The Kern River Horizontal-Well
Steam Pilot
".K. Dietrich, SPE, The Dietrich Corp.
Summary. Sluggish oil response in the Kern River horizontal-well steam pilot was caused by placement of the wells in a
reservoir environment unfavorable for application of either conventional oil recovery processes or novel oil-mining techniques.
Encouraging pilot operational experience and the tremendous potential for improved ultimate oil recovery shown by preliminary
simulations suggest that future pilot testing of horizontal-well steam technology is warranted in a more favorable environment.
Introduction
The Kern River vertical-shaft and horizontal-well steam pilot was
designed and installed on the basis of a geologic model that emerged
from analysis of numerous closely spaced wellbores drilled on the
25-acre [lO-ha] test site. Numerical simulation was used to develop
both the strategy for steamflooding operations performed at the test
site during the period 1982-83 and the projections of long-term proc-
ess performance.
Eight horizontal wellbores spaced at 45° [0.79-rad] increments
were rotary-drilled into the base of the heavy-oil column (18 to
20° API [0.95 to 0.93 g/cm 3]) from a 500-ft [150-m] vertical shaft
positioned at the center of the 25-acre [lO-ha] rectangular pilot area.
The original concept was to use only horizontal wells for cyclic
steaming and steamflooding operations; this concept was modified
on the basis of simulation results that indicated the potential for
early steam breakthrough and poor capture efficiency of the dis-
placed oil. The modification involved drilling conventional vertical
wells (one well within each of the eight sectors formed by the
horizontal wells) and injecting steam into them while producing from
the horizontal wells (Fig. 1).
The pilot was terminated because of unfavorable economics after
21h% of the oil in place (OIP) was recovered. The oil recovery
rate and process efficiency were each improving at the time the
pilot was abandoned. Early sluggish oil response was predicted and
observed owing to low vertical permeability and extensively depleted
oil saturation and pressure conditions that exist at the pilot site.
Long-term pilot operations were shown to be capable of recovering
significantly more oil at equivalent oil/steam ratio (OSR) than that
expected from conventional steamflood development.
The concept of using horizontal wellbores to improve thermal
oil recovery was developed by Turk, Kehle and Assocs. of Austin,
TX. The concept was called the heavy-oil process (HOP) and was
initially commercialized by Barber Oil Exploration Inc. The tech-
nology is currently owned by Ladd Petroleum Corp.
The HOP pilot described here was installed and operated by Fenix
and Scisson Inc. on Shell Oil Co. 's D&D lease at Kern River (Fig.
2) with funding provided by private-sector investors.
The purpose of this paper is to describe the geologic and reservoir
engineering features of the project; details of the construction and
drilling techniques are proprietary.
Drilling and Completion Practices
Vertical Shaft and Chamber. A 7-ft [2.1-m] -diameter cutter as-
sembly and a specialized drilling rig were used to drill a hole to
a depth of about 500 ft [150 m] at the center of the 25-acre [lO-ha]
rectangular pilot area. The hole was then lined with 5-ft [l.5-m]
-diameter steel casing from the surface to the top of a heavy-oil
accumulation at about 350 ft [105 m]. Miners were lowered into
the shaft where they hand-dug a 25-ft [7.6-m] -diameter chamber
within the interval selected for pilot operations and pressure-grouted
the chamber walls and floor.
Copyright 1988 Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988
Thermocouples were installed in the chamber wall near embedded
strain gauges and in 'h-in. [l.3-cm] pipe positioned within the for-
mation about 50 ft [15 m] radially from the chamber wall.
Lateral Holes. Eight lateral holes were rotary-drilled by men and
equipment placed in the chamber; four of these were about 430 ft
[130 m] in length and four were about 700 ft [210 m] in length
(Fig. 3). These laterals were drilled parallel to the base of the gently
dipping heavy-oil zone (Fig. 4). The imaginary plane containing
the laterals is located at depths between 350 and 600 ft [105 and
180 m] below the irregular ground surface. The maximum difference
in elevation between the tip of a lateral and the point where it meets
the chamber wall is about 50 ft [15 m].
Sections of 8%-in. [22-cm] preslotted steel liner (with a plug at
the end of the first section) were pushed to the terminus of each
of the holes created by rotary drilling. An unperforated 3-in.
[7.6-cm] steam-injection string was then placed within the full length
of the slotted liner.
Fig. 5 indicates that eight separate steam-injection strings and
eight separate produced-fluid strings pass through the vertical shaft
and chamber. Eight conventional beam-pumping units were posi-
tioned on the surface with rods and pumps placed within 2%-in.
[6-cm] tubing.
Geologic Conditions
Extraordinarily dense well control C!4 acre/well [3035 m 2 /well])
allowed a detailed description of the reservoir for this pilot.
Structural Features. A critical element of this pilot was the drilling
of the steam-injection/oil-recovery lateral holes radially from the
central shaft, parallel to and a few feet above the base of the oil
sand that was subsequently produced. To position the lateral holes
properly, the structural configuration of the oil sand was carefully
defined by combination of geologic data from various sources.
Drillers' logs taken in many old wells drilled within the pilot area
were used with data obtained in four new wells to prepare numerous
structural cross-sections (e.g., Fig. 4) and contour maps.
The base of the Interval QI sand, which was paralleled by the
lateral holes, is not a planar surface; it exhibits some irregularity,
which was allowed for during placement of the laterals. The base
of the Interval Ql sand was found to strike north 15 to 45° west
and dip an average of about 4 ° [0.79 rad] southwest across the pilot
area. The term "horizontal well" is used here to mean a lateral
that dips about 4° [0.07 rad].
Lithology. Zone Q consists of very porous, unconsolidated sands
interbedded with various types of nonreservoir deposits. The reser-
voir sands are moderately to well sorted, range from very fine
grained to pebble and cobble size, and contain variable but gener-
ally small amounts of interstitial clay. The unconsolidated sands
are uncemented except for occasional small calcite concretions and
are held together mainly by the viscous oil. Igneous rock clasts of
cobble and boulder size occupy up to 20% of the oil-sand bulk
935
 KERN RIVER FIELD

5000'
"COl.' tl '

j PRODUCTION WELL

n VERTICAL STEAM INJECTION WELLS T. 285

T 295
R.ZBE
R.2BE
........ SLOTTED LINER INTERVAL

Fig. 1-Schematlc of pilot Injection and production wells.

~~
volume in some Zone Q intervals. The presence of this coarse clastic
material was an important factor in the decision to use rotary-drilling
rather than augering techniques to place the horizontal wells. @
\
MC:::-:OPERTV
Nonreservoir deposits include clays, silts and poorly sorted sands.
These sediments are usually poorly bedded and often appear mot-
tled, as though reworked by organisms or weathering processes. Fig. 2-Locatlon of Kern River horizontal-well steam pilot.

Stratification. Areally continuous and tight (e.g., 2- to lO-md)

claystone members separate Intervals Ql and Q2 (Fig. 6) and isolate
both of them from overlying and underlying beds. These claystones
are about 20 ft [6.1 m] thick and were probably formed as clay
drapes during stream deposition on a large alluvial fan. Numerous
conventional steam projects at Kern River demonstrate that these
thick claystones confine injected steam to the intended displace-
ment intervals.
Interval Ql consists of three distinctive sand packages (Figs. 6
and 7) in the pilot area with a composite gross thickness of about
90 ft [27 m] and an average net oil-sand thickness of 77 ft [23 m].
The three sand packages consist of a highly resistive (35- to 50-0 . m)
upper zone, a low-resistivity (15- to 20-0· m) middle zone, and an
intermediate-resistivity (25- to 35-0· m) lower zone. Suppressed
resistivity in the middle zone is caused by a highly laminated or
bedded structure. Numerous thin beds of sand and clay distinguish
this deposit from the massive oil sands that make up the upper and
lower Interval Ql.
Nonreservoir sediments within Interval Ql have permeabilities
in the range of 20 to 200 md and oil saturations <20% of bulk
volume. These nonreservoir sediments are present as lenses, which
are usually not continuous over the 25-acre [lO-ha] pilot area
(Fig. 4).
Saturation and Pressure Depletion. Shell Oil Co. drilled and com-
pleted 21 wells within the pilot area during 1947 and 1948 as part
of an overall program to develop its updip Kern River reserves on
1.25-acre [0.5-ha] well spacing. These wells were produced inter-
mittently on primary until Shell initiated steam-soak operations dur-
ing 1969. Several old wells located within the pilot area and
numerous wells on adjacent acreage have been stimulated with mul-
tiple steam cycles.
During excavation of the chamber and horizontal-well drilling
in the eastern area of the pilot, water inflow was a problem and
required pumping from the central shaft. The source of this mo-
bile water at the base of Interval Ql is probably steam condensate
from the prior steam-soak operations and percolation from the
overlying aquifers, which are recharged by the adjacently flowing
Kern River (Fig. 2).

I VERTICAL STEAM
l'\. IH"[CTOftS

Fig. 3-Posltlon and numbering of horizontal wells.

936 SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988

 L L'
I-- S 67 1/2°W N67i12° E-...j

o 100

Fig. 4-Posltlon of horizontal well and lenses In cross-sectional view.

41/2·' PROOUCTlON~ 3"STEAM INJECTION WELL HOP # 4

STRING STRING

I
I
INDUCTION RESISTIVITY
(ohm METERS}
DEPTH
-450' 0 25

SHAFT
WALL

MOOEL LAYERS
1'I~16'

t~~:;Z· =:::i;==i:lCCliiiIllU:mONj[E=
SAND

LAMINATED SANDSTONE
e. IjU0Nt
SAND
,.,.0
_ _ _ _ ...L..6518"SL~~ _ ~EA. -800'
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- N
3"SH: .... INJECTION
STRING
41/2" PRODUCTION
STRING -650' h:82'
''''23%
5 0.32.6%

Fig. 5-Schematlc of horizontal-well piping.

-700'

WELL HOP /I 2

INDUCTION RESISTIVITY -715'

(ohm METERS)
DEPTH
-250' 0r-______~~~------~5~0---- Fig. 7-Layerlng model used In numerical simulations.

Modem logging suites (including compensated neutron/formation

density logs) obtained in many of the four exploratory wells and
eight vertical wells drilled specifically for the pilot indicate that
h=32.4'
-300' .'=29%
a thin gas cap (from 1 to 7 ft [0.3 to 2 m]) exists at the top of Interval
5 0 =66% Q lover most of the pilot area. The gas cap consists of air that en-
tered the shallow, unconfmed reservoir through numerous idle well-
bores during the 4O-year depletion history. This condition of liquid
desaturation is common in other reservoirs of the Coalinga and
_ 350~'4IIt"'l";;..>';>"7""~I.hT
Midway-Sunset fields in the San Joaquin Valley.
HORIZONTAL_ The presence of this air/liquid interface establishes an atmospheric
WELL POSITION 375. pressure boundary condition at the top of Interval Q 1. This low
reservoir energy was shown during the pilot design simulations to
be incapable of adequately supporting production rates during cy-
-400'
409
clic steaming operations. This led to a modification of the original
h=36'
cyclic steam concept for the HOP. As an alternative, a continuous
,'=26.1 % steam-injection program, which included both horizontal and ver-
5.=36.9% tical wells, was designed and installed to augment the low reser-
voir energy found at this pilot site.

OIP and Horizontal-Well Placement. The approach used to cal-

culate OIP included comparison of oil saturations determined from
-490' whole-core analysis in the pilot area exploratory wells to oil satu-
rations previously determined from log analysis on an analog Kern
Fig. 6-Typical resistivity vs. depth profile In pilot area. River property. The analog was the McManus lease (Fig. 2), where

SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988 937

 TABLE 1-CURRENT OIP, AVERAGE PILOT BASIS

Oil
Saturation Porosity Net Pay Current OIP
Interval (%/100) (%/100) (It) (STB/NAF) (MSTB) (% Total)
01 upper 0.601 0.276 32.3 1,287 1,039 52
01 middle 0.399 0.278 17.0 861 403 20
01 lower 0.428 0.242 27.8 803 558 28
01 total 0.507 0.264 77.1 1,038 2,000 100
02 total 0.346 0.260 57.4 697 1,000 100

TABLE 2-ACREAGE AND OIL SATURATION x POROSITY x THICKNESS PRODUCT

FOR THE EIGHT PILOT SECTORS

Sector Area (acres)

North Northeast East Southeast South Southwest West Northwest
-- -- --- --
1.60 3.30 4.30 3.30 1.60 3.30 4.30 3.30
Sector Oil Saturation x Porosity x Thickness Product (It)
Interval North Northeast East Southeast South Southwest West Northwest
-- -- --
01 upper 5.1 6.2 6.2 6.2 5.5 4.8 4.4 4.1
01 middle 2.5 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.3 2.3 3.1
01 lower 2.6 2.2 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.2 3.1
01 total 10.2 10.2 10.8 11.3 10.3 9.5 9.9 10.3
02 total 5.2 1.1 2.3 3.5 4.8 6.1 7.8 9.5

highly saturated upper Interval Ql oil sand was not expected to con-
TABLE 3-MEASURED OIL VISCOSITY vs. TEMPERATURE tribute significantly to production during early time. The reason
ON UPDIP KERN RIVER ZONE Q OIL SAMPLE
is that viscous oil (Table 3) in upper Interval Ql would not become
Temperature Oil Viscosity effectively mobile until heat injected into the horizontal wells was
(OF) (cp) convected and conducted upward through intervening sediments,
which consist of several claystone/siltstone lenses (Fig. 4) and the
80 5,046.8
140 302.0
bedded (laminated) series of oil sands and silts in middle Interval
180 78.7 Ql (Figs. 6 and 7).
200 44.3
250 19.9 Pilot Design Simulations
300 8.9 The feasibility of using horizontal wells in a steam process was first
Rock and Fluid Properties for Simulator Input studied with thermal reservoir simulation during 1977. 2 Horizontal
PV compressibility, psi -1 0.00025 wellbores were shown at that time to be capable of improving ulti-
Irreducible water saturation, fraction PV 0.30 mate thermal oil recovery from conventional projects. On the basis
Critical gas saturation, fraction PV 0.05 of these promising feasibility results, the simulator was used to de-
Residual oil saturation to steam, fraction PV 0.01 to 0.08 sign the Kern River pilot with a site-specific geologic model and
Initial reservoir temperature, OF 110 many alternative well geometries and operating policies. The most
Rock heat capacity, Btu/lt3_oF 35.0 promising pilot design was installed and the project was operated
Rock thermal conductivity, Btu/D-It_oF 28.0 during 1982 and 1983.
Relative permeability Temperature independent
Thermal Reservoir Simulator. The volatile-oil steamflood simu-
Oil density at 60°F, Ibm/lt 3 59.9
lator described in the Appendix was used in all the pilot design and
Oil density at 110° F, Ibmlft 3 58.9
Oil gravity at 60°F, °API 15.9 monitoring work. Since its development in 1980, this simulator has
Oil gravity at 110°F, °API 18.4 been used extensively within the petroleum industry to design and
Oil compressibility, pSi-I 0.000008 analyze field projects worldwide. 3-9 Steam distillation, steam addi-
Oil thermal expansion coefficient, of-I 0.00034 tives, hydraulically induced fractures, and reservoir compaction
Oil specific heat, Btu/lbm-oF 0.44 were important elements in many of these field applications.

Reservoir Prototype. Although steam-distillation effects are ob-

the standard Waxman-Smits equations for shaly sand interpreta-
tion 1 were used for Interval Q.
Total Zone Q DIP beneath the 25-acre [1O-ha] pilot area is cur-
rently about 3,000,000 STB [480 x 10 3 stock-tank m 3 ]. Interval
Ql was chosen as the target for the steam pilot because two-thirds
of the oil is contained there (Table 1). Saturation of oil in the upper
portion ofthe zone averages 50% higher than that in either middle
or lower Interval Ql (Table 1). The product of oil saturation, porosi-
ty, and oil-sand thickness for Interval Ql as a whole is remarkably
uniform, varying between 9.5 and 11.3 ft [2.9 and 3.4 m] among
the eight sectors of the pilot area (Table 2). A sector's fraction of
total pilot area OIP is therefore expected to be about equal to the
fraction of total pilot area occupied by that sector.
The horizontal wellbores were placed in the basal portion of In-
terval Ql (Figs. 6 and 7), where oil saturation varies between 30
and 45% and averages about 42 %PV (Table 1). Oil from the more
served in Kern River projects, their importance in overall pilot de-
sign was thought to be minor. Therefore, only water and a dead-oil
component were used during analysis of the horizontal-well pilot.
The horizontal wellbores were represented by a standard radial
well model running on pressure constraint. High flow coefficients
were set for each gridblock penetrated by the horizontal well to
eliminate any pressure drop from the wellbore to the reservoir. This
is a distributed source-and-sink approach to well modeling, meaning
that the sandface sees a uniform and constant potential along the
full length of the pipe under both injecting and producing conditions.
The converging nature of the horizontal wellbores toward the cen-
tral vertical shaft led to our use of cylindrical coordinates. Large
three-dimensional grid systems were used (1,056 active gridblocks)
to model one-eighth elements of the 25-acre [lO-ha] pilot area.
Several different one-eighth pattern elements (or sectors) were used
during the simulations, each with unique structural dip and geologic

938 SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988

 0.8,.-----r---.,----,.---.... -----r---,
HEAVY OIL PROCESS SIMULATIONS

Z7 HORIZONTAL
~WELL \ / ZZ

0.7
\ /
-------
------- '----
>-
------- cr 0.6
w
>
o MODIFIED HOP
o STEAM FLOOD
W
23 a: 0.5

o
...J 0.4
«
z
o
t-
00.3
«
cr
u.
I
Z •
Fig. 8-Finite-difference grid system for heavy-oil process ..... 0.2
C1
0
•
/'
simulations. Z a
..J
/'
./'
~­ . / ' HOP CYCLIC
conditions; one of these is shown in Fig. 8. The grid system extends :K
./
0.1 ~
beyond the pilot area in the radial direction to represent the uncon- '"E /
fined nature of the pilot in that direction. Direction of true bed dip
0
with respect to the grid is along a radial vector 22 [0.38 rad] coun-
.
a
en
terclockwise from the direction of horizontal Well 26 (Fig. 3). °OL-~~~50~0~--I-O~O~O---'5~O-O---2-0~O-O---25~O-0---30~OO
Oil recoveries simulated with downdip pattern sectors were always DAYS FOLLOWING INITIAL STEAM INJECTION
10 to 20% higher than those simulated with updip sectors. This
0
results because gravity forces present with the 4 [0.07-rad] dip
held the steam injected downdip and the displaced oil within the Fig. 9-Simulated oil recoveries for alternative pilot designs.
pilot area; fluids were free to migrate upstructure beyond the pilot
perimeter in the simulations that used updip sectors.
The vertical dimension is described by an eight-layer grid, as A
shown in Fig. 7. Logs and cores available in many old and new
wells were used to describe both areal and vertical distributions
27
HORIZONTAL
............... ~WELL
\ 22

of rock properties and fluid saturations within the one-eighth reser- ........ \
voir prototype. Horizontal and vertical permeabilities within the
......... VERTICAL
oil sands range from 300 to 700 md and from 60 to 470 md, re- ------- lNJECTOR'A

spectively; permeabilities within the claystone lenses range from

20 to 200 md. There is 253,350 STB [40280 stock-tank m 3 ] of
OIP within the gridblocks approximating the southwestern pilot area.
PV of this region is 502,650 bbl [79 900 m 3 ], resulting in an aver-
age oil saturation of 0.504 at the start of pilot operations.
Simulation Operating Constraints. One 50 x 10 6 -Btu/hr
W] steam generator was available for the pilot; hence, the maximum
injection rate for the entire pilot area was set at about 2,900 BID
[460 m 3 /d] of cold water equivalent (eWE) steam. The maximum
sandface injection pressure was limited to 350 psia [2.4 MPa] to
stay below expected fracturing or pressure-parting conditions. The
minimum bottomhole operating pressures were set at 15 psia [103
kPa], and the maximum horizontal-well production rates were limit-
ed to 750 BID [120 m 3 /d] per well.
HOP. The initial concept for the HOP was one in which the horizon-
tal wells were cyclically steamed to create a "hot-plate" effect at
the base of a heavy-oil accumulation. Early simulations of this
process 2 were conducted with boundary conditions that assumed
that a fully confined pilot was operated "in phase." This meant
that the pilot was assumed to be surrounded by an infinite number
of identical pilots and that each one-eighth pilot sector was simul-
taneously undergoing identical injection, soak, or production op-
erations. Under these assumed boundary conditions, HOP was
shown to be capable of recovering 65 % of the OIP during a 5-year
period at an overall OSR of 0.32 bbllbbl [0.32 m 3 /m 3 ].
Later design simulations (described here) of the actual unconfined
pilot condition at Kern River in which practical facility constraints
require out-of-phase cyclic operations indicate that the original HOP
process is capable of recovering 17.5% of the OIP during a 5-year
period at an overall OSR of 0.21 bbllbbl [0.21 m 3 /m 3 ]. In addi-
SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988
A
[14.7-
'0
Fig. 1O-Finite-difference grid system for modified heavy-oil
process simulations.
tion to well interference effects caused by differing boundary con-
ditions, this reduced estimate of oil recovery is a result of two other
factors: (1) the extent of the pressure depletion at the pilot site
(visualize the atmospheric pressure condition at the top of Interval
Ql) was not recognized at the time of the early HOP simulations
during 1977 and (2) operating out of phase (unlike in phase) does
not allow perforation of the entire length of the converging horizontal
wells because of problems with early steam breakthrough.
Simulation results for the unconfined pilot condition wyre gener-
ated with the grid shown in Figs. 7 and 8 and are shown in Fig.
9. The period simulated consists of five injection cycles for Horizon-
tal Well 25 and four for Well 26 and covers a time of 2,050 days.
Oil recovery during this time was 21,841 and 30,735 STB [3470
and 4890 stock-tank m 3 ] for Wells 25 and 26, respectively. This
amounts to 20.8% of the OIP within the portion of the pilot area
enclosed between these two horizontal wells (Fig. 8).
The simulations indicate that after a short period of injection,
the horizontal well on production begins to respond to the iniec-
939
 TABLE 4-STEAM SLUGS w~

:::
1-..... 0.1
KERN RIVER HORIZONTAL-WELL STEAM PILOT

Total Steam c~
~<n
,,~

Well (bbl) ..J

"m
III O.O~
DSR "
~z
.
:Err.- 0 ·0
21 6,974 "<n ~C/lKi!lL
z-
00 0"
22
23
3,921
28,543
l..Jio..ruZONoT,-"A-".L) - - - - STEAM FLOODING
!WELLS ---,
J
.. "
-0
00
Wo
24 27,308 80 800..., a:
~
25
26
35,643
7,769
~.
0;
m
STEAM

~
/.,.,...

~a:
Q.

60 / WATER 600 : ~
27 36,620 W'
>z
.. c
/ .,;0
28
Total
34,966
181,735
-0
1-"-
c ..
~o
40

tion pressure wave with an increase in total production rate. As
soon as the injection well is shut in, soaked, and put on produc-
tion, however, the opposing well's production rate rapidly decreases
as pressure is depleted.
To study the effect of increasing reservoir energy, a steamflood
was simulated after several steam cycles (from 1,400 days). In this
case, steam was injected continuously into Horizontal Well 25 with
Horizontal Well 26 on production. Only a slight improvement in
oil recovery was shown as a result of steam-injectivity and capture-
efficiency problems. The tight overlying middle Interval Ql prevent-
ed vertical steam-zone growth, and some displaced oil was pushed
out of the pilot acreage. Injectivity and capture efficiency were re-
duced by the short perforation intervals.
Modified HOP. The design simulations indicate that a steamflood
process is necessary to provide reservoir energy at the pilot location
and that fully perforated horizontal wells are needed for capture
efficiency. Because the total fluid throughput rate is set by the steam
generator capacity in this pilot, full length perforating was shown
to be more important to improve capture efficiency than overall
production rate.
The original concept of HOP was therefore altered to a scheme
where conventional vertical wells were used for steam injection and
horizontal wells were used for production. In this modified program,
it was possible to produce all eight fully perforated horizontal wells
simultaneously (i.e., in phase) following their initial steam stimu-
lation treatments.
The grid system shown in Figs. 7 and 10 was used to evaluate
this modified process. In this case, the full steam generator capacity
was allocated to the eight vertical injectors following 60,000- to
80,000-bbl [9540- to 12 700-m 3 ] steam-soak treatments in each of
the horizontal wells.
Simulated oil recovery for the modified HOP process is shown
in Fig. 9. The slow response is caused by placement of the horizontal
wells within the low-oil-saturation environment at the base of the
heavy-oil column. In this pilot, it is the low permeability (60 md)
/
/ OIL
~D::
....
""020
~o
/ 200 ~~
:::1
0::: / ::
D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~DIO
IJ A SON 0 1 F M A M IJ A SON ~~ J J
t 2nd/HALFI982 I tst/HALFI983 I 2nd/HALFI983 I
PILOT OPERATING MONTHS
Fig. 11-0bserved pilot response-cumulative basis.
of the highly laminated middle Interval Ql (Figs. 6 and 7) that con-
trols the rate at which hot oil moves downward into the horizontal
wellbore. Although the lenses are less permeable, they are less im-
portant because they are areally discontinuous. Note that strong oil
response was not predicted by the simulator during the first 2 years
of the pilot (Fig. 9).
Steam breakthrough was shown to occur in the modified HOP
process at about 2,000 days when steam was injected into upper
Interval Q 1. An interesting feature of this process is that steam was
shown to break through initially to a limited section of the slotted
liner and subsequently to move radially along the horizontal well
in both directions. Oil was shown to be severed by the steam and
to move by gravity drainage into the horizontal well in a manner
analogous to the movement of hot oil into the lower perforations
of a vertical well after steam override in the conventional steam-
flood process.
Pilot Operations
Steam Injection. Each of the eight horizontal wells was stimulated
by injection of I,OOO-Btu/lbm [2326-kJ/kg] steam to initiate the
project using the eWE steam slugs shown in Table 4.
These steam slugs were injected through a 3-in. [7.6-cm] tubing
string and placed at the radial terminus of each horizontal well (Fig.
5). The disproportionate injection volumes were the result of differ-
ences in injectivity and the need to begin the production stage of
the project without incurring time delays. Wellbore surveys were
not available in the horizontal wells; hence, the injection profiles
are unknown.

TABLE 5-0BSERVED PILOT RESPONSE (STB)

Injected Steam Oil Produced Water Produced

Per Per Per Per Per Per
1982 Month ~ Cumulative Month Day Cumulative Month Day Cumulative
-- -- -- ---
July Steam soaking 40,000 357 12 357 10,102 326 10,102
Aug. Steam soaking 110,000 503 16 860 18,112 584 28,214
Sept. Steam soaking 182,000 689 73 1,549 2,908 97 31,122
Oct. Steam soaking 182,000 1,981 64 3,530 32,740 1,056 63,862
Nov. 40,231 1,341 222,231 3,763 125 7,293 48,762 1,625 112,624
Dec. 89,925 2,901 312,156 4,333 140 11,626 86,830 2,801 199,454
1983
--
Jan. 93,900 3,029 406,056 4,948 160 16,574 105,169 3,393 304,623
Feb. 77,745 2,777 483,801 4,630 165 21,204 86,671 3,095 391,294
March 80,211 2,587 564,012 3,670 118 24,874 86,938 2,804 478,232
April 80,776 2,693 644,788 4,447 148 29,321 83,698 2,790 561,930
May 92,138 2,972 736,926 5,187 167 34,508 84,878 2,738 646,808
June 50,921 1,697 787,847 5,348 178 39,856 64,006 2,134 710,814
July 0 0 787,847 3,822 123 43,678 39,002 1,259 749,816
Aug. 0 0 787,847 3,306 107 46,984 28,207 911 778,063

940 SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988

 TABLE 6-0BSERVED PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE
PER HORIZONTAL WELL

Horizontal Oil Production Water Production

SCI\J<ING
~lZ0NTA'-'''''L+_ _ _ STEAM FLOODING --j Well bbl % of total bbl % of total
!""WELLS
Z 21 3,383 7.2 118,266 15.2
0400 4000 ~ 22 4,745 10.1 212,412 27.3
;;; I-
o 23 6,578 14.0 116,709 15.0
I-
:>
~ 300 3000 0 24 8,598 18.3 67,691 8.7
Z o 24,898 3.2
o a: O 25 4,229 9.0
I-
Q.,
26 2,725 5.8 17,117 2.2
0 200 2000 ~~
:> :>(/)
27 11,417 24.3 135,383 17.4
c
o a 28 5,309 11.3 85,587 11.0
a: 100 1000 ::;
100.0
Q. Totals' 46,984 100.0 778,063
(/)
.... (/)

o o • Allocations of total pilot production on the basis of weekly well tests.

AS 0 N 0IJ F M AM
2nd/HALFI982
PilOT
[ 'st/HALF/sa3
OPERATING
Fig. l2-0bserved pilot response-rate basis.
After this preheating of the horizontal wells, the full generator
capacity of about 3,000 BID [480 m 3 /d] was switched to the ver-
tical injection wells. Steam was injected into only lower Interval
QI with injection rates allocated on the basis of the area served
by each injector. It was planned to recomplete the vertical injection
wells later in the project to place the majority of the steam into
upper Interval Q 1.
Several injectors were unable to take their share of the generator
capacity at the maximum allowed injection pressure during the early
weeks of the project. Fig. II indicates that about 606,000 bbl
[96 300 m 3 ] CWE steam was injected into the vertical wells during
an 8-month period; this is an average daily rate of about 2,500 bbl
[400 m 3 ].
Observed Production Response. The pilot recovered about 47,000
STB [750 stock-tank m 3 ] oil in response to the injection of 788,000
bbl [125 000 m 3 ] CWE steam. This is a cumulative OSR of 0.06
bbIlbbl [0.06 m 3 /m 3 ] (Fig. 11). The project was terminated after
14 months of operation because oil revenue was not matching the
pilot operating costs.
Monthly fluid rates shown in Table 5 and in Fig. 12 indicate that
although the producing oil cut for the pilot as a whole averaged
less than 10 %, it was gradually increasing with time.
Peak temperatures recorded by the thermocouples installed in the
J,J A a:
I
MONTHS
2nd/HALFI983
" to 300°F [120 to 150°C] before injection into vertical wells be-
gan. Although wellbore injection profiles were not available in the
horizontal wells, some hot fluid leaving the 3-in. [7.6-cm] steam-
injection lines at the radial termini of the wells must have moved
through the annuli and exited through liner slots near the shaft.
Temperature data indicate that steam condensate from the vertical
injection wells reached the horizontal wells during the life of the
pilot. The breakthrough of live steam did not occur. Wellhead tem-
peratures for all but two of the horizontal wells were in the range
of 210 to 245°F [99 to 118°C]; Wells 26 and 28 averaged 180 to
200°F [82 to 93°C]. The two wells that recovered the most oil and
the two that recovered the least (Table 6) were located in areas con-
taining the highest and lowest products of oil saturation, porosity,
and oil-sand thickness, respectively.
Discussion of Pilot Response. Field pilot results are compared with
simulator predictions in Fig. 13. The simulation results for the modi-
fied HOP process were obtained before project startup. Several early
simulations were conducted withaltemative sets of relative per-
KERN RIVER PROJECTS

chamber wall were about 240°F [115°C]; thermocouples installed (A) IMBIBITION CURVE FROM MATCH
OF [NJECTIVITY.(McMANUS STEAMFLOOD)
near the vertical shaft indicate that temperatures there reached 250 (9) CURvE FROM MATCH OF KERN"A"
STEAM FLOOD PILOT.

(C) DRAINAGE CURVE FROM MATCH OF

CYCLIC STEAM RESPONSE. (McMANUS PROPERTY)

>-
I-
:::;
0.05 -m
>- / <
a:
w
>
/ w
~

o / ~ IX 10-2
0 0 .04 Q.

w
a: / >
w
A)

(8)

...J / I-
<
-'
0 0 . 03
...J
/ w
a:
<
Z
/
~ 0.02
/ IXIO-!
t-
o
<
a: co
c
u.. :a:. - PILOT RESPONSE
I 0.01
go
-
Z

<>
Z
"'li
Ec--'
~-'
u;
- - IMBIBITION k rw
_.- DRAINAGE k rw

00 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

WilTPV-FRACTIONAL STEAM INJECTION

Fig. l3-Comparison of early pilot response-observed vs. Fig. 14-Drainage and imbibition relative permeability func-
simulated. tions for simulation.

SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988 941

 O.Sr------r------.-----_.------~----_.----__, 25-ACRE MODULE
STEAMFLOOD PROCESS SIMULATIONS
(I) CONVENTIONAL 5-SPOT(IMSISITION)
(2) CONVENTIONAL 5- SPOT (DRAINAGE)
0.7 (3)
(3) MODIFIED HOP (IMBIBITION)
(4) MODIFIED HOP (DRAINAGE)

>
~ 0.6
>
0
0
w
a:: 0.5
..J

~ 0.4
Z Fig. 16-Finite-dlfference grid systems for conventional five-
0 spot steamflood analysis.
t-

~ 0.3
a::
LL
I
. served and calculated for the McManus steamflood.
Z
....... 0.2
a
~
...J
Z fluid throughput rate for the full 25 acres [10 hal was set to the
'"c
:i'_
~ CWE steam injection rate of 280 B/D [45 m 3 /d] per full injector
E
0.1
~ was used with only Interval Ql open. When a total of 1.2 PVof
;;;
°0~~~~~--~~----~~----~-----25~OO~--~3000
DAYS INJECTION
Fig. 15-Comparison of simulated oil recovery-conventional
five-spot vs. horizontal-well steamfloods.
meability functions to display the sensitivity of the modified HOP
process to this variable. The functions shown as imbibition and
drainage 5 in Fig. 14 were used; these were obtained by history
matching cyclic steam response observed for the McManus lease
at Kern River (Fig. 2). Relative permeability functions published
for the Kern "A" pilot 10 in the central portion of the Kern River
field are similar to those developed for the McManus lease.
The slope of the observed pilot response in the dimensionless plot
of Fig. 13 falls within the envelope of performance predicted by
the simulator with the alternative relative permeability functions.
The slope of the early pilot response curve might have been even
more favorable if the horizontal wells had been preheated with the
larger steam injection design slugs.
Modified HOP vs. Conventional Steamflood
Pilot oil recovery predicted by the simulator for the modified HOP
is compared with that predicted by the simulator for conventional
steamflood development in Fig. 15. Results generated from imbi-
bition relative permeabilities after 8 years of project simulation for
the modified HOP indicate a cumulative oil recovery of 0.74 of
OIP and a cumulative OSR of 0.20 bbllbbl [0.20 m 3 /m 3 ]. Results
for the conventional five-spot steamflood indicate a cumulative oil
recovery of 0.47 of the OIP and an OSR of 0.19 bbllbbl [0.19
m 3 /m 3 ].
Predictions made with imbibition and drainage relative permea-
bility functions are considered to provide a lower and upper limit
to process performance, respectively. The improved ultimate oil
recovery potential shown by the modified HOP reflects increased
vertical sweep efficiency associated with injecting at the top of the
formation and producing from the base. Early conventional steam-
flood response was shown to be strong in the simulations because
the high oil saturations present in upper Interval Ql (Figs. 6 and
7) are open in the production and injection wellbores.
The cumulative OSR for the modified HOP process was 0.18
bbl/bbl [0.18 m 3 /m 3 ] after nearly 7 years, when steam injection
was terminated and pressure blowdown was initiated. In the five-
spot analysis, the cumulative OSR was 0.15 bbllbbl [0.15 m 3 /m 3 ]
after 5 years, when steam injection was converted to warm water
injection. These low OSR values are comparable with those ob-
The series of 2V2-acre [1-ha] five-spot patterns shown in Fig .
16 was assumed for analysis of the conventional steamflood. The
same level assumed for analysis of the modified HOP process. A
CWE (1 ,OOO-Btu/lbm [2326-kJ/kg]) steam had been injected, the
simulated injection was switched to warm water containing 128
Btu/Ibm [298 kJ/kg]. The 15 producing wells were operated with
a 50-psia [345-kPa] minimum bottomhole operating pressure and
a maximum lift capacity of 320 BID [50 m 3 /d] per full well. The
several different prototypes or pattern elements shown in Fig. 16
were simulated to develop the composite production function for
the entire 25-acre [lO-ha] area.
Modeling Limitations
The modeling approach described here has several limitations; two
of these are caused by the current cost of computer processing and
the other relates to inadequate field data.
Computer run times and costs currently prohibit the use of a reser-
voir model (for practical engineering analysis) that includes the en-
tire pilot area. As an alternative, the pilot acreage was subdivided
into one-eighth sectors or elements that were assumed to be enclosed
by no-flow boundaries that do not move. Overall pilot project
response was developed by adding the responses from the individual,
relatively high-resolution, fine-grid simulations of reservoir pro-
totypes. Each pattern element or sector was assigned to one of sever-
al classes of reservoir prototype, where a prototype class represents
any combination geometry/geology/process description that yields
a significantly different simulation response. In this pilot analysis,
the variation in structural dip among the various sectors yielded
significantly different simulation responses. Each of the eight pattern
elements was therefore assigned to one of the appropriate simulated
prototype responses to develop estimates for its oil-rate-vs.-time
function. The overall pilot oil rate was then obtained by addition
of the individual pattern elements.
Cost constraints also led to the simplified modeling technique de-
scribed here for the horizontal wellbore. A more rigorous approach
would involve using a series of small gridblocks scaled to the size
of the wellbore. This type of treatment for modeling either well-
bores or hydraulically induced fractures 3 .4.6 is possible with the
fully implicit formulation of the simulator. However, preliminary
simulations of this nature were discontinued for analysis of this pi-
lot because they were prohibitively expensive. Simulation results
presented here assume that the steam injected at the terminus of
each horizontal well (through the 3-in. [7.6-cm] injection string)
unloads the water and oil within the 8%-in. [22-cm] slotted liner
and contacts the sandface along the full length of the well.
Finally, the inability to obtain either openhole or cased-hole logs
in the horizontal wells (particularly profile surveys taken during
injection and production operations) limits the engineering analysis
of this pilot.

942 SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988

Review and Conclusions
Reservoir conditions at the pilot site are unfavorable for application
of either conventional oil recovery processes or novel oil-mining
techniques. OIP was low initially relative to that found in the central
portion of the Kern River field owing to abundant silt and clay frac-
tions in the porous medium and proximity to groundwater. Fur-
thermore, previous development of the pilot area with both primary
and steam-soak operations partially depleted oil saturation and re-
duced reservoir energy to the atmospheric pressure level.
The horizontal wells were placed at the base of the heavy-oil
colunm in an environment containing mobile water where they were
in poor communication with overlying oil-rich sands. Simulations
of anticipated pilot performance made before project startup indi-
cated that these reservoir features would be responsible for a slow
oil response.
The following conclusions are based on the work reported here.
I. The type of oil-mining process described is technically promis-
ing because it was shown to be capable of reducing the serious prob-
lem of steam override, which is so pronounced in conventional
steamflood operations.
2. Oil cut and OSR were increasing throughout the life of the
pilot. The pilot was terminated because revenues from oil produc-
tion were not covering operating costs.
3. Observed pilot performance is in agreement with simulator
predictions of pilot response, which were in hand before project
startup.
4. Simulator predictions indicate that continuation of the pilot may
have ultimately recovered about SO% more oil at equivalent OSR
than that oil recovery volume expected from conventional steam-
flood development.
S. The encouraging operational experience with this pilot and the
tremendous potential for improved ultimate oil recovery shown by
preliminary simulations suggest that future pilot testing of the tech-
nology may be warranted in a more favorable environment.
Nomenclature
h = thickness, ft [m]
krw =relative permeability to water
N =OIP at pilot start, STB [stock-tank m 3 ]
Np =cumulative oil production, STB [stock-tank m 3 ]
r =radial coordinate
So =oil saturation, fraction
Wi =cumulative barrels of steam injection in
I,OOO-Btu/lbm [2326-kJ/kg] CWE
z = vertical coordinate
8 = tangential coordinate
</> = porosity, fraction
Acknowledgments
Many individuals participated heavily in the design and analysis
of the pilot, including J.C. Allen (consultant), Don Lockwood and
Bruce Russell of Fenix & Scisson Inc., and Richard Ellis (formerly
of Completion Technology, Inc.). The concept of the modified HOP
was introduced by J.C. Allen, and strong geologic contributions
were provided by Bruce Russell. Appreciation is extended to Ladd
Petroleum Corp. for permission to publish this paper.
References
I. Koerperich, E.A.: "Utilization of Waxman-Smits Equations for De-
termining Oil Saturation in a Low-Salinity, Shaly Sand Reservoir," JPT
(Oct. 1975) 1204-08.
2. "Heavy Oil Process, Kern River Project, Performance Predictions for
Cyclic Steam Stimulation," Intercomp Resource Development and En-
gineering Inc. report for Barber Oil Exploration, Houston (Feb. 1978).
3. Soni, Y. and Hannon, R.A.: "Simulation of the Saner Ranch Fracture
Assisted Steamflood Pilot," J. Cdn. Pet. Tech. (Jan.-Feb. 1986).
4. DeGrisogono, 1.: "Evaluation of the Steam Injection Test in the Nord-
horn Oil Sand Reservoir, ,. paper presented at the 1982 European Sym-
posium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Paris, Nov. 8-10.
5. Dietrich, J.K.: "Relative Permeability During Cyclic Steam Stimulation
of Heavy-Oil Reservoirs," JPT (Oct. 1981) 1987-89.
6. Dietrich, J .K.: "Cyclic Steaming of Tar Sands Through Hydraulically
Induced Fractures," SPERE (May 1986) 217-19; Trans., AIME, 282.
SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988
7. Claridge, E.L. and Dietrich, J.K.: "Viscous Fingers and Gravity
Tongues in Carbon Dioxide/Steam Stimulation," paper SPE 11707
presented at the 1983 SPE California Regional Meeting, Ventura, March
23-25.
8. Chase, C.A. and Dietrich, J.K.: "Compaction Within the Belridge Di-
atomite," paper SPE 17415 presented at the 1988 SPE California
Regional Meeting, Long Beach, March 23-25.
9. Dietrich, 1.K.: "Steamflooding in a Water Drive Reservoir: Upper
Tulare Sands-South Belridge Field," paper SPE 17453 presented at
the 1988 SPE California Regional Meeting, Long Beach, March 23-25.
10. Chu, C. and Trimble, A.E.: "Numerical Simulation of Steam Displace-
ment-Field Performance Applications," JPT (June 1975) 765-76.
Appendix-Simulator Description
Overview. The compositional steamflood simulator was used to
design and monitor this horizontal-well steam pilot. This simulator
is a fully implicit, finite-difference-based program capable of run-
ning in either an isothermal or thermal mode, with or without active
reservoir compaction. The program can treat up to four mass-con-
servation equations and an energy balance. There are three phases:
aqueous, liquid hydrocarbon, and vapor.
The four mass species are water, a nonvolatile heavy oil, and
two volatile components. The water and nonvolatile heavy-oil com-
ponents are present in all simulations. The energy balance and one
or both volatile components, however, may be added or deleted
at the user's option by setting the appropriate mode switches in the
input data. This allows the simulator to be run in either thermal
or isothermal mode and with either zero, one, or two volatile com-
ponents. At the user's option, the volatile components may also
dissolve in the aqueous phase. Noncondensables are treated as vola-
tile components with negligible solubility in the liquid hydrocarbon
phase.
Phases and Components. The simulator treats four components
and an energy balance. The four components may partition among
three phases: a liquid hydrocarbon phase, a vapor phase, and an
aqueous phase. Allowed partitioning among the phases is shown
in Table A-I.
Partitioning of the two volatile components among the three phases
is determined from user-specified relationships of vapor pressure
vs. temperature. Calculation of partition coefficients is purposely
confined to a single subroutine, permitting easy modification to in-
clude more general phase behavior if desired.
Additional Physical Properties. Vapor-phase density is calculated
with the Redlich-Kwong equation of state (EOS). Behavior of the
individual volatile components in the vapor phase is determined by
specifying either their Redlich-Kwong parameters or their critical
temperatures and pressures. The Redlich-Kwong parameters for
water are directly coded into the program. Use of the EOS in the
absence of the volatile hydrocarbon components rather than the more
accurate steam table-lookup approach guarantees continuity of cal-
culated results as volatile component concentrations go to zero.
Liquid-hydrocarbon-phase and gas-phase viscosities are both
concentration- and temperature-dependent.
Enthalpies of hydrocarbon components are calculated from user-
specified heat capacities. Water enthalpies in the liquid and vapor
phases at zero pressure come from table lookups. Vapor-phase en-
thalpy is then adjusted for pressure with the Redlich-Kwong EOS.
Relative permeabilities are entered in tabular form as functions
of saturations and temperature. Up to 10 sets of relative permeability
tables, corresponding to 10 rock types, may be entered. Relative
permeabilities may be changed during a simulation at restart points
to model important hysteresis effects in the single-well cyclic steam
process.
Conservation Equations and Unknowns. Depending on a mode
switch for the energy balance (NEB), a simulation is either isother-
mal (NEB=O) or thermal (NEB = I). A second mode switch (NVC)
determines the number of volatile components: either zero, one,
or two. Thus, there are six permutations. The number of conser-
vation equations is 2 + NEB + NVC. The number of dependent vari-
ables solved for is always one more than the number of conservation
equations. An additional constraint equation is appended so that
the number of equations equals the number of unknowns.
943
 operation. If, for example, the mode is isothermal w~th only~ne
TABLE A-1-PARTITIONING AMONG volatile component, the energy balance and conservatIon equatIon
PHASES IN SIMULATION
for the second volatile component are otnitted from the set of equa-
Liquid tions being solved. After application of the constraint equation, only
Hydrocarbon Vapor Aqueous three unknowns remain per gridblock, and each element of the
Component Phase Phase Phase coefficient matrix is a 3 x 3 submatrix. By contrast, for thermal mode
--- with two volatile components, there are five unknowns per grid-
Water X X
Nonvolatile hydrocarbon X block, and each element of the coefficient matrix for this case is
Volatile 1 X X X a 5x5 submatrix.
Volatile 2 X X X
Coordinate and Geometrical Capabilities. The user may specify
either Cartesian or cylindrical coordinates. Any other curvilinear
coordinate system (viz., gridblock edges parallel to flow stream-
The set of primitive unknowns is (1) aqueous-phase saturation, lines and isopotentiallines) may be "manually" specified by means
Sw; (2) vapor-phase saturation, Sg; (3) pressure, p; (4) tempera-
of individual modifications to gridblock PV's and interblock trans-
ture, T; (5) mole fraction Volatile Component 1, x(1); and (6) mole missibilities. This feature permits maximum flexibility in specify-
fraction Volatile Component 2, x(2)' .
ing heterogeneities in rock properties (permeabilities, porosities,
The set of conservation equations is (1) water (as a chelDIcal spe- conductivities, and heat capacities) and in reservoir configuration
cies), (2) nonvolatile heavy hydrocarbon component, (3) energy,
(variable-thickness layers and variable structural dip).
(4) Volatile Component I, and (5) Volatile Component 2.
The convention used in the program is that the unknowns and Reservoir Compaction. The simulator has been formulated to treat
conservation equations are always taken in the above order, even the effects of reservoir compaction on reservoir pressure and fluid
when the mode is such that not all of them are required. For exam- flow. The formulation allows for either linear or nonlinear strain
ple, if the mode is isothermal (NEB =0) with only one volatile com- as a function of effective stress, temperature-dependent strain, visco-
ponent (NVC = I), the appropriate unknowns are Unknown Sets elastic effects (creep), and hysteresis in the form of limited or no
1 through 3 and 5, and the appropriate conservation equations are rebound as pore pressure increases because of fluid in)ect!on ..
Equation Sets I, 2, and 4. . Details concerning the formulation used for compactIon In thIS
Additional quantities, such as liquid-hydrocarbon-phase saturatIon simulator are given in Ref. 8.
and component concentrations in the vapor and aqueous phases,
are computed from the primitive unknowns from phase-equilibrium SI Metric Conversion Factors
relationships.
acres x 4.046873 E-OI ha
Solution Method. The nonlinear coupled partial-differential equa- °API 141.5/(131.5+ °API) g/cm3
tions describing the conservation of energy and of the up to fo,ur bbl x 1.589873 E-OI m3
chemical species are spatially discretized with standard fimte Btu x 1.055056 E+OO kJ
differences. Btu/ft3 x 3.725 895 E+Ol kJ/m 3
For maximum stability, time discretization is fully implicit; i.e., Btu/(lbm-OF) x 4.1868* E+OO kJ/(kg·K)
at the end of a timestep, all quantities are evaluated at the new time cp x 1.0* E-03 Pa·s
level. ft x 3.048* E-OI m
OF (OF - 32)/1.8 °C
Newton-Raphson iteration is used to solve the time and spatially
discretized finite-difference equations. The resultant linear equations in. x 2.54* E+OO cm
are solved by Gaussian elimination with alternate diagonal orde?ng Ibm/ft 3, x 1.601 846 E+OI kg/m3
(D4) or by the conjugate-gradient-like iterative method. A mne- psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa
point finite-difference formula is used to reduce grid orientation 'Conversion factor is exact. SPERE
effects in the areal plane.
Original SPE manuscript received for review April 8. 1987. Paper accepted for publication
For maximum efficiency, the program treats only those conser- Jan. 15.1988. Revised manuscript received Feb. 29, 1988. Paper (SPE 16346) first present-
vation equations and unknowns required by the current mode of ed at the 1987 SPE California Regional Meeting held in Ventura, Aprtl 8-10.

944 SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1988