OTC 21152

Optimizing Pressure Differential to Improve the Recovery of Viscous Oil

Chunming Zhao, Lizhen Ge, CNOOC; Yanchun Su, Liwen Fang, Qinghong Yang, Tingli Li, CNOOC

Copyright 2011, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 25 May 2011.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
Using big pump to enhanced liquid is a important workover in the developing of the complicated fluvial facies viscosity
reservoirs, especially in medium-high water cut period, the reasonable magnitude of enhanced liquid and the regularity of
increasing oil production are probed for different type reservoirs by numerical simulations. Based on this study, some wells
are selected to do field tests, which have resulted in good effects of increasing oil production, providing a theoretical
guidance and abundant experiences for effectively developing offshore heavy oilfields with different types of reservoirs.
On the base of the numerical simulation and the actual field tests, others oil field with bottom water / edge water / injection
water/rigid water can use the pressure differential optimization conclusions to improve the oil production.
A number of medium-high water cut wells were optimized to enhanced liquid in QHD32-6 field after identifying the using
big pump conditions. These wells display significant higher oil production with big pump and slower increase of water cut.
Now the success fate is 92%, the incremental oil rate from 10m3 to 65m3 , the cumulative oil is 15104m3.
The simulation and the field test verified the pressure differential is different in different oil type reservoir, for QHD 32-6 oil
field, the pressure differential is about 2MPa in injection water reservoirs, 2.5MPa in edge water reservoirs, 2.5MPa to 3MPa
in bottom water reservoir, and possible pressure differential under capable disposal in rigid water reservoirs.
Both simulations and field data demonstrate that the medium-high water cut wells can improve the increasing oil by
applicable big pump under the pressure differential optimization, the OOIP, the energy, the oil viscosity and the
heterogeneity are also have great impact on the pressure differentia optimization. Now the QHD32-6 oil field big pump
workover have significantly improved oil production, which provides the theoretical and production data for development
optimization of different oil type reservoirs in Bohai Bay.
1 Introduction
QHD32-6 [1] oil field is located in the center area of the Bohai Bay, with 20m average water depth. It is a joint venture
between China National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC) and Chevron. The Oil Field geographically is divided into 3 areas:
North, South, and West area. The main producing formations are Ming (Nm) and Guantao (Ng). Nm formation is fluvial
depositional reservoirs with meandering channels, multiple sand systems and complex oil/water systems, while Ng is a
fluvial sand deposition with braided channels and strong bottom water.
Fluid type is typical heavy oil characterized by the following properties. In the reservoir condition oil has high density
(0.903-0.926 g/cm3), and high viscosity (43-260mpa.s), and low soluble gas/oil ratio (13-24m3/m3). Reservoir porosity of Nm
is 0.25-0.45, and permeability of Nm is 100-11487 10-3m2, and porosity of Ng is 0.25-0.43, and permeability of Ng is
500-1844310-3m2. The difference of formation pressure and bubble pressure is about 2-5MPa. There are complex oil
water contacts in the reservoir.
QHD32-6 Oil Field was put into the production in 2001-2002 by stages. The average water cut of the whole field is 81% by
the end of 2008, with average 7.6% of recovery factor. Now the field has edge water and injects water, and some zones have
bottom water problems. How to get good production in medium-high water cut period is very important, in fact, there are
many workover that we can do, including water flooding, infill wells, water-shut off and so on, except for those methods.

OTC 21152

Using big pump to enhanced liquid is an important workover in the developing of the complicated fluvial facies heavy oil
reservoirs when the oil field water cut more than 80%.
Through the work done in this paper we were able to identify the timing for increasing pump rate by water displacing oil
physical experiment result, the water inflow mechanisms by analytical methods, the optimum drawdown by simulation and
field production test.
The water inflow mechanisms were further validated by using analytical methods for the fluid tracking and hence
recommend appropriate remedial actions with greater confidence.
The approaches taken towards production optimization were different for the bottom water, edge water, waterflooding
support, rigid water support reservoirs as is detailed in this study. The production responses from the proposed wells are also
shown. At the end, we present the summary and some conclusions from this study.
2 Feasibility study of using big pump
The requirements to implement big ESP:
Sufficient formation energy;
Pay zones supply enough fluids [2]. QHD32-6
oilfield was divided into North, South and West three areas, the total geology reserve is 1.7 108m3, it has the edge water
support, bottom water support, waterflooding support. The North area has been injected water for 7 years, result with the
formation pressure steady increase; the energy edge water of South area is strong, the saddle area has been injected water for
6 years, the lower area pressure is steady increasing, the energy bottom water of West area is abundant, the decline of
formation pressure is slow. All in all, the big ESP could be installed in QHD32-6 when the water cut rising while the oil rate
decreasing.
2.1 The mechanism to optimize heavy oil recovery by big pump
To simplify the model, suppose the two-phase water & oil flow physical model as: only the water and oil be considered in
the whole flow process is steady flow. The injection
reservoir;
flat radial flow, the flow accord with Darcy Law [3];
water drive reservoir (1-b) and edge water drive reservoir (1-a) is similar, use edge water reservoir as an example, the bottom
water drive reservoir and rigid water is similar, use the bottom water drive reservoir as an example. Due to the flow ratio of
oil and water is big, the edge water slowly drive to close the well bore under the condition of low production rate and low
draw down; when the production draw down is high, the edge water will move fast toward to the well bore along with low
resistance channels, result with water break through.
When the edge water close to the wellbore, two flow conditions exists in the zone: The 1st condition is hw part, this part is oil
water two-phase flow, belong to edge water drive; the 2nd condition is ho part, the distribution saturation of oil and water
dominates the mechanism of vadose. Hence the well production calculation was separated two parts, base on the flat radial
flow production formula, the expression is:

542.87 KK ro ( S w )ho p 542.87 KK ro ( S w )ho p

Qo = [1 f w ( S w )] Q
+
Re

ln( e ) + S
ln( ) + S

B
B
o
o
o
o

Rw

Rw

(1)

From formula (1):when the water cut exceed 80, the mainly production is from ho, so increase the production draw down
is useful way to increase the well production rate.
For the bottom water drive reservoir(1-c), due to the oil water flow ratio is high, when the production draw down exceed the
critical draw down, the oil water contact move up in the reservoir uniformity, slowness and wide range, and form steady
water cone under the well bore. With the production increasing, the water cone high on original oil and water contact grow
up, till reach to certain production, the water cone become unstable, the bottom water enter into well bore. Two flow
conditions exist around the well bore: 1st condition is a part, hemisphere flow, due to the flow ratio of water and oil if big,
most of flow are water phase flow, oil phase is small, the oil production could be ignore;2nd condition is ho part, the
distribution saturation of oil and water dominate the mechanism of vadose. Hence the production is dominated by Ho part,
the expression:

Qo =

542.87 KK ro ( S w )ho p
R

o Bo ln( e ) + S
Rw

In formula (1), (2)

(2)

OTC 21152

Q Pump rate, production rate,m3/d;

H Thickness of pay zone, m;
a None perforation height of Bottom water reservoir or water zone highness, m;
Re The distance between well bore and edge water, m;
Rw radius of well bore, m;
K Absolute permeability of core,10-3m2;
Kro, Krw Oil phase and water phase relative permeability at different water saturation Sw, none unit;
o,w Viscosity of underground oil and underground water, mPa.s;
pProduction draw down, MPa.
After water break through in edge water drive reservoir, the water cut will increase quickly, the production rate drop
dramatically. In order to keep the production stable, as per the formula (1) and (2) have to increase the draw down. The 2-a
is related curve of production rate and water cut at different pump rate (production draw down) in edge water drive reservoir,
2-b is related curve of production rate and water cut at different pump rate in the bottom water drive reservoir. From the
drawing conclusion:
1) Under certain pump rate, the oil production dropping with the water cut increasing. When the water cut is same, the
oil production increasing when draw down increasing;
2) At high water cut period, increase pump rate could gain more production rate, also could produce same volume oil,
the pump for bottom water drive reservoir should bigger than pump for edge water drive reservoir, increasing the
pump rate could uplift the production, and improve the heavy oil & edge drive reservoir current production
situation;
3) When use big ESP to lift the fluids, need to consider the timing, flow rate, and lifting period. When the water cut
climbing up, we need to evaluate the change of the draw down ,control the timing to pump the well. Under the
different water cut the pump rate is different, the daily oil increasing is different, the pumping rate is decided by the
water cut range;
4) Increasing fluids to increase the oil production is periodic, under certain water cut range the pumping rate is fixed.
When the water cut continue increasing, in order to keep the production, have to increase the pumping rate.
2.2 Timing for increasing pump rate
The physical experiment express of QHD 32-6 water drive oilfield: With the edge water, bottom driving, the oil and water
contact move to close of well bore. The water saturation in reservoir keeps increasing. The relative permeability of oil
decrease dramatically [4], the relative permeability of water increase rapidly. Since the viscosity of oil is high, the viscosity of
water is low, the flow ratio of oil and water is high, so the water cut increase quickly, indicate in schematic 3.
Due to the flow ration of oil and water is high, the water cut increase fast at water cut less than 80% area, with the water cut
increase, the water saturation increase rapidly, the relative permeability of oil decrease in short time; at water cut exceed 80%
area, the water cut climb up slow. Therefore, the timing of pumping rate should be increased when the water cut exceed 80%.
2.3 Optimized operating parameters of different reservoirs in simulation
A commercial, three phases, three dimensional, black oil simulator, Eclipse 100 is used to simulate the four different oil types
optimization parameters of the pump ,wells location and predict productivity by controlled operating parameters in reservoir.
After history match of numerical simulation model in QHD32-6 oilfield, North model is used to optimize waterflooding
water support reservoirs, western model is used to optimize bottom water support reservoirs, South model is used to
optimize edge water support reservoirs and Guantao model for the Rigid water support . Referenced the drawdown of actual
well test, gave the controlled condition and assigned different P value of Geocelluar model, i.e., 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0,
3.5(Table 1), use the producers of the fields. Then we can get the optimization parameters of the pump.
1) Waterflooding oil reservoir
The representative oil field is North area, In the end of the 2002, 5 producers converted to injectors, after 6 months ,
the water breakthrough in some wells ,in the simulation ,we give some parameters(table 1) to run the model, The
predicted time of simulation model is 20 years. (Figure 4-5), So the optimized drawdown of the Waterflooding oil
reservoir wells is recommended 2.0MPa nearby.
2) Bottom water support reservoirs
Based on the existing West model, 52 wells produce the edge water reservoirs, most of them are vertical producers.
after 1 to 3 months, bottom water are conning, so the water cut rising and the oil rate decreasing. In order to get
more oil, an effective workover is using big pump. The parameters (table 1) show the controlled condition, The
predicted time of simulation model is 20 years. According to Fig. 6-7 from the curve, While the P of producers lie
in 2.5-3.0MPa, the cumulative oil reach maximum, and at the recovery ratio is 15.8%, it is 3.0MPa, the oil recovery
rate is1.06, almost same as the 2.5MPa condition. So the optimized drawdown of the bottom water support
reservoir is recommended 2.5-3.0MPa.

OTC 21152

3)

4)

Edge water support

In South area, there are 64 wells produce the Nm1, an edge water reservoir, in the model , after 20 years, when P
of producers at 2.0MPa, the oil recovery ratio arrived at the maximum of 16%, so in edge water reservoirs, the
drawdown recommend 2.0-2.5MPa(Figure 8).
Rigid water support
Ng model, it has a large water sand body, and there are 5 horizontal wells totally in Ng reservoir, so in Ng, from the
Figure 9, we can choose the Drawdown between 2.5-3.0MPa.

3 Field Application and Results

In QHD32-6 oil field ,on the base of the research, till the end of 2009, total of 52 medium to high water cut wells went
through big pumps optimization process to increase production, these wells have significant higher oil production and slower
increase of water cut. Up to now, the success ratio is 92%, the single wells incremental oil rate is from 10m3/d to 74m3/d,
and the cumulative incremental oil of the 52 wells is 15x104m3. We give some examples of different water support reservoirs,
Figure 10-11 show us the results after using big pump in edge water support reservoir, the wells which near the edge water
(line1, 2), we use the dropdown 2.5MPa, but the wells which are in line 3 and 4, the optimization dropdown is 2.0MPa when
the water cut arrived at 80%, the incremental oil rate is from 10m3/d to 60m3/d of the edge water reservoir.
The Figure 12 show us the results after using big pump in rigid water support reservoir, QHD32-6-B27 produce Ng, when it
on line ,we use the pump is 80m3/d, after 1 month, the bottom water conning, the oil rate was 18.7m3/d,and the liquid left
135m3/d, the water cut was 86.1%, in order to get more oil , in march,2008, we used big pump1000m3/d , the oil rate arrived
at 92.7m3/d , and the incremental oil was 74m3/d.
According to the research, we used optimized drawdown in different type heavy oil reservoirs during medium to high water
cut stages from 2005 to 2009 year. And different oil reservoirs have different effect(Fig.13), from the statistics, we can see
the waterflooding support and edge water support can get more incremental oil than bottom water support reservoirs when
the wells using big pump. But when big pump is used in the bottom water reservoirs, the expiration date is longer than that of
other types of reservoir in QHD32-6 oil field.
4 Summary and Conclusions
Severe water coning/cresting is expected when producing oil from a strong bottom water drive reservoir. Edge water
reservoir, and waterflooding reservoir, the main objective of this paper is to improve well production performance after water
cut rising to 80%. We research from the water breakthrough mechanism of different reservoirs , then use simulation model,
and investigated the different types wells to get field test data, from the analysis, we revealed that the pressure differential
optimization are different for different type of oil reservoirs, for QHD32-6 oil field , the pressure differential is about 2.0MPa
for reservoirs through water injection; 2.0-2.5MPa for edge water support reservoirs , 2.5MPa to 3.0MPa in bottom water
reservoirs ,in rigid water support reservoirs, pressure differential should be maximized within facility limitation. This newly
developed techniques and processes in QHD32-6 oil field can be applied in all similar oil fields of Bohai Bay.
1) With water cut increasing, the production draw down decreasing, the oil production reducing. Use big pump to
uplift the fluid, increase the production draw down to increase the production rate. This is the effective method to
improve the offshore oil field development.
2) QHD32-6 oilfield has the qualification to uplift the fluids from underground, different reservoir type with different
characteristics for production uplift, at same water cut range reservoir, the edge water reservoir and injection water
reservoir for production uplifting is better than bottom water reservoir.
3) Use big pump to uplift the production rate need reasonable timing, rate and periodic, according to the reservoir
drive type, reservoir anisotropy [5], the lay out of formation layer and water cut for optimization.
4) In QHD32-6 oil field, based on the big pump uplifting studying combine the simulation analysis, carried out well
optimization one by one and got good result, it provides theory support and production experiences for offshore
heavy oil recovery.
References
[1] Lizhen Ge, Peng Zhang: The Analysis for QHD32-6 Water Cut Increasing, China Offshore Oil, 17(6), 2005, p394-397.
[2] Shiduo Hong: Physical Foundation of Reservoir, Oil Industry Press, February 1993.
[3] Jiali Ge: Theory of Modern Reservoir Dynamic of fluids through porous Media Oil Industry Press, February 2003.
[4] Naiju Wang: The Conclusion of China Reservoir Development Model, Oil Industry Press, 1999.
[5] Yongshen Chen: Reservoir Flowing Rheology, Oil Industry Press, October 1988.

OTC 21152

Table 1: The parameters Comparison of different reservoirs in the simulation model

Injector limited conditions

Type of
reservoirs

Waterflooding

Edge water
support

Bottom water
support

Rigid water
support

Producer
limited
conditions

fixed DD,
Pmin=6.0MPa

fixed DD,
Pmin=6.0MPa

fixed DD,
FPmin=6.0MPa

Prodction
time

Economic limited

IWR

IWR at
85%*FMP

from 0.6,0.8,1.0
to 1.2

1.0

0.98

oil rate=5m /d,

water cut=98%

from 0.6,0.8,1.0
to 1.2

1.0

0.98

oil rate=5m /d,

water cut=98%

1.0

oil rate=5m /d,

water cut=98%

0.98

fixed DD,
Pmin=6.0MPa

Edge water model

a

oil rate=5m /d,

water cut=98%

Injects water model

b

Liquid rate500m3/d

Water cut(%)

Liquid rate200m3/d
Liquid rate300m3/d

Liquid rate300m3/d

Liquid rate100m3 /d

oil rate(m /d)

oil rate(m /d)

Liquid rate200m3/d

1.5MPa
2.0MPa
2.5MPa
3.0MPa
1.5MPa
2.0MPa
2.5MPa
3.0MPa
1.5MPa
2.0MPa
2.5MPa
3.0MPa
3.5MPa
0.5MPa
1.0MPa
1.5MPa
2.0MPa
2.5MPa
3.0MPa

Bottom water model

c

Fig.1: Different types of heavy oil reservoirs model

Liquid rate100m3 /d

Drawdown

Liquid rate500m3/d

Water cut(%)

Fig.2: The oil production rate and water cut curve under different pump rate

OTC 21152

1.0

100

Kro
Krw
fw

80

0.6

60

0.4

40

0.2

20

fw(%)

Kro Krw

0.8

0.0

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Sw(%)

Fig.3: Core permeability curve of QHD32-6

1000

4 3

x10 m

900
800
700
600

1.5MPa

2.0MPa

2.5MPa

3.0MPa

500
2028

2027

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

cumulative oil production

1100

DATE

1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0

rate

Oil production

recovery

ratio

1.28
1.10
0.82

1.5MPa

0.95

2.0MPa

2.5MPa

22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14

Recovery ratio
%

Oil production rate

%

Fig.4: The relationship between cumulative oil and drawdown in North area

3.0MPa

x10 4 m 3

cumulative oil production

Fig.5: The relationship between oil production rate and recovery ratio according to P value in North area

DATE

Fig.6: The relationship between cumulative oil and drawdown in West area

Oil production rate

1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0

1.5MPa

1.06

1.10

3.0MPa

3.5MPa

0.97

0.85

0.69

recovery ratio

2.0MPa

2.5MPa

20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12

Recovery ratio
%

Oil production rate

%
%

OTC 21152

1100

4 3

x10 m

1000
900
800
700
600

1.5MPa

2.0MPa

2.5MPa

3.0MPa

500
2028

2027

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

cumulative oil production

Fig.7: The relationship between oil production rate and recovery ratio according to P value in West area

DATE

Fig.8: The relationship between cumulative oil and drawdown in South area

125
100

x104m3

cumulative oil production

150

75
50

0.5MPa
1.5MPa
2.5MPa

25

1.0MPa
2.0MPa
3.0MPa

0
2028

2027

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

DATE

Fig.9: The relationship between cumulative oil and drawdown in Ng

Line 12

Line 34
Fig.10: Well location map

OTC 21152

Line 12 wells dropdown =2.5MPa

Line 34 wells dropdown =2.0MPa

Fig.11: Production profile after using big pump in edge water support reservoir

1200
1450
1455

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

3200

3400

3600

3800

4000

Incremental oil
74m3/d

B27 Track

1460
ASL-m

1465
1470
1475
1480

11m

1485

OW C

1490

-1 4 8 4 m

1495

1500

Fig.12: QHD32-6-B27 production performance before and after the dropdown optimization

750

13

15

14

Rigid water support

1000
750

14

600

10

Incremental oil/increasing 100m3 liquid

expiration date

500

10 550

500
250

Expiration date
days

Incremental oil
3
m

20

0
Edge water

support

Bottom water

support

Waterflooding
water
Rigid

support
support

Fig.13: Incremental oil and expiration date in different oil reservoirs after using big pump in QHD32-6 oil field