TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 PETROLEUM RESERVOIR ROCKS ......................................... 1-1 1.1 1.2 1.3 PETROPHYSICS ............................................................................... 1-1 PETROLEUM RESERVOIR ROCKS ................................................1-2 MINERAL CONSTITUENTS OF ROCKS—A REVIEW ...................1-4

1.4 ROCKS............................................................................................... 1-5 1.4.1 Igneous Rocks.................................................................... 1-5 1.4.2 Metamorphic Rocks...........................................................1-6 1.4.3 Sedimentary Rocks ............................................................1-6 1.5 CLASSIFICATION OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS ............................. 1-7 1.5.1 Clastic Sedimentary Rocks ................................................ 1-7 1.5.2 Chemical Sedimentary Rocks............................................ 1-7 1.5.3 Organic Sedimentary Rocks ..............................................1-8

1.6 DISTRIBUTION OF SEDIMENTARY ROCK TYPES .................... 1-10 1.7 SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS (CLASTIC SEDIMENTARY ROCK) ............................................................................................. 1-10 1.7.1 Pore Space ....................................................................... 1-12 1.7.2 Compaction and Cementation......................................... 1-15 1.7.3 Classification ................................................................... 1-17

1.8 CARBONATE RESERVOIRS (LIMESTONES AND DOLOMITES) .................................................................................1-20 1.8.1 Classification ................................................................... 1-21 1.8.2 Pore Space .......................................................................1-22 1.9 FRACTURED RESERVOIRS ..........................................................1-28 1.10 RESEVOIR COLUMN.....................................................................1-29 REFRENCES ...................................................................................1-32 2 POROSITY AND FLUID SATURATIONS..................................2-1 2.1 2.2 2.3 DEFINITION OF POROSITY ...........................................................2-1 FACTORS AFFECTING SANDSTONE POROSITY ........................ 2-2 FACTORS AFFECTING CARBONATE POROSITY ........................ 2-4

2.4 TYPICAL RESERVOIR POROSITY VALUES.................................. 2-5 2.5 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF POROSITY.......................... 2-6

2.5.1 Direct Porosity Measurement by Routine Core Analysis .................................................................... 2-6 2.5.2 Indirect Porosity Measurement by CT Imaging.............. 2-11 2.6 FLUID SATURATIONS ..................................................................2-16 INDIRECT POROSITY MEASUREMENTS FROM WELL LOGS................................................................................... 2-24 2.7.1 Introduction to Well Logging......................................... 2-24 2.7.2 Mud filtrate Invasion...................................................... 2-25 2.7.3 Porosity Logs .................................................................. 2-32 Density Log .................................................................. 2-32 Sonic Log (Acoustic Log) ............................................. 2-36 Neutron Log .................................................................2-41 Combination Porosity Logs ......................................... 2-45 2.7.4 Resistivity Log ................................................................ 2-46 Electric Log ................................................................. 2-54 Induction-Electric Log ................................................ 2-56 Dual Induction Laterolog ........................................... 2-58 Focused Electric Log (Guard and Laterolog) ............. 2-62 Microresistivity Logs................................................... 2-65 2.7.5 Lithology Logs ................................................................ 2-68 Spontaneous Potential Log (SP) ................................. 2-68 The Gamma Ray Log (GR)...........................................2-73 2.7.6 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Logs.................... 2-76 Nuclear Spins in a Magnetic Field .............................. 2-76 The Effect of Radiofrequency Pulses Resonance Absorption ............................................... 2-79 Relaxation Processes................................................... 2-80 Molecular Diffusion Effect.......................................... 2-84 NMR Signal and Corresponding T2 Spectrum ........... 2-84 Pore Size Distribution................................................. 2-89 Estimation of Permeability from NMR Relaxation Times............................................... 2-95 2.7.7 NMR Imaging of Laboratory Cores................................ 2-97 The Effect of Magnetic Field Gradients...................... 2-98 Slice-Selective Excitation............................................ 2-99 Frequency Encoding ................................................. 2-100 Phase Encoding.......................................................... 2-101 Image Reconstruction............................................... 2-102 Three-Dimensional NMR Imaging............................2-103 Signal-to-Noise Ratio and Image Contrast............... 2-104 Example NMR Images of Laboratory Cores..............2-105 2.7.8 A Comparison of Various Porosity Measurements for Shaly Sand....................................... 2-112 2.8 RESERVE ESTIMATION PROJECT ........................................... 2-113 2.8.1 Reserve Estimation........................................................ 2-114 2.7

2.8.2 2.8.3 2.8.4 2.8.5

Economic Evaluation..................................................... 2-115 Simulation Procedure.................................................... 2-116 Sampling Procedure ...................................................... 2-116 Simulation Output.........................................................2-124

2.9 PORE VOLUME COMPRESIBILITY............................................2-126 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................2-135 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS.............................2-138 3 PERMEABILITY .....................................................................3-1 3.1 3.2 3.3 DEFINITION ....................................................................................3-1 DIMENSIONS AND UNIT OF PERMEABILITY ............................ 3-6 LABORATORY DETERMINATION OF PERMEABILITY...............3-7

3.4 FIELD DETERMINATION OF PERMEABILITY ..........................3-14 3.4.1 Diffusivity Equation for Slightly Compressible Liquid........................................................ 3-15 3.4.2 Pressure Drawdown Equation ........................................3-19 3.4.3 Pressure Buildup Equation ............................................ 3-22 3.4.4 Diagnostic Plots.............................................................. 3-24 3.4.5 Skin Factor...................................................................... 3-30 3.4.6 Homogenous Reservoir Model with Wellbore Storage and Skin ............................................. 3-33 3.4.7 Type Curve Matching ......................................................3-37 3.4.8 Radius of Investigation of a Well Test ........................... 3-40 3.4.9 Field Example of Well Test Analysis .............................. 3-40 3.4.10 Welltest Model for Dry Gas Reservoir .......................... 3-52 3.5 FACTORS AFFECTING PERMEABILITY..................................... 3-56 3.5.1 Compaction..................................................................... 3-56 3.5.2 Pore Size (Grain Size) ..................................................... 3-56 3.5.3 Sorting ............................................................................ 3-60 3.5.4 Cementation ................................................................... 3-60 3.5.5 Layering .......................................................................... 3-60 3.5.6 Clay Swelling....................................................................3-61

3.6 TYPICAL RESERVOIR PERMEABILITY VALUES .......................3-61 3.7 PERMEABILITY-POROSITY CORRELATIONS............................3-61

3.8 CAPILLARY TUBE MODELS OF POROUS MEDIA..................... 3-69 3.8.1 Carman-Kozeny Equation .............................................. 3-69 3.8.2 Tortuosity ........................................................................3-75 3.8.3 Calculation of Permeability from Pore

Size Distribution............................................................. 3-79 3.9 STEADY STATE FLOW THROUGH FRACTURES....................... 3-84 3.10 AVERAGING PERMEABILITY DATA .......................................... 3-85 3.11 DARCY’S LAW FOR INCLINED FLOW........................................ 3-88 3.12 VALIDITY OF DARCY’S LAW ....................................................... 3-99 3.13 NON-DARCY FLOW..................................................................... 3-101 3.14 DARCY’S LAW FOR ANISOTROPIC POROUS MEDIA ............. 3-106 3.14.1 Definition of Homogeneity and Anisotropy ................ 3-106 3.14.2 Darcy’s Law for Homogeneous and Anisotropic Medium .............................................3-107 3.14.3 Transformation of Permeability Tensor from One Coordinate system to Another .................... 3-114 3.14.4 Alternative Calculation of the Principal Values and the Principal Axes of the Permeability Anisotropy..............................................3-122 3.14.5 Directional Permeability...............................................3-124 3.14.6 Measurement of Transverse Permeability of a Cylindrical Core .................................................... 3-137 3.15 EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS OF PERMEABILITY.......................3-140 3.15.1 Productivity of Horizontal Well ....................................3-140 Introduction ............................................................... 3-141 Homogeneous and Isotropic Reservoirs ................... 3-141 Homogeneous and Anisotropic Reservoirs ...............3-145 3.15.2 Productivity of a Vertically Fractured Well..................3-152 NOMENCLATURE ....................................................................... 3-155 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS.............................3-159 4 HETEROGENEITY ................................................................ 4-1 4.1 4.2 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................4-1 MEASURES OF CENTRAL TENDENCY AND VARIABILITY (HETEROGENEITY)............................................... 4-3 4.2.1 Measures of Central Tendency ......................................... 4-3 Mean.............................................................................. 4-3 Geometric Mean............................................................ 4-3 Median .......................................................................... 4-3 Mode.............................................................................. 4-4 4.2.1 Measures of Variability (Heterogeneity or Spread) ............................................... 4-4 Variance ........................................................................ 4-4

Dykstra-Parsons Coefficient of Variation..................... 4-5 Lorenz Coefficient ......................................................... 4-8 4.3 MEASURES OF SPATIAL CONTINUITY ...................................... 4-11 4.3.1 Variogram ........................................................................4-13 Definition .....................................................................4-13 How to Calculate the Variogram .................................4-16 Physical Meaning of the Variogram............................ 4-27 Variogram Models....................................................... 4-28 Fitting a Theoretical Variogram Model to an Experimental Variogram ....................................... 4-35 Variogram Anisotropy .................................................4-41 Example Experimental Variograms............................ 4-44 4.3.2 Covariance (Autocovariance) Function...........................4-51 Definition .....................................................................4-51 Physical Meaning of Covariance Function ................. 4-54 4.3.3 Correlation Coefficient Function (Autocorrelation Function) .............................................4-57

4.4 PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS ................................................. 4-59 4.4.1 Normal (Gaussian) Distribution .................................... 4-60 4.4.2 Log Normal Distribution................................................ 4-72 4.5 ESTIMATION .................................................................................4-75 4.5.1 Introduction ....................................................................4-75 4.5.2 Ordinary Kriging Equations ........................................... 4-86 Derivation in Terms of the Covariance Function ................................................... 4-89 Derivation in Terms of the Variogram ....................... 4-94 Solution of the Kriging Equation in terms of the Covariance Function......................................... 4-98 Solution of the Kriging Equation in terms of Variogram ..............................................................4-103

4.6 CONDITIONAL SIMULATION ....................................................4-132 4.6.1 Introduction ..................................................................4-132 4.6.2 Sequential Gaussian Simulation ...................................4-132 4.6.3 A Practical Application of Sequential Gaussian Simulation .....................................................4-136 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................4-148 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS.............................4-149 5 DISPERSION IN POROUS MEDIA ..........................................5-1 5.1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 5-1

5.2 5.3

LABORATORY FIRST-CONTACT MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENTS........................................................................... 5-3 ORIGIN OF DISPERSION IN POROUS MEDIA .......................... 5-20 5.3.1 Molecular Diffusion.........................................................5-21 5.3.2 Mechanical Dispersion ....................................................5-21

5.4 CONVECTION-DISPERSION EQUATION................................... 5-23 5.4.1 Generalized Equation in Vector Notation...................... 5-23 5.4.2 One Dimensional Convection-Dispersion Equation ........................................................................ 5-25 5.4.2 Solution of the One-Dimensional Convection-Dispersion Equation ................................... 5-26 5.5 DISPERSION COEFFICENT AND DISPERSIVITY ..................... 5-42

5.6 MEASURMENT OF DISPERSION COEFFICENT AND DISPERSIVITY ......................................................................5-53 5.6.1 Traditional Laboratory Method with Breakthrough Curve .......................................................5-53 5.6.2 Laboratory Method of Peters et al. (1996) ..................... 5-56 5.6.3 Field Measurement of Dispersion Coefficient and Dispersivity ............................................ 5-71 5.7 FACTORS THAT COULD AFFECT DISPERSION COEFFICENT AND DISPERSIVITY ..............................................5-75

5.8 NUMERICAL MODELING OF FIRST-CONTACT MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT .........................................................5-79 5.8.1 Introduction ....................................................................5-79 5.8.2 Mathematical Model of First-Contact Miscible Displacement ....................................................5-79 5.8.3 Numerical Modeling of Laboratory Experiments.......... 5-82 Experiment 1 ................................................................. 5-84 Experiment 2..................................................................5-91 Experiment 3................................................................. 5-99 Experiment 4................................................................5-106 Experiment 5................................................................ 5-116 Experiment 6................................................................ 5-121 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................5-126 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS.............................5-128 6 INTERFACIAL PHENOMENA AND WETTABILITY ................ 6-1 6.1 6.2 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................6-1 SURFACE AND INTERFACIAL TENSIONS................................... 6-2 6.2.1 Surface Tension ................................................................ 6-2 6.2.2 Interfacial Tension .......................................................... 6-11

6.2.3 Measurement of Surface and Interfacial Tension......................................................... 6-20 Capillary Rise Experiment ............................................ 6-20 Sessile Drop Method ..................................................... 6-24 Pendant Drop Method .................................................. 6-26 Ring Method.................................................................. 6-27 Spinning Drop Method ................................................. 6-30 6.3 WETTABILITY................................................................................6-31 6.3.1 Definition.........................................................................6-31 6.3.2 Determination of Wettability ......................................... 6-36 Contact Angle Method ................................................. 6-37 Amott Wettability Test.................................................. 6-40 United State Bureau of Mines (USBM) Wettability Test............................................................. 6-42 6.3.3 Wettability of Petroleum Reservoirs.............................. 6-45 6.3.4 Effect of Wettability on Rock-Fluid Interactions........... 6-46 Microscopic Fluid Distribution at the Pore Scale ..................................................................... 6-47 Effect of Wettability on Irreducible Water Saturation .......................................................... 6-47 Effect of Wettability on Electrical Properties of Rocks ...................................................... 6-48 Effect of Wettability on the Efficiency of an Immiscible Displacement .............................................6-51 THERMODYMAMICS OF INTERFACES ..................................... 6-64 6.4.1 Characterization of Interfacial Tension as Specific Surface Energy.............................................. 6-64 6.4.2 Characterization of Microscopic Pore Level Fluid Displacements....................................................... 6-66 Case 1. Displacement of a Nonwetting Phase by a Wetting Phase ............................................ 6-67 Case 2. Displacement of a Wetting Phase by a Nonwetting Phase ................................................. 6-69 NOMENCLATURE ......................................................................... 6-71 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS .............................. 6-73 7 CAPILLARY PRESSURE .........................................................7-1 7.1 7.2 7.3 DEFINITION OF CAPILLARY PRESSURE ..................................... 7-1 CAPILLARY PRESSURE-SATURATION RELATIONSHIP FOR A POROUS MEDIUM.............................................................. 7-8 DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE .............................. 7-17

6.3

7.4 7.5

CONVERSION OF LABORATORY CAPILLARY PRESSURE DATA TO RESERVOIR CONDITIONS .......................................... 7-21 AVERAGING CAPILLARY PRESSURE DATA .............................. 7-21

7.6 DETERMINATION OF INITIAL STATIC RESERVOIR FLUID SATURATIONS BY USE OF DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE.................................................. 7-28 7.7 CAPILLARY PRESSURE HYSTERESIS.........................................7-45

7.8 CAPILLARY IMBIBITION..............................................................7-54 7.9 CAPILLARY END EFFECT IN A LABORATORY CORE ...............7-57 7.9.1 Capillary End Effect.........................................................7-57 7.9.2 Mathematical Analysis of Capillary End Effect ..............7-59 7.9.3 Mathematical Model of Capillary End Effect During Steady State Relative Permeability Measurement.................................................................. 7-68 7.9.4 Experimental Evidence of Capillary End Effect...............7-70 7.10 CAPILLARY PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS ................................7-76 7.10.1 Restored State Method (Porous Plate Method)..............7-76 7.10.2 Mercury Injection Method ............................................. 7-77 7.10.3 Centrifuge Method..........................................................7-81 7.11 PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTION......................................................... 7-96 7.11.1 Introduction.................................................................... 7-96 7.11.2 Pore Volume Distribution .............................................. 7-98 7.11.3 Pore Size Distribution Based on Bundle of Capillary Tubes Model............................................7-103 7.11.4 Mercury Injection Porosimeter..................................... 7-115 7.12 CALCULATION OF PERMEABILITY FROM DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE................................................. 7-118 7.12.1 Calculation of Absolute Permeability from Drainage Capillary Pressure Curve............................. 7-118 7.12.2 Calculation of Relative Permeabilities from Drainage Capillary Pressure Curve............................. 7-132 7.13 EMPIRICAL CAPILLARY PRESSURE MODELS ........................ 7-133 7.13.1 Brooks-Corey Capillary Pressure Models ..................... 7-133 7.13.2 van Genuchten Capillary Pressure Model .................... 7-143 7.14 CAPILLARY TRAPPING IN POROUS MEDIA ........................... 7- 145 7.14.1 Pore Doublet Model of Capillary Trapping................... 7-145

7.14.2 Snap-Off Model of Capillary Trapping ......................... 7-152 7.14.3 Mobilization of Residual Non-Wetting Phase.............. 7-155 7.14.4 Oil Migration................................................................. 7-159 7.15 EFFECTS OF WETTABILITY AND INTERFACIAL TENSION ON CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVES.......................7-162 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................7-164 REFRENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS ............................ 7-168 8 RELATIVE PERMEABILITY................................................... 8-1 8.1 DEFINITION OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY...............................8-1 8.2 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY BY THE STEADY STATE METHOD ......................................................................................... 8-6 THEORY OF ONE DIMENSIONAL IMMISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT IN A POROUS MEDIUM ..................................8-15 8.3.1 Mathematical Model of Two-Phase Immiscible Displacement................................................8-15 8.3.2 Buckley-Leverett Approximate Solution of the Immiscible Displacement Equation................................8-21 8.3.3 Waterflood Performance Calculations from Buckley-Leverett Theory .................................................8-31 Oil Recovery at any Time ...............................................8-31 Oil Recovery Before Water Breakthrough .....................8-31 Oil Recovery at Water Breakthrough............................ 8-32 Oil Recovery After Water Breakthrough ...................... 8-36 Water Production...........................................................8-41

8.3

8.4 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY BY THE UNSTEADY STATE METHOD ........................................................................................8-51 8.5 FACTORS AFFECTING RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES.............. 8-65 8.5.1 Fluid Saturation.............................................................. 8-65 8.5.2 Saturation History .......................................................... 8-66 8.5.3 Wettability ...................................................................... 8-67 8.5.4 Injection Rate ................................................................. 8-70 8.5.5 Viscosity Ratio ................................................................ 8-73 8.5.6 Interfacial Tension ......................................................... 8-74 8.5.7Pore Structure .................................................................. 8-75 8.5.8 Temperature ................................................................... 8-76 8.5.9 Heterogeneity ................................................................. 8-78

8.6 THREE-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES .......................... 8-79 8.4 CALCULATION OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES FROM DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE ............................. 8-82 NOMENCLATURE .........................................................................8-91 REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS ............................ 8-94

APPENDIX A: A Systematic Approach To Dimensional Analysis .. A-1 Summary .......................................................................................... A-1 Introduction ..................................................................................... A-1 Algebraic Theory of Dimensional Analysis...................................... A-2 Transformation of the Dimensionless π Groups ............................. A-9 Example Problem............................................................................. A-9 Procedure ....................................................................................... A-10 Transformation of the Dimensionless π Groups for Example Problem........................................................................... A-21 Some Practical Considerations ......................................................A-28 Concluding Remarks...................................................................... A-31 Nomenclature ................................................................................ A-31 References ...................................................................................... A-32

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 PETROPHYSICS

Petrophysics is the study of rock properties and their interactions with fluids (gases, liquid hydrocarbons and aqueous solutions). Because petroleum reservoir rocks must have porosity and permeability, we are most interested in the properties of porous and permeable rocks. The purpose of this text is to provide a basic understanding of the physical properties of permeable geologic rocks and the interactions of the various fluids with their interstitial surfaces. Particular emphasis is placed on the transport properties of the rocks for single phase and multiphase flow. The petrophysical properties that are discussed in this text include: • • • • Porosity Absolute permeability Effective and relative permeabilities Water saturation

1-1

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Irreducible water saturation Hydrocarbon saturation Residual oil saturation Capillary pressure Wettability Pore size Pore size distribution Pore structure Net pay thickness Isothermal coefficient of compressibility Mineralogy Specific pore surface area Dispersivity

**1.2 PETROLEUM RESERVOIR ROCKS
**

A petroleum reservoir rock is a porous medium that is sufficiently permeable to permit fluid flow through it. In the presence of interconnected fluid phases of different density and viscosity, such as water and hydrocarbons, the movement of the fluids is influenced by gravity and capillary forces. The fluids separate, therefore, in order of density when flow through a permeable stratum is arrested by a zone of low permeability, and, in time, a petroleum reservoir is formed in such a trap. Porosity and permeability are two fundamental petrophysical properties of petroleum reservoir rocks. 1-2

Geologically, a petroleum reservoir is a complex of porous and permeable rock that contains an accumulation of hydrocarbons under a set of geological conditions that prevent escape by gravitational and capillary forces. The initial fluid distribution in the reservoir rock, which is determined by the balance of gravitational and capillary forces, is of significant interest at the time of discovery. A rock capable of producing oil, gas and water is called a reservoir rock. In general, to be of commercial value, a reservoir rock must have sufficient thickness, areal extent and pore space to contain a large volume of hydrocarbons and must yield the contained fluids at a satisfactory rate when the reservoir is penetrated by a well. Any buried rock, be it sedimentary, igneous or metamorphic, that meets these conditions may be used as a reservoir rock by migrating hydrocarbons. However, most reservoir rocks are sedimentary rocks. Sandstones and carbonates (limestones and dolomites) are the most common reservoir rocks. They contain most of the world’s petroleum reserves in about equal proportions even though carbonates make up only about 25% of sedimentary rocks. The reservoir character of a rock may be primary such as the intergranular porosity of a sandstone, or secondary, resulting from chemical or physical changes such as dolomitization, solution and fracturing. Shales frequently form the impermeable cap rocks for petroleum traps. The distribution of reservoirs and the trend of pore space are the end product of numerous natural processes, some depositional and some post-depositional. Their prediction, and the explanation and prediction of their performance involve the recognition of the genesis of the ancient sediments, the interpretation of which depends upon an understanding of sedimentary and diagenetic processes. 1-3 Diagenesis is the process of

physical and chemical changes in sediments after deposition that convert them to consolidated rock such as compaction, cementation, recrystallization and perhaps replacement as in the development of dolomite.

**1.3 MINERAL CONSTITUENTS OF ROCKS - A REVIEW
**

The physical and chemical properties of rocks are the consequence of their mineral composition. A mineral is a naturally occurring crystalline inorganic material that has specific physical and chemical properties, which are either constant or vary within certain limits. Rockforming minerals of interest in petroleum engineering can be classified into the following families: silicates, carbonates, oxides, sulfates (sulphates), sulfides (sulphides) and chorides. These are summarized in Table 1.1. Silicates are the most abundant rock-forming minerals in the Earth’s crust. Table 1.1 Rock - Forming Minerals Name Silicates Quartz Orthoclase Plagioclase Clay Chemical Formula SiO2 KAlSi2O8 NaAlSi3O8 CaAl2Si2O8 Al2Si2O5(OH) and many more Carbonates Calcite Dolomite Oxides Magnetite Hematite CaCO3 CaMg(CO3)2 Fe3O4 Fe2O3 2.72 2.85 5.18 4.9 - 5.3 Specific Gravity 2.65 2.57 2.62 - 2.76 2.5

1-4

Sulfates Anhydrite Gypsum Barite Sulfide Pyrite Chloride Halite

CaSO4 CaSO4.2H2O BaSO4 FeS2 NaCl

2.89 - 2.98 2.32 4.5 5.02 2.16

1.4 ROCKS

A rock is an aggregate of one or more minerals. There are three classes of rocks: igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rocks . 1.4.1 Igneous Rocks These are rocks formed from molten material (called magma) that solidified upon cooling either: 1. At the earth’s surface to form volcanic or extrusive rocks, e.g., basaltic lava flows, volcanic glass and volcanic ash. or 2. Below the surface, usually at great depths, to form plutonic or intrusive rocks, e.g., granites and gabbros. Igneous rocks are the most abundant rocks on the earth’s crust, making up about 64.7% of the Earth’s crust.

1-5

1.4.2 Metamorphic Rocks These are rocks formed by transformation, generally in the solid state, of pre-existing rocks beneath the surface by heat, pressure and chemically active fluids, e.g., quartz is transformed to quartzite and limestone plus quartz plus heat gives marble and carbon dioxide. Metamorphic rocks are the second most abundant rocks on the earth’s crust, making up 27.4% of the Earth’s crust. 1.4.3 Sedimentary Rocks These are rocks formed at the surface of the earth either by 1. Accumulation and consolidation of minerals, rocks and/or

organisms and vegetation, e.g., sandstone and limestone. or 2. Precipitation from solution such as sea water or surface water, e.g., salt and limestone. Sedimentary rocks are the source of petroleum and provide the reservoir rock and trap to hold the petroleum in the earth’s crust. Sedimentary rocks are the least abundant rocks on the earth’s crust, making up about 7.9% of the earth’s crust. Because most reservoir rocks are sedimentary rocks, they are of particular interest to us in the study of petrophysics. Therefore, we will examine sedimentary rocks in more detail than igneous and metamorphic rocks.

1-6

**1.5 CLASSIFICATION OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
**

Sedimentary rocks may be classified by origin and composition as clastic, chemical or organic. types for each class. 1.5.1 Clastic Sedimentary Rocks These rocks are composed of fragments or minerals broken from any type of pre-existing rock. Clastic sedimentary rocks are usually classified by grain size as boulder, cobble, gravel, sand, silt and clay. Figure 1.1 shows such a classification known as the Wentworth scale. Table 1.2 Clastic Sedimentary Rocks Tables 1.2 to 1.4 show the various rock

1.5.2 Chemical Sedimentary Rocks These rocks are formed by chemical precipitation as carbonates, e.g., limestone (CaCO3) and dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2) or as evaporties, e.g., gypsum (CaSO4.2H2O), anhydrite (CaSO4) and salt (NaCl).

1-7

1.5.3 Organic Sedimentary Rocks These rocks are formed by biologic precipitation and by

accumulation of organic (plant and animal) material, e.g., peat, coal, diatomite and limestone.

Figure 1.1 Classification of clastic rocks according to texture.

1-8

Table 1.3 Chemical Sedimentary Rocks (Precipitates)

Table 1.4 Organic Sedimentary Rocks

1-9

7 22 Limestone and 2.2a) through Consequently. solution and replacement.7 SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS (CLASTIC SEDIMENTARY ROCK) Sandstones are composed of fragmented materials. rounded grains (Figure 1.2b).1. to argillaceous. cementation.6 DISTRIBUTION OF SEDIMENTARY ROCK TYPES Table 1. very poorly sorted sandstone containing varying amounts of rock fragments (Figure 1.2 53 Sandstone 1.5 shows the approximate distribution of sedimentary rocks in the earth’s crust. Table 1. which have been transported to the site of deposition by water currents and which have been subjected to varying degrees of wave and current action during transport and during deposition. 1-10 . sandstone more angular feldspathic reservoirs vary from clean.2c) all of which may be affected by varying degrees of compaction.9 100 1.5 Distribution of Sedimentary Rocks Type % Earth’s Crust % Sedimentary Rock Shale 4. well sorted quartz sandstone with well sandstone containing varying amounts of clay (Figure 1.0 25 Dolomite Total 7. Shales make up over 50% of total sedimentary rock volume in the earth’s crust.

Figure 1.2: Examples of sandstone reservoir rocks. very poorly sorted sandstone. (B) angular. (A) clean. feldspathic sandstone and (C) argillacious. well sorted sandstone. 1-11 .

grain size has no effect on This is true only for spherical grains of the same size. the arrangement of such spheres has a large effect on the porosity of the pack. porosity. Figure 1.3). However.3: Framework of reservoir sand with interstitial clay and cement. 1-12 .7.1. Sorting is a measure of the spread of distribution of grain size on either side of an average in a sediment. The amount of this intergranular pore space or porosity is controlled primarily by sorting of the sediment and to a lesser extent by the packing of the grains. Theoretically.1 Pore Space The basic framework of a sandstone reservoir is formed by the sand grains between which the pore space may or may not contain interstitial fine material and/or cement (Figure 1.

However. the smaller grains partially fill the interstices between 1-13 . as well as distribution throughout the reservoir rock.4 and 1. Experience has also shown that the permeability measured normal to the bedding is usually less than permeability measured parallel to the bedding and that large variations in permeability occur in different directions in the bedding plane. However. there are relationships between these factors and permeability. Experimental data from artificial sands confirm that the grain size essentially has no influence on porosity for well sorted sand. whereas a small amount has little effect on porosity. Experimental data show a marked decrease in permeability as grain size decreases and as sorting becomes poorer.5 show how the dispersed clay morphology affects the permeability and capillary pressure of sandstones. Clay in the pore space of a reservoir may affect the performance of a reservoir very adversely. Monk (1942) have shown that permeability varies as the square of the mean grain diameter and a complex function of sorting (other factors being equal). This is because with a mixture of sizes. shapes and extent of the interconnections between individual pores rather than the size of the pores themselves. Permeability. The amount and kind of clay. Figures 1.Porosity is at its maximum for spherical grains but becomes progressively less as the angularity of the grains increases because such grains pack together more closely. depends primarily upon the size. porosities of wet packed sands show a general decrease as sorting becomes poorer. has an important bearing on liquid permeability. the larger grains. being a measure of the ease with which a material transmits fluids. since the interconnections are directly Krumbein and related to the pore size which in turn is related to grain size.

4: Three general types of dispersed clay in sandstone reservoir rocks and their effects on permeability: (a) discrete particles of kaolinite.Figure1. (b) pore lining by chlorite. (c ) pore bridging by illite (from Neasham. 1977). 1-14 .

invades a reservoir. such as montmorillonite. for example drilling fluid filtrate.Figure1. If fresh water. drastically reducing the permeability. Compaction and cementation are the most important of these factors but they in turn are affected by 1-15 .2 Compaction and Cementation The pore space of the original unconsolidated sediment is reduced in ancient rocks by many factors. whereas saline water may have no effect. 1977).5: Three general types of dispersed clay in sandstone reservoir rocks and their effects on capillary pressure (from Neasham. certain clays. will swell and plug some of the pore interconnections. 1.7.

Bolivar District fields in Venezuela and Ekofisk field in the North Sea. Early cementation of sand may produce a rigid framework which will inhibit compaction until the depth of burial exceeds that at which fracturing of the grains and cement is initiated. Crushing and fracturing of grains. Abnormal fluid pressure in sandstone reservoirs also inhibits compaction because the overburden is partly supported by the fluid pressure. shale. This can produce serious and expensive subsidence of surface facilities such as occurred in the Wilmington field in California.composition of the sediment. Reduction of reservoir pressure by production of fluid can lead to compaction of the producing zone by rearrangement of the sand grains. Plastic deformation of the softer grains which tend to mold around the harder grains thus destroying pore space. and dissolution at points of contact sometimes accompanied by precipitation of silica in the pore space nearby. Alkaline interstitial water seems to provide conditions more conducive to dissolution than saline water. This form of 1-16 . Compaction by the weight of the overburden commences as soon as a sediment is deposited. siltstone and other rock fragments. 3. and when the amount of such soft material exceeds 10 to 12%. 2. and the contained fluids and their pressures. Closer packing of the grains which causes smaller pores and connected passages. It produces reduction of pore space as a result of: 1. the permeability may be largely destroyed even though some porosity usually remains. The softer grains may be composed of limestone.

(d) sublithic sandstone consisting of 5 . the distribution of silica cement can be related to both primary texture and depth of burial. Silica cement usually occurs in the form of quartz and grows in optical continuity with the sand grains until finally the crystals interfere with one another and an interlocking network results. Silica cement appears to have two origins: (1) early cementation before the sands were compacted appreciably. Much of this cement appears to be early and unrelated to the compaction process.3 Classification Sandstones may be classified by mineral composition (Figure 1. (b) feldspathic sandstone consisting of 5 . 1. to a lesser extent. The most common cementing materials in sandstone reservoirs are silica and calcite but many others do occur.25% rock fragments and (e) lithic sandstone consisting of over 25% rock fragments. and (2) deposition of silica predissolved by pressure solution during compaction. with depth. 1-17 . (c) arkosic sandstone consisting of over 25% feldspar. The principal types are: (a) quartz sandstones consisting of over 95% detrital quartz.compaction leads to porosity and permeability reduction which is irreversible and which may affect the producing characteristics of the reservoir very adversely. It is not uncommon to find both silica and calcite present in the cement and in such cases.7. Cementation is the result of recrystallization from solution of silica.25% feldspar. In the Eocene Wilcox sandstones of the Gulf Coast. the silica in the form of quartz has precipitated first and the calcite later.6). The amount of silica cement tends to increase in coarser and better sorted sands and. carbonates and other soluble materials in the pores of clastic rocks. Calcite cement is often patchy but may completely fill the pore space.

porosity and permeability.6: Classification of sandstones by composition. but decreases with poorer sorting.7 shows a grain size comparator where some of these qualitative terms are presented visually.Sandstone grain texture consists of five components: (a) size. (c) shape (sphericity). and (e) packing. (d) roundness. Figure 1. Close packing reduces The effects of shape and roundness on porosity are less definite. 1-18 . (b) sorting. Figure 1. Permeability generally increases with angularity and decreasing sphericity. Porosity is independent of grain size for uniform grains but decreases as sorting gets poorer. Permeability increases with increasing grain size.

1-19 .7: Grain size comparator chart (from Stow. 2005).Figure 1.

called “bio”. are composed of particles of clay to gravel size that were generally deposited in a marine environment.the excreta of worms. In addition. or the grains may be “floating” in lime mud which would be mudsupported rock. (2) lime mud. The material between the grains may be primary lime mud deposited at the same time as the grains which would be grain-supported rock. Lime mud consists of clay-sized particles of lime. They differ even more importantly from sandstones by being subject to more post-depositional diagenesis ranging from simple cementation of the original particles to complete recrystallization or replacement by dolomite or chert. and (3) carbonate cement precipitated later.8. sandstones are composed of particles transported from an outside source by water currents.1. They are usually more poorly sorted than clastics. Components of carbonate rocks are usually (1) grains of various kinds. However. (2) fragments of previously deposited limestone called “intraclasts”. they differ from terrigenous clastics in that they are deposited as lime particles which are produced locally.8. There are several kinds of grains. (3) small round pellets . whereas. and (4) ooliths . of which four are the most important.8 CARBONATE RESERVOIRS (LIMESTONES AND DOLOMITES) Most carbonate rocks. The presence or absence of lime mud and the 1-20 . 1. like clastics.1 Classification Carbonates are usually classified according to depositional texture as shown in Figure 1. These are (1) shell fragments.spheres formed by rolling lime particles along the bottom. they are susceptible to solution at any stage in their diagenesis.

Packstones are grain-supported but contain very substantial amounts of lime mud. Good porosity in carbonate reservoirs is usually due to dolomitization. the best porosity. Due to their larger surface area. such that the grains effectively “float” in the mud. reservoirs may have the lowest Thus. Grainstones consist of packed carbonate grains with the texture being grain-supported and very little lime mud (Figure 1. The presence of lime mud may be most important in the development of porosity in carbonates because under the right conditions. Mudstones consist of essentially lime muds only. carbonate structures. The largest volume of carbonate petroleum reserves Dolomitization occurs from the substitution of A comes from dolomites. magnesium for calcium in half of the sites in a carbonate crystal.type and abundance of grains form the basis of the classification. mud-size grains are more easily dolomitized than sand-sized grains. lime mud may be preferentially dolomitized and may also be more readily leached out than the grains. volume loss of 12 to 13% due to dolomitization results in a corresponding increase in porosity. primary Dolomitization also creates planar crystal surfaces and harder crystal Thus. dolomites retain more of their porosity during compaction than limestones. 1-21 .10).9). A boundstone consists of original skeletal components bound together during deposition (Figure 1. Wackestones have a larger amount of lime muds.

10. 1.2 Pore Space The porosity. permeability and pore space distribution in carbonate reservoir rocks are related to both the depositional environment and the diagenesis of the sediment. Carbonates have a large range of pore structures due to the complex nature of carbonate constituents and diagenetic features.8: Classification of carbonates by texture.8. 1-22 .Figure 1. The pore structures have been classified by Choquette and Pray. They are most commonly of secondary (diagenetic) origin although residual primary pore space does occur. 1970) as shown in Figure 1.

1-23 .9: Examples of boundstone.Figure 1.

1-24 .Figure 1.9: Examples of grainstones.

•Vuggy or cavernous porosity.widening and coalescence of fractures. •Intercrystalline porosity .selective solution of ooliths. In carbonates.selective solution of.Fabric-selective porosity includes: •Interparticle porosity. within. or shelter porosity . 1-25 .typical of dolomites. really high fracture porosity. framework. •Breccia porosity . or around fossil material.from boring and burrowing. •Fenestral porosity . •Channel porosity . petrophysical properties with rock type is thus very difficult. •Bioturbation porosity . •Oomoldic porosity .by stress or shrinkage. Porosity and permeability are controlled Correlation of largely by the amount of fines and by diagenesis. •Non fabric-selective porosity includes: •Fracture porosity .in some cases. porosity and permeability are not well-correlated with grain size or sorting. molding. •Skeletal.by solution along bedding planes or joint surfaces.

10: Classification of pore systems in carbonate rocks (Choquette and Pray. 1970). 1-26 .Figure 1.

Comparison of Pore-space Properties in Clastic and Carbonate Rocks (Choquette and Pray. 1970). 1-27 . 1970).6 shows a comparison of the pore space characteristics of clastic and carbonate rocks (Choquette and Pray. Table 1.6.Table 1.

(b) faulting. Naturally fractured reservoirs are usually treated by a dual porosity approach to deal with their properties. Natural fractures can exist in essentially any type of rock although they are particularly common in carbonates. Fractures that have not been filled with cement have very high permeabilities.11 shows a naturally fractured rock together with its idealized dual porosity approximation. permeability. (h) cooling and (i) impact craters. (c) fluid pressure. However. Thus. usually due to such factors as (a) folding.1. even though they may be fairly widelyspaced. the matrix contains the bulk of the reservoir pore volume while the fractures contain the bulk of the reservoir flow capacity. Figure 1. The matrix rock (between fractures) usually has reasonable porosity and extremely low Fractures range in size from hair-size to several millimeters in aperture. the fracture system generally contains only a small fraction of the reservoir pore space. (d) release of lithostatic pressure. 1-28 . (e) pressure solution. (f) dehydration. (g) weathering.9 FRACTURED RESERVOIRS Natural reservoir fractures are caused by brittle failure.

Figure 1. is h0 . This reservoir contains a hydrocarbon bearing zone and a water bearing zone at the bottom.10 RESERVOIR COLUMN Figure 1. The net pay for this example is given by 1-29 . The total thickness of the reservoir as determined from the spontaneous potential (SP) log.11: Idealization of naturally fractured reservoir (Warren and Root. discussed in Chapter 2. this thickness contains shale breaks which will not be productive and must be discounted to determine the net pay to be used in reserves estimation. which is the thickness of the hydrocarbon bearing portion of the reservoir as determined from the resistivity log (see Chapter 2). However. is H. 1963) 1. The gross pay thickness.12 shows a reservoir column penetrated by a well.

Net pay = h = ∑ hi i =1 i =6 (1.2) The net to gross is a number that is less than or equal to 1 or if expressed as a percentage. is a number that is less than or equal to 100%. The thickness of the gas zone is hgas and that of the oil bearing zone is hoil . not all petroleum reservoirs have a gas oil contact or an oil water contact. Notice that in this example.1) The net to gross (NTG) pay is defined as h h ∑ i i =1 Net to gross (NTG) = = h0 h0 i =6 (1. 1-30 . Of course. Net pay is used along with other petrophysical properties of the reservoir to estimate the hydrocarbon reserve as discussed in Chapter 2. there is a gas oil contact (GOC) and an oil water contact (OWC) in the reservoir.

1-31 .12. Reservoir column showing gross and net pay.Figure 1.

Tech.A. Selley. A. Beard. 2005.H. New York. : Geology of Petroleum. : Sedimentary Rocks in the Field. 1942. 1995. Mining and Met. W. San Francisco. : An Introduction to Petroleum Exploration for Non-Geologists.: "The Morphology of Dispersed Clay in Sandstone Reservoirs and Its Effect on Sandstone Shaliness. Pub. 2 (1970) 207-250. 349-369. R. 1492.” AAPG Bull.W. 5 (May 1950) 943-961. D. No. 54. G. 1985. L.V..H. (Feb. 1973) 57. Neasham. Oct. : “Permeability as a Function of the Size Parameters of Unconsolidated Sand.K. 9-12.W.” Amer.C. Int. and Weyl.REFERENCES Archie.I. D.E. Presented at the 52nd Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. and Pray. W. 34.” AAPG Bull. Stow.D. No.C. P. New York. P. :“Introduction to Petrophysics of Reservoir Rocks. Oxford University Press. R. G." SPE 6858.” AAPG Bull. : “Geologic Nomenclature and Classification of Porosity in Sedimentary Carbonates. 1967. : Elements of Petroleum Geology. 1-32 . Krumbein. J.. : “Influence of Texture on Porosity and Permeability of Unconsolidated Sand. Freeman and Company. 1977. Denver. and Monk.C. W. Pore Space and Fluid Flow Properties. Elsevier Academic Press. Freeman. Stoneley. Vol.C. Levorsen. Vol. Burlington. Choquette.

CHAPTER 2 POROSITY AND FLUID SATURATIONS 2.1 DEFINITION OF POROSITY Porosity gives an indication of the rock’s ability to store fluids. not the total porosity. it is the effective porosity that matters. 2-1 . Therefore. From a reservoir engineering standpoint. isolated pores) whereas effective porosity only accounts for Total the porosity accounts for all the pores in the rock (interconnected and interconnected pores.1) Porosity may be classified as total or effective porosity. effective porosity will be less than or equal to total porosity depending on the amount of isolated pores in the rock. It is defined as the ratio of the pore volume to the bulk volume of the porous medium as shown in the following equation: Vp Vb Vb − Vs Vb φ= = (2.

2.1. 2–2 . Well sorted sandstone consists of grains having approximately the same size whereas poorly sorted sandstone consists of grains having a wide range of different grain sizes. the hexagonal packing has a porostiy of 39.2 FACTORS AFFECTING SANDSTONE POROSITY Sandstone cementation.Porosity may also be classified as primary or secondary.1 shows three idealized types of relative to one another. Primary porosity is that which was formed at the time of deposition of the sediments whereas secondary porosity was developed after deposition and burial of the formation. The cubic packing has a porosity of 47. Sandstone porosity is practically all primary porosity whereas carbonate porosity tends to be secondary porosity. porosity is affected by packing.6%. packing for spherical sand grains and their theoretical porosities. Poor sorting reduces the porosity of the sandstone as may be seen in Figure 2. As shown by the geometrical derivations in Figure 2.2 in which the small grains fit into the pores created by the large grains.9%. thereby reducing the porosity.5% and the rhombohedral packing has a porosity of 25. sorting and Packing describes the arrangement of the sand grains Figures 2. the porosity of a pack of uniform spheres is independent of the grain size as the grain diameter cancels out.

(A) Irregular grains.1. 2-3 . Effect of sorting on porosity.2. Figure 2.Figure 2. 2004). Effect of packing on porosity of uniform spheres. (B) Idealized spherical grains (from Tiab and Donaldson.

1973) In consolidated rocks. Table 2. Cementation reduces the porosity of the sand as shown in Figure 2. Effect of cementation on porosity.3.1 shows experimentally measured porosities of various artificial sandpacks. 2–4 . Figure 2. the sand grains are cemented together usually by quartz or carbonates.Table 2.1 Measured Porosities of Artificial Sandpacks (adapted from Beard and Weyl. Note the general decrease of porosity with poor sorting for all grain sizes and the approximately constant porosity of the extremely well sorted sands for all grain sizes.3.

Fractures are cracks in the rock. Solution is a chemical reaction in which water with dissolved carbon dioxide reacts with calcium carbonate to form calcium bicarbonate which is soluble. Idealized fractured rock with low fracture porosity. Although fracture porosity is generally small.3 FACTORS AFFECTING CARBONATE POROSITY In carbonates. secondary porosity is usually more important than primary porosity. The major sources of secondary porosity are fracturing. Therefore. Figure 2. The chemical reactions are 2-5 .2. This reaction increases the porosity of the limestone. they greatly enhance the flow Figure 2. often 1-2%. capacity of the rock. the fractures are very useful in allowing fluids to flow more easily through the rock.4.4 shows an idealized fractured formation where the grains are bricks and the fractures constitute the pore space. solution and chemical replacement.

porosity.4) 2. An example is dolomitization in which some of the calcium ions in calcium carbonate are replaced by magnesium ions to form calcium magnesium carbonate (dolomite).2) (2. Carbonate porosities are much more difficult to characterize and may consist of (1) intergranular. with an average of 18%. About 95% of sandstone porosity is effective porosity. The chemical reaction is 2CaCO3 + MgCl2 = CaMg ( CO3 )2 + CaCl2 (2. with an average of about 8%. 2–6 . (2) intercrystalline.4 TYPICAL RESERVOIR POROSITY VALUES Sandstones have porosities that typically range from 8% to 38%. Sandstone porosity is usually mostly intergranular porosity. About 90% of carbonate porosity is effective Carbonates have porosities that typically range from 3% to 15%. and (4) vugular porosities. (3) fractures and fissures.CO2 + H 2O = H 2CO3 H 2CO3 + CaCO3 = Ca ( HCO3 )2 (2. This replacement causes a shrinkage of 12 to 13% in the grain volume. with a corresponding increase in secondary porosity.3) Chemical Replacement is a chemical reaction in which one type of ion replaces another with a resulting shrinkage in the size of the new compound.

measures the volume of mercury displaced by the sample (Figure 2.2. measurements are usually performed on extracted cores. For well machined samples. Bulk volume can be determined by (1) caliper and (2) fluid displacement. The loss in weight of the 2-7 . Grain volume can be determined by (1) fluid displacement and (2) gas exapansion using Boyle’s law porosimeter. which is known as a pycnometer. the volume of mercury displaced is equal to the bulk volume of the sample.5 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF POROSITY 2. In the first method. from which the bulk volume can be calculated. fluid that does not easily penetrate the pores such as mercury is used. evacuated and then saturated with a liquid (brine.1 Direct Porosity Measurement by Routine Core Analysis Direct measurement of porosity requires the measurements of two of the three volumes Vb. kerosene. In the second method. Since mercury does not penetrate the pores at atmospheric pressure.5. Two types of fluid displacements can be used to determine bulk volume. The saturated sample is weighed in air and then weighed fully immersed in the saturating liquid. Vs and Vp. the dimensions can be measured with a caliper. The sample is weighed in air. fluid which easily saturates the sample is used. In the laboratory. The apparatus. or toluene). which have been cleaned and dried.5a). The loss in weight of the saturated sample when fully immersed in the saturating liquid is proportional to the bulk volume of the sample (Archimedes principle).

The sample. which is initially evacuated. 2–8 . which should be linear with a slope.5b shows a schematic diagram of a Boyle’s law porosimeter for grain volume determination by gas expansion. -V2. The valve between the two vessels is opened and the pressure in the two vessels is allowed to stabilize at P2 (absolute units). Also.6) The instrument can be calibrated with steel blanks of known volume. Once the calibration line has been established. V2 and V1. the slope and the intercept should be checked against the known volumes.(2. V1. which is confined in a vessel of known volume V1. (V1 − Vs ) P1 = (V1 − Vs + V2 ) P2 Eq.dry sample and the sample fully immersed in a liquid is proportional to the grain volume.5) can be solved for the grain volume as ⎛ P2 ⎞ Vs = V1 − V2 ⎜ ⎟ 1 ⎝ P − P2 ⎠ (2. The vessel of volume V1 is connected to a second vessel of known volume V2.5) (2. Calibration consists of a plot of Vs versus P2/(P1-P2). The three data points should fall on the calibration line. nitrogen or helium) to a pressure P1 (absolute units). Figure 2. and an intercept. By Boyle’s law (PV = constant at a constant temperature). it is used to convert the measurements from core samples to grain volume. At least three steel blanks of different sizes should be used in the calibration to ensure reliability of the calibration. is pressured by gas (air.

Schematics of equipment for measurement of core plug porosity.Figure 2. (b) Boyle’s law porosimeter.5. 2-9 .(a) Bulk volume pycnometer. (c) Bulk and pore volume porosimeter.

the volume of mercury injected is essentially equal to the connected pore volume of the sample. The methods so far described determine the effective porosity of the sample. The grain volume of the ground sample can be determined either by liquid displacement or by assuming an average grain density.5% porosity. The measurement of porosity on consolidated samples in routine core analysis might generally be expected to yield values of the true fractional porosity plus or minus 0. Mercury porosimetry is also used to determine capillary pressure and pore size distribution of the sample (see Chapter 6).005. the core is evacuated before mercury injection.5% and 27. To determine the total porosity. Mercury injection consists of forcing mercury under relatively high pressure into the pores of the sample using a mercury porosimeter (Figure 2. the sample is ground into a fine powder after bulk volume measurement. the sample is no longer suitable for other measurements. Because any air left in the pores is compressed to a negligibly small value.. Typically. The difference in the weight of the saturated sample and the dry sample is proportional to the pore volume. This is a destructive method because after the test.e. 2–10 . Core porosities may differ from in-situ porosities for the following reasons: • The core may be altered during recovery.Pore volume can be determined by (1) fluid saturation and (2) mercury injection.5c). a true value of 27% porosity may be measured between 26. i.

the results of core analysis are used to calibrate well logs.80 gm 2-11 . the saturated sample was weighed when it was fully immersed in the oil. Calculate the porosity of the core. Here are the results of the experiment. Example 2.85 gm/cc and then weighed again in air.49 gm 28. It was then evacuated and fully saturated with an oil with a density of 0. Frequently. which may not be representative of the entire reservoir. Despite these limitations.40 gm 45. • The volume of the core analyzed is small and may not account for the variability of the porosity in the reservoir.1 An experiment has been performed to determine the porosity of an irregularly shaped core sample. Afterwards. Weight of dry sample in air Weight of the saturated sample in air Weight of the saturated sample immersed in the oil a. = = = 42. The cleaned dry sample was weighed in air.• The core in the laboratory is no longer subjected to the overburden and lateral stresses that it was subjected to in the reservoir. • The porosities are measured on small plugs. core analysis provides the only direct measurement of porosity.

185 or 18.64 cc Porosity (φ) = Vp/Vb = 3.85 = 16.64 cc Bulk volume (Vb) = (Wsat – Wi)/ρL = (45.64–3.49–42.00 cc 2–12 .80 gm = 0. Pore volume (Vp) = (Wsat – Wdry)/ρL = (45.80)/0.85 = 3.85 gm/cc Required to calculate the porosity of the sample.64 = 16.49–28.64/19. Solution to Example 2.49 gm = 28.40– 28. Grain volume (Vs) = Vb–Vp =19.b.40 gm = 45. Yes.85 = 19.64 = 0. There is enough information to determine the mineralogy of the sample through the grain density.80)/0. = 42. Grain volume (Vs) = (Wdry–Wi)/ρL = (42.1 Wt of dry sample (Wdry) Wt of saturated sample (Wsat) Wt of sample immersed in oil (Wi) Density of saturating oil (ρL) a. Is there enough information from this experiment to determine the mineralogy of the sample? If yes.00 cc Alternatively.40)/0.5% b. what is it? Please justify your answer with appropriate arguments.

The x-ray attenuation equations for the two scans are 2-13 .000 porosity values in some cases.65 Table 1.5. which is the same as the specific gravity of the sample matrix.Grain density (ρs) = Wdry/Vs = 42.65 gms/cc Specific gravity of mineral (γm) = ρs /ρw = 2. it is convenient to present the results of the measurements as images (Figures 2. Peters and Afzal (1992) have made such measurements in an artificial sandpack and a Berea sandstone approximately 60 cm long and 5 cm in diameter.1 lists the specific gravities of common reservoir rock minerals. it is now possible to measure the porosity distributions in core samples. The packing history is clearly evident in the image. The dominant feature in the porosity variation of the Berea sandstone is layering which is clearly visible in Figure 2.2 Indirect Porosity Measurement by CT Imaging With the availability of X-ray computed tomography (CT) imaging systems in research laboratories. From the table. Therefore.65/1. the mineral of the sample is quartz. The porosity in each voxel (volume element) was obtained by scanning the sample dry and then scanning it fully saturated with a wetting fluid such as brine.10. The packing technique used in this test introduced significant porosity variation into the pack. over 600. CT imaging gives rise to a very large data set.00 = 2. based on the available information.00 = 2.7 and 2. The porosity data also can be presented in histograms as shown Figures 2. It should be noted in Figure 2.40/16.8).9 and 2. 2.65.8. Therefore.7 that a sandpack may not be as uniform as we always assume it to be. quartz has a specific gravity of 2.

7. L = 54. Porosity image of a sandpack from CT imaging.7) and (2.2 cm.8) Eqs. 2–14 .ψ m (1 − φ ) + φψ air = ψ dry ψ m (1 − φ ) + φψ brine = ψ wet (2.7) (2.9) is obtained by scanning a sample of the brine in a test tube and the attenuation for air is assumed to be zero.(2.8) can be solved simultaneously to obtain the porosity in each voxel as φ= ψ wet −ψ dry ψ brine −ψ air (2.(2.9) The x-ray attenuation coefficient of the brine in Eq. Figure 2.

(b) Longitudinal vertical slice.8 cm. Figure 2. 2-15 . (a) Cross-sectional slice. 1992). L = 60. (b) Longitudinal vertical slice.1 cm. (a) Cross-sectional slice. d = 5. 1992).d = 4. Porosity image of a Berea sandstone from CT imaging.2 cm. (Peters and Afzal.8. (Peters and Afzal.

5%.8 cm. Standard deviation = 2. Porosity histogram for a sandpack from CT imaging.2 cm.9.7%. d = 4.(Peters and Afzal. Mean = 29.Figure 2. 2–16 . 1992). L = 54.

There is a need to keep track of the quantity of each type of fluid occupying the pore space. Standard deviation = 2.(Peters and Afzal. The petrophysical property that describes the amount of each fluid type in 2-17 . there is always more than one fluid phase occupying the pore space.10. oil and water occupy the pore space. Porosity histogram for a Berea sandstone from CT imaging. oil.1 cm. Mean = 17. In a gas reservoir.3%.6 FLUID SATURATIONS In a petroleum reservoir.2 cm.0%. 2. d = 5. 1992). water and gas could occupy the pore space. At a certain point in the production of an oil reservoir. In an oil reservoir.Figure 2. L = 60. gas and water occupy the pore space.

be related to fluid saturation. So + Sw + Sg = 1. The volumes of oil and water divided by the pore volume of the core sample give the oil and water saturations. In this method. gas and pore space. Fluid approach is to measure some other physical property of the rock that can The direct approach is discussed here. Thus. Fluid Saturation = Fluid Volume Effective Rock Pore Volume (2. then Sw = Vw/Vp. So + Sw = 1. graduated receiving vessel (Figure 2. saturation may also be expressed in %. Vo.0. For an oil reservoir with a free gas saturation. There are two methods of determining the in-situ fluid saturations in a petroleum reservoir rock.11). which are condensed and collected in a small. So = oil saturation and Sg = gas saturation.10) If Sw = water saturation. One method of direct measurement of fluid saturations is the retort method.0. It is defined as the fraction of the pore space occupied by a fluid phase. where Vw. The indirect approach such as using electric logs or capillary pressure measurements to estimate water saturation will be discussed later. For an oil reservoir without a free gas saturation. oil. Sg + Sw = 1. and Sg = Vg/Vp. in general. So = Vo/Vp. 2–18 . The gas saturation is obtained indirectly by the requirement that saturations must sum to one. respectively. a core sample is heated so as to vaporize the water and oil. The direct approach is to measure the The indirect fluid saturations from a core cut from the reservoir. Vg and Vp are the volumes of water.the pore space is the fluid saturation.0. For a gas reservoir without a liquid hydrocarbon saturation.

it is necessary to heat the core to temperatures in the range of 1000 to 1100 °F. In order to remove all the oil.Figure 2. There are two disadvantages to the retort method of saturation determination.11. Retort distillation apparatus. At these 2-19 .

2–20 The Soxhlet extractor is similar to the Dean-Stark apparatus except that there is no provision for . toluene) rises through the core and is condensed back over the sample. the gas saturation is calculated indirectly from the requirement that the saturations must sum to one. This cracking and coking tend to reduce the oil volume resulting in an oil saturation that is less than the true value.temperatures.. resulting in an estimated water saturation that is higher than the true interstitial (connate) water saturation. To ensure that all the oil has been removed from the sample. This process leaches out the oil and water from the sample. The water saturation is calculated directly from the volume of The oil saturation is calculated water expelled from the sample. the water of crystallization (hydration) of the rock is driven off. The water and solvent are condensed and trapped in a graduated receiver.13). Another method of direct saturation measurement is by extraction with a solvent. the weight of the dry sample after distillation and the weight of the water expelled from the sample. Again. trapping the extracted liquids. The extraction is continued until no more water is collected in the receiving vessel.12).g. The water settles to the bottom of the receiver while the solvent refluxes back into the main heating vessel. The core is placed in the apparatus in such a way that the vapor from a solvent (e. The second disadvantage is that the oil when heated to high temperatures has a tendency to crack and coke. the sample may be transferred from the Dean-Stark apparatus to a Soxhlet extractor for further extraction (Figure 2. Corrections can be made to the retort measurements to make them more accurate. indirectly from the weight of the saturated sample before distillation. This is accomplished in a Dean-Stark distillation apparatus (Figure 2.

then the oil mud filtrate could potentially displace some of the water making the laboratory measured water saturation to be too low. Dean-Stark apparatus. 2-21 . If the original in-situ water saturation was not at the irreducible level. The measured oil saturation in this case would be the residual oil saturation after waterflooding. undisturbed formation water saturation. the water saturation obtained by direct measurement will be essentially the correct original water saturation.12. if it was at irreducible level.The saturations determined by direct measurements on cores should be treated with caution because they may not represent the insitu fluid saturations for several reasons. Figure 2. it would have been flushed by mud filtrate resulting in a higher water saturation than the original. If the core was cut with a water-based drilling mud. which is less than the original in-situ oil saturation. If the core was cut with an oilbased mud.

As the core is brought from the high pressure and temperature of the reservoir to the low pressure and temperature of the laboratory. In particular. expelling water and oil in the process. The evolution of solution gas causes the oil to "shrink". The free gas. changes occur in the fluid saturations which can make them considerably different from the original in-situ saturations. 2–22 . expand and further reduce the oil and water volumes.13. the changes cause gas saturation to be excessive even when there was no free gas saturation at the original in-situ conditions. Soxhlet extractor.Figure 2. will expand. Solution gas will evolve from the oil. if present. These changes cause the saturations determined by core analysis to be different from the in-situ saturations.

There was no free gas saturation below the gas oil contact at insitu conditions. oil saturation. wettability.5 to 4851. Sw and Sg. interfacial tension. and a gas cap on top of the oil zone. core permeability.5 feet. The saturation measurements can be used to approximately locate the gas-oil and water-oil contacts in the reservoir if they are present.14 shows the saturation distributions from the core data. only tell us the proportion of each fluid type in the pore space. Although the fluid saturations are not the true in-situ saturations. So.2 shows the data obtained in an example core analysis from a hydrocarbon bearing formation from a depth of 4805. Figure 2. 2-23 .5 ft. A gas oil contact exists at 4828. we need to consider the interfacial forces and phenomena that arise when immiscible fluids are confined in reservoir pores of capillary dimensions. capillarity and capillary pressure (see Chapters 6 and 7). and a water oil contact exists at 4848. an oil bearing zone above it. The table shows the depth. One can easily see a water bearing zone at the bottom where the measured water saturation is very high. To determine the fluid distribution. Fluid saturations. Table 2.Although the saturations determined by direct measurements on cores may not reflect the true in-situ saturations. They do not tell us how the fluids are distributed in the rock. nevertheless they provide useful information. water saturation and gas saturation as determined in the laboratory. core porosity. they do provide useful information about the reservoir. Note the misleading gas saturation below the gas oil contact.5 ft. The important interfacial forces and phenomena include surface tension.

0 68.0 0. 5 62. 7 26. 2 68. 1 78.0 0. 0 31.5 4807. 9 29. 2 60. 2 20. 4 38.5 4808.5 4812.0 0. 9 21. 5 38.0 0.5 4814.0 0. 9 18.0 0.5 4816.0 0.5 4819. 8 31. 9 13.0 0. 9 18.5 4821. 3 16.5 4824. 8 Sg (%) 32. 0 15. 1 86. 7 65.5 4809. 3 73. 3 17. 0 22. 7 75. 1 22. 2 34. 0 71. 8 69. 4 39. 6 16.5 4826. 3 65. 0 43.5 4810. 3 24. 8 39. 2 30. 2 15.5 4827. 0 65. 7 19. 9 77.0 0. 8 73. 1 70.5 4813.5 4825.5 12.0 0. 0 23. 3 15.0 0.5 4822.5 4815. 0 29. 3 15.5 4817. 6 60. 0 78.2: Core Analysis Data Depth (ft) 4805.5 4818.0 0. 1 20.0 0. 0 57. 4 23. 1 17. 4 28. 0 34.0 0.5 4806. 1 14.0 Sw (%) 68. 6 71.0 0. 3 34. 1 20.0 0.5 4820.0 0.5 59 221 211 275 384 108 147 290 170 278 238 167 304 98 191 266 40 260 179 312 φ (%) 7. 7 34.0 0.5 4811.0 0. 2 26. 3 24.0 0. 6 61. 3 15. 6 So (%) 0. 0 16.5 4823.0 0.Table 2.5 k (md ) 0 0 2. 8 65.0 0. 0 20. 2 2–24 .

4 1. 4 17. 5 61. 9 16.5 4850. 3 64.5 4830. 6 17. 3 19. 5 19.5 4851. 4 2-25 . 7 17. 8 61. 7 22. 3 15. 7 19. 1 0. 7 23. 0 15. 4 17. 2 22.5 4847. 8 13. 0 16. 0 56. 1 18. 8 18.7 77. 4 55.5 4837.5 4831.0 0. 6 19.1 0.0 6.5 4843.5 4845. 4 14. 2 22. 8 14. 6 65.5 4835. 7 19. 6 57. 5 59.5 4838. 3 20. 8 21. 6 68. 2 68. 5 8. 5 21.5 4829. 2 18. 3 19. 6 15. 5 19. 8 9.5 4840. 5 14.2 13. 8 36.0 34.5 4848. 0 16. 3 19.5 4842.5 4849. 2 59.5 4844. 3 62. 5 58.5 4833. 6 77.2 20. 3 24.5 272 395 405 275 852 610 406 535 663 597 434 339 216 332 295 882 600 407 479 0 139 135 0 15. 6 8. 5 19. 6 15. 0 20. 3 25.4828. 8 65. 6 16. 3 18. 7 64. 8 25. 5 20.5 4839. 1 15. 2 71.5 4834. 7 58. 2 21. 2 15. 2 59. 7 20.5 4841. 2 13.5 4836. 2 20. 4 17. 1 17.0 0. 8 27. 1 57. 3 19. 8 61. 3 22. 5 16. 9 42.5 4832. 1 15. 2 63.

All of 2–26 .Figure 2. Other useful observations can be made from the core analysis data.14. The low residual oil saturation of about 20% indicates a light oil reservoir in contrast to a heavy (more viscous) oil reservoir in which the residual oil saturation would be much higher than 20%. Saturation distributions from core analysis data.

a laboratory core has been relieved of the overburden and lateral stresses and because it is an elastic medium.1 Introduction to Well Logging In-situ porosity cannot be measured directly in the field as in the laboratory. Logs measure average porosities over a much larger volume than conventional laboratory core analysis. The porosity and permeability distributions are shown in Figure 2. Also.15. Therefore. However. they also vary laterally away from the well. Since the minerals have very low coefficient of expansion. Neither in-situ water saturation nor hydrocarbon saturation can be measured directly in the wellbore. which is an indication that the reservoir is heterogeneous in nature. Therefore.the measured properties vary with depth. only indirect measurements are made through well logging. Not only do the properties vary along the well depth. 2. Care should always be taken in comparing core versus log-derived porosities.7 INDIRECT POROSITY MEASUREMENT FROM WELL LOGS 2. Variability of reservoir properties is pervasive. particularly in rocks that have been highly affected by diagenesis. Most log evaluation is concerned primarily with determining in-situ porosity and water saturation. Thus. in this section. the porosity measured in the 2-27 . The characterization of this variability and the estimation of the properties at unmeasured locations are the subjects addressed by geostatistics (see Chapter 4). porosity and resistivity logs are discussed. the increase in volume must be due almost solely to the increase in porosity. it is possible to infer the water saturation if the porosity is known by measuring the resistivity of the formation. it will expand.7. These measurements use either sonic energy or some form of induced or applied radiation.

laboratory at ambient conditions may be expected to be higher than at in situ conditions.

Figure 2.15. Porosity and permeability distributions from core analysis data.

2–28

2.7.2 Mud Filtrate Invasion Well log measurements are made in the borehole after the well has been drilled. The drilling operation alters the formation characteristics near the wellbore where the log measurements are made. In order to interpret the logs, it is necessary to understand the changes that have occurred in the formation caused by the drilling mud. Drilling mud is a complex liquid usually composed of mainly water (for water-based muds) and suspended solids and various chemicals that control the mud properties (viscosity, fluid loss, pH and others). Clays (bentonite) are added to give the mud viscosity and weighting material (barite) is added to increase the mud density above that of water. The mud is circulated during drilling to lift the cuttings out of the borehole. Another important function of the mud is to exert a backpressure on the formation to prevent the well from "kicking" during the drilling operations. In general, during drilling, the pressure in the mud column in the borehole is higher than the formation pressure. If we take a mud sample and place it in a mud press as is typically done in mud testing, we can separate the mud into its two main components: mud filtrate and mudcake. Mud filtrate is a clear liquid whose salinity varies according to the source of the water used to mix the mud and the chemical nature of the additives. Usually, the filtrate salinity is lower than the formation water salinity. Since the filtrate is clear (no suspended solids), it can invade the formation if the pressure in the wellbore is greater than the formation pressure, which is the case during overbalance drilling. The mud filtrate can displace some of the original formation fluids away from the wellbore into the formation.

2-29

The mudcake seals off the formation from further invasion by the mud filtrate. The presence of the mudcake can be detected by the logging tool and will cause the borehole diameter to be smaller than the bit diameter. It is an indication of invasion and, indirectly, of permeability. Since the mudcake is a solid, it will not normally invade the formation. Drilling mud itself usually cannot invade the formation because it contains a lot of suspended solids. However, whole mud can be lost into the formation if the formation is inadvertently fractured. This is lost circulation, which should not be confused with mud filtrate invasion. The mudcake has a very low permeability and as a result, controls the volume of filtrate invasion. The depth of invasion is determined by the porosity of the formation. The depth of invasion will be greater in a low porosity formation than in a high porosity formation everything else being equal. Figure 2.16 shows a schematic diagram of the undisturbed formation and the altered formation after it has been penetrated by the bit. The left figure shows the undisturbed formation before it was drilled. Let us assume that this is a sandstone formation bounded above and below by impermeable shales. The bottom of the sand has water saturation, Sw, of 100% and the upper section of the sand is at an irreducible water saturation, Swirr. Irreducible water saturation is that saturation at which the water cannot be produced during normal production operations. The water occupies the lower portion of the formation because it is denser than oil which floats to the top of the formation. There is a transition zone in which the water saturation decreases from 100% at the bottom to 25% at the top over a finite length of the formation. This transition zone is caused by capillarity (see

2–30

Chapter 7). It should be pointed out that not all hydrocarbon bearing zones contain irreducible water. Some can contain mobile water.

Figure 2.16. Schematic diagram of mud filtrate invasion. Undisturbed formation is at left and invaded formation is at right.

On the right is the same formation after it has been drilled. Here, invasion has occurred. Because of the higher pressure in the borehole than the formation, the formation acts as a mud press and separates the mud into mudcake which plasters the borehole wall, and mud filtrate, which invades the formation. In order to invade the formation, the fluids that were originally there must be displaced. The filtrate flushes or

2-31

displaces the fluids deeper into the formation and takes their place near the wellbore. In the bottom of the formation where Sw = 100%, the flushing is nearly complete because the formation water is being displaced by water which is different only in salinity and is miscible with it. The salinity of any formation water left behind will soon reach equilibrium with the filtrate because of diffusion. In the upper part of the formation, we had an initially large oil saturation (Soi = 1-Swirr). Although most of the formation water has been displaced by mud filtrate, residual oil remains in the flushed zone with a saturation, Sor, because an immiscible displacement can never be complete. The filtrate has flushed out all the original fluids that it can flush out to a certain depth. This depth is called the flushed zone. The flushed zone water saturation is designated Sxo and the flushed zone diameter is designated dxo. The resistivity of the water in the flushed zone is Rmf, the resitivity of the mud filtrate, and the resistivity of the flushed zone formation is Rxo. If we go a little deeper into the formation, we will find a transition zone, which contains a mixture of formation fluids and mud filtrate. The zone, from the borehole wall to the end of the mud filtrate is the invaded zone and includes the flushed zone. The diameter of the invaded zone is designated as di, the water saturation is Si, and the formation resisitivity Ri. Note that in the flushed zone, Si = Sxo and Ri = Rxo. Since the water between dxo and di is a mixture of formation water and filtrate, it is not possible to measure a single value for Ri in this zone. Finally, as we pass the invaded zone, we return to the undisturbed or uncontaminated formation. This is the virgin zone. The conditions in this 2–32

zone are the same as at the left side of Figure 2.16. The resistivity of this undisturbed zone is Rt, the true formation resisitivity, which we ideally would like to measure for estimating the undisturbed water saturation, Sw. Figure 2.17 gives the same information about the fluid

distributions but in a different format. On the left is a plot of Sw versus depth for the undisturbed formation. At the bottom, Sw = 100% and is constant for about 30 ft from the bottom. We then enter the transition zone, where Sw changes with depth until it reaches an irreducible water saturation of about 25%. Sw is constant for the last 20 ft or so at Sw = Swirr. Note that the hydrocarbon saturation, Sh is equal to (1-Sw).

Figure 2.17. Variation of water saturation with distance from the borehole.

2-33

On the right are three sections drawn horizontally through the formation to show how Sw varies with distance from the borehole at three depths. At the bottom section, Sxo = Si = Sw = 100%. This is because there was never any hydrocarbon in this section of the formation and as a result, Sh = 0. The depth in the middle section was chosen in the transition zone where Sw was about 40%. We can see a change in the various water saturations because oil is present in this zone and some of it has been displaced by mud filtrate. Because of the residual oil, Sxo is less than 100% (Sxo = 1-Sor). Si will be lower than Sxo because some of the hydrocarbon that was originally in the flushed zone has been displaced into this zone, and Sw in the uncontaminated zone will be 40%. In the uppermost section, Sw is at its irreducible saturation value for the undisturbed formation. We see the maximum variation in the various saturations after invasion. Sxo will be lower than the Sxo in the transition zone, and (1-Sxo) will be close to the residual oil saturation, Sor. The water saturation will vary throughout between dxo and di. Beyond di, Sw = Swirr = 25%. In this uppermost section, we clearly see the flushed zone diameter, where Sxo is constant, and the end of the invaded zone, where Sw becomes constant. Most of the difficulties in log evaluation and the proliferation of many tool configurations are caused by the presence of mud invasion, usually of unknown depth, in the logging environment. Figure 2.18 shows a schematic diagram of the borehole condition for logging measurements.

2–34

Figure 2.18. Borehole conditions for well logging (Courtesy of Schlumberger).

2-35

2.7.3 Porosity Logs Conventional logging techniques for measuring porosity are the Density, Neutron and Sonic logs. All of these logs provide an indication of total porosity. Density Log The Density log measures the electron density of the formation by using a pad mounted chemical source of gamma radiation and two shielded gamma detectors (Figure 2.19). The medium-energy gamma rays emitted into the formation collide with electrons in the formation. At each collision, a gamma ray loses some, but not all, of its energy to the electron and then continues with reduced energy. This type of interaction is known as Compton scattering. The scattered gamma rays reaching the detector, at a fixed distance from the source, are counted as an indication of the formation density.

Figure 2.19. Schematic of density logging tool.

2–36

The number of Compton scattering collisions is related directly to the number of electrons in the formation. Therefore, the response of the density tool is determined essentially by the electron density (the number of electrons per cubic centimeter) of the formation. Electron density is related to the true bulk density in gm/cc, which in turn depends on the density of the rock matrix, the formation porosity and the density of the pore fluids. For a pure element, the electron density index, which is proportional to the electron density is defined as

ρe = ρb ⎜

⎛ 2Z ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ A ⎠

(2.11)

where ρe is the electron density index, ρb is the bulk density, Z is the atomic number of the element and A is the atomic weight of the element. For a molecule, the electron density index is given by

ρe = ρb ⎜ ⎜

⎛ 2∑ Z i ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ M ⎠

(2.12)

where M is the molecular weight and

∑Z

i

is the sum of the atomic

numbers of the atoms making up the molecule, which is equal to the number of electrons per molecule. For most materials encountered in the formation, the quantities in brackets in Eqs.(2.11) and (2.12) are approximately equal to unity as shown in Tables 2.3 and 2.4. The density tool is calibrated in a fresh water filled limestone formation of high purity to give an apparent density that is related to the electron density index by

2-37

ρ a = 1.0704 ρe − 0.1883

(2.13)

For liquid filled sandstones, limestones and dolomites, the apparent density read by the tool is practically equal to bulk density of the formation. The bulk density of a clean formation is given by

ρb = φρ f + ρ m (1 − φ )

Eq.(2.14) can be solved for the porosity as

(2.14)

φ=

ρ m − ρb ρm − ρ f

(2.15)

To calculate porosity from Eq.(2.15), the matrix and fluid densities must be known or assumed. The depth of investigation of the density log is relatively shallow. Therefore, in most permeable formations, the pore fluid is the drilling mud filtrate, along with any residual hydrocarbons. Usually, the fluid density is assumed to be 1.0 gm/cc. When residual hydrocarbon saturations are fairly high, this can cause the calculated porosity values to be greater than the true porosity, and should be corrected for this effect. Table 2.4 gives the densities of various rock matrices. Figure 2.20 shows a typical presentation of a density log. Track 1 shows the Gamma Ray log, which measures the natural gamma radiation of the formation. Radioactive elements such as uranium, potassium and thorium tend to occur more in shales than in sands. As a result, the Gamma Ray log is a lithology log that identifies shales from sands. The caliper in the same track measures the borehole diameter. 2–38

The formation density and the porosity derived from it are presented in Tracks 2 and 3. Also shown is the correction or compensation applied to account for mud cake effect and small borehole irregularities.

**Table 2.3: Atomic Properties of Common Elements in the Formation
**

Elemen t H C O Na Mg Al Si S Cl K Ca 1.008 12.01 1 16.00 0 22.99 24.32 26.98 28.09 32.07 35.46 39.10 40.08 11 12 13 14 16 17 19 20 8 1 6 1.984 1 0.999 1 1.000 0 0.956 9 0.986 8 0.963 7 0.996 8 0.997 8 0.958 8 0.971 9 0.998 0 A Z

⎛ Z⎞ ⎜2 ⎟ ⎝ A⎠

2-39

**Table 2.4: Densities of Rock Formations and Fluids Compound
**

Quartz Calcite Dolomite Anhydrite Sylvite Halite Gypsum Fresh Water Salt Water “Oil” Methane “Gas”

Formula

SiO2 CaCO3 CaMg(CO3)2 CaSO4 KCl NaCl CaSO4.H2O H2O 200,000 ppm N(CH2) CH4 C1.1H4.2

ρb (gm/cc)

2.654 2.710 2.870 2.960 1.984 2.165 2.320 1.000 1.146 0.850 ρmeth ρgas

⎛ 2∑ Z i ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ M ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠

0.9985 0.9991 0.9977 0.9990 0.9657 0.9581 1.0222 1.1101 1.0797 1.1407 1.247 1.238

ρe (gm/cc)

2.650 2.708 2.863 2.957 1.916 2.074 2.372 1.110 1.237 0.970 1.247ρmet

h

ρa (gm/cc)

2.648 2.710 2.876 2.977 1.863 2.032 2.351 1.00 1.135 0.850 1.335ρmeth0.188 1.325ρgas -0.188

1.238ρgas

2–40

Figure 2.20. Presentation of density log.

2-41

Sonic Log (Acoustic Log) The Sonic log measures the time, Δt, required for compressional sound wave to traverse one foot of formation. Known as the interval transit time, Δt is the reciprocal of the velocity of the compressional sound wave. To avoid fractions, the interval transit time is scaled by 106 and reported in micro-seconds per ft (μsec/ft). Thus,

106 Δt = v

(2.16)

where Δt is the interval transit time in μsec/ft and v is the compressional wave velocity in ft/s. The sonic tool contains a transmitter and two receivers (Figure 2.21). When the transmitter is energized, the sound wave enters the formation from the mud column, travels through the formation and back to the receivers through the mud column. The difference between the arrival times at the two receivers divided by the distance between the receivers gives the interval transit time. The speed of sound in the tool and the drilling mud is less than that in the formation. Accordingly, the first arrival of sound energy at the receivers corresponds to sound travel paths in the formation near the borehole. The logging tool has circuits to compensate for hole size changes or any tilting of the tool in the hole. The interval transit time in a formation depends upon lithology and porosity. In general, the more dense or consolidated a formation, the lower the interval transit time. An increase in travel time indicates an increase in porosity. Based on laboratory measurements, Wyllie (1956) concluded that in clean and consolidated formations with uniformly

2–42

**distributed small pores, there is a linear relationship between porosity and interval transit time as follows:
**

Δt = φΔt f + (1 − φ ) Δtm

(2.17)

where Δt is the interval transit time measured by the log, Δtf is the interval transit time in the pore fluid, Δtm is the interval transit time in the rock matrix, and φ is the formation porosity.

Figure 2.21. Schematic of sonic logging tool.

2-43

Eq.(2.17) can be solved for porosity as

φ=

Δt − Δtm Δt f − Δtm

(2.18)

To calculate porosity from Eq.(2.18), the transit times for the rock matrix and the pore fluid must be known or assumed. Table 2.5 gives the sonic speeds and interval transit times for common rock matrices. The depth of investigation of the sonic log is relatively shallow. Thus, the pore fluid is usually assumed to be mud filtrate with an interval transit time of 189

**μsec/ft, corresponding to a fluid velocity of 5300 ft/sec.
**

If any shale laminae exist in the sandstone, the apparent sonic porosity is increased by an amount proportional to the bulk volume fraction of such laminae. The interval transit time is increased because transit time for shale generally exceeds that of the matrix. In carbonates having intergranular porosity, Wyllie’s average formula still applies. But sometimes, the pore structure and pore size distribution are significantly different from sandstones. Also, there is often some secondary porosity such as vugs and fractures with much larger dimensions than the pores of the primary porosity. In vuggy formations, according to Wyllie, the velocity of sound depends mostly on the primary porosity, and the porosity derived from the sonic reading through the time average formula will tend to be too low by an amount approaching the secondary porosity. Direct application of the Wyllie formula to unconsolidated and insufficiently compacted sands gives porosity values that are too high. When shale transit time exceeds 100 μsec/ft, which is an indication of

2–44

undercompaction, then the compaction correction should be made to obtain more accurate porosity values. This is accomplished by applying an empirical correction factor as shown in Eq.(2.19):

φ =⎜

⎛ Δt − Δtm ⎞ ⎛ 100 ⎞ ⎜ Δt f − Δtm ⎟ ⎜ Δtsh ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎝

(2.19)

where Δtsh is the interval transit time in the adjacent shale. Figure 2.22 shows a typical presentation of the sonic log.

**Table 2.5: Sonic Speed and Interval Transit Time for Rock Formations
**

Δtm (μsec/ft) vm (ft/sec) Sandstones Limestones Dolomites Anhydrite Salt Casing (iron) 18,000 – 19,000 21,000 – 23,000 23,000 20,000 15,000 17,500 Δtm (μsec/ft) 55.5 – 51.0 47.6 – 43.5 43.5 50.0 66.7 57.0 (commonly used) 55.5 or 51.0 47.5 43.5 50.0 67.0 57.0

2-45

Figure 2.22. Presentation of sonic log. Neutron Log The Neutron log measures induced formation radiation produced by bombarding the formation with fast moving neutrons (Figure 2.23). 2–46

The tool responds primarily to the hydrogen present in the formation. Thus, in clean formations, whose pores are filled with water or oil, the neutron log reflects the amount of liquid-filled porosity. Neutrons are electrically neutral particles with a mass almost identical to the mass of a hydrogen atom. High-energy (fast) neutrons are continuously emitted from a radioactive source mounted in the logging tool. These neutrons collide with the nuclei of the formation materials. With each collision, a neutron loses some of its energy. The

Figure 2.23. Schematic of neutron logging tool.

amount of energy lost per collision depends on the relative mass of the nucleus with which the neutron collides. The greatest energy loss occurs when the neutron collides with a nucleus of practically equal mass, i.e., 2-47

However. the slowing down of neutrons depends largely on the amount of hydrogen in the formation. Thus. the neutrons travel farther from the source before they are captured. without losing any more energy. They then diffuse randomly. A high 2–48 . neutron logs measure the liquid filled porosity. Since there is very little difference in the concentration of hydrogen in oil or water. most of the neutrons are slowed down and captured within a short distance from the source. Within a few microseconds.hydrogen. corresponding to energies of around 0.025 electron volt (eV). hydrogen. silicon and others. either these capture gamma rays or the slow neutrons themselves are counted by a detector in the tool. until they are captured by the nuclei of atoms such as chlorine. Accordingly. Collisions with heavy nuclei do not slow the neutrons down very much. if the hydrogen concentration is small. The capturing nucleus becomes intensely excited and emits a high-energy gamma ray of capture. The porosity based on the neutron count is given by N = a − b log φ (2. Depending on the type of Neutron logging tool. the neutrons have been slowed down by successive collisions to thermal velocities. When the hydrogen concentration of the material surrounding the neutron source is large.20) where N is the slow neutrons counted. the counting rate at the detector increases for decreased hydrogen concentration and decreases for increased hydrogen concentration. a and b are empirical constants determined by appropriate calibration and φ is the porosity.

a zone containing gas will indicate a neutron porosity that is lower than it should be. Secondly. the neutron porosity is too low and the density porosity is too high. the fluid density is very much lower than the 1. In a gas zone. These features are really an advantage since a comparison of the neutron porosity to cores and other porosity logs provides a convenient method for determining shale volumes and for distinguishing gas zones from oil or water zones. the density porosity in a gas zone is higher than it should be. When the two porosity logs are superimposed.15) to calculate the density porosity. Thus. This cross over of the two logs can be used to identify gas bearing zones as shown in Figure 2. First. Figure 2. Two additional factors should be considered in the interpretation of neutron logs. The porosity is in neutron porosity units based on calibration with limestone or sandstone. As a result.24 shows a typical presentation of the Neutron log. will indicate a high neutron porosity due to the bound water associated with the shale. The neutron count is presented in API (American Petroleum Institute) units.0 gm/cc used in Eq. 2-49 .(2.25. shales and zones containing a significant amount of shale. because of the lower concentration of hydrogen in gas than in oil or water. in a gas zone. the two curves will agree is shales and in liquid zones and will cross over in gas zones.neutron counting rate indicates low porosity and a low neutron counting rate indicates high porosity.

24. Presentation of Neutron log.Figure 2. 2–50 .

2-51 .25. A comparison of neutron and density porosities.Figure 2. Shaded areas indicate gas zones.

They are also used in conjunction with lithology logs to identify hydrocarbon bearing intervals and to estimate the net pay thickness. These logs are usually recorded along with a Gamma Ray curve and a Caliper. all three logs are run in the same well. Figure 2. In well logging. 2. both resistivity and conductivity are used frequently. in conjunction with porosity and water resistivity.4 Resistivity Log Resistivity is one of the most useful physical properties measured in the borehole.Combination Porosity Logs In many areas. Resistivity = 1 Conductivity (2.21) 2–52 . Combination porosity logs are used to (1) differentiate oil or water from gas zones. hydrocarbon saturation. One is the reciprocal of the other. Sometimes. are used to obtain values of water saturation and consequently. independent of size and shape. (2) calculate quantitative values for lithology. Resistivity is the degree to which a substance “resists” or impedes the flow of electrical current. it is common practice to record more than one porosity log on a well.26 shows a section of the three porosity logs run in the same well. Formation resistivity measurements. Thus. Common combinations are Density-Neutron. Density-Sonic and Sonic-Neutron. and (3) determine volume of shale in the rock matrix.7. It is a physical property of the material.

2-53 . A comparison of the three porosity logs in the same formation.Figure 2.26.

which is usually shortened to ohm-meter. In reservoir rocks. The current then is carried by the ions of the salt. (3) water volume (porosity) and (4) hydrocarbon content. The amount of water contained in the formation is directly related to the porosity and. (2) reservoir temperature.Low resistivity corresponds to high conductivity and high resistivity corresponds to low conductivity. the formation resistivity is affected by (1) salt concentration in the water (salinity). As the volume of water increases. in electrical logging. Thus. 2–54 . Therefore. although we cannot directly measure the amount of hydrocarbon in a formation. these ions are capable of moving faster. conductivity is proportional to the salt concentration (salinity) of the water. current flow in sedimentary rocks is associated with the water in the pore space. The resistivity unit used in well logging is ohm-meter2/meter. as the formation temperature is increased. Although each ion is capable of carrying only a definite quantity of charge. it is expressed in millimhos per meter. hydrocarbons such as gas and oil are non-conductors. Therefore. affects the formation resistivity. In order to avoid decimal fractions. Also. we can infer the hydrocarbon content from resistivity measurements. Most of the waters encountered in well logging contain some sodium chloride (NaCl) in solution. the capacity for ions increases and the conductivity increases. which is dissolved in the water. also. Electrical conductivity is expressed in mhos per meter. Figure 2. the sedimentary minerals that make up the formation matrix are non-conductors. Thus. This results in increased conductivity.27 shows the variation of water resistivity with temperature at various salinities.

Ro = FRw or F = Ro Rw (2. Thus. Let Rw be the resistivity of the formation water.27. Ro be the resisitivity of the formation saturated 100% by the formation water of resistivity Rw and Rt be the true resistivity of the formation partially saturated with water of resistivity Rw and hydrocarbon.22) where F is a constant of proportionality at a given porosity known as the formation resistivity factor. He further found that F could be related to the porosity of the core by an equation of the form 2-55 . Archie (1953) found that Ro was directly proportional to Rw for clean.Figure 2. consolidated sandstone cores for a fixed porosity. Variation of water resistivity with temperature and salinity. Based on laboratory measurements.

1 1 Porosity Figure 2. Log-Log graph of formation resistivity factor versus porosity for various water resistivities.(2. Thus. 2–56 . Figure 2.10 and m = 1.3 for unconsolidated sands to 2. For these data.24) Eq. ln F = ln a − m ln φ (2. for clean sandstone cores of varied porosity.28.01 0.8648 -1. 1000 Formation Resistivity Factor y = 1.28 shows such a graph for clean sandstone cores.5 for consolidated sandstones.7332 100 10 1 0.F= a φm (2.1016x 2 R = 0.24) suggests that a graph of lnF versus lnφ should be linear.23) where a is an empirical constant and m is a cementation factor that varies from 1.73. a = 1.

(2.26) is known as the Humble formula and is still widely used in the petroleum industry. Sw. A group in Humble Oil (Now ExxonMobil) performed similar measurements and found that their data were best fitted by an equation of the form F= Ro 0. Therefore.For the cores used in his measurements.27) He found that the formation resistivity index. Archie found a to be approximately 1.62 = Rw φ 2. I.26) Eq. was related to the water saturation by an equation of the form I= Rt 1 = n Ro S w (2. he proposed the following relationship between formation resistivity factor and porosity F= 1 φm (2.28) 2-57 . Archie also conducted resistivity measurements in partially saturated cores to measure Rt at various water saturations. He defined formation resistivity index as I= Rt Ro (2.15 (2.0.25) Others performed similar measurements using their own core samples.

For this sample.30) Figure 2.29) Figure 2. Archie found n to be approximately 2 for the core samples in his study. n = 2.29 shows lnI versus lnSw for a Berea sandstone core. This profile is analogous to the water saturation profile of Figure 2.27.28) can be solved for the water saturation as Sw = n 1 R FRw =n o =n I Rt Rt (2.where n is the water saturation exponent. 2–58 .17. The hydrocarbon saturation is given by Sh = 1 − Sw (2.(2. Eq.30 shows an example invasion profile for resistivity measurements.

Resistivity index for Berea sandstone core 2-59 .Figure 2.29.

Three types of logging tools are used to measure formation resistivity: Induction tools.Figure 2. focused resistivity tools and unfocused resistivity tools. Table 2.30. These tools can be further subdivided into those that measure a very small volume of the formation (microresistivity logs) and those that measure a relatively large volume of the formation.6 presents a summary of the various resistivity tools and their limitations. 2–60 . Example invasion profile for resistivity logs.

31 shows the presentation of an electric log. Resistivity values are measured by recording the voltage drop across these electrodes. Figure 2. It consists of a Spontaneous Potential (SP) curve in Track 1 and a combination of resistivity curves designated as normal and lateral depending on the electrode arrangements. is used for correlation to define bed boundaries. with electrode spacing of 18 inches. Conrad and Marcel Schlumberger.Table 2. This log was invented and developed by two French brothers.6: Resistivity Tools Electric Log The Electric log was the basic and most frequently used log until the mid 1950's. The normal curve is produced by two effective electrodes downhole. and to measure the 2-61 . A short normal. a current electrode and a pickup electrode as shown in Figure 2.32.

2–62 .resistivity near the wellbore. Presentation of an electric log. Figure 2. Normal curves have a radius of investigation of approximately twice the electrode spacing.31.

The lateral curve is produced by three effective electrodes. Figure 2.32). Schematic of electric logging tool: (A) Normal curve. (B) Lateral curve. 2-63 . The radius of investigation is approximately equal to the electrode spacing. but are effective in measuring true resistivity in thick homogeneous formations. which is the distance from the current electrode to the midpoint between the two pickup electrodes. Lateral curves are nonsymmetrical and highly distorted by adjacent beds and thin beds.32. one current and two pickup electrodes (Figure 2. The spacing is usually in the range of 16 to 19 feet.

and it read close to true formation resistivity in formations where the resistivity was not over 200 ohm-meter and Rmf was greater than Rw. The signal in the receiver coil is detected. The ground loop currents set up a magnetic field of their own. 2–64 . The alternating magnetic field causes currents to flow through the formation concentric with the axis of the induction tool. it soon became recognized that the tool worked better than the original electric log in freshwater muds. They alternate at the same frequency as the magnetic field and the transmitter current flowing through the induction coil. All the original electric logging tools used the mud column to conduct the current into the formation. The currents. A high-frequency alternating current flows through a transmitter coil mounted on the logging tool (Figure 2. The induction tool works by the principle of electromagnetic induction. Although the induction tool was developed to meet the need for a resistivity tool that could operate in a nonconductive mud.33). are proportional to the conductivity of the formation. The induction curve was easier to read than the electric log.Induction-Electric Log The Induction-Electric log is a combination of electric log curves with induction curves. This current sets up a high-frequency magnetic field around the tool. The induction tool was developed to provide a means of logging wells drilled with oil-based (nonconductive) muds. This secondary magnetic field causes a current to flow in the receiver coil located in the logging tool. The amount of current flowing in the receiver coil is proportional to the ground loop currents and therefore to the conductivity of the formation. which extends into the formation. so they could not be run in nonconductive muds or air-drilled holes. called ground loops.

The vertical resolution (the thinnest bed that the tool will detect) is 40 inches. Thus. different depths of investigation can be designed into a tool. Rt.33 is a simple two-coil device. In practice. By judicious selection of these parameters. one can measure the resistivity profile through the invaded zone and correct the deep induction reading to move it close to the true formation resistivity. Schematic of induction logging tool. 2-65 . One popular induction tool used today has six different coils. The tool illustrated in Figure 2. Both the depth of investigation and the vertical resolution are affected by the spacing between the main transmitter and receiver coils as well as by the placement of the focusing coils.processed and recorded on the log as either a conductivity measurement or a resistivity measurement. bucking coils are used to help focus the effects of the main transmitter and receiver coils and to remove unwanted signals from the borehole. Figure 2. The depth of investigation (the depth from which most of the measurement is obtained) for a typical deep induction tool is about 10 feet.33.

along the US Gulf Coast and in other high-porosity. Since mud filtrate invasion is seldom deep in high-porosity formations. the induction electric log was the most popular induction tool in high-porosity formations such as in California. 18" normal and the induction curve on both the resistivity and conductivity scales. ILm. A shallow-reading laterolog combined with the two induction curves gives a good description of the resistivity profile. the ILd. 2–66 . reads very deeply into the formation. It includes an SP and/or Gamma Ray curve. For many years. could be used to determine Rt. A single induction curve with a vertical resolution of about 3 feet and a depth of investigation of about 10 feet was combined with either a short normal curve or a shallow laterolog curve. An amplified 18" normal curve is often recorded in areas where low resistivities are encountered. while the medium induction curve. reads only half as deep. The tool has two induction curves (ILd and ILm) with a vertical resolution of about 40 inches. moderate-resisitivity formations. Dual Induction Laterolog The Dual Induction Laterolog was developed for those areas that had low porosities and deep invasion. these two curves. one induction curve. corrected for borehole and bed boundary effects. However.34 shows a typical presentation of the induction electric log (IEL).Figure 2.

34.Figure 2. 2-67 . Presentation of induction-electric log.

The logarithmic presentation permits a greater dynamic range for resistivities and is convenient for determining ratios since the difference of two logarithms is equal to their ratio. Ri. The resistivity curves may be recorded on logarithmic or linear scales. Figure 2.36 shows a typical "tornado chart" (so called because of its distinctive shape) used to correct the dual induction log to obtain Rt. measures the combined resistivity of the flushed and invaded zones. Rxo. ILm. the resistivity of the flushed zone.35 shows a typical presentation of a dual induction laterolog. and the true formation resistivity. Rt. The shallow laterolog measures the resistivity of the flushed zone. The deep induction curve responds primarily to the resistivity of the uncontaminated zone. Rt.Figure 2. di. Rxo. The medium induction curve. An SP and/or Gamma Ray curve and three resistivity curves having different depths of investigation are recorded. 2–68 . The ratios of shallow to deep curves and medium to deep curves are used to determine the diameter of invasion.

2-69 .35. Presentation of dual induction laterolog.Figure 2.

Tornado chart used to correct deep induction resistivity to true resistivity.36. 2–70 .Figure 2.

of the current penetrates surrounding resistive material. Rt. Figure 2. Shallow guard systems. are used with tools like the Dual Induction for measuring the flushed zone resistivity. utilizing short guard electrodes (approximately 30 inches). or the invaded zone resistivity. if any. The radius of investigation is approximately three times the length of the guard electrode. the induction logging tool is also adversely affected because too much of the receiver voltage is derived from high conductivity of the invaded zone. referred to as the guard and laterolog. the current that is emitted from a normal or lateral electrode is almost entirely confined within the borehole and flows up and down within the mud column. guard electrodes are placed above and below a current electrode and kept at the same potential to focus the formation current into a thin disc. Under similar borehole conditions. In the guard system. The longer guard (5 feet in length) systems are used for measuring the true resistivity of the uncontaminated formation.Focused Electric Log (Guard and Laterolog) In boreholes which contain extremely saline drilling muds or very high resistivity formations. The guard log defines bed boundaries very well and is affected very little by adjacent bed resistivities. which flows perpendicularly to the borehole. Ri. There are two different focused-current logging systems.37). Rxo. Focused-current logging tools have been designed to overcome these problems in part.38 shows an example guard log presentation. A controlled current is emitted from the short-circuited outer 2-71 . The laterolog electrode arrangement consists of a center current electrode placed symmetrically between three short-circuited pairs of electrodes. in use today (Figure 2. Very little.

which flows perpendicularly to the borehole. Various laterolog tools have been developed over the years. these electrode arrangements focus the formation current into a thin disc. Focused-current electrode arrangements. similar to the dual induction tool.pair of electrodes in such a manner that the voltage difference between the two inner short-circuited pairs of electrodes is essentially zero.37. which is mounted on a pad pressed against the borehole. has both deep and shallow measuring laterologs. As in the guard system. the dual laterolog is common. It is often run in conjunction with a very shallow reading laterolog tool. Figure 2. 2–72 . This tool. Among the most commonly used tools.

However. Collectively. and then to the uncontaminated zone. a feature which minimizes corrections. through the invaded zone to the undisturbed formation. Microresistivity Logs Microresistivity tools are designed to measure the resistivity of the flushed zone (Rxo). Microresistivity logs include the microlog.This shallow reading curve. through the invaded zone.39). the resistivity readings are a combination of these different zones. Since the current path for these logs is through the mud to the borehole wall. called the micro-spherically focused log. measures the flushed zone resistivity (Rxo). Rxo tools have very shallow readings. with depths of investigation approximately 1 to 4 inches. The electrodes are mounted on flexible pads pressed against the borehole wall. microlaterologs and microspherically focused logs. thereby eliminating most of the effects of the mud on the measurement (Figure 2. these logs can be used to estimate • • • • • • • Depth of invasion Flushed zone water saturation (Sxo) Moveable hydrocarbon saturation (Sxo-Sw) Corrections for deep induction and laterologs Permeability Hole diameter Pay zone thickness 2-73 . This combination of measurements can define the resistivity profile from the borehole. Since the flushed zone could be only 3 or 4 inches deep. mud and the invaded zones affect the tool's resistivity measurement much less than unfocused tools.

Figure 2. Presentation of a guard log. 2–74 .38.• Porosity.

Figure 2. Microresitivity logging tools. 2-75 .39.

2. and certain ionselective rocks such as shale. The SP is measured in millivolts (mV). If the formation water is more saline than the mud filtrate. The position of the shale baseline on the SP log is arbitrary as it is set by the logging engineer so that the curve deflections remain in the SP track of the log.5 Lithology Logs Two lithology logs are commonly used in formation evaluation. An SP curve cannot be recorded in boreholes filled with nonconductive muds. In thick beds. The deflection may be to the left (negative) or to the right (positive). It is a recording versus depth of the difference between the electrical potential of a moveable electrode in the borehole and the electrical potential of a fixed surface electrode. conductive drilling mud.7. If it is less saline than the mud filtrate. such as oil muds or air. Opposite permeable formations. Spontaneous Potential Log (SP) The SP curve records the electrical potential produced by the interaction of formation water. Opposite shales. these deflections tend to reach an essentially constant deflection defining a sand line. the deflection is to the left. Also. Both are recordings of naturally occurring phenomena in the formation. because such muds do not provide electrical continuity between the SP electrode and the formation. the deflection is to the right. depending primarily on the salinities of the formation water and of the mud filtrate. the curve shows deflections from the shale baseline. if the resistivities of the mud filtrate and formation water are about 2–76 . called the shale baseline. the Spontaneous Potential (SP) log and the Gamma Ray (GR) log. the SP curve usually defines a more or less straight line on the log.

shales resemble ion-selective membranes. shales are permeable to the Na+ cations but impermeable to the Cl. These currents are caused by electromotive forces in the formation. and the force causing them to move constitutes a potential across the shale.are more mobile than Na+ ions.can diffuse from one electrolyte to the other. This is equivalent to a conventional current flow in the opposite direction as shown by the 2-77 . The deflections on the SP curve result from electric currents flowing in the mud in the borehole.equal. Consider a permeable formation with thick shales above and below it. Only the Na+ cations are able to move through the shale from the more saline to the less saline NaCl solution. This movement of charged ions constitutes an electric current. which are of electrochemical and electrokinetic origins. Assume that the two electrolytes present.ions from the more saline to the less saline electrolyte. The curve arrow in the upper section of Figure 2. Here Na+ and Cl. formation water and mud filtrate. Because of the layered clay structure and the charges on the layers. Since Cl.anions. the SP deflections will be small and the curve will be rather featureless and useless. A second component of the electrochemical potential is produced at the edge of the invaded zone where the mud filtrate and formation water (the electrolytes) are in direct contact. Since shales pass only the cations. the net result of the diffusion is the flow of negative Cl. contain sodium chloride (NaCl) only. and the potential across the shale is called the membrane potential.40 shows the direction of the current corresponding to the flow of Na+ ions through the adjacent shale from the more saline formation water to the less saline drilling mud in the borehole.

31) where aw and awf are the chemical activities of the two solutions at formation temperature. The chemical activity of a solution is roughly proportional to salinity and hence to its conductivity. corresponding to these two phenomena is given by aw amf Ec = − K log (2. The current flowing across the junction between solutions of different salinity is produced by an electromotive force called liquid-junction potential. If the solutions contain substantial amounts of salts other than NaCl. and for NaCl formation water and mud filtrate is 71 at 25 ºC (77 ºF). If the permeable formation is shaly.40. The magnitude of the liquid-junction potential is much smaller than the membrane potential. the value of K at 77 ºF may differ from 71. K is a coefficient proportional to temperature. 2–78 . Ec. or contains dispersed clay. the total electrochemical emf.arrow A in the upper half of Figure 2. the total electrochemical emf will be reduced since the clay produces an electrochemical membrane of opposite polarity to that of the adjacent shale bed. If the permeable formation is clean (not shaly).

Figure 2. Schematic representation of potential and current distribution in and around a permeable bed. 2-79 .40.

However. This negative variation corresponds to an SP curve deflection to the left of the SP log as shown in the figure. Eksh. therefore. there is no direct relationship between the magnitude of the SP deflection and permeability. The movement of ions. which causes the SP phenomenon. An electrokinetic emf. nor does the SP deflection have any direct relationship with the porosity.40. The magnitude of the electrokinetic potential is determined by several factors. In the borehole. among which are the differential pressure producing the flow and the resistivity of the electrolyte. the SP currents flow through four different media: the borehole (mud). is possible only in formations that have a certain minimum permeability. The net contribution to the SP deflection is.An electrokinetic potential. The lower portion of Figure 2. Thus. an electrokinetic emf. which is generally small and negligible. Ek (also known as streaming potential or electrofiltration potential). the difference between Ekmc and Eksh. Ekmc. the potential observed over the permeable bed is negative with respect to the potential opposite the shale. is produced when an electrolyte flows through a permeable. Each of these electrokinetic emfs contributes to a more negative SP reading opposite the permeable bed and opposite the shale. The current direction shown corresponds to the more usual case where the salinity of the formation water is greater than that of the mud filtrate. nonmetallic. since it may have sufficient permeability to permit a tiny amount of filtrate flow from the mud. the noninvaded 2–80 .40 shows how the SP currents flow in the borehole and formations. is produced by the flow of the mud filtrate through the mud cake. the invaded zone. may also be produced across the shale. porous medium. As shown in Figure 2.

a measurement of only the potential drop in the borehole (mud) resulting from the SP currents. however. and the surrounding shale. The deflections on the SP curve are. Also. This potential drop represents only a fraction (although usually the major fraction) of the total emf. The SP curve recorded in such an idealized condition is called the static SP curve and is shown in the lower part of Figure 2.part of the permeable formation. the potential differences observed in the mud would equal the total emf. In general. (2) the resistivity (Ri) and the diameter (di) of the invaded zone. shale-free permeable beds of moderate to low resistivity are sharply defined by the SP curve. 2-81 . High resistivity beds distort the SP currents. (3) the resistivity (Rs) of the surrounding formation. In each medium.40. Figure 2. the SP curve is depressed in permeable zones that contain shale or hydrocarbon. The total potential along a line of current flow is equal to the total emf. causing a change in the shape of the SP curve at bed boundaries and thus poor boundary definitions.40. If the currents could be prevented from flowing by means such as the insulating plugs as shown in the upper part of Figure 2. The shape of the SP curve is influenced by (1) the thickness (h) and resistivity (Rt) of the permeable bed.41 shows the presentation of an SP curve. the potential along a line of current flow drops in proportion to the resistance encountered. and (4) the resistivity of the mud (Rm) and the diameter (d) of the borehole.

In sedimentary formations. The GR log can be recorded in cased holes. Clean formations usually have a very low level of radioactivity. the log normally reflects the shale content of the formation because the radioactive elements tend to concentrate in clays and shales. unless a radioactive contaminant such as volcanic ash or granite wash is present or formation waters contain dissolved radioactive salts.Figure 2. which makes it very useful as a correlation curve in completion and workover operations. The Gamma Ray Log (GR) The GR log is a measurement of the natural radioactivity of the formation. It is 2–82 . Presentation of an SP curve in a sand-shale sequence.41.

natural gamma rays are gradually absorbed and their energies reduced as they pass through the formation. These elements emit gamma rays. the number and energies of which are characteristic of each element. it is absorbed by means of photoelectric effect. is proportional to the weight concentrations of the radioactive material in the formation: GR = ∑ρV A i i i ρb (2.32) 2-83 . In each case. but having different densities. gamma rays experience successive Compton-scattering collisions with atoms of the formation material. it is useful for the location of shales and nonshaly beds and. whereas the uranium and thorium series emit gamma rays of various energies. The less dense formations will appear to be slightly more radioactive than the more dense formations. Nearly all gamma radiation encountered in the earth is emitted by the radioactive potassium isotope of atomic weight 40 (K40) and by the radioactive elements of the uranium and thorium series. Potassium emits gamma rays of a single energy at 1. In passing through matter. Gamma rays are bursts of high-energy electromagnetic waves that are emitted spontaneously by some radioactive elements.42 shows the energies of the emitted gamma rays. most importantly. Figure 2. losing energy with each collision.frequently used to complement the SP log and as a substitute for the SP curve in wells drilled with salt mud.46 MeV. Two formations having the same amount of radioactive material per unit volume. After the gamma ray has lost enough energy. air or oil-based muds. The GR log response. Thus. after appropriate corrections. by an atom of the formation. for general correlation. will show different levels of radioactivity.

where ρi are the densities of the radioactive minerals. Ai are proportionality factors corresponding to the radioactivity of the mineral.42. 2–84 . Vi are the bulk volume factors of the minerals. The gamma ray logging tool contains a detector to measure the gamma radiation originating in the volume of formation near the tool. and ρb is the bulk density of the formation. Figure 2. the depth of investigation of the GR log is about 1 foot. Gamma ray emission spectra of radioactive minerals. In sedimentary formations.

2-85 . cased holes). The GR log is particularly useful for defining shale beds when the SP is distorted (in very resistive formations). in many regions. For this reason. 2. when the SP is featureless (in fresh water-bearing formations or in salty muds.7.Scintillation counters are now generally used for this measurement. A field calibration standard is used to normalize each tool to the API standard and the logs are calibrated in API units. irreducible water saturation. It is readily combined with most other logging tools and permits the accurate correlation of logs made on one trip into the borehole with those that were made on another trip.20). such as potash and uranium ore. can be used to quantitatively as a shale indicator. The radioactivities in sedimentary formations generally range from a few API units in anhydrite or salt to 200 or more units in shales. The primary calibration for the gamma ray tools is in the API (American Petroleum Institute) test facility in Houston. gamma ray logs have a ragged appearance (see Figure 2. The bed boundary is picked at the point midway between the maximum and minimum deflection of the anomaly. empty or airdrilled hole. They are much more efficient than the Geiger-Mueller counters used in the past. The GR log is part of most logging programs in both open hole and cased hole. or when the SP cannot be recorded (in nonconductive mud. Events resulting in gamma rays are random. when Rmf = Rw).6 Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Logs NMR measurements of fluids in porous media can be used under favorable conditions to estimate porosity. It is also used for the detection and evaluation of radioactive minerals. The gamma ray reflects the proportion of shale and.

In the absence of an externally applied magnetic field. fluid viscosity. Alignment parallel to B0 is the lower energy orientation and is thus preferred. H nuclei (protons) possess a strong magnetic moment (second only to radioactive 3H). the spinning motion causes a magnetic moment that is co-linear with the direction of the spin axis. the energy difference between the two states is very small. there is a tendency for the magnetic moments 1 to align with the external field. Thermal energy alone causes the two states to be almost equally populated. which. together with the high natural abundance of hydrogen and prevalence in most fluids. However. we can define two groups or populations of spins. In this section. makes it the ideal nucleus for NMR logging and NMR imaging in radiology. The remaining population difference results in a net bulk 2–86 . Since atomic nuclei are charged particles.moveable fluid saturation. surface to volume ratios and permeability. Consider a collection of 1H nuclei as in Figure 2. H nuclei with a quantum number of I = 1 2 in this situation may adopt one of two possible orientations: alignment parallel or anti-parallel to B0 as shown in Figure 2. the individual magnetic moments have no preferred orientation and the net magnetization of the collection of spins is zero. Nuclear Spins in a Magnetic Field Most atomic nuclei possess a quantum mechanical property called spin angular momentum. Thus. However. while the anti-parallel alignment is the higher energy state. pore size distribution.43. This means that the nucleus spins around an axis. depending on their orientation. the principles of NMR and its use in petrophysical measurements are presented. The strength of this magnetic moment is a property of the type of 1 nucleus.44. if an externally supplied magnetic field (denoted as B0) is imposed.

magnetization aligned parallel to B0. Random orientations of the nuclear magnetic moments in the absence of an externally applied magnetic field.43.44. Bo parallel antiparrallel Figure 2. The individual spins do not align exactly parallel or anti-parallel to B0. This is analogous to the case of a spinning top: Figure 2. It is only this net magnetization arising from a small population difference that is detectable by NMR techniques. but at an angle to B0. Two orientations of the nuclear magnetic moments in the 2-87 .

which is determined by the strength of the magnetic field and the type of nucleus. Bo is the magnetic field strength. The bulk net magnetization M The individual magnetic moments precess at a certain frequency.33) where ω0 is the Larmor frequency (in radians per second). The Larmor equation gives this frequency as ω0 = γ B0 (2.presence of an externally applied magnetic field (Bo). Bo M parallel antiparallel Figure 2.45 shows a model for a large collection of spins at any given instant. This precession defines the surface of a cone. Here. and γ is a constant for each nucleus known as 2–88 . each of the vectors (arrows) represents an individual spin. the top precesses about the axis defined by the pull of gravity. known as the Larmor frequency.45. The vector M represents the bulk net magnetization that results from the vector sum of the contributions from each of the spins. Figure 2.

7: Magnetic Resonance Properties of Some Important Nuclei Nucleus H C 19 F 23 Na 31 P 13 1 Natural Abundance % 99.(2.830 0.7. So H nuclei (protons) possess a strong magnetic moment and are most commonly used in NMR logging and NMR imaging.066 The Effect of Radiofrequency Pulses .093 0. RF radiation. and energy dissipation is mediated by relaxation processes. like all electromagnetic radiation. we can see that 1 H nucleus has the highest 1 relative sensitivity and a high natural abundance.016 0.98 1. The term “resonance” implies alternating absorption and dissipation of energy.33) is the fundamental equation for all NMR methods. We may consider the RF as another magnetic field of strength B1 perpendicular to B0 as shown in Figure 2. From Table 2.Resonance Absorption In order to detect a signal.0 γ Hz / Gauss 4257 1071 4005 1126 1723 Relative Sensitivity 1.0 100. By 2-89 . At equilibrium. a condition of resonance needs to be established.0 0.0 100. M (=Mo) is stationary and difficult to observe. Table 2. possesses electric and magnetic field components.46.10 100.the gyromagnetic ratio. Energy absorption is caused by radiofrequency (RF) perturbation. Eq.7 gives γ values for some NMR active nuclei. Table 2.

This is called a 90degree pulse. and that current can be used to record the action of the magnetization in the transverse plane. There are two relaxation processes involved: transverse relaxation and longitudinal relaxation. Relaxation is the process by which the nuclei release this energy and return to their original configuration. A second magnetic field B1 generated by Radiofrequency (RF) 2–90 . RF energy is absorbed by the nuclei when it is broadcast at the Larmor frequency. Once in the transverse plane. This rotating magnetization can induce an alternating current (AC) in a receiver coil. Bo M B1 Figure 2. A maximum transverse component is obtained by applying B1 with an amplitude and duration that rotates M by 90 degree and into the plane transverse to B0. M precesses (rotates) around the B0 axis at the Larmor frequency. M can be rotated so that it has a component transverse to B0. The signal that is induced in the receiver coil decays over time.46.applying an RF field B1 perpendicular to B0. Relaxation Processes In resonance absorption. The signal decay is due to a process known as relaxation.

1950). This decay process is exponential and the decay envelop can be expressed by the equation 0 M transverse = M transverse exp ( −t / T2* ) (2. the equilibrium magnetization in the transverse plane is zero. ΔB0 effects are largely suppressed by correcting the magnetic field uniformity as much as possible.34) 0 where M transverse is the initial transverse magnetization immediately after a 90º RF pulse. ΔB0 2-91 . After a second delay τ. which in turn yields a range of Larmor frequencies. which characterizes the rate of signal decay. the transverse magnetization M transverse is refocused as an NMR spin-echo. and by employing NMR “spin-echo” techniques. One of the major causes of this dephasing is B0 inhomogeneity (ΔB0) effects. a process known as “dephasing” in the transverse plane. M transverse is the transverse magnetization at any given time t after a 90º RF pulse. So the signal that is induced in the receiver coil will decay over time and reach zero some time after the 90º RF pulse is turned off. the net magnetization is longitudinal (B0 direction). Since the signal recorded is the vector sum of all the transverse components. The decay mechanism is that different components of the magnetization may precess at slightly different rates. the dephasing ΔB0 effects are largely reversed by following a 90-degree RF pulse with a short delay τ and a 180-degree “refocusing” pulse. sufficient dephasing will lead to complete cancellation of the signal.Given that at equilibrium. Spins at different locations are not exposed to exactly the same B0 field. T2* is the apparent NMR transverse relaxation time or spin-spin relaxation time. In spin-echo NMR (Hahn.

T2 is the true NMR transverse relaxation time or spin-spin relaxation time. where the NMR signal is refocused multiple times as shown in Figure 2. 400 or more echos are used in the measurements. In Eq. 2–92 . In NMR logging.35) where TE=n2τ and n is the number of 180-degree pulses.35). then equation (2. which measures the amplitudes of the decaying echos is the fundamental well log measurement and is used to compute the T2 spectrum. where the dephasing from ΔB0 is momentarily rephased.34) can be rewritten as 0 M transverse = M transverse exp ( −TE / T2 ) (2. Another more accurate method.(2. This method removes unwanted molecular diffusion effects. If the induced signal is measured at time TE after a 90º RF pulse. and one that is used in NMR logging.35). then fitting the resulting M transverse versus TE curve to Eq. The exponential curve.effects are canceled at the center of the echo.47. T2* is substituted with T2 upon the correction of ΔB0 effects. T2 can be measured by repeating the spin-echo experiment with different TE. is to employ a multiple-spin-echo sequence.(2.

Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill spin echo pulse sequence.47. T1 is greater than or equal to T2. as time passes.36) where M0 is the equilibrium value of the longitudinal magnetization. the net magnetization vector lies in the transverse plane. Therefore. This buildup of the longitudinal magnetization is also exponential in time and can be expressed as M z ( t ) = M 0 ⎡1 − exp ( −t / T1 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ (2. However. Longitudinal relaxation is a process that restores the longitudinal magnetization to its equilibrium state after an RF pulse is turned off. longitudinal magnetization is zero. For any given system.Figure 2. (T1 and T2 of 1H nuclei in water 2-93 . Mz(t) is the longitudinal magnetization at any given time t after a relaxation time 90º RF pulse. and T1 is the NMR longitudinal relaxation time or spin-lattice that characterizes the rate of buildup. the longitudinal magnetization will approach the equilibrium value. Immediately after a 90º pulse.

e. This time. In an NMR experiment. TR should be greater than 5T1. the T1 and T2 are significantly lower than in a test tube and are of the order of milliseconds). i. then fitting the resulting M transverse versus TR to Eq.in a test tube is about 3 seconds. Molecular Diffusion Effect 2–94 . 0 M transverse = M 0 ⎡1 − exp ( −TR / T1 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ (2. is conventionally assigned the z direction. known as the repetition time TR.. T1 can be measured by repeating an NMR experiment with several different TR values.39) As Eq. Substituting TR into Eq. B0=Bz.37) where Mz(TR) is the longitudinal magnetization at the repetition time TR after a 90º RF pulse is turned off. In general.38).(2.(2. sufficient time must elapse between successive 90º RF pulses to allow M to achieve equilibrium.(2.(2. the M transverse for this subsequent 90º RF pulse should be equal to Mz(TR)) of Eq. The longitudinal direction or direction of B0.38) implies.38) Substituting Eq.38) into Eq. Thus.(2.36) gives M z (TR ) = M 0 ⎡1 − exp ( −TR / T1 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ (2. Since another 90º RF pulse is applied 0 immediately at time TR.(2. In a porous medium.35) gives the transverse magnetization at the time of measurement as M transverse = M 0 ⎡1 − exp ( −TR / T1 ) ⎤ exp ( −TE / T2 ) ⎣ ⎦ (2.37). depends on the sample’s T1.

This would be applicable to the spins in a bulk fluid such as the protons in water in a test tube. Further. the protons in small pores will relax faster than those in large pores.40) where D is the diffusion coefficient and G (∝ΔB0) is the magnetic field gradient. the NMR decay signal will contain a spectrum of T2 relaxation times. NMR Signal and Corresponding T2 Spectrum The exponential decay curve shown in Figure 2.Random thermal motion will affect the NMR signal as spins move from one part of the sample to another and experience a different magnetic field strength because of static field inhomogeneities.40) (Hahn. This effect can be expressed by Eq. The signal can be decomposed into its T2 spectrum by using a multi-exponential model as M ( t ) j =m = ∑ f j exp ( −t / T2 j ) M0 j =1 (2. when the fluids are confined in the pore space of a porous medium. However.41) 2-95 . As a result. Variation in the frequency and phase of these mobile spins introduces a phase incoherence that causes a reduction in the signal amplitude. the protons near the pore wall will relax faster (shorter T2) than those in the center of the pores.47 suggests that all the spins relax at the same T2 relaxation time. 1950): ⎛ T 0 M transverse = M transverse exp ⎜ − E ⎝ TR ⎡ 2 Dγ 2G 2 ⎛ TE ⎞3 ⎤ ⎞ exp ⎢ − ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 3 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎥ ⎢ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (2.(2.

. Note the noisy data.41) to each echo gives the following system of linear equations in fj gi = M ( ti ) j = m = ∑ f j exp ( −ti / T2 j ) + ε i for i = 1. n M0 j =1 (2. The magnitude of the NMR signal at t =0 (M0) is proportional to the number of hydrogen nuclei in the measurement volume.49 shows the corresponding T2 spectrum obtained from the data of Figure 2.43) where αi is a regularization constant or smoothing parameter. The inversion problem is to find a set if T2 amplitudes. This number can be calibrated into the total NMR porosity. Application of Eq. εi is the error caused by noise in the data and n is the total number of echos.where fj is proportional to the population of protons which have a relaxation time of T2j. fj. gi. 2–96 .48 shows an example log measurement for n = 500.48. A least square fit is used to determine the fjs that minimize the sum m ⎛ m ⎞ 2 ⎜ ∑ f j exp ( −ti / T2 j ) − gi ⎟ + α ∑ f j j =1 ⎝ j =1 ⎠ 2 ∑ i =1 n (2. 2. from a set of measurements of echos.. with 12 measurements averaged together.. TE = 1. Figure 2.42) where gi is the amplitude of the echo measured at time ti.2 milliseconds. Figure 2.(2..

49. T2 spectrum of the data of Figure 2. Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill spin echo measurements.Time (ms) Figure 2.49. 2-97 . T2 (ms) Figure 2.48.

50.Based on laboratory measurements in sandstone cores.50. this is shown as the fraction of the 2–98 . T2 spectrum and fluid distribution in the pore space.50 is as follows. the NMR spectrum can be divided into several segments to represent the fluid distribution in the pore space as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2. the area under the spectrum is equal to the total NMR porosity. In Figure 2.50. In this figure. The nomenclature for Figure 2. The Free Fluid Index (FFI) is the percent of the bulk volume occupied by movable fluids (water + hydrocarbon).

The irreducible water consists of two components: (1) Clay Bound Water (CBW) (T2 from 0. The Free Fluid Index is also known as Bulk Volume Movable (BVM). The Bulk Volume Irreducible (BVI) is the percent of the bulk volume containing irreducible water. capillary bound water and clay bound water).50) 2-99 .45) V p = VCBW + VBVC + VBVM VCBW + VBCV VBVM + Vb Vb VCBW + VBCV Vb VBVM Vb (2.bulk volume for T2 greater than 30 milliseconds.48) BVM = (2. which is the water trapped by capillary forces.47) BVI = (2. which is the water bound to the clay minerals and (2) Bulk Volume Capillary (BVC) (T2 from 3 to 30 milliseconds). These bulk volumes are related to porosity and saturations as follows: φtotal = Vp Vb (2.49) φtotal = BVI + BVM (2.44) Si = Vi Vp (2.3 to 300 milliseconds) is the percent of the bulk volume occupied by water (moveable. The Bulk Volume Water (BVW) (T2 from 0.46) φtotal = (2.3 to 3 milliseconds).

59) Figure 2. where the 2–100 .2 to 0.54) φe = VBVC + VBVM φtotalVb BVC + BMV (2.53) φe = (2. Also shown in the third track is the T2 spectrum.57) BVI = φtotal S wirr FFI = φtotal (1 − S wirr ) (2.2 to 3 ms) correspond to clay bound fluid.58) (2. and very small pore bound fluid (0.φtotal = MPHI BVM = φtotal − BVI = MPHI − BVI = FFI Vw S wV p = = S wφtotal Vb Vb VBVC + VBVM Vp (2. The two small pore bound fluids (0.28 ms).52) BVW = (2. Note the two streaks with free fluid at depths of X163 m and X189 m. capillary bound fluid (3 to 30 ms).28 to 3 ms).55) φe = φtotal ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞ BVI ⎟⎜ b ⎟ = ⎟ Vb ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ φtotal (2.51 shows an NMR log in which the pore fluids in the second track have been divided into free fluid (above 30 ms). with a T2 cutoff of 30 ms for free fluid. small pore bound fluid (0.51) (2.56) ⎛V + VBVC S wirr = ⎜ CBW ⎜ Vp ⎝ (2.

T1bulk>>T1surface. The simplest and most common model is the “two-fraction fast-exchange” model (Senturia and Robinson. the observed relaxation rate is given by a single average T1 value as 1 1 S λ = + T1 T1bulk V T1surface (2. Assuming that diffusion of the fluid is much faster than the relaxation process. This example is from a predominantly shaly formation where the differences in the bound fluids are more apparent. The NMR T1 relaxation behavior of a fluid confined within a pore is sensitive to both the pore geometry and size. 1970. Usually. The T1 technique basically determines the surface/volume ratio as a characteristic pore-size parameter. Pore Size Distribution NMR relaxation measurements have been shown to be a sensitive probe in the study of the microscopic structure of porous media. so Eq.(2.60) where S/V is the pore surface area to volume ratio and λ is the thickness of the surface monolayer. 1990). which assumes that there are two magnetically distinct phases within the pore: a bulk phase with relaxation characteristic of the bulk fluid and a surface phase with much faster relaxation..60) can be simplified as 2-101 . and thus yields much useful information when related to the pore-size distribution via an appropriate mathematical model. Howard et al. The connection between NMR measurements and pore size is based on the strong effect that the rock surface has on promoting proton relaxation.T2 is greater than 30 ms.

51. Example NMR log showing fluid distribution in the pore space.Figure 2. 2–102 .

61) where ρ1 = λ/T1surface is the NMR surface relaxivity. Usually. However. the T2 relaxation is also controlled by a surface relaxation mechanism as well as the diffusion effect because of the magnetic field gradient. it is expected that a similar relationship exists between the distribution of T2 and the pore-size distribution. Since transverse relaxation time T2 is closely related to T1. The relaxation rate equation is of the form 1 1 S λ 1 2 = + + (τγ∇B ) D T2 T2bulk V T2 surface 3 (2. in this case. Small pores (large S/V ratio) exhibit small values for T1. γ is the gyromagnetic ratio for protons. and the converse is true for large pores. τ is the pulse spacing (pulse-to-echo delay).62) where the first two terms on the right side correspond to similar expressions in Eq.(2. Eq. apart from the bulk relaxation process. which is a measure of the ability of the surface to cause relaxation of proton magnetization. The surface relaxivity ρ1 has dimensions of length/time.61) shows that T1 responds to pore size.1 ⎛S⎞ = ρ1 ⎜ ⎟ T1 ⎝V ⎠ (2. while the last term accounts for spin dephasing because of restricted diffusion in a magnetic field gradient ∇B. and D is the diffusion coefficient. the first and the last 2-103 . which can often be neglected.60).(2.

If all pores are geometrically similar. Thus. The ratio will be a maximum for a spherical pore (a sphere has the smallest surface area for a given volume) and will decrease for other pore shapes.” The ratio (V/S) is not a pore size or a pore diameter.49 could be viewed as a pore-size distribution.(2. Its magnitude is markedly affected by the pore shape. (V/S). While this assertion is based on inference. a trend 2–104 . in a water bearing zone without the complications of hydrocarbons. Eq. Geological analysis suggests that this corresponds to a coarsening-upward sequence. then the T2 spectrum could be viewed qualitatively as a pore size distribution.63) where ρ2 = λ/T2surface is the NMR T2 surface relaxivity. Thus.(2. 1 ⎛S⎞ = ρ2 ⎜ ⎟ T2 ⎝V ⎠ (2.63) shows that T2 also responds to pore-size.62)are small and can be neglected. the T2 spectrum in the third track shows an upward increase in the relaxation times.terms on the right side of Eq. the T2 spectrum such as shown in Figure 2. then its distribution could be viewed as a “pore-size distribution. Since (V/S) has the dimension of length.52 shows a clastic sequence with shales overlying a sandstone in a water zone. It should be emphasized that what is measured by NMR relaxation is the distribution of volume-to-surface ratio. Figure 2. The volumetric calculations in the first track indicate an upward decreasing clay in the sandstone interval.

an increase in the grain size.which can be explained by an increase in the pore size and. Example NMR log showing pore size distribution in a waterbearing sandstone section. 2-105 . Figure 2.52. therefore.

64) of the form k = 10 4 φ 4.5 2 S wirr (2. intercrystalline and interparticle pores. Further. typically 1. Estimation of Permeability from NMR Relaxation Times The fact that T1 and T2 NMR relaxation times can be used to estimate permeability stems from the fact that these relaxation times can be correlated with pore size distribution in water-bearing zones.7μm/s for carbonates compared to 5μm/s for sandstones. Permeability is proportional to the square of some characteristic length of the porous medium and as such would be proportional to T12 or T22 .64) where C is an empirical constant.Carbonates often have a variety of pore types such as moldic. the surface relaxivity of carbonates is less than that of sandstones. φ is the porosity. the protons align and relax faster in sandstones than in carbonates. Therefore. Timur developed a permeability equation in the spirit of Eq.65) 2–106 . Swirr is the irreducible water saturation and x and y are numerical exponents. Various empirical equations have been proposed for estimating the absolute permeability of a porous medium. The relationship between relaxation times and pore size distribution is therefore more complex in carbonates than in sandstones. Wyllie and Rose (1950) suggested an empirical permeability equation of the form −y k = Cφ x S wirr (2. typically on the order of 100 ms. As a result.(2. the cut off T2 for free fluid in carbonates is higher than in sandstones.

BVI and FFI are related to the irreducible water saturation by Eqs.68) j Other equations proposed by Kenyon et al.67) where T2gm is the logarithmic (geometric) mean of the T2 spectrum defined as T2 gm = ∑f j =1 m j m log T2 j ∑f j =1 (2. In Eq.58) and (2. FFI and BVI are in porosity units (p. One version of the Timur/Coates equation that is widely used to estimate permeability from NMR logs is given by ⎛φ ⎞ ⎛ FFI ⎞ k = ⎜ NMR ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ C ⎠ ⎝ BVI ⎠ 4 2 (2.66) where C=10 or can be determined from laboratory measurements on cores.where the porosity and irreducible water saturation are in fractions and the permeability is in millidarcy. Another permeability equation based on laboratory measurements at Schlumber Doll Research (SDR) is given by k = aφ 4T22gm (2.u. are 4 k = C1φNMRT12 (2.) and the permeability is in millidarcy.59).(2.(2.66) the porosity.69) and 2-107 .

4 k = C2φNMRT22 (2.70) Figure 2.(2. Figure 2. Also shown is the comparison of the NMR porosity measurements with those from core analysis.. The agreement between the two sets of data is good.66) with those from core analysis. A comparison of NMR-derived permeability and porosity with measurements from core analysis (from Dunn et al. The agreement also is good.53 shows a comparison of the permeability from NMR measurements using Eq. 2002).53. 2–108 .

(b) slice-selection gradient. Gr and γ. the NMR experiments must be modified to spatially encode the NMR signals. and (e) NMR signal (echo).7. frequency encoding or independently of other events (phase encoding). the position of the resonating nucleus can be determined. porosity distribution and fluid saturation distribution or solvent concentration distributions can be imaged in the laboratory. and r is the position along the gradient axis. A magnetic field gradient or simply gradient refers to the spatial variation of the strength of the B0 field. (d) phase-encoding gradient. The Effect of Magnetic Field Gradients For most NMR imaging applications. 2-109 . Gr is the gradient.71) where ωr is the Larmor frequency at position r.7 NMR Imaging of Laboratory Cores Nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (NMRI) can be used to map the spatial distribution of NMR observables in core analysis. Magnetic field gradient is a key factor in NMR imaging. (c) frequency-encoding gradient. In order to create an image. A magnetic field gradient causes the transverse magnetization to precess at a frequency that is proportional to position along the gradient axis as follows: ωr = γ ( B0 + rGr ) (2. the B0 field must be made to vary in a linear fashion with distance. Gr can be applied concurrently with slice selection. The experiment is repeated with multiple phaseencoding gradient amplitudes.2.54 is a typical 2DFT (2-dimensional Fourier Transform) spin-echo NMR imaging sequence showing (a) radiofrequency pulses. Figure 3. Since we can measure ωr and we know B0. Thus.

RF o 180o b.54. its direction (i. 90 a..The magnitude of the gradient. NMR TE Timing TR p1 tpe pw tro Figure 2. along what axis). G ss c. G RO d. G PE Echo e. and timing need to be controlled.e. Simplified timing diagram for a 2DFT spin-echo NMR imaging sequence 2–110 .

Slice-Selective Excitation In most NMR imaging applications. Once Gss is determined. A frequency-selective RF pulse has two parts associated with it. a central frequency and a bandwidth of frequencies Δωss defined by the shape of the pulse envelope. a narrow region of the object will achieve the resonance condition and will absorb the RF energy. Typically. Each RF pulse has the same bandwidth but a different central frequency. Different slice positions are achieved by changing the central frequency. the central frequency ωr is calculated using Eq. it is desirable to generate a single slice or multislice images. 2-111 . Gss. on an axis perpendicular to the chosen slice plane.(2. Δωss is fixed so that the slice thickness is changed by changing the amplitude of Gss. The slice thickness is determined by the bandwidth of frequencies Δωss incorporated into the RF pulse and is given by Δωss = γ Gss d s1 (2. When such a pulse is broadcast in the presence of the slice-selection gradient. The central frequency of the pulse determines the particular location that is excited by the pulse when the slice-selection gradient is present. The initial step in generating such an image is the localization of the RF excitation to a region of space. thereby exciting a different region of the object.71) to bring the desired location into resonance. Thinner slices require larger Gss. Multislice imaging uses the same Gss for each slice but a unique RF pulse during excitation.72) where ds1 is the slice thickness. This is accomplished by the use of frequency-selective excitation in conjunction with a slice-selection gradient.

Two distinct processes are used for encoding the two dimensions: frequency encoding and phase encoding.Frequency Encoding The next task in the imaging process is encoding the image information within the excited slice.73) and 2–112 . direction: the field of view (FOV) in the readout direction and the number of readout data points in the matrix. Under the influence of this new gradient field. The frequency encoding provides one of the two visual dimensions of the image. The magnitude of GRO and the frequencies that are detected enable the positions of the nuclei to be determined. also known as the readout gradient.(2. The NMR signal is always detected in the presence of a frequency encoding gradient in an imaging pulse sequence.71). The pixel size in the readout direction is given by Δ RO = ( FOV ) RO N RO (2. After sliceselective excitation. the nuclei within the slice will precess at different frequencies depending on their positions in the readout gradient’s direction. or the readout. is applied perpendicularly to the slice direction. the frequency encoding gradient. in accordance with Eq. The echo signal is detected in the presence of GRO and digitized at a chosen sampling interval for later Fourier transformation. The image information is actually the amplitude of the NMR signal arising from the various locations in the slice. Each of these frequencies will be superimposed in the echo. NRO. GRO. Two user-selectable parameters determine the image resolution in the frequency encoding.

the second Fourier transformation converts signal amplitude at each readout frequency from a function of GPE to a function of frequency. Phase Encoding In order to produce a two-dimensional image of the slice. The pixel size in the phase encoding direction is given by Δ PE = ( FOV ) PE N PE (2.75) 2-113 . The resulting signals are stored separately for subsequent processing. GPE. one can cause a systematic variation in phase that would encode the spatial information along the one remaining axis of the image plane. The NMR imaging information is obtained by repeating the slice excitation and signal detection many times (typically 128 or 256 times). Specifically. The image resolution in the phase encoding direction depends on two user-selectable parameters. the FOV in the phase encoding direction and the number of phase encoding steps in the matrix. This is accomplished by the use of a phase encoding gradient.74) where BW is the receiver bandwidth. GPE is perpendicular to both Gss and GRO and is the only gradient that changes amplitude during the data acquisition loop of a standard twodimensional imaging sequence. NPE.( FOV ) RO = N RO BW = γ GRO 2γ GRO tro (2. γ is the gyromagnetic ratio and tro is the duration of the frequency encoding gradient. each with a different amplitude of GPE applied before detection. Separate Fourier transformation of each of these data sets yields a set of projections onto the readout axis.

and ( FOV ) PE = π N PE γ GPE t pe (2. the phase information is often discarded so that the normal image matrix contains only the magnitude information. The image matrix is a spatial map of the nuclei signal intensity. While the Fourier transformation contains information regarding both the magnitude and the phase of the measured signals. The second Fourier transformation of each column of the temporary data matrix converts the signal magnitude at each readout frequency from a function of GPE to a function of frequency. Image Reconstruction Two types of matrices are used in NMR imaging: raw data and image data. resulting in the image. The image matrix is usually displayed as a rectangular image with readout in one direction and phase encoding in the other direction. All image information is contained within the raw data matrix.76) where γ is the gyromagnetic ratio and tpe is the duration of the phase encoding gradient. The raw data matrix is a grid of complex points with the frequency encoding direction displayed in the horizontal direction and the phase encoding direction displayed in the vertical direction. The first Fourier transformation of each row of the raw data matrix yields a set of modulated projections of the slice onto the frequency encoding axis. 2–114 . The image data matrix is obtained by a two-dimensional Fourier transformation of the raw data matrix.

Each RF pulse excites the entire imaging volume instead of just one slice. The slice-selective excitation is replaced with another phase encoding process along that axis. For example. Each column of the data from the first Fourier Transform projection images is Fourier transformed again to determine the spatial projection in the vertical image plane. the frequency encoding direction is horizontal and the phase encoding direction is vertical. The second phase encoding is applied to partition or subdivide the volume into individual layers.55 shows a graphical representation of how an image is spatially encoded during 2DFT imaging. Three-Dimensional NMR Imaging Three-dimensional volume imaging technique is. which constitutes a onedimensional projection in the frequency encoding direction. A set of NMR signals is acquired using the same frequency encoding gradient but different values of the phase encoding gradient. Each of these NMR signals is Fourier transformed to provide a frequency spectrum of each phase encoding step.Figure 2. 2-115 . a double phase encoding technique. 3D-FFT of the 3D data set then yields 32 to 128 image layers in that direction. if the number of the second phase encoding gradient steps is changed from 32 to 128. In this figure. The number of layers is determined by the number of phase encode steps. in essence.

The advantage of the 3D-imaging technique is that very thin contiguous layer images can be obtained with minimal interslice crosstalk. In practice. Instead. Graphical demonstration of 2DFT NMR image data acquisition and reconstruction. The disadvantage of the technique is the time required. the signal-to-noise ratio is greater than for a comparable 2D-sequential imaging method.Figure 2. 3D volume imaging is not widely used.55. Also. The total scan time for 3D volume imaging is much longer than for 2D slice or multislice imaging. Signal-to-Noise Ratio and Image Contrast 2–116 . 2D-multislice imaging is often used as a replacement for 3D volume imaging.

causing it to appear hyperintense in the NMR image relative to the long T1 object. Small voxels imply a low SNR but a high spatial resolution.(2. thus increasing the SNR. the user-controlled parameters. are important parameters that affect the signal-to-noise ratio and the image resolution. a short TR would yield different signal intensity from objects possessing different T1 values. causing it to appear hyperintense in the NMR image relative to the short T2 object. longitudinal relaxation time T1 and transverse relaxation time T2 are the important factors that determine image contrast as defined in Eq.77) If the voxel volume is large. The converse is also true.” Similarly. repetition time TR. The object exhibiting a short T1 value will contribute more signal. then there are more spins in each voxel to contribute to the signal. NRO and NPE. slice thickness ds1. since T1 relaxation describes the rate of recovery of the longitudinal magnetization. But large voxels imply a low spatial resolution.39). The echo time TE. The long T2 object will contribute more signal.” 2-117 . This is termed a “T1weighted image. Remembering that T2 relaxation describes the rate of decay of the NMR signal in the transverse plane. Voxel size is defined by ⎛ ( FOV ) RO ⎞⎛ ( FOV ) PE ⎞ Δv = d s1 ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎝ N RO ⎠ ⎝ N PE ⎠ (2. This is termed a “T2-weighted image.Voxel size is a very important factor in increasing the signal-tonoise ratio (SNR). Therefore. a long TE would yield different signal intensity from objects possessing different T2 values. FOV.

57 shows the images of four. Short T2 objects are dark on T2-weighted images. Although the images are not calibrated with numerical porosity values.56 and 2. and has a permeability of 97 md and an average porosity of 15. Example NMR Images of Laboratory Cores Figures 2. the first three slices in Figure 2.56 and 2.In summary.57 show NMR-derived porosity images of a brine saturated sandstone core. nevertheless. 5 cm in diameter. TE controls T2-weighting and TR controls T1weighting of an image. longitudinal vertical slices.57. The layered nature of the core is clearly apparent from these images.56 indicate that the core appears to be less porous at the top than elsewhere.9 %. but short T1 objects are bright on T1-weighted images. Figure 2. The core is 10 cm long.58 shows NMR-derived images of the solvent concentration for a first-contact miscible displacement conducted in the core of Figures 2. Figure 2.56 shows the images at six cross sections along the core whereas Figure 2. a more viscous deuterium oxide (D2O) was used to displace the less viscous brine from 2–118 . In this experiment.

so the injection of D2O reduces the NMR signal in the voxels 2-119 .56. D2O is practically devoid of protons.Figure 2. NMR images of transverse slices of a brine saturated sandstone core.84. the core at a favorable mobility ratio of 0.

58. Because the mobility ratio is favorable. Figure 2. Figure 2.invaded by the D2O. vertical slices of a brine saturated sandstone core.56. the displacement pattern is controlled entirely by the permeability variations in the core. NMR images of longitudinal. the top of the core is less permeable than the rest of the core.59 shows one-dimensional solvent concentration profiles for the same displacement. This correlates well with the low porosity of the top of the core shown in Figure 2. Note the chanelling of the injected solvent due to permeability variation in the core. 2–120 .57. Clearly. The reduced NMR signals can be used to image the progress of the displacement as shown in Figure 2. The information is quantitative and can be used to calibrate a numerical model of the displacement.

Solvent concentration images of a first-contact miscible displacement in the sandstone core of Figures 2.Figure 2.55 and 2.58.56. 2-121 .

61 shows a comparison of NMR-derived permeability with flow-derived permeability for five core samples. Solvent concentration profiles of the first-contact miscible displacement of Figure 2. Figure 2.57. The permeability for each voxel of the image was calculated from T1 distributions using Eq. The agreement between the two sets of permeability values is reasonable for four of the five measurements.(2.60 shows NMR-derived permeability images of another layered sandstone core.59. 2–122 .Figure 2. Figure 2.69).

2-123 .Figure 2. Permeability images of a layered sandstone core.60.

8 A Comparison of Various Porosity Measurements for Shaly Sand Figure 2.Figure 2.7. The total porosity from the sonic tool is less than that of the density tool because the density tool measures the porosity in isolated pore whereas the sonic 2–124 . A comparison of NMR-derived permeability with flow-derived permeability of core samples.62 shows the porosities measured by the various logging tools along with the porosity from core analysis.61. This figure shows that the total porosity measured by a neutron tool is larger than those measured by the density tool. 2. the NMR tool or the sonic tool.

8 RESERVE ESTIMATION PROJECT The objective of this project is to compute the recoverable oil reserve and the anticipated undiscounted net cash flow for a new oilfield discovery using Monte Carlo Simulation. 2. A comparison of porosity measurements by various methods for a shaly sand. The petrophysical parameters that go into the reserve estimation are uncertain and as such should be 2-125 . Figure 2.tool does not. Thus. If isolated pores are present. Figure 2.62.62 could be helpful in reconciling differences in the porosity measurements from the various methods. the effective porosity measured in core analysis will be less than the effective permeability measured by NMR.

The outcome of the simulation will be a range of reserve and net cash flow estimates with their associated probabilities and uncertainties. This project gives an example practical application of the petrophysical properties of porosity and water saturation. STB) area of the reservoir (acres) net pay thickness (feet) porosity (fraction) average water saturation (fraction) recovery factor (fraction) φ Sw Rf = oil formation volume factor (reservoir barrels/stock tank Bo barrel.1 Reserve Estimation Based on volumetric considerations (Figure 2. which should be of interest to all petroleum engineers. 2.8.78) where Nr A h = = = = = = recoverable oil reserve (stock tank barrels. the recoverable oil reserve is given by Nr = 7758 Ahφ (1 − S w ) Bo Rf (2. RB/STB) 7758 = conversion constant (barrels/acre-foot) 2–126 .63). which are the main subjects of this chapter.treated as random variables with distinct probability distributions. The project also introduces the important subject of risk analysis of petroleum development.

63.35 0. These estimates are shown in Table 2. Table 2.35 1.20 25 30 6000 300 0.78) various experts within the company have been requested to provide their best estimates of these variables based on their professional judgments.8 along with their assumed probability distributions. Reservoir volume.30 9000 500 0.Figure 2.25 1.8 Reservoir parameter estimates from experts. Property Minimum (x1) Most Likely (x2) Maximum (x3) Probability Distributio n A (acres) h (ft) φ Bo (RB/STB) RF Oil Price ($/STB) 2500 200 0.20 0.40 40 Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Uniform Triangular 2-127 . To account for the uncertainties in the variables on the right side of Eq.15 1.(2.

500φ 2. OPEX = operating expenses) Tax Rate = 40% 2–128 . The undiscounted net cash flow is given by Net Cash Flow (NCF) = (Gross Revenue .325 − 0. for the purpose of this project. a preliminary undiscounted net cash flow analysis will be sufficient.8.2 Economic Evaluation (2. However.79) In order to assess the profitability of the proposed development. the water saturation has been determined to correlate with porosity as shown in Eq.80) (2.(2.Royalty .Tax Rate) Gross Revenue = Reserve x Price (2.Costs)(1 .79).81) For this project.5% of Gross Revenue Costs (CAPEX + OPEX) = 38% of Gross Revenue (CAPEX = capital expenditures. assume the following: Royalty = 12. S w = 0.Based on preliminary evaluation. it will be necessary to perform a detailed year-by-year discounted cash flow projection for the field. It is assumed that the petroleum fiscal regime applicable to this field is a royalty/tax system.

. they are no longer sensitive to the number of iterations). 2. except for the water saturation.8.64 shows the probability density function (pdf) for a triangular distribution. A different random number should be used to sample each variable because the variables are assumed to be uncorrelated.e.82) 2-129 . The first step is to compute the cumulative distribution function (F) as a function of x.000 iterations. the probability density function is given by f1 ( x) = ( x3 − x1 )( x2 − x1 ) 2 ( x − x1 ) (2. you should perform enough simulation iterations so that the means and standard deviations of the reserve and the net cash flow are approximately constant (i. Each variable can be sampled using a random number generator. which is correlated to porosity. Figure 2. For this exercise. you should perform at least 5.3 Simulation Procedure You should draw a random sample for each variable of interest from its probability distribution and compute the recoverable reserve and the net cash flow for each iteration of the simulation. x1≤ x ≤x2 For this case. This could require several thousand iterations. Two cases are examined.8. Case 1.2.4 Sampling Procedure Presented herein is the procedure for sampling from a triangular distribution and a uniform distribution using a random number generator. Normally.

(2. Probability density function for a triangular distribution.64.83) for x gives x = x1 + F ( x3 − x1 )( x2 − x1 ) (2.(2. just like the random number generator in spreadsheets or other computer software. The cumulative distribution function (F).82) to obtain ( x − x1 ) F = ∫ f1 ( x)dx = x ( x3 − x1 )( x2 − x1 ) 2 x 1 (2. Therefore. to sample from the first part of a triangular distribution.84) to obtain the sample value for x as x = x1 + Rn ( x3 − x1 )( x2 − x1 ) (2.85) 2–130 .(2.84) It turns out that F is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1.Figure 2. which is the probability that x is less than or equal to a prescribed value.83) Solving Eq. generate a uniformly distributed random number (Rn) between 0 and 1 and substitute it for F in Eq. is obtained by integrating Eq.

Eq.(2.87) for x gives x = x3 − (1 − F )( x3 − x1 )( x3 − x2 ) (2.88) to obtain x = x3 − (1 − Rn )( x3 − x1 )( x3 − x2 ) (2. it is necessary to test the random number to determine if Eq.89) For each iteration. Such a test is straightforward.Case 2.85) gives the critical value of Rn as Rn = ( x2 − x1 ) ( x3 − x1 ) (2.88) To sample from the second part of the triangular distribution.(2.85) or Eq.(2.86) to obtain ( x3 − x ) F = ∫ f1 ( x)dx + ∫ f 2 ( x)dx = 1 − x x ( x3 − x1 )( x3 − x2 ) 2 x2 1 x (2.(2. For x = x2. (2.82) and (2.89) should be used to calculate x.90) 2-131 .86) The cumulative distribution function (F) is obtained by integrating Eqs. x2≤ x ≤x3 For this case.(2. substitute the random number for F in Eq. the probability density function is given by f 2 ( x) = ( x3 − x1 )( x3 − x2 ) 2 ( x3 − x ) (2.87) 2 Solving Eq.

The data used to construct Figure 2. The upper part of the figure shows the probability density function whereas the lower part shows the cumulative distribution function.93) Solving Eq.Eq. For this case.91) Otherwise.65 are shown in Table 2.(2.94) 2–132 .(2.93) for x gives x = x1 + F ( x3 − x1 ) (2.89) should be used to calculate x.(2.8. Also shown in the lower part of the figure is the sampled value of 380 ft of net pay for a random number of 0. Figure 2.(2.9.66 shows the probability density function for a uniform distribution.85) should be used to calculate x if Rn ≤ ( x2 − x1 ) ( x3 − x1 ) (2. Figure 2.92) to obtain F = ∫ f ( x)dx = x1 x ( x − x1 ) ( x3 − x1 ) (2.92) The cumulative distribution function (F) is obtained by integrating Eq.65 shows a graphical demonstration of Monte Carlo sampling using the triangular distribution for net pay thickness of Table 2.760. Eq. the probability density function is given by 1 ( x3 − x1 ) f ( x) = (2.

9: Data for Monte Carlo Sampling of Net Pay Thickness x 200 210 220 F 0.001 0. Graphical demonstration of Monte Carlo sampling Table 2.006 0.200 0.300 0.0013 2-133 .003 0.005 0.004 f(x) 0.65.003 0.500 0.800 0.000 0 100 200 300 x (ft) 400 500 600 Figure 2.100 0.400 0.007 0.600 F 0.0006 7 0.002 0.000 0.700 0.013 f(x) 0.000 0.0000 0 0.900 0.000 0 100 200 300 x (ft) 400 500 600 F 1.0.

518 0.398 0.0066 7 0.0020 0 0.0036 2–134 .120 0.0053 3 0.460 0.625 0.0040 0 0.053 0.0060 0 0.0063 3 0.0056 7 0.163 0.718 0.213 0.333 0.0026 7 0.0040 0 0.760 0.0053 3 0.030 0.673 0.0046 7 0.270 0.3 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 0.798 0.573 0.0046 7 0.0060 0 0.0050 0 0.083 0.0043 3 0.0033 3 0.

918 0.998 1.0033 3 0.0006 7 0.865 0.0003 3 0.0000 0 2-135 .893 0.833 0.0023 3 0.7 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 0.0030 0 0.958 0.0016 7 0.000 0.0013 3 0.0026 7 0.973 0.940 0.993 0.0020 0 0.0010 0 0.985 0.

Probability density function for a uniform distribution To sample from a uniform distribution. substitute the random number for F in Eq.95) The sampling procedure outlined above is the basic Monte Carlo Sampling procedure. A brief description of the Latin Hypercube Sampling is as follows. known as the Latin Hypercube Sampling. for each variable is divided into n subintervals of equal probability and numbered 0. 1. This sampling procedure ensures that all parts of the distribution are sampled equally and will result in a faster convergence of the simulation to the final results than the traditional Monte Carlo Sampling Method. 2–136 . n-1. is available.94) to obtain x = x1 + Rn ( x3 − x1 ) (2. 2. A more efficient and sophisticated stratified sampling procedure. 3. The cumulative distribution function. …. 0<F<1.66.Figure 2.(2. It is not a very efficient sampling technique because there is no guarantee that all parts of the distribution will be sampled equally.

The subintervals could be picked at random in advance and stored in a one-dimensional array of 100 elements. 1.The objective is to sample from each subinterval during the first n iterations. as an example. say 0.263. The random number used to sample subinterval 45 is computed as Rn = A(1) r 45 0.96) 2-137 .263 + = + = 0. Let’s look at the array for the Area. For example.45263 100 100 100 100 (2. 2. Each subinterval can be selected randomly by generating a random integer from 0 to 99. To do so. The contents of this array after the random selections might look like this: A(1) = 45 A(2) = 2 A(3) = 7 A(4) = 92 A(5) = 23 A(6) = 0 … A(100) = 8 Make sure every subinterval is represented in the array. During the first simulation iteration. the subinterval to be sampled is selected randomly. 99. A similar array is generated with a new set of random numbers for each of the other variables. A(100). generate a random number (r) between 0 and 1. the area will be sampled from subinterval 45. However. …. the subintervals will be numbered 0. 3. if n = 100.

950 and computing Rn = A(2) r 2 0.In the second iteration.67 shows qualitatively the effect of 2–138 . each of the subintervals has been sampled once. A similar sampling procedure is applied to the other variables. To perform the next 100 iterations of the simulation. For example.950 + = + = 0.02950 100 100 100 100 (2. the sequence in which the subintervals are sampled is picked randomly. Figure 2. the area will be sampled from subinterval 2 by generating another random number (r) between 0 and 1. for the second 100 iterations. Thus. the entire simulation is performed in increments of 100 iterations until the planned total number of iterations is achieved. say 0.97) At the end of the first 100 iterations. the array A may look like this: A(1) = 3 A(2) = 86 A(3) = 50 A(4) = 14 A(5) = 6 A(6) = 99 … A(100) = 72 The sampling for the second 100 iterations then proceeds in the same manner as for the first 100 iterations.

67. 3. 2. Effect of stratification in Latin Hypercube sampling. 4. Figure 2.5 Simulation Output Based on your simulation results. calculate the following for the Reserve (Nr) and Net Cash Flow (NCF) estimates: 1. 2. The bands get progressively wider towards the tails of the distribution as the probability density drops off. 6. 5.8.stratification in Latin Hypercube sampling from a normal distribution for n = 20. Minimum Maximum Mean Standard deviation Skewness Kurtosis 2-139 .

Note that a similar simulation approach can be used to compute the recoverable gas reserve in the case of a gas reservoir. and Frequency vs natural log of N) 2. P10 > P90. Please do not perform the simulation with a commercial risk analysis software such as @Risk or Crystal Ball because I want you to experience the simulation first hand rather than using the commercial software as a black box. Histograms for A. h.7. Sw. C++ or Matlab. P10 value (There is a 10% probability that the variable of interest is equal to or greater than the P10 value – High Value) Note: Based on the above definitions. Mode (most likely value) 8. Bo. In this case. Suggestion: You can easily perform this simulation in Excel with VBA or by writing a high level computer program in Fortran. RF and Oil Price based on your sampling to see how close they are to their theoretical input probability density functions . The choice is yours. Expectation Curve for the reserve ( (1– F) vs N on the same graph as F vs N) 5. Reserve histograms (Frequency vs N. the appropriate equations are as follows: 2–140 . and Frequency vs natural log of NCF) 3. P50 value (median) 10. Plot the following graphs: 1. Expectation Curve for the net cash flow ( (1– F) vs NCF on the same graph as F vs NCF) 7. φ. Net Cash Flow (NCF) histograms (Frequency vs NCF. P90 value (There is a 90% probability that the variable of interest is equal to or greater than the P90 value – Low Value) 9. Cumulative Distribution Function (F) for the net cash flow (F vs NCF) 6. Cumulative Distribution Function (F) for the reserve (F vs N) 4.

2-141 . whereas at the surface.99) where Gr Bg Z T P = = = = = recoverable gas reserve (standard cubic feet. scf) gas formation volume factor (reservoir cubic feet/scf) gas compressibility factor (dimensionless) absolute reservoir temperature (ºRankine) reservoir pressure (psia) = conversion constant (ft2/acre) 43560 2. laboratory-measured porosities are generally expected to be higher than in situ values. Pore volume compressibility can be used to correct laboratory-measured porosity to an in situ value and for other reservoir engineering calculations.Gr = 43560 Ahφ (1 − S w ) Bg ZT P RF (2. Because of this.02827 (2.98) Bg = 0. recovered core has been relieved of the overburden stress.9 PORE VOLUME COMPRESSIBILITY Reservoir rock at in situ conditions is subjected to overburden stress. It is not usual to perform routine porosity measurements under stress approaching reservoir conditions.

101) where P is the pore pressure (internal pressure) rather than the overburden pressure (external pressure). a rather small dataset for a universal correlation. Pore volume compressibility is ⎝ ∂P ⎠T defined without the negative sign as 1 ⎛ ∂V p ⎞ 1 ⎛ ∂φ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ V p ⎝ ∂P ⎠T φ ⎝ ∂P ⎠T cf = (2. the isothermal coefficient of compressibility of a material is defined as 1 ⎛ ∂V ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ V ⎝ ∂P ⎠T c=− (2. a decrease in pore pressure causes a decrease in the ⎛ ∂V ⎞ ⎛ ∂φ ⎞ pore volume or porosity thereby making ⎜ ⎟ or ⎜ ⎟ positive. This correlation was developed from measurements on seven consolidated limestone and five consolidated sandstone samples.68. Newman (1973) has presented a more comprehensive pore volume compressibility data based on 256 samples. Compressibilities. ⎝ ∂P ⎠T ⎝ ∂P ⎠T For many years. 2–142 .100) where the negative sign convention is used to ensure that c is a positive number because when a material is compressed. When the pore pressure declines during production. Thus. the petroleum industry has relied on Hall’s (1953) correlation.In general. are highly affected by reservoir type and overburden conditions. its volume decreases ⎛ ∂V ⎞ thereby making ⎜ ⎟ a negative quantity. for estimating pore volume compressibility. shown in Figure 2. however. the overburden pressure causes the reservoir to compact.

Pore volume compressibility versus porosity (Hall. Figure 2. Viewed collectively.69 shows a correlation of the pore volume compressibilities with initial sample porosities for all 256 samples.Of the 256 samples. the data show little or no correlation between pore volume compressibility and initial sample porosity. 197 were sandstones from 29 sandstone reservoirs.68. and 59 were limestones from 11 limestone reservoirs. Also shown is Hall's correlation. 2-143 . 1953). The data show considerable disagreement with Hall's correlation. Figure 2.

Poorly consolidated or friable sandstone could be broken by hand whereas consolidated sandstone 2–144 . (2) consolidated sandstone. Pore volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure versus initial sample porosity for sandstone and limestone samples (Newman.Figure 2.69. He classified the samples as (1) consolidated limestone. and (4) unconsolidated sandstone. 1973). (3) poorly consolidated (friable) sandstone. Newman divided his data into four qualitative classifications in an effort to improve the correlation between pore volume compressibility and initial porosity.

1973). 2-145 .70 shows the correlation for consolidated limestones along with the correlations from Hall and van der Knaap (1959). However. there is considerable scatter in the data.could not. Qualitatively. all three dataset show a general decrease in pore volume compressibility with an increase in porosity. Figure 2. Figure 2. Pore volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure versus initial sample porosity for limestone samples (Newman.70. Unconsolidated sandstone would collapse under its own weight if it is not protected in a sleeve.

Qualitatively.71 shows the correlation for consolidated sandstones along with Hall's correlation.Figure 2. Newman's data decrease more rapidly with an increase in porosity than Hall's data. Figure 2. the data show a general decrease in pore volume compressibility with an increase in porosity with some scatter. 2–146 . Pore volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure versus initial sample porosity for consolidated sandstone samples (Newman.71. 1973).

class of sandstones. 2-147 .72.Figure 2.72 shows the correlation for poorly consolidated or friable sandstones along with Hall's correlation. 1973). Pore volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure versus initial sample porosity for poorly consolidated sandstone samples (Newman. There appears to be no correlation between pore volume compressibility and porosity for this Figure 2.

the pore volume compressibility increases with an increase in porosity. 1973). For this class of sandstones. Pore volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure versus initial sample porosity for unconsolidated sandstone samples (Newman. Figure 2.73 shows the correlation for unconsolidated sandstones along with Hall's correlation. in contrast to the trend for consolidated samples.73.Figure 2. 2–148 .

For detailed analysis. in abnormally pressured reservoirs.74 shows a schematic diagram of a typical device for measuring pore volume compressibility.74. and must include calibrations for the compressibilities of the fluids and the equipment. 1953). For example. Figure 2. Pore volume compressibility is not always constant. it is common to find that pore volume compressibility at high reservoir pressures is much larger than 2-149 . pore volume compressibility should be measured in the laboratory on core samples of interest. Typical apparatus for measuring pore volume compressibility (Hall.Newman's data clearly show that there is no universal correlation for pore volume compressibility and porosity. Figure 2. These measurements are fairly difficult to make.

8 meters. the operator undertook expensive measures to jack up their platforms by 6 meters. Continuous monitoring indicated subsidence of 33 to 38 cm per year. A famous case of this is the subsidence of Ekofisk field in the Norwegian sector of North Sea. This is due to Pore volume compaction can lead to undesirable operational problems. pore volume compaction provides valuable reservoir drive energy to increase production from the field. Total system compressibility is defined as the combined compressibility of the pore volume and all the fluids saturating the medium: ct = So co + S wcw + S g cg + c f (2. By 1997. In 1998.102) NOMENCLATURE amf = aw A Bg Bo B0 = = = = = activity coefficient of mud filtrate activity coefficient of formation water atomic weight gas formation volume factor oil formation volume factor magnetic field strength 2–150 . The seafloor subsided about 3 meters from 1971 to 1984 due to reservoir depletion. On the other hand.the pore volume compressibility at low pressures. especially above the bubble point pressure of the oil. Total system compressibility is a parameter of importance in pressure transient testing and reservoir material balance analysis. compaction effects as the pore pressure declines. the cumulative subsidence was 7.

BVI = c cf cg co cw dh di = = = = = = = bound fluid index isothermal coefficient of compressibility isothermal coefficient of compressibility of pore volume isothermal coefficient of compressibility of gas isothermal coefficient of compressibility of oil isothermal coefficient of compressibility of water borehole diameter diameter of invaded zone slice thickness diameter of flushed zone diffusion coefficient electrochemical potential electrokinetic potential electrokinetic potential of mud cake formation resistivity factor free fluid index field of view gradient = = = phase encode gradient readout gradient slice selection gradient ds1 = dxo = D Ec Ek F = = = = Ekmc = FFI = FOV = G GPE GRO Gss Gr h I k m M Mz n Nr = = = = = = = = = = recoverable gas reserve net pay thickness formation resistivity index permeability cementation factor net magnetization net magnetization in the z direction saturation exponent recoverable oil reserve = nuclear magnetic resonance 2-151 MNR .

P Rf Ri = = = pressure radiofrequency recovery factor resistivity of invaded zone resistivity of mud filtrate random number resistivity of water saturated zone resistivity of surrounding formation true formation resistivity resistivity of formation water resistivity of flushed zone surface area of pore hydrocarbon saturation gas saturation oil saturation initial oil saturation residual oil saturation water saturation of flushed zone water saturation irreducible water saturation time duration of phase encoding gradient pulse duration of frequency encoding gradient pulse temperature longitudinal relaxation time or spin-lattice relaxation time transverse relaxation time or spin-spin relaxation time geometric mean time apparent transverse relaxation time spin-spin relaxation time = transverse relaxation time of bulk fluid transverse relaxation time of surface fluid RF = Rmf = Rn = Ro Rs Rt Rw S Sh Sg So Soi = = = = = = = = = Rxo = Sor = Sxo = Sw t tpe tro T T1 T2 = = = = = = = = Swirr = T2gm = T2* T2bulk TE = T2surface = echo time 2–152 .

TR v V Vp Vb Vs Z = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = repetition time compressional wave velocity volume of pore pore volume bulk volume grain volume atomic number porosity effective porosity total porosity NMR T1 surface relaxivity NMR T2 surface relaxivity apparent density bulk density electron density fluid density rock matrix density magnetic field inhomogeneity pixel size in the phase encoding direction pixel size in the readout direction voxel size interval transit time fluid interval transit time rock matrix interval transit time shale interval transit time magnetic field gradient regularization constant or smoothing parameter thickness of surface monolayer noise interpulse spacing time 2-153 φ φe ρ1 ρ2 ρa ρb ρe ρf ρm φtotal = ΔB0 = ΔPE = ΔRO = Δv Δt Δtf = = = Δtm = Δtsh = ∇B = α λ τ = = = ε(tj) = .

Beard. London.ωo ωr γ = = = Lamor frequency Lamor frequency at position r gyromagnetic ratio x-ray attenuation coefficient of air (= 0) Ψair = Ψbrine = x-ray attenuation coefficient of brine Ψdry Ψm = = x-ray attenuation coefficient of dry sample x-ray attenuation coefficient of rock matrix Ψwet = x-ray attenuation coefficient of brine saturated sample REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Amyx. Baker Atlas Publication: Introduction to Wireline Log Analysis. 1982. 1994. 2–154 . D.” AAPG Bull. and Interpretation of Well Logs. New York. SPE. Archer.L. : Theory. Vol.E. Oklahoma. Bradley. 1975. Texas.B. : Petroleum Reservoir Engineering. AIME (1942) 146. and Wall. Bassiouni.M.G. Tulsa. : “Influence of Texture on Porosity and Permeability of Unconsolidated Sand. 54-62. Petroleum Publishing Company. Richardson. Norman. 1973) 57.W. C.C. (Feb. University of Oklahoma Press. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Anderson. G. : Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering. :“The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics. P. (Editor-in-Chief) : Petroleum Engineering Handbook. Archie. SPE Textbook Series.. 1986. J. Measurement.S. Bass. England. and Whiting. 1987. Z. Oklahoma. and Weyl. : Coring and Core Analysis Handbook. 1960.. Society of Petroleum Engineers.C.K. J. 4. H.” Trans. 1992. G. TX. D. : Petroleum Engineering. Richardson. Calhoun. Graham & Trotman. Jr. 349-369. J. R.

: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Petrophysical and Logging Applications. : “How to Handle and Process Soft and Unconsolidated Cores. and Beveridge.L. G. :”Structural Properties of Packed Beds . G. Chem. Xiao. Coats.” J.” Soc. K. L.J. Carman.R. Dobrynin. Colorado.. Fatt. 8.N. : “The Effect of Fluid Pressure Decline on Volumetric Changes of a Porous Medium.Dec. V.C. 789-909.A Review. 309-311. 225-234. Paris. Geol. : Basics of Reservoir Engineering. D.R. Core Laboratories Inc.C. AIME (1958) 213. Borehole Environment. L. 1962) 360-366. Geertsma. I. Eng. Handbook of Geophysical Exploration. and Spencer.” Trans. : “Measurements of the Compressibility of Consolidated Oil-Bearing Sandstones. Soc.With Particular Relation to Porosity and Permeability. 150-156. : NMR Logging: Principles and Applications. A.C. J. and Latorraca. G. Chem. (Dec. Nov.” Trans.G. P.. and Campbell. H. J. Jennings. Dunn. Bergman. H. 362-364. London (1937) 15. Mud and Temperature Logging. Hall. C. Indus (1938) 57. P. Pergamon. 1976. Inst. and Graton. D. Eng. J.J. AIME (1953) 198. 1999. Chem. Seismic Exploration Vol. Cosse.. 1935. 1993.. Vol. 331-340.. G. J. : “Compressibility of Reservoir Rocks. Carpenter. Water Resources Publications. Pet.” RI 3540.Rock Properties. USBM (Oct. Fraser.” World Oil (June 1965) 116-119. : Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials.J.Carman.T. : Mechanics of Heterogeneous Fluids in Porous Media. Fort Collins. : "Determination of the Specific Surface of Powders.” Trans..E.” Trans. H.B. AIME (1957) 210.G.. Research & Engineering Consultants Inc. 1990. 32. : Well Logging I . Vol.M. and Prammer. Editions Technip.P. F. 43. No. Collins. 1977.” J. R.B. Halliburton Energy Services. Corey. 2002. Haughey. : Special Core Analysis. Monograph 2-155 . 47 (April 1969) 130-149. Jorden.” Can. .S. : "The Effect of Overburden Pressure on Some Properties of Sandstones.J. : "Systematic Packing of Spheres . Houston. New York.. 1940). : "Fluid Flow Through A Granular Bed. R. Eng. M.A. : “Pore Volume Compressibilities of Sandstone Reservoir Rocks.

2. T. 1984.J.” The Industrial Physicist. Gulf Publishing Company. 1980. 4. 1987. No. Inc. E.. Can. Kleinberg.” Geophysics (1960) 25. Pet. McGraw-Hill Book Company. J. Schlumberger Educational Series. : “Effect of Pore Fluids on the Elastic Properties of Sandstones. E. : Petroleum Engineering.L. Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME . New York. No. I. Monicard.J.J.W. TX. 9-12. Mann. and Fatt. D.” J. 1976. Newman. 1958. Texas. D. 9. Schlumberger Publication: Log Interpretation Principles/Applications. The University of Texas at Austin. and Unconsolidated Reservoir Rocks Under Hydrostatic Loading. 1977. Tech. : "A Critical Review of Core Analysis Techniques” The Jour. Ping: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media. (April-June 1972) 42-55. S. and Hardham. (Feb. : “Probing Oil Wells with NMR. Neasham. : "Pore-Volume Compressibility of Consolidated. Li.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. Peters. and Pohjoisrinne. Richardson. Mayer-Gurr. : “Visualization of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using Computed Tomography Imaging. W. Friable. Austin. Houston. R. August 1997. 433-444. (June/July 1996) 18-21. Ch. (May 1990) 155-168. I.D.-Dec.H. : Oil Reservoir Engineering.P. G. Oct. Presented at the 52nd Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Pore Space and Fluid Flow Properties.Vol. R. 2. Ruth. Texas.: "The Morphology of Dispersed Clay in Sandstone Reservoirs and Its Effect on Sandstone Shaliness. : Properties of Reservoir Rocks. (May 1992) 283296. New York. : "The Precision of Grain Volume Porosimeters” The Log Analyst (Nov. John Wiley & Sons. N. and Afzal. : “Characterization of Heterogeneities in Permeable Media with Computed Tomography Imaging. Tech. Keelan.K. 1973) 129-134. 3/4. A. Peters. 7. 1993) 29-36." SPE 6858. Pet. Denver.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2–156 . PhD Dissertation. Pirson.

D. W. Wyllie. 179-187.B. M. A. Wyllie. : Petrophysics. Masson. 2004. and Spangler. : Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Guide to Monte Carlo Simulation Modeling.H.. van der Knaap.. Second Edition.. M. 105-118. Tiab. H.M. Jr. Shearin. D. M.D.. : "Elastic Wave Velocities in Heterogeneous and Porous Media” Geophysics. 1952) 359-403. M. 1998. Gregory. P. Wyllie. 2 (Feb. : "Nonlinear Behavior of Elastic Porous Media. W. Winsauer.J. AIME (1950) 189. Vose. Vol.O. and Gardner. 1952) 253-277. 1 (1956) 41-70.Vol. No.R. G. 2-157 . 2004.J.J. W.. and Rose.15.H.” Trans.” Trans. : "Optimum Design of the Constant-Volume Gas Pycnometer for Determining the Volume of Solid Particles. and Williams.. AIME (1959) 216.R.R. : "Some Theoretical Considerations Related to the Quantitative Evaluation of the Physical Characteristics of Reservoir Rock from Electrical Log Data..R. 2 (Feb.. New York. John Wiley and Sons. 21. 36. Vol.C.F. : "Resistivity of Brine-Saturated Sands in Relation to Pore Geometry. M. Elsevier." AAPG Bull. New York. Tech." Meas. Vol.” AAPG Bull. : "Application of Electrical Resistivity Measurements to Problems of Fluid Flow in Porous Media.. Sci. 36. 549-558. S. and Donaldson. No. E. No.Tamari.

3-1 . Darcy’s law for single phase flow in differential form is q=− kA dP μ dx (3. It is defined through Darcy’s law.e.CHAPTER 3 PERMEABILITY 3.1) For steady-state linear flow of a single phase liquid in a horizontal medium as shown in Figure 3.1 DEFINITION Permeability gives an indication of the porous medium’s ability to transmit fluids (i. permit fluid flow).2) Figure 3. Darcy’s Law may be integrated to give q= kA ( P − P2 ) kA ΔP 1 = L μ μ L (3.. Linear flow geometry.1.1. For a horizontal system.

363 cp L = 115.4) is useful for processing laboratory data to determine the absolute permeability of a sample using a non-reactive liquid. It is a property of the porous medium and is independent of the fluid properties.3) The absolute permeability is the permeability of the medium when it is saturated 100% by a single phase.(3.2) can be solved for the absolute permeability of the porous medium as k= qμ L AΔP (3. non-reactive liquid. Eq.(3.1 shows the data from such an experiment performed on an unconsolidated sandpack using Dow Corning mineral oil. Eq.4) shows that a graph of ΔP versus q should be linear with a slope.Eq(3.4) Eq.(3.6 cm d = 4. given by m= μL kA (3.6) Table 3.80% 3-2 .5) from which the absolute permeability can be calculated as k= μL mA (3. The fluid and sandpack properties were as follows: μ = 105.2) can be written as ⎛ μL ⎞ ΔP = ⎜ ⎟q ⎝ kA ⎠ (3.961 cm φ = 37. If a steady state liquid flow experiment is performed at several rates. m.

The slope of the line is m = 33. thereby verifying the validity of Darcy's law for the experiment.2 were nonlinear.363)(115. 1979).1333 0.0476 1.6) as k= (105.465 ΔP (atm) Figure 3.658) ⎢π ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ⎢ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ = 18. The permeability is calculated with Eq. This situation would occur if the liquid reacted with the porous medium. An example of such a reaction would occur if the experiment were performed on a sandstone containing a significant amount of montmorrillonite-type clays using fresh water.2 shows the graph of ΔP versus q from the experiment.658.0014 0.1: Pressure Drop and Flow Rate Data for Steady State Flow Experiment in a Sandpack (from Peters.3111 0 0.0573 4.2222 0.0556 0.5439 7.6 ) ⎡ ⎛ 4.9284 3. Can you sketch how ΔP would vary with q in such an experiment? 3-3 . If the graph of Figure 3.961 ⎞ 2 ⎤ ( 33.5303 10.Table 3. The data plot as a straight line through the origin.(3.0889 0. q (cc/s) 0 0.72 darcys. then Darcy's law would not be valid for the experiment.

2 μ B L (3.8) For radial flow into a wellbore as shown in Figure 3.3. Graph of ΔP verus q for steady state flow of a non-reactive liquid through an unconsolidated sandpack. Darcy’s law may be expressed in radial coordinates in oilfield units as 3-4 .001127 kA ΔP μB L (3.2) can be written in oilfield units as q= or 0. Table 3.Figure 3. Using the information in the table.2.2 compares Darcy units with oilfield units. Eq.(3.7) q= 1 kA ΔP 887.

3.2 ⎛r ⎞ μ B ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ (3.2 Comparison of Darcy and Oilfield Units Variable Pressure Time Flow rate Wellbore radius Well drainage radius Porosity Permeability Pay thickness Fluid viscosity Compressibility Darcy Unit atm second cm3/s cm cm fraction darcy cm cp atm-1 Oilfield Unit psia day STB/D ft ft fraction millidarcy ft cp psi-1 Figure 3.q= 0. 3-5 .00708kh ( Pe − Pw ) ⎛r ⎞ μ B ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ (3. Radial flow into a wellbore.10) Table 3.9) or q= 1 kh ( Pe − Pw ) 141.

(3.2) can be rearranged to determine the dimensions of permeability as follows: [k ] = [ q ][ μ ][ L ] [ A][ Δp ] (3. length (L) and time (T) as the fundamental dimensions.(3. M LT 2 ⎛ L3 ⎞ ⎛ M ⎞ ⎟ ( L) ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎝ T ⎠ ⎝ LT ⎠ [k ] = M ( L2 ) ⎛ LT 2 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ or [ k ] = L2 (3.12) Eq.(3. 3-6 . This means that permeability is proportional to the square of some characteristic dimension of the porous medium.11) where the square brackets refer to the dimensions of the enclosed variable.3.2 DIMENSIONS AND UNITS OF PERMEABILITY Eq. the dimensions of the variables on the right side of Eq.12) shows that the permeability of a porous medium has the dimensions of length squared.11) are [q] = L3 T [μ ] = M LT [ L] = L [ A] = L2 [ Δp ] = Thus. Using mass (M).

15) where kg is the permeability to gas of the medium.869 x10−13 m 2 = 1.(3.062 x10−11 ft 2 (3. Substituting Eq. Both units were found to be too large for use with porous media. recognizing that the volumetric flow rate of a gas varies with pressure. which must be determined by measuring all the parameters in Darcy’s law. For an ideal gas at a constant temperature.869 x10−9 cm 2 = 9.(3.17) .3 LABORATORY DETERMINATION OF PERMEABILITY Permeability is an empirical parameter.14) into (3. the petroleum industry adopted the darcy as the unit of permeability. It can be shown that 1darcy = 9.15) can be integrated to give the working equation for a gas permeameter as qsc = k g A ⎛ P 2 − P22 ⎞ 1 ⎜ ⎟ 2 μ Psc ⎝ L ⎠ (3. In this case. nitrogen or helium) as the flowing fluid to minimize rock-fluid reaction.13) 3. Eq. another form of Darcy’s law for steady-state flow of an ideal gas must be used.14) where qsc is the gas volumetric flow rate at a reference pressure Psc. a rational unit for permeability would be foot squared or centimeter squared.12). Therefore. Boyle's law can be written for a fixed mass of gas at two conditions as qP = qsc Psc (3.1) and rearranging gives qsc = − k g A ⎛ 1 dP 2 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ μ Psc ⎝ 2 dx ⎠ (3. Core permeabilities are usually measured in the laboratory using dry gas (air.16) which can be used to calculate the permeability to gas as kg = 2qsc μ LPsc A ( P 2 − P22 ) 1 3-7 (3.Based on Eq.(3.

Klinkenberg found that the permeability to gas. 3-8 . Klinkenberg effect is due to the fact that at low mean pressures.4. kg. As a result. the permeability to gas at low pressure is higher than the absolute permeability of the porous medium.The permeability to gas determined from Eq.5 shows the Klinkenberg correction plots for a core for gas permeabilities measured with hydrogen. A graph of kg versus 1 yields a straight line with an P intercept equal to kL and a slope equal to kLb as shown in Figure 3.17) at the low pressures typically used in the laboratory measurement is usually higher than the absolute permeability of the porous medium because of an electro-kinetic phenomenon known as the Klinkenberg (1941) effect. by the equation ⎛ b⎞ k g = k L ⎜1 + ⎟ ⎝ P⎠ where P is the mean gas pressure given by (3. It is usually not important at the high mean pressures of a petroleum reservoir. nitrogen and carbon dioxide. It should be noted that the degree of gas slippage varies with the nature of the gas.19) and b is a constant. is related to the absolute permeability of the medium. Figue 3.(3. kL. Hydrogen with the smallest molecules has the most gas slippage and carbon dioxide with the largest molecules has the least gas slippage. which depends on the gas used in the measurement. The absolute permeability (liquid permeability) of the medium can be determined in the laboratory by measuring permeabilities to gas.18) P= P + P2 1 2 (3. This gives rise to gas slippage at the wall of the pores. kg. the mean free path of the gas molecules is about the same size as the pores in the rock. at different average core pressures. All three straight lines extrapolate to the absolute permeability of the core at infinite mean pressure. The Klinkenberg effect is a laboratory scale phenomenon.

Figure 3. Figure 3. Klinkenberg permeability correction.55 md (from Klinkenberg.4. 1941). Absolute permeability of the core to isooctane = 2. nitrogen and carbon dioxide. Permeability of a core sample to hydrogen. 3-9 .5.

Figure 3. 3-10 . Therefore.Figure 3. it is directional. is measured at the outlet pressure. P2. that is.6 shows a schematic diagram of a gas permeameter. in this case.6. Plugs are sometimes cut vertically if it is desired to obtain vertical as well as horizontal permeabilities. the gas volumetric flow rate. These plugs are shown in Figure 3. Schematic diagram of a gas permeameter. In this figure.7. It is sometimes possible to specify that plugs be cut along bedding planes. permeability is an anisotropic property of a porous medium. In general. qsc. Psc. P2 is the reference pressure. Routine core analyses are usually made on core plugs drilled horizontally from a core.

is often somewhat less than the For this reason.7. The permeability to brine. Because of interactions of fluids with reservoir rocks. absolute permeabilities to different fluids may not always be the same. especially if waterflooding is anticipated. it is usually beneficial to obtain at least a few brine permeability measurements. Possible core plug samples. for example. Klinkenberg-corrected gas permeability. and 3-11 .Figure 3. These measurements are time-consuming.

11 kor (darcy) 15.29 8. Its value is typically around 80% to 98% of the absolute permeability depending on the quality of the porous medium.93 20.91 9. unconsolidated sandpacks.6 112. Table 3.90 15.23 20.8 110. 1979) Sample No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 L (cm) 22.96 4.81 4.91 14.3 presents typical values for clean.82 17.43 18.05 18.92 11.97 4.40 11.89 0.78 0.0 112.53 11.20 8.48 15.1 113.61 38.9 22.66 9.60 35.20 10.15 12.44 k (darcy) 16.96 4.72 14.6 23.11 35.36 21.33 18.96 4.90 0.91 37.80 38. Another permeability that is sometimes referenced is the permeability to oil at irreducible water saturation (kor).50 22.81 4.84 4.48 15.49 34.58 18.34 10.86 37.92 0.49 15.99 19.96 4.66 39.83 0.19 18. This permeability is known as the effective permeability to oil at irreducible water saturation.81 4.38 38.89 0.28 22.3: Petrophysical Data of Sandpacks (from Peters.83 10.99 kor/k Swirr (%) 11.03 10.7 d (cm) 4.61 37.02 3-12 .98 0.7 110.thus are more costly.50 19.6 116.0 23.83 4.32 8.03 15.4 23.85 0.84 0.85 18.84 4.49 11.87 12.22 16.52 21.81 4.51 20.52 37.94 38.87 0.57 19.66 0.00 9.48 34.26 8.90 9.94 0.84 4.81 4.4 115.5 110.8 23.89 0.98 36.82 0.81 0.54 22.97 0.9 110.18 11.81 φ (%) 38.61 12.62 20. Table 3.19 18.84 4.89 18.8 23.99 18.37 38.97 4.53 18.96 0.84 4.46 37.94 0.0 115.9 23.62 35.

why not? 3-13 .Example 3. The upstream gauge pressure (at the inlet of the core) was 76 cm of mercury. The core was installed in a gas permeameter and air was flowed through it at an average rate of 100 cm3 in 2 minutes 20 seconds. The gas viscosity at the test temperature was 0.8.01808 cp. The barometric pressure was 76 cm of mercury. 2. Does the permeability calculated in part 1 represent the true absolute permeability of this core? If yes. The pressure differential across the sample was kept constant at 12 cm of mercury.1. 1. measured at atmospheric pressure (Figure 3. The core is cylindrical with a diameter of 24 mm and a length of 32 mm. dry core plug is to be determined. why? If no. Calculate the permeability to air at the test conditions. Figure 3.8). Gas permeameter for Example 3.1 The permeability of a clean.

3.1 md 2 π ( 2.4 / 2 ) ( 22 − 1.12) = 152 .0808 cp Substituting into Eq.842 atm absolute Psc = 1 atm μg = 0. 3-14 .17) gives kg = ( 2 )(100 /140 )( 0. A transient pressure test consists of changing the flow rate of a well and then recording the bottomhole pressure response as a function of time.2 cm qsc = 100cm3/(2 minutes 20 seconds) = (100/140) cm3/s P1 = 76cm of Hg gauge = 76+76 = 152 cm of Hg absolute = 152/76 = 2 atm absolute P2 = (P1 . Oil permeability at irreducible water saturation is normally used for comparison with the permeability from most pressure transient tests that involve only oil flow.4 cm L = 32 mm = 3.0301 darcy = 30.1 md is not the true absolute permeability of the core because of Klinkenberg effect. The pressure data can be analyzed to obtain formation permeability and other reservoir and well parameters. It is larger than the absolute permeability of the core.(3.4 FIELD DETERMINATION OF PERMEABILITY Permeability can be determined in the field by use of pressure transient tests.8422 ) No. essentially measuring the permeability of the in-situ reservoir rock on a large scale. The calculated permeability to gas of 30.1 d = 24 mm = 2.12 = 140 cm of Hg absolute = 140/76 = 1.2 ) = 0.Solution to Example 3.01808)(1)( 3.

21) The equation of state for a slightly compressible liquid such as oil or water is given by ρ = ρo ec( P − P ) o (3.3.20) through (3. The solutions of this equation for specific initial 3-15 .1 Diffusivity Equation for Slightly Compressible Liquid The partial differential equation that describes the transient pressure response of a reservoir undergoing single phase flow is obtained by combining the law of mass conservation.4. Darcy’s law and an equation of state for the fluid. parabolic.20) v =− k μ ∇P (3.(3. also known as the continuity equation. Others may recognize it as the diffusion equation or the heat conduction equation. Thus.23 is known as the diffusivity equation in the petroleum engineering community.22) can be combined to give ∇2 P = φμ ct ∂P k ∂t = 1 ∂P α ∂t (3.23) where α is a constant and is given by α= k φμ ct (3. Eq. Eqs. 3.23) is a standard partial differential equation of mathematical physics.24) Eq. It is a second order. The mass conservation equation. linear partial differential equation. is ∇.22) where ρo is the density at a reference pressure Po. ( ρ v ) + Darcy's law is given by ∂ (φρ ) =0 ∂t (3.(3.

28) (3.29) is the initial condition.(3.29) (3. Pi. The constant. the pressure in the reservoir was constant and equal to the initial reservoir pressure.26) and S is the storativity of the reservoir given by S = φ hct (3. Eq. 0 ) = Pi ⎛ ∂P ⎞ qsf μ lim ⎜ r ⎟= r →0 ⎝ ∂r ⎠ 2π kh lim P ( r .27) Thus.and boundary conditions are used for transient pressure analysis and for natural water influx calculations. the diffusivity constant is the ratio of the transmissibility to the storativity (storage capacity) of the reservoir.(3.31) Eq.(3.28) is Eq. t ) = Pi r →∞ (3.23) for one-dimensional radial flow.30) (3. The mathematical model (initial-boundary value problem) for transient pressure analysis is as follows: ∂ 2 P 1 ∂P φμ ct ∂P + = ∂r 2 r ∂r k ∂t P ( r. which specifies that before production commenced. is known as the diffusivity constant and can be written as ⎛ kh ⎞ ⎜μ ⎟ k T α= =⎝ ⎠= φμ ct φ hct S (3. 3-16 .25) where T is the transmissibility of the reservoir given by T= kh μ (3. α.

which specifies that far away from the wellbore.(3.(3.31) constitute the initial-boundary value problem that describes the transient pressure response of a reservoir that has been put on instantaneous constant sandface rate production. This boundary condition is the infinite acting reservoir boundary condition. there is a wealth of solutions of linear.29) also specifies a vanishingly small wellbore radius thereby treating the well as a line source.Eq.28) through (3. Eqs. It is useful to put these equations in dimensionless forms. the reservoir is undisturbed and as such. which specifies a constant instantaneous sandface rate upon commencement of production. the reservoir pressure will remain at the initial pressure.28) through (3. Pi.33) 3-17 . have been made for mathematical expediency because with them. These two specifications.31) become ∂ 2 PD 1 ∂PD ∂PD + = 2 ∂rD rD ∂rD ∂t D PD ( rD .(3. Eq. In dimensionless forms. Casting our model in dimensionless variables allows the immediate use of these existing solutions from other disciplines for our purpose.30) is the internal boundary condition at the wellbore.(3. Eqs. we can obtain a simple approximate solution to the partial differential equation. the sandface rate should increase from zero to the final constant rate over a finite time. This will reduce the number of variables and also will facilitate the use of existing solutions from other fields for pressure transient analysis.(3. This instantaneous constant sandface boundary condition is unrealistic because we expect that when a well is put on production. For example.31) is the external boundary condition. second order. Eq. 0 ) = 0 (3. though unrealistic. parabolic partial differential equation in the heat conduction literature.32) (3.

37) and tD = kt φμ cr rw2 (3. t ) ⎛ qμ B ⎞ 141.36) (3. q is surface rate and qB is the sandface rate. by Laplace transformation. t ) ⎛ qsf μ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 2π kh ⎠ rD = r rw (3.39) and tD = 0. It can be shown that the solution is of the form 1 PD ( x ) = − Ei (− x) 2 (3.39).41) 3-18 .40) In Eq.32) through (3.0002637 kt φμ cr rw2 (3. the dimensionless pressure and dimensionless time are given by PD = Pi − P ( r .(3. Eqs. for example.(3.35) can be solved. t D ) = 0 where the dimensionless variables are defined as PD = Pi − P ( r .2 ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ kh ⎠ (3.34) (3.38) In oilfield units.35) lim PD ( rD .⎛ ∂P ⎞ lim ⎜ rD D ⎟ = −1 rD → 0 ⎝ ∂rD ⎠ rD →∞ (3.

where rD = 1. In terms of actual pressure. radius and time in oilfield units.43) Ei(-x) is the exponential integral function.4 gives the Ei function for various values of the argument.44) at any dimensionless radius and time. the exponential integral function can be accurately approximated as 3-19 . which is tabulated in mathematical handbooks.42) Ei ( − x ) = − ∫ ∞ x e− y dy y (3. and 1 ⎛ 1 ⎞ PD (1.where x= and 2 rD 4t D (3.2 Pressure Drawdown Equation For x ≤ 0. t D ) = − Ei ⎜ − ⎟ 2 ⎝ 4t D ⎠ (3.46) Pwf ( t ) = P ( rw .45) become P ( r .(3.41) can be written as 2 1 ⎛ rD ⎞ PD ( rD . t ) = Pi − and 141. Eq.2qμ B ⎡ 1 ⎛ 948φμ ct rw ⎞ ⎤ − Ei ⎜ − ⎢ ⎟⎥ kh kt ⎠⎦ ⎣ 2 ⎝ (3. t ) = Pi − 2 141. Table 3.2qμ B ⎡ 1 ⎛ 948φμ ct r 2 ⎞ ⎤ ⎢ − Ei ⎜ − ⎟⎥ kh kt ⎠⎦ ⎣ 2 ⎝ (3. t D ) = − Ei ⎜ − ⎟ 2 ⎝ 4t D ⎠ (3.44) and (3.(3. x.4.45) at the wellbore. The solution given in Eq.47) 3.01 .

Eq.(3.6qμ B ⎡ ⎢log t + log ⎜ ⎟ − 3.45). t D ) = 1.53) The formation permeability can be calculated from the slope of the semilog line as k =− 162.1513 ⎢ log t + log ⎜ − 3.50) gives the flowing bottomhole pressure as (3. t ) = Pi − ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ 162.23⎥ 2 kh ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. can be written as PD (1. then a graph of Pwf versus logt will be linear with a negative slope given by m=− 162. It shows that if the well is produced instantaneously at a constant sandface rate.54) .80907 ) for tD ≥ 25 2 (3.51) Eq.51) provides the theoretical basis for the semilog analysis of drawdown pressure data.49) Eq.5772 (3.Ei ( − x ) ln x + 0.23⎥ 2 ⎟ ⎣ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎦ (3. t D ) = 1 ( ln tD + 0.50) Pwf ( t ) = P ( rw .(3.6qμ B kh (3. the dimensionless solution at the wellbore.52) and a pressure intercept at logt = 0 given by ⎡ ⎛ k ⎞ ⎤ Pint = Pi + m ⎢log ⎜ − 3.(3.6qμ B mh 3-20 (3. Using the approximation.48) This approximation is usually valid at the wellbore in all well testing situations.23⎥ 2 ⎟ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ Eq.(3.49) can be written in terms of log to base 10 as ⎡ ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ PD (1.

4: Exponential Integral Function 3-21 .Table 3.

If the constant production rate A is added to the constant injection rate B.55) We wish to solve the diffusivity equation for the case of a well. Figure 3.and the initial pressure can be calculated from the pressure intercept as ⎡ ⎛ k ⎞ ⎤ Pi = Pint − m ⎢log ⎜ − 3.9C. which simulates the rate for a pressure buildup test for a well that had produced for time tp before it was shut in for the buildup test.9.23⎥ 2 ⎟ ⎣ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎦ 3. Figure 3. 3-22 . Since the diffusivity equation is a linear partial differential equation. Rate schedule for pressure buildup test.3 Pressure Buildup Equation (3.4. which has been producing at a constant instantaneous rate q for a time and then shut in at time tp as shown in Figure 3. superposition principle can be used to construct this solution from the constant rate solution that we already have. the outcome will be the rate in C.9 shows a graphical construction of how two constant rates can be used to generate the rate schedule for a pressure buildup test.

57) PDB = − (3. ⎜ p ⎟ .80907] 2 (3.Using Eq.(3.(3.61) 3-23 . then a graph of the buildup ⎛ t + Δt ⎞ bottomhole pressure.(3.56) (3.(3.54) and a pressure intercept equal to Pi.(3.8C. the dimensionless pressure for the buildup test can easily be derived by applying superposition principle as follows: PDC = PDA + PDB PDA = 1⎡ ln ( t p + Δt ) + 0.57) and (3.58) into Eq.6q μ B log ⎜ ⎟ kh ⎝ Δt ⎠ (3. For a bounded reservoir (in contrast to an infinite acting reservoir).59) gives the following pressure buildup equation Pws ( Δt ) = Pi − ⎛ t p + Δt ⎞ 162.80907 ⎤ D ⎦ 2⎣ 1 [ ln ΔtD + 0. versus Horner time. Pws(Δt).60) Eq.6q μ B log ⎜ ⎟ kh ⎝ Δt ⎠ (3.59) Eq.56) gives the dimensionless pressure for the buildup test as PDBU = PDC = 1 ⎛ t p + Δt ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎝ Δt ⎠ (3. will be linear with ⎝ Δt ⎠ a negative slope given by Eq. The formation permeability can be calculated from the slope of the Horner line and the initial reservoir pressure can be determined by extrapolating the Horner line to an infinite shut in time. Horner pressure buildup equation takes the form Pws ( Δt ) = P* − ⎛ t p + Δt ⎞ 162.(3.49). It shows that if the sandface rate (qB) can be reduced to zero instantaneously as shown in Figure 3.60) is known as the Horner pressure buildup equation for an infinite acting reservoir.58) Substituting Eqs.

P*. the surface rate is zero but the sandface rate will decline from its constant value to zero over a finite period of time as shown in Figure 3.51). This phenomenon. is known as wellbore unloading during drawdown and afterflow during buildup.10. is less than the initial reservoir pressure. Eq. Given that the wellbore contains compressible fluids. 3-24 .4. was derived using an internal boundary condition in which the sandface rate increased instantaneously from zero to a constant value. the surface rate may be constant but the sandface rate will increase from zero to a constant value over a definite period of time as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Idealized and actual sandface rates during drawdown and buildup.(3. Similarly. was derived using an internal boundary condition in which the sandface rate decreased from a constant value to zero instantaneously. when the well is shut in at the wellhead for a pressure buildup test. whereby the sandface rate lags behind the surface rate.60). Pi .10.(3.where the extrapolated pressure. 3.9. The term wellbore storage is normally used to describe the phenomenon either during drawdown or during buildup. The buildup equation. when the well is opened for production. Eq.4 Diagnostic Plots The drawdown equation.

The consequence of neglecting the effect of wellbore storage in our mathematical model is that the very early time pressure data will deviate from the semilog line of Eq.60) for the buildup test as shown in Figures 3. The function normally used to diagnose the presence of wellbore storage in the pressure data is the welltest derivative function defined as ' PD = dPD dP = tD D d ln t D dt D (3.62) Figure 3. 3-25 .11 and 3. Semilog plot for pressure drawdown test showing deviation from semilog line due to wellbore storage effect.11.12.(3.51) for the drawdown test or from the Horner semilog line of Eq. It is therefore necessary to perform preliminary diagnostic plots of the pressure data to identify those data that should be fitted to the semilog lines if any.(3.

It is only the pressure data that have a constant welltest derivative (making allowance for fluctuations due to noise) that should be fitted to the drawdown semilog line. the dimensionless welltest derivative function will be a constant as shown below: ' PD = dPD dP 1 = t D D = = a constant d ln t D dt D 2 (3.62) to take advantage of the fact that the data that fit the welltest model for a drawdown test fall on the semilog line of Eq.(3.64) Thus. Horner plot for pressure buildiup test showing deviation from semilog line due to wellbore storage effect.12. The welltest derivative function is defined in the manner shown in Eq. 3-26 . after the effect of wellbore storage has subsided. Along this semilog line.42).63) In actual variables. the welltest derivative function will become constant along the semilog line.Figure 3.(3. the welltest derivative function becomes ΔP ' = d ΔP d ΔP ⎛ qμ B ⎞ =t = 70.6 ⎜ ⎟ = a constant d ln t dt ⎝ kh ⎠ (3.

Diagnostic plots for pressure drawdown data affected by wellbore storage.13 shows typical diagnostic plots for a pressure drawdown test affected by wellbore storage. In the first time segment. ΔP and ΔP' separate from each other. Figure 3. ΔP and ΔP' are equal and have a unit slope on the log-log scale. In the second time segment. They cannot be used to estimate reservoir properties.The diagnostic plots consist of log-log plots of ΔP versus t and ΔP' versus t superimposed on the same graph. The pressure data 3-27 . They can only be used to estimate wellbore storage coefficient. The magnitude of the hump is a measure of the severity of the wellbore storage problem (and skin damage).13. Figure 3. The derivative function has a characteristic hump indicative of wellbore storage. The data in this time segment are dominated 100% by wellbore storage. The diagnostic plots can be divided into three time segments.

the diagnostic plots are similar to those of a drawdown test. This fact can be used to estimate ⎝ kh ⎠ the formation permeability from the derivative function. the welltest derivative becomes constant in accordance with Eq. which happens in many tests. Figure 3.6 ⎜ ⎟ as shown in Eq.64). such a test cannot be analyzed with a semilog plot. The only difference is that in the third time segment. This distortion is caused by the fact that an approximate ΔP is used to calculate the derivative function for a buildup test instead of the true ΔP. If the test ended during the second time segment. Note that the constant value of the welltest derivative function in this time segment ⎛ qμ B ⎞ is equal to 70. The data in this segment can be analyzed by type curve matching to estimate approximate formation properties. which is not accessible.64). The welltest derivative function can be calculated with the following central difference approximation: ⎡ ⎛ ΔPi − ΔPi −1 ⎞ ⎤ ⎛ ΔPi +1 − ΔPi ⎞ ⎢⎜ ⎟ ( ti +1 − ti ) + ⎜ ⎟ ( ti − ti −1 ) ⎥ ⎛ d ΔP ⎞ ⎝ ti +1 − ti ⎠ ⎢ ⎝ ti − ti −1 ⎠ ⎥ ΔP ' = ti ⎜ ⎟ = ti ⎢ ⎥ dt ⎠ti ti − ti −1 ) + ( ti +1 − ti ) ( ⎝ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3. Data in this time segment are no longer affected by wellbore storage and will plot on the correct semilog line of Eq.14 shows typical diagnostic plots for a pressure buildup test affected by wellbore storage.14.in this time segment are still affected by wellbore storage but to a lesser degree than in the first time segment.(3.(3. In the third time segment.51). the welltest derivative function for a buildup may not be constant but may be distorted as shown in Figure 3.(3.65) 3-28 . In general. when the pressure data are no longer affected by wellbore storage.

ΔP for buildup test is approximated by 3-29 . Diagnostic plots for pressure buildup data affected by wellbore storage.15 shows the pressures used to define ΔP for drawdown and buildup tests.Figure 3.66) For buildup test.67) However. because Pwf(tp+Δt) is not available. ΔP should be defined as ΔP = Pws ( Δt ) − Pwf ( t p + Δt ) (3. Figure 3. For drawdown test.14. ΔP is defined as ΔP = Pi − Pwf ( t ) (3.

(3.5 Skin Factor During drilling operations. the near wellbore permeability could be enhanced and the well is said to be stimulated. if the well is treated by an acid job.65) using actual shut in time. for a damaged or stimulated well.ΔP = Pws ( Δt ) − Pwf ( t p ) (3. Δt.69) Figure 3. Also.68) This approximation could distort the welltest derivative function after the effect of wellbore storage has subsided. Pressures used to define ΔP for drawdown and buildup. or ⎛ t + Δt ⎞ Horner time. 3. Thus. ⎜ p ⎟ . or effective shut in time. defined as ⎝ Δt ⎠ Δte = ( Δt ) ( t p ) Δt + t p (3. Δte. the near wellbore permeability could be reduced by formation damage caused by mud filtrate invasion. 3-30 . The derivative function for a pressure buildup test can be calculated with Eq.15.4.

ks and rs. k. S. is a dimensionless pressure change at the wellbore given by S= ΔPskin ⎛ qμ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 2π kh ⎠ (3.16. 3-31 . It can be seen from Figure 3. ks.74) Eq.2 ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ kh ⎠ (3. by the equation ⎛k ⎞ ⎛r ⎞ S = ⎜ − 1⎟ ln ⎜ s ⎟ ⎝ k s ⎠ ⎝ rw ⎠ (3.16 that ΔPskin and hence.74) contains two unknowns. S. It can be shown that the permeability of the altered zone.(3.70) in Darcy units or S= ΔPskin ⎛ qμ B ⎞ 141.73) for a stimulated well.there is a region of altered permeability near the wellbore as shown in Figure 3. The additional pressure change near the wellbore caused by the region of altered permeability can be incorporated into the welltest model through the concept of a skin factor. The skin factor. is positive for a damaged well and negative for a stimulated well. an as such is not as useful for estimating the skin factor as it appears to be.72) ΔPskin = Pwfundamaged − Pwfstimulated (3.71) in oilfield units where ΔPskin is defined as ΔPskin = Pwfundamaged − Pwfdamaged for a damaged well or (3. is related to the true formation permeability.

t D ) = 1 ( ln tD + 0. Schematic diagram showing skin.75) Eq.16.(3.Figure 3.75) can be written in terms of log to base 10 as 3-32 . Skin factor can be incorporated into the welltest model as PD (1.80907 ) +S for tD ≥ 25 2 (3.

78) where Pwf(1hr) is read on the semilog straight line or its extrapolation as shown in Figure 3. the skin factor.1513 ⎢ log t + log ⎜ − 3.(3.6qμ B ⎞ ⎥ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎝ ⎥ kh ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. Thus.1513 ⎢ 2 ⎟ ⎢ − ⎛ 162. t D ) = 1.10.87 S ⎥ ⎢log t + log ⎜ 2 ⎟ kh ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. can be determined from a drawdown or a buildup test.23 + 0. it can still be used to perform its diagnostic function.79) where Pws(1hr) is read on the Horner straight line or its extrapolation as shown in Figure 3. S.87 S ⎥ 2 ⎟ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. The resulting initial-boundary value problem to be solved consists of the following equations in Darcy units 3-33 . the skin factor is given by ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ Pwf ( t p ) − Pws (1hr ) ⎥ ⎛ k ⎞ − log ⎜ + 3.4.23⎥ S = 1.23 + 0. t ) = Pi − ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ 162.6q μ B ⎡ − 3.76) gives the flowing bottomhole pressure in the presence of a skin as Pwf ( t ) = P ( rw .77) can be solved for the skin factor from the drawdown semilog line as ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ Pwf (1hr ) − Pi ⎥ ⎛ k ⎞ − log ⎜ S = 1. Note that the presence of a skin factor does not affect the shape of the welltest derivative function and as such.⎡ ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ PD (1.77) Eq.23⎥ 2 ⎢ − ⎛ 162. For a buildup test.6 Homogeneous Reservoir Model with Wellbore Storage and Skin The welltest model can be reformulated to include wellbore storage and skin.6qμ B ⎞ ⎥ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ ⎥ kh ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ ⎦ (3.76) Eq.12.(3. 3.1513 ⎢ ⎟ + 3.

81).∂ 2 P 1 ∂P φμ ct ∂P + = ∂r 2 r ∂r k ∂t P ( r.81) The previous single internal boundary condition. atm = initial wellbore fluid volume before unloading.80) ⎡ ⎛ ∂ΔP ⎞ ⎤ ΔPwf = ⎢ ΔP ( r . consists of the sum of the sandface rate. Eq. The constant. reservoir cm3 = wellbore fluid volume during unloading. C. Eqs.31) dPwf 2π kh ⎛ ∂P ⎞ =q ⎜r ⎟ −C μ ⎝ ∂r ⎠r = rw dt (3.29) (3.30). reservoir cm3 = initial wellbore pressure before unloading. t ) − S ⎜ r ⎟⎥ ⎝ ∂r ⎠ ⎦ r = rw ⎣ (3. Eq. has now been replaced by two internal boundary conditions.80) states that the constant surface rate. given by the first term on the left side of the equation. and the wellbore storage rate.(3.80) and (3. is the wellbore storage coefficient defined as C= V − V (t ) ΔV = i ΔP Pi − Pwf (t ) (3. 0 ) = Pi lim P ( r .(3. atm ΔV ΔP Vi V(t) Pi Pwf(t) = wellbore pressure during unloading.28) (3.(3. atm 3-34 . t ) = Pi r →∞ (3.82) where C = wellbore storage coefficient. reservoir cm3 = change in bottomhole pressure. reservoir cm3/atm = change in wellbore fluid volume. given by the second term on the left side of the equation. q.

86) where the dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient is defined as 3-35 . C.The wellbore storage coefficient. t D ) = 0 CD dPwD ⎛ ∂PD ⎞ − ⎜ rD ⎟ =1 dt D ⎝ ∂rD ⎠r =1 D ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎠ ⎦ rD=1 (3.(3.83) ⎛ qB ⎞⎛ t ⎞ C =⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 24 ⎠⎝ ΔP ⎠unit slope line (3. given by the second term on the right side of the equation. given by the first term on the right side of the equation. 0 ) = 0 (3. is a measure of the severity of the wellbore storage problem and can be determined from the unit slope line of the first time segment on the diagnostic plots.81) states that the pressure change at the wellbore. and ΔPskin.33) (3. The initial-boundary value problem can be put in dimensionless form as ∂ 2 PD 1 ∂PD ∂PD + = 2 ∂rD rD ∂rD ∂t D PD ( rD .35) rD →∞ lim PD ( rD . consists of the sum of the pressure change for the undamaged or unstimulated well. (Pi-Pwf). The unit slope line in oilfield units is given by ⎛ qB ⎞ ΔP = ⎜ ⎟t ⎝ 24C ⎠ from which C can be calculated in RB/psi as (3.84) Eq.32) (3.85) ⎡ ⎛ ∂P PwD = ⎢ PD − S ⎜ rD D ⎝ ∂rD ⎣ (3.

87) CD = 5. to obtain the PwD function in the time domain.32). (3. the Calculus derivative with respect to tD in Laplace space is first obtained. (3. which can be used to analyze transient pressure tests that fit a homogeneous reservoir model with wellbore storage and skin by type curve matching. To obtain the welltest derivative function.(3.17 shows the solutions and welltest derivative functions for various values of CDe2S plotted on log-log scales. z ) = z 3/ 2 K1 ( ) z ⎡ K o z + S zK1 z ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 2 ⎡ K o z + S zK1 z + z CD ⎣ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) z ⎤ ⎦ (3. This family of solutions constitutes Bourdet et al.88) in oilfield units. Eq. The Calculus derivative in Laplace space is given by P ' wD (1. z ) = Ko z 3/ 2 K1 ( z)+ z C 2 ( z)+S D ⎡ Ko ⎣ ( z)+ S zK1 ( z) zK1 ( z )⎤ ⎦ (3.615C 2 2πφ ct hrw (3. the more severe is the wellbore storage problem. by say Stehfest algorithm. (3. z ) = zPwD (1.89) where z is the Laplace parameter and Ko and K1 are Bessel functions of the second kind of order 0 and 1.85) and (3.33).(3.86) can be solved by Laplace transformation. inverted and multiplied by tD. The initial-boundary value problem represented by Eqs.35). 3-36 .'s wellbore storage type curves. The larger the dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient.90) Figure 3.CD = in Darcy units or C 2 2πφ ct hrw (3.89) can easily be inverted numerically. It can be shown that the dimensionless pressure at the wellbore in Laplace space is given by PwD (1.

often on a log-log scale. 3-37 . BOURDET TYPE CURVES 100 CDe 2S 1060 1050 1040 1030 1020 1015 1010 108 106 104 103 102 10 PwD .17 is an example of type curves obtained by solving the diffusivity equation in the presence of wellbore storage and skin. Bourdet et al type curves for a homogeneous reservoir with wellbore storage and skin for CDe2S from 102 to 1060. Such a graph is a convenient way to present the solution to the diffusivity equation obtained by numerical computations.17.7 Type Curve Matching A type curve is a graph of dimensionless pressure together with the corresponding welltest derivative function versus dimensionless time. Figure 3.3.4. From the definitions of PwD.1 1 10 tD/CD 100 1000 10000 Figure 3.1 0. tD and CD.PwD' 1 0.

⎜ D ⎟ . Trace the matched type curve on the field plot to obtain a visual record of the best match.2q μ B ⎠ ⎛ tD ⎞ ⎛ 2. Thus.91) and (3.92) ⎛t ⎞ Eqs. ⎛t ⎞ 3.93) . tM and ⎝ CD ⎠ M (C D e2 S ) . M 4.'s type curves to analyze a transient pressure test is as follows: 1. This is the field plot. 2.91) (3. Use only major grid lines on this plot.(3.2qμ B )( PDM ) ( h )( ΔPM ) 3-38 (3.⎛ ⎞ kh log PwD = log ΔP + log ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 141. Calculate the formation permeability from the pressure match as k= (141. Choose a convenient match point and record PDM .951x10−4 kh ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ kh log ⎜ and log ⎜ ⎟ . Slide the field plot over the type curves both vertically and horizontally to obtain the best match of the PD function and the corresponding welltest derivative function. Prepare a log-log plot of ΔP versus t on tracing paper using the same scale as the type curves.951x10−4 kh ⎞ log ⎜ ⎟ = log t + log ⎜ ⎟ μC ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ CD ⎠ (3.92) show that the graph of log PwD versus log ⎜ D ⎟ is the ⎝ CD ⎠ same as the graph of log ΔP versus log t with the axes shifted by the constants ⎛ 2.2q μ B ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ transient pressure test can be matched graphically with the appropriate type curve to estimate the reservoir and well parameters. the ΔP versus t obtained from a ⎟ μC ⎝ 141. The procedure for using the Bourdet et al.

3-39 . Example type curve match.18.94) ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ (3. Calculate the skin factor as 2S 1 ⎡ ( CD e ) M S = ln ⎢ 2 ⎢ CD ⎣ (3.'s type curves. 7.18 shows qualitatively a type match using the Bourdet et al. Figure 3. Calculate the wellbore storage coefficient from the time match as ⎛ 0.0002951kh ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ( ΔtM ) μ ⎝ ⎠ C= ⎛ tD ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ CD ⎠ M 6. Calculate the dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient.95) Figure 3.5.

40500 15.33000 15.35083 15.00000 0.13333 0. 3.02500 0.22917 0.01250 0.02083 0.21250 0.36750 15.12083 0.17 3147.33417 15.00833 0.68 3227.3.34250 15.43833 15.03248 kt φμ ct (3.5: Pressure Buildup Data for Field Example t (hrs) 15.47583 15.37 3249.35500 15.50917 15.48 3122.96 3135.41333 15.03333 0.8 Radius of Investigation of a WellTest An approximate equation for estimating the radius investigated by a welltest is given by rinv = 0.55917 15.4.38833 15.06667 0.16250 0.96) where the variables are in oilfield units.05833 0.54250 15.10833 0.45083 15.48 3128.14583 0.19583 0.02917 0.38000 15.33833 15.95 3170.03 3103.24 3205.07 3261.27 3106.25000 Pws ( Δt ) (psia) 3086.79 3-40 .96 3216.81 3096.00417 0.25 3116.49250 15. Table 3.37583 15.35917 15.17917 0.49 3119.68 3178.09583 0.01667 0.33 3090.42583 15.64 3161.07500 0.57 3093.34667 15.01 3113.05000 0.03750 0.39 3187.08333 0.12 3194.36333 15.4.5.89 3238.55 3100.77 3110.04583 0.92 3141.46333 15.9 Field Example of a Well Test Analysis A pressure buildup test was conducted on a new well in a new reservoir with the results shown in Table 3.52583 15.58000 Δt (hrs) 0.39667 15.

50000 4.83000 18.39250 16.33333 0.33000 18.20 3821.20500 16.70 3826.58000 16.32 3673.74667 15.83000 20.44 3413.58000 20.78 3843.33000 17.18750 1.69 3518.25000 3.08000 19.62167 15.08000 21.00000 5.19 3763.83 3448.45 3829.99667 16.50000 2.58000 19.51750 16.58000 22.75000 0.58000 23.25000 3287.27 3705.50000 1.06 3799.91333 15.00000 3.05 3466.29167 0.80 3809.15 3640.81 3692.63 3537.78833 15.97 3493.00000 1.65 3785.70500 15.87167 15.54167 0.02 3840.33000 20.66333 15.25000 6.15.26 3732.94 3838.43750 1.75000 3.03833 16.70500 16.33000 21.41 3631.58000 17.23 3602.70833 0.76750 16.52 3719.25000 4.26 3481.75000 5.25000 1.37500 2.70 3837.45500 16.34 3356.81250 0.87500 0.83000 21.95500 17.83000 16.98 3394.31250 1.00000 6.75000 8.33000 19.58333 0.95 3617.00000 4.00000 2.75000 6.50000 3.58000 18.86 3652.08000 20.95500 15.08000 22.85 3664.20500 17.62500 1.37500 0.50000 0.26750 16.01 3844.62500 0.75000 1.97 3820.12500 1.75 3586.50 3815.08000 16.27 3374.55 3571.64 3834.75000 4.93750 1.21 3310.19 3838.34 3553.08000 17.44 3774.69 3832.25000 2.08000 18.25000 5.75000 7.41667 0.70500 17.90 3433.50000 5.66667 0.45833 0.33000 16.25000 7.83000 15.52 3-41 .87500 2.95 3823.37500 1.06250 1.58000 0.71 3757.23 3749.15 3334.83000 19.08000 23.64250 16.11 3794.14250 16.

33000 32.83000 45.58000 34.99 3858.25000 26.76 3852.75 3851.58000 39.01 3850.25000 27.08000 24.33000 35.08000 32.25 3855.00000 3846.25000 12.08000 26.25000 22.75000 20.08000 29.58000 31.23 3865.50 3857.99 3864.75000 10.50000 15.75000 12.75000 13.25000 23.07 3855.25000 24.50 3853.25000 16.25000 9.74 Other pertinent data are as follows: Producing time before the test = Production rate before the test = Wellbore radius Formation thickness Porosity Total compressibility Formation volume factor Oil viscosity = = = = = = 3-42 15.48 3863.58000 41.25000 10.83000 33.25000 13.27 3847.50 3856.58000 29.49 3864.5 cp .58000 27.08000 25.06 RB/STB 2.25000 19.75000 17.50000 30.73 3860.73 3865.50000 18.99 3860.74 3863.51 3848.52 3850.58000 42.58000 43.50000 21.25000 28.00000 19.58000 28.75000 14.75000 9.99 3861.2x10-6 psi-1 1.08000 28.83000 30.48 3859.08000 27.33000 8.58000 40.24 3862.00000 16.75000 11.25 3857.51 3854.58000 26.49 3862.58000 25.24.08000 35.33 hours 174 STB/D 0.22 3863.58000 37.58000 38.74 3859.25000 25.83000 36.25000 11.29 ft 107 ft 25 % 4.

24 22.03333 0.36750 15.00833 0.46 36.6: Calculated Values of ΔP and ΔP' t (hrs) 15.96 614.69 25.20 526. S and CD .62 736.88 20.37583 15.03 3-43 .45 16.01667 0.05833 Δte (hrs) 0.98 23.00833 0.24 7.77 3110.02917 0.34250 15.57 3093.6.82 Pws ( Δt ) (psia) 3086.46 16. What are the values of k.02911 0.04583 0. the total skin factor and the initial reservoir pressure. Calculate the radius of investigation of the test. b.15 36.15 42.03 3103.00000 0.92 30.70 16.35500 15.48 3128.02083 0.00417 0.02500 0.32 13.91 27. Screen the pressure data using appropriate diagnostic plots.50 307.33 3090.38000 15.93 23.02496 0.60 263.03741 0.26 1841.35917 15.03750 0.44 23.55 37.94 20.20 22. Show the best match graphically by superimposing the simulated and the test data on the plots of P versus t. Analyze the test data and determine the formation permeability.33417 15.01 3113.25 3116.85 20.07 47.55 3100.95 47.04984 0.33 13.48 10.01665 0.03326 0. d. Table 3.16 33.40 920.33000 15.34667 15.38833 Δt (hrs) 0.33833 15.00417 0.36333 15.81 3096.96 27.05000 0.02080 0.27 3106.49 3119. Simulate the buildup test assuming a homogeneous reservoir with wellbore storage and skin.63 ΔP ' wrt Δte (psi) ΔP ' wrt Δt (psi) 5.01249 0.95 409.48 3122.73 25.98 9.96 ΔP (psi) 4.68 26. log-log diagnostic plots and the Horner plot.a.34 1227. Pwf(tp) and Pi that gave the best match? The pertinent data for the diagnostic plots and Horner plot are shown in Table 3. c.01250 0.80 335.04569 0.98 9.22 13.35083 15.21 5.54 460.05811 Horner Time 3677.

03 53.98 278.95 3170.11 247.24599 0.44 192.94 288.99 22.41667 0.88 37.29 110.05 3466.99 41.63 3537.27 3374.98 106.23 3602.33333 0.64250 0.74667 15.08288 0.89 127.30 27.60052 0.20 280.14250 16.87 115.32 53.56 48.91333 15.28 283.36605 0.90 516.15576 1.62 298.32 71.17710 0.87 18.24 79.17917 0.96 3216.07 3261.13218 0.31250 0.52583 15.66333 15.12083 0.11989 0.92 152.77160 0.08333 0.56 46.05 239.04809 1.73 244.63889 0.01 467.16080 0.25000 1.06638 0.40500 15.43833 15.73 80.40564 0.64 216.43 88.74 301.62 267.19336 0.82775 0.62 84.08000 16.44 258.33 15.61 169.07463 0.15 3334.10 172.63 13.70833 0.43 14.45083 15.42 499.58333 0.41 3631.87500 0.46 200.62 531.87 146.54167 0.27 188.26750 16.15 3640.83 71.14446 0.14 67.93876 0.21 3310.28 73.50 256.25 273.52318 0.30 451.21 271.79 3287.42583 15.17 246.53 23.99 88.07 261.62167 15.95 3617.54250 15.00000 1.12 265.78833 15.31 75.52 17.35 16.76 76.34 86.48421 0.04 162.39667 15.63 130.85 3-44 .97 160.34 3553.06 100.24 3205.10213 1.00 143.82 248.30 247.98 3394.90 3433.56 152.65 212.52 207.82 554.64 3161.44 19.21250 0.64 407.68 3227.50000 0.12500 1.87167 15.09583 0.79 34.92 3141.88347 0.20959 0.72 379.88 223.93 395.09523 0.44 3413.82 52.19583 0.56195 0.44 265.35 92.37 233.22579 0.53 91.16250 0.22917 0.13333 0.26 12.07500 0.01 269.06 243.10833 0.59 54.11 327.99667 16.71502 0.52 119.55917 15.36 432.25000 0.40 109.97 3493.67705 0.40 184.15.81250 0.50 227.64 21.84 61.55 3571.09 85.65 308.05 288.66 29.12 95.12 3194.83 3448.52 203.32624 0.14583 0.83000 15.27 129.06 155.20899 230.47583 15.74 175.53 49.51750 16.45833 0.46333 15.06667 0.55 208.07 243.46 84.39 3187.25 92.37 3249.94 233.50917 15.26 283.76 258.89 62.22 485.51 127.44 258.10757 0.68 3178.28 25.20500 16.89 3238.57 347.58000 16.91 119.58000 15.37 117.97 142.35 141.45500 16.86 49.45 31.44 135.37500 0.03833 16.93750 1.66667 0.79 107.28622 0.75 3586.29 283.18750 1.21 209.06 136.90 234.39250 16.56 79.75000 0.99363 1.60 253.03 77.95 253.44502 0.94 205.95500 15.50 361.69 3518.29167 0.08 544.91 13.49250 15.70500 15.68 3135.34 3356.24 241.41333 15.26 3481.17 3147.06250 1.33000 16.62500 0.

84944 3.50 3815.58000 1.18 8.15 11.70 119.01 3844.57 6.43 2.33 50.50000 4.27 3847.75 3851.32 698.25000 4.61 4.98 2.56 3.19 3763.33 184.95 3823.44 120.17 729.32 3673.36355 5.75000 9.29 41.33 12.25 40.27 85.46 138.46 95.80 3809.52 3846.97 3820.46926 1.25000 10.19 3838.00000 3.95 258.92217 5.64 3834.65 32.48 605.19 763.94 619.26182 1.22 10.33000 18.11 3794.62500 1.79 3.58000 18.42 36.18 107.08000 18.49 108.58000 25.77029 3.76750 16.43750 1.19 759.06 43.93 200.42 210.90 65.16 20.11 2.19 116.31 748.17 74.69 3832.74 227.08000 22.46 140.11 5.14279 6.78 707.57 72.73 713.86 2.52 577.11 52.75000 6.98 26.86 18.66 11.64 733.86 677.57049 5.70 3826.00000 4.83000 21.31892 6.37 750.76 566.31 79.83 4.60 50.74 208.83000 19.00000 2.14947 2.43 9.18 762.45 756.46 247.58000 17.27 3705.08000 19.44 3774.19 632.76902 5.11 688.51 34.50000 5.93 645.42 765.75 56.25000 1.00000 6.69 3-45 .68 764.43987 4.75000 7.83000 18.45 3.58000 20.47882 3.37500 1.17227 3.52 3850.01297 3.25000 8.21 33.08000 24.66 2.75000 5.67 7.50 42.26 3732.38 670.33000 19.89 26.75000 4.25000 3.56 224.83000 20.72 5.51 3848.91071 4.13 6.84 150.33000 20.62 737.88 25.08000 21.70500 16.12 188.07 133.69 754.58000 19.31224 4.52 3719.38 22.20 37.36 3652.50 2.00000 5.20500 17.70500 17.67 3.08000 17.04 225.06 241.37 740.18 28.12 743.81 7.18157 4.86 752.31426 1.83000 16.76 9.08000 23.16 263.58000 24.67066 1.20 130.58000 22.08000 20.20 3821.71 3757.32750 3.76919 1.95963 6.57070 1.81 24.98 115.52 53.25000 5.87 735.94 761.38 5.07 3.02 3840.68 758.68 150.81 19.47 723.43 281.50000 2.81 3692.33172 2.61 87.75 59.75000 11.01 3850.00 55.08000 26.23 4.37 162.52 40.33000 21.16.99 587.41 4.50000 3.36631 1.87500 2.96 142.25000 9.09 4.05641 2.57 2.25000 6.75000 10.70 3837.27 3.25000 2.62637 3.83 31.65 3785.85 3664.25000 7.50900 2.50000 1.48843 12.45 3829.75 2.94 3838.75000 3.68 206.82 33.90 663.58000 23.12 70.08000 25.61 751.75000 8.68648 4.08 121.24 40.92 3.45 7.06 3799.37500 2.04777 4.23 3749.46 19.96203 2.58000 26.95500 17.33000 17.78 3843.75000 1.14764 5.68151 2.36 746.37 64.26 140.

Notice the noise in the derivative function.00000 6.06 2.25000 13.92 15.92 771.64495 7.58000 39.41 773.89 16.48 3863.74 3863.34 12.75000 12.58 1.27 26.75000 17.74 3859.72 1.58 15.99 3858.78 23.08000 28.92 768.50000 30.49 3862.25 3857.15 777.00429 8.50 3857.65168 6.01 1.71 8.24 3862.08 16.89 777.22 40.28 39.67803 9.58000 28.16 775.10716 7.08000 32.72 21.83 30.75000 13.58000 29.53875 9.96074 7.33000 32.60 27.41 776.99 3860.33 24.25 3855.33152 8.43 16.55 27.48 10.08000 29.51 3852.25000 19.75000 20.82892 8.76 25.18 767.33000 35.48 3859. it would appear that the effect of wellbore storage had subsided at about 10 hrs.17 770.92 1.99 3864.66 775.90548 9.63077 8.89 16.99 3861.25000 24.66 778.73 3860.50 3853.70 30.15 773.83000 45.66 1. From the welltest derivative function.56 1.25000 28.58000 43.27.83000 36.22 3863.51 3854.56 21.77100 8.58000 38.25000 26.23 32.98 33.58000 42.19 show the classic response of a homogeneous reservoir model with wellbore storage and skin.51 34.25 2.25000 25.88 30.81077 9.75000 14.40 774. in which case.50000 21.91 776.66 774.83000 33.39243 9.20 2. This is not surprising because numerical differentiation is a noisy process.25000 16.00000 16.49 3864.16 778.54 38.33000 11.25 20.73 3865.45173 7.78 1.40 778.60 9.91 23.75 9.08000 35.90 8.17 770.74 766.11 2.00000 19.14560 2.58000 37.63 1.23853 9.58000 41. the pressure data beyond 10 hrs might be fitted to the Horner semilog line.07644 9.50000 18.58000 31.44 19.21 12.52 33.01 17.69 1. The wellbore storage coefficient can be calculated from the unit slope line as 3-46 .90 779.48442 8.75 1.84 1.25000 22.36 36.96817 10.64 14.88 1.25000 27.51 30.50000 15.17164 8.41 36.24854 7.66 772.25000 23.16 2.56 14.80901 6.64 32.30 2.61 1.70 10.83000 30.25000 12.54 1.15 15.81 1.58000 34.17 767.23 3865.58000 40.74 769.96 1.08000 27.50 3856.62 The diagnostic plots depicted in Figure 3.67 10.07 3855.

25 ) ( 4.20 shows the Horner plot.20 x10−6 ) (107 )( 0.52 log ⎜ ⎟ Δt ⎝ ⎠ 3-47 .19. The Horner straight line is given by ⎛ 15.29 ) = 9.0096 RB/psi ⎝ 800 ⎠ The dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient is given by CD = ( 5. Diagnostic plots for field example.C= (174 )(1.0096 ) 2 2π ( 0.06 ) ⎛ 24 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = 0. Figure 3.09 x102 Figure 3.33 + Δt ⎞ Pws ( Δt ) = 3880.615)( 0.60 − 78.

92 md ( −78.20.52 )(107 ) Figure 3.5 )(1.52 psi/log cycle from which the permeability is calculated as k=− (162.6 )(174 )( 2.35 psia The skin factor can be calculated as 3-48 .06 ) = 8. Pws (1hr ) = 3785. From the Horner line. Horner plot for field example.The slope of the Horner line is m = −78.

03248 (8.92 md can be assigned to this volume of the reservoir.1513 ( 8.35 ⎫ ⎡ ⎤ 8.61 + 3.33) = 234 ft ( 0. The radius of investigation for the drawdown portion of the test is given by rinv = 0.25 )( 2. S and CD obtained from the semilog analysis as preliminary estimates. The initial reservoir pressure is given by Pi = P* = 3880.25 )( 2.23⎪ − log ⎢ S = 1. though non-unique. the well is damaged.92 )( 30 ) = 330 ft ( 0.406 x106 ft 3 The estimated permeability of 8.6 psia. A successful simulation of the test.5 ) ( 4.1513 ⎨⎜ ⎬ ⎟ 2 −78.33 − 3785.20 x10−6 ) The buildup test cannot investigate what the drawdown did not investigate. Therefore.21 Thus. Using the k. The reservoir bulk volume investigated by the test is given by 2 V = π rinv h = (π ) ( 2342 ) (107 ) = 18.03248 (8. the homogeneous reservoir model with 3-49 . This is in contrast to the core permeability.20 x10−6 ) ( 0. the radius of investigation of the buildup test test is obtained from the drawdown portion of the test as 234 ft. which is measured on a minute portion of the reservoir.92 )(15.20 x10−6 ) The radius of investigation for the buildup portion of the test is given by rinv = 0.25 )( 2. The last step in a pressure transient analysis is to simulate the test.90 − 7.29 ) ⎥ ⎠ ⎪⎝ ⎪ ⎣ ⎦ ⎩ ⎭ S = 1.52 ⎢ ( 0.5 ) ( 4.5 ) ( 4.23) = 5.92 ⎪⎛ ⎞ ⎥ + 3. tends to lend credibility to the results of the analysis.⎧ 3086.

Clearly.22 compares the log-diagnostic plots.21.46 x108 Pwf ( t p ) = 3089.21 compares the pressure buildup responses. The best match was obtained with the following parameters: k = 9.23 compares the Horner plots.wellbore storage and skin can be used to simulate the test by a trial and error procedure.23 show graphical comparisons of the simulated test and the field test. and Figure 3. Figure 3. Figure 3. Figures 3. A comparison of the simulated and the measured pressure buildup response for field example. the simulation serves to fine tune the parameters obtained by the conventional semilog analysis of the test.46 psia Pi = 3880. Figure 3. 3-50 .4 md S =6 CD = 9 x102 CD e 2 S = 1.21 through 3.60 psia Thus. the agreement between the simulated test and the field test is good.

Figure 3. Figure 3. A comparison of the simulated and the measured diagnostic plots for field example.23.22. 3-51 . A comparison of the simulated and the measured Horner plots for field example.

(3. is defined as M ( P) = ∫ P Po 2P dP μZ (3.97) The dependent variable in Eq. Mscf/D T = absolute temperature of the reservoir.87 S ⎥ 2 kh ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. The dimensionless pressure for real gas flow in oilfield units is defined as PD = M ( Pi ) − M ( Pwf ⎛ 1422qscT ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ kh ⎝ ⎠ ) (3.23) that formed the basis for the welltest model for oil (and water) reservoirs. M(P).99) where qsc = gas production rate. M(P).97).3. Eq.(3.10 Welltest Model for Dry Gas Reservoir The diffusivity equation for real gas flow is given by ∇2 M = φμ ct ∂M k ∂t = 1 ∂M α ∂t (3. This suggests that all the equations used to analyze transient pressure tests in an oil reservoir can be adapted to analyze transient pressure tests in a dry gas reservoir provided the pressure data from the gas well test are first transformed into the real gas potential.23 + 0.4.100) 3-52 .97) is similar in structure to Eq. M(P) is known as the real gas potential or the real gas pseudo pressure.(3. ºRankine (ºR = ºF+460) The semilog drawdown line is given M ( Pwf ) = M ( Pi ) − ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ 1637qscT ⎡ ⎢log t + log ⎜ ⎟ − 3.98) where Po is a reference pressure.

23⎥ 2 ⎢ − ⎛ 1637 qscT ⎞ ⎥ ⎝ φμi cti rw ⎠ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ kh ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3.12.23 + 0.104) suggests that a graph of M ( Pws ) versus log ⎜ p ⎟ will be linear ⎝ Δt ⎠ with a negative slope.96) from which the formation permeability can be determined.101) ⎢log t + log ⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎝ φμi cti rw ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ The slope of the semilog line is given by m=− 1637 qscT kh (3. The total skin 3-53 . With this modification.(3. m. The total skin factor for drawdown test is given by ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ M ( Pwf ) − M ( Pi ) ⎥ ⎛ k ⎞ 1hr − log ⎜ S = 1.103) Horner's buildup equation is given by M ( Pws ) = M ( P* ) − ⎛ t p + Δt ⎞ 1637 qscT log ⎜ ⎟ kh ⎝ Δt ⎠ (3.104) ⎛ t + Δt ⎞ Eq. given by m=− 1637 qscT kh (3.87 S * + 0. the total skin factor for a gas well test.(3. where D is a non-darcy coefficient and S* is the part of the total skin factor that does not include the non-darcy effect. Eq. S.87 Dqsc ⎥ (3. As a result.100) becomes M ( Pwf ) = M ( Pi ) − 1637qscT kh ⎡ ⎤ ⎛ k ⎞ − 3. This could lead to non-darcy flow with an additional pressure drop above that of darcy flow. The effect of non-darcy flow can be expressed as a skin factor as shown in Section 3.102) from which the formation permeability can be determined. is normally split into the sum of two skin factors S* and Dqsc.The gas velocity in the reservoir can be quite high given the low viscosity of gas.1513 ⎢ ⎟ + 3.

67 ºR = 665.428 31.10 μg (cp) 0.7 shows the gas properties and the M(P) function for a dry gas reservoir with the following properties: Reservoir temperature Pseudocritical pressure Pseudocritical temperature Apparent molecular weight of gas Apparent molecular weight of air Density of fresh water = 246 ºF + 459.67 = 705.9625 lb mass/lb mole = 62.870 lb mass/lb mole = 28.1625E+07 2.07 1303. P*. Correlations exist for these functions in the literature.095 2.01437 0. and μ * and ct* are obtained at the pressure intercept.factor for a buildup test is given by ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ M ( Pwf ) − M ( Pws ) ⎥ ⎛ k ⎞ 1hr − log ⎜ * * 2 ⎟ + 3.368 lb mass/cu ft Table 3.6298E+07 7.120 48.6130E+07 4.554 2.942 P/Z (psia) 203 411 624 841 1062 Bg (ft3/Mscf) 98.105) where M(Pws)1hr is obtained from the semilog straight line or its extrapolation.951 0.736 ρg (lbm/ft3) 0.656 18.7: Variation of Gas Properties with Pressure Pressure (psia) 200 400 600 800 1000 Z 0.1964E+07 3-54 .13 1047.91 1725. Table 3. The M(P) function for a dry gas reservoir can be computed in advance using the gas properties.65 2562.01498 M(P) (psia2/cp) 2.0 psia = 374.646 cg (106/psi) 5066.9 ºR = 18.01413 0. To do so requires the ability to estimate the gas Z factor and viscosity as functions of pressure and temperature.1513 ⎢ ⎢ − ⎛ 1637 qscT ⎞ ⎥ ⎝ φμ ct rw ⎠ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ kh ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (3. Diagnostic plots should be used to screen the M(P) data for wellbore storage in the manner described for oil welltests to determine the correct semilog lines if any.505 1.01393 0.024 1.986 0.895 23.01466 0.974 0.8933E+06 1.23⎥ S = 1.962 0.

034 1.327 4.79 89.945 0.2690E+08 3.418 3.267 7.22 409.538 6.021 1.488 9.02400 0.02753 0.02280 0.0367E+08 7.341 10.64 0.537 7.19 137.036 9.30 305.501 14.20 572.03084 0.8321E+08 4.090 1.9033E+09 1.582 8.2901E+09 1.9801E+09 2.923 10.01924 0.2144E+09 1.0292E+08 1.85 455.7962E+08 2.362 3.01760 0.996 6.954 0.4466E+08 9.02976 0.02866 0.01868 0.770 3.3540E+08 7.71 215.977 873.7350E+08 8.009 1.048 1.0568E+09 3-55 .931 0.439 13.938 0.104 1.03137 1.02810 0.066 7.082 8.6727E+09 1.02220 0.5192E+09 1.02340 0.7496E+09 1.52 120.02637 0.915 0.0643E+09 1.31 254.9024E+08 1.02520 0.997 1.927 0.015 6.1697E+08 9.169 11.225 4.743 14.63 76.486 5.614 4.793 4.140 9.310 3.03030 0.119 1.02579 0.102 8.915 0.3890E+08 1.957 3.07 158.02460 0.01710 0.920 0.01573 0.02695 0.82 335.925 0.479 3.446 5.30 650.921 0.310 4.165 1285 1511 1737 1962 2186 2406 2623 2836 3043 3244 3438 3626 3808 3982 4150 4312 4467 4616 4759 4896 5028 5154 5276 5393 5506 5614 5719 5820 5917 6011 15.914 0.8265E+09 1.69 747.583 7.02040 0.528 12.130 11.39 128.567 9.7397E+08 3.01534 0.2476E+08 2.075 1.01982 0.01 278.786 5.181 4.456 10.859 3.477 13.063 3.67 84.974 0.543 3.613 3.888 5.764 4.149 1.061 1.6894E+08 6.689 3.01661 0.990 14.68 233.14 106.917 0.1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 4000 4200 4400 4600 4800 5000 5200 5400 5600 5800 6000 6200 6400 6600 6800 7000 0.03 147.964 0.4426E+09 1.64 508.454 4.203 3.45 170.4254E+08 5.934 0.719 13.36 183.917 0.02159 0.843 13.01616 0.0455E+08 5.46 100.5959E+09 1.199 12.37 94.133 5.96 80.995 4.47 113.147 13.857 12.42 369.03 198.1391E+09 1.250 14.01813 0.02921 0.501 11.02100 0.985 0.134 1.3662E+09 1.744 11.

As a result of compaction.8: Measured Porosities and Permeabilities of Artificial Sandpacks (adapted from Beard and Weyl.8).5. for a sand. Table 3. for well sorted sands.5 FACTORS AFFECTING PERMEABILITY Permeability is affected by compaction. the pore size is proportional to the grain size.2 Pore Size (Grain Size) In general. sorting. it also reduces permeability. cementation. a well sorted sand with a larger grain size will have a higher permeability than a well sorted sand with a smaller grain size (Table 3. Therefore. 3. the permeability is proportional to the square of the grain size.3. pore size. the permeability is proportional to the square of the mean pore size. layering and clay swelling. For a well sorted sand. 3. 1973) 3-56 . Thus.1 Compaction Just as compaction reduces porosity.5. the permeability of rocks tends to decrease with depth of burial.

106) Figure 3. Comparison of flow in a pipe with flow in a porous medium.To see why grain size affects the permeability of a medium. contained in the L3 meter3 of bulk volume is given by N= L3 (1 − φ ) Total Solid Volume = Volume of 1 sand grain ⎛ 4 3 ⎞ ⎜ πr ⎟ ⎝3 ⎠ (3.107) The wetted surface area is given by 3-57 . the number of grains. volume (S) is S= Surface Area 4 L2 ⎛ 4 ⎞ 2 3 = =⎜ ⎟ m /m Bulk Volume L3 ⎝ L ⎠ The wetted surface area of the pipe per unit bulk (3. Let the porous medium consist of uniform spherical sand grains of radius r meter and porosity φ. Figure 3. let us compare the wetted surface area per unit bulk volume (specific surface area) for flow through a pipe with no grains and through a porous medium with two grain sizes. For the porous medium.24.24 shows a cube of each medium of volume L3 meter3. N.

Put another way. it is obvious that much more energy will be required to sustain the same volumetric flow rate through the porous medium than through the pipe. it is obvious that the porous medium is much less permeable than the pipe.28 ) = 432000 m 2 / m3 −6 5 x10 3-58 .800 times that of the pipe.L3 (1 − φ ) 3L3 (1 − φ ) 2 Area = NxArea of 1sand grain = x 4π r = r ⎛4 3⎞ ⎜ πr ⎟ ⎝3 ⎠ (3. In this case.28 ) = 43200 m 2 / m3 −6 50 x10 Thus. the specific surface area is S= 3 (1 − . Figure 1. the specific surface area of the porous medium is 10. everything else being equal.108) The wetted area per unit bulk volume (specific surface area) is given by ⎡ 3L3 (1 − φ ) ⎤ ⎛ 1 ⎞ 3 (1 − φ ) 2 3 S=⎢ m /m ⎥⎜ 3 ⎟ = r r ⎣ ⎦⎝ L ⎠ (3. Let us examine the effect of grain size on the specific surface area of the porous medium.1 gives the diameters of the grains of various clastic rocks. The specific surface area for the pipe flow is S = 4m 2 / m3 The specific surface area for the porous medium is S= 3 (1 − . Let L = 1 meter and let the porous medium consist of very fine sand with a grain diameter of 100 x10−6 meter (r = 50 x10−6 meter) and a porosity of 28%. and hence the permeability. by changing the grain size to a fine silt with a grain diameter of 10 x10−6 meter (r = 5 x10−6 meter).109) Let us examine some numerical values. Since the fluid velocity is zero at the wetted surface during flow (no slip condition).

The sand grains were deposited in such a way as to give the closest packing possible with spherical grains. Porosity. permeability decreases as the grain size decreases.2 L = 3 miles = (3)(5280)(30.48) = 7620. Example 3.00 cm 3-59 . This extremely well-sorted.48) = 482803.48 cm Solution to Example 3. Notes: 1 mile = 5280 ft 1 ft = 30.20 cm W = 2 miles = (2)(5280)(30. homogeneous and isotropic reservoir has the following dimensions: Length Width Thickness Grain diameter = = = = 3 miles 2 miles 250 feet 1/8 mm (fine sand) Estimate the following properties for the reservoir: a. the specific surface area of the fine silt has increased by a factor of 10 compared to the very fine sand. Surface area per unit bulk volume (specific surface area). Therefore.48) = 321868. Using the same argument as before.2 An idealized petroleum reservoir consists of an unconsolidated sand of uniform grain size. it is obvious that the silt will be less permeable than the fine sand.80 cm h = 250 ft = (250)(30. b.Thus. c. Wetted surface area of the sand grains in square miles.

9% is the closest packing. The specific surface area based on bulk volume is given by Eq. This enormous surface area has implications for the occurrence of surface phenomena in reservoir rocks.626 x107 square miles. 3-60 . 3.5.5 Layering Permeability is a tensor and can therefore be different in different directions.212 x1017 cm 2 ( 5280 x30.0125 cm (fine sand) Rhombohedral packing with a porosity of 25.68 )( 482803.d = 1/8 mm = 0.212 x1017 cm 2 Wetted Surface Area = 4. horizontal permeabilities in petroleum reservoirs tend to be higher than vertical permeabilities in the absence of vertical fractures.8).0125 / 2 ) The wetted surface are is given by Wetted Surface Area = SxVb = ( 355. 3.80 x7620.5. 3.68 cm 2 / cm3 ( 0.3 Sorting Poor sorting reduces the pore size and consequently reduces the permeability of a medium (Table 3.109) as S= 3 (1 − 0.5.00 ) = 4. It should be observed that the wetted surface area for the idealized reservoir is enormous and would be considerably more if the grains were of clay sized particles. Because of layering in sedimentary rocks.48) 2 ( cm 2 / mile 2 ) = 1.4 Cementation Cementation reduces the pore size and consequently reduces the permeability of the rock.(3.20 x321868.259 ) = 355.

oil reservoirs with permeabilities less than 1 md are unlikely to produce at economic rates even with hydraulic fracturing.6 Clay swelling Many consolidated sandstones contain clay and silt. it is possible to establish relationships between porosity and either some measure of apparent pore 3-61 .5. or in fact.001 md for a tight gas sand in East Texas to 4000 md for an unconsolidated sand in the Niger Delta.7 PERMEABILITY-POROSITY CORRELATIONS Since permeability depends on the continuity of pore space. Since montmorillonite-type clays absorb fresh water and swell.6 TYPICAL RESERVOIR PERMEABILITY VALUES Reservoir permeabilities vary widely. eliminate the clay swelling.3.. arkoses and graywackes. The addition of salts. 3.g. 3. the permeabilities of such sandstones will be greatly reduced when measured with fresh water. a unique relationship between the porosity of a rock and its permeability. gas reservoirs with permeabilities less than 1 md can still produce at economic rates if the reservoir is hydraulically fractured. Reservoir permeabilities may be loosely described as follows: Very low: k < 1md Low: 1md < k < 10 md Fair: 10 md < k < 50 md Average: 50 md < k < 200 md Good: 200 md < k < 500 md Excellent: k > 500 md Because of low gas viscosity. will in most cases. For unconsolidated sands. such as sodium chloride or potassium chloride. Because of the higher oil viscosities compared to gas viscosities. there is not in theory. from 0. e.

permeabilities can vary widely. The permeabilities were measured with gas and corrected for Klinkenberg effect. The figure shows a correlation of permeability versus porosity for 500 samples from a uniform sandstone reservoir in Pennsylvania. However.diameter or specific surface area and permeability. Nevertheless. Apart from showing the general increase of permeability with an increase in porosity. it does provide one method of estimating permeability from well logs and even possibly from drill cuttings.110) where a and b are constants. although for a given porosity. Figure 3.327φ − 3. there is sometimes a reasonable relationship between porosity and permeability. Attempts have been made to correlate permeability and porosity using an equation of the form: Nelson (1994) has presented a comprehensive review of permeability .26 shows the regression line for the permeability .049 with the square of the correlation coefficient (R2) equal to 0. or lack of a close relationship. the correlation shows the wide spread. these have very limited applications. between porosity and permeability. The porosity was measured by saturating a well machined core with a wetting liquid. The correlation is weak. let us examine the data from sandstone cores shown in Table 3.porosity correlation. where it exists. The regression line is given by ln k = 0.9. Figure 3. To test the strength of the linear relationship between lnk and φ. In the same depositional and diagenetic environment.porosity correlations using data from the open ln k = aφ + b (3.3514.25 shows a typical permeability-porosity correlation obtained from core analysis. This relationship is at best applicable at a local level. The scatter in the data is not the result of experimental errors. literature. 3-62 .

9: Permeability .25..Porosity Data for Sandstone Cores (from Kenyon et al.8 28. 1986) Sample No 1 2 3 4 5 φ (%) 31. Permeability-porosity correlation for a sandstone reservoir (Ryder. Table 3.2 30.5 33 k (md) 2719 1382 3.3 215 151 3-63 .Figure 3.4 24. 1948).

5 890.6 669.2 22 22.56 311 7.6 11.3 18.3 9.8 20.9 21.7 17.1 14.8 426 1072 0.6 18.6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 31 30.3 16.9 270.0012 32.4 19 18.4 3-64 .3 15.3 28.2 16.9 19.3 137.5 52.3 18.5 36.8 17.4 424.8 12.3 11 10.4 18.2 11.3 7.2 4.47 20.7 14.5 200.5 243.9 64.5 4.8 91.7 18.4 2.1 1.2 337.17 10.9 190.7 12.8 3.1 83.6 20.6 17.1 10.4 13.3 4.5 3 2.3 18.3 39.2 16.6 18.9 4.5 540.

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 17.8 22.5 19.6 24.087 12.4 1425 2590 0.7 14.3 20 21.8 6.003 0.93 20.8 31.2 22.011 0.6 12.9 6.3 19.499 139 12.8 16.7 429.72 45 45 663 591 511 478 131 1305 621 10.52 0.9 21.97 1.68 3-65 .7 15.2 19.1 18 16.2 22.1 14.5 23.6 16.5 20.3 4.849 6 0.3 16.52 0.1 17.72 0.6 1.6 22.8 20.9 23.3 25.8 0.063 0.1 5.3 24.

Samples containing more than 50% of 1-2 mm grain size were classified as very coarse-grained.porosity correlations in which an effort was made to classify the grain size of the sandstones. It would appear that accounting for the grain size 3-66 .27 shows permeability . The permeabilities shown in Figure 3.Figure 3.1 mm) were called silty. They are functions of the porous medium and the wetting and nonwetting fluids.25 mm.25-0.5 mm. 0. 1986).004 mm) content greater than 7% were classified as clayey. Figure 3. These end point permeabilities are not functions of the porous medium alone as in the case of the absolute permeabilities.5-1 mm.27 are the effective permeabilities to the nonwetting gas at irreducible wetting phase saturation.1-0. 0. Permeabilities also were corrected for Klinkenberg effect. Permeability-porosity correlation for sandstone cores (from Kenyon et al.26. whereas samples with clay (<0. and 0. Samples containing more than 10% of silt (<0.. Both the absolute permeabilities and the effective permeabilities to gas at irreducible water saturations were measured. medium-grained. fine-grained. coarse-grained.

3 for clean. The R2 for the regression line for the absolute permeability . unconsolidated and well sorted sandpacks.27. The data are highly scattered.porosity correlation for unconsolidated sands is even weaker than for consolidated sandstones. The R2 of 0.1742. Effect of grain size on the permeability-porosity correlations for various sandstones (from Chillingar. which is a very weak correlation. The permeability .distribution improved the correlation of the end point effective permeabilites with porosity. The author indicates that the correlations of the absolute permeabilities with porosity showed the usual scatter regardless of the grain size classification but the data were not presented.2305 for the correlation of the effective 3-67 . Figure 3.porosity correlation is only 0.28 shows the correlations based on the data of Table 3. Figure 2. 1964).

3-68 .28. Figure 3.27. 1979).permeability at irreducible water saturation versus porosity is higher than for the absolute permeability. the effective permeability in the presence of irreducible water saturation correlates better with porosity than the absolute permeability of the medium. This observation is consistent with the observation of the author of Figure 3. Permeability . Thus.porosity correlations for unconsolidated sandpacks (from Peters.

8. circular capillary tube of radius r is qi = where π r 4 ( p1 − p2 ) π r 4 Δp = 8μ 8μ Le Le (3. cm For n capillary tubes. The Hagen-Poiseuille’s law for steady flow through a single tortuous. flow conduits. qT = nπ r 4 ( p1 − p2 ) nπ r 4 Δp = 8μ 8μ Le Le (3. dynes/cm2 μ = fluid viscosity. tortuous. cm3/s r = the radius of the capillary tubes. Figure 2.8 CAPILLARY TUBE MODELS OF POROUS MEDIA 3.29 shows such a porous medium model with n cylindrical and tortuous pores (capillary tubes).1 Carman-Kozeny Equation Because rock pore space is made up of a network of interconnected.111) q1 = volumetric flow rate for a single capillary tube. poise Le = tortuous length of the capillary tube.3. Such models are sometimes termed “bundle-of-capillary-tubes” models and can provide some insights into permeability .112) where qT is the total volumetric flow rate for the porous medium.porosity relationships and the effect of grain size on permeability. cm ΔP = pressure drop across the medium. attempts have been made to calculate permeability by modeling pore-level flow as if through cylindrical capillary tubes. The porosity of the medium is given by 3-69 .

29.(3.(3.112) shows that the permeability of the bundle of capillary tube model is given by 3-70 .(3.115) A comparison of Eq. Bundle of capillary tubes model of a porous medium with tortuous pores.115) with Eq.nπ r 2 Le φ= = Vb AT L Vp (3.113) Figure 3.114) The integrated form of Darcy's law for single phase flow through the medium is given by qT = kAT ΔP μ L (3. where AT is the total cross-sectional area and L is the length of the porous medium. Solving Eq.113) for AT gives AT = nπ r 2 ⎛ Le ⎞ φ ⎜L⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (3.

119) shows once again that permeability is proportional to the square of a characteristic dimension of the porous medium. In addition.116) Substituting Eq.(3.k= nπ r 4 ⎛ L ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ 8 AT ⎝ Le ⎠ (3. The tortuosity.120) gives k= φ 2 2τ S p (3.118) k= φr2 8τ (3. Note that some authors define tortuosity as (Le/L) instead of (Le/L)2 as defined here.120) Substituting for r in Eq. the permeability is given by ⎛L ⎞ 2 (3.119) Eq. we introduce specific surface area into the model.121) 3-71 .116) gives the permeability for the model as k= φr2 8 ( Le / L ) 2 (3.(3.(3. it shows that the permeability is also proportional to the porosity of the medium. Let Sp be the wetted surface area of the pores per unit pore volume of the porous medium. For cylindrical pores.(3. is a parameter that is greater than 1.114) into (3.119) using Eq.117) The tortuosity of the porous medium is defined as τ =⎜ e ⎟ ⎝L⎠ Thus. To enable the bundle of capillary tubes model to describe a porous medium made of granular material. τ. Sp = 2π nrLe 2 = π nr 2 Le r (3.

It can be easily converted to darcy or millidarcy using Eq. the Kozeny constant.124) Substituting Eq.(3. to give k= φ 2 koτ S p (3.123) The permeability in Eq.125) shows that the permeability is proportional to the porosity cubed. Other versions of the Carman-Kozeny equation can be obtained depending on how the specific surface area is defined.(3.13).(3. Then S = φSp (3.(3.122) can be written as k= φ 2 5S p (3. the 2 in Eq. koτ. The factor. Carman suggested that for granular material. is known as the Kozeny constant.126) 3-72 . Let S be the wetted surface area per unit bulk volume of the porous medium.122) gives the following alternative version of the Carman-Kozeny equation: φ3 k= koτ S 2 (3.(3.(3. Let Ss be the wetted surface area per unit grain volume of the porous medium.124) into (3.(3.125) Eq. S and Ss are related by S = (1 − φ ) S s (3. Eq.121) can be replaced by an empirical numerical factor.122) Eq.122) is one version of the Carman-Kozeny equation.What if the pore is not circular in cross-section? In that case.123) is in units of length squared. is equal to 5. koτ. ko . Based on laboratory measurements. to estimate the permeability of such materials. Thus.

Since small grains have a higher specific surface area than large grains.125) and (3. a medium composed of small grains will have a lower permeability than one composed of large grains.(3.129) Substituting Eq. rH = nπ r 2 Le r = 2π nrLe 2 (3. All three versions of the Carman-Kozeny equation will give the same permeability.(3. a conclusion we arrived at previously.129) into (3.127) The three versions of the Carman-Kozeny equation. Which one to use depends on what information is on hand. (3. The hydraulic radius. is defined as rH = Volume of Pore 1 = Wetted Surface Area of Pore S p (3.(3. Two more versions of the Carman-Kozeny equation can be obtained by introducing the concept of hydraulic radius into the model and introducing the grain diameter in the case of granular material.Substituting Eq. 3-73 .126) into (3.119) gives k= 2 φ rH 2τ (3.122) gives yet another version of the CarmanKozeny equation as k= φ3 koτ S s2 (1 − φ ) 2 (3.128) For cylindrical pores. Eqs.122). rH.127) show that permeability is inversely proportional to the square of the specific surface area of the grains.130) It is unfortunate that the hydraulic radius of a circular pore is equal to (r/2) instead of r.

2.133) suggests that permeability is proportional to the square of the grain size. Several techniques have been proposed for the determination of the specific surface area of porous media.(3.132).(3. To apply any of the Carman-Kozeny equations to estimate permeability. Solution to Example 3.(3.(3. fluid flow developed by Kozeny. (2) adsorption methods. then k= 2 D pφ 3 72τ (1 − φ ) 2 (3.131) Substituting Eq.125) gives 3-74 . Eq. These include (1) a statistical method. Dp.3 Estimate the permeability of the idealized petroleum reservoir of Example 3. 4π ( D p / 2 ) 6 Ss = = 3 4 π ( Dp / 2 ) Dp 3 2 (3.132) If ko = 2 is substituted into Eq. which contains S is the most convenient version of the Carman-Kozeny equation to use for the permeability esstimation. an assertion we have encountered before. specific surface area and the Kozeny constant must be known.3 Since the specific surface area with respect to bulk volume (S) is available from Example 3.127) gives k= 2 D pφ 3 36koτ (1 − φ ) 2 (3.2. the porosity.For granular material with spherical grains of diameter. (3) the heat of wetting method and (4) a method based on Example 3.125).131) into (3. Substituting numerical values into Eq.133) Eq.(3.

6 (Le/L) 2.6 8.0 14.4 33.7467 x10−8 cm 2 = 2.0 16. the lower the porosity.00 Tortuosity τ (Le/L)2 5.7 6.869 x10−9 ( cm 2 / darcy ) where the Kozeny constant of 5 has been used.20 2.6 26.6 18. we see that tortuosity is a geometric property of the porous medium that reflects the length of the flow path at the pore level as the fluid flows around the grain obstacles relative to the length of the porous medium.3 51.00 1.6 13.30 3.30 3. 1952.0 22. Therefore.2 Tortuosity Based on the bundle of capillary tube model.8 Permeability k md 90 7 4 220 1920 4400 145 25 410 Resistivity Factor F 23.3 25. 3.6 9.10.24 4.. the higher the tortuosity should be.68) 3 = 2.9 18.0 67. Table 3.00 3-75 .60 1.56 2.78 darcys 9. Their results are shown in Table 3.7467 x10−8 cm 2 = 2.76 5. (1952) have measured the tortuosity of sandstones along with other properties. Their original data have been squared to obtain the more current definition of tortuosity.40 2.9 18. Winsauer et al.7 17.29 4.10: Tortuosity and Other Data from Winsauer et al.8. The tortuosity was measured electrically based on the analogy between the flow of electrical current and fluid flow.30 2.60 2.56 5.( 0.259 ) k= 2 ( 5)( 355. Porosity Core No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 φ % 17. They defined tortuosity as (Le/L).89 10.29 10.00 2.

4 11.0 4.10 1.4 21.7 31. Resistivity factor represents the obstacle to the flow of electric current in the medium whereas tortuosity represents the obstacle to the flow of fluid in the medium.05 2. The lower the porosity.00 1.88 8.97 2.0 20.31 shows the correlation between tortuosity and the formation resistivity factor.20 2.41 3.6 37.35 1.8 27.0 41. the longer is the length of the flow path that the fluid particles must take to flow from one end of the porous medium to the other.00 1.41 4.6 30.25 7.5 3 9 200 36 70 330 98 1560 36 1180 3200 2100 8 18 2200 19 88 370 115 130 42.0 13.4 39. there is a strong positive correlation between the two variables.2 19.37 10.10 2.1 20.1 16.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 16.7 10.0 18.90 2.20 1.84 3.88 Figure 3.1 28.70 2.8 24.41 2. Figure 3.24 5.29 3.1 19.9 24.84 3.05 2.41 4.06 4.80 2.1 15.2 8. As expected.30 1.52 2.7 3.30 shows the correlation between tortuosity and porosity.9 24. there is a negative correlation between the two variables.1 29. the larger the tortuosity of the medium.4 19.5 19.25 5.4 18.20 6.20 1.75 2.90 2.3 10.8 6.3 27. Since there is a close relationship between the 3-76 .50 2. As expected.3 25.89 4.7 16. The longer the flow path.50 2.8 19.1 15.90 1.4 12.0 22.6 8.24 8.70 2.61 4.20 4.29 4.4 11.3 19.8 17.

tortuosity and formation resistivity factor should be positively correlated. Hence. 1952).30. 3-77 . a property that obstructs one will also obstruct the other. Figure 3. Tortuosity-porosity correlation (from Winsauer et al..flow path for electric current and for fluid flow.

The electrical resistance of the core is given by ⎛L⎞ ro = Ro ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ A⎠ (3.Figure 3. An approximate relationship between tortuosity and formation resistivity factor can be derived as follows.. The electrical current in the core is conducted by the water alone since the rock minerals are nonconductors. Since the electrical current in the core follows a tortuous path in flowing from one end to the other. 1952).31. length L and cross-sectional area A saturated with water of resistivity Rw.134) where Ro is the resistivity of the core fully saturated with the water. the length of the equivalent water 3-78 . Let us replace the core with the same volume of water in a test tube such that the resistance of the water is equal to that of the saturated core. Consider the flow of electric current through a core sample of porosity φ. Tortuosity-formation resistivity factor correlation (from Winsauer et al.

138) Eq. we extend the model to include an arbitrary pore size distribution.7. an approximate relationship between turtuosity and the formation resistivity factor is τ = φF 3.(3.139) Thus. Let Ae be the cross-sectional area of the equivalent water circuit.136) gives ⎛ L2 ⎞ rw = Rw ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ φ AL ⎠ (3.(3.136) Substituting Eq.3 Calculation of Permeability from Pore Size Distribution (3. Eqs.8.(3.135) The equivalent water circuit must have the same volume as the water in the core to maintain the same salinity.137) give ⎛ L2 ⎞ ⎛L⎞ Ro ⎜ ⎟ = Rw ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ A⎠ ⎝ φ AL ⎠ (3.138) can be rearranged as Ro ⎛ Le ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ τ =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟= Rw ⎝ L ⎠ ⎝ φ ⎠ φ 2 (3. Then Ae Le = φ AL (3.135) into (3.137) Since the equivalent water circuit has the same resistance as the saturated core. Given the probability density 3-79 .134) and (3.140) The bundle of capillary tubes model presented in Section 3. The resistance of the equivalent water circuit is given by ⎛L ⎞ rw = Rw ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ Ae ⎠ (3.1 assumed that the n capillary tubes had the same pore size.circuit Le will be longer than L. Here.

Consider the probability density function for pore diameter distribution as shown in Figure 3.141) Let nδ be the number of pores with diameter between δ and δ+dδ and n be the total number of pores. we wish to calculate the permeability of the bundle of capillary tubes model. Then nδ = nf (δ ) d δ (3.32. The probability density function satisfies ∫ f (δ )dδ = 1 0 ∞ (3. Probability density function for pore size distribution.function (pdf) for the pore size (pore diameter) distribution.142) Figure 3.32. The cross-sectional area occupied by pores with diameter between δ and δ+dδ is given by 3-80 .

(3. one obtains (3.149) gives 3-81 .(3.146) and solving for n.143) as Ac = πn 4 ∫ ∞ 0 f (δ )δ 2 dδ = π nR 2 4 (3.143) The cross-sectional area occupied by all the pores is obtained by integrating Eq.147) into (3.146) n= 4 AT φ π R2 (3.⎛δ2 ⎞ dAc = π ⎜ ⎟ nf (δ ) d δ ⎝ 4 ⎠ (3.148) The total volumetric flow rate for the porous medium is obtained by integrating Eq.(3.145) The cross-sectional area occupied by all the pores is related to the crosssectional area of the porous medium by the porosity as Ac = AT φ Substituting Eq.149) Substituting Eq.(3.147) The volumetric flow rate for pores with diameter between δ and δ+dδ is obtained from Hagen-Poiseuille's law as dqT = πδ 4 ΔP ⎡ nf (δ ) dδ ⎤ ⎦ 128μ Le ⎣ (3.144) into (3.148) as qT = π nΔP 128μ Le ∫ f (δ ) δ 0 ∞ 4 dδ (3.144) where R 2 is a constant defined as R 2 = ∫ f (δ )δ 2 d δ 0 ∞ (3.

0. If the minimum pore diameter (δ1) = 0 μm.145) into (3. the most likely pore diameter (δ2) = 8 μm and the largest pore diameter (δ3) = 10 μm.(3. (3.150) with Darcy's permeability of the bundle of capillary tube model as k= f (δ ) δ 32 ( L / L ) R ∫ 2 φ ∞ 4 e 0 dδ (3.(3.(3. The porosity of the medium is 15%.153) The probability density function for the pore size distribution of a bundle of capillary tubes model is given by a triangular distribution as shown in Figure 3.115).152) gives the final result k= 32 ( ) φ ⎡ ∞ f (δ ) δ 4 d δ ⎤ ⎢ ∫0 ⎥ ⎢ ∞ f δ δ 2 dδ ⎥ τ ⎢∫ ( ) ⎥ ⎣ 0 ⎦ Example 3. 3-82 . Eq.4 (3. calculate the permeability of the medium.qT = A comparison of AT φΔP 32μ Le R 2 ∫ f (δ ) δ 0 ∞ 4 dδ law.151) gives k= φ 32 τ R 2 ( ) ∫ f (δ ) δ 0 ∞ 4 dδ (3.151) Substituting Eq.(3. Assume a tortuosity of 1.33.152) Substituting Eq.118) into (3.150) gives the Eq.

(3.156) Substituting Eqs.86) give f1 (δ ) = 2 ( δ − δ1 ) (δ 3 − δ1 )(δ 2 − δ1 ) 2 (δ 3 − δ ) (δ 3 − δ1 )(δ 3 − δ 2 ) (3. All we need to do is to evaluate the two integrals on the right of the equation for the triangular probability density function.4 The required permeability is given by Eq. Probability density function for pore size distribution for Example Solution to Example 3.154) Eqs.(3. Eq.Figure 3.153) then takes the form ⎡ δ 2 f (δ ) δ 4 d δ + δ 3 f (δ ) δ 4 d δ ⎤ ∫δ2 2 φ ⎢ ∫δ1 1 ⎥ k= δ3 ⎢ δ2 32 τ ∫ f1 (δ ) δ 2 d δ + ∫ f 2 (δ ) δ 2 d δ ⎥ ⎢ δ1 ⎥ δ2 ⎣ ⎦ ( ) (3.82) and (2.156) into Eq.(3.(2.153).(3.155) f 2 (δ ) = (3.155) and (3.33.154) and performing the integrations gives 3-83 .

5 Calculate the permeability of a fracture of width 2 millimeters.157) where A = wh is the cross-sectional area of the fracture.241x103 ⎞ 2.158) as (3. shows that the permeability of the fracture is given by w2 2 k= cm 12 Example 3.34.583x10−13 m 2 = 0.(3.158) ( 0.(3.0 ⎝ 4. it is often necessary to hydraulically fracture the reservoirs. Eq.2617 darcy = 261. 3-84 . It can be shown that Hagen-Poiseuille’s law for steady state flow through the fracture of width w in cgs units is given by q= w2 A ΔP 12 μ L (3.869 x10 cm 2 / darcy −9 The permeability of the fracture is enormous and therein lies the benefit of fracturing for the improvement of the productivity of a well.7md μ m2 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ 9.157) with Darcy’s law. A comparison of Eq.20 ) k= 2 cm 2 12 x 1 = 3.(3.115).067 x10 ⎠ 3.15 ⎛ 2. Consider the single vertical fracture shown in Figure 3. Solution to Example 3.k= 0.5 The fracture permeability is given by Eq.378 x105 darcys 9.869 x10−13 m 2 / darcy 32 1.9 STEADY STATE FLOW THROUGH FRACTURES To increase the productivities of certain reservoirs.

For linear beds in series (Figure 3. 3-85 . Li is the length of bed i and ki is the permeability of bed i. the average permeability is given by k = ∑L i =1 n n i L ∑ ki i =1 i = L L ∑ ki i =1 i n (3. 3. Flow through a fracture (Flow between parallel plates). the volumetric flow rate is the same for each bed and the total pressure drop is equal to the sum of the pressure drop across each bed. It becomes necessary to be able to estimate the apparent or average permeability of various permeability combinations.35). different portions of the same reservoir may have different permeabilities.10 AVERAGING PERMEABILITY DATA Because of heterogeneity.Figure 3.34.159) where L Is total length of the porous medium in the flow direction. For n beds in series.

the volumetric flow rate is the same for each bed and the total pressure drop is equal to the sum of the pressure drop across each bed.Figure 3. For n beds in series. rw Figure 3. Linear beds in series For radial beds in series (Figure 3.160) where re is the well's drainage radius and r0 is equal to the wellbore radius.36).36. the average permeability is given by k = ln ( re / rw ) ln ( r / r ) ∑ ik i−1 i =1 i n (3.35. Radial beds in series 3-86 .

If the beds have the same width.38). Linear beds in parallel. the total volumetric flow rate is the sum of the flow rate of each bed and the pressure drop is the same for all the beds.161) i where Ai is the area of bed i and ki is the permeability of bed i.37. the total volumetric flow rate is the sum of the flow rate of each bed and the pressure drop is the same for all the beds.(3. For radial beds in parallel (Figure 3.For linear beds in parallel (Figure 3. Eq.162). For n beds in parallel. the average permeability is given by 3-87 . For n beds in parallel.162) i Figure 3. then k = ∑k h i =1 n n i i ∑h i =1 (3. the average permeability is given by k = ∑k A i =1 n i n i ∑A i =1 (3.37).

centipoise absolute pressure. Radial beds in parallel.0133x10 ds ⎟ ⎠ (3.11 DARCY'S LAW FOR INCLINED FLOW For inclined flow. then the positive 3-88 . 981 cm/s2 1. cm pressure gradient along s.38.0133x106 dynes/cm2 μ P s dP ds ρ g 1 atm = The sign convention for applying Darcy's law for inclined flow is as follows. cm2 fluid viscosity. atm distance in the direction of flow and is always positive. If the z direction is positive upwards as shown in Figure 3. Darcy's Law in differential form can be written as q=− where q k A = = = = = = = = = kA ⎛ dP ρg dz ⎞ ± ⎜ 6 μ ⎝ ds 1. atm/cm fluid density.Figure 3.163) volumetric flow rate. darcy total area of the medium normal to the flow direction. cm3/s absolute permeability of the porous medium. 3. gm/cm3 acceleration of gravity.39.

0133x10 ds ⎟ ⎠ (3.39.163) and the equation becomes Figure 3.40.sign is used in the term in parenthesis in Eq.163) to obtain q=− kA ⎛ dP ρg dz ⎞ − ⎜ 6 μ ⎝ ds 1.165) 3-89 .164) On the other hand. then the negative sign is used in the term in parenthesis in Eq. Coordinate system for applying Darcy's law for z positive upwards. q=− kA ⎛ dP ρg dz ⎞ + ⎜ 6 μ ⎝ ds 1. if the z coordinate is positive downwards as shown in Figure 3.0133 x10 ds ⎟ ⎠ (3.(3.(3.

433γ ⎜ ⎟ ds ⎠ μ ⎝ ds (3.(3. ⎝2 ⎠ Eq.433 is the pressure gradient of fresh water in psi/ft.001127 kA ⎛ dP dz ⎞ ± 0. Alternatively.Figure 3. Eq.166) where γ is the specific gravity of the fluid and 0. it could be written as cosα. dz in Eqs.165) could be written as sinθ. where α is the angle that the porous medium makes ⎛π ⎞ with the upward vertical z axis and is equal to ⎜ − θ ⎟ . where θ is the angle the ds porous medium along s makes with the horizontal plane.40.163) can be written in oilfield units as q = −0.163) to (3.(3. Coordinate system for applying Darcy's law for z positive downwards.167) .(3.163) also can be written in terms of a velocity potential as q=− kA d Φ μ ds 3-90 (3.

171) Eq. flow does not necessarily occur in the direction of decreasing pressure. Eq.433γ z (3.173) 3-91 .where the velocity potential is defined by Φ = P± in Darcy units or ρ gz 1.170) can be further written in terms of the hydraulic conductivity. as vs = where q dh = −K A ds (3.172) K= and kρg 1. For example.(3. for a static system in which the porous medium is oriented vertically. K. and hydraulic or piezometric head.170) where vs is known as the Darcy velocity or superficial velocity.167) shows that flow will occur in the direction of decreasing velocity potential.169) in oilfield units.0133 x10 μ ds ⎝ A ρg ⎠ (3. An interstitial velocity can be defined as vi = vs φ (3.156) may also be written as vs = ⎞ q kρg d ⎛ 1.0133x106 μ (3. Note that for inclined systems.0133x106 (3.(3.(3.168) Φ = P ± 0. the pressure at the top of the medium is less than at the bottom and yet there is no flow.0133 x106 P =− ± z⎟ ⎜ 6 1. Eq. h.

Note that hydraulic head has dimension of length and the hydraulic conductivity has dimension of length/time.08 x10−2 m / d 1 darcy = 9.41 shows the range of hydraulic conductivity and permeability for various rock types and soils. Sometimes. rocks and soils have a wide range of permeability and hydraulic conductivity values.(3. Clearly.h= P ±z ρg (3. Useful conversion factors are as follows: 1US gal/day ft 2 = 4.177) Table 3. Figure 3. m/s.4156 x10−2US gal/min ft 2 (for water at 20 C ) (3. Possible units of hydraulic conductivity are cm/s.175) (3. m/d.42 shows the definition of the hydraulic head (piezometric head) for a point O in an inclined porous medium located above a datum level at which z is zero. it is easier to solve single phase flow problems in terms of hydraulic head (piezometric head) rather than in terms of pressure.172) is the form of Darcy's law normally used in the groundwater community.178) 3-92 .174) Eq.11 shows typical hydraulic conductivity values for various rock types and soils. The hydraulic head is given by h =ψ + z (3. US gal/day ft2 and US gal/min ft2.176) (3. This is especially true for inclined or vertical flow in which gravity plays a role.613x10−4 cm/s (for water at 20 C ) 1 darcy = 1.75 x10−5 cm/s = 4. Figure 3.

11: Typical Hydraulic Conductivity for Various Rock Types 3-93 .Table 3.

The pressure head is given by ψ= P ρg 3-94 (3. then z is negative. where h is the hydraulic head. The datum at which z = 0 is arbitrary and can be selected anywhere in the system. It should be emphasized that z in Eq. z is a gravity head that reflects the potential energy of the fluid at O in the earth’s gravitational field. Range of permeability and hydraulic conductivity of various rock types and soils. If the point O is below the datum. z is the height of O above (or below) an arbitrary datum and ψ is the pressure head.(3.178) is not a cartesian coordinate in the flow direction but rather the elevation of the point P above or below a reference datum.Figure 3.179) .41. In a sense.

174) can be rewritten as ⎛h −h ⎞ ⎛ Δh ⎞ q = KA ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ = KA ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ΔL ⎠ ⎝ s2 − s1 ⎠ (3.180) may be integrated to obtain ⎛h −h ⎞ q = − KA ⎜ 2 1 ⎟ ⎝ s2 − s1 ⎠ (3.(3.180) Examination of the manometer levels (hydraulic heads) immediately shows the direction of flow.It should be observed in Figure 3.181) Eq. Eq.42 that the hydraulic head at point O is given by the elevation of a liquid manometer at point O above (or below) the arbitrary datum. Consider the flow in an inclined porous medium shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Definition of hydraulic head h. Darcy’s law for 1D flow is given by q = − KA∇h = − KA dh ds (3.182) 3-95 . Flow always occurs from a high hydraulic head to a low hydraulic head.43.(3.42. pressure head Ψ and elevation head z for a laboratory manometer.

(3. It should be observed that the elevations of points 1 and 2 (z1 and z2) do not appear explicitly in Eq.43. Substituting Eq. Darcy’s experiment for inclined flow.182) although they do appear implicitly in the hydraulic heads.(3.Figure 3. ΔL cos α = z1 − z2 (3.183) where α is the angle the porous medium makes with the vertical direction. However.184) 3-96 .182) gives ⎛h −h ⎞ q = KA ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ cos α ⎝ z1 − z2 ⎠ (3. Eq. From Figure 3.(3.183) into Eq.182) can be rewritten such that z1 and z2 appear explicitly as follows. where Δh is the positive difference in the hydraulic heads at points 1 and 2 and ΔL is the positive length of the porous medium between points 1 and 2 in the flow direction.43.(3.

189) where a is the cross-sectional area of the manometer.186) Figure 3.182).(3. Eq.44 shows schematic diagrams of two types of liquid permeameters normally used to measure permeability in groundwater hydrology. The hydraulic conductivity is related to the permeability of the porous medium in consistent units by K= kρg μ (3.In the special case in which the porous medium is vertical. Using the principles of inclined flow outline above.187) into (3. α is zero.(3. the working equations for the permeameters can easily be derived as follows.184) gives ⎛ Δh ⎞ q = KA ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ΔL ⎠ (3. Thus.(3. cosα is 1. For the constant head permeameter.0 and z1 – z2 = ΔL. where A is the cross-sectional area of the porous medium. Figure 3.(3. For the falling head permeameter.44 (a) is a constant head permeameter whereas Figure 3. Substituting Eq.(3.182) applies for all angles of inclination.188) The volumetric balance for flow in the manometer gives q = −a dh dt (3.185) which is identical to Eq. Eq. h. Substituting these values into Eq.44 (b) is a falling head permeameter.182) gives q = KA h ⎛ kρg ⎞ h =⎜ ⎟A L ⎝ μ ⎠ L (3. as 3-97 .187) in consistent units.186) gives the differential equation for the falling head. Darcy's law at time t is q = KA h L (3.

44.Figure 3. (a) constant head permeameter. Schematic diagram of liquid permeameters. (b) falling head permeameter. dh ⎛ KA ⎞ = −⎜ ⎟h dt ⎝ aL ⎠ with the initial condition h ( 0 ) = ho (3.190) (3.191) Eq.(3.190) along with (3.191) can easily be solved to obtain the working equation for the falling head permeameter as 3-98 .

laminar flow in porous media without chemical reaction.12 VALIDITY OF DARCY'S LAW Darcy's law is valid for slow. For flow through porous media. gm/cm3 μ = fluid viscosity. Fanning friction factor factor for flow in porous media (Rose. Reynolds number is defined as Re = vρ Dp μ (3.45 shows the Fanning friction factor versus Reynolds number for single phase flow in a porous medium.192) in consistent units. poise Figure 3. 1945) 3-99 . Figure 3.193) where v = Darcy velocity. cm/s Dp = mean grain diameter of the granular porous medium. 3.45.⎛h⎞ ⎛ k ρ gA ⎞ ⎛ KA ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ = − ⎜ ⎟t = −⎜ ⎟t ⎝ aL ⎠ ⎝ μ aL ⎠ ⎝ ho ⎠ (3. cm ρ = fluid density.

Darcy's law is no longer valid. Thus. flow at Reynolds number greater than 1 can be characterized as non-darcy flow. and turbulent flow for Reynolds number greater than 100. the flow regimes for non-darcy flow can be classified as shown in Figure 3.194) It can seen in the figure that the experimental data begin to deviate from the line at a Reynolds number of about 1.46 as transition flow for Reynolds number in the range 1 to 100. in which Darcy's law is valid. Based on analogy with flow in pipes. At Reynolds numbers greater than 1.46.0. Therefore. Figure 3.45 having the equation f = 1000 Re (3. the friction factor versus Reynolds number is given by the line shown in Figure 3. Darcy's law is valid for flow in porous media for Reynolds number up to about 1. 3-100 .For laminar flow. Classification of flow in porous media.

Eq.(3. The density at reservoir conditions and at standard conditions are related by the gas formation volume factor as 3-101 . Consider radial steady state flow of a real gas from the reservoir into the well.197) is at reservoir conditions. Figure 3. We would like to evaluate the density at standard conditions.197) The gas density in Eq. The first term on the right-side of Eq.(3. The velocity coefficient (β) is a function of the permeability and porosity of the porous medium and is independent of rate.(3.13 NON-DARCY FLOW Darcy’s law is inadequate for modeling high velocity flow in porous media such as high velocity gas flow near the wellbore in a natural gas reservoir in which the Reynolds number is greater than 1.3.196) ∫ Pe Pwf re 2 P μ v re 2 P 2P dP = ∫ dr + ∫ βρ v 2 dr rw μ Z k rw μ Z μZ (3. For this case. For this non-darcy flow. Because the non-darcy flow effect is most severe near the wellbore.195) where the variables are in Darcy units. which constitutes the non-darcy flow effect.195) can be written as dP μ v = + βρ v 2 dr k Let us multiply Eq.196) by (2p/μZ) and integrate to get (3.47 shows a correlation of the velocity coefficient with permeability from core analysis.195) gives the viscous component of the pressure gradient (Darcy flow) whereas the second term gives the inertial-turbulent component of the pressure gradient. this additional effect is usually incorporated into the gas flow equation as a rate-dependent skin factor.(3. Forchheimer has proposed a flow equation of the form − dP μ v = + βρ v 2 dx k (3.

47. For real gas flow.199) The Darcy velocity at radius r is given by 3-102 . 1979.198) where Bg is the gas formation volume factor and ρsc is the gas density at standard conditions. Velocity coefficient in Forchheimer equation (Firoozabadi and Katz. the gas formation volume factor is given by Bg = Psc ZT Tsc P (3.Figure 3. ρ= ρ sc Bg (3.

206) 3-103 .(3.197) gives (3.204) can be written in dimensionless form as ⎛r ⎞ PD = ln ⎜ e ⎟ + Dqsc ⎝ rw ⎠ (3. Integration of Eq.202) where Po is an arbitrary base pressure. (1/re) is normally negligibly small compared to (1/rw).204) Eq.(3.202).(3. the left–hand side of Eq.203) where M(P) is the real gas potential or real gas pseudo pressure.v= q 2π rh (3.198) to (3. At field scale.205) where the dimensionless pressure in terms of M(P) is defined as PD = M ( Pe ) − M ( Pwf qsc PscT π khTsc ) (3.197) has been split into two integrals for convenience.(3.(3. Eq.201) ∫ Pe Po Pwf 2 P q PT 2P dP − ∫ dP = sc sc Po μ Z μZ π khTsc ∫ re rw dr ⎛ qsc PscT ⎞ ⎛ βρ sc kqsc ⎞ re dr +⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ r ⎝ π khTsc ⎠ ⎝ 2πμ h ⎠ ∫rw r 2 (3. In Eq.202) gives M ( Pe ) − M ( Pw ) = qsc PscT ⎛ re ⎞ ⎛ qsc PscT ⎞ ⎛ βρ sc kqsc ⎞ ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ − ⎟ π khTsc ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎝ π khTsc ⎠ ⎜ 2πμ h ⎟ ⎝ rw re ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ (3.201) into (3. With this approximation.(3.203) becomes M ( Pe ) − M ( Pwf ) = qsc PscT ⎛ re ⎞ ⎛ qsc PscT ⎞ ⎛ βρ sc kqsc ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ π khTsc ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎝ π khTsc ⎠ ⎜ 2πμ h ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ (3.200) The equation of state for real gas flow is given by Pq Psc qsc = ZT Z scT Substituting Eqs.

208) Eq. Eq.207) Eq.205) can be modified to include the mechanical skin factor S* to give ⎛r ⎞ PD = ln ⎜ e ⎟ + S * + Dqsc ⎝ rw ⎠ (3.(3. The non-darcy flow component of the total skin factor cannot be eliminated by well stimulation.209) ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ M P −M P ⎥ ( e) ( wf ) ⎥ kh ⎢ qsc = ⎥ 1422T ⎢ ⎛ re ⎞ * ⎢ ln ⎜ ⎟ + S + Dqsc ⎥ ⎢ ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3. 3-104 .(3.208) can be rewritten in the form of an inflow performance relationship in Darcy units as ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ M P −M P ⎥ ( wf ) ⎥ π khTsc ⎢ ( e ) qsc = ⎥ PscT ⎢ ⎛ re ⎞ * ⎢ ln ⎜ ⎟ + S + Dqsc ⎥ ⎢ ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ In oilfield units.211) Therefore.209) becomes (3. It can be estimated by conducting drawdown tests at two different flow rates. the total skin factor determined from a gas well test should be investigated further to determine the contribution of the non-darcy flow component.210) It should be noted that the skin factor normally determined from well test analysis is the total skin factor given by S = S * + Dqsc (3.and a non-darcy flow coefficient is defined as D= βρ sc k 2πμ hrw (3.(3.

213) where (1/re) is negligibly small compared to (1/rw). then 90% of the total nondarcy flow potential drop occurs within 3 ft of the well.203) as ⎛ q P T ⎞ ⎛ βρ kq ⎞ ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ ΔM ( r ) = ⎜ sc sc ⎟ ⎜ sc sc ⎟ ⎜ − ⎟ ⎝ π khTsc ⎠ ⎝ 2πμ h ⎠ ⎝ rw r ⎠ (3. Thus. r ΔM (r ) = 1− w r ΔM ( re ) (3.50 0.212) At r =re.90 3-105 .(3. Table 3. It can be observed that 90% of the total non-darcy flow potential drop occurs within r = 10rw. This additional potential drop at any radius r can be obtained from Eq.(3.3 ft.It can be shown that the additional potential drop due to non-darcy flow occurs mostly near the wellbore.80 0.12: Non-Darcy Potential Drop r rw 1 2 5 10 ΔM (r ) ΔM ( re ) 0 0. This is the justification for treating the non-darcy flow effect as a flow-dependent skin factor.214). if rw is 0.214) Table 3. ⎛ q P T ⎞ ⎛ βρ kq ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ΔM ( re ) = ⎜ sc sc ⎟ ⎜ sc sc ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ π khTsc ⎠ ⎝ 2πμ h ⎠ ⎝ rw ⎠ (3. Thus.12 shows the variation of Δm(r)/Δm(re) with r as calculated from Eq.

z2) in a vertical cross-section of a porous medium.3. Diagrams showing heterogeneity and anisotropy (Freeze and Cherry. 3-106 . A medium is isotropic with respect to a certain property if that property is independent of direction within the medium.48 shows the principal values of permeability anisotropy at two locations (x1. a property of the medium varies with direction. the medium is heterogeneous.14 DARCY’S LAW FOR ANISOTROPIC POROUS MEDIA 3.14.1 Definition of Homogeneity and Anisotropy A medium is homogeneous with respect to a certain property if that property is independent of position within the medium. Figure 3. If at a point in the medium. Otherwise. Although arrows Figure 3. z1) and (x2. 1979).48. the medium is said to be anisotropic with respect to that property.

(3. The special form of the permeability tensor shown in the figure is ⎡k k ( x.14.218) The permeability tensor given by ⎡ k xx ⎢ k ( x. not a vector. z ) = ⎢ x ⎥ ⎣kz ⎦ (3. z ) = ⎢ x ⎣0 0⎤ kz ⎥ ⎦ (3.217) can be expanded in 3D Cartesian coordinates as ⎡ k xx ⎡ vx ⎤ ⎢v ⎥ = − 1 ⎢ k ⎢ y⎥ μ ⎢ yx ⎢ ⎢ vz ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ k zx k xy k yy k zy ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ k xz ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎥ ∂Φ ⎥ k yz ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ k zz ⎦ ⎢ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎢ ∂z ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3. z ) = ⎢ k yx ⎢ k zx ⎣ k xy k yy k zy k xz ⎤ ⎥ k yz ⎥ k zz ⎥ ⎦ (3.215) and not ⎡k ⎤ k ( x.217) Eq.219) 3-107 . they should not be misinterpreted as vectors.216) 3. Permeability is a tensor.and arrow lengths have been used to indicate the directions and magnitudes of the principal values of the permeability anisotropy. Darcy’s Law is given by v =− k .∇Φ μ (3.2 Darcy's Law for Homogeneous and Anisotropic Medium For a homogeneous and anisotropic porous medium. y.

These principal axes contain the maximum and minimum values of the directional permeabilities which are the diagonal terms of the transformed tensor. kxx = kzx and kyz = kzy. The tensor is symmetric and as such kxy = kyx.220) and ⎡ k xx k ( x.222) where K is the hydraulic conductivity tensor. All the properties of the permeability tensor are applicable to the hydraulic conductivity tensor. When viewed in the coordinates of the principal axes of anisotropy. The axes that permit this transformation of the tensor to diagonal form are called the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy of the porous medium. This is a considerable simplification. it is possible to transform the full tensor into another tensor consisting of only diagonal terms with the off-diagonal terms being zero. The corresponding equations for 2D flow are ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ k xy ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ k yy ⎥ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ vx ⎤ 1 ⎡ k xx ⎢v ⎥ = − ⎢ k μ ⎣ yx ⎣ y⎦ (3.is a second rank tensor with nine elements. y ) = ⎢ ⎣ k yx k xy ⎤ k yy ⎥ ⎦ (3.221) Darcy's law can also be written in terms of hydraulic conductivity and hydraulic head as v = − K . An important property of a symmetric tensor is that by a suitable change of axes. the permeability (hydraulic conductivity) tensor in 3D becomes 3-108 .∇h (3.

The corresponding equations for 2D flow are ⎡k k ( u. j and w are unit vectors.228) 3-109 .227) vu i + vv j = − 1 ⎛ ∂Φ ∂Φ ⎞ i + kv j⎟ ⎜ ku μ ⎝ ∂u ∂v ⎠ (3. v ) = ⎢ 0 ⎢ ⎢0 ⎣ 0 kv 0 0⎤ 0⎥ ⎥ kz ⎥ ⎦ (3. the Darcy velocity vector and the velocity potential gradient vector are collinear and the equation can be written as vu i + vv j + vw w = − 1 ⎛ ∂Φ ∂Φ ∂Φ ⎞ i + kv j + kw w⎟ ⎜ ku μ ⎝ ∂u ∂v ∂u ⎠ (3.⎡ ku k ( u. v ) = ⎢ u ⎣0 0⎤ kv ⎥ ⎦ (3.226) ⎡ k vx ⎤ ⎡ 1⎢ u ⎢v ⎥ = − ⎢ μ⎢ ⎣ y⎦ k ⎢ v ⎣ and ∂Φ ⎤ ∂u ⎥ ⎥ ∂Φ ⎥ ∂v ⎥ ⎦ (3. When viewed in the coordinates of the principal axes of the anisotropy. v. w are the coordinates in the directions of the principal axes of the anisotropy.225) where i.224) In this special coordinate system. Darcy's law for homogeneous and anisotropic media in 3D simplifies to ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ ⎢ ku ∂u ⎥ ⎡ vu ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ v ⎥ = − 1 ⎢ k ∂Φ ⎥ ⎢ v⎥ μ ⎢ v ∂v ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ vw ⎦ ⎢ k w ∂Φ ⎥ ⎢ ∂w ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.223) where u.

Calculate the magnitude (in ft/day) and the direction of the Darcy velocity for the flow. homogeneous and anisotropic reservoir.y)= 200 –50 md –50 750 The pressure in the reservoir has been measured at three observations wells whose coordinates are given in Table 3.49 shows the positions of the wells and their bottomhole pressures. The liquid viscosity is 1 cp. Solution to Example 3. 3-110 .5 Figure 3. Sketch the flow field and the pressure gradient field. 2D. which has a permeability tensor given by k(x. 2.axis.Example 3. Sketch two vectors with one pointing in the flow direction and the other pointing in the direction of the pressure gradient.13: Data from Observation Wells Observation Well 1 2 3 x – Coordinate (ft) 0 0 800 y – Coordinate (ft) 0 800 0 Pressure (psia) 2000 1800 1500 1. Give the direction in terms of the angle the Darcy velocity vector makes with the positive x. Do the negative entries in the permeability tensor bother you? Table 3.13. What is the angle between the two vectors in degrees? 3.5 Steady state flow of a single phase liquid occurs in a horizontal.

229) For the 2D flow.∇P μ (3. ∂P 1500 − 2000 ⎛5⎞ = = − ⎜ ⎟ psi/ft ∂x 800 ⎝8⎠ ∂P 1800 − 2000 ⎛1⎞ = = − ⎜ ⎟ psi/ft ∂y 800 ⎝4⎠ 3-111 .(3.217) in oilfield units to obtain v = − ( 0. Positions of the observation wells and their bottomhole pressures. Eq.001127 )( 5.001127 )( 5.615 ) k .Figure 3.229) can be expanded to give ⎡ vx ⎤ ( 0.230) From the given data.49.(3. We apply Eq.615) ⎡ k xx =− ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ μ ⎣v y ⎦ ⎣ k yx ⎡ ∂P ⎤ k xy ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ k yy ⎦ ⎢ ∂P ⎥ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.

250 j 8 4 ∇P = ( −0.6731 psi/ft Let the pressure gradient make an angle θ with the negative x-axis.9888 ) 2 2 = 1.7120 3-112 .625) + ( −0.001127 )( 5. ( −i ) = ( −0.250 ) (1) cos θ 2 2 ( ) cos θ = 0.625 0.615 ) ⎢( 200 ) ⎜ ⎟ − ( 50 ) ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.625) + ( −0.7120i + 0.615 ) ⎢( −50 ) ⎜ ⎟ + ( 750 ) ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ = 0.7120 ft/D ⎝8⎠ ⎝ 4 ⎠⎦ ⎣ ⎡ ⎛5⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤ v y = ( 0.2502 = 0.250 ) 2 2 = 0. tan α = 0.615) ⎡ 200 −50⎤ ⎢ − 8 ⎥ ⎢v ⎥ = − ⎢ −50 750 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ 1 ⎣ ⎦ ⎢− ⎥ ⎣ y⎦ ⎢ 4⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ ⎛5⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤ vx = ( 0.7120 ) + ( 0.3888 0.9285 θ = 21.625i − 0.9888 = 1.625i − 0. Then ( −0.6252 + 0.001127 )( 5.5 1 ∇P = − i − j = −0.250 j ) .80 The components of the Darcy velocity are given by ⎡ 5⎤ ⎡ vx ⎤ ( 0.9888 j v = ( 0.9888 ft/D ⎝8⎠ ⎝ 4 ⎠⎦ ⎣ The Darcy velocity vector is v = 0.2185 ft/D Let the Darcy velocity make an angle α with the positive x-axis.001127 )( 5.

24 Figure 3. ∇P cos β 3-113 .50 shows the magnitudes and the directions of the darcy velocity and the pressure gradient vectors. Figure 3. Directions and magnitudes of Darcy velocity and pressure gradient vectors for flow in an anisotropic reservoir.α = 54.50. The figure shows that the Darcy velocity and pressure gradient vectors are not collinear for flow in the anisotropic porous medium.56º. The angle between the Darcy velocity vector and the pressure gradient vector is 147. This angle can also be calculated directly from vector calculus as v .∇P = v .

6731) β = 147.7120i + 0. 3.51 shows sketches of the flow field and the pressure gradient field.3 Transformation of Permeability Tensor from one Coordinate System to Another The objective is to derive the equations for transforming the permeability tensor (hydraulic conductivity tensor) for an anisotropic reservoir from one coordinate system to another coordinate system that makes and angle θ with the first coordinate system. ( −0.25 j ) = − 0.6922 = −0.5. cos β = ( 0.56 Figure 3.625i − 0. where θ is considered positive for 3-114 .8440 0. Thus.51.2185)( 0. Figure 3.where β is the angle between the two vectors.9888 j ) .14. Flow and pressure gradient fields for Example 3.8202 (1.

52 are not the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy.v) coordinates shown in Figure 3.231) (3. the relationship between the two coordinate systems also can be written as ⎡u ⎤ ⎡ cos θ ⎢ v ⎥ = ⎢ − sin θ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ sin θ ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ cos θ ⎥ ⎢ y ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ (3. The two coordinate systems are related by the following equations: x = u cos θ − v sin θ (3.anticlockwise rotation. Such a transformation can be used to (1) determine the principal values of the permeability anisotropy.234) Darcy’s law in the xy coordinate system is given by 3-115 . This can be achieved by first establishing the geometric relationship between the two coordinate systems and then transforming Darcy’s Law from the first coordinate system to the second coordinate system. It should be emphasized that the (u.232) can be written in matrix form as ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡cos θ ⎢ y ⎥ = ⎢ sin θ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ − sin θ ⎤ ⎡u ⎤ cos θ ⎥ ⎢ v ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ (3. (2) determine the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy and (3) examine the flow field in any coordinate system.(3.233) Using the inverse of the rotation matrix of Eq.52 shows the relationship between the two coordinate systems.232) y = u sin θ + v cos θ Eqs.(3. Figure 3.231) and (3.233).

52.Figure 3. Relationship between the two coordinate systems. ⎡ vx ⎤ 1 ⎡ k xx ⎢v ⎥ = − ⎢ k μ ⎣ yx ⎣ y⎦ ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ k xy ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ k yy ⎥ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.220) The Darcy velocity in the uv coordinate system is related to the Darcy velocity in the xy coordinate system by Eq.(3.234) as 3-116 .

238) and (3.⎡ vu ⎤ ⎡ cos θ ⎢ v ⎥ = ⎢ − sin θ ⎣ v⎦ ⎣ sin θ ⎤ ⎡ vx ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ cos θ ⎥ ⎣ v y ⎦ ⎦ (3.235) gives ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ k xy ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ k yy ⎥ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ vu ⎤ 1 ⎡ cos θ ⎢ v ⎥ = − μ ⎢ − sin θ ⎣ ⎣ v⎦ sin θ ⎤ ⎡ k xx ⎢ cos θ ⎥ ⎣ k yx ⎦ (3.238) Eq.233) as ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ ⎢ ∂x ⎥ ⎡cos θ ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎣ sin θ ⎢ ∂y ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ − sin θ ⎤ ⎢ ∂u ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ cos θ ⎥ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ∂v ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.239) shows that the permeability tensor in the uv coordinate system is related to the tensor in the xy coordinate system as follows: ⎡ kuu ⎢k ⎣ vu kuv ⎤ ⎡ cos θ = kvv ⎥ ⎢ − sin θ ⎦ ⎣ sin θ ⎤ ⎡ k xx ⎢ cos θ ⎥ ⎣ k yx ⎦ k xy ⎤ ⎡cos θ k yy ⎥ ⎢ sin θ ⎦⎣ − sin θ ⎤ cos θ ⎥ ⎦ (3.220) into (3.235) Substituting Eq.240) 3-117 .238) is Darcy’s law in the uv coordinate system and is of the form ⎡ vu ⎤ 1 ⎡k = − ⎢ uu ⎢v ⎥ μ ⎣ kvu ⎣ v⎦ ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ kuv ⎤ ⎢ ∂u ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ kvv ⎥ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ∂v ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.236) gives ⎡ vu ⎤ 1 ⎡ cos θ ⎢ v ⎥ = − μ ⎢ − sin θ ⎣ ⎣ v⎦ sin θ ⎤ ⎡ k xx ⎥⎢ cos θ ⎦ ⎣ k yx k xy ⎤ ⎡cos θ ⎢ k yy ⎥ ⎣ sin θ ⎦ ⎡ ∂Φ ⎤ − sin θ ⎤ ⎢ ∂u ⎥ ⎥ ⎥⎢ cos θ ⎦ ⎢ ∂Φ ⎥ ⎢ ∂v ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (3.239) A comparison of Eqs.(2.(3.237) into (3.236) The flow potential in the xy coordinate system is related to the flow potential in the uv coordinate system by Eq.(3.(3.(3.237) Substituting Eq.

242) and (3.245) to (3.248) can be simplified to (3.(3.(3.250) 3-118 .243) (3.Since kxy = kyx and kuv = kvu. Substituting Eqs.243) shows that kuv = kvu.241) gives (3.(3.250) can be simplified to (3.242) gives kuv = − 1 sin 2θ k xx − 1 (1 − cos 2θ )k yx + 1 (1 + cos 2θ )k xy + 1 sin 2θ k yy 2 2 2 2 ….244) From trigonometry.242) (3.240) and equating the result to the left side matrix gives kuu = k xx cos 2 θ + k yx sin θ cos θ + k xy sin θ cos θ + k yy sin 2 θ kuv = − k xx sin θ cos θ − k yx sin 2 θ + k xy cos 2 θ + k yy sin θ cos θ kvu = − k xx sin θ cos θ + k yx cos 2 θ − k xy sin 2 θ + k yy sin θ cos θ kvv = k xx sin 2 θ − k yx sin θ cos θ − k xy sin θ cos θ + k yy cos 2 θ (3.247) into Eq.(3.(3.245) to (3. Eq.247) kuu = 1 (1 + cos 2θ )k xx + 1 sin 2θ k yx + 1 sin 2θ k xy + 1 (1 − cos 2θ )k yy 2 2 2 2 Since kxy = kyx.241) (3.Carrying out the matrix multiplications on the right side of Eq.245) (3.(3. Eqs.249) A comparison of Eqs.(3.246) (3. Eq.248) kuu = k xx + k yy 2 + k xx − k yy 2 cos 2θ + k xy sin 2θ (3.247) into Eq.(3. cos 2 θ = 1 (1 + cos 2θ ) 2 sin 2 θ = 1 (1 − cos 2θ ) 2 sin θ cos θ = 1 sin 2θ 2 Substituting Eqs.

(3.247) into Eq.255) yields tan 2θ = or 2k xy sin 2θ = cos 2θ k xx − k yy (3.251) gives ⎛ k xx − k yy −⎜ 2 ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ sin 2θ + k xy cos 2θ = 0 ⎠ (3.255) Eq. Example 3.(3.5.245) to (3. 1.254) into Eq.257) The other principal axis of the permeability anisotropy is given by (θ +90) degrees.253) One of the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy is obtained from kuv = kvu = 0 Substituting Eq.(3.254) (3. Calculate the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy.252) (3.(3.(3.244) gives kvv = 1 (1 − sin 2θ )k xx − 1 sin 2θ k yx − 1 sin 2θ k xy + 1 (1 + cos 2θ )k yy 2 2 2 2 which can be simplified to kvv = k xx + k yy 2 ⎛ k xx − k yy −⎜ 2 ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ cos 2θ − k xy sin 2θ ⎠ (3.6 For the flow field of Example 3.⎛ k xx − k yy kuv = kvu = − ⎜ 2 ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ sin 2θ + k xy cos 2θ ⎠ (3. 3-119 .251) Substituting Eqs.256) θ = 1 tan −1 ⎜ 2 ⎛ 2k xy ⎜ k xx − k yy ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (3.

249) and (3.9443 = 195.6 One of the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy is given by Eq. Figure 3.v) makes an angle of +5.3048 200 − 750 ⎠ ⎝ θ= 10.y coordinate system.2. Show the transformed permeability tensor for the principal coordinate system.3048 ) + 50sin (10.51md The transformed permeability tensor is given by ⎡k k ( u.3048 ) 2 2 ⎝ ⎠ kv = 475 + 270.3048 = 5.3048 ) 2 2 ku = 475 − 270. 3-120 .15º with the x.3048 ) − 50sin (10.(3.(3.53 shows that the coordinate system along the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy (u.49md ku = kv = 200 + 750 ⎛ 200 − 750 ⎞ −⎜ ⎟ cos (10.1818 ) = 10. v ) = ⎢ u ⎣0 0 ⎤ ⎡195.9443 = 754. Calculate the components of the Darcy velocity vector in the principal directions of the permeability anisotropy.5⎥ ⎦ the permeability anisotropy.253) as 200 + 750 200 − 750 + cos (10.5642 − 8. where ku and kv are the principal values of ⎥=⎢ 0 kv ⎦ ⎣ 754.15 2 The principal values of the permeability anisotropy are given by Eqs. Solution to Example 3.257) as ⎛ 2 ( −50 ) ⎞ −1 tan −1 ( 2θ ) = tan −1 ⎜ ⎟ = tan ( 0. 3.5642 + 8.5 0 ⎤ md . Calculate the principal values of the permeability anisotropy.

The components of the Darcy velocity in the u.v coordinate systems. Also shown in Figure 3.v coordinates also can be calculated from Eq.v coordinates are the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy.Figure 3.9209 ft/D The components of the Darcy velocity in the u.53.234) as 3-121 .09 = 0.v coordinates can be calculated as follows.2185sin ( 54.2185cos(54.24 − 5.2185sin 49. where the u.53 is the Darcy velocity vector in relation to the x.2185cos 49.7980 ft/D vv = 1. vu = 1.15 ) = 1.15 ) = 1. Relationship between the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy and the (x.24 − 5.y) coordinates.(3.09 = 0.y and the u.

The direction of the Darcy velocity also remains the same.9209 ⎦ vu = 0.15 ⎦ ⎣ 0.9888 ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ cos 5. The characteristic equation is given by −50 ⎤ ⎡ 200 − λ det ⎢ =0 750 − λ ⎥ ⎣ −50 ⎦ ( 200 − λ )( 750 − λ ) − ( −50 )( −50 ) = 0 3-122 . Example 3.7 Rework Example 3.⎡ vu ⎤ ⎡ cos 5.7120 ⎢ cos 5.7120 ⎤ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = 0. the principal values of the permeability tensor are given by the eigenvalues of the permeability tensor whereas the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy are given by the eigenvectors of the permeability tensor.7980 ⎤ ⎥ + 0.9888⎦ ⎣ − sin 5.14. Solution to Example 3.15 ⎤ ⎡ sin 5. the magnitude of the Darcy velocity (1.6 as an eigenvalue problem.9209 ft/D These are the results obtained previously.15 sin 5.15 ⎦ ⎣ 0.15 ⎤ ⎡ 0. It should be noted that because the flow is invariant with a rotation of the axes.15 ⎡ cos 5.7 Let the eigenvalues of the permeability tensor be λ. Only the components of the Darcy velocity change in the new coordinate system.2185 ft/D) remains the same in the new coordinate system. This can be demonstrated by reworking Example 3.7980 ft/D vv = 0.4 Alternative Calculation of the Principal Values and the Principal Axes of the Permeability Anisotropy From linear algebra.15 ⎢v ⎥ = ⎢ ⎣ v ⎦ ⎣ − sin 5. 3.15 ⎤ ⎡0.6 by calculating the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the permeability tensor.

5085 x − 50 y = 0 −50 x + 554.0902 θ = 5.5md λ2 = 754. For λ1 = 195.6. the eigenvector is obtained by solving the following simultaneous equations: −50 ⎡ 200 − 195.5 ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡0 ⎤ = ⎢ −50 750 − 195.5085⎥ ⎢ y ⎥ = ⎢0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4.5085 y = 0 ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡11.5085 ⎢ −50 554.15 3-123 .0902 ⎤ u=⎢ ⎥ ⎣ 1 ⎦ This eigenvector makes an angle θ with the positive x-axis given by tan θ = 1 = 0.0902 11.5md These principal values are the same as obtained in Example 3.0902 ⎤ ⎢ y⎥ = ⎢ 1 ⎥ y ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ The eigenvector is ⎡11.5⎥ ⎢ y ⎥ ⎢0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ −50 ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡0 ⎤ ⎡ 4.0170 2 λ1 = 195.λ 2 − 950λ + 147500 = 0 λ= 950 ± 9502 − ( 4 )(1)(147500 ) 2 = 950 ± 559.5 .

For this case. u .6.54.0902 ⎤ v=⎢ ⎥ ⎣ 1 ⎦ We can easily show that the two eigenvectors are orthogonal.5 y = 0 ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡ −0. Because the two vectors lie along the same line with an angle of 180º between them.0902 ⎤ ⎢ y⎥ = ⎢ 1 ⎥ y ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ The eigenvector is ⎡ −0. the Darcy velocity vector and the velocity potential gradient vector are collinear as shown in Figure 3.For λ2 = 754.0902 )( −0.5 .0902 ) − 1 = 0 The eigenvectors point in the directions of the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy.v = (11. we ordinarily do not specify whether the permeability is in the direction of flow or in the direction of the velocity potential gradient.5 x − 50 y = 0 −50 x − 4.14. the eigenvector is obtained by solving the following simultaneous equations: −50 ⎡ 200 − 754. 3. the "directional" permeability in the direction of flow (kdf) is equal to the 3-124 .5 Directional Permeability For an isotropic medium.5⎥ ⎢ y ⎥ ⎢0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ −554.5 ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡0 ⎤ = ⎢ −50 750 − 754.5 −50 ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡0 ⎤ ⎢ −50 ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥ 4. These are the same results obtained in Example 3.5 ⎥ ⎣ y ⎦ ⎣0 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ −554.

in general. Collinear relationship between the direction of flow and the direction of the velocity potential gradient for an isotropic medium.258) Figure 3.(3."directional" permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient (kdp) and is calculated in Darcy units as kdf = kdp = μv ∇Φ (3.259) where ∇Φ cos α is the component of the velocity potential gradient vector that is collinear with the Darcy velocity.54. Similarly. For an anisotropic medium. the directional permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient is defined in Darcy units by the equation 3-125 .55. the directional permeability in the direction of flow is defined in Darcy units by the equation kdf = μv ∇Φ cos α (3. the Darcy velocity vector and the velocity potential gradient vector are not collinear as shown in Figure 3. The concept of directional permeability seeks to extend the definition of permeability of an isotropic medium expressed in Eq. Accordingly.258) to an anisotropic medium.

Solution to Example 3.6731) cos (180 − 147.55.96 md 3-126 .(3.5.615) ( 0. Example 3.2185 ) (0.8 The directional permeability in the direction of flow is calculated with Eq. Relationship between the direction of flow and the direction of the velocity potential gradient in an anisotropic porous medium.001127(5.001127(5.259) in oilfield units as kdf = = μv (0.56 ) = 338.260) where v cos α is the component of the Darcy velocity vector that is collinear with the velocity potential gradient vector.8 Calculate the directional permeabilities for the flow field of Example 3.615) ∇Φ cos α (1)(1.kdp = μ v cos α ∇Φ (3. Figure 3.

Darcy velocity vector in the flow direction that makes an angle θ with the positive x axis. Let kdf be the directional permeability in the direction of flow (in the direction of the Darcy velocity vector) that makes an angle θ with the positive x-axis as shown in Figure 3.(3.y coordinates are the principal axes of the anisotropy in a 2D reservoir.615) ∇Φ (1)(1.6731) ) = 241. y ) = ⎢ ⎣0 0⎤ ky ⎥ ⎦ (3.261) Figure 3.46 md We now derive the relationship between the directional permeabilities and the principal values of the permeability anisotropy.001127(5.56. The permeability tensor for this medium in the x.y coordinate system is ⎡kx k ( x.2185) cos (180 − 147. 3-127 .56.615) ( 0.001127(5.The directional permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient is calculated with Eq.260) in oilfield units as kdp = = μ v cos α (0.56 (0. Let kx and ky be the principal values of the permeability anisotropy where the x.

(3.269) dx = cos θ ds 3-128 (3.56.263) give the potential gradients in the x and y directions as ∂Φ μ = − vs cos θ kx ∂x ∂Φ μ = − vs sin θ ky ∂y (3.264) where s is the flow direction.265) (3.262) vy = − (3. Figure 3.267) (3.270) .56 shows the relationships between the Darcy velocity in the flow direction vs and its x and y components vx and vy. (3. we find vx = vs cos θ v y = vs sin θ (3.56. y and s directions as vx = − k x ∂Φ μ ∂x k y ∂Φ μ ∂y kdf ∂Φ μ ∂s (3. From Figure 3.362) and (3. from Calculus.263) vs = − (3.Darcy’s law can be written in the x.y). ∂Φ ∂Φ dx ∂Φ dy = + ∂s ∂x ds ∂x ds From Figure 3.266) Eqs.268) Because Φ = Φ(x.

(3.275) and (3.272) gives r 2 x2 y 2 = + kdf k x k y (3.276) Substituting Eqs. ky) and the principal coordinate system (x. Eq.(3.274) (3.278) .dy = sin θ ds (3. then Eq.275) y = r sin θ cos 2 θ = x2 r2 y2 r2 sin 2 θ = (3.277) If we make the magnitude of the vector r = kdf .y).(3.(3.271) into Eq.264) and rearranging gives the directional permeability in the direction of flow as 1 cos 2 θ sin 2 θ = + kdf kx ky (3.272) can be used to calculate the directional permeability in the flow direction that makes an angle θ with the positive x-axis.273) (3.272) Given the principal values of the permeability anisotropy (kx.276) into (3. Eq.(3.277) becomes x2 y 2 1= + kx k y 3-129 (3.271) Substituting Eqs.272) can be put in rectangular coordinates by choosing a vector r in the s direction (flow direction) and noting that x = r cos θ (3.267) to (3.(3.

(3.57. Figure 3. by constructing the permeability ellipse as shown in Figure 3.280) kz with semiaxes k x . Thus. the directional permeability in the direction of flow will be given by the permeability ellipsoid 1= x2 + y2 ky + z2 ( ) ( 2 kx ) ( ) 2 2 (3.or 1= x2 + y2 ky ( ) ( 2 kx ) 2 (3. Permeability ellipse for calculating the directional permeability in the direction of flow.279) Eq. k y and kz .57. the directional permeability can easily be determined graphically for any given flow direction. 3-130 . For flow 3D.279) is the cannonical equation of an ellipse with major semiaxes k x and k y .

Thus. They are also the directional 3-131 . the directional permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient is distinct from the directional permeability in the direction of flow. y and z). ky and kz) are the true permeabilities in the principal directions (x. ) In an anisotropic medium.Let the velocity potential gradient vector make an angle α with the positive x-axis. The permeability ellipsoid in 3D is + y2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ky ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 2 ) ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ k ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ x⎠ 2 + y2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ k ⎟ ⎝ z⎠ 2 (3.284) with semiaxes 1/ k x . It can be shown that the directional permeability in the direction of the gradient vector is given by cos 2 α sin 2 α = + ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛1⎞ ⎛ 1⎞ ⎜ ⎜ kdp ⎟ ⎝ k x ⎠ ⎜ k y ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ 1 The permeability ellipse in 2D is (3. 1/ k x ( ) ( ) and (1/ kz .283) with semiaxes 1/ k x ( ) and (1/ 1= x2 k y .281) 1= x2 y2 + ⎛1⎞ ⎛ 1⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ kx ⎠ ⎝ k y ⎠ (3. there are two distinct definitions of directional permeability for an anisotropic medium. It should be noted that principal values of the permeability anisotropy (kx.282) or 1= x2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ k ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ x⎠ 2 + y2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ky ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ 2 (3.

60. Figure 3.58. These data can be used to identify the principal axes and the principal values of the permeability anisotropy. the Darcy velocity and the velocity potential gradient are collinear. Figures 3. Permeability data measured around a cylindrical core (Data from Scheidegger. 1954). The measured permeability data appear to fit a complicated curve. However. when the same data are plotted as k and 1 k as shown in Figures 3. 3-132 .59 and 3. This observation verifies the tensorial nature of permeability. they fit on ellipses.permeabilities in the direction of flow and the direction of the potential gradient because in the principal coordinate system.58 shows a polar plot of permeability data from Scheidegger (1954) for permeabilities measured around a full-sized core.

Permeability ellipse for permeability in the direction of flow for the data of Figure 3. 3-133 .59.Figure 3.58.

58. Permeability ellipse for permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient for the data of Figure 3.60. 3-134 .Figure 3.

Solution to Example 3.62.9 Calculate and plot the permeability ellipses for the flow field of Example 3.283) for the potential gradient direction. 3-135 . where x and y are the principal axes of the permeability anisotropy.(3.5 ⎠ 2 These ellipses are plotted in Figures 3.9 The permeability ellipses are given by Eqs. These equations can be adapted for our purpose as follows: 1= u2 + v2 = u2 195.61 and 3.Example 3.5.5 ( k) ( k) ( 2 2 u v ) ( 2 ) 2 and 1= u2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ k ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ u⎠ 2 + v2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ k ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ v⎠ 2 = u2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 195.279) for the flow direction and (3.5 ⎠ 2 + v2 ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 754.5 + v2 754.

9. Permeability ellipse for permeability in the direction of flow for Example 3.61. 3-136 .Figure 3.

9.Figure 3.285) . Permeability ellipse for permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient for Example 3. Figure 3. After a permeability measurement.6 Measurement of Transverse Permeability of a Cylindrical Core If the transverse permeabilities around a full-sized core could be measured. the sleeve is rotated to a new angle and the measurement is repeated.62. Collins (1961) has derived the following equation for calculating the transverse permeability from a gas flow experiment (in Darcy units): k= Pq1μ 1 G (α ) ⎛ b⎞ 2 PL ⎜ 1 + ⎟ ΔP ⎝ P⎠ 3-137 (3. Using conformal mapping. 3.63 shows a schematic diagram of an apparatus that can be used to make the measurements.14. then the permeability anisotropy of the core could be determined.

G(α) is a geometric correction factor to account for the complex flow 3-138 . L is the height of 1 the core. P is the mean pressure ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ . where P1 is the inlet pressure. Apparatus for measuring transverse permeability of a full-sized cylindrical core.63.Figure 3. b is the Klinkenberg parameter. q1 is the gas volumetric flow rate measured at ⎛P +P ⎞ P1. ΔP is the pressure drop between the ⎝ 2 ⎠ inlet and the outlet ( P − P2 ) .

64 ⎝2⎠ shows the plot of G(α) versus α.64. By making such measurements around the core.⎛θ ⎞ geometry of the gas from inlet to outlet and α is equal to ⎜ ⎟ .65. 1961). Figure 3. Such a plot can be used to determine the principal values and the principal directions of the permeability anisotropy. The permeability tensor of the medium can then be constructed from this information for any coordinate system. Geometric factor for transverse permeability calculation (from Collins. 3-139 . Figure 3. a polar plot of the permeability can be made as shown in Figure 3.

65. The purpose of this 3-140 . Permeability (absolute and relative permeability) must be assigned to every one of the approximately one million grid blocks in a fullfield simulation. often with a full tensor representation. 1954). Polar plot of transverse permeabilities around a core (from Scheidegger.Figure 3. 3.15 EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS OF PERMEABILITY Permeability is used in numerical reservoir simulations to predict reservoir performance.

The analysis shows that a horizontal well and a fractured well are similar in the manner in which they affect reservoir performance. We examine the productivity indices of a horizontal well and a hydraulically fractured well with infinite fracture conductivity. This larger areal contact can significantly enhance the productivity of a horizontal well compared to a vertical well draining the same reservoir volume. the productivity of a horizontal well can be affected significantly by the permeability anisotropy of the reservoir.15.section is to present simple examples of how permeability could be used to predict reservoir performance. (2) to compare the productivities of a horizontal well and a vertical well in the same reservoir to determine if a horizontal well is superior to a vertical well under the particular circumstance. 3. (1984) as 3-141 . Homogeneous and Isotropic Reservoirs The steady state productivity index (PI) for a horizontal well in a homogeneous and isotropic reservoir is given by Giger et al. and (3) to examine how the permeability anisotropy of the reservoir affects the productivity of a horizontal well.1 Productivity of a Horizontal Well Introduction Horizontal wells are increasingly being drilled for petroleum recovery. However. The objectives of this section are: (1) to provide a simple formula for estimating the productivity index of a horizontal well for single phase flow in terms of the reservoir permeability and other relevant factors. One of the major advantages of a horizontal well over a vertical well is the larger contact area between a horizontal well and the reservoir compared to a vertical well in the same reservoir.

FD.⎛ kL ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ μB ⎠ PI H = FD 2 ⎤ ⎡ ⎢1 + 1 − ⎛ L ⎞ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎛ h ⎞ L ⎢ ⎝ 2re ⎠ ⎥ ln ⎢ ⎥ + ln ⎜ ⎟ h ⎢ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎝ 2π rw ⎠ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎥ ⎝ 2re ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ where PIH FD k L = = = = = = = = = (3. is given in Table 3. surface rate/unit pressure drop units conversion constant effective permeability to oil total length of the horizontal well oil viscosity oil formation volume factor.286) productivity index of a horizontal well. reservoir volume/surface volume formation thickness wellbore radius well drainage radius μ B h rw re Figure 3. The horizontal well of length L is located half-way between the top and the bottom of the reservoir of thickness h.14. 3-142 . The units conversion constant. L is assumed to be small relative to 2re.66 shows the flow geometry.

14: Units and Dimensions Field Metric Units m m2 MPa Dimension Distance Area Pressure Permeability Fluid Viscosity Liquid Flow Rate FD L L2 ML-1T-2 L2 ML-1T-1 L3T-1 Darcy Units cm cm2 atm darcy cp cm3/s 1 SI Units m m2 Pa m2 Pa.4 The steady state productivity index of a vertical well can be obtained by integration of Darcy’s Law as 3-143 .s m3/D 86.001127 μm2 mPa.Figure 3.66: Flow geometry for steady state productivity index equation.s m3/s 1 Oilfield Units ft ft2 psi millidarcy (md) cp B/D 0. Table 3.

(b) the productivity index for a vertical well.⎛ kh ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ μB ⎠ PIV = FD ⎛r ⎞ ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ (3. Length of horizontal well (L) Formation thickness (h) Drainage radius (re) Wellbore radius (rw) Horizontal permeability (kH) Vertical permeability (kV) = = = = = = 500 m 40 m 1000 m 0.286) and (3.12 m 400 md 400 md 3-144 .288) Note that because the right side of Eq.(3. Eq. the ratio of the productivity index of a horizontal well to a vertical well draining the same reservoir volume is obtained from Eqs. calculate (a) the productivity index for a horizontal well.288) is valid in any system of units.(3. Example 3.288) involves ratios of lengths.287) Therefore. and (c) the ratio of the productivity indices of the horizontal and the vertical wells.(3.287) as PI H = FD PIV ⎛r ⎞ ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎡ ⎢1 + L ⎢ ln ⎢ h ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎤ 1− ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2re ⎠ ⎥ ⎛ h ⎞ ⎝ ⎥ + ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎝ 2π rw ⎠ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ⎝ 2re ⎠ ⎥ ⎦ 2 (3.10 Given the following data for an isotropic reservoir.

001127 ⎝ ⎛ 1000 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 0.10 In oilfield units. Homogeneous and Anisotropic Reservoirs Many the vertical petroleum reservoirs is are anisotropic much less and than have the different horizontal permeabilities in the different directions.02 STB/D/psi PI H = 0.2 ⎠ = 6. in a layered reservoir.02 = = 3.86 PIV Clearly. For example.286) gives the productivity index for the horizontal well as ⎛ 400 x500 x3.86 STB/D/psi PIV = 0. FD = 0.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1. in this isotropic reservoir.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1.Oil viscosity (μo) = 5 cp 1.2 ⎝ ⎠ = 26.(3.8 6. Substituting the numerical values into Eq.12 ⎟ 40 ⎛ 500 ⎞ ⎝ ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 2 x1000 ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ Substituting the numerical values into Eq.001127.001127 2 ⎡ 500 ⎞ ⎤ ⎢1 + 1 − ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 500 ⎢ ⎛ 40 ⎞ ⎝ 2 x1000 ⎠ ⎥ ln ⎢ ⎥ + ln ⎜ 2π x0.287) gives the productivity index for the vertical well as ⎛ 400 x 40 x3. the productivity of the horizontal well is much higher than that of the vertical well. a reservoir that is intersected by a large number of vertical 3-145 . permeability usually permeability.12 ⎠ The ratio of the horizontal to vertical well productivity indices is PI H 26. Also.(3.2 RB/STB Oil formation volume factor (B)= Solution to Example 3.

289) By a suitable change of coordinates. Eq.(3.289) can be transformed into a form that describes the flow in an equivalent isotropic medium having a permeability k * .291) k* Z=z kV (3.(3. The diffusivity equation for steady state single phase flow for the anisotropic medium is given by kH ∂P ∂P + kV 2 = 0 2 ∂x ∂z (3. respectively.292) where X and Z are the transformed spatial coordinates. Eq.293) yields (3.293) 3-146 . Eq. The required transformation equations are as follows: k * = k H kV X =x and (3.290) k* kH (3. With these transformations. Permeability anisotropy can have a significant effect on the productivity of a horizontal well.(3. This effect is examined in this section.fractures will have a higher vertical permeability than the horizontal permeability. Consider an anisotropic reservoir with horizontal and vertical permeabilities kH and kV. These are the principal values of the permeability anisotropy and x and z are the principal axes of the anisotropy.289) becomes ∂P ⎞ ⎛ ∂P k* ⎜ 2 + 2 ⎟ = 0 ∂Z ⎠ ⎝ ∂X Since k * is nonzero.

(b) the productivity index for a vertical well. Example 3.11 Given the following data for an anisotropic reservoir.12 m 400 md 25 md 5 cp = 1.294) which is the diffusivity equation for an equivalent isotropic medium with a permeability of k * . and (c) the ratio of the productivity indices of the horizontal and the vertical wells.(3.290) to (3.(3.(3. Length of horizontal well (L) Formation thickness (h) Drainage radius (re) Wellbore radius (rw) Horizontal permeability (kH) Vertical permeability (kV) Oil viscosity (μo) = = = = = = = 500 m 40 m 1000 m 0. Eqs.286) to calculate the productivity index of a horizontal well in an anisotropic reservoir as shown in the following example.292) can be used in conjunction with Eq.2 RB/STB Oil formation volume factor (B) Solution to Example 3. k * = 400 x 25 = 100 md From Eq.(3.11 From Eq. L* = 500 100 = 250 m 400 3-147 .∂P ⎞ ⎛ ∂P ⎜ 2 + 2 ⎟=0 ∂Z ⎠ ⎝ ∂X (3. calculate (a) the productivity index for a horizontal well.291).290).

⎛ 400 x 40 x3.71 STB/D/psi PI H = 0.86 Thus.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1.001127 ⎝ ⎛ 1000 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 0.(3. Thus. h* = 40 100 = 80 m 25 Substituting these numerical values into Eq. for the vertical well.2 ⎠ = 6.001127 2 ⎤ ⎡ 250 ⎞ ⎢1 + 1 − ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 250 ⎢ ⎛ 80 ⎞ ⎝ 2 x500 ⎠ ⎥ ln ⎢ ⎥ + ln ⎜ 2π x0.71 = = 1.re* = 1000 100 = 500 m 400 From Eq. 3-148 .12 ⎠ The ratio of the horizontal to the vertical well productivity indices in the anisotropic medium is PI H 8.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1.(3.27 PIV 6.(3.292).286) gives the productivity index for the horizontal well in the anisotropic reservoir as ⎛ 100 x 250 x3.12 ⎟ 80 ⎛ 250 ⎞ ⎝ ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 2 x500 ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ The productivity index for the vertical well in the anisotropic reservoir is given by Eq.2 ⎝ ⎠ = 8.86 STB/D/psi PIV = 0. the productivity advantage of a horizontal well is reduced considerably in an anisotropic reservoir in which the vertical permeability is significantly lower than the horizontal permeability.287) with k = kH.

67 such that the vertical permeability is larger than the horizontal permeability. calculate (a) the productivity index for a horizontal well. Length of horizontal well (L) Formation thickness (h) Drainage radius (re) Wellbore radius (rw) Horizontal permeability (kH) Vertical permeability (kV) Oil viscosity (μo) = = = = = = = 500 m 40 m 1000 m 0. if the azimuth of the horizontal is such that it intersects the vertical fractures. and (c) the ratio of the productivity indices of the horizontal and the vertical wells.12 m 400 md 800 md (Due to the vertical fractures) 5 cp = 1. (b) the productivity index for a vertical well.12 A horizontal well has intersected a large number of vertical fractures as shown in Figure 3. then the productivity of the well will enhanced as shown in the following example. Example 3.In a naturally fractured reservoir. Given the following data for this anisotropic reservoir.2 RB/STB Oil formation volume factor (B) 3-149 .

291).292).(3.69 = 33.12 From Eq.(3. L* = 500 565.286) gives the productivity index for the horizontal well in the fractured anisotropic reservoir as 3-150 .69 = 594.(3.64 m 800 Substituting these numerical values into Eq.69 md From Eq.(3. A horizontal well that intersects vertical fractures.290).69 = 1189.21 m 400 re* = 1000 From Eq.Figure 3.67. h* = 40 565. Solution to Example 3. k * = 400 x800 = 565.60 m 400 565.

(3. that if the horizontal well was wrongly drilled parallel to the fractures instead of normal to the fractures as shown in Figure 3. The change in coordinates given by Eqs.67. for the vertical well.001127 2 ⎤ ⎡ 594.60 ⎞ ⎢1 + 1 − ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 594.34 = = 4.12 ⎟ 250 ⎞ 33.69 x594.(3.12 because its effect is negligibly small.64 ⎞ ⎝ 2 x1189. 3-151 .2 ⎝ ⎠ = 32. ⎛ 400 x 40 x3. The horizontal well placement relative to the fracture azimuth is therefore important to take advantage of the fractures.⎛ 565.21 ⎠ ⎝ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ The productivity index for the vertical well in the anisotropic reservoir is given by Eq.71 6. the productivity of the horizontal well will not be enhanced by the fractures.001127 ⎝ ⎛ 1000 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 0.11 and 3.86 PIV Clearly.12 ⎠ The ratio of the horizontal to the vertical well productivity indices in the anisotropic medium with vertical fractures is PI H 32.286) with k = kH.60 ⎢ ⎛ 33.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1. the advantage of a horizontal well that intersects vertical fractures in an anisotropic reservoir compared to a vertical well is apparent from this example.64 ⎛ ⎝ ⎠ ⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ 2 x1189.292) also transforms the circular wellbore into an elliptical wellbore with the same cross sectional area as the circular wellbore.290) to (3.60 x3. however.86 STB/D/psi PIV = 0.2 ⎠ = 6. Note. This change in the shape of the wellbore has been neglected in the calculations in Examples 3.21 ⎠ ⎥ ln ⎢ ⎥ + ln ⎜ 2π x0.2808 ⎞ 2π ⎜ ⎟ 5 x1.34 STB/D/psi PI H = 0. Thus.

There are more elaborate equations for calculating the productivity index of a horizontal well in the literature.295) where L is the total length of the fracture.296) where kf is the fracture permeability and w is the fracture width.68 is given by Karcher et al.2 Productivity of a Vertically Fractured Well The productivity index of a vertically fractured well with an infinite fracture conductivity in a homogeneous and isotropic reservoir as shown in Figure 3. The assumptions underlying the above equation are: • • • • Fracture height is equal to the reservoir pay thickness The fracture is plane and is centered on the well The well drainage radius is large compared to the fracture length The fracture has infinite conductivity The fracture conductivity is defined as FC = k f w (3. 3. (1986) as PI F = FD ⎛k L⎞ 2π ⎜ H ⎟ ⎝ μB ⎠ ⎡ ⎢1 + L ⎢ ln ⎢ h ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎤ 1− ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2re ⎠ ⎥ ⎝ ⎥ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2re ⎠ ⎝ ⎥ ⎦ 2 (3. A dimensioless fracture conductivity is defined as 3-152 . These more complicated equations and their associated assumptions may be found in the references.14.

68.297) ⎛L⎞ where Lf is the fracture half-length ⎜ ⎟ .FCD = kf w kH L f (3. A hydraulic fracture behaves as if it ⎝2⎠ has an infinite conductivity for FCD ≥ 300 (3.298) Figure 3. Vertically fractured well. 3-153 .

295) simplifies to ⎛k h⎞ 2π ⎜ H ⎟ ⎝ μB ⎠ PIV = FD ⎛ 4r ⎞ ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ L ⎠ (3.301) can be used to demonstrate the increased productivity of a fractured well compared to the unfractured well.(3. The 3-154 .(3. The ⎛ h ⎞ horizontal well has a positive pseudo skin represented by the term ln ⎜ ⎟ in 2π rw ⎠ ⎝ Eq. The pseudoskin is caused by the convergence of flow into the horizontal wellbore whereas the flow into the fracture occurs over the entire fracture face with no convergence of flow.301) Eq. then Eq.300) The ratio of the productivity index of the fracture well to the unfractured well is given by PI F = FD PIV ⎛r ⎞ ln ⎜ e ⎟ ⎝ rw ⎠ ⎡ ⎢1 + L ⎢ ln ⎢ h ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎤ 1− ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2re ⎠ ⎥ ⎝ ⎥ ⎛ L ⎞ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ 2re ⎠ ⎝ ⎥ ⎦ 2 (3.(3.295) and (3.286) shows that the productivity index of a vertical fracture with an infinite conductivity is similar to but somewhat higher than the productivity index of a horizontal well.299) which is the productivity index of a vertical well with an equivalent wellbore radius given by rw = L 4 (3.(3. A comparison of Eqs.⎛ L ⎞ If ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 2re ⎠ 1 .286) compared to the fractured well.

hydraulic head thickness of bed i hydraulic conductivity absolute permeability of the medium directional permeability in the direction of flow 3-155 hi = kdf = .similarity in the productivity index equations for a fracture and a horizontal well indicates that fracturing a vertical well is an alternative to drilling a horizontal well. NOMENCLATURE A = cross sectional area in the flow direction Area of bed i total area Klinkenberg empirical constant dependent on rock and gas core diameter oil formation volume factor gas formation volume factor compressibility of porous medium total compressibility wellbore storage coefficient dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient non-Darcy coefficient grain diameter. mean grain diameter exponential integral function probability density function for pore diameter for a bundle of capillary tubes model formation resisitivity factor fracture conductivity dimensionless fracture conductivity gravitational acceleration Ai = AT = b d B cf ct C D = = = = = = = Bg = CD = Dp = Ei = f(δ) = F = FC = FCD= g = G(α) = geometric factor for calculating transverse permeability of a cylindrical porous medium h K k = = = pay thickness.

kdp = ki = directional permeability in the direction of the velocity potential gradient permeability of bed i permeability tensor. kw = principal values of permeability anisotropy where uvw is the principal coordinate system L = length length of bed i tortuous length of flow path natural logarithm (log to base e) log to base 10 real gas potential or real gas pseudo pressure pressure dimensionless pressure dimensionless welltest derivative function initial reservoir pressure extrapolated pressure from a Horner plot reference pressure pressure at external radius pressure at the wellbore dimensionless wellbore pressure dimensionless wellbore pressure in Laplace space Calculus derivative of dimensionless wellbore pressure in Laplace space 3-156 Li = Le = ln = log = M = P = PD = ' PD = Pi = P* = Psc = Pe = Pw = PwD= PwD = ' PwD = . ky. kz = principal values of permeability anisotropy where xyz is the principal coordinate system ku. kv. average permeability individual entries in the permeability tensor measured gas permeability permeability to liquid (absolute permeability of medium) permeability to nonwetting phase at irreducible wetting phase saturation Kozeny constant k = kij = kg = kL = kor = koτ = kx.

skin factor storativity surface area per unit bulk volume (specific surface area) 3-157 dP = ds PI = PIH = PIV = q = qsf = qsc = qT = r = rD = re = rH = ri ro = = rinv = rw = rw = Re = Ro = Rw = s S S S = = = = .Pwf = Pws = P1 = P2 = flowing bottomhole pressure shut-in bottomhole pressure inlet pressure outlet pressure P = ⎛P +P ⎞ mean pressure ⎜ 1 2 ⎟ ⎝ 2 ⎠ pressure gradient productivity index productivity index of a horizontal well productivity index of a vertical well volumetric flowrate sandface rate volumetric rate at a reference pressure. Psc total volumetric flow rate radial distance from the wellbore dimensionless radius external drainage radius hydraulic radius radius of bed i radius of investigation of a welltest resistance of a porous medium fully saturated with water resistance of water wellbore radius Reynolds Number resistivity of a porous medium fully saturated with water resistivity of water cartesian coordinate in the flow direction.

vw = components of Darcy velocity in the uvw Cartesian coordinate system. w z z Z = = = = = = = = = = = = fracture width height above (or below) an arbitrary datum Cartesian coordinate in the vertical direction gas Z-factor non-darcy velocity coefficient fluid density. Darcy velocity vector Swirr = irreducible wetting phase saturation Tsc = v vx. vv. fraction tortuosity liquid specific gravity velocity flow potential function pressure head gradient operator pressure change welltest derivative function shut-in time effective shut-in time 3-158 β ρ μ φ τ γ Φ Ψ ∇ = ΔP = ΔP' = Δt = Δte = . vy. vu. vz = components of Darcy velocity in the xyz Cartesian coordinate system. viscosity porosity.Sp = Ss = S* = t tp T T = = = = = tD = surface area per unit pore volume (specific surface area) surface area per unit grain volume (specific surface area) mechanical skin facor time dimensionless time producing time before shut-in absolute temperature transmissibility reference temperature flux vector.

AIME (1942) 146. and Pet. Gas and Bitumen. Clarendon Press. Chem.C. Vol. R.B. XX (1970) 303-335. Archie. : Petroleum Reservoir Engineering.. 225-234. 3-159 .R. : Horizontal Wells for the Recovery of Oil.L. Carman. Babu..S. SPE. (Editor-in-Chief) : Petroleum Engineering Handbook. 1986. J. : Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Carpenter. G. J. 1972. J. Bear... No. Archie. Inst. England.S. and Wall. G. and Jaeger.C. London. : "Fluid Flow Through A Granular Bed. Eng.. Soc. C.” Trans.C. and Whiting. C.W. Carman. G. Bradley. New York. G. : Conduction of Heat in Solids. : "Productivity of a Horizontal Well. Gulf Coast Assoc.E. H. :“The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics. 1994.” J. Canadian Inst. A. 1940).G. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Tulsa.K.B. 1989) 417-421.B. Calgary. 54-62. : Petroleum Engineering. Bass. 5 (May 1950) 943-961. P.V. D. REFEREENCES Amyx.” Trans. Petroleum Publishing Company. Elsevier. Vol. Min. Permeability and Grain Size Distribution of Sands and Sandstones. USBM (Oct. Anderson. Archer. The Netherlands and Belgium. Oxford (1959). R.” Proceedings of the Sixth International Sedimentological Congress. 34. Texas. Graham & Trotman. Chilingar. of Geol. and Spencer." SPE Reservoir Engineering (November. : “Measurements of the Compressibility of Consolidated Oil-Bearing Sandstones. 1987.S. Butler. London (1937) 15. 2nd edition. Jr.” AAPG Bull. Petroleum Society.E. 1975.. Indus (1938) 57. Met. : “Method for Determining Permeability from Reservoir Rocks. Chem. :“Introduction to Petrophysics of Reservoir Rocks.M. and Odeh. Soc.. D. Berg. Oklahoma.: “Relationship Between Porosity. H. New York. : "Determination of the Specific Surface of Powders. R.M.” RI 3540. : Coring and Core Analysis Handbook. J. positive length of the porous medium between points 1 and 2 in the flow direction.” Trans. G. 1960. Richardson.Δh = ΔL = positive difference in the hydraulic heads at points 1 and 2. P. 150-156. Carslaw.

A. L. 72‐75. Vol." World Oil (June.Fluid Transport and Pore Structure. and Kuchuk. : "The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Horizontal Wells. Corey. J.A. R.J. 3-160 . R. : "Anisotropy and Measurement of Air Permeability of Soil Clods. D. J. Collins. : "Evaluating Horizontal Versus Vertical Well Performance. F. : Porous Media .J. Freeze. : Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials. P. : Mechanics of Heterogeneous Fluids in Porous Media. (Dec. A.U van Straatan.A. Deltaic and Shallow Marine Deposits.R. : "Inflow Performance for Horizontal Wells. 1979. Hutta. 76 (1953) 127-313. New York." Producers Monthly. 1961. Vol. : "An Aanlysis of High Velocity Gas Flow Through Porous Media. J. : Basics of Reservoir Engineering. 1993. Nov.T. L. 1977.24. : "The Effect of Overburden Pressure on Some Properties of Sandstones. 31. 26.F. 1979) 221. H. Englewood Cliffs. Colorado. Clarke. Eng. and Jargon. :"Reservoir Properties of Conglomerates and Conglomeratic Sandstones. New York. J." AAPG Bulletin.M.J. : Goundwater..R.34 and Oct.R." Soil Sci. F. 1984. Reiss. Pet. 1979.A. : "Evaluating Horizontal Versus Vertical Well Performance: Part 2. and Kirkham. Reprinted by Research & Engineering Consultants Inc. Dobrynin. R." paper SPE 13024. Dullien. Vol. : "Directional Permeability of Sandstones: A Test Technique. and Griffiths.1963. and Cherry. M. 1955. Goode. R. D. Firoozabadi." World Oil (April.” World Oil (June 1965) 116-119. Reprinted by the Petroleum Publishing Company. Cosse.. presented at the 59th SPE Annual Technical Meeting. Vol. J." SPE Reservoir Engineering (August.L.J.M.L. Gilman. Gilman." JPT (Feb. Academic Press. Ed. and Jargon. Dallas.R.E. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. : “How to Handle and Process Soft and Unconsolidated Cores. Texas. Giger.. : Special Core Analysis.P.A. 1990. 1992) 67-72.H. Elsevier. Jennings.H. and Katz. Editions Technip. 1976. J. Paris. F. Prentice-Hall. A. 1991) 319-323. Core Laboratories Inc. 1976. De Boodt. 63 (1979) 799-809.” Soc. 1992) 55-60. Fort Collins. and Jourdan. September 16-19. J.M.. V. 1962) 360-366. Water Resources Publications.

" Producers Monthly. B.J. D. : “Permeability as a Function of the Size Parameters of Unconsolidated Sand.. 1976.W. Tianjin. 504.M. Pet. W. Pollchick. and Storch. Houston. Maasland.” Drilling and Production Practices.P.C.D. Klinkenberg. Texas." paper SPE 16868. Karcher. Houston. W.J. presented at the 61st SPE Annual Technical Meeting. : "A Review of Horizontal Well and Drainhole Technology. Grummer.W. Krumbein. Tulsa. 1942." Proc.. Mayer-Gurr.K." US Bureau of Mines Bull.H. Tech. : Properties of Reservoir Rocks. Amer. L. D. 1987. : "A Critical Review of Core Analysis Techniques” The Jour. Can. Brice. S. Soc.E. and Monk. presented at the 63rd SPE Annual Technical Meeting. F. Int. 1492. Monicard. : Horizontal Well Technology. R. 1980.. Joshi.A. 1.” The Log Analyst (May-June 1994) 38-62. October 2-5. 3-161 . and Combe. M. : "Production Forecasting Methods for Horizontal Wells. M.K. F.V. Leva. Nelson... : “The Permeability of Porous Media to Liquids and Gases. American Petroleum Institute (1941) 200. 1986. 18 (November 1948) 17-25. Vol. S. 19 (1955) 395-400. Keelan.Johnson. 1991." paper SPE 18300. P. :”Permeability-Porosity Relationships in Sedimentary Rocks. and Kirkham. H. Joshi. A.New Orleans. 1951. M. PennWell Publishing Co. Sherrard. Kuchuk. Tech. 4. and Hughes. No. J. 1988. Gulf Publishing Company. Soil Sci. Vol.: "Directional Permeability Measurements and their Significance. : "Fluid Flow Through Packed and Packed and Fluidized Systems. New York. D. Joshi. S." paper SPE 17580. R. Weintraub. M. September 27-30. Giger. B." paper SPE 15430. 1988. (April-June 1972) 42-55. Goode.. LA.H.M. No. P. John Wiley & Sons. D. R. and Thambynayagam. G. China. Texas.” Amer. : "Some Practical Formulas to Predict Horizontal Well Behavior. October 5-8. Mining and Met. M. November 1-4. D. : "Theory and Measurement of Anisotropic Air Permeability in Soil Clods. presented at the 62nd SPE Annual Technical Meeting. presented at the SPE International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering. D. Pub. Dallas. No.J.: "Pressure Transient Analysis and Inflow Performance for Horizontal Wells... TX. : Petroleum Engineering.

A. Numerical Inverse of Laplace Transforms.” Section 16. Wyllie.. Masson. Vol. E. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Inc. 3-162 .. H. Ysreal. E. S. 2 (Feb. 141-148. : "Performance of Horizontal Wells. : Stability Theory and Viscous Fingering in Porous Media. Toronto. Oklahoma. : Oil Reservoir Engineering. : "Permeability.M. No. 1988.W.J..O..: "Fluid Flow Through Unconsolidated Porous Aggregates” Industrial and Engineering Chem. W.” D-5. AIME (1970) 249. : "Application of Electrical Resistivity Measurements to Problems of Fluid Flow in Porous Media. Shearin. 1998. Measured” 1948) 173-177. McGraw-Hill Book Company. S.J. 13. Tulsa. D.. Ryder. M.R." AAPG Bull.J. 36.Ozkan.H. University of Tulsa. Winsauer. Jr. Streeter. Wyllie. Alberta.” Soc. 7. 47 (1955) 1379-1388. (June 1970) 171-180.I. 1952) 253-277. : "Resistivity of Brine-Saturated Sands in Relation to Pore Geometry. H. Montgomery.R.F.G. Eng.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. Pirson.. (1945) 153. : “Algorithm 368. Pet. P. 1961.E.” Proc. and Ramey.J.M. Peters. University of Toronto Press. and Williams. 3/4. (May 1992) 283-296. Jr.S. J.B. : “Flow Through Porous Media.R. H..48.” AAPG Bull. New York. E. N. Rose. Edited by V. New York.J. John Wiley and Sons.. Vol.M. Stehfest. Vol. Inc. World Oil (May Scheidegger. : The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. : “Characterization of Heterogeneities in Permeable Media with Computed Tomography Imaging. H. A. A. Vol.. 36. and Gregory. 1958. Handbook of Fluid Dynamics.J. : “The Effect of Temperature on Irreducible Water Saturation and Relative Permeability of Unconsolidated Sands. 1952) 359-403. S. No. E. Richardson.1 (1970) 47. III. and Spangler. 2 (Feb. No. Hossain.K. No. Inst. January 1979. Edmonton. Effective. 1960. New York. University of Alberta. Communications of the ACM. Canada. Mech.. H. J. M. Poston. Vose. and Afzal. : “ An Investigation into the the Laws of Flow of Fluids Through Granular Material. Peters. Trans. : Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Guide to Monte Carlo Simulation Modeling.C.. Absolute. M.. Eng..E. PhD Dissertation." PhD Dissertation. M.

porosity. heterogeneous and very often anisotropic in nature. Variability of rock and fluid properties is a reality that must be dealt with in petroleum resource assessment and reservoir performance prediction. relative permeability. fluid saturation. This means that the petrophysical properties of interest such as permeability. every one of the nearly one million grid blocks requires the assignment of porosity. in general. It was found that the permeability. Suppose it has been decided to model reservoir performance through numerical simulation. Evidence of heterogeneity was seen in the results of the core analysis presented in Table 2. absolute permeability.CHAPTER 4 HETEROGENEITY 4. lithology and others vary in space both vertically and laterally. Such a simulation model 4-1 . How can one generate the values of the rock and fluid properties to be used in the simulation model? One may assume that the reservoir is homogeneous and use the same value of each property in every grid block.1 INTRODUCTION Petroleum reservoir rocks are. In the construction of the simulation model. porosity and fluid saturations varied from top to bottom within the same reservoir. capillary pressure and various fluid properties.2.

This model also ignores the geology of the reservoir and the general observation that data from nearby locations tend to be similar whereas data from locations that are far apart tend to be dissimilar.ignores the geology of the reservoir and will consequently yield misleading and optimistic results. petrophysical data tend to be correlated. There is therefore a need to devise a rational way to estimate the petrophysical properties for the reservoir simulation model. The estimation of reservoir properties at locations for which no measurements have been made can be accomplished with a new type of statistics known as geostatistics (compare with geochemistry and geophysics). independent and uncorrelated data whereas geostatistics is based on random and spatially correlated data. one must first characterize the heterogeneity from the samples of the property that have been collected from core analysis. Geostatistics is the practical applications of the Theory of Regionalized Variables developed by Georges Matheron in Fontainebleau. Of course. The basic concepts of geostatistics are presented in this chapter. However. well logs and other sources. Before estimating the values of the properties of the heterogeneous reservoir. because wells sample only a very minute volume of the reservoir. In other words. the properties in the bulk of the reservoir remain unknown and must be estimated by other means. an 4–2 . One may resort to populating the grid blocks with property values from a random number generator. some of these properties can be estimated from core analysis and well logs. The main difference between ordinary statistics and geostatistics is that ordinary statistics is typically based on random. After characterizing the nature of the heterogeneity.

2) gives the geometric mean as Φ geom = N Φ1Φ 2 Φ 3 .1) Geometric Mean The geometric mean is a better measure of central tendency for data from a log normal distribution than the arithmetic mean. Φ 3 .2.1 Measures of central tendency Mean The mean (arithmetic mean) is the best known measure of central tendency..2) Taking antilog in Eq. the data are arranged in ascending (or 4-3 ..estimation is undertaken that honors both the measured data (samples) and the structure of the heterogeneity observed from the samples. To determine the median.(4. 4..Φ N Median (4.2 MEASURES OF CENTRAL TENDENCY AND VARIABILITY (HETEROGENEITY) 4. the mean (arithmetic mean) of the sample data is defined as Φ= 1 N ∑Φ i =1 i= N i (4. The geometric mean is defined as ln Φ geom = 1 N ∑ ln Φ i =1 i= N i (4. Given N sample data Φ1 ... Φ N ..3) The median of a sample data set is found by determining that value of Φ i which has equal number of values above it and below it. Φ 2 .

The mode is useful primarily when there is a single sharp maximum. If the number of data N is odd.6) The standard deviation is the positive square root of the variance and is given by 4–4 .5) Mode The mode of a probability distribution p ( Φ ) is the value of Φ at which the probability distribution is a maximum. 4.2. with two relative maxima. the mean and median are not very useful as measures of central tendency.. in which case the mode estimates the central value. a distribution is bimodal.4) If N is even. In such a case..Φ N ) = s = ∑ ( Φi − Φ ) N − 1 i =1 2 2 (4.2 Measures of Variability (Heterogeneity or Spread) Variance The most useful measure of variability around the central value is the variance defined for sample data as 1 i= N Var ( Φ1.descending) order. Sometimes. one may wish to know the two modes individually. then the median is determined from the sorted data as Φ median = Φ ( N +1) / 2 for N odd (4. then the mean of the two most central values is used to calculate the median as Φ median = 1 Φ N / 2 + Φ ( N / 2)+1 2 ( ) for N even (4. For a bimodal distribution.

at least when the central portion is used.. The data are plotted on a log-normal probability graph paper as shown in Figure 4. which is one 4-5 . where N is the number of samples. the percent greater than or equal to value is normalized by N+1.1) . which are not present on the probability scale.1 k50 (4.1 is the permeability value at ( % ≥ 84.Φ N ) = Var ( Φ1.7) Dykstra-Parsons Coefficient of Variation A measure of permeability variability that is widely used in the petroleum industry is the Dykstra-Parsons (1950) coefficient of variation.8) where k50 is the permeability value at ( % ≥ 50 ) . V. coefficient of permeability variation. The calculation of the Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of permeability variation involves plotting the frequency distribution of the permeability data on a log-normal probability graph paper. Table 4. is defined as V= k50 − k84. V. Note that to avoid values of 0 or 100%.1. This coefficient of variation is determined based on the assumption that permeability data are drawn from a log normal distribution.Φ N ) (4. such a plot gives a straight line. which is the log mean permeability and k84.s ( Φ1. This is done by arranging the permeability values in descending order and then calculating for each permeability.1 shows an example calculation.. Normally. distribution The midpoint of the permeability The Dykstra-Parsons ( % ≥ 50 ) is the median permeability. the percent of the samples with permeabilities greater than or equal to that value...

1.1. N+1 = 20 k50 = 17.standard deviation from the mean. Calculation of Dykstra-Parsons Coefficient of Variation (V) k (md) 100 65 50 32 29 27 27 23 23 18 17 17 16 8 7 7 6 4 1 No of Samples >= k 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 % >= k 5 10 15 20 25 35 45 50 60 65 70 80 85 90 95 4–6 . For the data of Table 4.1 = = 0.1 = 6.8 Table 4.1 md V= k50 − k84.8 md k84.8 − 6.1 17.1 and Figure 4.66 k50 17.

1.5 and 0. A homogeneous reservoir has a coefficient of permeability variation that approaches 0 whereas an extremely heterogeneous reservoir has a coefficient of permeability variation that approaches 1. corresponding Dykstra-Parsons coefficients.Figure 4. Petroleum reservoirs typically have Dykstra-Parsons coefficients of permeability variation between 0. Figure 4. Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of variation is a dimensionless number that ranges from 0 to 1.9. Log normal permeability distribution.2 shows theoretical log normal permeability distributions and their 4-7 .

Figure 4.2 as Lorenz Coefficient = area ABCA area ADCA (4. 2003). defined from Figure 4.9) 4–8 .3 shows the plot of cumulative kh versus cumulative φh for determining the Lorenz coefficient. The Lorenz coefficient of variation is obtained by plotting a graph of cumulative kh versus cumulative φh. Table 4. sometimes called a flow capacity plot.2 shows an example calculation The Lorenz coefficient is whereas Figure 4.2. Theoretical log normal permeability distributions and their corresponding Dykstra-Parsons coefficients (Carlson. Lorenz Coefficient Another measure of heterogeneity used in the petroleum industry is the Lorenz coefficient .

2 2822. 8 50231.280 7.799 0. Unfortunately.800 4.903 0.292 0.777 2. Several different permeability distributions can give the same value of Lorenz coefficient.0 9409.20 0.140 0.4 Σkh (md-ft) 0.824 6.232 0.564 0. the Lorenz coefficient is very similar to the DykstraParsons coefficient of permeability variation.4 2.4 1085.21 0.19 0. 8 5280. 1 71024.20 0.2 is about 0.399 1.20 0.000 35542.65.222 0.1 2. Table 4. 9 0.22 0.000 3.000 0. Calculation of Lorenz Coefficient of Variation h (ft) 8.0 3.0 3720.078 0.695 0. The Lorenz coefficient of variation also varies from 0 to 1.where ABCA is the cross-hatched area in the figure and ADCA is the triangle below the cross-hatched area.0 4.440 2. 5 72109.277 0. 9 68202.766 1.459 0.653 1. From Figure 4.335 0.2.6 6.623 0.22 0. 9 61846.782 1.0 9. the Lorenz coefficient is not a unique measure of reservoir heterogeneity.810 0.432 8. the Lorenz coefficient of the data of Table 4. 8 40822.782 Σkh/Sumk h (ft) (ft) 0.7 5.1 7895. For log-normal permeability distribtutions.999 0.0 6355.798 1.105 0.999 0.16 kh (md-ft) 35542.2 . 9 58126.168 0.7 k (md) 4388 2640 2543 1579 930 662 441 402 φ (fraction) 0.062 φh Σφh Σφh/Sumφh 4-9 .

4 88988.0 3775.455 10.003 0.17 0.836 0.557 0.578 0. 6 84341.0 105.000 Sumφh = 1.2 7.444 1.5.331 0.735 14.998 1. 5 83691.992 0.440 0.840 3.7 288.18 0.616 1.056 2.120 1. 9 74355.1 9.6 3.8 401 378 267 250 249 232 200 136 98 47 30 28 16 13 0.886 0.19 0.622 0. 4 87817.309 26.6 1480.0 4.20 0. 5 88988.865 0.783 19.6 10.19 0.577 9. 5 78447.17 0. 2 85821.000 4–10 .737 0.995 0.8 474.1 5. 9 0.8 7. 9 88579.22 0.212 28.924 0.6 205.623 21.17 0. 2 87072.411 0.909 16.21 0.882 0.381 0.1 649.067 22.595 1.906 15.0 1068.987 0.919 1.2 744.978 0.18 0. 2 88291.6 15.21 0.895 11.804 0.714 25.577 0.940 0.525 17. 9 88783.986 24.6 3024.0 1469.9 2.964 0.171 1.6 8.728 0.687 0.4 9.258 1.997 0.522 0.365 28.870 0.0 15.0 1251.840 1.5 6.923 1. 5 77379. 5 82222. 9 88677.948 0.20 0.16 0.14 Sumkh = 2245.0 98.

It is well known that permeability and other petrophysical properties of reservoir rocks are not randomly distributed but are spatially correlated. 4.4 shows the spatial distributions of a petrophysical property. Flow capacity distribution.3. measured at equally spaced coordinates in two linear reservoirs A and B. they provide no information on the spatial relationship between the permeability values.Figure 4. There is a need for other measures of heterogeneity that take into account the spatial correlation of the data. Φ . While the Dykstra-Parsons and Lorenz coefficients give quantitative measures of the permeability variation. Which of the two reservoirs is more heterogeneous with respect to the property Φ ? Most professionals will say that reservoir 4-11 .3 MEASURES OF SPATIAL CONTINUITY Figure 4.

A is more heterogeneous than reservoir B. the spatial correlation structure of the property must be taken into account. the degree of heterogeneity of the two reservoirs is the same. the mean of Φ is 5. by the usual measure of ordinary statistics. to fully characterize heterogeneity. In reservoir A. it is distributed in an orderly and continuous fashion. the property appears to be randomly distributed in space whereas in reservoir B. Yet.0. there is something about the two reservoirs that leads one to conclude that A is more heterogeneous than B. Thus. a careful examination of the numerical values of the property shows them to be the same in both reservoirs. It is the spatial arrangement of the values of the property relative to each that leads one to conclude that A is more heterogeneous than B. However. 4–12 . the variance is 6.58. For both reservoirs. Thus. Three related functions are normally used to characterize the spatial continuity of the data from a heterogeneous reservoir. These are (1) the variogram (semi-variogram).67 and the standard deviation is 2. (2) the covariance function and (3) the correlation coefficient function.

Spatial distribution of a petrophysical property in two linear reservoirs A and B. 4-13 .4.Figure 4.

3.5 shows an ideal variogram. each numerical ⎣ ⎦ value of γ is the semivariance of ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎤ for a lag distance h and ⎣ ⎦ the function γ (h) is the variogram or semivariogram.1. Φ ( x) = Φ ( x + h) = Nh = Examination of Eq. Figure 4. Thus. The variogram is defined as γ (h) = Var ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 2 = ∑ ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 2Nh 2 (4. where the mean of ⎡ Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎤ is normally assumed to be zero.(4. 4–14 . The lag distance at which the variogram levels off (a in the figure) is defined as the correlation length.4.10) where γ h = = semivariance lag distance value of property at location x value of property at location x+h number of data pairs separated by the distance h. Variogram Definition The variogram is a function obtained by plotting the semivariance of the differences between the properties at two locations separated by a distance h versus h. It starts at zero and increases with increasing lag distance until a certain distance is reached at which it levels off and becomes constant.10) shows that each numerical value of γ is the variance of ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ divided by 2.

The sill is the semivariance of the entire data set. will be different in different directions. Typical variogram hidden in the variogram are the variance and standard deviation of the data set.or the range of influence. Figure 4. and the value of the variogram at this point is called the sill. Thus. and in general. the range of influence of one value on its neighbors increases up to the correlation length. the usual measures of heterogeneity of ordinary statistics. At lag distances beyond the correlation length. the data are no longer correlated. With increasing correlation length. The variogram and correlation length are directional quantities (anisotropy again). the spatial distribution of the property is fully random. 4-15 .5. If the correlation length is zero.

By contrast. The value of the variogram at the discontinuity (Co in the figure) is known as the nugget effect. a term that originates from the mining industry which was the first industry to widely apply geostatistics to estimate ore grade. Variograms come in different shapes depending on the underlying geological structure of the heterogeneity. Therefore. 4–16 .4. which indicates that the values of the property are randomly distributed in space as is apparent from Figure 4. Figure 4. the variogram for reservoir B is continuous for all lag distances. It should be emphasized that not all variograms have a nugget effect.Sometimes. let us compare the variograms for reservoirs A and B as shown in Figure 4.5 for all lag distances.5. The constant average value can be viewed as a pure nugget effect. the variogram (and later the covariance and correlation functions) does capture the spatial continuity of the data.6. an indication of the orderly and continuous spatial distribution of the property as evident in Figure 4. a sill or even a correlation length.4. the variogram has a discontinuity at the origin as shown in Figure 4. In order to demonstrate that the variogram does capture the spatial continuity of the data from a heterogeneous reservoir.5 was presented as one possible variogram shape to introduce the general features of the function and the associated nomenclature. The variogram for reservoir A is cyclical with a constant average value of about 5.

6.3. How to Calculate the Variogram Let us consider the simple case of a linear reservoir in which the property Φ is measured at 10 equally spaced locations with a distance of Δx between each datum.(4. Let the values of the property at locations 1 through 10 be Φ1 .. the semivariance for h = 0 can be obtained by inspection as γ(0) = 0. Φ 2 ...4. To compute the semivariance at each lag distance. Comparison of the variograms for reservoirs A and B of Figure 4. The 4-17 . Φ10 ..Figure 4. one can generate a table of Φ ( x ) and Φ ( x + h ) for each lag distance as shown in Table 4. the semivariances can easily be calculated with Eq.10). Φ 3 . In fact. Using the entries in the table.

3. 1. 2. The variogram is a non-negative function. Therefore. decreases as h increases. The number of data pairs. Table 4. Nh. the variogram is typically truncated beyond h = NΔx /2. the reduction in Nh causes the variogram to fluctuate excessively and unmeaningfully. 4–18 .semivariance at h = 0 is always equal to 0 even if the variogram has a nugget effect. Beyond h = NΔx/2. Table of Φ(x) and Φ(x+h) for Computing Semivariances of Sample Data h=0 Nh = 10 Φ(x ) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 Φ (x+h) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 Φ(x ) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ (x+h) Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 h = Δx Nh = 9 Φ(x ) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ (x+h) Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 h = 2Δx Nh = 8 ) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 h = 3Δx Nh = 7 Φ(x Φ (x+h) Φ(x) Φ (x+h) Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 Φ(x) Φ (x+h) Φ1 Φ2 Φ3 Φ4 Φ5 Φ6 Φ7 Φ8 Φ9 Φ10 h = 4Δx Nh = 6 h = 5Δx Nh = 5 The following observations can be made about the calculation of semivariances and the variogram.

Here is one possible algorithm.7. the following data pairs: (Φ i −Φj) 2 2 for all the data pairs. a different computational strategy must be used. there will be 45 data pairs.. 2 2 2 ( Φ − Φ1 ) . there will be given by NC2 data pairs in the set where NC2 is the combination of N things taken 2 at a time and is N C2 = N ( N − 1) N! = 2 ( N − 2 )!2! (4.(4. The first task is to compute and store the lag distances. The algorithm is as x2 − x1 x3 − x1 . compute and store sequentially.11). If there are N data points. 2. Consider the non-uniformly distributed data at ten locations in a linear reservoir as shown in Figure 4. hij. and the corresponding values of follows: 1. The variogram can be computed even for irregularly spaced data. In this case.3.11) For 10 data points. Create two one-dimensional arrays of size equal to the number of data pairs. Visit location 1. 10 2 2 4-19 .. 3 2 2 ( Φ − Φ1 ) . x10 − x1 ( Φ − Φ1 ) . Let these be H(M) and B(M) where M is the number of data pairs as determined from Eq.

Irregularly spaced data.7. 4.Figure 4. 3. Move to location 2 and continue to compute and store the following data in the arrays 4–20 . Eliminate Φ1 from the data set to prevent duplication. where the first number is stored in array H and the second number is stored in array B.

In constructing the bins. compute and plot 1 ( Φi − Φ j ) 1 versus ∑ hij ∑ 2 n n n n 2 where n is the number of data points in the bin. hij. 10 2 2 7.8. which can be different for each bin.8. there should be enough data points in each bin to prevent the 4-21 . that were computed as xi − x j . Divide the data in the scatter diagram into bins as shown in Figure 4. Such a scatter plot is shown in Figure 4.. 6. 8. x10 − x2 5. Continue to compute and fill the arrays by visiting each location in the manner described above until the last data pair is added to the array. (Φ − Φ2 ) . Perform a scatter plot of B(i) versus H(i).. 3 2 2 2 (Φ − Φ2 ) . 10 2 2 Eliminate Φ 2 from the data set to avoid duplication. where array H now contains the lag distances. For each bin.x3 − x2 x4 − x2 . 4 2 (Φ − Φ2 ) . The last data pair for our example will be x10 − x9 ( Φ − Φ9 ) .

variogram from fluctuating excessively. 9. Several bin sizes may be tried to determine the optimum bin sizes. Scatter plot for computing experimental variogram. 4–22 .8. The plot in step 8 is the experimental variogram as shown in Figure 4.8. Figure 4.

the resulting distribution is the same as in reservoir B.4.4 shows a data set in which data are missing from location 7. those locations should be skipped over. In this example. after subtracting the drift. the following data set from a linear reservoir C has an underlying trend or drift of the form Φ trend = 1 + x : 3 6 9 12 15 15 14 13 12 This data set is presented in Figure 4. Calculate the semivariance of the permeability (NOT the natural log of permeability) at lag distances of 1 foot and 2 feet. If there is an underlying trend in the data. the resulting variogram is lower and reaches the sill at h = 4 km.9. If data are missing from some locations. Figure 4. Start your calculations from the top of the reservoir and work your way down. This trend or drift should be subtracted from the data before the variogram is computed. Thus. Table 4. 5. the trend should be subtracted from the data before computing the variogram.10 compares the variograms for reservoir C with and without the underlying trend or drift. whereas after removing the drift. the true variogram for reservoir C is the same as for reservoir B. 4-23 . For example. This is the true experimental variogram for reservoir C. Resist the temptation to interpolate and fill in the missing data. The variogram with the drift is an ever increasing function of h because of the underlying trend and will never reach the sill.

4–24 .9. Variograms for reservoir C with and without the underlying trend or drift. Figure 4. Spatial distribution of a petrophysical property in a linear reservoir C with an underlying trend or drift.10.Figure 4.

7 Porosit y Permeabilit y 6.9 12.3 25 17 4.4. NE-SW and NW-SE.Table 4.8 6. the variogram can still be computed using the basic method outlined for 1D data.7 7. Relativ e Depth (ft) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 5. 4-25 .2 14.7 (md) 93 18 8.7 16.5 4. E-W. In this case. Porosity and Permeability Distributions with Missing Data.11 shows the distribution of a petrophysical property in a 2D reservoir.4 21 10 1. the variogram should be computed in several directions to reveal any anisotropy that may be present. If the data are distributed in 2D or 3D.3 9.8 22 5.6 (%) 20 16. variograms should be computed in the following directions: N-S.5 5. In this case. Figure 4.

Φ(x+h) and Φ(x) are perfectly correlated and the data will follow the 45º line on the scatter plot as shown in Figure 4.14. As h increases. Unless you are already familiar with the variogram.11. 4–26 . 7. the cloud of data points scattered about the 45º line increases.Figure 4. you may not see what it has to do with spatial correlation of the data. For h = 0.12. Distribution of a petrophysical property in a twodimensional reservoir.3 have a lot to do with spatial correlation by plotting the scatter diagrams of Φ(x+h) versus Φ(x) for each value of h.13 and 4. We can see that the entries in Table 4. indicating less and less correlation between Φ(x+h) and Φ(x) as shown in Figures 4.

12. Scatter plot of Φ(x+h) versus Φ(x) for h = 0 km for reservoir B.Figure 4. 4-27 . Figure 4. Scatter plot of Φ(x+h) versus Φ(x) for h = 1 km for reservoir B.13.

The distance d from a datum point to the 45º line is given by ⎡Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x ) ⎤ ⎦ d = ⎡ Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x ) ⎤ cos 45 = ⎣ ⎣ ⎦ 2 ⎡Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x ) ⎤ ⎦ d = ⎡ Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x ) ⎤ cos 45 = ⎣ ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 2 2 2 (4.12) (4. the expectation of d2 is given by 4–28 . Consider the scatter plot shown in Figure 4.15.13) From statistics. Physical Meaning of the Variogram The scatter plot of Φ(x+h) versus Φ(x) at a fixed h can be used to derive the physical meaning of the variogram.Figure 4.14. Scatter plot of Φ(x+h) versus Φ(x) for h = 3 km for reservoir B.

After computing the experimental variogram. the variogram is the mean of d2 about the 45º line at each lag distance as a function of the lag distance h.14) Thus. a smooth theoretical 4-29 . Variogram Models The variogram is a means to an end not an end in itself. The h-scatter plot.E (d 2 ) = E ⎡Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x )⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 2 { 2 }= ⎡ ⎤ ∑ ⎣Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x ) ⎦ 2Nh 2 = γ ( h) (4. Figure 4. The variogram is used to quantify the correlation structure of the variable of interest for the purpose of estimation and conditional simulation. The variogram of the sample data is known as the experimental variogram.15.

1. whose coefficients are derived from the variogram. the need to fit a smooth and well behaved theoretical model to the rough experimental variogram for the purpose of estimation. Hence. The Spherical Model The spherical model is given by ⎛3 h 1 h3 ⎞ γ ( h ) = Co + C ⎜ − ⎟ for h < a ⎜ 2 a 2 a3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ γ ( h ) = Co + C for h ≥ a (4.variogram model is usually fitted to the experimental variogram and the model is then used for estimation.16) 4–30 . Popular variogram models include (1) the spherical model. (4) the linear model. Unless the variogram is well behaved. the simultaneous equations may not have a solution. (6) the nugget effect model. and (7) the cardinal sine model (also known as the hole effect model). As will be shown later. (3) the guassian model.15) where a is the correlation length or range. the estimation process involves the solution of a set of linear simultaneous algebraic equations. The Exponential Model The exponential model is given by ⎛h⎞ ⎛ −⎜ ⎟ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜1 − e ⎝ a ⎠ ⎟ γ ( h ) = Co + C ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (4. (5) the generalized linear model. 2. (2) the exponential model. Co is the nugget effect if present and C is the sill minus Co.

16. Note that there is no nugget effect in these figures. Figure 4. 4-31 . A comparison of the spherical and exponential models with the same range and sill.17 compares the two models with the same initial slope and sill.16 compares the spherical and the exponential models with the same range and sill whereas Figure 4.Figure 4.

C = 10 and a = 4 units.Figure 4. The Gaussian Model The Gaussian model is given by ⎛ h2 ⎞ ⎛ −⎜ 2 ⎟ ⎞ ⎜a ⎟ γ ( h ) = Co + C ⎜1 − e ⎝ ⎠ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (4.17) Figure 4. 4–32 .18 shows an example of a Gaussian model with Co = 0. 3. A comparison of the spherical and exponential models with the same initial slope and sill.17.

4.19) 4-33 . 5. This model does not have a sill.18) γ ( h ) = Co + m h α for 0 < α ≤ 2 (4.Figure 4. The Generalized Linear Model The generalized linear model is given by (4.18. Example Gaussian model. The Linear Model The linear model is given by γ ( h ) = Co + m h where m is the slope.

20) This model gives the variogram of a property that has a random spatial distribution. the model degenerates to the linear model. This model does not have a sill.19 compares the linear model to the generalized linear model. Figure 4. When α = 1. The Nugget Effect Model The nugget effect model is given by γ ( 0) = 0 γ ( h ) = Co for h > 0 (4.19.where m is a constant and α is an exponent between 0 and 2. It is basically a spherical model with a very 4–34 . Figure 4. 5. The linear model and the generalized linear model.

21 shows an example cardinal sine model with Co = 0.20 shows an example nugget effect model.small range of influence.20. The Cardinal Sine Model (Hole Effect Model) The cardinal sine model or hole effect model is given by γ ( h ) = Co + C ⎢1 − ⎣ ⎡ sin ( h / a ) ⎤ ⎥ h/a ⎦ (4. 4-35 . The nugget effect model. Figure 4. Figure 4. C = 10 and a = 1 unit. 6. The sinusoidal nature of the variogram is an indication of the periodic nature of the underlying heterogeneity.21) Figure 4.

To keep the magnitude of the 4–36 . The only restriction is that each of the combined models must be applied to all the lag distances. several models can be combined or nested to fit the experimental variogram. The cardinal sine model (hole effect model). If one model does not fit the experimental variogram. It is not permissible to apply a model up to a certain lag distance and then switch to a different model for the remaining lag distances. Fitting a Theoretical Variogram Model to an Experimental Variogram Every experimental variogram can be fitted with a theoretical variogram model.Figure 4. To demonstrate the procedure for fitting a theoretical model to an experimental variogram.2 and then fit a theoretical model to it. let us compute the experimental variogram for the permeability data from the results of the core analysis of Table 2. The procedure for fitting a theoretical model to an experimental variogram is a trial and error procedure.21.

545 5 384 5. fit a theoretical model to the experimental variogram. 1 2 3 4 Uncorrecte d Depth 4807.596 2 0. It should be noted that the transformation in this example does not imply that the permeability data is log normally distributed.variogram manageable. The transformation affects the magnitude of the variogram but not its shape.617 0.000 0.038 0.5 0. Such a transformation is frequently done in geostatistics to make the data more manageable. 5 4811.398 0.057 0.050 0. compute the variogram.000 k lnk 5 Correcte d lnk h (ft) With Drift Without Drift 6 7 γ(h) 8 γ(h) 4-37 .057 0.269 6 0. 5 4810. 5 4808.2.916 -3.682 -0. use the model to perform estimation and then transform the estimated data back to its original units. The transformation has been done purely for convenience.812 0 0. we compute the variogram for the natural log of the permeability rather than the permeability itself. Table 4.688 1 0.078 -0.5.512 3 0.740 4 0.591 4 275 5. The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 4. 6 108 4. 5 4809.468 2 221 5.618 3 211 5. 5 4812.488 1 59 4.352 0.362 XCoord 0 2. 5 4813. It is not unusual to transform the data.5. Variograms for Permeability Data of Table 2.951 1.037 5 0.051 0.049 0.

743 0.187 -0.979 0.606 0.271 20 0. 5 4824.335 11 0.098 0.077 0.054 0.061 0.505 13 0. 5 4825.075 0.528 10 0.632 17 40 3.097 21 0.260 16 0. 5 4828. 5 4817.623 8 290 5. 5 4820.990 0.064 0.641 10 278 5.561 0.065 0.115 0.065 0. 5 4830. 5 4821. 5 4819.574 4–38 .670 0.642 18 260 5. 5 4823.118 -0.583 0.780 12 167 5.432 22 0.057 0.485 16 266 5.004 0.073 9 0.068 0.248 19 0.034 15 0.664 14 0.420 23 0.105 0. 5 4827.689 -1.655 20 312 5.605 13 304 5. 23 405 6.074 0.002 7 0.632 9 170 5. 5 4829.628 15 191 5.672 17 0.585 -0.5 4814. 5 4818. 5 4815.057 12 0. 5 4816.163 18 0.628 0.136 0.644 8 0.717 0.472 0. 5 4822.787 22 395 5.769 21 272 5.728 11 238 5.252 -0.630 7 147 4.720 19 179 5.060 0.097 0.684 14 98 4.084 0. 5 4826.086 0.

5 4832.782 0.044 38 407 6.282 0. 5 4843. 5 4840.715 35 295 5.513 28 0. 5 4847.004 24 0.149 0.826 -0.343 34 332 5.5 4831.718 26 0.497 0. 5 4834.135 0.548 29 663 6.413 0.292 36 882 6.274 27 0. 5 4833.089 25 0.830 25 852 6. 5 4838.006 0.192 30 597 6. 5 4844.690 29 0.188 33 216 5. 5 4836.009 -0.397 0.687 -0. 5 4839. 5 4841.617 -0.392 0.946 24 275 5. 5 4835.805 -0.880 26 610 6. 5 4837.136 0. 5 4845.375 -0.109 0.172 -0.580 32 339 5.748 1.170 28 535 6. 5 40 479 6.965 27 406 6.073 0.092 31 434 6. 5 4842.701 4-39 .132 0.133 37 600 6.164 1.

4848. Figure 4. 5 4849. 5 41 42 43 44 0 139 135 0 4. Before addressing the problem of the underlying trend.934 4. let us fit a theoretical model to the experimental variogram to demonstrate the procedure. Experimental variogram for natural log of permeability for core analysis data. The ever increasing nature of the variogram indicates an underlying trend or drift in the permeability data.5. 5 4851.905 -1.22 shows the experimental variogram for the natural log of permeability.22. 5 4850.356 -1. 4–40 .422 Figure 4. lnk. The graph is the plot of the data in columns 6 and 7 of Table 4.

23.000101h 2 ⎜ 2 3 2 33 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ The nested model is of the form γ ( h ) = Spherical Model + Generalized Linear Model Figure 4.23 shows the fitted theoretical model from trial and error. Theoretical variogram model fit to the experimental variogram of core analysis data.027 + 0.025 ⎜ − ⎟ + 0.Figure 4. The nested model is ⎛3 h 1 h3 ⎞ γ ( h ) = 0. 4-41 .

Figure 4.24.0372 x + 4. This trend was subtracted from the lnk data to obtain the corrected lnk data shown in column 5 of Table 4. Permeability data showing underlying trend or drift. there is an underlying trend or drift in the permeability data.Let us now deal with the underlying trend in the permeability data. Clearly. Figure 4.24 shows a scatter plot of the log permeability data versus relative depth together with the regression line. 4–42 .7281 where x is the relative depth. The trend line is ln k = 0.5.

Figure 4.5. ⎜ 2 9 2 93 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ Figure 4. We see that after removing the underlying trend. 4-43 . the experimental variogram can be fitted with a spherical model of the form ⎛3 h 1 h3 ⎞ γ ( h ) = 0.25 shows the scatter plot for the corrected permeability data together with the regression line. Figure 4.25.35 ⎜ − ⎟. Permeability data after the drift has been removed.31 + 0. The experimental variogram is the graph of the data in columns 6 and 8 of Table 4.26 shows the experimental variogram and the theoretical model fit after the drift has been removed. the underlying trend has been removed. Clearly.

a sill of 0.27b. In Figure 4. the slopes of the variograms in the two directions are different.66 and a correlation length of 9 ft. 4–44 . the sills of the variograms in the two directions are the same but the correlations lengths are different. Variogram of natural log of permeability after removing the underlying trend.26.27a. Variogram Anisotropy Variograms computed in different directions can show anisotropy. We can compute the correlation lengths or the slopes of the variograms in different directions and plot them as Figure 4.The true variogram of the natural log of permeability has a nugget effect of 0.31. Figure 4.27 shows two such anisotropies. In Figure 4.

28. then the equivalent isotropic variogram is given by 2 ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎜ h 2 + ⎜ a1 ⎟ h 2 ⎟ γ (h) = γ1 ⎜ 1 ⎝ a2 ⎠ 2 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (4. If γ1(h) is the variogram in direction 1. 4-45 .23) for the case of the slope anisotropy.27.shown in Figure 4.22) for the case of the correlation length anisotropy and 2 ⎛ ⎛ slope1 ⎞ 2 ⎞ 2 γ ( h ) = γ 1 ⎜ h1 + ⎜ ⎟ h2 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ slope2 ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ (4. If the plot turns out to be an ellipse as shown in the figure. Figure 4. then a simple coordinate transformation can be used to compute an equivalent isotropic variogram. Geometric anisotropy.

Ellipses showing variogram anisotropy. because of layering.28.Figure 4. The overall variogram is then given by γ (h) = γ o ( h12 + h22 + h32 + γ v ( h3 ) ) (4.24) 4–46 . the anisotropy would be missed because. an isotropic component given by γ o ( h12 + h22 + h32 and a ) vertical component given by γ v ( h3 ) . If the variograms were computed only in the horizontal and vertical directions.28b shows the importance of computing the variograms in at least four directions in a 2D data set to reveal possible anisotropy. In this case. in the case shown in the figure. the variogram can be split into two components. Figure 4. In sedimentary rocks. the sill of the variogram in the vertical direction is usually different from that in the horizontal direction because the degree of heterogeneity normal to the layers is higher than along the layers. As a result. the correlation lengths in the vertical and horizontal directions are the same and would not reveal the presence of the anisotropy. the principal axes of the anisotropy make an angle of 45º with the vertical and horizontal axes.

Y and X) as shown in Figure 4. Orthogonal directions in which variograms were computed for CT data. Experimental variograms can be computed for any property that varies in space. Here.7 to 2. Each 3D image data set consisted of 128x128x50 voxels (volume elements) for a total of 812. 4-47 . The CT number is proportional to the bulk density of the sample and is similar to the measurements from a density log.10. For each sample.29. Figure 4. variograms were computed in three orthogonal directions (Z.200 data points.Example Experimental Variograms Presented in this section are the experimental variograms for the sandpack and Berea sandstone cores whose porosity distributions were presented in Figures 2. we present the variograms for the CT numbers of the dry scans of the sandpack and the Berea sandstone.29.

confirming the radial symmetry observed in the CT images of the sandpack. Figure 4.32 show the experimental variograms for the sandpack in the transverse and longitudinal directions.Figure 4.31 shows that the vertical and horizontal variograms are essentially the same.31 and 4. This is caused by the longitudinal heterogeneity introduced into the sandpack by the packing method. 4–48 .32) has a wavy or sinusoidal characteristic. This characteristic is known as a trend surface. The packing method introduced radial and longitudinal heterogeneities into the sandpack. Figures 4. The variogram in the longitudinal direction (Figure 4.30 shows CT images for a vertical slice and a typical cross-sectional slice of the sandpack.

30. 4-49 . Experimental variograms for sandpack in the transeverse directions (Y.31. Figure 4. Z) (Peters and Afzal. 1992). 1992). Vertical and cross-sectional slices of CT image of dry sandpack (Peters and Afzal.Figure 4.

Figure 4.33 shows CT images for a vertical slice and a typical cross-sectional slice of the Berea sandstone.34 and 4. 1992). This is caused by the layering in that direction.35 shows that the correlation length in the longitudinal direction (X-direction) is about 40 cm. 4–50 . As expected. the magnitudes of the variograms show that the medium is more heterogeneous in the Y-direction (across the layers) than in the Z-direction (along the layers). Clearly. Figure 4.32. Figures 4.Figure 4.34 shows a wavy characteristic in the vertical direction (Y-direction). in this case. the x-ray absorption coefficient of a sandpack and a Berea sandstone. the variograms are able to characterize the spatial structure of the heterogeneity in the property of interest. Experimental variogram for sandpack in the longitudinal direction (X) (Peters and Afzal. Figure 4.35 show the experimental variograms for the Berea sandstone in the transverse and longitudinal directions.

4-51 .

1992). Vertical and cross-sectional slices of CT image of dry Berea sandstone (Peters and Afzal. Z) (Peters and Afzal.Figure 4. Experimental variograms for Berea sandstone in the transeverse directions (Y. Figure 4. 1992).34. 4–52 .33.

2. Experimental variogram for Berea sandstone in the longitudinal direction (X) (Peters and Afzal.3. 4-53 . 2. The covariance function gives the strength of the linear relationship between Φ(x) and Φ (x+h). the covariance function at a lag distance h is defined as C (h) = ∑ ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x )⎤ ⎡Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x + h )⎤ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ Nh −1 (4. 1992). The covariance function can be positive or negative.25) The following observations can be made about the covariance function: 1. Covariance (Autocovariance) Function Definition For sample data. Recall that the variogram function was non-negative.35. 4.Figure 4.

Because the covariance function depends on the units of measurement of Φ (x). The fact that C(0) is the variance of the data set is apparent from the entries in Table 4. 5. 4–54 . In this case.27) Thus. the covariance function also has hidden in it the usual measure of variability by ordinary statistics. Φ i and Φ j as the locations are visited.3 for h = 0. 4. The variance of the data is given by ⎤ ⎡Φ ⎤ ⎡Φ ∑ ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x )⎦ ⎣ ( x ) − Φ ( x )⎦ ∑ ⎣ ( x ) − Φ ( x )⎤ ⎣ ⎦ N −1 = N −1 2 C (0) = = s2 (4.3. The table of data used to calculate the variogram can also be used to calculate the covariance function. three one-dimensional arrays should be used to store hij. it is not always possible to tell from the magnitude of the covariance if the linear correlation is strong or weak. s2.26) where C(0) is the covariance at a zero lag distance and is equal the variance of the data. It will be shown that for a stationary random field. The algorithm for computing the covariance function for unequally spaced data is similar to that for computing the variogram. the variogram and the covariance function are related by the equation γ ( h ) = C ( 0) − C ( h) (4. like the variogram. A better measure of the strength of the linear correlation is a dimensionless covariance function known as correlation coefficient to be discussed next.

6 shows that the covariance function is roughly the variogram turned up-side-down about the h-axis in the spirit of Eq. like the variogram.26). 4-55 .(4. The covariance function for reservoir A is periodic indicating the random spatial distribution of the property in reservoir A whereas the covariance function for reservoir B is smooth and orderly. a comparison of Figures 4.36. In fact. A comparison of the covariance functions for reservoirs A and B.Figure 4.37 and 4.36 and 4. the covariance function captures the correlation structure of the spatial distribution of the property of interest and can be used for the purpose of estimation instead of the variogram. which compare the variogram and the covariance function for each reservoir.36 shows a comparison of the covariance functions for reservoirs A and B.38. Thus. This observation is more apparent in Figures 4. Figure 4. indicating the continuous nature of the spatial distribution of the property in reservoir B. These are the same features observed in the variograms.

A comparison of the variogram and the covariance function for reservoir A. 4–56 .Figure 4.37.

Figure 4. 4-57 . then all the areas are negative and the covariance will show a strong negative correlation.38. The sum of the shaded areas divided by (Nh-1) is the covariance function at that lag distance.40. Figure 4. A comparison of the variogram and the covariance function for reservoir B. If the scatter plots are concentrated along the axis AB in Figure 4. then all the areas will be positive and the covariance will show a strong positive correlation.39 shows the scatter plot for the covariation of ⎡Φ ( x + h ) − Φ ( x + h ) ⎦ versus ⎡Φ ( x ) − Φ ( x ) ⎤ at a fixed ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ lag distance h. the covariance can be positive or negative. Because the areas can be positive or negative depending on which quadrant the scatter plot data fall in. If the scatter plots are concentrated along the axis CD. Physical Meaning of Covariance Function The covariance function measures the covariation of Φ(x) and Φ(x+h) about their respective means.

Scatter plot of covariation at a fixed lag distance. 4–58 .Figure 4.39.

37. the covariance function will be negative at this lag distance as can be confirmed in Figure 4. Patterns of covariation at a fixed lag distance. Therefore.Figure 4. Figure 4.36 or 4.41 shows the scatter plot of the covariation for reservoir A at a lag distance of 1 unit. The data are concentrated in the quadrants in which all the areas are negative.40. 4-59 .

A cross covariance function can be computed between two different variables such as permeability and porosity. the cross covariance is defined as C ( k . Correlation Coefficient Function (Autocorrelation Function) Definition The correlation coefficient function is the dimensionless version of the covariance function and is defined as 4–60 .φ ) = ∑ ( k − k ) (φ − φ ) i i N −1 (4. In that case.3.41.3.28) 4.Figure 4. Covariation for reservoir A at a lag distance of 1 unit.

Like the covariance function. the correlation coefficient function gives the strength of the linear relationship between Φ(x) and Φ(x+h).42. 2. The following observations can be made about the correlation coefficient function. The correlation coefficient function is dimensionless and can vary in value from –1 to +1 as may be seen in Figure 4. which shows the correlation coefficient function for reservoir A. Figure 4. 1.29) where sΦ( x ) is the standard deviation of Φ ( x ) and sΦ( x + h ) is the standard deviation of Φ ( x + h ) .ρ (h) = C (h) sΦ( x ) sΦ( x + h ) (4. Correlation coefficient function for reservoir A. 4-61 .42.

3. A cross correlation function between two variables such as permeability and porosity can be computed as ρ ( k . If Φ (x) and Φ (x+h) are independent. 6.4 PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS There are several probability distributions in statistics. Based on core analyses and field 4–62 . the correlation coefficient will be negative. The sign of the correlation coefficient indicates the nature of the correlation. the correlation coefficient will be positive.φ ) sk sφ (4.30) 4. If low Φ (x) are paired with high Φ (x+h) or high Φ (x) are paired with low Φ (x+h). then the correlation coefficient (and the covariance) will be zero. A zero correlation coefficient (or covariance) does not necessarily mean that Φ (x) and Φ (x+h) are independent. 4.φ ) = C ( k . Remember that the correlation coefficient is a test for a linear relationship not a quadratic relationship. but only the normal and the log normal distributions are presented in this section because they are the two distributions most commonly observed in petrophysical properties. 5. The magnitude of the correlation coefficient function is a measure of the strength of the linear relationship between Φ(x) and Φ (x+h). If low Φ (x) are paired with low Φ (x+h) or high Φ (x) are paired with high Φ (x+h). They could be related as a quadratic or other nonlinear function.

is given by ⎡ ( x − μ )2 ⎤ 1 P ( x) = exp ⎢ − ⎥ for − ∞ ≤ x ≤ ∞ 2σ 2 ⎥ σ 2π ⎢ ⎣ ⎦ (4. 4.9 and 2.measurements. The distribution is characterized by two parameters. the mean (μ) and the standard deviation (σ). The distribution is centered on the mean and is symmetric about the mean. also commonly known as the Gaussian.33) 4-63 .43 shows a normal distribution with μ = 5 and standard σ = 4. Note that the distribution extends from −∞ to +∞ .4. For this distribution.31) where x is a random variable and μ is the mean. Figure 4. all the measures of the central tendency of the distribution (mean. median and mode) have the same numerical value.10) whereas permeability tends to follow a log normal distribution.1 Normal (Gaussian) Distribution The probability density function for a normal distribution. it has been observed that porosity tends to follow a normal distribution (see Figures 2. Using the transformation z= x−μ σ (4. σ2 is the variance and σ is the standard deviation of the distribution.32) all normal distributions can be can standardized as ⎛ z2 ⎞ 1 exp ⎜ − ⎟ for − ∞ ≤ z ≤ +∞ 2π ⎝ 2⎠ P( z) = (4.

Normal (Gaussian) distribution with μ = 5 and σ = 4. about 68% of the data are contained within one standard deviation below and above the mean.9500 P ( z ≤ 2σ ) = 0. Thus. of standard deviation. Also shown are the areas under the curve for certain ranges of the horizontal axis.96σ ) = 0. for a normal distribution.35) (4.43.36) 4–64 . For example. the following are true P ( z ≤ σ ) = 0.9544 (4.6826 P ( z ≤ 1.44 shows a standard normal distribution with the horizontal axis calibrated in units Figure 4. Figure 4.where z is a random variable with μ = 0 and σ = 1.34) (4.

37) (4.9973 P ( −∞ ≤ z ≤ −σ ) = 0.38) (4.8413 (4.P ( z ≤ 3σ ) = 0. Standard normal distribution with baseline in standard deviation units.39) Figure 4.1588 P ( −∞ ≤ z ≤ +σ ) = 0. The cumulative distribution function for a normal distribution is defined as 1 F ( x) = σ 2π ⎡ ( x − μ )2 ⎤ ∫−∞ exp ⎢ − 2σ 2 ⎥ dx ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ x (4.40) 4-65 .44.

It is not particularly convenient to integrate any function numerically from −∞ to +∞ .46. which is tabulated in mathematical handbooks. 4–66 .Figure 4.(4. the cumulative distribution function plots as a straight line as shown in Figure 4.45. mean μ and standard deviation σ. Only numerical integration is possible. we undertake a transformation that allows the integration of Eq.40) using the complementary error function. Figure 4.45 shows the cumulative distribution plot on linear graph paper. Cumulative normal distribution.(4.40) cannot be performed analytically. To overcome this difficulty. When potted on a special probability graph paper. The cumulative distribution function is difficult to compute because the integration called for in Eq.

46. Cumulative normal distribution plotted on probability paper.Figure 4. 4-67 .

45) F (u ) = 1 ⎡ 2 − erfc ( u ) ⎤ ⎦ 2⎣ (4.(4.42) into (4.42) Substituting Eqs.46) where 4–68 .43) The function e−u 2 π is symmetric about u = 0.40) gives the cumulative distribution function as F (u ) = 1 π ∫ u −∞ e − u du 2 (4.(4.Let u= x−μ σ 2 (4. 1 π ∫ u −∞ e − u du = 1 − 2 1 π ∫ ∞ u e − u du 2 (4.44) Substituting Eq.44) into (4. Therefore.43) and rearranging gives 1⎛ 2 F (u ) = ⎜ 2 − 2⎝ π Eq.41) du = dx σ 2 (4.(4.45) can be written as ∫ ∞ u 2 ⎞ e − u du ⎟ ⎠ (4.41) and (4.

48 shows graphs of the two functions.94362 8 0. Table 4.6 gives the error and the complementary error functions whereas Figure 4.(4.16799 erfc(x) 1 0.05637 2 0.43. Using the information in Table 4. is defined as erf ( u ) = 2 π ∫ u 0 e −u du 2 (4.48) Thus.00 0.05 0. which arises frequently in the solutions of certain partial differential equations of mathematical physics such as the diffusivity equation. is the complementary error function. erf ( u ) = 1 − erfc ( u ) (4.(4.83200 Useful relationships 4-69 . Error and Complementary Error Functions x 0. The error function.11246 3 0. erfc(u).47) The function.88753 7 0.48 shows the F(x) obtained from such a computation for the normal distribution of Figure 4. Figure 4. the cumulative distribution function F(x) can be computed with Eq. heat conduction equation.46) instead of Eq.10 0.6.6.40) and plotted against x.49) Table 4.erfc ( u ) = 2 π ∫ ∞ u e− u du 2 (4.15 erf(x) 0 0. diffusion equation and convection-dispersion equation. erf(u).

70 0.65 0.30 0.35 0.84270 4 0.75 0.45 0.90 0.32862 7 0.62061 8 0.60385 6 0.22933 2 0.28884 4 0.39614 4 0.55 0.42839 2 0.25 0.79690 8 0.77729 7 0.64202 9 0.52050 0 0.6 0.15729 erfc(x) = 1 .25789 9 0.40 0.20309 2 0.82089 1 0.50 0.17910 9 0.32219 9 0.27632 6 0.85 0.60 0.35797 1 0.22270 3 0.00 0.erf(x) erf(-x) = -erf(x) erfc(-x) = 1 + erf(x) 4–70 .71115 6 0.95 1.80 0.67780 1 0.56332 3 0.72367 4 0.57160 8 0.74210 1 0.47950 0 0.77066 8 0.37938 2 0.20 0.43667 7 0.67137 3 0.47548 2 0.52451 8 0.

01621 0 0.00013 4-71 .99976 4 0.00 2.20 1.98909 1 0.02365 2 0.20 2.99959 3 0.03389 5 0.50 1.40 1.99702 1 0.99931 1 0.99532 2 0.06599 2 0.00040 7 0.99813 7 0.95228 5 0.96610 5 0.98379 0 0.1 1.60 1.99279 0 0.00023 6 0.00721 0 0.00186 3 0.00467 8 0.99986 9 0.93400 8 0.90 2.11979 5 0.88020 5 0.40 2.30 2.10 2.08968 6 0.99885 7 0.97634 8 0.70 0.70 1.00297 9 0.50 2.04771 5 0.60 2.30 1.00114 3 0.01090 9 0.80 1.10 1.00068 9 0.91031 4 0.

90 3.00004 1 0.00 0.47.6 2.99995 9 0.00007 5 0.99992 5 0. 4–72 . Graphs of error and complementary error functions.99997 8 4 0.00002 2 Figure 4.80 2.

Thus. The first method is based on the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) and the second method is the Box Muller method. The Central Limit Theorem shows that the mean of a group of numbers drawn randomly from any distribution tends to a normal (Gaussian) distribution as the number of means increases. Two methods are presented for generating such data. Cumulative distribution function calculated with the complementary error function for the normal distribution of Figure 4. if we calculate many times the sums of N variates drawn from a uniform distribution.43. If we generate N values of a random number ri from a uniform distribution ( 0 ≤ ri ≤ 1) and calculate 4-73 . we should expect the sums to fall into a truncated normal (Gaussian) distribution bounded by 0 and N.Figure 4.48. we wish to generate sample data from a normal distribution. Generation of Random Deviates from a Normal (Gaussian) Distribution Sometimes. with a mean value of N/2.

the mean or expectation of the distribution is given by μ = E [r ] = ∫ b a r a+b dr = b−a 2 (4.51) σ= (4.52) The choice of N = 12 is particularly convenient because z will be a normal (Gaussian) distribution with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.55) But 4–74 .(4. from a normal (Gaussian) distribution of mean μ and standard deviation σ as x = μ +σ z (4.z = ∑ ri − i =1 N N 2 (4. x. Such a random variate can be used to draw a random sample.54) The variance or second moment is given by 2 2 σ 2 = Var ( r ) = E ⎡( r − E ( r ) ) ⎤ = E ⎡ r 2 ⎤ − ( E [ r ]) ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.51) and (4.50) the random variable z will be drawn from an approximately Gaussian distribution with a mean μ and a standard deviation σ given by μ =0 N 12 (4.52) can be proved as follows. For a uniform distribution of r between a and b.53) Eqs.

then ⎡ ⎣ N⎤ 2⎥ ⎦ (4.61) Substituting Eq.55) gives (b − a ) a 2 + ab + b 2 ( a + b ) − = σ = Var ( r ) = 3 4 12 2 2 2 (4..56) into (4. + rN − Since r1...61) gives σ 2 = Var ( z ) = 1 1 1 N + + .62) ..(4. + − The variance of z is given by 1 2 1 2 1 2 N N N = − =0 2 2 2 (4..(4.(4.(4.60) σ 2 = Var ( z ) = Var ( r1 ) + Var ( r2 ) + .. + Var ( rN ) − Var ⎜ ⎛N⎞ ⎟ ⎝2⎠ (4. Eq. + − 0 = 12 12 12 12 4-75 (4.E ⎡r 2 ⎤ = ∫ ⎣ ⎦ b a r2 a 2 + ab + b 2 dr = b−a 3 (4..57) The mean of the variable z is given by μ = E [ z ] = E ⎢ ∑ ri − ⎣ i =1 ⎡i=N N⎤ ⎡N ⎤ ⎥ = E [ r1 ] + E [ r2 ] + . substituting this into Eq. + E [ rN ] − E ⎢ 2 ⎥ 2⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4..57) with a = 0 and b = 1 into Eq.(5..56) Substituting Eqs. …. r2. Thus.58) gives μ = E [ z ] = + + .54) and (4.58) For the case of a = 0 and b = 1.54) gives E[r]=1/2.59) σ 2 = Var ( z ) = Var ⎢ r1 + r2 + . rN are independent..

51) and (4.(4.63) are the same as Eqs. Calculate z1 = ( ( −2 ln r1 cos 2π r2 −2 ln r1 sin 2π r2 ) (4.65) It can be shown that z1 and z2 are random deviates from a normal (Gaussian) distribution with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.64) z2 = ) (4.4. The method of Box and Muller for generating normal deviates from a uniform random number generator is as follows.2 Log Normal Distribution The probability density function for a log normal distribution is given by 4–76 . The deviates can be used to draw two random variates (x1 and x2) with mean μ and standard deviation σ as x1 = μ + σ z1 (4. Select two random numbers r1 and r2 from a uniform distribution ( 0 ≤ ri ≤ 1) .(4.66) (4.The standard deviation for z is N 12 σ= (4.52).59) and (4.67) x2 = μ + σ z2 4.63) Eqs.

and the variance. which in turn is larger than the mode or geometric mean. of the log normal distribution are related to the parameters of lnx as ⎛ ⎝ τ = exp ⎜ μ + σ2 ⎞ ⎟ 2 ⎠ (4. the mean is larger than the median. Note that x is always positive. 4-77 . The mean. τ.69) ω 2 = eσ − 1 exp ( 2μ + σ 2 ) 2 ( ) (4. Note that in this case. σ2 is the variance and σ is the standard deviation of lnx. The distribution is positively skewed with a long tail towards the high values of x.68) where x is a random variable and μ is the mean.49 shows a log normal distribution.70) It should be noted that x has a log normal distribution whereas lnx has a normal distribution. Figure 4.⎡ ( ln x − μ )2 ⎤ 1 1 exp ⎢ − P ( x) = ⎥ 2σ 2 ⎥ σ 2π x ⎢ ⎣ ⎦ (4. ω2. the geometric mean is a better measure of central tendency than the mean or the median. Because of the high values in the tail.

Figure 4. Figure 4. 4–78 . Such a plot was used in Figure 4.49. On this scale. Log normal distribution. the log normal distribution plots as a straight line.1 to determine the Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of permeability variation on the assumption the data were drawn from a log normal distribution.50 shows the cumulative distribution function for a log normal distribution plotted on a log normal probability graph paper.

4.50.5 ESTIMATION 4.1 Introduction Estimation is one of the major applications of geostatistics.Figure 4. The objective is to estimate the 4-79 . Cumulative log normal distribution plotted on log normal probability paper.5. the other being conditional simulation.

in Figure 4. where the asterisk is used in the symbols to distinguish 8 the estimated from the measured values.variable of interest at a location xo for which no datum has been measured. using the data measured at other locations xi distributed in space. 4–80 . In fact.51 and requested to estimate the values at locations 3. 5 and 8 at which no measurements were made.51. Suppose you are given some petrophysical data from a linear reservoir as shown in Figure 4. some would claim that there was not enough information to estimate Φ* because no data were 8 measured beyond location 8. What would you do? Most professionals would construct the diagram shown Figure 4. Sample data from a linear reservoir.52 to estimate Φ* and Φ* but would be at a loss about how to 3 5 estimate Φ* .

Substituting Eq.71) and rearranging gives the estimator as 4-81 .72) where hij are lag distances.72) into (4. Estimation of unmeasured values by linear interpolation. Let us write the equation for the estimator Φ* . From linear 3 interpolation ⎛x −x ⎞ Φ* = Φ 2 + ⎜ 3 2 ⎟ ( Φ 4 − Φ 2 ) 3 ⎝ x4 − x2 ⎠ (4.(4.Figure 4.71) Let ⎛ x3 − x2 ⎞ h23 = λ4 ⎜ ⎟= ⎝ x4 − x2 ⎠ h42 (4.52.

50 )( 50 ) = 40 3 Similarly 4–82 . Let us now use Eqs. Φ* and Φ* .73) and the constraint of Eq.Φ* = λ2 Φ 2 + λ4 Φ 4 3 where (4. the subscript o has been used to indicate the location at which an estimate is to be made and N could be the entire available data set or a subset of the available data depending on the structure of the heterogeneity.75) We can easily generalize the estimator of Eq.(4.74) λ2 + λ4 = 1 (4.75) as follows: Φ* = ∑ λi Φ i o i =1 i=N (4.(4.77) to estimate Φ* .73) λ2 = 1 − λ4 or (4.76) and (4.50 )( 30 ) + ( 0.5 and 3 5 8 3 Φ* = ( 0.76). λ2 = λ4 = 0. For Φ* .(4.76) subject to the constraint ∑λ i =1 N i =1 (4.(4.77) In Eq.

we proceed as follows.Φ* = ( 0.0909. Here is one strategy.5000α α α 4 Total = 0.50 )( 20 ) = 35 5 To estimate Φ* . We can adopt several different strategies to accomplish this.(4.1667α = 0.77). in Eq. We can measure how far away each sample is from the point of estimation but we cannot measure how close it is to the point of estimation. it is clear that Φ 6 should have the most weight.50 )( 50 ) + ( 0.76) 8 should be assigned to each measured value used in the estimation depending on how close the measured value is to the point xo at which the estimate is to be made. Let us measure the lag distances of the measured data from the point of estimation as xo − x2 = 6Δx xo − x4 = 4Δx xo − x6 = 2Δx Total = 12Δx Based on the above lag distances. Unfortunately. there is no mathematical expression for closeness.9167α 2 where α is to be chosen to satisfy the constraint of Eq. The weights. In this case. Let us make the weights proportional to the inverse lag distances as follows: λ2 = λ4 = λ6 = α 6 = 0. Thus. followed by Φ 4 and Φ 2 . λi.(4. 4-83 . α = 1.2500α = 0.

0909 ) = 0. However.2727 = 0.2500α = ( 0.5455 )( 20 ) = 30 8 It should be noted that in estimating Φ* and Φ* .1667α = ( 0.5000 )(1.5455 = 1.λ2 = λ4 = λ6 = α 6 = 0. 8 Having completed the estimation. it is worthwhile to mention the major limitation of the estimation undertaken above. the next question is what is the reliability of the estimates? What are the error bounds on the estimates? Most professionals would give up at this point.2727 )( 50 ) + ( 0.0000 α α 4 2 Total Therefore. All the measured data could 3 5 have been used to estimate Φ* and Φ* in the manner similar to the 3 5 estimation of Φ* .0909 ) = 0. Geostatistics uses a probabilistic framework to make estimations and in so doing provides estimates that honor the correlation structure of 4–84 .1819 )( 30 ) + ( 0. Φ* = ( 0. there was no good reason to use the subset of the measured data to estimate Φ* and Φ* . only a subset of the 3 5 measured data was used whereas in estimating Φ* . the covariance function or the correlation coefficient function has not be taken into account in the estimation.2500 )(1. all the measured 8 data were used. Before presenting the geostatistical estimation technique known as ordinary kriging.1819 = 0. It is that the structure of the heterogeneity as represented by either the variogram. This is where geostatistics can help.5000α = ( 0.1667 )(1.0909 ) = 0.

47). It also provides quantitative assessment of the reliability of the estimates. let us use the first "ring" of data around the missing datum (or rather first "square" of data) to obtain an estimate as Φ* = 19λ1 + 18λ2 + 17λ3 + 15λ4 + 18λ5 + 15λ6 + 15λ7 + 18λ8 o The error of the estimation.80) 4-85 . is given by (4.76) and (4. Let us demonstrate a simple geostatistical estimation using a probabilistic framework. The error can be expanded as eo = Φ* − Φ o = (19 − Φ o ) λ1 + (18 − Φ o ) λ2 + (17 − Φ o ) λ3 + (15 − Φ o ) λ4 o + (18 − Φ o ) λ5 + (15 − Φ o ) λ6 + (15 − Φ o ) λ7 + (18 − Φ o ) λ8 (4. Proceeding in the spirit of Eqs.the heterogeneity.79) o i =1 i =8 where Φ o is the unknown missing datum. Suppose we wish to estimate the missing datum in Figure 4.78) eo = Φ* − Φ o = 19λ1 + 18λ2 + 17λ3 + 15λ4 + 18λ5 + 15λ6 + 15λ7 + 18λ8 − Φ o ∑ λi (4.(4.(4.47) has been used in Eq.53. Notice that the constraint of Eq.79).(4. which is unknown.

With this simplification. However.(4. To simplify the calculations.53.81) 4–86 . our estimate is Φ* = 19 o and the error is now given by (4. we have not violated the estimation model given by Eqs. This is not the optimum choice of the weights and will not lead to the best estimate.Figure 4. because the weights sum to 1.46) and (4. let us choose λ2 = λ3 = λ4 = λ5 = λ6 = λ7 = λ8 = 0 and λ1 = 1.47) and as such the estimation is legitimate. Missing data from a 2D reservoir.

Φ(x) 5 [Φ(x+h)-Φ(x)]2 4-87 .7. Δx 2 . there is enough information in the available data for us to determine its statistics. then we can look at the field of data in the SW-NE direction to find similar errors and from them determine the statistics of our error. 1 Error # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 23 22 20 21 17 17 19 15 18 20 18 19 14 17 16 15 22 20 19 17 17 14 15 18 20 16 18 14 19 16 15 18 -1 -2 -1 -4 0 -3 -4 3 2 -4 0 -5 5 -1 -1 3 1 4 1 16 0 9 16 9 4 16 0 25 25 1 1 9 2 Φ(x) 3 Φ(x+h) 4 Φ(x+h .7.82) Although the error given by Eq. Table 4. Errors in the SW-NE Direction of the Data Set at a Lag Distance of Δx 2 . If we accept the premise that the error is a function of the lag distance.(4. There are in fact 47 such errors in the data set. They are tabulated in column 4 of Table 4.82) is unknown.eo = Φ* − Φ o = (19 − Φ o ) o (4.

447 4–88 .766 15.128 0 5 -7 -1 -4 5 5 5 -4 -7 -3 6 2 2 0 -3 2 1 9 -5 1 3 5 4 -9 -2 5 0 -2 4 2 0 25 49 1 16 25 25 25 16 49 9 36 4 4 0 9 4 1 81 25 1 9 25 16 81 4 25 0 4 16 4 15.17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 18 18 23 15 14 10 15 20 25 21 13 10 16 18 20 20 11 13 14 23 18 10 13 18 22 17 15 20 16 14 15 18 23 16 14 10 15 20 25 21 14 10 16 18 20 20 17 13 14 23 18 19 13 18 22 13 15 20 20 14 18 17 Mean Variance 0.

It would have been narrower if we had chosen the weights to minimize the variance of the 4-89 .Std Dev Semivarianc e 3. then we are 95% confident that the error of our estimation is given by μ − 1. is the statement of Eq.442 ≤ Φ o ≤ 26.7.96σ ≤ eo ≤ μ + 1. the mean.83) If we assume that the error is normally distributed.272 (4.128 + 1.87). it would have been nice if the 95% confidence interval was narrower than that given by Eq.272 ≤ (19 − Φ o ) ≤ 7.791) ≤ (19 − Φ o ) ≤ 0.791 (4.84) (4. Of course. 0.(4. variance and standard deviation of the error are μ = 0.87) true? You bet.128 − 1.87) Given our knowledge of the missing datum.96 ( 3.723 As shown at the bottom of Table 4.96σ Thus.96 ( 3.766 σ = 3.128 σ 2 = 15.(4.791) −7.558 (4.85) (4.971 3.930 7.86) or 11.

7.(4.54.7 are the same data needed to calculate the semivariance at a lag distance of h= ( 2 ) Δx in the SW-NE direction. Figure 4.error of Eq. It should be noted that the data in columns 2 to 5 of Table 4.54 shows the histogram of the errors of Table 4. we have σ2 2 = γ Δx 2 = 7. Histogram of errors in the SW-NE direction at h = Δx 2 .723 ( ) (4. From the calculations.88) 4–90 . which indicates that the assumption of a normal distribution of the errors in the calculation of the 95% confidence interval is reasonable.80) instead of choosing them arbitrarily as we did to simplify the calculations. Figure 4.

the variable of interest is treated as a stationary random function with a 4-91 .930 (4.(4.83).703 (4. geostatistics gives the mean.(4.55.000 σ 2 = 15. we are ready to formally derive ordinary kriging equations for geostatistical estimation.89) These statistics of the error are very similar to those given in Eq.000 + 1.92) The result given in Eq. 4.92) is essentially the same as that given by Eq. Applying Eq.297 ≤ Φ o ≤ 26.90) (4.930 ) −7.96 ( 3.000 − 1.Thus.703 ≤ (19 − Φ o ) ≤ 7.96 ( 3.2 Ordinary Kriging Equations The objective is to estimate an unknown variable at the location x0 at which no measurement has been made using the measured data at locations xi as shown in Figure 4. Having now demonstrated a simple geostatistical estimation that gave both the estimate and the confidence limits for the estimate.447 σ = 3.703 (4.89) gives the following 95% confidence interval: 0.91) or 11.87). variance and standard deviation of the error as μ = 0.930 ) ≤ (19 − Φ o ) ≤ 0. In geostatistical estimation. the variogram (or the covariance function) is used to calculate the error variance. in geostatistics.(4.(4.5. Therefore.

…. Figure 4. they must first be transformed into a normal distribution before proceeding further. If the measured data do not exhibit a normal distribution. By contrast.0 as shown schematically in Figure 4. Figure 4. x4. x1. the estimated value is transformed back to its original distribution by using the same two cumulative distribution functions in reverse order. Schematic showing the locations sample data and the location at which an estimation is to be made. Z A ( x ) is described as a stationary random function. 4–92 .55. After the estimation.normal probability distribution. Such a transformation can always be done by using the cumulative distribution function of the data and the cumulative distribution function of a standard normal distribution with a mean of zero and a standard deviation of 1. As a result.57 shows two random functions Z A ( x ) and Z B ( x ) together with their probability density functions at four locations.56. The mean of random function Z A ( x ) is constant throughout the field.

56. it increases as x increases. random function Z B ( x ) is described as a non-stationary random function. In fact. Figure 4. The criteria used in ordinary kriging to obtain the best estimate are (1) the estimate should be unbiased and (2) the estimation error should have 4-93 .the mean of random function Z B ( x ) is not constant throughout the field. The challenge is to determine the weights λi in such a way as to obtain the best estimate in some sense.76).(4. The kriging estimate is calculated as the weighted average of the measured data as in Eq. Transformation of sample data to a standard normal distribution. As a result.

Figure 4.minimum variance. Derivation in Terms of the Covariance Function The estimated value at the unsampled location xo is given by 4–94 .57. Stationary ( Z A ( x ) ) and non-stationary ( Z B ( x ) ) random functions. Thus. ordinary kriging is a Best Linear Unbiased Estimator (BLUE).

the Z(xi) are just samples drawn from the random function Z(x). 2D or 3D. Z(x) is the assumed random function model.95) What is an unbiased or biased estimator? Figure 4. which is independent of the locations xo and xi.93) where Z*(xo) is the estimated value at location xo. λi are the weights to be determined and xi are the locations where the variable of interest has been measured (i. the expectation of the error must be zero: E [ e( xo ) ] = E ⎡ Z * ( xo ) − Z ( xo ) ⎤ = 0 ⎣ ⎦ (4. Thus. In order to obtain an unbiased estimate. Note that in this model.Z * ( xo ) = ∑ λi Z ( xi ) i =1 N (4. Estimator 1 is unbiased but not very precise. Let the true but unknown value at xo be Z(xo). the data). for an unbiased estimate.93) is valid in 1D. Also.. Estimator 2 is unbiased 4-95 .e. on average. Z(x) is a stationary random function with a constant mean. Moreover.(4.94) This error is a random variable with a probability distribution. The estimation error is given by e( xo ) = Z * ( xo ) − Z ( xo ) (4.58 shows three estimators for a petrophysical property whose value is know to μ. Z(xi) are the measured data. m. the mean estimation error must be zero. Eq.

Biased and unbiased estimators.(4.96) 4–96 .94) gives the condition for an unbiased estimate as ⎡N ⎤ E ⎢ ∑ λi Z ( xi ) − Z ( xo ) ⎥ = 0 ⎣ i =1 ⎦ Changing the order of the summation and the expectation gives (4.93) into Eq. Estimator 3 is biased and more precise than estimator 1. Figure 4.58.(4.and more precise than estimator 1. Substituting Eq.

which is a constant for the stationary random function model used in the estimation.100) Substituting Eq.(4.101) and make use of Eq.100) gives the error variance as 2 ⎡⎛ N ⎞ ⎤ σ = E ⎢⎜ ∑ λi Z ( xi ) − Z ( xo ) ⎟ ⎥ ⎠ ⎥ ⎢⎝ i =1 ⎣ ⎦ 2 e (4.97) can now be written as ∑ λ m − m = ⎜ ∑ λ − 1⎟ m = 0 ⎝ ⎠ i =1 i i =1 i N ⎛ N ⎞ (4. m.(4.93) into Eq. from the inner bracket in Eq.(4.77).(4. m. Z(xi) and Z(xo) are equal and is given by the mean of Z(x).97) But the expectations of the random variables.101) Let us add and subtract the mean. The error variance is given by 2 σ e2 = E ⎡( Z * ( xo ) − Z ( xo ) ) ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (4.99) (∑λi = 1) to obtain 4-97 .(4. Eq.(4.99) which is the same as Eq.98) The condition for an unbiased estimate is therefore given by ∑λ i =1 N i =1 (4.∑ λ E [ Z ( x )] − E [ Z ( x )] = 0 i =1 i i o N (4.

the square of the simple summation in Eq.106) 4–98 .102) gives the estimation variance as 2 N ⎡⎛ N ⎤ ⎞ 2 σ = E ⎢⎜ ∑ λi ( Z ( xi ) − m ) ⎟ + ( Z ( xo ) − m ) − 2∑ λi ( Z ( xi ) − m)( Z ( xo ) − m) ⎥ (4.103) can be rewritten in terms of a double summation to obtain σ e2 = E ⎢∑ ⎣ i =1 ⎡ N ∑ λ λ ( Z ( x ) − m)(Z ( x ) − m) + ( Z ( x ) − m ) j =1 i j i j o N 2 N ⎤ − 2∑ λi ( Z ( xi ) − m )( Z ( xo ) − m ) ⎥ i =1 ⎦ …………….104) Changing the order of the summation and the expectation in Eq.105) − 2∑ λi E ⎡( Z ( xi ) − m )( Z ( xo ) − m ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ The expectations in Eq.105) can be expressed in terms of the covariance function as follows: σ e2 = ∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ j C (hij ) + C (0) − 2∑ λiC (hio ) j =1 i =1 N N (4.102) Expanding the right side of Eq.(4.104) gives σ e2 = ∑ i =1 N ∑ λ λ E ⎡(Z ( x ) − m)(Z ( x ) − m) ⎤ + E ⎡( Z ( x ) − m ) ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ j =1 N i j i j o i =1 N 2 ⎤ ⎦ (4.103) i =1 ⎠ ⎢⎝ i =1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ 2 e Algebraically.(4.(4.(4.2 ⎡⎛ N ⎞ ⎤ σ = E ⎢⎜ ∑ λi ( Z ( xi ) − m ) − ( Z ( xo ) − m) ⎟ ⎥ ⎠ ⎥ ⎢⎝ i =1 ⎣ ⎦ 2 e (4.(4.

we first derive the relationship between the variogram and the covariance function for a stationary random function.108) The estimation problem now boils down to determining the values of λi. Recall that the location of the point at which an estimate is to be made is o and the locations of the data to be used in the estimation are at points i. Therefore.106) can be rearranged as σ e2 = C (0) + ∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ j C (hij ) − 2∑ λiC (hio ) j =1 i =1 N N (4. which can be solved by the method of Lagrange multipliers. the variogram is given by 2 γ ( h ) = 1 E ⎡( Z ( x ) − Z ( x + h ) ) ⎤ 2 ⎣ ⎦ (4.109) 4-99 .108) subject to the unbiasedness constraint given by Eq. By definition. the covariance function at a lag distance of 0. hij is the lag distance between locations i and j.99).(4. is the same as the variance of the data.where C(hij) is the covariance function.(4.(4. Eq.107) can be written in the following final form: σ e2 = σ 2 + ∑ i =1 N ∑ λ λ C ( h ) − 2∑ λ C ( h j =1 i j ij i =1 i N N io ) (4. σ2. Z(x).108) can be derived in terms of the variogram instead of the covariance function.107) But C(0). and hio is the lag distance between locations o and i. This is a classical problem of optimization. Eq. Derivation in Terms of the Variogram Eq. To do so.(4.(4. which will minimize the estimation variance given by Eq.

112) can be expressed in terms of the covariance function as follows: γ (h) = 1 C (0) + 1 C (0) − C (h) 2 2 Finally.(4.(4.(4.Adding and subtracting the mean of the random function from the inner bracket of Eq.(4.115) For a stationary random function. For large lag distances.110) gives γ (h) = 1 E ⎡( Z ( x) − m ) + ( Z ( x + h) − m ) − 2 ( Z ( x) − m )( Z ( x + h) − m ) ⎤ (4.113) γ (h) = C (0) − C (h) (4.114) which is the same as Eq.113) yields the required relationship as (4. Eq.(4. γ(∞) is the sill of the variogram. C(∞) is 0 because there is no more correlation beyond the correlation length and 4–100 .112) The expectations in Eq.(4.26).110) Expanding the right side of Eq.(4.111) 2 2 2 ⎣ ⎦ Eq.109) gives 2 γ ( h ) = 1 E ⎡( ( Z ( x ) − m ) − ( Z ( x + h ) − m ) ) ⎤ 2 ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (4.114) becomes γ (∞) = C (0) − C (∞) (4. Eq.111) can be rewritten as γ (h) = 1 E ⎡( Z ( x) − m )( Z ( x) − m ) ⎤ + 1 E ⎡( Z ( x + h) − m )( Z ( x + h) − m ) ⎤ 2 ⎣ ⎦ 2 ⎣ ⎦ − 2 E ⎡( Z ( x + h) − m )( Z ( x) − m ) ⎤ 2 ⎣ ⎦ (4.

(4.(4. Eq.114). From Eq. Substituting these facts into Eq.117) (4.115) gives γ (∞) = C (0) = σ 2 = sill of the variogram (4. we have C (hij ) = C (0) − γ (hij ) C (hio ) = C (0) − γ (hio ) 4-101 (4.59.(4.116) Figure 4. A comparison of the variogram and the covariance function for a stationary random function.C(0) is the variance of the data (σ2) as previously stated.118) . We are now ready to rewrite the error variance equation.59 compares the variogram and the covariance function for a stationary random function.108). Figure 4. in terms of the variogram.

(4.(4.108) subject to the constraint given by Eq.99).(4.120) can be simplified to σ e2 = C (0) + C (0) − ∑ i =1 N ∑ λ λ γ (h ) − 2C (0) + 2∑ λ γ (h j =1 i j ij i =1 i N N io ) (4.(4.(4.120) Eq.123) 4–102 .108) gives the error variance as σ e2 = C (0) + ∑ i =1 N ∑λ λ j =1 i N ⎡ ⎤ j ⎣C (0) − γ ( hij ) ⎦ − 2∑ λi [ C (0) − γ ( hio ) ] i =1 N (4.122) Solution of the Kriging Equations in terms of the Covariance Function The problem to be solved is to choose the weights (λi) to minimize the error variance given by Eq.(4.(4.119) can be rearranged as σ e2 = C (0) + C (0)∑ i =1 N ∑ λ λ − ∑ ∑ λ λ γ (h ) − 2C (0)∑ λ + 2∑ λ γ (h j =1 i j i =1 j =1 i j ij i =1 i i =1 i N N N N N io ) (4.121) gives the error variance in terms of the variogram in final form as σ e2 = −∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ jγ (hij ) + 2∑ λiγ (hio ) j =1 i =1 N N (4.121) Further simplification of Eq.117) and (4.118) into Eq. The problem statement is as follows: Minimize σ e2 (λi ) = σ 2 + ∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ j C (hij ) − 2∑ λiC (hio ) j =1 i =1 N N (4.119) Eq.Substituting Eqs.

⎛ N ⎞ Subject to ⎜ ∑ λi − 1⎟ = 0 ⎝ i =1 ⎠ (4. λ2 . Convert all constraints into equality constraints. which constitute the required solution. Applications of steps 1 to 3 to the problem at hand will result in the following Lagrangian function: L(λi . Multiply each equality constraint by a new variable μi.126) . Differentiate the Lagrangian function and equate to zero to determine the stationary points. μ ) = σ 2 + ∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ jC (hij ) − 2∑ λiC (hio ) + 2μ ⎜ ∑ λi − 1⎟ j =1 i =1 N N ⎛ N ⎞ ⎠ ⎝ i =1 (4.(4. The Lagrangian can be expanded to obtain L(λ1 . μ ) = σ 2 + λ12C (h11 ) + λ1λ2C (h12 ) + λ2 λ1C (h21 ) + λ22C (h22 ) − 2λ1C (h10 ) − 2λ2C (h20 ) + 2λ1μ + 2λ2 μ − 2 μ Differentiating Eq. 3. 2.126) and equating to zero will give the following linear simultaneous equations: 4-103 (4. L. where μi is the Lagrange multiplier for the ith constraint.124) This problem can be solved by the method of Lagrange multipliers.125) Consider the case for N = 2. Add (or subtract) the resulting constraint equations to the original objective function to obtain the Lagrangian function. This step relaxes the constraint and converts the constrained optimization to an unconstrained optimization. 4. The solution steps are as follows: 1.

4–104 .130) can be rewritten as ⎡ 2C (h11 ) 2C (h12 ) 2 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 2C (h10 ) ⎤ ⎢ 2C (h ) 2C (h ) 2 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ = ⎢ 2C (h ) ⎥ 21 22 20 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 2 2 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.(4.127) (4.(4.131) simplifies to ⎡ C (h11 ) C (h12 ) 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C (h10 ) ⎤ ⎢C ( h ) C ( h ) 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ ⎥ = ⎢C ( h ) ⎥ 21 22 20 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.132) can be solved by standard techniques such as matrix inversion or Gaussian elimination.(4.130) Because C(h12) = C(h21).127) to (4.129) (4.128) (4. Eq.129) can be rewritten in matrix form as 2C (h11 ) C (h12 ) + C (h21 ) 2 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 2C (h10 ) ⎤ ⎡ ⎢C ( h ) + C ( h ) 2C ( h22 ) 2 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ = ⎢ 2C (h20 ) ⎥ 21 ⎢ 12 ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 2 2 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4. Eq.(4.131) Upon dividing by 2.∂L = 2λ1C (h11 ) + λ2C (h12 ) + λ2C (h21 ) − 2C (h10 ) + 2 μ = 0 ∂λ1 ∂L = λ1C (h12 ) + λ1C (h21 ) + 2λ2C (h22 ) − 2C (h20 ) + 2 μ = 0 ∂λ2 ∂L = 2λ1 + 2λ2 − 2 = 0 ∂μ Eqs.132) Eq.

λ2 and μ can be substituted into Eq.(4.135) and λ2 C (h21 ) + λ2C (h22 ) = C (h20 ) − μ (4.123) to calculate the minimum estimation error variance.134) gives the minimum estimation error variance as σ e2min = σ 2 + λ1 ( C (h10 ) − μ ) + λ2 ( C (h20 ) − μ ) − 2λ1C (h10 ) − 2λ2C (h20 ) (4.(4.136) into Eq.132). λ2 .After solving Eq.(4.(4.133) can be rearranged as σ e2 (λ1 .(4. λ2 .135) and (4.137) 4-105 . Let us derive an algebraic expression for the minimum error variance.(4.134) From Eq.133) Eq. it can be seen that λ1 C (h11 ) + λ2C (h12 ) = C (h10 ) − μ (4.136) Substituting Eqs.(4. μ ) = σ 2 + λ1 ⎡λ1 C (h11 ) + λ2C (h12 ) ⎤ + λ2 ⎡λ1C (h21 ) + λ2 C (h22 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ − 2λ1C (h10 ) − 2λ2C (h20 ) (4.132). μ ) = σ 2 + λ12C (h11 ) + λ1λ2C (h12 ) + λ2 λ1C (h21 ) + λ22C (h22 ) − 2λ1C (h10 ) − 2λ2C (h20 ) (4. λ1.123) for N = 2 gives the error variance as σ e2 (λ1 . Expanding Eq.

(4.141) ∑λ j =1 j =1 4–106 ..(4. λ2 and μ into Eq.138) can be used to calculate the minimum error variance directly instead of substituting λ1. Eqs.(4. Eq.(4.139) σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) i =1 4 (4.140) For any value of N.which simplifies to σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) i =1 2 (4.138) Eq.123) to calculate the minimum estimation error variance.132) and (4. 2.132) can be generalized to the following N+1 linear simultaneous equations: ∑ λ C (h ) + μ = C (h j =1 N j ij N io ) for i = 1.. N (4.138) can easily be generalized to any value of N. Eq. .. for N = 4.138) will become ⎡ C (h11 ) ⎢C ( h ) 21 ⎢ ⎢C (h31 ) ⎢ ⎢C (h41 ) ⎢ 1 ⎣ and C (h12 ) C (h22 ) C (h32 ) C (h42 ) 1 C (h13 ) C (h23 ) C (h33 ) C (h43 ) 1 C (h14 ) C (h24 ) C (h34 ) C (h44 ) 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C (h10 ) ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ2 ⎥ ⎢C (h20 ) ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ = ⎢C (h30 ) ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ ⎢C (h40 ) ⎥ 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.132) and (4.(4. For example.

In order to set up the simultaneous equations to be solved. the matrix is diagonally dominant. one must first compute the lag distance matrix.143) 2.The minimum estimation error variance can be generalized to σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) i =1 N (4. the lag distance matrix will look like this: ⎡ h11 ⎢h ⎡ hij ⎤ = ⎢ 21 ⎣ ⎦ ⎢h 31 ⎢ ⎣ h41 h12 h22 h32 h42 h13 h23 h33 h43 h14 ⎤ ⎡ 0 h24 ⎥ ⎢ h21 ⎥=⎢ h34 ⎥ ⎢ h31 ⎥ ⎢ h44 ⎦ ⎣ h41 h12 0 h32 h42 h13 h23 0 h43 h14 ⎤ h24 ⎥ ⎥ h34 ⎥ ⎥ 0⎦ (4. Except for the one zero at the bottom corner. (4. Thus. The solution λ1. λN and μ depends only on the spatial coordinates of the data and not on the values of the data. Therefore. …. depending on the value of N.144) All the off diagonal entries of the matrix equation are less than the diagonal entries. the diagonal entries of the matrix equation to be solved are given by C (h11 ) = C (h22 ) = . hij. This is a desirable structure for solving the system of linear simultaneous equations... 5. λ2. The matrix to be inverted is full. a lot of calculations could be involved. C (hNN ) = C (0) = σ 2 3. 4. 4-107 . For N = 4.142) The following observations can be made about the ordinary kriging model in terms of the covariance function. 1.

the problem statement is Minimize σ e2 (λi ) = −∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ jγ (hij ) + 2∑ λiγ (hio ) j =1 i =1 N N (4. 7.145) ⎛ N ⎞ Subject to ⎜ ∑ λi − 1⎟ = 0 ⎝ i =1 ⎠ The Lagrangian is given by (4.146) L(λi . λ2 . the Lagrangian can be expanded to obtain L(λ1 . Solution of the Kriging Equations in terms of the Variogram In this case.147) For the case of N = 2. The estimation error variance depends only on the spatial coordinates of the data and not on the values of the data.6.148) 4–108 . μ ) = −∑ i =1 N ∑ λi λ jγ (hij ) + 2∑ λiγ (hio ) + 2μ ⎜ ∑ λi − 1⎟ j =1 i =1 N N ⎛ n ⎞ ⎠ ⎝ i =1 (4. Kriging is an exact estimator and will return the measured value if it is applied to the location for which datum was measured. μ ) = −λ12γ (h11 ) − λ1λ2γ (h12 ) − λ2λ1γ (h21 ) − λ22γ (h22 ) + 2λ1γ (h10 ) + 2λ2γ (h20 ) + 2λ1μ + 2λ2 μ − 2 μ Differentiating the Lagrangian and equating to zero will give the following linear simultaneous equations: (4.

Let us derive an algebraic expression for the minimum error variance.(4.149) to (4.145) to calculate the minimum estimation error variance.(4.149) (4.153). λ2 and μ can be substituted into Eq.151) ⎡ −2γ (h11 ) − [γ (h12 ) + γ (h21 ) ] 2 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ −2γ (h10 ) ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ −2γ (h22 ) 2 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ = ⎢ −2γ (h20 ) ⎥ ⎢ − [γ (h12 ) + γ (h21 ) ] ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢μ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 2 2 0⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ 2 ⎦ ⎣ (4. Eq.153) After solving Eq.(4.145) for N = 2 gives the error variance as σ e2 (λ1 . μ ) = −λ12γ (h11 ) − λ1λ2γ (h12 ) − λ2 λ1γ (h21 ) − λ22γ (h22 ) + 2λ1γ (h10 ) + 2λ2γ (h20 ) (4.150) (4. Expanding Eq.152) Upon dividing by 2 and noting that γ(h12) = γ(h21).151) can be rewritten in matrix form as (4.(4. λ1.154) 4-109 .152) can be rewritten as ⎡γ (h11 ) γ (h12 ) −1⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡γ (h10 ) ⎤ ⎢γ (h ) γ (h ) −1⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ = ⎢γ (h ) ⎥ 22 ⎢ 21 ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎢ 20 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ 1 0 ⎥⎣μ ⎥ ⎣ 1 ⎦ ⎣ ⎦⎢ ⎦ ⎢ (4.∂L = −2λ1γ (h11 ) − λ2γ (h12 ) − λ2γ (h21 ) + 2γ (h10 ) + 2μ = 0 ∂λ1 ∂L = −λ1γ (h12 ) − λ1γ (h21 ) − 2λ2γ (h22 ) + 2γ (h20 ) + 2μ = 0 ∂λ2 ∂L = 2λ1 + 2λ2 − 2 = 0 ∂μ Eqs. λ2 .(4.

155) gives the minimum estimation error variance as σ e2min = −λ1 (γ (h10 ) + μ ) − λ2 (γ (h20 ) + μ ) + 2λ1γ (h10 ) + 2λ2γ (h20 ) (4. For example. μ ) = −λ1 ⎡λ1 γ (h11 ) + λ2γ (h12 ) ⎤ − λ2 ⎡λ1γ (h21 ) + λ2 γ (h22 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ + 2λ1γ (h10 ) + 2λ2γ (h20 ) (4. λ2 .157) Substituting Eqs.Eq.159) will become 4–110 .156) and λ2 γ (h21 ) + λ2γ (h22 ) = γ (h20 ) + μ (4.153) and (4.153).(4.156) and (4.153) and (4.(4.159) can easily be generalized to any value of N.159) Eqs. it can be seen that λ1 γ (h11 ) + λ2γ (h12 ) = γ (h10 ) + μ (4.(4.155) From Eq. Eqs.158) which simplifies to σ e2min = − μ + ∑ λiγ (hio ) i =1 2 (4.154) can be rearranged as σ e2 (λ1 . for N = 4.(4.(4.(4.157) into Eq.

163) The following observations can be made about the kriging model in terms of the variogam..162) ∑λ j =1 j =1 The minimum estimation error variance can be generalized to σ e2min = − μ + ∑ λiγ (hio ) i =1 N (4.160) σ e2min = − μ + ∑ λiγ (hio ) i =1 4 (4.153) can be generalized to the following N+1 linear simultaneous equations: ∑ λ γ (h ) − μ = γ (h j =1 N j ij N io ) for i = 1.⎡γ (h11 ) ⎢ ⎢γ (h21 ) ⎢γ (h31 ) ⎢ ⎢γ (h41 ) ⎢ 1 ⎣ and γ (h12 ) γ (h22 ) γ (h32 ) γ (h42 ) 1 γ (h13 ) γ (h23 ) γ (h33 ) γ (h43 ) 1 γ (h14 ) γ (h24 ) γ (h34 ) γ (h44 ) 1 −1⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡γ (h10 ) ⎤ ⎥⎢ ⎢ ⎥ −1⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ ⎢γ (h20 ) ⎥ ⎥ −1⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ = ⎢γ (h30 ) ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ −1⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ ⎢γ (h40 ) ⎥ ⎥ 0 ⎥⎢μ ⎦ ⎢ 1 ⎦ ⎦⎣ ⎥ ⎣ (4.. The diagonal entries of the matrix equation to be solved are given by γ (h11 ) = γ (h22 ) = .164) . 1.. γ (hNN ) = 0 4-111 (4.(4. .. N (4. Eq. 2.161) For any value of N..

60. The variogram for the porosity distribution in this reservoir is shown in Figure 4. It is essential that these numbers be consistent and well behaved for the system of equations to have a solution. The locations are evenly spaced 10 meters apart. Most of the entries in the matrix equation are numbers computed from the variogram. This is why a well behaved theoretical variogram model is usually fitted to the experimental variogram and the theoretical variogram model is then used instead of the experimental variogram for the estimation calculations.1 The porosities at locations 1 and 4 in a linear reservoir have been measured as shown Figure 4. Example 4.61. Inconsistent numbers from an experimental variogram could lead to a system of equations without a solution. We are required to estimate the porosity at location 3 at which no measurement was made. This is an undesirable structure for the solution of the system of linear simultaneous equations. This is why the formulation and solution of the estimation problem in terms of the covariance function is usually preferred over the formulation in terms of the variogram.All the diagonal entries of the matrix equation are zero. 2. 4–112 .

60. 4-113 . Calculate the best estimate of the porosity at location 3 based on the available information and determine the 95% confidence interval assuming a normal distribution. Assuming a stationary random function model. Measured porosity values and their locations. carefully sketch on Figure 4. 2.Figure 4. 1.60 the covariance function for the porosity distribution for this reservoir showing important features of your sketch.

Show that kriging is an exact interpolator.1 The best estimate of the porosity at location 3 can be obtained using ordinary kriging.Figure 4. if kriging is applied to estimate the porosity at location 1.61.1. In other words. The kriging equations to be solved can be written by inpection in terms of the covariance function as ⎡ C11 C12 ⎢C ⎢ 21 C22 ⎢ 1 1 ⎣ 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ = ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4. 3. Solution to Example 4.165) 4–114 . Variogram for Example 4. An exact interpolator will return the measured value if it is applied at a location containing a measured value. it should return a value of 10% with a minimum error variance of 0.

140) as ⎛1⎞ ⎛2⎞ ⎛1⎞ ⎛2⎞ σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 5 − 0 − ⎜ x3 + x 4 ⎟ = 3 ⎠ 3 ⎝3 i =1 2 ⎛1 2 ⎞ 4 4-115 . the matrix equation to be solved is ⎡ 5 2 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 3 ⎤ ⎢ 2 5 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ = ⎢ 4 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.(4.165) can easily be computed from the variogram. the covariances needed in Eq. Thus. the variogram and the covariance function are related by Eq.114).(4.166) For a stationary random function.167) can easily be solved by elimination to obtain 1 3 2 λ2 = 3 μ =0 λ1 = The estimated porosity is given by φ0* = φ3* = ⎜ ⎟ Φ1 + ⎜ ⎟ Φ 4 = ⎜ ⎟ (10 ) + ⎜ ⎟ ( 25 ) = 20% ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ The minimum error variance is computed from Eq.(4.(4. location 3 = 0 and location 4 = 3.167) Eq. Therefore.Let us adopt the following subscripts: Location 1 = 1. The matrix of lag distances for location 3 is (subscript 0) is ⎡ h11 ⎢h ⎣ 21 h12 h22 h10 ⎤ ⎡ 0 30 20 ⎤ = meters h20 ⎥ ⎢30 0 10 ⎥ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ (4.

169) The solution of Eq.96 )(1.96 )(1.(4.169) gives 4–116 .26 or 20% ± 2.168) ⎡ 0 3 −1⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 2 ⎤ ⎢ 3 0 −1⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ = ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢1 1 0 ⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.26 or 17. In this case. the corresponding equations are ⎡ γ 11 γ 12 ⎢γ ⎢ 21 γ 22 ⎢1 1 ⎣ −1⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ γ 10 ⎤ −1⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ = ⎢γ 20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0 ⎥⎢μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.26 ≤ ( 20 − φ3 ) ≤ 2.1547 ) ≤ ( 20 − φ3 ) ≤ 0 + (1.1547 ) 2.The minimum standard deviation is 4 = 1.74 ≤ φ3 ≤ 22.1547 3 σ e min = The 95% confidence interval is given by 0 + (1.26% The problem could also be solved in terms of the variogram.

74 ≤ φ3 ≤ 22.96 )(1.1547 ) ≤ ( 20 − φ3 ) ≤ 0 + (1.96 )(1.26 or 20% ± 2.1547 3 σ e min = The 95% confidence interval is given by 0 + (1.(4.1547 ) 2.159) as ⎛1⎞ ⎛2⎞ ⎛1⎞ ⎛2⎞ σ e2min = − μ + ∑ λiγ (hio ) = −0 + ⎜ x 2 + x1⎟ = 3 3 3 i =1 2 ⎛1 ⎝ 2 ⎞ ⎠ 4 The minimum standard deviation is 4 = 1.26% 4-117 .26 or 17.1 3 2 λ2 = 3 μ =0 λ1 = The estimated porosity is given by φ0* = φ3* = ⎜ ⎟ Φ1 + ⎜ ⎟ Φ 4 = ⎜ ⎟ (10 ) + ⎜ ⎟ ( 25 ) = 20% ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ ⎝3⎠ The minimum error variance is obtained from Eq.26 ≤ ( 20 − φ3 ) ≤ 2.

(4.(4.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 5 − 0 − (1x5 + 0 x 2 ) = 0 i =1 2 4–118 . as expected. We should recover the sample value of 10% with an error variance of 0.171) Eq.165) gives the matrix equation to be solved as ⎡ 5 2 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 5 ⎤ ⎢ 2 5 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ = ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4. To demonstrate that kriging is an exact interpolator.171) can be solved to obtain λ1 = 1 λ2 = 0 μ =0 φ0* = φ1* = (1) Φ1 + ( 0 ) Φ 4 = (1)(10 ) + ( 0 )( 25 ) = 10% The minimum error variance is computed from Eq.61 is left as an exercise for the reader. we solve the kriging equation at location 1. The sketch of the covariance function on Figure 4.(4.170) Substituting these numbers into Eq.Thus. The matrix of lag distances is ⎡ h11 ⎢h ⎣ 21 h12 h22 h10 ⎤ ⎡ 0 30 0 ⎤ = meters h20 ⎥ ⎢30 0 30 ⎥ ⎦ ⎦ ⎣ (4. which contains a sample datum. the kriging equations based on the covariance function and the variogram give the same results.

we renumber the known values as shown in Figure 4. 3.51 at locations 1. 2.3 h Solution to Example 4.Therefore. h20 is the lag distance (4Δx) from the point of estimation to the renumbered sample 2 and h30 is the lag distance (2Δx) from the point of estimation to the renumbered sample 3. The other entries are lag distances. 7 and 3. kriging is an exact interpolator. This order is determined by a random drawing. 1. The correlation structure of the heterogeneous property is given by C ( h ) = 100e −0.2 Estimate the petrophysical property shown in Figure 4. 5. Using a random number generator for integer values from 1 to 8.8.8 should be read as follows. The index 0 represents the location at which an estimate is to be made. we construct the lag distance matrix for location 8 as shown in Table 4.62. The indices 1. we must determine the order in which the estimates will be made. 3 represent the locations of the renumbered known values.172) To begin the calculations. h10 is the lag distance (6Δx) from the point of estimation to the renumbered sample 1. These are the lag distances needed to construct the right hand side vector of the system of equations 4-119 . this value is treated as a known sample and is used 8 along with the measured data for the subsequent estimations. 7 and 8 at which no measurements were made. Next. We begin the calculations by visiting location (node) 8. it has been determined that the order for the estimations is 8. For example. 5. Example 4.2 (4. the number of equations to be solved increases as the estimation progresses. After estimating Φ* . Thus. The entries in Table 4. In order to generate a compact matrix equation.

8. h11 is the lag distance between the renumbered sample 1 and itself. Lag Distance Matrix hij for Location 8 1 0 1 2 3 6Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 2 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 3 2Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx hi0 6Δx 4Δx 2Δx The matrix equation to be solved is 4–120 . which is zero.to be solved. they have been transferred into the last column of the table under the heading hi0. Table 4. Renumbered sample values for the estimation at location 8. The other entries in the table should be self explanatory.62. For example. Figure 4. Therefore.

3 2 = 54.174) into the inverse matrix of Eq. Using the matrix of lag distances in Table 4.172).8812 30.0117 −0.173) In this problem.174). Δx = 1 unit.(4. C12 is given by C12 ( h12 ) = C ( 2 ) = 100e −0.0000 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢54.175) gives the solution vector as 4-121 .8 and Eq.4080 −63.0000 54.8812 100.1194 54.8812 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 1 1 0⎦ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ 1 ⎦ ⎣ (4.0090 −0.8812 100.8812 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢30.174) Eq.0181 −0.1862 ⎦ ⎣ 0.⎡ C11 C12 ⎢C ⎢ 21 C22 ⎢C31 C32 ⎢ 1 ⎣ 1 C13 C23 C33 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢C30 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0⎦ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ 1 ⎦ (4.174) can be solved by any standard method of solving a system of linear simultaneous equations.(4. For example.4080 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0. by matrix inversion.(4. inverse matrix for Eq.4080 ⎤ ⎢ −0.0026 0.1194 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡16.(4.4080 (4.(4.0090 0.0000 54.173) can easily be computed.1841 0.5299 ⎤ ⎢ 54. for example.(4.174) is The ⎡ 0.0026 −0.1841 ⎥ − ⎥ Cij 1 = ⎢ ⎢ −0.8812 The results of the other calculations are shown in Eq.0090 0. ⎡100.0090 0. the entries of the covariance matrix of Eq.0117 0.175) Multiplying the right hand side of Eq.1194 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 30.(4.

5299 + 0.3321 ± (1.176) The minimum error variance (estimation variance) is computed from Eq.8812 ) = 82.7329 )( 20 ) = 24. 4–122 .33 ± 17.(4.83 8 The estimated value at location 8 is then added to the sample data set in preparation for the estimation at location 1 as shown in Figure 4.5088⎦ The kriged value is calculated as Φ* = Φ* = ( 0.7329 x54.1194 + 0.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 100 − ( −28.0830 x30.63.0963 The 95% confidence interval is given by Φ* = 24.7329 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ −28.0830 )( 50 ) + ( 0.96 )( 9.⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 0.7434 The minimum standard deviation (estimation standard deviation) is σ e min = 82.1841 ⎤ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.1841x16.3321 0 8 (4.0963) = 24.5089 ) i =1 3 − ( 0.1841)( 30 ) + ( 0.7435 = 9.0830 ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 0.

Figure 4. Table 4. Next.9. we visit location 1 and construct the lag distance matrix shown in Table 4.63. Sample data set for the estimation at location 1. Lag Distance Matrix hij for Location 1 1 0 1 2 3 4 1Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 6Δx 2 3Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 3 5Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4 7Δx 6Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx hi0 1Δx 3Δx 5Δx 7Δx 4-123 .9.

(4.179) Multiplying the right hand side of Eq.178) ⎡ 0.0000 1 ⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ ⎢12.0089 0.178) into the inverse matrix of Eq.180) . Eq.0182 −0.0121 −0.6570 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 30.3445 ⎥ ⎢ −0.8812 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ = ⎢ 22.0089 0.0022 0.3445 −53.0893 ⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ −13.3636 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (4.3130 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 16.(4.0000 54.The matrix equation to be solved is ⎡ C11 C12 ⎢C ⎢ 21 C22 ⎢C31 C32 ⎢ ⎢C41 C42 ⎢ 1 1 ⎣ C13 C14 C23 C24 C33 C34 C43 C44 1 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ = ⎢C30 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ ⎢C40 ⎥ 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.1194 54.1194 54.8812 30.0403 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ ⎢ 0.8812 30.0121 ⎢ 0.2456 ⎥ ⎢ 1 1 1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ The inverse matrix for Eq.(4.177) Using the matrix of lag distances in Table 4.0182 −0.1194 16.0083 0.0403 ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ = ⎢ 0.0089 0.1555 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ − Cij 1 = ⎢ −0.0083 −0.0089 −0.0010 −0.178) is (4.177) becomes ⎡100.8301 ⎤ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.8309 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ 4–124 (4.8812 100.5299 30.0022 −0.3445 ⎤ ⎢ −0.170).(4.(4.0000 54.0010 0.8812 100.0000 54.8812 100.0818 ⎤ ⎢ 54.1555 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0.1194 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ ⎢ 40.3445 0.0010 −0.9 and Eq.1555 0.0010 −0.5299 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 74.179) gives the solution vector as ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 0.1555 0.

3130 + 0.7035 The estimation standard deviation is i =1 3 σ e min = 48.10.8301)( 30 ) + ( 0.(4.6570 + 0.0893)( 24.0819 + 0.8301x74. Next.68 8 The estimated value at location 1 is then added to the sample data set in preparation for the estimation at location 5 as shown in Figure 4.8309 ) − ( 0.0403)( 50 ) + ( 0.0893x12.96 )( 6.2456 ) = 48.99 ± 13.8968 0 The estimation variance is computed from Eq.3321) = 29.9788 The 95% confidence interval is given by Φ* = 29.The kriged value is calculated as * Φ* = Φ1 = ( 0.0403 x 40. we visit location 5 and construct the lag distance matrix shown in Table 4.7035 = 6.8968 ± (1. 4-125 .9788 ) = 29.0403 x 22.0403)( 20 ) + ( 0.64.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 100 − ( −13.

Table 4.64. Lag Distance Matrix hij for Location 5 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 3Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 6Δx 1Δx 1Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 3Δx 2 1Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 5Δx 3 3Δx 6Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 7Δx 4 4Δx 1Δx 3Δx 5Δx 7Δx 0Δx 5 hi0 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 3Δx 4Δx 4–126 .10. Sample data set for the estimation at location 5.Figure 4.

8812 100.182) is ⎡ 0.5299 74.8812 100.(4.(4.0083 0.5299 30.0205 0.0008 −0.0007 0.183) ⎥ 0.0170 ⎢ ⎣ 0.0818 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ (4.8812 30.1440 0.0818 40.0182 −0.3192 −0.6570 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ ⎢ 74.181) Using the matrix of lag distances in Table 4.3130 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 74.182) into the inverse matrix of Eq.6570 ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 74.0000 54.0818 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 40.0818 ⎥ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 30.1194 16.0008 −0.0000 54.0088 −0.1088 0.0007 ⎢ −0.0082 −0.The matrix equation to be solved is ⎡ C11 ⎢C ⎢ 21 ⎢C31 ⎢ ⎢C41 ⎢C51 ⎢ ⎣ 1 C12 C22 C32 C42 C52 1 C13 C14 C23 C24 C33 C34 C43 C44 C53 C54 1 1 C15 C25 C35 C45 C55 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ2 ⎥ ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢C30 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ ⎢C40 ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢C50 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0⎦ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ 1 ⎦ (4.0083 −0.2840 ⎥ ⎥ −49.0009 −0.1440 0.1194 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 1 1 1 1 1 0⎦ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ 1 ⎦ ⎣ The inverse matrix for Eq.6570 ⎤ ⎢ 54.182) ⎢ 16.0262 ⎢ −0.6570 22.8812 30.(4.(4.1194 54.2456 1 ⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ ⎢ 40.8812 100.0008 −0.8812 22.0018 0.0082 ⎢ ⎢ −0.170).10 and Eq.4359 ⎦ 0.181) becomes ⎡100.0122 −0.0000 12.1088 −0.3192 Multiplying the right hand side of Eq.0000 54.1194 40.2456 100.1440 0.0182 −0.0170 −0. Eq.3130 12.0018 0.(4.183) gives the solution vector as 4-127 .0000 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢ 30.2840 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ (4.0088 0.1440 0.0003 −0.0008 −0.1194 54.0009 −0.0003 − Cij 1 = ⎢ ⎢ −0.

7659 The estimator variance is computed from Eq.(4.4059 The 95% confidence interval is given by Φ* = 34.96 )( 5.6570 + 0.⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 0.4846 )( 50 ) + ( 0.60 8 The estimated value at location 5 is then added to the sample data set in preparation for the estimation at location 7 as shown in Figure 4.1194 ⎠ The estimator standard deviation is σ e min = 29.65.4059 ) = 34.1441) − ⎜ ⎟ = 29.0818 ⎞ − ( −2.8968 ) = 34.0047 x 40.0123)( 29.7659 ± (1.4846 x74.0047 )( 30 ) + ( 0.0047 ⎤ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.4846 ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 0.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 100 i =1 3 ⎛ 0.0138 x 40.184) Φ* = Φ* = ( 0.3321) 0 5 + ( 0.1441⎦ The kriged value is calculated as (4.0123x30.0138 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢ 0.4846 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ ⎢ 0.77 ± 10.0138 )( 24.2243 = 5.0818 + 0.4846 x74.0123 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ μ ⎦ ⎣ −2.2243 ⎝ +0.4846 )( 20 ) + ( 0. 4–128 .6570 + 0.

Figure 4. Lag Distance Matrix hij for Location 7 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 5Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 6Δx 1Δx 2Δx 3Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 3Δx 1Δx 2 1Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 5Δx 1Δx 3 1Δx 6Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 7Δx 3Δx 4 6Δx 1Δx 3Δx 5Δx 7Δx 0Δx 4Δx 5 2Δx 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 3Δx 4Δx 0Δx 6 hi0 5Δx 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 6Δx 2Δx 4-129 .65. Sample data set for the estimation at location 7. we visit location 7 and construct the lag distance matrix shown in Table 4. Next.11.11. Table 4.

0818 40.1194 40.2898 −0.0993 ⎤ −0.0818 74.0044 −0.(4.0019 0.0202 0.2898 ⎥ ⎥ 0.3130 74.0000 30.1320 −0.1194 100.0818 40.3130 12.8812 ⎥ ⎢ 1 1 1 1 1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ …….0009 −0.0420 0.185) Using the matrix of lag distances in Table 4.1320 ⎥ ⎥ −0.8812 22.8812 74.8812 100.0159 0.0000 54.0818 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 16.8812 100.2456 40.0000 54.0159 ⎢ 0.0251 ⎥ 0.1348 ⎥ ⎥ −0.6570 74.1194 54.186) ⎡ 0.0155 0.0002 0. The inverse matrix for Eq.1348 0.0000 12.0023 ⎢ ⎢ 0.185) becomes ⎡100.0279 −0.6570 22.0251 −49.4209 ⎥ ⎦ 4–130 .3191 ⎥ (4.0202 0.0155 0.0009 −0.0023 0.0097 0.(4.0818 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ ⎢ 40.0207 −0.0073 −0.0228 0.3191 −0.0818 40.8812 30.0008 −0.0002 0.0818 ⎥ ⎢ 74.187) 0.0044 −0.0000 54..0073 ⎢ −1 Cij = ⎢ −0.0000 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢54..1194 54.6570 1 ⎥ ⎢λ4 ⎥ = ⎢ 74.0008 0.0087 −0.(4.1194 16.0006 ⎢ −0.0097 0.0055 −0.5299 30.6570 30.186) is (4.0322 ⎢ −0.0019 −0.0239 −0. Eq.0055 −0.6570 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 22.0087 0.6570 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 30.8812 100.8812 30.0207 ⎢ ⎢ −0.11 and Eq.0122 −0.170).2456 100.1194 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢16.The matrix equation to be solved is ⎡ C11 ⎢C ⎢ 21 ⎢C31 ⎢ ⎢C41 ⎢C51 ⎢ ⎢C61 ⎢ 1 ⎣ C12 C22 C32 C42 C52 C62 1 C13 C14 C23 C24 C33 C34 C43 C44 C53 C54 C63 C64 1 1 C15 C25 C35 C45 C55 C65 1 C16 C26 C36 C46 C56 C66 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ2 ⎥ ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢C30 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ = ⎢C40 ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢C50 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢C60 ⎥ 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.5299 74.0993 ⎣ −0.0006 −0.0818 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 74.3130 ⎤ ⎢ 54.5299 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 54.

0123 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢ 0.3130 + 0.Multiplying the right hand side of Eq.186) into the inverse matrix of Eq.2242 = 5.(4.1422 ) − ⎜ ⎟ = 29.4921)( 24.0058 ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 0.0058 x 40.96 )( 5.4921x74.187) gives the solution vector as ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 0.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 100 i =1 3 ⎛ 0.4841)( 20 ) + ( 0.4841 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ = ⎢ 0.4886 ± (1.6570 + 0.0009 x54.8968 ) + ( 0.0123x16.0818 ⎞ − ( −2.0123)( 29.4059 The 95% confidence interval is given by Φ* = 22.4059 ) = 22.7659 ) = 22.4886 The estimation variance is computed from Eq.60 7 4-131 .4921 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢ 0.5299 + 0.2242 ⎝ +0.4886 ± 10.1422 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ The kriged value is calculated as (4.0058 )( 50 ) + ( 0.8812 ⎠ The estimation standard deviation is σ e min = 29.0009 )( 34.0818 + 0.188) Φ* = Φ* = ( 0.3321) 0 7 + ( 0.0047 x 22.0047 ⎤ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.(4.0009 ⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ −2.(4.4841x74.0047 )( 30 ) + ( 0.

Lag Distance Matrix hij for Location 3 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 6Δx 1Δx 2Δx 2Δx 2 1Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 4Δx 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 3 3Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 2Δx 5Δx 1Δx 1Δx 4 5Δx 6Δx 4Δx 2Δx 0Δx 7Δx 3Δx 3Δx 5 2Δx 1Δx 3Δx 5Δx 7Δx 0Δx 4Δx 4Δx 6 2Δx 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 3Δx 4Δx 0Δx 0Δx 7 4Δx 3Δx 1Δx 1Δx 3Δx 4Δx 0Δx 0Δx hi0 1Δx 1Δx 3Δx 5Δx 2Δx 2Δx 4Δx 4–132 .66. Sample data set for the estimation at location 3. Next.The estimated value at location 7 is then added to the sample data set in preparation for the estimation at location 3 as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4.66.12. Table 4.12. we visit location 3 and construct the lag distance matrix shown in Table 4.

6570 74.1194 54.170).3130 12.5299 30.8812 100.6570 74.189) becomes ⎡100.0818 74.0000 54.5299 74.0000 54.0000 30.8812 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 54.0818 ⎤ ⎢ 54.6570 30.0818 40.190) The inverse matrix for Eq.6570 74.0818 74.0000 54.8812 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢54.3130 ⎥ ⎢ 74.1194 16.0818 16.(4.3130 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 74.3130 40. Eq.8812 100.8812 100.1194 16.8812 74.189) Using the matrix of lag distances in Table 4.8812 30.2456 40.0818 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 40.8812 ⎥ ⎢ 22.0818 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 30.6570 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ 16.0818 40.6570 22.8812 100.1194 54.(4.6570 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 74.1194 100.8812 22.0718 74.1194 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 7⎥ ⎢ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ …… (4.12 and Eq.5299 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢54.0000 54.0818 40.0818 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ = ⎢ 22.0000 12.The matrix equation to be solved is ⎡ C11 ⎢C ⎢ 21 ⎢C31 ⎢ ⎢C41 ⎢C51 ⎢ ⎢C61 ⎢C ⎢ 71 ⎢ 1 ⎣ C12 C22 C32 C42 C52 C62 C72 1 C13 C23 C33 C43 C53 C63 C73 1 C14 C24 C34 C44 C54 C64 C74 1 C15 C25 C35 C45 C55 C65 C75 1 C16 C26 C36 C46 C56 C66 C76 1 C17 C27 C37 C47 C57 C67 C77 1 1 ⎤ ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ C10 ⎤ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ2 ⎥ ⎢C20 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢C30 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ ⎢C40 ⎥ = 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢C50 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢C60 ⎥ 1 ⎥ ⎢λ7 ⎥ ⎢C70 ⎥ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 0⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (4.1194 40.(4.6570 22.2456 100.3130 74.0000 1 ⎥ ⎢λ ⎥ ⎢30.0818 40.8812 30.190) is 4-133 .5299 54.

0228 −0.0155 −0.0322 ⎢ −0.0151x 22.0006 −0.190) into the inverse matrix of Eq.192) Φ* = Φ* = ( 0.7659 ) + ( 0.1170 )( 20 ) + ( 0.0053 −0.00004 0.0151)( 29.0151x54.0.(4.0006 −1 Cij = ⎢ ⎢ −0.2830 ⎥ 0.0965 ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ 0.0002 −0.0420 −0.6342 ) i =1 3 ⎛ 0.0990 0.0818 + 0.0001 0.191) Multiplying the right hand side of Eq.0359 −0.1343 0.6570 ⎞ −⎜ ⎟ = 29.0733 ⎥ −0.0097 0.1194 ⎠ The estimation standard deviation is 4–134 .0151 ⎥ ⎢ λ5 ⎥ ⎢ 0.191) gives the solution vector as ⎡ λ1 ⎤ ⎡ 0.0733 −49.0342 ⎥ 0.0074 ⎢ −0.0006 −0.2888 ⎥ −0.0023 ⎢ ⎢ 0.00004 0.(4.0205 −0.5972 ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ3 ⎥ ⎢ 0.0039 )( 22.0168 0.1170 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ4 ⎥ = ⎢ 0.0155 −0.0001 −0.0151 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ λ6 ⎥ ⎢ −0.3321) 0 3 + ( 0.0001 ⎢ ⎢ 0.0006 −0.8812 + 0.0202 −0.0039 x30.8968 ) − ( 0.5490 The estimation variance is computed from Eq.2888 −0.4886 ) = 39.0017 0.0207 ⎢ ⎢ −0.2830 0.0168 −0.0965 −0.0818 + 0.4841)( 30 ) + ( 0.0207 0.0008 −0.0008 −0.0044 −0.0074 −0.(4.1343 −0.0004 ⎥ 0.3130 + 0.2325⎥ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.0002 0.0166 (4.2306 0.8812 − 0.0001 −0.0166 0.0097 0.0007 0.0004 −0.5972 )( 50 ) + ( 0.2325 x54.1170 x 40.0007 −0.0159 ⎢ −0.140) as σ e2min = σ 2 − μ − ∑ λi C (hio ) = 100 − ( −2.0202 −0.5972 x74.2455 ⎝ +0.0239 −0.0250 ⎥ −0.0990 ⎣ −0.0017 −0.⎡ 0.0023 0.4841x74.0044 −0.0159 −0.6342 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ The kriged value is calculated as (4.2637 ⎥ ⎦ 0.0151)( 24.2325 )( 34.4841 ⎤ ⎢ λ ⎥ ⎢ 0.0053 −0.0039 ⎥ ⎢ 7⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ −2.

49 33.60 24.96 σ e min 13. Table 4.13 presents a summary of the results of the estimation.58 4-135 .96σ e min i i 16.84 11.52.41 9.55 29.2.60 17.41 10.81 5.55 ± 10.4079 ) = 39.15 Φi Φ* i 29.37 30 39.27 5.89 6.60 28.96σ e min Φ* + 1. Location 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 20 22. Results of Estimations for Example 4. It should be noted that kriging gives the estimated values of Φ* and Φ* that 3 5 are essentially the same as those obtained from the linear interpolation of Figure 4.98 1.95 50.49 24.27 82.22 43.5490 ± (1.67 shows the estimated values along with the measured values.96 )( 5.17 45.90 σ e2min 48.72 σ e min 6.σ e min = 29.60 7 Table 4.10 10.17 50 34.77 29.33 29.09 42. Figure 4.13.41 10.68 Φ* − 1.2455 = 5.4079 The 95% confidence interval is given by Φ* = 39.27 5.

2. There are other types of kriging such as simple kriging. Using kriging. block kriging and ordinary 4–136 . We have made significant progress in dealing with the heterogeneities of our reservoir rock. universal kriging.Figure 4. Graph of the measured and the kriged values for Example 4.67. we are now able to estimate the petrophysical properties for all the grid blocks of our reservoir simulation model that honor the measured data and the correlation structure of the heterogeneous properties. Further. we are able to estimate the uncertainty associated with the estimates at each grid block. We have studied ordinary kriging.

If such local variability is important.1 Introduction Kriging gives a smooth estimate because the estimate is a weighted average of the sample data. Conditional simulation also is referred to as stochastic simulation or Monte Carlo simulation is the other major application of geostatistics. If the kriged value comes from a normal distribution. kriging eliminates local variability. Thus.cokriging. The simulation is conditioned on the measured data. Thus.6 CONDITIONAL SIMULATION 4. the kriged estimate is a random variable with a known variance or standard deviation.6. 4.2 Sequential Gaussian Simulation The objective is to perform a stochastic simulation to estimate the values of a petrophysical property in a heterogeneous reservoir at 4-137 . The idea behind conditional simulation is as follows. Each of the estimates obtained from kriging was associated with an uncertainty in the estimated value measured by the estimation variance or the estimation standard deviation. 4. These other types of kriging are usually covered in a geostastistics course. then it is possible to draw a simulated value from this distribution that is centered on the kriged value and has a variance that is equal to the estimation variance and a standard deviation that is equal to the estimation standard deviation.6. then it can be incorporated into the estimated values using conditional simulation. Such a weighted average can never be larger than the largest sample value nor can it be smaller than the smallest sample value.

The simulated values should honor the measured sample data and the correlation structure of the heterogeneity as revealed by the analysis of the sample data. 3. (4. Select at random a location or node not yet simulated in the grid. a new zi must be drawn for that location.(4.50. Draw a random value from a normal distribution with a mean equal to the kriged estimate and a standard deviation equal to the estimation standard deviation at that node.193) where Φ si is the simulated value at location i. σ ei is the standard deviation or the square root of the estimation variance at location i and zi is a standard normal variate with μ = 0 and σ = 1 drawn for location i. it should retain the local variability.locations for which no sample data have been measured.65) to draw a sample from a standard normal distribution and then applying either Eq. 4–138 .(4.67) to compute the simulated value as Φ si = Φ* + σ ei zi i (4. Use ordinary kriging to compute the local estimate at the node along with the estimation variance and the estimation standard deviation. Here is an algorithm for performing such a stochastic simulation known as Sequential Gaussian Simulation (SGS).66) or (4. This step can be accomplished by using either Eq. 1. Further.53). This is the simulated value at that node.64) or (4. (4. Φ* is the kriged value i at location i. Note that upon moving to a new location. 2.

50. 5. whose simulated values will be different from the previous realizations. Solution to Example 4. and repeat the calculations to simulate the value at this location. Include the newly simulated value in the set of conditioning data and use the expanded data set to simulate the value at the next location. This completes one realization of the simulation. To simulate values at the five nodes. The estimation variance and standard deviations also were computed and presented in Table 4. 7. 5. using 4-139 . Repeat the calculations until all grid nodes have a simulated value. 5. 7 and 3.13. 3. Example 4.3 Simulate values at the locations 1. 6. Other realizations can be obtained by repeating the calculations from step 1. the order of the simulation is first determined using a random number generator.3. (4. If there are N nodes to be simulated. The first part of the calculations was done in Example 4. there will be N! (N factorial) possible realizations. This order should be different from all previous orders. Proceed to the next location.51 at which no samples were taken using Sequential Gaussian Simulation. The calculations will then yield a new realization. For example.(4. Let us simulate one realization.4. we draw five variates from a standard normal distribution using Eq. To do so.64) or (4. 1.65). 7 and 8 of Figure 4.2 in which kriged estimates were computed in the following random order: 8. which of course was selected randomly at the start.

6419 2.1679 ) = 21.68 shows the measured values.36 8 s * Φ*1 = Φ1 + σ e1 z1 = 29.8546 0. 5.1679 0.Eq. 7 and 3 as follows: Φ*8 = Φ* + σ e8 z8 = 24. kriged values and the simulated values.24 5 s Φ* 7 = Φ* + σ e 7 z7 = 22.77 + ( 5. 1.98 )( −1.6419 ) = 38.8546 ) = 37.55 + ( 5.42 3 s Figure 4.9009 ) = 44.8821) = 32. 4–140 .92 7 s Φ*3 = Φ* + σ e 3 z3 = 39.91009 Using these numbers.33 + ( 9. we can simulate the values at nodes 8.64) the following five variates were drawn from a standard normal distribution: 0.41)( 2.90 + ( 6.8821 -1.49 + ( 5.(4.75 s Φ*5 = Φ* + σ e5 z5 = 34.41)( 0.41)( 0.10 )( 0.

The task at hand is to use the laboratory test in a sandpack to forecast the oil recovery curve for a heterogeneous reservoir. kriged and simulated values for Example 4. The coreflood experiment was performed in an unconsolidated sandpack. 4. It is shows a fairly uniform displacement of oil by 4-141 .3 A Practical Application of Sequential Gaussian Simulation A laboratory waterflood experiment was conducted to determine the oil recovery curve for a viscous oil reservoir (μo = 100 cp).69 shows the CT images of the laboratory waterflood at three times just before water breakthrough.6.3.Figure 4. A comparison of the measured. Figure 4.68.

the oil recovery after 3 pore volumes of water injection is less than 60% of the initial oil in place. (b) 0.the water.69. What will be the oil recovery in a reservoir with significant permeability heterogeneity? Figure 4.70 shows the oil recovery curve from the experiment. 4–142 . CT images of a laboratory waterflood in a sandpack: (a) 0. ( c) 0. It should observed that even for a fairly uniform sandpack.05 pore volume injected.10 pore volume injected.25 pore volume injected (Gharbi and Peters. Figure 4. 1993) .

Figure 4.71 shows the twelve heterogeneous. To address this question.70. Oil recovery curve for a laboratory waterflood in a sandpack (Gharbi and Peters. 1993) . The problem of forecasting the oil recovery curve in the field based on a laboratory waterflood boils down to investigating the effect of permeability heterogeneity on the waterflood performance. 2D 4-143 .Figure 4. we generated twelve synthetic reservoirs with varying degrees of permeability heterogeneity and correlation structures and then scaled the laboratory waterflood to the synthetic reservoirs through numerical simulation.

for Ly = 0.2.01. dimensionless by dividing the correlation length by the length of the A Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of 0. the contrast in the permeability values increases while their spatial arrangements remain similar. reservoir in that direction. number of layers is inversely proportional to Ly. and correlation lengths using Sequential Gaussian Permeability fields were generated at Dykstra-Parsons The correlation length was made coefficients (V) of 0.2) distinct homogeneous layers.2 represents mild correlation. with increasing Dykstra-Parsons coefficient at a given Lx. 0.9. 0.01 medium.0 represents extremely strong correlation.89 represents an extremely heterogeneous range from 0. which indicate that the permeability fields are log-normally distributed in accordance 4–144 .72 shows the permeability histograms. petroleum reservoirs can have widely different correlation lengths. Figure 4.2 for the permeability fields shown in Figure 4.2. The value of dimensionless correlation length in the y direction (Ly) was constant at 0.55 and 0. as Lx permeability distributions become more and more stratified. approaches infinity. represents a nearly homogeneous medium whereas a Dyktra-Parsons coefficient of 0. First. as the correlation length (Lx) increases. a correlation length of 2. a correlation length of 0.71.permeability fields generated to cover a wide range of Dykstra-Parsons coefficient Simulation. Depending on the depositional environment.0.71. the The In fact. the permeability distribution will consist of exactly five (1/0. Second.87 and dimensionless correlation lengths of 0. Petroleum reservoirs typically have Dykstra-Parsons coefficients that A dimensionless correlation length of zero represents an uncorrelated or random permeability distribution. 0.7 and 2. Two observations can be made from the permeability distributions of Figure 4.5 to 0.

Figure 4.71. which give a visual impression of the degree of correlation in each permeability field. 1993) Figure 4. 4-145 .74 shows a comparison of the recovery curve for the waterflood experiment and the numerical simulation of the experiment.73 shows the variograms for the twelve permeability fields. Simulated permeability distributions (Gharbi and Peters.with observations in sedimentary rocks. The simulation was used to determine the relative permeability curves to be used to scale the laboratory waterflood to the synthetic heterogeneous reservoirs. Figure 4. The agreement between the two recovery curves is good.

4–146 . 1993).Figure 4.72. Simulated permeability histograms (Gharbi and Peters.

1993). 4-147 .73.Figure 4. Simulated permeability variograms in the x-direction (Gharbi and Peters.

Figure 4. the waterflood response will be essentially the same as in the laboratory sandpack regardless of the correlation structure of the 4–148 .Figure 4.74.75 compares the simulated oil recovery curves for each of the twelve heterogeneous synthetic reservoirs with that of the laboratory waterflood experiment. A comparison of the oil recovery curves of the experiment and the numerical simulation of the experiment (Gharbi and Peters. variability in If the heterogeneous reservoir is characterized by low the permeability distribution (low Dykstra-Parsons coefficient). The following observations can be made from these results. 1993).

heterogeneity. This is most clearly shown by the response in the last permeability field in Figure 4. we examine the simulated water saturation maps.01).77 show the simulated water saturation maps for each of the twelve heterogeneous reservoirs at 0. We see that the displacements in the heterogeneous media with high DykstraParsons coefficient and high correlation length are dominated by channeling of the injected water due to the permeability stratification. To investigate between the the reason for the significant in disparity a in performance laboratory waterflood relatively homogeneous sandpack and in certain kinds of heterogeneous reservoirs.10 and 0. the waterflood effeciency is significantly less in the heterogeneous reservoir than in the laboratory sandpack. essentially leaving much of the reservoir unswept. These channels provide easy pathways for the water to flow from the injection well to the producing well. This is indicated by the agreement between the simulated and the experimental recovery curves in the first row of Figure 4. resulting in a low oil recovery. the waterflood response will be essentially the same as in the laboratory sandpack regardless of the variability in the permeability distribution.87). This results in significant bypassing of the oil in some layers. By contrast.75 (V = 0. the displacements in the reservoirs with low Dykstra-Parsons coefficients are characterized by 4-149 . If the heterogeneous reservoir is characterized by a low correlation length in the permeability distribution (low Lx). This is indicated by the agreement between the simulated and the experimental recovery curves in the first column of Fig.76 and 4. the waterflood response could be significantly different from that of the laboratory sandpack.75 (Lx = 2 and V = 0. Figures 4.75 (Lx = 0). In this case. 4. If the heterogeneous reservoir is characterized by high variability and high correlation length in the permeability distribution.25 pore volume injected.

4–150 . This results in a displacement performance that is comparable to the laboratory waterflood experiment in the sandpack.69). The methodology developed and presented in this study can be used to accomplish this scaling and prevent erroneous performance forecasts. We conclude from this study that the performance of an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) displacement in a heterogeneous reservoir could be significantly lower than in a laboratory experiment depending on the degree and structure of the heterogeneity of the reservoir.excellent sweep comparable with that observed in the CT images of the laboratory waterflood experiment (Figure 4. This conclusion underscores the need for proper scaling when using the results of laboratory coreflood experiments in relatively homogeneous porous media to forecast the expected performance of an EOR process in heterogeneous reservoirs.

A comparison of the experimental and simulated oil recovery curves (Gharbi and Peters.Figure 4.75. 4-151 . 1993).

NOMENCLATURE a C = = correlation length (range of influence) covariance function 4–152 . 1993).10 pore volume injected (Gharbi and Peters. Simulated water saturation maps at 0.25 pore volume injected (Gharbi and Peters.76. Simulated water saturation maps at 0. Figure 4.77.Figure 4. 1993).

C0 = erf = erfc = F h h k = = = = nugget effect error function complementary error function cumulative probability distribution pay thickness lag distance absolute permeability of the medium natural logarithm (log to base e) dimensionless correlation length in the x-direction dimensionless correlation length in the y-direction probability density function standard deviation of sample data variance of sample data Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of variation linear coordinate random variable variate from a standard normal distribution correlation coefficient function population mean Lagrange parameter population standard deviation population variance porosity. fraction mean of log normal distribution variogram kriging weights sample data sample mean standard deviation of a log normal distribution variance of a log normal distribution ln = Lx = Ly = P s V x x z = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = s2 = ρ μ μ σ φ τ γ λ Φ ω σ2 = Φ = ω2 = 4-153 .

and Harper. (April 2006) 14-20. : "Does Geostatistics Work? ". Chambers. Clark. 4–154 . J. Deutsch. 2000. Yarus. Dykstra. and Journel. 1992. Pet. 1979. E.B. Chambers. London. Yarus.J. New York. K. Society of Petroleum Engineers.G. PhD Dissertation. C. M. Deutsch. : “Petroleum Geostatistics for Nongeostatisticians – Part 1. Ecosse North America Llc. 1998.” The Leading Edge (June 2000) 592599. 16th APCOM. M.” The Leading Edge (May 2000) 474479. 2003. and Peters. R.L. Ed. J. Proc.. Richardson. J.L.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. R. Tech. Springer-Verlag.V. C. New York. Tulsa. : Practical Geostatistics 2000. W.V. C. A. Carlson. New York.V. New York. 213-225. : Practical Geostatistics. Clark.L. H. Columbus.” Secondary Recovery of Oil in the United States. Thomas J O'Neil. Applied Science Publishers. : Petroleum Geostatistics. 2005. 10.REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Armstrong. R. K. R.. Cand. : “Petroleum Geostatistics for Nongeostatisticians – Part 2. I.B. and Hird. (1993) 83-95. Gharbi.: Numerical Modeling of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Assisted by Computed Tomography Imaging. Clark.. PennWell. Texas. Oxford University Press. and Parsons. August 1993. Caers. R. Gharbi. Jour. : “Scaling Coreflood Experiments to Heterogeneous Reservoirs. 2002.V. I. The University of Texas at Austin.R. Deutsch.M. I.: "What in the Reservoir is Geostatistics Good For ?".: Geostatistical Reservoir Modeling. : Basic Linear Geostatistics. American Petroleum Institute (1950) 160-175. : “The Prediction of Oil Recovery by Waterflood. Oxford University Press. Austin.M. : Practical Reservoir Simulation. 1979. Society of Mining Engineers of AIME Inc. : GSLIB Geostatistical Software Library and User’s Guide. and Hird.

R. Van Nostrand Reinhold. Porter-Hische. K.M. E. 4-155 . No. Vol.. N.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. Jensen. and Goggin.Gotway. Force Balanced Petrophysics. (1993) 207-221. Corbett. Peters. and Gharbi. : “GEO-Statistics: The Variogram.W.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. : “Characterization of Heterogeneities in Permeable Media with Computed Tomography Imaging. and Hardham. Zirschy. D. : "Incorporating Spatial Trends and Anisotropy in Geostatistical Mapping of Soil Properties. 2001.E.W. (May 1992) 283296. 2. R. : “Numerical Modeling of Laboratory Corefloods. 1988.J. Vol. (1993) 183-205. Oxford University Press.J. Peters. G.J. Kerbs. : "Geostatistical Analysis of Hazardous Waste Site Data. Lake.W. J. : Statistics for Petroleum Engineers and Geoscientists. Metheron.L. L. 61 (1977) 298-309.. Holbrook. and Harris." The Leading Edge (March 1997) 253-260.J. E. : "Principles of Geostatistics. Hirsche. 1989. C. 4. D. Afzal. of Environmental Engineering." J. : Geostatistics and Petroleum Geology.M. L.A. : “On Scaling Immiscible Displacements in Permeable Media. L. New York. J. No. and Afzal. No. : An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. 2nd Edition. New York. New York. Peters. G. 9. : “Visualization of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using Computed Tomography Imaging. 58 (1963) 1446-1266. and Davis." Economic Geology. 2. 9. 54-59. and Srivastava. R. J.D. M. and Hergert. Peters.” Computer Oriented Geological Society Computer Contributions (August 1986) 2. and Gharbi.H.. Elsevier.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. E. (May 1990) 155-168. Isaaks. 112 (1986) 770784. W.J. R. Mewhort... : Pore Pressure Through Earth Mechanical Systems. E. Vol. Hohn. 2000. P. P.J. 7. E. : "The Use and Abuse of Geostatistics.H." Soil Science of America Journal. 3/4. N.

4–156 .

This mixing and spreading of the injected fluid is known as dispersion.". the displacing fluid tends to mix with the displaced fluid.. Bear (1972) describes dispersion as the "macroscopic outcome of actual movement of individual tracer particles through pores. Essentially..CHAPTER 5 DISPERSION IN POROUS MEDIA 5.1 INTRODUCTION When a miscible fluid displaces another in a porous medium. but can be thought of as a concentration of any chemical component within a given phase that is transported through the system. 5-1 . What is "mixed" is usually called a tracer. Experiment shows that the mixing zone grows as the displacement progresses. dispersion is the mixing caused by single-phase fluid movement through a porous medium. The result is that a mixing or transition zone develops at the front in which the concentration of the injected fluid decreases from one to zero.

it is theoretically possible to recover 100% of the oil by miscible displacement. (3) radioactive and reclaimed sewage waste disposals into aquifers. spread and contact the displaced fluid even after it had been originally bypassed by the injected solvent. dispersion improves the displacement efficiency. If a miscible contaminant is accidentally introduced into an aquifer at a site. Dispersion will dilute and reduce the effectiveness of the miscible slug as it is propagated through the reservoir. (4) use of reactors packed with granular material in the chemical industry. Thus. In this case. (2) development of a transition zone between salt water and fresh water in coastal aquifers. dispersion is detrimental to the recovery process. because the injected solvent is usually more expensive than the oil that is to be displaced. However. Miscible displacement is the most efficient improved oil recovery method. a much larger area than the original spill will need to be cleaned up by any contaminant remediation measure. it is usually injected in small quantities as slugs and chased by a less expensive fluid such as water or gas. and (5) 5–2 . Other industrial processes that involve dispersion include (1) use of tracers such as dyes. Because there is no capillary force to trap the displaced oil. In this case.Dispersion has practical consequences in contaminant transport in aquifers and in improved oil recovery from petroleum reservoirs. a much larger area of the aquifer will become contaminated as a result of dispersion than the original spill area. On the other hand. dispersion will cause the contaminant to spread to a larger area as it is being transported by groundwater flow. dispersion causes a solvent to mix. electrolytes and radioactive isotopes to characterize reservoir and aquifer properties. Even though the concentration of the contaminant is reduced by dispersion.

Mobility ratio is defined as 5-3 . 5. dispersion and the heterogeneity of the porous medium. it is instructive and illuminating to view images of miscible displacements that show dispersion at work. First-contact miscible displacements are the most efficient type of displacements. the effect of gravity. after a certain time has elapsed. However. Mobility ratio is a dimensionless number that is characteristic of a displacement. mass transfer between the injected and the displaced fluids causes the two fluids to become miscible.movement of fertilizers in the soil and the leaching of salts from the soil in agriculture. The efficiency of a miscible displacement or an immiscible displacement for that matter. among other factors. This is in contrast to developed miscibility encountered in certain enhanced oil recovery process in which the injected fluid is not initially miscible with the displaced fluid. This means that the two fluids used in the experiment are fully miscible upon first contact. the mobility ratio.2 LABORATORY FIRST-CONTACT MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENTS Before embarking on the mathematics of dispersion in porous media.1) where k phase is the effective permeability to that phase and μ phase is the viscosity of that phase. is controlled by. The images presented in this section are for first-contact miscible displacements. The mobility of a fluid phase in a porous medium is defined as λ phase = k phase μ phase (5.

Gravity can be as a double-edged sword in displacements. the mobility ratio is the viscosity ratio given by the viscosity of the displaced fluid divided by the viscosity of the displacing fluid. gravity override can be used to enhance the displacement efficiency if the less dense solvent is injected up dip while the denser displaced fluid is withdrawn down dip. by careful engineering. A mobility ratio of 1 or less is favorable to the displacement efficiency whereas a mobility ratio greater than 1 is unfavorable to the displacement efficiency. we have single phase flow and as a result. the higher is the displacement efficiency. Dispersion can also be as a double-edged sword in displacements. The lower the mobility ratio. Gravity override and gravity underride or tonguing can significantly reduce the displacement efficiency. the mobility ratio simplifies to ⎛ ⎞ k ⎜ ⎟ ⎜μ ⎟ ⎝ displacing fluid ⎠ = μdisplaced fluid M= ⎛ ⎞ μdisplacing fluid k ⎜ ⎟ ⎜μ ⎟ ⎝ displaced fluid ⎠ (5.2) For a first-contact miscible displacement.M= λdisplacing fluid λdisplaced fluid (5. for a first-contact miscible displacement. for first-contact miscible displacements. the effective permeability to each fluid is equal to the absolute permeability of the porous medium.3) Thus. Therefore. However. the lower is the displacement efficiency. The higher the mobility ratio. If a miscible slug is used in a displacement process to reduce cost. 5–4 .

These permeability arrangements cause the injected fluid to channel through the high permeability layers. The images show the concentrations of the injected solvent in a vertical slice of the 3D sandpack at dimensionless times of 0.10. Figure 5. the tilt is a small gravity override. Thus. The displacement efficiency is slightly less than 100% because 5-5 . Permeability heterogeneity of the porous medium tends to reduce the displacement efficiency for the most part. dispersion is favorable to the displacement efficiency. Because the heterogeneity has a correlation structure.90 and 0. 0. is slightly tilted in Figure 5.1B because of a small density difference between the injected brine and the displaced brine. In this case.82. mixing caused by dispersion can allow the injected solvent to spread and contact more of the displaced fluid than if dispersion was absent. On the other hand.1 shows CT images of a first-contact miscible displacement in an unconsolidated sandpack at a favorable mobility ratio of 0.50 and 1.13. which is an x-ray doppant. The injected brine was slightly less dense that the displaced brine.0 pore volume injected. the displacement is very efficient with almost 100% displacement efficiency at 1 pore volume injected. Because of the favorable mobility ratio. In the experiment. a brine containing sodium chloride was used to displace another brine containing barium chloride. The mixing zone length. high permeabilities tend to occur next to high permeabilities and low permeabilities tend to occur next to low permeabilities as the porous medium is traversed from one point to another. thereby leaving the low permeability layers unswept. defined as the distance between the solvent concentrations of 0.dispersion will dilute and degrade the effectiveness of the slug as the process progresses. Mixing caused by dispersion is clearly visible at the displacement front.

5–6 .53% (Peters and Hardham.50. M = 0.76 darcies. 1990).13. k = 15.1. Figure 5.154x10-2 cm/s. BT recovery = 96. CT images of solvent concentration for a first-contact miscible displacement in a sandpack. C: tD = 1. φ = 35. This experiment shows that a miscible displacement can be quite susceptible to gravity instability in the form of gravity override if the injected fluid is less dense than the displaced fluid and gravity tonguing if the injected fluid is denser than the displaced fluid.0 pore volume injected.of the small gravity override problem.26%. B: tD = 0.82. v = 0. A: tD = 0.

1 (Peters and Hardham. 1990). The transverse or lateral dispersion is quite orderly as one moves from the pure solvent to the pure displaced 5-7 . Mixing caused by dispersion is also clearly evident. It can be seen that the density difference results in a significant gravity override. Average solvent concentration profiles for the miscible displacement experiment of Figure 5. brine with an x-ray doppant was used to displace a mixture of glycerine and brine. The profiles have the classical shapes predicted by the convection-dispersion model of dispersion to be presented later in this chapter. Such an override is detrimental to the displacement efficiency. The injected brine was less dense than the displaced fluid.2.2 shows the 1D profiles of the 3D solvent concentration distributions at the three dimensionless times. The profiles can be used to characterize the dispersion phenomenon in the direction of flow.Figure 5. Here.3 shows the images of a first-contact miscible displacement at an unfavorable mobility ratio of 74. Figure 5. Figure 5.

fluid.1.3B. There is also viscous instability or viscous fingering caused by the adverse mobility ratio. 5–8 . Clearly.2 and cannot be predicted by the idealized convection-dispersion model. the displacing fluid tends to penetrate the displaced fluid due to the inevitable imperfections in the porous medium. These perturbations may grow to form viscous fingers as shown in Figure 5. At a mobility ratio greater than 1. As a result. The shapes of the profiles are significantly different from those of Figure 5. Figure 5. this displacement is less efficient than that of Figure 5.4 shows the corresponding solvent concentration profiles for this displacement. the displacing fluid is more mobile than the displaced fluid. at the interface between the two fluids.

50.4. C: tD = 1. Average solvent concentration profiles for the miscible displacement experiment of Figure 5. k = 16.3. v = 0. φ = 35. Figure 5.23% (Peters and Hardham.13. CT images of solvent concentration for a first-contact miscible displacement in a sandpack.0 pore volume injected. A: tD = 0. M = 74. B: tD = 0. BT recovery = 31.014x10-2 cm/s. 5-9 .3 (Peters and Hardham.Figure 5. 1990).69 darcies.68%. 1990).

The mixing zone length caused by dispersion is also visible. This is a testament to the efficiency of miscible displacements. 5–10 . were subsequently displaced with continued solvent injection. dyed water was used to displace clear water in a thin porous medium consisting of uniform glass beads.Figure 5.6 shows the corresponding solvent concentration profiles. there are dead spots between the injector and the producing wells. As a result. Figure 5. In this experiment. As expected. The images show that portions of the porous medium that were initially bypassed by the solvent due to gravity override.5 shows the images of a first-contact miscible displacement at an unfavorable mobility ratio of 54 with gravity override. The images were obtained with a home-built imaging system described by Peters and Reid (1990). The areal sweep efficiency can easily be measured. gravity effect was negligibly small. in an immiscible displacement. Such disturbances typically remain stationary in immiscible displacements.7 shows a first-contact miscible displacement in a quarter five-spot pattern at a mobility ratio of 1. Here. Notice how the disturbances in the profiles propagate in time and space. This is characteristic of miscible displacements. Note that because of the geometry of the displacement pattern. the displacement is efficient. the thin porous medium was oriented horizontally. such dead spots would be potential candidates for infill drilling. In a field flood. Figure 5. The areal sweep efficiency is the ratio of the area contacted by the injected fluid and the total area of the pattern. portions of the porous medium initially bypassed for whatever reason typically remain unswept with continued injection. By contrast.

1992).80% (Peters and Afzal.5 darcies.5. M = 54.Figure 5.850x10-2 cm/s. k = 9. φ = 31. 5-11 .70%. CT images of solvent concentration for a first-contact miscible displacement in a sandpack. BT recovery = 28. v = 0.

Figure 5.Figure 5. Average solvent concentration profiles for the miscible displacement experiment of Figure 5. 1990). 1992).6. 5–12 .5 (Peters and Afzal. Video images of solvent concentration in a miscible displacement in a glass bead pack.7. M = 1(Peters and Reid.

8 shows the images of another first-contact miscible displacement in the same porous medium as in Figure 5. There is significant mixing due to dispersion and viscous fingering due to the adverse mobility ratio.Figure 5. this displacement is less efficient than that of Figure 5. M = 100 (Peters and Reid. The porous medium was oriented horizontally. 1990).7 at a mobility ratio of 100. 5-13 . Clearly.8. Video images of solvent concentration in a miscible displacement in a glass bead pack. Figure 5.7.

With this arrangement.Figure 5. 1990). This experiment was designed to simulate a horizontal injection well at the top left corner and a horizontal producing well at the bottom right corner of the medium.9. gravity override is beneficial to the displacement efficiency in contrast to the displacement of Figure 5. Figure 5.8 but with the medium oriented vertically to take advantage of the beneficial effect of gravity override. 5–14 .3 in which gravity segregation was detrimental to the displacement efficiency. Video images of solvent concentration in a gravity-assisted miscible displacement experiment in a glass bead pack (Peters and Reid. It can be seen that here.9 shows images of a first-contact miscible displacement in the same porous medium and at the same mobility ratio as in Figure 5.

Here. Figure 5.8.13 shows the corresponding solvent concentration profiles.10 but at an unfavorable mobility ratio of 95. Notice that the channels created by the injected solvent are thinner than in Figure 5.84. the dominate effect is channeling due to the permeability heterogeneity of the layered medium. Clearly. Figure 5. the effect of viscous fingering due to the adverse mobility ratio is superimposed on the channeling due to the heterogeneity of the core.57 at a favorable mobility ratio of 0.gravity override delays the solvent breakthrough thereby significantly enhancing the displacement efficiency compared to the displacement of Figure 5.12 shows a miscible displacement is the same layered sandstone core as in Figure 5. One can see mixing due to dispersion.10. Figure 5. 5-15 . this displacement is more efficient than that of Figure 5.8. miscible or immiscible. However. Figure 5. It can be concluded from these images that permeability stratification in a porous medium can have a significant adverse effect on any displacement.10 shows NMR images of a first-contact miscible displacement in the layered sandstone core of Figure 2.11 shows the corresponding solvent concentration profiles.10 indicating a less efficient displacement than in Figure 5. There is viscous fingering due to the adverse mobility ratio as well as significant mixing due to dispersion.

10. NMR images of a first-contact miscible displacement in a layered sandstone core at a mobility ratio of 0.Figure 5.84 (Peters and Li. 5–16 . 1996).

5-17 . Average solvent concentration profiles for the miscible displacement of Figure 5. 1996).11.Figure 5.9 (Peters and Li.

NMR images of a first-contact miscible displacement in a layered sandstone core at a mobility ratio of 95 (Peters and Li. 5–18 .12. 1996).Figure 5.

1996). Clearly. Finally.10 for mobility ratios ranging from 0.13. Displacements at adverse mobility ratios suffer from early solvent breakthroughs and require more pore volumes of 5-19 . mobility ratio has a significant impact on the efficiency and the timing of a miscible displacement. Figure 5. The figure shows the recovery curves for miscible displacements in the same layered sandstone core as in Figure 5.14 shows the effect of mobility ratio on the efficiency of miscible displacements.84 to 95.Average solvent concentration profiles of a first-contact miscible displacement in a layered sandstone core at a mobility ratio of 95 (Peters and Li.Figure 5.

5. Recovery curves for a first-contact miscible displacement in a layered sandstone core at various mobility ratios (Peters and Li.injection to attain the same displacement efficiency as favorable mobility ratio displacements.3 ORIGINS OF DISPERSION IN POROUS MEDIA Dispersion is the net result of (a) molecular diffusion. (c) locally heterogeneous streamline lengths and velocities. and (d) mechanical mixing in pore bodies. 1996). (b) local velocity gradients within given pores.14. Figure 5. 5–20 .

1 Molecular Diffusion. The solid grains hinder diffusion just as they hindered the flow of electrical current and fluid flow. due to boundary effects acting in three different ways as shown in Figure 5.3. In Figure 5. The figure shows marked fluid particles at time t and at time t+Δt.Dispersion can be viewed as consisting of two components: molecular diffusion and mechanical dispsersion. molecular diffusion in a gas is much larger than in a liquid. Molecular diffusion is isotropic and occurs equally in all directions.15. Molecular diffusion is a physiochemical dispersion caused by chemical potential gradient.2 Mechanical Dispersion.15. If a drop of blue ink is carefully added to a beaker of water and allowed to sit. When a fluid flows in a porous medium. Because of the larger molecular spacing. the water in the beaker will turn blue as a result of molecular diffusion. the no slip condition at the pore wall creates a velocity gradient in the fluid. Molecular diffusion can easily be demonstrated in the laboratory.15a.3. Thus. It is mixing caused by random motions of the fluid particles due to the thermal kinetic energy of the solute. This motion is known as Brownian motion. 5. Molecular diffusion will contribute to both longitudinal and transverse dispersions. 5. its velocity distribution within a pore is not uniform. after sometime. Molecular diffusion in a porous medium is less than it would be in the absence of the porous medium. The second component of dispersion may be described as mechanical dispersion. which is correlated to the chemical concentration of the solute being transported. This 5-21 . The origins of mechanical dispersion can be seen in Figure 5. molecular diffusion occurs whether there is flow or not.

Origins of mechanical dispersion. there is local mixing of the fluids within the pores as shown in Figure Figure 5. In Figure 5.15b. perpendicular to the direction of flow. This is longitudinal dispersion in the direction of flow.velocity gradient causes the marked fluid particles to be spread out in the flow direction. This effect of the tortuosity of the porous medium causes the fluid particles to be spread out in the transverse direction with respect to the mean flow direction. This contributes to the mechanical dispersion. the variation in pore dimensions (recall k ∝ r2) causes flow to occur faster (further) in some pores than in others.16. This causes the marked fluid particles to be spread out in the direction of flow.15c. This is transverse dispersion. In Figure 5. the streamlines fluctuate with respect to the mean flow direction as the fluid particles navigate around the solid grains. This is longitudinal dispersion in the flow direction. Finally.15. 5–22 . 5.

Figure 5.Local mechanical mixing of fluid particles.4) where J a is the mass flux vector (mass/area/time) of species i due to advection. φ is the porosity of the porous medium.5) 5-23 .4.16. 5. Advection is mass transport due to the bulk motion of the carrying fluid and is given by J a = φ uC (5. The mass flux due to dispersion is given by J d = −φ D∇C (5.1 Generalized Equation in Vector Notation Chemical species are transported in a flowing system by two transport mechanisms: (a) advection or convection and (b) dispersion.4 CONVECTION-DISPERSION EQUATION 5. u is the interstitial velocity vector (Darcy velocity vector/porosity) and C is the concentration (mass/unit volume of solution) of species i in the solution.

solute transport equation and mass transport equation. The dispersion coefficient tensor characterizes molecular diffusion and mechanical dispersion and is given by D = Dd + Dm (5.J = 0 ∂t (5.(5.where J d is the mass flux vector (mass/area/time) of species i due to dispersion and D is the dispersion coefficient tensor. It is a linear. The continuity equation for mass transport is given by ∂ (φ C ) + ∇. second order.9) Eq. ( D∇C ) = 0 ∂t (5.(5. which is known by a variety of names such the advection-dispersion equation.7) where t is time and J is the total mass flux vector of species i due to advection and dispersion and is given by the vector sum J = Ja + Jd (5. first-contact miscible displacement equation.7) gives the mass transport equation for a constant porosity medium as ∂C + ∇. convection-dispersion equation. ( uC ) − ∇. parabolic partial differential equation.9) is a well known equation of mathematical physics.5) into (5.8) Substituting Eqs. It can be 5–24 .4) and (5.6) where Dd is the molecular diffusion coefficient and Dm is the mechanical dispersion tensor.

If the transport is by pure convection with no dispersion.used to solve a variety of transport problems.(5.9) becomes (5. Eq.9) becomes ∂C − Dd ∇ 2C = 0 ∂t which is the diffusion or diffusivity equation. then Eq. 5. In this case. transport is by molecular diffusion only and Eq.4.10) If there is no convection (static fluid).(5. In this case.12) where vx is the interstitial velocity in the x direction and DL is the principal value of the dispersion coefficient in the x direction known as the longitudinal dispersion coefficient.9) simplifies to ∂C + ∇. ( uC ) = 0 ∂t (5.2 One-Dimensional Convection-Dispersion Equation For 1D transport in the x direction.(5. the flow direction is a principal axis of the dispersion coefficient anisotropy. then there will be no mechanical dispersion.13) 5-25 .12) can be written in terms of Darcy velocity instead the interstitial velocity as ∂C vx ∂C ∂ 2C + − DL 2 = 0 ∂t φ ∂x ∂x (5.(5.11) ∂C ∂C ∂ 2C + ux − DL 2 = 0 ∂t ∂x ∂x (5. Eq.

where ux is the Darcy velocity also known as the superficial velocity.(5. This fact is obvious from Eq. there is adsorption and the transport of the chemical species will be retarded. If Rf is equal to 1. This means that in the presence of adsorption. the initial-boundary value problem consists of the following equations: ∂C ∂C ∂ 2C + ux − DL 2 = 0 ∂t ∂x ∂x C ( x.(5.12) becomes ∂C u x ∂C DL ∂ 2C + − =0 ∂t R f ∂x R f ∂x 2 (5. In the case of retardation due to adsorption of the chemical species on the surface of the porous medium. For transport in a semi infinite medium. there is no adsorption whereas if Rf is greater than 1.(5. chemical reaction.15) 5–26 .(5. It is possible to extend the mass transport equation to include retardation of the solute due to adsorption. 5.14).3 Solution of the One-Dimensional Convection-Dispersion Equation The initial-boundary value problem for 1D transport consists of Eq.14) in which the speed of convection has been reduced from vx to vx/Rf.14) where Rf is a retardation factor that accounts for adsorption. retardation reduces the effective dispersion coefficient as shown in Eq.4. 0 ) = Ci (5.12) together with appropriate initial and boundary conditions. biological transformations or radioactive decay. the concentration profiles of the chemical species will travel at a speed that is lower than if there was no adsorption. Also.12) (5. Eq.

17) Eq.(5.(5.19) (5. A convenient initial concentration in laboratory experiments is Ci equal to zero.17) is the external boundary condition.(5. the concentration of the injected species is equal to its initial value at time zero.18) C ( xD . 0 ) = 0 CD ( 0. The initial-value problem can be put in dimensionless form as follows: ∂CD ∂CD 1 ∂ 2CD + − =0 2 ∂t D ∂xD N Pe ∂xD (5.C ( 0.15) is the initial condition. t D ) = 1 C ( ∞. which specifies the concentration of the injected species at all times. which specifies that far away from the inlet. Eq. t ) = C j C ( ∞.16) (5. A convenient inlet boundary condition is Cj is equal to 1 at all times. t D ) = 0 (5. Eq.16) is the inlet boundary condition. which means there is no injected chemical species in the initial saturating fluid.21) 5-27 . Such a boundary condition was used in the welltest model of Chapter 3 for an infinite acting reservoir. t ) = Ci (5. although this is difficult to arrange in an actual laboratory experiment.20) (5. which specifies the initial concentration of the injected species in the solution domain at time zero.

has been used as a characteristic dimension of the system. Eq.where CD = C ( x.25).25) defines a relevant dimensionless number for the transport known as the Peclet Number. L.25) Eq. 5–28 .(5. In the definition of Peclet Number in Eq.24) N Pe = ux L qL = DL Aφ DL (5.23) gives the dimensionless time in pore volumes injected. in a semi infinite medium. Peclet Number is defined as N Pe = ux Dp DL (5. Of course. In general.(5. the length of the porous medium.22) tD = (5. A convenient characteristic dimension could be the grain diameter in the case in which the porous medium is composed of granular material. advection and dispersion. t ) − Ci C j − Ci uxt qt = L Aφ L x L (5.(5. the length of the porous medium would not be a convenient characteristic dimension of the system.26) where Dp is a characteristic dimension of the porous medium. It is the ratio of the two transport mechanisms involved.23) xD = (5.

can be solved by Laplace transformation. (5.119).47) and reproduced here for convenience as erfc ( u ) = 2 π ∫ ∞ u e− u du 2 (5.15).17) or their dimensionless versions.30) Also. Eqs.18) through (5.(5.21).27) can be written in dimensionless form as 5-29 . (5. (5.31) The solution given by Eq.17) as ⎡ ⎛ x − uxt ⎢erfc ⎜ ⎜2 D t ⎢ L ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ vx x ⎛ x + uxt D ⎟ + e L erfc ⎜ ⎟ ⎜2 D t L ⎠ ⎝ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ C C ( x.(5. erf ( −u ) = −erf ( u ) (5.(4. (5.Another possible characteristic dimension of a porous medium could be k φ in the spirit of Eq. t ) = i 2 (5. Eqs.27) where erfc is the complementary error function defined by Eq. Ogata and Banks (1961) give the solution of Eqs.(5.15).(3.16) and (5.(5.12).16) and (5.12).28) The error function and the complementary error function are related by erf ( u ) + erfc ( u ) = 1 erfc ( −u ) = 1 + erf ( u ) (5.29) (5.

35) 5–30 . Eq. t D ) = erfc ⎜ D D ⎜ 2⎢ t ⎢ ⎜2 D ⎜ N Pe ⎢ ⎝ ⎣ ⎞ ⎛ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ + e xD N Pe erfc ⎜ xD + t D ⎟ ⎜ t ⎟ ⎜2 D ⎟ ⎜ N Pe ⎠ ⎝ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟ ⎠⎥ ⎦ (5.33) in dimensionless ⎡⎛ ⎢⎜ 1 x −t CD ( xD .(5.32) can be neglected in comparison to the first term.(5.27) and Eq. variance 2 DLt and standard deviation form is 2 DLt . t D ) = erfc ⎢⎜ D D ⎢⎜ 2 t ⎢⎜ 2 D ⎜ N Pe ⎢⎝ ⎣ or ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟ ⎠⎥ ⎦ (5.(5.33) shows that it is related to the cumulative normal probability distribution with mean vx t .33) A careful examination of the solution given by Eq. t D ) = erfc ⎢ N Pe ⎜ D D ⎜ 2 t 2 ⎢ D ⎝ ⎣ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟ ⎠⎥ ⎦ (5.34) ⎡ ⎛ x −t 1 CD ( xD .32) Ogata and Banks (1961) demonstrated that the second term in the square bracket of the right hand sides of Eqs.(5. The solution given by Eq.(5.⎡ ⎛ ⎢ ⎜ 1⎢ x −t CD ( xD . t ) = Ci 2 (5.27) then becomes ⎡ ⎛ x − uxt ⎢erfc ⎜ ⎜2 D t ⎢ L ⎝ ⎣ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟ ⎠⎥ ⎦ C ( x.

(2) the injected fluid has the same density as the displaced fluid. gravity override or gravity tonguing and viscous fingering.(5.36) with mean t D and standard deviation 2t D .34) or (5. all of which phenomena are not included in the convection-dispersion equation. These conditions preclude channeling due to gross permeability heterogeneity.35) for a Peclet Number of 100.34) or (5. If these restrictions are met. the solution given by Eq. then Eq.34) or (5. the breakthrough time is less than 1 pore volume injected. nevertheless Eq. Note also that because of dispersion. and (3) the injected fluid has the same viscosity as the displaced fluid.Eq. t D ) = 1 − Cumulative Normal Pr obability Distribution (5. N Pe Figure 5. variance 2t D and standard deviation N Pe 2t D .1 and 5.34) or (5. The shape of the solution is N Pe that of an inverted S.35) is valid for an idealized system under very restrictive conditions. For example. It should be observed that the solution at each dimensionless time is given by CD ( xD .17 shows the evolution of the solution predicted by Eq.(5.2 does not quite meet all the restrictions because of the small gravity override.35) also is related to the cumulative normal probability distribution with mean t D .35) can be used to approximately reproduce 5-31 . Although it has not be stated explicitly. although the experiment shown in Figures 5.35) gives a good representation of the solvent concentration profiles observed in laboratory experiments.34) or (5.5 travels at the advection speed all times. The concentration CD = 0.(5.(5.(5. The conditions are (1) homogeneous and isotropic porous medium.

(5. The agreement between laboratory measured profiles and those predicted by Eq.18 shows the result of a first attempt to reproduce the solvent concentration profiles of Figure 5. Solutions of the convection-dispersion equation for a Peclet Number of 100. Let us focus on the solution at a dimensionless time of 0. Marked on the figure are the Figure 5. the experimental profiles are distorted by the small gravity override observed in the experiment.(5. As a result.34).the laboratory measured solvent concentration profiles of Figure 5.1 using Eq.34) is good. 5–32 .19. the experimental profiles and the calculated profiles do not match exactly at the displacement front.50 pore volume injected shown in Figure 5. Of course. Figure 5.17.1. There is also evidence of retardation in the experiment as the experimental profiles seem to lag behind the calculated profiles.

90 and 0. the advection front has traveled exactly half the distance of the porous medium.10 and the dimensionless mixing zone length equal to twice the standard deviation between CD = 0.5 pore volume injected. It should be observed that at tD = 0. A comparison of the simulated and the measured solvent concentration profiles for the miscible displacement of Figure 5. although this is not obvious from looking at the solution at one time. In 5-33 .8413 and 0.1588.18. advection front.Figure 5. Both the mixing zone length and the length that represents twice the standard deviation grow in proportion to t D . the dimensionless mixing zone length between CD = 0.2. This is as it should be because the advection front travels at the advection speed or at the interstitial velocity.1 and 5.

then a graph of Δx versus t could be used to determine the longitudinal dispersion coefficient.37) or in dimensional form by Δx = 3.10 is given by tD N Pe ΔxD = 3.625 (5. 5–34 .50 pore volume injected.38) shows that if the mixing zone length can be measured as a function of time during an experiment.38) Eq.19. it can be shown that the dimensionless mixing length between CD = 0.fact.90 and CD = 0.(5. Solution of the convection-dispersion equation for a Peclet Number of 100 at tD = 0.625 DL t (5. Figure 5.

the higher is the Peclet Number or the lower is the longitudinal dispersion coefficient. which shows that CD is a function of the parameter NPe and the independent variable xD − t D .39) A remarkable thing happens various dimensionless times. The slope of this curve reflects the Peclet Number or the longitudinal dispersion coefficient. where z is defined as z= xD − t D tD to the solutions at the (5.21 shows the effect of Peclet Number or longitudinal dispersion coefficient on the solutions of the convection-dispersion equation.35). They collapse into one dimensionless curve that is characteristic of the displacement as shown in Figure 5. tD Figure 5.Let us replot the solutions of Figure 5. The steeper the curve.(5. 5-35 . the mixing zone length is large whereas at high Peclet Numbers or low longitudinal dispersion coefficient. This transformation can be used to test if the concentration profiles measured in an experiment obey the complementary error function solution of the convectiondispersion equation.19 as CD versus z. The transformation was derived from Eq. At low Peclet Numbers or high longitudinal dispersion coefficient. the mixing zone length is small.20.

Transformation of the solutions at a fixed Peclet Number.Figure 5.20. 5–36 .

It is S-shaped and a mirror image of the solvent concentration profiles.(5. ( N Pe ) and hence. the 5-37 . variance 2 and standard deviation N Pe 2 . Thus.40) Eq.22 shows the breakthrough N Pe curve given by Eq. Eq.40) is the cumulative normal distribution with mean 1. The effect of Peclet Number or longitudinal dispersion coefficient on the solution of the convection-dispersion equation. t D ) = (5.(5.21.40) for a Peclet Number of 100.Figure 5.40) can be used in conjunction with the breakthrough curve measured in an experiment to determine the Peclet Number longitudinal dispersion coefficient ( DL ) .(5. Figure 5. The breakthrough curve obtained by observing the concentration at the outlet end of the porous medium (where xD = 1 ) for the case of a finite length medium is given by ⎡ ⎛ 1 − tD 1 erfc ⎢ N Pe ⎜ ⎜2 t 2 ⎢ D ⎝ ⎣ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ CD (1.

24. This curve. Such a plot can be used to fit the breakthrough curve to the normal distribution for the purpose of determining the Peclet Number. the longitudinal dispersion coefficient. 5–38 . Breakthrough curve.41) It is similar to the solvent concentration profiles. and hence. if plotted on a linear normal probability graph paper.22.Figure 5. Figure 5. where the transformation equation is z= 1 − tD tD (5. will be a straight line as shown in Figure 5.23 shows the transformed breakthrough curve.

Figure 5.23. 5-39 . Transformed breakthrough curve.

5–40 .Figure 5.24. Transformed breakthrough curve plotted on normal probability scale.

42) 5. y. Using the same transformation equations presented in Chapter 3 for permeability and hydraulic conductivity. the solution given by Eq.44) in 2D.5 DISPERSION COEFFICIENT AND DISPERSIVITY The dispersion coefficient is a second rank tensor. y ) = ⎢ ⎣ Dyx Dxy Dyy Dzy Dxz ⎤ ⎥ Dyz ⎥ Dzz ⎥ ⎦ (5. The dispersion coefficient tensor in the xyz coordinate system is given by ⎡ Dxx ⎢ D ( x.34) can be modified to include the retardation factor as ⎡⎛ t ⎢ ⎜ xD − D Rf 1 ⎢ CD ( xD .In the presence of retardation due to adsorption.43) Dxy ⎤ Dyy ⎥ ⎦ (5. the dispersion coefficient tensor becomes 5-41 . and by ⎡ Dxx D ( x. z ) = ⎢ Dyx ⎢ Dzx ⎣ in 3D. t D ) = erfc ⎢⎜ ⎜ 2 tD ⎢⎜ 2 R f N Pe ⎢⎜ ⎣⎝ ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ (5.(5. Along the principal coordinates of the anisotropy uvw. The dispersion coefficient tensor like the permeability or hydraulic conductivity tensor is symmetric. the principal values of the dispersion coefficient tensor and the principal axes of the dispersion coefficient anisotropy can be determined.

45) in 3D. the concentration of the tracer would be as shown in Figure 5. v ) = ⎢ L ⎣0 0⎤ DT ⎥ ⎦ (5. w ) = ⎢ 0 ⎢ ⎢0 ⎣ 0 DT 0 0 ⎤ 0 ⎥ ⎥ DW ⎥ ⎦ (5. the direction of mean flow and the direction perpendicular to the mean flow are principal axes of the dispersion coefficient anisotropy. Thus. The principal value of the dispersion coefficient tensor in the direction of mean flow is DL and the one perpendicular to the direction of mean flow is DT. In general. The tracer has spread and the concentration distribution has become elliptical. There is more spreading or dispersion in the direction of mean flow than in the direction perpendicular to it. v. and ⎡D D ( u.25.⎡ DL D ( u . The relative magnitudes of DL and DT and the tensorial nature of the dispersion can be demonstrated qualitatively by the following experiment. where DL is the longitudinal dispersion coefficient in the direction of mean flow and DT is the transverse dispersion coefficient in the direction perpendicular to the mean flow. 5–42 . At times t1 and t2. Suppose a tracer is injected at time zero as a point source into a homogeneous and isotropic reservoir in which there is steady flow as shown in Figure 5.25. DL ≥ DT .46) in 2D.

Do is the effective binary molecular diffusion coefficient between the miscible displacing fluid and the displaced fluid. Variation in tracer concentration in 2D for a constant velocity flow system.47) represent the contributions of molecular diffusion and mechanical dispersion to the dispersion coefficients.49) ⎛ uD ⎞ DT = C1 + C3 ⎜ p ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ β (5.46) and (5.47) and (5.47) (5. the longitudinal and transverse dispersion coefficients can be written as DL = DLd + DLm DT = DTd + DTm (5.Figure 5. C3 and β are properties of the porous medium and the flow regime.50) where C1.25.6). and Dp is the mean 5-43 . Using Eq.(5.(5. C2. Based on experimental observations.48) may be written in dimensionless form as ⎛ uD p ⎞ DL = C1 + C2 ⎜ ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ β (5.48) where the two terms on the right sides of Eqs. Eqs.(5.

50) can be written as ⎛ uD ⎞ DL 1 = + C2 ⎜ p ⎟ Do τ ⎝ Do ⎠ ⎛ uD ⎞ DT 1 = + C3 ⎜ p ⎟ Do τ ⎝ Do ⎠ β (5.26a shows that at Peclet Numbers less than 0. This means that the diffusion coefficient for a tracer in a porous medium is less than the diffusion coefficient in the same 5–44 .particle diameter of the porous medium. In this regime.49) and (5. for unconsolidated porous media obtained by Perkins and Johnson (1963). DL D and T with the Peclet Do Do vD p Do . molecular diffusion dominates the longitudinal dispersion coefficient and the dispersion coefficient is equal to the diffusion coefficient in the porous medium. Figure 5.51) where F is the formation resistivity factor and τ is the tortuosity of the porous medium. It has been found also from experiments that C1 is given by C1 = 1 1 = φF τ (5.(5.26 shows the correlations for Number.53) Perkins and Johnson (1963) have shown that β is of the order of 1 to 1.25.52) β (5. the dimensionless molecular term is about 0.(5. the mechanical dispersion term on the right side of Eq. Therefore.52) is negligible compared to the molecular diffusion term.02. Figure 5. In this regime.67. Eqs.

At normal reservoir velocities.02 and 6.52) and (5.liquid in the absence of the porous medium. Other authors have obtained correlations for longitudinal dispersion coefficient similar to that of Perkins and Johnston as shown in Figure 5. The shape of the correlation for the dimensionless transverse dispersion coefficient is similar to that of the dimensionless longitudinal dispersion coefficient.26a. the longitudinal dispersion coefficient is greater than the transverse dispersion coefficient. as pointed out earlier. In fact. This means that the regime dominated by molecular diffusion occurs over a larger range of Peclet Numbers for transverse dispersion than for longitudinal dispersion.26b starts at 0. the dispersion coefficient is dominated by mechanical dispersion and the effect of molecular diffusion can be neglected. At high Peclet Numbers.001 in Figure 5. Also. molecular diffusion is much more important to transverse dispersion than to longitudinal dispersion.53) can be approximated as ⎛ uD ⎞ DL = C2 ⎜ p ⎟ Do ≅ α L u ⎝ Do ⎠ 5-45 β (5.1 compared to 0. Thus. the Peclet Number is normally greater than 6. Under these conditions.28.(5.67 or 1. both molecular diffusion and mechanical dispsersion contribute to the dispersion coefficient. β is approximately 1. However. At the transition Peclet Numbers between 0. it should be noted that the scale of the Peclet Number in Figure 5. 1/0.54) . This is clearly evident by plotting the two correlations for dimensionless dispersion coefficients on the same scale as shown in Figure 5.27. At Peclet Numbers above 6. molecular diffusion can be neglected and Eqs.5 is an estimate of the tortuosity of unconsolidated porous media. This difference is caused by the tortuosity of the porous medium.

⎛ uD ⎞ DT = C3 ⎜ p ⎟ Do ≅ αT u ⎝ Do ⎠ β (5.54) and (5.26.(5.(5. Eqs. the Peclet Number defined in Eq. Correlations for dimensionless longitudinal and transverse 5–46 .25) becomes Figure 5.55) where α L is known as the longitudinal dispersivity and αT is the transverse dispersivity of the porous medium.55) can be used to estimate the dispersivities if the dispersion coefficients have been measured independently. In terms of the longitudinal dispersivity.

(b) transverse dispersion coefficient (Perkins and Johnston. Correlations for dimensionless longitudinal and transverse dispersion coefficients plotted on the same scale (Perkins and Johnston.dispersion coefficients. 5-47 . Figure 5. (a) dimensionless longitudinal dispersion coefficient. 1963).27. 1963).

1960). Figures 5.29 and 5. 5–48 . In general. N Pe = L αL (5. 1963. in general. the effect of heterogeneity is to stretch out the solvent concentration profile. Correlation for dimensionless longitudinal dispersion coefficient by various authors (Pfannkuch. dispersivities are highly scale dependent. Note the logarithmic scales.56) Dispersivity is. making it a property of the porous medium. Reservoir heterogeneity is the cause of this scale effect. In field measurements. However. Saffman.Figure 5. not a function of fluid velocity.28. dispersitivities measured at laboratory scale are much smaller than those measured at field scale.30 show values of measured dispersitivities as functions of the measurement scale.

which is interpreted as a large dispersion coefficient or a large dispersivity. 5-49 .

Figure 5. Field measured longitudinal dispersivity versus measurement scale (Gelhar.Figure 5. Longitudinal dispersivity versus measurement scale (Arya. 5–50 .30. 1986).29. 1988).

6 MEASUREMENT OF DISPERSION COEFFICIENT AND DISPERSIVITY 5.40) to estimate the Peclet Number and the longitudinal dispersion coefficient.6. The figure at the upper left of Figure 5.1 Traditional Laboratory Method with Breakthrough Curve A laboratory coreflood experiment can be used to measure the longitudinal dispersion coefficient. The curve of concentration versus time at the outlet end of the core is known as the breakthrough curve and can be fitted to Eq. its concentration will increase from zero to 1 over a finite period of time as shown in the sketch. A tracer or solvent is used to displace a miscible fluid from the porous medium and the solvent concentration of the effluent at the outlet end of the core is measured as a function of time. The injected solvent concentration is a step function in which pure solvent is injected throughout the experiment. the concentration of the injected solvent will be zero because it has not yet broken through. Figure 5.5.31 shows the injected tracer or solvent concentration as a function of time whereas the figure at the upper right shows the concentration of the solvent in the effluent.(5. At the outflow end. After the injected solvent has arrived at the outlet end ahead of the advection front because of dispersion.31 shows a schematic diagram for such a test. 5-51 . initially.

24. When these restrictions are implemented. the breakthrough curve will approximate the cumulative normal probability distribution.9 ⎝ t D ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠CD =0. Laboratory coreflood experiment for measuring longitudinal dispersion coefficient.(5. The mixing zone length between CD = 0. the density of the injected solvent and the displaced fluid must be matched and the viscosity of the injected solvent and the displaced fluid also must be matched.34) or (5.31.9 and CD = 0.1 (5.Figure 5. In order for the solvent concentration distribution in the coreflood to satisfy the mathematical model of Eq.57) 5–52 . the restrictions outlined previously must be implemented in the experiment. The core should be fairly uniform.625 ⎛ 1 − t D =⎜ N Pe ⎜ t D ⎝ ⎞ ⎛ 1 − tD −⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎠CD =0.35).1 read from the graph is related to the Peclet Number as 3. A graph of CD versus 1 − tD tD on a linear probability graph paper will be a straight line as shown in Figure 5.

1 ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ 2 (5.59) Eq. Thus. ⎛ 1 − tD 2 =⎜ N Pe ⎜ t D ⎝ ⎞ ⎛ 1 − tD −⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎠CD =0.16 ⎥ ⎦ 2 (5. (1996) Peters et al.84 ⎝ t D ⎤ ⎞ ⎥ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠CD =0.58) Alternatively.2 Laboratory Method of Peters et al.6.16 2 (5.60) It is much more difficult to measure transverse dispersion coefficient experimentally. there are very few transverse dispersion coefficient data reported in the literature beside those of Perkins and Johnson (1963). the mixing zone length corresponding to CD = 0.59) can be rearranged to calculate the longitudinal dispersion coefficient as uL ⎡⎛ 1 − t D ⎢⎜ DL = ⎜ 8 ⎢⎝ t D ⎣ ⎞ ⎛ 1 − tD −⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎠CD =0.(5. As a result. (1996) have presented a method for measuring longitudinal dispersion coefficient and dispersivity by imaging the 5-53 .(5. 5.625 ⎤ ⎞ ⎥ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠CD =0.16 will be equal to twice the standard deviation of the normal distribution.84 ⎝ t D ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠CD =0.Eq.9 ⎝ t D 3.84 and CD = 0.57) can be rearranged to calculate the longitudinal dispersion coefficient as ⎡⎛ 1− t D ⎢⎜ ⎜ t ⎢⎝ D DL = uL ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎣ ⎞ ⎛ 1 − tD −⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ ⎠CD =0.

(5. Figure 5.(5. The growth of the mixing zone is clearly visible.34) or (5. The mixing zone is distorted by permeability heterogeneity of the core. Furthermore.laboratory tracer test. Eq.35). CT or NMR imaging of the coreflood gives the solvent concentration profiles in time and space similar to those of Figure 5.32 shows the CT images of the tracer test in the Berea sandstone. To demonstrate the methods.17. we measured the longitudinal dispersion coefficient and the longitudinal dispsersivity of the Berea sandstone core of Figure 4.33 and the unconsolidated sandpack of Figure 5. The dispersivity is calculated from the dispersion coefficient using Eq. the growth of the mixing zone length with time can easily be calculated from the 3D image data such that the graph of Δx versus t can be used to calculate the longitudinal dispersion coefficient. The advantage of this approach is that the contribution of heterogeneity to the dispersion coefficient also can be measured.33.54). The permeability distribution of the core was determined by a technique described by Peters and Afzal (1991).34 shows a preliminary history match of the solvent concentration profiles using Eq. The longitudinal dispersion coefficient so determined will be the same as that determined from the breakthrough curve. This is evident in the permeability image of the core shown in Figure 5. The slopes of the profiles from 5–54 . The lower half of the core is more permeable than the upper half.1.30 using these methods. by trial and error to estimate the Peclet Number and the longitudinal dispersion coefficient.34).(5. These profiles can be fitted to the solution of the convectiondispersion equation. A summary of the experimental conditions for the tracer test in the Berea sandstone core is presented in Table 5. Figure 5.

1.These are the longitudinal dispersion coefficient and longitudinal dispersivity that would have been obtained from a breakthrough curve. However.029 Distilled Water+1. Figure 5.4 17. The parameters that resulted in this history match are N Pe = 159 .4% NaCl + 10% KCl Density of Displaced Fluid (g/cm3) 1.(5.42) with a retardation factor. DL = 600 x10−5 cm 2 / s and α L = 0. the profiles obtained from Eq. Rf. at late dimensionless times.1 160. Experimental Conditions for Tracer Test in Berea Sandstone Type of Displacement Porous Medium Length (cm) Diameter (cm) Absolute Permeability (md) Average Porosity from CT (%) Fluids Displacing Fluid Distilled Water + 10% NaI First-Contact Miscible Berea Sandstone 60.078 Viscosity of Displacing Fluid (cp) Displaced Fluid 1. This is evidence of retardation caused by adsorption.34) and the experiment are in good agreement indicating that the Peclet Number is correct.0 2. It should be noted that the effect of the distortion in the mixing zone caused by permeability heterogeneity is interpreted as increased dispersion coefficient and increased dispersivity of the porous medium.2 5.11.742x10-3 5-55 .028 1.35 shows the history match using Eq.Eq.078 Viscosity of Displaced Fluid (cp) Mobility Ratio (Viscosity Ratio) Darcy Velocity (cm/s) 1.3 Density of Displacing Fluid (g/cm3) 1. Table 5. of 1. The agreement between the two sets of solvent concentration profiles is good.379cm .(5.(5.34) have traveled further than those from the experiment.

714x10-2 Figure 5..20. 1996) 5–56 .50. C: tD = 0.32.80 (Peters et al. B: tD = 0. CT images of a tracer test in a Berea sandstone core. A: tD = 0.Interstitial Velocity (cm/s) 1.

1991).36 is the average mixing zone length plotted against the corresponding time. The several thousand values were then averaged to obtain one mixing zone length for each time.36 shows the growth of the mixing zone length with time for the Berea sandstone core. Each point in Figure 5.36 as 5-57 .38). Figure 5. It can be seen that the mixing zone length grows as the square root of time as predicted by Eq.90 and CD = 0. Permeability distribution for Berea sandstone core (Peters and Afzal.33.Figure 5. The longitudinal dispersion coefficient and longitudinal dispersivity are calculated from the slope of the straight line of Figure 5. This resulted in several thousand values of mixing zone length at each dimensionless time. The mixing zone length was obtained for the 3D CT data by calculating the distances between CD = 0.(5.10 for each dimensionless time.

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Berea sandstone core for Rf = 0 (Peters et al. It should be noted that with this method. 1996).272 cm . the dispersion coefficient and the dispersivity are less than calculated previously because the effect of the permeability heterogeneity was excluded from the calculations.34.. Figure 5.DL = 431x10−5 cm 2 / s and α L = 0. 5–58 .

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Berea sandstone core for Rf = 1.. 1996). 5-59 .11 (Peters et al.Figure 5.35.

Figure 5. There is retardation caused by adsorption in the sandpack. 1996).04.Figure 5. at late dimensionless times.. the profiles obtained from Eq.38 shows the permeability distribution for the sandpack.(5.2. However. It should be recalled that this sandpack contained radial heterogeneities based on the packing method that was used in preparing it. It can be seen that there is more dispersion in the Berea 5–60 sandstone core than in the . Figure 5.(5.42) with a retardation factor of 1. DL = 100 x10−5 cm 2 / s and α L = 0.098 cm . A summary of the experiment for the unconsolidated sandpack is presented in Table 5.080 cm . Figure 5.(5. The agreement between the two sets of solvent concentration profiles is good.34) and the experiment are in good agreement indicating that the Peclet Number is correct. The growth of the mixing zone also is clearly visible. The parameters that resulted in this history match are N Pe = 554 . The slopes of the profiles from Eq. Figure 5.34). The mixing zone is distorted by the heterogeneity of the sandpack.39 shows a preliminary history match of the solvent concentration profiles using Eq.40 shows the history match using Eq.(5. Growth of mixing zone length with time for the Berea sandstone core (Peters et al.37 shows the CT images of the tracer test in the sandpack.34) have traveled further than those from the experiment. Figure 5.36. Figure 5. The longitudinal dispersion coefficient and longitudinal dispersivity are calculated from the mixing zone length as DL = 82 x10−5 cm 2 / s and α L = 0.41 shows the growth of the mixing zone length with time for the sandpack.42 shows the similarity transformations of the solvent concentration profiles from the two tracer tests.

The results of the tracer tests for both porous media are summarized in Table 5. Table 5.037x10-3 1.3.089 1.7 Density of Displaced Fluid (g/cm3) 1.8 6400 29.2.023x10-2 95 5-61 .089 Viscosity of Displaced Fluid (cp) Mobility Ratio (Viscosity Ratio) Darcy Velocity (cm/s) Interstitial Velocity (cm/s) Breakthrough Recovery (%) 1.9 3.2 4. Experimental Conditions for Tracer Test in Unconsolidated Sandpack Type of Displacement Porous Medium Length (cm) Diameter (cm) Absolute Permeability (md) Average Porosity from CT (%) Fluids Displacing Fluid Density (g/cm3) Viscosity of Displacing Fluid (cp) Displaced Fluid of Displacing Fluid 1.127 0.unconsolidated sandpack.262 Distilled Water + 10% BaCl2 Distilled Water + 13% NaCl First-Contact Miscible Unconsolidated Sandpack 54.

1996) 5–62 . CT images of a tracer test in unconsolidated sandpack.80 (Peters et al. B: tD = 0. C: tD = 0.50.Figure 5.20.37.. A: tD = 0.

1991). 5-63 .Figure 5.38. Permeability distribution for unconsolidated sandpack (Peters and Afzal.

5–64 .. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for unconsolidated sandpack for Rf = 0 (Peters et al. 1996).Figure 5.39.

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for unconsolidated sandpack for Rf = 1. 1996). 5-65 ..Figure 5.40.04 (Peters et al.

5–66 . Growth of mixing zone length with time for unconsolidated sandpack (Peters et al.Figure 5. 1996)..41.

.Figure 5.42. Summary of Results 5-67 . Table 5. 1996).3. Similarity transformation of solvent concentration profiles (Peters et al.

080 1.61) Gelhar and Collins (1971) give the solution of Eq.098 600x10-5 100x10-5 5.(5.379 0.6.11 159 0. Eq.(5.Porous Medium Berea Sandstone Unconsolidated Sandpack Longitudinal Dispersion Coefficient with Heterogeneity (cm2/s) Longitudinal Dispersivity with Heterogeneity (cm) Longitudinal Dispersion Coefficient without Heterogeneity (cm2/s) Longitudinal Dispersivity without Heterogeneity (cm) Retardation Factor Peclet Number 0. Eq.272 1.(5.04 554 431x10-5 82x10-5 0.9) can be written in radial coordinates as ∂C ∂C ∂ 2C + ur − α L ur 2 = 0 ∂t ∂r ∂r (5.3 Field Measurement of Dispersion Coefficient and Dispersivity Longitudinal dispersion coefficient and dispersivity are measured in the field by tracer tests either in a single well or between two or more wells.61) with appropriate initial and boundary conditions for a single-well tracer test as 5–68 .9) in radial coordinates can be used to calculate the dispersion coefficient and the dispersitivity from a single-well tracer test.

63) In Eq. the volume of the tracer fluid injected was such that the tracer fluid extended to a radius of 3. the volume of tracer fluid was such that the tracer fluid extended to a radius of 4. The aquifer was 8.99 meters. Figure 5. Based on the history match shown in Figure 5. The results show the dependence of the dispersivity on the scale of the measurement.62) to the concentration profile obtained from the tracer test. The two scales of measurement resulted in two different estimates of dispersivity with the larger measurement scale resulting in a larger dispersitivity than the smaller measurement scale.13 meters from the well. t D is the pore volume of fluid produced at various times. In Test SW1.62) R= qt π hφ (5.13 meters whereas in Test SW2. In Test SW1. Thus. with an average hydraulic conductivity of 1.4x10-2 cm/s and a porosity of 38%. the scale of measurement was 3. t Di is the total pore volume of tracer fluid injected at the beginning of the test. In Test SW2.0 cm and that from the second test was 9.2 meters thick. the dispersitivity of the aquifer from the first test was 3.(5. The longitudinal dispersitivity can be calculated by fitting Eq. the two tests had different measurement scales. it was 4.42.⎡ ⎢ ⎢ ( tD − tDi ) − 1 1 CD = erfc ⎢ ⎢ 1 2 ⎢ ⎧ 16 ⎛ α L ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ t D ⎞ ⎤ 2 ⎛ t D ⎪ ⎢ ⎨ 3 ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ 2 − ⎜1 − ⎟ ⎥ ⎜1 − ⎢ ⎩ ⎝ R ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ tDi ⎠ ⎦ ⎝ tDi ⎣⎪ where ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ 1 2 ⎥ ⎞⎫ ⎥ ⎪ ⎟⎬ ⎥ ⎠⎭ ⎥ ⎪ ⎦ (5.0 cm.43 shows the fit of Eq.(5.62).62) to two tracer tests in the same well in a water-bearing aquifer.(5. 5-69 .99 meters.

(5.43. 1981). in this case. Comparison of tracer concentration and Eq.Figure 5. a numerical simulator will be needed to 5–70 . A multi-well tracer test also can be used to estimate dispersivity in the field.62)for singlewell injection-withdrawal test (Pickens and Grisak. However.

44 shows attempts to interpret a two-well tracer test using a finite element numerical simulator.interpret the test. a slug of tracer was injected into one well and chased by water while the tracer concentration was measured as a function of time at the second well. In the test. Figure 5. A 2D homogeneous aquifer model gave a longitudinal dispersitivity of 4. 5-71 .15 m.. Figure 5. Of course. Different configurations of the aquifer heterogeneity can result in good history matches with widely different values of dispersivity.44.0 m whereas a 3D heterogeneous aquifer model gave a much smaller dispersivity of 0. the history match of the breakthrough curve for a heterogeneous aquifer does not give a unique solution to the problem. A comparison of three model fits to the breakthrough data from a two-well tracer test (Huyakorn et al. 1986).

7 FACTORS THAT COULD AFFECT DISPERSION COEFFICIENT AND DISPERSIVITY A poll was taken in a previous class in which the students present were requested to name the factors they believed could possibly affect the dispersion coefficient and the dispersivity of a porous medium. 1.5. All factors that came to mind were listed. fluid properties and process characteristics. Rf) Biological transformation Radioactive decay Morphology of the porous medium (Γ) 5–72 . organized into rock characteristics. There were no restrictions. Rock Characteristics Porosity (φ) Permeability (k) Pore size (δ) Pore size distribution (frequency) Heterogeneity Dykstra–Parsons coefficient (V) Variogram (γ) Correlation length (range of influence. a) Chemical reaction Adsorption (retardation factor. Here are the factors that were listed.

μo .64) The objective is to design an experimental program to determine the nature of the function f1. dimensional 5-73 . Process (Displacement) Characteristics Interstitial velocity field ( u ) Gravitational acceleration field ( g ) After extensive discussion. To plan the experimental program. Fluid Properties Viscosity of the displaced fluid (μo) Viscosity of the displacing fluid (μs) Density of the displaced fluid (ρo) Density of the displacing fluid (ρs) Binary diffusion coefficient between the displaced and displacing fluids (Do) 3. Δρ g ) (5. Do . u. it was decided that the longitudinal dispersion coefficient is a function of some of these variables and that the functional relationship is of the form DL = f1 ( μ s .Pore structure Cementation Dead end pores Tortuosity Mean grain diameter (Dp) Specific surface area (S) 2. D p .

will be a ⎜ Dμ ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ o s ⎠ constant equal to zero and it will not be a factor in the experiment. the mobility ratio. ⎜ p .analysis can be used to derive the set of complete and independent dimensionless groups that can be used in the experimental program to determine the nature of f1.65) becomes ⎛ uD p ⎞ DL = f3 ⎜ ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ (5. Also. will be a ⎠ constant equal to 1 and its effect will be eliminated from the experiment.66) A similar analysis gives the functional relationship for the transverse dispersion coefficient as ⎛ uD p ⎞ DT = f4 ⎜ ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ (5. the dimensionless group. ⎜ o ⎝ μs ⎞ ⎟ . p ⎟ ⎜ D μ Do Do μ s ⎟ s ⎝ o ⎠ (5. In this case. Eq. Upon performing the dimensional analysis as presented in Appendix A. In the laboratory experiments for determining the longitudinal dispersion coefficient.65) where f2 is a new function to be determined from experiments. If this is done. the density of the injected fluid should be matched with that of the ⎛ D 3 Δρ g ⎞ displaced fluid.(5.(5.64) can be written in dimensionless form as ⎛ uD p μo D 3 Δρ g ⎞ DL = f2 ⎜ . If these restrictions are implemented in the experiments. . then Eq. the viscosity of the injected fluid should be matched with that ⎛μ of the displaced fluid.67) 5–74 .

(φ D∇C ) = 0 ∂t ∂ (φρ ) + ∇. 5.8. continuity.(vC ) − ∇. The results of such an experimental program are shown in Figures 5. Such a numerical simulator can be used to interpret tracer tests or to model field processes that can be adequately described as first-contact miscible processes. flow and mixing equations: ∂ (φ C ) + ∇. DL D and T as Do Do uD p Do .70) 5-75 .27 and 5.The experimental program will then consist of measuring functions of the Peclet Number. to determine the nature of f3 and f4. 5.( ρ v ) = 0 ∂t k (5.68) (5.69) v =− μ ∇( P ± ρ gz ) (5.1 Introduction First-contact miscible displacement is sufficiently well understood to be modeled accurately with a finite difference numerical simulator.2 Mathematical Model of First-Contact Miscible Displacement The mathematical model for first-contact miscible displacement in a heterogeneous and anisotropic reservoir consists of the following mass transport.8.8 NUMERICAL MODELING OF FIRST-CONTACT MISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT 5.28.

(5.(5.(5. It is a modified version of Eq. which was for a homogeneous reservoir with a constant porosity.(5.74) Eq. The agreement is good. Note that the advection term in Eq.(5. Eq.9).ρ mixture = ρ s Cs + ρo (1 − Cs ) ⎛ C 1− C ⎞ = ⎜ 1/s 4 + 1/ 4 s ⎟ μo ⎠ ⎝ μs −4 (5. It is a linear mixing rule. It specifies how to calculate the fluid density as a function of the solvent concentration.73) ⎡ k xx ⎢ k = ⎢ k yx ⎢ k zx ⎣ k xy k yy k zy k xz ⎤ ⎥ k yz ⎥ k zz ⎥ ⎦ (5.72) where ⎡ Dxx ⎢ D = ⎢ Dyx ⎢ Dzx ⎣ and Dxy Dyy Dzy Dxz ⎤ ⎥ Dyz ⎥ Dzz ⎥ ⎦ (5.(5. Figure 5. It specifies how the viscosity is to be calculated as a function of the solvent concentration. Eq.(5.70) is Darcy's law for a heterogeneous and anisotropic reservoir.68) is in terms of Darcy velocity instead of interstitial velocity. which has been verified experimentally.68) is the convection-dispersion equation for a heterogeneous reservoir. Eq.71) is the mixing rule for density.69) is the continuity equation for flow.45 compares the linear mixing rule with experimental density measurements for mixtures of glycerol and brine.72) is the mixing rule for viscosity. It is known as the quarter-power viscosity 5–76 .71) μ mixture (5. Eq.

45.mixing rule. Figure 5. Fluid 2 is glycerol and water. 5-77 . Verification of linear density mixing rule for two first-contact miscible fluids: Fluid 1 is brine. This mixing rule also has been verified in laboratory measurements as shown in Figure 5.46 for glycerol and brine.

(5.74). Use the pressure field and Eq.(5. Fluid 2 is glycerol and water. advance.(5.70) into (5.Figure 5. Solve the pressure equation by finite difference.(5. Eqs. Substitute the Darcy velocity field into Eq. the properties of the porous medium and the fluids must be specified in 5–78 . Verification of quarter-power viscosity mixing rule for two first-contact miscible fluids: Fluid 1 is brine.69) to derive a generalized diffusivity equation for the pressure field.(5.70) to calculate the Darcy velocity field.68) by finite difference to calculate the solvent concentration distribution. Of course. Substitute Eq. The mathematical model for first-contact miscible displacement. A possible sequence for the calculations at one time-step is as follows.68) through (5.68) and solve Eq.46. can be solved by finite difference using appropriate initial and boundary conditions.

The gravity number is the ratio of the gravity force to the viscous force and is given by Ng = k ( ρ s − ρo ) g μo u (5.75) The higher the gravity number. the gravity segregation will be in the form of gravity tonguing. the Peclet Number (NPe) as defined in Eq. the higher the potential for gravity segregation in the experiment.25). we present the results of numerical simulations of first-contact miscible displacements experiments based on the numerical solution of Eqs.8.(5. and the density number (Nρ). whereas if the it is positive. Each simulation Simulation.3 Numerical Modeling of Laboratory Experiments In this section. If the gravity number is negative.5.(5. the gravity or buoyancy number (Ng). The porous media used in the experiments and the solvent concentration distributions in time and space were imaged using by NMR.76) 5-79 . The pertinent dimensionless groups for the displacements are mobility ratio (M). The density number is defined as Nρ = ρ s − ρo ρo (5. the gravity segregation will be in the form of gravity override.74).68) through (5. entailed The the characterization of the porous medium by constructing its permeability distribution Sequential Gaussian porosity distribution was obtained directly from by NMR imaging.

Three-dimensional simulation grids. a finite difference chemical flooding simulator developed at The University of Texas at Austin. All the simulations were performed with UTCHEM. All the simulations were performed with 40x40x20 grid blocks.47 shows how the rectangular grids were adapted to simulate a cylindrical system.The higher the density number. the higher the potential for gravity segregation. Experiment 1 This experiment was conducted in homogeneous Berea sandstone core at a favorable mobility ratio of 0.84 and a Darcy velocity of 0.47. Figure 5. Figure 5.00014 5–80 . A negative density number correlates with gravity override whereas a positive density number correlates with gravity tonguing. A 3D Cartesian coordinate system was used to simulate the displacements in a cylindrical core.

Figure 5. The core properties were: L = 10 cm. 5-81 . The mixing zone is tilted because of gravity tonguing. d = 5 cm.49 shows the porosity distribution of the core obtained by NMR imaging.40 ft/day). Figure 5. Figure 5.48.51 shows the solvent concentration profiles for the experiment. Artist impression of homogeneous Berea sandstone core.50 shows the NMR images of the solvent concentration distributions in time and space. Figure 5. Figure 5.cm/s (0.48 shows an artist impression of the core along with the nomenclature used in the core characterization. k = 622 md and φ = 24%.

5–82 .Figure 5. 1997)..49. Porosity distribution for homogeneous Berea sandstone core (Majors et al.

Figure 5. Nρ = 0. 1997) 5-83 .0899.50.84.5 (Li. Solvent concentration images for Experiment 1. M = 0. Ng = 0.3656. NPe = 45.

3656. ax = 5. The experiment was simulated using α L = 0.5 (Li. NPe = 45.53 compares the simulated and the experimental solvent concentration distributions. The agreement between the 5–84 .Figure 5.84. The parameters of the log normal permeability field are k = 622 md.25 cm and V = 0.54 compares the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles. M = 0.5 cm.52 shows the permeability field generated for the Berea sandstone core and used as the porous medium for the numerical simulation. Average solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 1.0 cm.51. az = 0. Ng = 0. Figure 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is good.0899. 1997) Figure 5. φ = 24%. ay = 2. Figure 5.0031 cm.0975 cm and αT = 0.20. Nρ = 0.

φ = 24%.5 cm. k = 622 md.55 shows a head to head comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentrations at the same cross-sections of the core. Permeability distribution for homogeneous Berea sandstone core obtained by Sequential Gaussian Simulation. 1998). ax = 5.25 cm. V = 0. Finally.52. The data are fairly well distributed about the 45 degree line. Therefore. ay = 2.20 (Shecaira and Peters.0 cm. 5-85 .simulation and the experiment is acceptable. the agreement between the simulation and the experiment is reasonable. Figure 5. az = 0. Figure 5.

1998). 5–86 .53. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 1 (Shecaira and Peters.Figure 5.

1998).Figure 5. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 1 (Shecaira and Peters. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 1 (Shecaira and Peters. Figure 5. 1998). 5-87 .56.54.

00014 cm/s (0. The images of Figure 5.58 show the solvent concentration images and the solvent concentration profiles for the experiment.0180 by increasing the Darcy velocity from 0.Experiment 2 This experiment was conducted in the same Berea sandstone core and at the same mobility ratio as Experiment 1.33 ft/day) in an effort to eliminate the gravity tonguing observed in Experiment 1. 5–88 .3656 to 0. the gravity number was reduced from 0. However.40 ft/day) to 0.57 appear to show more tonguing than in Experiment 1.57 and 5.00294 cm/s (8. Figures 5.

Ng = 0.57.0180.0899.Figure 5. Solvent concentration images for Experiment 2. 1997) 5-89 . M = 0. NPe = 49. Nρ = 0.5 (Li.84.

33 ft/day. it can be safely concluded that the tonguing in Experiment 2 was not caused by 5–90 . Average solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 2. 1997) Figures 5.5 (Li.0899.84. Therefore. except that the injection rate was increased from 0.58.59 to 5. The images from the simulation clearly show that at the gravity number of 0.40 ft/day to 8. The simulation model is the same as for Experiment 1. M = 0. Ng = 0. there should be no gravity tonguing.0180. NPe = 49.0180.61 compare the initial simulation of Experiment 2 with the experiment. Nρ = 0.Figure 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is poor.

59.gravity segregation but rather by a mechanical problem with the experiment. 5-91 . 1998). Figure 5. A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 2 (Shecaira and Peters.

Figure 5. 5–92 . A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 2 (Shecaira and Peters.60. Figure 5. 1998). 1998). A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 2 (Shecaira and Peters.61.

40 ft/day in Experiment 2. As a result.65 show comparisons of the results of the simulation with the modified inlet boundary condition and the experiment. Figure 5. Radial grooves are machined on the face of the end piece to assist in distributing the injected fluid uniformly over the inlet face of the core.Figure 5. In order to test the fluid injection hypothesis. Figures 5. Fluid is injected as a point source. the grooves were effective in distributing the injected fluid over the inlet face of the core. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is excellent. It would appear that at the injection rate of 0.62 shows the end piece of the core holder through which fluid is injected into the core. the inlet boundary condition of the simulation model was modified to inject more fluid at the center than at the periphery of the core as shown in Figure 5. when the rate was increased to 8.33 ft/day. the injected fluid was distributed unevenly over the inlet face with more fluid being injected at the center of the core than at the periphery of the core .63 to 5. the grooves became ineffective in distributing the injected fluid over the inlet face of the core.62. The hypothesis 5-93 . However. Schematic diagram of end piece of core holder showing fluid injection hole and grooves.62.

63. Figure 5. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 2 with a modified inlet boundary condition (Shecaira and Peters. 1998). 5–94 .about the nonuniform fluid injection appears to be supported by the simulation.

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 2 with a modified inlet boundary condition (Shecaira and Peters.65. Figure 5.Figure 5. 1998). A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 2 with a modified inlet boundary condition (Shecaira and Peters. 5-95 . 1998).64.

The combination of high mobility ratio and high injection normally result is viscous fingering as is evident in Figure 5.73 compare the results of the refined simulation with the experiment. 5–96 .33 ft/day).67. The preliminary simulation was based on a uniform permeability distribution in the core and a uniform fluid injection at the core inlet. More transverse dispersion ( αT = 0. There is no agreement between the two. Figures 5. Figures 5.00294 cm/s (8.0122 cm) was included in the numerical model than in the simulations of Experiments 1 and 2.68 to 5.66. which shows the solvent concentration images for this experiment.71 to 5. The simulation was then refined by the using permeability distribution of Figure 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is excellent.Experiment 3 This experiment was performed in the same Berea sandstone core as Experiments 1 and 2 but at an adverse mobility ratio of 98 at the high Darcy velocity of 0.52 and the modified inlet boundary condition. The solvent concentration profiles are shown in Figure 5.70 compare the results of a preliminary simulation with the experiment.

NPe = 49.66. Ng = -0.5 (Li. M = 98. Solvent concentration images for Experiment 3. 1997) 5-97 .Figure 5. Nρ = -0.097.0002.

Figure 5.5 (Li. NPe = 49.0002. Ng = -0. M = 98. Average solvent concentration images for Experiment 3. 1997) 5–98 .67. Nρ = -0.097.

A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 3 (Shecaira and Peters.Figure 5. 1998).68. 5-99 .

A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 3 (Shecaira and Peters. 1998).69.Figure 5. A comparison of the preliminary simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 3 (Shecaira and Peters. Figure 5. 1998). 5–100 .70.

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 3 after refinement of the simulation (Shecaira and Peters. 1998). 5-101 .71.Figure 5.

73. 1998). A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 3 after refinement of the simulation model (Shecaira and Peters. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 3 after refinement of the simulation model (Shecaira and Peters.72. 1998).Figure 5. Figure 5. 5–102 .

Figure 5. Figures 5. The permeability field was further refined into a five-layer model as shown in Figure 5.80 compare the results of the simulation based on the three-layer model with the experiment. Using the porosity images as guidance. 5-103 .74 shows the porosity images for sandstone obtained by NMR.78 to 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is excellent.84 show comparisons of the results of the simulation with the fivelayer model with the experiment.75 and 5.Experiment 4 This experiment was performed in a layered Antolini sandstone core at a favorable mobility ratio of 0.81. a three-layer permeability distribution was generated for the sandstone core as shown in Figure 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is fair.81 at a Darcy velocity of 0.00014 cm/s (0. Figures 5.82 to 5.77. Figures 5.76 show the solvent concentration images and the solvent concentration profiles for the experiment.40ft/day). This distribution was used in the initial simulation of Experiment 4.

Porosity images of layered Antolini sandstone core of Experiment 4 (Li.74. 1997). 5–104 .Figure 5.

75. Nρ = 0.Figure 5.103. Ng = 0. NPe = 46.81.8 (Li. 1997) 5-105 . M = 0. Solvent concentration images for Experiment 4.0649.

103. 1997) 5–106 .8 (Li. Nρ = 0. NPe = 46. Ng = 0.Figure 5.0649.81. Average solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 4. M = 0.76.

Figure 5.77. A three-layer model for the Antolini sandstone core of Experiment 4. 5-107 .

1998). 5–108 . A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 4 based on a three-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.78.Figure 5.

1998). 1998). A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 4 based on a three-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.80. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 4 based on a three-layer model (Shecaira and Peters. 5-109 .Figure 5. Figure 5.79.

5–110 .81. A Five-layer model for the Antolini sandstone core of Experiment 4.Figure 5.

A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 4 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.82. 1998). 5-111 .Figure 5.

1998). 5–112 .Figure 5. 1998). A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 4 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters. A comparison of the simulated and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 4 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.83.84. Figure 5.

5-113 . it was decided to use the same simulation to predict Experiment 5 by increasing the mobility ratio from 0.89 show comparisons of the predicted performance and the experiment.89 show that the quantitative prediction is not as good as might be inferred from Figure 5. Figures 5. Figures 5. However.Experiment 5 This experiment was performed in the same core as Experiment 4 but at an adverse mobility ratio of 11 and a Darcy velocity of 0. The objective of the numerical simulation of this experiment was to predict the outcome of the experiment instead of history matching it. Having used the five-layer model to successfully simulate Experiment 4. This lack of accurate quantitative prediction is not surprising because Experiment 5 is an unstable displacement and as such is unpredictable.40 ft/day).81 to 11.87 shows that predicted solvent concentration images are in qualitative agreement with the experimental images.85 and 5. Figure 5.00014 cm/s (0.87.87 to 5. Figures 5.88 and 5.86 show the solvent concentration images and the solvent concentration profiles for the experiment.

0027. 1997) 5–114 . Solvent concentration images for Experiment 5.8 (Li.049.Figure 5. Nρ = -0.85. NPe = 46. Ng = -0. M = 11.

Ng = -0.86. M = 11. NPe = 46.0027. Nρ = -0.Figure 5. Average solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 5.8 (Li.049. 1997) 5-115 .

5–116 . 1998). A comparison of the predicted and experimental solvent concentration distributions for Experiment 5 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.Figure 5.87.

5-117 .Figure 5.88. 1998). 1998).89. A comparison of the predicted and experimental solvent concentration profiles for Experiment 5 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters. Figure 5. A comparison of the predicted and experimental solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 5 based on a five-layer model (Shecaira and Peters.

92 shows the upscaled permeability distribution. Permeability distribution was calculated using the empirical equation of Kenyon et al. A technique was developed to map the T1 distribution in a core. presented in Chapter 2 as Eq.8% and k = 114 md.91 shows the porosity distribution after upscaling the high resolution porosity data (512x512x512 voxels) to the low resolution numerical simulation grid of 40x40x40. 2000).90 shows a high resolution porosity image of the core. A high permeability streak is clearly visible in the center of the core. Figure 5. φ = 12.77) Figure 5.Experiment 6 The purpose of Experiment 6 and the accompanying numerical simulation was to verify a new method for mapping the porosity and permeability distributions in a heterogeneous core by NMR (Zuluaga et al. A layered Antolini sandstone core was used for this experiment.(2. A technique was developed to map the 3D porosity and permeability distributions in the core by NMR imaging. 5–118 .. d = 5 cm.69) calibrating the NMR-derived The constant C1 was obtained by permeability to be equal to the permeability of the core in the direction of flow measured by Darcy's law and found to equal to 180 μm2/s2. The core properties are L = 10 cm. Figure 5.69) and reproduced here for convenience as 4 k = C1φNMRT12 (2. Dipping layers are clearly visible in the image. The upscaling makes the porosity distribution somewhat fuzzy. The equation used to calculate the permeability of each voxel is 4 k = 180φNMRT12 (5.

the displacement was simulated using the NMR-derived porosity and permeability distributions as the input data for the core description. High resolution NMR porosity image of layered Antolini sandstone core (Zuluaga.000692 cm/s (1. 1999).90.81 at a Darcy velocity of 0. 5-119 .96 ft/day). a first-contact miscible displacement was conducted in the Antolini core at a favorable mobility ratio of 0. In an effort to verify the validity of the porosity and permeability distributions derived by NMR. Figure 5.After measuring the porosity and permeability distributions. Rather the porosity and permeability distributions were used as is in order to verify their validity. No attempt was made to adjust the porosity and permeability data to history-match the experiment.

92.Figure 5. Upscaled permeability distribution from NMR imaging (Zuluaga et al.. 2000) 5–120 . 2000) Figure 5.. Upscaled porosity distribution from NMR imaging (Zuluaga et al.91.

93 shows a comparison of the solvent concentration distribution from the experiment and the simulation. 5-121 . The NMR-derived porosity and permeability distributions are verified. Figure 5. The agreement between the experiment and the simulation is good.94 shows the head to head comparison of the experimental and simulated solvent concentration distributions at the same cross-sections.Figure 5. The agreement between the simulation and the experiment is excellent thereby verifying the validity of the porosity and permeability distributions obtained by NMR imaging.

5–122 .. 2000). Nρ = 0.Figure 5. NPe = 133 (Zuluaga et al.93.81. Ng = 0.1027.0160. M= 0. A comparison of the experimental and simulated solvent concentration distribution for Experiment 6 using NMR-derived porosity and permeability distributions.

1027. Ng = 0. A comparison of the experimental and simulated solvent concentration at the same cross-sections for Experiment 6 using NMRderived porosity and permeability distributions.0160. 2000). NPe = 133 (Zuluaga et al. NOMENCLATURE ax ay az A C Ci Cj = = = = = = = = correlation length in the x direction correlation length in the y direction correlation length in the z direction cross-sectional area of porous medium solvent concentration dimensionless solvent concentration initial solvent concentration injected solvent concentration dispersion coefficient tensor mechanical dispersion coefficient tensor 5-123 CD = D Dm = .81. M= 0.Figure 5.94. Nρ = 0..

Dd DL Do Dp = = = = molecular diffusion coefficient longitudinal dispersion coefficient binary diffusion coefficient between the solvent and oil mean grain diameter of the porous medium error function complementary error function formation resistivity factor gravitational acceleration total mass flux mass flux vector due to advection mass flux vector due to dispersion permeability mobility ratio gravity number Peclet number density number volumetric injection rate retardation factor specific surface area time dimensionless time interstitial velocity vector Darcy velocity vector Dykstra-Parson’s coefficient of permeability variation dimensionless distance longitudinal dispersivity transverse dispersivity viscosity of displaced fluid viscosity of displacing fluid 5–124 erf = erfc = F g J Ja Jd = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = k L M Ng Nρ q Rf S t tD u = length of porous medium NPe = v V xD αL αT μo μs .

” Water Resources Res.: “On the Dispersion of a Solute in a Fluid Flowing Through a Tube.. 69.W. R. 3. A. Y. The University of Texas at Austin. 4. Res. Bachmat.” IASH (International Association of Scientific Hydrology) Publ. N. A. J. T. 235 (1956) 67-78. Lake: “Dispersion and Reservoir Heterogeneity.” IASH (International Association of Scientific Hydrology) Symp. Bear. Roy. Bear.: Investigation of Heterogeneities and Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using CT. Dubbrovnik 1. New York. Y. 4 (1961) 1185-97.” J. Geophys. No. Bachmat.. No. London A. Y. Bear: “The General Equations of Hydrodynamic Dispersion. 1972. MS Thesis.: Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media.. J.φ λ τ ρo ρs Δx Δρ ∇ = = = = = = = = porosity fluid mobility tortuosity density of displaced fluid density of displacing fluid mixing zone length density difference gradient operator REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Afzal.. and Y. Bear. and J. Elsevier. 72 (1967) 7-16. J.No. Bachmat: “A Generalized Theory on Hydrodynamic Dispersion in Porous Media.” J.” Proc. 12 (1964) 2561-67. Publ.: “Basic Transport Coefficients as Aquifer Characteristics.: “On the Tensor Form of Dispersion.G. Arya. 66. Res. (1967) 1079-83. Hewtt. Geophys.: “On the Similitude of Dispersion Phenomena in Homogeneous and Isotropic Porous Medium. Larson and L. Bachmat. Hydrology of Fractured Rocks. 5-125 . Aris.” SPERE (February 1988) 139-48. R.73 (1965) 63-75. May 1992.

England (1979). J. University of Texas at Austin.T.. 3 (1974) 145-67. W. van der Dee: “Dispersion of Continuously Injected..E. and D.. Garms.E. Clark.: The Mathematics of Diffusion.” J. L. II. Soc. Barlaz: “Dispersion at the Field Scale Resulting from Spatial Variability of the Hydraulic Conductivity Field.. No. Oxford (1959). Broman.. J. Hydrol. Bond. 1 (1979) 467. Bosma.” Water Resources Res. Am.” Water Resources Res. Shearin. Ginn: “On Dispersion in Fractal Porous Media.T. MS Thesis.C. J. Clarendon Press. 159. 43. H. Hydrol.. 3.A. Oxford. 3 (1995) 181-98. and R. H. 18 . No. 7 (1989) 1575-81. Research & Engineering Consultants Inc.L. : Conduction of Heat in Solids. W. 1. and Dagan. W. 13.M. Jr. F. J.: Visualization of Viscous Fingering in Miscible and Immiscible Displacements..72. Collins. 22 . K.T. W.J. Non Linearly Adsorbing Solute in Chemically or Physically Heterogeneous Porous Formations. No.: “Solute Transport in Unsaturated Heterogeneous Soils at Field Scale.N. Carslaw.. E.Boersma. Lindstrom and M. 29..L. Soc." JPT (June 1958) 1120.F. and Moore. (1983) 438-41.E. Experimental Methodology and Results. Butters.A. Cushman.S. 5–126 . Clarendon. J. (1986) 1881-89.. (1990).M. No. Smiles: “Influence of Velocity on Hydrodynamic Dispersion During Unsteady Soil Water Flow.” Soil Sci..H.: “On Diffusion in Fractal Porous Media. December 1985. G. and S. Schultz. MS Thesis. W. J.. : "Miscible Drive . Applications. J.. May 1990. No. No.H. 2nd ed.It’s Theory and Application. No. Cavalero. 47.. University of Texas at Austin. G. Bond.” Water Resources Res. Am. Unsaturated Soil Water Flow: Experiments. Crank. H..” J.P.: Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials. W.” Soil Sci. Ernst: “Field Scale Transport of Bromide in an Unsaturated Soil.: Experimental Verification of A Stability Theory for Miscible Displacements. Jury and F. Contam. R. 4 (1991) 643-44.A. and Jaeger.J.J.” Water Resources Res. Bresler. 27. 25. No. J. 10 (1993) 3513-15. Cushman. S. 2nd edition.: “Velocity-Dependent Hydrodynamic Dispersion During Steady.

Freyberg.” Rep. 2030-46 (1986). State University of New York at Stony Brook (19 91). (1979). 5.A. and Schwartz. P. Ellsworth. Prentice Hall.. Freeze. New York.W. Part A. No. Chemical Dullien.: "General Analysis of Longitudinal Dispersion in Nonuniform Flow. J. and E.A. Lindquist. Porous Media.. T. 1993.: Porous Media . Spatial Moments and the Advection and Dispersion of Non reactive Tracers. Englewood Cliffs. 43. D. 967-81 (1991). 5-127 . F. Furtado.Dagan. F.” Water Resour. G. : Physical and Hydrogeology. H. J. J.R." Water Resources Research. Polymer Sci. New York. R. New Jersey. T.” J. 2. Vol. M. G.A.W... No. Lindquist.A. SUNYSB-AMS-91-06. John Wiley and Sons.J. Gelhar.L. 1979..6 (1971) 1511-1521. : Groundwater. 2. Characterization of Vertical Dispersion. II”. Prentice Hall. 7. and Collins. No.” Advances in Hydroscience. 27 No. 7 pp. Res. Fluid Mech. B. J. L. F. Fried. and Stat.. F. B. F.” Report.A. Furtado. 1 (1979) 461-67. and W. F.T. Am. Frisch. State University of New York at Stony Brook (1991).W.. 1. 7. 145 (1984) 151-77. Glimm. Dept. of Appl. Res. Jury: “A Three-Dimensional Field Study of Solute Transport through Unsaturated Layers. Upper Saddle River.. No. Math.Fluid Transport and Pore Structure. 1990.K.A. Theory. Bresler: “Solute Transport in Unsaturated Heterogeneous Soils at Field Scale. 7 (1971) 169–282. Pereira and Q. 2. Pereira and Q. of Appl. C.: “Solute Transport in Heterogeneous Porous Formation. M.. Academic Press. J. :”Dispersion in Porous Media. Wang and T. 879-87 (1969)..” Soil Sci. Dagan.L. J. New Jersey. Zhang: “Flow in Multi-Fractal and Partially Layered Porous Media.A. Dept. I. 22.” Water Resour. and Stat.L.: “A Natural Gradient Experiment on Solute Transport in a San Aquifer. Glimm. and Cherry. Kwei: “Diffusion in Glassy Polymers. Domenico. Math. and Combarnous. Fetter. : Contaminant Hydrogeology. Zhang: “Time Dependent Anomalous Diffusion for Flow in Multi-Fractal Porous Media.

Guven.F. L. F. No.R.L.” Water Resour. Andersen. No. 5–128 ..Gelhar. O. O..J. L. 20. Giona. August 1993.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.N. P. L. Hill. and Elkamel. Huyakorn. Molz and J. Molz. Gharbi. Guven. Sci. Austin. Res. Texas. R.F. 1955-74 (1992).” J. J. C. 72.W. 22. No. 14 (1967) 3595-3607.W. 7 (1986) 1016-1030. of Geophysical Research.” Water Resour.W. 28.G. University of Texas at Austin.J. Dewynne: Cambridge.: "Scaling Miscible Flood Displacements in Porous Media.G. 161-80 (1983). 19. No. J. E. : " Stochastic Subsurface Hydrology From Theory to Application. 12. MS Thesis. : “Scaling Coreflood Experiments to Heterogeneous Reservoirs.” Chem Eng. Mass.. R. 801-811. No. Res.. and Melville. Gelhar. December 1988. and Peters. D. J.. and Harleman. : “A Curvilinear Finite Element Model for Simulating Two-Well Tracer Tests and Transport in Stratified Aquifers at the Chalk River and Mobile Sites” Water Resources Research. No. 10.. P. Melville: “An Analysis of Dispersion in a Stratified Aquifer.. Vol. Axness: “Three-Dimensional Stochastic Analysis of Macro dispersion in Aquifers.R. Gelhar. F.." Jour. Welty and K. Hoopes.A.R. 10. 9 (1986) 135S145S.. W.M. Peters. : "Dispersion in Radial Flow From a Recharge Well. Rumer: “Longitudinal and Lateral Dispersion in an Isotropic Porous Medium.. and J.. M. No..: “First Order Reaction-Diffusion Kinetics in Complex Fractal Media. and R. Gharbi. Res. 16. Heat Conduction. 4. Vol. R. 7. A. 1503-15 (1992).. 6. (1993) 83-95. 1337-54 (1984).J. Harleman. Hardham.F. Blackwell Sci. 47. 1. No. E. PhD Dissertation. No. 1998.” Water Resour.: Numerical Modeling of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Assisted by Computed Tomography Imaging. and C. (1987).: Computerized Tomography Applied to the Visualization of Fluid Displacements.R. 38594 (1963). Gharbi. D. Rehfeldt: “A Critical Review of Data on Field-Scale Dispersion in Aquifers.J. Fluid Mech." Energy & Fuels. 3." Water Resources Research 22. D. The University of Texas at Austin.

and J.. Springer-Verlag..T. : Enhanced Oil Recovery. December 1986. Math. W. Steffen and O. 10. Dissertation. J. C. S.W. New York (1992). (1991) 205-218. :”NMR Imaging of Immiscible Displacements in Porous Media. AGU. No..” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. Rep. Todd: “Dispersion of a Water Tracer in a Radial. The University of Texas at Austin. Khataniar. (1952).” Society of Petroleum Engineers Formation Evaluation (September 1997) 164-169. San Diego. 5-129 .D. pp 17-29. Li. 3/4 (May 1992) 263-81. August 1991.” J. and E. University of Texas at Austin. Lau. 5. University of Texas at Austin. 8. P. P. I. (1984). Philip: “Exact Solution in Nonlinear Diffusion.. and E. Englewood Cliffs.F. Tsang: “Groundwater Transport: Handbook of Mathematical Models. Liquids.L. H. New Jersey. Majors. Ser. J. MS Thesis.. J. L.” Water Resour.: A Numerical Study of the Performance of Unstable Displacements in Heterogeneous Media.D. Denmead.: Numerical Simulation of Unstable Miscible Displacements by a Modified Finite Element Method. Prentice Hall. S. 219-27 (1992).J.K. Ping: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. Li. G. L. 7. Elsevier.Javandel. Texas.R. Washington. S. Canal Seepage Eng. Gases. W. Univ. J. Peters: “A Comparison of the Finite Difference and Finite Element Methods for Simulating Unstable Displacements. Berkeley (July 1959). Korvin. Lake. and Peters. H. August 1997. Laminar Flow through Homogeneous Porous Media. 5.. Khataniar. Peters: “The Effect of Heterogeneity on the Performance of Unstable Displacements. Kaufman and D.: Diffusion in Solids.J. E. PhD Dissertation. W. Calif.. Monogr. Doughty and C. DC. Khataniar. Eng. E. Knight.: Solute Transport and Dispersion: Commentary. ed.: Fractal Models in the Earth Sciences. of Calif. 1989. Res. Kasap. New York (1988). Austin. Ph. Lab. Jost.K. in Flow and Transport in the Natural Environment: Advances and Applications. Knight.” Progr.

O.” SPE 15597. 26. T.A. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Technical Conference of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (October 1989) San Antonio.” Water Resour. and E. E. Melville.” Ground Water. Peters. 9.K.M. Jr. No. Hardham: “A Comparison of Unstable Miscible and Immiscible Displacements. O’ Shaughnessy. Mercado. Broman. Kasap: “Simulation of Unstable Miscible Displacements by Finite Element Method. : “Numerical Modeling of Laboratory Corefloods.Marle. : “A Review of Diffusion and Dispersion in Porous Media. No. (1993) 207-221. and Afzal. Neuman. Proceedings of the 61st Annual Technical Conference of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (October 1986) New Orleans.: “A Note on Micro and Macrodispersion. Porous Media. Muralidhar.: “Universal Scaling of Hydraulic Conductivities and Dispersivities in Geologic Media. No.: Multiphase Flow in Porous Media.J.C. R. O. No. : “A Look at Dispersion in Porous Media Through Computed Tomography Imaging. E. N. (March 1963) 70-84. R. No. Procaccia: “Analytical Solutions for Diffusion on Fractal Objects. and D.” SPE 19640.G. 1749-58 (1990). and W. (1981). 21. and Johnston. Peters.” Ground Water. Gharbi.. 7. Peters. and I. 54. 3/4.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. B. Broman and W. J. E. 6.” SPE Reservoir Engineering (November 1987) 720-28. Gulf Publishing Company. Molz. J.. Peters. S.” Soc. D. and Gharbi. and Afzal. E.: “Computer Image Processing: A New Tool for Studying Viscous Fingering in Corefloods.J. Pet.J. Eng. R. E. 15 (1996) 23-31.” Phys. 1. Texas. Houston. Guven and J. 5–130 . J. 790-91 (1984). Ramkrishhna: “Diffusion in Pore Fractals: A Review of Linear Response Models. 455-58 (1995). Rev. 5. 71525 (1983).” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. “An Examination of ScaleDependent Dispersion Coefficients. Lett..” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. N.J. Perkins. C.P. F. J. Res. 79-95 (1993). A. A. : “Characterization of Heterogeneities in Permeable Media with Computed Tomography Imaging. (May 1992) 283296. 6.. J. 22. 8. Peters.. Peters. E. H.” Transp.

F. August 1988. (May 1990) 558-563. Pickens. F. : “A Microcomputer-Based Imaging System for the Visualization of Fluid Displacements. 11911211 (1981). J. and G. 6..-P. C.” Water Resour. Res. Res.: “An Analysis of Hydrodispersive Transfer in Aquifers. 6. Pet. Philip.. No. J.E.” J. 3273-78 (1961).G.” J. C. J.: The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. 5-131 . Grisak: “Modeling of Scale-Dependent Dispersion in Hydrogeologic Systems.: “General Theory of Dispersion in Porous Media. M. Saffman. 1.G.: “A Theory of Dispersion in a Porous Medium.D. : "Numerical Modeling of Miscible Displacements in Permeable Media Monitored by Imaging Techniques.E. No. Saffman.S.: “Issues in Flow and Transport in Heterogeneous Porous Media. 194-208 (1960). and Reid. Fluid Mech. Scheidegger. 1701-11 (1981). Soil Res. F. 10. 16. 1998. 13.Peters. 7. Porous Media. Grisak: “Scale-Dependent Dispersion in a Stratified Granular Aquifer.J. Pickens. No. Res. : “Visualization of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using Computed Tomography Imaging. Toronto. Reid. P. P.: “Sorption and Infiltration in Heterogeneous Media. A. Transp." Paper submitted to Computational Geosciences.” Transp. 5.” Water Resour..: “Fractal and Superdiffusive Transport and Hydrodynamic Dispersion in Heterogeneous Porous Media. and G... A.E. J. Sahimi.J. 17.” J. Tech.” J. 4. MS Thesis.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. E. Fluid Mech. and Peters. W. Geophys. 1-10 (1967). E. Philip. No.A. 2.E. University of Texas at Austin. 319-38 (1986).R. J.J. (May 1990) 155-168.R. Porous Media. Sauty.” Water Resour. 321-49 (1959). 17. Shecaira. 4. Canada (1960). 66. 1.: “Dispersion Due to Molecular Diffusion and Macroscopic Mixing in Flow Through a Network of Capillaries. Scheidegger. 3-40 (1993). University of Toronto Press. E. and Hardham. 145-58 (1980). Res.” Aust. Peters. J.: Development of an Image Processing Workstation for the Quantitative Analysis of Fluid Displacements.. No.

Am. No. 3.. J. Res. 1.: “Macrodispersion in Porous Media: The Controlling Factors. 2019-28 (1969).” Soil Sci.T.A.R. van Genuchten. F. 4.” Water Resour. and S.. Wang.” Water Resour. Wheatcraft and S. PhD Dissertation.” Water Resour. Alves: “Analytical Solutions of the OneDimensional Convective-Dispersive Solute Transport Equation. 743-52 (1977).J.W. Jobes: “Steady-State Infiltration as a function of Measurement Scale.. 1661 (1992). Res. Wheatcraft. Ellsworth and J. Res. G. 5..J. 26. Part A 2. Ferlin: “An Experimental Study of Solute Transport in a Stony Field Soil. Taylor.S.W.: “Diffusion by Continuous Movements. Tyler: “An Explanation of Scale-Dependent Dispersivity in Heterogeneous Aquifers Using Concepts of Fractal Geometry. 566-78 (1988).L. III.: “A Lagrangean-Eulerian Method with Zoomable Hidden FineMesh Approach to Solving Advection-Dispersion Equations. E. No.W.. No. S. Frind and E. 1. Tyler. 3-7 (1991).R. 17. Texas. Water Resour. Sudicky: “Contaminant Transport in Fractured Porous Media: Analytical Solutions for a Single Fracture.. Bull. F.” Tech. No. Res. Soc. Fluhler and P..K. Tyler. H. 5–132 . May 1998. J.” Water Resour.” Soil Sci. Schwartz. T.” J. R. van Genuchten. 1487-90 (1992). No. M. Kwei and H. Tang. Taylor.” Water Resour. Schulin. and R.S. No.T. 555-64 (1981).W. No. 3. 7. S.W. U.: “Dispersion of Soluble Matter in Solvent Flowing Slowly Through a Tube. G. The University of Texas at Austin. Philip on ‘An Explanation of Scale-Dependent Dispersivity in Heterogeneous Aquifers Using Concepts of Fractal Geometry. Austin. Agric. and W.W. 24. Res. No.. 129-36 (1994).. 55.G. Polymer Sci. D.” Proc. T.Shecaira..” Proc. Frisch: “Diffusion in Glassy Polymers. T. 186-203 (1953).O. 1785-95 (1987).. Dep. Shouse. Kachanoski: “Spatial Scale Dependence of In Situ Solute Transport.T.H. 28. 6.. 219.A. 2. P.W. Soc. Yeh. Res. 196-211 (1981). London A... and S. 1133-44 (1990). R. M. van Wesenbeeck. 20. G..: Numerical Modeling of Miscible Displacements in Permeable Media Monitored by Imaging Techniques. 4. 9. 157.’” by S.T. London Math Soc. Wheatcraft: “Reply to Comment by J.

and Peters.. E. MS Thesis.: "A Simulation Approach to Validate Petrophysical Data from Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 35-39. August 1999. Zuluaga. University of Texas at Austin.J. E. Majors." SPE Journal.D. 5-133 . P.Zuluaga. March 2002. E.: A Simulation Approach to Validate Petrophysical Data from Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

PV Injected (tD) 0.010 0.000 CD 0. has a porosity of 0. Effluent Data for Tracer Test of Problem 5.89 0.215 0.35.5. Table 5. Determine the dispersion coefficient of the core.516 0. Table 5. A laboratory core.2. Time (hour) 0.37 0.066 0.37 0.65 0.96 5. Determine the Peclet number for the tracer test.434 0.60 0.83 0.PROBLEMS 5.4. Table 5.43 0.015 0.70 0.44 0.224 0.502 5–134 .5 gives the data for a one-dimensional core tracer test. which is 6 cm in diameter and 40 cm in length.105 0.4 were recorded at the outlet end of the core.00 1 − tD tD 0.90 1. A tracer is then injected continuously into the core at the rate of 1000 cm3/hour.65 0. C/Co is the relative tracer concentration.5 0. Data for Problem 5.1. The effluent data shown in Table 5.385 0.396 0.2.41 0.037 0.359 0.300 0.46 C/Co 0.075 0. The core is initially saturated with water.1.80 0.35 0.

095 -0. Comment on the effectiveness of molecular diffusion as a transport mechanism in a porous medium.2 65. Distance from Core Inlet (cm) 48.10 1. 5-135 .2 73. Tracer Data for Problem 5.4 C/Co (%) 0. If a tracer is placed in contact with the inlet end of the porous medium.3 63. 5.3.30 1.0 94. As the salt water is displaced the concentration measurements in Table 5.6.408 0.7 98.4.685 0.2 49.2 3.1.2 59.3 61.50 -0.7 51.5 9.988 0. The molecular diffusion coefficient of a porous medium is equal to 5x10-10 m2/s.6 55.5 21.6 were made at a specific time t.183 -0. How long after the initiation of flow were these readings taken? b.997 5.820 0.5 98.906 0. Determine the dispersion coefficient and the dispersivity of the sandpack.8 2.263 -0.5 53.338 -0. a. Fresh water at relative concentration C/Co = 0 is injected into a sandpack saturated with salt water at relative concentration C/Co = 1. estimate the relative tracer concentration C/Co at a distance of 5 m from the inlet after 100 years of diffusion.3 78.4 68.7 100 The average interstitial velocity of flow was 1.7 50. Table 5.3.6 cm/minute.40 1.20 1.4 57.5 94.

A tracer test is conducted in a relatively homogeneous cylindrical sandpack using continuous injection of a nonreactive tracer. why not? How would the dispersivity you calculated in part a compare with the dispersivity obtained from the breakthrough curve in the same experiment? 5–136 .5.6 cm/minute.9 and 0. The tracer test was imaged by CT at t = 50 minutes from the beginning of the test.5.9 hour from the start of injection.0 gm/cm3 981cm/s2 1 atmosphere = 1. Figure 3 shows the 0.75 was observed to arrive at the outlet end of the core after 0. The interstitial velocity for the test was 1. Calculate the dispersivity of the porous medium and state its units. Other data about the test are: Length of sandpack = 30 cm Diameter of sandpack = 10 cm Volumetric injection rate = 1000 cm3/hour Porosity of the sandpack Hydraulic gradient Fluid viscosity Fluid density Gravitational acceleration = = = = = 35% 0. Calculate the permeability of the porous medium and state its units. Problem 3 (15 points) A tracer test was conducted in a long core to determine the dispersivity of a porous medium using a tracer that had the same density and the same viscosity as the displaced liquid. a.1 tracer concentration contours inside the porous medium obtained by imaging. b. The relative concentration C/Co of 0.0 cp 1. b. Is the core homogeneous? If yes. why? If no.0133x106 dynes/cm2 a. The injected tracer and the displaced liquid have the same density and viscosity. c. Calculate the dispersivity of the porous medium and state its units.1 1.

Tracer concentration contours at t = 50 minutes. Sodium iodide solution is used as a solvent in this experiment because its high x-ray absorption coefficient permits the solvent concentration profiles to be imaged by x-ray computed tomography (CT scanning). The injected and displaced fluids are miscible in all proportions and have the same density and viscosity.Figure 3. Probes are installed at the inlet and outlet 5-137 . Problem 3 (20 points) A solution of nonabsorbing sodium iodide is injected continuously to displace a brine solution from a core of length L. porosity φ. permeability k and cross sectional area A at a constant volumetric rate q.

Superimpose the two graphs so that one can make a qualitative comparison of the two. c.75 5–138 . Determine the dispersivity of the porous medium. Sketch the graphs of solvent concentration versus dimensionless time you expect from the probes at the inlet and outlet ends of the core. a. Please label your graphs with inlet and outlet. given: L = 30 cm 3 q = 50 cm /hour 2 A = 20 cm φ = 0. Predict the solvent concentration at the outlet end of the core at t = 108 minutes. Do your sketches on Figure 3. Show the inlet and outlet ends of the core on your sketch as well as the critical values of solvent concentration. b.6 minutes from the start of the test. 4. The relative concentration C/Co of 0. A tracer test is conducted in a relatively homogeneous cylindrical sandpack using continuous injection of a nonreactive tracer. Sketch the solvent concentration profile you would expect to see from the CT scanning after injecting 0.15 DL = 400x10 6. A relative concentration of 0. –5 2 cm /s (20 points) A nonabsorbing tracer is pumped through a porous medium of length 30 cm at an interstitial velocity of 1x10-2 cm/s.ends of the core to monitor and report the solvent concentrations as functions of time during the entire experiment. The injected tracer and the displaced liquid have the same density and viscosity. Do your sketch on Figure 2. what transport property of the porous medium and fluids can be estimated from this experiment? d.5 pore volume of the solvent.42 was measured in the effluent after 46. Other than the absolute permeability.

5-139 .0133x10 dynes/cm Fluid density = Gravitational acceleration = 1 atmosphere = a.0 gm/cm 2 981cm/s 6 2 1.9 hour from the start of injection. Please state the units of your answer.0 cp 3 1.1 1.was observed to arrive at the outlet end of the core after 0. Other data about the test are: Length of sandpack Diameter of sandpack = = 30 cm 10 cm 3 1000 cm /hour Volumetric injection rate = Porosity of the sandpack Hydraulic gradient Fluid viscosity = = = 35% 0. Calculate the dispersivity of the porous medium.

why? If no. Figure 2 shows the 0. (a) Calculate the dispersivity of the porous medium and state its units. Please state the units of answer.25 0. 5–140 .9 and 0.833 0. (b) Is the core homogeneous? If yes.7 0.50 0. your Calculate the permeability of the porous medium. The relative concentrations measured at the outlet end of the core were as follows: Time (Hour) 0.6 cm/minute. The interstitial velocity for the test was 1. (20 points) A nonabsorbing tracer was injected into a 30 cm long core at a constant interstitial velocity of 36 cm/hr. The tracer test was imaged by CT at t = 50 minutes from the beginning of the test.992 C/Co 0. (10 points) A tracer test was conducted in a long core to determine the dispersivity of a porous medium using a tracer that had the same density and the same viscosity as the displaced liquid.1 tracer concentration contours inside the porous medium obtained by imaging. why not? 2.75 Determine the dispersivity of the core. 6.b.

5-141 . Tracer concentration contours at t = 50 minutes.Figure 2.

water and oil occupy the pore space. space.1 INTRODUCTION The pore space in a petroleum reservoir rock is usually occupied by more than one fluid. In an oil reservoir. Such an affinity is characterized by the concept of wettability. water. Further. new set of problems arise. capillarity plays a role. oil and gas may occupy the pore 6-1 .CHAPTER 6 INTERFACIAL PHENOMENA AND WETTABILITY 6. Because the pores are of capillary dimensions. the rock surface can show a marked affinity for one of the fluids. Capillarity also ensures that an immiscible displacement can never be complete. at some stage of depletion. water and gas occupy the pore space. Interfacial forces (surface forces) between the immiscible fluids and between the fluids and the rock surface come into play. Interfacial phenomena and wettability are presented in this In some oil reservoirs. In a gas reservoir. There is always a residual saturation of the displaced fluid that is trapped by capillarity. When more than one fluid occupies the pore space of a porous medium. Interfaces separate the fluids within the pores giving rise to differences in fluid pressure between the phases (capillary pressure) and differences in the flow capacity (relative permeability) of the rock and fluids. Fluid saturations must be tracked.

Figure 6.1: Apparent surface film caused by unequal attraction of surface molecules of a liquid.2. The force per unit length (σ = Force/Length) tending to contract the surface of a liquid is a measure of the surface tension of the liquid. It is a property of the liquid and is usually expressed in units of dynes/cm. a new interface can 6-2 . The force is caused by unequal molecular attractions of the fluid particles at the surface as shown in Figure 6. 6.chapter. If the forces acting on a molecule at the surface or interface are different from those acting on a molecule in the body of the liquid. Capillary pressure and relative permeability are presented in subsequent chapters. Surface tension makes the surface of a liquid drop act like a membrane.2.1 Surface Tension Surface tension is the contractile force that exists at the interface of a liquid and its vapor (or air).1. SURFACE AND INTERFACIAL TENSIONS 6.

The surface tension of pure water at 70 °F is 72. σ is surface (interfacial) tension and da is the increase in area.1) corresponds to a free energy quantity. The reversible work shown in Eq. It can be shown from thermodynamics that the surface entropy is given by 6-3 . This is because pressure exerts a compressive force on the surface which reduces the tensile or contractile tendency of the surface.(6. The surface tensions of crude oils at 70 °F range from 24 to 38 dynes/cm. A liquid jet tends to break up into spherical drops because a sphere has the smallest surface area per unit volume. It is apparent from Eq.(6.1) that surface (interfacial) tension also can be viewed as free surface energy per unit area with units of erg per square centimeter. temperature and solute concentration. liquids at equilibrium tend to minimize their surface area. An increase in pressure leads to a reduction in the surface tension of a liquid. Values on the order of 1 dyne/cm may be expected at temperatures and pressures exceeding 150 °F and 3.g.5 dynes/cm. Table 4. Factors that affect the surface tension of a liquid include pressure. The increase in temperature causes increased randomness at the surface which leads to an increase in the surface entropy.only be created if work is done. and at 200 °F is 60. An increase in temperature leads to a reduction in the surface tension of a liquid.1) is reversible work required to create a new area. by It can be shown (e. Because a system at equilibrium minimizes its free energy.000 psig.1 dynes/cm. by soap film experiment) that the reversible work required to create a new interface is given δ W = −σ da where δW (6.1 shows the surface tensions of some selected liquids. High temperatures and dissolved gas both tend to reduce the surface tension of crude oils..

1.2) where Ss is the surface entropy and T is the temperature. Liquids having fairly close values of surface tension.22 28.2) that surface tension decreases with temperature. It is clear from Eq. 6-4 . Generally. Table 4.9 22. the surface tension increases linearly with composition (mole % chloroform) from 22 dynes/cm for pure acetone to 27 dynes/cm for pure chloroform. for a mixture of acetone and chloroform at 18° C.0 28. the surface tension of the mixture varies approximately linearly with the composition.88 28.8 72.⎛ ∂σ ⎞ Ss = −⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ∂T ⎠ P (6. For example.39 21. 1. Surface Tension of Pure Liquids Liquid Water Water Benzene Benzene Toluene Carbon tetrachloride Ethanol n-Octane Ethyl ether T (°C) 20 25 20 25 20 20 20 20 20 σ (dynes/cm) 72.43 26.(6. Four general cases may be identified.01 The effect of solute concentration on the surface tension of a liquid depends on the liquid and the nature of the solute. Figure 6.8 17.2 shows the variation of surface tensions of hydrocarbons with temperature.

For example. In general. the surface tension increases with solute concentration. For example.2 to only 29. In general.Figure 6. addition of water to benzene raises its surface tension from 28. addition of ethanol to water causes a rapid reduction in the surface tension of water with ethanol concentration. 2. However.2. the surface tension 6-5 . 3. Liquids having widely different values of surface tension. Variation of surface tensions of hydrocarbons with temperature. but is only slightly increased by addition of a liquid of higher surface tension. Solutions of inorganic electrolytes. the surface tension of a liquid is reduced substantially by addition of a liquid of lower surface tension.3 dynes/cm.

2. The parachors for pure substances are given in Table 6. For example.4.01 moles per liter of solution. Correlations for parachors with molecular weight are shown in Figures 6. In general. Equation (3. Solutions of colloidal (long chain) electrolytes. σ is the surface tension of the liquid in dynes/cm.5.4) can be rearranged to calculate the surface tension as 6-6 . Parachor has definite values for specific atoms and structures. ρL is the saturated liquid density in g/cm3 and ρg is the saturated vapor density in g/cm3.3) where Λ is the parachor.of water at 20° C will be increased by addition of sodium chloride from 72. the surface tension of water at 25° C will be reduced by addition of sodium lauryl sulfate from 72 dynes/cm to 40 dynes/cm at a concentration of 0. Parachors are predicted from the structure of the molecules or can be calculated for pure substances and mixtures from surface tension measurements at atmospheric pressure.8 dynes/cm to 80 dynes/cm at a concentration of 5 moles of sodium chloride per liter of solution. A useful empirical relation often used to calculate surface tension is through the concept of the parachor. the surface tension decreases with solute concentration but is followed by a region over which the surface tension is virtually unchanged by solute concentration. 4. The saturated liquid and vapor densities for various liquids are given in Figure 6. M is the molecular weight of the liquid. The surface tension remains constant above this concentration.3 and 6. The parachor for a pure substance is defined as Mσ 4 Λ= ρL − ρg 1 (6.

5 351.5 34 (approx) 41 (approx) 78 6-7 .3 181.4) Table 4.5 225.⎡ ⎛ ρ − ρg σ = ⎢Λ ⎜ L ⎣ ⎝ M ⎞⎤ ⎟⎥ ⎠⎦ 4 (6. 1959) Constituent Methane Ethane Propane i-Butane n-Butane i-Pentane n-Pentane n-Hexane n-Heptane n-Octane Hydrogen Nitrogen Carbon dioxide Parachor 77. Parachors for Computing Surface and Interfacial Tensions (Katz et al.0 150.2.0 312.0 231.5 181..0 108.5 271.

. Parachors for computing interfacial tension of normal paraffin hydrocarbons (Katz et al.3. 6-8 .Figure 6. 1959).

1988). Parachors of heavy fractions for computing interfacial tension of reservoir liquids (Firoozabadi et al.4.. 6-9 .Figure 6.

6-10 .5: Saturated liquid and vapor densities of various substances.Figure 6.

These examples show that there is no simple relationship between the surface tensions of liquids and their interfacial tensions. The free energy required to create a fresh interface is referred to as the excess interfacial free energy.39 dynes/cm and that of water is 72. a fairly low number considering the surface tensions of water and butanol.2 Interfacial Tension Interfacial tension is the contractile force per unit length that exists at the interface of two immiscible fluids such as oil and water (Figure 6.3 lists accurately known interfacial tensions for various organic liquids against water.4 dynes/cm. The specific excess interfacial free energy is dimensionally equivalent and is numerically equal to the interfacial tension.6. Like surface tension. the surface tension of ethanol is 22. The low interfacial tension indicates that the molecules of butanol must concentrate at the interface. Consider butanol (C4H9OH) with a surface tension of 24 dynes/cm in contact with water (H2O) with a surface tension of 72 dynes/cm. the interfacial tension of water and iso-pentanol is 4. Table 6. the ethanol molecules will adsorb at the interface. If ethanol is added to the system. the unit of measurement of 2 interfacial tension is dynes/cm (or ergs/cm ). Interfacial orientation of the butanol is favored because the hydrocarbon chain in the butanol is hydrophobic. the interfacial tension is 1.6).2. 6-11 .80 dynes/cm. What will be the interfacial tension between the two liquids? For this system. At 20 ºC. For example.8 dynes/cm. The presence of a third component of the right kind can significantly reduce the interfacial tension between two liquids. What is the interfacial tension between ethanol and water? The answer is zero because ethanol and water are miscible. but the mutual attraction of unlike molecules across the interface becomes important. decreasing the contractile tendency of the interface. The forces acting on the surface molecules are similar to those in the liquid-vapor system.

3.8 48. the interfacial tension is reduced to zero.thereby reducing the interfacial tension between the water and the isopentanol.6. The system then becomes miscible and forms a single phase.7 38. Apparent surface film caused by unequal attraction of molecules at the interface of two liquids.7 . When 25% by weight of ethanol is added.0 50. Interfacial Tension between Water and Pure Liquids Liquid n-Hexane n-Octane Carbon disulphide Carbon tetrachloride Carbon tetrachloride Bromobenzene Benzene Benzene Nitrobenzene Ethyl ether 6-12 T (°C) 20 20 20 20 25 25 20 25 20 20 σ (dynes/cm) 51.1 43.0 45.0 10.71 26.0 34.1 35. Figure 6. Table 6.

85 4. The The monolayer is in a state of compression which reduces the contractile tendency of the interface.4 2.9 2.n-Octanol n-Hexanol Aniline n-Pentanol Ethyl acetate Isobutanol n-Butanol n-Butanol 20 25 20 25 30 20 20 25 8. σo is the original interfacial tension and Π is the spreading pressure. and 8 to 19 dynes/cm at 130 °F. which reduces the interfacial tension.8 1. In fact. presence of the adsorbed molecules creates a surface or spreading pressure σ = σo − Π (6. Such chemicals form a monolayer at the interface. thereby reducing the interfacial tension.4 presents the results of interfacial tension measurements for some fluid pairs. The interfacial tension between reservoir oil and gas can be estimated using parachors as 6-13 .6 Chemicals that adsorb at interfaces are usually referred to as surface active agents or surfactants. 8 to 25 dynes/cm at 100 °F. Table 6.5 6. Surfactants are often used to reduce the interfacial tension between oil and water in order to improve oil recovery. The interfacial tensions between reservoir water and crude oils have been measured for a number of reservoirs and found to range from 15 to 35 dynes/cm at 70 °F.5) where σ is the reduced interfacial intension.8 5.1 1.

xi is the mole fraction of component i in the liquid. Table 6. Some of these surface active agents occur naturally in crude oils. ML is the apparent molecular weight of the liquid.4. Interfacial tensions of reservoir water and oil can be reduced significantly by the addition of surface active agents to either the oil or to the water. Mg is the apparent molecular weight of the gas. Typical Interfacial Tensions and Contact Angles for Fluid Pairs (Archer and Wall.⎡i=N ⎛ ρ ρ ⎞⎤ σ = ⎢ ∑ Λ i ⎜ xi L − yi g ⎟ ⎥ M g ⎟⎥ ⎢ i =1 ⎜ M L ⎝ ⎠⎦ ⎣ 4 (6. yi is the mole fraction of component i in the gas. 1986) Wetting Phase Brine Brine Brine Brine Oil Gas Non-Wetting Phase Oil Oil Gas Gas Gas Mercury Conditions Contact Angle (º) 30 30 0 0 0 140 Interfacial Tension (dynes/cm) 30 48 72 50 4 480 Reservoir Laboratory Laboratory Reservoir Reservoir Laboratory Many reservoir phenomena depend on the interfacial tensions between the reservoir fluids and between the reservoir fluids and the reservoir rock.6) where σ is the interfacial tension between oil and gas in dynes/cm. Λi is the parachor of component i. N is the total number of components in the mixture and ρg is the saturated gas density in g/cm3. 6-14 . ρL is the saturated liquid density in g/cm3.

μ w .7) Using the technique of Appendix A for dimensional analysis.The residual oil saturation for an immiscible displacement in a porous medium is a function of the interfacial tension between the fluids. It is the ratio of the viscous to the capillary force. The corresponding dimensionless group is π2 = σ cos θ μwv or μwv (6. μ w and v is two. Therefore.9) Next. the wettability.(6. v ) (6. μnw .10) The dimensionless group in Eq.8) Let us choose x3 = -1. It can be shown that ⎡σ cos θ ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ 0 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ μ ⎥ ⎢ x ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ nw ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ x3 + ⎢ 1 ⎥ x4 ⎢ μ w ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ v ⎦ ⎣ x4 ⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ ⎣1⎦ (6. we can write Sor = f1 (σ cos θ . The corresponding dimensionless group is given by π1 = μnw μw (6. x4 = 0.10). 6-15 . let us choose x3 = x4 = 1. μnw . is known as the capillary number. σ cos θ μwv in the case of perfect σ wetting. the fluid viscosities and the displacement rate. it can be shown that the rank of the dimensional matrix obtained from the four variables σ cos θ . Therefore. two independent dimensionless groups can be derived from the four variables. Thus.

the residual nonwetting phase can be mobilized and displaced by increasing the capillary number of the displacement.14) Figure 6. the residual oil saturation decreases as the capillary number increases. Capillary number can be increased by increasing μ w and v .11) The functional relationship between the residual oil saturation and the two dimensionless groups can be written as ⎛μ μ v ⎞ Sor = f 2 ⎜ nw . ⎛ μ v ⎞ Sor = f 3 ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ σ cos θ ⎠ The oil recovery is given by 1 − Sor − S wi ⎛ μwv ⎞ = f4 ⎜ ⎟ 1 − S wi ⎝ σ cos θ ⎠ (6. the most effective way to increase the capillary number is by 6-16 . It can be seen that there is a critical capillary number below which the residual nonwetting fluid saturation is constant and independent of the capillary number. Thus.13) R= (6. w ⎟ ⎝ μ w σ cos θ ⎠ (6.7 shows typical correlations for residual saturations versus capillary number for a wetting fluid displacing a nonwetting fluid and for a nonwetting fluid displacing a wetting fluid.Nc = σ cos θ μwv or μwv σ (6.12) For a fixed viscosity ratio. Consider a wetting fluid displacing a nonwetting fluid such as a waterflood in a water wet reservoir. Above the critical capillary number. However. Normal waterfloods usually fall in this range of capillary number. Such correlations are usually referred to as capillary desaturation curves (CDC).

such as a waterflood of an oil wet reservoir. Consider the case of a nonwetting fluid displacing a wetting fluid.lowering the interfacial tension between the wetting and nonwetting phases with a surfactant. pore size distribution. it is more difficult for a nonwetting fluid to displace a wetting fluid than for a wetting fluid to displace a nonwetting fluid. Also. the fluids would become miscible and no residual saturation would be left behind. In the limit. nor should one infer from the figure that it is more efficient to displace a wetting fluid with a nonwetting fluid. It should be noted that the numerical values of the residual saturations given in Figure 6. in general. The residual oil saturation can be greater or less than 30% depending on such factors as the mobility ratio of the displacement and the properties of the porous medium such as pore structure.7 are for illustrative purposes. if the interfacial tension could be lowered to zero. The capillary desaturation curve is similar to that for the residual nonwetting fluid except that the critical value of the capillary number is higher. the interfacial tension cannot be reduced to zero except in a miscible process. permeability and wettability to name a few. It should not be assumed that waterfloods always have a residual oil saturation of 30%. 6-17 . Interfacial tensions less that 0. in a practical process.1 dyne/cm can be achieved. Of course.

1989). The inclusion ⎝ σ ⎠ ⎝ μo ⎠ of the viscosity ratio appears to improve the correlation. 0. Figure 6.8 shows capillary desaturation experimental data from Abrams (1975) obtained on the same core sample but at different viscosity ratios. ⎜ w ⎟ ⎜ w ⎟ . the decrease in residual oil saturation with increasing capillary number is evident.Figure 6.7.9 shows the same data plotted against a modified ⎛ μ v ⎞⎛ μ ⎞ capillary number that includes the viscosity ratio. Clearly.4 6-18 . Typical correlations of residual nonwetting and wetting phase saturations with capillary number (Lake. Figure 6.

Capillary desaturation data with the effect of viscosity ratio included (Abrams. Capillary desaturation data (Abrams.9. 1975). Figure 6.8.Figure 6. 1975). 6-19 .

(2) sessile drop method. These include (1) capillary rise method.6. Figure 6. Capillary Rise Experiment When a capillary tube is dipped into a wetting liquid. Capillary rise experiment. the liquid will be spontaneously imbibed (sucked) into the capillary tube as shown Figure 6.2. (4) ring method and (5) spinning drop method.10. (3) pendant drop method.3 Measurements of Surface and Interfacial Tensions Several techniques are used to measure surface and interfacial tensions.10. 6-20 .

(6.18) σ= rh ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g 2 cos θ (6.15) (6. The capillary force acts upward and for a circular capillary tube is given by Capillary Force = Force Up = 2π rσ cos θ The gravitational force acts downward and is given by Gravitational Force = Force Down = π r 2 h ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g (6. Eq. ρ nw << ρ w . The experiment can be simplified by using air as the nonwetting phase and treating the capillary tube such that it is perfectly wetted by the wetting fluid.15) and (6. can be estimated by measuring the variables on the right side of Eq. θ = 0 and cosθ = 1.The equilibrium height is determined by the balance between the capillary suction force and the pull of gravity. In this case.17) At equilibrium.18) can be rearranged as (6.(6. Equating Eqs. the force up is equal to the force down.19) The surface tension.19) becomes 6-21 .(6.19) in a capillary rise experiment. σ.16) The downward force also can be expressed in terms of the pressures on the opposite sides of the meniscus as Pr essure Force = Force Down = π r 2 ( Pnw − Pw ) (6.16) gives 2σ cos θ = h ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g r Eq.(6.

Eq. the effect of gravity is negligible and capillary effect dominates the process. capillary effect dominates gravity effect.22) The constant a2 is a property of the wetting fluid only. σ = 72 dynes/cm.20) By measuring r.71 mm.20) can be used to define a characteristic capillary length scale as κ −1 = σ rh = 2 ρw g (6.20). h and ρ w .23) .(6. Eq.(6.σ= rh ρ w g 2 (6. 72 = 0. a2 = 0.(6. For water at 25 ºC. 1x981 κ −1 = The significance of the capillary length is that when dealing with a system with the characteristic length scale δ < κ −1 . Thus. For example. at the pore scale where the characteristic length is of the order of microns.20) can be written as a 2 = rh 6-22 (6.21) For water at 25 ºC. g = 981 cm/s2.2709 cm or 2.1468 cm2. an estimate of the surface tension can easily be obtained from Eq. Let us define another constant for the capillary rise experiment as a2 = 2σ ρw g (6. for water. ρ w = 1 g/cm3 and of course.

24) where the r corrects for the volume of the liquid in the spherical meniscus.23).Pw). As shown in 6-23 . Jurin (1718) gives the capillary rise equation as r⎞ ⎛ a2 = r ⎜ h + ⎟ 3⎠ ⎝ (6.27) Eq.(6.(6.1312r 3 ⎞ a 2 = rh ⎜ 1 + − + ⎟ h2 h3 ⎝ 3h ⎠ (6.(6.1111r 2 0.27) gives the excess pressure. 3 Hagen and Desains (19xx) proposed ⎛ r 0. (Pnw . This excess pressure is known as the capillary pressure (Pc) and will be the subject of Chapter 7. (6. Eq.1288r 2 0.26) For our purpose.16) and (6.25) where the last two terms on the right hand side correct for deviations of the meniscus from sphericity. Rayleigh (1915) further refined Eq.25) as ⎛ r 0.(6.15). across the curved interface between the wetting and nonwetting phases in terms of the pertinent variables of the capillary rise experiment.23).0741r 3 ⎞ a 2 = rh ⎜ 1 + − + ⎟ h2 h3 ⎝ 3h ⎠ (6.17) gives Pnw − Pw = 2σ cos θ = h ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g r (6. Equating Eqs.(6. we will use the simple version of the capillary rise equation.Some famous scientists have studied the capillary rise experiment and have proposed more elaborate equations to describe the capillary rise than Eq.

The detached drop leaves behind some liquid residue.28) The sessile drop method of determining the surface tension of a liquid consists of measuring the number of liquid drops that fall from the capillary end of the instrument while the surface of the liquid within the bulb is lowered from the upper to the lower mark as shown in Figure 6.12 shows the sequence of shapes for a drop that detaches from a tip.27) can now be written as Pc = Pnw − Pw = Sessile Drop Method 2σ cos θ = h ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g r (6.11. The size of the drop is reached when the surface tension can no longer support its weight.(6. Figure 6. To a first Wideal = 2π rσ where Wideal is the weight of the drop that should fall.Eq.(6. Wactual = Wideal f = 2π rσ f (6.29) is modified as To account for this. the excess pressure for the capillary rise experiment is positive. The principle of the method is based on the fact that the size of the liquid drop is proportional to surface tension of the liquid. which means that the pressure in the nonwetting phase is higher than that in the wetting phase. Eq. approximation. Thus. Eq.30) 6-24 .(6. (6.27).29) r is the external radius of the tube and σ is the surface tension. the actual weight of the drop which is what is measured is less than the ideal weight.

Table 6. where V is the volume of the drop. Sequence of shapes for a drop. 6-25 . Sessile drop method of measuring surface tension.12.5 shows the correction factors for various r V3 1 .11. Figure 6.where f is a correction factor which can be expressed as a function of r V3 1 . Figure 6.

13 shows a pendant drop and the relevant dimensions. ρg is the density of the vapor. de is the maximum diameter of the drop. The surface or interfacial tension is given by σ= gd e2 ( ρ L − ρ g ) H (6.5. Correction Factors for Sessile Drop Method (Adamson. 1982). It can also be adapted for measurements at elevated temperature and pressure.31) where σ is the surface tension. ρL is the density of the liquid. The constant H is ds tabulated as a function of de/ds. Figure 6. Pendant Drop Method The pendant-drop method of measuring surface or interfacial tension depends only on the density of the fluids and the dimensions of the drop. The pendant drop method can be used to measure surface tension or interfacial tension. 6-26 .Table 6. H is a constant that is a function of de and g is the gravitational acceleration.

the surface or interfacial tension is given by σ= F 2L (6. In practice. Figure 6. Surface tension by pendant drop method.14. that employs the ring method for surface or interfacial tension determination. corrections are needed to account for the mass of liquid lifted by the ring in breaking through the interface as shown in Figure 6. known as the du Nouy tensiometer.Figure 6. Such corrections are made available with the instrument.15.32) where σ is the surface or interfacial tension. Theoretically. Ring Method The ring method of determining surface or interfacial tension depends on measuring the force required to pull the ring free of the interface as shown in Figure 6. F is the force required to pull the ring free of the interface and L is the circumference of the ring. The factor of 2 accounts for the fact that there are two surfaces around the ring.16 shows a typical instrument. 6-27 .13.

Surface tension by ring method. 6-28 .Figure 6.14.

Figure 6. Condition of liquid surface film at breaking point. 6-29 .15.

Under rotation.000 revolutions per minute (RPM). The drop or bubble is typically rotated at speeds of 1. the original spherical drop or bubble becomes elongated into a 6-30 . du Nouy tensiometer.Figure 6.200 to 24.16. Spinning Drop Method The spinning drop method of determining surface or interfacial tension is based on measuring the shape of a drop of liquid or gas bubble in a more dense liquid contained in a rotating horizontal tube.

The fluids are water. limestone. 6. or dolomite. Normally. together with cementing material. ω is the angular velocity in radians/s and r is the cylindrical radius of the drop in cm. Interfacial tensions as low as 10-6 dyne/cm have been successfully measured with the instrument. The fluid that spreads or adheres to the surface is known as the wetting fluid. The instrument is manufactured and sold by the Chemistry The instrument is particularly Department at the University of Texas. suitable for measuring low interfacial tensions and is therefore used extensively in surfactant research. 6-31 . either water or oil is the wetting phase.cylindrical shape as shown in Figure 6.33) where σ is the surface or interfacial tension.17. An instrument based on the spinning drop method has been designed and patented at the University of Texas at Austin by Schechter and Wade (Figure 6.18).1 Definition Wettability is a tendency for one fluid to spread on or adhere to a solid surface in the presence of other immiscible fluids. the solid surface is the reservoir rock which may be sandstone. The interfacial tension is given by σ = Δρω 2 r 3 1 4 (6. In a petroleum reservoir. oil and gas.3. dynes/cm Δρ is the density difference between the two fluids in g/cm3.3 WETTABILITY 6. Gas is always a nonwetting phase. A strobe light is used to visualize the deformed drop. A microscope is used to measure the diameter of the drop.

Cylindrical liquid drops in a spinning drop apparatus. 1975). 6-32 .Figure 3.000 RPM.000 RPM (Cayias et al..17. (B) octane-surfactant system at 6. (A) benzene-water system at 20.

18..19.Figure 6. this equation is given by σ os − σ ws = σ ow cos θ 6-33 (6.Dupre equation obtained by considering horizontal equilibrium of the point of contact of the interfacial tensions. Three interfacial tensions (specific free surface energies) arise: σos is the solid-oil interfacial tension. the interfacial tensions are related by the Young . Consider the water-oil-solid system shown in Figure 6. For Figure 6. 1975).19.34) . The angle θ is known as the contact angle and is measured through the water (the more dense fluid). σow is the oil-water interfacial tension and σws is the water-solid interfacial tension. At equilibrium. The contact angle is a measure of the wettability of the solid. Schematic of spinning drop tensiometer (Cayias et al.

19. If σws < σos .34). A contact angle of 90° means that the solid has no preferential wettability for the oil or the water. giving a contact angle of 90°.(6. water will advance and spread on the solid surface. Interfacial tensions in a water-oil-solid system.(6. their difference can be determined by measuring the oil-water interfacial tension and the contact angle. If the free surface energies for the oil-solid (σos) and the water-solid (σws) interfaces are equal. When the oil.34) must be zero.34) is zero. water and solid are first brought in contact. then θ < 90°. The following may be deduced from Eq. 6-34 During . The solid is said to be preferentially water wet.(6. achieved. cosθ on the right side of Eq. 2. displacing the oil until an equilibrium contact angle is attained according Eq. Since the oil-water interfacial (σow) tension is nonzero.32): This difference controls the movement of the interface before equilibrium is Figure 6. However. 1. This is a situation of neutral or intermediate wettability. (6. the left side of Eq.The free surface energies for the oil-solid and water-solid interfaces cannot be measured readily.

the free energy of the system is reduced since σws < σos.20c. 3.spreading of the water. 6-35 . the surface is preferentially oil wet. and in Figure 6. in Figure 6. In Figure 6.20d. 4. the surface is water wet.20a. the surface is totally water wet. If σws > σos . the surface is of neutral wettability.20b. in Figure 6. Complete spreading of the oil on the surface takes place if θ = 180° and complete spreading of water on the surface takes place if θ = 0°. Figure 6.20 shows the equilibrium contact angles for four wettability states. Complete spreading of crude oil or water on a surface has never been observed with reservoir fluids. The difference (σos − σws) is known as the adhesion tension. then θ > 90°. The solid is said to be preferentially oil wet.

No wettability determination method involves the simultaneous use of reservoir fluids and reservoir rock.Figure 6. Equilibrium contact angles showing four wettability states.2 Determination of Wettability Reservoir wettability is usually determined either by contact angle measurement using reservoir fluids and a pure mineral surface or by an imbibition test on a reservoir core sample using refined oil and a synthetic brine.3. 6. 6-36 .20.

This change in the wettability of the surface can be observed and quantified by measuring the contact angle over time until an equilibrium contact angle is obtained.Contact Angle Method Contact angle is one of the earliest and still most widely used measurement to evaluate reservoir wettability. The mineral surface is A drop of the oil (or immersed in the brine (or oil) and allowed to equilibrate. The contact angle measurement is performed with a contact angle cell using an instrument known as a goniometer. These pure minerals are known to be preferentially water wet initially. the contact angle test uses reservoir oil and brine and a pure. The contact angle is then measured over time. The equipment can be adapted for contact angle measurements at elevated pressures and temperatures. synthetic brine is used in the test since the surface active fluid is the oil and not in the brine. clean mineral surface which is known to be preferentially water wet at the outset. pure calcite for a limestone reservoir and pure dolomite crystal for a dolomite reservoir. 6-37 . If the oil contains surface active agents. The contact angle measurement essentially seeks to establish whether or not the reservoir oil contains surface active agents that could make an originally preferentially water wet mineral surface become preferentially oil wet over time. The solids normally used in the test to represent reservoir rock are pure quartz (silica) for a sandstone reservoir.21. Accordingly. In the absence of reservoir brine. then these will adsorb on the mineral surface over time and increase the degree of oil wetness. The test can last several weeks depending on the time required to achieve adsorption equilibrium. It is reasonable to assume that a similar wetting equilibrium will be approached in the reservoir. brine) is then introduced on to the surface with a hypodermic syringe as shown in Figure 6.

21. Several The early time contact angle measurements showed the solid to be preferentially water wet. interesting observations can be made. However. Normally. The receding contact angle (θR) is the contact angle obtained when oil comes into equilibrium with a surface previously in contact with water. The advancing contact angle (θA) is the contact angle obtained when water comes into equilibrium with a surface previously in contact with oil as shown Figure 6. it is the advancing contact angle that is reported as the contact angle in a wettability test. Contact angle cell.22. as 6-38 .Figure 6. Two contact angles are normally measured: the advancing and receding contact angles. The advancing contact angle is always greater than the receding contact angle. Figure 6.23 shows the results of a contact angle test.

after adsorption equilibrium was achieved the solid was found to be preferentially oil wet. Note that for this test. 1971). Advancing and receding contact angles.time passed. Figure 6.23. 6-39 . Had the contact angle test been terminated prematurely.22. the wettability assessment would have been wrong. over 30 days of aging were needed to establish adsorption equilibrium. Figure6. the degree of water wetness diminished. Eventually. Approach to equilibrium contact angle (Craig.

2. The core is centrifuged under brine and the additional oil displaced by centrifuging is measured. 4. clean. (4) There is evidence that the contact angle is affected by which fluid was first in contact with the solid. Pure minerals may not be limestone and dolomite reservoir rocks. 6-40 . it is then subjected to the following tests: 1. homogeneous mineral surface. (2) Pure minerals are used in the test to simulate sandstone. (1) Contact angle is measured on a flat. The core is immersed in oil (e. Amott Wettability Test The Amott wettability index is obtained by a combined imbibitiondisplacement test on a reservoir core sample using refined oil and synthetic brine. The following disadvantages should be noted. 3. The core is centrifuged under kerosene and the additional brine displaced by centrifuging is measured. Such a surface does not exist in the reservoir. After the reservoir core sample has been flushed with brine to residual oil saturation and evacuated to remove gas.The major advantages of contact angle measurements are the reliability of the results and the relative ease of obtaining uncontaminated reservoir fluid samples compared to uncontaminated reservoir rock samples.. (3) The test can be very long and requires extreme cleanliness and inertness of the test system.g. representative of actual reservoir mineralogy. kerosene) and the volume of brine displaced by the imbibition of oil is measured after 20 hours in an imbibition cell as shown in Figure 6. The core is immersed in brine and the volume of oil displaced by the imbibition of brine is measured after 20 hours.24.

The wettability indices of water (WIw) and oil (WIo) are calculated as follows: WI w = Volume of oil displaced by brine imbibition (6. If the rock is preferentially water-wet. Imbibition cell. if 6-41 .35) Volume of oil displaced by brine imbibition + forced displacement Volume of brine displaced by oil imbibition (6. WIo will be 0 and WIw > 0. the closer will WIw be to 1.36) Volume of brine displaced by oil imbibition + forced displacement WI o = The Amott wettability indices and dimensionless numbers that range from 0 to 1.24. The greater the degree of water wetness. Similarly.Figure 6.

WIw and WIo will be 0 or close to 0. Next. However.37) 6-42 . The results of such experiments are shown in Figure 6. This is the process labeled III in each figure. the difference (WI w − WI o ) is used to as the wettability measure. The wettability of the core sample may easily be altered by the coring operation. WIw will be 0 and WIo > 0. the wettability index will range from -1 to +1. the closer will WIo be to 1. United States Bureau of Mines (USBM) Wettability Index The USBM wettability index is obtained by carry out a number of forced water and oil displacement experiments using a centrifuge. The sample is saturated initially with water. Sometimes. The greater the degree of oil wetness. which contains initial oil saturation and irreducible water saturation is then centrifuged in water to residual oil saturation. the sample.the rock is preferentially oil wet. An index of -1 indicates a strongly oil wet rock whereas an index of +1 indicates a strongly water wet rock. The sample. In this case. This is the process labeled I in each figure. The USBM wettability index is calculated as ⎛A ⎞ USBM Wettability Index = I w = log10 ⎜ 1 ⎟ ⎝ A2 ⎠ (6.25. For a rock of intermediate or neutral wettability. The Amott wettability index is a reliable measure of the wettability of the core sample. The water is then displaced with oil to irreducible water saturation using the centrifuge. which now contains water and residual oil saturation is then centrifuged in oil to irreducible water saturation. the wettability of the core sample may not be representative of the wettability of the reservoir rock because of the difficulty of obtaining an unaltered core sample. This is the process labeled II in each figure.

of forty three outcrop rock samples and three reservoir rock samples. (WI w − WI o ) . Therefore. the ratio ⎛A ⎞ of the areas under the capillary pressure curves.25A. In particular. ⎜ 1 ⎟ . The area under a capillary pressure curve represents the thermodynamic work required for the displacement.26 compares the USBM wettability index and the Amott wettability index. The displacement of a nonwetting phase by a wetting phase requires less work than the displacement of a wetting phase by a nonwetting phase. is a measure of the ⎝ A2 ⎠ degree of wettability of the porous medium. There is a strong correlation between the two measures of wettability. both methods show the three reservoir rock samples to be oil wet as indicated by the negative values for both wettability indices. the USBM wettability index for a water wet medium will be positive as shown in Figure 6. that of an oil wet medium will be negative as shown in Figure 6.where A1 and A2 are the areas under the capillary pressure curves shown in each figure. Figure 6. The absolute value of the index is a measure of the degree of wettability preference.25B and that of a medium of neutral wettability will be 0 as shown in Figure 6. wetting by either fluid.25C. A wettability index of zero indicates no preferential 6-43 . The USBM wettability index ranges from -1 for a strongly oil wet rock to +1 for a strongly water wet rock. Therefore.

25. 1969).. Determination of USBM wettability index (Donaldson et al. 6-44 .Figure 6.

(1972) measured the wettabilities of 30 sandstone and 25 carbonate reservoirs by measuring contact angles at the reservoir temperatures using the reservoir oils and synthetic brine.3 Wettability of Petroleum Reservoirs The wettabilities of petroleum reservoirs span the entire spectrum from preferentially water wet to preferentially oil wet reservoirs. The wettabilities of the reservoirs were evaluated using an arbitrary contact angle scale. those with contact angles from 75 to 105° were classified as having 6-45 . 6. Quartz crystal was used to represent the sandstone reservoirs whereas calcite crystal was used to represent the limestone and dolomite reservoirs in the contact angle measurements.26. A comparison of the USBM wettability index with Amott wettability index for several core samples (Donaldson et al.Figure 6..3. Reservoirs with contact angles from 0 to 75° were classified as water wet. 1969). Treibel et al.

8% were preferentially water wet and 8% were of intermediate wettability. (f) the relative permeability curves of the porous medium and (g) the electrical properties of the porous medium. (d) the residual oil saturation. 50% were preferentially oil wet and 7% were of intermediate wettability. A similar contact angle study by Chiligarian and Chen (1983) on 161 carbonate reservoirs showed 80% of the reservoirs to be preferentially oil wet. Wettability affects (a) the microscopic fluid distribution at the pore scale in the porous medium. However.(1972). 84% of the carbonate reservoirs were preferentially oil wet. 6.4 Effect of Wettability on Rock -Fluid Interactions Wettability has a profound effect on multiphase rock-fluid interactions. It would appear from the results of this study that carbonates are more likely to be preferentially oil wet than preferentially water wet. It was found that 43% of the sandstones were preferentially water wet. 66% were preferentially oil wet and the remaining 7% were of intermediate wettability. 8% to be preferentially water wet and 12% to be of intermediate wettability. The results showed that 27% of the reservoirs tested were preferentially water wet. (b) the magnitude of the irreducible water saturation. Microscopic Fluid Distribution at the Pore Scale 6-46 . (e) the capillary pressure curve of the porous medium.3.intermediate wettability and those with contact angles from 105 to 180° were classified as preferentially oil wet. this assertion cannot be generalized because the 55 reservoirs used in this study were not obtained by random sampling. (c) the efficiency of an immiscible displacement in the porous medium. These results are consistent with those of Treibel et al. A random sample of reservoirs would be needed if the results of the wettability tests are to be given statistical significance. On the other hand.

the water occupies the center of the pores and the residual oil wets the grain surface and occupies the nooks and crannies of the medium. For water wet reservoirs. the irreducible water saturation is usually greater than 20 to 25% whereas for oil wet reservoirs it is generally less than 15% and frequently less than 10% of the pore volume. being the nonwetting phase occupies the center of the pores and is surrounded by oil. 6-47 .27 for water wet and oil wet porous media. coats the surface of the solid grains and occupies the corners of the grain contacts. at the initial state. Effect of Wettability on Irreducible Water Saturation It has been observed that the irreducible water saturation in an oil wet reservoir rock tends to be less than in a water wet reservoir rock. The wetting fluid occupies the small pores. The wetting phase occupies the small pores. The water.Wettability determines the microscopic fluid distribution in a porous medium at the pore scale. oil being the wetting phase coats the grain surface and occupy the nooks and crannies of the medium. After waterflooding. These microscopic fluid arrangements have implications for the nature of the end point relative permeabilities of a water wet rock and an oil wet rock. Craig (1971) gives the following rule-of-thumb for irreducible water saturation for water wet and oil wet reservoirs. These pore scale fluid distributions are shown schematically in Figure 6. which have high specific surface areas (S=3(1-φ)/r) in order to minimize the specific surface free energy of the system. For the oil wet medium. For the water wet medium. water being the wetting phase coats the grain surface and occupy the nooks and crannies of the medium. The nonwetting phase occupies the large pores and are located at the center of the pores. Oil. the residual oil globules occupy the center of the pores. being the nonwetting phase occupies the center of the pores and is surrounded by water. After waterfooding.

However. the exponent can increase to rather high values as the water saturation decreases.6 shows the result of laboratory measurements of n as a function of water saturation in an oil wet sandstone.27. in Archie's resistivity index equation. An exponent as high as 9 was measured in the experiments. Effect of Wettability on Electrical Properties of Rocks Wettability affects the saturation exponent. for oil wet rocks. Fluid distributions as a function of wettability (adapted from Pirson. 1958). For water wet rocks.Figure 6. the saturation exponent increases above the usual value of 2. Table 6. 6-48 . n. the exponent is typically around 2. It can be observed that below a certain water saturation.

Measurements were also made on cores that were of neutral wettability. giving saturation exponents of 12. 6-49 . the cores were rendered preferentially water wet by heating up to 500 ºF and preferentially oil wet by washing with an organic acid.27 for the first trend and I = 0. In this study.Table 6. Archie Saturation Exponent in Oil Wet Rocks (Mungan and Moore. The equations relating resistivity index to water saturation for neutral and − − preferentially water wet cores are I = S w1.000027 S w12.6. Figure 5.09 for the second trend.27 and 8.61 . 1968). giving saturation exponents of 1.28 shows the effect of wettability on the resistivity index of carbonate cores.61. The separation of the oil wet data was attributed to differences in the pore size distributions of the cores. The data for the preferentially oil wet cores separated into two distinct trends described by the equations − − I = 0. The wettability classification was based on imbibition tests.92 and 1.09.92 and I = S w1.37 S w8. respectively.

the water is continuous and therefore conducts electrical current. the resistivity of the system will increase and this increase in resistivity is reflected in the increase in the water saturation exponent as observed in the experiments. Effect of wettability on the resistivity index of carbonate cores (Sweeney and Jennings. water being the nonwetting phase occupies the center of the large pores. In an oil wet medium. It is reasonable to expect that wettability will affect the resistivity and hence the saturation exponent of a partially saturated porous medium. As a result. 6-50 . At high water saturations. the water will breakup into disconnected globules and can no longer conduct electrical current. below a certain water saturation. As the water saturation is decreased.Figure 6. 1960).28.

6-51 . it is easy to see that the waterflood efficiency will be higher in the water wet medium than in the oil wet medium everything else being equal. From this pore level picture. The core plugs were rendered progressively oil wet by dissolving a sulfonate in the oil phase.29 shows schematically the microscopic displacement of oil from a water wet medium and an oil wet medium at the pore scale. Figure 6. The residual oil is trapped at the center of the large pores. The decline in the oil recovery efficiency with increasing oil wetness is obvious. the injected water channels through the large pores leaving behind considerable residual oil in the small pores. In the oil wet medium. In the water wet medium. at the solid contacts and as coatings on the solid grains. The higher waterflood efficiency of the water wet rock compared to the oil wet rock seen at the pore scale manifests itself at the macroscopic scale (core scale) as well. the injected water is imbibed into the medium along the pore walls in a manner that enhances the oil displacement efficiency.30 shows the oil recovery curves for the waterfloods as a function of the wettability of the core.Effect of Wettability on the Efficiency of an Immiscible Displacement Wettability has a significant effect on the efficiency of an immiscible displacement in a porous medium. Figure 6.9 cm diameter and 4. Owens and Archer (1971) performed waterflood experiments in core plugs (1.4 cm length) at various wettability conditions.

(b) strongly oil wet medium (Raza et al. Microscopic displacement of oil from a pore during a waterflood: (a) strongly water wet medium. 1968).29.Figure 6.. 6-52 .

Figure 6. The results of two such experiments are presented here. In Experiment 2. a second sandpack was 6-53 . In Experiment 1. the sandpack was first saturated with brine and the brine was displaced by a viscous silicon-based test oil (103. Peters and Hardham (1989) have conducted similar waterflood experiments in unconsolidated sandpacks at a larger scale (4. Effect of wettability on waterflood performance at an oil-water viscosity ratio of 5 (Archer and Owens.8 cm diameter and 54 cm length) than core plugs. 1971).4 cp) to establish irreducible water saturation in contact with the sand grains. The viscous oil was then displaced by brine to simulate a waterflood at an unfavorable viscosity ratio of 85.30.

33 show the water saturation images for the two waterfloods at several pore volumes injected. They confirm the higher displacement efficiency of Experiment 1 compared to Experiment 2. The low water breakthrough recoveries in this study are due to the high oil-water viscosity ratio of 85. with relatively high water saturations. the images for the oil wet sandpack show a chaotic. These images clearly show the important role of wettability in determining the efficiency of waterfloods at the macroscopic scale.34 and 6.35 show the water saturation profiles for the experiments. The oil recovery curves for the two waterflood experiments are shown in Figure 6. in time and space. These results are in agreement with those of Archer and Owens. it is believed that the first sandpack would behave as a water wet system whereas the second sandpack would behave as an oil wet system over the short time scale of the experiments. Figures 6. Figures 6. fragmented and inefficient displacement.32 and 6. The images for the water wet sandpack show a relatively uniform and efficient displacement of the oil by the water. Both waterfloods were imaged by X-ray CT to visualize the insitu fluid saturations 6-54 . with relatively low water saturations. Although the wettabilities of the sandpacks were not measured directly.first saturated with the same viscous silicon-based oil and the oil was then displaced by the same brine to simulate a waterflood at the same unfavorable mobility ratio as in Experiment 1. They show the displacement in the water wet sandpack to be more efficient than in the oil wet sandpack . In contrast.31.

Figure 6. Effect of wettability on waterflood performance at an oil-water viscosity ratio of 91 (Peters and Hardham.31. 6-55 . 1989).

6-56 .

6-57 .

50. (E) tD = 1. (G) tD = 3. (D) tD = 0.0. 1989).0 (Peters and Hardham. (F) tD = 2. Water saturation images for a waterflood in a water wet sandpack at a viscosity ratio of 91. (B) tD = 0. (C ) tD = 0.0. 6-58 .05.Figure 6.25.10.32. (A) tD = 0.

6-59 .

6-60 .

6-61 .

25.10. 1989). (D) tD = 0.33.05. (E) tD = 1. Water saturation images for a waterflood in an oil wet sandpack at a viscosity ratio of 91: (A) tD = 0. 6-62 . (C ) tD = 0.0.Figure 6. (B) tD = 0.0 (Peters and Hardham. (G) tD = 3. (F) tD = 2.50.0.

35.Figure 6. 6-63 . Water saturation profiles for a waterflood in an oil wet sandpack. Water saturation profiles for a waterflood in a water wet sandpack.34. Figure 6.

38) gives for a closed system.40) into Eq.39) where da is the interfacial area.39) and (6.(6.38) heat where dU is the change in total internal energy of the system.(6.41) For an open system. dQ = TdS (6. dQ is the input into the system and dW is the work done by the system. The first law of thermodynamics applied to this system gives dU = dQ − dW (6. infinitesimal changes are reversible so that the reversible work is given by dW = PdV − σ da (6.41) becomes dU = TdS − PdV + σ da + ∑ μi dni i =1 i= N (6. dU = TdS − PdV + σ da (6. For an equilibrium system.42) where μi is the chemical potential or molal free energy of component i in the system.1 Characterization of Interfacial Tension as Specific Surface Free Energy Consider a closed system consisting of the interface between two immiscible fluids or between an immiscible fluid and a solid surface.4 THERMODYNAMICS OF INTERFACES 6. Eq.4. For a closed system.(6. ni is the moles of component i in the system and N is 6-64 the total .40) Substitution of Eqs.6.

We may obtain the interfacial tension from Eq.(6.45) Substituting Eq.(6. μi is the same in the bulk fluid and at the interface.42) into Eq.48) 6-65 .number of components in the system.V .45) gives dA = − SdT − PdV + σ da + ∑ μi dni i =1 i= N (6.n Gibbs free energy is defined by ⎛ ∂A ⎞ (6.44) gives dA = dU − TdS − SdT (6.(6. The Helmholtz free energy is defined by A = U − TS (6.43) i The interfacial tension also can be expressed in terms of Helmholtz Free Energy (A) and Gibbs Free Energy (G).V .46) We may obtain the interfacial tension from Eq.(6.n ⎛ ∂U ⎞ (6.42) in terms of the internal energy of the system as σ =⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ∂a ⎠ S .(6.47) i G = A + PV = U − TS + PV = H − TS (6.46) in terms of the Helmholtz free energy of the system as σ =⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ∂a ⎠T .44) Differentiating Eq. At equilibrium.

51) i In general.(6.(6. a displacement that leads to an increase in the free energy of the system is not favored and will not occur spontaneously.50) in terms of Gibbs free energy of the system as σ =⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ∂a ⎠T . Differentiating Eq.(6. A system in equilibrium always seeks to minimize its free energy.4.2 Characterization of Microscopic Pore Level Fluid Displacements We wish to examine the direction of energy change during an immiscible displacement at the pore scale. a displacement that leads to a decrease in the free energy of the system is favored. P . Therefore. Such a displacement will occur spontaneously (without pumping) given the chance. changes in P and V accompanying surface changes are small.50) We may obtain the interfacial tension from Eq.48) gives dG = dU + VdP + PdV − TdS − SdT (6. The Helmholtz free energy of the system will change as the displacement progresses.where H is the enthalpy of the system. Our objective is to determine whether the displacement will lead to a decrease or an increase in the Helmholtz free energy of the system.n ⎛ ∂G ⎞ (6. 6. On the other hand.49) gives dG = VdP − SdT + σ da + ∑ μi dni i =1 i=N (6.(6. Displacement of a Nonwetting Phase by a Wetting Phase 6-66 . Such a displacement will have to be forced by pumping the displacing fluid. Case 1.49) Substituting Eq.42) into Eq.

The change in the Helmholtz free energy of the system as the interfacial areas change is given by dA = ∂A ∂A ∂A dasw + daso + dawo ∂asw ∂aso ∂awo (6. at the pore level as shown in Figure 6. A = f ( asw . Suppose the wetting–nonwetting phase interface maintains the same shape during the displacement.36. Thus.53) Figure 6.52) Let the interface move to the right by a small distance dx.Consider the displacement of a nonwetting phase by a wetting phase. aso . Then 6-67 . Displacement of a nonwetting phase by a wetting phase at the pore scale.36.36. awo ) (6. such as water displacing oil in a water wet medium. The interfacial forces and interfacial areas at an instant are also shown in Figure 6. The Helmholtz free energy of the system is a function of the interfacial areas.

which 6-68 .59) The right side of Eq. This means that the Helmholtz free energy will decrease as the nonwetting phase is displaced by the wetting phase.56) where r is the radius of the pore.53) gives the change in Helmholtz free energy of the system as dA = −2π r (σ so − σ sw ) dx (6.47).55) (6.(5.59) is a positive number.54). The left side of Eq.(6.54) dasw = +2π rdx = increase in the area daso = −2π rdx = decrease in the area (6.57) For the wetting–nonwetting interface to move to the right requires an imbalance in the interfacial forces given by σ so > σ sw + σ wo cos θ Eq. The interfacial forces are given in terms of the Helmholtz free energy by Eq. the displacement will occur spontaneously if given the opportunity to do so.36. (6.(6.57).(6.dawo = 0 Also. (6. Substituting Eqs.55) and (6.58) can be rewritten as (6.59) is larger than this positive number.(6.58) (σ so − σ sw ) > σ wo cos θ (6. In fact. This is a favored displacement. we see that the change in the Helmholtz free energy during the displacement is negative. When these facts are applied to Eq. (6.(6. This is the origin of spontaneous imbibition.(6. from the geometry of Figure 6.47).56) into Eq.

such as water displacing oil in an oil wet medium.60) Thus. Displacement of a Wetting Phase by a Nonwetting Phase Consider the displacement of a wetting phase by a nonwetting phase. Because the nonwetting phase never contacts the solid. Let the interface move to the right by a small distance dx.explains the spontaneous imbibition of a wetting fluid in the capillary tube experiment.61) daso = 0 (6.63) 6-69 . at the pore level as shown in Figure 6. dasw = 0 Because the wetting phase is always in contact with the solid. (6. We can calculate an effective displacing force as Feffective = − dA >0 dx (6. Such a force will develop spontaneously to enable water to displace oil in a water wet porous medium.37. an effective displacing force develops spontaneously to enable the wetting phase to displace the nonwetting phase.62) The change in the wetting–nonwetting phase interfacial area is given by dawo = +2π r *dx (6. Case 2.

64) Eq. This is not a favored displacement. the displacement will not occur spontaneously.53) gives the change in the Helmholtz free energy of the system as dA = +2π rσ wo dx (6.Figure 6. (6.63) into Eq.37.64) shows that the Helmholtz free energy of the system increases during the displacement. displacement force in this case is given by The effective Feffective = − dA <0 dx (6. a negative displacement force arises to oppose the displacement of the wetting phase by the nonwetting phase. Substituting Eqs. Displacement of a wetting phase by a nonwetting phase at the pore scale. This is why a positive displacement 6-70 . Thus.(6.(6. (6.65) Thus.62) and (6.(6. It must be forced by pumping.61).47). where r* is the radius from the center of the pore to the thin wetting phase film on the surface of the pore.

pore radius. This means that the waterflood efficiency of an oil wet medium will be less than the waterflood efficiency of a water wet medium. This observation is in agreement with the microscopic picture of the displacements shown in Figure 6.pressure is required in order to initiate a drainage capillary pressure measurement. NOMENCLATURE a A F g G h H M = = = = = = = = interfacial area Helmholtz free energy force gravitational acceleration Gibbs free energy equilibrium height in a capillary rise experiment enthalpy molecular weight apparent molecular weight of gas apparent molecular weight of liquid moles of component i total number of components in the mixture capillary number pressure capillary pressure pressure in the nonwetting phase pressure in the wetting phase radius of capillary tube. Thus.29. radius of spinning drop heat 6-71 Mg = ML = ni N Nc P Pc Pw r Q = = = = = = = = Pnw = . To minimize the increase in free energy of the system during the displacement. r* will be as small as possible. the injected nonwetting phase will channel or finger through the wetting phase leaving behind a significant wetting phase film and residual wetting phase saturation.

R S Ss T U v V W xi yi = = = = = = = = = = = oil recovery entropy surface entropy residual oil saturation temperature internal energy Darcy velocity volume work mole fraction of component i in the liquid mole fraction of component i in the gas surface or interfacial tension oil solid interfacial tension (oil solid specific surface energy) oil water interfacial tension (oil water specific surface energy) water solid interfacial tension (water solid specific surface energy) contact angle advancing contact angle receding contact angle saturated liquid density saturated gas density wetting phase density nonwetting phase density chemical potential of component i viscosity of wetting phase viscosity of nonwetting phase parachor spreading pressure Sor = σ σ os = σ ow = σ ws = θ θA θR = = = = = = ρL ρg ρw μi μw Λ Π ρ nw = = = μnw = = = 6-72 .

and Denekas. W. Sixth Edition. Chilingar.O. Presented at the 56th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.G. : “Wettability Literature Survey . : “Wettability Literature Survey . Pet. Pet.P.G.. Anderson. Tech.Part 2: Wettability Measurement.V. Interfacial Tension. Eng. 156-162. : Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media.F.” Energy Sources . W. October 5-7. E.W. and Gast. Bear. I. Amott. 1 (1983) 67-75.G. W. England. : “Wettability Literature Survey . (December 1987) 1605-1622.E. F. AIME (1959) 216.” J.G. (November 1987) 1453-1468. Anderson. Tech. 1972. Benner. 7. vol. London.Part 3: The Effects of Wettability on the Electrical Properties of Porous Media. Graham & Trotman. Anderson.S.Part 6: The Effects of Wettability on Waterflooding. Pet.” J. and Flow Velocity on Residual Oil Saturation Left by Waterflood. Anderson. Tech. 1981. and Bartell. C. No. 1975) 437-447.” Trans.G. T.” SPE 10114. Bobek. Pet. (November 1986) 1246-1262. Anderson.Part 4: Effects of Wettability on Capillary Pressure. A. : “Correlation of Capillary Number Relationships for Sandstones. Tech.: Physical Chemistry of Surfaces.” J. : “Wettability Literature Survey . Pet.” J. Pet. J. (Oct. : “Wettability Literature Survey . Adamson. New York. Tech. 155-160. Anderson. : “Observations Relating to Wettability of Porous Rock.C. A. Inc. 6-73 . : “The Effect of Polar Impurities Upon Capillary and Surface Phenomena in Petroleum Production." Soc. G.” Trans. : “Some Notes on Wettability and Relative Permeabilities of Carbonate Rocks.R. San Antonio.” API Drilling and Production Practice (1941) 341-348. (December 1986) 1371-1378. 1997. : “Reservoir Rock Wettability Its Significance and Evaluation.E. J. A.Part 5: The Effects of Wettability on Relative Permeability. Pet. Archer. N. (October 1987) 1283-1300. Elsevier. John Wiley and Sons..G. Tech. : “Wettability Literature Survey . M. W. Mattax.” J.. C.Part 1: Rock/Oil/Brine Interactions and the Effects of Core Handling on Wettability. Jour. 1986. W. AIME (1958) 213. F. (October 1986) 1125-1144. and Yen. J.G.. W. Chatzis. New York. and Morrow..” J. and Wall. : "The Influence of Fluid Viscosity. : Petroleum Engineering.C.REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Abrams.

and Pray.. L. 48 (Dec.M.. C. Howard.E. C.M. New Jersey... Sv. Prentice Hall. : “Surface Properties of Natural and Synthetic Porous Media.W. 54.” Soc. R.” J. 1990. Marle. Tech (Oct.” AAPG Bull. L. Lake. Chem. Pet.C. 6-74 . 1989.” J. Springfield. 1980. No. Donaldson.W. M. Tulsa. : “Equipment and Procedures for Fluid Flow and Wettability Tests of Geological Materials." Cnd J.” DOE/BETC/IC-79/5. Thomas. R. 1977) 68-80. Morrow. : “Wettability and Its Effect on Oil Recovery. AIME (1959) 216.C. : “Geologic Nomenclature and Classification of Porosity in Sedimentary Carbonates.C.” Producers Monthly (March 1957) 20-24. and Crocker. and Davis. Pavelka. : “Effects of Crude Oil Components on Rock Wettability. : Capillarity and Wetting Phenomena. Jr. " Vol. 1976. G. R.C. 1981. Nat..T. E. and Lorenz. Englewood Cliffs.. N. J. Eng. : "Wettability and Fluid Saturations Determined From NMR T1 Distribution.Dec. L. Presented at the SPE/DOE Seventh Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery. 2004. J. . P. Collins. A. 1971." SPE/DOE 20264. 1970) 638-644.F.. (December 1990) 1476-1484. April 22-25. P. Springer Science and Business Media.D. : “Wettability Determination and Its Effect on Recovery Efficiency. Texas. Eng. Info.” Trans. F. Scheie. Gulf Publishing Company.B. Society of Petroleum Engineers. Garnes. Mattax.. A. 3. Pet.E. : “Study of Problems Related to the Restoration of Natural State of Core Samples. Jennings. Craig. (March 1969) 13-20. A. D. 2 (1994) 197200. No. Tech. SPE Monograph Vol. 1961. Vol. Texas.R. VA 2216. Melrose. Reprinted by the Petroleum Publishing Company. Denekas. Richardson. E.Choquette. Inc.A. 330-333.F. : The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding.O. Reprinted by Research & Engineering Consultants Inc..C. J. de Gennes.. and Quere. E. : "Capillary Number Relations for Some North Sea Reservoir Sandstones.J.Y.. 2 (1970) 207-250. : Multiphase Flow in Porous Media.M. : Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials. Cuiec. Vol. : Enhanced Oil Recovery. 1990. : "Interfacial Phenomena as Related to Oil Recovery Mechanisms. Donaldson. Tech." Magnetic Resonance Imaging. M. and Skauge. Mathisen. 12. J. Houston.E. P.. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.G. H. Canadian Pet. Kendall.

65-72. D. (December 1972) 531-540. E. Pirson. L. Mungan. Pet. B..” Producers Monthly (April 1968) 2-7. D. 4. : “A Laboratory Evaluation of the Wettability of Fifty Oil-Producing Reservoirs. F." SPEJ (August 1973) 221-232. and W. Inc." J.D.L.R. Mungan.G. Eng. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Technical Conference of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (October 1989) San Antonio.W.W.. New York. and Owens. J.. N. Peters. Tech. E. AIME (1959) 216.-March 1968) 7. E. D.H. and Hardham.” World Oil (March 1981) 77-83. and Moore. N.O. D.J.J. Phy. Sweeny. H. Rowlinson. : "Effect of Wettability on the Electrical Resistivity of Carbonate Rock from a Petroleum Reservoir. D. No.S. S. : Molecular Theory of Capillarity. S. McGraw-Hill Book Company. : “The Effect of Rock Wettability on Oil-Water Relative Permeability Relationships. Elsevier. Part 3 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Capillarity.E. (Jan. Second Edition. : Petrophysics.L. and Archer. : Oil Reservoir Engineering. and Archer. J." J. : "Certain Wettability Effects on Electrical Resisitivity in Porous Media.J.1. 551-553. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid. Owens. N. New York. 1958. : “Improving Oil Displacement Efficiency by Wettability Adjustment. 6-75 . Tiab.L. W. 2004. O. Inc. R. New York.” World Oil (May 1981) 149-158.. Treiber.A. Treiber. S.R. and Widom.” J. Chem.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 20-25. (May 1960) 64. L.Y. W. and Donaldson. and McCaffery. No. Cdn.Morrow. Raza. Cram. Mungan. : "Displacement Studies in Dolomite With Wettability Control by Octanoic Acid... P. Dover Publications. 2. 1982.” SPE 19640. Pet.E. Peters. Wagner. Mineola. and Leach.J. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid. : “Wettability of Reservoir Rocks and Its Evaluation. and Jennings. N.” Soc. Archer. : “Visualization of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using Computed Tomography Imaging. J. Tech.C. Hardham: “A Comparison of Unstable Miscible and Immiscible Displacements. Pet. W. (May 1990) 155-168. (July 1971) 873-878. Part 2 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Wettability.” Trans. E.

Richardson. 3.” API Drilling and Production Practice (1947) 161-165. 6-76 . SPE Textbook Series Vol. H. Society of Petroleum Engineers. G.A. : “A Restored-State Method for Determination of Oil in Place and Connate Water. : Waterflooding. Willhite. 1986. Texas. W.Welge.J. and Bruce. P.

The capillary pressure is given by Laplace equation (sometimes referred to as Young-Laplace equation) as ⎛1 1⎞ Pc = P2 − P = σ ⎜ + ⎟ 1 ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7.1 DEFINITION OF CAPILLARY PRESSURE When two immiscible fluids are in contact. Figure 7. The pressure P2 is greater than P1. This pressure difference or excess pressure is known as the capillary pressure.1). The pressure on the concave side of the interface is higher than that on the convex side of the interface.CHAPTER 7 CAPILLARY PRESSURE 7. The curvature of the interface is given by 7-1 . They are mutually perpendicular.(7.1 shows a curve interface between to immisicible fluids labeled 1 and 2.1) In Eq. there is a pressure discontinuity between the two fluids which depends upon the curvature of the interface separating the two fluids. r1 and r2 are referred to as the principal radii of curvature of the interface.

Equilibrium at a curved interface between two immiscible fluids.1.2) Figure 7.⎛1 1⎞ Curvature = ⎜ + ⎟ ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7. 7-2 .

7) (7.(7.Laplace equation can be derived by considering the mechanical equilibrium of the interface or by energy considerations.7) and (7. ( P2 − P1 ) xydz = σ ( xdy + ydx ) From similar triangles (Figure 7. The increase in surface energy is given by dE = σ ( xdy + ydx ) (7.6) and rearranging gives (7. (7.3) where dxdy is considered negligibly small.8) into Eq.2).5) At equilibrium. where z is vertically upward. Thus.4) The work done in increasing the interfacial area is given by δ W = ( P2 − P ) xydz 1 (7. We derive it here by energy considerations.(7.8) 7-3 . The increase is surface area of the interface is given by da = ( x + dx )( y + dy ) − xy = xdy + ydx + dxdy = xdy + ydx (7. the work done is equal to the increase in surface energy. Let the interface be expanded by a small amount in the xyz directions.6) x + dx x = r1 + dz r1 y + dy y = r2 + dz r2 Substituting Eqs.

A mean radius of curvature. rm.10) Figure 7. may be defined as 1 1⎛ 1 1 ⎞ = ⎜ + ⎟ rm 2 ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7. Laplace equation becomes Pc = 2σ rm (7.1) which is Laplace equation.⎛1 1⎞ Pc = P2 − P = σ ⎜ + ⎟ 1 ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7. Fluid interface in the planes of the principal radii of curvature. 7-4 .2.9) In terms of the mean radius of curvature.

r1 = r2 = ∞. If the two immiscible fluids are in contact with a solid surface. the radius of the bubble. where r is the radius of the capillary tube. the interface will intersect the solid at an equilibrium contact angle θ given by the Young-Dupre equation. the radius of the drop. The capillary pressure or excess pressure is given by Pc = 4σ r (7. the capillary pressure is zero. In this case. Such an interface is shown in Figure 7. Assuming the interface lies on a sphere as shown in the figure. Several special cases of Laplace equation are of interest.Laplace equation is the fundamental equation of capillarity.11) For a soap bubble in air. Laplace equation holds at the interface. For a flat interface. r1 = r2 = r.13) 7-5 . r1 = r2 = r.3 for the capillary rise experiment.12) where a factor of 2 has been incorporated to account for the two gas-liquid interfaces of a soap bubble. pressure of the drop is given by The capillary pressure or the excess Pc = 2σ r (7. For a spherical liquid drop. then r1 = r2 = r/cosθ. The capillary pressure is given by ⎛1 1⎞ ⎛ cos θ cos θ + Pc = σ ⎜ + ⎟ = σ ⎜ r ⎝ r ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ ⎞ 2σ cos θ ⎟= r ⎠ (7.

For a pendular ring of wetting fluid at the contacts of two spherical sand grains in an idealized porous medium consisting of a cubic pack of uniform spheres as shown in Figure 7.3. the capillary pressure is given by Laplace equation as ⎛1 1⎞ Pc = σ cos θ ⎜ − ⎟ ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7.Figure 7. Interface for capillary rise experiment.4.14) 7-6 .

r1 and r2 will increase and the capillary pressure will decrease. r1 will be reduced more than r2 as the wetting phase recedes into the corners of the contact of the grains. As a result. one radius will be positive and the other will be negative. Figure 7. the capillary pressure will increase.4. If the wetting fluid saturation is increased. Immiscible fluid interface in an idealized porous medium. an inverse relationship exists between the capillary pressure and the wetting phase saturation for a porous medium. Low wetting phase saturation corresponds 7-7 . By sign convention. the principal radii of curvature are on opposite sides of the interface. However. If the wetting fluid saturation in the pendular ring is reduced.In this case. Therefore. r1 and r2 will be reduced.

the capillary pressure versus wetting phase saturation relationship can be calculated.16) The wetting phase saturation as a function of elevation z is calculated from the dimensions of the capillary tubes and is presented in Table 7.1. The non-wetting phase is air. Let the bundle of capillary tubes medium be dipped into the wetting phase and allowed to attain capillary equilibrium as shown in Figure 7. 7-8 . 7. Let the wetting fluid be water with a surface tension of 72 dynes/cm and a contact angle of 0 with the solid.5.1468 = cm r ρw g r (7. The equilibrium height of water in each capillary tube can be calculated with Eq.(6.to high capillary pressure and high wetting phase saturation corresponds to low capillary pressure.SATURATION RELATIONSHIP FOR A POROUS MEDIUM Before considering the capillary pressure versus saturation relationship for a porous medium. The wetting fluid will rise to a different elevation (z) above the free wetting fluid level in each tube depending on its radius as shown in the figure. Let the model consist of ten capillary tubes with their radii as shown in Table 7.2 CAPILLARY PRESSURE . In this case.1.18) as z= 2σ cos θ 0.15) The capillary pressure in each tube is given by Laplace equation as Pc = 2σ cos θ 144 = dynes / cm 2 r r (7. it is instructive to consider the relationship for an idealized medium consisting of a bundle of capillary tubes of varied radii.

109 0.0 72000.145 0.036 0.036 0.0018 0.182 0.028 0.36 36.020 0.0046 0.68 16.97 24.088 14.016 0.164 0.000 0.0037 0.018 1.024 0.5.0009 0.000 Pc (atm) Pc (psi) z cm Volume (cm3) Volume Fraction Water Saturation 7-9 . Table 7.0014 0.509 0.0042 0.142 0.182 0.348 0.4 24000.0 0.261 0. Radius (μm) Pc (dynes/cm2 ) 0.091 0.232 0.0028 0.071 0.0023 0.014 0.0 48000.Figure 7.047 0.127 0.0 18000.79 0.018 0.0 20571.696 1.0005 0.522 0.418 0.0 16000.0 28800.018 0.655 0.70 48.044 2.39 146. Capillary Pressure versus Wetting Phase Saturation for Bundle of Capillary Tubes Model.00 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 14400.31 18.382 0.298 0.209 0.93 73.273 0.35 20.055 0.109 0.055 0.818 0.0032 0.1.0 36000.46 29. Capillary rise experiment for a bundle of capillary tubes medium.0 144000.073 0.

The features include a non-zero displacement pressure at a wetting phase saturation of 1 and the inverse relationship between capillary pressure and wetting phase saturation mentioned previously. The capillary pressure curves have a stair-case shape in this case because of the limited number and size of the capillary tubes used in the experiment.7 captures the general trend of capillary pressure curves for porous media. The curve will approach a smooth curve if more tubes are used and the differences in the tube diameters are made small. This type of presentation can be used to determine the water saturation distribution in a petroleum reservoir starting from the free water level at or below the oil water contact to the top of the reservoir.6 gives the water saturation distribution as a function of the height above the free water level.6. The capillary pressure versus saturation relationship for the idealized porous medium shown in Figures 7. There is no possibility of trapping an irreducible saturation for a model consisting of straight and isolated capillary tubes. The presentation in Figure 7. 7-10 .6 and 7. The presentation in Figure 7.7.0.7 is useful for calculating pore size distribution. In Figure 7. The only limitation of the capillary pressure curves for the bundle of capillary tube model is the absence of an irreducible wetting phase saturation. the capillary pressure is given in psi.0254 Figures 7. the capillary pressure is presented as height in cm above the free water level whereas in Figure 7.6 and 7.7 show the capillary pressure versus wetting phase saturation for this idealized medium. Both presentations are valid and can be used for different purposes.

7-11 . Figure 7.Figure 7.7. Capillary pressure in psi versus wetting phase saturation for a bundle of capillary tubes medium. Capillary pressure expressed as height of water above the free water level versus wetting phase saturation for a bundle of capillary tubes medium.6.

Figure 7. 7-12 . Capillary rise experiments for two porous media of different grain sizes.8. Figure 7. Such experiments are widely used in soil science to determine the capillary pressure curve (referred to as water retention curve or matric suction head in soil science) for unconsolidated soils. The tube often is instrumented to measure the resistivity of the medium in order to calculate the water saturation along the column by Archie's equation.8 shows capillary rise experiments for two porous media having different grain sizes (pore sizes). The capillary pressure is calculated as height of water above the free water level as was done in the bundle of capillary tube model. The soil. which is packed in a tube is dipped into water and allowed to sit for several days or weeks to achieve capillary equilibrium. The wetting phase will rise higher in the finer grain porous medium than in the courser grain medium.

The radius and length of each segment of the pore are shown in Table 7. The volume of water 7-13 . The porous medium consists of one pore. Next. the semi-permeable plate and the connecting vessel below the semi-permeable plate is at atmospheric pressure. nothing will happen.In an actual porous medium. the complexity of the pore structure and the fluid interface arrangements preclude the use of Laplace equation to calculate the capillary pressure. Eventually. this complexity also precludes the calculation of the wetting phase saturation from the fluid interface arrangements as was done for the bundle of capillary tubes experiment. Further. The medium rests on a semi-permeable plate at the bottom of the apparatus. the apparatus is open to the atmosphere so that the water in the core. Initially. which is strongly water wet (θ = 0º). the gas pressure is increased to Pg2 equal to 2σcosθ/r2 and the segment of the pore with radius r2 will be drained. the pressure of the gas is increased to Pg3 equal to 2σcosθ/r3 and the segment of the pore with radius r3 will be drained. which is a capillary tube with three radii as shown in the figure. The medium. is initially saturated with water. Instead.2. the capillary pressure versus wetting phase saturation relationship is measured experimentally. It will permit water to flow through it but because of its fine pores will prevent the air from flowing through it. We demonstrate one possible way of making this measurement for a porous medium using the idealized porous medium and the experimental set up shown in Figure 7. The water drainage will stop after draining the largest pore because Pg1 is not high enough to drain the pore with radius r2. The gas pressure is then increased to Pg1 until it is equal to 2σcosθ/r1 and the segment of the pore with radius r1 will be drained of water. The gas pressure is not high enough for the gas to displace the water from the largest pore. Gas is admitted into the apparatus at a low pressure of Pg. It is strongly water wet and is fully saturated with water.9. Let water be the wetting phase and air the non-wetting phase in the experiment. If Pg is less than 2σcosθ/r1. This semi-permeable plate is manufactured such that it has very fine and uniform pores. such as reservoir rock.

It compares the capillary pressure curve for a contact angle of 0º and a contact angle of 75º. The graph of Pgi versus water saturation gives the capillary pressure curve of the porous medium. less work is required to desaturate the rock. For this simple porous medium. Note how the shape of the capillary pressure curve reflects the pore size distribution of the porous medium. Thus. if the medium is less water wet. Therefore.11 shows the effect of wettability on the capillary pressure curve for the idealized porous medium. the capillary pressure curve can be calculated using Laplace equation and the dimensions of the pore and is presented in Figure 7. 7-14 . Figure 7.drained at each capillary pressure is measured and is used to calculate the water saturation in the medium corresponding to that capillary pressure. This is the basis for estimating the pore size distribution of a porous medium from its drainage capillary pressure curve.10. the capillary pressure that needs to be applied to desaturate the rock will be less at a contact angle of 75º than at 0º at any saturation level. the magnitude of the capillary pressure will be less at each wetting phase saturation than when it was more water wet. Since the wettability preference of the rock for the water is less at a contact angle of 75º than at 0º.

221 0. Table 7.283E11 1.Figure 7.142 2.355 5.088 0. Capillary pressure measurement for an idealized porous medium.0000 0.093E09 0.0575 1440000 1. Capillary Tube # 1 2 3 Radius (μm) 10 4 1 Length (μm) 2 8 20 Volume (cm3) 6.2.884 0.3678 360000 0.283E10 4.9.421 20.4253 (atm) (psi) Saturation Pc Pc Pc Water 7-15 .021E10 6.5747 (dynes/cm2 ) 144000 0. Capillary Pressure Curve for Idealized Porous Meium.0575 Fractiona l Volume 0.

Figure 7. Capillary pressure curve for an idealized porous medium.10. 7-16 .

A process in which the wetting phase saturation decreases is known as drainage whereas the converse process in which the wetting phase saturation increases is known as imbibition. It can be estimated with Laplace equation where r is the largest pore radius connected to the surface. The irreducible wetting phase 7-17 . In this case. the threshold pressure or the entry pressure. the capillary pressure curve would look like the one shown in Figure 7. As the pressure of the non-wetting phase is increased. The drainage capillary pressure curve has several characteristic features.3 DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE If the idealized porous medium of Figure 7. If the rock does not have a strong wettability preference for the initially saturating fluid. smaller and smaller pores are invaded by the non-wetting fluid. If the rock has a strong preference for the displacing fluid. which is known as the displacement pressure.Figure 7. then no pressure is required to initiate the displacement because it will occur spontaneously. an irreducible wetting phase saturation is achieved for the porous medium at a high capillary pressure. the capillary pressure curve becomes nearly vertical. This minimum pressure. This figure shows a typical drainage capillary pressure curve obtained by displacing the wetting phase from a porous medium with a non-wetting phase. The curve shows that a minimum positive pressure (Pd) must be applied to the non-wetting phase in order to initiate the drainage. is determined by the size of the largest pores connected to the surface of the medium.9 were replaced by an actual porous medium and the experiment repeated. At the irreducible wetting phase saturation. the capillary pressure will start at the initial fluid saturation of less than 1. Effect of wettability on the capillary pressure curve for an idealized porous medium. Therefore. Eventually.12. the wetting phase becomes discontinuous and can no longer be displaced from the medium by increasing the capillary pressure. then the displacement pressure will be zero.11. 7.

the higher porosity . the wettability of the medium and the interfacial tension between the wetting and non-wetting fluids. What information does the capillary pressure curve for a reservoir rock provide about the rock? If one reservoir rock has a higher permeability than another. Figure 7. the higher permeability rock is more desirable than the lower permeability rock as a petroleum reservoir rock. Thus. we know that the higher permeability rock will permit faster fluid flow through it.saturation is a function of the grain size (pore size). 7-18 Therefore. A typical drainage capillary pressure curve. If one reservoir rock has a higher porosity than another. than the lower permeability rock. everything else being equal.12. we know that the higher porosity rock will store more reserves than the lower porosity rock.

Its capillary pressure curve remains essentially flat as the wetting phase saturation is decreased from 100% to 60%. indicating that it has relatively larger grains and pores than the other rocks. finer grains and pores. It has a higher irreducible water saturation than B. extremely poorly sorted and would be a very poor reservoir rock. Rock B has a higher displacement pressure than A. Rock B has a higher irreducible wetting phase saturation than A.13 shows the drainage capillary pressure curves for four rocks: A. it has smaller pores than A. Rock C is even more fine grained than B because of its higher displacement pressure. If one rock has a higher capillary pressure at the same wetting phase saturation than another. Therefore.rock is a more desirable reservoir rock than the lower porosity rock. Therefore. indicating good sorting. which is consistent with its finer grains and pores. This means that many of the pores are invaded by the nonwetting fluid at essentially the same capillary pressure. C is poorly sorted. 7-19 . it has the largest pores connected to the surface. Without being told. very steep capillary pressure curve and very high irreducible wetting phase saturation. Therefore. The capillary pressure curve at the high wetting phase saturations is relatively flat. This means that C has a wider pore size distribution than A and B. The shape of its capillary pressure curve shows that a higher capillary pressure is required at each wetting phase saturation to desaturate the rock. Rock A has the least displacement pressure. C and D. which is consistent with its Rock D is extremely fine grained. This indicates that A has uniform pores or is well sorted. Rock A also has the least irreducible wetting phase saturation. B. what can we say about the rocks? Is the rock with the higher capillary pressure curve more desirable or less desirable as a petroleum reservoir rock than the rock with the lower capillary pressure curve? Figure 7. This observation is based on its very high displacement pressure. one can easily infer that this rock is essentially made of clay.

followed by B. (5) fluid saturation history. it is easy to see that Rock A has the highest permeability. From this discussion. Figure 7. (3) pore structure. 7-20 .13.Since permeability is proportional to the square of the mean grain size (pore size). the capillary pressure curve for a porous medium is a function of (1) pore size. Capillary pressure curves for four different rocks. we conclude that the rock with the higher capillary pressure curve is a less desirable reservoir rock than the one with the lower capillary pressure curve. (6) wettability of the rock and (7) interfacial tension of the fluids involved. (2) pore size distribution. In general. (4) fluid saturation. C and D in that order.

18) gives ( Pc )reservoir = ( Pc )lab (σ cos θ )reservoir (σ cos θ )lab (7.5 AVERAGING CAPILLARY PRESSURE DATA The capillary pressure curves for rock samples from the same reservoir having different permeabilities will be different. 7.4 CONVERSION OF LABORATORY CAPILLARY PRESSURE DATA TO RESERVOIR CONDITIONS Typically.(7. Eliminating rm from Eqs.17) and (7.7. equation. ( Pc )lab = 2 (σ cos θ )lab rm (7.17) ( Pc )reservoir = 2 (σ cos θ )reservoir rm (7.19) This ability to scale the laboratory capillary pressure data to reservoir conditions provides the flexibility for making laboratory capillary pressure measurements with more convenient fluids than reservoir fluids.18) where rm is the mean radius of curvature of the interface in the rock at a particular fluid saturation. It is often necessary to average the capillary pressure data for cores from the same reservoir believed 7-21 . capillary pressure curves are measured in the laboratory using fluids other than reservoir fluids. It is not uncommon to measure the capillary pressure curves to be used for analyzing an oil-water reservoir using air and water or mercury and air in the laboratory. it From Laplace becomes necessary to convert the laboratory data to reservoir conditions. This conversion is done using Laplace equation as follows. When this is done.

This averaging can be done using the Leverett J-function. which is a dimensionless capillary pressure function (Leverett. k is the absolute permeability of the porous medium. cementation and dead end pores. tortuosity.to have the same pore structure in order to obtain one capillary pressure curve that can be used for reservoir performance analysis. . ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g ⎟ φ ⎝ ⎠ (7. Sw is the wetting phase saturation. The capillary pressure curve of a porous medium is a function of several variables as shown in Eq. σ cos θ . ρw is the wetting phase density.20) where Pc is the capillary pressure. Γ is a dimensionless pore structure function that accounts for such things as pore size distribution. φ is the porosity.21) Carrying out the dimensional analysis yields the following solution to the dimensional analysis problem: 7-22 . ρnw is the non-wetting phase density and g is the gravitational acceleration. The wetting phase saturation (Sw) and the pore structure function (Γ) are dimensionless and should be set aside from the dimensional analysis until the end. σ is the interfacial tension. We form the dimensionless product with the remaining variables as x3 ⎛k⎞ x4 ⎜ ⎟ ⎡( ρ w − ρ nw ) g ⎤ Pc = dimensionless constant ⎣ ⎦ ⎝φ ⎠ x2 (σ cos θ ) x1 (7. ⎛ ⎞ k Pc = f ⎜ S w .20). The Leverett J-function can be derived by dimensional analysis as follows. θ is the contact angle.(7. 1941). Γ.

For a porous medium of 1 darcy permeability and a porosity of 25%. The corresponding dimensionless group is given by Pc k / φ σ cos θ π2 = (7.(7. π2 is of the order of 10−7 . At the pore scale. ρw = 1 g/cm3. π2 will be small and can be neglected. capillary forces dominate the gravity force. it is of the order of 10−6 .25) then becomes 7-23 . θ = 0º.⎡ σ cos θ ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ k ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ ⎥ 2 ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥x +⎢ 2 ⎥x φ ⎢ ⎥ 3 ⎢0⎥ 4 ⎢ ρ − ρ g ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ nw ) ⎥ ⎢ ⎢( w ⎣1⎦ ⎣ x4 ⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ Pc ⎣ ⎦ (7. Therefore. let us choose x3 = 0 and x4 = 1. The corresponding dimensionless group is given by π1 = ( ρ w − ρnw ) g ( k / φ ) σ cos θ (7.22) Let us choose x3 = 1 and x4 = 0. σ = 72 dynes/cm. For a mercury-air capillary pressure curve. for an air-water capillary pressure curve.25) The dimensionless group given as π2 in Eq. g = 981 cm/s2. w ⎟ σ cos θ σ cos θ ⎝ ⎠ (7. Eq. For example.24) From the dimensional analysis. we can write ⎛ Pc k / φ ( ρ − ρnw ) g ( k / φ ) ⎞ = f1 ⎜ S w .23) is the ratio of gravity force to the capillary forces at the pore scale.(7. Γ.23) Next.

If the porous media have different pore structures.(7.15 shows the Jfunction for a carbonate reservoir.Pc k / φ = f 2 ( Sw . they should plot as one curve. then the Leverett J-functions for the different rocks will be different and will not plot as one curve as may be seen in Figure 7. Eq. Figure 7.26) suggests that porous media that have the same pore structure but different permeability and porosity will have the same Leverett J-function.14 shows the Leverett J-function for nine unconsolidated sands with widely different permeabilities ranging from 0.057 to 2160 darcies. if the different capillary pressure curves of the porous media are rescaled as a Leverett J-function. Γ ) = J ( Sw . Figure 7.16. This curve provides the means to average capillary pressure data. 7-24 .26) where J ( S w . Γ ) σ cos θ (7. It is remarkable that the data plot as one curve. Therefore. Γ ) is a dimensionless capillary pressure function known as the Leverett J-function.

14. Leverett J function for unconsolidated sands (Leverett. 7-25 . 1941).Figure 7.

(e) coarse-grained limestone cores (Brown. (a) all cores. (b) limestone cores.15. Leverett J-functions for a carbonate reservoir. (d) microgranular limestone cores.Figure 7. 1951). (c) dolomite cores. 7-26 .

Figure 7.16. 1949). Leverett J-functions for different rock types (Rose and Bruce. 7-27 .

**7.6 DETERMINATION OF THE INITIAL STATIC RESERVOIR FLUID SATURATIONS BY USE OF DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE
**

Initially, the petroleum reservoir was saturated with water before oil migrated into the reservoir and displaced the water. This displacement of a wetting phase by a non-wetting phase is simulated in the laboratory measurement of the drainage capillary pressure curve. capillary and gravitational forces. Consider the static equilibrium for the water and oil. hydrostatics, for the water, dPw = − ρw g dz where is z is pointed vertically upwards. Similarly, for the oil, dPo = − ρo g dz From The final fluid distribution in the reservoir is determined by the equilibrium between

(7.27)

(7.28)

**Assuming the fluids are incompressible, Eqs.(7.27) and (7.28) can be integrated to obtain
**

Pw ( z ) = Pw ( 0 ) − ρ w gz

(7.29)

and

Po ( z ) = Po ( 0 ) − ρ o gz

(7.30)

Subtracting Eq.(7.29) from (7.30) gives

7-28

Pc ( z ) = Pc ( 0 ) + ( ρ w − ρo ) gz

(7.31)

We select as datum the free water level at which the capillary pressure is zero. With this choice of datum, Eq.(7.31) becomes

Pc ( z ) = ( ρ w − ρ o ) gz = Δρ gz

(7.32)

where Δρ is the density of water minus the density of oil. It is remarkable that Eq.(7.32) is the same as Eq.(6.26) for the capillary rise experiment. The free water level occurs at a depth do below the oil-water contact given by do = Pd Δρ g

(7.33)

where Pd is the displacement pressure of the capillary pressure curve. Thus, the elevation above the oil-water contact of any particular saturation is given by h= Pc − Pd Δρ g

(7.34)

If the displacement pressure of the capillary pressure curve is 0, then the free water level and the oil-water contact will be the same. However, this is a special case. In general, the free water level and the oil-water contact are not the same. Figure 7.17 shows (1) a typical static fluid distribution in a homogeneous reservoir, (2) the oil-water contact, (3) the free water level and (4) the oil and water pressure profiles. Note the transition zone above the oilwater contact in which the water saturation decreases from 100% to the irreducible water saturation. The height of this transition zone is a function

7-29

of the wettability of the rock, the oil-water density contrast, the oil-water interfacial tension, the grain size (pore size) and sorting, which determine the permeability of the rock.

Figure 7.17. Initial static fluid distribution in a homogeneous reservoir.

7-30

It should be noted that the capillary pressure in the reservoir is highest at the top of the reservoir. In order to prevent escape of the hydrocarbon from the reservoir, the cap rock must have a displacement pressure that is higher than the maximum capillary pressure labeled Pcap in the figure. Shales typically form the cap rock in many reservoirs. Shales are fine grained and have very high displacement pressures. The shale, which is saturated with water, will prevent the oil from penetrating it because its displacement pressure is higher than the maximum capillary pressure in the reservoir. Of course, some may think that the oil does not penetrate the shale because it has a low permeability. However, the correct analysis is that the shale prevents the oil from penetrating it because its displacement pressure is much higher than the pressure in the oil phase. This is a capillary phenomenon not a Darcy law phenomenon. Figure 7.18 shows the initial fluid distribution in an actual petroleum reservoir based on log analysis. The track labeled "Bulk Volume Analysis" shows the water and oil distributions in the pay zone as a percent of the bulk volume of reservoir rock. The dark area gives the oil content and the light area to its left gives the water content. A careful examination of this section of the plot shows a water saturation versus depth graph that is similar to the water saturation versus depth graph sketched in Figure 7.17.

7-31

Figure 7.18. Initial static fluid distribution in an actual petroleum reservoir.

7-32

In a layered reservoir in which the layers have different capillary pressure curves, the layers are in capillary equilibrium. As a result, saturation discontinuities will occur. However, there will be only one free water level. Figure 7.19 shows the water saturation distribution for a well that has penetrated a layered reservoir. Given the capillary pressure curve for each layer, it is a simple matter to apply Eqs.(7.32) and (7.33) to calculate the water saturation distribution from the free water level to the top of the reservoir. The steps for calculating the water saturation distribution in such a heterogeneous reservoir is as follows. 1. Using the displacement pressure of the bottom layer, calculate the free water level using Eq.(7.33). 2. 3. 4. 5. Take a small value of z measured from the free water level. Calculate the capillary pressure at that level using Eq.(7.32). Determine the layer in which z occurs. Using the capillary pressure curve for the layer in which z occurs, read or calculate the water saturation for the value of capillary pressure from step 3. 6. If z is at the boundary of two layers, there will be a saturation discontinuity at that value of z. Two saturation values should be calculated one from each of the capillary pressure curves of the two layers involved. 7 Increase the value of z and repeat steps 3 through 6 until z reaches the top of the reservoir.

7-33

This is how the saturation distribution in Figure 7.18c was calculated. If you look closely at Figure 7.18b in which the four layers have been identified and their capillary pressure curves have been plotted as height above the free water level, you can mentally sketch the water saturation distribution over the entire column of the well.

Figure 7.18. Fluid distribution for a layered reservoir; (a) well penetrating a layered reservoir; (b) capillary pressure curves for the layers; (c) water staturation profile observed at the well (Archer and Wall, 1986).

7-34

Example 7.1 Table 7.3 gives the properties of an idealized oil reservoir consisting of four layers with distinct petrophysical properties. The top of the reservoir is at 8000 ft below the surface and the oil water contact is at 8185 ft. Table 7.4 gives the drainage oil-water capillary pressure curve for Layer 1. All the layers have the same pore structure but different permeabilities and porosities. Table 7.3. Petrophysical Properties of Idealized Layered Reservoir.

Depth (ft) h (ft) k (md) φ %) Layer 1 80008050 50 144 23.5 Layer 2 80508070 20 50 20 Layer 3 80708125 55 10 18 Layer 4 81258185 60 200 24

**Table 7.4. Drainage Capillary Pressure Curve for Layer 1
**

Pc1 Sw 1.000 0.950 0.900 0.850 0.800 0.750 0.700 0.650 0.600 0.550 0.500 0.450 0.400 0.350 0.300 0.278 (psi) 1.973 2.377 2.840 3.377 4.008 4.757 5.663 6.781 8.195 10.039 12.547 16.154 21.787 31.817 54.691 78.408

7-35

Other properties for the reservoir are as follows:

**ρ w = 1.036 g/cm3 ρo = 0.822 g/cm3
**

σ = 35 dynes/cm

θ =0

1. 2. Calculate and plot the graph of the Leverett J-function for the reservoir. Calculate and plot the capillary pressure curves for Layers 2, 3 and 4, together with that of Layer 1. 3. 4. Calculate the depth of the free water level for the reservoir. Calculate and plot graphs of the initial water and oil saturations in the reservoir from 8000 ft to the free water level assuming the reservoir is in capillary equilibrium. 5. Calculate and plot graphs of the water and oil pressures at the initial reservoir conditions. 6. A well drilled into the reservoir has been perforated from 8090 to 8110 ft. Determine the type of reservoir fluid that will be produced initially. Solution to Example 7.1 1. The Leverett J-function is calculated with Eq.(7.26) using the capillary pressure curve for Layer 1. Consistent units are required to make the function dimensionless. For example, a set of consistent units is Pc in

7-36

dynes/cm2, k in cm2 and σ in dynes/cm. For example, at S w = 0.278 , Pc = 78.408 psi, the J-function is calculated as

J ( 0.278, Γ ) =

**( 78.408 /14.696 ) (1.0133x106 ) (144 /1000 ) ( 9.689 x10−9 ) / ( 0.235)
**

35cos 0

= 11.902

The calculated Leverett J-function is presented in Table 7.5 and Figure 7.19. It is the characteristic underlying dimensionless capillary pressure curve for the reservoir. Table 7.5. Summary of Calculated Leverett J-function and the Capillary Pressure Curves for Layers 2, 3 and 4 for Example 7.1.

Layer 1 Pc1 Sw 1.000 0.950 0.900 0.850 0.800 0.750 0.700 0.650 0.600 0.550 0.500 0.450 0.400 0.350 0.300 0.278 (psi) 1.973 2.377 2.840 3.377 4.008 4.757 5.663 6.781 8.195 10.039 12.547 16.154 21.787 31.817 54.691 78.408 J(Sw) 0.299 0.361 0.431 0.513 0.608 0.722 0.860 1.029 1.244 1.524 1.905 2.452 3.307 4.830 8.302 11.902 Layer 2 Pc2 (psi) 3.089 3.721 4.446 5.287 6.275 7.447 8.866 10.616 12.830 15.717 19.643 25.290 34.109 49.812 85.624 122.755 Layer 3 Pc3 (psi) 6.553 7.894 9.432 11.215 13.311 15.799 18.807 22.520 27.217 33.341 41.670 53.649 72.357 105.668 181.635 260.402 Layer 4 Pc4 (psi) 1.692 2.038 2.435 2.896 3.437 4.079 4.856 5.815 7.027 8.609 10.759 13.852 18.683 27.283 46.898 67.235

7-37

Figure 7.19. Leverett J-function for the reservoir of Example 7.1. 2. Since all the layers have the same pore structure, they share the same Leverett J-function. Thus, Eq.(7.26) can be solved for Pc using the known J-function from Layer 1. However, for this example, the capillary pressure curve for Layer j can be calculated from the data for Layer 1 as

⎛ k ⎞⎛ φ Pcj = Pc1 ⎜ 1 ⎟ ⎜ j ⎜ ⎝ φ1 ⎠ ⎝ k j ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠

**For example, at Sw = 0.278,
**

⎛ 144 ⎞ ⎛ 20 ⎞ Pc 2 = 78.408 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ = 122.755 psi ⎝ 23.5 ⎠ ⎝ 50 ⎠

7-38

The calculated capillary pressure curves are presented in Table 7.5 and Figure 7.20.

Figure 7.20. Capillary pressure curves for all the layers for the reservoir of Example 7.1.

3.

The free water level occurs in Layer 4. Therefore, the displacement pressure for Layer 4 is used to calculate the depth of the free water level below the oil water contact from Eq.(7.33) as

**(1.6919 /14.696 ) (1.0133x106 ) do = = 555.69 (1.036 − 0.822 )( 981)
**

d o = 555.69 / 30.48 = 18.23 ft

cm

7-39

**Eq.(7.33) can also be written in oilfield units as
**

d o [ ft ] = Pc [ psi ] Δρ ⎡lb / ft 3 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ 144 Pc [ psi ] Δρ ⎡lb / ft 3 ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

= 144

do =

(144 )(1.6919 ) = 18.24 ft (1.036 )( 62.4 ) − ( 0.822 )( 62.4 )

The free water level is at 8185+18.24 = 8203.24 ft. 4. The capillary pressure is zero at the free water level and increases as a linear function of height above the free water level for incompressible liquids. The height of any point in the reservoir above the free water level is designated as z in Eq.(7.32) and can be used to calculate the capillary pressure at that point in the reservoir. Clearly, at any depth D, z is given by

z = FWL − D

**For example at D = 8100 ft, which is in Layer 3,
**

z = 8203.24 − 8100 = 103.24 ft

**The capillary pressure is calculated with Eq.(7.32) in oilfield units as
**

⎡(1.036 )( 62.4 ) − ( 0.822 )( 62.4 ) ⎤ ⎦ 103.24 = 9.574 psi Pc = ⎣ ( ) 144

The water saturation at 8100 ft is calculated from the capillary pressure curve for Layer 3 by linear interpolation as

7-40

**⎛ 9.574 − 9.432 ⎞ S w = 0.900 + ⎜ ⎟ ( 0.850 − 0.900 ) = 0.896 ⎝ 11.215 − 9.432 ⎠
**

The oil saturation is So = 1 − S w = 1 − 0.896 = 0.104 . Table 7.6 shows the calculated water and oil saturations from 8000 ft to 8203.24 ft (FWL). Figure 7.21 shows the calculated saturation distributions. It can be observed that none of the layers is at irreducible water saturation. Therefore, each layer will produce some water if perforated. Table 7.6. Calculated Saturations and Pressures for Example 7.1.

Depth ft 8000 8005 8010 8015 8020 Layer 1 8025 8030 8035 8040 8045 8050 8050 8055 Layer 2 8060 8065 8070 8070 8075 8080 8085 8090 z ft 203.24 198.24 193.24 188.24 183.24 178.24 173.24 168.24 163.24 158.24 153.24 153.24 148.24 143.24 138.24 133.24 133.24 128.24 123.24 118.24 113.24 Pc psi 18.847 18.383 17.920 17.456 16.992 16.529 16.065 15.601 15.138 14.674 14.210 14.210 13.747 13.283 12.819 12.356 12.356 11.892 11.428 10.965 10.501 0.426 0.430 0.434 0.438 0.443 0.447 0.451 0.458 0.464 0.471 0.477 0.576 0.584 0.592 0.600 0.611 0.823 0.834 0.845 0.857 0.870 0.574 0.570 0.566 0.562 0.557 0.553 0.549 0.542 0.536 0.529 0.523 0.424 0.416 0.408 0.400 0.389 0.177 0.166 0.155 0.143 0.130 3688.95 3689.15 3689.36 3689.57 3689.78 3689.99 3690.20 3690.40 3690.61 3690.82 3691.03 3691.03 3691.24 3691.44 3691.65 3691.86 3691.86 3692.07 3692.28 3692.49 3692.69 3670.10 3670.77 3671.44 3672.12 3672.79 3673.46 3674.13 3674.80 3675.47 3676.15 3676.82 3676.82 3677.49 3678.16 3678.83 3679.51 3679.51 3680.18 3680.85 3681.52 3682.19 Sw So Pw Po

7-41

Layer 3

8095 8100 8105 8110 8115 8120 8125 8125 8130 8135 8140 8145 8150

108.24 103.24 98.24 93.24 88.24 83.24 78.24 78.24 73.24 68.24 63.24 58.24 53.24 48.24 43.24 38.24 33.24 28.24 23.24 18.24 18.24 13.24 8.24 0.00

10.037 9.574 9.110 8.646 8.183 7.719 7.255 7.255 6.792 6.328 5.864 5.401 4.937 4.473 4.010 3.546 3.082 2.619 2.155 1.691 1.691 1.228 0.764 0.000

0.883 0.896 0.910 0.926 0.941 0.957 0.974 0.593 0.610 0.629 0.648 0.672 0.696 0.725 0.755 0.791 0.833 0.880 0.935 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

0.117 0.104 0.090 0.074 0.059 0.043 0.026 0.407 0.390 0.371 0.352 0.328 0.304 0.275 0.245 0.209 0.167 0.120 0.065 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

3692.90 3693.11 3693.32 3693.53 3693.73 3693.94 3694.15 3694.15 3694.36 3694.57 3694.78 3694.98 3695.19 3695.40 3695.61 3695.82 3696.02 3696.23 3696.44 3696.65 3696.65 3696.86 3697.06 3697.41

3682.86 3683.54 3684.21 3684.88 3685.55 3686.22 3686.90 3686.90 3687.57 3688.24 3688.91 3689.58 3690.25 3690.93 3691.60 3692.27 3692.94 3693.61 3694.29 3694.96 3694.96 3695.63 3696.30 3697.41

Layer 4

8155 8160 8165 8170 8175 8180

WOC Aquifer

8185 8185 8190 8195

FWL

8203.24

7-42

Figure 7.21. Fluid saturation distribution for the reservoir of Example 7.1.

5.

The water pressure is given by Eq.(7.29), which can be written in oilfield units as

Pw ( z ) = Pw ( 0 ) −

ρw z

144

7-43

where Pw ( 0 ) is the water pressure at the free water level. The water pressure at the free water level is given by

Pw ( 0 ) = Patm +

**( ρ w )( FWL ) = 14.7 + (1.036 )( 62.4 )(8203.24 ) = 3697.41 psia
**

144 144

At D = 8100 ft,

Pw (103.24 ) = 3697.40 −

(1.036 )( 62.4 )

144

(103.24 ) = 3651.06 psia

At the free water level, the pressure in the oil phase is equal to the pressure in the water phase because the free water level is the reference depth at which the capillary is zero. Thus,

Po ( 0 ) = Pw ( 0 ) = 3697.41 psia

Of course, there is no oil in the reservoir below the water oil contact. Therefore, there can be no oil pressure below the water oil contact. The oil pressure starts at the water contact. However, if the oil pressure is extrapolated to the free water level, its value will be equal to the water pressure of 3697.41 psia. It should be noted that the difference between the water oil pressure and the water pressure at the water oil contact is equal to the displacement pressure of Layer 4 of 1.692 psi. At D = 8100 ft, the oil pressure can be calculated as

Po (103.24 ) = Pw (103.24 ) − Pc (103.24 ) = 3651.06 − 9.574 = 3641.87 psia

The calculated phase pressures are presented in Table 7.6 and Figure 7.22.

7-44

Figure 7.22. Water and oil phase pressures for Example 7.1.

6.

The well is perforated in Layer 3, the lowest permeability layer, where the oil saturation ranges from only 2.6% to 17.7%. This is in the saturation range of residual oil for most reservoirs. Therefore, only water will be produced from the well. The well should have been perforated in Layer 1, where it would have produced a mixture of oil and water.

**7.7 CAPILLARY PRESSURE HYSTERESIS
**

Capillary pressure curves show a marked hysteresis depending on whether the curve is determined under a drainage process or an imbibition process. Figure 7.23 shows typical drainage and spontaneous imbibition 7-45

capillary pressure curves for the same porous medium. At any wetting phase saturation, the drainage capillary pressure is higher than the imbibition capillary pressure. At a capillary pressure of zero, the spontaneous imbibition curve terminates at a wetting phase saturation that may or may not correspond to the true residual non-wetting phase saturation depending on the wettability of the rock. If the rock has a strong preference for the wetting phase, then the wetting phase saturation at which the imbibition curve terminates will be close to the true residual non-wetting phase saturation, Sor, which is equal to (1-Swro). This is the case shown in Figure 7.23. If the rock does not have a strong preference for the wetting phase, then the wetting phase saturation at zero capillary pressure on the imbibition curve will not correspond to the true residual non-wetting phase saturation. This means that (1-Swro) will be larger than Sor. Additional oil can be displaced from the rock, say be centrifuging the sample in water. This is the case shown in Figure 7.24. The branch of the imbibition curve labeled 3 on the figure is the forced imbition capillary pressure curve of the rock. Note that this branch constitutes a negative capillary pressure. Note also that the true residual nonwetting saturation (Sor) in this case can only by determined by forced displacement not by spontaneous imbibition. Figure 7.25 shows several cycles of capillary pressure

measurements on the same rock. The primary drainage curve labeled 1 was performed first, followed by the spontaneous imbibition curve labeled 2. The secondary drainage curve labeled 3 was performed after the spontaneous imbibition measurement. It should be noted that the secondary drainage curve will be less than the primary drainage curve at any given wetting phase saturation. This is another aspect of capillary pressure hysteresis. If the spontaneous imbibitition experiment is interupted and the measurement reversed, then a different drainage curve will be followed as shown in curve 4. If the drainage experiment is interupted and reversed, then a different imbibition curve will be followed as shown in curve 5. Curves 4 and 5 form a 7-46

loop known as a scanning curve. Note that the area under the secondary drainage curve was one of the areas used to define the USBM wettability index.

Figure 7.23. Drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves. (1) drainage curve, (2) spontaneous imbibition curve (Killins et al., 1953).

Capillary pressure hysteresis can be explained in a variety of ways. In Section 6.4.2, it was shown from energy considerations that more work is required for a non-wetting phase to displace a wetting phase than for a wetting phase to displace a non-wetting phase. This means that at any level of saturation, more work is required during the drainage capillary pressure measurement than during the imbibition measurement. Since work during the capillary pressure measurement is PcΔV, where ΔV is the volume of fluid

7-47

displaced at that capillary pressure.. Figure 7. 1953). (1) drainage curve. the capillary pressure on the drainage cycle will be greater than on the imbibition cycle to displace the same volume of fluid. Drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves. (3) forced imbibition curve (Killins et al.24. 7-48 . (2) spontaneous imbibition curve.

is larger than 2σcosθA /rm. the drainage capillary pressure. the wetting phase recedes from the porous medium and the contact angle is the receding contact angle. the imbibition capillary pressure at the same saturation state. 7-49 . During drainage. During imbibition. the wetting phase advances into the porous medium and the contact angle is the advancing contact angle.Contact angle hysteresis plays a part in the capillary pressure hysteresis. Figure 7. θA. 2σcosθR /rm.25. (1) primary drainage. (2) spontaneous imbibition. (3) secondary drainage. Cycles of capillary pressure measurements. θR. (4-5) scanning curve. Since θR is less than θA.

the pressure in the non-wetting phase is reduced to allow the wetting phase to be imbibed. Consider the capillary pressure versus wetting phase saturation relationship for the idealized pore shown in Figure 7.The very nature of immiscible displacement plays a role in the capillary pressure hysteresis. Thus. the imbibition capillary pressure will be approximately the same as the drainage capillary pressure of Figure 7. the pore is initially full of the wetting fluid at a capillary pressure given by Laplace equation as shown in Figure 7.26c.26a. the capillary pressure is increased to a higher value to drain some of the wetting fluid as shown in Figure 7. some non-wetting phase will be trapped in certain pores.26b because the mean curvature of the interfaces at c and d are about the same. When the capillary pressure experiment is reversed to measure the spontaneous imbibition curve. at the same capillary pressure. The pore structure also plays a role in the capillary pressure hysteresis. Next.26 during drainage and imbibition. we consider the imbibition process as shown in Figures 7. This is hysteresis. At c. As the wetting phase is imbibed into the rock.26b. However. the wetting phase saturation for imbibition is less than for drainage.26c and d. After the wetting fluid has been imbibed to the equilibrium level shown in Figure 7. Next. 7-50 . the wetting phase saturation at d is considerably lower than at b. This trapping causes the wetting phase saturation on the imbibition curve to be less than on the drainage curve at the same capillary pressure. The higher capillary pressure versus the wetting phase saturation is a point on the drainage capillary pressure curve. the capillary pressure is high at a wetting phase saturation of nearly zero. During drainage.

this capillary pressure is not sufficient to drain the entire pore because neck De2 is smaller than De1.35) However. Another effect of pore structure is shown in Figure 7.26. The interface will stop at De2.27. The pore (Figure 7. The drainage capillary pressure that must be applied to force the non-wetting phase into the pore is given by Pcdr1 = 4σ cos θ De1 (7. Drainage and imbibition capillary pressures versus saturation for an idealized pore. the applied capillary pressure must be increased to Pcdr2 given by 7-51 . To continue with the drainage.27a) is initially saturated with the wetting phase.Figure 7.

only water will be produced even though the zone has oil saturation. we see that Pcdr2 is large enough to drain the remaining portion of the pore.28 shows how the imbibition capillary pressure curve can be used along with the drainage curve to determine the type of fluid that will be produced at various depths in a reservoir. When the capillary pressure is reduced to Pcibm1 given by Pcimb1 = 4σ cos θ D1 (7. We see capillary pressure hysteresis. Figure 7.38) Looking at the remaining necks of the pore. let us reduce the capillary pressure to start the imbibition process.Pcdr 2 = 4σ cos θ De2 (7. If the well is perforated above the transition zone. only clean oil (water free oil) will be produced initially. the capillary pressure must be further reduced to Pcimb2 given by Pcimb 2 = 4σ cos θ D2 (7.36) Looking at the remaining necks of the pore. To drain the non-wetting phase further. we see that Pcimb2 is low enough to empty the remaining portion of the pore of the non-wetting phase. If the well is perforated in the upper part of the transition zone. both oil and water will be produced from day one. 7-52 . Figure 7. If the well is perforated in the bottom part of the transition zone.27b shows the drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves for the experiment just described. The oil saturation in this zone is residual oil saturation. Now.37) the first pore will be emptied of the non-wetting phase and the interface will come to equilibrium at the location marked Imb1.

27. Capillary pressure hysteresis presents no problem in reservoir engineering analysis as it is usually clear which curve should be used for a particular analysis.Figure 7. The drainage curve should be used for estimating the initial fluid saturation distribution in the reservoir whereas the imbibition curve should be used for analyzing a waterflood performance in a water-wet reservoir. 1992). Capillary pressure hysteresis in for an idealized pore (Dullien. 7-53 .

1986). Drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves showing the depth of water free oil production (Archer and Wall.8 CAPILLARY IMBIBITION Consider a reservoir consisting of two layers with different permeabilities and capillary pressure curves as shown in Figure 7. Initially. Let this equilibrium be disturbed by 7-54 .Figure 7. both layers are in capillary equilibrium at their respective irreducible water saturations.28.29 (a) and (b). 7.

the water injection rate must be sufficiently slow for imbibition to assist in waterflooding the low permeability layer. the capillary pressures in the two porous media will be equal at their boundary. The oil and water pressures are continuous across the boundary between the two layers. the imbibition process is very slow. Thus.40) from (7. Thus. so fluid exchanges will occur in an effort to achieve capillary equilibrium.40) Subtracting Eq. Sections B and E are not in capillary equilibrium. In Figure 7.41) Thus. 7-55 . at equilibrium. at the Po1 = Po 2 and (7. This fluid exchange is beneficial to the oil recovery process. water will be imbibed into the less permeable layer from the more permeable layer and oil will be expelled from the less permeable layer into the more permeable layer for subsequent displacement. boundary.(7. The injected water will advance further into the more permeable layer (Figure 7. However. Section E will loose water to section B and gain oil from B while section B will gain water from E and loose oil to E until a new capillary equilibrium is achieved. so no fluid exchanges will occur between these sections.waterflooding the two layers. sections A and D and C and F are in capillary equilibrium.39) gives the condition for equilibrium as Pc1 = Pc 2 (7. Therefore.29 (c)).39) Pw1 = Pw 2 (7.29c.

29. Capillary imbibition. The fractures have zero capillary pressure whereas the matrix blocks have normal capillary pressure curves. the oil saturation in the matrix will be reduced to the residual oil saturation over time. (a) reservoir before waterflooding. the capillary equilibrium will be disturbed. (b) capillary pressure curves for the layers. 7-56 . Water will be imbibed into the matrix blocks. expelling oil from the matrix blocks into the fractures. Naturally fractured reservoirs (fissured reservoirs) present another example of capillary imbibition.Figure 7. When the fractures become 100% saturated with water which comes in contact with the oil saturated matrix blocks. Ultimately. (c) reservoir after waterflooding.

1 Capillary End Effect Another capillary phenomenon of interest is the capillary end effect often experienced in laboratory coreflooding experiments. The end of the core is in contact with the outside which could be viewed as a second medium with zero capillary pressure. If the medium is flooded with the wetting phase (waterflooded). The observed breakthrough recovery of the non-wetting phase will be falsely high and the wetting phase saturation distribution in the core will be opposite what would normally be expected.9 CAPILLARY END EFFECT IN A LABORATORY CORE 7.30b. Consider a porous medium initially saturated with a non-wetting phase (say oil) and irreducible wetting phase saturation (say water). This phenomenon is known as capillary end effect. Thus. When the wetting phase arrives at the outlet end. initially. to zero.41) requires that the capillary pressure inside the core at the outlet end be equal . 7. only the non-wetting phase (oil) will be expelled from the outlet end at a higher capillary pressure than the outside (Figure 7.30c). with the wetting phase saturation being higher towards the core outlet than in the rest of the core (Figure 7.30b).9. This saturation is marked Swro in Figure 7. however.30a). the production of the wetting phase is delayed until well after the arrival of the wetting phase at the outlet end of the core. This phenomenon has several undesirable consequences. Most corefloods are blind tests because one cannot see the fluid distribution inside the core. 7-57 The condition for capillary equilibrium (Eq. The outlet end of the core is at a higher capillary pressure than the outside. This equilibrium will be achieved by the accumulation of the wetting phase at the outlet end of the core until the wetting phase saturation equals the wetting phase saturation at zero capillary pressure on the imbibition capillary pressure curve (Figure 7.7. the system now has a chance to seek capillary equilibrium.

the fractional flow of the wetting phase versus the wetting phase saturation at the outlet end of the core is used to calculate relative permeabilities on the assumption that there is no capillary end effect. the breakthrough recovery is usually taken to be a good measure of the displacement efficiency. (d) relative permeabililty curves.30. the calculated relative permeabilities will be wrong. Also. Therefore. (a) coreflood. Capillary end effect. Figure 7. the breakthrough recovery will be too large and will give a false sense of the displacement efficiency. 7-58 . in the unsteady state method for relative permeability measurement described in Chapter 8. (b) spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure curve. if there is capillary end effect in the experiment.Therefore. (c) wetting phase saturation profiles. In the presence of capillary end effect.

42) and (7.30a and use it to explain the capillary end effect phenomenon.2 Mathematical Analysis of Capillary End Effect We can derive the mathematical model for the immiscible displacement shown in Figure 7.(7. Let us define the relative permeabilities of the wetting and non-wetting phases as krw = and kw k (7.43) where kw and knw are the effective permeabilities to the wetting and nonwetting phases.42) and qnw = − knw A ∂Pnw μnw ∂x (7.7. Darcy's law for the wetting and non-wetting phases is given by qw = − kw A ∂Pw μ w ∂x (7.45) Eqs.9.44) krnw = knw k (7.43) can be written in terms of the relative permeabilities as qw = − kkrw A ∂Pw μ w ∂x (7.46) and 7-59 .

52) gives upon rearrangement 7-60 .(7.51) Eqs. the saturation constraint gives S w + Snw = 1 (7. Subtracting Eq.50) Finally.qnw = − kkrnw A ∂Pnw μnw ∂x (7.48) Assuming incompressible fluids.46) through (7.52) Substituting Eqs.49) into (7.46) from (7.47) Capillary equilibrium gives Pnw − Pw = Pc ( S w ) (7.51) constitute the complete mathematical description of two-phase immiscible displacement in the absence of the effect of gravity.(7. then q = qw + qnw The continuity equation for the wetting phase is (7.49) φA ∂S w ∂qw + =0 ∂t ∂x (7.(7.47) and rearranging gives qw μ w qnw μnw ∂Pnw ∂Pw − = − ∂x ∂x kkrw A kkrnw A (7.48) and (7.

57) Let the dimensionless distance from the inlet end be defined as xD = x L (7.54) and (7. Substituting Eqs.55) into (5.53) fw = qw q (7.58) 7-61 .kkrnw A ∂Pc qw q μnw ∂x = k μ q 1 + rnw w krw μnw 1+ Let the true fractional flow of the wetting phase be defined as (7.55) The approximate fractional flow of the wetting phase also can be defined as a function of the mobility ratio as Fw = 1 1+ 1 M (7.56) Both f w and Fw are functions of saturation.54) Let an approximate fractional flow of the wetting phase be defined as Fw = 1 k μ 1 + rnw w krw μnw (7.53) gives the true fractional flow of the wetting phase as ⎛ kk A ∂Pc ⎞ f w = Fw ⎜1 + rnw ⎟ q μnw ∂x ⎠ ⎝ (7.(7.

58) and (7. Let this dimensionless number be defined as N cap = Aσ cos θ kφ q μnw L (7.(7.63) into (7.60) is a dimensionless number that gives the ratio of the capillary to viscous forces in the displacement.57) gives the true fractional flow of the wetting phase as ⎡ ⎛ Aσ cos θ kφ ⎞ ∂J ⎤ f w = Fw ⎢1 + ⎜ ⎥ ⎟ krnw ⎜ ⎟ ∂xD ⎥ q μnw L ⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ (7.(7.61) into (7.61) Substituting Eq.59) Substituting Eqs.(7.60) gives ⎡ ∂J ⎤ f w = Fw ⎢1 + N cap krnw ⎥ ∂xD ⎦ ⎣ (7. Γ ) k /φ (7.59) into (7.50) gives the continuity equation for the wetting phase as 7-62 .(7.62) Let the dimensionless time be defined as tD = qt Aφ L (7.Let the spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure curve be given in terms of its Leverett J-function as Pc ( S w ) = σ cos θ J ( Sw .63) Substituting Eq.60) The term in the inner bracket on the right side of Eq.

64) gives ∂S w ⎛ dFw ⎞ ∂S w ∂ ⎛ ∂J +⎜ + N cap ⎟ ⎜ Fw krnw ∂t D ⎝ dS w ⎠ ∂xD ∂xD ⎝ ∂xD ⎞ ⎟=0 ⎠ (7. Our concern here is the capillary end effect.66) is the final form of the partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation for two phase immiscible displacement in a linear porous medium. Eq.(6. When supplemented with appropriate initial and boundary conditions together with the rock and fluid properties.66) Eq. Applied to the outlet end of the core.65) Because J is a function of S w .65) can be written as ∂S w ⎛ dFw ⎞ ∂S w ∂ ⎛ dJ ∂S w ⎞ +⎜ + N cap ⎟ ⎜ Fw krnw ⎟=0 ∂t D ⎝ dS w ⎠ ∂xD ∂xD ⎝ dS w ∂xD ⎠ (7.67) where the derivative of the J-function with respect to xD is given by the following finite difference approximation: 7-63 .(7.64) (7.(7. not the prediction of the overall displacement performance.62) can be written as ⎡ ⎛ J − − J + ⎞⎤ f w = Fw ⎢1 + N cap krnw ⎜ ⎟⎥ ⎝ δ xD ⎠ ⎦ ⎣ (7. Eq. its solution can be used to calculate the performance of the immiscible displacement such as a waterflood or a gas flood. Let us examine in detail the fractional flow of the wetting phase at the outlet end of the core.(7.62) into (7.∂S w ∂f w + =0 ∂t D ∂xD Substituting Eq. The solution of this equation is deferred to Chapter 8.

J − is equal to zero.31.68). and J + . 7-64 . it is possible for the following inequality to prevail during the displacement: J+ 1 − N cap krnw ≤0 δ xD (7. Of course. Therefore.69) Depending on the values of N cap .31.68) In Eq. Initial capillary barrier at the outlet end of the core.70) Figure 7. J − is the Jfunction outside the porous medium and δ xD is a small distance in the neighborhood of the outlet end of the porous medium as shown in Figure 7. the fractional flow of the wetting phase at the outlet end of the porous medium becomes ⎡ J+ ⎤ f w = Fw ⎢1 − N cap krnw δ xD ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (7.(7.∂J ∂xD ⎛ J− − J+ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ δ xD ⎠ (7. J + is the J-function inside the porous medium. krnw .

If 1 − N cap krnw J+ =0 δ xD (7. this will not happen because there is no supply of the wetting phase outside the outlet end of the core for it to be imbibed into the core. If 1 − N cap krnw J+ <0 δ xD (7. This is the capillary end effect phenomenon at work. Therefore. raising the wetting saturation there to an abnormal level.(7. Before the arrival of the wetting phase at the outlet end of the core. only the non-wetting phase will be produced. At this time. Although the inequality given by Eq. At time ta .73) appears to indicate that the wetting phase will flow backwards into the core. The wetting phase saturation profiles will be as shown in Figure 7. J + has its maximum possible value at the irreducible wetting phase 7-65 . Because the fractional flow of the wetting phase is zero at the outlet end of the core.73) the wetting phase cannot flow out of the core either but will accumulate at the end as before. Eq. Let us now examine the physics of the displacement before and after wetting phase breakthrough.(7.70) gives the condition for capillary end effect to occur in an immiscible displacement.30a at t1 and t2.72) at the outlet end of the core. the wetting phase arrives at the outlet end of the core. the wetting phase cannot flow out of the core but instead will accumulate there raising the wetting phase saturation to an abnormal level.71) then fw = 0 (7.

(7.76) 7-66 . t ) .30c at t∞ . If the values of N cap . At this time. When the wetting phase saturation has increased to S wro . J + decreases dramatically as shown in Figure 7. krnw and J + are such that Eq. Beyond this time. As the wetting phase saturation increases.69) gives f w = Fw > 0 (7.75) or N cap < δ xD krnw J + (7.30b. J + becomes zero and capillary equilibrium is achieved between the porous medium and the outside. The wetting phase saturation profile at breakthrough is shown in Figure 7.saturation. then capillary end effect will occur and the wetting phase begins to accumulate at the outlet end of the core resulting in the increase of the wetting saturation. Eq.(7.74) and the wetting phase flows out of the core and is produced along with the non-wetting phase. How can capillary end effect be eliminated from the experiment? The condition for eliminating the capillary end effect is obtained from Eq. only the wetting phase will be produced. S w ( L.30c at tbt . After breakthrough.69) as 1 − N cap krnw J+ >0 δ xD (7.(7. The wetting phase saturation profile will be as shown in Figure 7.70) holds. both phases will be produced until residual non-wetting phase is achieved in the core after many pore volumes of wetting phase injection.

How can the value of N cap be controlled in the experiment? The only means to control N cap in the experiment is through the injection rate. In terms of Darcy velocity.(7. Above the critical value.61) into (7.(7.76) gives the condition for the injection rate to eliminate capillary end effect as q> Akrnw J +σ cos θ kφ μnw Lδ xD (7.79) become q krnw J +σ cos θ kφ v= > μnw Lδ xD A (7.79) For injection rates below the critical value. Substituting Eq. Eqs.78) and (7. q. A critical value of N cap can be defined as N capcritical = δ xD krnw J + (7. capillary end effect will be eliminated.77) For N cap below the critical value. capillary end effect will occur in the displacement. capillary end effect will occur. Examination of Eq.61) shows that N cap can be made small by the use of a high injection rate in the experiment.80) 7-67 .(7.78) A critical injection rate can be defined as qcritical = Akrnw J +σ cos θ kφ μnw Lδ xD (7.Thus. For rates above the critical. capillary end effect will be eliminated. N cap should be as small as possible in the experiment to eliminate capillary end effect.

Eq. The steady state saturation profile can be derived from Eq.82) Rearranging Eq.(7.(7.83) 7-68 .32.81) Is capillary end effect a problem in field displacements? The answer is no because the large value of L at field scale ensures that N cap is always smaller than is required to eliminate capillary end effect at field rates. The wetting phase saturation will be higher at the outlet end of the core than at the inlet end.(7. However.82) gives ⎛ fw ⎞ − 1⎟ ⎜ dS w ⎝ Fw ⎠ = dxD N k dJ cap rnw dS w (7.76).62) as follows. q. satisfies the condition of Eq.9.3 Mathematical Model of Capillary End Effect During Steady State Relative Permeability Measurement.(7. then the injection rate is high enough to eliminate capillary end effect and the wetting phase saturation will be uniform throughout the core.62) can be written as ⎡ dJ dS w ⎤ f w = Fw ⎢1 + N cap krnw ⎥ dS w dxD ⎦ ⎣ (7. 7. At steady state conditions. The fluids are injected at various ratios of qw/qnw until steady state is achieved. if the total rate is not high enough to eliminate capillary end effect. If the total injection rate. the wetting phase saturation will be non uniform in the core.vcritical krnw J +σ cos θ kφ = μnw Lδ xD (7. The steady state method for relative permeability measurements involves the simultaneous injection into the core of the wetting and nonwetting fluids as shown in Figure 7.

(7.83) is the partial differential equation for the steady state wetting phase saturation. 7-69 .33 shows the steady state saturation profile obtained by solving Eqs.84) Figure 7.84).(7. The appropriate boundary condition for the equation is S w (1) = S wro (7.(7. It is a first order nonlinear equation that can easily be integrated to obtain the steady state saturation profile.83) with the boundary condition given by Eq.Figure 7.32. Steady state experiment. Eq.

25 inches in diameter.4 ft/day whereas the high injection rate was 36 ft/day. 7-70 . The low injection rate was 2. The oil and water viscosities were 1.Figure 7. These electrodes enabled the resistivity of the core to be measured along the length of the core. one below the critical rate for capillary end effect and one above the critical rate. The core was instrumented with two current electrodes and nineteen potential electrodes distributed along its length.33. He conducted waterfloods in laboratory cores at two rates.8 and 0.1 normal sodium chloride solution. Steady state wetting phase saturation profile in the presence of capillary end effect.9. The injected water was 0.9 cp.4 Experimental Evidence of Capillary End Effect Perkins (1957) has presented experimental data that show capillary end effect at work. 7. The core was 12 inches in length and 1. from which the water saturation profiles were calculated using Archie's equation.

The water saturation profile at tD = 0.41 pore volume injected. Thus. the capillary end effect was significantly reduced in the high rate displacement compared to the low rate displacement. However.60 clearly shows the capillary end effect. Figure 7. 1957).35 shows the water saturation profiles for the high rate flood. The water arrived at the outlet end of the core at tD = 0. Thus. no water was produced from the core until tD = 0.Figure 7.60 pore volume injected. 7-71 . Figure 7.34.60 pore volume injected and got produced shortly thereafter at tD = 0.65 pore volume injected. Wetting phase saturation profiles at low injection rate (Perkins.34 shows the water saturation profiles for the low rate flood. the flood was affected by capillary end effect. The water arrived at the outlet end of the core at tD = 0.

The core was initially saturated with oil.36. the core segments were weighed to determine the wetting phase saturation in each segment. Steps were taken to ensure capillary continuity between the segments. 1957). 7-72 . the non-wetting phase. The core was cut into 8 segments as shown in Figure 7. Wetting phase saturation profiles at high injection rate (Perkins. and oil were injected simultaneously at various ratios.Figure 7.35. Then helium.85 cm. The core was a Berea sandstone of length 30 cm and diameter 6. The second example from Richardson et al. which was the wetting phase. After steady state was achieved. (1952) investigated capillary end effect in steady state experiments.

Since such displacements are normally used to determine relative permeability curves in 7-73 .39 show the measured and calculated wetting phase saturation profiles at steady state for successively higher total injection rates.84) using the drainage relative permeability curves and drainage capillary pressure curves shown in Figure 7.(7. Segmented core used in steady state experiments (Richardson et al. 1953).37 to 7. Figures 7. The theoretical saturation profiles were calculated with Eqs.36. The lesson from these examples is that capillary end effect could dominate laboratory scale immiscible displacements.Figure 7.83) and (7. Capillary end effect occurred in the three experiments shown in Figures 7.37 to 7.39.40. However. it can be seen that the capillary end effect was reduced as the total injection rate was increased..

qnw = 0. Capillary end effect in a steady state experiment..000336 cm3/s (Richardson et al. Figure 7. 7-74 . qw = 0. Failure to do so will result in the relative permeability curves so derived being wrong. it is imperative that steps be taken to eliminate or at least minimize capillary end effect in these experiments.36.15 cm3/s.the laboratory. 1953).

80 cm3/s.37. qnw = 0.38.264 cm3/s. Capillary end effect in a steady state experiment.. Capillary end effect in a steady state experiment. Figure 7.0022 cm3/s (Richardson et al.Figure 7. 7-75 . qw = 0. qw = 0. qnw = 0. 1953).00288 cm3/s (Richardson et al.. 1953).

In this method. 7. which allows the wetting phase displaced from the sample to pass through while blocking the passage of the non-wetting phase.39. 1953). 7. initially saturated with a wetting fluid. capillary pressure is measured by placing the sample.Figure 7.10 CAPILLARY PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS Three methods are commonly used to measure capillary pressure curves in the petroleum industry: the restored state method (porous plate method). in a vessel filled with the non-wetting fluid. The bottom of the vessel consists of a semi-permeable plate. mercury injection method and centrifuge method..1 Restored State Method (Porous Plate Method). Extending from the porous 7-76 .10. Drainage relative permeability curves and capillary pressure curve for Berea sandstone (Richardson et al.

The apparatus used in the measurement is shown in Figure 7. The porous plate apparatus can be used to measure the imbibition capillary pressure curve as well as the drainage curve. This limits the maximum capillary pressure that can be measured with the method to about 200 psi. capillary pressure is measured by injecting mercury. which is a non-wetting phase. 7. into the sample. Nitrogen pressure is then applied in successive increments and at each step. With the sample in place. 7-77 .41. The method gives a reliable estimate of the irreducible wetting phase saturation. The wetting phase saturation of the sample is determined from the volume of wetting phase displaced at each pressure to obtain the capillary pressure versus saturation relationship. A dry sample is placed in the cell and the cell is evacuated.plate is a graduated tube which allows the volume of the wetting phase displaced to be measured as shown in Figure 7.10. The volume of wetting phase displaced at each pressure is measured. The capillary pressure is the non-wetting phase pressure minus the wetting phase pressure at each step.42. It is not unusual for the capillary pressure experiment to take several weeks to complete. the pressure of the non-wetting fluid is increased in steps and the system is allowed to achieve equilibrium after each pressure change.2 Mercury Injection Method In this method. It consists of a sample cell and a mercury injection pump. It must have a displacement pressure that is higher than the largest capillary pressure to be measured. The porous plate is typically made of porcelain or fritted glass. The major disadvantage of the porous plate method is that it takes too long to obtain the entire capillary pressure curve. Mercury is injected into the cell until the mercury is level with a graduation on the high-pressure glass capillary above the sample chamber.

mercury is injected to maintain the mercury level with the graduation on the capillary.Figure 7. the bulk volume of the sample can be determined.41. The mercury-air capillary pressure versus saturation relationship is calculated from the volume of mercury forced into the sample pore space as a function of the applied nitrogen pressure. 1947). 7-78 . Porous plate capillary pressure apparatus (Welge and Bruce. From the volume of the cell and the volume of mercury required to fill the cell with the sample before mercury injection into the sample.

mercury withdrawal and mercury re-injection. Capillary pressure cell for mercury injection (Purcell.43 shows typical capillary pressure curves obtained by mercury injection. 1949). The capillary pressure curve can be obtained in a matter of hours. The imbibition curve can be obtained very easily by decreasing the nitrogen pressure and withdrawing mercury from the system. 7-79 .Figure 7. The mercury injection method is very fast.38. Figure 7.

The scaling factors for the sandstone These are different from the . respectively. and limestone were 7. Brown (1951) has shown that the mercury injection method can give essentially the same capillary pressure curve as the restored state method except for a scaling factor.5 and 5.45 compare capillary pressure curves obtained by mercury injection and the restored state method for a sandstone and a limestone core. respectively.44 and 7.43. Mercury-air capillary pressure curves.Figure 7.5. 7-80 The results show good agreement between the two methods. Figures 7.

2 suggested by Purcell (1949) based on the ratio of σcosθ of mercury-air and water-air systems.10.46 and 7.47. 7. The method also cannot be used to determine the irreducible wetting phase saturation. The only data measured directly in this method are the volume of wetting fluid displaced and the corresponding rotational speed of the centrifuge. the dPw = − ρ wω 2 r dr dPo = − ρ oω 2 r dr (7. These data can be used to derive the capillary pressure versus saturation relationship of the porous medium.86) 7-81 . The theory underlying the method is that the centrifuge imposes a centrifugal force (typically. The sample is rotated at a series of constant angular velocities and the amount of wetting fluid displaced at equilibrium at each velocity is measured with the aid of a stroboscopic light. Consider an oil-water system in which water is the wetting phase and oil is the non-wetting phase. In this method. the sample saturated with a wetting fluid is placed in a centrifuge cup containing the non-wetting fluid as shown in Figures 7.85) (7. This causes the denser wetting fluid to be displaced outward away from the center of rotation and the non-wetting fluid to flow into the sample through the inlet face of the sample. The major disadvantage of the mercury injection method is that the core can no longer be used for other tests after mercury injection.3 Centrifuge Method. over 1000 times the force of gravity) on the sample. pressure gradients in the water and oil are given by At equilibrium.scaling factor of 5.

A comparison of water-nitrogen and mercury-air capillary pressure curves for a sandstone core (Brown. 1951).Figure 7.44. 7-82 . Note the different capillary pressure scales for the two sets of data.

45.Figure 7. A comparison of water-nitrogen and mercury-air capillary pressure curves for a limestone core (Brown. Note the different capillary pressure scales for the two sets of data. 1951). 7-83 .

1980). Positions of core and graduated tube in a centrifuge for measurement of oil-displacing-water capillary pressure curve (Donaldson et al.Figure 7.46.. 7-84 .

where ω is the angular velocity of the centrifuge in radians/s.85 from 7.86 gives dPc = − ( ρ w − ρo ) ω 2 r = −Δρω 2 r dr (7. 1980). 7.Figure 7.. Positions of core and graduated tube in a centrifuge for measurement of water-displacing-oil capillary pressure curve (Donaldson et al.87) 7-85 .47. Subtracting Eqs.

89) where r2 is the outlet face of the core measured from the center of rotation. Since the capillary pressure at the core inlet can be calculated from Eq. r1. the inlet face of the core measured from the center of rotation. it is only necessary to estimate the water saturation at the core inlet in order to obtain the required capillary pressure versus saturation relationship.90) At any stage of the centrifuge experiment. the highest capillary pressure occurs at r1.0 at the core outlet.91) 7-86 . At the inlet face. 7.88) where C is an integration constant. The average water saturation in the core is given by S wav ∫ = r2 r1 S w dr r2 − r1 (7.90). The water saturation at the core inlet can be estimated from the average water saturation determined from the amount of water displaced at each speed. Application of the Hassler-Brunner boundary condition that Pc = 0 at r = r2 gives the capillary pressure at any r as Δρω 2 2 2 Pc = ( r2 − r ) 2 (7. At any stage of the centrifuge experiment.(7.87 gives the capillary pressure at radius r as Pc = − Δρω 2 r +C 2 (7.Integration of Eq. to a value of 1. r2. the water saturation in the core varies from a minimum at the core inlet. the capillary pressure is given by Pc1 = Δρω 2 2 2 ( r2 − r1 ) 2 (7.

(7. Noting that Δρω Lr1 is approximately equal to Pc1 since L is small relative to r1 and r2 and Δρω2r1dr is equal to − dPc1 . When applied to experimental data.(7.93) Differentiating Eq.8.94) gives a smoother capillary pressure curve than Eq. Eq. Eq.95).93) gives the water saturation at the core inlet as S w1 = d ( Pc1S wav ) dPc1 (7.92) 2 where L is the length of the core.95) The approximate water saturation equation. The centrifuge method is fast and allows the capillary pressure measurement to be completed in a day or less.95).Multiplying Eq. experience shows that Eq. determining the irreducible water saturation. is applicable for r1/r2 equal to or greater than 0.94) or (7.(7.92) can be written as Pc1S wav = ∫ S w ( Pc ) dPc Pc1 0 (7. The method is good for Figure 7.(7.48 shows a comparison of the capillary pressure curves of the same sample from centrifuge measurement and by the restored state method obtained by 7-87 .94) or ⎛ dS ⎞ S w1 = S wav + Pc1 ⎜ wav ⎟ ⎝ dPc1 ⎠ (7.(7.91) by Δρω2r1 and rearranging gives Δρω 2 Lr1S wav = ∫ S w Δρω 2 r1dr r1 r2 (7.(7.

the agreement between the two sets of data is reasonable. Although the capillary pressure curve from centrifuge measurement is somewhat higher than from the restored state method. (2) the Hassler-Brunner boundary condition at the core outlet may be violated at high centrifuge speeds. the open circles are data obtained by the use of Eq.(7.49 shows comparisons of the capillary pressure curves for the same cores measured by the restored state method (diaphram).95) to compute the inlet water saturation. and (4) inability to obtain spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure curve. In this figure. It should be observed that both equations give somewhat different results for the water saturations. Figure 7.(7. 7-88 .Hassler and Brunner (1945).94) and the open squares are data obtained by the use of Eq. Rajan (1986) has presented a more accurate method for calculating the water saturation at the core inlet. The agreement between the three methods is excellent. Melrose (1988) has investigated the Hassler-Brunner boundary condition and concluded that it was unlikely to be violated under normal core analysis conditions. (3) the calculated water saturation at the core inlet is an approximation. mercury injection and centrifuge experiments. The disadvantages of the method include (1) inability to measure the displacement pressure since the water saturation at the core inlet is always less than the average water saturation of the core.

A comparison of capillary pressure obtained by centrifuge and by the restored state method (Hassler and Brunner.Figure 7.48. 7-89 . 1945).

73 cm3 144 md 7-90 .53 cm 1. A comparison of capillary pressure curves obtained by centrifuge.Figure 7. Example 7.49.2 Table 7.7 shows the data obtained in a centrifuge experiment for determining the air-water capillary pressure curve of a core sample.0 cm 2. Other data from the experiment are as follows: Core length Core diameter Core pore volume Core permeability = = = = 2. 1991).. mercury injection and by the restored state method (Hermansen et al.

3. Calculate the acceleration imposed on the inlet of the core at the centrifuge speed of 5690 RPM and compare to the acceleration due to gravity.05 3810 1.60 1840 0.40 1550 0.90 2740 1.75 2200 0.20 5690 1. 7-91 .50 1700 0.Centrifuge arm (r2) = 8.6 cm = 0. (7.00 3120 1.10 4510 1. 2.9988 gm/cm3 Water-air density difference r2 = 8.80 2500 0.30 1410 0. Calculate the capillary pressure curves for the sample using Eq.95) (method 2) for the inlet water saturation. Compare the capillary pressure curves obtained from the two methods.7.6 cm Table 7.(7.94) (method 1) and Eq. Centrifuge Experimental Data Centrifuge Volume of Water Speed Displaced (RPM) (cc) 1300 0.70 2010 0.25 1.

28 atm Pc1 = ( 281362.0133 x106 ⎣ ⎦ −0.Solution to Example 7.30 ) /1.40 )(14.0133 x106 psi Figure 7.3563Pc0.495 7-92 .142 )(8.50 shows the graph of S wav Pc1 versus Pc1 .40 dynes/cm2 Pc1 = 281362.(7.9988) (136.40 /1.696 ) ⎤ S w1 = = ( 0.40 )(14.62 ) 2 = 281362.08 1.8.696 ) = 4.73 − 0. 1. The regression equation is S wav Pc1 = 1. The entries in the table were computed as follows at the centrifuge speed of 1300 revolutions per minute (RPM).6217 1 Application of Eq. S wav = (V p − Vw ) / V p = (1.62 − 6.94) gives the inlet water saturation as d ( S wav Pc1 ) ⎡ ( 281362.0133x106 = 0.2 The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 7.3563) ⎢ ⎥ dPc1 1.73 = 0.3783 = 0.6217 )(1.14 radians/s Δρω 2 ( r22 − r12 ) 2 Pc1 = = ( 0.827 ω = 2π N / 60 = 2π (1300 ) / 60 = 136.

302 -0.08 4.189 2.02 192.24 0.3783 1 7-93 .335 0.350 0.51 shows the graph of S wav versus Pc1 .0 1 3120 1.03 4.485 0.0222 -0. Calculated Results for Example 7.282 -0.162 -0.364 0.20 0.0173 -0.447 0.381 0.28 7.39 35.47 0.80 0.32 78.49 230.80 1.25 0.70 0.364 398.80 5.277 595.05 12. The regression equation is S wav = 1.8.296 Pc1 dynes/cm2 Pc1 atm Pc1 psi 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Method 1(Eq.60 0.0122 0.495 0.0038 0.Table 7.6 6 5690 1.12 4.7.3563Pc−0.238 1.12 481146.38 261.566 0.231 1. 1 Centrifug e Speed RPM Vw cc Swav ω radians/ s 1300 1410 1550 1700 1840 2010 2200 2500 0.393 326.00 0.407 0.80 281362.0024 0.29 3386354.80 6.13 7.0353 -0.10 0.69 15.24 0.193 -0.60 23.711 0.0590 -0.653 0.251 0.11 15.69 0.87 5.05 0.53 6.2.356 0.179 3.56 4.34 49.17 9.422 286.76 0.93 1249915.33 0.68 210.40 330992.769 0.69 4.0455 -0.73 1620647.37 3.5 4 4510 1.827 0.0283 -0.7 2 5.39 0.4 3 3810 1.538 0.76 11.40 0.0739 -0.05 0.0013 0.36 563657.65 162.14 147.86 5390187.09 3.306 472.7.75 0.0066 0.13 672622.90 0.0095 0.480 136.23 18.95) dS wav dPc1 psi-1 Sw1 psi Figure 7.333 0.65 0.404 0.07 399984.94) SwavPc1 psi Sw1 9 10 11 Method 2 (Eq.50 0.525 0.28 0.66 0.255 -0.30 0.98 8.56 0.63 805795.220 -0.4 3 2740 1.466 0.17 21.32 178.50 9.28 1040541.98 2416736.595 0.434 0.

525 1.30 ) ⎡ ( 281362. 7-94 .3783)(1.0739 Application of Eq.3783 = −0.3563) ⎢ ⎥ 1.696 ) ⎤ dS wav = ( −0.⎡ ( 281362.696 ) ⎤ −⎢ ⎟= ⎥ ( 0.0133x106 dPc1 ⎣ ⎦ −1.0133 x106 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ Figure 7. Graph of S wav Pc1 versus Pc1 for Example 7.40 )(14.2.40 )(14.(7.50.95) gives the inlet water saturation as ⎛ dS S w1 = S wav + Pc1 ⎜ wav ⎝ dPc1 ⎞ (1.73 − 0.73 1.0739 ) = 0.

95) shows more scatter in the computed water saturations than Eq.51.(7. Eq.19 cm/s2 ⎟ r1 = ⎢ 60 ⎝ 60 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 2 This acceleration is 2388 times the acceleration due to gravity. Figure 7. Both equations give essentially the same capillary pressure curves.94).Figure 7. However.94) and (7.52 shows a comparison of the capillary pressure curves from Eqs.(7.6 ) = 2343288.2. Graph of S wav versus Pc1 for Example 7. 7-95 . The acceleration imposed at the inlet end of the core at the centrifuge speed of 5690 RPM is given by ⎡ 2π ( 5690 ) ⎤ ⎛ 2π N ⎞ acceleration = ω r1 = ⎜ ⎥ ( 6. 3.(7. 2.95).

95 for Example 7. It should come as no surprise that one of the principal applications of capillary pressure curve is for estimating the pore size distribution of porous media.Figure 7.2 that the capillary pressure versus saturation relationship of an idealized porous medium captured the pore size distribution of the medium.1.1 Introduction We saw in Section 7.94 and 7.7.11.11 PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTION 7. mercury 7-96 .52. Thus. 7. Because mercury does not wet most solids. Comparison of the capillary pressure curves derived from Eqs. the capillary pressure curve derived from mercury injection is particularly well suited for probing the pore structure of porous media.

injection porosimetry is widely used in the petroleum and material science industries to determine the pore size distribution of porous materials. the cumulative volume of mercury injected versus the capillary pressure can be used to determine the pore size distribution of the medium. The second pore size distribution function is based on the assumption of a bundle of capillary tubes model of the porous medium and represents the distribution of the pore throat size assuming the pores are capillary tubes. pores with smaller pore throat sizes are invaded by mercury.11. Therefore.53.96) where R is the pore throat radius. When mercury is injected into the porous medium at a low pressure. the two pore size distribution functions are not the same. which does not assume a model for the porous medium such as the bundle of capillary tubes model. Two different pore size distribution functions can be derived from mercury porosimetry. If the mercury pressure is high enough. The only assumption is that the pore throat is circular.2 Pore Volume Distribution Consider the result of the mercury injection experiment as shown in Figure 7. As the capillary pressure is increased. Because they represent different things. mercury will invade those pores having pore throat radii equal to or greater than the radius given by Laplace equation: Pc = 2σ cos θ R (7. all the pores in the porous medium will be invaded by mercury. 7. The figure shows the cumulative volume of mercury injected expressed as a fraction of the total pore volume plotted against the capillary 7-97 . The first is the pore volume distribution.

96) as R= 2σ cos θ Pc (7.(7.97) Figure 7. Snw. Shown on the capillary pressure axis is the corresponding pore throat size obtained from Eq. Also shown on the figure is the wetting phase saturation versus capillary pressure obtained from S w = 1 − Snw 7-98 (7.53. This is the raw data obtained from the experiment. Cumulative pore volume of mercury injected versus capillary pressure.98) .pressure. Note that the cumulative volume of mercury injected expressed as a fraction of the pore volume is the non-wetting phase saturation.

Sw is the fraction of the pore volume occupied by pores having pore throat size equal to R or less.102) Various alternative expressions can be derived for the probability density function by use of Eq. the probability density function for the pore volume distribution also is given by f ( R) = − dS nw dR (7. then Sw = ∫ R R final f ( R ) dR (7. 7-99 . At any value of R. If the probability density function for the pore volume distribution is f (R).(7.(7. Let us replot the saturations versus pore throat size such that the pore throat size increases from left to right as shown in Figure 7.96).99) where ∫ R0 R final f ( R ) dR = 1 (7. From Eq.54.It should be noted that the pore throat radius.101) Because of the relationship between Sw and Snw.(7. It should be observed that the Sw versus R curve now represents the cumulative probability distribution function for the pore volume distribution whereas the Snw versus R curve represents the expectation curve for the pore volume distribution.96).100) Differentiating Eq. R.99) using Leibnitz's rule for differentiating an integral gives the probability density function as f ( R) = dS w dR (7. decreases from left to right in the figure.

103) gives Pc dR + RdPc = 0 (7.105) .(7.96) and (7.54.(7.104) Figure 7.(7.101) and (7.104) into Eqs. Saturations versus pore throat size from mercury injection.102) gives the following alternative expressions for the probability density function for the pore volume distribution: f ( R) = 2σ cos θ dS w dS w P dS =− c w =− dR R dPc R2 dPc 7-100 (7. Substituting Eqs.Pc R = 2σ cos θ = a constant (7.103) Differentiating Eq.

106) Thus. a plot of the incremental pore volume of mercury injected versus pore throat size also is a measure of the pore volume distribution. The first derivative at x3 is given by 7-101 . differentiating the saturation versus the pore throat radius curve from the experiment leads directly to the probability density function for the pore volume distribution of the rock.55. The threepoint central difference approximation given previously for the calculation of the welltest derivative function (Eq. Further. There are other differentiation schemes that may be less noisy than the three-point central difference formula. Differentiation of experimental data can be a noisy affair.65)) can be used to differentiate the experimental data.f ( R) = − dS nw Pc dS w 2σ cos θ dS nw = = dR R dPc R2 dPc (7. The computational template for the five-point central difference formula is shown in Figure 7. The five-point central difference formula proposed by Akima (1970) may be less noisy than the three-point central difference formula.(3. It should be noted that the welltest derivative function should be divided by ti to obtain the first derivative of the function.

Figure 7. 1970).55.110) . m4 − m3 m2 + m2 − m1 m3 ⎛ dy ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = m4 − m3 + m2 − m1 ⎝ dx ⎠ x3 (7.109) m2 = (7.108) m3 = (7. Computational template for calculating the first derivative using Akima's method (Akima.107) where m4 = y5 − y4 x5 − x4 y4 − y3 x4 − x3 y3 − y2 x3 − x2 7-102 (7.

112) The fractional number of pores with radii between R and R+dR is δ ( R)dR . Let 7-103 . Let the probability density function for the pore size distribution be δ ( R) .3 Pore Size Distribution Based on Bundle of Capillary Tubes Model The objective is to estimate the pore size distribution of a porous medium from the drainage capillary pressure curve based on a bundle of capillary tubes model of the porous medium. where N is the total number of pores (capillary tubes) making up the porous medium. The cross-sectional area of the pores with radii between R and R+dR is given by dAc = π R 2 N δ ( R)dR (7.(7. ∞ ∫ δ ( R)dR = 1 0 (7.114) where AT is the total cross-sectional area of the porous medium and φ is the porosity of the porous medium.11. for the porous medium. Further.113) The cross-sectional area occupied by all the pores can be obtained by integrating Eq.111) 7. The number of pores with radii between R and R+dR is Nδ ( R)dR . Then. the pore size distribution should be scaled into a pore size probability density function.m1 = y2 − y1 x2 − x1 (7.113) to obtain ∞ Ac = AT φ = π N ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR 0 (7. where R is the pore throat radius.

the wetting phase occupies all the pores with radii less than R corresponding to the capillary pressure given by Pc ( S w ) = 2σ cos θ R (7.116) V p = AT φ L = π NL ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR = π NLR 2 0 (7.(7.119) The wetting phase saturation is given by R R Sw = Vw = Vp 0 ∞ ∫ R δ ( R)dR ∫ R δ ( R)dR 2 2 = 0 ∫ R δ ( R)dR 2 0 R2 (7.117) At capillary equilibrium.120) can be rearranged as 7-104 .120) Eq.114) can be rewritten as Ac = AT φ = π NR 2 The pore volume of the porous medium is given by ∞ (7.(7.118) The wetting phase volume is given by R Vw = π NL ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR 0 (7.115) Eq.R 2 = ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR = a constant 0 ∞ (7.

R 2 S w = ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR = ∫ r 2δ (r )dr

0 0

R

R

(7.121)

where r is a dummy integration variable, which is not to be confused with the radius R, the upper limit of the integral. Differentiating Eq.(7.121) with respect to R gives

R dS w d 2 R = ∫ r δ (r )dr dR dR 0

2

(7.122)

The right side of Eq.(7.122) can be evaluated using Leibnitz’s rule for differentiating a definite integral as follows:

R R ∂ ⎡ r 2δ (r ) ⎤ d dR d0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 ∫ r δ (r )dr = R δ ( R) dR − 0δ (0) dR + ∫ ∂R dr dR 0 0

(7.123)

The integrand of the integral on the right side of Eq.(7.123) is zero. Therefore, Eq.(7.123) simplifies to

d r 2δ (r )dr = R 2δ ( R) dR ∫ 0

Substituting Eq.(7.124) into Eq.(7.122) gives

R

(7.124)

R2

dS w = R 2δ ( R) dR

(7.125)

Differentiating Eq.(7.118) with respect to R gives

2σ cos θ dPc ( S w ) =− dR R2

(7.126)

7-105

Dividing Eq.(7.126) by Eq.(7.125) gives

2σ cos θ R 2 dPc ( S w ) =− dS w R 4δ ( R)

(7.127)

The probability density function for the pore size distribution can be obtained from Eq.(7.127) as

δ ( R)

R

2

=−

2σ cos θ ⎡ dP ( S ) ⎤ R ⎢ c w ⎥ ⎣ dS w ⎦

4

(7.128)

Using Eq.(7.96), Eq.(7.128) can be rewritten in the following alternative form:

δ ( R)

R

2

=−

Pc ( S w ) ⎡ dP ( S ) ⎤ R3 ⎢ c w ⎥ ⎣ dS w ⎦

(7.129)

Eqs.(7.118) and (7.129) can be used to calculate the pore size distribution from a drainage capillary pressure curve as follows: 1. Pick a high Pc(Sw) value corresponding to a low wetting phase saturation, Sw, and a small pore size, R. 2. Calculate the pore radius, R, using Eq.(7.118). 3. Calculate the derivative of the capillary pressure curve with respect to the wetting phase saturation at the value of the Pc(Sw) in step 1. Note that this is a negative quantity. 4. Calculate δ ( R) / R 2 using Eq.(7.129).

7-106

5. Pick lower values of Pc(Sw) and repeat steps 2 through 4 until the entire capillary pressure curve has been used in the pore size distribution calculation. 6. Plot the graph of δ ( R) / R 2 versus R. Calculate the area under the graph, Ag. Using Ag, calculate the constant R 2 so as to satisfy Eq.(7.112), which is the requirement for a probability density function. 7. Using the value of R 2 , calculate and plot the graph of δ ( R) versus R, which is the required probability density function for the pore size distribution. Eq.(7.129) was derived for a general capillary pressure curve obtained by any method. In the case of the capillary pressure curve obtained by mercury porosimetry, Eq.(7.129) can be transformed by substitution of Eq.(7.104) to obtain the probability density function as

δ ( R) =

or

R 2 dS w R 2 dR

(7.130)

δ ( R) = −

R 2 dS nw R 2 dR

(7.131)

Using Eq.(7.130) or (7.131), the probability density function can easily be calculated from the mercury injection data. Figure 7.56 shows the pore size distributions of various sedimentary rocks determined from drainage capillary pressure curves.

7-107

Figure 7.56. Pore size distributions of sedimentary rocks based on the bundle of capillary tubes model of the rock (Crocker, 1983).

7-108

Example 7.3 The first three columns of Table 7.9 give the mercury injection data for a low permeability sandstone sample with k = 0.048 md and φ = 5.6%. Calculate and plot the following graphs: 1. 2. 3. 4. Snw and Sw versus pore throat radius, R.

**ΔSnw versus pore throat radius, R.
**

Probability density function for pore volume distribution. Probability density function for pore radius distribution assuming a bundle of capillary tubes model of the porous medium.

**Table 7.9. Mercury Injection Data and Calculated Pore Size Distributions for Example 7.3.
**

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pore Volume Distribution Pc Snw Sw (psi) Pc (dynes/cm2

)

9 Pore Radius Distribution

ΔSnw

R (cm)

R (μm)

f ( R) =

dS w dR

δ ( R) =

R 2 dS w R 2 dR

(1/μm)

(1/μm)

0.000

1.000

124.92

8.613E+06

0.0000 0

8.538E05 7.075E05 6.080E05 5.322E05 4.270E05

0.853 8 0.707 5 0.608 0 0.532 2 0.427 0

0.000

0.000

0.031

0.969

150.75

1.039E+07

0.0312 1

0.323

0.002

0.068

0.932

175.43

1.210E+07

0.0370 6

0.424

0.004

0.104

0.896

200.40

1.382E+07

0.0355 3

0.508

0.006

0.168

0.832

249.77

1.722E+07

0.0640 4

0.691

0.012

7-109

0.229

0.771

300.12

2.069E+07

0.0613 1

3.554E05 2.665E05 2.135E05 1.780E05 1.525E05 1.335E05 1.186E05 1.067E05 9.706E06 8.900E06 8.214E06 7.628E06 7.119E06 6.672E06 6.292E06 5.934E06 5.626E06

0.355 4 0.266 5 0.213 5 0.178 0 0.152 5 0.133 5 0.118 6 0.106 7 0.097 1 0.089 0 0.082 1 0.076 3 0.071 2 0.066 7 0.062 9 0.059 3 0.056 3

0.928

0.024

0.330

0.670

400.20

2.759E+07

0.1011 0

1.385

0.064

0.428

0.572

499.51

3.444E+07

0.0981 5

2.310

0.166

0.513

0.487

599.28

4.132E+07

0.0847 8

2.499

0.259

0.577

0.423

699.36

4.822E+07

0.0637 2

2.507

0.354

0.625

0.375

799.13

5.510E+07

0.0478 7

2.501

0.461

0.660

0.340

899.29

6.201E+07

0.0351 3

2.289

0.534

0.686

0.314

999.18

6.889E+07

0.0264 7

2.268

0.654

0.709

0.291

1098.89

7.577E+07

0.0227 2

2.636

0.919

0.730

0.270

1198.44

8.263E+07

0.0212 7

2.637

1.094

0.748

0.252

1298.50

8.953E+07

0.0180 9

2.638

1.284

0.765

0.235

1398.24

9.641E+07

0.0165 3

2.875

1.623

0.780

0.220

1498.24

1.033E+08

0.0149 6

3.042

1.971

0.794

0.206

1598.66

1.102E+08

0.0141 0

3.245

2.394

0.806

0.194

1695.09

1.169E+08

0.0124 5

3.255

2.700

0.818

0.182

1797.32

1.239E+08

0.0114 5

3.268

3.048

0.829

0.171

1895.87

1.307E+08

0.0107 6

3.390

3.518

7-110

0.838

0.162

2000.98

1.380E+08

0.0095 6

5.330E06 4.855E06 4.450E06 4.105E06 3.810E06 3.558E06 3.284E06 3.051E06 2.848E06 2.669E06 2.511E06 2.373E06 2.247E06 2.134E06 2.033E06 1.940E06 1.856E06

0.053 3 0.048 5 0.044 5 0.041 1 0.038 1 0.035 6 0.032 8 0.030 5 0.028 5 0.026 7 0.025 1 0.023 7 0.022 5 0.021 3 0.020 3 0.019 4 0.018 6

3.539

4.091

0.856

0.144

2196.94

1.515E+08

0.0175 7

3.800

5.295

0.871

0.129

2396.98

1.653E+08

0.0154 9

3.866

6.413

0.885

0.115

2597.89

1.791E+08

0.0135 1

4.010

7.812

0.897

0.103

2799.03

1.930E+08

0.0121 2

4.038

9.133

0.907

0.093

2997.38

2.067E+08

0.0100 5

4.054

10.514

0.918

0.082

3248.15

2.240E+08

0.0113 2

4.196

12.778

0.928

0.072

3495.86

2.410E+08

0.0098 7

4.253

15.004

0.937

0.063

3744.60

2.582E+08

0.0087 5

4.213

17.054

0.944

0.056

3996.64

2.756E+08

0.0065 9

4.068

18.757

0.950

0.050

4246.84

2.928E+08

0.0064 0

4.068

21.180

0.956

0.044

4494.10

3.099E+08

0.0056 2

4.041

23.561

0.960

0.040

4745.57

3.272E+08

0.0047 7

3.725

24.214

0.965

0.035

4997.24

3.446E+08

0.0041 9

3.675

26.495

0.968

0.032

5245.84

3.617E+08

0.0036 7

3.645

28.956

0.972

0.028

5496.45

3.790E+08

0.0035 1

3.958

34.517

0.975

0.025

5746.20

3.962E+08

0.0036 5

4.128

39.346

7-111

0.978

0.022

5994.05

4.133E+08

0.0030 6

1.779E06 1.708E06 1.642E06 1.581E06 1.524E06 1.423E06 1.334E06 1.256E06 1.186E06 1.123E06 1.067E06 1.016E06 9.699E07 9.278E07 8.891E07 8.536E07 8.207E07

0.017 8 0.017 1 0.016 4 0.015 8 0.015 2 0.014 2 0.013 3 0.012 6 0.011 9 0.011 2 0.010 7 0.010 2 0.009 7 0.009 3 0.008 9 0.008 5 0.008 2

3.692

38.296

0.981

0.019

6246.10

4.307E+08

0.0025 8

3.509

39.516

0.983

0.017

6497.47

4.480E+08

0.0022 9

3.491

42.548

0.985

0.015

6744.53

4.650E+08

0.0022 2

3.308

43.446

0.987

0.013

6996.48

4.824E+08

0.0016 0

2.964

41.879

0.990

0.010

7497.19

5.169E+08

0.0031 6

2.913

47.272

0.992

0.008

7997.18

5.514E+08

0.0020 4

2.862

52.840

0.995

0.005

8494.95

5.857E+08

0.0025 4

2.734

56.951

0.997

0.003

8995.38

6.202E+08

0.0018 8

2.661

62.153

0.998

0.002

9495.55

6.547E+08

0.0016 3

2.452

63.825

0.999

0.001

9996.48

6.893E+08

0.0009 4

1.491

43.010

1.000

0.000

10496.0 0

7.237E+08

0.0006 5

0.524

16.671

1.000

0.000

10997.0 3

7.583E+08

0.0000 8

0.000

0.000

1.000

0.000

11495.5 6

7.926E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

0.000

1.000

0.000

11996.4 7

8.272E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

12495.5 4

8.616E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

12996.0 7

8.961E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

7-112

1.000

0.000

13495.1 1

9.305E+08

0.0000 0

7.903E07 7.621E07 7.358E07 7.112E07 6.883E07 6.668E07 6.466E07 6.276E07 6.096E07 5.927E07 5.766E07 5.615E07 5.471E07 5.334E07 5.080E07 4.849E07 4.638E07

0.007 9 0.007 6 0.007 4 0.007 1 0.006 9 0.006 7 0.006 5 0.006 3 0.006 1 0.005 9 0.005 8 0.005 6 0.005 5 0.005 3 0.005 1 0.004 8 0.004 6

0.000

1.000

0.000

13995.9 0

9.650E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

14495.6 8

9.995E+08

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

14996.2 0

1.034E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

15495.9 8

1.068E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

15995.1 3

1.103E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

16495.5 2

1.137E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

16995.2 8

1.172E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

17495.3 3

1.206E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

17995.5 0

1.241E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

18495.9 5

1.275E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

18996.3 7

1.310E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

19495.3 3

1.344E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

19995.7 3

1.379E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

20995.3 1

1.448E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

21995.7 9

1.517E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

22995.6 4

1.586E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

7-113

1.000

0.000

23995.7 2

1.655E+09

0.0000 0

4.445E07 4.267E07 4.103E07 3.951E07 3.810E07 3.678E07 3.556E07 3.441E07 3.333E07 3.232E07 3.137E07 3.048E07 2.963E07 2.883E07 2.807E07 2.735E07 2.667E07

0.004 4 0.004 3 0.004 1 0.004 0 0.003 8 0.003 7 0.003 6 0.003 4 0.003 3 0.003 2 0.003 1 0.003 0 0.003 0 0.002 9 0.002 8 0.002 7 0.002 7

0.000

1.000

0.000

24996.3 4

1.724E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

25994.9 6

1.792E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

26995.6 5

1.861E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

27995.6 6

1.930E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

28996.0 8

1.999E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

29995.4 9

2.068E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

30996.2 1

2.137E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

31995.5 3

2.206E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

32996.2 0

2.275E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

33996.5 7

2.344E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

34996.1 7

2.413E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

35996.3 2

2.482E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

36995.5 3

2.551E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

37996.3 9

2.620E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

38996.3 8

2.689E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

39995.7 5

2.758E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

7-114

1.000

0.000

41995.3 9

2.896E+09

0.0000 0

2.540E07 2.424E07 2.319E07 2.222E07 2.134E07 2.051E07 1.975E07 1.905E07 1.839E07

0.002 5 0.002 4 0.002 3 0.002 2 0.002 1 0.002 1 0.002 0 0.001 9 0.001 8

0.000

1.000

0.000

43995.2 2

3.034E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

45993.7 9

3.171E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

47991.1 8

3.309E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

49990.5 5

3.447E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

51989.8 4

3.585E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

53989.7 5

3.723E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

55989.4 0

3.861E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

1.000

0.000

57988.7 6

3.998E+09

0.0000 0

0.000

Solution to Example 7.3 The calculated results are shown in columns 4 to 9 of Table 7.9. For mercury, σ = 480 dynes/cm and θ = 140º. Figure 7.57 shows the graphs of non-wetting phase saturation, wetting phase saturation and incremental pore volume of mercury injected versus pore throat size. It should be observed that the incremental pore volume of mercury injected provides a rough estimate of the pore volume distribution for the porous medium.

7-115

Figure 7.57. Graphs of Snw, Sw and ΔSnw versus pore throat radius for Example 7.3.

Columns 8 and 9 of Table 7.9 show the probability density functions for the pore volume and pore throat radius distributions calculated with the 5-point central difference formula of Akima. For the pore radius distribution, R 2 was found to be 0.003284. Figures 7.58 and 7.59 show the graphs of the probability density functions for pore volume and pore radius distributions.

7-116

Figure 7.58. Probability density function for pore volume distribution for Example 7.3.

Figure 7.59. Probability density function for pore throat radius distribution assuming a bundle of capillary tubes model for the sample of Example 7.3. 7-117

7.11.4 Mercury Injection Porosimeter Several different types of equipment are used for mercury injection porosimetry. The mercury injection equipment used by Purcell (1949) was described in Section 7.9.2. However, more modern mercury porosimeters are now available. One such porosimeter is the Autopore IV 9520, manufactured by Micromeritics. Figure 7.60 shows this equipment. It is a compact, high precision, computer-controlled instrument capable of injecting mercury into a sample at capillary pressures up to 60,000 psi. Pressure is measured with transducers that produce an electrical signal that is proportional to the applied pressure. This analog signal is converted into digital code for processing by the monitoring computer. The transducer that detects the volume of mercury injected is integrated into the sample holder assembly as shown in Figure 7.61. The sample cup has a capillary stem, which serves both as the mercury reservoir and as an element of the mercury volume transducer. The capillary stem is made of glass, which is an insulator but the outer face of the capillary is plated with metal, which is a conductor. The sample is placed in the sample cup and the cup along with the capillary stem is filled with mercury, which is a conductor. The combination of two concentric electrical conductors separated by an insulator produces a co-axial capacitor, whose capacitance is a function of the length of mercury in the capillary. As mercury is injected into the sample, the length of mercury in the capillary decreases and this in turn changes the capacitance of the penetrometer assembly. The capacitance of the assembly is measured at each step of mercury injection and used to calculate the volume of mercury injected into the sample.

7-118

Figure 7.60. Autopore IV 9520 mercury injection porosimeter (from Micromeritics).

7-119

Figure 7.61. Penetrometer for the Autopore IV 9520 mercury injection porosimeter (from Micromeritics).

7-120

**7.12 CALCULATION OF PERMEABILITY FROM DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE
**

7.12.1 Calculation of Absolute Permeability from Drainage Capillary Pressure Curve The objective is to estimate the permeability of a porous medium from the drainage capillary pressure curve based on the bundle of capillary tubes model of the porous medium. This problem was addressed in Section 3.7.3 using the probability density function for the pore throat diameter. Here, we present the estimate of the absolute permeability of the porous medium based on the probability density function for the pore throat radius obtained from mercury injection porosimetry. Let the probability density function for the pore throat radius be δ ( R ) , where R is the pore throat radius. Then, for the porous medium,

∞

∫ δ ( R)dR = 1

0

(7.132)

The fractional number of pores with radii between R and R+dR is δ ( R)dR . The number of pores with radii between R and R+dR is N δ ( R)dR , where N is the total number of pores making up the porous medium. The cross-sectional area of the pores with radii between R and R+dR is given by

dAc = π R 2 N δ ( R)dR

(7.133)

**The cross-sectional area occupied by all the pores can be obtained by integrating Eq.(7.133) to obtain
**

∞

Ac = AT φ = π N ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR

0

(7.134)

7-121

where AT is the total cross-sectional area of the porous medium and φ is the porosity of the porous medium. Let

∞

R 2 = ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR = a constant

0

(7.135)

Eq.(7.135) can be written as

Ac = AT φ = π NR 2

(7.136)

The volumetric flow rate for pores with radii between R and R+dR is given by Hagen-Poiseuille’s law as

1 ⎡ R2 ⎤ ΔP 2 ⎢ ⎥ (π R N δ ( R)dR ) L μ ⎣ 8τ ( R) ⎦

dq =

(7.137)

where τ ( R) is the tortuosity of the porous medium and L is the length of the medium. Note that the tortuosity is a function of the pore throat size, R. The wetting phase occupies the pores with radii less than R. The volumetric flow rate of the wetting phase is obtained by integrating Eq.(7.137) as

qw =

π N ΔP R R 4δ ( R ) dR 8μ w L ∫ τ ( R ) 0

(7.138)

The effective permeability to the wetting phase is given by Darcy’s law as

kw =

qw μ w L π N = AT ΔP 8 AT

R 4δ ( R) ∫ τ ( R) dR 0

R

(7.139)

The pore volume of the porous medium is given by

7-122

V p = AT φ L = π NL ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR = π NLR 2

0

∞

(7.140)

At capillary equilibrium, the wetting phase occupies all the pores with radii less than R corresponding to the capillary pressure given by

Pc ( S w ) =

2σ cos θ R

(7.141)

**The wetting phase volume is given by
**

R

Vw = π NL ∫ R 2δ ( R)dR

0

(7.142)

**The wetting phase saturation is given by
**

R R

V Sw = w = Vp

0 ∞

∫ R δ ( R)dR ∫ R δ ( R)dR

2 2

=

0

∫ R δ ( R)dR

2 0

R2

(7.143)

**Eq.(7.143) can be rearranged as
**

R R

R S w = ∫ R δ ( R)dR = ∫ r 2δ (r )dr

2 2 0 0

(7.144)

where r is a dummy integration variable, which is not to be confused with the pore throat radius R, the upper limit of the integral. Differentiating Eq.(7.144) with respect to R gives

R2

dS w d = r 2δ (r )dr dR dR ∫ 0

R

(7.145)

7-123

The right side of Eq.(7.145) can be evaluated using Leibnitz’s rule for differentiating a definite integral as follows:

R R ∂ ⎡ r 2δ (r ) ⎤ d dR d0 ⎣ ⎦ 2 2 ∫ r δ (r )dr = R δ ( R) dR − 0δ (0) dR + ∫ ∂R dr dR 0 0

(7.146)

The integrand of the integral on the right side of Eq.(7.146) is zero. Therefore, Eq.(7.146) simplifies to

d 2 2 ∫ r δ (r )dr = R δ ( R) dR 0

Substituting Eq.(7.147) into Eq.(7.145) gives

R

(7.147)

R 2δ ( R)dR dS w = R2

(7.148)

Substituting Eqs.(7.136) and (7.148) into Eq.(7.139) gives the effective permeability to the wetting phase as

kw =

φ

R2 dS w 8 ∫ τ ( R) 0

Sw

(7.149)

The R in Eq.(7.149) is the largest pore size filled with the wetting phase. This can be obtained from the capillary pressure curve as

R=

2 σ cos θ Pc ( S w )

(7.150)

Let us approximate the tortuosity by a function of the form

7-124

155) 7-125 .(7.149) gives the effective permeability to the wetting phase as kw ( 2σ cos θ ) = 8a 2 +α φ∫ 0 Sw dS w Pc 2+α (7.153) Let α = 0 and 1/a = F1. the permeability is in millidarcy and the surface tension is in dynes/cm. Substituting Eqs.150) and (7.152) for the medium fully saturated by the wetting phase as k ( 2σ cos θ ) = 8a 2 +α φ∫ 0 1 dS w Pc 2+α (7.154) becomes.(7.(7.(7. k = 10.τ ( R) = where a and α a Rα (7. Substituting these values into Eq.6566 (σ cos θ ) 2 F1φ ∫ 0 1 dS w Pc 2 (7.(7. Eq.152) The absolute permeability of the porous medium can be obtained from Eq.151) into Eq.153) gives the absolute permeability of the porous medium as ( 2σ cosθ ) k= 8 2 F1φ ∫ 1 dS w Pc 2 0 (7. after the units conversion.151) are numerical constants. This function satisfies the requirement that the tortuosity increases as the pore size decreases.154) If the capillary pressure is in psi.

085 to 0. Because of this correlation.216 plotted on log scales.216.(7.156) is Purcell's equation in which F1 is a lithology factor to account for tortuosity of the porous medium.441x106 F1φ ∫ 0 dS w Pc 2 (7. the use of the average lithology factor of 0.10. Lithology factors for various core samples (Purcell.In the case of mercury injection. His results are shown in Table 7. He suggested the use of the average value of 0. the lower the lithology factor. Substituting these values into Eq.10. Figure 7. 1949). the lower the permeability. The lithology factor is related to the reciprocal of the tortuosity of the porous medium. Purcell (1949) performed measurements on core samples and computed the lithology factors that made the measured permeabilities to be equal to the calculated permeabilities from the drainage capillary pressure curves of the samples.216 to calculate the permeability of all porous media can lead to poor estimates of permeability. the higher the permeability. the correlation is weaker than in Figure 7.64.363.63 compares the measured permeability with the calculated permeability using the average lithology factor of 0. there is a positive correlation between the lithology factor and permeability. σ = 480 dynes/cm and θ = 140º. The calculated lithology factors ranged from 0. Similarly. the higher the lithology factor. Therefore. However. with an average value of 0.1 md.216 for estimating the permeability of a rock from its drainage capillary pressure curve. The correlation between the two sets of data appears very strong. as shown in Figure 7. 7-126 .(7. Clearly. the positive correlation between the lithology factor and permeability is to be expected.63. when the same data are plotted on linear scales as shown in Figure 7.155) gives the permeability as 1 k = 1.62. Table 7.156) Eq. The permeabilities of samples 17 and 18 were too low to measure but were estimated to be less than 0. However.

4 70.363 3.2 12 13.2 184 235 307 320 506 634 1150 0.200 0.04 21.149 0.276 0.3 110 116 144 336 430 439 496 772 1070 1459 Factor Using F1 = 0.2 54.085 0.7 40.9 91.256 0.6 92.5 61.231 0.003 0.3 53.284 0.282 0.191 0.9 172 183 308 422 383 502 734 7-127 .216 (md) 0.2 17.182 0.158 0.5 163 680 430 348 388 902 816 865 0.273 0.272 0.107 0.216 0.9 57.215 0.3 97.257 0.Lithology Calculated Permeability Sample No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Permeability (md) 1.276 0.185 0.122 0.338 42.1 35.165 0.4 36.163 0.168 0.

1949). Correlation between lithology factor and permeability (Purcell.Figure 7.216 plotted on log scales (Purcell. Figure 7.63.62. 1949). A comparison of measured permeability and calculated permeability using the average lithology factor of 0. 7-128 .

3 using the mercury injection capillary pressure data of Table 7. A comparison of measured permeability and calculated permeability using the average lithology factor of 0.64.4 Estimate the permeability of the sample of Example 7.Figure 7. Figure 7. The integration called for in Eq.65 shows the graphs of Pc and 1 versus S w . Example 7. Solution to Example 7.355 x10−6 1/ psi 2 2 Pc 7-129 .11 presents the calculated results.216 plotted on linear scales (Purcell.9. 1949).156) was performed with Pc2 the trapezoidal rule to obtain ∫ 1 0 dS w = 8.4 Table 7.(7.

085 in Table 7.4.4554.216 for this tight sample.085 )( 0. Thus.10 gives the permeability as k = 1.Using the average lithology factor of 0.(7.11. compared to the measured value of 0.156) gives the estimated permeability as k = 1. However.30 gives a correlation between tortuosity and porosity based on the experimental data of Winsauer et al.056 ) ( 8. the low lithology factor of 0.216. Using the this value of the lithology factor in Eq. the lithology factor (1/τ) predicted by the correlation is 0.216.(7.048 md. if the correlation of the lithology factor with permeability is recognized and taken into account. Therefore.1058.441x106 ( 0. Table 7.048 md. compared to the measured permeability of 0.216 )( 0.35φ + 10.441x106 ( 0. (1952).146 md. the lithology factor for the very low permeability sample should be much less than 0.355 x10−6 ) = 0. Using the lowest lithology factor of 0.987 For the sample with a porosity of 0.441x106 ( 0.056. 7-130 .071 md. Calculated Results for Example 7.355 x10−6 ) = 0.056 ) ( 8.156) gives k = 1.056 ) ( 8. the tortuosity predicted by the regression line is 9.355 x10−6 ) = 0.216 in Eq.057 md. compared to the measured permeability of 0. This estimate also is better than that based on the average lithology factor of 0.1058 )( 0. The equation of the regression line is τ = −27.048 md. Figure 3.085 gives a better estimate of the permeability than the average value of 0.

932 175.768 1.487 599.401 2.104E-06 0.270 1198.223E-06 0.603E05 5.000 psi 124.359 2.244E06 7.249E05 3.832 249.566E06 8.266E-06 0.143E-06 0.434E-06 0.919 (1/ psi ) (1/ psi ) 2 2 1 Pc2 ∫ Sw 1 dS w Pc2 6.670 400.124E-06 0.572 499.237E06 8.747 4.503 5.121 1.314 999.934E-06 0.174E-06 0.896 200.290 1.088E-06 0.203 6.428 3.045E06 8.290E-06 0.931E- 8.771 300.253E-06 0.375 799.000E+0 0 1.646E-06 0.281E07 8.Pc Sw 1.110E05 6.969 150.252 1298.002E06 8.962E07 8.423 699.490E05 4.302E-06 7-131 .443 6.784E06 7.401E05 0.408E05 0.291 1098.894 8.340 899.008E06 7.515 4.278 2.184 1.274E-06 0.133 1.687E-06 0.

983 2.027 1.478E08 0.603 7.182 1797.350E-06 8.498E07 0.980 1.642 6.056 3996.115 2597.220 1498.455E07 0.113E07 0.063 3744.351E-06 8.183E08 0.332E-06 8.096E07 0.317 3.866 2.338E-06 8.913E07 0.353E-06 8.241 5.865 8.482E07 0.115E07 0.171 1895.480E07 0.740E07 0.072 3495.239 4.154 9.353E-06 8.324E-06 8.132E08 0.545E8.235 1398.082 3248.162 2000.328E-06 8.276E07 0.129 2396.349E-06 8.206 1598.843 5.335E-06 8.353E-06 8.782E07 0.945 2.318E-06 8.261E08 0.07 0.103 2799.194 1695.379 1.342E-06 8.665 3.345E-06 8.092 3.352E-06 8.093 2997.050 4246.311E-06 7-132 .347E-06 8.072E07 0.892 1.144 2196.

355E-06 8.203 3.634E08 0.010 7497.355E-06 8.354E-06 8.005 8494.002 9495.355E-06 8.055 2.779E08 0.015 6744.783E08 0.003 8995.355E-06 8.841 3.479 1.355E-06 8.310E08 0.567 4.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.474 2.044 4494.354E-06 8.951E08 0.198E08 0.355E-06 8.029E08 0.025 5746.354E-06 8.954 1.241 4.022 5994.188 1.035 4997.354E-06 8.109E08 0.563E08 0.355E-06 8.08 0.100 4.004E08 0.019 6246.008 7997.032 5245.476 2.043E08 0.001 9996.001E8.354E-06 8.178 1.386E08 0.378 1.355E-06 8.028 5496.017 6497.369E08 0.532 2.040 4745.564E08 0.104 2.236E08 0.013 6996.355E-06 8.550 1.440E08 0.453 3.354E-06 7-133 .

000 16495.000 11495.355E-06 8.000 14996.355E-06 8.405E09 5.269E09 7.000 13995.491E09 5.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.07 4 0.447E09 4.355E-06 8.355E-06 7-134 .355E-06 8.00 0 0.355E-06 8.567E09 6.267E09 3.90 2 0.000 18495.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.921E09 5.759E09 4.923E8.19 5 0.105E09 4.355E-06 8.000 11996.675E09 3.355E-06 8.13 0 0.000 13495.164E09 3.462E09 3.000 10496.355E-06 8.000 12495.94 9.355E-06 8.000 17495.000 17995.000 12996.077E09 8.47 0 0.355E-06 8.000 15495.355E-06 8.50 4 0.000 10997.088E09 2.55 9 0.355E-06 8.97 6 0.08 0.000 15995.33 2 0.10 8 0.53 8 0.52 0 0.27 7 0.000 14495.909E09 3.949E09 6.02 9 0.68 0 0.000 16995.

276E09 1.000 31995.000 20995.65 4 0.372E09 1.000 18996.355E-06 8.501E09 2.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.631E09 2.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.041E09 9.355E-06 8.269E09 2.72 1 0.768E10 9.771E09 2.355E-06 8.21 1 0.96 3 0.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.185E10 8.355E-06 8.067E09 1.000 32996.000 30996.480E09 1.891E09 1.000 23995.355E-06 8.52 7 0.111E09 1.600E09 1.19 9 0.66 0 0.189E09 1.7 0.79 1 0.000 24996.31 3 0.000 21995.07 8 0.34 4 0.000 25994.000 19495.355E-06 8.000 26995.355E-06 7-135 .000 22995.57 09 2.000 19995.64 3 0.355E-06 8.73 2 0.36 5 0.355E-06 8.32 6 0.652E8.000 27995.000 29995.49 4 0.000 28996.737E09 1.000 33996.355E-06 8.

355E-06 8.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.000 38996.78 5 0.000 45993.000 49990.17 6 0.75 4 0.000 47991.165E10 7.000 36995.355E-06 8.53 1 0.000 43995.000 59988.355E-06 8.55 5 0.576E10 6.727E10 4.000 39995.355E-06 8.355E-06 7-136 .355E-06 8.76 2 0.000 35996.355E-06 8.4 0.355E-06 8.974E10 2.190E10 2.779E10 8.39 1 0.355E-06 8.718E10 7.700E10 3.39 1 0.355E-06 8.000 34996.16 8 0.355E-06 8.431E10 3.000 51989.355E-06 8.21 9 0.83 6 0.251E10 5.75 4 0.39 8 0.166E10 4.306E10 6.37 9 0.000 55989.000 37996.32 0 0.355E-06 8.355E-06 8.927E10 6.342E10 4.002E10 3.000 57988.000 41995.670E10 5.26 6 10 8.000 53989.

65.12.Figure 7. Pc and 1 versus S w for Example 7. Pc2 7.4.2 Calculation of Relative Permeabilities from Drainage Capillary Pressure Curve The relative permeability to the wetting phase is given by 7-137 .

158) If α = 0. Eqs.158) become Sw krw ( S w ) = kw = k ∫ 0 1 dS w Pc 2 dS ∫ Pc 2w 0 (7.157) and (7. Experiments show that. (krw+krnw) < 1. This lack of agreement of the models with experiments is because the tortuosity of the 7-138 . in general.(7.160) The weakness of the above relative permeability models is that (krw+krnw) = 1.Sw krw ( S w ) = kw = k ∫P 0 1 dS w c 2 +α dS ∫ Pc 2+wα 0 (7.157) The relative permeability to the non-wetting phase is given by 1 krnw ( S w ) = knw = k Sw 1 ∫P dS w c 2 +α dS ∫ Pc 2+wα 0 (7.159) and dS w Pc 2 Sw 1 krnw ( S w ) = knw = k ∫ 1 dS ∫ Pc 2w 0 (7. which does not agree with experimental observations of relative permeability functions.

1 Brooks-Corey Capillary Pressure Models A popular capillary pressure model in the petroleum industry and soil physics is the Brooks-Corey model (Brooks and Corey.porous medium has been neglected. These defects of the models will be corrected in Chapter 8 to derive more realistic relative permeability curves from drainage capillary pressure curves. 1966). the tortuosity of the medium in the presence of multiphase fluids is a function of saturation. Based on evaluations of several drainage capillary pressure curves for consolidated porous media. 7. 7.161) or 7-139 . We present two such models from Brooks and Corey (1966) and van Genuchten (1980). Capillary pressure appears in the immiscible displacement model as a derivative. In fact. Several empirical analytical models are available for this purpose. Furthermore. Therefore. either as ∂Pc dPc or . it is desirable to fit analytical models to capillary pressure curves to simply reservoir performance calculations. Brooks and Corey observed that all the drainage capillary pressure curves they examined could be represented by linear functions of the form * ln S w = −λ ln Pc + λ ln Pe (7.13 EMPIRICAL CAPILLARY PRESSURE MODELS Often. an analytical model will allow ∂xD dS w the derivatives to be calculated without numerical noise.13. especially in numerical simulations. the models do not allow for residual saturations of the wetting and non-wetting phases.

Brooks and Corey called λ the pore size distribution index. which corresponds to the capillary pressure curve for a wide pore size distribution. which corresponds to the capillary pressure curve with a narrow pore size distribution whereas a small value of λ gives a large slope.162) give a drainage capillary pressure model of the form * Pc = Pe ( S w ) − 1 λ (7.165) 7-140 . In view of these observations.162) that λ controls the slope of the linear capillary pressure plot. small values of λ indicate a wide pore size distribution whereas large values of λ indicate a narrow pore size distribution.162).163) In Eqs. Pe is a constant given by the value of Pc on the * straight lines at S w = 1. Eqs.(7.161) and (7. It should be observed from Eq.(7.162) * by an appropriate choice of irreducible wetting phase saturation.ln Pc = − 1 λ * ln S w + ln Pe (7.(7. and λ is the pore size distribution index obtained from the slopes of the straight lines. Thus.164) Brooks and Corey also proposed an imbibition capillary pressure model of the form 1 − ⎡ ⎤ Pc = Pe ⎢( Se ) λ − 1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (7. where S w is the reduced wetting phase saturation defined by * Sw = S w − S wirr 1 − S wirr (7. A large value of λ gives a small slope. A porous medium with a uniform pore size corresponds to λ = ∞ .161) and (7.

Pe is * determined from the linear log-log plot at S w = 1 and λ is determined from the slope of the straight line. a log-log plot of the drainage * capillary pressure data is made either as ln S w versus ln Pc or as ln Pc versus * ln S w . If the plot is nonlinear.164) and (7. then S wirr is adjusted until the plot is linear. Fit the Brooks-Corey model to the air-water drainage capillary pressure data given in Table 7.5 1.166) where Snwr is the residual non-wetting phase saturation.where Se is the effective wetting phase saturation defined by Se = S w − S wirr 1 − S wirr − Snwr (7.165) to calculate the drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves. Example 7. Table 7. 2.12 and compare the result of the model to the original data.5.(7. The two parameters are then substituted into Eqs. Air-Water Drainage Capillary Pressure Data for Example 7. To fit this model to measured drainage capillary pressure data.12. Drainag e 7-141 . Derive the spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure curve for the sample using the Brooks-Corey spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure model.

300 0.377 2.039 12.787 31.4 1.377 4.750 0.450 0. a log-log graph of S w versus Pc was plotted as shown in Figure 7.100. The curve fitting procedure calls for the adjustment of Swirr until the graph is linear.350 0.278 as indicated by the drainage capillary pressure data * of Table 7. it too is linear.66.800 0.Pc Sw 1.68 is the corresponding log-log plot of Pc versus S w for Swirr = 0. Shown in Figure * 7.850 0. Clearly.781 8.12.400 0.008 4.195 10.67 shows the log-log plot with Swirr = 0.550 0.950 0.663 6.154 21. Using Swirr = 0.408 Solution to Example 7. Figure 7.650 0.100.973 2.700 0.000 0. 7-142 . the graph is nonlinear.500 0.278 psi 1.757 5.547 16.840 3.817 54. As expected.600 0.900 0. It is linear.691 78.

278 for Example 7.100 for Example 7.5.67. 7-143 .* Figure 7.Log-log plot of S w versus Pc for S wirr = 0.5.66. * Figure 7. Log-log plot of S w versus Pc for S wirr = 0.

100 for Example 7. From Figure 7.5. the resulting Brooks-Corey drainage capillary pressure straight line is * ln Pc = −2. Log-log plot of Pc versus S w for S wirr = 0. − 1 λ = −2.4664 Pe = 2.2238 7-144 .* Figure 7.68.68.2238 Therefore.1443 λ = 0.1443ln S w + ln 2.

69. Figure 7.The Brooks-Corey drainage capillary pressure equation for this example is * Pc = Pe ( S w ) − 1 * = 2. A comparison of the Brooks-Corey drainage capillary pressure curve with the measured data for Example 7. The overall agreement between the model fit and the original data is good.69 shows a comparison of the Brooks-Corey capillary pressure model with the measured capillary pressure curve.224 psi.70 shows the same comparison as in Figure 7.1443 λ Figure 7.68 but on an enlarged capillary pressure scale. The Brooks-Corey log-log plot extended the capillary pressure data to an irreducible wetting phase saturation of 0. The agreement is good.5. 7-145 . It also changed the displacement pressure from 1. Figure 7.10.2238 ( S w ) −2.973 to 2.

2. A comparison of the Brooks-Corey drainage capillary pressure curve with the measured data on an enlarged capillary pressure scale for Example 7.5.Figure 7. Table 7. 7-146 .5.13 shows the original capillary pressure data along with the calculated results with the Brooks-Corey model.25 for the sample of Example 7.70.71 shows the predicted Brooks-Corey drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves for Snwr = 0. Figure 7.

13.305 1.377 2.850 0.377 4.000 0.757 5.663 * Sw Brooks-Corey Model Drainage Pc psi 2.889 0.000 0.000 0.514 2.812 4.944 0. A comparison of the Brooks-Corey drainage and imbibition capillary pressure curves for the sample of Example 7.288 3.5.468 5.863 3.750 0.833 0.950 0.Figure 7.900 0. Original Data Drainage Pc Sw 1. Table 7.840 3.800 0.700 psi 1.778 0.000 0.973 2.416 Se Imbibition Pc psi 1.722 0.5. Calculated Results with the Brooks-Corey Model for Example 7.667 7-147 .923 0.71.008 4.224 2.

829 103.374 120.550 0.389 0.679 2.656 16.867 541.600 0.781 8.077 0.831 12.843 9.678 247.167 0.385 0.846 0. The shape of the drainage capillary pressure curve of Example 7.933 The Brooks-Corey capillary pressure model cannot adequately fit a capillary pressure curve with an inflection (S-shaped curved) such as shown in Figure 7.620 33. In fact.075 6.5 was that of a hyperbola. the Brooks-Corey model gave a good fit of the data.100 6.524 49.669 4.547 16.0.448 15. As a result.163 9.000 0.039 12. 7-148 .231 0.500 0. especially at high wetting phase saturation.615 0.958 1.274 0.452 34. Since the shape of the drainage capillary pressure curve is a reflection of the pore throat size distribution.154 0. fitting the Brooks-Corey model to such a capillary pressure curve will eliminate the inflection and turn the capillary curve into a hyperbola.611 0.154 21.195 10. the Brooks-Corey model would have given a poor fit. other capillary pressure models have been devised that preserve the shape of the drainage capillary pressure curve.444 0.462 0.393 7.691 78. If the original data had an inflection as typically observed in poorly sorted porous media.692 0.308 0.150 0.250 0.200 0.000 6.222 0.278 0.450 0.333 0.400 0.198 0.032 25.394 0.538 0.300 0.556 0.350 0.13 for sample C.650 0.056 0.851 23.331 1093.817 54. especially at high wetting phase saturations.500 0.947 71.769 0.787 31.672 55.111 0.408 0.278 0.

The model is given by ⎡ ⎤ 1 S =⎢ n ⎥ ⎢1 + (α Pc ) ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ * w m (7.14 and compare the result of the model to the original data. It can also match a capillary pressure curve with a hyperbolic shape. 7-149 . Example 7.14 shows the calculated results for the van Genuchten model using the following parameters: α = 0. n and m are the fitting parameters. The agreement is good especially at high values of the wetting phase saturation. This model is widely used in soil physics and in hydrology. Solution to Example 7.13.018 m = 45 n=6 Figure 7.6 Fit the van Genuchten model to the air-water drainage capillary pressure data given in Table 7.6 Table 7.7. unlike the Brooks-Corey model.72 compares the van Genuchten model with the measured data.2 van Genuchten Capillary Pressure Model An empirical capillary pressure model that preserves the shape of the capillary pressure curve at high wetting phase saturations was proposed by van Genuchten (1980). It should be observed that this model can match capillary pressure curves with inflections.167) where α.

466 0.8 26.875 0.006 0.655 0.0 21.798 0.902 0.0 26.993 0.205 0.252 0.8 23.200 0.0 24.0 27.25 0.210 0.0 32.75 0.555 0.100 0.450 0.063 0.0 30.68 0.065 0.28 0.0 39.35 0.332 0.877 0.188 0.597 0. van Genuchten Measured Data Pc Sw 0.481 0.761 0.8 26.813 0.20 0.938 1.0 34.0 38.625 0.496 0.569 0.655 0.85 0.50 0.0 18.838 0.959 0.70 0.0 35.8 27.250 0.199 0.14.125 0.100 0.012 0.991 7-150 .625 0.0 13.30 0.644 0.625 0.600 0.70 0.750 0.000 0.700 0.5 28.5 * Sw * Sw Model Sw 0.500 0.280 0.24 0.444 0.555 0.359 0.60 0.000 0.40 0.050 0.Table 7.569 0.585 0.90 0. Calculated Results for van Genuchten model.56 0.000 0.95 1.80 0.688 0.701 0.00 (psi) 50.0 28.375 0.949 0.

The pore doublet is initially filled with a non-wetting phase. There is always a residual phase that is trapped. which consists of two pores that are joined at the inlet and outlet ends.14. We examine two such models here: the pore doublet model and the snap-off model. Several models have been proposed to explain capillary trapping.Figure 7. A wetting phase is then injected at a rate q to displace the non-wetting phase from both 7-151 .73 shows the pore doublet model. A comparison of van Genuchten model with measured capillary pressure data for Example 7. 7.72. 7.14 CAPILLARY TRAPPING IN POROUS MEDIA Capillary trapping ensures that an immiscible displacement at normal interfacial tensions and rates is never complete.6. with one pore larger than the other.1 Pore Doublet Model of Capillary Trapping Figure 7.

branches of the pore doublet. let us assume that the wetting and non-wetting phases have the same viscosity to simplify the analysis. To determine which interface will arrive at B first. The problem is to determine which of the two interfaces in the capillary tubes will arrive at the outlet first (Point B). the non-wetting phase in the other tube will be trapped. (b) capillary tubes approximation. we need to derive the expressions for the velocities of the interfaces as a function of the relevant parameters of the model. The pressure drop across each capillary tube is given by 7-152 . Pore doublet model. We will assume that once the interface in one of the capillary tubes has arrived at B. (a) in a porous medium. Figure 7.73. Although it is not necessary to do so.

for the second capillary tube.172) Equating Eqs.174) .171) and (7. q1 + q2 = q 7-153 (7. From Hagen-Poisseuille's law.170) into Eq. q1 = π r14 ( PA − Pw ) L1 8μ (7. PA − PB = 8q2 μ L − Pc 2 π r24 (7.(7.169) π r14 ( Pnw − PB ) q1 = 8μ ( L − L1 ) (7.(7.PA − PB = PA − Pw + Pw − Pnw + Pnw − PB (7.171) Similarly.172) and rearranging gives ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎛1 1⎞ − ⎜ 4 ⎟ q1 + ⎜ 4 ⎟ q2 = ( Pc 2 − Pc1 ) = 2σ cos θ ⎜ − ⎟ ⎝ π r1 ⎠ ⎝ π r2 ⎠ ⎝ r2 r1 ⎠ (7.170) where L1 is the distance of the interface from the inlet end and L is the total length of the pore doublet from A to B. Assuming incompressible fluids.168) and noting that (Pnw .169) and (7. Substituting Eqs.173) where the Laplace equation has been used to replace the capillary pressures.168) where Pw and Pnw are the pressures on either side of the interface.Pw) is the capillary pressure gives PA − PB = 8q1μ L − Pc1 π r14 (7.(7.

175) (7. which can easily solved to obtain ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎛1 1⎞ ⎜ 4 ⎟ q − 2σ cos θ ⎜ − ⎟ πr ⎝ r2 r1 ⎠ q1 = ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎜ 4 ⎟+⎜ 4 ⎟ ⎝ π r1 ⎠ ⎝ π r2 ⎠ ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎛1 1⎞ ⎜ 4 ⎟ q + 2σ cos θ ⎜ − ⎟ πr ⎝ r2 r1 ⎠ q2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ ⎛ 8 μ L ⎞ ⎛ 8μ L ⎞ ⎜ 4 ⎟+⎜ 4 ⎟ ⎝ π r1 ⎠ ⎝ π r2 ⎠ Diving Eq.(7.179) Let ⎛ r2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ r1 ⎠ β =⎜ (7.180) 7-154 .176) by (7.176) ⎛ r2 ⎞ π r 4σ cos θ ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ q+ 2 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ − ⎟ 4 μ L ⎝ r2 r1 ⎠ q2 ⎝ r1 ⎠ = q1 π r 4σ cos θ ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ q− 2 ⎜ − ⎟ 4 μ L ⎝ r2 r1 ⎠ The interface velocities are given by 4 (7.(7.174) are two linear simultaneous equations in q1 in q2.173) and (7.Eqs.177) v1 = q1 π r12 q2 π r22 (7.178) v2 = (7.175) and simplifying gives (7.

182) can be used to determine the conditions under which the non-wetting phase will be trapped in the smaller pore or in the larger pore.178) through (7.181) into (7.(7.182) Eq.181) Substituting Eqs.185) the non-wetting phase will be trapped in the larger pore.183) gives the condition for trapping in the smaller pore as N vcap > β ( β 2 + 1) 4 ( β + 1) (7.183) the non-wetting phase will be trapped in the smaller pore.182) into (7.(7.185) gives the condition for the non-wetting phase to be trapped in the larger pore as 7-155 .182) into (7. If v2 >1 v1 (7.(7.N vcap = qμ L π r σ cos θ 3 1 (7.184) If v2 <1 v1 (7.177) gives the ratio of the interface velocities as ⎛1 ⎞ 4 N vcap + ⎜ − 1⎟ v2 ⎝β ⎠ = v1 4 N vcap ⎛1 ⎞ − β 2 ⎜ − 1⎟ 2 β ⎝β ⎠ (7.(7. Substituting Eq. Substituting Eq.

r2. If q is low. 7-156 .N vcap < β ( β 2 + 1) 4 ( β + 1) (7. If q is high. Clearly.186) The critical value of N vcap for trapping in either pore is given by N vcapcritical = β ( β 2 + 1) 4 ( β + 1) (7.187) For fixed values of r1. the displacement efficiency increases with an increase in vμL or N vcap in agreement with the prediction of the pore doublet model. N vcap will depend on the rate q. μ and L. These observations are in qualitative agreement with macroscopic observations in corefloods. it is a measure of the displacement efficiency. σcosθ. the displacement will be dominated by capillary forces and the nonwetting phase will be trapped in the larger pore resulting in a low displacement efficiency. The breakthrough oil recovery here is the oil recovery at the time of water arrival at the outlet end of the core. It should be observed that vμL is directly proportional to the macroscopic version of N vcap .74 shows the breakthrough oil recovery as a function of vμL obtained by Rapoport and Leas (1953). Figure 7. the displacement will be dominated by the viscous forces and the non-wetting phase will be trapped in the smaller pore resulting in a high displacement efficiency. As such.

vμL (Rapoport and Leas.188) gives the condition for this to happen as 7-157 .Figure 7. Breakthrough oil recovery versus Rapaport and Leas scaling coefficient. Substituting Eq. If v2 <0 v1 (7.182) into (7.188) the domination of the displacement by the capillary forces will be strong that the interface in the larger pore will retract resulting in the trapping of the non-wetting phase in the larger pore and low displacement efficiency.(7. 1953).74.

Chatzis and Dullien (1983) and Laidlaw and Wardlaw (1983) provide more detailed theoretical analyses of the pore doublet model along with experimental verifications. Figure 7.189) It is interesting to compare N vcap with N cap .(7. 7. it can suffer from capillary instability and snap off (breakup) after exiting the constriction.75 shows oil being displaced in two pores.(7.14.190) shows that both dimensionless numbers give the ratio of viscous to capillary forces or vice versa.61).181) and (7. The aspect ratio is define as 7-158 . From Eq. This phenomenon is controlled by the ratio of the pore body to the pore throat size.1⎛ 1 ⎞ N vcap < ⎜1 − ⎟ 4⎝ β ⎠ (7.2 Snap-Off Model of Capillary Trapping When a non-wetting phase is forced through a pore constriction. N cap gives the ratio of capillary to viscous forces at the macroscopic scale whereas N vcap gives the ratio of the viscous to capillary forces at the pore scale. which is the relevant dimensionless number for diagnosing the problem of capillary end effect. one with a low aspect ratio and the other with a high aspect ratio. Once again. we see the competition between viscous and capillary forces that pervades immiscible displacements in porous media. 1 qμ L = N cap Aσ cos θ kφ (7.190) A comparison of Eqs.

75a. the aspect ratio is high and the oil suffers capillary instability and snaps off at the pore throat and be trapped.75.75b.Aspect Ratio = D1 D2 (7.191) where D1 and D2 are the pore body diameter and the pore throat diameter. respectively.. 7-159 . In Figure 7. Capillary trapping by snap-off mechanism in a single pore. Figure 7. In Figure 7. 1983). the aspect ratio is low and the oil is displaced through the pore without trapping.(a) low aspect ratio. (b) high aspect ratio (Chatzis et al.

192) Figure 7. The drop will become unstable and breakup when the capillary pressure at the pore neck exceeds the capillary pressure at the leading edge of the drop.Figure 7.76 shows a drop of non-wetting fluid passing through a pore constriction is a uniform pack of spheres. The condition for snap-off is given by ⎛ 1 1 ⎞ 2σ Pcn = σ ⎜ − ⎟ > ⎝ rn rt ⎠ rf (7. 1976). 7-160 . Snap-off in a porous medium (Stegemeier.76.

Thus. Figure 7. For the blob to pass through the pore throat.193) gives (P ' B ⎛1 1⎞ − PB ) − ( PA' − PA ) ≥ 2σ cos θ ⎜ − ⎟ ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7. the pressure drop across the leading edge must exceed the entry pressure or the displacement pressure of the pore throat.193) From Laplace equation.194) Subtracting Eq.3 Mobilization of Residual Non-Wetting Phase Once a phase has been trapped.77 shows a sequence of mercury injection and withdrawal into a pore system.Figure 7. PA' − PA = 2σ cos θ r2 (7. the pressure gradient required to mobilize it can be significantly higher than can be generated under the flooding conditions. 7.77B shows mercury trapping by snap-off corresponding to the hysteresis loops. the condition for the blob to pass through the pore throat is given by PB' − PB ≥ 2σ cos θ r1 (7.194) from (7.78. Let us calculate the pressure gradient required to mobilize a trapped oil blob in a waterflood as shown in Figure 7.77A shows the capillary pressure hysteresis loops whereas Figure 7.(7.14.195) 7-161 .

A: capillary pressure scanning curves.77. B: corresponding mercury trapping by snap-off (Stegemeier. Snap-off in mercury injection-withdrawal experiment. 7-162 .Figure 7. 1976).

197) The pressure gradient required to mobilize the blob is given by ( PA − PB ) ≥ 2σ cos θ ⎛ 1 − 1 ⎞ L L ⎜ ⎝ r1 ⎟ r2 ⎠ (7.or ( PA − PB ) + ( PB' − PA' ) ≥ 2σ cos θ ⎜ Because PB' = PA' . Eq.196) becomes ⎛1 1⎞ − ⎟ ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7. Let r1 = 10μ m 7-163 . Trapped oil blob.198) Figure 7.(7.196) ( PA − PB ) ≥ 2σ cos θ ⎜ ⎛1 1⎞ − ⎟ ⎝ r1 r2 ⎠ (7.78. Let us estimate the pressure gradient required to mobilize a trapped oil droplet in a normal waterflood in a reservoir rock using typical values of the relevant parameters.

r2 = 50μ m L = 50μ m σ = 30 dynes / cm θ =0 k w = 500 md μ w = 1 cp vw = 1 ft / day The pressure gradient required to mobilize the droplet is given by ⎤⎛ ( 2 )( 30 ) ⎡ 1 1 1 PA − PB ⎞ ⎢ ⎥⎜ 14.73 psi / ft L This is an enormous pressure gradient requirement.001127 )( 5. The pressure gradient generated by the waterflood is given by Darcy's law as (1)(1) ΔP = = 0.696 )( 30.0133x10 ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ or PA − PB ≥ 4243. 7-164 .48 ) psi / ft ≥ − 6 ⎟( −6 −6 −6 L ( 50 x10 ) (100 ) ⎢ (10 x10 ) (100 ) ( 50 x10 ) (100 ) ⎥ ⎝ 1.32 psi / ft L ( 0. Therefore. it will remain trapped.615 )( 500 ) We see that the pressure gradient generated by the waterflood is not sufficient to mobilize the oil droplet.

79 shows an upward migrating oil bubble from a source rock into a reservoir initially fully saturated with water. one can calculate the length of the oil blob required for the blob to pass through the restriction and continue its upward migration.201) 7-165 . Therefore. in order for migration to continue. the condition for upward migration through the restriction is ( PoA − PwA ) > Laplace equation gives 2σ rH (7.200) PwB = PwA + ρ w gh (7.14. the leading end of the bubble (A) must squeeze through the pore throat.199) ( PoB − PwB ) = From hydrostatics through the water. the capillary pressure at the leading edge of the blob must exceed the displacement pressure of the restriction.4 Oil Migration Figure 7. Assuming that ends A and B of the bubble are hemispherical with B having a radius rB. To pass through the restriction.7. Obviously. The migrating bubble has encountered a restriction at a pore throat of radius rH. 2σ rB (7.

Migrating oil filament.79.Figure 7. 7-166 .

(7.(7.(7.204) into (7.206) Let rH = 10μ m rB = 50 μ m σ = 30 dynes / cm ρw = 1. PoB = PoA + ρ o gh Subtracting Eq.202) gives (7.201) from (7.199) gives the condition for upward migration as ( ρ w − ρo ) gh + or 2σ 2σ > rB rH (7.From hydrostatics through the oil.204) Substituting Eq.00 g/cm3 7-167 .205) h> ⎛ 1 1⎞ 2σ − ( ρ w − ρo ) g ⎜ rH rB ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ (7.203) ( PoA − PwA ) = ( ρ w − ρo ) gh + 2σ rB (7.200) into (7.203) and rearranging gives (7.202) ( PoB − PwB ) = ( PoA − PwA ) − ( ρ w − ρo ) gh Substituting Eq.

The effect of wettability on capillary pressure curve is shown qualitatively in Figure 7.ρo = 0. Capillary pressure decreases as the interfacial tension of the fluids decrease.15 EFFECTS OF WETTABILITY AND INTERFACIAL TENSION ON CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVES The effects of wettability and interfacial tension on capillary pressure curves can easily be deduced from Laplace equation. As the degree of preferential wettability is reduced.81.80. 7-168 . The effect of interfacial tension on capillary pressure is shown qualitatively in Figure 7.1 cm − (1 − 0.70 g/cm3 The minimum length of the blob to continue its upward migration is given by ⎤ ( 2 )( 30 ) ⎡ 1 1 ⎢ ⎥ = 163. the capillary pressure curve will decrease.70 )( 981) ⎢ (10 x10−6 ) (100 ) ( 50 x10−6 ) (100 ) ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ h> 7.

Effect of wettability on capillary pressure curve.80.Figure 7. 7-169 .

81.Figure 7. Effect of interfacial tension on capillary pressure curve. NOMENCLATURE A = cross sectional area in the flow direction oil formation volume factor water formation volume factor depth of free water level below water oil contact fractional flow of wetting phase fractional flow of water fractional flow of non-wetting phase fractional flow of non-wetting phase at the outlet end of porous medium 7-170 Bo = Bw = do = fw fw = = fnw = fnw2 = .

fo = fractional flow of oil probability density function for pore volume distribution approximate fractional flow of wetting phase lithology factor gravitational acceleration height above water oil contact Leverett J-function absolute permeability of the medium effective permeability to oil effective permeability to wetting phase end-point relative permeability to wetting phase effective permeability to gas relative permeability to oil relative permeability to water relative permeability to gas relative permeability to wetting phase f(R) = Fw = F1 = g h J k = = = = ko = kw = kwr = kg = kro = krw = krg = krw = knw = effective permeability to non-wetting phase krnw= relative permeability to non-wetting phase knwr= end-point relative permeability to non-wetting phase L = length mobility ratio end-point mobility ratio centrifuge speed in revolutions per minute dimensionless cumulative production pressure capillary pressure capillary pressure at the inlet end of core in a centrifuge displacement pressure displacement pressure for Brooks-Corey model 7-171 M = ME = N = NpD = P = Ncap = dimensionless capillary to viscous force ratio Pc = Pc1 = Pd = Pe = .

Pg = Pnw= Po = Pw = Pw = q = qo = qg = qnw= qw = qw = r = = pressure in the gas phase pressure in the non-wetting phase pressure in the oil phase pressure in the water phase pressure in the wetting phase total volumetric injection rate volumetric flow rate of oil volumetric flow rate of gas volumetric flow rate of non-wetting phase volumetric flow rate of water volumetric flow rate of wetting phase radius of capillary tube mean radius of curvature of an interface radii of curvature of an interface distance of inlet end and outlet end of core from the center of rotation in a centrifuge pore throat radius effective wetting phase saturation gas saturation oil saturation residual oil saturation water saturation wetting phase saturation rm r1 . r2 = R = Se = Sg = So = Sor = Sw = Sw = Swirr = irreducible wetting phase saturation Swro = wetting phase saturation at which the imbibition capillary pressure is zero Sw1 = Snw= Snwr = wetting phase saturation at the inlet end of porous medium in a centrifuge non-wetting phase saturation residual non-wetting phase saturation 7-172 . r2 = r1 .

Swav = average wetting phase saturation Swav = average water saturation Swf = frontal saturation * Sw = normalized wetting phase saturation time dimensionless time flux vector. fraction tortuosity liquid specific gravity t = = = tD v vw = vnw = x z = = xD = ρw = ρw = ρ nw = σ θ λ μ = = = = μg = μο = μw = μw = μnw= δ(R) = φ τ γ = = = 7-173 . Darcy velocity vector Darcy velocity for the wetting phase Darcy velocity for the non-wetting phase distance in the direction of flow dimensionless distance height above free water level density of water density of wetting phase density of non-wetting phase interfacial tension contact angle pore size distribution index viscosity gas viscosity oil viscosity water viscosity wetting phase viscosity non-wetting phase viscosity probability density function for pore throat size distribution based on bundle of capillary tubes model of porous medium porosity.

(June. W. Amer. Eng. Bear. 1972.W. London.G. Anderson. May 1992. Archer. 7-174 . The University of Texas at Austin. and Flow Velocity on Residual Oil Saturation Left by Waterflood. and Gast.S. A. F. England. MS Thesis.: Investigation of Heterogeneities and Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using CT. F. : Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. A.H. Inc. New York.P.E. G." Soc." J. Tech.T.” J. (December 1987) 1605-1622.ω = angular velocity of centrifuge pressure drop pressure drop in the wetting phase pore structure ΔP = ΔPw = Γ = ΔPnw = pressure drop in the non-wetting phase REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Abrams.C.” J. Proc. 1975) 437-447. : "Capillary Desaturation in Unconsolidated Beads. Of Civil Engr.Part 6: The Effects of Wettability on Waterflooding. Anderson. : "Trapping of Oil Drops in a Noncircular Pore Throat and Mobilization Upon Contact With a Surfactant. Benner. H. : “The Effect of Polar Impurities Upon Capillary and Surface Phenomena in Petroleum Production. Graham & Trotman.. (Oct. D. W. R.T. : “Properties of Porous Media Affecting Fluid Flow. Jour. 1997. Pet. (October 1987) 1283-1300.W. Bethel. : Petroleum Engineering.C. Interfacial Tension. C. A. Elsevier. 1970) 589-602. and Green. ACM. and Wall. AIME (1953) Vol." Trans. : “Wettability Literature Survey . Vol. New York..17. Afzal. 1983) 99-114. Sixth Edition. 197-202. Pet.: "A New Method of Interpolation and Smooth Curve Fitting Based on Local Procedures.: Physical Chemistry of Surfaces.Part 4: Effects of Wettability on Capillary Pressure. A.” Jour. A. and Corey. N. 1986. J. John Wiley and Sons. Brooks. Pet. : "The Influence of Fluid Viscosity.G. and Bartell. Irrigation and Drainage Div.P.. Arriola." SPEJ (Feb. 198. 4 (Oct. Tech. and Calhoun.. J. Soc. Adamson.” API Drilling and Production Practice (1941) 341-348. F. No.G. Willhite. J. Akima. 1966) 61-88. : “Wettability Literature Survey .

: "Contaminant Transport in Unsaturated Flow.” J.. N. Jr. Fort Collins. M. and Leverett. 1 (Jan. 67-74.” Trans. Craig. 91. 1971.W. 1990.. Vol. : “Correlation of Capillary Number Relationships for Sandstones. Water Resources Publications.Brown. : Mechanics of Heterogeneous Fluids in Porous Media. S. : The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding. R. I.” SPEJ (Oct. Pavelka.E.A. R. : “Dynamic Immiscible Displacement Mechanisms in Pore Doublets: Theory versus Experiment. 1983) 199-222. Eng. Richardson. A. and Quere. : Capillarity and Wetting Phenomena.E. Tech. Charbeneau. Chatzis. AIME (1950) 198. 6 (1974) 311314. Pet. and Dullien.S.. Collins." in American Society of Agronomy. F.G. E. H.. Research & Engineering Consultants Inc. AIME (1951) 192. 1977) 68-80.. G. : Special Core Analysis. G.Dec.: "Fundamental Basis for the Contact Angle and Capillary Pressure. D. : "A Simple Method for Determining Unsaturated Conductivity from Moisture Retention Data. Society of Petroleum Engineers. Colorado. McGraw-Hill Inc..” Trans. WI (1986) 619-633.R. Donaldson. and Lim. E. Inc. 1993. No.C. No.L.E. 3. and Gee. and Cooke." Trans. 55 (1959) 1602-1606.A.E. M.” Jour. Corey. Editions Technip.J. Core Laboratories Inc. R. Canadian Pet.” Soc. de Gennes. Maidment (Ed. 1984) 555-562. P.” J.. 1993. Kendall.T. Chatzis..S.R. and Daniel. N. : “Magnitude and Detailed Structure of Residual Oil Saturation. Colloid and Interface Science . : "Water Potential: Miscellaneous Methods. : “Pore Size Distribution of Petroleum Reservoir Rocks. H. : Basics of Reservoir Engineering.. SPE Monograph Vol. : “Study of Problems Related to the Restoration of Natural State of Core Samples. Texas. 1976.S. : Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials.). . : “Mechanism of Fluid Displacement in Sands. C.P. L.C. 1977. D. Buckley. R. Campbell.. (April 1983) 311-326. Chatzis. : “Equipment and Procedures for Fluid Flow and Wettability Tests of Geological 7-175 . Madison. Pet. Collins. G.F.T. Faraday Soc. I. F. and Reichertz. Cuiec.E. Paris. N. (May 1941) 107-116." Chapter 15. D.T. Tech (Oct. Springer Science and Business Media. 117.W : “Capillary Pressure Investigations. 195-204. L. I." Soil Sci.. P.R. and Morrow. and Crocker. New York. Gournay. Morrow.F. J. 2004. Cosse. vol. Burdine. R. Campbell.E. in Handbook of Hydrology.E..

K. G. F. Tulsa. Deflandre. : Porous Media . 1991.” Can. Gardescu.R. E. London.. Nat. P. Jennings. I. Eng. A. Y. Mathisen. Academic Press. May 20-22. Hassler.” Trans." Advance in Core Evaluation II." SPE Formation Evaluation (December 1990) 406-412. Garnes.. Forbes. Can.. 1975) 48-55. Presented at the SPE/DOE Seventh Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery. A.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. H. D. AIME (1945) 160. and Skauge. 96-102. J. O...J. A.M. Pet.” J. Cnd.I. Sv.P. Springfield.. : "Imaging Fluid Saturation Development in Long-Core Flood Displacements. J. VA Douglas. Keelan. Guo. 2216. : “Calculation of Linear Waterflood Behavior Including the Effects of Capillary Pressure. F.. Gharbi. Hermansen. 1980. Tech. Info. AIME (1958) 213.” DOE/BETC/IC-79/5." SPE/DOE 20264. and Skjaeveland. Lien. : “Scaling Coreflood Experiments to Heterogeneous Reservoirs..A. E. F.G.M. Blair. 7-176 . S. : “Surface Properties of Natural and Synthetic Porous Media. R. 10.S. Tech.A. (April-June 1972) 42-55.. Eliassen. : "Capillary Number Relations for Some North Sea Reservoir Sandstones. Vol.J. J. April 22-25. New York. : “Behavior of Gas Bubbles in Capillary Spaces. : "Structural Properties of Packed Beds A Review. 47 (April 1969) 130-149.” SCA Conference Paper Number 9215 (1992). K.M. Chem.. H.L.. Haughey. P.J.A New Direct Method. Chardaire-Riviere.. G. Dullien. (1993) 83-95. Tech.” Trans. AIME (1930) 351-370.. Kolltvelt. 1990.” World Oil (June 1965) 116-119. Dullien. and Skauge.M. C.L. : “Effects of Pore Structure on Capillary and Flow Phenomena in Sandstones. and Wagner. J.L. A. : “How to Handle and Process Soft and Unconsolidated Cores. and Peters. : “Local Saturation Measurement While Centrifuging (MWC) for Improving Centrifuge Capillary-Pressure Curve Determination.Fluid Transport and Pore Structure.Materials. (July-Sept. Jr. D. M.” Trans. Jennings. Scheie. Graue. : "Capillary Pressure From Centrifuge . R.Y. H.. 1979. EuroCAS. and Beveridge. and Brunner. : "A Critical Review of Core Analysis Techniques” The Jour. A. and Flcury.” Producers Monthly (March 1957) 20-24. Pet. : “Measurement of Capillary Pressures in Small Core Samples. 114-123.

. : "Hydraulic Conductivity and Diffusivity: Laboratory Methods. Pollchick. Madison. Land.: “Capillary Desaturation and Imbibition in Rocks. 1989.C.J. Grummer. Leva. F. (Oct. xxx-xxx. Klute (Ed. W. Leverett." Methods of Soil Analysis. No. 61 (October 1983) 719-727. Houston.. Melrose. Nielsen. Kyte. Tech.).W. M. and Storch. AIME (1939) 140.” Society of Petroleum Engineers Formation Evaluation (September 1997) 164-169. Prentice Hall. A. : "Water Retention: Laboratory Methods. : Enhanced Oil Recovery. M. : "Calculation of Imbibition Relative Permeability for Two. M. Part 1.-Dec.F." Canadian J. H.C. J. Vol. : “Linear Waterflood Behavior and End Effects in Water-Wet Porous Media. : "A Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of Trapping in Pore Doublets. Melrose. J. 7-177 . American Society of Agronomy. M. A. M.” SPEJ (June 1968) 149-156.” J.G. WI (1986) 635-686. L. C. Chemical Engineering.B. : “Closed-Form Expressions for Water Retention and Conductivity Data.” The Log Analyst (January-February 1988) 40-47. Lake. Li. No. Klute.C. 1951. Russell.R.C. No. Majors." US Bureau of Mines Bull.A.." Methods of Soil Analysis. E.Killins. 423-426.C. AIME (1958) 213.and Three-Phase Flow From Rock Properties.D.C. AIME (1941) 142. C. New Jersey. P. Klute. Laidlaw.M. and Peters.” Ground Water Vol. : “Flow of Oil-Water Mixtures through Unconsolidated Sands. 152-169. A. S. R... Leverett. C.. Marle.R. : “Capillary Behavior in Porous Solids. J..).” Trans. : "Fluid Flow Through Packed and Packed and Fluidized Systems. Jr. 35. Gulf Publishing Company. 5 (1997) 848-858. L. P. : “Role of Capillary Forces in Determining Microscopic Displacement Efficiency for Oil Recovery by Waterflooding.” Trans.” Trans. J. 1974) 54-62. Madison..J. Weintraub. : "NMR Imaging of Immiscible Displacements in Porous Media. Klute (Ed. A. N. and Calhoun.H.. 504. M. Cnd Pet. : Multiphase Flow in Porous Media.M. American Society of Agronomy. Texas. : “Interpretation of Centrifuge Capillary Pressure Data. W. Part 1. and Lesch. WI (1986) 687-734. and Wardlaw. 2.S. 3039. and Rapoport. 1981.” Producers Monthly (February 1953) 18. Englewood Cliffs. Leij.

369-371. An. AIME (1957) Vol. 787-791.. Houston. L. and Drake..M.” Trans. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid. Morrow.E. N. 1976)) 49-69. H. Eng. F. (1945) 17. J. : "Capillary Equilibrium in Porous Media. AIME (1950) 189.” World Oil (March 1981) 77-83.Melrose. Morrow. TX. 39-48.L. 1970) 638-644. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid. K. AIME (1949) 186. Mungan. 139-148.C. and Drake.Their Measurement Using Mercury and the Calculation of Permeability There From.C. 27th Annual Logging Symposium.K." SPE 9406 Presented at the 55th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME." Ind. 48 (Dec.P. 1980..R. Part 3 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Capillarity. 62 (1970) 32.R. Chem. : "Physics and Thermodynamics of Capillary.R. Monicard. Perkins. : "Physics of Oil Entrapment in Water-Wet Rock. An. AIME (1953) 198. 141-148. and Leas. Houston. Mohanty. Chem. N. 210.R. Mech. September 21-24.C. Vol. (1945) 153. Tx. Cnd Pet. : “Macropore-Size Distributions in Some Typical Porous Substances. Ed. Eng. and Scriven. Tech. Morrow. R. : "Interfacial Phenomena as Related to Oil Recovery Mechanisms. Eng. : "Capillary Pressure Correlations For Uniformly Wetted Porous Media. L. Rapoport. Chem.T. (Oct.” Proc.J.. 782-786.. W.” World Oil (May 1981) 149-158.” Ind.. N. Dallas. : “Interpretation of Capillary Pressure Data” Trans. Eng. Paper J. Part 2 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Wettability. : “Pore Size Distribution in Porous Materials. R. R. Gulf Publishing Company. : Properties of Reservoir Rocks. : "An Investigation of the Role of Capillary Forces in Laboratory Water Floods.L. Davis. Ritter. W." Trans. N.” SPWLA Trans. N. Ritter. : “ An Investigation into the the Laws of Flow of Fluids Through Granular Material.E. Rajan. Eng. 1980. Mungan. Vol. Ed.. (1945) 17. 1986. L.-Dec.R. : “Capillary Pressures .” Ind.. June 9-13.A. Eng.” Trans. 7-178 . : “Properties of Linear Waterfloods. H." Cnd J. W. Pet." Soc. Chem. J. 409-411.R. (March 1965) 15-24. Purcell. Rose." J. L. : “Theoretically Correct Analytical Solution for Calculating Capillary Pressure-Saturation from Centrifuge Experiments. Purcell. R. Inst.

1974. Toronto. P. G. New York. A. Dover Publications.E. G. G. Stegemeier.. and Annan.C.” Presented at the 81st National Meeting of AIChE.C." Water Resources Research. W. : Petrophysics. Tiab." Soil Sci. Soc. W. : “Mechanisms of Entrapment and Mobilization of Oil in Porous Media.J.. Soc. Soc. Proc. J. April 22-24. Klute. : Waterflooding. Residual Oil. : "Hysterisis Moisture Characteristics and Hydraulic Conductivities for Glass-Bead Media. 1986. and Bruce. Inc.S. B. 3.L. A. Scheidegger. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 7-179 . and Unsteady State Methods. Topp. : "Measurement of Soil Water Using Time-Domain Reflectometry (TDR): Field Evaluation. Vol.” SPE 4754 Presented at the Improved Oil Recovery Symposium of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME . : "Comparison of Water ContentPressure Head Data Obtained by Equilibrium.. 1976. 30 (1966) 156-162. Texas. 1982.L.P. 49 (1985) 19-24.A. : The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. Am. : "Electromagnetic Determination of Soil Water Content: Measurements In Coaxial Transmission Lines. A. A. 16 (19805) 574-582. 1960. : “Use of Centrifuge for Determining Connate Water... New York. van Genuchten. Chambers.. Proc. : “A Restored-State Method for Determination of Oil in Place and Connate Water.J. Slobod. and Miller. Welge. 127-134.C. : “Relationship of Trapped Oil Saturation to Petrophysical Properties of Porous Media. and Davis. Vol. AIME (1951) 192. Am. and Prehn. 31 (1967) 312314. and Peters. G.L. Willhite. Vol. : "A Closed-Form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils.E.T. Topp. : Molecular Theory of Capillarity. G. : "Dynamic and Static Forces Required to Remove a Discontinuous Oil Phase From Porous Media Containing Both Oil and Water. E." SPEJ (March 1969) 3-12.. E. Am. Vol.C. J. Vol. Jr.B. Richardson. and Capillary Pressure Curves of Small Core Samples.L. G. Davis.. Taber. and Widom.L." Soil Sci. 44 (1980) 892-898. R. Topp. J." Soil Sci. J. Elsevier.” Trans." Soil Sci. Second Edition. Am.L. Stegemeier. D. Tulsa. University of Toronto Press. J.” API Drilling and Production Practice (1947) 161-165.Rowlinson. H... Topp. G. April 12-14. Soc. SPE Textbook Series Vol. D. Kansas City. Proc. Mineola. Steady State.C. and Donaldson. 2004. M.

No. 105-118.O. M. and Williams.R.. 36. 7-180 .R. W. P. 1952) 253-277.. Masson.D.J. 1952) 359-403. Wyllie. Jr. 2 (Feb. and Rose.Winsauer.M. 2 (Feb. W. Vol. Wyllie. M. : "Some Theoretical Considerations Related to the Quantitative Evaluation of the Physical Characteristics of Reservoir Rock from Electrical Log Data.” AAPG Bull.H. No.” Trans. M. H. Vol.J. : "Resistivity of Brine-Saturated Sands in Relation to Pore Geometry. AIME (1950) 189. M. Shearin. and Spangler...." AAPG Bull. : "Application of Electrical Resistivity Measurements to Problems of Fluid Flow in Porous Media. 36..B.

7-181 .

To calculate the flow rate of each fluid in multiphase flow.CHAPTER 8 RELATIVE PERMEABILITY 8. we extend Darcy’s Law to multiphase flow. The permeability of one fluid in the presence of the other immiscible fluids is known as the effective permeability to that fluid. the absolute permeability of the porous medium is no longer sufficient to calculate the flow rate of each fluid type or to calculate the total flow rate of all the fluids.1 DEFINITION OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY In a petroleum reservoir. (c) the flow of oil and gas in an oil reservoir and (d) the flow of oil. Examples are (a) the flow of gas and water in a gas reservoir. For example.2) 8-1 . Darcy’s Law is applied to each phase as follows: qo = − ko A ⎛ ∂Po ⎞ ⎜ ∂x + ρo g sin α ⎟ μo ⎝ ⎠ k w A ⎛ ∂Pw ⎞ + ρ w g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μ w ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (8.1) qw = − (8. it is possible for two or three fluids to flow simultaneously. water and gas in an inclined linear system. we need to know the permeability to each fluid in the presence of the other fluids in the rock. for simultaneous flow of oil. water and gas in an oil reservoir. In multiphase flow situations. In order to make quantitative predictions for multiphase flow. (b) the flow of oil and water in an oil reservoir.

5) (8.1) through (8.1) to (8.9) In terms of relative permeabilities. Darcy’s Law is applied to each phase as if the other phases did not exist.3) show that using the concept of an effective permeability. for the three phase example. Thus. Eqs. water and gas are given by kro = krw = ko k kw k kg k (8.10) 8-2 .3) where α is the angle of inclination with the horizontal. using the absolute permeability of the porous medium as the base permeability.3) become qo = − kkro A ⎛ ∂Po ⎞ + ρ o g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μo ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (8.7) (8.6) Pc / ow + Pc / go = Pc / gw It is often more convenient to work with a dimensionless effective permeability known as the relative permeability obtained by dividing the effective permeability by a base permeability such as the absolute permeability of the porous medium.8) krg = (8. Capillary equilibrium between the phases gives Po − Pw = Pc / ow ( S w ) Pg − Po = Pc / go ( So ) (8.(8.(8. Eqs. the relative permeabilities to oil.qg = − k g A ⎛ ∂Pg ⎞ + ρ g g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μ g ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (8.4) (8.

(8.qw = − kkrw A ⎛ ∂Pw ⎞ + ρ w g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μ w ⎝ ∂x ⎠ kkrg A ⎛ ∂Pg ⎞ + ρ g g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μ g ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (8. In this case. The following observations can be made about the key features of the relative permeability curves.12). There is a residual non-wetting phase saturation (Snwr) at which the relative permeability to the non-wetting phase is zero and the relative 8-3 . it is necessary to ascertain the base permeability used to define a relative permeability curve before such a curve is used in performance calculations.0. 2. Failure to do so will lead to wrong results.12) Sometimes. The sum of the relative permeabilities at each saturation is always less than 1. the end point relative permeability to the non-wetting phase will be 1.10) to (8. the effective permeability to the non-wetting phase at the irreducible wetting phase saturation is used as the base permeability for defining the relative permeability. There is an irreducible wetting phase saturation (Swirr) at which the relative permeability to the wetting phase is zero and the relative permeability to the non-wetting phase attains a maximum end point value (knwr) 4. As the base pressure appears in Darcy's law as shown in Eqs.0. 3.1 shows typical imbibition relative permeability curves for a two-phase system.11) qg = − (8. The relative permeability curves are nonlinear functions of fluid saturation. 1. Figure 8.

Typical imbibition relative permeability curves.permeability to the wetting phase attains a maximum end point value (kwr). Figure 8. Imbibition relative permeability curves typically are used to perform the following reservoir performance calculations: • Waterflood calculations in a water wet reservoir in which water displaces oil and/or gas. Two phase flow occurs over the saturation range S wirr < S w < (1 − S nwr ) . 8-4 . 6.1. The relative permeability curves are not defined in the saturation ranges given by (1 − S nwr ) < S w < 1 and 0 < S w < S wirr . 5.

The obvious differences between the drainage and imbibition curves are that the drainage curve for the wetting phase starts at a wetting phase saturation of 1. there was no non-wetting phase in the medium.0 and that of the non-wetting phase is zero at the wetting phase saturation of 1.0 because there was only one phase present. the drainage and imbibition relative permeability curves will be different.• Natural water influx calculations in a water wet reservoir in which water displaces oil and/or gas. • Oil displaces gas.1. 8-5 . Drainage relative permeability curves typically are used to perform the following reservoir performance calculations: • • • • Solution gas drive calculations in which gas displaces oil. As will be shown later. This is the only occasion in which the sum of relative permeabilities is equal to 1. because of capillary pressure hysteresis. Gravity drainage calculations in which gas replaces drained oil. the relative permeability to the non-wetting phase must be zero. Of course. Gas drive calculations in which gas displaces oil and/or water. Therefore. The permeability of the wetting phase is then equal to the absolute permeability of the porous medium. at the start of the experiment. This is because at the start of the drainage relative permeability measurements. which occurs when oil is forced into a gas cap. Figure 8.2 shows typical drainage relative permeability curves with features that are very similar to the imbibition curves of Figure 8.0. the porous medium was fully saturated with the wetting phase. Oil or gas displacing water in tertiary recovery processes.

2. For imbibition relative permeability measurement. ⎝ qw ⎠ Steady state is achieved when the pressure drop across the core no longer changes with time and the ratio of the produced fluids is the same and the ratio of the injected fluids.Figure 8. Then a mixture of the two phases is injected into the ⎛q ⎞ inlet face of the core at a fixed ratio of ⎜ nw ⎟ until steady state is achieved. The steady state pressure drop across the core and 8-6 .2 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES BY THE STEADY STATE METHOD The most straight-forward laboratory measurement technique for relative permeabilities is the steady state method. 8. Typical drainage relative permeability curves. the test starts with the core initially saturated with an irreducible wetting phase saturation (Swirr) and a non-wetting phase saturation of (1-Swirr).

15) and (8. knw and Pc are independent of x.16) Pnw − Pw = Pc ( S w ) (8.16) can be integrated to give kw = μ w vw L ΔPw = μ w qw L AΔPw (8. the continuity equations for the wetting and nonwetting phases for horizontal flow are ∂vw =0 ∂x ∂vnw =0 ∂x Darcy's law applied to each phase gives (8. are uniform throughout the porous medium.19) Since Pc ( S w ) is uniform.14) vw = − k w ∂Pw = a constant μ w ∂x knw ∂Pnw = a constant μnw ∂x (8.(8. (8. Then.17) where Pc(Sw) in this case is the imbibition capillary pressure. At steady state.13) (8. If the saturations. Sw and Snw. ΔPw and ΔPnw are equal and the pressure drop across the core can be measured in either phase and used to calculate the effective 8-7 .the injection rate of each phase are measured. The relative permeabilities are calculated with the integrated forms of Darcy's law for two phase flow as shown later.18) knw = μnwvnw L ΔPnw = μnw qnw L AΔPnw (8. Eqs. then kw. The saturations are usually calculated by material balance.15) vnw = − From capillary equilibrium.

As there are no alternative equations to use. A typical sequence of steps for obtaining the imbibition relative permeability curves might be as follows: 1.permeabilities with Eqs. then Eqs. Install the clean.(8. Figure 8.83) with a specified inlet boundary condition. If the saturation distribution in the core is not uniform because of capillary end effect.19) are not valid and cannot be used to calculate the effective permeabilities.18) and (8. Displace the wetting phase with the non-wetting phase until no more wetting phase flows from the core. in the steady state experiment. Of course. dry core sample in the Hassler apparatus as shown in Figure 8.(7.19). which is reproduced here for convenience: ⎛ fw ⎞ − 1⎟ ⎜ dS w ⎝ Fw ⎠ = dxD N k dJ cap rnw dS w (7. Evacuate the core and saturate with the wetting phase. Therefore. the relative permeability experiment will be a failure. Measure the steady state pressure drop and the non-wetting phase 8-8 .3 shows an apparatus that can be used for the steady state experiment.83).18) and (8. krw . The steady state saturation distribution in the core can be calculated with Eq. krnw and Pc ( S w ) must be known.(8. to do so.3. 2. phase saturation and the initial Calculate the irreducible wetting non-wetting phase saturation. Determine the absolute permeability of the core by wetting phase flow. the total injection rate ( q = qw + qnw ) should be sufficiently high to minimize capillary end effect as outlined in Chapter 7.

5 show the pressure profiles in the gas and oil 8-9 . Calculate the relative permeabilities to the nonwetting and wetting phases at the latest wetting phase saturation using Eq.(8. Figures 8. Calculate the residual non-wetting phase Measure the steady state pressure drop and the wetting phase injection rate and calculate the relative permeability to the wetting phase at residual non-wetting phase saturation.injection rate and calculate the relative permeability to the non-wetting phase at the irreducible wetting phase saturation by use of Eq.20) and (8. (1952). This completes the relative permeability measurements. it is necessary to minimize capillary end effect. inject only the wetting phase until no more non-wetting phase flows from the core. Finally. This can be accomplished by injecting at a sufficiently high total rate or by other means as discussed by Richardson et al.(8. qw/qnw.18) as krw = 5.20) Inject a mixture of the wetting and non-wetting phases at rates qnw and qw such that the ratio. μnw qnw L kAΔPnw (8. In the steady state relative permeability experiment. saturation. 4. is very much less than 1 until steady state is achieved.4 and 8. Steady state is achieved when the injected and produced qw/qnw ratios are equal and the pressure drop no longer changes with time. Measure the pressure drop and calculate the wetting phase saturation by material balance. μ w qw L kAΔPw (8.21) Increase the ratio qw/qnw and repeat steps 3 and 4 to calculate the relative permeabilities at higher and higher wetting phase saturations. 6.19) as krnw = 3.

capillary end effect is apparent whereas at the higher rate (Figure 8. there is little or no capillary end effect. (1952).3.Figure 8.. the pressure drop in each phase is the same.5). 8-10 . that when the capillary end effect has been eliminated. 1951). the pressure drop measured in either phase is sufficient for calculating both relative permeabilities. Note also. Therefore. At the lower injection rate (Figure 8. phases for a gas-oil steady state relative permeability experiment conducted at two rates by Richardson et al. Hassler’s apparatus for relative permeability measurement (Osoba et al.4).

When capillary end effect has been eliminated. 8-11 .4. dispersed feed method. all the steady state methods give the same results as shown in Figures 8. 1952). single core dynamic method. Hafford method and Hassler method differ primarily in the techniques used to minimize or eliminate capillary end effect (Richardson et al.The various steady state methods such as the Penn State method.. Steady state oil and gas pressure profiles at a relatively low injection rate (Richardson et al. 1952). Figure 8.7.6 and 8..

1952).Figure 8.5.. 8-12 . Steady state oil and gas pressure profiles at a relatively high injection rate (Richardson et al.

Figure 8. 1952).6. short core section (Richardson et al. 8-13 . Relative permeability curves from six steady state methods..

8-14 .Figure 8. long core section (Richardson et al. unusual for a steady state experiment to take several weeks to complete. 1952). Relative permeability curves from six steady state methods.7. The major problem with the steady state method for relative It is not permeability measurements is that it takes too long to complete.. Because the calculation of relative permeabilities from unsteady state experiment is based on the solution of two-phase immiscible displacement equation. we must first solve the two-phase immiscible displacement problem before we can discuss the unsteady state relative permeability measurements. An alternative and much faster technique is the unsteady state method or the dynamic displacement method based on immiscible displacement theory.

8.25) f nw = qnw qnw = = 1 − fw q qw + qnw (8.23) Capillary equilibrium gives Pnw − Pw = Pc ( S w ) (8. mass conservation requires that q = qw + qnw (8.3 THEORY OF ONE DIMENSIONAL IMMISCIBLE DISPLACEMENT IN A POROUS MEDIUM 8.22) qw = − (8. Darcy’s Law applied to each phase gives qnw = − kkrnw A ⎛ ∂Pnw ⎞ + ρ nw g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μnw ⎝ ∂x ⎠ kkrw A ⎛ ∂Pw ⎞ + ρ w g sin α ⎟ ⎜ μ w ⎝ ∂x ⎠ (8.3.17) Assuming incompressible fluids.26) The continuity equation for the wetting phase is φA ∂S w ∂qw + =0 ∂t ∂x (8.1 Mathematical Model of Two-Phase Immiscible Displacement Consider the displacement of a non-wetting phase by a wetting phase in a linear inclined core as shown in Figure 8.27) 8-15 .24) The true fractional flows of the wetting and non-wetting phases are defined as follows: fw = qw qw = q qw + qnw (8.8.

The saturation constraint gives S w + Snw = 1 (8.29) .28) Subtracting Eq.8.Figure 8.(8.23) and rearranging gives qw μ w qnw μnw ∂Pnw ∂Pw − = − − ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g sin α kkrw A kkrnw A ∂x ∂x 8-16 (8. Displacement of a non-wetting phase by a wetting phase in an inclined core.22) from (8.

31) into (8.29) gives upon rearrangement qw = q 1+ kkrnw A ⎡ ∂Pc ⎤ ⎢ ∂x − ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g sin α ⎥ q μnw ⎣ ⎦ k μ 1 + rnw w krw μnw (8.32) gives the true fractional flow of the wetting phase as ⎡ ⎛ Aσ cos θ kφ ⎞ ⎛ kA ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g sin α ⎞ ⎤ ∂J f w = Fw ⎢1 + ⎜ − krnw ⎜ ⎟ krnw ⎟⎥ ⎜ ⎟ q μnw L q μnw ∂xD ⎢ ⎝ ⎝ ⎠⎥ ⎠ ⎣ ⎦ Eq.34) into (8.(8.24) into (8.33) Let the spontaneous imbibition capillary pressure curve be given in terms of its Leverett J-function as Pc ( S w ) = σ cos θ J ( Sw .(8.30) Let an approximate fractional flow of the wetting phase be defined as Fw = 1 k μ 1 + rnw w krw μnw (8.35) can be written as (8.Substituting Eqs.30) and (8.31) Substituting Eqs.25) gives the true fractional flow of the wetting phase as ⎧ kk A ⎡ ∂P ⎤⎫ f w = Fw ⎨1 + rnw ⎢ c − ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g sin α ⎥ ⎬ q μ nw ⎣ ∂x ⎦⎭ ⎩ (8.(8. Γ ) k /φ (8.34) Substituting Eqs.17) and (8.32) Let the dimensionless distance from the inlet end be defined as xD = x L (8.35) 8-17 .(8.83) and (8.

It represents the ratio of capillary to viscous forces in the displacement. The mobility ratio given in Eq. which represents the ratio of gravity to viscous forces in the displacement. A characteristic mobility ratio for the displacement can be defined in terms of the end-point relative permeabilities as ME = kwr μnw knwr μ w (8.(8.36) can also be written as 8-18 . N g is a new dimensionless number.61) Ng = kA ( ρ w − ρ nw ) g sin α qμnw (8.37) N cap is the same dimensionless number we encountered in the analysis of capillary end effect.39) where kwr and knwr are the end-point relative permeabilities for the wetting and non-wetting phases.38) is a function of saturation and will be different at each point in the porous medium depending on the saturation.⎡ ⎤ ∂J − krnw N g ⎥ f w = Fw ⎢1 + N cap krnw ∂xD ⎣ ⎦ (8.39) is a characteristic dimensionless number for the displacement that is independent of saturation. The mobility ratio of the displacement is given by M ( Sw ) = krw μnw krnw μ w (8. Eq.(8.38) The mobility ratio as defined in Eq(8.36) where N cap is given by N cap = and N g is given by Aσ cos θ kφ q μnw L (7.

The displacement efficiency can be increased by reducing the mobility ratio. 4.41) In order to maximize the displacement efficiency of the non-wetting phase. gravity will be detrimental to the displacement efficiency for down-dip displacement of the lighter non-wetting phase by the heavier wetting phase. Capillarity is detrimental to the displacement efficiency as it increases the fractional flow of the wetting phase at a given saturation. Much can be deduced about the immiscible displacement from the fractional flow equation. 2.40) where the approximate fractional flow of the wetting phase is given by Fw = 1 1 ⎞ ⎛ ⎜1 + ⎟ ⎝ M⎠ (8. 5.(8. The displacement behavior can be rate-sensitive if the effect of capillarity or gravity is significant.40). Conversely. 3. The fractional flow of the wetting phase is a strong function of saturation. This can be accomplished in practice by increasing the viscosity 8-19 . Examination of this equation leads to the following qualitative deductions about immiscible displacements in porous media: 1.1 + N cap krnw fw = ∂J − krnw N g ∂xD 1 ⎞ ⎛ ⎜1 + ⎟ ⎝ M⎠ (8. Eq. we need to minimize the fractional flow of the wetting phase at each point in the porous medium. Gravity is beneficial to the displacement efficiency for up-dip displacement of the lighter non-wetting phase by the heavier wetting phase as it reduces the fractional flow of the wetting phase at a given saturation.

The fractional flow equation indicates that the displacement efficiency can be improved by injecting the wetting phase at a high enough rate to minimize capillary smearing of the displacement front. an increase in rate can result in viscous instability which reduces the displacement efficiency.43) Ω ( S w ) = krnw Eq.of the wetting phase (the injected fluid) by use of a polymer. This is generally true for a favorable mobility ratio If the mobility ratio is unfavorable.37) by the aspect ratio (d/L). the injection rate is sufficiently low and the core has a vertical dimension (which it does). A multidimensional model is needed to correctly describe the gravity-dominated displacement. the one dimensional displacement model is inadequate to describe the displacement. The fractional flow equation suggests that the effect of gravity will be eliminated if the porous medium is horizontal.(8.36) then becomes dJ dS w 8-20 . gravity segregation will occur even in a horizontal medium. This is misleading because. Let Ψ ( S w ) = Fw − krnw N g (8. There are additional facts about the immiscible displacement that are not apparent from the fractional flow equation. The partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation can be derived as follows. The only fail proof way to eliminate the effect of gravity is to eliminate the density contrast between the fluids or perform the displacement in outer space. This is the basis for polymer flooding as an improved oil recovery technique. displacement. In this case.(8. 6. in practice.42) (8. One can create a gravity number for displacement in a horizontal core by replacing sin α in Eq. if there is a density contrast between the fluids. The effects of gravity and capillarity on the displacement can be reduced by increasing the injection rate.

to obtain the wetting phase saturation in time and space. When supplemented with appropriate initial and boundary conditions.47) of the wetting phase for horizontal 8-21 .44) Eq.46) can be solved. Eq.45) tD = qt Aφ L (7.63) Substituting Eq.46) We have reduced the immiscible displacement problem to the solution of a second order.(8.(8.(8. The continuity equation.(8. we examine the approximate solution obtained by Buckley and Leverett (1941).46) cannot be solved analytically for the saturation profiles. Here.(8. parabolic partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation. can be written as ∂S w df w ∂S w + =0 ∂t D dS w ∂xD where the true fractional flow displacement is given by (8.45) gives the partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation as ∂S w d Ψ ∂S w ∂S w ⎤ ∂ ⎡ + + N cap ⎢Ω ( S w ) ⎥=0 ∂t D dS w ∂xD ∂xD ⎣ ∂xD ⎦ (8.27) can be written in dimensionless form as ∂S w ∂f w + =0 ∂t D ∂xD where t D is given by (8. usually numerically. Eq.3.2 Buckley-Leverett Approximate Solution of the Immiscible Displacement Equation Eq.f w ( S w ) = Ψ ( S w ) + N cap Ω ( S w ) ∂S w ∂xD (8.45). 8.44) into (8. nonlinear.

47) by making a key simplifying assumption. hyperbolic partial differential equation that can be solved by the method of characteristics.50) Eq. The Buckley-Leverett approximation changes the original second order parabolic partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation to a first order. ∂xD which is unknown. t D ) is given by ∂S w ⎛ dxD ⎞ ∂S w dS w +⎜ = ⎟ ∂t D ⎝ dt D ⎠ ∂xD dt D (8.51) 8-22 . Buckley and Leverett (1941) obtained an approximate solution to Eq.49) Substituting Eq.48) It should be observed that the true fractional flow function contains ∂S w .(8. first order. From calculus.50) is known as the Buckley-Leverett equation in the petroleum industry.50) is a nonlinear. they approximated the fractional flow of the wetting phase as fw Fw (8. the change allows an approximate analytical solution to be obtained for the wetting phase saturation profiles that is adequate for making gross performance calculations for the immiscible displacement.49) into (8.(8.(8.1 + N cap krnw fw = dJ ∂S w dS w ∂xD 1 ⎞ ⎛ ⎜1 + ⎟ ⎝ M⎠ (8. the total time derivative of S ( xD .(8. However.(8. They dropped the capillary pressure term from Eq.47) gives the partial differential equation for the wetting phase saturation as ∂S w dFw ∂S w + =0 ∂t D dS w ∂xD (8. hyperbolic partial differential equation. Eq.48) and as a result. This is a radical change in the structure of the mathematical problem.

50) from (8. t D 0 will be zero and all the saturations from Swi to (1 .53).54) shows that along the characteristic path given by Eq.(8.(8.51) gives ⎛ dxD dFw ⎞ ∂S w dS w − = ⎜ ⎟ dt D dS w ⎠ ∂xD dt D ⎝ (8.(8.57) 8-23 . In this case. Eq.53) can be integrated to determine the distance traveled by a constant saturation at a given time as xDSw ( tD ) − xDSw ( 0) = ( t D − t D 0 ) dFw dS w (8.56) can be written as dFw dS w (8.(8. the saturation is a constant. Eq.54).52) can be decomposed into the following two simultaneous equations: dxD dFw − =0 dt D dS w dS w =0 dt D (8.(8.56) xD = t D dFw dS w (8.52) Eq.Snwr) will be located at the inlet end of the system.55) becomes xDSw ( tD ) = t D Eq.(8. Eq.55) If there was no prior injection.53) gives the characteristic path for the hyperbolic partial differential equation given by Eq(8. making xDSw ( 0) equal to zero.(8.54) Eq.(8.53) (8.Subtracting Eq.

61) Given the relative permeability curves and the viscosity ratio. The similarity transformation is given by z= xD dFw df w = = t D dS w dS w (8.60) If the saturation profiles for an immiscible displacement are plotted as S w versus xD .57) can be written in dimensional form as x= Qi ( t ) dFw φ A dS w (8.(8.58) applies to a particular wetting phase saturation. the approximate fractional flow function and its derivative can be computed and 8-24 .(8. Eq. To determine the dimensionless distance traveled by a particular saturation S w1 at time t D .where xD is the dimensionless distance traveled by a given saturation at time t D .58) Eq. we use Eq.57) can be used to derive a similarity transformation for an immiscible displacement. If the tD saturation profiles in an immiscible displacement are imaged say by CT or by NMR.57) or (8.59) where the derivative of the approximate fractional flow curve is evaluated at S w1 .(8.(8.57) to compute the distance as ⎛ dF ⎞ xD = t D ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Sw1 (8. then Eq. Eq. all the saturation profiles will collapse into one curve. It should be emphasized that Eq.58) is usually referred to in the petroleum industry as the BuckleyLeverett frontal advance equation. including the effect of capillarity.(8.60) can be used to calculate the true fractional flow curve.(8. as f w ( Sw ) = ∫ Sw S wirr xD dS w tD (8.

We see that the Buckley-Leverett approximation gives rise to multiple-valued saturations at various xD which is physically impossible.63) Upon performing the integration in Eq. the distance ⎝ dS w ⎠ traveled by each wetting phase saturation between Swirr and (1-Snwr) at a given time t D can be computed. A volumetric balance of the injected wetting phase can be used to calculate x f as follows: Qi ( t ) = ∫ φ A ( S w − S wirr )dx xf 0 (8.59) and this derivative function. This multiple-valued solution is caused by neglecting the capillary term in the fractional flow equation.plotted as shown in Figure 8.59) and the approximate derivative function.62) by parts and substitution of Eq.(8.(8.9.(8. Using Eq. one obtains 8-25 . we appeal to physical reality as follows. In this figure.63) and rearranging.(8. the S-shaped curve ADBC is the approximate fractional flow curve (Fw) obtained from the relative permeability curves and the viscosity ratio.(8. To eliminate the multiple-valued solution. At time t.58) gives Qi ( t ) = φ Ax f ( S wf − S wirr ) − Qi ∫ S wf 1− Snwr dFw dS w dS w (8. The curve AFE is the derivative of ⎛ dF ⎞ this function ⎜ w ⎟ . Figure 8. It is no accident that the multi-valued solution occurs in the saturation range S wirr < S w < S wf where the capillary pressure gradient is high and should not have been neglected. Qi(t) of wetting phase has been injected and the flood front has traveled a distance x f into the medium.10 shows the saturation profile that will be obtained before wetting phase breakthrough by use of Eq.62) Integration of Eq.

Approximate fractional flow function and its first derivative.9. Calculated water saturation distribution based on the BuckleyLeverett approximation showing the discontinuity in saturation as required by a material balance.10. Note the tangent construction. 8-26 .Figure 8. Figure 8.

66) The saturation distribution in Figure 8.10. The effect of the tangent construction is to correct the approximate fractional flow curve Fw for the capillary term that was neglected to obtain the true fractional flow curve fw. With this correction.9).64) From the Buckley-Leverett frontal advance equation. Swf. fw.10 will be single valued if all the saturations between Swirr and the frontal saturation.9) thereby eliminating the S-shaped lower portion of Fw.(8. This line is shown in Figure 8. which led to the tripple-valued saturation solution of Figure 8. Eq. With the tangent construction correction in place.58). is now given by the curve ABC (Fig. After the tangent construction.(8. Fw. the true fractional flow curve and its derivative are given by 8-27 . Eq.65) wf A comparison of Eqs. the true fractional flow curve. 8. are eliminated.(8. one can also obtain φ Ax f = Qi ( t ) ⎜ ⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S (8.64) and (8.66) shows that the frontal saturation (Swf) is the saturation at which the straight line passing through the point Sw = Swirr and Fw = 0 is tangent to the approximate fractional flow curve. 8. This tangent construction was first suggested by Welge (1952). the derivative of the ⎛ df ⎞ true fractional flow curve ⎜ w ⎟ used in the solution is given by the curve ⎝ dS w ⎠ EFG (Fig. Such a correction is needed at the front (low wetting phase saturation) where the capillary pressure gradient is high and should not have been neglected.φ Ax f = Qi ( t ) Fw ( S wf ) S wf − S wirr (8.9 as AB.65) gives Fw ( S wf ) ⎛ dFw ⎞ = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf S wf − S wirr (8.

8-28 .11.Figure 8. Integration of the transformed saturation data to calculate the true fractional flow curve including capillarity. Figure 8.12. Similarity transformation for an immiscible displacement.

the average wetting phase saturation behind the front is given by 8-29 .⎧⎛ S − S ⎞ ⎛ dF ⎞ wirr ⎪⎜ w ⎟ Fw ( S wf ) = ( S w − S wf ) ⎜ w ⎟ for S wirr ≤ S w ≤ S wf ⎪ (8.0 ⎩⎝ w ⎠ Sw (8. The slope of the tangent line can be written as 1 − Fw ( S wf ) ⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = S wav − S wf ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8.67) f w ( S w ) = ⎨⎜ S wf − S wirr ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf ⎝ ⎠ ⎪ ⎪ Fw ( S w ) for S wf ≤ S w ≤ 1.9) gives the constant average wetting phase saturation behind the front before and at wetting phase breakthrough.9) and is shown in Figure 8.68) The similarity transformation for the immiscible displacement is given by the curve EFGH (Fig.69) which can be rearranged as S wav = S wf + 1 − Fw ( S wf ) ⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8. We now show that the intersection of the tangent line with the line Fw = 1 (point J in Fig.0 ⎩ and ⎧⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎪⎜ ⎟ = a constant for S wirr ≤ S w ≤ S wf dS w ⎠ S df w ⎪⎝ wf =⎨ dS w ⎪⎛ dF ⎞ w ⎪⎜ dS ⎟ for S wf ≤ S w ≤ 1.11.70) Before breakthrough. Figure 8. 8. 8.12 shows how the transformed saturation data can be integrated to obtain the true fractional flow curve that includes the effect of capillarity.

Snwr.71) Substituting Eq.70). which confirms that the intersection of the tangent line and the line Fw = 1 gives the wetting phase saturation (Swav) corresponding to point J in Figure 8.72) Eq. the average wetting phase saturation at breakthrough can be obtained graphically from the tangent construction.58) into (8. the Buckley-Leverett approximation can be used to predict the performance of the one-dimensional immiscible displacement after wetting phase breakthrough. The intersection of the tangent line and the line Fw = 1 gives the average wetting phase saturation in the porous medium corresponding to the outlet wetting phase saturation. Before breakthrough. By this tangent construction. the entire displacement performance can be predicted for a given set of wetting and nonwetting relative permeability curves and wetting and non-wetting viscosity ratio.9. 8-30 . the amount of non-wetting phase recovered is equal to the amount of fluid injected.(8. Thus.71) and integrating gives the average wetting phase saturation behind the front as S wav = S wf + 1 − Fw ( S wf ) ⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8.(8.(8. Thus. The average wetting phase saturation after breakthrough can be obtained by a tangent construction at the outlet wetting phase saturation between Swf and 1 .72) is identical to Eq.S wav = ∫ 1− Snwr 0 φ AxdS w φ Ax f (8.

the oil recovery can be calculated at any time by first calculating the average water saturation in the porous medium at that time and applying Eq. depending on the stage of water injection. the equations in this section are written in terms of the true fractional flow curve. Eq. 8-31 . the viscosity ratio and the Welge tangent construction. Let us examine the waterflood performance at various stages of the flood.8. in principle.(8. the amount of oil recovered before water breakthrough must equal the amount of water injected. Oil Recovery Before Water Breakthrough Consider a constant rate water injection project.73) where R is the oil recovery as a fraction of the initial oil in place. Thus. at reservoir conditions. Swav is the average water saturation in the porous medium at the time of interest and Swirr is the initial water saturation in the porous medium before water injection which is assumed to be the irreducible water saturation. Assuming incompressible fluids. The methodology presented also applies to the calculation of the performance of a gas flood using gas-oil drainage relative permeability curves.73). Thus. Oil Recovery at any Time The oil recovery at any time after the initiation of water injection is given by R= S wav − S wirr 1 − S wirr (8.3 Waterflood Performance Calculations from Buckley–Leverett Theory We now apply Buckley-Leverett theory to calculate a waterflood performance from beginning to end.(8.73) may not offer the most direct way to calculate the oil recovery. It is assumed that the true fractional flow curve and its derivative have been computed using the relative permeability curves. However.3. Therefore.

At the moment of water breakthrough.76) where Wi is the pore volume of water injected. Eq. the distance traveled by a given saturation is given by x= Qi ( t ) ⎛ df w ⎞ qBwt ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S w (8. Bw is the water formation volume factor. The cumulative oil produced at surface conditions is Cumulative Oil Produced = qBwt Qi ( t ) Qo ( t ) = = Bo Bo Bo (8. The oil recovery as a fraction of the initial oil in place is given by R= Qi ( t ) qBwt Wi = = φ AL (1 − S wirr ) φ AL (1 − S wirr ) (1 − S wirr ) (8.78) wf At the moment of water breakthrough.77) to the frontal water saturation Swf to get xf = Qi ( t ) ⎛ df w ⎞ qBwt ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S wf (8. Eq.qBwt = Qi ( t ) = Qo ( t ) (8.58). t is the time of interest before water breakthrough. Qi is the cumulative water injected at time t in reservoir units and Qo is the cumulative oil produced at time t in reservoir units. Oil Recovery at Water Breakthrough From the Buckley–Leverett frontal advance equation.(8. the frontal saturation arrives at the outlet end of the porous medium and x f equals L.(8.77) w Let us apply Eq.74) where q is the constant water injection rate.78) then becomes 8-32 .75) where Bo is the current oil formation volume factor.(8. in surface units.

(8. tbt.79) wf Eq. The cumulative oil recovery at water breakthrough is equal to the cumulative water injected in reservoir volumes.(8.L= Qi ( t ) ⎛ df w ⎞ qBwt ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S wf (8.80) as tbt = φ AL ⎛ df ⎞ qBw ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8.75) can be rearranged as Wi = qBwt Qi ( t ) 1 = = φ AL φ AL ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8.(8. The fractional oil recovery at water breakthrough is obtained from Eq.80) as R= Qi ( t ) Wi qBwt = = = 1 − S wi φ AL (1 − S wi ) φ AL (1 − S wi ) 1 ⎛ df ⎞ (1 − S wi ) ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S (8.71) .80) where Wi is the pore volume of water injected.81) wf The breakthrough time.82) or in dimensionless form as t Dbt = 1 ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf (8.83) The average water saturation in the porous medium behind the displacement front before and at water breakthrough is given by S wav = ∫ 1− Sor 0 φ AxdS w φ Ax f 8-33 (8. can be obtained from Eq.

From Figure 8.86) But Fw at Sw = (1 – Sor) is equal to 1.Figure 8. Thus.58) into (8. Thus.85) Performing the integration in Eq.(8.84) Substituting Eq.(8.0. the average water saturation in the porous medium at water breakthrough can easily be determined graphically.13 shows a typical water saturation distribution at time t before breakthrough. we see that the integral (area under the curve) in Eq.(8. The average water 8-34 .85) gives S wav = S wf + Qi ( t ) ⎡ f w (1 − Sor ) − f w ( S wf ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ φ Ax f (8.72) It should be observed in Figure 8.71) can be split into two parts as follows: S wav = φ AS wf x f + ∫ 1− Sor S wf φ AxdS w φ Ax f (8.(8.(8. Eq.(8.87) Substituting Eq.78) into (8.84) gives the average water saturation as Qi ( t ) ∫ 1− Sor S wav = S wf + S wf dFw φ Ax f (8.81) can rewritten as S wav Qi ( t ) ⎡1 − f w ( S wf ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = S wf + φ Ax f (8.13.9 that the average water saturation behind the front up until water breakthrough as given in Eq.87) gives the average water saturation behind the front as ⎡1 − f w ( S wf ) ⎤ ⎦ S wav = S wf + ⎣ ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S wf (8.72) is the same as the water saturation at which the tangent to the fractional flow curve intersects the Fw = 1 axis.

73) gives Figure 8.73) to calculate the oil recovery at water breakthrough.72) into Eq.(8.saturation can then be substituted into Eq.(8. 8-35 .13.81). We can easily show that the result obtained by this approach will be the same as that obtained by Eq.(8.(8. Substituting Eq. Typical water saturation profile at time t before water breakthrough.

81).90) gives the pore volumes of water injected as Wi = qBwt Qi ( t ) 1 = = φ AL φ AL ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Sw 2 (8.(8.R= ⎡1 − f w ( S wf ) ⎤ ⎦ −S S wf + ⎣ wirr ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S wf 1 − S wirr (8.(8. we find that f w ( S wf ) ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf S wf − S wirr (8.91) 8-36 .66) Substituting Eq.9. Eq.88) From the equation of the tangent line in Figure 8.77) applied to the outlet end of the porous medium gives L= Qi ( t ) ⎛ df w ⎞ qBwt ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S w2 (8.(8.88) gives the oil recovery at water breakthrough as R= 1 ⎛ df ⎞ (1 − S wi ) ⎜ w ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S (8. Oil Recovery After Water Breakthrough After water breakthrough. Rearrangement of Eq.89) wf which is identical to Eq.66) into (8.90) w2 where Sw2 is the water saturation at the outlet end of the porous medium which now lies between Swf and (1 – Sor).(8.

where Wi is the pore volumes of water injected since the initiation of water injection. Eq.(8.91) is analogous to Eq.(8.80) before breakthrough. A material balance for the water after water breakthrough gives

Qi ( t ) − ∫ φ A ( S w − S wirr )dx = Qw ( t )

L 0

(8.92)

The integral in Eq.(8.92) can be performed using integration by parts. Performing integration by parts, Eq.(8.92) can be written as

**Qi ( t ) − ⎡φ A ( S w − S wirr ) x ⎤ 0 − ∫ φ AxdS w = Qw ( t ) ⎣ ⎦ Sw 2
**

L

{

1− Sor

}

(8.93)

Substituting the limits for the first integral gives

Qi ( t ) − φ AL ( S w 2 − S wirr ) − ∫

Substituting Eq.(8.77) into (8.94) gives

{

1− Sor

Sw 2

φ AxdS w = Qw ( t )

}

(8.94)

Qi ( t ) − φ AL ( S w 2 − S wirr ) − Qi ( t ) ∫

{

1− Sor

Sw 2

df w = Qw ( t )

}

(8.95)

Performing the integration in Eq.(8.95) gives

**Qi ( t ) − φ AL ( S w 2 − S wirr ) − Qi ( t ) ⎡ f w (1 − Sor ) − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ = Qw ( t ) ⎣ ⎦
**

or

{

}

(8.96)

Qi ( t ) − φ AL ( S w 2 − S wirr ) − Qi ( t ) ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ = Qw ( t ) ⎣ ⎦

{

}

(8.97)

**since fw at Sw = 1–Sor is equal to 1. Eq.(8.97) can be rearranged as
**

S w 2 = S wirr + Qi ( t ) − Qw ( t ) Qi ( t ) − ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎦ φ AL φ AL ⎣

(8.98)

8-37

S w 2 = S wirr + N pD − Wi ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

(8.99) (8.100)

N pD = S w 2 − S wi + Wi ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

where NpD is the oil recovery as a fraction of the total pore volume. We observe that the sum of the first two terms on the right hand side of Eq.(8.99) is the average water saturation in the porous medium after water breakthrough. Thus, Eq.(8.99) can be rewritten as

S w 2 = S wav − Wi ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

(8.101)

Substituting Eq.(8.91) into (8.101) and rearranging gives the average water saturation in the porous medium after water breakthrough as

⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎦ S wav = S w 2 + ⎣ ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S

w2

(8.102)

which is analogous to Eq.(8.72) at water breakthrough. Figure 8.14 shows that the average water saturation after water breakthrough as given by Eq.(8.102) is equal to the water saturation where the tangent line to the fractional flow curve at the outlet water saturation intersects the Fw = 1 axis. The average water saturation in the porous medium after water breakthrough could also have been derived using Eq.(8.71) and the water saturation profile shown in Figure 8.15. The average water saturation is then given by

S wav =

φ AS w 2 L + ∫

1− Sor

Sw 2

φ AxdS w

φ AL

(8.103)

Substituting Eq.(8.77) into (8.103) gives the average water saturation as

8-38

S wav = S w 2 +

Qi ( t ) ∫

1− Sor

Sw 2

df w

φ AL

(8.104)

Figure 8.14. Average water saturation after water breakthrough.

Performing the integration in Eq.(8.104) gives

S wav = S w 2 +

Qi ( t ) ⎡ f w (1 − Sor ) − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

φ AL

(8.105)

But fw at Sw = 1 – Sor is equal to 1.0. Thus, Eq.(8.105) can be rewritten as

8-39

Figure 8.15. Typical water saturation profile at time t after water breakthrough.

S wav = S w 2 +

Qi ( t ) ⎡1 − f w ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

φ AL

(8.106)

**Substituting Eq.(8.90) into (8.106) gives the average water saturation after water breakthrough as
**

⎡1 − Fw ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎦ S wav = S w 2 + ⎣ ⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ S

w2

(8.107)

8-40

which is identical to Eq.(8.102). Water Production There is no water production before water breakthrough. After water breakthrough, the water oil ratio is given by

⎛ fw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ qw ⎝ Bw ⎠ Bo ⎛ Fw ⎞ = = WOR = ⎜ ⎟ qo ⎛ f o ⎞ Bw ⎝ 1 − Fw ⎠ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ Bo ⎠

(8.108)

The pore volumes of water produced is given by material balance on the water as

**Water produced = Cumulative water injected − Water stored
**

Substituting appropriate symbols into Eq.(8.109) gives

W p = Wi − ( S wav − S wirr )

(8.109)

(8.110)

Substituting Eq.(8.91) into (8.110) gives the pore volumes of water produced as

Wp =

1 ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Sw 2

− ( S wav − S wi )

(8.111)

Example 8.1 A waterflood is to be performed in a linear reservoir. The relative permeability curves for the reservoir are adequately described by the following analytical models:

krw = k wr Se3

(8.112)

8-41

krnw = knwr (1 − Se )

where Se is defined as

2

(8.113)

Se =

S w − S wirr 1 − S wirr − Snwr

(8.114)

The other pertinent data are as follows:

S wirr = 0.20 S nwr = 0.30 knwr = 0.95 k wr = 0.35

μnw = μo = 10 cp μ w = 1 cp

Bo = 1.20 RB/STB Bw = 1.0 RB/STB

1. 2. Calculate and plot graphs of the relative permeability curves. Calculate and plot graphs of the approximate fractional flow curve

**( Fw ) and its derivative
**

3.

⎛ dFw ⎞ ⎜ ⎟. ⎝ dS w ⎠

Perform the Welge tangent construction and from it determine the frontal water saturation breakthrough

(S ) ,

wf

the average water saturation at water

( Swav )

and the true fractional flow curve

( fw )

and its

⎛ df ⎞ derivative ⎜ w ⎟ . ⎝ dS w ⎠

8-42

4. 5. 6.

Plot the graphs of the true fractional flow curve and its derivative. Calculate the end point mobility ratio for the waterflood. Calculate and plot graphs of the water saturation profiles at tD = 0.20, 0.30 and 1.0.

7. 8.

Calculate the dimensionless breakthrough time. Calculate the breakthrough oil recovery as a fraction of the initial oil in place.

9.

Calculate and plot the graph of oil recovery versus pore volume of water injected before and after water breakthrough.

10.

Calculate and plot the graph of water oil ratio versus oil recovery. Solution to Example 8.1

The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 8.1. 1. The relative permeability curves calculated with Eqs.(8.112) and (8.113) are shown in Figure 8.16. 2. Figure 8.17 shows the approximate fractional flow curve calculated with Eq.(8.41) and its derivative calculated by differentiating Fw with respect to Sw analytically. Table 8.1. Calculated Results for Example 8.1.

tD 0.20 Sw 0.200 0.210 0.220 0.230 0.240 krw 0.00000 0.00000 0.00002 0.00008 0.00018 krnw 0.950 0.912 0.876 0.839 0.804 Fw 0.00000 0.00003 0.00026 0.00090 0.00222 tD 0.30 xD 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 tD 1.00 xD 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 Wi 0.000 0.008 0.016 0.025 0.033 R WOR

dFw dS w

0.000 0.009 0.039 0.094 0.176

fw 0.000 0.028 0.056 0.083 0.111

df w dS w

2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775

xD 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555

0.000 0.023 0.045 0.068 0.091

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

8-43

0.250 0.260 0.270 0.280 0.290 0.300 0.310 0.320 0.330 0.340 0.350 0.360 0.370 0.380 0.390 0.400 0.410 0.420 0.430 0.440 0.450 0.460 0.470 0.480 0.490 0.491 0.492 0.493 0.494 0.495 0.496 0.497 0.498 0.499 0.500

0.00035 0.00060 0.00096 0.00143 0.00204 0.00280 0.00373 0.00484 0.00615 0.00768 0.00945 0.01147 0.01376 0.01633 0.01921 0.02240 0.02593 0.02981 0.03407 0.03871 0.04375 0.04921 0.05511 0.06147 0.06829 0.06900 0.06971 0.07043 0.07115 0.07188 0.07262 0.07335 0.07410 0.07485 0.07560

0.770 0.736 0.703 0.670 0.639 0.608 0.578 0.549 0.520 0.492 0.466 0.439 0.414 0.389 0.365 0.342 0.320 0.298 0.277 0.257 0.238 0.219 0.201 0.184 0.168 0.166 0.164 0.163 0.161 0.160 0.158 0.157 0.155 0.154 0.152

0.00453 0.00815 0.01348 0.02094 0.03097 0.04403 0.06057 0.08103 0.10575 0.13496 0.16875 0.20703 0.24949 0.29560 0.34465 0.39576 0.44794 0.50019 0.55153 0.60109 0.64815 0.69216 0.73274 0.76969 0.80296 0.80608 0.80917 0.81222 0.81524 0.81822 0.82117 0.82408 0.82695 0.82979 0.83260

0.290 0.441 0.632 0.866 1.147 1.473 1.844 2.254 2.693 3.150 3.607 4.044 4.439 4.772 5.024 5.181 5.238 5.195 5.058 4.842 4.561 4.234 3.879 3.511 3.144 3.107 3.071 3.035 2.999 2.964 2.928 2.893 2.857 2.822 2.788

0.139 0.167 0.194 0.222 0.250 0.278 0.305 0.333 0.361 0.389 0.416 0.444 0.472 0.500 0.527 0.555 0.583 0.611 0.638 0.666 0.694 0.722 0.749 0.777 0.805 0.808 0.810 0.813 0.816 0.819 0.822 0.824 0.827 0.830 0.833

2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775

0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555

0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833

2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775

0.041 0.049 0.057 0.066 0.074 0.082 0.090 0.098 0.106 0.115 0.123 0.131 0.139 0.147 0.156 0.164 0.172 0.180 0.188 0.197 0.205 0.213 0.221 0.229 0.237 0.246 0.254 0.262 0.270 0.278 0.287 0.295 0.303 0.311 0.319

0.113 0.136 0.158 0.180 0.202 0.223 0.243 0.263 0.281 0.299 0.315 0.330 0.343 0.355 0.365 0.374 0.381 0.388 0.393 0.398 0.403 0.407 0.411 0.416 0.421 0.423 0.426 0.428 0.430 0.432 0.434 0.436 0.438 0.440 0.442

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

8-44

0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.501 0.502 0.503 0.504 0.505 0.506 0.507 0.508 0.509 0.510 0.520 0.530 0.540 0.550 0.560 0.570 0.580 0.590 0.600 0.610 0.620 0.630 0.640 0.650 0.660 0.670 0.680 0.690 0.700

0.07568 0.07575 0.07583 0.07583 0.07586 0.07636 0.07712 0.07789 0.07866 0.07944 0.08023 0.08102 0.08181 0.08261 0.08341 0.09175 0.10062 0.11005 0.12005 0.13064 0.14183 0.15364 0.16609 0.17920 0.19298 0.20745 0.22262 0.23852 0.25515 0.27254 0.29070 0.30966 0.32942 0.35000

0.152 0.152 0.152 0.152 0.151 0.150 0.149 0.147 0.146 0.144 0.143 0.142 0.140 0.139 0.137 0.123 0.110 0.097 0.086 0.074 0.064 0.055 0.046 0.038 0.031 0.024 0.019 0.014 0.009 0.006 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.000

0.83288 0.83316 0.83343 0.83343 0.83357 0.83537 0.83810 0.84081 0.84347 0.84611 0.84871 0.85127 0.85380 0.85630 0.85877 0.88169 0.90160 0.91878 0.93351 0.94606 0.95668 0.96561 0.97306 0.97923 0.98430 0.98841 0.99171 0.99430 0.99629 0.99777 0.99882 0.99951 0.99988 1.00000

2.784 2.781 2.777 2.777 2.775 2.753 2.718 2.684 2.650 2.616 2.583 2.549 2.516 2.483 2.450 2.137 1.850 1.591 1.360 1.154 0.974 0.816 0.678 0.559 0.456 0.368 0.292 0.228 0.172 0.126 0.086 0.052 0.024 0.000

0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.834 0.835 0.838 0.841 0.843 0.846 0.849 0.851 0.854 0.856 0.859 0.882 0.902 0.919 0.934 0.946 0.957 0.966 0.973 0.979 0.984 0.988 0.992 0.994 0.996 0.998 0.999 1.000 1.000 1.000

2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.753 2.718 2.684 2.650 2.616 2.583 2.549 2.516 2.483 2.450 2.137 1.850 1.591 1.360 1.154 0.974 0.816 0.678 0.559 0.456 0.368 0.292 0.228 0.172 0.126 0.086 0.052 0.024 0.000

0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.555 0.551 0.544 0.537 0.530 0.523 0.517 0.510 0.503 0.497 0.490 0.427 0.370 0.318 0.272 0.231 0.195 0.163 0.136 0.112 0.091 0.074 0.058 0.046 0.034 0.025 0.017 0.010 0.005 0.000

0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.833 0.826 0.816 0.805 0.795 0.785 0.775 0.765 0.755 0.745 0.735 0.641 0.555 0.477 0.408 0.346 0.292 0.245 0.203 0.168 0.137 0.110 0.088 0.068 0.052 0.038 0.026 0.016 0.007 0.000

2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.775 2.753 2.718 2.684 2.650 2.616 2.583 2.549 2.516 2.483 2.450 2.137 1.850 1.591 1.360 1.154 0.974 0.816 0.678 0.559 0.456 0.368 0.292 0.228 0.172 0.126 0.086 0.052 0.024 0.000

0.328 0.336 0.344 0.352 0.360 0.363 0.368 0.373 0.377 0.382 0.387 0.392 0.397 0.403 0.408 0.468 0.540 0.628 0.736 0.866 1.027 1.226 1.474 1.788 2.191 2.716 3.420 4.392 5.798 7.966 11.663 19.193 42.067

0.444 0.445 0.447 0.449 0.450 0.451 0.452 0.453 0.454 0.455 0.456 0.457 0.458 0.459 0.460 0.469 0.479 0.489 0.499 0.508 0.518 0.528 0.537 0.546 0.555 0.564 0.573 0.581 0.589 0.597 0.605 0.612 0.619

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.010 6.089 6.212 6.338 6.466 6.598 6.732 6.868 7.008 7.151 7.297 8.943 10.995 13.575 16.849 21.048 26.502 33.693 43.348 56.589 75.235 102.358 143.471 209.224 322.295 537.909 1020.015 2444.665 10402.648

8-45

Figure 8.16. Relative permeability curves for Example 8.1.

8-46

Figure 8.17. Approximate fractional flow curve and its derivative for Example 8.1. 3. The Welge tangent construction is shown in Figure 8.17. From the tangent construction,

S wf = 0.500035

⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = 2.775 ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf

S wav = 0.5603

4. The true fractional flow curve and its derivative obtained from the tangent construction are shown in Figure 8.18.

8-47

Figure 8.18. True fractional flow curve and its derivative for Example 8.1.

5.

**The end point mobility ratio for the waterflood is given by
**

M E = ( krw / μ w ) / ( krnw / μnw ) = ( 0.35 /1) / ( 0.95 /10 ) = 3.68

6.

The water saturation profiles calculated with Eq.(8.57) are shown in Figure 8.19.

8-48

Figure 8.19. Water saturation profiles for Example 8.1.

7.

**The dimensionless breakthrough time is calculated with Eq.(8.83) as
**

t Dbt =

1

⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf

=

1 = 0.460 pore volume injected. 2.775

8.

**The breakthrough oil recovery as a fraction of the initial oil in place is calculated with Eq.(8.81) as
**

Rbt =

1 1 = = 0.450 ⎛ df w ⎞ (1 − 0.20 )( 2.775 ) (1 − S wirr ) ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ dS w ⎠ Swf

9.

Before water breakthrough, the oil recovery is a linear function of the pore volume injected and can be calculated with Eq.(8.86). After water 8-49

breakthrough, the oil recovery is calculated with Eq.(8.100) as

R=

N pD

1 − S wirr

.

Figure 8.20 shows the calculated oil recovery curve.

Figure 8.20. Oil recovery curve for Example 8.1.

10.

The producing water oil ratio is zero before water breakthrough. After water breakthrough, the producing water oil water ratio is calculated with Eq.(8.108). After breakthrough, the producing water oil ratio increases rapidly as shown in Figure 8.21.

8-50

Figure 8.21. Producing water oil ratio for Example 8.1.

**8.4 LABORATORY MEASUREMENT OF TWO-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES BY THE UNSTEADY STATE METHOD
**

The major problem with the steady state method for relative permeability measurements is that it is too slow. An alternative and much faster technique is the unsteady state method or the dynamic displacement method (Welge, 1952; Johnson et al., 1959; Jones and Roszelle, 1978). In this method, for an imbibition test, the core is first saturated with the nonwetting phase at irreducible wetting phase saturation as in the steady state method. However, only the wetting phase is injected into the core to displace the non-wetting phase. As the experiment progresses, the wetting phase breaks through at the outlet end of the core and over time a higher and higher fraction of the total produced fluid is the wetting phase. 8-51

By measuring the produced fractions of the wetting and non-wetting phases at the outlet end of the core and the pressure drop across the core versus time, the relative permeability curves can be calculated from the production and pressure data using the theory of immiscible displacement in porous media. This method is much faster than the steady state method, If adequate precautions are taken, the dynamic will give relative permeability curves that are usually requiring a few hours to complete compared to several weeks for the steady state method. displacement method

comparable to those obtained by the steady state method. Figure 8.22 shows the experimental setup and the measured data. Because the point of observation is the outlet end of the core, it is necessary that capillary end effect be minimized otherwise the calculated relative permeability-saturation relationship will be wrong. It should be noted that relative permeability curves can only be obtained over the saturation range Swf to 1-Snwr. Therefore, it is necessary to choose the fluid viscosities that will give the widest possible saturation window. This is obtained by using performing and adverse mobility ratio displacement. A favorable mobility ratio displacement will be unsuitable because for such a displacement, Swf is equal to (1-Snwr) and there is no saturation window for calculating the relative permeability curves. The relative permeability to the wetting phase below Swf can only be obtained by extrapolating the data above Swf. The technique for calculating relative permeability curves from

unsteady state measurements was developed by Welge (1952) and Johnson, Bossler and Neumann (JBN, 1959). The fractional flow of the non-wetting phase at the outlet end of the core is given by

f nw 2 =

1 k μ 1 + rw nw krnw μ w

(8.115)

8-52

Figure 8.22. Unsteady state method for determining two-phase relative permeability curves; (a) coreflood; (b) measured data.

It should be noted that for saturations above Swf, Eq.(8.115) gives the true fractional flow of the non-wetting phase because above Swf, the true fractional flow and the approximate fractional curves are equal. Eq.(8.115) can be rearranged to calculate the wetting-non-wetting phase relative permeability ratio as

⎞ krw μ ⎛ 1 = w ⎜ − 1⎟ krnw μ nw ⎝ f nw 2 ⎠

(8.116)

The fractional flow of the non-wetting phase at the outlet end of the core is also given by 8-53

f nw 2 =

qnw dQnw ( t ) dN pD = = q dQi ( t ) dWi

(8.117)

where Qnw(t) and Qi(t) are the cumulative non-wetting phase produced and the cumulative wetting phase injected and N pD and Wi are their dimensionless counterparts as fractions of the total pore volume. Eqs.(8.116) and (8.117) were first presented by Welge (1952). It should be noted that these equations give no useful information before breakthrough because the fractional flow of the non-wetting phase at the outlet end of the core is 1 and the relative permeability to wetting phase is zero. This is why the unsteady state relative permeability method is limited to only post breakthrough wetting phase saturations between Swf and 1-Snwr. After wetting phase breakthrough, we need to associate the computed relative permeability ratio with the wetting phase saturation at the outlet end of the core, the point of observation. wetting phase after breakthrough to obtain To determine the wetting phase saturation at the outlet end of the core, we perform a material balance for the

S w 2 = S wirr + N pD − Wi ⎡1 − Fw ( S w 2 ) ⎤ ⎣ ⎦

(8.99)

Eq.(8.99) can be written in terms of the fractional flow of the non-wetting phase as

S w 2 = S wirr + N pD − Wi f nw 2

Using Eqs.(8.116) and (8.118),

(8.118)

krw versus S w 2 can be computed. krnw

Johnson, Bossler and Neumann (JBN, 1959) presented equations for calculating the individual relative permeability curves by the unsteady state method by incorporating the pressure drop into the computations. pressure drop across the porous medium at time t is given by The

8-54

ΔP = − ∫

L

0

∂P dx ∂x

(8.119)

Darcy’s Law for the non-wetting phase gives

qnw = −

kkrnw A ∂P μnw ∂x

(8.120)

**Dividing Eq.(8.120) by q and rearranging gives the pressure gradient as
**

⎛ q μnw ⎞ ∂P = −⎜ ⎟ f nw ∂x ⎝ kkrnw A ⎠

(8.121)

**Substituting Eq.(8.121) into (8.119) gives
**

⎛ qμ ⎞ L f ΔP = ⎜ nw ⎟ ∫ nw dx ⎝ kA ⎠ 0 krnw

(8.122)

Applying the Buckley-Leverett frontal advance equation, Eq.(8.77), at the outlet end of the core after breakthrough gives

L=

Qi ( t ) ⎛ df w ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ φ A ⎝ dS w ⎠ S

(8.90)

w2

Dividing Eq.(8.77) by (8.90) gives

f' x = w L f w' 2

(8.123)

where f w' and f w' 2 are the derivatives of the fractional flow functions at any distance and at the core outlet, respectively. Differentiating Eq.(8.123) with respect to f w' gives

dx =

L df w' ' f w2

(8.124)

8-55

Substituting Eq.(8.124) into (8.122) and rearranging gives

∫

Let

' fw 2

0

f nw ' ΔPkAf w' 2 df w = krnw qμnw L

(8.125)

kA ⎛ q ⎞ = a constant ⎜ ⎟ = ⎝ ΔP ⎠ s μ nw L

(8.126)

Substituting Eq.(8.126) into (8.125) gives

∫

' fw 2

0

f nw krnw

⎛ q ⎞ ' ⎜ ⎟ f w2 ⎝ ΔP ⎠ s ' df w = ⎛ q ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ΔP ⎠

(8.127)

Let a relative injectivity ratio be defined as

⎛ q ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ΔP ⎠ Ir = ⎝ ⎛ q ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ΔP ⎠ s

Substituting Eq.(8.128) into (8.127) gives

(8.128)

∫

' fw 2

0

f nw ' f w' 2 df w = krnw Ir

(8.129)

**Differentiating Eq.(8.129) with respect to f w' 2 gives
**

f nw 2 d ⎛ f' ⎞ = ' ⎜ w2 ⎟ krnw df w 2 ⎝ I r ⎠

(8.130)

**Substituting Eq.(8.91) into (8.130) gives
**

f nw 2 = krnw d ⎛ 1 d⎜ ⎝ Wi ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎞ ⎝ Wi I r ⎠ ⎟ ⎠

(8.131)

8-56

The combination of high rate and adverse mobility ratio can lead to viscous instability that will make the displacement performance to be rate sensitive. in order to minimize capillary end effect. the unsteady state method can only be used to calculate relative permeability curves between Swf and the wetting phase saturation at the residual nonwetting phase saturation (1-Snwr) as previously noted. 1987). the relative permeability of the wetting phase can be calculated from Eq.116) as krw = ⎞ μw ⎛ 1 − 1⎟ krnw ⎜ μnw ⎝ f nw 2 ⎠ (8.(8.133) The advantage of the unsteady method over the steady state method of relative permeability measurement is that it is considerably faster.Eq. Because the method is based on the Buckley-Leverett displacement model.132) Knowing the relative permeability of non-wetting phase. unfavorable mobility ratio displacements are typically used to determine relative permeability curves by the unsteady state method. 8-57 .(8. Further.131) can be used to calculate the relative permeability of the nonwetting phase as krnw = f nw 2 d ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎛ 1 ⎞ WI d⎜ ⎟⎝ i r ⎠ ⎝ Wi ⎠ (8. then much of the relative permeability curves cannot be obtained because one is limited to a very small saturation observation window. To solve this problem. If this happens. the relative permeability curves obtained by the unsteady state method will be rate sensitive and can be quite different from the relative permeability curves of the same porous medium obtained by the steady state method (Peters and Khataniar. If Swf is high as in the case of a favorable mobility ratio displacement. high displacement rates are also typically used.

395 0. water was used to displace a viscous oil at a constant injection rate. Experimental Data for Unsteady State Relative Permeability Measurements.42 4. Any type of finite difference approximation of the derivatives will result in numerical noise leading to noisy relative permeability curves.95 ΔP psi 9. N pD = A1 + A2 ( ln Wi ) + A3 ( ln Wi ) ⎛ 1 ln ⎜ ⎝ Wi I r ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎟ = B1 + B2 ln ⎜ ⎠ ⎝ Wi 2 (8.(8.2.91 6.134) 2 ⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤ ⎞ ⎟ + B3 ⎢ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎦ (8.02 8.30 6.132) call for differentiating the measured experimental data. Wi PV 0.2 gives the experimental data for an unsteady state relative permeability measurement for a sandpack. The pore volume of water injected (Wi).439 0.87 8-58 . The challenge in calculating the relative permeability curves from these equations is to ensure that the curves are smooth.28 38.92 42. Peters and Khataniar (1987) have suggested the following curve fits.95 40.117) and (8.10 40. which they have shown to work well.07 5. The best way to process the experimental data is by fitting well behaved functions to the experimental data and then differentiating the functions.2 Table 8.135) Example 8. Table 8.351 0.91 41.502 0.Eqs.587 Qo %IOIP 38.339 0. In the experiment. the cumulative oil produced (Qo) and the pressure drop across the sandpack (ΔP) were measured as functions of time.

82 54.00 3.70 Other data for the experiment are as follows: Injection rate Irreducible water saturation Length of porous medium Diameter of porous medium Average porosity of porous medium Absolute permeability of porous medium Oil viscosity Oil density Water viscosity Water density Oil-water interfacial tension = = = = = = = = = = = 100 cc/hr 11.70 1.464 10.55 47.42 2.67 53.719 7.77 45.90% 54.71 54.578 13.13 1.30 2.52 2.016 43.203 12.7 dynes/cm 8-59 .092 8.67 54.0.78 52.604 2.840 1.75 1.16 54.74 1.79 1.11 46.70 1.34 54.8 cm 30.96 50.78 51.90 1.90 4.60 54.624 3.01 cp 0.32 2.996 gm/cm3 26.516 11.78 2.23 53.959 gm/cm3 1.96 48.346 5.99 1.08 50.271 14.83 1.42 Darcies 108.225 4.37 cp 0.029 2.7 cm 4.670 0.55 4.644 16.58% 3.137 1.

2 The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 8.0066 ( ln Wi ) ⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ln ⎜ ⎟ = −2. = = = 3.134) and (8.16 38. Plot graphs of the raw experimental data.5798ln ⎜ ⎟ + 0.28 % IOIP 54. The curve fit equations are ⎠ 2 N pD = 0.3600 + 1. Plot the graph of the true fractional flow curve measured in the experiment.1130 ⎢ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ⎝ Wi I r ⎠ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎦ 2 These equations can be differentiated analytically to obtain 8-60 .Effective permeability to oil at irreducible water saturation Darcies Oil recovery at water breakthrough Final oil recovery at termination of experiment 1. 3.0474 ln Wi + 0.25 show the curve fits of N pD versus ln Wi and ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 1 ln ⎜ ⎟ versus ln ⎜ ⎝ Wi I r ⎠ ⎝ Wi ⎞ ⎟ .3.4026 + 0.135) and display the results graphically. How long was this test? Solution to Example 8.23 shows the graphs of the raw experimental data. 6. Figure 8. 2.9 % IOIP Perform the curve fits suggested in Eqs. Figures 8. 2. 1. Calculate the oil-water relative permeability curves for the porous medium using the Johnson-Bossler-Neumann (JBN) method.24 and 8. 5. Plot graphs of the relative permeability curves. 4.(8.

91 6.13 1.823 -0.443 0.074 0.082 0.503 -0.004 -0.490 0.79 1.929 -0.1130 ⎡ln ⎛ W ⎞⎤ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ ⎟⎥ ⎢ ⎝ i ⎠⎥ ⎟ ⎝ i⎠ ⎣ ⎦ ⎠ ⎠ ⎥ e⎜ ⎝ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦ Table 8.174 0.084 0.026 0.006 0.823 0.550 -1.464 0.128 -0.030 0.559 0.353 0.197 0.021 0.029 2.386 0.473 0.003 0.87 4.401 0.276 0.532 1.037 0.07 5.711 5.90 1. Calculated Results for Example 8.532 0.42 2.319 0.004 0.959 2.339 0.349 0.113 0.416 -2.400 0.032 0.237 0.137 1.84 1.198 -5.689 -0.185 0.423 0.804 -1.1130 ) ln ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ WI 1.004 0.2.436 0.469 0.053 0.494 0.050 0.074 0.413 0.295 0.025 8-61 .047 -0.199 0.092 8.477 0.057 0.469 -1.171 1.441 0.040 -1.416 2.082 1.534 0.353 -2.456 0.55 4.379 -4.844 22.065 15.624 3.439 0.368 0.064 0.052 0.78 2.580 21.018 0.024 0.200 0.136 -2.203 12.032 0.3600+1.452 0.045 0.344 22.469 1.75 1.00 3.028 0.225 4.502 0.094 0.354 0.010 0.965 1.013 0.093 0.30 2.151 0.517 16.467 0. Wi PV NpD ΔP PV psi ln(Wi) ln ⎜ ⎛ 1⎞ ⎟ ⎝ Wi ⎠ fnw2 Sw2 0.747 -4.013 0.360 0.066 0.045 0.442 7.74 -1.722 -4.059 0.100 0.437 -5.0066 ) ln Wi Wi f nw 2 krnw ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ 1 d⎜ ( 2 )( 0.f nw 2 = dN pD dWi = 0.057 0.346 5.432 0.516 11.144 0.605 0.42 4.119 Ir 1 Wi I r ln ⎜ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ Wi I r ⎠ f nw 2 k rnw krnw 0.464 10.644 0.533 0.358 19.337 0.473 0.483 0.174 0.226 0.5798 ⎝ Wi = ⎝ i r ⎠=⎢ + ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎢⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ d⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎢ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎝ Wi ⎠ ⎣ ⎞⎤ ⎛ 2⎞ 1 1 ⎟ ⎥ ⎜ −2.983 -5.287 -1.573 0.744 1.500 0.097 0.019 0.3.214 8.174 -0.32 2.001 18.604 2.400 -0.578 0.002 0.457 0.385 -0.136 2.447 0.52 2.369 0.025 0.410 0.449 -3.547 0.002 0.533 -0.395 0.029 8.708 0.778 14.481 9.335 4.367 21.83 1.02 8.116 -3.526 0.431 0.009 0.30 6.258 0.708 -0.421 0.566 0.924 krw 0.744 -1.125 0.004 0.659 6.99 1.580 0.040 0.411 0.113 0.203 0.595 -3.959 -2.006 0.649 20.170 0.133 0.586 4.044 0.000 0.001 0.351 0.965 -1.108 0.775 11.171 -1.007 0.047 0.136 0.719 7.212 0.042 0.135 0.67 0.395 0.022 0.587 0.751 -2.343 0.075 0.356 0.162 0.079 0.047 0.473 0.206 0.397 0.175 0.479 0.158 17.582 0.0474 − ( 2 )( 0.353 2.378 0.162 0.182 0.290 0.472 0.447 0.689 0.033 0.594 9.512 0.473 -0.122 0.001 0.680 0.174 0.5798ln ⎛ W ⎞ + 0.929 0.106 -2.523 -5.128 0.388 0.047 0.004 -4.082 -1.

684 -2.2.820 -5.23.721 -5.001 0.001 0.484 1.016 0.644 16.483 0.003 0.482 0.70 1.592 23.588 0.019 0.909 0.003 -5.001 0.774 -2.022 0.208 0.213 0.13.586 2.70 2.016 0.774 0.045 0.271 14.684 2.001 23.217 Figure 8. Raw experimental data for the unsteady state relative permeability measurements of Example 8.590 0.586 -2.001 23.044 0.001 0.70 1. 8-62 .003 0.043 0.

⎠ ⎝ Wi ⎠ 3. They can only be obtained by extrapolation of the computed data to the conditions at the irreducible water saturation where krw = 0.133) are presented in Table 8. 4.25.592 .Figure 8. It should be noted that the relative permeability curves are obtained over the limited saturation range of 0.2.395 cannot be obtained from the experiment.119 and S wf = 0. Figure 8.2. The relative permeability curves between S wirr = 0.132) and (8.000 and knwr = 0. Curve fit of ln ⎜ ⎝ Wi I r ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎟ versus ln ⎜ ⎟ for Example 8.395 ≤ S w ≤ 0.26 shows the oil-water relative permeability curves from the unsteady state experiment. The oil-water relative permeability data calculated with Eqs. The 8-63 . ⎛ 1 Figure 8.24.924 .(8.2. Curve fit of N pD versus ln Wi for Example 8.

experiment predicts a residual oil saturation of 40% in this homogeneous high permeability sand.12. Figure 8.48 hours compared to several weeks for the steady state experiment. 6. The true fractional flow curve measured in the experiment is shown in Figure 8.27. If the saturation profiles in the experiment could be imaged.2. then it would possible to calculate the true fractional flow curve between S wirr and S w by the similarity transformation and the integration outlined in Figures 8. Computed relative permeability curves for Example 8. 5. 8-64 . The unsteady state experiment lasted 48. It is interesting to note that it is only that portion of the true fractional flow curve that is equal to the approximate fractional flow curve that can be measured in the experiment.26.11 and 8.

5 FACTORS AFFECTING RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES The factors that affect or could affect relative permeability curves include (1) fluid saturation. relative permeabilities are nonlinear functions of fluid saturation as shown in Figures 8. (7) pore structure. the higher the relative permeability to that fluid.1 Fluid Saturation Relative permeabilities are strongly dependent on fluid saturations. 8-65 . (5) viscosity ratio. (3) Wettability. (6) interfacial tension. (8) temperature and (9) heterogeneity.2. True fractional flow curve measured in the unsteady state experiment of Example 8. (2) fluid saturation history.Figure 8.27. 8.7. In general. 8.6 and 8.5. (4) injection rate. The higher the fluid saturation.

During imbibition.28. These observations are in accord with the experimental results shown in Figure 8. These differences can easily be explained. the imbibition relative permeability to the non-wetting phase is reduced compared to that during drainage. the wetting phase is forced to occupy and flow through pore sizes that are larger than it would otherwise have flowed if there was no trapping of the non-wetting phase. Therefore. saturations.28 shows typical relative permeability curves for drainage and imbibition. 8-66 .5. As a result. Figure 8. That of the wetting phase also will be high because it starts from 1 and decreases as the non-wetting phase begins to occupy some of the pores that were previously occupied by the wetting phase.8. some of the non-wetting phase will be trapped in the large pores.2 Saturation History Like capillary pressure curves. It also reduces the cross-sectional area of the medium occupied by the connected non-wetting phase. This forcing of the wetting phase to flow through larger pores than it would otherwise have done in the absence of trapping enhances the relative permeability of the wetting phase on the imbibition cycle compared to the drainage cycle. This capillary trapping reduces the amount of non-wetting phase available to flow during imbibition compared to during drainage. The thin film of wetting phase that coats the grain surface acts as a lubricant for the flow of the nonwetting phase. The imbibition non-wetting phase relative permeability curve is generally lower than the drainage curve at the same The imbibition wetting phase relative permeability curve is slightly greater than the drainage curve. the non-wetting phase flows through the large pores displacing the wetting phase along the way. relative permeability curves show saturation hysteresis. Because of capillary trapping of the non-wetting phase during imbibition. the relative permeability to the non-wetting phase will be high during drainage. During drainage.

In general. 1951). He then treated the core with a surface active agent (organo chlorosilane) that rendered the core oil wet and repeated the relative permeability measurements.28. Relative permeability hysteresis (Osoba et al. The results are shown Figure 8.5.. 8. Jennings (1957) measured steady state oil water relative permeability curves on a core that was initially strongly water wet.3 Wettability Relative permeability curves are markedly affected by the wettability of the medium. the relative permeability to oil decreases while the relative permeability to water increases as the medium changes from a strongly water wet to a strongly oil wet 8-67 .29.Figure 8.

We see that when plotted against the wetting phase saturation.4. and frequently less than 10%. These observations are consistent with the effect of wettability on the fluid distribution and displacement discussed in Section 6. In general. Based on experimental observations. (3) The end-point relative permeability to water is generally less than 30% for a strongly water wet medium and greater than 50% and approaches the oil end point for a strongly oil wet medium. (2) The water saturation at which the oil and water relative permeabilities are equal is greater than 50% for a strongly water wet medium whereas it is less than 50% for a strongly oil wet medium. relative permeability curves that intersect at a water saturation of 50% does not mean that the medium is of “neutral” wettability.medium. It is interesting to replot the relative permeability curves of Figure 8. (1) The irreducible water saturation for a water wet medium is usually greater than 20% to 25% whereas that of an oil wet medium it is generally less than 15%. The replotted curves are shown in Figure 8.29 as functions of wetting phase saturation instead of water saturation. However.3. It should be emphasized that the above rules of thumb are applicable only to systems that show a strong preferential wettability to either water or oil. Craig (1971) gives the following rules of thumb about the relative permeabilities for water wet and oil wet media.30. They are not identical because the degree of wettability preference in the two experiments may be different. the relative permeability curves for the wetting phase and the non-wetting phase from the two experiments are essentially the same. one cannot infer the wettability of a porous medium based solely on the relative permeability curves. the relative permeability curves for the oil wet core and the water wet core are close to each other. 8-68 . For example.

1957). Relative permeability curves from Figure 8. 1957).28 replotted as functions of wetting phase saturation (adapted from Jennings.30. 8-69 . Figure 8. Effect of strong preferential wettability on steady state relative permeability curves (Jennings.Figure 8.29.

Similarly. at any water saturation. Note the general decrease in the oil relative permeabilities and increase in the water relative permeabilities as the system was made progressively more oil wet.31 shows their results for contact angles ranging from 0 to 180°.At a given saturation. Figures 8. Note also. Figure 8. It should be noted that for the water wet system. the relative permeability to oil is higher when the oil was the non-wetting phase than when it was the wetting phase. At any water saturation. The rules of thumb do not strictly apply to the intervening degrees of wettability. This is observation can be seen in Figure 8.29. However. that the strongly preferentially wet systems with contact angles of 0 and 180° generally obey Craig’s rules of thumb regarding the end-point water relative permeability and the water saturation at which the water and oil relative permeabilities are equal. Both the curves for the oil wet medium and the water wet medium shift to lower water saturations as the injection rate (stability number) is increased.4 Injection Rate Injection rate usually does not affect relative permeabilities obtained by the steady state method provided the rate is sufficiently high to minimize capillary end effect.5.32 and 8. 8. the relative permeability curves obtained by the unsteady state method deviate from the steady state curves as the degree of instability is 8-70 .33 show the effects of rate and viscosity ratio on relative permeability curves for oil wet and water wet sandpacks. Peters and Khataniar (1987) have shown that relative permeabilities obtained by the unsteady state displacement method can show rate sensitivity due to viscous instability. the relative permeability for a phase is higher when that phase is the non-wetting phase than when it is the wetting phase. Owens and Archer (1971) measured relative permeability curves of sandstones that were rendered progressively oil wet with a surface active agent. the relative permeability to water is higher when the water was the non-wetting phase than when it was the wetting phase.

increased. Relative permeabilities for range of wetting conditions (Owens and Archer. 1971). Figure 8. 8-71 . The water curve increases and the oil curve decreases away from the steady state curves as the degree of instability of the displacement experiment increases.31.

Effect of stability number on unsteady state relative permeability curves for oil wet sandpacks (Peters and Khataniar.Figure 8. 8-72 . 1987).32.

Figure 8.34 shows the relative permeability curves obtained with the steady state method at various viscosity ratios.5. Figure 8.32 and 8.33. 8-73 . Effect of stability number on unsteady state relative permeability curves for water wet sandpacks (Peters and Khataniar. no viscosity ratio effect is apparent. However.5 Viscosity Ratio Viscosity ratio usually does not affect relative permeabilities obtained by the steady state method since there is no displacement involved. 8.33). Peters and Khataniar (1987) have shown that relative permeabilities obtained by the unsteady state displacement method at adverse viscosity ratios can show sensitivity to injection rate and viscosity ratio due to viscous instability (Figures 8. Clearly. 1987).

1 dyne/cm. In their study.35 shows the relative permeability curves that gave the best fit to the displacement recovery data at the calculated interfacial tensions.5. Figure 8.Figure 8. 8. The results show that the relative permeabilities to gas and oil 8-74 . interfacial tensions were calculated using parachors and the gas-oil relative permeabilities were calculated using relative permeability models and a numerical simulator to history match the displacement data. Bardon and Longeron (1978) studied the effect of interfacial tension on gas-oil relative permeabilities using methane and normal heptane displacement experiments. Effect of viscosity ratio on relative permeability curves obtained by the steady state method (Leverett.34. Above this value.6 Interfacial Tension Relative permeability curves are affected by interfacial tension only at interfacial tensions lower than 0. 1939). relative permeabilities are unaffected by interfacial tension.

In the limit. The residual fluid saturations decreased as the interfacial tension decreased as expected from the effect of capillary number on residual fluid saturations.7 Pore Structure Morgan and Gordon (1970) have presented results that show that rocks with large pores and correspondingly small specific surface areas have low irreducible water saturations that leave a relatively large amount of pore 8-75 . 1978). Effect of interfacial tension on gas-oil relative permeability curves (Bardon and Longeron.5. at ultra-low interfacial tensions.35. 8. (1981). the relative permeability curves were approximately These general trends in the effect of interfacial tensions on relative permeability curves have been confirmed by Amaefule and Handy Figure 8. straight lines.increased as the interfacial tension decreased.

8 Temperature There are data in the literature that suggest that relative permeability curves are affected by temperature. resulting in high irreducible water saturation and relative permeability behavior that is similar to rocks with small pores only. for such rocks. rocks having some relatively large pores connected by small pores have a large surface area. end point relative permeabilities are high and a large saturation change may occur By contrast. there are data in the literature that also show that relative permeabilities are not temperature dependent (Miller and Ramey. (1970) found that temperature causes residual oil saturation to decrease and irreducible water saturation to increase.37). Poston et al. the end point relative permeabilities are lower and the saturation range for two phase flow is smaller than in rocks with large pores. during two phase flow. it is difficult to categorically determine the effect of temperature on relative permeabilities.5. Apparently. the effect of temperature on relative permeabilities is still and open question. 8-76 . On the other hand.space available for multiphase flow. For example. Because of the effect of temperature on the other properties of the system that can affect relative permeabilities.. This situation is understandable because temperature can affect rock and fluid properties which in turn can affect relative permeability curves. 8. 1985). Finally. Therefore. which can affect relative permeabilities and the irreducible saturations. It can also reduce interfacial tensions. rocks with small pores have larger specific surface areas and larger irreducible water saturations that leave less room for multiphase flow.36. high temperature can change the wettability of the rock which affects relative permeabilities. As a result. These observations are summarized in Figure 8. with corresponding increases in relative permeability curves (Figure 8.

(b) sandstone with small.36.Figure 8. 1970). Effect of pore structure on relative permeability curves. (c) sandstone with a few large pores connected with small pores with k = 36 md (Morgan and Gordon. 8-77 . well-connected pores with k = 20 md. (a) sandstone with large. well-connected pores with k = 1314 md.

It is often necessary to adjust the laboratory measured relative permeability curves in order to successfully history match the performance of the heterogeneous reservoirs.38 . Effect of temperature on relative permeability curves (Poston et al. Gharbi and Peters (1993) simulated the waterflood performance of a heterogeneous reservoir using a set of input relative permeability curves and then used the simulated oil recovery versus pore volumes of water injected and the simulated pressure drop to calculate the equivalent relative permeability curves for the heterogeneous medium by the JBN method..5.9 Heterogeneity Relative permeabilities are typically measured on homogeneous core samples. These curves are then used in numerical simulators to model the performance of heterogeneous reservoirs.37. 1970).Figure 8. 8. 8-78 Figure 8.

The effect of the heterogeneity is to shift the oil and water relative permeabilities to low water saturations thereby increasing the water relative permeability curve and decreasing the oil relative permeability curve.38. water and gas.6 THREE-PHASE RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES Three phase relative permeabilities are required to predict the performance of three phase flow of oil. the relative permeabilities for the heterogeneous medium are similar to the relative permeabilities for a strongly oil wet medium. Thus. Figure 8. There are considerably less experimental data in the literature on three phase relative permeabilities than two phase relative permeabilities. 8. on a ternary 8-79 .compares the input relative permeabilities with the computed equivalent relative permeabilities for the heterogeneous medium. 1993).39 shows. Figure 8. Effect of heterogeneity on relative permeability curves (Gharbi and Peters.

Figures 8. However. It can be seen that the three phase flow region is small compared to single phase and two phase flow regions. kerosene and brine. Arrows point to increasing fraction of respective components in stream (Leverett and Lewis. 1941).41 and 8. oil and gas relative permeabilities measured by Leverett and Lewis (1941). the relative permeabilities to oil and gas were functions of all three fluid saturations. two phase flow and three phase flow in an oil. 1941).saturation diagram. Figure 8. 8. the approximate regions of single phase flow. Approximate limits of saturations giving 5 per cent or more of all components in flow stream for the flow of nitrogen. They found that the relative permeability to water was only a function of the water saturation.39.42 show the three phase water. 8-80 . water and gas system ( Leverett and Lewis.40.

Figure 8. 1941). Three phase relative permeability to oil (Leverett and Lewis. 1941).41. Three phase relative permeability to water (Leverett and Lewis. Figure 8.40. 8-81 .

three phase relative permeabilities are usually calculated from two phase relative permeability data using various relative permeability models.Figure 8.12.7 CALCULATION OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES FROM DRAINAGE CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE In Section 7. 1941). Delshad and Pope (1989) have reviewed the various three phase relative permeability models and found that some of them do not always agree with the available experimental three phase relative permeability data. Three phase relative permeability to gas (Leverett and Lewis. we derived the following approximate drainage relative permeability curves for wetting and non-wetting phases from the drainage capillary pressure curve: 8-82 . Three phase relative permeabilities are not routinely measured in the laboratory as two phase relative permeabilities. 8.42. Instead.2.

is also a function of the wetting phase saturation. Burdine (1953) proposed the following normalized drainage relative permeability models.Sw krw ( S w ) = kw = k ∫ 0 1 dS w Pc 2 dS ∫ Pc 2w 0 (7.136) * krnw ( S w ) = knw ( S ) * 2 = (1 − S w ) * knw ( S w = 0) * w * Sw 1 ∫P 1 1 2 c * dS w 1 * ∫ Pc2 dSw 0 (8. which was neglected in the models. Second. which account for these saturation dependencies in the cross-sectional area and the tortuosity for two phase flow: * Sw * krw ( S w ) = kw ( S ) * 2 = ( Sw ) * k w ( S w = 1) * w ∫P 0 1 1 2 c * dS w 1 * ∫ Pc2 dSw 0 (8.137) 8-83 . First. These deficiencies result from the fact that the models neglect certain facts about the nature of two phase flow in porous media. the tortuosity for the flow of the wetting phase. which is contrary to experimental observations.160) We found that these models were defective in two respects: (1) they do not include trapped residual saturations and (2) the sum of the relative permeabilities is equal to 1.159) and dS w Pc 2 Sw krnw ( S w ) = knw = k ∫ 1 1 dS ∫ Pc 2w 0 (7. the cross-sectional area open to the flow of the wetting phase is not a constant as assumed in the models but is a function of the wetting phase saturation.

136) and (8. Thus.136) to define the normalized relative permeability to the wetting phase is equal to the absolute permeability of the medium.(8.137) is to fit the Brooks-Corey (1966) model to the drainage capillary 8-84 .(8. Furthermore.137) can easily be calculated numerically to obtain the normalized drainage relative permeability curves.(8.138) In Eqs.(8. the normalized non-wetting phase relative permeability of Eq.(8. the end-point non-wetting phase relative permeability and a critical non-wetting phase saturation must be introduced into Eq. An alternative approach to evaluating the integrals in Eqs. Thus.137) is equal to the effective permeability to the non-wetting phase at the irreducible wetting phase saturation.(8.136) and (8. the normalized non-wetting phase relative permeability given by Eq. Given the drainage capillary pressure curve.137).0 or a non-wetting phase saturation of zero. It should be noted that the base permeability used in Eq. the integrals in Eqs.137) starts at a wetting phase saturation of 1. whereas the base permeability used to define the normalized relative permeability to the non-wetting phase in Eq. the normalized wetting phase relative permeability given by Eq. However. the ratios of the integrals on the right side account for the cross-sectional area changes with saturations and the terms (S ) * 2 w and (1 − S ) * 2 w account for the tortuosity changes with saturations. a critical nonwetting phase saturation is required before the non-wetting phase can flow.137) must be multiplied by the end point relative permeability to the non-wetting phase (knwr) in order to obtain the true nonwetting phase relative permeability.136) and (8.(8.(8. Normally.137) to obtain the true relative permeability for the non-wetting phase.136) is also the true relative permeability to the wetting phase.* where S w is the normalized wetting phase saturation given by * Sw = S w − S wirr 1 − S wirr (8.(8.

(7.139) and 2+λ ⎤ * 2 ⎡ * krnw ( S w ) = (1 − S w ) ⎢1 − ( S w ) λ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (8.141) 8-85 .164) where λ is the pore size distribution index obtained from the straight line given by Eq.(7.161) or (7.(8.162). the Brooks-Corey drainage capillary pressure model is given by * ln S w = −λ ln Pc + λ ln Pe (7. As discussed in Section 7.13.137) and performing the integrations gives the normalized drainage relative permeability curves as * krw ( S w ) = ( S w ) 2 + 3λ λ (8.pressure curve and then integrate the resulting linear function.161) or ln Pc = − and 1 λ * ln S w + ln Pe (7.140) A critical saturation can be introduced into the relative permeability model for the non-wetting phase as 2+ λ ⎛ S − S wirr ⎞ ⎡ ⎤ * krnw ( S w ) = ⎜ 1 − w 1 − ( Sw ) λ ⎥ ⎟ ⎢ ⎦ ⎝ Sm − S wirr ⎠ ⎣ 2 (8. Substituting Eq.162) * Pc = Pe ( S w ) − 1 λ (7.136) and (8.1.164) into Eqs.

Saturation 1.973 2.3.450 0.840 3.039 12.400 0. Finally.where Sm is the wetting phase saturation corresponding to the critical nonwetting phase saturation.154 21.4.008 4.650 0.950 0. Example 8.000 0.663 6.3 Use the air-water capillary pressure data of Table 8.377 4.143) where knwr is the non-wetting phase relative permeability at the irreducible wetting phase saturation.377 2.850 0.550 0.547 16.142) 2+λ ⎛ S − S wi ⎞ ⎡ ⎤ * krnw ( S w ) = knwr ⎜ 1 − w 1 − ( Sw ) λ ⎥ ⎟ ⎢ ⎦ ⎝ Sm − S wi ⎠ ⎣ 2 (8.500 0.800 0.781 8.195 10. Table 8. Drainage Capillary Pressure Curves for Example 8.750 0.350 Capillary Pressure (psi) 1.817 8-86 .600 0.757 5.700 0.787 31.4 to calculate the drainage relative permeability curves by the method of Brooks and Corey for a core sample. the true relative permeability curve for the wetting and non-wetting phases are given by * krw ( S w ) = ( S w ) 2 + 3λ λ (8.900 0.

(8. 8-87 .3 Figure 8.278 54.300 0.10.1443 Figure 8. − 1 λ = −2.46 shows the true drainage relative permeability curves for Sm = 0.139) and (8. Figure 8.140).1443 λ = 0.5. The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 8.45 shows the normalized drainage relative permeability curves calculated with Eqs.1443ln S w + ln 2.0.10. It also is linear and could have been used for the subsequent calculations.961.4664 Pe = 2.408 Solution to Example 8.691 78.2238 ( S w ) −2. The BrooksCorey drainage capillary pressure equation is given by * Pc = Pe ( S 1 * −λ w ) * = 2.43 shows the graph of lnPc versus lnS w for Swirr = 0. The equation of the resulting straight line is given by * ln Pc = −2.2238 Figure 8.95 and knwr = 0.44 shows the graph of lnS w versus lnPc for Swi = 0.2238 * Therefore.

* Figure 8. Log-log graph of Pc versus S w for Example 8.43.Figure 8. Log-log graph of S w versus Pc for Example 8.3. * 8-88 .3.44.

8-89 .46. Figure 8.3.45. True drainage relative permeability curves for Example 8.Figure 8. Normalized drainage relative permeability curves for Example 8.3.

001 0.829 103.002 0.468 5.500 0.656 16.000 0.017 0.160 0.521 0.424 0.000 0.377 2.500 0.863 3.394 krw ( S w ) 1.5.678 247.006 0.950 0.672 55.167 0.093 0.044 0.000 krw krnw 1.073 0.000 0.3 Brooks-Corey Original Data Pc Sw 1.443 0.601 0.100 psi 1.800 0.562 0.000 0.389 0.350 0.140 0.111 0.098 0.093 0.063 0.514 2.722 0.749 0.000 0.691 78.757 5.278 0. Results of Drainage Relative Permeability Calculations for Example 8.036 0.300 0.000 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.266 0.401 0.000 0.750 0.833 0.605 0.840 3.393 7.278 0.000 0.331 1093.189 0.000 0.850 0.265 0.198 0.000 0.787 31.014 0.889 0.778 0.331 0.022 0.817 54.650 0.008 0.288 3.160 0.700 0.224 2.408 Model Pc Drainage Relative Permeability Curves S * w psi 2.000 0.000 0.947 71.377 4.052 0.851 23.250 0.006 0.111 0.154 21.659 0.643 0.550 0.003 0.781 8.652 0.790 0.424 0.001 0.944 0.547 16.667 0.000 0.892 1.000 0.600 0.028 0.222 0.852 0.843 9.556 0.052 0.812 4.973 2.900 0.000 0.Table 8.028 0.208 0.694 0.450 0.039 12.831 12.659 0.200 0.305 6.150 0.962 8-90 .304 0.156 0.003 0.371 0.195 10.444 0.000 krnw ( S w ) 0.000 0.008 4.000 0.001 0.479 0.244 0.056 0.000 0.452 34.265 0.333 0.000 0.611 0.000 1.400 0.663 6.014 0.000 0.

NOMENCLATURE A = cross sectional area in the flow direction oil formation volume factor water formation volume factor fractional flow of wetting phase fractional flow of water fractional flow of non-wetting phase fractional flow of non-wetting phase at the outlet end of porous medium fractional flow of oil approximate fractional flow of wetting phase gravitational acceleration relative injectivity Leverett J-function absolute permeability of the medium effective permeability to oil effective permeability to water end-point relative permeability to wetting phase effective permeability to gas relative permeability to oil relative permeability to water relative permeability to gas relative permeability to wetting phase Bo = Bw = fw fw = = fnw = fnw2 = fo g Ir J k = = = = = Fw = ko = kw = kwr = kg = kro = krw = krg = krw = krnw= relative permeability to non-wetting phase knwr= end-point relative permeability to non-wetting phase L = length mobility ratio end-point mobility ratio = dimensionless capillary to viscous force ratio gravity number dimensionless cumulative production 8-91 M = ME = Ncap Ng = NpD = .

Nvcap P = Pc = Pe = Pg = Pnw= Po = = capillary number pressure capillary pressure displacement pressure for Brooks-Corey model pressure in the gas phase pressure in the non-wetting phase pressure in the oil phase oil-water capillary pressure curve gas-oil capillary pressure curve gas-water capillary pressure curve Pc/ow = Pc/go = Pc/gw = Pw = Pw = q = qo = qg = qnw= qw = qw = Qi = Qnw = Qo = R = Se = Sg = So = Sor = Sw = Sw = Swirr pressure in the water phase pressure in the wetting phase total volumetric injection rate volumetric flow rate of oil volumetric flow rate of gas volumetric flow rate of non-wetting phase volumetric flow rate of water volumetric flow rate of wetting phase cumulative injection cumulative non-wetting phase produced cumulative oil produced oil recovery as a fraction of initial oil in place effective wetting phase saturation gas saturation oil saturation residual oil saturation water saturation wetting phase saturation = irreducible wetting phase saturation 8-92 .

Swro= Sw2 = Snw= Snwr Swav Swav Swf * Sw = wetting phase saturation at which imbibition capillary pressure is zero wetting phase saturation at the outlet end of porous medium non-wetting phase saturation = = = = residual non-wetting phase saturation average wetting phase saturation average water saturation frontal saturation normalized wetting phase saturation time breakthrough time dimensionless time flux vector. Darcy velocity vector Darcy velocity for the wetting phase Darcy velocity for the non-wetting phase distance in the direction of flow distance to the displacement front dimensionless distance dimensionless distance to the displacement front dimensionless pore volume injected cumulative water produced = water oil ratio t = = = tbt = tD v vw = vnw = x = xf = xD = xDf = Wi = Wp = WOR δx = small length in the neighborhood of the outlet end of porous medium density of gas density of oil density of water density of wetting phase density of non-wetting phase interfacial tension 8-93 ρg = ρo = ρw = ρw = ρ nw = σ = .

and Handy.T. : “The Effect of Interfacial Tensions on Relative Oil-Water Permeabilities of Consolidated Porous Media. OK. October 1-3. Tulsa. Brooks. Of Civil Engr. R. C.” SPE/DOE 9783.θ λ μ = = = contact angle pore size distribution index viscosity gas viscosity oil viscosity water viscosity wetting phase viscosity non-wetting phase viscosity porosity. D. Irrigation and Drainage Div.H. Pet.” SPE 7609. presented at the 53rd Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. and Longeron. Bardon.L. April 5-8.O. Tech. J. Amer. Houston. Anderson. Proc. (June. Soc. 8-94 . A. Tx.” Jour. 1981. (November 1987) 1453-1468. presented at the SPE/DOE 2nd Joint Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.Part 5: The Effects of Wettability on Relative Permeability..” J.G. W. and Corey. L. 1978. fraction tortuosity liquid specific gravity angular velocity of centrifuge pressure drop pressure drop in the wetting phase = pressure drop in the non-wetting phase pore structure μg = μο = μw = μw = μnw= φ τ γ ω = = = = ΔP = ΔPw = ΔPnw Γ = REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Amaefule. : “Wettability Literature Survey . 1966) 61-88. : “Influence of Low Interfacial Tensions on Relative Permeability. : “Properties of Porous Media Affecting Fluid Flow.

Craig. P. 6. G.. From Pore Size Campbell.E. and Foreman. 6 (1974) 311314.Fluid Transport and Pore Structure. No. Water Resources Publications. Dullien.F. and Leverett. and Pope.).” Transport in Porous Media 4 (1989) 59-83.M. : "Some Methods of Calculating Unsaturated Permeability. H. : “Mechanism of Fluid Displacement in Sands.. No. : "Permeability Test for Unconsolidated Soil.S. 8-95 . 1990.” Secondary Recovery of Oil in the United States. McGraw-Hill Inc. Vol. D.” Trans. Jr. of Agricultural Engineers. A.E. Corey.R. W. Trautwein.T. 3 (1984) 113-122. Texas... 1993. Vol. S. : “Scaling Coreflood Experiments to Heterogeneous Reservoirs.J... Douglas.A. R. New York. 96-102.. Daniel. 1977. Vol..” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. R. D. Tech. of the Amer. No. SPE Monograph Vol. Research & Engineering Consultants Inc. and Parsons.” Trans.E. AIME (1958) 213. Dykstra. Gharbi.E. and Wagner. Daniel. (1993) 83-95." Trans. 10. Richardson. Maidment (Ed.L. D.J. AIME (1953) 71-78. 3. R. American Petroleum Institute (1950) 160-175. Pet. Collins. F. : "Permeability Testing with Flexible-Wall Permeabilities for Unconsolidated Soil. : Porous Media . D.. and Peters. Fort Collins. 10 (1967) 400404.Brutsaert. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 117. S." Geotechnical Testing Journal. (May 1941) 107-116.T. : “Relative Permeability Calculations Distribution Data.S. N. Colorado. New York.J. R.C.J.A. M. Burdine.L. Blair. 2 (1983) 81-86. : “Calculation of Linear Waterflood Behavior Including the Effects of Capillary Pressure. M.E. S. Boyton." Geotechnical Testing Journal." Soil Sci. Charbeneau. J. 1979. 1971. : Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials. and Daniel.E. : "A Simple Method for Determining Unsaturated Conductivity from Moisture Retention Data." Chapter 15.. Buckley. : “Comparison of the Three-Phase Oil Relative Permeability Models. Jr. R. 7. Academic Press. Soc. E.” J. F. Delshad. : "Contaminant Transport in Unsaturated Flow. : The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding. G. : “The Prediction of Oil Recovery by Waterflood. : Mechanics of Heterogeneous Fluids in Porous Media. D.. Vol. in Handbook of Hydrology..

Koederitz.” Producers Monthly (February 1953) 18.O. 5. University of Texas. L. 1986. 3039. H. Boca Raton. Ph. CRC Press. S. Nielsen. R.K. D. PhD Dissertation.P. J. August 1993. : “How to Handle and Process Soft and Unconsolidated Cores. December 1988. S. (1991) 205-218... A. Can. University of Texas at Austin..” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. V. Khataniar. S. 8-96 . Khataniar. D.Gharbi. MS Thesis. Peters: “The Effect of Heterogeneity on the Performance of Unstable Displacements.: A Numerical Study of the Performance of Unstable Displacements in Heterogeneous Media. S. E. (April-June 1972) 42-55. No. D.F. and Calhoun. Tech. M.J. H." SPE Formation Evaluation (December 1990) 406-412. 7. J. A. Kolltvelt.Y. K.. S. MS Thesis. (May 1978) 807-817. Peters: “A Comparison of the Finite Difference and Finite Element Methods for Simulating Unstable Displacements. J. : “Graphical Techniques for Determining Relative Permeability from Displacement Experiments. Tx.C. and Naumann. W.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. A. Dissertation.H. Khataniar. : An Experimental Study of the Effect of Instability on Dynamic Displacement Relative Permeability Measurements. R.. AIME (1959) 216. Killins. Jennings. Keelan. Pet. Graue. Khataniar. and E. Austin. No. W.D. : "Imaging Fluid Saturation Development in Long-Core Flood Displacements.” Producers Monthly (March 1957) 20-24.” World Oil (June 1965) 116-119.O. The University of Texas at Austin. C.R. Inc. and E.. J. Jones.C. Bossler.” J. Jennings. : “Calculation of Relative Permeability from Displacement Experiments. and Roszelle. August 1991. 2. : "A Critical Review of Core Analysis Techniques” The Jour. 370-372. University of Texas at Austin. Johnson. Jr. Tech. August 1985. Honarpour. and Harvey. Hardham.: Numerical Modeling of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Assisted by Computed Tomography Imaging. 3/4 (May 1992) 263-81.” Trans.: “Capillary Desaturation and Imbibition in Rocks. : “Surface Properties of Natural and Synthetic Porous Media.F. Florida..: Computerized Tomography Applied to the Visualization of Fluid Displacements. Texas. : Relative Permeability of Petroleum Reservoirs.. Austin. Lien. Pet.R. and Skauge.

A. : "Comparison of Calculated with Experimental Imbibition Relative Permeability. Jr. Miller.” SPEJ (Dec. (Dec. Pet. New Jersey. Li. M.Klute. 8-97 .W. E. M. 1973) 39-47. Prentice Hall. xxx-xxx. Englewood Cliffs. 1951.R. N. American Society of Agronomy." SPEJ (August 1973) 221-232. and Peters. August 1997. : “Flow of Oil-Water Mixtures through Unconsolidated Sands. L. 1985) 945-953. : “Capillary Behavior in Porous Solids. M. Leverett. H.G. : “Linear Waterflood Behavior and End Effects in Water-Wet Porous Media. Texas.” Trans. Part 1.S. F.R. and Rapoport. M. : "Water Retention: Laboratory Methods.A. : “Factors Affecting Liquid-Liquid Relative Permeabilities of a Consolidated Porous Medium. 504. Houston.S. : “Effect of Temperature on Oil/Water Relative Permeability of Unconsolidated and Consolidated Sands.” Trans. (Feb.J. 1971) 419-425. A. Majors. 1989. : "Fluid Flow Through Packed and Packed and Fluidized Systems.C. AIME (1958) 213.and Three-Phase Flow From Rock Properties. and Storch. Eng. Madison. Lake." Methods of Soil Analysis. Leva.. Li. C.D. L. J.. 152-169. PhD Dissertation..J.. WI (1986) 635-686. A. Weintraub.” Society of Petroleum Engineers Formation Evaluation (September 1997) 164-169. C.. Lefebvre du Prey. M.” Soc. H. J. AIME (1939) 140." US Bureau of Mines Bull. A. E. Gulf Publishing Company." Methods of Soil Analysis. Texas. P. Madison. No. and Ramey. Klute. C.J. Morrow.C. : "Displacement Studies in Dolomite With Wettability Control by Octanoic Acid.” SPEJ (June 1968) 149-156. : Multiphase Flow in Porous Media. Kyte. Ping: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media.J. Land. P.. 1981. Marle.. : "Calculation of Imbibition Relative Permeability for Two. WI (1986) 687-734.. Pet. Grummer.).M. Klute (Ed. M.H. : "Hydraulic Conductivity and Diffusivity: Laboratory Methods.” Soc. Austin. A. : Enhanced Oil Recovery. P. and McCaffery.” Trans. Part 1. M. Klute (Ed. 423-426. Pollchick.). Eng. The University of Texas at Austin. :”NMR Imaging of Immiscible Displacements in Porous Media. Land. Leverett. American Society of Agronomy. Cram. J. AIME (1941) 142.

J. Hardham: “A Comparison of Unstable Miscible and Immiscible Displacements. N. P. Canadian Pet.. Tech. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid.. 9. Trans. J. 47-56. : “The Onset of Instability During Two-Phase Immiscible Displacement in Porous Media. : “Laboratory Measurements of Relative Permeability. J.. : Stability Theory and Viscous Fingering in Porous Media. (1993) 183-205. (1993) 207-221. Mungan. January 1979. AIME (1951) 192. E. H. and Gordon. 210.. (March 1995) 34-41. E. J. Mungan.” J.” SPE 19640. Peters. Pet.J. Muqeem. Osoba. D..M. M.G.B. Richardson.” SPE Reservoir Engineering (November 1987) 720-28 Peters.A. Perkins. and W.” World Oil (May 1981) 149-158.J..” J. N. Edmonton. Pet. : “On Scaling Immiscible Displacements in Permeable Media. Peters. 409-411.1.T. No.L. : “Influence of Pore Geometry on Water-Oil Relative Permeability. J. and Moore. and Blair.K. J. and Gharbi.” World Oil (March 1981) 77-83.. 9. AIME (1957) Vol. : “Effect of Temperature on Three-phase Water-oil-gas Relative Permeabilities of Unconsolidated Sand. R. Kerver." Trans. 8-98 . B. F. Hafford. and Flock.” Soc.M. : “Numerical Modeling of Laboratory Corefloods. R. : “Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Water as a Driving Fluid. and Maini.G. E..J.S.J. Peters. Eng. : "Certain Wettability Effects on Electrical Resisitivity in Porous Media. D. E. N.” Trans. : "An Investigation of the Role of Capillary Forces in Laboratory Water Floods. and Gharbi. Part 2 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Wettability.J.-March 1968) 7.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.: “Computer Image Processing: A New Tool for Studying Viscous Fingering in Corefloods. Mungan. E. Broman and W. (Jan. J. Canada. D. 20-25.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. N. AIME (1981) 271.Morgan. E. Tech. Tech. A. R. Bentsen. Afzal. Cdn. J. PhD Dissertation. Pet. Broman. E. Peters. (April 1981) 249-258. Jr. University of Alberta. Peters." J. J.A.T. Part 3 Interfacial Phenomena and Oil Recovery: Capillarity. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Technical Conference of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (October 1989) San Antonio. (October 1970) 1199-1208. Alberta.

. Am. 2.K. Ysreal. 9-13.E : “Use of Permeability Distributions in Water Flood Calculations.” Soc. Pet.T.J.R. NATO ASI Series C: Mathematical and Physical Sciences. W.D. : “ An Investigation into the the Laws of Flow of Fluids Through Granular Material. AIME (1949) 186.F. Soc.J. AIME (1949) 186. AIME (1970) 249. Trans.” Trans. J. H.. E.. Inst.” Trans. : Oil Reservoir Engineering. (June 1970) 171-180.. AIME (1952) 195. van Genuchten. 141-148. Rose. E. L. 39-48. 91-98. and Osoba.E.J." Soil Sci. 1989.. M. (1945) 153. : “A Simplified Method for Computing Oil Recovery by Gas or Water Drive. : The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. S. H. S. New York.K. No. W.Peters. J..” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 1960.. 1958. Welge. J. Purcell. Mech. Vauclin. III.... J. : “Properties of Linear Waterfloods. Morel-Seytoux (Ed. Eng. Streeter. 44 (1980) 892-898. Eng.J.A. Stiles. New York.” Trans. 1987) 469-474. Edited by V. and Hardham. S. Vol.. S.J. 275. : "A Closed-Form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils. J. Peters. Toronto.M. Inc. Inc. McGraw-Hill Book Company. H.” Proc. Pirson." in Unsaturated Flow in Hydrologic Modeling: Theory and Practice. and Ramey.I.” Trans.Their Measurement Using Mercury and the Calculation of Permeability There From.. and Khataniar. University of Toronto Press. : “The Effect of Instability on Relative Permeability Curves Obtained by the Dynamic-Displacement Method.A. Vol. 1961. W. : “Flow Through Porous Media.S. Richardson. : “Laboratory Determination of Relative Permeability.W..J. : “The Effect of Temperature on Irreducible Water Saturation and Relative Permeability of Unconsolidated Sands. Handbook of Fluid Dynamics. Scheidegger. A. : “Capillary Pressures . : “Visualization of Fluid Displacements in Porous Media Using Computed Tomography Imaging. W.G. AIME (1952) 195.” Trans.J.. E. Richardson. Kerver. Rapoport. Hafford. 4. M.” Section 16. Montgomery.” SPEFE (Dec. J. : "Flow of Water and Air: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects..G. (May 1990) 155-168.C.S. McGraw-Hill Book Company. 139-148.E. Poston. Hossain. H. 187196. A. and Leas.). 8-99 . Jr. J. AIME (1953) 198..

” AAPG Bull. 1952) 359-403. Vol. No.B. P. Vol. No. M.. 2 (Feb. Society of Petroleum Engineers.. 1986.Willhite. M. SPE Textbook Series Vol. Richardson.J. : Waterflooding.J.B.R.R. :”Application of Electrical Resistivity Measurements to Problems of Fluid Flow in Porous Media. Wyllie. M. :”Application of Electrical Resistivity Measurements to Problems of Fluid Flow in Porous Media. and Spangler. Texas. 36. Wyllie. 8-100 . and Spangler. 2 (Feb. 3. 36. M.” AAPG Bull. 1952) 359-403. G.

An example problem is presented in detail to demonstrate the method.APPENDIX A A Systematic Approach To Dimensional Analysis Summary This appendix presents a systematic method for obtaining the complete set of independent dimensionless groups pertinent to a problem. the prototype system. Introduction Dimensional analysis is a powerful tool for solving engineering problems. It is shown that the dimensionless groups occupy the null space of the dimensional matrix. It can be used to design cost effective experimental programs. The algebraic theory underlying the method is presented. organize presentations of experimental as well as numerical simulation results. The eigenvectors of this null space. and to scale the results of model experiments to predict the performance of a large scale system. Other complete and independent dimensionless π groups can be obtained systematically by a careful navigation through this vector space. which constitute the bases vectors for the null space. Dimensional analysis is typically covered in a cursory manner in fluid mechanics courses in which ad hoc techniques are presented for A-1 . contain a complete set of independent dimensionless π groups.

We wish to determine the exponents of real numbers x1 . The dimension of the power product is given by x x ⎡u1x1 u2 2 ..deriving the dimensionless groups. Algebraic Theory of Dimensional Analysis Let a physical process be described by n variables u1 .... x2 .un n is dimensionless. has the dimensions of M0L0T0...un n ⎤ = M ( a1x1 + a2 x2 +..2) The power product will be dimensionless if and only if the following conditions are met: A-2 ..+ an xn ) L( b1x1 +b2 x2 +.. un ...... Suppose each of these variables can be expressed dimensionally in terms of the primary variables of mass (M). Perhaps. most engineers have failed to appreciate the power of the technique and have therefore not taken advantage of it in their work. xn such that the x x power product u1x1 u2 2 .1) The dimensional analysis problem may now be stated as follows. The objective of this appendix is to present a systematic method for obtaining the complete set of independent dimensionless groups pertinent to a problem.. The algebraic theory underlying the method is presented... u2 .+bn xn )T ( c1x1 + c2 x2 +. [ui ] = M a Lb T c i i i (A. length (L) and time (T) such that dimensionally. because of this cursory treatment.+ cn xn ) ⎣ ⎦ (A. that is.. An example problem is presented in detail to demonstrate the method.

(A. bn ⎥ ⎢ 3 ⎥ = ⎢0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎥ x .(A.. cn ⎥ ⎦ (A.5) are derived from Eq. respectively.(A.6) or Ax = 0 (A....4) (A. length (L) and time (T) to zero. Eqs.3) to (A..3) to (A. ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ xn ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ a1 ⎢b ⎢ 1 ⎢ c1 ⎣ a2 b2 c2 a3 b3 c3 a4 b4 c4 (A.5).. cn ⎥ ⎢ 4 ⎥ ⎢0 ⎥ ⎦ ⎢ ..2) by setting the dimensions of mass (M).5) constitute a homogeneous system of linear algebraic equations for the n unknowns x1 .5) may be written in matrix notation as ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ .3) to (A.. x2 ...a1 x1 + a2 x2 + .8) A-3 . Eqs. Dimensional analysis always gives rise to a homogeneous system of linear algebraic equations similar to Eqs. The system of equations is homogeneous because the right-hand side is zero.... an ⎤ b4 ... bn ⎥ ⎥ c4 ...7) where the dimensional matrix A is given by ⎡ a1 A = ⎢ b1 ⎢ ⎢ c1 ⎣ a2 b2 c2 a3 b3 c3 a4 .3) (A. (A.5) Eqs.(A.3) to (A. + bn xn = 0 c1 x1 + c2 x2 + . xn ... an ⎤ ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎡0 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ . + cn xn = 0 (A. + an xn = 0 b1 x1 + b2 x2 + ......

it is possible for the system of equations to be reduced to the following row echelon form by row and column operations: A-4 . Put another way. If we fail to find an mxm submatrix with a nonzero determinant.7) can be solved by simple row and column operations on the dimensional matrix A. Thus. the rank is m or less. to predict the number of independent dimensionless groups in advance. In general. We know from linear algebra that an mxn system of homogeneous linear algebraic equations does not have a unique nontrivial solution. If the rank of the dimensional matrix A is r. then we calculate the determinants of all possible ( m − 1) x ( m − 1) submatrices until we determine the rank of A. we know that an mxn system of homogeneous linear equations has an infinitely large number of solutions. we need to form the dimensional matrix and then determine its rank. Equation (A. Thus. for the mxn dimensional matrix A. because there are more unknowns than equations. We can easily determine the rank of A by calculating the determinants of all possible mxm submatrices. It is these nontrivial solutions that give rise to the dimensionless π groups we seek. In the case in which the dimensional matrix has a rank of 3. the dimensional matrix is usually an mxn matrix in which m < n .and x is the vector of the unknowns. The rank r of a matrix A is the largest rxr submatrix of A with a nonzero determinant. usually called dimensionless π groups.6) or (A. then we can solve for r of the variables in terms of the remaing ( n − r ) variables. A homogeneous system of linear algebraic equations with more unknowns than equations usually has an infinite number of nontrivial solutions. Such a solution will result in (n − r ) independent dimensionless groups.

.15) A-5 .14) (A... a3n ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ ..13) (A...(A...(A. − a2 n xn x3 = −a34 x4 − a35 x5 − . the initial objective of the solution procedure is to reduce the dimensional matrix using row and column operations such that an rxr unit submatrix appears at the beginning of the transformed matrix as shown in Eq. We can now solve Eq.11) (A. a2 n ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = ⎢0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ .10) (A. a1n ⎤ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎡0 ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ . xn = xn (A..12) with the following additional solutions: x4 = x4 x5 = x5 ... ⎥ ⎢ ⎢x ⎥ ⎣ n⎦ (A..(A.9) Thus.. − a1n xn x2 = −a24 x4 − a25 x5 − .9) to obtain the following result: x1 = −a14 x4 − a15 x5 − ..12) We supplement Eqs..⎡1 0 0 a14 ⎢0 1 0 a 24 ⎢ ⎢ 0 0 1 a34 ⎣ a15 a25 a35 ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ .9).. − a3n xn (A.10) to (A.

. These eigenvectors play a critical role in the dimensional analysis. Because the A-6 ...(A.15).17) (n − r ) vectors are the eigenvectors of the null space of the dimensional matrix....Eqs. e2 . ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ n⎦ ⎣ (A.16) shows that the solution to the system of linear homogeneous algebraic equations arising in dimensional analysis consists of a linear combination of ( n − r ) vectors. Because. ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ These (A.... can be rearranged as a linear combination of ( n − r ) vectors as follows: ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −a14 ⎤ ⎡ − a15 ⎤ ⎡ − a1n ⎤ ⎢ x ⎥ ⎢−a ⎥ ⎢−a ⎥ ⎢−a ⎥ ⎢ 2 ⎥ ⎢ 24 ⎥ ⎢ 25 ⎥ ⎢ 2n ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ − a34 ⎥ ⎢ −a35 ⎥ ⎢ −a3n ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = ⎢ 1 ⎥ x4 + ⎢ 0 ⎥ x5 + ....16) Eq..16) as ⎡ −a14 ⎤ ⎡ −a15 ⎤ ⎡ −a1n ⎤ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ 24 ⎥ ⎢ 25 ⎥ ⎢ 2n ⎥ ⎢ −a34 ⎥ ⎢ −a35 ⎥ ⎢ −a3n ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ e1 = ⎢ 1 ⎥ . We can identify these vectors e1 . ⎥ ⎢ . + ⎢ 0 ⎥ xn ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ . They contain a complete set of (n − r ) dimensionless π groups (Buckingham’s π theorem). ⎥ ⎢ .(A.. the dimensionless π groups derived from them are also linearly independent.. en − r in Eq. ⎥ ⎢ .. these eigenvectors are linearly independent. ⎥ ⎢ . ⎥ ⎢ ...(A... e2 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ .. en − r = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ . which constitute the required solution to the dimensional analysis problem..10) to (A...

⎥ ⎢ . which may be more convenient for applications than the initial set.. xn .(A.. their linear combinations can be used to access every part of the vector space thereby allowing us to derive other (n − r ) complete and independent π groups.. Let us choose x4 = 1. An initial complete set of π groups can be obtained systematically as follows. = xn = 0. x5 ..18) The corresponding dimensionless π group is given by A-7 .... The π groups are independent in the sense that each π group cannot be obtained by algebraic manipulation of the other π groups.16) shows that solutions to the dimensional analysis problem can be constructed by arbitrarily choosing the values for x4 .. The π groups derived from the eigenvectors are complete in the sense that any other π group that we derive will be found to be a combination of this initial set of π groups.16) becomes ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ − a14 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ 24 ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ − a34 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e1 = ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ . Eq.eigenvectors are the bases vectors for the null space of the dimensional matrix.. ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ n⎦ (A..(A. Such choices can be used to obtain an initial set of complete and independent dimensionless π groups. The choices can also be used to transform this initial complete set of independent dimensionless π groups into new complete and independent sets. The solution given by Eq. x5 = x6 .

The solution given by Eq.. x4 = x6 . = xn −1 = 0. x4 = x5 = ....u1 n 1n 2n 3n A-8 .16) becomes ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −a1n ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ 2n ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ − a3n ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = en − r = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ..20) The last dimensionless π group is then given by − − 0 0 π n −r = u1− a u2 a u3 a u4 u5 .. ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ n⎦ (A.(A.. ⎥ ⎢ ..un 15 25 35 We continue in this fashion until we finally choose xn = 1 ... = xn = 0..... we choose x5 = 1... The solution given by Eq. ⎥ ⎢ ...(A.un 4 14 24 34 Next.− − 0 0 π 1 = u1− a u2 a u3 a u1u5 .19) The corresponding dimensionless π group is given by − − 0 1 0 π 2 = u1− a u2 a u3 a u4 u5 . ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ n⎦ (A.16) becomes ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −a15 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ −a ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ 25 ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ − a35 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e2 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ .

the porous medium and the displacement conditions. To ensure that the new set of π groups is complete. then Π1 must contain the eigenvector e1 either alone or as a linear combination with one or more of the other eigenvectors. these new complete sets will be found to be transformations of π1.Transformations of the Dimensionless π Groups The π groups π1. πn–r. Πn–r. Do . μo . g ) (A. they are not unique. we must use a different eigenvector in forming each of the dimensionless π groups. ρ s . u . .. . Π2.... πn–r are complete and independent. .. D p . π2.21) A-9 . other complete and independent dimensionless π groups can be derived. ρ o .. The preliminary analysis further indicates that the longitudinal dispersion coefficient is a function of the fluid properties... if the new set of π groups is designated as Π1. Π2 must contain e2 either alone or in combination with the other eigenvectors and Πn–r must contain en − r either alone or in combination with one or more of the other eigenvectors... xn. For example. Let us write the functional relationship as DL = f1 ( μ s .. However. . However. π2. A preliminary analysis shows that dispersion in porous media in the direction of flow can be characterized by a longitudinal dispersion coefficient. we must derive (n − r ) of them. x5. By appropriate choice of the values for x4. Example Problem We wish to investigate experimentally the factors that affect dispersion in porous media. To ensure that the new π groups are independent..

Fourth. length (L) and time (T). we form the power product of all the variables involved in the problem to obtain x x μ sx D p u x Dox μox ( Δρ g ) DL = a dimensionless constant 1 2 3 4 5 x6 7 (A.(A. ρs. gravity segregation of two fluids always involve the combination of variables (ρo–ρs)g or Δρg. Step 4. For example. This step gives rise to the following A-10 . The dimensions of each variable in Eq.22) Step 3.22) in terms of the primary dimensional variables of mass (M).The objective is to derive a complete and independent set of dimensionless π groups that affect the longitudinal dispersion coefficient by dimensional analysis. we substitute the dimensions of each variable from Table 1 into Eq.(A. Third.22) and insist that the power product become dimensionless (i. The first step is to determine if the number of variables can be reduced by combining some of them.22) are shown in Table 1.(A.e. Procedure Step 1. we express each of the variables in Eq.. So. has dimensions of M0L0T0). Step 2. and g by the one variable Δρg. we can replace the three variables ρo . Next.

system of linear homogeneous algebraic equations for the powers x1.23).25) comes from T0.25) Dimensions M0L1T0 M0L1T–1 M0L2T–1 M1L–1T–1 M1L–1T–1 M1L–2 T–2 M0L2T–1 μs μo Δρg DL Eq.24) (A. x6 and x7: x1 + x5 + x6 = 0 − x1 + x2 + x3 + 2 x4 − x5 − 2 x6 + 2 x7 = 0 − x1 − x3 − x4 − x5 − 2 x6 − x7 = 0 Table 1 Dimensions of the Variables in Example Problem Variable Mean grain diameter Interstitial velocity Diffusion coefficient Solvent viscosity Oil viscosity Buoyancy group Dispersion coefficient Symbol Dp u Do (A. x3. x5.25) into a matrix equation as follows: A-11 .23) comes from insisting that the power product have a mass dimension of M0.(A.24) comes from L0 and Eq.(A. (A.(A. x4. Similarly.24) and (A. x2.(A. Eq.23) (A. Let us organize Eqs.

(A.⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ ⎡ 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 ⎤ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎡ 0 ⎤ ⎢ −1 1 1 2 −1 −2 2 ⎥ ⎢ x ⎥ = ⎢0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ 4⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ −1 0 −1 −1 −1 −2 −1⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ x6 ⎥ ⎢ ⎢x ⎥ ⎣ n⎦ (A. Dimensional Matrix for Example Problem x1 x2 Dp 0 1 0 x3 u 0 1 –1 x4 Do 0 2 –1 x5 x6 x7 DL 0 2 –1 μs M L T 1 –1 –1 μo 1 –1 –1 Δρg 1 –2 –2 A-12 .(A.26) is a matrix equation similar to Eq. Steps 2 and 3 were presented to show the origin of the dimensional matrix. Next. we derive the dimensional matrix using the information in Table 1. Step 3 (revised). The result is shown in Table 2. However. Let us combine Steps 3 and 4 into one step and call it Step 3(revised).7) where the dimensional matrix is given in this case by ⎡1 0 0 0 1 1 0⎤ A = ⎢ −1 1 1 2 −1 −2 2 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ −1 0 −1 −1 −1 −2 −1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ (A.26) Eq. Table 2.27) We could have derived the dimensional matrix directly from Step 2.

(A. Buckingham’s π–theorem states that the number of complete and independent dimensionless π groups is equal to the number of variables minus the rank of the dimensional matrix. The dimensional matrix A has a rank of r where r is the largest rxr submatrix of A with a nonzero determinant. the second row is the power of L and the third row is the power of T. Our interest is in the nontrivial solutions. we solve Eq.26) is to propose the solution x1 = x2 = x3 = x4 = x5 = x6 = x7 = 0. Next. An initial reaction to solving Eq.(A. There is extensive theory in linear algebra about the solutions of a system of homogeneous linear algebraic equations such as Eq. A system of linear homogeneous algebraic equations with more unknowns than equations has many (infinite number of) solutions. This is what the first column of Table 2 is designed to show. Eq. Therefore.26) to obtain a complete set of independent dimensionless π groups. we can predict the number of A-13 .(A.(A. Step 4 (revised). (n–r). It should also be noted that the variables and their powers in Eq.(A.26). These are the solutions we want.2) have been placed on top of the dimensional matrix to remind us of the relationship between the variables and the entries in the dimensional matrix. Although we cannot review all of this theory at this point.26) to obtain the powers of the variables that will make the power product dimensionless.(A. we will use some of it to enable us to solve Eq.It should be noted that the first row of the dimensional matrix is the power of M in each variable. This is the trivial solution in which we are not interested.26) has more unknowns (7 unknowns) than equations (3 equations).

Let us proceed to solve Eq. which is a standard method for solving a system of linear algebraic equations. of A is 3. In this example. We will then examine all possible 2x2 submatrices to see if the rank is 2. we should be aware that it is possible for the rank of the dimensional matrix to be less than the number of equations if the rows of the dimensional matrix are linearly dependent. then the rank is obviously less than 3. all possible 2x2 submatrices. 1 0 0 1 1 determinant −1 1 1 = 1xdeterminant = −1 0 −1 −1 0 −1 (A. we compute the determinant of the first 3x3 submatrix of A. only simple row operations will be required to solve the system A-14 . m. To determine the rank of the dimensional matrix in this example.26) by Gaussian elimination.complete and independent dimensionless π groups in advance by determining the rank of the dimensional matrix without actually solving the system of equations. we can find it by examining all possible 3x3 submatrices and if need be. Whatever the rank of A is. Therefore. the variables in the dimensional matrix have been carefully arranged initially to avoid column exchanges during the solution steps. r.(A. the rank.28) Because the determinant of a 3x3 submatrix of A is nonzero. Gaussian elimination involves only simple row and column operations. there will be 7–3 or 4 complete and independent dimensionless π groups in this example problem. Therefore. In this example.(A. If we examine all possible 3x3 submatrices and fail to find a nonzero determinant. However.27). r. is equal to the number of equations. This gives a determinant of –1 as shown in Eq. the rank of the dimensional matrix .

Our initial objective in the solution process is to perform the elimination to the point that the first 3x3 submatrix of A is transformed into a unit matrix of the form 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 (28) as shown in Eq.(A. Table 4 x1 x2 k x3 u x4 Do x5 x6 x7 DL μs μo Δρg A-15 .9). Let us solve Eq.(A. The result is shown in Table 3.(A.26) is zero and will always remain zero no matter how we manipulate the equations.26) systematically as follows.of equations. Table 3 x1 x2 k 0 1 0 x3 u 0 1 –1 x4 Do 0 2 –1 x5 x6 x7 DL 0 2 –1 μs M L T 1 0 –1 μo 1 0 –1 Δρg 1 –1 –2 Add rows 1 and 3 of Table 3 and place the outcome in row 3. we can ignore it in the solution procedure until the end and concentrate on performing the row and column operations on the dimensional matrix (A) alone. The result is shown in Table 4. Because the right hand side of Eq. Add rows 1 and 2 and place the outcome in row 2.

Table 6 x1 x2 k 0 1 0 x3 u 0 0 1 x4 Do 0 1 1 x5 x6 x7 DL 0 1 1 μs M L T 1 0 0 μo 1 0 0 Δρg 1 –2 1 We have achieved our initial objective of obtaining a 3x3 unit submatrix at the beginning of the modified dimensional matrix as shown in Table 6. The result is shown in Table 5. The right hand side of Eq. The result is shown in Table 6. Let us now bring the right hand side of Eq.26) has remained zero and has been unaffected by the row operations on the A-16 .(A.M L T 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 –1 0 2 –1 1 0 0 1 –1 –1 0 2 –1 Add rows 2 and 3 of Table 4 and place the outcome in row 2.(A.26) into the picture to complete our solution. Table 5 x1 x2 k 0 1 0 x3 u 0 0 –1 x4 Do 0 1 –1 x5 x6 x7 DL 0 1 –1 μs M L T 1 0 0 μo 1 0 0 Δρg 1 –2 –1 Multiply row 3 of Table 5 by –1 and place the outcome in row 3.

32) (A. With the right hand side of Eq.(A.(A.34) (A.33) (A. We can readily identify the (n–r) eigenvectors of the null space of A in Eq.36) for orientation purposes.dimensional matrix A.29) (A.29) to (A.31) (A. we can now solve for the 7 unknowns as follows: x1 = − x5 − x6 x2 = − x4 + 2 x6 − x7 x3 = − x4 − x6 − x7 x4 = x4 x5 = x5 x6 = x6 x7 = x7 (A.(A.26) brought into the picture.36) The variables associated with the solution have been placed in column 1 of Eq.(A.30) (A.36) as A-17 .35) appear somewhat confusing and unclear. Let us reorganize them into a linear combination of the eigenvectors of the null space of the dimensional matrix as follows: ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ 0 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢ x ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢2⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = ⎢ 1 ⎥ x4 + ⎢ 0 ⎥ x5 + ⎢ 0 ⎥ x6 + ⎢ 0 ⎥ x7 ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣0⎦ ⎣0⎦ ⎣1⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (A.35) The solutions presented in Eqs.

e2 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ .(A. e4 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ (A.25) to obtain − 1 0 0 π 1 = μ s0 D p 1u −1 D0 μo ( Δρ g ) DL = 0 D0 uD p (A.36).38) The corresponding dimensionless π group is obtained by substituting this solution into Eq.(A.(A. we obtain the predicted (n–r) complete and independent dimensionless π groups by constructing nontrivial solutions of Eq. x5 = 0. x5. x6 = 0 and x7 = 0. The solution becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e1 = ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ (A.39) A-18 .⎡0⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢2⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ e1 = ⎢ 1 ⎥ .26) as follows.(A. Step 5.37) We are now ready to obtain the predicted 4 (n–r) complete and independent dimensionless π groups from the solutions given in Eq.36) shows that nontrivial solutions can be constructed by arbitrarily choosing numerical values for x4. e3 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ . Eq. Let us choose x4 = 1. x6 and x7. Next.

41) Next. x5 = 0 and x7 = 0.(A. π 1 = D0 could have been written down uD p directly by inspection. Next. let us choose x5 = 1. x6 = 0 and x7 = 0.38) contains the variables and the last column contains the powers of the variables in the dimensionless π group. The solution then becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢2⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e3 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ (A.42) The corresponding dimensionless π group is A-19 .The dimensionless π group could have been obtained directly by inspection of Eq.40) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 1 0 π 2 = μ s−1 D p u 0 D00 μo ( Δρ g ) DL = 0 μ0 μs (A.38). The solution then becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e2 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ DL ⎦ ⎣ x7 ⎦ (A. Therefore. x4 = 0. The first column of Eq.(A. let us choose x6 = 1. x4 = 0.

μo appears only in π2. π4 cannot be formed by combining π1.44) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 1 − π 4 = μ s0 D p 1u −1 D00 μo ( Δρ g ) DL = 0 DL uD p (A. π2 and π4. and DL appears only in π4. π3 and π4. π1 cannot be formed by combining π2. For example.π 3 = μ D u D μ ( Δρ g ) D = −1 s 2 p −1 0 0 0 o 1 0 L 2 D p Δρ g uμs (A. π3 and π4 are independent is to observe that Do appears only in π1. π2 and π3. π2 cannot be formed by combining π1. Finally. The π groups are complete because any other dimensionless groups derived from the solutions will be some combination of π1.45) The dimensionless groups π1.36) then becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e4 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ DL ⎦ ⎣ x7 ⎦ (A.(A.43) Finally. π2. Since Do appears only in π1. Further. it is impossible to A-20 . π3 and π4. let us choose x7 = 1. A physical argument to convince oneself that π1. The groups are independent because each of the π groups cannot be formed by combining the remaining π groups. π3 and π4 constitute a complete set of independent dimensionless groups. π2. x4 = 0. π3 and π4. Similarly. Δρg appears only in π3. π2. π3 cannot be formed by combining π1. x5 = 0 and x6 = 0. The solution given by Eq.

π2 and π3. For example. A-21 . π3 and π4 are complete and independent but are not unique.manipulate π2. we should vary π1 while keeping π2 and π3 constant. A similar reasoning establishes the independence of π2. Other legitimate complete sets of π groups can be formed. we wish to establish the nature of the function f2 experimentally.46) ⎛ D μ D 2 Δρ g ⎞ DL = f2 ⎜ o . p ⎟ ⎜ uD p μ s ⎟ uD p u μs ⎠ ⎝ (A. these other groups will be found to be transformations of the original basic group π1. The result of the dimensional analysis obtained so far is given by π 4 = f 2 (π 1 . π 2 . π 3 ) or (A. π3 and π4. Let us demonstrate the need for transformations of the π groups in our example problem. π2. A good experimental strategy requires that we vary one π group at a time to determine its influence. Transformations of the Dimensionless π Groups for Example Problem The dimensionless π groups π1. π3 and π4 to get π1. vary π3 while keeping π1 and π2 constant. then vary π2 while keeping π1 and π3 constant and finally.47) Suppose we wish to conduct an experimental study to investigate the variation of π4 as a function of π1. o . π2. π3 and π4. There are occasions in which the transformations of the original π groups into new ones are necessary. In other words. However.

For a given fluid pair and porous medium. However.47) that u occurs in π4. its occurrence in π1 and π3 poses a serious problem in controlling the experiments if we were to plan the experiments based on the current π groups. e3 and e4 . π3 and π4. Do. A-22 . g are fixed. μo. we see in Eq. e2 . Therefore. x6 and x7 to obtain the solutions to Eq. The only variable available for varying π1 is u. it would impossible to tell if an observed change in π4 was caused by the change in π1 or by the change in π3.26). we return to the vector space spanned by the eigenvectors e1 . The occurrence of u in π4 poses no problem. We can choose these values in some fashion to access different parts of the vector space spanned by e1 . This vector space contains an infinite set of complete and independent (n–r) dimensionless π groups. e3 and e4 . The challenge in the transformations is to find these complete sets of dimensionless π groups without including the linearly dependent ones. D p and of course. Δρ. π1 and π3. x5. To perform the transformation systematically.(A. Let us form a new set of complete and independent dimensionless π groups that we shall call Π1. However. A change in u will simultaneously change π1 and π3. x5. Π3 and Π4 by choosing the values x4. π2. μs. e2 . Careful navigation through the vector space allows us to meet this challenge. Such a new set of dimensionless π groups can be obtained by transforming the current set of π1. Π2. What we need is a new set of complete and independent π groups that allows us to exert more experimental control by being able to vary one π group while keeping the other π groups constant. We recall that the complete set of dimensionless π groups was obtained by our judicious choice of the values of x4.(A.

The solution given by Eq. x6 = 0 and x7 = 0.x6 and x7 in the following manner.50) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 0 1 0 Π 2 = μ s−1 D p u 0 D0 μo ( Δρ g ) DL = 0 μ0 = π2 μs (A.51) Let us choose x6 = 1. The solution becomes A-23 .(A. Let us choose x4 = –1. x5 = 0.48) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 0 Π1 = μ s0 D1 u1 D0−1μo ( Δρ g ) DL = p 0 uD p D0 = 1 π1 (A.36) becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = −e1 = ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ (A. x4 = –1. x5 = 0 and x7 = 0. x4 = x6 = x7 = 0. The solution then becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = e2 = ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ (A.49) Let us choose x5 = 1.

π2.⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡ −1⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢3⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = −e1 + e3 = ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ DL ⎦ ⎣ x7 ⎦ (A. The solution then becomes ⎡ μ s ⎤ ⎡ x1 ⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ p ⎥⎢ 2⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u ⎥ ⎢ x3 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Do ⎥ ⎢ x4 ⎥ = −e1 + e4 = ⎢ −1⎥ ⎢ μo ⎥ ⎢ x5 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ Δρ g ⎥ ⎢ x6 ⎥ ⎢0⎥ ⎢ D ⎥ ⎢x ⎥ ⎢1⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L ⎦⎣ 7⎦ (A.54) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 0 1 Π 4 = μ s0 D p u 0 D0−1μo ( Δρ g ) DL = 0 DL π 4 = Do π 1 (A.55) The dimensionless groups Π1. let us choose x7 = 1. The new set was obtained by a careful manipulation of the vector space A-24 . Π2. x4 = –1. note that they are transformations of the original complete set of π1. However.52) The corresponding dimensionless π group is 0 0 Π 3 = μ s−1 D 3 u 0 D0−1μo ( Δρ g ) DL = p 1 D 3 Δρ g p Do μ s = π3 π1 (A.53) Finally. π3 and π4. x5 = 0 and x6 = 0. Π3 and Π4 constitute a new set of complete and independent dimensionless groups.

o . we are now in a position to keeping Π1 experimentally investigate the separate effects of Π1.as a linear combination of the eigenvectors. It is now possible to vary Π1 while keeping Π2 and Π3 constant. We can also vary Π3 while and Π2 constant. Therefore. The ⎝ μs ⎠ effect of this dimensionless group is eliminated from the experiment. we used e2 to form Π2. we formed the theoretically required (n–r) new groups. To ensure that the π groups are complete. Note that u now appears in Π1 only. Π2 and Π3 on Π4. p ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ D μ Do Do μ s ⎠ o s ⎝ (A. We used e1 to form Π1. The transformations lead to the result Π 4 = f 3 ( Π1 . Similarly. we can vary Π2 while keeping Π1 and Π3 constant. These choices of eigenvectors and eigenvalues preserve the linear independence of the dimensionless π groups. Π 2 . we used a different eigenvector to form the different π groups. and we used e4 (in combination with e1 ) to form Π4. A-25 . In the laboratory experiment for determining the dispersion coefficient. the viscosity of the injected solvent must be matched with ⎛μ ⎞ that of the displaced fluid. Π 3 ) (A.57) We see that the new set of dimensionless π groups allows us more experimental control. Therefore.56) or ⎛ uD μ D 3 Δρ g ⎞ DL = f3 ⎜ p . ⎜ o ⎟ is a constant equal to 1. we used e3 (in combination with e1 ) to form Π3. To ensure that the groups are linearly independent.

58) A similar equation can be written for the transverse dispersion coefficient as ⎛ uD ⎞ DT = f5 ⎜ p ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ (A. Figure 5.28. With these restrictions imposed on the experiments.(A. Correlations for dimensionless longitudinal and transverse A-26 .57) becomes ⎛ uD ⎞ DL = f4 ⎜ p ⎟ Do ⎝ Do ⎠ (A.27 and 5. Eq.27. the dimensionless group ⎜ p is a ⎜ Dμ ⎟ ⎟ ⎝ o s ⎠ constant equal to zero. which are reproduced here for convenience.59) The experimental program will then consist of determining the functions ⎛ uD ⎞ f4 and f5 by varying the Peclet Number. ⎜ p ⎟ . Its effect is eliminated from the experiment. Therefore. The results of such ⎝ Do ⎠ experimental programs are shown in Figures 5. the density of the injected solvent must be matched with that of the ⎛ D 3 Δρ g ⎞ displaced fluid.Also.

Correlation for dimensionless longitudinal dispersion coefficient by various authors (Pfannkuch. there are usually more unknowns than equations.dispersion coefficients plotted on the same scale (Perkins and Johnson.28. In general. Reduction of the dimensional matrix to row echelon form without any row becoming zero shows that the rank r of the dimensional A-27 . In the example problem. Figure 5. 1963). Some Practical Considerations There are several interesting observations that can be made about solving the dimensional analysis problem. 2. 1. This is an over-determined system with an infinite number of nontrivial solutions. there are 7 unknowns and 3 equations. 1963. 1960). Saffman.

In the example problem. no new information is contained in the extra row. x6 and x7. the rank of the dimensional matrix was determined in advance to be equal to 3. x5. Do whose power is x4 appeared only in π1. This is confirmed by the fact that upon reduction to row echelon form (Table 6). x6 and x7. we solved for x1. A row will become zero during the row operations if that row is a linear combination of the other rows. The variables whose powers are given by the remaining (n–r) unknowns will each appear in only one dimensionless group. x2 and x3 in terms of x4. Thus. 3. x2 and x3 in terms of x4. Δρg whose power is x6 appeared only in π3. in forming the initial dimensionless π groups. x5. In such a case. r unknowns can be solved for in terms of the remaining (n–r) unknowns. If one of the rows had become zero during the reduction to row echelon form. μo whose power is x5 appeared only in π2. These are important considerations because according to Buckingham’s π-theorem. none of the rows became zero. then the rank of the dimensionless matrix would have been 3-1 or 2. we solved for x1. The choice of which r variables to solve for in terms of the remaining (n–r) variables can be used to good advantage. A-28 . this choice can be used to isolate the most important variables of the problem into one dimensionless group. and DL whose power is x7 appears only in π4. Therefore. Because there are n unknowns and r equations. 4. in the initial set of dimensionless π groups. the rank of the dimensional matrix in this case is equal to the number of equations. Thus. In the example problem.matrix is equal to the number of equations. In the example problem. the number of independent dimensionless groups is equal to the number of variables minus the rank of the dimensional matrix.

A-29 . In such a case. both row and column operations may be necessary to solve the resulting homogeneous system of equations. Reduction to row echelon is then easily achieved by dividing each row of the dimensional matrix by the first nonzero entry of that row. The second advantage is that solution of the resulting system of homogeneous system of algebraic equations is considerably simplified if the first rxr submatrix of the dimensional matrix is a diagonal matrix.On the other hand. since the dependent variable of the problem needs to be isolated into only one dimensionless π group. Of course. Since the initial objective of the solution of the homogeneous system of the linear algebraic equations arising in dimensional analysis is to reduce the first mxm or rxr submatrix of the dimensional matrix to a unit matrix. the variables whose powers are given by the r variables solved for can appear in more than one dimensionless group. There are two significant advantages from such an arrangement. In the example problem. this variable should be placed in the rightmost column of the dimensional matrix. the dependent variable DL was placed in the last column of the dimensional matrix to ensure that it appeared in one dimensionless π group only. the dimensional analysis can still be performed with the variables arranged in any order. it is advantageous to arrange the variables in such a way that the first mxm or rxr submatrix of A is a diagonal matrix if possible. The initial arrangement of the variables is important in constructing the dimensional matrix. 5. Finally. The first advantage is that the rank of the matrix can be determined easily by inspection because the determinant of a diagonal matrix is equal to the product of the diagonal terms.

It is hoped that the systematic approach to dimensional analysis presented here will inspire those who have hitherto neglected this powerful tool to employ it in solving their engineering and scientific problems. the initial set of dimensionless π groups can be transformed systematically to obtain other complete and independent dimensionless π groups that may be more convenient to use in experiments than the initial set. By appropriate choice of eigenvalues. These eigenvectors contain a set of complete and independent dimensionless π groups. Nomenclature DL Dp f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 Do g u = = = = = = = = = = = longitudinal dispersion coefficient mean grain diameter of the porous medium an unknown function we wish to determine experimentally an unknown function we wish to determine experimentally an unknown function we wish to determine experimentally an unknown function we wish to determine experimentally an unknown function we wish to determine experimentally binary diffusion coefficient between the solvent and oil gravitational acceleration interstitial displacement velocity viscosity of the displaced fluid μo A-30 . The theoretical basis of the method has been presented and discussed. It is shown that a complete set of independent dimensionless π groups is given by the eigenvectors of the null space of the dimensional matrix.Concluding Remarks A systematic procedure has been presented to derive the complete and independent set of dimensionless π groups pertinent to a given problem.

pp.. 379-387. pp.μs ρo ρs π Π = = = = solvent viscosity density of the displaced fluid solvent density transformed set of dimensionless groups = initial set of dimensionless groups (has nothing to do with 3.C. Franklin Inst. 3 (March 1966) 46–60. and Fulford. 38. H.: “Dimensional Analysis and Partial Differential Equations. 345-376. Rev.: “Dimensional Analysis and Natural Circulation. Corrsin. Vol. 1185-1188. Appl.: Dimensional Analysis and Theory of Models. S. 1951. 1953. 1953. 4.” Chemical Engineering Symposium Series.” Studia Math. Phys. 516.. 1914. G.: “A Simple Geometrical Proof of Buckingham’s p-Theorem. Happ. pp. E.” Am.. 19. Math. pp. 403-422.” J. Vol. p. 242. Franklin Inst. 58. Vol. Vol. Franklin Inst.P. 59. 1948.. Vol. 75-80.” Am. Bridgman. John Wiley and Sons Inc. Langhaar. 1948.” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. 1946. 180-181. pp. p.” J.. Chen.” J. J. 292. No. Buckingham. A-31 . Catchpole. New York. 67. 1952. New York.: “Dimensionless Groups.W. Brand. G.141. J. New Haven. Langhaar. Dover. pp. : “On Physically Similar Systems: Illustrations of the use of Dimensional Equations. Vol. 245. Dec.” J. Hellums. J.” Elec. 1937. and Churchill. Yale University Press.W. S. Vol. W.D. pp. S. Monthly. L.. 84-99. Huntley. 1967. pp. H..E. 3918-3926.: “Algebraic Theory of Dimensional Analysis. W. No.: “Computer-oriented Procedures for Dimensional Analysis. Vol. 1948.W.: Dimensional Analysis. H.” Phys.: “On the Foundations of Dimensional Analysis..L. Vol.. 459-463.L. 14. Decius.. Drobot.: “Dimensional Analysis: An Approach from Transformation Theory and a Criterion for Scaling Model Experiments. J. 6. Phys. Vol. 1967.: Dimensional Analysis.: “The pi-Theorem of Dimensional Analysis. Eng. P.: “ A Summary of Dimensional Analysis.) References Birkoff.

: “Inspectional Analysis: A Method Which Supplements Dimensional Analysis..W. No. 1959. Shook. L. 1995. 1949. 1968.H. J. Silberberg. Part IV. The Rayleigh Method?” Petroleum Refiner. and Spencer. No.” NASA Rept. Vol. Sept.J. Rayleigh. Silberberg. Schmidt.. May 1953.S. 1940. Mag. 32. 1915. and Housen.. 3. Part II. K. Academic Press.W. pp. 32. 59.” Phil. 3. 179-183. 1964. Silberberg. R. ERC/CQD 68-631..E. J. Pankhurst.: “Matrix Methods of Dimensional Analysis. W. 175-180. Lord: “On the Stability of the Flow of Fluids. A. Jr. Moon. 127 (1935). The Correct Use of Dimensional Systems” Petroleum Refiner. Vol. and McKetta.. Vol. J.. pp.W. April 1953. 34.. Sloan.: “Dimensional Analysis. A. 66.H. I. Jr.C. 21–24.” Nature.” Brown Boveri Rev. 1981. Elisha Mitchell Sci..I.: “Problem Solving with Dimensional Analysis.E. I. R.” The Industrial Physicist. June 1953.: Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics. Li. Franklin Inst.D.: “Learning to Use Dimensional Analysis. No. Part III. L. 4.H. and Happ. and Lake.” J. The Buckingham Pi Theorem” Petroleum Refiner.W.” NASA Rept. Rayleigh. 1968. Soc. Sloan. 179-183???.H. Sedov. 147-150.: Dimensional Analysis and Scale Factors. July 1953..: “Learning to Use Dimensional Analysis.S. J. J. 32. Vol.” In Situ (1992) 16. ??. I.J. P. 311-349. 95. Aug. 1892.: “Learning to Use Dimensional Analysis. 32. Jr. Silberberg. D.: “Scaling Immiscible Flow Through Permeable Media by Inspectional Analysis. and Happ.W. Lord: “The Principle of Similitude. Chapman and Hall Ltd. 248. Marle. and McKetta. 3.M. No.J. 51. Vol. A-32 .: Multiphase Flow in Porous Media. Ruark.: “Literature Search: Dimensional Analysis. W.J. Part I. No. W. London. Jr.... Gulf Publishing Company.Luchsinger. and McKetta.: “A Modern Approach to Dimensions. and McKetta. 101-103. A. D. J. M. ERC/CQD 68-6231.: “Learning to Use Dimensional Analysis. New York. I.D. C.” J. 495-521. Which Dimensional System Should You Use?” Petroleum Refiner.

1968. Zlokarnik. Aug. Van Driest.” NASA Rept. W.Sloan.: “On Dimensional Analysis and the Presentation of Data in Fluid Flow Problems.R. Springer–Verlag. A-34 (March 1946) pp. 68. Marko: Dimensional Analysis and Scale–up in Chemical Engineering. and Happ. Appl.” J. A-33 . A-34-A40. Vol.W.. Mech.D.: “Computer Program for Dimensional Analysis. New York. ERC/CQD 68-621. A. 1991. E.