0 views

Original Title: Soution 2-1 Compressibility Effects

Uploaded by mhuf89

- Module 4 Permeability.pdf
- RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESERVOIR PRODUCTIVITY AND PORE PRESSURE DROP
- 26 Properties of Reservoir Rock
- Yardley 2000
- pete review
- El Reciclaje de Valor Añadido de Residuos de Construcción de Madera
- Chapter 19
- Loke_elect_tutorial.doc
- A009-T43GMSR-WellConstrainedSeismic
- Presentation 1
- SCA 2006-16
- Assignment-Material Balance Equation (2).pdf
- Abstract Lab 6
- Konduktivitas termal
- Petroleum Production Systems_Economides
- PETSOC-09-07-18 Gas Condensate reservoir performance.pdf
- Past Year Exam
- 781 Prokhorenko
- View Contentbb
- ViewFreeArticle.aspx.pdf

You are on page 1of 10

ROCK PROPERTIES

Given the following data from 2 rock samples, determine the behavior of the porosity and permeability

as functions of reservoir pressure.

Rock compressibility is normally calculated as the slope of the tangent to the pore volume versus net

overburden pressure curve. However in material balance calculations, the pressure drop is

calculated from initial pressure to current pressure conditions. Therefore, rock compressibility

can be expressed by relating the change in pore volume that occurs from initial pressure conditions

Note: The reservoir is at 15,000 feet of depth. The original reservoir pressure is 14,000 psi.

osity and permeability

sure drop is

compressibility

pressure conditions

Pore Volume (cc) versus Hydrostatic Confining Pressure

400 1000 1500 2000

Sample 1

f init = 30.8% (@400 psi) 16.943 16.716 16.631 16.55

Sample 3

f init = 27.4% (@400 psi) 15.536 15.312 15.236 15.163

1500 2000 2500

Sample A K= 310 278 257

Sample B K= 71.9 64.4 59.5

Sample C K= 638 580 542

Sample D K= 1170 1107 1061

Sample E K= 2178 2009 1931

Sample F K= 400 359 332

atic Confining Pressure

2500 3000 4000 6000

3000 4000 6000

243 227 215

56.2 52.4 49.7

516 484 460

1028 986 947

1885 1810 1712

314 294 278

Hydrostatic Confining Stress (psi)

Confining stress (psi) 400 1000 1500 2000 2500

Reservoir Presure (psi) 14600 14000 13500 13000 12500

Pore Volume (cc) 16.943 16.716 16.631 16.55 16.471

Delta PV 0.227 0.312 0.393 0.472

Delta PV * .62 0.14074 0.19344 0.24366 0.29264

Adjusted PV 16.80226 16.74956 16.69934 16.65036

Cf =Delta PV/PV/Delta P 6.3E-06 6.1E-06 6.0E-06

% reduction in PV 1 0.9968635172 0.993874634 0.990959549

Sample 3

f init = 27.4% 15.536 15.312 15.236 15.163 15.147

Delta PV 0.224 0.3 0.373 0.389

Delta PV * .62 0.13888 0.186 0.23126 0.24118

Adjusted PV 15.39712 15.35 15.30474 15.29482

Cf =Delta PV/PV/Delta P 6.1E-06 6.0E-06 4.4E-06

% reduction in PV 1 0.9969396874 0.994000177 0.9933559

= given data

= pore volume that would have been measured in a Uniaxial lab test

Porosity fraction of Initial Porosity

Porosity Reduction

fining Stress (psi)

1.01

3000 4000 6000

1

12000 11000 9000 0.99

16.393 16.237 15.939 0.98

0.96

0.341 0.43772 0.62248

0.95

16.602 16.50528 16.32052 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 15000

6.0E-06 5.9E-06 5.7E-06 Reservoir Pressure

0.988081365 0.982324997 0.971328857

15.075 14.933 14.708 7.0E-06

Rock Compressibility

4.0E-06

15.25018 15.16214 15.02264

3.0E-06

4.8E-06 5.1E-06 4.9E-06 2.0E-06

0.990456657 0.984738704 0.975678568 1.0E-06

8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 15000

Reservoir Pressure

y Reduction

Row 14

sample 2

sample 3

essure

pressibility Problem

sample 1

sample 2

sample 3

Pressure

Permeability Data

Reservoir Pressure 14000 13500 13000 12500 12000 11000

Sample A K= 342 310 278 257 243 227

Sample B K= 79.4 71.9 64.4 59.5 56.2 52.4

Sample C K= 696 638 580 542 516 484

Sample D K= 1233 1170 1107 1061 1028 986

Sample E K= 2347 2178 2009 1931 1885 1810

Sample F K= 441 400 359 332 314 294

% of K at Pi Sample A 100% 91% 81% 75% 71% 66%

% of K at Pi Sample B 100% 91% 81% 75% 71% 66%

% of K at Pi Sample C 100% 92% 83% 78% 74% 70%

% of K at Pi Sample D 100% 95% 90% 86% 83% 80%

% of K at Pi Sample E 100% 93% 86% 82% 80% 77%

% of K at Pi Sample F 100% 91% 81% 75% 71% 67%

Permeability data

6000 2500

9000

215 2000

49.7

Permeability

947 sample B

1000 sample C

1712

sample D

278 500

sample E

sample F

9000 0

63% 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000

63% Reservoir Pressure

66%

77%

73%

63% Permeability loss due to pressure reduction

100%

Permeability as a % of K at Pi

95%

90%

Sample A

85% Sample B

80% Sample C

75% Sample D

Sample E

70%

Sample F

65%

60%

9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 15000

Reservoir Pressure

Row 7

sample B

sample C

sample D

sample E

sample F

Sample A

Sample B

Sample C

Sample D

Sample E

Sample F

- Module 4 Permeability.pdfUploaded byMusic Resources
- RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESERVOIR PRODUCTIVITY AND PORE PRESSURE DROPUploaded byari_si
- 26 Properties of Reservoir RockUploaded byWahyudi Mufti
- Yardley 2000Uploaded byElshan Aliyev
- pete reviewUploaded byAnonymous gBUz44w
- El Reciclaje de Valor Añadido de Residuos de Construcción de MaderaUploaded byJohn Ramírez
- Chapter 19Uploaded byPedro Ramirez
- Loke_elect_tutorial.docUploaded byDjayus Yus
- A009-T43GMSR-WellConstrainedSeismicUploaded byIng. Luis Alberto García Córdova
- Presentation 1Uploaded bySagar Dadhich
- SCA 2006-16Uploaded byFalza Wihdany
- Assignment-Material Balance Equation (2).pdfUploaded byhari6622
- Abstract Lab 6Uploaded byadib assoli
- Konduktivitas termalUploaded bykomang
- Petroleum Production Systems_EconomidesUploaded byShengyun Zhan
- PETSOC-09-07-18 Gas Condensate reservoir performance.pdfUploaded byEduardo Ustarez
- Past Year ExamUploaded byVictor Ike
- 781 ProkhorenkoUploaded byDemian Pereira
- View ContentbbUploaded bySalman Haider
- ViewFreeArticle.aspx.pdfUploaded byAlejandro Vargas Calderon
- Producing gas oil ratioUploaded byEddy C. Embanglian
- IPA05-G-093 _p381_390Uploaded byNarendra Surya Aditya Krisna
- 130905662 Material Balance EquationUploaded byAbdelazim Mohamed
- Preparacion Pva YING WANUploaded byJonathan R. Sierra
- Chapter 03 Hole ProblemsUploaded byRobert
- Achieving the Desired WindowUploaded byMehrnoosh Aref
- Tavleoppgaver3.docUploaded byWisnu Adi Kurniawan
- ASSESSMENT OF EFFECT OF RICE HUSK ASH ON BURNT PROPERTIES OF BADEGGI CLAYUploaded byIJAR Journal
- reservoir ptrsentation.pptxUploaded bySayed Raheel Ahmed Shah
- PCB 3013 Chp 2 IntroductionUploaded byLeng Chai

- Hpt-snl Technology- Redefining Production LoggingUploaded bymhuf89
- How to Pay ZkataUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 12-5 Combination DriveUploaded bymhuf89
- Solution 12-1 Water Drive Gas ReservoirsUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 12-2.pptUploaded bymhuf89
- 21_Prospect Evaluation.pdfUploaded byAnonymous 3TyM2U3U4e
- Problem 12 2Uploaded bymhuf89
- Well_Testing.pdfUploaded bymhuf89
- Solution 12-2 Comp Dr Res.(Prob in Lecture)Uploaded bymhuf89
- Solution 12-3 Pressure Effects on WaterfloodingUploaded bymhuf89
- ndx_iqbalUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 12-3 Pressure Effects on WaterfloodingUploaded bymhuf89
- Chapter 5-Formation EvaluationUploaded byPriozky Pratama Purba
- Solution 12-4 Gas Cap ExpansionUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 12-4 Gas Cap ExpansionUploaded bymhuf89
- Solution 2-3 West Sparkle Reservoir DescriptionUploaded bymhuf89
- Solution Procedure for 12-4 Gas Cap Expansion ProblemUploaded bymhuf89
- W1V4 - Introduction to EP - HandoutUploaded bySaraCaballero
- Solution 2-2 Relative PermeabilityUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 2-2 Relative PermeabilityUploaded bymhuf89
- W1V3 - Actors & Challenges - HandoutUploaded byRahmat Hidayat
- Production LoggingUploaded byMuhammad Nur Ali Akbar
- Problem 2-3 West Sparkle Reservoir DescriptionUploaded bymhuf89
- W1V2 - Energy Commodity Markets - HandoutUploaded bySergio Andrés Rodríguez
- SPE-177729-MS Improving Mega Project Economics through the Use of early production.pdfUploaded bymhuf89
- 1st Qtr 2015 MpclUploaded bymhuf89
- Soution 2-1 Compressibility EffectsUploaded bymhuf89
- Problem 12-1 Water Drive Gas ReservoirsUploaded bymhuf89
- W1V1 - Energy Scene - Handout.pdfUploaded byDanilson Paulo Melicio