that the importanceof the effect of viscosity ratio on the imbibition nonwettingphaserelative permeabilityis of second-order magnitude.Ehrlich and Cranera8 concludedthat the imbibition and drainagerelativepermeabilities, under a steadycondition of flow, are independent of viscosityratio. However,they found that the irreduciblewettingphasesaturation following a steady-state drainage,when the interfacialeffect predominated
87 1.0
0.1
o J
0 . 01
0 . 0 01
"g
FIGURE 44.
Q
o.4
Relativepermeabilityratios for Nellie Bly sandstone.rre
over viscousand gravitationaleffects,decreases with an increase in the ratio of nonwetting to wetting-phase viscosities. McCafferyse reportedthat in stronglywettedsystems, the imbibition and drainage relative permeabilitiesare independent of the viscous forces. He concludedthat even though the relative permeabilityto a phasemight be influencedby viscosity variation of that phase, the relative permeabilityratio is independent of viscosity. Perkinsrae concludedthat flow in a porousbody is governedby relativepermeabilityand viscosity ratio when the ratio of capillary pressureto the applied pressureis negligible. Pickell et al.r-toconcluded that only a large variation in viscous forces could have any rs3recognizedthat the appreciable effect on residualoil saturation.Severalauthors4'67'rsr wetting and the nonwetting phaserelative permeabilitymight be significantly affectedby the ratio of capillary to viscous forces, ocos0/pv, where o represents interfacialtension expressed as dynes per centimeter;0 represents contact angle; p represents viscosity expressed as cp; and v represents fluid velocity expressed as centimeters per second.Lefebvre du Prey'samade a systematicstudy of the effect of this ratio on relative permeabilityby simultaneously varying the interfacialtension,viscosity,and velocity. He found that relative permeabilitydecreases as the ratio ocos0/pv increases. He also concludedthat the relative permeabilitycurve is influencedby the viscosityratio when the wetting phaseis displaced
88
240
t
6
L
-Y
50
1OO
aw FIGURE 45. Effectof viscosity r a t i o ( M ) o n r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y . r l s
by the nonwettingphase.Bardon and Longelsnr'3-s found that in some gas-oil systems,the drainagerelative permeabilityand residualoil saturation are stronglyaffectedby the p"vlct ratio. An assumption that the relativepermeability valuesare independent of viscosityimplies that the system can be represented by a bundle of parallel, noninterconnecting capillary tubes,eachof which is filled with eitherthe wettingor the nonwetting phasealone.Thus, the nonwettingphaseflows throughthe largerchannels while the wettingphase flows through the smaller capillaries. However, this model probably does not completely representthe conditionsin porousmedia.An alternative model is the simultaneous flow of two immiscible fluid phasesin larger capillaries. A flow picture more compatiblewith the presentknowledgeof fluid behavioris a combinationof the two modelsdescribed above,with one dominatingover the other depending primarily on wettability. OdehTbelieved that the fluid phasesdid not flow in separate capillariesof porous media as Leverettpostulated and further statedthat the wetting phase moves microscopicallyin a sort of sliding motion impartedto it by the shearforce caused by motion of the nonwettingphase.From this modelhe concluded thata decrease in interstitial wetting-phase saturationcan be developedas a result of an increasein viscosity, thereby affectingthe relative permeabilityvalues. In view of the diverse opinions which have been expressed by various investigators concerningthe influence of viscosity on relative permeability, it seemsbest to conduct
89
Water ---102
Present 5%
at
Start
------202
\r
olL
o
J
WATER
-:='
20 40 60 80 100
sw
FIGURE 46. on relativepermeability.'' Effect of original water saturation
with fluids which do not differ greatly in vislaboratoryrelative permeabilityexperiments cosity from the reservoirfluids. XV. EFFECTS OF INITIAL WETTING-PHASE SATURATION The amount of initial interstitialwater affectsthe oil-water relativepermeabilityvalues. Figure 46 shows the effect of varying the this relationship. Caudle et al.ra investigated on water and oil relativepermeability.It can be seenthat amountof initial water saturation not only the startingpoints, but also the shapeof the relativepermeabilitycurvesvary with the amountof initial interstitialwater.ro' tendedto shift water-oilrelative found that the presence of initial water saturation SaremrT2 permeabilityratio curves toward the region of lower oil saturation.The differencein the residualoil saturationcausedby this shift was reportedto be about half the differencein is obtainedat higher valuesof Thus, a lower residualoil saturation initial water saturation. initial water saturation. noted that the maximum effect of initial water saturationon the Hendersonet al.3-t'r6s 4Tc along relativepermeabilitycurve was a shift of the entire curve laterallyapproximately the oil saturationfor a given pair of the saturationaxis, in a direction which increased relativepermeabilityvalues.Craig indicatedthat up to 20Vainitial connatewater saturation However, a definiteeffect in oil-wet coreshad no effect on oil-waterrelativepermeabilities. was observedin water-wetcores. that, exceptfor specialstudies,the amountof water presentat the startof It is suggested watersaturation of the sample. shouldbe the irreducible determination a relativepermeability
90
100
ô
*"I
3 l t
";/ :l t/
no
connate
o
j
t/
1
O l
t/
\.
I
:l
o) .:<
ilr,
;l
I
sl
tl
!t
{t
/
.01 20
40 60
80
100
eg "
FIGURE 47. Effect of connatewater on relativepermeabilityratio.'7*
XVI. EFFECTS OF AN IMMOBILE
THIRD PHASE
may The mobile phases have only two mobile fluid phases. reservoirs Many hydrocarbon be gas and oil in the upper portion of the reservoirand water and oil in the lower portion. fluid flow behaviorin are sufficientto characterize Thus, two-phaserelative permeabilities thesereservoirs. suggestthat the immobile water saturationmay be regardedas part Some investigators may be given in terms of the hydrocarbonpore of the rock, and gas and oil saturations and cleanedcores,both water-wetand testedseveralnative-state space.Owens et al.rss'r73 influence had no measurable oil-wet. and found that an immobile connatewater saturation on the gas-oil relative permeability ratio in the majority of the casesthat were studied. affect the permeability did not appreciably concludedthat low water saturations CalhounrTa to the flow capacity which doesnot contribute space the wateroccupies ratio, simply because on gas-oil permeability of the rock. Figure 47 showsthe effect of connatewater saturation porosity, the ratio. Stewartet al.'tt have also shown that in a limestonewith intergranular effect of interstitialwater on externalgas or solutiongas drive gas-oilrelativepermeability ratio is negligible. betweenthe gas-oil relative permeabilityof a Leas et al.'2' reporteda close agreement system at various values of interstitial water saturation.This agreementwas best in the
9l
\\ \ \ \ \ \
o
l< GAS
15-25eaconnate
""ut"t";' / , \ \ / / , / y/ot f /
water f
,r /
.z'\''-40 60 80 100
So-
.__ sg
FIGURE 48. Efl'ect of the presence ol' connate water on relative permeabilities.l
equilibrium gas saturationregion. They concluded that the gas relative permeability is dependent on total liquid saturation.Other investigators have suggested that even though the immobile connatewater does not appreciablyaffect the relative permeabilityratio, the amount and distribution of the interstitial water may influence the relative permeability curve. Dunlap,r18 Leverett,a Caudleet al.,'" and McCaffery''e have indicated a dependency on connatewater saturation.Figure 48 compares the permeability-saturation curves for oil and gas at l5 to 25Voconnatewater with the corresponding curveswithout connatewater. Kyte et al.t7o studieda wide rangeof corematerials and fluid properties thatcould influence residualsaturation,to determinethe mechanism of oil displacement by water in a partially gas-saturated porous system. They found that the initial gas saturationis related to the trappedgas saturation,which plays a beneficial role in reducing residual oil saturation. Mattax and ClotheirtTT concludedthat the trappedgas saturation could improve oil-water relative permeabilityvalues in consolidated water-wetsandstones. (SeeFigure 49.) Holmgrenand MorserT8 attributed the oil recoveryimprovement of a samplein the presence of residualgas to one or more of the following factors: l. 2. 3. 4. The changes in physicalcharacteristics of oil. The selectiveplugging action of the gas as indicatedby Kyte. Inclusionof mist in the free gas phase. The additionalsweepingor driving action of the free gas as indicatedby Leverett.a.s
Holmgrenand Morse concludedthat the changes in physicalcharacteristics of oil, within the pressurerange used for their experimentalwork, were not sufficient to account for the differences in the residualoil saturation which were noted.They further statedthat a change in displacement mechanism was the most importantcauseof the oil recoveryimprovement.
92

100 GAS SATURATION, % PV
MOBILE TRAPPED
o
5
10
9 't2
3
-Y \ 1
o
L
.o1
1.O
so
lfrU.}?"a:.,, water-oil permeability relative ratioimprovement dueto
Schneider and Owenssa investigated the effect of trappedgas saturation in sandstone and carbonate rocks and concludedthat the trappedgasaffectedwater relativepermeabilitymore than oil relative permeabilityin oil-wet rocks. These effects are illustratedin Figures 50 and 5l . They also concludedthat the trappedgas saturation loweredthe maximum value of oil relative permeability. Water relative permeabilitywas also lowered as a result of an increasein trappedgas saturation.Theseeffectsare illustratedby Figure 52. XVII. EFFECTS OF OTHER FACTORS The effects of displacement pressure,pressuregradient,and flow rate on the shapeof relative permeability curves have long been a controversialsubject in petroleum-related literature.Someauthorsbelievethat the effect of displacment pressure and pressure gradient may be due to the changes imposedon viscosity,interfacialtension,and other fluid or rock properties.Others believe that the changesin relativepermeability,which appearto result from changesin displacmentpressureand pressure gradient,are actually due primarily to an "end effect" developedduring laboratorytests. End effect or boundary effect refers to a discontinuityin the capillary propertiesof a systemat the time of relative permeabilitymeasurement. In a stratumof permeablerock, the capillaryforcesact uniformly in all directions,and thusnegate eachother. In a laboratory sample,however,thereis a saturation discontinuity at the end of a sample.When the flowing phases are discharged into an open region under atmospheric pressure, a net capillary force persists in the sample;this force tendsto preventthe wetting phasefrom leavingthe sample. The accumulation of the wetting phaseat the outflow face of the samplecreates a saturation gradientalong the sample which disturbsthe relative permeabilitymeasurements. For example, a large difference in saturationat the displacement front causesa large capillary pressure gradient, which in turn causesthe water to advanceaheadof the flood front and to reducethe capillary pressure gradientin the measured region.The advancing watercannot be producedwhen it first reachesthe outflow face of a core, because the pressurein the
93
100
\ *r* vs. S,
10
be o
lz
kro vs. So
Trapped Gas Sat. o 0 % .a 1 1.8%
.1
1'o s*.-so
FIGURE 50. carbonate) .Ea
Effect of trapped gas saturation (oil wet Grayburg
waterjust insidethe core is lower than the pressure in the oil-filled spacearoundthe outflow face. This differencein pressure is equal to the capillary pressure for the existingsaturation at the outflow face. Therefore,water accumulates at the outflow end of the core, causing a reduction in the capillary pressure.The water will not be produceduntil the capillary pressureis overcome and the residual oil saturation(at the outflow face of the core) is reached.The calculation of relative permeability basedon the averagesaturationof the sampleproduces erroneous resultsin this case,sincethe relativepermeability variesthroughout the core due to the saturation gradientcreatedby the wetting phaseaccumulation at the outflow face of the core. Owens et al.,r-5s Sandberg et al.,to"Kyte and Rappoport,rs6 and Perkinsrae believethat the most convenientway of minimizing the boundaryeffect is the adjustment of capillary forcesto insignificantvalues, as comparedto the viscousforces. This is usually done by a flow rate adjustment.However, the adjustedrate must be low enoughso the inertial forces do not disturb the laboratory measurement. It is suggested that the higher flow rate also increases the fluid dispersion at the inflow end of the sample,so that fluid mixing is enhanced. An equation has been developedr-57 to predict the extent that a core can be disturbedby boundaryeffect, at a given rate. Another convenient way of minimizing the boundaryeffect at the outflow end of a core is to use a more viscousoil in a longercore.rs6 Leverett et al.a'8reported,then refuted, the influenceof flow rate upon relative permeability. They eventuallyattributedthe observeddeviationsin their resultsto an end effect.
100
be o
Y kro vs. So
T r a p p e dG a s S a t . o 0 % a 10.3% o 19.2%
s,rt_ So
(oilwet sandstone).Ea gas Tensleep saturation oftrapped RGURE 51. Effect found that a 50-fold variation by Hassler.rCrowell et al.3o suchas that previouslydescribed of injectionrate, within the limits of viscousflow of waterand gas,had no effect on residual also concludedthat, at reasonable Geffen et al.ra2 gas saturationof an Arizona sandstone. flow rates, the effect of waterflooding rate on the efficiency of gas displacementwas found that relativepermeabilitywas and Morse et al.r-58 negligible. Henderson and Yuster3s also found that were studied.Wyckoff and Botset3 in all gas-liquidsystems rate-dependent were when the two phases were rate-dependent that the gasand liquid relativepermeabilities gradient. allowed to flow through the core under the samepressure in flow rate when with increase Caudleet al.'a found that relativepermeabilitydecreased the effect of was a gas. Labastieet ol.,'-tnhowever, investigated one of the flowing phases coresand concludedthat relative and oil-wet carbonate flow rate in a water-wetsandstone of flow rate exceptnear residualoil saturation.Sandberg were independent permeabilities rel aO s o b ae t a l .,r3and Leas et al .r2rfoundthat drai nage Ric ha rd s o n e t a l .,r-t7 et al. , r ao of the flow rate as long as a saturationgradient is not tive permeability is independent concludedthat relativepermeability introducedin the core by the inertial forces. Pirsonr02 Ehrlich and Crane'otexaminedthe effect of flow in drainageprocesses. is not rate-sensitive rate variation on steady-staterelative permeability and concluded that both imbibition and of flow rate. drainagerelative permeabilitywere independent found that the imbibition relativepermeabilityvalueswere dependent Handy and Dattar62 that is, the relativepermeabilityvaluesunder free imbibition on the imbibition procedures;
95
100
kro vs
so
o\s o
-Y Kr* us. S*
s*---_
-so
Effectof trapped gas saturation (warer wet Tensleep il*"r,::.,i,]. were largerthan thoseundera controlledprocess. The difference between free and controlled imbibition was found to be smaller for more permeable samples.Perkinsrae found that the residualoil saturationafter flooding was independent of the flooding rate and concluded that capillary forces controlled the microscopicfluid distribution in the core. Moore and Slobod6T reportedthat waterflood recoveryfrom a water-wetcore was practically independent of flooding rate. However,they observed that a significant recoveryincrease may be obtained at extremely high rates. Hupplerr6s stated that the waterflood recovery from cores with significantheterogeneity was sensitiveto flooding rate. Lefebvredu Preyrsa concludedthat the relativepermeabilitywas a function of velocity (v), throughthe ratio (ocosO/pv),when the viscousforces predominate. Wyckoff and Botset,3Leverett,a and Henderson et al.3-s'r6s studiedthe possibleeffectsof displacement pressureand pressure gradienton water-oil relative permeability.They concluded that the water and oil relative permeabilityvalueswere slightly influencedby these factors. Muskatr3a and Krutter and Day,'oohowever, reportedthat the gas and oil relative permeabilityvaluesof a consolidated sandstone were not affectedby changes in differential pressure.McCafferyrTe indicated that the drainagerelative permeabilityvalues were not influencedby the flow rateswhich result from apressuregradientin the rangeof 1.0 to 5.0 psi acrossa 12 in. core. Delclaudr60 also concluded that relativepermeabilityis independent of displacement pressure. Pirson,ro2 however, suggested that the relativepermeabilityin an imbibition cycle is sensitiveto pressure gradient.
96
Krutter andDayr66 found that ultimaterecoveryincreases with increasing pressure gradient, althoughthe ratio of increased recoveryto increased pressure gradientdecreases in the region gradients. of high pressure Brownell and Katzr68 reported that an increase in pressure gradient decreased the residualsaturation toward zero in the systems that were investigated. Geffen et al.ra2also confirmed that residual gas saturationwas a function of pressuregradient. Stegemeier and Jensen3T believedthat the residualwetting phasein a drainageprocesswas held in pendularrings interconnected with only thin wetting-phase layers. They concluded that this residualwetting phasewas trappedby capillary forces and that a higher pressure gradient might overcome thecapillarypressure andreduce theresidual wetting-phase saturation. Stewart et al.rreobserved that the rateof pressure declinein a nonuniform limestone might influencethe gas-oilrelativepermeability ratio when the solutiongasdisplacement technique for relative permeabilitymeasurement was employed.Wall and Khuranar6e found the gas saturation developedin a sand pack, at a given rate of pressure decline, was a function of the meanparticlesize and probablya functionof permeability.They found that a finer grain sandpack gave rise to higher gas saturations in the solutiongas displacement technique. Crowell et al.30 studiedthe effect of coredimensions on laboratory measurement of relative permeability.They found that the residualgas saturation in water-gassystemswas almost independent of length of the core, within limits of the laboratory-scale models used. They also examinedcylindrical and rectangular samples,and observedthat a 100-foldchangein the ratio of core length to core cross-sectional area of Berea and Boise sandstones did not alter the residualgas saturationof the samples.Moore and SlobodoT also found that fluid recovery from water-wet cores was not affected by the sample length. Perkinstae and McCafferyrTe recommended the use of longer cores, to reduceinfluenceof the end effect. RoserTo studied the effect of gas expansion,createdby the pressure gradientalong the sample, on gas-liquid flow characteristics. He concludedthat a necessary condition for correct steady-state measurements of liquid-gasrelativepermeabilitywas the establishment of a uniform fluid saturation distributionin the core. Osobaet al. '3 found that gasexpansion affected gas and oil relative permeability values in tests conductedat near-atmospheric pressure.Richardsonet al.,r-'7however, found that the effect of gas expansionon gas and oil relativepermeabilityvalueswas insignificantat the low pressures which were employed in their study. In the laboratorygas displacement methodof relativepermeabilitymeasurement, a "sta' bilized zone' tendsto form when the wetting liquid saturation is sufficientlyhigh to permit its readjustment faster than the imposed displacement by the externaldrive. The relative permeabilityvaluesobtainedprior to passage of the stabilizedzone arenot valid. Therefore, it is advantageous to reduce the range of saturationinfluencedby the stabilizedzone, to obtain valid measurements over as wide a saturation rangeas possible. It can be shown from the Buckley-Leverettequation that the saturationat which the stabilizedzone passes out of a systemis inverselyrelatedto the viscosityof the displaced liquid. This relationshipis based on an assumptionthat a true stabilizedzone forms in laboratorygas drives on short cores. It can also be shown that the length of the stabilized zone is inverselyrelatedto the injection rate or differentialpressure. It has been suggested that the stabilizedzone will be sufficiently small if the pressuredifferential is of such a magnitudethat a volume of gas approximatelyequal to one half the pore volume of the samplewould be producedin lessthan 60 sec. This flow rate insuresthat the portion of the core in which the capillary effects predominate will be a negligibly small fraction of the total pore space. Loomis and CrowellrT' showedexperimentallythat the influence of the stabilizedzone fluid flow is much less marked with relatively viscousoil as the displaced phase. Botset2' investigatedthe effect of saturationpressureon gas-oil permeability values and pressure concluded that the saturation hadnegligibleeffecton laboratory relativepermeability
97 measurement. Stewart studiedthe effect of gas supersaturation on laboratorysolution gas displacement relative permeabilitymeasurements. He indicatedthat even though very liitle supersaturation existsundermost field conditions,the effect may be significantfor laboratory testsconductedat high flow rates.He found that the gas-oil relativepermeabilityratio was generallyindependent of the degreeof supersaturation in rock with intergranular porosity. The influenceof dispersionon relative permeabilitywas studiedby Chilingarianet al.ee They concludedthat an increase in degreeof dispersionincreased the relativs permeability of the porousmediumto both the continuous anddiscontinuous phases. They alsoconcluded that the degreeof dispersionincreasedwith decreasing interfacialtension and increasine time of coalescence of dispersed-phase droplets.
REFERENCES
l' Hassler, G. L., Rice, R. R., and Leeman, E. H., Investigations of recoveryon the oil from sandstones by gas-drive, T r a n s .A I M E , I 1 8 , l 1 6 , 1 9 3 6 . 2. Muskat, M. and Meres, M. W., phv-sics, j, 346. 1936. 3 ' W y c k o f f , R . D . a n d B o t s e t , H . G . , F l o w o f g a s l i q u i d m i x t u r e st h r o u g hs a n d s , p h y s i c s j,, 3 2 5 , 1936. 4' Leverett,M.C.,Flowof oil-watermixturesthroughunconsolidatedsan sn , s.AIME, l32, l49,lg3g. Td ra 5' Nowak, T. J. and Krueger, R. P., The effect of mud filtratesand mud particles upon the permeability of cores, Proceedings of the Spring Apr Meeting, Los Angeres, 1955. 6' Yuster, S. T., TheoreticalConsideration of MultiphaseFlow in ldealizedCapillary System, proceedings of the Third world Petroleumcongress, Hague, Netherlands,lgsl, (z\ 43i. 7. Odeh, A. S., Relative PermeabilityStudies,Mastersthesis,Universityof California, Los Angeles, 1953. 8' Leverett, M. C. and Lewis, W. 8., Steadyflow of gas-oil-water mixturesthroughunconsolidated sands, Trans. AIME, 142. 107. t94t. 9. Sarem, A. M., Three-phase relativepermeabilitymeasurements pet. Eng. by unsteady-state methods, Soc. J.,9. t99. t966. l0' Saraf, D. N. and Fatt, I., Three-phase relativepermeabilitymeasurement using a N.M.R. techniquefor estimatingfluid sarurarion, Soc. pet. Eng. J., 9,235, lg6j. ll' Owens, W. W. and Archer, D. L., The effect of rock wettability on oil-water relative permeability relationships , Trans. AIME, 251, 8j3, lgjl. l2' Geffen, T. M., owens, W. W., Parrish, D. R., and Morse, R. A., Experimental investigation of factors affectinglaboratoryrelative permeabilitymeasurements, Trans. AIME, lg2, gg, lg5l. 13. Osoba, J. S., Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A., and Blair, p. M., Laboratorymeasurementsof relative permeability,Trans. AIME, 192, 47, lg5l. 14' Caudle, B. H., Slobod, R. L., and Brownscombe, E. R., Further developments in the laboratory determination of relative permeability,Trans. AIME, 192, 145, 1951. 15. Snell, R. W., Measurement of gas-phase saturation in porousmedia, J. Inst.pet.45, (4Zg), lg5g. l6' Emmett, W. R., Beaver, K. W., and McCaleb, J. A., Little Buffalo basin Tensleep heterogeneity and its influence on drilling and secondary recoveryJ , . per. Technol.,2, 16l.lg7l. l7' Donaldson, E. C. and Dean, G. W., Two- and Three-Phase Relative PermeabilityStudies, report# 6g26, u.s. Departmentof the Interior, Bureauof Mines, Bartlesville,okla., 1966. 18. Arps, J. J. and Roberts, T. G., The effect of the relative permeabilityratio, the oil gravity, and the solutiongas-oil ratio on the primary recoveryfrom depletiontype reservoir,Trans.AIME,204,120, lg5l. 19' Bulnes, A. C. and Fittings, R. U., An introductory discussion of reservoir performance of limestone formations, Trans. AIME, 160, 179, 1945. 20' Stone, H.L., Probabilitymodel forestimating three-phase relativepermeability,Trans.AIME,24g,Zl4, t970. 2 1 . B o t s e t , H . G . , F l o w o f g a s l i q u i d m i x t u r e st h r o u g hc o n s o l i d a t e d s a n d , T r a n sA . IME,136,91 ,1940. 22' Naar, J., Wygal, R. J., and Henderson, J. H., Imbibition relativepermeability in unconsolidated porous media, Trans. AIME, 225. t3. t962. 23. Nind, T. E. w., Ed., Principles of oil production, McGraw Hill, New york. 1964. 24' Corey, A. T. and Rathjens, C.H., Effect of stratification on relativepermeability,Trans.AIME,207, ( 3 s 8 ) ,6 9 , 1 9 5 6 . 25' Huppler, J. D., Numerical investigation of the effects of core heterogeneities on waterflood relative permeability,,Soc.Pet. Eng. J., 10, 381, 1970. ,
98
26. Johnson, C. E., Jr. and Sweeney,S. A., Quantitativemeasurement of flow heterogeneity in laboratory core samplesand its effect on fluid flow characteristics, papersPE 3610 presented at the SpE 46th Annual M e e t i n g ,N e w O r l e a n s ,O c t o b e r3 , l g l l . 27. Muskat, M., Wyckoff, R. D., Botset, H. G., and Meres, M. W., Flow of gas-liquidmixturesthrough sands,Trans. AIME, 123, 69, 193i. 28. Morgan, T. J. and Gordon, D. T., Influenceof pore geometryon water-oilrelativepermeability J . pet. , T e c h n o l . ,l 1 9 9 , 4 0 7 . 1 9 7 0 . 29. Gorring, R. L., Multiphase Flow of Immiscible Fluids in porous M e d i a , P h . D . t h e s i s ,U n i v e r s i t yo f Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1962. 30. Crowell, D. C., Dean, G. W., and Loomis, A. G., Efficiency of gas <lisplacement from a water drive reservoir, U . S . B u r e a uM i n e s , 6 i 3 5 . 3 0 . 1 9 6 6 . 31. Fatt, I., Network model of porous media, dynamic properties of networks with tube radius distribution. Trans. AIME, 20'7, 164, 1956. 32' Dodd, C. G. and Kiel, O. G., Evaluationof Monte Carlo method in studying fluid-fluid displacement a n d w e t t a b i l i t yi n p o r o u sr o c k s ,J . p h v s .C h e m . , 6 3 , 1 6 4 6 , 1 9 5 9 . 33. Wyllie' M. R. J., Interrelationship betweenwetting and non-wettingphaserelative permeability , Trans. A|ME, 192,38t , l95l. 34. Pathak, P., Davis, H. T., and Scriven,L,E,, Dependence of residualnonwetting liquid on pore topology, p a p e rS P E l l 0 l 6 , p r e s e n t e d a t t h e S P E 5 7 t h A n n u a l F a l l M e e t i n g ,N e w O r l e a n s ,1 9 8 2 . 3 5 . H e n d e r s o n ,J . H . a n d Y u s t e r , S . T . , R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l r t y Study,WorltlOi\,3,139, 194g. 36. Land, C. S. and Baptist, O. C., Effect of hydration of montmorilloniteon the permeabilityto gas of water-sensitive reservoirrocks, _/.pet. Technol., 10, 1213, 1965. 37. Stegemeier, G. L. and Jensen, F. W., The Relationshipof Relative Permeabilityto Conract Angles, Theory of Fluid Flow in PorousMedia Conference, University of Oklahoma, 1959. 38. Benner, F. C. and Bartell, F. E., The effect of polar impuritesupon capillary and surfacephenomena in petrofeumproduction,Drill. Prod. Pract., 341, 209, 1941. 39. Salathiel, R. A., Oil recoveryby surfacefilm drainage in mixed wettabilityrocks, paperSpE 4104 presented at SPE 47th Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Calif., October g, 19'72. 40. Reisberg, J. and Doscher, T. M., Interfacialphenomena in crude oil-water systems,prod. Mon., 10, 43. t956. 41. Denekas, M. O., Mattax, C. C., and Davis, G. T., Effect of crude oil components on rock wettability, T r a n s .A I M E , 2 1 6 , 3 3 0 . 1 9 5 9 . 4 2 . E v a n s ,C . R . , R o g e r s , M . A . , a n d B a i l y , N . J . L . , C h e m .G e o l . , g , l 4 l , l g l l . 43. Nutting, P. G., Some physicaland chemicalproperties of reservoirrocks bearingon the accumulation and dischargeof oil, Probl. Pet. Geol. AAPG, lZ, 127, 1934. 44. Leach, R. O., Wagner, O. R., Wood, H. W., and Harpke, C. F., A laboratoryand field study of wettability adjustmentin waterflooding,"/. pet. Te<.hnot., 44,206, 1962. 45. Mungan, N., Interfacialeffects in immiscible liquid-tiquiddisplacement in porousmedia, Sot'.pet. Eng. J.,9,247, 1966. 46. Schmid, C., The wettability of petroleumrocks and resultsof experiments to study effects of variations i n w e t t a b i l i t yo f c o r e s a m p l e s E , r d o e lK o h l e , l 7 ( 8 ) , 6 0 5 , 1 9 6 4 . 47. Kusakov, M. M. et al., Researchin SurfoceForce.s,Deryagin, B. U., Ed., Consultants Bureau, New York, 1963. 48. Craig' F. F., Jr., The Reservoir EngineeringAspectsof WaterfloodingMonograph, yol.3, SpE of AIME, H e n r y L . D o h e r t yS e r i e s ,D a l l a s ,T e x . , 1 9 7 1 . 49. DeBano, L. F. and Letey, J. L., Symposiumon Water RepellentSoils, University of Calif., Berkeley, t969. 50. Holbrook, O. C. and Bernard, G. G., Determination of wettability by dye adsorption,Trans. AIME, 2t3.261.t958. 5 I . Fatt' I. and Klikoff, W. A., Jr., Effect of fractionalwettabilityon multiphase flow throughporousmedia, J . P e t . T e c h n o l . ,1 0 , I l , 1 9 5 9 . 52. Brown,R.J.S.andFatt, I.,Measurementsoffraction ae l ttabilityofoilfieldrocksbynuclearmagnetic w refaxation method, J. Pet. Technol., ll , 262, 1956. 53. Iwankow, E. N., A correlationof interstitialwater saturation and heterogeneous wettability, prod. Mon., 24, t8, t960. 54. Gimaludinov, Sh. K., The natureof mineral surfaces in oil bearingrocks, Neft. Gazov.2., 12,37,1963. 55. McGhee, J. W., Crocker, M. E., and Donaldson, E. C., RelativeWetting Properties of Crude Oils in BereaSandstone, BartlesvilleEnergyTechnology Center,Department of Energy,Bartlesville, Okla., BETC/ R I - 7 8 1 9 ,J a n u a r y ,1 9 7 9 . 56. Wagner, O. R. and Leach, R. O., Improvingoildisplacement efficiencyby wettabilityadjustment,Trans. AIME,216.65. 1959.
of the North Burbank Systemfor the Oil-Wet Sandstone 57 . Boneau, D. F. and Clampitt, R. L., A Surfactant T u l s a ,A r i z o n a ,M a r c h , 1 9 7 6 . o n I m p r o v e dO i l R e c o v e r y , Unit, Symposium recovery, reference to petroleum on contactanglewith special roughness 58. Morrow, N., The effectsof surface J . C a n . P e t . T e c h n o l . .1 0 . 4 2 , 1 9 7 5 . 59. McCaffery, F. G., The Effect of Wettability on Relative Permeabilityand Imbibition in Porous Media, P h . D . t h e s i s ,U n i v e r s i t yo f C a l g a r y ,A l b e r t a ,C a n a d a ,1 9 7 3 . in ChemistryA , m . C h e m . S o c ' . ,4 3 , 6 0 . Z i s m a n , W . A . , C o n t a c tA n g l e W e t t a b i l i t ya n d A d h e s i o nA d v a n c e s t. 1964. displacement of microscopic 61. Melrose, J. C. and Brandner, C. F., Role of capillaryforcesin determination fbr oil recoveryby water flooding, J. Can. Pet. Technol., 10, 54, 1914. efTiciency 62. Treiber, L. E., Archer, D. L., and Owens, W. W., A laboratoryevaluationof the wettability of fifty , o t ' . P e t . E n g . J . , 1 2 ( 6 ) ,5 3 1 , 1 9 7 2 o i l p r o d u c i n gr e s e r v o i r sS stt u d i e s i n d o l o m i t ew i t h w e t t a b i l i t y 63. Morrow, N. R., Cram, P. J., and McCaffery, F. G., Displacemen c o n t r o lb y o c t a n o i ca c i d , S o r ' .P e t . E n g . / . , l 3 ( 4 ) , 2 2 1 , 1 9 1 3 . o i l r e c o v e r yu s i n g w a t e r a s a d r i v i n g f l u i d . W o r l d O i l , 3 , 1 7 . 1 9 8 1 . 64. Mungan, N., Enhanced relating to the wettability of porousrock. frrut.r. AIME,216, 156. I959. 65. Amott, E., Observations 66. Raza, S. H., Treiber, L. E., and Archer, D. L., Wettability of reservoirrocks and its evaluation,Prod. Mon.. 32. 156.1968. oi oil by 67. Moore, T. F. and Slobod, R. L., The effect of viscosity and capillarity on the displacement w a t e r ,P r o d . M o n . , 8 , 2 0 , 1 9 5 6 . 68. Bobek, J. E., Mattax, C. C., and Denekas, M. O., Reservoirrock wettability - its significanceand e v a l u a t i o nT , r a n s .A I M E , 2 1 3 , 1 5 5 , 1 9 5 8 . and Imbibition in Porous 69. Killens, C. R., Nielsen, R. F., and Calhoun, J. C., Capillary Desaturation University, U n i v e r s i t yP a r k , l 9 - 5 3 , B u l l e t i n# 6 2 , P e n n S t a t e S l tation , xperimenta R o c k M i n e r a l I n d u s t r i e sE 55. /6, McGraw-Hill. Sectiort 70. Richardson, S. G., Flow Through PorousMedia, Hundbookof Ftuid Dt'namic's New York. 1961. and its effecton recovery 7l . Donaldsol, E. C., Thomas, R. D., and Lorenz, P. B., Wettabilitydetermination e f f i c i e n c y ,S o c . P e t . E n g . J . , 3 , 1 3 , 1 9 6 9 . i n w a t e r f l o o d i n gS , oc'P . et. Eng.J.,6, | 15, 1964. 7 2 . M u n g a n , N . , R o l e o f w e t t a b i l i t ya n d i n t e r f a c i atle n s i o n 73. Emery, L. W., Mungan, N., and Nicholson, R. W., Causticslug injectionin the Singletonfield, J. Pet. T e c h n o l . ,1 2 , 1 5 6 9 , 1 9 7 0 . on water-oil dis74. Kyte, J. R., Nuamann, V. O., and Mattax, C. C., Effect of reservoirenvirclnment 1961. placement J,. P e t . T e c h n o l . , 6 , 5 ' 7 9 , of syntheticporous media, Prod. 75. Gatenby, W. A. and Marsden, S. S., Some wettability characteristics Mon.. 22. 5. 1957. of Crude Oils by Capillarimetric 76. Johansen, R. T. and Dunning, H. N., Relative Wetting Tendencies M e t h o d . U . S . B u r e a uo f M i n e s . 1 9 6 1 . 5 ' 7 5 2 . 3rd ed., Oxford Univ. Press,London, 1959, 192. and Chemistryof Surfat'e.s, 77. Adams, N. K., The Physics 78. Slobod, R. L. and Blum, H. A., Method for determiningwettability of reservoirrocks, Truns. AIME, t95. t. t952. of Wettability 79. Lorenz, P. 8., Donaldson, E. C., and Thomas, R. D., Use of CentrifugeMeasurements t o P r e d i c tO i l R e c o v e r y ,U . S . B u r e a uo f M i n e s , 1 9 1 4 , ' 7 8 7 3 . imbibition model with fractional80. Reznik, A. A., Fulton, P. F., and Colbeck, S. C., Jr., A mathematical w e t t a b i l i t yc h a r a c t e r i s t i c P s ,r o d . M o n . , 3 l ( 9 ) , 2 2 , 1 9 6 7 . 8l . Coley, F. H., Marsden, S. S., and Calhoun, J. C., Jr., Study of the eff'ectof wettabilityon the behavior of fluids in syntheticporous media, Prod. Mon., 20(8), 29, 1956. techniques J,. C o n . P e t . T e c h n o l . , 6 , 4 2 , 1 9 1 2 . 8 2 . K e e l a n , D . K . , A c r i t i c a lr e v i e w o f c o r e a n a l y s i s 83. Poettmann, F. H., Caudle, B. H., Craig, F. F., Jr., Crawford, P. 8., Bond, D. C., Farouq Ali, S. M., Holott, C. R., Johansen, R. T., Mungan, N., and Dowd, W. T., Secondaryand Tertiary Oil lnterstate Oil CompactCommission,OklahomaCity, Okla., September1974. RecoveryProcesses, relativepermeability and carbonate, two- and three-phase 84. Schneider; F. N. and Owens, W. W., Sandstone c h a r a c t e r i s t i cS s ,o c . P e t . E n g . J . , 3 , 1 5 , 1 9 7 0 . 85. Scrom,H.M.,Significanceof Water-OilRelativePermeabilityDataCalculatedfromDisplacementTests, Theory of Fluid Flow in PorousMedia Conference,University of Oklahoma, 1959, 189. McGraw-Hill, New 86. Amyx, J. W., Bass, D. M., and Whiting, R. L., PetroleumReservoirEng,ineering, York. 1960. of oil by water under simulatedreservoir 87. Colpits, G. P. and Hunter, D. E., Laboratorydisplacement conditions,J. Can. Pet. Technol., 3(2), 64, 1964. 88. Haddenhorst, H. G. and Koch, R., Effect of temperatureand pressureon the separationof solids from petroleum,Erdoel Kohle, 2, 12, 1959.
100
89. Luks, K. D. and Kohn, J. P., The Effect of MethaneUnder Pressure on the Liquid Solubility of Heavy HydrocarbonComponents,Liquid-Vapor and Solid-Liquid-VaporBehavior, progressReport II, Apl Research P r o j e c t1 3 5 , N o t r e D a m e , I n d i a n a ,J u l y , t 9 7 1 . 90' Rathmell, J. J., Braun, P. H., and Perkins, T. K., Reservoirwaterfloodresidualoil saturation from laboratory t e s t s ,J . P e t . T e c h n o t . , 2 2 5 , l i 5 . l g j 3 . 91. Richardson, J. G., Perkins, F. M., Jr., and osoba, J. S., Differencein behaviorof fresh and agedeast Texas Woodbine cores, Truns. AIME,204, 86. 1955. 9 2 . M u n g a n , N . , R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y measuremen urs i n g r e s e r v o i r f l u i d s , S o c .p e t . E n g . J . , l 2 ( 5 ) , 3 9 g , 1972. 93. Ehrlich, R., Hasiba, H. H., and Raimondi, P., Alkaline waterfloodingfor wettability alterationevafuation o f a p o r e n t i af t i e l d a p p l i c a r i o n , , /p . e t . T e c h n o t . , 2 6 , 1 3 3 5 ,l g j 4 . 94. DeterminQtion of Residual Oil Saturatior?,Interstate Oil Compact Commission, Oklahoma City, Okla., t978. 95. Jennings, H. H., Surfaceproperties of naturaland syntheticporousmedia, prod. Mon., 2l(5). 20. 1957. 96' Hough, E. W., Rzasa,M. J., and Wood, B. 8., Interfacial tensions at reservoir pressures andtemperatures, apparatus and the water-methane system,Trans. AIME, 192, 5i, lg5l. 97. Poston, s. w., Ysrael, s., Hossain, A. K., Montgomery, E. F., and Ramey, H. J., Jr., The Effect of Temperature on Relative Permeabilityof Unconsolidated Sands.paper SPE 1897 presented at the SpE 4 2 n d A n n u a l F a l l M e e t i n g ,H o u s t o n ,T e x a s, . 1967. 98. Cuiec, L. E., Restoration of the Natural Stateof Core Samples, paperSPE 5634 presented at the SpE 50th A n n u a l M e e t i n g ,D a l l a s ,T e x . , 1 9 7 5 . 99. Chifingarian, G. V., Mannon, R. W., and Rieke, H. H., Eds., Oil and Gas productionFrom Cqrbonctre R o c k s ,E l s e v i e r ,A m s t e r d a m ,1 9 7 2 . 100. BradleY, D. J., The Applicability of WettabilityAlterationto NaturallyFracrured Reservoirs anrllmbibition W a t e r f l o o d i n gM , a s t e r st h e s i s ,U n i v e r s i t yo f T u l s a ; ' O k l a h o m a1 , 9g3. l0l' McCafferY, F. G. and Mungan, N.' Contactangle and interfacialtensionstudiesof some hydrocarbon w a t e r s o l i d s y s t e m sJ , . C u t t . p e t . T e c h n o t . ,j , l g 5 , 1 9 7 0 . 1 0 2 . o i l R e s e r v ' o iE r ngineeringP , i r s o n ,s . J . , E d . . M c G r a w - H i l l , N e w y o r k . 1 9 5 g . 6 g . 103' Lefebvre du Prey, E., Deplacements non-miscibles dans les millieux poreux influence des parameters interfaciauxsur les permeabilites relatives,c.R. IV Cotoq. ARTFp puu, 196g. 104. Donaldson, E. C. and Thomas, R. D., MicroscopicObservations of Oil Displacement in Water-Wetand O i l - W e t F o r m a t i o n sS , PE 3555 presented a t t h e 4 6 t h S P E A n n u a l F a l l M e e t i n g ,N e w O r l e a n s , Oct. 3-6. 197t. 105' McCafferY, F. G. and Bennion, D. W., The effect of wettability on two-phaserelative permeabilities. J. Can. Pet. Techno1.1 , 0.42. 1974. 1 0 6 . L e v i n e , J . S . , D i s p l a c e m e ne tx p e r i m e n t s i n a c o n s o l i d a t ep d o r o u ss y s t e m ,T r a n s .A t M E , 2 0 l , 5 7 , t 9 - 5 4 . 107. Josendal, V. A., Sandford, B. 8., and Wilson, J. W., Improved multiphaseflow studies employing radioactive tracers, T r o n s .A I M E , I 9 5 , 6 5 . 1 9 5 2 . 108. Terwilliger, P. L., wilsey, L. E., Hall, H. N., Bridges, p. M., and Morse, R. A., Experimental and theoreticalinvestigation of gravity drainageperformance . Trans. AIME, l92, 285, 1951. - 109. Johnson, E. F., Bossler, D. P., and Naumann, V. O., Calculationof relative permeability from displacementexperiments,Trans. AIME, 216. 370. lg5g. ll0. Land, C. S., Comparison of calculated with experirnenta l b i b i t i o nr e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y , T r u n sA im . IME, 2 5 t . 4 1 9 . t 9 7| . I I l ' Gardner, G. H. F., Messmer, J. H., and Woodside, W., EffectivePorosityandGas Relativepermeability on Liquid Imbibition Cycle. Theory of Fluid Flow in PorousMedia Conference, University of Oklahoma. Norman. 1959. 173. ll2. Shelton, J. L. and Schneider, F. M., The effect of water injectionon miscible flooding methods using hydrocarbons and CO,, paper SPE 4580 presented at the SPE 48th Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, 1973. 5 I l3' Land, C., Calculation of imbibitionrelativepermeability for two- and three-phase flow fiom rock properties, Soc'. Pet. Eng. J., 6, t49. 1968. I14. Wilson, J. W., Determination o f R e l a t i v eP e r m e a b i l i t y UnderSimulated ReservoiC r onditions. AIChEJ, 2(t), 4. 1956. - f l5' Fatt, I. and Barrett, R. E., Effect of overburdenpressure on relative permeability , Truns. AtME, lgE, 325. t953. I l6' Thomas, R. D. and Ward, D. C., Effect of overburden pressure and water saturation on gas permeability of tight sandstone cores,-/. Pet. Te<'hnot., 2, 120, lg'/2. ll7. Merliss, F. E., Doane, J. D., and Rzasa, M. J., Influenceof rock and fluid properties and immiscible fluid-flow behaviorin porous media, paper 510-G presented at the AIME Annual Meeting. New orleans. I955. ll8. Dunlap,E.N., Influenceoc f onnatewateronpermeability so afn d s t o o r l , T r a n s . A I M E ,l 2 j . 2 1 5 . l g 3 g .
t0l
characof limestoneperformance ll9. Stewart, C. R., Craig, F. F., Jr., and Morse, R. A., Determination teristicsby model flow tests,Trans AIME, 198, 93, 1953. relativepermeability of imbibition gas-water , J. Pet. to determination 120. Keelan, D. K., A practicalapproach T e c h n o l . ,4 , 1 9 9 , 1 9 7 6 . t o g a s , T r a n s .A I M E , 1 8 9 , 6 5 , l 2 l . L e a s , W . J . , J e n k s , L . H . , a n d R u s s e l l ,C . D . , R e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y
r950.
Trans.A1ME,216,258,1959. core characteristics, 122. Felsenthal,M., Correlationof k*/k,,datawith sandstone maintenance gravity drainageand gas pressure predictionsincorporating 123. McCord, D. R., Performance LL-370 Area, Bolivar coastal field,Trans. AIME' 198, 231, 1953. on waterflooding,Can. J. Pet. Tec'hnol.,10, 236, 1965. 124. Edmondson, T. A., Effect of temperature 125. Poston. S. W.. Ysrael, S., Hossain, A. K. M. S., MontgomerY, E. F., IV, and Ramey, H. J., Jr.' The effect of temperatureon irreducible water saturationand relative permeability of unconsolidatedsands, S o c .P e t . E n g . J . , 6 , l 7 l , 1 9 7 0 . on the permeabilityratio of different fluid pairs in two-phase 126. Davidson, L. B., The effect of temperature s y s t e m sJ , . P e t . T e c h n o l . ,8 , 1 0 3 7 , 1 9 6 9 . 1 2 7 .S i n n o k r o t , A . A . , R a m e y , H . J . , J r . , a n d M a r s d e n , S . S . , J r . , E f f e c t o tf e m p e r a t u r e l e v e l u p o n c a p i l l a r y pressure c u r v e s ,S o c . P e t . E t t g . J . , 3 . 1 3 . 1 9 7l . on relative and 128. Weinbrandt, R. M., Ramey, H. J., Jr., and Cass6, F. J., The effect of temperature permeability S,o r ' .P e t . E n g . J . , 1 0 . 3 7 6 , 1 9 1 5 . of sandstones absolute in Oil-Wet and on Water-Oil RelativePermeabilities 129. Lo, H. Y. and Mungan, N., Effect of Temperature r 0, 1973. S P E # 4 5 0 5 , L a s V e g a s ,N e v . , S e p t e m b e3 W a t e r - W e tS y s t e m s , Effects on Relative Permeabilities 130. Sufi, A. S., Ramey, H. J., Jr., and Brigham, W. E., Temperature r 6, 1982. S P E # l 1 7 0 1 , N e w O r l e a n s ,L a . , S e p t e m b e2 o f O i l - W a t e rS y s t e m s , on Oil-Water Relative Eff'ects 13l. Sufi, A. S., Ramey, H. J., Jr., and Brigham, W. E., Temperature Sands, U.S. Departmentof Energy, Technical Report, 12056-35.Defor Unconsolidated Permeabilities c e m b e r .1 9 8 2 . of on Oil/Water Relative Permeabilities t 3 2 .Miller, M. A., and Ramey, H. J., Jr., Effect of Temperature , a l i f . , O c t o b e r5 , 1 9 8 3 . S a n d s ,S P E # l 2 l 1 6 , S a n F r a n c i s c oC U n c o n s o l i d a t ea dn d C o n s o l i d a t e d RelativePermeability,Ph.D. thesis,StanfordUniv., Stanford,Calif., 1979. 1 3 3 Counsil, . J. R., Steam-Water t 3 4 .Muskat, M.,, PhvsicalPrinciples of oil Production, McGraw-Hill New York. 1949. on relativepermeability,paper tensions C. and Longeron, D., Influenceof very low interfacral 1 3 5 Bardon, . a t t h e S P E 5 3 r d A n n u a l M e e t i n g ,H o u s t o n ,T e x . , 1 9 7 8 . SPE7609presented relativepermeabilitydata,Trans. 136. Richardson, J. G., Calculationof waterfloodrecoveryfrom steady-state AIME. 210.373. 1951. 137. Johnson, E. F., Bossler, D. P., and Nauman, V. O., Calculationof relativepermeabilityfrom displacement experiments,Trans. AIME, 216. 370, 1959. d o r o u ss y s t e m ,T r s n s .A I M E , 2 0 1 , 5 7 , 1 9 5 4 . sn a c o n s o l i d a t e p txperimenti 1 3 8 . L e v i n e , J . S . , D i s p l a c e m e ne from laboratory data,J. Pet. Techrutl., of gas injectionperformance 139. Craig, F. F., Jr., Errors in calculation 8.23, 1952. 140. Sandberg, C. R., Gourney, L. S., Suppel, R. F., Effect of fluid flow rate and viscosityon laboratory T ,r s n s .A I M E , 2 1 3 , 3 6 . 1 9 5 8 . d e t e r m i n a t i oo n f o i l - w a t e rr e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t i e s 14l. Donaldson, E. C., Lorenz, P. 8., and Thomas, R. D., The effect of viscosity and wettability on oilat the SPE 4lst Annual Meeting, Dallas, Oct. 2-5, water relativepermeability,paper SPE 1562 presented t966. from 142. Geffen, T. M., Parrish, D. R., Haynes, G. W., and Morse, R. A., Efficiency of gas displacement porous media by liquid flooding, Trans. AIME, 195,29. 1952. consolidated cores../.Pet. Technol., on long horizontal 143. Krutter, H. and Day, R. J., Air-drive experiments t2, t, t943. on small core 144. Morse, R. A., Terwilliger, P. K., and Yuster, S. T., Relativepermeabilitymeasurements samplesO , il GasJ., 46. 109, 1947. 145. Odeh, A. S., Effect of viscosityratio on relativepermeability,Trans. AIME, 216,346, 1959. ,. Pet. Technol.,219,65, o f e f f e c t o f v i s c o s i t yr a t i o o n r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t yJ 146. Baker, P. E., Discussion I 960. 1 '9 56 91 '. 1 4 7 .D o w n i e , J . a n d C r a n e , F . E . , E f f e c t o fv i s c o s i t y o n r e l a t i v e p e r m e a b i l i t y , s o t ' . P e t . E n g . J . ' 6 M E 246, Trans . Al materials flow in consolidated , for two-phase E. A model , 148. Ehrlich, R. and Crane, F. , 22t, t969. 149. Perkins, F. M., Jr., An investigationof the role of capillary forces in laboratorywaterfloods.J. Pet. T e c h n o l . ,l l , 4 9 , 1 9 5 7 . 150. Pickell, J. J., Swanson, B. F., Hickman, W. B., Applicationof air-mercuryand oil-air capillarypressure S o c .P e t . E n g . J . , 4 , 5 5 . 1 9 6 6 . andfluid distribution, d a t ai n t h e s t u d yo f p o r e s t r u c t u r e l5l. Warren, J. E. and Calhoun, J. C., A study of waterfloodefficiency in oil-wet systems,Truns. AIME. 204.22. t955.
102
increase o i l r e c o v e r y .O i 1 a c t i v ea g e n t s 1 5 2 . C a r o , R . A . , C a l h o u n , J . C . , J r . , a n d N i e l s e n ,R . F . , S u r f a c e GusJ., 12. 6. 1952. 153. Ojeda, E., Preston, F., and Calhoun, J. C., Jr., Correlationof residualsfollowing surfactantfloods, Prod.Mon., 12,20, 1953. porous of a consolidated 154. Lefebvre du Prey, E. J., Factorsafl'ectingliquid-liquid relative permeabilities m e d i u m .S o c . P e t . E n e . J . , 2 , 3 9 . 1 9 ' 1 3 . o f a g a s d r i v e m e t h o df o r 155.Owens, W. W., Parrish, D. R., and Lamoreaux, W. E., An evaluation Truns. AIME, 201,275, 1956. determiningrelative permeabilityrelationships, in water-wetporousmedia, 156. Kyte, J. R. and Rapoport, L. A., Linear waterfloodbehaviorand end ef'fects Trans. AIME, 213. 423. 1958. of 157. Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A., and Osoba, J. S., Laboratorydeterminations , r a n s .A I M E , 1 9 5 , 1 8 7 , 1 9 , 5 2 . r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y T on Small Core Measurements 158. Morse, R. A., Terwilliger, P. K., and Yuster, S. T., RelativePermeability SamplesO , il GasJ., 46. 109, 1941. 159. Labastie, A., Guy, M., Delclaud, J. P., and lffly, R., Effect of flow rate and wettability on water-oil paperSPE 9236 presented at the SPE Annual Meeting, Dallas. and capillarypressure, relativepermeabilities T e x . , S e p .2 l - 2 4 , 1 9 8 0 . 159a. McCaffery, F. G., The Effect of Wettability on Relative Permeabilityand Imbibition in PorousMedia. P h . D . t h e s i s ,U n i v e r s i t yo f C a l g a r y ,A l b e r t a ,C a n a d a ,1 9 7 3 . of a fluid by anotherin a porous medium, paper SPE I 6 0 . Delclaud, J. P., New resultson the displacement 4103 presented a t t h e S P E 4 7 t h A n n u a l M e e t i n g .S a n A n t o n i o , T e x . , 1 9 1 2 . at the 48th Annual Fall l 6 l . Fetkovitch, M. J., The isochronaltestingof oil wells, paper SPE 4529 presented M e e t i n go f t h e S P E , L a s V e g a s ,N e v a d a . 1 9 7 3 . in porous media. Sot'. during immiscibledisplacements t 6 2 . Handy, L. L. and Datta, P., Fluid distributions Pet.Eng./.,, 10.261, 1966. on waterflood relative t 6 3 . Huppler, J. D., Numerical investigationof the effects of core heterogeneities p e r m e a b i l i t,yS o c ' .P e t . E n g . J . , 1 2 , 3 8 | , 1 9 7 0 . 164. Stewart, C. R. and Owens, W. W., A laboratorystudy of laminar and turbulentllow in heterogeneous porosity l i m e s t o n eT , r u n s .A I M E , 2 l 3 , 1 2 l , 1 9 5 8 . Prod. Mon.,4. 12, studies, r e p o r to n m u l t i p h a s e - f l o w H e n d e r s o n ,J . H . a n d M o l d r u m , H . , P r o g r e s s 16,5. t949. ., cores,-/. Pet. TeL'hnol on long horizontalconsolidated 166. Krutter, A. and Day, R. J., Air-drive experiments l l. l. r943. P e r m e a b i l i t y1 . 978 Geothermal R relative 1 6 7 . C h e n , H . K . , C o u n s i l ,J . R . , a n d R a m e y , H . J . , J r . , S t e a m - W a t e R e s o u r c eC s o u n c i l A n n u a l M e e t i n g ,H i l o , H a w a i i , J u l y 2 5 - 2 7 , 1 9 1 8 . fluids, 168. Brownell, L. E. and Katz, D. L., Flow of fluids through porous media - single homogeneous C h e m . E n s . P r o s , . ,4 3 ( 1 0 ) , 5 3 7 . 1 9 4 ' 7 . permeability . et., r e l a t i o n s h i p alto w g a ss a t u r a t i o n . J . l n s t P 169. Wall, C. G. and Khurana, A. K., Saturation 5 1 .2 6 1 .1 9 7 1 . flow,Trans. AIME, 192,312, 1951. ga s - l i q u i d s h a r a c t e r i z i ng 170. Rose,W.D., Fluid distributionc - l7l. Loomis, A. G. and Crowell, D. C., Relative . rod. Mon.,8. permeability s t u d i e sI . I . W a t e r o i l s y s t e m sP r8. 1959. tests, 172. Sarem, A. M., Significanceof water-oil relative permeabilitydata calculatedfrom displacement o f O k l a h o m a .N o r m a n , 1 9 5 9 , 1 8 9 . , niversity P r o < ' . ,T h e o r y o f F l u i d F l o w i n P o r o u sM e d i a C o n f e r e n c eU and of field k*/k,,characteristics 173. Owens, W. W., Parrish, D. R., and Lamoreaux, W. E., A comparison at the AIME laboratoryku/k,,test results measuredby a new simplified method. paper 518-G presented 3 0 t h A n n u l M e e t i n g , N e w O r l e a n s ,1 9 5 5 . 174. Calhoun, J. C., Jr., Fundamentalsof ReservoirEngineering,University of Oklahoma Press,Norman, t94'7. performance characteristics of limestone | 75. Stewart, C. R., Craig, F. F., and Morse, R. A., Determination by model flow tests. Truns. AIME, 198, 93, 1953. 176. Kyte, J. R., Stanclift, J. R., Stephan, S. C., Jr., and Rapoport, L. A., Mechanismof waterflooding of free gas,Trans. AIME, 101, 215, 1956. in the presence p a p e rS P E 4 9 8 6 dn d F r i a b l eS a n d s , 1 7 7 . M a t t a x , C . C . a n d C l o t h e i r , A . T . , C o r e A n a l y s i so f U n c o n s o l i d a t ea presented a t t h e S P E 4 9 t h A n n u a l M e e t i n g ,H o u s t o n ,T e x . . 1 9 7 4 . on oil recoveryby waterflooding.Trans. 178. Holmgren, C. R. and Morse, R. A., Effect of free gas saturation A I M E , 1 9 2 , 1 3 5 ,1 9 5 1 . 179. McCaffery, F. G., The Effect of Wettability on Relative Permeabilityand Imbibition in PorousMedia. Ph.D. thesis, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1973. 180. Gornik, B. and Roebuck, J. F., Formation Evuluetion through Extensive Use of Core Analysi,s,Core L a b o r a t o r i e sI,n c . , D a l l a s ,T x . , 1 9 7 9 .
103
Chapter4 THREE-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
I. INTRODUCTION Recent innovationsin the field of oil recovery have led to a renewedinterestin threephaserelative permeability. Three-phase flow occurs when the water saturationis higher than the irreducible level, and oil and gas are also presentas mobile phases.Detailed engineering of reservoirsunder recoverymethodssuch as calculationsof the performance carbon dioxide injection, in situ combustion,steamdrive, micellar fluid injection, and relativepermeabilitydata. nitrogen injection frequentlyrequirethree-phase All factors which influenceflow in systemscontainingtwo mobile phasesalso apply to potentialthree-phase systems, constitute systems.Virtually all oil reservoirs three-phase sincereservoirrocks invariably contain interstitialwater, and naturallyoccurringoils completely devoid of gas are rare. In fact, a two-phasesystemof oil and gas may be regarded as a three-phase systemin which the water phaseis immobile. The numberof reservoirs in which oil, gas, and water are simultaneously mobile during primary productionis probably small. Nevertheless,three-phase mobility is always possible when a producing interval includespart of the oil-water transitionalzone in a reservoir.It is probable,however, that in most caseswhere oil and free gas are producedwith an appreciable water cut, the water is being producedfrom layers of the reservoir in which relative permeabilityto water is high and not by true three-phase flow. relative permeabilitydata for conventionalreservoir In the past, the use of three-phase In consequence, engineeringcalculationshas seldom been necessary. considerablyless is known about three-phaserelative permeability characteristics of rocks than is known for comparabletwo-phasecases.The realizationthat detailedengineeringcalculationsof the performance producedby in sitrzcombustion processes of reservoirs requirethree-phase data is quite new. Three-phase relativepermeabilityis useful in the calculationof field performwaterandgasdrive, and alsoin analyzing ancefor reservoirs beingproduced by simultaneous solution gas drive reservoirs which are partially depletedand are being produced by water drive. An increasinginterestin three-phase flow phenomena is anticipated. perrneability There are two distinct classesof three-phase relative data: ( I ) that pertaining (2) pertaining to drainage;and that to imbibition. Drainagerefersto the direction of saturation changein which the wetting-phase Imbibition refers to an increasing saturation decreases. wetting-phase saturation.For the relative permeabilitydata to yield correct reservoirpredictions, the directionof saturation changein the reservoirmust correspond to the direction of saturationchange for which the data were derived. Drainagerelative permeabilitydata should be used in the following situations: l. Enhancedrecovery processes involving the injection of dry gas, flue gas, carbon dioxide, and other gasesinto watered-outreservoirs. in which liquified petroleum gas (LPG) is injected into Miscible flood processes watered-out reservoirs. Productionfrom reservoirs in which the water saturation is greater than the ineducible saturation. Imbibition relative permeabilitydata should be used under the following conditions: l. Reservoirsproduced by natural water drive.
2.
3.
104
I OOI
w!tor
oil
FIGURE l.
Three-phase relative permeability.r
2. 3.
Reservoirs developed by water flood, as well as by processes wherethe injectedwater containssurfactants, polymers, or other additives. Reservoirsdevelopedby recovery processes where water is used to push a slug of chemicals, LPG, etc.
II. DRAINAGERELATIVEPERMEABILITY
A. Leverett and Lewis Much of the credit for the classicalwork in three-phase relativepermeabilityis accorded to Leverettand Lewis' who were the first to measure three-phase relativepermeabilityof a water-oil-gassystem in an unconsolidated sand. These investigators used a steady-state single-core dynamic method and ignored end effects and hysteresis.Errors from ignoring capillary end effects were probably significant,since low flow rateswere used. Ring electrodes were spacedalong the length of a sand pack to measureresistivity of the sample and brine saturationwas assumed to be directly relatedto resistivity. Gas saturation was determined from pressure and volume measurements. Oil sdturation was obtainedby a material balancetechnique.Leverett and Lewis obtainedthree separate triangulargraphs showing lines of constantrelative permeability("isoperms") to the three phases; thesewere plotted againstthe saturations of the three fluids, as shown by Figure l. They also obtaineda plot showing the region of three-phase flow; Figure 2 shows the region where each component comprisesat least5Voof the flow stream.As shown by the figure, three-phase flow occurs in a rather confined region. Relativepermeabilityto water, k,*, was found to be dependent only on water saturation, S*, and was not affected by the introduction of an additional nonaqueous phase. Relative permeability to gas, k,r, was found to be slightly less than would be expectedfor the same gas saturation, S* in two-phase flow. The k., isoperms are convex towards the 1007oS, apex of the triangulardiagram. As gas becomes one of the two flowing nonwettingphases, whenboth oil and waterarepresent, the relativepermeability to gasdecreases asoil saturation
105
lOO%gas
100% water
lOO%oil
FIGURE 2.
Region of three-phase flow.l
approaches the water saturation value, becominga minimum when roughly equal saturations of oil and water are associated with the gas. The relative permeability to oil is seento vary in a more complex manner. Starting with a gas saturation of zero, oil relative permeabilityat constantoil saturation increases as gas (except at low oil saturations saturationincreases where k,, remainsconstant)then decreases to its original value as more gas is introduced,finally falling well below this value when gas saturationis further increased.In a water-wet system,the presence of gas leavesthe mode of water flow unchanged,but since the gas tends to occupy the central portions of (where the oil is also driven by capillary forces)interference the intergrainspaces between oil and gas flow is likely. Visual examinationunder the microscope showsthe presence of an oil film (in some casescontaininga very small amountof finely divided water) through which oil flows aroundeachgasbubble.It is not clearwhetherall gasbubblesare connected. However, the gas bubblesare observed to move jerkily, as opposed to the generallysmooth flow of water (and of oil when gasbubblesare absent or are stationary). This unevenmotion of the gas implies a similar motion of at leastpart of the oil, which would be expectedto move faster than in the absenceof gas at the same oil saturation.We see a decreasein k,. at constantS" as S, is increased, especiallyat low S*. Also, there is an increasein k.o at constantS" as S* is increased at low values of S*. This effect is evidently due to ihe shifting of oil into parts of the intergrain spacewhere it may flow more freely. The water introduced tends to occupy the sharply curved parts of the pores,forcing oil into the centralspacevacated by gas. Sincefluid in the sharplycurved parts of the poresmoves only with difficulty and that in the centermoves more readily, the result is an increasein k,o. Leverettand Lewis pointed out that they found no effect of oil viscosityon the isoperms for various saturationsof the three phases. B. Corey, Rathjens, Henderson, and Wyllie The resultsof the work of Corey et al.2are shown by Figure 3. Theseinvestigators used a calcium chloride brine. Capillary end effects were minimized by using a core with semi-
106
gas FIGURE 3. relative permeability.r Three-phase
gravimetricallyand saturations permeable membranes mountedat eachend. They measured rather than resacores for each measurement effects by using separate avoided hysteresis of turating the samecore. In an initial conclusion,they reportedthat when the saturations the wetting phaseswere equal, the nonwettingphase relative permeability,k,n, was unregardless of whetherthe nonwettingphasewas oil or gas.They usedthe equivalent changed liquid permeabilityas the basevalue. The oil isopermsof Corey et al. are similar to those obtainedby Leverettand Lewis, exceptthat Corey's oil isopermshave a greatercurvature. that on the assumption but was calculated Relativepermeabilityto water was not measured, aloneand that waterpermeabilityin a water-wetsystem it was a function of water saturation was the sameas the oil permeabilityin an oil-wet system.It shouldbe noted that the data that the behavior of Cltrey et al. are for oil drainagein an oil-gassystem.They alsoobserved of the nonwetting phaseswas more sensitiveto changesin pore geometry than was the in S* (and in k." (at low S*) with the increase behaviorof the wetting phase.The increase samplesthan sandstone in S*) is higher in Corey's consolidated decrease a corresponding of k..,on the ratio of the dependence samples.This is because in the unconsolidated ft' I dsl/P.r
JS*
l,
dsL/P:
which is usually higher in consolidated rocks than in unconsolidated rocks. Corey et al. extendedtheir two-phaserelative permeabilityrelationshipto three-phase flow on the basisof the following approximation:
107
N
2
FIGURE 4. Three-phase relative permeability.r
I
Sr_,
l/Pl : g
IS,_-(S*,..+S,,.)]
for S, ' t
St' (soi,, + s.,,)
t''=, :ofbrS.s -'^ (S*,,, * S",)
(l)
The drainage oil phaserelativepermeabilityin a water-wetsystemcontaininggas is given bv
(2)
where S., is residualliquid saturation. As in Leverett's data, the oil isopermstend to be parallel to the oil isosaturation lines, especiallyat high S*. At increasingS* and constantS.,, the gas which was previously in the systemis no longerpresent.Thus, the rate of increase of k..,with increasing S* decreases at higher valuesof S*. Corey et al. proposeda methodto obtain k.,,and k,*, basedon k.* alone. Incidentally, k.* was found to be a function of S* and independent of the relative wetting propertiesof the fluids within the rock. C. Reid Using the samemethodemployedby Leverettand Lewis (single-core dynamictechnique), Reid3obtaine{ the isopermsshown in Figure 4; He eliminatedend effects, but hysteresis was ignored.'frine saturation was measured by resistivity, and'oil and gas saturations were obtainedby gamma ray absorption.His saturation measuremenis possiblywere affectedby differentialabsorption of gamma rays by oil and water. While Leverettand Lewis obtained
108
straightlines for the water phasebehavior(showingk,* to be independent of the distribution of the nonwettingphases) and oil isoperms concavetoward the l}OVaSoapex, Reid's results indicatedconcavewater isoperms,convex oil isoperms,and slightly concavegas isoperms. These results were interpreted as indicating that the relative permeability to each phase is dependent both upon its own saturation and the saturations of the other phases.His results showeda greateroil permeabilitywhen threephases were presentthan with two phases,at a given oil saturation. Reid made no attempt to correlate the three-phaseresults with those from two-phase experiments.He placed emphasison his conclusionsfor the oil isopermsand noted that Leverett'soil phasedata showeda substantial amountof scatter.For this reason,he believed that his oil isopermswere more valid than Leverett's.The work of Rose seemsto confirm Reid's findings. D. Snell Three-phase behavior in a water-wet unconsolidated sand was investigated by Snell,a-6 who used radio frequency detection for the determination of S* and a neutron counting methodfor measurement of Sr. Oil saturation was obtainedby materialbalancecalculation. His experiments had a repeatability within Ilr%o for relativepermeability values,with a better repeatability for the saturation values.He found that when the wetting phasesaturation was uniform over a length of the test sample,the saturations of the other two phases were also uniform over the samelength. Although Caudle et al. " did mention hysteresis in their work, the first significantstudy on the effect of saturationhistory on three-phase relative permeabilitywas done by Snell. In describingSnell's work, it is convenient to definefour typesof liquid saturation histories: l. 2. 3. 4. Imbibition of water with oil saturation increasing(II). Imbibition of water with oil saturation (ID). decreasing Drainageof water with oil saturation increasing(DI). (DD). Drainageof water with oil saturation decreasing
As seen from his results in Figure 5, k.o values were lower for DD than for the other saturation histories.Since, in two-phaseflow, drainagecausedthe wetting phapeto lose its mobility at highersaturations, it hasbeensuggested that thereis a partialchange in wettability from water-wetto oil-wet during DD. When the systemwas oil-wet, a largerS,,was required for the samek,., because someof the oil was trappedin the smallerpores.This oil increases S.,,but it is immobile. He further suggested that this changein wettability may be caused by polar compoundsin the oil. Snell's resultsdo not show good agreement with those of Leverettand Lewis except in the caseof k.*. Oil and water isoperms reported by Snell are similar to those determinedby Reid, but Snell's k.. valuesare higher than Reid's, especiallyat low water saturation. In a later work, Snell reinterpreted the resultsof four earlier studiesdoneon unconsolidated sands.In these investigations,no hysteresis was found for water isoperms.Oil isoperms showed hysteresisonly when keroseneor a kerosene/lubricating oil mixture was used as the oil phase.Nonpolaroil gaveno hysteresis. Reinterpretation of the earlierresultswas possible because Leverettand Lewis indicated possible enors in their saturation measurements. Reid's saturationdata might also have been inaccuratebecause of differential absorptionof gamma rays by oil and water. Relativepermeabilityto oil was found to be dependent only on the historiesof the liquid phasesaturations, althoughSnell did not rule out dependence on gas phasesaturationhistory. Snell reinterpreted Leverett'sdata to obtain oil isopermsconvex toward the l00%oS,,apex. Oil isopermsthen followed the samepatternin all four investigations.Theseresultsareshownin Figure6. The curvature of the isoperms of both nonwetting
109
I OO*
watet
10Oi
oil
water
10OS water
M
'l0O% gas
R)
oil I OOi oil
roOS
gas
FIGURE 5.
Three-phase relative permeability.5
100% gas
lmbibition _ D ra ina ge - - - -
Rsults of Snell
1OO%water
/I,a'
il!to,Dt oD
_ ----
100% oil
100% water
10 0 %
1O0% oil
non-polar
1OO%water
1O0% oil
'l
OO% water
100% oil
FIGURE 6.
Reinterpretation of resultsby Snell.6
ll0
---
_) _ 4 o :;,--=-.
\ Gas iniectsd, pore volumes
i---- to-..\..
(L E
zj+
o o o
O_ o .z
-'--\:\:1..,, i /,
[--'"-\..
.1
F---,:-:N*,
*-'
^-.5
< - L
-l
I
-A
L-.25
---A
J . 1
0
O tNtlAL wATERsATURATtoN
100
0
100
FIGURE 7.
{-
rNrrrAL orL sATURATToN
Fluid flow experimental aata for Berea sandstone.T
(oil and gas)are convextoward the corresponding phases phase-apex, whereas wetting phase isopermsare straightlines or are concavetoward the l00%o apex of the wetting phase. E. Donaldson and Dean An extensionof Welge's two-phase unsteady-state technique was usedby Donaldsonand DeanTto determinethree-phase relative permeabilities of Berea sandstone and Arbuckle limestone.Oil and water in the core were displacedby gas and the flow ratesof all three phaseswere measuredsimultaneously. Their resultsfor the displacement testson the two cores startingwith various S*, and S.,,are shown in Figures7 and 8. They minimized end effects by using a high pressure differential and high flow rates, and they did not account for hysteresis effects. The volumes of oil and water displacedwere less in the limestone than in the sandstone for the same S,,(or S*) and the samepore volumes of gas injected. This effect is presumably caused by the largerflow channels in the limestone. The efficiency of a gas displacement processis greaterfor a matrix with smallerpores.There is a narrower rangeof saturations for three-phase flow in the limestonebecause the large vugs may allow gas to flow without transferingenergy to oil or water. The isoperms arepresented asfunctionsof terminalratherthanaverage saturations, because the former govern the flow of fluids throughthe core. The resultsof Donaldsonand Dean, shown in Figures9 through 14, indicatethat, at low and constant S' k., for Bereasandstone initially decreased with increasing S" until S" reached a valueof about50Vo. Furtherincreases in Socausedan increase in k,r. At S* greaterthan I 3Vo,k," increased so the isoperms became concavetoward the gas apex. No explanationof this phenomenon was suggested by the authors.At a given S* the k., was lower in the presence of water than in the presence of oil, probably because water adheredmore stronglyto the rock surfacethan did the oil. The flow path of gas is more restrictedin the presence of water, sincegas can displaceoil more easily than it can displacewater. For the limestone,k,, was alwaysconcavetoward the gas apex.
lll
DataPoints:
.4
A)
oE q) O (g O A -
.3
t
e "oo,
.r, /-oas Inlecteo. pore votumes
o U, o
A .Z
i5 o
o o -o_ !
A'
100
FIGURE 8.
INITIAL OIL SATURATION
Fluid flow experimentaldata for Arbuckle limestone.T
uw
FIGURE 9.
so
Gas relative permeabilityfor Berea sandstone.T
The water isoperms are concave toward the water apex. Relative permeability to water was generallyhigher in the presence of oil than in the presence of gas, but k.* was higher in the presence of gas than in its absence at a constanthigh S*. Both k." and k.* increased
tt2
o^ ao/
sw
FIGURE IO
so
Gas relative permeabilityfor Arbuckle limestone.i
A6
ieo
1o
sw
FIGURE I l.
so
Oil relative permeabilityfor Berea sandstone.T
at constantS,,and S*, respectively,when S, was increased from 0 to 8Vapossiblybecause gas was trappedin poreswhich would otherwisebe occupiedby immobile wetting phases. Also, k.* increased in the presence of oil because there may be partial oil wetting, so that water was displacedinto larger pores;this was not the casewhen gas was present.
113
sw
so
I 2 . Oil relative permeabilityfor Arbuckle limestone.T FIGURE
ss
-w
oo
f o r B e r e as a n d s t o n e ' F I G U R E 1 3 . W a t e r r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y
F. Sarem data for a Bereacore. He obtainedthree-phase method, Sarems Using an unsteady-state history, but his methoddid accountfor wettability. did not considerend effectsor saturation technique,is relatively fast. Sarem'smethod, which is an extensionof Welge's two-phase
tt{
sw
so
FIGURE 14. Water relative permeabilityfor Arbuckle limestone.T
first with one liquid and then flooded with an immiscible unreactive The core is saturated by gas. In the derivation Then, both liquids are displaced breakthrough. liquid, at leastuntil permeability to be a function of the colrerelative assumed each Sarem of his equations, lines. The parallel isosaturation to the were therefore Isoperms alone. saturation sponding saturation and liquid on total be dependent gas to permeability was assumed to relative properties. wetting of the relative independent The saturationequationsare
Soz : S*z : S..o,, * f", Q
(3)
(4)
S*.ou* *
f*, Q
S r r : 1 - S * r - S . , 2
(5)
where Q : cumulativevolume of injectedfluid (per pore volume)
e : 9 LAO rt
and f : fractionalflow. and q, : total volumetric flow rate (cclsec),t : time (seconds), The relative o, w, g, and 2 standfor oil, water, gas, and outlet, respectively. Subscripts permeabilitiesare computed from the following relationships: d (l/Q) k.* : I*z -l-4pp4 1 tl l I \L p " q' Q/ (6)
115
k.* Or,,H
d ( l/Q) : t"'(-4r!4-r*,, K"' o,J
(7)
(8)
Saremalso concludedthat initial saturation conditionsaffect k..,and k.*, but havelittle effect on k,r. He found that k."/k.* was influencedby initial saturations in three-phase studiesin the samemanneras in two-phasestudies.Sarem'sresultsdiffered from thoseof Donaldson and Dean even though both used the sametype of sandstone. G. Saraf and Fatt (NMR) techniques A dynamic method using nuclearmagneticresonance was used by Sarafand Fatteto determineliquid saturations in Boise sandstone. A volumetricmethodwas used to obtain gas saturations. The experimental techniquewas designedto minimize end effects.To maintaina constantpressure differential,the gas flow rate was increased as the justification for Sarem's oil flow rate was decreased. Saraf and Fatt found no theoretical assumption that three-phase relative permeabilityto each phasewas a function only of the saturation of that phase.In the water-wetBoise sandstone, however, they did find that k,* was a functionof S* alone.Using waterpermeability asthe base,they found thatk,* depended only on the total liquid saturationand was independent of the relative wetting properties. Oil isopermsdeterminedby these investigators were convex toward the oil apex. Their resultsare shown in Figure 15. The explanationgiven by the authorsfor this unexpected shapeof the isopermsseemsless than convincing.They did state,however,that in studies where k,* was a function of both S* and S", the systemwas not 1007awater-wet.In such a case,it seemslikely that S* did not remain constant when Soor S* was increased and that the assumption of constantS* could be a sourceof experimental error. H. Wyllie and Gardner Three-phase relative permeabilityequationsfor preferentiallywater-wet systemswhere water and oil saturations were determinedby the drainagecycle rather than by imbibition have been given by Wyllie and Gardnerro and are presented in Chapter 2, Table 3. The following factors should be taken in consideration when using the equations presented into this table. l. 2. The k,* valuesare normalizedto absolutepermeability. The values of k.o and k., calculatedfrom theserelationships are both normalizedto the effective hydrocarbon permeability at irreducible water saturation. Inasmuch as they are normalized to the same base, k.s/k.. values may be calculateddirectly by using these equations.This is not true, of course, for water-hydrocarbon relative permeabilityratios. The gas and oil relative permeabilityequations do not include provision for residual oil saturation.When S* equals S*i.,, k,o is equal to [S"/(l - S*,.,)]ofor cemented sandstone, oolitic limestones,and vugular rocks. To handle residualoil saturation, this relationshipshould be alteredto [(S" - S.,,)/(l - S*,'..)].0
3.
The correlations developed by Wyllie and Gardner can be used to construct a ternary diagramshowing the relative permeabilities to oil, gas, and water. In general,the valuesof relative permeability(10, 20,30Vo, etc.) are chosenfirst and then the valuesof saturation are obtained from the correlations. As can be seen from Chapter 2, Table 3, some of the
r16
Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs 10 0 % g a s
orL
100% water
100% oil
gas
WATER
water gas
GAS
water
oil
FIGURE 15. Three-phase relative permeability.'
equations are nonlinear.Hence, numericalmethods(suchas Newton-Raphson) are required to solve theseequations.Manual interpolationis also possiblefor plotting relative permeability isoperms.
tl7
WATER
wut6l olL GAs
FIGURE 16. Three-phase relative permeabilitydata of Caudleet al.rr
Empirical relationships provide reasonable resultsin some casesand very disappointing ones in other situations;consequently, they must be used carefully. Note that most of the previousrelationships were developed for media with intergranular porosity.This points out the huge problem of determining relative permeability curves for naturally fractured reservoirs. The difficulty arisesprimarily from the difficulty (or impossibility)of making this type of measurement on a fracturedcore sample. For totally oil-wet three-phase systemsin which oil is the wetting phase, water the nonwettingphase,and gas nonwettingwith respectto both, the substitution of S" for S* in the Wyllie and Gardner equationscan be made for estimationof the relative permeability to each phase.
III. IMBIBITION RELATIVEPERMEABILITY

A. Caudle, Slobod, and Brownscombe Using a dynamic displacementmethod on a consolidated core sample, Caudle et al.rl obtainedisopermsfor k.o, k.*, and k,*, as shown in Figure 16. They useddistillationto find the water and oil saturations at eachdata point, and usedmaterialbalancefor determination of gas saturation.Caudle et al. employed a pressuredifferential of 5 to 50 in. of water across the core and usedwater permeabilityas the basevalue. Relativepermeabilityto water k.* was found to be dependent on S*, Sr, and S". These workers recognizedthe presence of some form of hysteresisin the three-phase studies,but they ignored the capillary end effect. They found all relative permeabilities to be approximately at minimum valueswhen So was maintainedat the value of S*.. B. Naar and Wygal Naar and Wygal12developeda set of equationsthat was discussed in Chapter2. Based
l18
water-wet
S' w
mbibition.rr F I G U R E 1 7 . T h r e e - p h a sie
S;
at the apexes,as reducedsaturations on theseequationsthey plotted isopermswith 1007a that at the beginning indicated mechanism shown in Figures17 and 18. The displacement of S, at increased at the expense of the imbibition process,S** (reducedwater saturation) at the expenseof S., constantS", until no more gas was trapped.Thereafter,S* increased at constantS*. This path is tracedin Figure 17. The locus of all such paths is also shown. Unlike the findings of other workers, Naar and Wygal concludedthat k,.,/k,* is not a flow. On the other hand, the function of S*, for equal valuesof oil recoveryin three-phase is shown in Figure ratio was found to be a function of Sr, and wettability. This dependence the lessthe influenceof wettabilityon k.,,/k.*.Also, 19. The higher the initial gas saturation, and initial at a given recoverywas a function of initial water saturation the water saturation gas saturation. The ratio of S*, for a water-wetsystemto S*, for an oil-wet systemincreased was an incresingfunction of S*,. For a given S* ratio and with Sri, and the rate of increase Sri. With higherS*,,thereis lesspore space with increasing a given recovery,S*, decreased of the higher S*i; availableand the oil is alreadypushedout into larger channelsbecause therefore,less water is requiredfor the samerecovery. developedby Naar and Wygal, The imbibition water-oil relative permeabilityequations that l/P.2 equalsCS*, are basedon the assumption
""intt' So,i,,,.imb /s*
S * * . , n,b s* ds* P:
kr*.irrb
f' t - s* ds* J,, P:
(e)
119
o2
water
FIGURE 18. Three-phase drainage.rl
and
kr,r.irrb
: s;:i(s..,, + 3 Si")
+ 3S*, - 3S*') S"o)t(S,, + 2S.,n (I S * ' )"
(s,,
(l0)
Naar and Wygal suggestedthe following approximationfor imbibition gas relative permeability: k,* where
S**,.i-t,
: S**.druin -
0.5
S**i.in,r,
0.5
( I - S*i'",n)
(ll)
l/2 S::, drain;
S* :
S _ S* '. l -S * ,
s.l,:S"-S"t' l - S * ,
Sl*-S*lS*'
l -
S.t,
S*i
and S"ois the trappedoil saturation.
t20

1 A
S*1r,= o'3
't2
o 3
I (!
3 ro = 3 ; ;
L 8
-l
s w i r r - o . ' l5
^ t^ (Dl
{ o =
o
I o
u) l { l= lo:
{ lq - l t lr
l o
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
INITIAL GASSATURATION FIGURE 19. Influenceof wettability at 40o/c recovery.'l
Thesemodelswere derivedby assuming the randominterconnection of straightcapillaries, with a provision for blocking of the nonwettingphaseby the invading wetting fluid. The imbibition water, and drainage oil and gas, relativepermeabilittequations developed by Naar and wygal were also presented in the following form:
kr*,i,r,b : (S;)o
(t2)
(l 2S*x;,,2t
k,..i*u :
(l -
2S*x;t't {2 -
(l 3 )
and
k,* s_ir: - 2srr)

where
(r4)
SF -' , : s F - s * '
l - S * ,
"t" In theseequations the subscript stands for "trapped" and,,f" for.,free,, C. Land In Land's13work, equationsfor imbibition two- and three-phase relative permeabilities were obtainedfrom rock properties. Land considered residualgas saturation after imbibition to be directly related to the initial gas saturation.The gas and water imbibition relative permeabilities were reportedto be the samein three-phase systems as in two-phase systems,
12l
Gas
orL
Water
FIGURE 20. Imbibition k.,,for a mobile gas saturation.rl
since the totally nonwetting and wetting phasesoccupiedthe samepores regardless of the natureof the other phasespresent. His plots fork.o in the II and ID casesare shown in Figures20 and21. The ID plots are similar to the plots obtainedby Naar and Wygal,12 their systembeing an II case. Land's final equationsare ^*r It ds*
5 i I ts'Jr*sgr p:
k,*
It
_ -
(ls)
t. Kr*
II''E
It
(l6)
k.. :
r,'fl.,": Y f'ds*
J,, P:
(t7)
For S* increasingand S* constant: k.o : S:i [2(S** * S",*) * S"r*] (18)
122

Gas
GAS
Water
oil
F IGU R2 EI.
Imbibition k,,,for a trappedgas saturation.rl
This equationis similar to the one obtainedby Corey et al.2 for the drainagecondition. When all the gas is trapped: k.. : where S* : (l _ S*r*) S. - S.l-S*, -S,,,.
s:i(2s** +
S"r*) - S,,r*[S*i.+ 2/C(S;, + llC{lnSr,/Sr,})J
(l e )
S .* :
S", Sr,* : l -S *,
Sot
S.u* :
l-s*,
S. - Sru l-S*, I (sr,* ),.u*
S.r* :
(--
123
s**:
s
v()m
S* - S*. l-S*.
: minimum residual oil saturation

trappedgas saturation trappedoil saturation
Sr, : S.r, :
Land's correlations did not considerhysteresis sincehis derivationwas basedon the work of Corey et al., which did not include hysteresis effects. D. Schneider and Owens Schneiderand Owensraperformed steady-state and unsteady-state tests on a variety of carbonateand sandstonesamples, and found the relative permeability to oil during an imbibition processin a water-wet systemto be insensitiveto the flowing gas phasewhen gas saturation was increasing. Oil relativepermeabilitywas found to be primarily dependent on oil saturation.It was reported that residual oil significantly reducedthe gas relative permeabilityin a water-wetsystem.The gas relativepermeabilityin an oil-wet systemwas found to be insensitiveto the presence of a residualoil saturation. The nonwettingrelative permeability-saturation relationshipin three-phase flow was reportedto dependon the saturation history of both nonwetting phasesand on the ratio of the saturations of the two wetting phases.In some casesthe nonwettingrelative permeabilitywas found to be lower then the two-phasevalue due eitherto trappingof a nonwettingphaseor to flow interference between the nonwetting phaseswhen both were mobile. For some tests the nonwetting relative permeabilityvalue for three-phase flow was found to be higher than the two-phase value. The authorsdiscussed the reasons why their resultsdid not fullv asreewith thoseof Corey et al. B. Spronsen The centrifugemethod, alreadyproven for two-phaseflow, was extendedby Spronsenrs to drainagethree-phase flow in a water-wetsystem.Oil isopermsdetermined by Spronsen are concavetoward the l00Vo oll apex. He discussed the adverseinfluenceof immiscible CO, injection on the shapeof three-phase oil isoperms.The resultsof his investigationare shown in Figure 22.
IV. PROBABILITY MODELS

Sincethe experimental problemsassociated with three-phase flow aredifficult to surmount, a mathematical model appears to be an alternate approach. The correlations discussed earlier required some type of experimental three-phase flow data. On the other hand, probability models as formulated by Stoner6'r7 and modified by Dietrich and Bondor'8 and later by Nolen as cited by Molina,'e assume that two-phase flow behaviorcan be usedas a limiting condition for three-phase flow. Water-oil-gas flow can be boundedby water-oil flow at one extremeand oil-gas flow at the other. While someof thesemodelscan considerhysteresis, the earlier correlations,such as Land's,r3cannotdo so. Most probability models assumethat gas relative permeabilityis dependent only on the gas saturation:
kry k., (Sr)
(20)
124
Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs gas
water OIL ISOPERMS
gas
.0o002 - o o o1 -ooo5 - o o1
water WATER ISOPERMS

FIGURE 22. Data of Spronsen for Berea sandstone.r5
oil
Similarly, it is assumedthat the relative permeabilityto water is dependent only on the water saturation: k,* : k.*(S*)
(2t)
Oil relative permeability,however, varies in a more complex manner.Theseassumptions have been confirmed in laboratoryinvestigations for a water-wetsystem. In a water-wet system, gas behavesas a completelynonwettingphase, but oil has an intermediate ability to wet the rock. The relativepermeability to oil in a water-oil-gas system
12s
will thereforebe boundedby relative permeabilityto oil in a water-oil systemat low gas saturations and by relative permeabilityto oil in a gas-oil systemat low water saturations. Stoneattempted to combinethesetwo terminalrelativepermeabilities to obtaina three-phase result by using the channel flow theory in porous media and simple probability models. Water and gas three-phase relativepermeabilities, accordingto Stone,are the sameas their corresponding two-phaserelative permeabilities.In his first model, Stone developedthe expression:
k.. : s;P",F*
where S.,* : S. - S.,, l-S*,-S.. k_. P*: r=; (2-Phase)
(22)
S*.*
s * - S*i
l-S*, -S.,
9, : +T
and
(2-phase)
S,:
s .[-s*, -s..-Sr.
Fayersand Matthews26 suggested that S.. : where : lr S ' I -S*.-{ c{.S,,,* + (l - o,) S,,.o
Stone'searliermodel did not agreewell with datainvolving the dependence of waterflood residualoil saturationon trappedgas saturations. Stone's secondmodel gave three-phase oil relative permeabilityas k,,, : (k..,* + k,*)(k",* + k,s) - (k.* + k,s) (23)
where k,o* and k.* represent oil and water relativepermeabilities from two-phase, oil-water relativepermeabilitydata;k,o,and k,* represent oil and gasrelativepermeabilities from twophase,oil-gas relative permeabilitydata. Equation 23 may yield unrealisticresultsat low k.o values. Although it seemsreasonable that one should be able to combine the two two-phase relativepermeabilities to arrive at three-phase dataat leastfor water-wetsystems, the manner in which they have been combined in thesemodels may not accountfor the total physics of the process.Theseprobability modelsstronglydependon the assumption that there is at most one mobile fluid in any channel.That is, Stone's assumption implies that water-oil
126
capillary pressure and water relative permeabilityare functionsof water saturation alone in the three-phase system,regardless of the relativesaturations of oil and gas. Moreover, they are the samefunction in the three-phase systemas in the two-phase gas-oil system.Stone's second model generallypredictsthe correctoil relativepermeability in the three-phase system if the relative permeability at the end points is equal to one. Stone points out that when his secondmodel yields a negativek,,,, this implies a completeblockageof oil and as a result k." equals zero. The Stone models accountfor hysteresis when water and gas saturations are changingin the samedirection. Dietrich and Bondorr8applied Stone's models to publishedthree-phase data and found them to be only partially successful. They found that it was necessary to modify Stone's secondmodel for the casewhere gas/oil relative permeabilityis measured in the presence of connatewater. They pointed out that, at irreduciblewater saturation and zero gas saturation, Equation 23 reducedto k,. : (k..,*)(k.,,*)
This expressioncan be valid only if both k..,* and k.,,, equal unity. Since k,,, at S*. is frequentlyless than one, Stone's secondmodel has some limitations. Dietrich and Bondor adjustedStone'smodel by normalizingit with k..,.* to obtain:
k..:
fr
- (k.*+ k.g) (k.", * k.r)l * k,*) t,0,"*
(24)
where k.o.* is the oil relative permeabilityat connatewater saturation. At irreduciblewater saturationand zero gas saturation this equationreducesto:
k-. : (k"'o )(k"'t ) k..r.*
This model tends to predict incorrectoil relative permeabilityvalues (magnitudelarger than unity) for valuesof k,,,.* < 0.3. Nolen, as referenced by Molina'e has taken into accountthis problem and suggested the following model which remainsboundedas k.,,.* approaches zero: k.,, : k..,.*)*
k_ t.
+ k,*:: '*
k..r.*
* k.s - (k.*, + k.s)
(25)
Na,,.o
V. EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATION
Three-phase relativepermeabilitystudiesare still in an early stageof development. Little has been done on the experimental confirmationof imbibition correlations and most of the correlationsavailableare for imbibition. Early work was done primarily on unconsolidated sandsand the effectsof wettability and hysteresiswere not recognizeduntil recently. Donaldsonand Kayser2o have categorized the reasonsfor divergenceof experimental three-phase relative permeabilitydata as follows: l. 2. 3. 4. 5. Errors introducedin saturation measurements in variousexperimental methods. Errors introducedby neglectof capillary end effectsand saturation hysteresis phenomena. Variations caused by use of different oils, brines, and cores which could exhibit different wettability characteristics. Assumptionsmade to facilitate experimental procedures or calculations. Inadequacy of mathematical formulationsto represent three-phase flow conditions.
The empirical methods,though seeminglysimpler, suffer from simplifying assumptions that have limited the rangeof saturation historiesthat can be simulated.
r27
determinedthree-phase relative Table I is a chronologicallisting of the experimentally permeabilities In all of the studiesincludedin the tabulationthe that have been reported.2r authorsusedrefined oils in order to minimize oil-wetting;they assumed a totally water-wet history of the system.In caseswhere a single core was used,the influenceof the saturation rock samplewas frequently ignored. The gasesused in the studieslisted in Table 1 were air, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen.
VI. LABORATORY APPARATUS

relativepermeabilitystudieshavebeenconducted using refinednonpolaroil, Three-phase hydrocarbon fractions,brine, nitrogen,air, and carbondioxide. dieseloil, Soltrol, kerosene, as well as Arbuckle limeBerea, Boise, Torpedo, Tensleep,and Weeks Island sandstones, have beenusedfor the flow media. Bereasandstone stoneand unconsolidated sandsamples is often preferredbecause of its uniformity and generalacceptability as an industrystandard. in this field have indicatedthat the most praccommunications with researchers Personal measurement is gravimetric.Othermodernmethods,suchas gamma tical meansof saturation ray absorption,X-ray absorption,NMR, etc., are unnecessarily expensiveand elaborate. measurements aresufficientlyaccurate and relativelyinexpensive. The gravimetricsaturation Problems may be encountered with gravimetricsaturation measurements, however,especially of volatile oil. Therefore,core holderswhich permit rapid when gas is used in the presence removal of cores (without the removal of rubber sleeves)should be used when relative permeabilityis determined by steady-state methods.Wettability of the core shouldbe monitored either by the centrifugaltechnique23 or an alternativemethod. Brine saturationmay be determinedwith satisfactoryaccuracyby',electricalresistivity when nonpolaroil is employed.Oil saturation may be obtainedgravimetrically measurement and the gas volume may be computedas the differencebetweentotal pore volume and total liquid volume. The oil and water flow ratesmay be obtainedby a simpleburettearrangement or by flowmeters.The gas flow rate may be obtainedby use of a gas flowmeter. The effect of wettability on the relative permeabilities is an importantfactor that should be studied.The changeof wettability in a core from oil-wet to a water-wethas beenknown to influencerelative permeabilities, but no definite conclusions are found in the literature relativepermeabilities. concerningthe influenceof wettability on three-phase Boundary effects should be eliminatedby using core plugs at either end of the test core high flow rates.A semipermeable membrane and performing the experimentat reasonably A modified may precedethe core plug at the inlet end for properdistributionof the phases. may be used, since most investiPenn Statemethod of relative permeabilitymeasurement gatorsbelieve that the Penn Statemethodgives betterresultsthan any of the other steadystatemethods. for each phase,one needsto measurethe flow In addition to saturationmeasurements rate of each fluid and the pressure relativepermeability drop while making the steady-state A gas dome may inject fluids into the core and a back-pressure regulator measurements. may be used to maintain a constantpressureat the outlet end. Also, the gaseousphase shouldbe bubbledthrough the oil supply tanks. This procedure ensures that the oil is saturated with the gas before it enters the core. As a result, there should be no masstransfer between the gaseousphase and the oil inside the core. The gas flow rate may be regulated with a needle valve, with a large pressuredifferential acrossthe valve. The rate of gas flow may of water for a known length of time, be measured either by collecting gas by displacement differentialmeasurements, it or with a soapbubble meter or a wet-testmeter. For pressure possible into measuring device be small of fluid the as as that the displacement is desirable is not possible,but differential so as to minimize error. Hence, use of a regularmanometer pressuretransducersmay be used. The connectionsfor measuringpressuredifferential can
r28

a
t J U ) (h .
U)
U)
9 = E . =
:'': 9
(n 5 v i (t
U) (n
i a
.jl
u)
V)
F
rrt
F (n
r-l
E
E ; E = q E z -
o -'. r E , l
; ^, )
J
c..l
z
H
3
-l
" c 3
r-l
tr.9 9 q F Y U F L g
F b
.= ;
t 5 E
E U J
<
r 9
n 2 X F
. ! E
^ : ? ;
L ;
tv. r-l
O C)
Q , : = ! . .
, : ' i q g
t r tL s E ; '
3
11
F E 3 EEtE F 3.E
L Fi E
? X
bO
q) L
= E i "r SI a r ! . E ' E i j =
9 E J i l H : : i; h.d i..5 = :E--
s &
! r-r
rF
H H I
: a
n
FF H
i t g
i E iE *
E E
E ! E : t H i H EE E t 3 : ; E Z ; ; : f i ; ! r
* E E d ' = O o # = o - : + = 3 - i E j 5 : g ;
i s E
E EE Fe = i = Es i ! r e ! t g s r H s ; :
EIEEE;IgEgEili;
2E
EE
( ) L
Fr
rh
z
3 a
FI
.E: 8ir
F- FeE
I g
g Ei F ;
iie=
tfrE
#ytE
s
(
t A
Fl j Q
rh
J
. E E - r r_ 9 { q , c i * o . - . .
E - o 3 F s > : a I c p - t l
A ^ v
j
v l l
.- c 2
u v f
>
)
.
z
(.)
il fF
t = ! o - :
O t r A
t$e; rr
^ l l " L ! ! f q J )
-Pidr\
;
F i l a - Y , . .
-aE
- i '
) C
( ! c a ^
rr
ss : g ; :
= c ' t(O o
=
E '' u
f,u
v g ; H
;,,
-
gl
,c!
f V
a+:
l
i rr
\n O,
\n o\
0 E =
!
;
.
o
:
9 . = > q O -.1
E z ' =E P . i Fco \./
e # F
> e ? = g.qr.>, . 1ia3 \-,/
E a )
129
(n
U)
2
(n a
q;
l
3
.o -v a > . =
U)
(h
R
,,. J
F - =
; t
O :
-i,
E : 7 E P
E E y , E
> . - Q
'j ,n u
j ; E?; i 5 e.e 9Eyep .ef; . ; , v t E . , . iE > : .

E OrJ9 0J 0J = E o!> =
E
E
bO
3. " 3 : 3 = 'E E - :a ;o 9 _ i E
' - ' =L F ^ *
! >
: . Er
g'rtil,
E
r -i
s.)
E . = = = = t E . = - t z
. "
q) L
. = ! 2 e. ?- Z ? *
= 13E i i E E jz = UI e
P B g
t > 9 ! = g
-a'*
: 1
i-e-+E=32
oo
EE E. E E ; E -
I-lJ
I
9 . = F i i o o l = E - 4 r i ; . l b P
Eg U E E : E " f = E H E I E = 3
Z a i t ' Z i . ' .
. . : = - i
.=
O -
9 r y >. g)
> =
cJ
L J
E 9
c!i; sElEeEr=:;EEEg ' 5 E : gi ; s : : * E ! ; s ; : * E s s + ! e :; : ! E $*s E *; t E E s ;; EE Fr *$ 3 E E F E= > 3 i : B ! 3 ; i ' P E

i
Ere
*=E*
i=E f
u o
F ' v) .
t r
=
l F
qJ
r v
i
s t
=
-
u
4 a
x t z
=
-
V a
",
biH
F . - 4 _
C)
'E*,H:
F . - E 4 l
e.,
brJ=
gEe? lri=-=
l
i s"_ai F i E !
Z y?EE i=E ' .& P r -I ,; ' i E ! +=.E Zi-==.7=;='=
F . g *
t t Z
: : i ; E T q ?* U !
c.l o\
|r)
- l t -
1 a
s t I i ; = n [ g t * [ i t n l i . , ; = g j=;=3-;;l:-$t
l x e El : g i $ $ i g l
n
HE f i - . i E H *
t--
(.)
q..)
I (h
trc)
U)
o -
(n
130

(n (t) >. U) ._i A L (n
:itr . o E . !
(na
FI
z
3
rh
j , ;
o .r, u Y v t
3 a r-'! -l
T ; E
J
= g E ) z -
) ? -
z
3
Fl
& -
O F F J
tr .c)
()
O
>';
9 -
; J E t r ( D
Fr
rrt
r -
a 0 )
^)
E F
O F
= <
= n x Y r-r -t U) o ( .o* Enr F 'Jr -
E#*
:': >, v
F 8 E : L t ' ,
; ; g 9 J - t r H > ' 13 o) 92i-= = d - t E t r i F

LIJ
u - - - 2 F i 9'6 '
>.-'
X
9
c : i
S U .
=
' d
d
A
i E "
U)
E 3
i.= t
-?:$! s 5 5 ; 1
3
q) r Q ) o =
8.s
.r, I .l
. Y Z
. = e
E E E :
> i i : /
. o ; :
i l L
X c t r
& 3 FF H
F U 3 g ,;,() E F,9
ri
rfr
E-r (t) tl J
lr( rh Fl
z -
.E;
x
E X
9 q r S olJ
ii ' U)
o.r
O
(.)
2
rco
q)
o Z x 9 r "
@ V ^ N
-,(EE t 't , ,= * Egl; lE: i gE ' gF Y i

E I -: ;:x.E,., E, _ y ; X
2 = " d s I
E
H J?o
a E =
'r t
t = r " 3F
z
tl rF FI
L q )
g " A
lv
9 i x : Y! i l ' , :, ; , a; sI
a.l co
i fi: _
5s=3; ,g , 5geTU;e
I
q,,
: F A o ,
t^
q)
E 4
E 9 E :
v (h v
U)
131
CORE HOLOER
FIGURE 23.
relative permeabilityapparatus. Schematicdiagram of three-phase
ports. The capillary tubesconnecting membrane the transbe made through semipermeable in placeabout I in. from eachend of the testapparatus. ducermay be insertedand cemented relative permeabilitymeasurements have the admethodsof three-phase Unsteady-state gasdrive processes by gasto duplicate vantage of beingrapid. Oil and watermay be displaced recoverymethods.However, the calculationof isopermsfrom laboratory used in enhanced data requiresanalytical solutionsof the partial differentialequationsdescribingthe threephase fluid flow. Some early studies have made erroneoussimplifying assumptionsin process.Reliablevaluesof relative describingthe dynamic condition of the unsteady-state permeabilityas a function of saturations may be obtainedby mathematical simulation of laboratory data using finite difference calculations.20 Capillary pressuredata should be for obtainedfor gas-oil, water-oil, and water-gassystemsto provide basic data necessary relative permeabilitycalculations. Solubility of the gas in the liquids employed three-phase are performed. in the study should be determinedbefore thesecalculations relative permeabilitymeasA schematicdiagram of the apparatus used for three-phase urementis shown in Figure 23. The core holder, which has ports for differentialpressure is controlledwith a Proporallows rapid retrievalof the core. Temperature measurements, tional Controller connectedto a heatingtape wrappedaroundthe core holder. In order to with pumps, fluids are injectedby applying eliminatepulsationof flow normally associated gas pressure relief valves. Solenoid on top of the fluid in a tank equippedwith appropriate valves and level controllersmaintain a constanthead of fluid in the supply tanks. Filters are provided in the supply lines of each phasebeing injectedinto the core holder. Check valves preventbackflow of each of the three phases.A cross sectionof the core holder is shown in Figure 24. balance,electricalresistivitymeasurement sysAuxiliary equipmentincludesan accurate transducer, cylinders,compressed tem, level controller,chart recorder,differentialpressure air and regulators,and a humidity oven.
r32
D I F F E R E N T I AP LRESSURE PORTS
ANNULAR
<-._
2"
P R ES S U R E PORT
rO N cv)
-19"
FIGURE 24.
-1.125>
+1JJ\
Diagram of a core holder.
VII. PRACTICALCONSIDERATIONS FOR LABORATORYTESTS

The literature cited contains a large amount of information on factors affecting the.laboratory investigationof relative permeability.The following listing, however, cites iome practicalconsiderations that have not been widely discussed in the literature: l. If a pump is used to inject fluids into the core, the packingmaterialshouldpreferably be Teflon@.Most other packing materialscontain silicon and carbon which may dissolvein injected fluids and affect the wettability of the core. When brine is used as one of the fluids, all metal parts of the systemshould be of stainless steel. One-eighth-in.tubing offers excellenthandlingcharacteristics. Tygon tubing is recommended if the pressure is not too high. Most electronic differential pressuretransducershave good linearity and hysteresis characteristics; however,if possible,the transducer shouldbe recalibrated at leastonce per month. While changingpressures on the liquid storage tanks, it is importantnot to exceedthe backpressure rating of the solenoidvalves. Every effort should be made to ensure l00%osaturationof the wetting phase before startinginjection of the nonwettingphase. In a steady-state experiment, input flow rate should equal the output flow rate for each phase.In many cases,this condition is tediousto achieve. Some extraneous material may be noticed in the output lines. It must be determined whether the particles are fines from the test sampleor bacterial matter. A bactericide may be used with caution not to alter either the wettability or the resistivity of the core. Often the resistivity meter utilizes chamoisleathercontactsat either end of the core holder. The contacts should be kept immersed in brine to prevent changesin the readings. It has been noticed that the position of the outlet tubes going into the measuring cylinders affects the pressuredifferential readings.It is recommended that the tubing outlet be kept at the same level as the core holder to eliminate gravitational effects.
2.
3.
4. 5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
r33
FIGURE 25.
Comparisonof three-phase oil relative permeabilitydeterminations.
10.
Gas in the transducer lines seriouslyaffectspressure differentialreadings.The transducer should be bled of gas at frequentintervals. I l. Every effort should be made to eliminateend effectsas described by Batycky et a1.22 12. If possible, the wetting characteristics of the core should be frequently monitored during the relative permeability experiments.The centrifugemethod23 may be employed for monitoring wettability.
VIII. COMPARISON OF MODELS The following sectionpresents a comparisonof some of the modelsdiscussed earlier. The equationof Corey et al.2 for three-phase k,,,valuesis valid for a systemin which oil is displacedby a gas. Donaldsonand DeanTobtainedthree-phase k..,valuesfollowing the same displacementmechanism.Thus, we have an opportunity to observehow well the equation of Corey et al.2 fits data provided by other workers. Three-phase oil relative permeability valuescalculated by the equation of Coreyet al.2werecompared with Donaldson and Dean's data. The isopermsobtainedare shown in Figure 25 along with Donaldsonand Dean's data as a basis for comparison.The Corey et al.2equationgives higher k,. values than those obtainedby Donaldsonand Dean. Isopermsby Corey et al3 are less concave towards l00%o oil saturation.Both methodsare in agreement in predictingthat the isoperms becomeconcavetoward l00Vo S" and decreasing S*. The Donaldsonet a1.23'2a data show k..,increasingup to an optimum S, value and then decreasing. This is evidentfor valuesof S" between30 and 6OVo on this Berea core. The Corey et al. correlationsgive isoperms which show k,o to increaseas S.,increases at the expense of S*. The discrepancy between the two methodsis larger at low S.,values. In the second comparison, data of Schneiderand Owens2s have been used to obtain
134
Nolen,s Model -o--<rMeihod of Naar & Wygal
FIGURE 26.
Comparisonof three-phase oil relativepermeabilitydeterminations.
isoperms by Nolen's modelreand by Naar and Wygal's correlation.r2 Few dataare available in the literature that show how the latter methodcompareswith experimentalvaluesor other correlations.Figure 26, however, provides such a comparison.Schneiderand Owens obtainedgas-oil drainagedata in the absence of connatewater; their oil-water imbibition data is for a water-wet system. Theoretically, the Dietrich and Bondorr8or the Nolen model should give the same results as Stone's second model, since gas-oil data used in this comparisonhave beenobtainedin the absence of connatewater, i.e., k.o"*equalsunity. As in the earlier comparison,the discrepancybetweenthe two methodsis evident at low S" values.Another point to note is the evidencethat k," depends only on Sovalues,especially at low S" in Naar and Wygal's correlations.There is a slight indication in both methods that k," isopermsbecomeconvex towards the l}OVo So apex at high S".
REFERENCES
l. Leverett, M. S. and Lewis, W.8., Steadyflow of gas-oil-watermixtures throughunconsolidated sands, T r a n s .A I M E , 1 4 2 . 1 0 7 . 1 9 4 1 . 2. Corey, A. T., Rathjens, C. H., Henderson, J. H., and Wyllie, M. R. J., Three-phase relativeperrneability, Trans. AIME, 201,349. 1956. 3 . R e i d , S . , T h e F l o w o f T h r e eI m m i s c i b l eF l u i d si n P o r o u s M e d i a , P h . D . t h e s i s ,U n i v e r s i t v of Birminsham. E n g l a n d1 9 5 6 . 4. Snell, R. W., Measurements of gas-phase saturationin a porous medium, "/. Inst. Pet., 45(428), 259, l 959. 5. Snell, R. W., Three-phase relative permeabilityin an unconsolidated sand, "/. Inst. Pet., 48(459), 80, t962.
135
6. Snell, R. W., The saturation history dependence of three-phase oil relativepermeability,J. Inst.pet.,59, 4 ' 7 1 .1 9 6 3 . 7. Donaldson, E. C. and Dean, G. W., Two- and Three-Phase RelativePermeabilityStudies,U.S. Bureou of Mines, Washingron,D.C. , #6826, 1966. 8. Sarem, A. M., Three-phase pet. Eng. relativepermeabilitymeasurements by unsteady-state methods,Soc.. J . . 9 . 1 9 9 .1 9 6 6 . 9. Saraf, D. N. and Fatt, I., Three-phase relative permeability measurement using a nuclear magnetic resonance technique for estimating f l u i d s a t u r a t i o ns ,or'. Pet. Eng. J.,9,235. 1967. 10. Wyllie' M. R. J. and Gardner, G. H. F., The generalized Kozeny-Carman equation,its applicationto problems of multi-phase f l o w i n p o r o u sm e d i a , W o r l d O i l , 1 4 6 , l 2 l . 1 9 5 8 . ll. Caudle, B. H., Slobod, R. L., and Brownscombe, E. R., Further developmentsrn the laboratory determination of relative permeability , Trans. AIME, 192. 145, l95l . 12. Naar, J. and Wygal, R. J., Three-phasi e m b i b i t i o nr e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t y ,S o < 'P . et. Eng. J., 12,254.
r96r.
13. Land, C. S., Calculation of imbibition relative permeability for two- and three-phase flow fiom rock properties,Soc. Pet. Eng. J., 6, 149, 1968. 14. Schneider, F. N. and Owens, W. W., Sandstone and carbonate two- and three-phase relativepermeabrlity c h a r a c t e r i s t i cS s ,o c . P e t . E n g . J . , 3 , 7 5 , 1 9 1 0 . 15. Van Spronsen, E., Three-Phase RelativePermeability Measurements Using the CentrifugeMethod. Society of Petroleum Engineers/Departme on f tE n e r g y ,T u l s a ,O k l a . , # 1 0 6 8 8 , 1 9 8 2 . 16. Stone,H. L., Estimation o f t h r e e - p h a sre , . P e t . T e c h . ,2 , 2 1 4 , 1 9 7 0 . e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t yJ 1 7 . S t o n e ,H . L . , E s t i m a t i o n o f three-phaserelativepermeabilityandresidualoild Ja .t oa f ,C a n . P e t . T e c h n o l . , t2, 53, t913. 18. Dietrich' J. K. and Bondor, P. 8., Three-phase oilrelative permeability models,paperSPE 6044 presenred at the 5lst Annual Fall TechnrcalConference and Exhibition of the SPE, New Orleans. 1976. 19. Molina, N. N., A systematic approach to the relativepermeabilityproblemsin reservoirsimulation,paper SPE 9234 presented at the 55th Annual Fall TechnicalConference and Exhibition of the SPE, Dallas, 1980. 20. Donaldson, E. C. and Kayser, M.8., Three-Phase Fluid Flow in PorousMedia. DOE/BETCilC-8)t4. r e p o r tp u b l i s h e d b y t h e U . S . D e p a r t m e no t f E n e r g y .B a r t l e s v i l l eO , kla., April. 1981. 21. Manjnath, A. and Honarpour, M. M., Investigationof three-phase relative permeability, SPE 12915 presented at the Rocky Mountain RegionalMeeting of the SPE, Casper,May 20-23, 1984. 22. Batycky, J. P., McCaffery, F. G., Hodgous, P. K., and Fisher, D. 8., Interpreting capillary pressures androckwettingcharacteristicsfromunsteady-statedisplacementmeasureP me etn t sn ,g so r. '. .E .J ,6,296, t 9 8 l. 23. Donaldson, E. C., Thomas, R. D., and Lorenz, P. 8., Wettabilitydetermination and its ef-fect on recovery e f f i c i e n c y ,S o < 'P . et. Eng. J., 3, 13, 1969. 24. Donaldson, E. C. and Dean, G. W., Two- and Three-Phase RelativePermeability Studies,U.S. Bureau of Mines, WashingtonD , .C., #6826. 1966. 25. Schneider, F. N. and Owens, W. W., Sandstone and carbonate two- and three-phase relativepermeability c h a r a c t e r i s t i cS s ,o r ' .P e t . E n s . J . , 3 , 7 5 , 1 9 1 0 . 26. Fayers, F. J. and Matthews, J. D., Evaluationof normalizedStone'smethodsfor estimatingthree-phase . o r ' .P e t . E n g . J . , 4 . 2 2 4 , 1 9 8 4 . r e l a t i v ep e r m e a b i l i t i e s S
r37
APPENDIX SYMBOLS
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
A A, a B b C F g h I k L m N n P
a
q R r S
s*
SL
T Z
ct
p
0 \ f.r
o
0 .1,
area constant adhesiontension materialconstant formation volume factor constant materialconstant constant fraction gravitationalacceleration thickness injectivity resistivityindex permeability length exponent number of barrelsof oil exponent pressure volume volumetric rate radius resistivity radius saturation distance in directionof flow reducedsaturation total liquid saturation time velocity vertical coordinate constant constant angle lithology factor viscosity surfaceor interfacial tension porosity immobile saturation
Subscripts : absolute a av : average - critical c : capillary cw : connatewater : displacement D : displacingphase d de : immobile displacingphase - equilibrium e : external(radius) : effective : free f :gas g - initial i : index number : irreducible imb : imbibition irr : irreducible : liquid L LR : residualliquid : minimum m mf : mud filtrate : nonwetting n :oil o : measured at 1007oS* (resistivity) ob : trappedoil : produced p - relative r : residual - solution s SL : total liquid STD : standard condition : total T - trapped t : water w : well wt : wetting xo : flushed zone

Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoir PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoir PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RelativePermeability of Reservoirs Petroleum

...... 15 .......15 .. ' 15 .....16 ...... 16 . . . . . ' . 19 . . . . . . 20

Chapter I MEASUREMENT OF ROCK RELATIVE PERMEABILITY

METHODS II. STEADY-STATE

Three-section core assembly.8

and Q.i ^ Fr" dL ,n -d Pn:=

>{ -i- ^ -o-

fnf low face

0 5 10 15 20 25 Distance from Outflow Face, cffi

dP.:dP.-dP*, These three equationsmay be combined to obtain

_ 9"U=\ / o : /Q*, Fr,*,

where dP"/dL is the capillary pressuregradient within the core. Since

dP. : dP. ds*, dS*, dL dL

/Q*, Fr*, - Q"p.\

Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs

't o I -o-o- -o--o-- :- -- : - J

Theoretical saturation gradient

Distance from Outflow Face, ctrl

Two-phase relative permeability apparatus.r5

PRESSURE GAS METER

OIL BURETTE FIGURE 5. Hafford relative permeability apparatus.e

initial injectivity (q*,/Ap) (q*,/Ap) at start of injection

IV. CAPILLARYPRESSURE METHODS

where S, is the total liquid saturation.

Relative Permeabiliy of Petroleum Reservoirs

SPEEDDISK SPEED SET POINT

Automated centrifuge system.28

VI. CALCULATION FROM FIELD DATA

Calculation of gas-oil relative permeability values from production data.

Similarly, the rate of oil flow in the same system is

Thus, the relative permeability ratio is given by k" _ ( R o- R . ) & - ! !

S.: (t- too,) *,t-

l5 Chapter 2 TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY

AND LEAS II. RAPOPORT

: (ti k,*,(min) - j; )'

IV. FATT, DYKSTRA,AND BURDINE

l/P"'], (cm Hg)-t

Area from 0 to S*, in.2

100 90 80 '70 60 s0 40 30 20 ' "

4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.7 7.s 8.7 13.0

0.0156 0.0110 0.0080 0.0060 0.0046 0.0033 0.0024 0.00 15 0.0005

100.0 70.0, 49.2b 33.8 22.1 13.3 6.1 2.7 0.4

Fatt and Dykstra found good agreementwith observeddata when b : Equation 5 to

9 I | 7 Pol (cm Hg) 6 5 4 3 2 I

as a function of water saturation. Capillary pressure

r60 r50 r40 r30 t20

AND GARDNER V. WYLLIE, SPRANGLER,

Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs

o WYLLIE ond SPANGLER

Reciprocalof (capillary pressure)r as a function of saturationfor normalized

k,* (r-r+" _ S*,/ )' !Y or",r3

VI. TIMMERMAN,COREY,AND JOHNSON

Imbibition Process: Wetting-Phase Injection Curve

Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs

k.r:(l-S".)2x(l-S3") and they are related through

Relative Permeabilitv of Petroleum Reservoirs

Sg, %, at krn /kro=0.01

+;-q*: | + (s*), (l - s*),

Sg, %, at krg/kro of O.O01

o.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 Sg

VII. WAHL. TORCASO. AND WYLLIE

: +(o.o43s .l,) + o.4ss6

Relative Permeabilin of Petroleum Reservoirs

_ 9"U=\ / o : /Q, Fr,,

dP. : dP. ds, dS, dL dL

/Q, Fr, - Q"p.\

initial injectivity (q,/Ap) (q,/Ap) at start of injection

+;-q: | + (s), (l - s*),

k., : later modified to k,t : and

: 0.s37s2 k,e (jil'(ff-o': 'sossffik'gts,,,*t