Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids
NORMAN J. CLARK NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
MEMBER AIME
Editor's Note: The following paragraphs briefly intro-
duce and summarize material to be found in a five-part
series of Technical Articles which will be published in
consecutive issues of JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOL-
OGY. This series will cover the fundamentals of sampling,
testing, adjusting and interpreting oil and gas sample data
for use in reservoir studies. The first installment begins
on page 12 of this issue. References, Tables and Figures
will be numbered consecutively, but will be published
only with the particular installment of the series in which
they are first mentioned.
Fundamentals of Reservoir F1uids--Introduction
During the movement of oil and gas to the surface
from the reservoir in which they are found, the tempera-
tures and pressures to which they are subjected change
significantly; as a result, their physical properties undergo
many radical changes. The economic value of produced
oil and gas is dependent upon these physical properties,
and the operator finds it invaluable to be able to predict
handling and producing techniques which will allow him
to produce his reserves in a form that will provide a
maximum profit.
For many years, therefore, investigators have studied
the phase behavior of hydrocarbon materials with the
goal of fully developing methods for dctermining answers
to problems concerning the physical behavior both of
produced hydrocarbons and of those that are left in the
reservoir. Written material'-' regarding the fundamental
physical concepts governing hydrocarbon behavior and
describing the methods employed in practically ap')lying
these concepts to solving production problems is scattered
throughout the literature. The purpose of this series,
therefore, is to bring together these concepts and methods
of their application in solving practical, day-to-day reser-
voir engineering problems.
When production starts and pressure is reduced in a
hydrocarbon reservoir, both liquid and gas are formed
from what was at first only a liquid (as in an oil reser-
voir) or only a gas (as in a gas reservoir). One or the
other of the two phases (liquid and gas) is produced dif-
ferentially to some degree because of variations in per-
meability of the rock to gas and oil as saturations change.
Therefore, the hydrocarbon analysis of the composite pro-
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers of-
fice April 3, 1961. Revised manuscript received Nov. 17, 1961.
lReferences given at end of paper.
SPE 91
JANUARY, 1962
DAllAS, TEX.
duced materials changes from that of the original material
in place in the reservoirs. Obviously, then, the behavior
of reservoir fluids during production operations becomes
quite complex, and it is necessary to obtain laboratory
analyses of the initial reservoir fluids for conditions of
change where liquid and gas separate both differentially
and under equilibrium conditions. With these data, pro-
duction problems involving separation under various con-
ditions can then be solved.
The practical approach to the study of reservoir fluid
behavior is to anticipate pressure and temperature changes
to which the reservoir material will be SUbjected during
production operations, both in the reservoir and at the
surface; then the changes to reservoir fluid samples, which
occur for each of these pressure and temperature con-
ditions, are measured by laboratory tests.
The study of oil and gas reservoir performance requires
quantitative data on the composition, characteristics and
behavior of the oil and gas in the reservoir under original
conditions; in addition, similar data must be obtained for
the oil and gas under all changing conditions of tempera-
ture and pressure-as the materials move to the wellbore,
as they are produced to the surface, and as they are either
gathered in the stock tank or piped to the consumer.
The laws for perfect gases and perfect solutions do not
apply, without modification, to the behavior of hydro-
carbon mixtures. Although in recent years many investi-
gators have made notable progress toward developing
means for quantitatively evaluating hydrocarbon phase be-
havior, the industry still does not have a reliable theoreti-
cal method by which it can accurately and completely
calculate the behavior of complex hydrocarbon mixtures
under high pressures.
Where the production problem deals with changes in
the reservoir material under conditions approximating that
of equilibrium conditions, such changes may be calculated
with reasonable precision. For this purpose, the concept
of K-values has been employed. A K-value is the ratio
of the mole fraction of a component in the equilibrium
gas phase to the mole fraction of the same component in
the equilibrium liquid phase. In essence it is a measure of
volatility, which is controlled by the balance between
molecular forces at the condition of temperature and
pressure to which the material is SUbjected. A complete
description of equilibrium calculations, how they are made,
their qualifications and application to reservoir engineering
problems will be covered in this series. ***
11

FUNDAMENTALS OF
RESERVOIR FLUIDS
Sampling and Testing Oil Reservoir Samples
NORMAN J. CLARK
MEMBER AIME
Introduction
An oil-reservoir performance study depends upon a
few direct laboratory measurements made on the reservoir
oil sample. The following data usually are required: (l)
original reservoir temperature and pressure; (2) pressure-
volume relation at one or more temperatures, with one
relation always being measured at reservoir temperature;
(3) the effects of variation of separator pressure on the
amounts of gas liberated and on the shrinkage of produced
oil in the stock tank which results from such separation
process; ( 4 ) differential gas liberation data; ( 5) the
density or specific volume of reservoir fluid; (6) the re-
lation of reservoir oil viscosity at reservoir temperature and
at pressures ranging from reservoir pressure to atmospheric
pressure with the viscosity of stock-tank oil; (7) a hydro-
carbon analysis of the mixture as it existed originally in the
reservoir; and (8) ASTM distillation analyses of residual
oil. Complete and fairly accurate data on these various
properties can be obtained with comparative ease and at
moderate cost through a laboratory examination of a
sample of reservoir oil.
Extrac·ting Reservoir Oil Samples
There are two general methods for obtaining a sample
of reservoir oil for laboratory examination purposes-( 1 )
by means of subsurface samplers,"· and (2) by obtaining
surface samples of separator liquid and gas.
Several different types of subsurface samplers are used,
the most notable of which are the Humble Oil & Refining
Co. evacuated-chamber type" which has a valve only at
the bottom of the sample chamber, the U. S. Bureau of
Mines type,12 and the Gulf Oil Corp. type 13 which has
valves on both the top and the bottom of the sample
chamber. These instruments are run by wire line into
the well to be sampled. Reservoir temperature and pres-
sure are recorded either simultaneously or on separate
runs made the same day as near the time of sampling as
possible.
Surface samples of oil and gas are obtained at the
separator in separate containers and then recombined in
the lab in proportion to the gas-oil ratio measured at the
separator.
Either method of obtaining the sample is suitable pro-
viding exacting procedures are followed to yield samples
for laboratory tests that are truly representative of the
12 SPE 91
Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids, Part One
NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
DALLAS, TEX.
material as it exists at reservoir conditions of temperature
and pressure. Local conditions and the experience of per-
sonnel usually determine which method is better to use."
It is extremely important that experienced personnel plan
and perform the sampling program; the manner in which
the well is stabilized for sampling often completely con-
trols the nature of the sample obtained and, therefore, the
results of all subsequent studies utilizing the data.
Laboratory Examination of the Oil Sample
When a subsurface sampler is received in the lab, the
saturation pressure of the oil sample at the measured
reservoir temperature is determined and checked against
the measured pressure at the time of sampling. Three
subsurface samples usually are obtained from the well, the
extra samples being used to check laboratory results
(particularly in regard to the saturation pressure) and to
conduct any repeat tests that might be required. Obtaining
an accurate measurement of saturation pressure is very
important because this value is utilized in many of the
other tests performed on the sample. After this test, the
sample is ready for further testing.
When first received in the lab, separator oil and gas
samples are recombined at reservoir temperature condi-
tions, and the saturation pressure is determined. The re-
(A) (B) (C) (0) (E)
8t /Bt.= ~~.~90~~C
%.9959 Bt/Bt.= ;~:~~~~
=-1.0000
t.= ;~~3~~~CC
8t/ B
=- 1.3532
8t/ Bta= ;~~j~~C~
=;(.0032
Bt/8,.", 227~·.~~~CcC
=2.9681
Fig. I-Equilibrium liberation of gas from oil and gas
mixture by removing mercury and reducing pressure (de-
termination of PVT data at 134°F).
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
sulting recombined sample of saturated oil then is used
for subsequent tests in the same manner as the subsurface
sample.
Liberation of Dissolved Gas
If liberated gas is permitted to stay in direct contact
with a liquid sample (as shown by the equilibrium or flash
process in Fig. 1), a different volume of gas will be liber-
ated down to a given pressure than would be liberated
if gas were removed from contact with the liquid as it is
liberated. The remaining liquid is also different but in the
opposite direction and, thus, shrinkage is different.
Differential liberation is that process of gas liberation
where the gas is removed as it is formed incident to a drop
in pressure at constant temperature, as shown in Fig. 2.
Each type of liberation process is encountered to a cer-
tain degree at one time or another in the production of
petroleum deposits; for a given oil sample, therefore, both
processes must b<, investigated to provide data for any
eventual reservoir study.
Fig. 3 compares equilibrium and differential shrinkages
of a low-shrinkage oiP" under reservoir conditions as pres-
sure drops. It shows that under equilibrium conditions a
greater quantity of heavy components is progressively
pulled into the gas by light gas components and, thus,
shrinkage is greater. Under these conditions, the low
shrinkage by differential liberation is caused by gas being
removed as it is formed; this prevents the light gas mole-
cules from being attracted to heavy liquid molecules,
thereby minimizing the quantity of liquid pulled into the
gas phase.
Fig. 4 compares the equilibrium and differential shrink-
ages of a very high-shrinkage oil. In this case, the difference
may be reversed from that of low-shrinkage oil (Fig. 3).
A relatively greater volume of gas is formed in the high-
pressure range than is formed with low-shrinkage oil, a
phenomenon caused by the large quantity of intermediates
being pulled into the gas phase. These intermediates enter
the gas phase because they have an inherently high kinetic
energy and because they are strongly attracted to the light
gas molecules which are densely spaced at the high-pres-
sure condition. Once the intermediates are removed from
the system by differential liberation, they have no further
influence on gas liberation and oil shrinkage; therefore,
oil shrinkage remains high through the lower pressure
ranges. If the gas is not removed, as in the flash liberation
process, intermediate molecules lose much of their tendency
to vaporize. This is true for two reasons-( 1) a large
quantity of intermediates is already present in the gas
phase; and (2) the intermediates are attracted to the heavy
liquid molecules, as well as to the light gas molecules.
Obviously, then, shrinkage is less under equilibrium condi-
tions than under the differential process.
Differential Liberation Tests
An oil sample is prepared for differential liberation
testing by charging a quantity of saturated oil into a pres-
sure-volume cell at original reservoir pressure and tempera-
ture. To perform the test, the pressure of the sample at
constant reservoir temperature is reduced by withdrawing
increments of mercury, as shown in Fig. 2.
While the gas liberated during a pressure-reduction step
JANUARY, 1962
(A) (B) (C)
~ ----"--
GAS REMOVED
CONSTANT PRESSURl
GAS REMOVED CONSTAt<"
PRESSlRE mcc o! S C
1900 1900 1,037CC e,se
"'''
PSIG PSIG PSIG
1600
PSIG
1600
PSIG
7'
~h~~M~b~~RED
GAS L'IBERATED
Hg RETURNED
CONSTANT PRESSURE
H9 RETURNED
CONSTANT PRESSURE
Bo/Boa: :~:~:3 0 ,9664
Fig. 2-Differential liberation of gas from oil and gas
mixture (determination of differential shrinkage and gas
liberation data at 134°F).
is withdrawn and metered, the reduced pressure on the
oil sample is maintained constant by returning mercury to
the cell. The cumulative volume of gas liberated by this
differential liberation process, designated G r,,, is recorded
for the corresponding pressures as cubic feet of gas at
standard conditions of temperature and pressure (60°F
and 14.7 psia) per barrel of oil saturated at the reservoir
sampling conditions of temperature and pressure (134°F
and 2,190 psig). The remaining volumes of saturated oil
at the various pressure steps are recorded as the volume
of saturated oil at reduced pressure and reservoir tempera-
ture per volume of saturated oil at sampling conditions of
temperature and pressure. This is designated as the dif-
ferential shrinkage factor B"/B,,,.
Table 1 gives the differential liberation data for the oil
sample to be used in the example problem. Note that the
laboratory data are based on the sampling pressure, or
the pressure existing in the wellbore at the time of samp-
ling. In nearly all cases this is a lower pressure than that
which existed at original conditions, and the value will
require adjustment to a unity basis at initial reservoir pres-
sure before it can be used in reservoir calculations. The
adjustment procedure will be discussed later."
Many calculations utilize differential liberation data in
the form of a formation-volume-factor curve (or Bo curve)
where units are expressed as barrels of oil at reservoir
pressure and temperature per barrel of stock-tank oil. Com-
merical lab reports nearly always include calculated Bo
data utilizing the residual oil volume, where all gas first
was liberated at reservoir temperature and then brought
up to standard conditions of temperature and pressure.
A common mis-use is to apply this data directly to reser-
voir studies, utilizing production data as though the field
production were separated similar to oil in the lab rather
than at field separator conditions. The method for obtain-
ing an adjusted Bo curve requires knowledge of either
the initial flash BOit or its reciprocal, the initial flash oil-
shrinkage factor, which applies to the specific conditions
of field separation by which the oil was produced. * *
''The method of adjusting differential liberation data will be dis-
cussed in the Feb., 1962 issue of Journal of Petroleum Technology.
"*This method will be explained in the Feb., 1962 issue of J ourual of
Petroleum Technology, following the section on adjustment of separator
liberation data.
13
 LObr--~------------1

SEPARATED
AT REDUCED
.75 PRESSURE
EOUILIBRIUMt-. _
LiJ ....--
LiJ 2
2: SEPARATED ~
::;) AT REDUCED ..J
..J PRESSURE 0.50
0.50 >
>
..J ..J
o o
SATURATED OIL SATURATED OIL
.25 AT ORIGINAL
.25 AT ORIGINAL
RESERVOIR RESERVOIR
PRESSURE - __ mw~ PRESSURE --~

OLW~~--_ _ _-~~~--------~~

PRESSURE - - - - - PRESSURE
Fig. 3-Differential and equilihriutn shrinka·ge of a low- Fig. 4-Differential and equilihriUln shrinkage of a very
shrinkage oil at reservoir tenIperature. 15 high-shrinkage oil at reservoir temperature.

Flash Liberation Tests to atmospheric pressure, and the volume and API gravity
Two types of flash liberation tests are performed in the of the residual oil are measured.
laboratory. This complete process represents production to a sepa-
1. Separator tests are conducted to simulate the mech- rator, and then further production to the stock tank.
anism by which oil and its gas (which was dissolved at Data determined from these tests are gas-oil ratios and
initial conditions but which is liberated in passing to sepa- shrinkage factors at various separator pressures. The gas-
rator conditions) are separated by the field separators. oil ratios are determined as cubic feet of gas separated
2. Pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) tests are per- at standard conditions per barrel of residual stock-tank
formed to determine, at constant reservoir temperature, oil and, also, per barrel of initial reservoir oil. The shrink-
the relation of total volume of oil and its gas with pres- age factor determined is the barrels of stock-tank oil per
sure. barrel of sample reservoir oil, and is designated 1IB o , , '
Although in a single-stage separation set-up oil is con- At least two separator pressures usually are selected
sidered as being under flash equilibrium up to surface for flash separation tests utilizing the burette-O psig and
separation conditions, a degree of differential liberation is some pressure near 25 psig. Lab data from such tests on
encountered if multistage separation exists. Although not the sample oil are shown in Table 2. Note that this table
usually the case, under some circumstances PVT measure- does not show the volume of gas liberated from the oil
ments may require that oil and gas volumes be measured in passing from the separator pressure to atmospheric pres-
separately. sure. Since measurements of this gas are subject to error
due to the small volumes involved, the values usually are
Laboratory Separator Tests not recorded. The specific gravity of the gas liberated at
the O-psig separator pressure is measured and recorded as
Separator data obtained from laboratory tests are par-
shown in Table 6.
ticularly necessary in determining proper operation of field
A high-separator-pressure test is made between 100 and
separators, and they serve as an important adjunct to
200 psig utilizing a pressure-volume cell to withstand the
proper reservoir control. Low-pressure separator tests are
high pressures, and similar data are obtained. Stock-tank
made in the laboratory by use of a Bunte burette into
gas-oil ratios usually are measured in conjunction with
which a measured amount of saturated oil is bled from
these tests because the greater volumes of gas liberated at
the quantity of sample oil. During a test, pressure is main-
the high pressures permit greater accuracy to be obtained.
tained in the burette at a constant pressure below 25 psig,
From the volumes and densities of the separator gas and
and the volume of oil at the burette pressure is measured.
residual oil separated at 0 psig, the specific volume of the
The gas separated from the oil in the burette is measured
by a wet-test meter. The burette pressure then is decreased initial oil is determined and recorded as shown in Table
6. The oil sample used in the example is saturated at
sampling pressure and reservoir temperature.
TABLE I-DIFFERENTIAL LIBERATION DATA FOR SAM·PLE FLUID AT SAMPLE
PRESSURE AND RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE
TABLE 2-FLASH SEPARATION DATA ON SATURATED OIL SAM,PLE
GL. BO/Q08
p Gas Liberated IDifl'. Shrinkage Factor (4) (6)
Pressure (scf/bbl (bbl Sat. Oil/bbl l/B o ./ GOR
~ Sat. Oil at p. and Tr) Oil at ps and T r ) fla,h Separator
(1) (2) (3) Shrinkage (scf/bbl
p. =2190 o 1.0000 Separator GOR GOR' Factor (5) sample oil)
1900 70 .9664 Pressure Separator Stock Tank (STB/bbl
1600 Gravity Col. (2) X
137 .9355 (p,ig) (,cf/STS) (,cf/STB) ,ample oil) (OAPI) Col. (4)
1300 209 .9034
1000 275 .8731 o 1190 0 0.602 42.9 717
700 347 .8405 20 1060 0.635 45.0 675
400 423 .8029 SO" 947 0.660 45.7 625
195 487 .7750 150 802 190 0.655 45..4 525
o 646 .6850 *Flashed from pressure in Col. (1) to 0 psi.
o 760 .6650 ** Interpolated from curve.

14 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 TABLE 3-PRESSURE-VOLUME-TEMPERATURE RELATION AT
RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE (BASED ON UNIT VOLUME OF
SATURATED OIL AT SAMPLING PRESSURE)
Pressure 8t/Bl8
In P-V Cell Volume Oil
-~ Or Oil and Gas
3500 0.9824 10 r---r- ~- -- --_.--f-. . -
3000 0.9888
Pi ~ 2500 0.9959
p,~2190 1.0000
2130 1.0090 08 f.\----+-----+---t------ f----- ------+-------i
2075 1.0182
1970
1835
1680
1.0397
1.0706
1.1173
061\ " SAMPLE

~_----+'~
1525 1.1799
1380 ,1.2586
0.4
_ _++=-"-_±:__-__+jJSA-T-URr__AT-'O-N----t--=I
PRESSURE
2190 P$!G
1240
1120
1.3532
,1.4639 r-- vi. _I--
1000 1.5905
875 1.7809
770 2.0033 0.2 I----+-----+-----i---j-------r-,-----,
570 '2.6698
505 2.9881
440 3.4836
390 3.9614 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
350 4.4636 PRESSURE, PSIG
315 4.9415
290 5.4417 Fig. 5-Viscosity of reservoir oil (tempera-
265 5.9194 ture, 134°F).

Pressure-Volume-Temperature Tests The residual is reported as the decane-plus fraction. In

many cases, however, the sample is analyzed only through
PVT tests are performed by transferring a known volume hexane, and the remainder is reported as a heptane-plus
of the saturated sample oil from the sampler to the pres- fraction.
sure-volume cell, and then measuring the total volume The accuracy and applicability of phase-behavior cal-
at reservoir temperature and at pressures higher than sample culations for such things as optimum separator conditions
saturation pressure. The sample is permitted to expand will depend to a great degree upon the detail and accuracy
to pressures which are as low as practical, and the result- of the hydrocarbon analysis in the range of the heavier
ing volumes are recorded at various pressure points. The components; therefore, accurate extended analyses through
test process is shown in Fig. 1. nonane should be obtained when practicable.
Occasionally, the effect of temperature change on the In addition to the weight-per cent analysis obtained,
sample is needed. In such a case, tests are repeated at the molecular weights and densities of the individual cuts
two other temperatures, e.g., at atmospheric temperature are determined after volumetric measurements. The hydro-
and at some intermediate temperature between atmospheric carbon analysis, molecular weight and density data for
and reservoir temperature. The data obtained are volume the sample oil are illustrated in Table 4.
factors, designated B,jB,,, and are expressed as barrels
of total oil and liberated dissolved gas at the pressure under ASTM Distillation
consideration per barrel of saturated oil sample at samp- ASTM distillation test data may be used to extend the
ling pressure. Table 3 gives laboratory pressure-volume hydrocarbon analysis through the range of components
data for the sample oil at a reservoir temperature of heavier than hexane, in conjunction with more detailed
134°F.
phase-behavior calculations. In addition, the data serve as
Viscosity Relationships an index for evaluating crude because they indicate the
The viscosity of the reservoir oil sample usually is de- boiling ranges of gasoline, kerosene and lube-stock con-
termined by a pressure or rolling-ball type of viscosi- stituents. ASTM distillation data for the oil sample are
meter.",16 This apparatus is based upon the principle that shown in Table 5.
oil viscosity determines the time required for a close-
Orsat Gas Analyses
fitted steel ball to roll down an inclined steel cylinder
An Orsat gas analysis is run on gas liberated from the
filled with oil. Time measurements are made at pressure oil to determine the amou·nts of components other than
intervals, and the viscosity is determined from the time hydrocarbons which might be present-components such
data. Fig. 5, a plot of the laboratory viscosity data de- as oxygen, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide. The nitro-
termined for the sample oil, shows that above the satura:- gen content may then be determined by difference cal-
tion pressure the viscosity increases with an increase in culations.
pressure; below the saturation pressure, viscosity increases
with a decrease in pressure. TABLE 4-HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS OF OIL SAMPLE
The viscosity of residual or stock-tank oil is determined Density
Weight (gm/cc Molecular
by an Ubbelohde'7 (or similar) viscosimeter at room tem- Component Per Cent at 60'F) Weight
perature, at reservoir temperature and at some intermediate Methane 7.39
Ethane 3.96
temperature. Propane 5.75
I-Butane 0.79
Hydrocarbon Analysis N-Butane 4.44
I·Pentane 0.84
A hydrocarbon analysis is made of a portion of the N-Pentane 2.98
Hexane 4.11 0.6826 86
saturated oil sample. Two types of apparatus are used in Heptane 5.57 0.7263 99
this analysis-(1) the Podbielniak (or pod column) for Octane 5.17 0.7430 ,110
Nonane 4.44 0.7623 123
low-temperature distillation of the low-molecular-weight Decone and Heavier 54.56 0.8472 285
fractions, methane through hexane; and (2) a high-tem- iOo.OO
Hexane and
perature apparatus for distilling heptane through nonane. Heavier 0.8147 203

JANUARY, 1962 15
 TASLE 5-ASTM DISTILLATION OF RESIDUAL-OIL SAMPLE TABLE 6-MISCELLANEOUS OIL-SAMPLE DATA
FLASHED TO 0 PSI AND 76°F Specific Gravity of 0 psi Separator
Per Cent Gas @ 60°F _ ~~ 1.096
Temperature (OF) Over Temperature, OF ___________ _ 76 105 134
Saturation Pressure, psi 1,865 2,040 2,190
112 ISP Specific Volume, cu ftjlb 0.02331 0.02380 0.02428
176 5 API Gravity, Residual Differential
212 10 Liberation Oil _ ............. ~ ........ 45.4
244 15 Viscosity, cp:
274 20 Saturated Oil, 2,190 psi and 134°F. . ... _ ............. 0.31
(l00 25 Residual Oil, 74°F .... 2.92
332 30 Residual Oil, 105° 1.99
372 35 Residual Oil, 134°F 1.48
418 40
460 45
506 50
550 55 Subsurface Sample of Oil and Gas", Oil and Gas Jour.
588 60
626 65 (May 16, 1935).
Maximum Temperature = 652°F
Recovery, by Volume = 67 per cent
11. "Humble Subsurface Sample Equipment", Manual 0/ IT!-
Residue, by Volume = 31 per cent structions, Engineering Laboratories, Inc., Tulsa, Okla.
Loss, by Volume = 2 per cent 12. Lindsly, B. E.: "A Bureau of Mines Study of a Bottom-
Gravity of Overhead Product = 49.9 °API
Hole Sample from the Crescent Pool, Oklahoma", Pet. Eng.
(Feb., Mar., Apr., 1936).
Nomenclature 13. Pirson, S. J.: Elements 0/ Oil Reservoir Engineering, McGraw-
Hill Book Co., Inc., N. Y. (1950).
Tr = reservoir temperature, of 14. Buckley, S. E.: Petrol,eum Conservation, AIME, Dallas
p, = sampling pressure, psig (1951).
G L8 = gas liberated, scf/bbl saturated oil at p, and T,. 15. Clark, N. J.: "It Pays to Know Your Petroleum", World Oil
(April, 1953).
Bt/B t , = two-phase flash formation volume factor, bbJ
16. Hocott, C. R. and Buckley, S. E.: "Measurements of the
oil and gas/bbl saturated oil at p, and Tr Viscosities of Oils Under Reservoir Conditions", Trans.,
l/B o .! = flash shrinkage factor, STB/bbl sample oil AIME, (1941) 142, 131.
Bo/Bo. = differential shrinkage factor, bbl saturated oil! 17. Ubbelohde, L.: "The Simplest and Most Accurate Viscosi-
bbl oil at p, and Tr meter and Other Instruments with Suspended Level", Jour.
of Inst. 0/ Pet. (1933) 19, 396. ***
References
1. Lewis and Randall: Thermodynamics, McGraw-Hill Book Coo, NORMAN J. CLARK is the owner of
Inc., N. Y. (1923). Norman J. Clark Engineering Co.,
2. Andrews: Trans., Roy. Soc. London (1869) 159. Dallas-based petroleum consulting firm.
3. Nielson, Ralph F.: "Molecular Explanation of Retrograde He organized the company in July,
Condensation", Oil Weekly (Jan. 5, 1952).
1958, after resigning his position as
4. van der Waals: Zeit. physik, Chem. (1890) 5, 133.
assistant manager in charge of engineer-
5. Sage, B. H. and Lacey, W. N.: Volumetric and Phase Be·
havior of Hydrocarbons, Stanford U. Press, Stanford U., ing and consulting work for Core Labo-
Calif. ratories, Inc., Dallas. Before joining
6. Weinaug, C. F. and Bradley, H. A.: "The Phase Behavior of Core Labs in 1955, he had spent 14
a Natural Hydrocarbon System", Trans., AIME (1951) 192, years with Humble Oil & Refining Co.
233. in Houston. He graduated from Southwest Texas State
7. Allen, J. c.: "Factors Affecting Classification of Oil and Gas Teachers College with a BS degree in math and physics
Wells", Paper presented at API Spring Meeting (1952) in
Shreveport, La. in 1937, and received a BS degree in petroleum engineer-
8. Kuenen: Zeit. physik, Chem., (1893) II, 38.
ing from The U. of Oklahoma in 1941. A frequent
9. Clark, Norman J.: Elements of Petroleum Reservoirs, AIME,
contributor to Society publications and to industry trade
Dallas (1960). journals, he is the author of ELEMENTS OF PETROLEUM
10. Schilthuis, R. J.: "Techniques of Securing and Examining RESERVOIRS, a book published by the Society in 1960.

16 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids, Part Two
FUNDAMENTALS OF
RESERVOIR FLUIDS
Adjusting Oil Sample Data for Reservoir Studies
NORMAN J. CLARK
MEMBER AIME
Editor's Note: This is the second of five Technical
Articles in the Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids series.
The first, "Sampling and Testing Oil Reservoir Samples",
appeared in the Jan., 1962, issue of JOURNAL OF PETRO-
LEUM TECHNOLOGY. References, Tables and Figures are
numbered consecutively, but are published only with the
particular installment of the series in which they are first
mentioned.
Introduction
The presence of free gas in the form of a gas cap
located above the oil zone in a reservoir usually indicates
that equilibrium conditions exist between the gas and oil.
Therefore, the oil at the gas-oil contact probably was
saturated at initial reservoir conditions of pressure and
temperature.
Any reduction in this reservoir pressure as oil is pro-
duced causes gas to be released from solution in the oil.
Oil samples taken from a reservoir after production has
occurred, therefore, will contain less dissolved gas even
though the oil was saturated at sampling pressure.
If the reservoir is initially undersaturated and the
sampling pressure is above saturation pressure, the sample
will contain the same amount of dissolved gas as it did
initially. If the sample has liberated some of its dissolved
gas prior to sampling, the laboratory data must be ad-
justed to provide values comparable to those which would
have been measured had the sample been taken at the
initial reservoir pressure. It is necessary to have data on
the oil sample at initial conditions of pressure and tem-
perature because most reservoir calculations, particularly
for reservoir behavior, utilize initial conditions as a basis.
Amyx, Bass and Whiting'· have described the necessity of
adjusting reservoir oil sample data.
Adjustment Procedures
Procedures for adjusting the various oil sample data
are illustrated in detail in the following paragraphs, and
then applied to the oil sample data of Tables 1 and 6. *
In adjusting the example data used here, the following
assumptions are made.
18References given at end of paper.
':'Tables 1 through 6 appeared with the first article in the Funda-
mentals af Reservoir Fluids series, published in the Jan., 1961. issue of
Journal of Petroleum Technology.
SPE 91
FEBRUARY, 1962
NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
DALLAS, TEX.
1. In the reservoir from which the sample was taken,
the oil was saturated at initial reservoir pressure.
2. As a result of the bottom-hole pressure traverses
made at the time of sampling, the sampling pressure was
found to be 2,190 psig.
3. Examinations of available information - such as
early bottom-hole pressure measurements, drill-stem tests
and other reservoir characteristics - revealed the initial
reservoir pressure to be 2,500 psig. Therefore, the labora-
tory oil sample data will be adjusted to this pressure at
a reservoir temperature of 134°P.
Differential Liberation Data
Corrective Gas Volume
The relation for determining the corrective gas volume,
or the amount of gas liberated from the sample oil be-
tween initial reservoir pressure and sampling pressure, is
as follows.
- p, X G
CGV = Pi
--- L8(pS-p) • (1)
p, - p
where CGV = corrective gas volume, cu ft of gas/bbl
of oil at p, and Tr,
Pi = initial reservoir pressure, psig,
p. = sampling pressure, psig,
p = some low pressure on the straight-line
portion of the gas liberation curve, psig,
and
GL,(ps-P) = gas liberated between p, and p, cu ft of
gas/bbl of oil at p, and T, ..
Utilizing the 400-psig-pressure data point for p, the
value for the corrective gas volume is
2,500 - 2,190
CGV = 2,190 _ 400 X 423 = 73 cu ft.
The corrective gas volume can also be determined
graphically by plotting the differential gas liberation data
and extrapolating the curve to the initial reservoir pres-
sure. This technique, illustrated in Pig. 6, merely utilizes
graphical means to obtain the results of Eg. 1.
Corrective Oil Volume
The next determination is the corrective oil volume;
this is the volume of oil saturated at the initial reservoir
pressure (2,500 psig) which, after the corrective gas
volume of gas (73 cu ft) has been released, will result in
143
1 bbl of oil saturated at the sampling pressure (2,190
psig). The relation for obtaining the corrective oil volume
is as follows.
COV=
(2)
where COY = corrective oil volume, bbl of oil at p,
and Tr/bbl of oil at p, and T" and
p = some low pressure on the straight-line
portion of the differential liberation
curve.
The corrective oil volume may also be determined by
the graphical method. Fig. 6 shows the corrective oil
volume to be 1.035 bbl of oil at p, and T,.jbbl of oil at
p, and T r •
Adjusting the differential liberation data involves alter-
ing all of the data to a basis of 1 bbl of oil saturated
at the initial reservoir pressure of 2,500 psig. This is
accomplished by the following relations.
G - GL , + CGV (3)
L - COY
where G L =
adjusted value, scf of gas liberated to
some reduced pressure/bbl of saturated
oil at Pi and Tn and
G", = value of unadjusted laboratory data, scf
of gas liberated to some reduced pres-
sure/bbl of saturated oil at p, and T,;
and
Bo/B" = unadjusted laboratory shrinkage factor,
bbl of saturated oil at some reduced
pressure/bbl of saturated oil at p, and T ,.
The laboratory differential liberation data of Table 1
are adjusted and the results of calculations are shown
in Table 7. The adjusted differential liberation data then
are plotted in the form of work curves for subsequent
reservoir calculations, as shown by Fig. 7.
Separator Liberation Data
Laboratory separator liberation data, including gas-oil-
ratio and shrinkage values, must be adjusted to the basis
of initial saturated reservoir oil; since the amount of gas
dissolved in the oil sample is a function of initial reser-
voir pressure, then the separator liberation data also are
functions of that pressure.
At the time of the reservoir study, it may be found
that none of the laboratory separator tests on the sample
were taken at the same pressure as that of the average
separator pressure maintained in the field during its pro-
ducing life. Therefore, laboratory separator results first
are interpolated to obtain data on a basis of correct field
separator pressure; the resulting data then are adjusted to
a basis of correct initial reservoir pressure. The following
paragraphs describe two methods by which this adjust-
ment can be accomplished. The proper method to use
should depend upon the data available or upon the data
which the analyst considers more appropriate at the time
he makes the adjustment. Generally, however, the first
method presented will be the easier and the more straight-
forward of the two.

Bo Bo/B" Method 1
(4)
Ho ' = COY
where Bo/B" , = adjusted differential shrinkage factor, bbl Fig. 8 shows the five steps to be followed in the first
of saturated oil at some reduced pres- method.
sure/bbl of saturated oil at Pi and Tn and Step A-The laboratory separator data first are plotted
graphically to obtain values which correspond to the
50-psig (or average) field trap pressure. These plots,
shown in Fig. 9, indicate that 1 bbl of oil at p, and T,
will be separated by a 50-psig trap into 0.660 STB of oil
and 625 scf of gas.

700

I I
I a:
II ~
600 I .oooo~ t-"
,.A I I IIJ 0
,, (!)
<t <t
Z
i !
i
, .9000~ Ci
1\ II ii:
ii
I
J:
(J) ~
1\ I i I :I!
I j ,
.8000 ci ...J
(5
1\ I II i t i I i=
z ...,:
'\ I, I iI! I
IIJ <t
a: (J)
.7000 UJ
1\ I ! U. ...J
I 1\ I! I I U.
is m
m
I I 1\.,1
I I
I I I , "-
, .6000~ ...J
(5
I I! 1• I,I ! i i
I
! 1
I
(J)
-,
I
0 I-'
! I! i
I
i I <t «(J)
100 I I :! i
.5000

NOTE: CbRREtT. ~i' EST.

.- ...J
"\ I
1 Om
~m
PRESSURE, PSIG TO BE 2,500 PSIG 1\ 0
I I I I I I I I I I I , m
Fig. 6-Laboratory differential-shrinkage 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 JOOO

and gas-liberation data, illustrating graph-

ical method of determining corrective oil and PRESSURE PSIG
gas voluDles in adjusting oil sample data to Fig. 7-Adjusted differential liberation data
a basis of correct initial reservoir pressure to basis of correct initial reservoir pressure
(data from Table 1). (data from Table 7).

144 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 SAT. Oil AT SAT. OIL AT STOCK.TANK OIL 800
p, (2,500 PSIG)
AND T, (l34°F)
P. (2,190 PSIG)
G
AND T, (134 F) GAS, SCF
SEPTD. AT AVG.
FiElD SEP. PRESSURE GAS, SCF
T I
~ I;; I/Bost- I-- I-- .
;:.... ·T

-
~~ ~~ ~~700
i"""-< :>....... j / ' r-.
I-~~II+
~~ r-
(!)'" '00 /
.....
1
51PI GRAVITY
~ 0.-

~"""-'--'""-' !:;I-
a: « 500
/ /' -- -
SEP lOR
......
Step {AI-flash liberation Data (Interpolated from laboratory Data).
~:::! / / I
UJO
III.J
'I

II
~ IDID
",ID /
~ .96bbl + .Jii:: I
(.)
III

Step Un-Data from Adjusted Differential liberation Data.

10.
SEPARATOR PRESSURE, PSIG

II Step (C)-From Data of Step {AI.

+
Fig. 9-Laboratory flash separator data vs separator pres-
sure for sample oil (data from Table 2).

of gas in continuing to separator conditions, the total gas

liberated to 50-psig separator conditions from 1 bbl of

I--~ Step (D)-Adjusted Shrinkage Factor =co.

__
.6376 STB/bbllnitial Reservoir Oil.
+u==
initial oil is 675 scf (or 604 + 70.5). The flash-shrinkage
factor, adjusted for both initial reservoir pressure and
field separator pressure, then is 0.6376 STB of oil/bbl of
initial reservoir oil.
Step E-The initial dissolved gas-oil ratio, adjusted for
initial reservoir pressure and field separator pressure, is
1,059 scf (or 675/0.6376) of gas/STB of oil.

Method II
Step (EI_Adjusted Initial Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio = , ,059 cu ft/STB.
The second method, illustrated in Fig. 10, utilizes flash
Fig. 8-Graphic illustration of adjustment of flash shrink- separator data.
age factor and dissolved gas-oil ratio to initial reservoir Step A-The separator flash liberation data for a 150-
conditions using differential liberation data.
psig trap (Table 2) indicates that, for 1 bbl of oil at p.,
0.655 STB of oil and 525 scf of gas will be separated
Step B-The volume of gas which must be added to through a 150-psig separator.
the volume measured in the laboratory so that the total
volume will be consistent with an oil sample saturated at Step B-The 150-psig separator data are used as a
initial reservoir pressure is determined by the plot of ad- basis for preparing a gas-oil-ratio curve to determine the
justed differential data (Fig. 7 and Table 7). This amount amount of gas liberated from oil when the pressure drops
is the corrective gas volume divided by the corrective from Pi = 2,500 psig to the 2,190-psig sampling pressure.
oil volume and, in the case of the example problem, is The assumption is made here that the gas liberation
70.5 scf (or 73/1.035) of gas/bbl of oil at PI and Tr curve is a straight line between the highest (l50-psig)
(or/0.966 bbl of oil at P. and Tr). separator pressure and the sampling pressure, as shown
by Fig. 11. Extrapolation of the curve indicates 80 scf
Step C-Based on data from Step A, 0.966 bbl of oil of gas/bbl of oil at sampling pressure. Although this
at P. and Tr will separate through a 50-psig trap into assumption is not exact, the existence of two partially
0.6376 STB (or 0.660 X 0.966) of oil and 604 scf (or compensating errors permits the approximation to be
625 X 0.966) of gas. reasonable. These errors are as follows: (1) the line is a
Step D-Since 1 bbl of oil at Pi and TT releases 70.5 curve, which tends to decrease the gas volume required;
scf of gas in going to the p s condition and then 604 scf and (2) the separation in the reservoir occurs at reser-

TABLE 7-ADJUSTMENT OF DIFFERENTIAL LIBERATION DATA TO BASIS OF INITIAL RESERVOIR PRESSURE AND RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
GL B./B •• B./B.I
Adistd. Gas Difl'. Shrinkage Adjstd. Difl'.
GLs Liberated Factor Shrinkage Fador B.
Gas Librtd. (scf/bbl sat. oil (bbl sat. oil/ (bbl sat. oil/ Adjstd. Form.
p (scf/bbl sat. oil at pi and TT) bbl sat. oil bbl sat. oil Volume Factor
pressure at ps and TT} Col. (2) + 73- at p. and TT) at PI and TT) (bbl sat. oil/STB)
(psig) From Table 1 , .035*- From Table 1 Col. (4)/1.035*' Col. (5)/.6376*--
Pi = 2,500 -73* 0 1.0350 1.0000 1.5684
p, = 2,190 0 70.5 1.0000 .9660 1.5151
1,900 70 138 .9664 .9345 1.4657
1,600 137 203 .9355 .9045 1.4186
1,300 209 272 .9034 .8725 1.3684
1,000 275 336 .8731 .8430 1.3222
VOO 347 406 .8405 .8140 1.2767
1400 423 479 .8029 .7755 ·1.2163
195 487 1541 .7750 .7490 1.1747
0 646 695 .6805 .6620 1.0383
*Corrective gas volume.
**Corrective oil yolu!11e.
***Adiusted flash shrinkage factor.

FEBRUAUY, 1962 145

voir temperature, which tends to increase the volume of
gas required.
The corrective gas volume can also be calculated alge-
braically by Eq. 1. Comparing this value with that of the
corrective gas volume determined by differential libera-
tion data reveals a difference of about 10 per cent. Since
the value determined by the latter method is considered
more accurate, it should be used if differential liberation
data are available.
Step C-The unknown volume of saturated oil required
at PI and Tr to result in 1 bbl of saturated oil at P. and
Tr must be determined. First, the thermal shrinkage for
0
the oil in changing from 134 to 76°F is determined from
the "National Standard Petroleum Oil Tables""; in the
case of the example problem, this value is found to equal
0.0431 bbl of oil. The total shrinkage caused only by
the liberation of total gas at both the 150-psig separator
and the stock tank then equals 0.3019 bbl (or 1 - 0.6550
- 0.0431).
Step D-The amount of shrinkage to the initial oil and
the actual volume of the initial oil, before it changed from
the Pi and Tr conditions to the conditions of P. and Tn
are determined by first calculating an amount of shrink-
age caused by the liberation of 1 cu ft of gas alone
(without temperature effects). The value of this shrinkage
equals 0.000465 bbl, or 0.3019/[525 + (190 X 0.655)],
of sample oil. Therefore, the total shrinkage to the initial
quantity of oil is .0372 bbl (or 0.000465 X 80), and the
actual volume of initial oil is 1.0372 bbl (or 1 + 0.0372)
saturated at P. and T •.
Step E-Again from Fig. 9, the separator gas-oil ratio
and shrinkage factor interpolated for a 50-psig trap pres-
sure is 625 scf and 0.660 STB, respectively; for the same
trap pressure, therefore, 1.0372 bbl of oil at Pi and T,,,
will liberate 705 scf (or 625 + 80) of gas.
SAT. OIL AT
P. (2,500 PSIG)
SAT. Olt AT
p,(2,190PS1Gl
STOCK.TANK OIL
SEPTD. AT NOTED
AND T, (13,f"f) AND T, (l34"F) GAS, SCf
,---, ,---, ,---,
/'.
Step F-At p, and Tn 1 bbl of oil will liberate 680
cu ft (either 603 + 77, or 705/1.0372) of gas; there-
fore, the adjusted initial shrinkage factor is 0.6363 STB
(or 0.660/1.0372) of oil/bbl of oil at Pi and T,,,.
Step G-The adjusted initial dissolved gas-oil ratio is
1,069 scf (or 680/0.6363) of gas/STB of oil.
Oil Formation-Volume-Factor Curve
The value of the adjusted flash separator shrinkage
factor derived using Method I is considered to be the most
accurate-that is, 0.6376 STB of oil (separated through a
50-psig separator at atmospheric temperature) /bbl of
saturated oil at 2,500 psig and reservoir temperature.
The formation-volume-factor curve, or differential liber-
ation data, applicable to oil and gas separated in field
separators is determined by dividing the differential oil-
shrinkage data by the adjusted flash-shrinkage factor. This
is shown in Table 7 and plotted in Fig. 12.
Pressure-Volume-Temperature Data
Adjustment of the pressure-volume data B,/B" is neces-
sary both to smooth and to extrapolate the data to the
initial reservoir pressure. Smoothing the data may be ac-
complished by drawing a smooth curve through the points
plotted as pressure vs volume; however, this manner of
smoothing seldom is used because extrapolation of the
curve through the laboratory data points in the range of
the sampling pressure cannot be accomplished with satis-
factory precision. The following empirical relation, how-
ever, usually will permit suitable smoothing and extra-
polation of the relative-volume curve because the data
BOO ,,
II I I I I I I I I ,
FSEPARATOR DATA
l,
ii: 700
EXTRAPOLATED
o PORTION
~ ,,
SEP.PRESSURE GAS. SCF
a:: ,
r---. ,---, tt 600 ,,
I]

II ,
150#
W
Q-II
= .655 obi
+ en
~ STRAIGHT-LINE INTERPOLATION
I-I-. BETWEEN HIGHEST SEPARATOR ....
,
Step (A)-Flash Liberation Data, l50-psi Separator Pressure.
~ 500 f',. PRESSURE AND SAMPLE PRESSURE
~
tia:: 111
0.
"\
Step (B}-Dato from Plot of Flash Gas-Oil Ratio vs Pressure. M:l ~ 400
"{
150#,
.301
.0431
8bl Shrinkage Due 1,,0 ?'"
8bl Thermol Shrinkage from
liberation ::J....I "\
Ibb' ------ ~--- .655.5T TemperatureCorreclion
:J:al
en al "\ .L r-~
(!)

Step (C}-Determination of Shrinkage Due to Temperature Chonge and Gas liberation, <{ ~300 (!)
J 50-psi Separator Pressure. 190 x .655
....10 "\ - 0
'~f!,, __ ~r--+ ~~':~;.;Y:~} '" , ,"
11-
(f)
l1...Cf) Q.
0
III
c=1
.655STB
Oil
S25(ult
~e~~~':1 >- "\ 0 N
al 200 ~
TolalGcr.liberaled -- 525 T 124= 649SCF I "c..-
Shrin~age per (U II GO! liberated = :3019/649 -' .000465 b~1
.0372 bbl Shrlnkoge c "\ N
Shrinkage from p, ta p. and T, = 80 X .000465

Step (D)-Determinatian af Shrinkage from p, to p"

w "•
c. r:
150-psi Separator Pressure. t:c
a::
"\
(f)
ILl

I-II + ~--Q--~~;,'''i + I}",""

100
w 1"\
(II "\ ,
::J \
Step (E)-Determination of Adjusted Initial Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio and Shrinkage factor,
50·psi Separator Pressure. • ~ Itl} en ,\
11-. + ~ Q~63~;,''' II
,
<{

+ 680,""
(!) i', : "\ 80CUFT
, ~
Slep (f)-Adjusted Shrinkage foctor .6363 STB/bbl Initial Reservoir Oil,
,
IIII
~
Adiusted Initial Diss,olved Gas-Oil Ratio 680 cu ft/bbllnitiol Oil. -100
500 1000 15M 2000 2500 3000
680/.6363
PRESSURE, PSIG
Step (G)-Adiusted Initial Dissolved Gas·Oil Ratio 1,068 cu ft/STB.
Fig. II-Flash liberation data plotted vs
pressure, illustrating method of estimating
Fig. IO-Graphic illustration of adjustment of Hash shrink- gas liberated between initial reservoir pres-
age factor and dissolved gas-oil ratio to initial reservoir sure and sample pressure per barrel of'
conditions using Hash liberation data. saturated oil at sampling pressure.

146 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 1.6
! i !
1- t-t-
1-+-
:
•,'RESERVOIR
INITIAL

/
I
I I, fPRESSURE
1,.': : I
1.5 r="1
I
3.0
I I , :
- LAST GOOD DATA POINT '~

-
I I I I
l-
V
~

Ul , i ' I I i-t EXTRAPOLATED

a. m , ~
ff ~O~~WV~~ ,
I ........
cf'm
2.5 ,
I I
I I V I

-t+tt -tt
V ~w

>-"
a.
f~:~:i.:j
:ri-
__ ._, I
!

:_
';
)"i- ~tt
-./::, I
--,-!

I-err- +-
I I I,

/
/ I{
,/

,
T ,_. H-i+-
0 POINTS FROM LAB DATA
I I I I I

1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

/ where Bt/B"
Fig. 13-Procedure for adjusting PVT data.
PRESSURE, PSIG

= relative volume of oil and its liberated

dissolved gas, volume at P and Tr/vol-
ume at Pi and T r •
1.0
o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 The relative-volume data for samples from undersaturated
RESERVOIR PRESSURE, PSIG reservoirs with saturation pressures below sampling pres-
Fig. 12-Formation-volume-factor curve adjusted to surface sures do not require adjustment, but laboratory data usually
separation conditions (data from Table 7). must be smoothed by drawing the best curve through the
data points.
usually plot either as a straight line or as one with only
Calculations for adjusting the relative-volume data to
a gentle curve on co-ordinate paper."
initial reservoir conditions of 2,500 psig and 134°F are
y ~ <I;; - p) 1 . (5) shown in Table 8, and the adjusted data are plotted in
p[-.-!...-
B,.
1
Fig. 14 as a work curve for reservoir study calculations.
Specific Volume
where Y = compressibility function of pressure, relative The specific volume of saturated oil at Pi and Tr can
volume and saturation pressure for flash liber- be calculated by combining the volumes of shrunk oil and
ation data, liberated gas determined from the flash gas-oil ratios; to
p, = saturation pressure of sample, psia, this sum the corrective gas volume is added, with the
P = any intermediate pressure, psia, and assumption being made that all of such added gas is
B,/B t , = relative volume of oil and its liberated dis- methane (molecular weight = 16). With high-shrinkage
solved gas, volume at P and Tr/volume at oils, where the first gas liberated may contain large pro-
P, and T r • portions of heavy or intermediate components, this as-
Values of the function Y are calculated from laboratory sumption may be quite erroneous; thus, precautions must
data and plotted vs pressure. The fact that a straight line be taken in estimating the molecular weight of the gas
usually can be drawn through the data points permits ease to be added.
in extrapolating the curve to initial reservoir pressure. Hydrocarbon Analysis
Fig. 13 illustrates this extrapolation. Calculation of the The hydrocarbon analysis data usually are adjusted only
adjusted relative-volume data is accomplished by Eq. 5 in cases where extreme accuracy is required. The adjust-
in the following form. ment procedure involves adding the corrective gas volume
Bt/B" = 1 + Pi - P . (6) to the hydrocarbon analysis on a weight-per cent basis,
pY with the assumption being made that all gas to be added
TABLE 8-PROCEDURE FOR ADJUSTING PRESSURE·VOLUME-TEMPERATURE DATA TO BASIS OF 1 BBL OF OIL
SATURATED AT INITIAL RESERVOIR PRESSURE
Eq. 5, Y = (p, - p)/{p[(Bt/B,,) - 1]}
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
St/S ..
p p St/S" p[(S,/S .. ) - 1], Y Adiusted
Pressure Pressure ReI. Vol. [Col. (2)] X Col. (4) Col. (8) + 1
(psig) (psia) From Table 3 ps - p [Col. (3) - 1] 5=01.(5) Y' Pi - P Cols. (2) X (7)
Pi = 2500 2515 3.2270 1.0000
2400 tl415 3.1459 100 1.0132
2300 2315 3.0638 200 1.0282
p, = 2190 2205 1.0000 2.9749 310 1.0473
2130 2145 1.0090 60 19.31 3.1072 2.9275 370 1.0589
2075 2090 1.0182 115 38.04 3.0232 2.8802 425 1.0706
1970 1985 1.0397 220 78.80 2.7913 2.7913 530 1.0957
1835 1850 1.0706 355 130.61 2.7179 2,6811 665 1.1341
1680 1695 1.1173 510 198.82 2.5652 2.5546 820 1.1894
1525 1540 1.1799 665 277.05 2.4000 2.4299 975 1.2606
1380 1395 1.2586 810 360.75 2.2454 2.3121 1120 1.3472
1240 1255 1.3532 950 443.27 2.1430 2.1971 1260 1.4570
1120 1135 1.4639 1070 526.53 2.0319 2.0985 1380 1.5794
1000 1015 1.5905 1190 599.36 1.9855 2.0019 1500 1.7382
875 890 1.7809 1315 695.00 1.8918 1.8976 1625 1.9622
770 785 2.0033 1420 787.59 1.8029 1.8097 1730 2.2178
570 585 2.6698 1620 976.83 1.6580 1.6502 1930 2.9991
505 520 2.9881 1685 1033.81 1.6300 1.5952 1995 3.4051
440 455 3.4836 1750 1130.04 1.5488 1.5411 2060 3.9378
390 405 3.9614 1800 1199.37 1.5024 1.5024 2110 4.4677
*Values from smooth curve through data.

FEBRUARY, 1962 147

is either methane (molecular weight = 16) or some mix- to Curve C may exhibit a curve similar to Curve B after
ture of components as deemed probable. This type of some of its initial dissolved gas has been liberated from
calculation is illustrated later under flash calculations. solution. It is readily apparent, therefore, that conventional
extrapolation of Curve B to the initial pressure will not
Limitations in Adjustment Procedures provide the analyst with data which may be properly
represented by Curve C. This is an exaggerated case, of
The reservoir analyst must exercise caution when ad- course, because ranges of pressure change involved in
justing measurements made on either the subsurface extrapolation are usually small; however, it does illustrate
sample or the recombined sample. In adjusting the example the manner in which large errors may be encountered in
data used here, the assumption was made that the oil the extrapolation process unless caution is exercised and
was saturated at initial reservoir pressure. If the reservoir unless a thorough investigation is made of all data as-
oil had been saturated at some intermediate pressure be- sociated with the oil sample.
tween the sampling and initial reservoir pressures, how- To illustrate the various shapes encountered, Fig. 16
ever, the resulting adjusted data will be erroneous and all shows differential shrinkage curves for five actual oil
subsequent reservoir study calculations utilizing the er- samples. 22 ,23 Curve E obviously represents an oil existing
roneous data also will be in error. Espach21 has shown in the reservoir at conditions fairly near the critical state,
that in undersaturated reservoirs a great variance may and great care must be employed in adjusting its sample
exist in oil characteristics, including dissolved gas-oil data.
ratios. If the reservoir is undersaturated, therefore, it
usually is necessary to obtain more than one sample, de-
pending upon the nature of the problem to be solved. Correlations of Reservoir Oil Sample Data
Some naturally occurring crude oils exist at conditions Various investigators have attempted to generalize oil
very near to their critical temperatures and pressures. Be- sample data so that correlations could be made. They
cause of the high-shrinkage behavior (or the behavior reasoned that by using these correlations they might elim-
that may govern the change in physical state) of some inate the need for a great deal of expensive oil-reservoir
crude oils during isothermal pressure changes at tempera- sampling, testing and analysis.
tures below but near the critical temperature, a thorough Since the reservoir-oil hydrocarbon analysis controls
examination and study must be made not only of the data fluid data to a large extent, any accurate correlation of
for such samples, but also of the reservoir conditions and sample data must include some parameter of hydrocarbon
characteristics; a study of this type is essential if the be- analysis. This is impractical, however, because the hydro-
havior of the oil sample is to be evaluated with the greatest carbon analysis may include anyone of an infinite num-
precision. ber of combinations. Therefore, various correlations have
In Fig. 15 Allen' illustrates the basis for concern re- limited value for precision reservoir calculation work, but
garding interpretations of reservoir oil samples. This figure they are extremely valuable for many practical, day-to-
shows a sample of oil with four amounts of dissolved
.038
gas and, also, the flash liberation data from the resulting
sample. Samples with oil-volume curves similiar to Curve
A may be extrapolated to higher saturation pressures with .036
\\ \ ·SURFACE GAS
PER BARREL OF
STOCK TANK OIL

reasonable precision. Samples with curves similiar to

Curve B cannot be extrapolated with reasonable precision
except over small pressure increments. This is explained .034
1\
\
\ ~
by the fact that an oil having a shrinkage curve similiar
1.3000
3200
.032
I~r---
<D
..J
;:: .030
\ /
""~
LL SP ECIFIC /
~VfB~~;
VOLUMES

--<
::l
~ \ L I

o
w· 028
~
..J
o \ /
r ~ ~~BBLE
OINT
LOCUS
i_

w > .026

~~~ /
/
\/
o u
z u:
~ u
x
w ~ .024
~ ~OVII
~
~
<I)

-f' {>0,'0
/' ,0:
.022
/ i}o/(A)
~) (C)

.020
~
H-1-t-+++++-t--t-+--i'1t~+- i ,,\c-j-
/
3200
-
I-t~~~- n-f- ~ ~
f--" ---
-f-t-+++--I-I-f---+-+-H-+ .01 8
1.0000 L...L-.L.LJL"L--I-L..l-LIO...Loo--'--...L-L...L,--1s00-L-LL..l-200LO...L-LL-lI...ll2500 1.0000
o
o 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
PRESSURE (PSIA)
PRESSURE, PSIG
Fig. 15-Pressure-volume relations of mix-
Fig. 14--Adjusted relative volume or tures of oil and gas at 145 0 F
PVT data (from Table 8). (from J. C. Allen, Ref. 7).

J.18 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 1.0 50

0
45
0
.9 W 0
:I:
(J)W
co:: ~ 0
...J:::> .j()
u.m
o
::!~
0

III 00:: ~ g
(!) Q. eO
~ .B ~ o 0

Z
Zo:: 3S --II:--
~o

~t
it: ,I-
:I: ~c
(f) 00::
..J olf
I-w
< m(J) 30
i= .7 u. 0

o(!)
oo~
Z
III
0: >-u;
III I-Q.
U.
U. ~o 25 o 0 ~ 0

C 0

~ i-'<-
0::
(!)t:(
;3
......
.6 ~ 0
o C
m 20

GOR 3950
BO/BOI~·271
SAT. PRESS.-4527 PSI'
.5
15
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
VISCOSITY OF SAT. RESERVOIR OIL AT PI AND Tr , CP

Fig. IS-Relation of API gravity to viscosity.

.4
25 50 75 100
Two of the most common correlations are shown in
PRESSURE, PERCENT OF SATURATION PRESSURE Figs. 17 and 18 for a large number of oil samples. Fig.
17 shows oil shrinkage at O-psig separator pressure plotted
Fi,g. 16-Comparison of differential shrink- vs initial dissolved gas-oil ratio, and Fig. 18 shows the rela-
age curves for different shrinkage oils.
tion of stock-tank API gravity to the viscosity of initial
,~ '--r-'--'--'--~-'--'-'--'--'--r---------o
reservoir oil. The close correlation between shrinkage and
1500 U-l---+--+--+------ __ 1--____I----tt!_:2-r20_0_C+U_F_T+-/B_B--j~1 gas-oil ratio results from both parameters being volu-
metric and because of the small variation in vapor volumes
1400 r--f--+---+--+--+--+-+---+--+---+-----,4-+---+--+-----j
1
of the various components.
1300 I---t---+----+-+--+-+-_+_ +---+----+,-1I /-1 --t-----t-+-----l The good correlation between API gravity of stock-tank
~ oil and the viscosity of initial oil is expected, since both
(J) 1200 1---+---1---+--+--+----+--1--+--+--*1 1

7' ~~
Q. I have a functional relation to the molecular weight of the
o 1100 - - ---+--+--J--- --- -+----+--+-----+--I--I--+-----i---+----+------j mixture and because a fairly uniform relation exists be-
/, i I
~...J'''' I--~-~--T--r'~--+----+~~~~~.---+.---~-+~--+----+ tween the viscosities of initial oil and residual oil. In this
r-i---t- 1---4-
q 1_
00 respect, the residual oil is approximately two to four times
III
:I:m
900
e (' ,--j , ! as viscous as the initial saturated oil.

r-t-~,.- ~-fi 1-i~o:8,~fo "'o-l~_ ~i- T

(J)I-BOO
<(J)
ii~700 References *
ZO
W
:I:
~
(f) 600

- r
Ii,

t
'-
--
,
I--
i' ~",."

~ ----I
!
'.
.. - - -- 18. Amyx, 1. W., Bass, V. M., Jr. and Whiting, R. 1.: Petroleum
Reservoir Engineering, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N. Y.
(1960) .
0::
o(!) J__ ! ~ '" , i I i I I -,- 19. "National Standard Petroleum Oil Tables", Circular C-41O
400 I--ii,-----+,-~.---yt---.f'-f-'+o SATURATED SAMPLE (superceding C-154), U. S. Dept. of Commerce (1936).
, , 0' ' " • UNDERSATURATED SAMPLE
200
/ i i ! I I! I r 20. Standing, M. B.: Volumetric and Phase Behavior 0/ Oil Field
Hydrocarbon Systems, Reinhold Publishing Corp., N. Y.
,/ i (1952) .
-r
I I

Y I
0.96 092 0.88 0.84 0.80 0.76 D.n
1/80if WHEN FLASHED TO 0 PSIG
Fig. 17-Relation of oil shrinkage to
dissolved gas-oil ratio.
day reservoir engineering calculations. Typical of these
correlations are those presented by Standing" (GOR vs
formation volume factor, bubble-point pressure and two-
phase formation volume factor) and by Beal24 (viscosities
of air, water, natural gas, crude oil and associated gases).
I
21. Espach, Ralph H.: "Variable Characteristics of Oil in the
Tensleep Sandstone Reservoir, Elk Basin Field, Wyoming
0.66 0.64 0.60 0.56 0.52 0.46 044 0.40 and Montana", Trans., AI ME (1950) 192,75.
22. Welsh, J. R., Simpson, R. E., Smith, 1. W. and Yust, C. S.:
"A Study of Oil and Gas Conservation in the Pickton Field",
Trans., AIME (1949) 186,55.
23. Crego, W. O. and Henegan, J. M.: "Report on the Mamou
Field Pressure Maintenance Project", Trans., AIME (1951)
192, 263.
24. Beal, Carlton: "Viscosity of Air, Water, Natural Gas, Crude
Oil and Its Associated Gases at Oil-field Temperatures and
Pressures", Trans., AI ME (1946) 165, 194. ***
"'For Refs. 1 through 17, see Jour. Pet. Tech. (Jan., 1962) 16.

FEBRUARY, 19'62 149


FUNDAMENTALS OF
RESERVOIR FLUIDS
Sampling and Testing Gas Reservoir Samples
NORMAN J. CLARK
MEMBER AIME
Editor's Note: This is the third of five Technical Articles
in the Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids series. References,
Tables and Figures are numbered consecutively, but are
published only with the particular installment of the series
in which they are first mentioned.
An error has been noted in the second article of the
series, "Adjusting Oil Sample Data for Reservoir Studies",
which appeared in the Feb., 1962, issue of JOURNAL OF
PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY. On page 149, Fig. 16 shows a
comparison of differential-shrinkage curves for five dif-
ferent-shrinkage oil samples. By each curve inside the
figure, the symbol "B.IB • ." was incorrectly used to desig-
nate "adjusted flash shrinkage factor"; the correct symbol
for "adjusted flash shrinkage factor" is "lIB.i'" For ex-
ample, the data appearing by Curve (A) should read
"1 lB." = .763" indicating the oil, from which this dif-
ferential shrinkage curve was obtained, had a flash shrink-
age factor of .763 STB oillbbl initial reservoir oil.
Types of Gas Reserves
Gas deposits are grouped into the following three broad
classifications.
1. Dissolved gas deposits, as the name implies, refer to
gas which is dissolved in the oil in place in the reservoir
and which will be liberated as pressure drops when oil is
produced.
2. Associated gas deposits identify caps of gas which are
located above and in equilibrium with oil zones in the
reservoir.
3. Nonassociated gas deposits are free gas deposits
which are located away from and not in equilibrium with
oil deposits in the reservoir.
Thornton" has classified free gas deposits into three
types, according to the phase behavior of the gas as tem-
perature, pressure, or both, decline. Any of these three
types-(l) retrograde gas condensate, (2) wet gas and
(3) dry gas-may apply to either associated or nonas-
sociated gas deposits.
The type of gas data most frequently needed for reservoir
studies depends, of course, on the types of gas being con-
sidered and the nature of the problem. For instance, if
the problem involves gas containing heavy components
which will condense in the form of retrograde condensate
as pressure drops in the reservoir, the information needed
may be very complex and may require that numerous tests
266
Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids, Part Three
NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
DAllAS, TEX.
and measurements be made to obtain it. If the problem in-
volves wet gas where no retrograde condensation occurs
but where liquid is recovered in separators or if it in-
volves dry gas where no liquid is condensed in either the
reservoir or separator, then the information needed may
be somewhat less complex.
However, the gas-behavior information normally re-
quired for oil-reservoir studies includes hydrocarbon-analy-
sis data, pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) relationships
and viscosity relationships; these data may be required
either for gas in the form of free gas saturation in the
oil zones of an oil reservoir or gas-cap gas in equilibrium
with an oil rim. If the oil reservoir has high-shrinkage oil
in place or if the reservoir temperature is near the critical
temperature of the mixture, the gas hydrocarbon-analysis
and PVT data may be highly changeable as reservoir pres-
sure decreases. Obviously, therefore, the tests conducted
for these properties may become complex.
Both dry-gas and wet-gas reservoir studies usually re-
quire hydrocarbon-analysis data and PVT relationships.
In addition, wet-gas reservoir studies also require data
necessary to determine phase-behavior characteristics under
conditions of surface separation.
Most free gas deposits, especially the deep high-pressure
reservoirs, fall into the gas-condensate classification be-
cause of the retrograde condensation of liquid which occurs
in the reservoir as pressure drops. Testing the gas from
these reservoirs involves gathering sufficient data to indicate
characteristics and phase behavior of the reservoir fluid
at reservoir temperature, plus data which describe these
same properties under surface separation conditions. To
prevent losing substantial amounts of retrograde liquid
in wet-gas reservoirs, it is important that enough tests be
conducted on the produced gas to positively identify it
as not being retrograde material.
Extracting Gas Samples
A representative sample of gas as it exists in the reser-
voir must be obtained for laboratory analysis. In the past,
bottom-hole gas samples have been extracted with a special
subsurface sampling container" which, when lowered to
the bottom of the gas well, permitted samples to be ob-
tained without first losing some condensable material
through a loss in pressure. Using this subsurface sampler
to extract gas samples has several disadvantages, however,
"References given at end of paper. SPE 91
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
the most notable one being that the size of the obtained practice, published data such as that of Katz, et ai,'" and
sample is too small to permit an accurate analysis of the Carr, Kobayashi and Burrows"' usually can be utilized.
heavier components. Another drawback is that trouble-
some condensation occurs within the sampler when the Calculations of Gas PVT Relationships
temperature of the sampler is reduced.
Theoretically, a "perfect gas" is one in which the
For these reasons, therefore, gas reservoirs are nearly
molecules are so small and far apart that they never
always sampled at the surface, even though both pressure
come close enough together to be influenced by attractive
and temperature are reduced on the produced material
forces. Furthermore, the volume occupied by the mole-
at the surface and some of the gas will have condensed
cules themselves is infinitesimally small compared to the
to form a liquid. Obviously, then, all gas-sampling tech-
space within which the molecules are free to move. The
niques require that careful procedures be followed if the
pressure-volume-temperature behavior of this so-called
analyst is to be provided a material for laboratory testing
"perfect gas" conforms to that predicted by the following
which truly represents the material existing in the reservoir.
well-known laws of Boyle and Charles.
There are two general methods for sampling gas wells. os
pV = nRT (7)
The first utilizes the full-scale field separator, and the
second method utilizes a tubing head or line probe which where p = pressure, psia,
diverts a portion of the produced material to a small-scale V = volume, cu ft,
portable separator called a "test car". Normally used when n = number of lb moles,
detailed testing is required, the latter method will be R = gas constant = 10.71, and
described in a later section dealing with the sampling of
T = temperature, oR (460 + OF).
gas-condensate reservoirs.
A gram molecular weight of any actual gas (for example,
In sampling gas reservoirs for the purpose of determining
methane = 16 gm) occupies only 23.6 liters of space;
only the hydrocarbon analysis of the original reservoir
within this space, however, there are 6.06 X 10" mole-
material, the method utilizing the full-scale field separator
cules. In view of this, it is readily apparent that practically
is usually employed as follows. First, the separator and
all actual gases experience some degree of molecular at-
gas measuring equipment are calibrated, and the gas-oil
traction or interference and, thus, deviate somewhat from
ratio is measured accurately. Samples of the separator
the so-called "perfect-gas" laws.
gas, the separator liquid and the stock-tank liquid then
are taken and forwarded to the laboratory for subseqent A compressibility factor Z is incorporated in the ideal
testing. A charcoal sample" of the butanes and heavier gas law equation (Eq. 7) to make the relation applicable
components in the separator gas sometimes is taken, but to hydrocarbon gases. The term Z corrects for the non-
this practice has been minimized if not obviated by the conformance of the actual gas to the ideal relation, i.e.,
recent development of the chromatograph for obtaining for the difference in pressure caused by the added molecu-
accurate hydrocarbon analyses of these heavy fractions in lar attraction or internal pressure, and for the difference in
gas samples. total volume occupied by the molecules brought about by
the reduction of the volume of the molecules themselves.
Laboratory Examination of Gas Samples The resulting relation is
pV = ZnRT . (8)
Hydrocarbon Analysis
where Z = compressibility factor, dimensionless.
The laboratory procedure for examining the components
of the gas sample essentially consists of (1) analyzing the The numerical value for the compressibility factor may
gas sample for methane, ethane and propane, (2) dis- be obtained from experimental data or it may be approxi-
tilling the components from the charcoal sampler and mated by a method of correlation by Kay" called the
obtaining a hydrocarbon analysis of the butane-plus in "pseudocritical" method. This latter method, involving use
that mixture and (3) obtaining a hydrocarbon analysis of of the hydrocarbon analysis of the reservoir gas, is ex-
the separator liquid. The hydrocarbon analysis of the plained in detail in the following paragraphs. For the
material from the charcoal sampler is mathematically com- example calculations which follow, the hydrocarbon an-
bined with the methane, ethane and propane analyses of alysis of a gas-cap gas will be used, and compressibility
the gas sample on the basis of the volume of gas passed factors will be calculated through the pressure range up
through the charcoal sampler. Finally, the hydrocarbon to the original pressure of the reservoir from which the
analysis of the original reservoir material is obtained by oil sample was taken.
mathematically combining the previously combined gas As shown in Table 9, the pseudocritical temperature
and charcoal liquid analysis with the analysis of the sep- of the gas is found by summing all the products of mol
arator liquid on the basis of the measured separator gas-
liquid ratio. TABLE 9-CAlCUlATION OF PSEUDOCRITICAl TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE
FOR GAS·CAP HYDROCARBON MIXTURE
Distillation Test (1) (2) (3) (4) .(5) (6)
A high-temperature or Hypercal distillation test is run pc
Mix.
on the stock-tank sample to obtain data from which the To Camp. Pseudo-
Compo Mix. erit. crit.
hydrocarbon analysis can be mathematically extended Hydrocarbon Crit. Pseudo- Press. IPress.
with better precision through a wide range of heavy Temp. (OR)
Analysis of erit. (psia) (psia)
Gas-Cap Gas NGSMA Temp. (OR) NGSMA (Col. 2)
components. Component (mol frac.) Data Book (CoL 2) (CoL 3) Data Book ,(Col. 3)

Viscosity Methane .8087 344 278.2 673 544.3

Ethane .0976 550 53.7 709 69.2
Occasionally, gas viscosity measurements are needed Propane .0520 672 34.9
16.1
643 33.4
11.5
Butane .0215 750' 537'
for certain reservoir behavior calculations involving fluid- Pentane .0073 839' 6.1 485' 3.5
Hexane .0038 914 3.5 435 1.7
flow problems, and these measurements are difficult to Heptane+ .0091 972 8.8 396 3.6
make. Fortunately, however, viscosity values do not vary 1.0000 To = 401.3 pc = 667.2
greatly between the different natural gases so that, in *Average of critical values for iso-and nor-components.

MARCH, 1962 267

fraction times critical temperature, which have been com- TABLE 10-CALCULATION OF COMPRESSIBILITY FACTOR FOR
GAS·CAP GAS AT 134 OF
puted for each of the individual components, while the (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
pseudocritical pressure is calculated by adding the Pi Tr
individual-component products of mol fraction times criti- pc Ta Mix. Mix.
Mix. Mix. Pseudo- Pseudo· Z
cal pressure. T Pseudocrit. Pseudo· redcd. ceded. Compress-
Temp. Press. erit. Press. Temp. ibility
The pseudoreduced temperature is the ratio of the p
Pressure C'R or (psia) Temp. (OR) (Col. 1) (Col. 2) factor
pseudocritical temperature to the absolute temperature (psia) 460 + OF) Table 9 Table 9 (Col. 3) (Col. 4) (Fig. 20)
under consideration; similarly, the pseudoreduced pressure 2515 594 667 401 3.77 1.48 .780
2315 594 667 401 3.47 1.48 .780
is the ratio of the pseudocritical pressure to the absolute 2115 594 667 401 \3.17 1.48 .784
pressure. A classic correlation by Brown'· gives Z factors 1915 594 667 401 2.87 1.48 .790
1715 594 667 401 2.57 1.48 .800
plotted against pseudoreduced pressures for various pseudo- 1515 594 667 401 2.27 1.48 .815
1315 594 667 401 1.97 1.48 .832
reduced temperatures, as shown in Fig. 19. The Z-factor 1115 594 667 401 1.67 1.48 .855
curve for the sample gas is then obtained by determining 915 594 667 401
401
1.37
1.07
1.48
1.48
.875
715 594 667 .900
the pseudoreduced temperature for the gas, which is (460° 515 594 667 401 0.77 1.48 .925
+ 134°F/401°R, or 1.48. Since the compressibility curve
is to be based on the gas at reservoir temperature for the with the temperature the same in both cases. For conveni-
pressure range between atmospheric and the original reser- ence, therefore, it is customary to use the compressibility
voir pressure of 2,515 psia, various pressure points data in terms of these relations as follows.
throughout the range are chosen and the corresponding V = 1,000 Vb Pb Tr Zr _ 1,000 B (9)
reduced pressures calculated. With the reduced tempera- 5.615 pr Tb Zb - 5.615 g
ture and pressure data, the corresponding Z factors are
obtained from Fig. 19. These determinations are illustrated where V = volume of gas, in bbl at P and Tr/Mscf gas,
in Table 10, and the Z-factor curve is plotted in Fig. 20. Vb = volume of gas, in Mscf,
In case a hydrocarbon analysis of a particular gas is Pb = base pressure from which volume is being con-
not available, a similar procedure may be utilized to verted, psia,
determine compressibility relations, provided the specific Tb = atmospheric temperature, 460 + OF,
gravity of the gas is known. This process utilizes correla-
tions by Brown'· of pseudocritical temperature and pres- .95
1

sure with gas specific gravity, as shown in Fig. 21. If the I :

density of the gas changes as pressure changes, this must ,1
!
be taken into consideration and Z factors must be calcu- .,. I 1,\ I

lated at each point corresponding to the proper density '">-

0

value. ~ , ~I-'
i I i
i:
In oil-production operations, volumes of produced free :i 1+-4-
tt
.85 I
or gas-cap gas are metered at the surface and referred !!i
to some base temperature and pressure. It is necessary in w r-c- r-~ 'I..
i~

f -; -iT
;-!-
reservoir calculations, therefore, particularly in volumetric-
'""-
8'" I-e-
~--L f-- i
c-r- I
balance calculations, to refer these volumes back to vari- N .80
H- I
e- e- e-~-~ ~+-
ous reservoir pressures. These relative gas volumes are
calculated utilizing the compressibility factors as barrels -
e-
-
-f -f-f-- -

"e- -
f-

of gas at the reservoir pressure and temperature per

thousand cubic feet of gas at standard conditions. In addi- .75
-
f-- . e-
-H---
-
-

1,000
- -

e--
-

I.5no
-
--

- f-=-
2,000
f-
=li- 2,500
tion, it is necessary to refer volumes of gas at original PRESSURE, PSIG
reservoir conditions to various reservoir pressures below
Fig. 20-Calculated compressibility-factor curve for gas-
the original pressure as barrels of gas at reduced reservoir cap gas (Table 10).
pressure per barrel of gas at original reservoir pressure,
700 «
Cf)
1.0
-..
'~':"M.ocn"cm
'CM""""' U"C a.
1_ V
.6 TR
~ W
0.'
680 a::
:J
).~ r-. Cf)
1..
r"_ ./ Cf)
0.8
"I--, ./ 1.1.1
10' 660 a::
-,." 1.:::-:,...-
a.
~I~ 0.7
.lA
..JCf) II
N
" «m V Il ..J

0.'
'1.3
o « 380
.. ~ -I--"
640 «
o
t=Cf)
t=
'1.2 a:: 1.1.1 ./
01.1.1 ./ 0::
0.'
" 1.~' o a:: 340 i."'" 620
o
ABSOLUTE TEMPERATURE
O(!)
::JI.I.I o
0.4 ,,1..'0. T R- MOLECULAR AV[RAGE 0 o
~RITICAL TEMPERA~~~..L 1.1.1 ::J
Cf) 1.1.1
0.3 a. 300
O.S 0.6 0.7 O.B 0.9 1.0
600
Cf)
o 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 '.0 '.0 7.0 8.0 a.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF GAS: tAIR=I.O)
PSEUDO·REDUCED PRESSURE =MOLECULARAB;~~~:~E P~:I~I~~~ PRESSURE
Fig. 21-Approximate pseudocritical temperature and
Fig. 19-Compressibility of natural gases (after pressure in relation to gas gravity; air = 1.0
Brown, Ref. 30). (after Brown, Ref. 30).

268 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 Zb = compressibility factor at atmospheric pressure, 6.0

Pr = reservoir pressure at reservoir conditions, psia, lL

(,)
T,. = temperature to which volume is being con- en
verted, 460 + of, 2
""
'.0
Q.
1\
Zr = compressibility factor at reservoir conditions,
and
~
By = volume of gas at reservoir conditions per vol-
ume of gas at standard conditions. en
•• 0
,
«
(!) 1\
Complete calculations of a V-curve for example gas
analysis are shown in Table II, and results are plotted ...J 3.0
in Fig. 22. The relation of barrels of gas at reduced en
en I\.
reservoir pressures per barrel of gas at initial conditions
of pressure and temperature is determined by dividing at
.
the value for V at the pressure in question by the value CD 2.0

for V, at initial conditions. When plotted, the relation is Vj =.9242-

r.....
called the By/By, curve. Complete calculations of the a; ,...,
curve from the example gas analysis are shown in Table 11. ~
,.0
This curve closely parallels the V-curve and, therefore, is
not illustrated. For convenience in calculating values for a::
o
V and By/By" Eq. 9 is rearranged and all constant factors
are grouped together as one constant, as follows. >
500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2.500

V = C~
p,.
(10) RESERVOIR PRESSURE: PSIG
1,000 Pb Vb T,. Fig. 22-V-curve (pressure volume) for gas-cap gas at
where C = 134°F (Table II).
5.615 Zb Tb .
voir pressure or at some reduced pressure. It is necessary,
Sampling and Testing Retrograde therefore, to establish proper separation conditions if a
Gas-Condensate Reservoirs maximum amount of liquid is to be recovered in the
separator. After reservoir pressure drops and liquid drops
The problems involved in the study of gas-condensate out in the reservoir to form a hydrocarbon saturation,
reservoir materials are many and complex if complete the hydrocarbon analysis of the composite material pro-
phase-behavior analyses are to be made so that operations duced to the surface will have changed considerably,
yielding maximum economic recovery may be followed. depending upon the amount of material condensing in the
The basis for the complexity of the problem lies in the reservoir due to retrograde effects. The produced material
change of composition of produced material brought about is leaner, the heavy components of the original material
by the retrograde condensation in the reservoir of the being the first to drop out in the reservoir as pressure
heavier hydrocarbon components as reservoir pressure drops. Conditions of one- and two-stage separation still
drops. This retrogade condensation drastically affects de- will exist where maximum stock-tank liquid will be sepa-
sirable operations because the condensate material pro- rated at the surface; however, these separator conditions
vides a large portion of the income from the produced may have changed substantially from the corresponding
gas (or, conversely, would provide the loss of income if conditions where original reservoir material is being pro-
allowed to condense in the reservoir to form a liquid duced from the reservoir.
saturation). Because this liquid saturation constitutes only
The reservoir may be produced by pressure depletion
a small per cent of the entire reservoir pore volume, dis-
or by cycling operations. In straight pressure-depletion
placement of it from most areas of the reservoir other
operations, the liquids that condense by retrograde are
than adjacent to wellbores cannot be accomplished me-
lost. To eliminate some of the retrograde loss in cycling
chanically by producing the reservoir gas.
operations, the dry gas is returned to the reservoir to
The problem of surface separation is involved in gas displace the condensate gas at high reservoir pressure.
production, whether the produced gas is at original reser- Cycling may be carried out at anyone or a combination
of changing reservoir-pressure conditions during the pro-
TABLE ll-PRESSURE-VOLUME RElATION OF GAS CAP AT 134 0 F ducing life of the reservoir.
Equation, V = C~ =
p
178.1 By. C = 1,000 Pb Vb T .
5.615 ZlJ Til
Selecting the better method for a specific reservoir,
however, depends upon the economics and other factors
Data, C = ·1,000 X 14.65 ~< 1 X 594 = 2,980.
5.615 X 1 X 520 involved. In making studies of condensate-gas reservoirs,
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) it is necessary to know the quantity and quality of the
V or 178.1 By material recoverable under both types of operations.
z (bbl gas at p/Mscf
Compress- gas) By/Byi Complete phase-behavior data of the reservoir fluid under
p p ibility (bbl gas
Pressure Pressure Factor 2980 (Col. 3) at p/bbl
conditions of pressure depletion generally will provide
(psig) {psia) . (Fig. 20) (Col. 2) gas at pi) the information needed to evaluate both methods of opera-
2500 2515 .780 Vi = .9242 1.0000 tions; therefore, field and laboratory tests are designed to
2300 2315 .780 1.0041 1.0864
2100 2115 .784 1.1046 ,1.1952 provide such information. This information includes the
1900 1915 .790 1.2293 1.3301 following: (1) the quantity, hydrocarbon analysis and
1700 1715 .800 1.3901 1.5041
1500 1515 .815 1.6031 1.7346 specific volume of original material in the reservoir;
1300 1315 .832 1.8854 2.0400
1100 1115 .855 r2.2851 2.4725 (2) the quantities of vapor and condensed liquid in the
900
700
915
715
.875 2.8497 3.0834 reservoir at subsequent reduced reservoir pressures; and
.900 3.7510 4.0586
500 515 .925 5.3524 5.7913 (3) the complete surface separation history as reservoir

MARCH, 1962 269

pressure decreases, which includes optimum separation
data together with hydrocarbon analyses of separator gas,
separator liquid, stock-tank gas and liquid.
Test Car Method
Gathering the afore-mentioned data is best accom-
plished by using a test car, where all data are obtained
by actual measurements or where some data are calcu-
lated with some actual measurements used as control data.
The test car method of sampling condensate-gas reservoirs
is described in detail by Flaitz and Parks" and by Hoff-
man, Crump and Hocott." A flow diagram of a portable
apparatus given in Ref. 32 is shown in Fig. 23. Katz and
Brown" have pointed out that this method requires ac-
curate calibration of field separation equipment and a
determination of proper sampling rates and conditions
in order to divert aliquot portions of the produced stream
into the small-scale separators of the test car. The aliquot
portion of the produced stream is heated and compressed
to reservoir temperature and original reservoir pressure,
and then produced to one- and two-stage production-
separator (test car) systems at varying controlled pres-
sures. Separated materials are sampled and sent to the
laboratory where their hydrocarbon analyses are
determined.
The hydrocarbon analysis of the original reservoir ma-
terial is found from these tests, from which the amount
of hydrocarbons originally in place in a unit volume of
pore space may be determined; a compressibility factor
then can be determined by pseudocritical calculations. In
addition, this compressibility-factor value may be checked
in the laboratory by using a pressure-volume cell. Also
from these tests, the optimum conditions of one- and
two-stage separator systems are determined for conditions
where the reservoir material is produced while the reser-
voir is at original pressure.
The aliquot material is produced to the test car and
From Field
Separator
10.000
Crosby #
~
10,000 #
Heise
Trap
Heater
Fig. 23-Flow diagram of portable apparatus for gas-con-
densate testing (from Hoffman, Crump and
Hocott, Ref. 32).
270
flashed at various pressures below original reservoir pre~­
sure in the high-pressure retrograde separator at reservo~r
temperature. At each of these high-pressure tests, quantI-
ties of liquid and gas formed and their hydrocar.bon analy-
ses are determined from the samples so obtamed. Data
from these tests are used to indicate the severity of
retrograde condensation by plots such as those of Stand-
ing, Lindblad and Parsons" shown in Fig. 24. T~e analy-
ses of the gas usually are determined by dIfferences
between the analyses of the original material and those
of the produced liquid because some difficulty exists in
determining accurate gas analyses at the high tempera-
ture and pressure. Plots of liquid content and hydro-
carbon analyses of the gas produced during the depletion
of the reservoir are illustrated in Figs. 24 and 25. The
change in hydrocarbon analysis of retrograde liquid during
the depletion of the reservoir is illustrated in Fig. 26.
Gas from the retrograde separator is produced to the
production separators (test car), and optimum surface
separation conditions are determined for one- and two-
stage separator systems at various pressure conditions of
the retrograde separator. Data from these tests show the
changes in field separator conditions that must be made
as reservoir pressure drops in order to obtain maximum
separator recovery. Samples of separator gas, separator
liquid, stock-tank gas (test car) and residual liquid are
taken and sent to the laboratory where hydrocarbon
analyses are obtained. Shrinkage factors on the condensate
and data on liquid content of separated gas are obtained
from this information.
The tests just outlined may be limited in number to
the extent that optimum separator conditions are found
for gas at original reservoir pressure only; therefore, fill-in
data on such items as shrinkage, gas-oil ratios, gravity of
stock-tank liquid and density of separated gas may be
calculated by means of phase-behavior calculations. The
K-values in such instances may be obtained from various
t
From
published correlations, from experimental data on the
Well sample, or by further elaborate testing of the sample.
Field Separator Method
The test car method of testing condensate-gas material,
whereby complete phase behavior is determined, is quite
f";-1 time-consuming and expensive because it involves a great
deal of laboratory work. To simplify the testing procedure
LJ
Healer 150
0
\
\
\ /
Ind
5
~C4+ IN PROOUCED ~ V
~OTAL LIQUID ~
~ c4 + FRACTION AT roOF ~
o/-_
~
,
____ ~ROGRADE LIQUID IN $A~
.... ~
I '
5
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3()00
PRESSURE, PSIA
Fig. 24-Retrograde liquid condensation and C4 + fraction in
produced gas resulting from depletion of a condensate-
bearing reservoir (from Standing, Lindblad
and Parsons, Ref. 34).
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
so that reservoir behavior can be studied quickly and basically similar. With this method, a recombined sample
economically, laboratory procedures may have been devel- is obtained using the field separator method of sampling
oped to simulate test car work. Although the procedure may (described earlier), and then charged into a pressure-
vary between companies because of the difference in volume cell for laboratory testing.
thinking between the individuals involved, the basic in- If pressure is dropped on a gas sample by increasing
formation desired is the same and the procedures are the volume without withdrawing gas, a different volume
v
of liquid will drop out by retrograde condensation than
O. 8

o. 6
-- c,
-
will occur if the pressure is dropped by removing gas
without changing the volume of the remainder of the
sample. The first process (illustrated by Fig. 27) is termed
O. 5 equilibrium, or flash, condensation. The latter process
O. 4 (Fig. 28) is termed differential condensation and is analo-
z gous to production from a closed reservoir. A comparison
0
O. 3
l3
C(
of equilibrium and differential condensation of a retro-
grade gas measured in the laboratory is presented in
a::
II.. O. 2 Fig. 29. More liquid condenses under equilibrium condi-
oJ
0.1 5
tions than under differential conditions because a greater
0
quantity of gas remains in the system from which heavy
~

~
. O. I
components may condense as pressure drops .
i= 0.0 8
en
-- C2
Sloan"·3G describes flash condensation tests performed
by step-wise increases in the volume of the material. At
~ 0.06 , .... several reduced pressure conditions, small subsamples of
~ 0.05 material are obtained for hydrocarbon analyses and data
0 0.04 '\ r-- CJ L similar to those of Figs. 24, 25 and 26 are obtained. The
\ '~ ~ V
~ 0.03 '.
CrY

0.02
,', .........
C4
.h

" ""'- ............... 5!- t?'

0.01 5

1
500 1000 ISOO
- ~
2000 2500 3000
PRESSURE PSIA
Fig. 2S-Composition change of produced
material from gas-condensate reservoir de-
scribed by Fig. 24. (from Standing, Lindblad ;CONDENSATE 1
and Parsons, Ref. 34).

1.0
0.8

O. 6 .... A
o5 " ~

t--
GAS IN CELL AT MERCURY REMOVED MERCURY REMOVED

0.4 ............... C,,,, ORIGINAL RESERVOIR PRESSURE REDUCED CONnlUATION OF

PRESSURE 'TEMPERATURE RETROGRADE CONDENSATE STEP 8
"'""'"-
z
o 0.3 t-- ~ FORMED

~a:: V ~
Fig. 27-EquiIibrium retrograde condensation of
liquid from gas.
/'

---
0.2
II..
oJ 0.1 5
lr"
o
~
Z O. I _~ lLF--r-- ~
o
i= 0.08 , c. t-..
en .'t.
00D6
a.. , ,
/
19
~
~ 0.05
o
00.04
I
,1 /
/
o I
:5 0.0J
o I
::J
0.02

0.015

I~ ~ 2~ ~
I
MO 500 2500 A B C
PRESSURE PSIA GAS IN CELL AT GAS REIIOVED CONTINUATION OF
ORIGINAL RESERVOIR PRESSURE REDUCED STEP B
Fig. 26-Composition change of reservoir PRESSURE &TEMPERATURE RETROGRADE CONDENSATE
~nRM~n
liquid phase for gas-condensate reservoir de-
scribed by Fig. 24 (from Standing, 'Lindblad Fig. 23-Differential retrograde conden,ation of
and Parsons, Ref. 34). liquid from gas.

MARCH, 1962 271

 1.00

~ .75
~ SATURATED lAS AT
-I OmlKAlRESm
o
>.50
PRESSURE_

EQUILIBRIUM

//
/"'--,",",~....--"~"
/~~
DIFFERENTIAL
a L---P-=REc-=-S.....,..S-U=R=E--=---=---:~~-=--=--=--=--=---:;..--
Fig. 29-Differential and equilibriuDl condensation of
liquid froDl retrograde gas.
disadvantage of this method is the possibility that some
loss in accuracy may result because of the small size of
the subsample involved; this possibility is more probable
when determining the subsample's hydrocarbon analyses at
various reservoir pressures. However, inaccuracies now
can be minimized by using the chromatograph.
General Retrograde-Condensate-Gas ProbleDls
Two main problems face an operator as he attempts
to economically produce gas and condensate from a
retrograde-gas-condensate reservoir: (l) determining the
proper reservoir operating conditions to provide minimum
retrograde condensation of liquid from the gas in the
reservoir rock; and (2) adjusting separator conditions to
provide maximum condensation of condensate from the
gas in the stock tank. The following example calculations
illustrate the solutions to these two problems.
Problem No. I-Retrograde Condensation (Fig. 30)
Assumptions:
1. Original Reservoir Volume-lO billion scf of gas.
2. Total Original Gas Recovered-80 per cent.
3. Abandonment Conditions-(a) fast-pressure-deple-
tion, low-abandonment-pressure operations, retrograde =
19 bbl of condensate/MMcf of gas; and (b) slow-
producing-rate water-drive operations with high abandon-
ment pressure, retrograde = 10 bbl of condensate/MMcf
of gas.
Solution:
Condensate Lost under 3 (a) = 10,000 X 0.8 X 19
= 152,000 bbl.
Condensate Lost under 3(b) = 10,000 X 0.8 X 10
= 80,000 bbl.
Difference Lost by 3 (a) over 3 (b) = 72,000 bbl of con-
densate.
It should be recognized that the displacement aspects
involved in this type of problem are so influential that
they can easily reverse the outcome of the answer. In
this regard, the operator may find that more total liquid
can be obtained under conditions where the time or
reservoir-heterogeneity factor will act to permit more
original gas to be produced by pressure depletion.
Problem No.2-Separator Recovery (Fig. 31)
Assumptions:
1. Original Reservoir Volume-lO billion scf of gas.
2. Total Original Gas Produced to Surface-80 per cent.
3. Separator Producing Conditions-(a) average re-
covery under 350-psig trap pressure = 95 bbl/MMcf of
272
Fig. 30--.:Condensate lost by retrograde effects.
Fig. 31-Recovery of condensate in separation equipDlent.
original gas; and (b) average recovery under 100-psig
trap pressure = 90 bbl/MMcf of original gas.
Solution:
Condensate Recovered under 3(a) = 10,000 X 0.8 X 95
= 760,000 STB.
Condensate Recovered under 3(b) = 10,000 X 0.8 X 90
= 720,000 STB.
Difference in
Recovery of 3(a) over 3(b) = 40,000 STB of
condensate.
References
25. Thornton, O. F.: "Gas-Condensate Reservoirs-A Review",
Pet. Eng. Riel. Annual (1947) 124.
26. Lewis, J. 0.: "Interpretation Well Test Data in Gas Conden-
sate Fields", Pet. Eng. (Sept., 1947).
27. Bulletin T. S. 351, California Nat. Gasoline Assn.
28. Katz, D. L, et al: Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N. Y. (1959).
29. Kay, W. B.: "Density of Hydrocarbon Gases and Vapors",
Ind. Eng. ekem. (1936) 28, 1014.
30. Brown, G. G.: "The Compressibility of Gases", Pet. Eng.
(Jan., Feb., March, April, 1940).
31. Flaitz, J. M. and Parks, A. S.: "Sampling Gas-Condensate
Wells", Trans., AIME (1942) 146, 13.
32. Hoffman, A. E., Crump, J. S. and Hocott, C. R.: "Equilibrium
Constants for a Gas-Condensate System", Paper 219-G pre-
sented at AIME Petroleum Branch Fall Meeting (1952).
33. Katz, D. L and Brown, G. G,.: "Sampling Two-Phase Streams
from High Pressure Condensate Wells", Pet. Eng. (March,
April, 1947).
34. Standing, M. B., Lindblad, E. N. and Parsons, R. L: "Calcu-
lated Recoveries by Cycling from a Retrograde Reservoir of
Variable Permeability", Trans., AIME (1948) 174, 165.
35. Sloan, J. P.: "Laboratory Studies and Their Relation to
Cycling Problems", Oil and Gas Jour. (March 25, 1948).
36. Sloan, J. P.: "Phase Behavior of Natural Gas and Condensate
'Systems", Pet. Eng. (Feb., 1950).
37. Carr, Norman L, Kobayashi, Riki and Burrows, David B.:
"Viscosity of Hydrocarhon Gases Under Pressure", Trans.,
AIME (1954) 201,264. ***
JOURNAl. OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids, Part Four
FUNDAMENTALS OF
RESERVOIR FLUIDS
Theoretical Aspects of Oil and Gas Equilibrium Calculations
NORMAN J. CLARK
MEMBER AIME
Editor's Note: This is the fourth of five Technical
Articles in the Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids series.
References, Tables, Figures and Equations are numbered
consecutively, but are published only with the particular
installment of the series in which they are first mentioned.
Introduction
The economic value of produced oil and gas is de-
pendent upon their physical properties. It is of great
importance to the operator, therefore, to be able to
predict means of producing and handling his reserves
which will permit production of materials in such form
as to provide a maximum profit.
Unfortunately, precise calculations of such are ex-
tremely difficult to make. There have been made avail-
able in the literature, however, certain generalized data
and data on specific hydrocarbon systems that permit
the development of methods whereby physical changes
occurring to hydrocarbon mixtures can be approximated
with a fair degree of precision. Burcik 19 has described in
considerable detail various properties and physical changes
occurring to hydrocarbon systems, and one method of
predicting changes is developed by Buckley." This system
may be utilized and calculated results may be correlated
with laboratory equilibrium data obtained on the oil
sample under controlled conditions in order to obtain more
complete and exact results than usually is possible through
use of laboratory data alone.
Equilibrium calculations for produced hydrocarbon mix-
tures permit the analyst to determine how particular oper-
ating conditions and techniques will affect ( 1 ) gas-oil
ratios, (2) composition and gasoline content of liberated
gas, (3) composition and gravity of liberated oil, (4)
amount and composition of the gas liberated upon flashing
the oil from the separator to the stock tank and (5)
shrinkage of oil in passing from the reservoir to the stock
tank.
The Ideal Gas Laws
The laws of Dalton and Raoult governing the behavior
of ideal gases and solutions were applied by early investi-
gators in calculating the behavior of hydrocarbon mix-
4VReferences given at end of article.
SPE 91
APRIL, 196:!
NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
DALLAS, TEXAS
tures (e.g., see Huntington'"). The ideal solution follows
the laws of additive volumes. DaMon's law indicates that
in a mixture of gases the total pressure is equal to the
sum of the partial pressures. From this law, the following
relation may be obtained.
Partial Pressure of a Gas Component = 7Ty ( 11 )
where 7T = total pressure on the system, psia, and
y = mol fraction of the component in the vapor.
Raoult's law indicates that the partial vapor pressure
of a component in a liquid mixture depends upon the
amount of the component in the liquid and the vapor pres-
sure of the pure component. From this law, the follow-
ing relation is obtained.
Partial Vapor Pressure
of a Liquid Component = px (12)
where p = vapor pressure of the same component in the
pure state, and
x = mol fraction of the same component in the
liquid.
When the liquid-gas system is in equilibrium, the total
pressure on the system is equal to the vapor pressure of
the liquid, and the partial pressure of a component in the
gas is equal to the partial vapor pressure of the same
component in the liquid. This is shown in the following
relation.
7Ty = px (13 )
A rearrangement of this equation to
y p
-=--= K , (14)
X 7T
where K = equilibrium or volatility constant, formed
the basis for hydrocarbon behavior calculations used by
earlier investigators. This relation was found to be a fairly
good approximation at temperatures and pressures ap-
proaching atmospheric, where molecules are far apart
and have little attraction for each other.
At high pressures and at temperatures approaching the
critical, however, deviations from the behavior of ideal
gases and the effects of total pressure on the vapor pres-
sure of the mixture have such pronounced effects on the
equilibrium condition that Dalton's and Raoult's laws
have been found completely inapplicable." Many past in-
vestigations into the estimation and use of critical tem-
peratures, critical pressures and convergence pressures
have been employed in an attempt to more precisely
;{73
evaluate the relation of K at higher pressures and tem-
peratures."'"

K -Values in Equilibrium Calculations

The idea of using the equilibrium constant K in phase
behavior calculations is sound, requiring only that ap-
propriate K-values be known for components of the ma- MOL FRAC
terial within the range of temperatures and pressures cov- Cj .9287

ered by the particular investigation. However, the difficulty HYDROCARBON

C2
C3
in obtaining the proper K-values for these individual com- ANALYSIS

ponents arises from the fact that the values vary not only
with temperature and pressure changes, but also with EQUILIBRIUM AT
1.0000

changes in the composition of the mixture; thus, a K-value ~~~4;;;;';';;"'~ ~TEMP. AND PRESS.
MOL FRAC
for a given component actually changes each time the (1 .3572
mixture in which the component exists changes. Obviously, HYDROCARBON C2
therefore, K-values must be chosen with knowledgeable ANALYSIS
[
C3 ===
care. CN -
The analyst can obtain hydrocarbon K-values for solving --r:oooo-
his production problems from two general sources: (1) Y(C j f,ac)
.9287
from published general correlations such as those appear- K(fo, Cj)" - - - = -
X(C 1f,ac)
= 2./fJ
.3572
ing in the Natural Gasoline Supply Men's Assn.-NGAA
Engineering Data Book," and (2) from expensive and
time-consuming laboratory measurements made on sam- Fig. 32-Hydrocarbon vapor and liquid in equilibrium,
ples extracted from the specific hydrocarbon system under illustrating basis of K-values.
consideration. Examples of the first source include the
K -values for carbon dioxide, oxygen and nitrogen reported
by Sage, Lacey and Hicks," and those for water reported If accurate composItion analyses of the oil and gas
by Poettmann and Dean." equilibrium phases are to be made, it may become neces-
When dealing with surface separation problems, the sary to employ some correlation procedure to smooth out
pressures and temperatures usually encountered are low, the scatter of laboratory data points and to develop from
that is, below 500 psig and 100°F, respectively; in such the data some mutually consistent equilibrium constants.
cases, the published correlations mentioned previously will One such procedure, developed by Buckley and published
provide reasonably good approximations. This is especially in detail by Hoffman, Crump and Hocott," utilizes plots
true if theoretical behavior calculations are made only of log KP (the equilibrium constant times the absolute
after calculated data are found to match data obtained
in laboratory separation tests (to be described later). pressure) vs a function b (~ _. ~), where b is a constant
Til T
Only when dealing with unusual hydrocarbon mixtures
will such correlations not be applicable, in which case characteristic of the particular hydrocarbon, To is its boil-
the analyst may find that, after proper checks are made. ing point in OR and T is the temperature in OR. These
only the detailed laboratory data will apply. When dealing plots are reasonably straight lines which permit K-values
with problems in subsurface separation at high pressures to be correlated, and they can be extrapolated and inter-
and temperatures, a considerable amount of laboratory polated with reasonable precision to determine consistent
data must always be obtained if precise calculations are K -values of other components. The value for the constant
to be made. b for each component is determined by the following re-
lation.
The significance of Eq. 14 stems from the following.
If the qnalyst knows the hydrocarbon analysis of one phase (logp,. - log 14.7)
b= (15 )
(-~~ -- T~)
of the material in equilibrium with the other phase and
if he has at his disposal the applicable equilibrium con-
stants for all components in the mixture, he can then cal-
where p, = critical pressure, psi a, and
culate the hydrocarbon composition of the other phase
of the material. In Fig. 32, which illustrates the relation T, = critical temperature, OR.
y = Kx of Eq. 14, the mol fraction of methane in the Values for h for the various pure components through
liquid phase is 0.3572 and the value for the equilibrium decane are given in Table 12.
constant for methane at 2,190 psig and 134°F is 2.60, The example problem shown in Table 13 utilizes Eq.
The value for y, or the mol fraction of methane in the 14 to calculate an analysis for a gas-cap gas in equilibrium
equilibrium vapor, is then 0.9287 (or 2.60 X 0.3572), with the example oil used earlier. For purposes of these
One use of this relation would be in estimating the calculations, K-values were obtained from Buckley" for
analysis of a gas cap in equilibrium with an oil zone- methane, and from Katz and Hachmuth'6 for ethane
a calculation which can be made if the K-values for the
significant components are known; in a problem of this TABLE 12-VALUES FOR b FUNCTION FOR PURE HYDROCARBON COMPONENTS
type, the components involved may include those that are Component
----
Value Component Value
much heavier than those normally dealt with individually Methane 808 N-Pentone 2473
at low temperatures and pressures. The difficulty, however, Ethane .. 1415 Hexane .. 2780
Propane .......... 1792 Heptane 3061
lies in recognizing the significant components and in know- I-Butane 2045 Octane .. 3333
ing the K-values for these components at the elevated N-Butane ..... 2129 Nonane .. 3602
I-Pentane 2375 Decane 3B47
pressure and temperature existing in the reservoir.

3H .1 () (. II '\ A L () F PET 1I0LEl1!1t TEI:H" OLO(; y

TABLE 13-CALCULATION OF HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS OF GAS·CAP GAS IN EQUILIBRIUM WITH RESERVOIR OIL AT RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE
PRESSURE = 2,190 PSIG; y = Kx
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
KP Y
x K* From y Aditd. Hydroearb.
Hydrocarb. Anal. EquiJib. Correlation Calc. Hydroearb. Anal. of Vapor
of liquid Xo K (Mol Frae.)
Constant at Curve of Anal. of Vapor
(Mol Fmc.) 2·,190 psig, KP
b(-i- -- +) KP vs b (Col. 61 (Mol Frae.) (Col. 8)
Component From Table 14-r 134"F (2205)(Col. 3) Function 2205 (Col. 7)(Col. 2) (1: Col.8!.
Methane .3572 2.600 5,733 2.650 5,733 2.600 .9287 .BOB7
Ethane .1021 .864 1,906 -1.873 2,420 1.098 .1121 .0976
Butane .1011 .562 1,240 1.291 1,300 .590 .0597 .0520
Propane .0697 .343 756 .830 780 .354 .0247 .0215
Pentane .0411 .149 469 .328 450 .204 .0084 .0073
Hexane .0370 .158 349 - .167 265 .120 .0044 .0038
Heptane .0436 - .574 172** .078 .0034 .0030
Octane .0364 - .968 110** .050 .0018 .0016
Nonane .0280 -1.345 73** .033 .0009 .0008
Decone -+ .1838 -1.699 50** .023 .0042 .0037
1.0000 1.1483 1.0000
tTable 14 will appear in May, 1962 issue of Journal of Petroleum Technology.
*Dato as follows: c I , Buckley;
C2 -C6 inclusive, Katz and Hochmuth (interpolated for temperature of 134°F).
"''''Extrapolated values.

through hexane. In this example problem, the assump-
tion is made that no reliable data could be found for
octane and heavier components for a pressure of 2,190
psig and a temperature of 134°F; thus, the methane-
through-hexane data must be extrapolated to obtain the
proper K-values for components heavier than hexane.
Further assume that K-values for methane through hep-
tane could not be found in the literature for a temperature
of 134°F; therefore, as shown in Fig. 33, the analyst
must plot curves of K vs temperature and then interpolate
to find the values of K at 134°F. If there is considerable
curvature to the correlations, a better method would be
to plot KP vs the reciprocal of absolute temperature-a
correlation which, according to Buckley and Lightfoot,"
usually plots as a straight line.
After determining these K-values, each of which is con-
sistent within itself, the analyst must utilize a KP vs
3.0
C,II
2.0
1.0
U ~
L- r--
J-'
~ r--
, -"
).-'
b-function plot to (1) smooth the values so that they
will be consistent with each other and (2) extrapolate
to determine K-values for components heavier than hex-
ane. These calculations are shown in Table 13, and the
correlation is illustrated in Fig. 34.
An excellent set of K-values now generally available
for use with production problems appears in the Natural
Gasoline Supply Men's Assn.-NGAA Engineering Data
Book." These charts cover a range of convergence pres-
sures between 600 and 20,000 psia. The proper con-
vergence pressure for a particular hydrocarbon system
can be calculated by using a method described by Lenoir
and White." With the convergence pressure of the system
determined, the proper K-values for the components are
obtained either directly or by interpolation from the charts.
The Material-Ba,lance Calculation
In many cases, the analyst must determine the equilib-
I
rium conditions existing between two phases of hydro-
I carbon materials at a specific set of temperature and pres-
1 sure conditions, but the only analysis he knows is that
1 of the original single-phase material from which the two
2 c phases were derived; further, this known analysis is valid
only for the temperature and pressure conditions under
I. which the single-phase material existed. A material-balance
c
11
I
_.-4..
C4 ~~

I--'I--'
,,,.1.
>f ,.,i,

0.1
Y' ....

"'"
J.,ool--'

I"'"
J.,oo
Ii
C6
1,..-1--'
.... 1--' ".I.~ 1,..-..... , ....
,,,.1.
1,000.__ _
t±ttili
-1 tm1
l
J..+.t+++++++++++
i -+++-J

1++++++++' . ! !,
i
l
I

~i .~cs~
++r 1

i I
I 1+++++-H--J,.rn· c,
I
c~

j.- -l-i--W--i-W++-I-l
c. 1 I

~
I
I I ill I ' c, ++1 r~+ H+Ji _1+
1
I 100 m iii U)';;,
1--" I I
Ii 11111'
:
"co -+I-.,..:-~~4-~l-Il-,:-,I_H-H-+-+-+-
r-r- _ J-, t
.I-

1r i I •
i
x
·liil.
LEGEND
Calculat.d Points _
i
t-
(
t-+
t;.,
H Adluat.d Point. . 1- IT

~'~'iffi~fir .lillI1~~~1~Trr~
LEGEND C EXTRAPOLAI£D
o DATA POINTS
X INTERPOLATED POINTS
CI BUCKLEY'S DATA

0.01
40 50
ITiil'ITIill 100 150
TEMPERATURE: OF
I--'t
.,i,

200
~~.7 -1.5 -1.00 0.00

b( ~_~)
1.00 2.00 3.00

T. T
Fig. 33-Correlation of K-values at 2,190
psig vs temperature to obtaiu K-values Fig. 34-Correlation of KP vs b-function to determine
at 134°F. K-values for heavier components at 2,190 psig and 134°F.

APRIl.., 1962 375

calculation which permits the analyst to solve problems
of this type is developed in the following paragraphs.
Suppose that a given quantity of a single-phase hydro-
carbon material (such as a liquid mixture) existing at
some elevated temperature and pressure has its tempera- HYDROCARBON
ANAL YSI~

ture and pressure reduced; if none of the original material

is lost and if a combination of liquid and vapor results,
', .,,,,
(2 -~­

the following relation will hold. HYDROCARBON

ANALYSIS [(3 - --

Xo =V, + L, . CN~
ORIGINAL
(16) LIQUID

whereXo = original single-phase material, Ib-mol, (1 .3572 }

HYDROCARBON
ANALYSIS
MOL fRAC
V, = vapor at altered conditions of temperature and
(2 ---

_oo~,~ .
CJ ---

pressure, Ib-mol, and eN - - _

l.OOOo-
J
(::
L, = liquid at altered conditions of temperature and I LB. MOL X .35n MOL FRAC =.60185 LB MOL X .$.497 MOL FRAC 1.0000
+ .3515 La MOL x .0025 /,()L FRA~_
pressure, Ib-mol. .3571 LB MOL (1 '" .Jsn LB MOL C 1

The original single-phase material is. composed of all com- Fig. 35-Material balance of methane in original single-
ponents; i.e., phase liquid with methane in vapor and liquid separated
from the original liquid.
Xo = xo-c, + XO-C2 + XO-03 + .... + xo-on ' (17)
where xo-o, is the amount of methane in the original single- KxXo
phase material in Ib-mol. Similarly, the separated phases y, = -=-=-=--:--::- (22)
KV,+L,
of the original material are composed of all the com-
ponents. Then, substituting Xo - V, from Eq. 16 in Eq. 22 for L,
results in
V, = Y,-c, + Y'-C2 + Y'-03 + .... + Y,-c n (18)
and (23)
L, = x,-o, + X'-C2 + X'-03 + .... + x,-on (19)
y, = KV, + X o - V,
where Y,-c, = amount of methane in the V, vapor, mol If the relation is based on lib-mol of original material,
fraction, and the following simplified equation results.
x,_c, = amount of methane in the L, liquid, mol (24)
fraction. y, = V,(K - 1) + 1
A material balance on anyone component is, therefore, And, since x = y/K,
xo_c,Xo = x,_c,L, + Y,-C,V, . (20) (25)
x, = V,(K - 1) + 1
where xo_c,Xo = amount of methane in the original ma-
terial, lb-mol, Problems of flash separation are then solved by a trial-
and-error calculation utilizing Eq. 24, in which a value
x,_o,L, = amount of methane in the resulting liquid
for V, is assumed for the amount of equilibrium vapor.
L" lb-mol, and The correct value for V, is chosen when the sum of all
Y'-C1 V, = amount of methane in the resulting vapor the calculated mol fractions of the components in either
V" lb-mol. equilibrium phase equals unity.
The significance and utility of the material balance of
Eq. 20 will be illustrated with data of the example oil sam- Reference~
ple and answers from more complete, subsequent calcula-
38. Buckley, S. E.: "Calculation of Equilibria in Hydrocarbon
tions. The value for xo_c, of the oil sample at reservoir condi- Mixtures", Trans., AIME (1938) 127, 178.
tions is 0.3572 from the hydrocarbon analysis. The value .39. Huntington, R. L.: "Elements of Vaporization and Condensa·
of x,-o, of the L, or separator liquid separated at 0 psig tion", Refiner and Natural Gasoline Manufacturer (March,
and 70°F separator conditions was found to be 0.0025. 1940).
The value of Y,-c, of the V, or separator vapor was found 40. Brown, G. G.: "The Compressibility of Gases", Pet. Engl.
to be 0.5497. In addition, L, was found to be 0.3515 (May, June, 1940).
lb-mol and V, was found to be 0.6485 lb-mol. 41. Smith, K. A. and Smith, R. B.: Pet. Processing (Dec., 19491
4, 1355.
Thus, a check by Eq. 20 shows the relationship of 42. Liquid-Vapor Equilibrium in Mixtures oj Light Hydrocarbons.
these values as illustrated by Fig. 35 to be The M. W. Kellogg Co. (1950).
(1 X 0.3572) = (0.6485 X 0.5497) 43. Engin,eering Data Book, Seventh Ed., Natural Gasoline Supply
+ (0.3515 X 0.0025), Men's Assn. and NGAA (l9571.
or 44. Sage, B. H., Hicks, B. L. and Lacey, W. N.: Drill. and
Prod. Prac., API (1938) 386.
0.3572 lb-mol = 0.3564 lb-mol + 0.0008 lb-mol.
45. Poettmann, F. H. and Dean: Pet. Refiner (Dec., 1948) 25,
The values for V, and L, used here, as well as the hydro- No. 12.
carbon analysis of the newly formed vapor and liquid, were 46. Katz. D. L. and Hachmuth, K. H.: "Vaporization Equilibrium
calculated by the material-balance equation that incorpo- Constants in a Crude OiLNatural Gas System", Ind. and
Engr. Chem. (Sept., 1937) 29, No.9.
rates both the volumes and compositions of the two phases,
47. Buckley, S. E. and Lightfoot, J. H.: "Effects of Pressure
as follows. The fraction y/K from Eq. 14 is substituted for and Temperature on Condensation of Distillate from Natural
x in Eq. 20, resulting in Gas", Trans., AIME (1941) 142, 232.
y,L, 48. Lenoir, J. M. and White, G. A.: "Predicting Convergence
xaXo = K + y,V, , (21) Pressure", Pet. Refiner (March, 1958) 37, No.3.
49. Burcik, E. J.: Properties 0/ Reservoir Fluids, John Wiley &
and Sons, Inc., N. Y. (1957). ***
376 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids, Part Five
FUNDAMENTALS OF
RESERVOIR FLUIDS
Practical Application of Oil and Gas
Equilibrium Calculations
NORMAN J. CLARK
MEMBER AIME
Editor's Note: This is the fifth and last Technical Article
in the Fundamentals of Reservoir Fluids series. References.
Tables, Figures and Equations have been numbered con-
secutively, but were published only with the particular
installment of the series in which they were first mentioned.
Introduction
When hydrocarbon materials are subjected to changing
conditions of pressure and temperature, their physical
properties change. By utilizing methods to predict these
changes, the operator can determine the one set of pres-
sure-temperature conditions that will provide the hydro-
carbon materials in a form offering the maximum economic
advantage. He then can purchase and install equipment
designed to provide these optimum separator conditions,
thus eliminating time-consuming field experimentation and
costly equipment modifications and replacements.
Optimum Field Separation Conditions
The utility of the equilibrium equations in determining
optimum field separation conditions can perhaps best be
presented through a complete series of calculations. Opti-
mum field separation conditions will be determined by
flash calculations for both single-stage and two-stage separa-
tor systems.
Preliminary Calculations
The hydrocarbon analysis of original reservoir oil is
recorded on the basis of weight per cent, as shown by
the lab data of Table 4. * This analysis must first be con-
verted to a mol per cent basis for use in all subsequent cal-
culations. This conversion is shown in Table 14. The values
for molecular weights of components methane through
pentanes are for paraffin series from published literature.
The molecular weights for hexane and heavier components
are experimental values determined in the laboratory.
In addition, the gallons of liquid per mol and the vapor
equivalent, in cubic feet of vapor per gallon of liquid,
must be obtained for each component. Published data are
used for normal paraffin components for methane through
pentane, and laboratory data are used to determine the
':'Jour. Pet. Tech. (Jan., 1962) 15.
SPE 91
MAY, 1962
NORMAN J. CLARK ENGINEERING
DALLAS, TEXAS
values for the heavier components. Calculations for the
example oil are shown by Table 14.
Verification of Calculations and [(-Values Used
Before a series of calculations can be considered reliable,
especially if K-valves are used which were obtained from
the literature or from some correlation procedure, a trial
flash calculation must be made for a case in which cor-
responding laboratory data are available. Thus, labora-
tory data can be checked against the calculated results, the
differences studied, and the causes for variation eliminated
before long, tedious behavior calculations are subsequently
made. The best check calculations are based on the O-psig
flash separator test because it is considered the easiest to
control and, thus, the most reliable of the laboratory separ-
ator tests.
The first calculation involves determining the hydro-
carbon analyses of residual-liquid and separated-gas phases,
and the quantity of liquid and gas formed at 0 psig and
70 P separation conditions resulting from 1 mol of orig-
0
inal sampled oil at 2,190 psig and 134°P. It is signi-
ficant that 1 mol of the original oil is used as a basis and
its original conditions of temperateure and pressure are
not considered in the flash calculation. Pirst, a value for
the quantity of gas formed V" (some fraction of a mol of
stock-tank vapor formed from 1 mol of original single-
phase material) is estimated. This will be some value be-
tween 0 and 1.0 if the change of state in the original ma-
terial results in two phases. If by Eq. 24** the sum of
the component hydrocarbon analyses for the gas formed is
calculated to be 1.00, the assumed value for V" is correct;
if not, new values for V" are chosen and the calculations
are repeated until a V" is found which will result in the
component analyses' summing to equal unity. Table 15
illustrates this procedure. After the hydrocarbon analysis
of the equilibrium gas is found, the hydrocarbon analysis
of the residual oil is calculated by Eq. 14. * *
The next step is the calculation of molecular weight
and GPM of the various saleable components of the equili-
brium gas formed, and the gallons per mol and pounds
per mol of the equilibrium liquid formed. These data, cal-
culated in Table 16, are based on the preliminary data
'·"\Jour. Pet. Tech. (April. 1%2) 373.
491
 tABLE 14 - HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS AND DATA OF SUBSURFACE OIL SAMPLE
(I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Xo Vapor
Hydrocarbon Equivalent
Weight Molecular Analysis of Density Density Gal/Mol, (cu ft vapor/
Per Cent Weight Mol/100 Ib Sample Oil (gm/cc at (Ib/gal at Published Data gal liquid
(From Source as Sat. Material Xo (mol frac) 60° F) 60° F) or at 60° F)
Companent Table4) Noted (Col. 2)/(Col. 3) (Col. 4)/~ (Col. 4) Lab. Data 8.345 (Col. 6) (Col. 3)/(Col. 7) 379/(Col. 8)
Methane 7.39 16.03t .4610 .3572 7.05 53.S
Ethane 3.96 30.05t .1318 .1021 9.0 42.0
Propane 5.75 44.06t .1305 .1011 10.37 36.6
I-Butane 0.79 58.08t .0136 .0105 12.34 30.8
N-Butane 4.44 58.08t .0764 .0592 11.92 31.8
I-Pentane 0.84 72.09t .0117 .0091 13.84 27.4
N-Pentane 2.98 72.09t .0413 .0320 13.69 27.7
Hexane 4.11 86. tt .0478 .0370 .6826 5.696 15.098 25.10
Heptane 5.57 99. tt .0563 .0436 .7263 6.061 16.334 23.20
Octane 5.17 110. tt .0470 .0364 .7430 6.200 17.742 21.36
Nonane 4.44 123. tt .0361 .0280 .7623 6.361 19.337 19.60
Decane + 54.56 230.* tt .2372 .1838 .8567* 7.149 32.172 11.78
100.00 1.2907 1.0000
* Adjusted values to permit matching calculated with laboratory separation data.
t From publ i shed literature.
t t From lab data.

TABLE 15 - ATMOSPHERIC SEPARATION FLASH CALCULATIONS-SUBSURFACE OIL TO STOCK TANK

(CHECK OF LABORATORY RESULTS AND FLASH CALCULATIONS)*

Equations: Yst
K Xo
= Vst(K-1) + 1; Xst= +;
Y t
Xo = V st +L st '
Conditions of Flash: Liquid Xo From 2,190 psig and 134° F To 0 psig and 70° F •

Estimated V st = .6485 , Lst = .3515.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
xo Yst Xst
Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon
Analysis of K Analysis of Analysis of
Original Res- Equi I ibrium Stock-Tank Stock-Tank
ervoir Oil Xo Constant at K xo' K - 1, Vst(K - 1) + 1, Vapor V st Liquid Lst
(mol frac from opsig and V st (Col. 5) + 1
(mol frac), (mol frac),
Com~onent Table 14) 70° F (Col. 2)(Col. 3) (Cal. 3) - 1 (Col. 4)/(Col. 6) (Col. 7)/(Col. 3)
Methane .3572 221.10 78.97692 220.10 143.73485 .5497 .0025
Ethane .1021 32.99 3.36828 31.99 21.74552 .1549 .0047
Propane .1011 8.299 .83903 7.299 5.73340 .1463 .0176
I-Butane .0105 3.197 .03357 2.197 2.42475 .0138 .0043
N-Butane .0592 2.180 .12906 1.180 1.76523 .0731 .0335
I-Pentane .0091 .898 .00817 .1020 .93385 .0087 .0097
N-Pentane .0320 .6463 .02068 .3537 .77063 .0268 .0415
Hexane .0370 .2177 .00805 .7823 .49268 .0163 .0751
Heptane .0436 .0701 .00306 .9299 .39696 .0077 .1098
Octane .0364 .0223 .00081 .9777 .36596 .0022 .0995
Nonane .0280 .0066 .00018 .9934 .35578 .0005 .0787
Decane+ .1838 -1.0000 .35150 .5231
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
* Subscripts 0, 1, 2 and st denote conditions at reservoir, first-stage separator, second-stage separator and stock-tank, respectively.
TABLE 16 - ATMOSPHERIC SEPARATION, CALCULATION OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH
CALCULATIONS (CHECK OF LABORATORY RESULTS AND FLASH CALCULATIONS)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Yst Xst
Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon GPM*
Analysis of Analysis of Vapor
Stock-Tank
Stock-Tank Stock -Tank Mol Wt.of Gal/Mol of Equivalent, Mol Wt. Gal/Mol Lb/Mol
VaporVst
Vapor Vst Liquid Lst Components Components (cu ft vapor/ Stock -Tank Stock - Tank Stock- Tank
(mol frac from (mol frac from (from (from gal component, Vapor Vst 1,000(Col.2) Liquid Lst Liquid Lst
Component Table 15) Table 15) Table 14) Table 14) from Table 14) (Col. 2)(Col. 4) (Col.6) (Col. 3)(Col. 5) (Col. 3)(Col. 4)
Methane .5497 .0025 16.03 7.05 53.80 8.8117 .0176 .0401
Ethane .1549 .0047 30.05 9.00 42.00 4.6547 .0423 .1412
Propane .1463 .0176 44.06 10.37 36.60 6.4460 3.997 .1825 .7755
I-Butane .0138 .0043 58.08 12.34 30.80 .8015 .448 .0531 .2497
N-Butane .0731 .0335 58.08 11.92 31.80 4.2456 2.299 .3993 1.9457
I-Pentane .0087 .0097 72.09 13.84 27.40 .6272 .318 .1342 .6993
N-Pentane .0268 .0415 72.09 13.69 27.70 1.9320 .968 .5681 2.9917
Hexane .0163 .0751 86 15.098 25.10 1.4018 .649 1.1339 6.4586
Heptane .0077 .1098 99 16.334 23.20 .7623 .332 1.7935 10.8702
Octane .0022 .0995 110 17.742 21.36 .2420 .103 1.7653 10.9450
Nonane .0005 .0787 123 19.337 19.60 .0615 .026 1.5218 9.6801
Decane+ .5231 230 32.172 11.78 16.8292 120.3130
1.0000 1.0000 29.9864 9.140 24.4409 165.1101
*GPM Cg 3.997, C4 2.747, C5 + = 2.396.

492 JOURNAL OF l'ETROUWM TECHNO.LOGY

calculated in Table 14 and the hydrocarbon analyses of
the equilibrium materials calculated in Table 15.
With these calculated data, it is then possible to calcu-
late the (1) gravity of stock-tank oil, (2) gas-oil ratio,
(3) shrinkage factor and (4) specific gravity of gas. These
calculations are made with units explained in Table 17.
The calculated values, however, were found to vary
slightly from the corresponding laboratory values; there-
fore, certain adjustments of calculated data which were
within laboratory accuracy were made to permit complete
agreement within allowable precision. Adjustments can be
made on the molecular weight and/or density of the
C lO + fraction in the original material (Table 14) and the
specific volume of the original material (Table 6*). These
quantities are difficult to measure in the laboratory, and
the allowable adjustment in values may be up to as much
as 20 and 10 per cent, respectively.
Any change made in the value for molecular weight of
the Co + fraction will require (1) recalculation of the
hydrocarbon analysis on a mol fraction basis in Table 14,
(2) new volumetric factors for the C,o + fraction in Table
14 and (3) re-evaluation of the mols-per-barrel factor in
Table 17.
From a study of the tabular calculations, increasing the
molecular weight will increase the gallons-per-mol factor,
which increases API gravity, decreases gas-oil ratio, de-
creases shrinkage (Le., increases the shrinkage factor) and
increases the specific gravity of gas. Increasing the value
for density will have an opposite effect on these calculated
values. Increasing the specific volume of reservoir oil will
result in decreasing the mols-per-barrel value, thus increas-
ing shrinkage (decreasing the shrinkage factor).
A final and reasonable check for the example calcu-
lation was made when the molecular weight of the C IO +
fraction was changed from 285 to 230; the density of the
C,o + fraction changed from 0.8472 to 0.8567 gm/cc, and
the specific volume of the original material changed from
0.02428 to 0.024625 cu ft/lb.
The process of adjusting molecular weights and densities
often requires a knowledge of the general relationship be-
tween these two measurements so that, when only one is
known, the other can he determined for purposes of eval-
uating the vapor equivalent for a component. This relation
is given by the following equation.
379 X 8.345 X D
Vapor Equivalent (26)
MW
where
Vapor Equivalent = cu ft (at 60°F)/gal of liquid,
379 = cu ft of gas/lb-mol of gas,
8.345 = weight of water, lb/gal,
D = density of component, gm/cc, and
MW = molecular weight, or lb/lb-mol.
Fig. 36 is a correlation of molecular weight and density
for pure paraffin components and for hydrocarbon mix-
tures obtained from residual fluids of reservoir-oil samples
and gas-condensate samples. This correlation, made with
data from several thousand measurements, is used to deter-
mine or verify one parameter when the other is known.
Adjustments in the molecular weight and density of the
heavy fraction may be considered as changes which com-
pensate for inaccuracies in the K-values used. To mini-
mize the amount of this required adjustment, the best
K-value for the heavy fraction is obtained by a plot of
b vs K-values on semilog paper for the various components
at the temperature and pressure under consideration.
The best K-values obtainable for the light components,
together with their b-values from Table 12, * * are first
plotted as shown on Fig. 37. The line is extrapolated to a
b-value calculated by Eq. 15** for the heavy fraction or
fractions, utilizing values for critical pressure, critical
temperature and average boiling point for the heavy frac-
':"'J our. Pet. Tech. (April, 19'62) 374.
500
450 I
I
LEGEND:
400 ~
CURVE A PURE COMPONENTS
CURVE B COMPONENT CUTS BY HYPERCAL
DISTILLATION OF CONDENSATE
I

III
SAMPLES

"Jour. Pet. Tech. (Jan .. 1962) 16.

CURVE C ~~tlbuA:~ F~81t M~~1~R~\L °rAMPLES
350
TABLE 17 - ATMOSPHERIC SEPARATION, CALCULATION
OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH CALCULATION
(CHECK ON VALIDITY OF LABORATORY DATA AND
300
FLASH CALCULATIONS)
Gravity of Stock Tank Oil:
Ib/mol Ib 165.1101
gal/mol = g.;r = 24.4409
6.756 ;: 42.9° AP I 250
I
I
C
Stock-Tank Gas-Oil Ratia: Aj B/
Vst (cu ft/mol)(gal/bbl) _ .6485 x 379 x 42
1202 sef gas/STB 200

/~
Lst (gal/mal) .3515 x 24.• 4409

Flash Shrinkage Factor:

(gal/mal)(mal/bbl) Lst 24.4409 x 2.9431 x .3515 150
1/B 0: f = :::...----=-'----'----'::..:
(gal/bbl) 42
1/
v
.602 STB oillbbl orig. sample oil.
100
Specific Gravity of Separator Gas: V
SG = MW gas = 29.9864 = 1.0351
MWair 28.97 50 ./
Mals per Barrel Original Reservoir Oil: 30
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
(mol/100 Ib)(cu ft/bbl) 1.2907 x 5.615 =2. 9431 DENSITY
mol/bbl = (100)(cu ft/lb) = 100 x .024625* Fig. 36-Molecular weight vs density for pure hydrocarbon
cmnponents and hydrocarbon mixtures obtained from re-
* Adjusted to cause agreement in calculated and lab-measured sidual fluids of subsurface oil samples and condensate
shrinkage-factar data. samples.

MAY, 19j'il 493

 5000
CURVE EXTRAPOLATED TO
b-VALUE 4618 TO FIND K-VALUE ~
-
~
::::::
4500

4000 --------- -.. -~.----- --.- - .- -------"- ---------- 1--- - " .. -

FOR C6 + FRACTION OF.0003
---'---, - -_.- - - - ------7,4.. -----.
/
/
/ -- --
_.------+
I
I
--_ .. - -.-----.---
/
-- I

3500 -- I

-- -- I

-- -- --
I
3000 /

2500
/
/
-- -- I
I
X""""'- X:;-X/;':C5 (2473) I
~x '-C (2375) I
2000 ~X_ N-C 4(218 ) 3
x I-C 4 (2045) I
C 3 (i792)
1500
/ I

~XC2(i415) I
I
1000
~X'6;(8f8) I
I
500 I
I
o
1000 100 10.0 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 0.00001

EQUILIBRIUM CONSTANT K
Fig. 37-Plot of b·values vs K-values of hydrocarbon components to determine K-value for. residual mixtures (Co +)'
tion or fractions from Figs. 38, 39 and 40, respectively. A second and third set of check calculations may be
The following example illustrates this calculation for the made to determine the match between the calculated data
case where a K-value is obtained for the entire Co + frac- and the lab separation data for the two remaining condi-
tion utilizing the data of Table 4 for 0 psig and 70°F tions of laboratory separator pressures listed in Table 2-
conditions.
Given: C, + fraction having SG = .8147, MW = 203. 180200
.~'"

Then: gravity = 42.2° API;

p" critical pressure = 276 psia, from Fig. 38; "" . _+- -1:+
--
! I
I
\-t- '- I -l I
-

lo~
I

V
..... ~
I--""
.,0- ---
V I--"" f' ...... V I- W
,

......
I

I- ''''''
-- r- 1--- -
1
i .,.~ ,f-""" V ...... 1- .- ...... -~ ,
To, critical temperature = 795°F, from Fig. 39, ~
j,j
1100 f--
- ~ i I '0" : 'J.....- ...... L-- L-- L--
= 795 + 460 = 1,255° R; De
, I_+~'. :..r-:v v 1- --
T b , boiling point = 472°F, from Fig. 40, ...
=>
-< ''''
------ 1--
I I

~
,-'" ...... 1--""

"':"- /;" i;:::::;::

:::.;.--:: ....... ;:::: ~
I I •

= 472 + 460 = 932° R;

De -
,-I-!-.
W
0.. ." --- ;- -, '0f-"""
-- --
r--f·
...'" ~~
log 276 - log 14.65 I
k:~V:;::::~
W - -

and b
1 1 .J ." I I
I 1-- - l - I-
"'"
~~~~~
«
o ! • :-- f-
------_.-
;::
932 1,255 '"
"-
I- -I--
it'
o !1"~;6: I
,- '"
2.441 - 1.166

~
----I-

.0010729 - .0007968 = 4,618. ." -r-- --- -- ,---

I
1- 000

The curve of Fig. 37 is extrapolated to a b-value of ." --

,- ."
4,618, and the K-value of .00033 is thus determined for -·-~.Irr·· ---1---

the Co + fraction. In this case, all the heavy components

in the Co + fraction are handled together. More accurate MOLECULAR WEIGHT

equilibrium calculations will be accomplished when each Fig. 39-Critical temperature of petroleum fractions vs
of the heavy-component cuts is handled separately so that molecular weight. (Courtesy Petrocon Engineering
b-values and K-values are obtained for each. Co., Compton, Calif.)

100 leo 140 160 leo 200 220 MOLAL BOILING POINT, OF

«
iii
a.. $00 ...
I
ui
Q:
(!)

=> iii
<f) ~
<f)
UJ
Q:
Il-
." Q:
«
.J
.J =>
0
5 40~ UJ
.J
E
Q:
0
~
0

MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLAL BOILING POINT, OF

Fig. 38-Critical pressure of petroleum fractions vs mo- Fig. 40-Molecular weight of petroleum fractions vs molal
lecular weight. (Courtesy Petroeon Engineering boiling point. (Courtesy Petrocon Engineering
Co., Compton, Calif.) Co., Compton, Calif.)

494 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY


Fig. 41-Schematic diagram showing flash separation of
original reservoir liquid through one separator
stage and stock tank.
to insure applicability of the equilibrium constants used.
These check calculations are made in a similar m:umer
to the single-stage separation calculation presente6 in the
following paragraphs and, therefore, will not be shown
here. Instead, for this series of example calculations, it is
assumed that the data providing a match with the O-psig
flash will also provide a suitable match for the other labOI"a-
tory separator conditions.
Single-Stage Separation
Single-stage separation, illustrated in Fig. 41, is defined
as the process wherein original reservoir oil Xo (single
phase) is produced to a separator where vapor V, and
liquid L, are separated while at equilibrium conditions;
the liquid L, (single phase) is then produced to the stock
tank where vapor V", and liquid L." are separated while
at equilibrium conditions.
The separator conditions of pressure and temperature
chosen to illustrate the method of calculating single-stage

TABLE 18 _. SINGLE-STAGE SEPARATION FLASH CALCULATIONS-SUBSURFACE OIL SAMPLE TO FIRST-STAGE SEPARATOR

K Xo Y,
Equations: Y, = ; x, =- ; XO = V, + L, .
V, (K - 1) + 1 K
Conditions of Flash: Liquid Xo From 2,190 psig and 134° F To 100 ps ig and 70° F
Estimated V, = .5052 L, = .4948
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Xo Y, x,
Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon
Analysis of K Analysis of Analysisof
Original Res· Equilibrium First.Stage F irst.Stage
ervoir Oil Xo Constant ,t Vapor V, Liquid L,
100 psig and K xo K - 1 V,(K - 1) + 1
(mol frac from (mol frac), (mol frac),
Component Table 14) 70° F (Col. 2)(Col. 3) (Col. 3) - V, (Col.5) + 1 (Col. 4)/(Col. 6) (Col. 7)/(Col. 3)
Methane .3572 28.6399 10.23017 27.6399 14.96368 .6836 .0239
Ethane .1021 4.3679 .44596 3.3679 2.70146 .1651 .0378
Propane .1011 1.0985 .11106 0.0985 1.04976 .1058 .0963
I-Butane .0105 .4294 .00451 - .5706 .71173 .0063 .0148
N-Butane .0592 .3043 .01801 - .6957 .64853 .0278 .0913
I·Pentane .0091 .1238 .00113 - .8762 .55734 .0020 .0163
N·Pentane .0320 .0933 .00299 - .9067 .54194 .0055 .0590
Hexane .0370 .0329 .00122 - .9671 .51142 .0024 .0723
Heptane .0436 .0121 .00053 - .9879 .50091 .0011 .0870
Octane .0364 .0042 .00015 - .9958 .49692 .0003 .0733
Nonane .0280 .0013 .00004 - .9987 .49546 .0001 .0565
Decane + .1838 -1.0000 .49480 .3715
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

TABLE 19 - SINGLE-STAGE SEPARATION FLASH CALCULATIONS-FIRST-STAGE LIQUID TO STOCK TANK

Equations:
K x, Yst
K
Conditions of Flash: Liquid L, From 100 psig and 70° F To o psig and 70° F •
Estimated V st = .1507 , Lst .8493.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
x, Yst Xst
Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon
Analysis of K Analysis of Analysis of
F irst·Stage Equilibrium Stock· Tank Stock-Tank
Sep. Liquid Constant at Vst(K - 1) + 1 Vapor Vst liquid Lst
L,(mol frac o psig and K x, K- 1
Vst (Col.5) + 1
(mol frac), (mol frac),
Component from Table 14) 70° F (Col. 2)(Col. 3) (Col. 3) - (Col. 4)/(Col. 6) (Col. 7)/(Col. 3)
Methane .0239 217.0068 5.18646 216.0068 33.55222 .1546 .0007
Ethane .0378 31.3946 1.18672 30.3946 5.58047 .2127 .0068
Propane .0963 7.6667 .73830 6.6667 2.00467 .3681 .0480
I·Butane .0148 2.9184 .04319 1.9184 1.28910 .0335 .0115
N·Butane .0913 1.9796 .18074 0.9796 1.14763 .1575 .0796
I·Pentane .0163 .7993 .01303 .2007 .96975 .0134 .0168
N·Pentane .0590 .5755 .03395 .4245 .93603 .0363 .0630
Hexane .0723 .1918 .01387 .8082 .87820 .0158 .0823
Heptane .0870 .0602 .00524 .9398 .85837 .0061 .1014
Octane .0733 .0188 .00138 .9812 .85213 .0016 .0860
Nonane .0565 .0056 .00032 .9944 .85014 .0004 .0665
Decane+ .3715 -1.0000 .84930 .4374
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

MA Y. 1962 495
 TABLE 20 _ SINGLE·STAGE SEPARATION, CALCULATION OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH CALCULATION
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ( 11) (12)
y, x, y., X~,;.t Vapor
Equiv. (cu
Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. GPM' GPM"
Anal. of Anol. of Anal. of Anal. of Mol Wt.of Gal/Mol of ft vapor! V st ,
V, (mol L,(mol Vsdmol Ls,(mol Components Components gal comp.) V" GollMol of Lb/Molof
1,000(Col.2) 1,OOO(Col.4) LsI
frac from frac from frac from frac from (from (from from
(Col.8) Ls'
Table 18) Table 18) Table 19) Table 19) Table 14) Table 14) Table 14 (Col.8) (Col.5)(Col.7) (Col.5)(Col.6)
Component
Methane .6836 .0239 .1546 .0007 16.03 7.050 53.80 .0049 .0112
Ethane .1651 .0378 .2127 .0068 30.05 9.000 42.00 .0612 .2043
Propane .1058 .0963 .3681 .0480 44.06 10.370 36.60 2.891 10.057 .4978 2.1149
I-Butane .0063 .0148 .0335 .0115 58.08 12.340 30.80 .205 1.088 .1419 .6679
N-Butane .0278 .0913 .1575 .0796 58.08 11.920 31.80 .874 4.953 .9488 4.6232
I-Pentane .0020 .0163 .0134 .0168 72.09 13.840 27.40 .073 .489 .2325 1.2111
N"Pentane .0055 .0590 .0363 .0630 72.09 13.690 27.70 .199 1.310 .8625 4.5417
Hexane .0024 .0723 .0158 .0823 86 15.098 25.10 .096 .629 1.2426 7.0778
Heptane .0011 .0870 .0061 .1014 99 16.334 23.20 .047 .263 1.6563 10.0386
Octane .0003 .0733 .0016 .0860 110 17.742 21.36 .014 .075 1.5258 9.4600
Nenana .0001 .0565 .0004 .0665 123 19.337 19.60 .005 .020 1.2859 8.1795
Decane .3715 .4374 230 32.172 11.78 14.0720 100.6020
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 4.404 18.884 22.5322 148.7322

* GPM first-stage vapor: C a = 2.891, C 4 = 1.079, C s + = .434.

** GPM stock-tank vapor: Ca = 10.057, C4 = 6.041 , Cs + = 2.786 •

separation are 100 psig and 70°F, respectively The K- second-stage separator into the stock tank at atmospheric
values used are assumed to be pertinent to their respective pressure where vapor V" and liquid L" are separated
components at these conditions of pressure and tempera- while at equilibrium conditions.
ture. The hydrocarbon analyses of the single-stage separa- The separator conditions of pressure and temperature
tor liquid and gas are calculated by Table 18. The values chosen to illustrate the method of calculating two-stage
for V, and L, were found by trial and error to be 0.5052 separation are 100 psig and 70°F for the first-stage separa-
and 0.4948, respectively. The 100-psig separator liquid tor, and 10 psig and 70° F for the second-stage separator.
is then considered as original material, and flash calcula- The K-values used are pertinent to their respective com-
tions are made on its composition at O-psig and 70°F ponents at these conditions of pressure and temperature.
stock-tank conditions. The hydrocarbon-analysis calcula- The hydrocarbon analyses of the first-stage separator vapor
tions for the gas and liquid material are shown in Table 19. V, and liquid L, are calculated as shown in Table 18 under
The values for V" and L" were found by trial and error the single-stage separation example. The hydrocarbon an-
to be 0.1507 and 0.8493, respectively. The trial-and-error alyses of the second-stage vapor V, and liquid L, are calcu-
calculation is performed by assuming a value for V and lated as shown in Table 22 based on material of a hydro-
calculating for the summation of y, repeating the calcula- carbon analysis of the first-stage separator liquid from Table
tions until the value of the summation for y equals unity. 18. The values for V, and L, were found by trial and error
The hydrocarbon analysis of the liquid and gas separated to be 0.09684 and 0.90316, respectively. The hydrocarbon
at the 100-psig separator (from Table 18) and the hydro- analyses of the stock-tank vapor V" and liquid L" are
carbon analysis of the liquid and gas separated in the calculated as shown in Table 23 based on material of a
O-psig stock tank (from Table 19) are combined with the hydrocarbon analysis of the second-stage liquid from Table
preliminary data in Table 14 to <:alculate the GPM of 22. The values for V" and L" were found by trial and
both separator and stock-tank gas, and the gallons per mol error to be 0.0325 and 0.9675, respectively.
and pounds per mol of stock-tank liquid. These calcula- The hydrocarbon analyses of the second-stage vapor
tions are shown in Table 20. The final calculations of (1)
stock-tank oil gravity, (2) separator gas-oil ratio, (3)
stock-tank gas-oil ratio and (4) shrinkage factor are shown TABLE 21 - SINGLE-STAGE SEPARATION, CALCULATION
in Table 21. OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH CALCULATIONS
These data are determined by means of similar calcula- Gravity of Stock- Tank Oil:
tions utilizing appropriate K-values at other chosen separa- Ib/mol Ib 148.7322
tor pressures, and the results of all the calculations are gal 22.5322
6.6009 ;: 47° API
gal/mal
plotted in the form of curves. These curves (illustrated
by Figs. 42, 43 and 44) then permit interpolation of opti- Separator Gas-Oi I Ratio:
mum single-stage separator pressure conditions. Note that V, (cu ft/mol){gal/bbl} .5052 x 379 x 42
the O-psig conditions for the single-stage separator are the L, x Lst (gal/mol) .4948 x .8493 x 22.5322
same as the check calculations; those points are plotted 849 scf gas/STB oil.
in Figs. 42, 43 and 44. Stock-Tank Gas·Oi I Ratio:
Two-Sta·ge Separation Vs! (cu ft/mol}{gal/bbl) = .1507 x 379 x 42
Two-stage separation, illustrated in Fig. 45, is defined Lst (gal/mol) .8493 x 22.5322
as the process wherein original reservoir oil Xo (single 125 scf gas/STB oil.
phase) is produced to the first-stage (or high-pressure) Flash Shrinkage Factor:
separator where vapor V, and liquid L, are separated while
(gal/mol}{mollbbl) L, x Lst
at equilibrium conditions; the liquid L, (single phase) is lIBoil =
(gal/bbl)
produced from the first-stage separator into the second-
stage (or low-pressure) separator where vapor V, and 22.5322 x 2.9431 x .4948 x .8493
liquid L, are separated while at equilibrium conditions; 42
finally, the liquid L2 (single phase) is produced from the 0.6635 STB oilibbl orig. sample oil.

JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

and liquid from Table 22 and the stock-tank vapor and are 200 psig for the first-stage separator and 20 psig for
liquid from Table 23, together with preliminary data from the second-stage separator.
Table 14, are used to calculate GPM content of second- The shrinkage factor for optimum two-stage separation
stage and stock-tank vapor, and gallons per mol and is seen to be 0.6765 STB oiljbbl of reservoir oil (from
pounds per mol of stock-tank liquid. These calculations Fig. 49) and for optimum single-stage separation is seen
are shown in Table 24. to be 0.664 STB oiljbbl of reservoir oil (from Fig. 42) .
. Table 25 shows the final calculations of (1) stock-tank Therefore, two-stage separation provides 0.0125 bbl more
oil gravity, (2) 100-psig separator gas-oil ratio, (3) 10- oil in the stock-tank per barrel of reservoir oil pro-
psig separator gas-oil ratio, (4) stock-tank gas-oil ratio duced than does optimum single-stage separation. For a
and (5) shrinkage factor. given reserve, therefore, the economics of the problem will
These calculations are performed for various two-stage involve: (1) additional stock-tank oil recovered and its
pressures while holding the first-stage pressure constant, price (if allowables are not changed by the operations,
and the optimum second-stage pressure is determined for the added income will be deferred); (2) an increase in in-
the listed data. Curves representing plots of these data are come from increase in gravity, if such is the case; (3) a
shown in Figs. 46 through 49, with the sample calculated decrease in gas volume resulting from increases in oil
data points shown. To determine the optimum first- and volume and its price, if gas is being sold; and (4) additional
second-stage pressures, it is necessary to repeat the series
of calculations for other first-stage pressures. Plots of API
11
gravity and liB" data for stock-tank oil calculated for
first-stage pressures of 75, 100, 150, 200 and 250 psig
are shown in Figs. 48 and 49, respectively. From these
plots it is seen that, if high stock-tank oil gravity and low
shrinkage are desired, the optimum separator conditions
~ 10
'"
'"0..
....
'"
o'"
9

V
/
v -- ~

-
,
>-- .- - -- ..J
..J
-<

"
/" A <!I
.;.;
~ )
/
,I
-<
I

-
<!I
45

7 ...-<fil 6
~
c4 -

/
44
II '"
w
!!!
43 ..J
LL
I .....
rr
o
0
...z ~
...... .....
./ ...z.u c5<
V
B
3
...... .. ..
."
.,so
17
/ o
U

'"~ 2
I

v:".
,, ......... - . 1-·-3
C

..... -- -- --- ._-- -.._.- -- _

0
, 1- .. _
/ ; C -
I-- 4••
.62 J o
o 2C 40 60
--
!I:l
--(
---
100 120
I- - -
140 160 180
....
Cs.+;.

200
., 10 SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG

.600
Fig. 44-Effects of separator pressure on GPM content of
liberated gases, single-stage separation at 70°F (solid lines
represent stock-tank gas; dashed lines represent separator
SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG gas).
Fig. 42-Effects of separator pressure on
.gravity and volume of stock-tank oil (single-
stage separation at 70°F)-(A) residual oil
gravity, API at 60°F; and (B) l/B'i resid-
0

ual oil volume, STB/bbl saturated oil.

~ '>m
.......
t- .1<10
~\
I I
lL \ /
~ SEPARATOR RATIO
::;) .... /'"
o
0: ...
-It 1',
..... V rt t---
.so 0:
o o
(!)
t? ~~ r--STOCK-TANK
(!)
0:""
o
tt,., ./
V
1'--.-
-
R,(I~IO
1---
'00

so
~
Z
t!
FIRST STAGE
SEPARA,TlON

'.J l,

!
=
SECONDSTACE
SEPARATION

v,
I
+
,_~
L,

.........V
QUANT'n
0: ~
,"p"R.no
".PO ... NOCIQ!.HO
PH.'"
~~ 1<, .,. ,0
" '00 .. ~
.. 00
l&J '00
en StPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG Fig. 45-Schematic diagram showing flash separation of
Fig. 43-Effects of separator pressure on gas-oil ratio original reservoir liquid through two separator
(single-stage separation at 70°F). stages and stock tank.

MAY, 1962 497

cost of two-stage separation equipment over one-stage
separation equipment.
Should the gas separated at the surface be rich in con-
densate content (as the gas from this example indicates)
and if reserves of reservoir fluid from which gas is pro-
duced are fairly large, the operator may wish to determine
the economic feasibility of installing a natural-gasoline
plant to strip the condensate from the gas for sale. A prob-
lem of this nature may consider several plans with varying
degrees of decreasing the stock-tank oil recovery and in-
creasing the condensate content of the gas, the economics
of which involve such things as (1) the market value of
natural gasoline compared to the market value of stock-
tank oil, (2) the cost of the gasoline plant installation and
(3) the added revenue from the recovered natural gasoline.
Other problems of a similar nature are involved when pres-
sure maintenance operations are invoked to increase re-
covery by more efficient reservoir displacement or vapor·
ization.
SECOND-STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PS~

Calculating an Adjusted Hydrocarbon Analysis Fig. 46-Effects· of separator pressure on

gas-oil ratio (two-stage separation at 70°F,
There are certain types of problems involved in the first-stage separator pressure 100 psig).
manipulation of hydrocarbon analyses with which the
analyst must be able to cope in order to perform some of the original oil so obtained would have been used in the
phase-behavior calculations. One general type involves calculations of flash separation. It was assumed, however,
altering the original hydrocarbon analysis by adding vol- that the example calculations did not warrant such precise
umes of other hydrocarbons, and this problem is solved by treatment. In addition, the analysis of the 73 cu ft of gas
adding the hydrocarbons on a mol fraction basis. A typical was unknown, and an estimation would have been re-
example is involved with the example oil sample used quired. Pure methane is usually assumed in such cases.
here. If precision calculations of phase behavior had been This same type of calculation, however, is illustrated in
mandatory, it would have required adding the 73 cu ft of a gas-lift problem; the addition of gas-lift gas to the gas-
gas to the barrel of sample oil at sampling temperature lifted produced oil has a hydrocarbon analysis of the
and pressure on a mol basis, and the hydrocarbon analysis sample oil, and the gas used for gas-lift has th'; analysis of

TABLE 22-TWO·STAGE SEPARATION FLASH CALCULATIONS-FIRST·STAGE TABLE 23-TWO·STAGE SEPARATION flASH CAlCULATIONS-SECOND·STAGE
LIQUID TO SECOND·STAGE SEPARATOR LIQUID TO STOCK TANK
E"""ltons: '"',
Condittons01 Fla1h: U""idL, IOOp"'l0nd70°F T"lOpsiIlQnd70"F. Candllion. of Flosh: L,qu,d L2 From 101'''9 ond 70° f To Op",gond70'f.
E.timated Yz - .09684. L2 ~ .90316. Estimaled V", - .0325, L"

'-.,"
(2) (3) (4) 1" (6) (7) (8,
-, -, ii' 12'
-,
13)
'" '",,,
Hyd.oca.bon
Anoly.is of , "
Hydrocarbon
Anoly.i,,,1
Hydrocarbon
"n"ly.is,,1
Hydroca,b<>n
AnalysIs 01 K
Hydrocarbon
Anolys .. of
Hyd.oca,b""
Analy~i~ of
FltSI.Stog. EqUlhb"uIh ~.cond·SlO1I. s....::ond.St0'l. Slack-Tank

", ,
5",,<>nd·5Io 9" Equ,lib"um SI<>ck·Tonk
S.p.Liq.L,
(mol /'0" from
Conslanl at
10 P~'9 and
'" , , V 2 (K
Vapor V2
(mollrac),
Liqu.dl z
(mol froc).
Sep.L'q.L 2 Cansl"n' o'
, , '''',,(I(
I), I
Vap'" V~, Liquid L s '
_(ompo",,'" ~ 70"F (C"I.2)(C"I.3) (Co!.3)- I V2 (Col.5),1 (Col. 4)/(Col. 6) (Cot.7)/(Col.3) Compan.nl
(m<>1 f'a" Irom
~
Op.igand
~
'"
(Cot. 2)(Col, 3) (Col.]) - 1 V,,(Col,51+ I
(mol f,,,c),
(C"I.4l/(C<>I.6)
(mol (.DC),
(Col.7l/(eol.!!
Methone .0239 129.3522 3.09152 128.3522 13.42963 .2302 ~ M.than. .0018 217.0068 ,39061 216.0068 8.02022 .0487 .0002
Ethane .0378 18.7449 .70856 17.7449 2.71842 .2607 .0119 E,hon. .0139 31.3946 .43638 30.3946 1.98782 .2195 .0070
P,op"",, .0963 4.6356 .44641 3.6356 1.35207 .3301 .0712 P<opane .0712 7.6667 .54587 6.6667 1.21667 .4485 .0585
j.8ul" .... .0148 1.7773 .02630 0.7773 1.07527 .024,5 ,0138 I.Bulan. .013B 2.9184 .04027 1.9184 1.06235 .0379 .0130
N.B"t .. " .. .0913 1.2267 .11200 0.2267 1.02195 .1096 .0893 N·Bulan. .0B93 1.9796 .17678 0.9196 1.031B4 .1713 .0865
I.P.nt" .. e .0163 .4960 .00808 -.5040 .95119 .0085 .0171 I.P.nlane .0171 .7993 .01361 -.2007 .9934B .0138 .0112
N.P e """,.. .0590 .3522 .02078 -.6478 .93727 .0222 .0629 N.Penlan" .0629 .5755 .03620 -.4245 .98620 .0367 .0638
H"xone .0723 .1182 .00855 -.8818 .91461 .0093 .0791 H"xan. .0791 .191Q .01517 -.8082 .97373 .0156 .0812
.0870 -.9612
Heptane
0<;10"" .0733
.0388
.0123
.00338
.00090 -.9877
.90692
.90435
.0037
.0010
.0959
.0811
H"pl"n" .0959
.0811
.0602 .00507 _.9398
.9812
.96946
.96811
.00"
.0016
.0989
.0838
Oclan .. .DI88 .00152
Nona .... .0565 .0033 .00019 -.9967 .90348 .0002 .0625 Nonan .. .0625 .0056 .(l(l035 -,9944 ,96768 .0004 .0646
.3715. -1.0000 .90316
0""0"" ' -~ D.can .. + ~ -1.0000 .96750 .:.~
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

TABLE 24 - TWO-STAGE SEPARATION, CALCULATION OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH CALCULATIONS
(1) (2) (4) (3) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ( 11) (12)
Y2 X2 Yst xsI Vapor
Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. Hydrocarb. Equiv. (cu
It/gal GPM* GPM**
Anal. of Anal. of Anal.of Anal.of Mol Wt.of .Gal/Molof
comp.) V2 , Vst, Gal/Mol of Lb/Molof
V2 (mol L2 (mol Vst (mol Lst (mol Components Components
frae from fraefrom frae from frae from (from (from from l,OOO(Col.2) l,OOO(Col.4) Lst Lst
ComE:onent Table 22) Table 22) Table 23) Table 23) Table 14) Table 14) Table 14 (Col.8) (Col.8) (Col.5)(Col.?) (Col.5)(Col.6)
Methane .2302 .0018 .0487 .0002 16.03 7.050 53.80 .0014 .0032
Ethane .2607 .0139 .2195 .0070 30.05 9.000 42.00 .0630 .2104
Propane .3301 .0712 .4485 .0585 44.06 10.370 36.60 9.019 12.254 .6066 2.5775
I-Butane .0245 .0138 .0379 .0130 58.08 12.340 30.80 .?95 1.231 • 1604 .7550
N-Butane .1096 .0893 .1713 .0865 58.08 11.920 31.80 3.447 5.387 1.0311 5.0239
I-Pentane .0085 .0171 .0138 .0172 72.09 13.840 27.40 .310 .504 .2380 1.2399
N-Pentane .0222 .0629 .0367 .0638 72.09 13.690 27.70 .801 1.325 .8734 4.5993
Hexane .0093 .0791 .0156 .0812 86 15.098 25.10 .371 .622 1.2260 6.9832
Heptane .0037 .0959 .0060 .0989 99 16.334 23.20 .159 .259 1.6154 9.7911
Octane .0010 .0811 .0016 .0838 110 17.742 21.36 .047 .075 1.4868 9.2180
Nonane .0002 .0625 .0004 .0646 123 19.337 19.60 .010 .020 1.2492 7.9458
Decane+ .4114 .4253 230 32.172 11.78 13.6828 97.8190
1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 14.959 21.677 22.2341 146.1664
* GPM second"stage vapor: Ca 9.019 C 4 = 4.242 Cs = 1.698.
** GPM stock-tank vapor: Ca = 12.254 , C 4 =6.618, C s = 2.805 •

·1911 JOl·H.'.\/. OF PETHOLEl ~ TECH:\OI.OI;\

th~ gas-cap gas in equilibrium with the oil at sampling produced material as reservoir pressure drops and retro-
conditions of reservoir temperature and pressure, as calcu- grade condensation occurs in the reservoir; thus, the con-
lated in Table 13. It will also be assumed that the gas-lift densate study must be guided by premises based on such
ratio is 3 Mcf/bbl of reservoir oil. The calculation of the changes.
hydrocarbon analysis of the combined mixture is shown
in Table 26. The 3 Mcf gas/bbl of reservoir oil ratio is Extending the Hydrocarbon Analysis
equivalent to 2.9425 mols gas/mol of reservoir oil.
A problem which often confronts the analyst is that of
In oil reservoirs where pressure drops substantially, such
extending the hydrocarbon analysis from one which groups
as is typically the case with dissolved-gas-drive reservoirs,
all heavy components together, such as hexane-plus com-
the average produced GOR becomes very high compared
ponents, to one which breaks the heavy group into indi-
to the dissolved GOR of the original reservoir oil. The
vidual heavy components. The hydrocarbon analysis of the
combined material thus produced is substantially altered
in composition from that of the original reservoir oil. This
I I
is true because of the large amounts of methane and ethane
which comprise the gas that has evolved incident to pres-
/
V ;~A;t~;p~:r~~RM :~~~~URE !
sure drop in the reservoir. 48
While the surface separation calculations illustrated here ~-... ~-~

------- -
~ -~~
r-- ~~;; .::::"~
--- ----;-
apply to the original oil mixture being produced to the
~ -----
~.

surface, they do not apply to a higher-GOR oil and gas

........
------ ~
/"-"
produced later in the life of such a reservoir because the
oil that was originally combined with a substantial portion
of the subsequently produced gas remains behind at reser-
IL

..,
<>

..... 47
Il/"
II
I

voir conditions. Oils that later deviate to a troublesome I

degree from the calculated behavior of early reservoir life
a: I
I
~
,:: I
generally are those which have reservoir temperatures near c---'
the critical and which contain a high percentage of inter-
mediate components such as propane, butanes and pen-
..
I-
;;
'"
C>
~ STAGE
20 PS1G ~ OPTIMUM SECOND
SEPARA7R PRESSUY

46
tanes. ..J
(5 I
LEGiND
Therefore, additional study and laboratory data may be ::i::::> FIRST-STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURES
required to analyze such a reservoir material properly. A _ _ _ _ 75 PSIG
~ t----- B - 1 0 0 PSIG -
However, the practice has been to treat such oils as unusual W
C _ - 1 5 0 PSIG
cases, using the techniques developed herein which apply '" D - - - 200 PSIG
E - - __ 250 PSIG
to the bulk of the oils normally encountered in practice. 45 1 I I
The' general premise does not apply to condensate materials m m ~ • ~ • ro
because drastic changes occur to the composition of the SECOND-STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG

Fig. 48-Effects of separator pressure on gravity of stock-

tank oil (two-stage separation at 70°F).
14
LEGEND,

-- - ..J
_ ___ FIRST·STAGE SEPARATOR GAS
13 - - SECOND-STAGE SEPARATOR GAS
_ _ STOCK·TANK GAS 0
/ .680
12 0 I I
.............
u.
~11
r--.. --.. c,
ILJ
~ -"".l2
~ __.L 200 PSIG = OPTIMUM FIRST
STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURE
a::
'""-w
~ 10
z
o
..J
::i
~
9
""
::l
~
en
..J
III
.670
£.~
t/~I~
Art.4..

-~~ - -- ---.~
-S'o+
..
"r-..:::, •

"'.....
.... ...... .............. ~
.... - .--
.......-:: E

..
Vi
~
C)
8
\
" \.
III
.....
III
t-
..:.

II
I LOCUS OF OPTIMUM FIRST
STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURES
-- A'"'

..'"
o 7
w
I- " en "
W 6 I' c,
iLl
.6W
"
~~
!E .......
..J

go; 5
t\ i'-
I
~
::l I D
",:0 =
PSIG OPTIMUM SECOND
STAGE SEPARATOR 7ESSURE

I-
\, .... ..J
0
Z
\': 4
'C, > LEGEND,
z

",
FIRST-STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURES
A ____
o oJ
u 7S PSIG
c, (5 .650
'" 3 ~ B - 100 PSIG
"- C,+ C _ _ 150 PSIG

~
C)
.... 1' oJ o -- __ 200 PSIG
....... <t E - - __ 250 PSIG
_ _ c,
"'t ::l
~~ -- -- --
--- --- - - - c, 0
Cst en
ILJ
- -< ~
C,+ a:: .640
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 o 10 m 30 ~
• 70

SECOND·STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG

Fig. 47-Effects of separator pressure on GPM of liberated
!e SECOND-STAGE SEPARATOR PRESSURE: PSIG
gases (two-stage separation at 70°F; first-stage separator Fig. 49--Effects of separator pressure on residual oil
pressure 100 psig). volume (two-stage separation at 70°F).

MAY, 1962 499

 TABLE 25 - TWO-STAGE SEPARATION CALCULATION 70Q
OF FLUID DATA FROM RESULTS OF FLASH CALCULATIONS

Gravity af Stack-Tank Oil:

Ib/mol _ 146.1664 _ 65740 = 477° API 600
gal/mol - 22.2341 - . -.
100-psig Separator Gas-Oil Ratio: 36.95 CC of C 19+
V, (cu ft/mol)(gal/bbl) (.5052)(379) (42)
500
L, x L2 x Lst (gal/mol) (.4948) (.90316) (.9675) (22.2341)
837 cu ft/STB oil.
10-psig Separator Gas-Oi I Ratio: ou.
W 400
V 2 (cu ft/mol)(gal/bbl) (.09684) (379) (42)
'">-
::>
L2 x Lst (gal/mol) (.90316) (.9675) (22.2341) <
79 cu ft/STB oil. '"
w
""'"w 300
Stoc\,c-Tank Gas-Oil Ratio: >-
V st (cu ft/mol)(gal/bbl)
(.03250)(379)(42) = 24 cu ft/STB oil
Lst (gal/mal) (.9675)(22.2341)
200
Flash Shrinkage Factor:
(gal/mol) (mol/bbl) L, x L2 x Lst
1/ Boi! =
(gal/bbl) LEGEND
100
(22.2341) (2.9431) (.4948) (.90316) (.9675) • ASH. . DISTILLATION DATA
+ BOILING POINT
42
0.6736 STB oil/bbl orig. sample oil.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

sample oil is assumed for purposes of illustration; the
hexane-plus fraction is grouped together and is equal to
0.3288, as shown in Table 27. The heavy fraction is
broken down into individual components up to C 19 +. The
breakdown is made on the basis of the ASTM distillation
curve shown in Fig. 50, plotted from the ASTM data of
Table 5. * The process involves determining the volume of
each component per 100 cc of charge stock of residual oil.
The component volumes are determined based on the
known mid-boiling points of the components from published
data. With the volume of each component and its specific
gravity known, the weight of each component is deter-
mined; with the molecular weight of each component
known, the mol per cent of each component in the hexane-
*Jour. Pet. Tech. (Jan., 1962) 16.
PERCENT DISTILLED, CC PER 100 cc
Fig. 50-ASTM distillation curve of residual oil showing
mid-boiling points and volumes of hydrocarbons in mixture.
plus fraction can then be calculated. The extended hydro-
carbon analysis is then obtained by combining the hydro-
carbon analysis of the hexane-plus fraction on the basis of
0.3288 fraction of the total. Complete calculations illustrat-
ing the method are shown in Table 27.
Effects of Using Heat to Break Emulsions
In many cases, it is necessary to heat oils to break water-
oil emulsions. Volatile materials may be lost to such a
considerable extent that the gravity of the stock-tank oil
is severely reduced. This is particularly true if the heating
is done before separation. The effect of such operations

TABLE 26-CALCULATION OF ORIGINAL HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS OF A GAS-LIFT SYSTEM

3 Mef 3000/(cu ft/mol)

Data: Combining GOR
bbl reservoir oil 5.615 (mol/l00 Ib)/100 (cu ft/lb)
3000/379 mols gas-lift gas
2.9425
5.615 x 1.2907/100(.02463)* mol reservoir oil
(l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Mol Hydrocarbon
Mols Gas Component/ Analysis
Camponent/ 3.9425 Mols Combined
Reservoir Oi I Gas-L ift Gas MoiOil, Mixture, Mixture,
Component (mol frac)** (Mol frac)*** 2.9425(Col.3) (Col. 2) + (Col.4) (Col. 5)/£ (Col. 5)
Methane .3572 .8087 2.3795 2.7367 .6941
Ethane .1021 .0976 .2872 .3893 .0987
Propane .1011 .0520 .1530 .2541 .0645
I-Butane .0105 .0105 .0027
N-Butane .0592 .0215 .0633 .1225 .0311
I-Pentane .0091 .0091 .0023
N-Pentane .0320 .0073 .0215 .0535 .0136
Hexane .0370 .0038 .0112 .0482 .0122
Heptane .0436 .0030 .0088 .0524 .0119
Octane .0364 .0016 .0047 .0411 .0104
Nonane .0280 .0008 .0024 .0304 .0077
Decane + .1838 .0037 .0109 .1947 .0494
---
1.0000 1.0000 2.9425 3.9425 1.0000
* Adjusted value. See Table 14.
** Assumed analysis of sample reservoir oil.
*** Assumed calculated value of original equilibrium gas-cap gas.

500 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 TABLE 27-EXTENSION OF HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS BY USE OF ASTM DISTILLATION DATA

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

Hydrocarbon Specific Extended
Analysis Vol/l00 cc Gravity gm/l00cc Mol Wt. Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon
Sample Oil, C6+ Frae. (from C6 + Frae., (from Analysis Analysis
Xo(mol frae) (from ASTM Published (Col. 3)(Col. 4) Published Mol/l00 ce (mal fro c), (mol frae),
Component Lab Data and Fig. 50) Data) (.999)*** Data) (Col. 5)/(Col. 6) (Col. 7)/I(Col. 7) (.3288)(Col.8)
Methane .3572 .3572
Ethane .1021 .1021
Propane .1011 .1011
I-Butane .0105 .0105
N-Butane .0592 .0592
I-Pentane .0091 .0091
N-Pentane .0320 .0320
Hexane .3288* 6.25 .6640 4.146 86.2 .0672 .1474 .0485
Cut C 7 7.30 .6880 5.017 100.2 .0501 .1099 .0361
Cs 7.90 .7070 5.580 114.2 .0489 .1073 .0353
C9 7.20 .7220 5.193 128.3 .0405 .0889 .0292
Cl0 5.30 .7340 3.886 142.3 .0273 .0599 .0197
Cn 4.20 .7471 3.135 156.3 .0201 .0441 .0145
C12 4.05 .7560 3.059 170.3 .0180 .0395 .0130
C13 3.95 .7630 3.011 184.4 .0163 .0358 .0118
C14 3.90 .7690 2.996 198.4 .0151 .0331 .0109
C 15 3.35 .7760 2.597 212.4 .0122 .0268 .0088
C 16 3.50 .7780 2.720 226.4 .0120 .0263 .0086
Cn 3.55 .7820 2.773 240.5 .0115 .0252 .0083
C1S 2.60 .7860 2.042 254.5 .0080 .0176 .0058
C 19 + 36.95 .7896** 29.147 268.5 .1086 .2382 .0783
= .4558 1.0000 1.0000
* C 6 + fraction.
** C 19 + data for normal C19'
*** 1 ee water weighs .999 gm at 60° F.

can be calculated using flash calculations, the only require- = 3,140,000 STB oil,
ment being that the analyst know the hydrocarbon analysis Difference in Recovery = 940,000 STB more oil
of the mixture being heated and the temperature and pres- from 2(b) than 2(a).
sure of the material when separated. Separator Shrinkage Problem
Assumptions:
General Oil-Shrinkage Problems 1. Same reservoir as in "Reservoir Shrinkage" problem.
The operator encounters two main problems regarding 2. Separator Producing Conditions-(a) O-psig trap-
the economic production of oil reservoirs-( 1) the prob- pressure operations permit stock-tank oil shrinkage l/Bai!
lem of determining proper reservoir operating conditions to of 0.603 to occur; and (b) optimum separator pressure
provide minimum shrinkage of oil in the reservoir, and operations permit stock-tank oil shrinkage ljBo" of 0.664
(2) the problem of adjusting separator conditions to pro- to occur.
vide minimum stock-tank shrinkage of produced oil. The 3. Reservoir displacement under both operations results
following two sample calculations illustrate these two prop- in 50 per cent of oil-filled pore space remaining with .95
lems in a general way. shrinkage to reservoir oil.
Solution:
Reservoir Shrinkage Problem
5,000,000]
Assumptions: Recovery under 2 (a) = [ 10,000,000
.95
1. Reservoir Volume = 10 million bbl original oil-filled X 0.603
pore space. = 2,850,000 STB oil,
2. Abandonment Conditions-(a)low-pressure primary Recovery under 2 (b) = [ J 0,000,000 5,0~g;000 1
operations, 50 per cent of oil-filled pore space remains with
differential oil shrinkage Bo/Bai = 0.75; and (b) high- X 0.664
pressure gas or water-injection operations, 50 per cent of 3,140,000 STB oil,
oil-filled pore space remains with differential oil shrink- Difference in Recovery = 290,000 STB more oil
age Bo/Boi = 0.95. from 2(b) than 2(a).
3. Surface Separator Shrinkage l/B u;, = 0.664. It is important to note that the economic justification for
operation under optimum conditions may be somewhat re-
Solution: duced or reversed if the separated gas is delivered to a
5,000,000] gasoline plant where the remaining liquefiable hydrocar-
Recovery under 2 (a) = [ 10,000,000 - .75 bons will be recovered.
X 0.664
Acknowledgment
= 2,200,000 STB oil, The author wishes to thank his associates, J. D. Lindner
5,000,000] and T. G. Roberts, for their advise and assistance during
Recovery under 2 (b) = [ 10,000,000 - .95
the preparation of the five Technical Articles in the Funda-
X 0.664 mentals of Reservoir Fluids series. ***
MAY, 1962 501