Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163 – 174

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

A correlation approach for prediction of crude oil viscosities

A. Naseria,T, M. Nikazarb, S.A. Mousavi Dehghania
a
PVT Department, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Tehran, Iran
b
Chemical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Received 29 June 2004; received in revised form 10 February 2005; accepted 14 March 2005

Abstract

The role of reservoir fluid viscosity for reservoir evaluation in performance calculations, planning thermal methods of
enhanced oil recovery, evaluation of hydrocarbon reserves and designing production equipment and pipelines makes its
accurate determination necessary. Reservoir oil viscosity is usually measured isothermally at reservoir temperature. However, at
temperature other than reservoir temperature these data are estimated by empirical correlations. High dependency of oil
viscosity on fluid nature and fluid source causes the unique application of these correlations to special cases from which they
have been derived.
Here, based on Iranian oil reservoirs data; new correlations have been developed for prediction of dead, saturated and under-
saturated oil viscosities. These correlations have been derived using so many oil viscosity data. Validity and accuracy of these
correlations have been confirmed by comparing the obtained results of these correlations and other ones with experimental data
for so many Iranian oil samples. In contrast to other correlations which need so many specific parameters for oil viscosity
prediction, this type of correlations need only some field data which always are available. Checking the results of these
correlations shows that the obtained results of Iranian oil viscosities in this work are in agreement with experimental data
compared with other correlations.
D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Correlation; Viscosity data; PVT; Oil reservoir

1. Introduction surface facilities design and fluid flow in porous

Reservoir fluid properties form the basis of many
petroleum-engineering calculations. PVT data are
used in field reserve calculation, EOR processes,
T Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 21 2221586; fax: +98 21
6154854.
E-mail address: naseria@ripi.ir (A. Naseri).
0920-4105/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2005.03.008
media and pipelines.
Viscosity data in the petroleum industry are usually
obtained at reservoir temperature, which is a constant
value. However, viscosity data at temperatures other
than reservoir temperature and in cases where
laboratory data becomes unavailable are estimated
from empirical correlations. Sampling and viscosity
measurement costs are the main reasons for inacces-
sibility of these data at other temperatures.
164 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174

2.40
Above Pb the first type. As it can be seen in the results
Below Pb section for Iranian crude oils, the results of these
2.24 correlations were not in good agreement with
experimental data. Some of them have high errors
Oil Viscosity, c

in viscosity prediction. It seems that these behaviors

2.08
are expectable; this is due to high dependency of oil
viscosity on oil nature (heavy component content
1.92 and nature in crude oils) and source; as we know
all of these correlations are based on specific
regions/crude oils (Sutton and Farshad, 1990).
1.76 Using Iranian crude oil data in this work, new
correlations have been developed for prediction of
1.60 dead, saturated and under-saturated oil viscosity.
0 1040 2080 3120 4160 5200 The final correlations have been applied for about
Pressure, psia 222 real samples of Iranian oils. Comparing with
Fig. 1. Oil viscosity as a function of pressure.
other correlations and experimental data has
inspected the validity and accuracy of the proposed
correlations.

Generally it may be said that there are two main

types of correlation for oil viscosity prediction. The
first type is those that use oil field data that usually
are available, such as reservoir temperature, oil API
gravity, solution gas / oil ratio, saturation pressure and
pressure. The second type are empirical and/or semi-
empirical correlations which use some parameters
other than those used in the first type; such as
reservoir fluid composition, pour point temperature,
molar mass, normal boiling point, critical temper-
ature, and acentric factor of components (Lohrenz et
al., 1964; Little and Kennedy, 1968; Ahrabi et al.,
1987).
In this work at first the experimental data have
been checked with so many viscosity correlations of
2. Viscosity correlations review
A literature survey has indicated that empirical
viscosity correlations developed by classical regres-
sion techniques are divided into three major sections.
First, dead oil viscosity correlations, which are used
to estimate crude oil viscosity at atmospheric
condition (stock tank) as a function of stock tank
API gravity and reservoir temperature. Second,
saturated oil viscosity correlations that use usually
solution gas–oil ratio and dead oil viscosity to
estimate viscosity of oil reservoir at bubble point
pressure. The third type is under-saturated oil
viscosity correlations, which usually use saturated

Table 1
Statistical data for dead crude oil viscosity correlations
Correlations Beal Beggs and Glaso Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy This work
(Beal, 1946) Robinson (Glaso, 1980) (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo and Alikhan
(Beggs and (Kartoatmodjo (Elsharkawy
Robinson, and Schmidt, and Alikhan,
1975) 1994) 1999)
Source of the used oils US – North Sea Africa Data Bank Middle East Iran
API 52–10 58–16 48–20 48–32 59–14.4 48–20 44–17
Temperature 8F 220–100 295–70 300–50 306–100 320–80 300–100 295–105
Dead oil viscosity, Cp 188–0.8 – 39–0.6 0.6–4.8 586–0.5 0.6–33.7 54–0.75
Average relative error % 24.2 0.6 15.5
2.6
13.2
2.5 6.61
Average absolute error % – 13.5 22.1 – 39.6 19.3 7.77
 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174 165

Table 2
Statistical data for saturated oil viscosity correlations
Correlations Chew and Beggs and Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy and This work
Connaly Robinson (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo Alikhan (Elsharkawy
(Chew and (Beggs and (Kartoatmodjo and Alikhan, 1999)
Connally, 1959) Robinson, 1975) and Schmidt, 1994)
Source of the used oils US – Africa Data Bank Middle East Iran
Gas oil ratio SCF / STB 51–3544 2070–20 3533–13 572–2.3 3600–10 4116–255
Saturation Pressure, Pisa 5645–132 5265–132 6358–60 6054–14.7 100–3700 5900–420
Saturated oil viscosity, Cp 0.37–50 – 0.11–6.3 0.1–6.3 21–0.05 18.15– 0.11
Average relative error % –
1.8 2.4 0.1 2.8 1.2
Average absolute error % – 27.3 22.8 16.1 18.7 16.4

crude oil viscosity and pressure above the bubble
point to estimate viscosity of under-saturated oil
reservoirs. Fig. 1 shows a typical oil viscosity dia-
gram as a function of pressure at constant reservoir
temperature.
2.1. Dead oil viscosity correlations
The most popular empirical correlations that are
used for dead oil viscosity (stock tank) in petroleum
engineering are those developed by Beal (Beal,
1946), Beggs and Robinson (Beggs and Robinson,
1975), Glaso (Glaso, 1980), Labedi (Labedi, 1992)
and Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt (Kartoatmodjo and
Schmidt, 1994). Beal’s correlation (Beal, 1946) was
developed from crude oil data of California, Beggs
and Robinson’s correlation (Beggs and Robinson,
1975) was developed based on the crude oils of an
unknown location, Galso’s correlation was devel-
oped (Glaso, 1980) from the North Sea crude oils,
Labedi correlation (Labedi, 1992) has been pre-
sented for African crudes and finally Kartoatmodjo
and Schmidt correlation (Kartoatmodjo and
Schmidt, 1994) is based on a given data bank.
Recently, Elsharkawy and Alikhan (Elsharkawy and
Alikhan, 1999) have presented other empirical
correlations for estimating dead crude oil viscosity
for Middle East crudes. All of these correlations
have expressed dead oil viscosity (l od) as a
function of both oil API gravity and reservoir
temperature (see Appendix A). Usually, application
of dead oil viscosity correlations to crude oil of
different sources results in huge errors. This difference
is attributed to the difference in asphaltic, paraffinic
and/or mixed nature of the oils. Egbogah and Ng
(Egbogah and Ng, 1990) improved Beggs and
Robinson’s (Beggs and Robinson, 1975) correlation
by adding a new parameter, pour point temperature.
However, pour point temperature is neither reported in
any usual PVT report nor measured in the field.
Mehrotra and Svrcek (Mehrotra and Svrcek, 1988)
presented a one-parameter viscosity equation for
bitumen that was later extended by Mehrotra (Mehro-
tra, 1991) to predict the viscosity of light and medium

Table 3
Statistical data for under-saturated oil viscosity correlations
Correlations Beal Beggs and Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy and This work
(Beal, 1946) Vasquez (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo Alikhan (Elsharkawy
(Vasquez and (Kartoatmodjo and and Alikhan, 1999)
Beggs, 1980) Schmidt, 1994)
Source of the used oils US – Africa Data Bank Middle East Iran
Pressure above bubble point, Pisa 1515–5155 141–9515 – – 1287–10,000 1400–7000
Under-saturated oil viscosity, Cp 0.2–315 0.2–1.4 – 0.2–517 0.2–5.7 31–0.1
Average relative error % 2.7
7.5
3.1
4.3
0.9
0.64
Average absolute error % – – 6.9 6.4 4.9 2.12
166 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174

100.00
T=100F
viscosity, pressure and saturation pressure in their
T=150F models.
T=200F
Dead oil viscosity, Cp

10.00
T=250F
T=300F
3. Viscosity data
1.00
In this study PVT experimental data of 472
series of Iranian oil reservoirs have been used.
0.10 These data include oil API gravity, reservoir
temperature, saturation pressure, solution gas–oil
ratio and PVT measurements (oil characterization)
0.01 at reservoir temperature. Using the Rolling Ball
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 viscometer (Ruska, series 1602), reservoir oil
Oil API gravity
viscosities have been measured at various pressures
Fig. 2. Dead oil viscosity. above and below the bubble point pressure. In this
study about 250 series of PVT and viscosity data
have been used in developing a new empirical
hydrocarbons. This parameter is evaluated from molar
mass, normal boiling point, critical temperature, and
acentric factor of components; however these param-
eters are not available for most crudes. Several a
1000.0
empirical or semi-empirical correlations have also This Work
been developed from corresponding state equations by
Dead oil viscosity, Cp

Beal
Teja et al. (Teja and Rice, 1982), Johnson et al. 100.0 Beggs
(Johnson and Mehrotra, 1987), and Johnson and AliKhan
Svreck (Johnson and Svrcek, 1991). Although these 10.0
corresponding state correlations involve numerous
computations and use fluid composition as an input
variable, their prediction of dead oil viscosity is poor 1.0

(Elsharkawy and Alikhan, 1999).

0.1
2.2. Live oil viscosity correlations 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Oil API gravity
Viscosity data of saturated and under-saturated b
1000.0
oils at temperatures other than reservoir temperature This Work
are predicted from live oil reservoir viscosity
Dead oil viscosity, Cp

Glaso
correlations. Most saturated oil viscosity correlations 100.0
Labedi
express saturated oil viscosity (l ob) as a function of Schmidt
both dead oil viscosity (l od) and solution gas–oil 10.0
ratio (R s) (see Appendix B). These correlations are:
Chew and Connally (Chew and Connally, 1959),
Beggs and Robinson (Beggs and Robinson, 1975), 1.0

Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt (Kartoatmodjo and

Schmidt, 1994), Labedi (Labedi, 1992) and Elshar- 0.1
kawy and Alikhan (Elsharkawy and Alikhan, 1999). 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Also Appendix C shows some important correlations Oil API gravity
usually used in the prediction of under-saturated oil Fig. 3. (a) Dead oil viscosity from various correlations at 100 8F. (b)
viscosity. All of these correlations use saturated oil Dead oil viscosity from various correlations at 100 8F.
 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174 167

0.9

Under-Saturated oil viscosity, cP

correlation. Validity and accuracy of the proposed Beal
correlations have been checked by their application 0.8 Beggs
Schmidt
to 222 samples, from which their PVT and viscosity 0.7
Labedi
data were available. 0.6 Alikhan
This Work
0.5
0.4
4. Development of the proposed correlations
0.3

Proposed correlations are based on real data, which 0.2

almost covers all Iranian oil types. Proposed correla- 0.1

tions include dead oil viscosity, saturated and under- 0.0
saturated viscosity correlations and Tables 1, 2, 3 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

show some statistical information data for all dis- P-Pb , Psi
cussed correlations in this paper such as the source of Fig. 5. Under-saturated oil viscosity above P b.
the used oils, accuracy and the limitations of each
correlation. Data in these tables have been presented
by the authors who have developed the following tional form is the best case for our dead oil viscosity
correlations. data.

4.1. Dead oil viscosity correlation lod ¼ antilog10 ð11:2699
4:2699log10 ðAPIÞ

2:052log10 ðT ÞÞ ð1Þ
Table 1 shows different correlations for dead oil
viscosity. This table also gives source of data that Where l od is dead oil viscosity in cP, API is dead
have been used for the correlations. In this table all oil API gravity and T is temperature in 8F.
limitations including API, temperature and dead oil
viscosity ranges and error percentages have been 4.2. Saturated oil viscosity correlation
considered.
In this section, dead oil viscosity (l od) is As can be seen in Fig. 1, in single phase (under-
considered to be a function of oil API gravity and saturated) oil viscosity decrease with pressure reduc-
reservoir temperature (T). Results of multiple tion. This trend continues to bubble point. Pressure
regression analysis show that the following func- reduction below the bubble point pressure causes gas
release. This leads to increase in oil density and oil
viscosity. It can be said that oil viscosity has its
minimum value at bubble point.
100.00
Pb = 100 Psi For oil viscosity at bubble point, one can use two
Pb = 250 Psi
Pb = 500 Psi distinct forms. At first form oil viscosity at bubble
Saturated oil viscosity, cP

10.00
Pb = 1000 Psi
Pb = 1500 Psi
point is a function of dead oil viscosity and solution
Pb = 2500 Psi gas–oil ratio. At second form oil viscosity at bubble
Pb = 3500 Psi
Pb = 4500 Psi point is a function of dead oil viscosity and oil
1.00 saturation pressure. Here both forms have been
applied and the obtained results showed that the
second form is better than the first. Proposed
0.10
correlation in this section is:

0.01 lob ¼ 101:1145  Pb
0:4956  l0:9961

od : ð2Þ
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Dead oil viscosity, cP
Percentage errors, data range, and source of data
Fig. 4. Saturated oil viscosity. that have been used for the correlations for some
168 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174

Table 4
Accuracy of dead crude oil correlations for estimating viscosity of Iranian oil reservoirs
Correlations Beal Beggs and Glaso Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy This work
(Beal, 1946) Robinson (Glaso, 1980) (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo and Alikhan
(Beggs and (Kartoatmodjo and (Elsharkawy and
Robinson, 1975) Schmidt, 1994) Alikhan, 1999)
Average relative error % 688 17.63 40.02 68.88 50.36 14.44 8.9
Average absolute error % 701 33.07 41.69 102.03 53.33 54.55 15.3
Standard deviation % 546.56 60.45 60.45 160.14 66.36 74.78 30.3

Table 5
Accuracy of saturated oil correlations for estimating viscosity of Iranian oil reservoirs
Correlations Chew and Beggs and Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy This work
Connaly Robinson (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo and Alikhan
(Chew and (Beggs and (Kartoatmodjo and (Elsharkawy
Connally, 1959) Robinson, 1975) Schmidt, 1994) and Alikhan, 1999)
Average relative error % 0.03 513.32 0.83
49.96
6.57 1.45
Average absolute error % 53.63 513.32 88.52 53.93 37.33 26.31
Standard deviation % 86.58 220.33 143.98 114.37 64.55 32.65

saturated crude oil viscosity correlations and the for various oils. The slopes of these lines were found
proposed correlation for the Iranian oil reservoirs are to be a function of dead oil viscosity (l od). Proposed
shown in Table 2. correlation in this work (for under-saturated oil) is as
follows:
4.3. Under-saturated oil viscosity correlation
lop ¼ lob þ a  ð P
Pb Þ ð3Þ
At pressures above bubble point pressure, oil is at
single-phase state, while its solution gas–oil is where
constant and it seems that pressure will be the most
a ¼ 1:5029  10
5 þ 1:602  10
5 lod
effective in oil viscosity. By increasing pressure
above the bubble point, oil density and oil viscosity þ 1:73695l2od
4:2347  10
6 l
3
od : ð4Þ
will be increased (Fig. 1). Several function forms
have been tested to correlate under-saturated oil Similar to Tables 1 and 2, Table 3 shows the source
viscosity (l o) to saturated oil viscosity (l ob), and of oil reservoirs, data range, and percentage errors for
pressure increment above the bubble point ( P
P b). some under-saturated oil viscosity correlations; this
It was found that plotting (l o
l ob) versus ( P
P b) table also contains these data for proposed correlation
results in a series of straight lines through the origin in this work.

Table 6
Accuracy of under-saturated oil correlations for estimating viscosity of Iranian oil reservoirs
Correlations Beal Beggs and Labedi Schmidt and Elsharkawy This work
(Beal, 1946) Vasquez (Labedi, 1992) kartoatmodjo and Alikhan
(Vasquez and (Kartoatmodjo and (Elsharkawy and
Beggs, 1980) Schmidt, 1994) Alikhan, 1999)
Average relative error % 3.98
4.00 11.99 7.22 0.29
1.24
Average absolute error % 6.69 4.75 11.99 7.22 5.94 3.68
Standard deviation % 9.72 12.10 12.10 10.27 11.43 5.49
A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174 169

1000 100
Beggs Model

500 50

0 0
Ei

Ei
-500 -50
Beal Model
-1000 -100
15 25 35 45 15 25 35 45
Oil API gravity Oil API gravity
Beal Beggs
100 100
Labedi Model

50 50
Ei

0
Ei

-50 -50

Glaso Model

-100 -100
15 25 35 45 15 25 35 45
Oil API gravity Oil API gravity
Glaso Labedi

100 100
Elsharkawy and Alikhan

50 50
Ei
Ei

0 0

-50 -50

Schmidt and Kartoatmodjo

-100 -100
15 25 35 45 15 25 35 45
Oil API gravity Oil API gravity
Schmidt and Kartoatmodjo Elsharkawy and Alikhan

100
This Work

50
Ei

-50

-100
15 25 35 45
Oil API gravity
This Work

Fig. 6. Percent relative error distribution for dead oil viscosity correlations.
170 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174

5. Validation of the proposed correlations
In this section the validity of the proposed
correlations, as well as other correlations, for estimat-
ing the viscosity of Iranian oils are checked.
correlation in this work. Fig. 3a and b, show that
correlation in this work has the same trend as other
correlations.
5.2. Saturated oil viscosity correlation

5.1. Dead oil viscosity correlation
Fig. 2 shows the general effects of temperature and
oil API gravity on dead oil viscosity; as it can be seen
these effects are correctly predicted by the proposed
Fig. 4 shows saturation pressure and dead oil
viscosity on saturated oil viscosity. As shown in this
figure, the oils with higher saturation pressure have
corresponding lower saturated oil viscosities; and the
oils with higher dead oil viscosity have higher

100
1000

50
500
0
Ei

-50
Ei

-100
-500
-150 Beggs Model
Chew Model
-200 -1000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs) Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs)
Chew and Cannaly Beggs and Robinson

200 200
Labedi Model Schmidt and Kartoatmodjo

100 100
Ei

0
Ei

-100 -100

-200 -200
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs) Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs)
Labedi Schmidt and kartoatmodjo
200
200
Elsharkawy and Alikhan
New
100
100
Ei

0
Ei

-100 -100

-200 -200
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs) Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rs)
Elsharkawy and Alikhan This Work

Fig. 7. Percent relative error distribution for saturated oil viscosity correlations.
 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174 171

saturated oil viscosities, which in live oils have the as Alikhan’s correlation (Elsharkawy and Alikhan,
same trend as the one that was shown in this figure. 1999) and Labedi’s correlation (Labedi, 1992).

5.3. Under-saturated oil viscosity correlation

Fig. 5 shows the trend of some correlations and
also the proposed correlation in this work for
predicting the viscosity of under-saturated oils.
Increase in pressure gradient above the bubble point
pressure results in increasing oil viscosity. It seems
that under-saturated oil viscosity is very sensitive to
pressure gradient above the bubble point pressure.
This behavior is shown by the proposed model as well
6. Accuracy of the proposed correlations
Here, the accuracy of the proposed correlations
in this work, as well as the correlations previously
discussed, is checked. Using the 222 real cases data
series of Iranian oils, the results of this work and
other ones for estimating the oil viscosity are
compared. Tables 4, 5, 6 and Figs. 6, 7, 8 show
all of these comparisons. These tables give average

60 60
Beal Model Beggs Model
40 40

20 20
Ei
Ei

0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
P/Pb P/Pb
Beal Beggs

60 60
Schmidt Model
40 40

20 20
Ei
Ei

0 0

-20 -20
Labedi Model
-40 -40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
P/Pb P/Pb
Schmidt and Kartoatmodjo Labedi

60 60
Elsharkawy and AliKhan Model This Work
40 40

20 20
Ei

Ei

0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
P/Pb P/Pb
Elsharkawy and Alikhan This Work

Fig. 8. Percent relative error distribution for under-saturated oil viscosity correlations.
172 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174
relative error, average absolute error, and standard
deviation for all correlations and these figures show
percent relative error distribution for all correlations.
At this point, it should be mentioned the proposed
correlations are only applicable to Iranian oils and
their applicability to other regions should be
checked.
6.1. Dead oil viscosity correlations
Table 4 gives the results of proposed correlations
and also other ones for prediction of dead oil viscosity.
This table shows that the suggested correlation for
predicting of dead oil viscosity of Iranian oil reservoirs
has the lowest average relative error, average absolute
error, and standard deviations relative to the others. As
it can be seen in Fig. 6, the new proposed model has
the smallest relative error whereas Beal’s correlation,
which was developed based on US crude oils, has
biggest relative error than the other correlations.
6.2. Saturated oil viscosity correlations
Table 5 and Fig. 7 reveal that the new correlation in
estimating saturated oil viscosity for Iranian oil
reservoirs has the smallest average relative error,
absolute error, and standard deviation relative to other
correlations. Against other correlations, which either
underestimate (Schmidt and Kartoatmodjo (Kartoat-
modjo and Schmidt, 1994) Correlation) or over-
estimate (Beggs (Beggs and Robinson, 1975)
Correlation) viscosity, it can be seen the results of
this work are in better agreement with experimental
data.
6.3. Under-saturated oil viscosity correlations
For under-saturated oil viscosity, Table 6 shows
that the proposed correlation in this work has the
smallest average relative error, average absolute error
and standard deviations for predicting Iranian under-
saturated oil viscosity.
Fig. 8 shows that Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt
(Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt, 1994) and Labedi
(Labedi, 1992) correlations overestimate experimental
data whereas Beggs and Robinson (Beggs and
Robinson, 1975) correlation underestimate these data.
This figure shows that the results of the proposed
model in this work are in better agreement with
experimental data relative to the other ones.
7. Conclusions
It seems that the most common method for getting
viscosity data is viscosity correlations. Those correla-
tions are very useful and effective in predicting oil
viscosity at different environmental conditions such as
temperature and pressure for different oil fluids. What
are very important in the application of these
correlations are their limitations on the parameters,
which these correlations have derived from them. On
the other hand one can say that these correlations are
most bregional dependentQ. As may be seen in this
paper for Iranian oil fluids these correlations have
been applied, but almost all of them have a great error
in estimating real viscosity. In this work a new set of
correlations for estimation of dead, saturated and
under-saturated Iranian oils has been proposed. These
correlations are based on real data of the different
types of Iranian oils. Input parameters for these
correlations are oil API gravity, saturation pressure,
reservoir temperature and pressure, which are easily
measured in oil fields. In comparison with correlations
previously published in the literature, new correlations
have a better accuracy and performance for predicting
the viscosity of Iranian oils. It should be mentioned
that, these proposed correlations might be used for the
prediction of Iranian oil viscosity. Application of these
correlations for other oil samples can result in errors.
Nomenclature
cg gas specific gravity (air = 1.0)
API Oil API gravity
P Pressure, psi
Pb Saturation pressure, psi
Rs Solution gas–oil ratio, scf / stb
lo Under-saturated oil viscosity, cp
l ob Saturated oil viscosity, cp
l od Dead oil viscosity, cp
T Reservoir temperature, R
Tf Reservoir temperature, F
Ei Percent relative error
E ave Average absolute percent relative error
Ea Average percent relative error
 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174 173

S Standard deviation Appendix B. Saturated oil viscosity correlations

Nd Number of data points
1—Chew and Connally (Chew and Connally,
1959)
Appendix A. Dead oil viscosity correlations
lob ¼ ð10Þa ðlod Þb ;
1—Beal (Beal, 1946) 



   a ¼ Rs 2:2 10
7 Rs
7:4 10
4 ;
1:8 107 360
lob ¼ 0:32 þ a;
API4:53 T
460

b ¼ ð0:65=10c Þ þ 0:25=10d þ ð0:062=10e Þ;
a ¼ 10ð0:43þ8:33=APIÞ :



2—Beggs and Robinson (Beggs and Robinson, c ¼ 8:62 10
5 Rs ; d ¼ 1:10 10
3 Rs ;


1975) e ¼ 3:74 10
3 Rs :
lod ¼ 10x
1 2—Beggs and Robinson (Beggs and Robinson,
1975)
x ¼ yðT
460Þ
1:163 y ¼ 10z
lob ¼ ð10Þa ðlod Þb
z ¼ 3:0324
0:02023API:
3—Glaso (Glaso, 1980) a ¼ 10:715ðRs þ 100Þ
0:515


lod ¼ 3:141 1010 ðT
460Þ
3:444 ½logðAPIÞa ;
b ¼ 5:440ðRs þ 150Þ
0:338
a ¼ 10:313½logðT
460Þ
36:447:
3—Labedi (Labedi, 1992)
4—Labedi (Labedi, 1992)


0:426 
lob ¼ 102:344
0:03542API l0:6447
od = pb :
109:224
lob ¼ : 4—Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt (Kartoatmodjo and
API4:7013 Tf0:6739
Schmidt, 1994)
5—Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt (Kartoatmodjo and
Schmidt, 1994) lob ¼
0:06821 þ 0:9824f þ 0:000403f 2

 

lod ¼ 16 108 Tf
2:8177 ðlogAPIÞx f ¼ 0:2001 þ 0:8428 10
0:000845 Rs ð xÞ
x ¼ 5:7526logðTf Þ
26:9718: ð0:43þ0:5165yÞ
x ¼ lod y ¼ 10
0:00081Rs :
6—Elsharkawy and Alikhan (Elsharkawy and
Alikhan, 1999) 5—Elsharkawy and Alikhan (Elsharkawy and
Alikhan, 1999)
lod ¼ antilog10 ð xÞ
1:0
lod ¼ Aðlod ÞB
x ¼ antilog10 ð yÞ
A ¼ 1241:932ðRs þ 641:026Þ
1:12410
y ¼ 2:16924
0:02525API
0:68875log10 ðT Þ:

7—This work B ¼ 1768:841ðRs þ 1180:335Þ
1:06622 :

lod ¼ antilog10 ð11:2699
4:298log10 ðAPIÞ 6—This work

2:052log10 ðTf ÞÞ: lob ¼ 101:1145  Pb
0:4956  l0:9961
od :
174 A. Naseri et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 47 (2005) 163–174

Appendix C. Under-saturated oil viscosity Average absolute percent relative error

correlations
1 Xnd
Eave ¼ jEi j:
1—Beal (Beal, 1946) nd 1

 Standard deviation
lo ¼ lob þ 0:001ð p
pb Þ 0:024l1:6 0:56
ob þ 0:038lob :
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2—Vasquez and Beggs (Vasquez and Beggs, 1980) 1 X nd
S¼ ðEi
Er Þ2 :
lo ¼ lob ð p=pb Þm nd
1 1


 

a ¼
3:9 10
5 p
5 m ¼ 2:6 p1:187 ð10a Þ: References
3—Labedi (Labedi, 1992)
Ahrabi, F., Ashcroft, S.J., Shearn, R.B., 1987. High pressure
lo ¼ lob
Mua ½1
ð p=pb Þ volumetric phase composition and viscosity data for a North
Sea crude oil and NGL mixtures. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 67,

 329 – 334.
10
2:488 l0:9036
od Pb0:6151 Beal, C., 1946. Viscosity of air, water, natural gas, crude oil and its
Mua ¼ :
100:01976API associated gases at oil field temperature and pressures. Trans.
AIME 165, 114 – 127.
4—Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt (Kartoatmodjo and Beggs, H.D., Robinson, J.R., 1975. Estimating the viscosity of
Schmidt, 1994) crude oil systems. JPT 9, 1140 – 1141.
Chew, J., Connally, C.A., 1959. Viscosity correlation for gas-
lo ¼ 1:00081lob þ 0:001127ð p
pb Þ saturated crude oil. Trans. AIME 216, 23 – 25.



0:006517l1:8148
ob þ 0:038l1:590
ob : Egbogah, E.O., Ng, J.T., 1990. An improved temperature viscosity
correlation for crude oil systems. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 5, 197 – 200.
5—Elsharkawy and Alikhan (Elsharkawy and Elsharkawy, A.M., Alikhan, A.A., 1999. Models for predicting the
viscosity of Middle East crude oils. Fuel 78, 891 – 903.
Alikhan, 1999)
Glaso, O., 1980. Generalized pressure–volume–temperature corre-
lo ¼ lob lation for crude oil system. JPT 2, 785 – 795.
Johnson, S.E., Mehrotra, A.K., 1987. Viscosity of Athabasca

 bitumen using the extended principle of corresponding states.
þ 10
2:0771 ð p
pb Þ l1:19279
od l
0:40712
ob p
0:7941
b :
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 26, 2290 – 2298.
6—This work Johnson, S.E., Svrcek, W.Y., 1991. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 26 (5), 60.
Kartoatmodjo, F., Schmidt, Z., 1994. Large data bank improves
lo ¼ lob þ a  ð P
Pb Þ crude physical property correlation. Oil Gas J. 4, 51 – 55.
Labedi, R., 1992. Improved correlations for predicting the viscosity
of light crudes. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 8, 221 – 234.
a ¼ 1:5029  10
5 þ 1:602  10
5 lod þ 1:73695l2od Little, J.E., Kennedy, H.T., 1968. Calculating the viscosity of
hydrocarbon systems with pressure temperature and composi-

4:2347  10
6 l
3
od : tion. Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 6, 157 – 162.
Lohrenz, J., Bray, B.C., Clark, C.R., 1964. Calculating viscosities of
reservoir fluids from their composition. JPT 10, 1170 – 1176.
Appendix D. Statistical analysis Mehrotra, A.K., 1991. Generalized one parameter viscosity equa-
tion for light and medium hydrocarbon. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
30, 1367 – 1372.
Percent relative error Mehrotra, A.K., Svrcek, Y., 1988. One parameter correlation for
  bitumen viscosity. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 66, 323 – 327.
Xexp
Xest Sutton, R.P., Farshad, F.F., 1990. Evaluation of empirically derived
Ei ¼  100ði ¼ 1; 2 . . . ; nd Þ:
Xexp PVT properties for Gulf of Mexico crudes. Soc. Pet. Eng.
Reservoir Eng. 79 – 86 (Feb.).
Average percent relative error Teja, A.S., Rice, P., 1982. Generalized corresponding state method
for the viscosity of liquid mixtures. Ind. Engng. Chem. Fundam.
1 Xnd
20, 77 – 79.
Ea ¼ Ei : Vasquez, M.E., Beggs, H.D., 1980. Correlations for fluid physical
nd 1
property predictions. JPT (June), 968 – 970.