SPE/DOESociety of

Petroleum Engineers
U.S. Department
of Energy

SPE/OOE 10691

Lumped-Component Characterization of Crude Oils for Compositional

Simulation
by K.C. Hong, Chevron Oil Field Research Co.

Member SPE-AIME

This paper was presented at the 1982 SPE/DOE Third Joint Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers held in Tulsa, OK, April 4-7, 1982. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an
abstract of not more than 300 words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expwy., Dallas, TX 75206.

This paper presents the results of an attempt to

develop Peng-Robinson equation-of-state models with
reduced numbers of components for three representative
Compositional simulators using an equation of reservoir fluids. Details of lumping schemes used for
state to describe the phase behavior of multicomponent reducing the number of components as well as methods
fluid mixtures are expensive to use because of the for characterizing the lumped fractions are discussed.
large number of iterative phase equilibrium calcula-
tions and large computer storage space required. It
is thus desirable to keep the number of components
used in describing a fluid mixture to a minimum. This
paper describes a method for reducing the number of The original Peng-Robinson equation-of-state
components without a significant loss of accuracy in models were developed by matching (tuning) the equa-
describing the phase behavior. Peng-Robinson equa- tion-of-state to available empirical phase behavior
tion-of-state models with up to five pseudocomponents data on three reservoir fluids: Reservoir Fluid A,
were developed for three reservoir fluids ranging from Reservoir Fluid B, and Condensate Fluid C. The num-
a bubble-point to a dewpoint fluid under initial bers of components required to describe adequately the
reservoir conditions. These models are shown to match phase behavior of these fluids were:
the laboratory-measured phase behavoir data almost as
accurately as the more complex 14 to 17 component 1. Reservoir Fluid A-C0 2 system: 14 components (12
models originally used in reservoir simulation. hydrocarbon (HC); 2 non-HC)

2. Reservoir Fluid B-N z system: 17 components (15

INTRODUCTION HC; 2 non-HC)

Compositional simulators are expensive to use 3. Condensate Fluid C: 17 components (14 HC; 3
because of the large number of phase equilibrium non-HC)
calculations required to describe the phase behavior
of multicomponent fluid mixtures in the reservoir. In Tables 1 through 3 show the original Peng-
addition, their use is generally limited to large Robinson characterizations for the three fluid systems
computers because keeping track of phase compositions and the compositions of the fluids at their respective
and fluid properties requires large storage space. reservoir conditions. The equation-of-state models
For these reasons the number of components used in were used to generate the pressure-composition (p-2)
describing a fluid mixture must be kept to a minimum. diagrams shown in Figures 1 through 4. T~o situations
were considered for Condensate Fluid C: (1)
Peng-Robinson equation-of-state 1 models involving injection (Figure 3) and (2) nitrogen injection
14 to 17 components were previously developed and used ure 4).
for describing the phase behavior of many reservoir
fluids ranging from a bubble-point to a dewpoint fluid
under initial reservoir conditions. The author's LUMPING SCHEMES
experience to date in using these models for various
purposes has indicated that they are too cumbersome Various schemes were suggested in the literature
and often impossible to use for large scale problems for lumping the crude-oil fractions to describe the
because of the reasons stated above. Concise, though phase behavior of crude oils with a minimum number of
less accurate, models were needed to allow the compo- lumped fractions.
sitional simulator to run economically and on large
scale problems. A thorough study was reported by Lee et al. 2 In
that reported work, Lee employed the physical~eason­
ing that crude-oil fractions having relatively close
References and illustrations at end of paper. physico-chemical properties can be fairly accurately

241
 , .
LUMPED-COMPONENT CHARACTERIZATION OF CRUDE OILS FOR COMPOSITIONAL SIMULATION SPE/DOE 10691
represented by a single fraction. Having observed mixture properties, the choice of a correct mixing
that the closeness of these properties are reflected rule is as important as that of a lumping scheme, to
by the slopes of curves when these properties are get the best approximation to the true phase behavior
plotted against the weight-averaged boiling-point of the mixture.
curve, Lee used the weighted sum of slopes of these
curves as a guide for lumping the crude oil fractions. For describing the phase behavior of a fluid
mixture using the Peng-Robinson equation-of-state
Although this procedure resulted in satisfactory (P-R EOS), the following component properties (see
lumping of some crude-oil fractions, it was somewhat Reference 3 for definition of these properties) must
cumbersome and required a large amount of experimental be specified:
data which were costly to obtain. Besides, the proper-
ties measured are usually interrelated, making the 1. Critical pressure, Pc . (i for component i)
slopes of so many plots of curves redundant as cri- 1
teria for deciding which fractions to lump. It ap-
peared that simpler criteria could be used. 2. Critical temperature, T
c,
1
Since most properties of a hydrocarbon fraction
are related to the average molecular weight of that 3. Cri tical volume, v c .
fraction which is in tUrn related to the average 1
carbon number, it was thought that the latter by
itself could perhaps be used as a lumping criterion. 4. Acentric factor, Wi
To see if this simple criterion can give satisfactory
lumping of hydrocarbon fractions, the following proce-
5. Molecular weight, MW
dure was employed: i

1. Lump all C7 + fractions into a single fraction. 6. Binary interaction parameters, 0 ..

1J

2. Find the best mixing rule to characterize the

lumped fraction: that is, the mixing rule that
produces the best match of predicted and experi-
mentally measured bubble point or dewpoint as a
function of the amount of an external gas added
to the fluid mixture.
In this study, six different mixing rules were
evaluated for characterizing the lumped C7 + fraction
from its constituent component properties (listed
above). The following symbols will be used to des-
cribe the mixing rules:

3. I f the match of predicted and measured bubble PcQ L<PiPc

i
point or dewpoint curves is not satisfactory,
adjust tuning parameters within reasonable limits
TcQ L ¢i Tc
to get a satisfactory match. If a satisfactor,
i
match cannot be obtained, then go back to Step 2
with more than one fraction to represent the C7
cut. Otherwise, proceed to the next step. + v cQ :::: L <Pi v c
i
4. Lwnp C2 to C6 components into a single fraction.
The mixture is then represented by three He frac-
wQ =L ¢i w.1
tions C 1 , C2 -C 6 , and C 7 +) and any non-HC compo-
nents present.

5. Use the best mixing rule obtained in Step 2 to

characterize the lumped C2 -C 6 fraction.
Ok/)
N
=I - L L <p. <p. (1-0 .. )
1 J 1J
6. Generate a full, predicted p-z phase diagram with
the lumped model obtained in Step 5.
where subscript Q denotes the lumped fraction. The
term ¢. is a weighting factor as defined below for
7. If the predicted p-z diagram is not satisfactor-
ily matched with the experimental data, adjust di ffere1t mixing rules.
tuning parameters within reasonable limits to get
MIX 1. Molar average:
a satisfactory match.
<p. ; :;
8. If a satisfactory match cannot be obtained in 1
Step 7, return to Step 5 with more than one frac-
MIX 2. Surface fraction average: 4
tion to represent the C2 -C 6 cut. Otherwise,
stop.
2/3
'i ci
This procedure is shown schematically as a flow dia- ¢.
gram (Figure 5). 1 L x. v 2/3
1 c.
1

MIXING RULES
MIX 3. Weight fraction average:
Mixing rules are used for determining the gross
properties of a fluid mixture or a lumped fraction
from its component properties. Since there are numer-
ous ways to mix the properties, all giving different
SPE/DOE 10691 K. C. HONG
MIX 4. p -weighted average for including ef- condensed 8- or 10-component models shown above. The
fgcts of intermolecular ; molar aver- predicted dewpoint or bubble point pressures are
ages for other properties: tabulated against mole percent N2 or CO 2 added to the
reservoir fluid for six different mixing rules used to
4>.1 = for all properties, except characterize the lumped C7 + fraction.

It is apparent from the comparisons that the

weight fraction average (MIX 3) is the best mixing
for rule to characterize the lumped C7 + fraction. In all
three cases it gave the closest match of the true
dewpoint or bubble point pressures.

T )1/2 (1-0 .. ) Since the match of predicted and measured bubble

c. 1J point or dewpoint pressures was satisfactory, the
J
tuning mentioned in Step 3 of the lumping procedure
above was not attempted. The study proceeded directly
to lumping of C2 to C6 HC components.
MIX 5. v -weighted average for including ef-
f~cts of intermolecular ; molar aver-
ages for other properties: Lumping of C2 to C6 HC Components
4>.1 = Xi for all, except The C2 to Cs hydrocarbon components were lumped
into One pseudocomponent for each of the fluid models.
The properties of t'he lumped fraction were character-
ized by applying the best mixing rule (weight fraction
averaging) as established earlier. For Condensate
Fluid C, the nonhydrocarbon components were combined
into one lump by representing the components present
in smaller amounts (zC0 2 0.0325 and zN 2 = 0.007)
with that present in a larger amount (zH 2 S 0.1687).
l: l: cpo 4>. (T T )1/2 (1-0 .. ) The resulting models were
i j 1 J C
i cj 1J

1. Reservoir Fluid A-C0 2 system; 4 components

(3 He; 1 non-HC (C0 2 ))
MIX 6. v 2/3-weighted average for , including ef-
f~cts of intermolecular ; molar aver- 2. Reservoir Fluid B-N2 system: 4 components (3 HC;
ages for other properties: 1 non-HC (N 2 ))

x. for all, except 3. Condensate Fluid e-dry gas (CH 4 ) system: 4 com-
CPi 1
ponents (3 HC; 1 non-HC (H 2 S))
2/3 One additional model was considered for Condensate
x.
1
Fluid C because nitrogen injection was being consi-
4>i = for dered as an alternate process to recover the retro-
l: x. v grade gas. Nitrogen was added back to the four-
1 c.
1
component model, resulting in a five-component model.
Since the properties of CO 2 were closer to those of N2
Td._ l: L cpo 4>j (T T )1/2 (1-6 .. ) than to those of H2S, CO 2 was combined with N2 (total
. 1 C. C. 1J mole fraction of 0.0395). Thus the model was:
i J 1 J

4. Condensate Fluid e-N2 system: 5 components

(3 HC; 2 non-He (H 2 S, N2 ))
LUMPED MODELS Tables 4, 5, and 6 compare bubble point or dewpoint
pressures predicted by the 4- or 5-component models
Lumping of C7 + Fractions with those obtained with the original 14- or 17-compo-
nent models as well as those by the intermediate 8- or
The above mixing rules were used for characteri- IO-component Ones. Table 6 is for the Condensate
zing the C7 fractions of the three reservoir fluids. Fluid C-N2 system. The dewpoint pressures predicted
The resul ti~g models consisted of the following num- by the 4-component Condensate Fluid C model for dif-
bers of components: ferent mole percent CH 4 added are compared with those
by the original 17-component model in Table 7.
1. Reservoir Fluid A-C0 2 system: 8 components
(7 HC; 1 non-HC (C0 2 ») It can be seen that the results predicted by the
lumped 4- or 5-component models differ significantly
2. Reservoir Fluid B-N 2 system: 8 components (7 HC; from those obtained with the original models. Hence,
1 non-HC (N z )); CO 2 was combined with N2 tuning of the equation-of-state was deemed necessary
for these lumped models.
3. Condensate Fluid C: 10 components (7 HC; 3
non-HC)
Tables 4, 5, and 6 compare bubble point or dewpoint
pressures predicted by the original 14- or 17-compo-
nent P-R EOS models with those obtained with the
 LUMPED-COMPONENT CHARACTERIZATION OF CRUDE OILS FOR COMPOSITIONAL SIMULATION
Tuning of an EOS model to match experimental
phase behavior data usually involves adjustment of
binary interaction parameters and, if necessary) of
the critical constants and molecular weight of the
heaviest hydrocarbon fraction. In this study) a respectiveli.
satisfactory match between the lumped and original
model predictions could be obtained for the Reservoir
Fluid A-C0 2 system or the Reservoir Fluid B-N 2 system
by adjusting just one interaction parameter, that
between methane and the C7 + fraction. For the Conden-
sate Fluid C) two interaction parameters as well as
the critical constants of the C7 + fr~ction had to be
adjusted to obtain a satisfactory match. Thus, the
following adjustments were made for the four lumped
models:
1. Reservoir Fluid A-C0 2 system: increased 1- C 7 +
from the weight-fraction average of 0.114 to
°c
0.130
2. Reservoir Fluid B-N 2 system: decreased °c
from the weight-fraction average of 0.075
0.070
3. Condensate Fluid C-dry gas system:
Increased °C 7 +-H 2 S from 0.047 to 0.230;
0
Increased C1 -C 7 + from 0.098 to 0.260;
Increased PC(C 7 +) from 22.8755 to 23.3;
Decreased T (C 7 +) from 609.38 to 597.2.
C
4. Condensate Fluid e-N2 system (5-component):
0
Increased C 1 +-N 2 from 0.142 to 0.275;
0
Increased C1 -C 7 + from 0.098 to 0.260;
Increased PC(C 7 +) from 22.8755 to 23.3;
Decreased Te (C 7 +) from 609.38 to 597.2.
The las t columns of Tables 4 through 7 show the
phase properties computed with the tuned, lumped
models. Comparison of these results with those ob-
tained with the original 14- or 17-component models
shows that the lumped models approximate the rigorous
models quite well. Only bubble point or dewpoint
prediction results are shown in Tables 4 through 7 for
comparison. In tuning the lumped models for the three
fluids, however, the full pressure-composition dia-
grams were considered: that is, the constant volume-
percent liquid lines were also matched. It was found
that models predicting the bubble point or dewpoint
pressures closely do not necessarily predict the
constant volume-percent liquid lines satisfactorily.
Hence, the final models developed were compromises be-
tween the models that give good bubble point or dew-
point match and those that give good constant volume-
percent liquid lines match.
Tables 8 through 11 give the Peng-Robinson charac-
terization data required to describe the four lumped
models with the P-R EOS program. The lumped fractions
must be treated as defined hypothetical components in
runnjng the P-R EOS program 5 ,
?44
SPE/DOE 10691
The bubble point and dewpoint curves as well as
the volume-percen:-t liquid values for selected pres-
sures and compositions computed with the lumped models
above are compared with the experimental phase beha-
vior data in Figures 6 and 7, for the Reservoir Fluid
A-C0 2 system and the Reservoir Fluid B-N 2 system,
The quality of match is almost as good
as that obtained with the more rigorous 14-component
or 17-component model.
Figures 8 and 9 are pressure-composition diagrams
predicted by the 4-component Condensate Fluid C-dry
gas model and the 5-component Condensate Fluid C-N 2
model, respectively. These diagrams may be compared
with those of Figures 3 and 4 based on the more rig-
orous 17-component model. The quality of match is not
as good as was hoped. For the condensate system an
improved match could be obtained by allowing one or
more additional lumped fractions to represent the C7 +
cut. Thus 4 or 5 hydrocarbon fractions could conceiv-
ably represent the condensate phase behavior more
closely. This i.dea was not pursued in this study
because no experimental phase behavior data was avail-
able to determine the model accuracy.
f'(lNrT.Tl<iIONS AND N lATIONS
1. The lumping procedure and m~x~ng rule developed
in this study are simple yet effective methods
for reducing the number of components required to
describe the phase behavior of mixtures.
2. Lumped 4-component models (and an alternate
5-component model for the Condensate Fluid C-N2
system) were developed for the three representa-
ti ve reservoir fluids. They appear to describe
adequately the phase behavior of these fluids.
3. Because the numbers of components needed to
describe the phase behavior were drastically
reduced, use of these lumped models in place of
the more rigorous ones in reservoir simulators is
expected to result in significant cost savings.
4. The idea of subdividing the C7 cut into two or
more fractions to more c10sely ~atch experimental
phase behavoi r dat,a should be tested, perhaps
with a condensate fluid for whi.ch measured data
are available.
Nm1FN r.T.ATURE
MW Molecular weight
Pc Critical pressure
Critical temperature
v Crjtical volume
c
Greek:
O.. Binary interaction parameter characterizing
1J
the binary formed by components i and j.
Weighting factor defined for mixing rules.
Acentric factor.
SPE/DOE 10691 K. C. HONG
Suu:;cLipts

i Refers to component i.

Q Denotes lumped component.

1. Peng, D. Y. and Robinson, D. P., "A New Two-Con-

stant Equation of State." Ind. Eng. Chern. Fun
dam. 15:59-64 (1976a).

2. Lee, S. T., et "Experimental and Theoretical

Studies on the Fluid Properties Required for
Simulation of Thermal Processes." SPE 8393
presented at the 54th Annual Fall Meeting, Las
Vegas, 1979.

3. Reid, R. C., et al. "The Properties of Gases and

Liquids. II 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, N. Y. , N. Y. 1977.

4. Prausnitz, J. M. and Chueh, P. L. "Computer

Calculations for High-Pressure Vapor-Liquid
Equilibria." (p. 35) . Prentice-Hall, Inc. ,
Inglewood Cliffs, N.J., 1968.

5. Peng, D. Y. and Robinson, D. P. "User's Guide

for GPA Peng-Robinson Program." University of
Alberta Report prepared for Gas Prodessors Asso-
ciation, 359 G 110 PR (1977).

245
TABLE 1
TUNED PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION FOR
RESERVOIR FLUID A-CO 2 SYSTEM
PC TC VC MOLW
COMPo ID MOLE W
CO 2 72.89999 304.20 0.094 0.2250 44.0
COMP-C l 45.80000 190.70 0.099 0.0130 16.0
COMP-C 2 48.20000 305.43 0.148 0.0986 30.1
COMP-C 3 42.00999 369.90 0.200 0.1524 4t~. 1
COMP-C 4 37.47000 425.20 0.255 0.2010 58.1
COMP-C s 33.31000 469.80 0.311 0.2539 72.2
COMP-C 6 29.92000 507.90 0.368 0.3007 86.2
COMP-C 7 26.92741 538.55 0.504 0.3481 100.2
COMP-C 8 24.57310 567.68 0.582 0.3913 109.0
COMP-C 9 22.58444 594.37 0.663 0.4345 119.0
COMP-CIO 20.88578 618.66 0.746 0.4777 132.0
COMP-Cll 19.41985 640.66 0.831 0.5209 147.0
COMP-C 12 18.14298 660.54 0.917 0.5641 162.0
COMP-C 13 + 14.50000 700.00 1.400 0.8000 312.0

Binary, Interaction Parameters

CO 2 -Hydrocarbons Range from 0.20 (C0 2 -C 1 ) to 0.1 If
(C0 2 -C 13 +)
CH 4 -Other HCs Range from 0.16 (C l -C 13 +) to 0.01
(C 1 -C 7 )
All others 0.01 or 0.0

CO 2 Cl C2 C3 C4 C6
0.0001 0.3100 O. 1041 0.1187 0.0732 0.0441 0.0255

C7 C8 C9 C10 ell C12 C13 +

0.0571 0.0472 0.0246 0.0233 0.0212 0.0169 0.1340
TABLE 2
TUNED PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION
FOR RESERVOIR FLUID B-N2 SYSTEM,

PC TC VC MOLW
COMPo ID
---~.----
ATM W

N2 33.50000 126.20 0.090 0.0400 28.0

CO 2 72.89999 304.20 0.094 0.2250 44.0
COMP-C 1 45.80000 190.70 0.099 0.0130 16.0
COMP-C 2 48.20000 305.43 0.148 0.0986 30.1
COMP-C 3 42.00999 369.90 0.200 0.1524 44.1
COMP-C 4 37.47000 425.20 0.255 0.2010 58.1
COMP-C 5 33.31000 469.80 0.311 0.2539 72.2
COMP-C e 29.92000 507.90 0.368 0.3007 86.2
COMP-C 7 27.01000 540.16 0.426 0.3498 100.2
COMP-C 8 24.64000 568.60 0.486 0.4018 114.2
COMP C9 22.50000 594.60 0.543 o. 1-1455 128.3
COMP-C 1O 20.80000 617.60 0.602 0.4885 142.3
COMP-C I I 19.Ld985 640.66 0.831 0.5209 156.0
COMP-C 12 18. 1L~298 660 . 5L~ 0.917 0.5641 170.0
COMP-C 13 17.02146 678.49 1.004 0.6073 184.0
COMP-C 14 16.02899 694.72 1. 092 0.6505 198.0
COMP C 15 + 11.10719 782.92 1.776 0.9775 420.0

Binary Interaction_~~!ameters

N2 -Hydrocarbons Range from 0.120 (N 2 -C 1 ) to 0.261

(N 2 -C 15 +)
CO 2 -Hydrocarbons Range from 0.155 (CO 2 Cd to 0.155
(C0 2 -C 15 +)
CH 4 -Other HCs Range from 0.091 (C 1 C15 +) to 0.030
(C 1 C7 )

All others 0.01 or 0.0

Mole Fractions
N2 CO 2 C1 C3 C4 Cs C6
0.0102 0.0040 0.5462 0.1147 0.0733 o. 0/-101 0.0196 0.0142
C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C 12 C13 C14
0.0221 0.0423 0.0191 0.0113 0.0081 0.0078 0.0064 0.0071
C1 ,';+
0.0535
TABLE 3
TUNED PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION
FOR CONDENSATE FLUID C
PC TC VC MOLW
COMPo ID W
H 2S 88.89999 373.60 0.098 0.1000 34.1
N2 33.50000 126.20 0.090 0.0400 28.0
CO 2 72.89999 304.20 0.094 0.2250 44.0
COMP-C 1 45.80000 190.70 0.099 0.0130 16.0
COMP-C 2 48.20000 305.43 0.148 0.0986 30.1
COMP-C 3 42.00999 369.90 0.200 0.1524 44.1
COMP-C 4 37.47000 425.20 0.255 0.2010 58.1
COMP-C s 33.31000 469.80 0.311 0.2539 72.2
COMP-C 6 29.92000 507.90 0.368 0.3007 86.2
COMP-C 7 27.01000 540.16 0.426 0.3498 100.2
COMP-C g 24.64000 568.60 0.486 0.4018 114.2
COMP-C g 22.50000 594.60 0.543 0.4455 128.3
COMP-C lO 20.80000 617.60 0.602 0.4885 142.3
COMP-C ll 23.93500 651.46 0.6857 0.4385 147.0
COMP-C 12 21.95000 671. 32 0.7705 0.4835 161. 0
COMP-C 13 20.27600 689.32 0.8565 0.5283 175.0
COMP-C 14 + 16.51900 733.93 1.1193 0.6622 227.1

HzS-Hydrocarbons from 0.06 (H 2 S-C l ) to 0.03

-C 14 +)
N2 -Hydrocarbons Range from 0.12 (N 2 -C 1 ) to 0.20
(N Z -C 14 +)
CO 2 -Hydrocarbons Range from 0.15 (C0 2 -C 1 ) to 0.14
(C0 2 -C 14 +)
CH 4 -Other HCs from 0.310 (C 1 -C 14 +) to 0.025
)
All others or 0.0

N2 CO 2 H2 S C1 C4
0.00701 0.03247 0.1687 0.59158 0.06992 0.03298 0.02513
C5 C6 C7 CIa C11
0.01422 0.01034 0.01265 0.01216 0.00879 0.0049 0.00268
C12 C13 C14 +
0.00148 0.00120 0.00379
TABLE 4 RESERVOIR FLUID A-C0 2 SYSTEM PHASE PROPERTIES - COMPARISON
OF DEWPOINT AND BUBBLE POINT PRESSURES PREDICTED BY THE ORIGINAL
14-COMPONENT MODEL AND THE LUMPED 8- and 4-COMPONENT MODELS

14-Comp.
ProQerty 1
Bubble Point
with 0% CO 2 1651 1608 1722 1816 1544 1696 1666 1613 1688
20% 1860 1822 1933 2023 1750 1922 1888 1833 1896
40% 2088 2030 2160 2265 1938 2161 2115 2088 2140
50% 2228 2126 2289 2425 2016 2393 2234 2251 2302
60% 2456 2228 2470 2684 2080 2473 2384
65% 2637 2292 2603 2893 2111 2599 2486

Dewpoint
with 60% CO 2 2113 1803 1942 2060 1687 1985 1921 1886 1937
65% 2487 2079 2316 2513 1913 2348 2251
70% 2868 2309 2675 3027 2086 2681 2526 2840 2906
75% 3182 2373 2934 3576 458 2878 2712
80% 3769 2908 4236 3005 2610 3896 £+014
90% 10,467 10,392 13,533 10,019 20,397 17,541 18,248 10,135 10,111

i'rMIX 1 = Molar average; MIX 2 = Surface-fraction average; MIX 3= Weight-fraction average;

MIX 4 pc-weighted average; MIX 5 v c -vle average; MIX 6 2/3-weighted average.

TABLE 5 RESERVOIR FLUID B-N2 SYSTEM PHASE PROPERTIES - COMPARISON

OF BUBBLE POINT PRESSURES PREDICTED BY THE ORIGINAL
17 COMPONENT MODEL AND THE LUMPED 8- and 4-COMPONENT MODELS

17-Comp. 4-Component
Model Untuned Tuned
Bubble Point
with 0% N2 3990 3783 4023 4157 3403 1-1292 4111 4013 3937
5% 4742 1+441 L~ 779 1.+971 3969 5073 4848 4822 4735
10% 5603 5167 5627 5897 4587 5946 5670 571.+2 5644
15% 660/+ 5976 6591 6963 5266 6932 6592 680~~ 6691
20% 7787 6882 7699 8213 6016 8056 7637 8044 7913
25% 9217 7909 8992 9697 6854 9384 8836 9520 9366
TABLE 6 CONDENSATE FLUID C-N2 SYSTEM PHASE PROPERTIES - COMPARISON
OF DEWPOINT PRESSURES PREDICTED BY THE ORIGINAL
17-COMPONENT MODEL AND THE LUMPED 10- and 5-COMPONENT MODELS

17-Comp. 5-Component
Model Untuned Tuned
Dewpoint
with 0% N2 3565 2717 2971 3040 2598 2972 2871 29 /f6 3469
10% 4080 2994 3309 3395 2845 3315 3187 3298 3945
20% 46 /+/j 3263 3649 3755 3078 3660 3502 3652 t~450

30% 5259 3508 3979 4107 3281 3996 3802 3997 4974
40% 5921 370lj 4274 4430 3427 4299 4061 4308 5488
50% 6609 3802 4490 4678 346/j '+523 4236 4544 5927

TABLE 7 CONDENSATE FLUID C-DRY GAS SYSTEM PHASE PROPERTIES -

COMPARISON OF DEWPOINT PRESSURES PREDICTED BY THE ORIGINAL
17-COMPONENT MODEL AND THE LUMPED 4-COMPONENT MODEL

17-Component
Model
Dewpoint
with 0% Dry Gas 3501 2708 3660
10% 3718 2762 3839
20% 3948 2788 3982
30% 4190 2777 4065
40% 4432 2714 4058
50% 4626 2578 3920
60% 4796 2332 3592
70% 4752 2985
80% 4309 1800
TABLE 8

PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION FOR LUMPED

4-COMPONENT RESERVOIR FLUID A-C0 2 MODEL

Cri s:

PC TC VC MOLW
ATM K -MOLE W
-~-
QL11 0LE

CO 2 72.89999 304.20 0.09400 0.22500 44.01

Methane 45.80000 190.70 0.09900 0.01300 16.04
C2 -6 Lump 39.00000 406.27 0.24410 0.19060 55.07
COMP-C 7 + 17 .1+6820 661.92 1.14280 0.67190 2(~5. L~O

CO 2 C1 C6 C7 +

CO 2 0.0 0.2000 0.1700 0.1400

C1 0.2000 0.0 0.0 0.1300
C2 -C 6 0.1700 0.0 0.0 0.0100
C7 + 0.1400 0.1300 0.0100 0.0

Fraction :

0.0001 0.3100 0.3656 0.3243

TABLE 9

PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION FOR LUMPED

4-COMPONENT RESERVOIR FLUID B-N 2 MODEL

PC TC VC MOLW
ATM Deg. K L/G-MOLE W-
-- G/MOLE

N2 33.50000 126.20 0.09000 0.0400 28.01

Methane 45.80000 190.70 0.09900 0.01300 16.04
C2 -6 Lump 40.61000 388.56 0.22670 0.17400 50.56
COMP-C 7 + 16.04830 699.76 1.22660 0.71250 268.90

N2 C1 C2 -C 6 C7 +

N2 0.0 0.1200 0.1200 0.2074

C1 0.1200 0.0 0.0 0.0700
-C 6 0.1200 0.0 0.0 0.0100
C7 + 0.2074 0.0700 0.0100 0.0

0.0102 0.5484 0.2630 0.1784

TABLE 10

PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION FOR LUMPED

4-COMPONENT CONDENSATE FLUID C-DRY GAS MODEL

Constants:

PC TC VC MOLW
W

H2 S 88.89999 373.60 0.09800 0.10000 34.08

Methane 45.80000 190.70 0.09900 0.01300 16.04
C2 -6 Lump 40.09000 394.51 0.23380 0.18040 52.36
COMP- + 23.30000 597.20 0.62160 0.45490 138.74

H2 S C1 C2 -C 6 C7 +

H2 S 0.0 0.0500 0.0500 0.0470

C1 0.0500 0.0 0.0 0.3400
C2 -C 6 0.0500 0.0 0.0 0.0100
C7 + 0.0470 0.3400 0.0100 0.0

0.20818 0.59158 0.15259 0.04765

TABLE 11
PENG-ROBINSON CHARACTERIZATION FOR LUMPED
5-COMPONENT CONDENSATE FLUID C-N2 MODEL

Critical Constants:
PC TC VC MOLW
Qeg. K L/C-MOLE W QlM9LJ~~

N2 33.50000 126.20 0.09000 0.04000 28.01

H2 S 88.89999 373.60 0.09800 0.10000 34.08
Methane 45.80000 190.70 0.09900 0.01300 16.04
-6 Lump 40.09000 394.51 0.23380 0.18040 52.36
COMP-C 7 + 23.30000 597.20 0.62160 0.45490 138.7/+

tion Parameters:

N2 H2 S C1 C2 C7 +

N2 0.0 0.0 0.1200 0.1200 0.2750

H2 S 0.0 0.0 0.0500 0.0500 0.0 1+70
C1 0.1200 0.0500 0.0 0.0 0.2600
C2 -C 6 0.1200 0.0500 0.0 0.0 0.0100
+ 0.2750 0.0470 0.2600 0.0100 0.0

Mole Fraction

0.03948 0.16870 0.59158 0.15259 0.04765

 PHASE BEHAVIOR MEASUREMENTS
(PVT Cell)

Laboratory Phase Envelope

14-Component Model I
5000 ._, - Peng-Robinson Prediction
- Extrapolation

Bubble Point Region

I I
I

4000

ro
'iii
a.
a,)
:5
II>
II>
(JJ
Critical
Q: 3000 Point
(2570 psia)

1000
/
,/
.......- /
, ! c//' I <,.-',-

o 20 40 60 80 100
Mol Percent C02 in Reservoir Oil A

Figure 1

Pressure-Composition Diagram for Reservoir Fluid A-C02 System at 130°F

 10,000

I
9000 I
I
I
8000
I
~i
7000
I
I
6000
co
'C;;
Cl.
(1)'
I-
::l 5000
~
....
(1)

c...

4000

/
/
/ 17-Component Model
_.- Peng-Robinson
Generated
Phase Envelope
- Laboratory
Phase Envelope

o
a 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
MOL Percent N2 in Reservoir Oil B

Figure 2
Pressure - Composition Diagram for Reservoir Fluid B - Nitrogen System at 164°F
 I

17-Component Model Prediction

(No measured data)

5000

4000

~:ooo

Pressure,
p!:ia

2000

1000

o
o 20 40 60 80 100
Percent Dry Gas Added

Figure 3

Pressure-Composition Diagram, Condensate Fluid C CH4 System

 17~Component Model Prediction
(No measured data)
6000 r-------.-4----..--~~~------~r_--------~/-------~

5000

4000

Pressur2,
psia

3000

2000

1000

Dew Poiflt Curve

o
a 10 20 30 40 50
Percent N 2 Added

Figure 4
Pressure - Composition Diagram, Condensate Fluid C - Nitrogen System
 Original Peng-Robinson EOS
Models
(14- or 17 -component)

Lump C7+ Fractions

Predict Phase Behvaior I0Il------1 Mixing Rules

No

Tune
Parameters

1. Combine non-HC
2. Lump C2-C6
Fractions

Predict Phase Behaviorlo4----,-~

Best
Mixing Rule

Tune
Parameters

Figure 5
Lumping Procedure Flow Diagram
 Lumped 4-Component
or X Model Prediction
LABORATORY PHASE ENVELrE

5000 I

I i
BUBBLE POINT REGION

I
DEW POINT REGION

j' \,
10.2
4000 X
I
I
<t:
U5
Q..

uJ
a::
:::::l
tn
tn
CRITICAL
IJ..I
a::
3000 POINT
0...
10
(2570 PSIA)

2000

X21.9 X16.0 X13.2

X23.7
X30.8 I I
20 40 60 80 100
MOL PERCENT CO 2 IN RESERVOIR OIL A

Figure 6
Pressure-Composition Diagram for Reservoir Fluid A at 130°F,
Comparison of 4-Component Model Prediction with Experimental
Phase Behavior Data
 10,000

Bubble
Point
9000

52.8
8000 X 31.4
BO%
X

38.B 29.1
7000 X X

BOOO X2B.5
ctl
'Vi
0..
III
23.5
"- 5000 X
:J
til
til
(l)
"-
Q..

21.5 15.8
X X

19.5 15.0 11.0

X X X
X Lumped 4 Component
Model Prediction
1000 . X X15.2 - Laboratory
X9.B X7.4
2B.0 17.0 Phase Envelope

ot ---l--..I..-----1---L---L----L-~_____1......__.
I....--

o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
MOL Percent N2 in Reservoir Oil B

Figure 7

Pressure-Composition Diagram for Reservoir Fluid Bat 164o F,

Comparison of 4-Component Model Prediction with Experimental
Phase Behavior Data
 dC7+~H2S= 0.23
dC7+-C1 0.26
5000~--------+---------~--------+----4 22.9
Tc (C7+) = 609.4

3000 1----,.---,
Pressure,
p~ia

2000

1000 I------~"""--+------+-"'"

20 40 60 80 100
Per:::ent Dry Gas Added
Figure 8

Pressure-Composition Diagram, 4-Component Model for Condensate Fluid C - CH 4 System

 6000
dC7+-N2 0.275
dC7+-C1 0.26
Pc (C7+) 23.3
Tc (C7+) 597.2

5000

4000 1 - - - - . - - - I o.....r-JIIf!'

3000 1 - - - - - - - 1 1 - - - - ,

Pressure,
p£ia

2000......-----JIIII

1000

o
o 10 20 30 40 50
Percent N2 Added

Figure 9

Pressure-Composition Diagram, 5-Component Model for Condensate Fluid C - Nitrogen System