SPE 107803
Generation of a Compositional Model to Simulate EOR Processes for the Complex
Fluids System of the Carito-Mulata Field, Venezuela
F. Rodríguez, L. López G., and J. Bello, PDVSA, and F. Skoreyko, Computer Modelling Group
Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2007 SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15–18 April 2007.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, Texas 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The Carito-Mulata field is located in eastern Venezuela. This
field is ranked as a giant oil producer because of its 240,000
STB/D current oil production and its 6.5 MMMSTB original
oil in place. It is possible to observe a significant
compositional gradient from seventy-five fluid samples taken
at different depths, over a column of fluids of approximately
4000 feet thick. This complex system changes from a gas
condensate at the top to an under saturated black oil down the
flank. The depth of the Gas-oil contact is estimated at 14,040
feet.
The Carito-Mulata field has been operated and
characterized traditionally in four blocks (Central, West, North
and South). The fundamental goal of this study is to establish a
compositional model that can represent areally and vertically
the complex fluid system using an Equation of State (EOS),
which represents a big challenge considering the huge number
of laboratory experiments. This EOS will be used for EOR
simulations under gas and nitrogen injection processes.
The Peng-Robinson EOS was used to match the PVT
experiments. Included in the matching parameters was the
variation of the saturation pressure of the gas condensate due
to nitrogen injection. A swelling test using black oil crude
with the injection of gas condensate was also fitted, as well as
stacked core miscible experiments of gas condensate displaced
by nitrogen injection. Finally, a set of PVT tables were
generated for the compositional numerical reservoir simulator.
The most important result that has been obtained of this
project is to prove that a single Equation of State can model
the complex thermodynamic behavior of three areas that were
previously modeled as isolated. Considering that the field
could be under nitrogen or natural gas injection, the Equation
of State generated in this study will allow the numerical
simulation to predict the impact of these processes on the
ultimate hydrocarbon recovery.
Introduction
The Carito-Mulata field is located in the Eastern Basin of
Venezuela, about 50 km west from city of Maturín, Monagas
state. It is defined an asymmetrical anticline witch is
characterized by a production of fluids whose composition
varies with depth, from the condensate gas, at the crestal part
of the structure, to under-saturated black oil in deep areas.
The field is situated in the northern part of Monagas State,
between the El Furrial and Santa Barbara oilfields. Its
production started in 1988 with the MUC-1E well. The
reservoirs present a considerable level of heterogeneity as a
result of a combination of complex geological events,
including compressional tectonics, faulting and a diversity of
sedimentary environments.
At the present time, the central and western blocks of the
field are subject to natural gas injection, the northern block
undergoes water injection while the southern one flows
naturally.
Despite of the good definition of the fluid distribution
throughout the field, the actual compositional modeling was
still carried out in an isolated way previous to this study.
In order to create an integrated simulation model taking
into account the observed communication between blocks, it is
indispensable to have a correct areal and vertical fluid
characterization based on revision and validation of the
available laboratory data. These include PVT studies,
production data, RFT logs, etc. In case of EOR process
modeling, it is necessary to also consider the special fluid tests
(swelling test and displacement measures on cores) which
permit the evaluation of the injected gas effect on the original
fluid properties in the reservoir, particularly at the saturation
pressure.
The compositional modeling which is the subject of the
present paper was aimed at reproducing the fluid behavior
under reservoir and surface conditions through the equation of
state (EOS) and experimental data. The objective is optimizing
the field exploitation strategies considering the injection of
nitrogen or natural gas.
Methodology
The method used for the creation of the compositional model
so as to simulate EOR processes in the Carito-Mulata field is
the following:
1. Inventory of the PVT Studies
2. Validation of the Available Laboratory Information
3. Analysis of Areal and Vertical Fluid Behavior
2 SPE 107803
4. Characterization of the Heavy Fraction
5. Construction of the Compositional Model
6. Matching of Special Fluid Tests
7. Calculation of the Compositional Gradient
8. Exporting the Results to the Numerical Reservoir
Simulator
Next, there is a description of each one of the previously
mentioned steps and the results of its application for the study
area.
Inventory of the PVT Studies
The information related to the study of laboratory fluid
phase behavior for the Carito-Mulata field, has been compiled
and classified by blocks and type of fluids. To date, this field
has 75 PVT studies, which are distributed in different areas or
blocks (Figure 1).
Validation of the Available Laboratory Information
The data reported in the PVT studies must be subjected to
a validation process, beginning with the evaluation of the
representativity of the samples of fluids and internal
consistency of the laboratory experiments. This was to obtain
the suitable representation of the thermodynamic behavior of
the present fluids in the field.
As results of the validation process, there were found 39
PVT studies as representative and consistent for the four
blocks of the Carito-Mulata field: 15 of them for the Central
area, 14 Western, 06 Northern and 04 South.
Representativity of the Fluid Samples:
To guarantee a sample of fluid with the same
characteristics of the original reservoir fluid, it is essential to
verify its representativity which is verified by checking the
following aspects:
Stable Conditions of the Well[1]:
One of the most important criteria of assuring the monophasic
sampling at the bottom of the well, it is to stabilize the bottom
hole flowing pressure and production rate conditions during
the sampling. The procedure consists in monitoring the
production rate and the pressure in the wellhead, varying the
choke size, until stable conditions are reached. If these stable
conditions aren’t met, the sample obtained is not
representative of the original fluid in the reservoir and should
be discarded.
Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure[1]:
The flowing bottom hole pressure must be bigger than the
saturation pressure to guarantee the monophasic conditions of
the fluid. In case of wellhead sampling, the same condition
should be fulfilled.
Temperature [1]:
The temperature used in the PVT experiments must be the
same as that of the reservoir, with a deviation of less than 3%.
Gas Oil Ratio (GOR):
The GOR used to recombine the gas and liquid samples of the
separator in the PVT experiments must be similar to the GOR
obtained under stable conditions in the well (maximum
deviation of 5%). The GOR of the high-pressure separator
must be used, which should be corrected in the laboratory for
any liquid losses.
Conditions of the Separator:
The sampling of liquid and gas must be at the same
pressure and temperature condition to guarantee the
thermodynamic equilibrium of the samples. It is recommended
to take them from the high pressure separator. If the samples
are taken at different times, the conditions of separation
perhaps may not be the same, and for this, the recombined
sample will not reproduce the composition of the original fluid
from the reservoir.
Sample Quality[1]:
The percentage of contaminants in the samples must not
exceed 1%.
Mathematical Recombination:
This technique consists of comparing the experimental
composition obtained by chromatography, with the calculated
through the compositions of the liquid and gas from the
separator at the same conditions of sampling (pressure and
temperature).
This process the following criteria[2] must be fulfilled:
9 The difference in the percentage of error of the molar
fraction of the heavy component must not be more
than 5%.
9 The difference in the percentage of error of the molar
fraction of methane (C1) must not be more than 2%.
If these conditions are not fulfilled, the experimental
composition is not valid and the experiments of constant
composition expansion (CCE), differential liberation (DL) or
constant volume depletion (CVD), are not representative of
the thermodynamic behavior of the original fluid from the
reservoir
Thermodynamic Equilibrium of the Recombined
Samples[1]:
To validate the conditions of equilibrium of the liquid and
gas from the separator, the Hoffman technique is used. This
method permits to check the consistency of the equilibrium
constants of a sample, through the composition of the fluids of
the separator. This technique is only applied to surface
samples and consists of a plot of the log (Ki*P) against the
Hoffman F factor, which is a function of the component
properties. The equations utilized in this technique are as
follows:
Yi
Ki = Eq. 1
Xi
bi
F(b ) = Eq. 2
⎛ 1 1⎞
⎜ − ⎟
⎝ Tbi T ⎠
bi =
(LogPci − Log14.7 ) Eq. 3
⎛ 1 1 ⎞
⎜ − ⎟
⎝ Tbi Tci ⎠
The graphed information must generate a straight line.
Deviations of this tendency will indicate non-equilibrium
conditions and so, the sample must be discarded.
SPE 107803
Evaluation of the Internal Consistency of Laboratory
Studies:
The internal consistency of each PVT study must be
determined through revision and analysis of the following
tests:
Hoffman Technique, Molar and Compositional Balance of
the CVD Test (Samples of Gas Condensate and Volatile Oil):
The technique is applied to every pressure level in samples
of gas condensate or volatile oil at surface. The consistency is
obtained when each graphed pressure level shows a straight
line and all the lines begin to converge. It is considered that
the experiment is inconsistent when all the indicated steps
show a tendency far from a straight line and do not converge.
When crossing between curves occurs, it means that the
balance conditions are not reached. When this behavior occurs
only at low pressure in the last stages of the experiment, the
first steps may be used and the samples can be still classified
as a consistent experiment, until where the pressures have the
thermodynamic balance.
The Figures 2 and 3 show how the technique works for a
sample of gas condensate.
Lineage of Function Y (Black Oil)
To verify the internal consistency of the CCE experiment
the values of Function Y with pressure should be graphed. If
the oil contains a small quantity of non hydrocarbon
components and the laboratory measurements are done with
precision, a straight line should be obtained [1].
P − Pb
P(V − 1)
Vb
Function Y= Eq.4
On the other hand, the validity of this test allows the
verification that the bubble point pressure determined in the
PVT analysis corresponds to the relative volume data
supplied, Figure 4. The behavior of the pressure near to the
bubble point can be a sign that experimental value of the
bubble point pressure is in some way underestimated or
overestimated. If the bubble point pressure is above the real
value, then the graphed points should be above the defined
curve with the values away from the bubble point. If the
bubble point pressure is under estimated, the Y Function
values near the bubble point tend to decrease.
Material Balance Test (Black Oil):
This test consists of verifying if the dissolved gas oil ratio
(Rs) of the DL test is equal to the calculation from the material
balance equation. This is based on data of oil density, oil
formation volume factor (Bo) as a function of pressure and the
specific gravity of the liberated gas in each stage, supposing
that the calculation reference is a liter of residual oil. The
difference between the two values of Rs must not exceed 5%
as shown in Figure 5.
Density Test (Black Oil):
This test consists in comparing the oil density at the bubble
point calculated from separator data versus oil density at the
3
bubble point obtained from the DL test. The difference must
not exceed 5%.
Analysis of Areal and Vertical Fluid Behavior
The areal and vertical PVT validated information
distribution is presented in figure 6 and 7, where it can be
observed that sufficient information exists to obtain a reliable
thermodynamic characterization of the fluid column of the
Central, North and West areas of the Carito-Mulata field. For
the Carito-Mulata Southern area, only four valid PVT studies
were obtained, of which three of them corresponded to
different production intervals in the same well.
Figure 8 shows the behavior as a function of depth of the
saturation pressure determined by the validated PVT Analysis
of the fluid samples, which were taken from the different areas
of the Carito-Mulata field.
It can be clearly observed that two well defined tendencies
exist with respect to the fluid column. The first of them
(labeled 1) is defined from the saturation pressures
corresponding to Carito-Mulata Central, Carito- Mulata West
and Carito- Mulata North areas. The complex behavior of the
fluid column can be observed as it varies from a gas
condensate zone in the upper section, passing through a
transition zone of volatile oil, and finally to a black oil zone in
the lowest part of the structure. It can also be observed that a
branch of this trend exists in the volatile oil zone moves
toward the black oil zone (labeled 1’). However, there is no
either a continual vertical or areal tendency that can be
modeled in this study. The last tendency (labeled 2), even
though it is not well defined due to scarce laboratory data
corresponds to Southern area of the Carito-Mulata field, of
which can be only observed the behavior of an undersaturated
black oil.
This leads us to presume that the thermodynamic behavior
of the fluid column in the Central, West and North areas of
Carito-Mulata field can be reproduced through one single
tuning of EOS. However, the south block will be considered as
another thermodynamic zone for which will do an independent
adjustment. This is also supported by the visualization of the
behavior of the Rs and the API Gravity (Figure 9 and Figure
10) in which can be observed a different behavior of these
properties for the South area with respect to the tendency for
the Central, West, and North areas of Carito-Mulata field.
It is important to mention that at the top of the structure of
the Carito-Mulata North area the PVT information for the
thermodynamic characterization is not available, so that
production data will be used to estimate the behavior of the
fluid properties above -14500 Feet (TDVss). The wells Carito-
33 and Carito-72 have been selected because they are located
upward the Carito-Mulata North structure. The GOR and the
API Gravity of the production tests fell within the general
tendency obtained from the validated PVT analysis as shown
in Figures 9 and 10. It can be observed that the production
behavior of the wells located in the upper section of the North
area of the Carito-Mulata field follow the general tendency of
the Central and West areas of the field.
Characterization of the Heavy Fraction
The heavy fraction of hydrocarbon samples is made up of
compounds that play an important role in the behavior phases
4 SPE 107803

of the fluid mixture, for which it is necessary to make an
adequate characterization.
Analysis of Fractions C7+ and C20+ Molecular Weight
Behavior:
It is well known that the laboratory procedure to determine
the molecular weight (MW) of the heavy fractions generates a
degree of uncertainty in the final reported value in the PVT
analysis. This difference could be as much as 10% for fraction
C7+ and up to 20% for C20+ in some cases.
Figure 11 shows the variation versus depth of the
measurements made in the laboratory for MW of fractions
C7+ and C20+ from fluid samples that are representative of
the fluids found in the Carito-Mulata field. A great variation of
the distribution of the MW of C20+ can be observed. This
behavior led us to think about the possible general
inconsistency of the determined values of this fraction.
However, the MW of C7+ fraction shows a defined behavior
that can help with a better characterization of the variation of
fluid properties with depth, which is defined on the last stages.
Table 1 shows some of the characteristics of the PVT that
have been selected to make the tuning of the EOS in the
different areas of the Carito-Mulata field.
Mass Fractions and Molar Fractions:
The molar compositions of the fluids are determined and
defined with mass fractions as a base obtained in the
laboratory. This eases the modification or the molecular
weight tuning of fraction C7+, which will be used as a tuning
parameter that is associated with a high weight and degree of
uncertainty.
The molar fractions (Zi) have been calculated from the
molecular weight of i component (MWi), using the following
equation:
wi / MWi
zi = Eq. 6
∑ wi / MWi
In the same way, the mass fractions (wi) have been calculated
from the molar fractions (Zi):

z i MWi
Consistency of the Fraction C7+ Molecular Weight: wi = Eq. 7
The errors of the molar compositions of the fluid samples ∑ wi / MWi
correspond largely to errors of measurement of the molecular
weight in the laboratory. The Watson characterization factor For example, table 2 shows the molecular weights that
(Kw) is useful when trying to detect inconsistencies in the have been tuned for the PVT of the well Carito-19 and C7+
values of the molecular weight. It is stated that this factor is molar fraction, which increased 6.3%.
related to the molecular weight (MW) and the specific gravity
(γ) of the fluid in the following way: Generalized Characterization of the Heavy Fractions:
The molar fraction of the C7+ component has been divided
K W ≈ 4.5579 MW 0.15178 γ 0.84573 Eq.5 in three pseudo components, using the Three Parameters
Gamma Distribution Function, which describes the relation
The fluid samples of the Carito-Mulata field have been between the molar fraction and the molecular weight of the
characterized with KW ≈ 11.73 for the C7+ fractions. The heavy fractions in the following way:
selected data is located in a range ±1% of the deviation with
respect to the determined Kw factors. Thus, a good correlation
between the molecular weight values and specific gravity (MW − η )α − 1 Exp⎛⎜ MW − η ⎞⎟
⎝ β ⎠
determined in the laboratory can be observed, except for some p ( MW ) = Eq. 8
α
possible inconsistencies in the values of the C7+ molecular β Γ(α )
weight in respect to the specific gravity of the samples
corresponding to some wells of the field (Figure 12). These
PVT studies have been considered doubtful, to be used later Where Γ is the gamma function, α is a measure of the
for the definition of property tendencies and not to be used for distribution configuration, η is the molecular weight plus
the tuning of the EOS. lowest of the heavy fractions and β came given for the
Construction of the Compositional Model normalization conditions. MW is the molecular weight of
Cn +
For the construction of the compositional model, a phase the heavy fraction:
behavior simulator will be used. Eight different depth samples
have been selected that represent areal and vertically the fluid
column from the Central, West and North areas of the Carito- MW − η = αβ Eq. 9
Cn +
Mulata field. The eight samples have been chosen by taking
into consideration that in general, the fraction of the
component C1 should decrease with depth and the molar
The solution of the function is the integral of p (x ) from
fraction and the C7+ fraction molecular weight should
increase from the top to the base of the structure. α to x :
Using the same criteria, the PVT studies have been
−y
∞ yα + 1
selected for the South area of the Carito-Mulata field. In this p ( x, α ) = ∫ x p ( x ) dx = e ∑ Eq. 10
α
zone, considering the scarce information, two PVT analyses j = 0 Γ (α + j + 1)
for the tuning of the EOS will be used. Where:
SPE 107803
y = (x − η) / β Eq. 11
The molar fraction and the molecular weight come given
for:
Zi = P ( MWi , α ) − P( MWi −1 , α + 1) Eq. 12
αβ
MWi = η + [P( MWi , α + 1) − P( MWi −1 , α + 1)]
Zi
Eq. 13
The resulting molecular weight corresponding to the last
division of the heavy fraction is 780, being enough to
reproduce the thermodynamic behavior of fluids of high
molecular weight.
The composition of the well Carito-5 fluids is detailed in
Table 3, as well the molar fraction, the molecular weight and
the split of the C7+ heavy fraction. Additionally, the result is
shown by the summation of the product of MWi and Zi for the
components HYP01, HYP02 and HYP03, which is one of the
basic conditions to consider the consistency of the split made.
In the same way, the characterization of the C7+ fraction
in the South area of the Carito-Mulata field has been done by
splitting from the composition of the PVT of the well Sur-1
(15674’-15752’). In this case the heaviest fraction resulted
with a molecular weight of 730 as listed in Table 4.
It is important to mention, that there is more data for the
C7+ fractions. However, many PVT studies do not describe
completely the heavy fraction components. The molecular
weight of C7+ that has been presented as inconsistent can be
estimated by the correlation, considering Kw = 11.73.
(
MW ≈ K W γ −0.84573 / 4.5579 ) 6.5885
Eq. 14
Tuning of the Equation of State:
As it is well known, one set of EOS parameters cannot
reproduce adequately volumetric properties or the phase
behavior of complex fluid columns like the ones present in the
Carito-Mulata field. This is because it is necessary to tune the
parameters in the EOS in order to reproduce the original
experimental PVT information.
In the current study the Peng-Robinson's EOS with three
parameters has been used. Peneloux introduced the third
parameter of this equation in 1982 in order to improve the
density calculation by the correction of liquid and vapor
volumes.
The PVT data that need to be matched by the tuning of the
parameters of the EOS are saturation pressure, constant
composition expansion experiments (CCE), constant volume
depletion (CVD), differential liberation (DL), separator tests,
and swelling tests among others.
For the samples of volatile oil and gas condensate the
experiments conducted have been CCE, CVD, and separator
tests; while with black oil samples the experiments conducted
have been the CCE, DL and separators.
5
The experimental data that have been adjusted by
regressions of the pseudo-components' properties belonging to
the heaviest fraction like critical temperature (Tc), critical
pressure (Pc), acentric factors (ω), volume shift (Vsh) and the
correlation coefficient to determine the binary interaction
coefficients (δ). In a first phase, the EOS has been adjusted by
regressions of the Pc, Tc, retrograde liquid volume, and gas
produced from the CVD experiments of the Carito-5 PVT,
corresponding to the gas condensate zone (Figure 13). This
tuning of EOS reproduced very well the experiments in the
PVT of Carito-1 and Carito-3, which are also located in the
condensate region, resulting in differences no bigger than 5%
in all the matched properties (Figure 14 and Figure 15).
Subsequently, the PVT data for the volatile oil zone have been
included, for which the saturation pressure has been
reproduced fair enough, with differences lower than 5%.
Sensitivities have been run including ω, δ and Vsh as
regression parameters in order to adjust volumetric factors and
density of the liquid phase, obtaining differences reasonably
acceptable (Figure 16 and Figure 17).
Including the PVT from the black oil zone, small
adjustments have been made to determine and match the
properties of the liquid phase as the oil formation volume
factor (Bo) and the density, since the saturation pressure has
always kept a good match (Figure 18 and Figure 19).
To match the mixture viscosity the correlation of Jossi-
Stiel-Thodos has been used. This correlation allows
determining the mixture viscosity through the following
equation:
[(μ − μ )ξ + 10 ]
* − 4 0.25
= a 0 + a1 ρ r + a 2 ρ r 2 + a3 ρ r 3 + a 4 ρ r 4
Eq.15
1/ 6
ξ = Tc M −1 / 2 Pc
−2 / 3
Eq.16
Where μ is the oil or gas viscosity, μ is mixture
*
viscosity to low pressure. a 0 , a1 , a 2 , a3 and a 4 are
constants.
The Critical Volume (Vc) is calculated from the following
equation:
1/ α
⎛ nc α ⎞
Vc = ⎜⎜ ∑ xi vci ⎟⎟
⎝ i =1 ⎠ Eq. 17
Where α is the mixture exponent, xi the composition and
vci the critical volume used to calculate the viscosity.
Finally, regressions have been made with the correlation of
Jossi-Stiel-Thodos' parameters in order to match the viscosity.
To do that, the critical volumes for the components in the
heavy fraction have been adjusted as well as the coefficients in
Jossi-Stiel-Thodos correlation.
For the South Carito-Mulata area, since there are only two
PVT tests for black oil, they have been adjusted
6 SPE 107803
simultaneously by regressions of Pc, Tc and δ at an initial
phase. After that, ω and Vsh for the pseudo-components of the
heavy fraction have been adjusted to match volumetric factors
and the liquid-phase density, obtaining reasonable acceptable
differences. The viscosity has been also matched by
regressions of the critical volumes and the coefficients in
Jossi-Stiel-Thodos correlation.
Lumping:
Lumping is a technique used to reduce the number of
components to be used in the simulation in order to reduce
computational times. The lumping scheme applied has been
defined based on the critical properties and molecular weight
of the components, additionally considering the field
exploitation strategies such as natural gas injection and the
possibility of nitrogen injection. On the other hand, it has to be
considered that in the lumping scheme there is the necessity of
having a heavy pseudo-component that allows representing the
fluids with a high molecular weight.
Based on the criteria mentioned above, nitrogen (N2) and
C1 have been defined as pure components in order to facilitate
the modeling the behavior of the injection fluids and light
components. The heavy components have been represented by
the fraction HYP 03, which has high molecular weight.
Finally, a total of seven (7) components have been defined for
the fluid model being used in the simulation study.
Table 5 shows the resulting composition for well Carito-
5’s PVT after lumping the fluid composition.
Match of the Experimental Data:
From Figure 20 to Figure 23 is shows a summary of the
matching for the experimental PVT data by the tuning of the
EOS for the Central, West and North areas of the Carito-
Mulata field. Initially, there is the comparison of experimental
and calculated saturation pressure for the eight PVT tests that
have been selected in the tuning of the EOS, showing in
general an excellent match of this property. Additionally, it is
shown the comparison of the experimental and calculated
results of the Rs, Bo and density of the oil at saturation
pressure.
Figure 24 and Figure 25 show the profile of saturation
pressure versus depth, and the Rs (from the differential
liberation test) respectively. These values have been obtained
from the initialization of a 1-D model using 200 grid blocks in
the vertical direction, built in the numerical reservoir
simulator. A good match can be observed in both cases with
the experimental data from all the validated PVT information.
Additionally, a laboratory experiment has been simulated
with the purpose of visualizing the reproduction of the
saturation pressures with depletion after starting fluid
production. In order to do that, a 1-D model has been built in
the numerical reservoir simulator, and it has been initialized in
two phases. The first phase was initialized using pressure,
temperature and composition conditions corresponding to –
13000 feet TVDSS (gas condensate zone) in order to
reproduce dew point pressure. The second phase has been
initialized at the conditions corresponding to –14500 feet
TVDSS (black oil zone) in order to reproduce the bubble point
pressure.
The results of these experiments are shown in Figure 26
and Figure 27, respectively. In the first figure, it can be
observed that once the fluid production starts, the grid block
pressure declines progressively from 10500 Psi to 8100 Psi,
and the presence of liquid in the grid block can be observed
indicating that the dew point pressure has been reached.
Similarly, it can be observed on Figure 27 the increment in the
gas saturation at approximately 4600 Psi, the point at which
the bubble pressure is reached. In this way, it is guaranteed to
reproduce phenomena like retrograde-gas condensation and
the increment in the gas saturation in the reservoir numerical
simulation model (full field) once saturation pressures are
reached. Also in Figure 28 to Figure 31 a summary of the
matching of the experimental data for the South area of the
Carito-Mulata field is shown.
Matching of Special Fluid Tests
The simulation of special tests such as swelling tests and
coreflood tests allow matching the fluid phase behavior in a
reservoir when subjected to gas injection processes (natural
gas, Nitrogen, CO2, etc). The simulation of these tests
provides reliable information when evaluating the influence of
the injection of fluids in the final hydrocarbon recovery.
Swelling Test:
This test consisted of the measurement of fluid properties
when subjected to the injection of gas at different molar
concentrations.
Figure 32 and Figure 33 show a very acceptable match of
the swelling tests with nitrogen (well Carito-76) and with
natural gas (well Carito-23) respectively. These matches were
made by using the tuned EOS for the central, west and north
areas of the Carito-Mulata field. It is important to mention that
in order to reproduce these experiments it has been necessary
to perform a small adjustment to the molecular weight of the
fraction C7+ from the fluid samples. This was necessary due
to the difference exhibited with respect to the general behavior
of the fluid column in the field.
Corefloods using Composite Cores
A coreflood test using gas condensate, from well Carito-76
(Central area of the Carito-Mulata field), and pure nitrogen
using a composite core from the area was conducted. Some of
the core characteristics are the following:
• Length: 26.8 cm
• Porosity (Phi): 13.56 %, Kg: 69.76 mD
• Saturation of water: 21%
For the simulation of the coreflood test, a 200 grid block 1-
D model has been built (Figure 34), considering a
homogeneous porous media, constant injection rate of 3
cm3/hr, and a pressure of 7500 Psi. The relative permeability
curves used in the simulation have been the oil-water and oil-
gas curves established for the rock type defined by the K/Phi
of the core. The simulation results are shown in Figure 35, in
which a good match of the percentage of produced gas can be
observed. Also the results of a test using a 1D-model with 10
grid blocks (green curve) are shown, so as to visualize the
displacement conditions given by a full field model. Less
SPE 107803 7

recovery is observed from this model when compared to the 2. Almeida, J. Caracterización Termodinámica de los
model with 200 grid blocks due to the earlier breakthrough of Fluidos del Yacimiento El Carito. Informe Técnico
the injection front and increased numerical dispersion. INTEVEP, 1995. PDVSA Internal Technical Report.
3. Rojas, G. Ingeniería de Yacimientos de Gas Condensado.
Calculation of the Compositional Gradient Venezuela. Año 2003.
In order to have a reservoir model that reproduces the 4. Thorsen, B., Trujillo, E. y Auxiette, G. Propiedades de los
thermodynamic behavior of the fluid as close as possible, a Fluidos y Modelo Composicional Campo El Furrial.
model with variation in the mixture composition with depth Furrial Integrated Studies, 2004. PDVSA Internal
has been defined by selecting the composition of the PVT tests Technical Report.
selected for the match of the EOS in the different areas of the 5. Borges, A., González, Y., Camacho, M., Caraballo, Y.,
Carito-Mulata field. It is well known that at equilibrium Hernandez, J. y Peralta Y. Prueba de Hinchamiento
conditions the composition of the fluids present in the (Swelling Test) del fluido MUC-76 S/C (15075´-15328´)
reservoir varies only in the vertical direction. Thus, areal con Nitrógeno (N2). Prueba de vaporización con N2 en la
variations suggest a system consisting of different mezcla crítica de fluidos CRC-23 + MUC-76 s/c. Informe
compartments. Técnico INTEVEP, 2004. PDVSA Internal Technical
The model of the compositional gradient for the central, Report.
west and north area of the Carito-Mulata field is listed in 6. Borges M., L. Prueba de Desplazamiento en Núcleo
Table 6. Compuesto para Crudo de Carito Central inyectando
Similarly, the compositional gradient for the South area of Nitrógeno. Informe Técnico INTEVEP, 2001. PDVSA
the Carito-Mulata field has been defined (Table 7), as it has Internal Technical Report.
been considered a different thermodynamic zone for the
numerical reservoir simulation. It has to be mentioned that the Nomenclature
composition toward the top of the structure in the south area EOS = Equation of State
has been extrapolated as a function of the general behavior of EOR = Enhanced Oil Rcovery
the fluid column in the reservoir, so that it can represent the PVT = Pressure-Volume-Temperature
behavior of the production from the wells completed in that CCE = Constant Composition Expansion
zone. DL = Differential Liberation
CVD = Constant Volume Depletion
Exporting the Results to the Numerical Reservoir Eq = Equation
Simulator F = Hoffman F factor
Finally, the model with the Equation of State is exported Ki = Equilibrium Constant of Component i
directly to the reservoir numerical simulator in order to allow Xi = Molar fraction of liquid of the i component
the start of the compositional simulation. Yi = Molar fraction of gas of the i component
Zi = Mole fraction of the i component (Global composition)
Conclusions P = Pressure
™ The 39 PVT analyses have been found to be V = Volume
representative and consistent from the 75 analyses Pb = Bubble pressure
available for the different areas of El Carito-Mulata field.
™ One model with good match has been achieved for Vb = Volume at the bubble point
modeling the behavior of the fluids components in the T = Temperature
Central, West and North areas of the Carito-Mulata field.
™ The fluids from the South area of the field have been Tbi = Temperature of normal boiling of the pure component i
modeled in an independent way to present behavior Rs = Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio
different in the fluids components. TDVss = True Vertical Depth sub sea
™ The displacement test of composite core and the swelling MW = Molecular weight
test with nitrogen and gas condensate allowed the Kw = Watson Characterization Factor
evaluation of the effect of gas injection on the fluid Pc = Critical pressure
properties and on the recovery of hydrocarbons. Tc = Critical temperature
™ A good match has been seen between the saturation Vsh = Volume Shift
pressure profile and the gas petroleum relationship Zg = Gas Compressibility
obtained from the one-dimensional model and the Bo = Oil Formation Volume Factor
validated PVT information data. Bg = Gas Formation Volume Factor
™ The variation of the composition with depth has been ρ r = Pseudo density= ρ / ρ c = Vc / V
defined in the function of the selected PVT that has been
adjusted with the EOS. Phi = Porosity
γ = Specific gravity
References ω =Acentric factor
1. Embid, S, Avila, M. and Salazar, P. Development of a δ = Binary interaction coefficient
Methodology for Areal and Vertical Characterization of ρ = Density
Fluids. PDVSA, SPE 69396, 2001. μ = Viscosity
8 SPE 107803

N 3.50

NORTH 3.00
y = 0.0004x + 1.7414
R2 = 0.9992
(12 PVT STUDIES)
2.50

WEST

FUNCTION Y
2.00

(35 PVT STUDIES) 1.50

CENTRAL 1.00

0.50
(22 PVT STUDIES)
0.00

SOUTH
SUR
SUR
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

(6 PVT STUDIES) PRESSURE (psia)

Figure 1. Structural Map of the Carito-Mulata Field Showing the Figure 4. Function Y for a Black Oil Sample: Consistent PVT
Different Blocks and the Areal Distribution of the PVT Studies. Experiment.

3 .0 800
y = 1 .389 x - 2. 438
2
R = 0. 975 700
2 .0

Solution Gas-Oil Ratio (SCF/STB

600
1 .0
b( 1/Tb - 1/ T

500

0 .0 400

300
-1 .0
0. 0 0 .5 1 .0 1. 5 2. 0 2 .5 3. 0 3. 5 4. 0
200
-2 .0
100

-3 .0 0
Lo g (P*K i) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Pressure (psia)
Figure 2. Hoffman Technique for a Gas Condensate Sample.

Figure 5. Example of Material Balance for a Black Oil Sample:

4.5 Consistent PVT Experiment.

4.0

3.5
Lo g (PK)

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5
0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500

b(1/Tb - 1/T )

Figure 3. Hoffman technique, Molar and Compositional Banlance

of the CVD Test for a Gas Condensate: Consistent PVT SOUTH CENTRAL WEST NORTH

Experiment.
Figure 6. Areal Distribution of the PVT Samples Considered as
Representative and Consistent in the Carito-Mulata Field.
SPE 107803 9

Central North West South -12000

-12000
-13000

-13000

D epth (TV DSS- F eet)

-14000
Depth (TVDSS-Feet)

-14000
-15000

-15000
-16000

-16000
-17000
Central
CEN TRAL North
NORTE West
OESTE South
SUR
-17000 -18000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

-18000 St oc k Tank Oil API Gravity

Figure 7. Vertical Distribution of the PVT Samples Considered as Figure 10. API Gravity as a Function of Depth (TVDss) for the Four
Representative and Consistent in the Carito-Mulata Field. Areas of the Carito-Mulata Field.

-12000 -12000

Central North West South

-13000
-13000

Depth (TVDSS-Feet)
-14000
-14000
Depth (TVDSS-Feet)

-15000
-15000 2

1'
-16000
-16000

-17000
-17000
MW C7+ MW C20+
-18000
-18000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Saturation Pressure (psia) Molecular Weight

Figure 8. Saturation Pressure as a Function of Depth (TVDss) for Figure 11. Variation in Depth of MW of Fractions C7+ and C20+
the Four Areas of the Carito-Mulata Field. from Fluid samples Considered as Representative and Consistent
in the Carito-Mulata Field.
-12000
0.94

-13000
K Watso n = 11.73
0.92
Depth (TVDSS-Feet)

-14000
Specific Gravity of C7+

- 1%
0.90
-15000

+ 1%
-16000 0.88

-17000
0.86
Centr al North West South
-18000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0.84
180 230 280 330 380
Gas Oil Ratio (SCF/STB)
Molecular Weight of C7+

Figure 9. Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio as a Function of Depth (TVDss)

for the Four Areas of the Carito-Mulata Field. Figure 12. C7+ Specific Gravity versus C7+ Molecular Weight from
Fluid Samples Considered as Representative and Consistent in
the Carito-Mulata Field.
10 SPE 107803

Table 1. PVT Experiments Selected for Tuning of the EOS of the Table 4. Split of the Fraction C7+: PVT Experiment of the Sur-1
Carito-Mulata Field. Well. Intervals 15674’-16752’.

Saturation COMPONENT Molar Comp. (%) MW Zi * MWi

Fluid DEPTH MW
Area Pressure % C1 % C7+
Sample (TVDss) C7+
(psia) N2 0.1100 28.01
Carito-5 -12738 West 8325 71.27 11.20 218 CO2 9.6000 44.01
C1 26.1100 16.043
Carito -1 -13143 Central 8140 69.26 10.98 218
C2 6.4700 30.07
Carito -3 -13977 West 7116 63.87 14.41 239 C3 6.6600 44.097
Carito -6 -14283 Central 5835 56.95 20.8 252 iC4 1.6900 58.123
Carito -19 -14620 Central 4460 46.6 29.23 251 nC4 3.3000 58.123
iC5 1.4500 72.15
Carito -24 -14971 West 3645 41.75 34.25 272
nC5 1.6000 72.15
Carito -8 -15108 North 3446 41.81 35.92 267 C6 2.2400 84
Carito -17 -15922 Central 3166 39.53 39.27 297 C7+ 40.7700 275 112.12
Sur-1 -15072 South 2435 26.11 40.77 275
C7+ SPLITTING
Sur-2 -15628 South 1774 22.80 52.94 292

HYP 01 19.926 132.0 26.3023

Table 2. Tuning of the C7+ Molecular Weight for the Fracción C7+ HYP 02 16.310 323.2 52.7139
of the Carito-19 well fluids. HYP 03 4.533 730.0 33.0909

Molar Comp. Normalized Adjusted

Normalized ∑ Zi*MWi 112.12
Component MW Molar Comp.
Reported (%) Weight (%) MW
(%)
Table 5. Scheme of Lumping: PVT Experiment of the Carito-5 Well.
N2 0.07 28.01 0.0212 28.01 0.0712
CO2 3.81 44.01 1.8126 44.01 3.8771
PseudoComponent Molar Comp. (%) MW
C1 46.60 16.04 8.0816 16.04 47.4202
C2 7.02 30.07 2.2819 30.07 7.1436 N2 0.17 28.01
C3 5.37 44.10 2.5598 44.10 5.4645 C1 71.2 16.04
CO2-C2-C3 14.41 39.45
IC4 1.26 58.12 0.7917 58.12 1.2822
C4-C5-C6 2.94 68.19
NC4 2.43 58.12 1.5268 58.12 2.4728
HYP 01 7.5 131.3
IC5 1.02 72.15 0.7955 72.15 1.0380 HYP 02 3.5 341.4
NC5 1.10 72.15 0.8579 72.15 1.1194 HYP 03 0.3 780.0
C6 2.09 84.00 1.8978 84.00 2.1268
C7+ 29.23 251.2 79.3732 267 27.9843
Carito-5 : CVD Calc. Carito-5 : CVD Calc.
1.6 80 80

Gas Z Exp. Gas Z

Gas Compressibility Factor

1.4
Table 3. Split of the Fraction C7+: PVT Experiment of the Carito-5
Liquid Volume, % vol.

60 60

Produced Gas, % mol

Well. 1.2
40 40

1.0

20 20
COMPONENT Molar Comp. (%) MW Zi * MWi 0.8

0 0
N2 0.1698 28.01 0.6
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Pressure (psia)
CO2 4.7251 44.01 Pressure (psia) Liq. Vol. Exp. Liq. Vol. Prod. Gas Exp. Prod. Gas

C1 71.1962 16.043
Carito-5 : CCE Calc.
C2 6.6731 30.07 5.0

ROV Psat Exp. ROV

C3 3.0069 44.097 4.0

iC4 0.6394 58.123

Relative Volume

3.0
nC4 0.9190 58.123
2.0
iC5 0.3396 72.15
nC5 0.2997 72.15 1.0

C6 0.7392 84 0.0
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

C7+ 11.2920 218 24.39 Pressure (psia)

C7+ SPLITTING Figure 13. Match between the Experimental Data and the
Calculated Data with the EOS: Gas Condensate Sample of the
HYP 01 7.5005 135.31 10.1488
Carito-5 Well.
HYP 02 3.4963 341.4 11.9389
HYP 03 0.2952 780.0 2.30293

∑ Zi*MWi 24.39
SPE 107803 11

Carito-1 : CVD Calc. Carito-1 : CVD Calc. Carito-19 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-19 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
1.6 80 80 1400 2.5 1.80 1.60
Gas Z Exp. Gas Z

Oil Volume Factor (rb/stb)

1200
Gas Compressibility Factor

Gas-Oil Ratio (scf/stb)

1.4 2.0 1.60

Produced Gas, % mol

Liquid Volume, % vol.
60 60

Gas Comp. Factor

Gas FVF (rcf/scf)

1000 1.20
1.40
1.2 800 1.5
40 40 1.20 0.80
1.0 600 1.0
1.00
20 20 400 0.40
0.8 0.5 0.80
200
0 0 0 0.0 0.60 0.00
0.6
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia) Liq. Vol. Exp. Liq. Vol. Prod. Gas Exp. Prod. Gas
GOR Exp. GOR Exp. ROV ROV Gas Z Exp. Gas Z Gas FVF Exp. Gas FVF

Carito-1 : CCE Calc.

Carito-19 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-19 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
10 0.9 2.0 2.0 0.08
ROV Psat Exp. ROV
8 1.8
0.8

Oil SG (Water = 1)

Gas Viscosity (cp)

Oil Viscosity (cp)
1.5 0.06
Relative Volume

1.6

Gas SG (Air = 1)
6 0.7 1.4
1.0 0.04
4 0.6 1.2

1.0
0.5 0.5 0.02
2
0.8

0 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.00

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia)
Oil SG Exp. Oil SG Gas SG Exp. Gas SG Oil Visc. Exp. Oil Visc. Gas Visc.

Figure 14. Match between the Experimental Data and the

Figure 17. Match between the Experimental Data and the
Calculated Data with the EOS: Gas Condensate Sample of the
Calculated Data with the EOS: Volatile Oil Sample of the Carito-19
Carito-1 Well.
Well.
Carito-3 : CCE Calc. Carito-3 : CCE Calc.
5.0 100 Carito-24 : CCE Calc. Carito-24 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
3.0 1000 2.0
ROV Psat Exp. ROV
ROV Psat Exp. ROV
Liquid Volume, % cell vol.

4.0 80

Oil Volume Factor (rb/stb)

2.5

Gas-Oil Ratio (scf/stb)

800 1.6
Relative Volume

3.0 60 Relative Volume

2.0 600 1.2
2.0 40
1.5 400 0.8
1.0 20 Liq. Vol. Exp. Liq. Vol.
1.0 200 0.4
0.0 0 GOR Exp. GOR Exp. ROV ROV
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 0.5 0 0.0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Carito-3 : CVD Calc. Carito-3 : CVD Calc.
1.6 100 80 Carito-24 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-24 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
0.9 2.2 2.0 0.07
Gas Compressibility Factor

Produced Gas, % mol

0.06
Liquid Volume, % vol.

1.4 Gas Z Exp. Gas Z

80 60 0.8

Gas Viscosity (cp)

Oil SG (Water = 1)

1.8 1.5

Gas SG (Air = 1)

Oil Viscosity (cp)

0.05
1.2 0.7
60 40 0.04
1.4 1.0
1.0 0.6 0.03
40 20 0.02
1.0 0.5
0.8 0.5
0.01
20 0
0.6 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.00
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Pressure (psia) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia) Liq. Vol. Exp. Liq. Vol. Prod. Gas Exp. Prod. Gas
Oil SG Exp. Oil SG Gas SG Exp. Gas SG Oil Visc. Exp. Oil Visc. Gas Visc.

Figure 15. Match between the Experimental Data and the Figure 18. Match between the Experimental Data and the
Calculated Data with the EOS: Gas Condensate Sample of the Calculated Data with the EOS: Black Oil Sample of the Carito-24
Carito-3 Well. Well.
Carito-6 : CCE Calc. Carito-6 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
2500 3.0 Carito-8 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-8 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
4.0
1200 1.6 1.10 1.00
ROV Psat Exp. ROV 2.5
Oil Volume Factor (rb/stb)
Gas-Oil Ratio (scf/stb)

2000 1.5 1.00

3.0 1000 0.80
Oil Volume Factor (rb/stb)

Gas Comp. Factor

Gas FVF (rcf/scf)

Gas-Oil Ratio (scf/stb)

2.0 0.90
Relative Volume

1.4
1500
800 0.80 0.60
1.5 1.3
2.0
1000 600 1.2 0.70
1.0 0.40
1.1 0.60
1.0 500 0.5 400 0.20
1.0 0.50
0 0.0 200
0.9 0.40 0.00
0.0 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 GOR Exp. GOR Exp. ROV ROV
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 0 0.8
GOR Exp. GOR Exp. ROV ROV 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia)
Pressure (psia) Gas Z Exp. Gas Z Gas FVF Exp. Gas FVF

Carito-6 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-6 : Dif. Lib. Calc.

0.9 2.5 2.0 0.09 Carito-8 : Dif. Lib. Calc. Carito-8 : Dif. Lib. Calc.
0.9 2.0 1.8 0.04
0.8 1.8 1.6
Oil SG (Water = 1)

2.0
Gas SG (Air = 1)

1.5 0.07 0.03

Oil Viscosity (cp)

Gas Viscosity (c p)

0.8 1.4
Gas Viscosity (cp)
Oil SG (Water = 1)

Gas SG (Air = 1)

Oil Viscosity (cp)

0.7 1.6
1.2 0.03
1.5 0.7 1.4
1.0 0.05 1.0
0.6 0.02
1.2 0.8
0.6
1.0 0.5 0.03 0.6 0.02
0.5 1.0
0.5 0.4
0.8 0.01
0.4 0.5 0.2
0.0 0.01
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.01
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Oil SG Exp. Oil SG Gas SG Exp. Gas SG Oil Visc. Exp. Oil Visc. Gas Visc. Pressure (psia) Pressure (psia)
Oil SG Exp. Oil SG Gas SG Exp. Gas SG Oil Visc. Exp. Oil Visc. Gas Visc.

Figure 16. Match between the Experimental Data and the

Calculated Data with the EOS: Volatile Oil Sample of the Carito-6 Figure 19. Match between the Experimental Data and the
Well. Calculated Data with the EOS: Black Oil Sample of the Carito-8
Well.
12 SPE 107803

10000 1,0

Experimental Experimental
0.54%
1.45% EOS EOS
8000 3.32% 0,8
1,66%
.

3,45% 3,15%
8,09%
Saturation Pressure (psi)

.
1,47%
1.56%

Oil Density (gr/cc)

6000 0,6

6.17%
1.05% 0.13%
4000 5.66% 0,4

2000 0,2

0 0,0
Carito-5 Carito-1 Carito-3 Carito-6 Carito-19 Carito-24 Carito-8 Carito-17 Carito-6 Carito-19 Carito-24 Carito-8 Carito-17

Figure 20. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated Figure 23. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated
Satutation Pressure for the Central, West and North Areas of the Oil Density for the Central, West and North Areas of the Carito-
Carito-Mulata field. Mulata field.

2500 -12000
Experimental
1.38%
EOS
Dissolved Gas Oil Ratio (SCF/STB)

-13000
2000

Depth (feet) -14000

1500
2.54%
-15000

2.07% 5.16%
1000 -16000
1.23%
-17000
500
Experim ental Data EOS
-18000
0 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Carito-6 Carito-19 Carito-24 Carito-8 Carito-17 Saturation Pressure (psia)

Figure 21. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated Figure 24. Match Between the Calculated and Observated
Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio for the Central, West and North Areas of Satutation Pressure for the Central, West and North Areas of the
the Carito-Mulata field. Carito-Mulata field.

2.5 -12000
3.41%
Experimental
Oil Formation Volume Factor (RB/STB)

EOS -13000
2.0 0.78%
4.94%
4.21% -14000
1.63%
Depth (Feet)

1.5
-15000

1.0
-16000

0.5 -17000
Experimental Data EOS
-18000
0.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Carito-6 Carito-19 Carito-24 Carito-8 Carito-17
Gas Oil Ratio (SCF/STB)

Figure 22. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated

Oil Formation Volume Factor (Bo) for the Central, West and North Figure 25. Match Between the Calculated and Observated
Areas of the Carito-Mulata field. Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio for the Central, West and North Areas of
the Carito-Mulata field.
SPE 107803 13

1000
Experimental
EOS

Dissolved Gas Oil Ratio (SCF/STB)

3.58%
800

600

2.98%

400

200

0
Sur-1 Sur-2

Figure 29. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated

Figure 26. Simulation of the Experiment in order to Reproduce Dissolved Gas-Oil Ratio for the South Area of the Carito-Mulata
Dew Point pressure. El Carito-Mulata Field. field.

2.0
Experimental
1.59%
EOS

Oil Formation Volume Factor (RB/STB)

1.6
1.83%

1.2

0.8

0.4

0.0
Sur-1 Sur-2

Figure 30. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated

Figure 27. Simulation of the Experiment in order to Reproduce Oil Formation Volume Factor (Bo) for the South Area of the Carito-
Bubble Point pressure. El Carito-Mulata Field. Mulata field.

1,2
4000
Experimental Experimental
EOS 1,0 EOS

3000 2,34%
Saturation Pressure (Psi)

1.11% 0,8
Oil Density (gr/cc)

1,96%

3.88%
2000
0,6

0,4

1000
0,2

0 0,0
Sur-1 Sur-2 Sur-1 Sur-2

Figure 28. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated Figure 31. Comparision between the Calculated and Observated
Saturation Pressure for the South Area of the Carito-Mulata field. Oil Density for the South Area of the Carito-Mulata field.
14 SPE 107803

10000 100

9000
80

% Recovered gas condensate

Saturatio n Pressure (psia)

8000
60
7000

40
6000

5000 20

4000 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
N2 Inyected (% mol)
IV/PV (%)
Saturation Pre ssure (psia) Exp. Data Experimental % Rec. 200 Cells % Rec. 10 Cells

Figure 32. Simulation of the Swelling Test with N2. Figure 35. Simulation Results of the Coreflood Test using a 1-D
Model.
8000 2,6
Table 6. Compositional Gradient for the Central, West and North
Areas of the Carito-Mulata Field.
7000 2,2
Saturation Pressure (psia)

DEPTH C7+
N2 C1 CO2-C3 C4-C6
Swelling Factor

(TVDss) HYP 01 HYP 02 HYP 03

6000 1,8
-12738 0.17 71.19 14.40 2.93 7.50 3.49 0.29
-13143 0.34 69.20 15.29 4.13 7.22 3.44 0.30
5000 1,4 -13441 0.34 69.32 15.30 4.13 7.10 3.46 0.32
-13977 0.09 63.87 16.68 4.95 8.65 5.05 0.70
-14283 0.14 56.95 16.61 5.50 11.82 7.65 1.31
4000 1,0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 -14620 0.07 47.42 16.48 8.03 14.95 10.74 2.27
Composition (% mol)
-14971 0.61 41.75 17.19 6.17 17.93 13.31 3.00
Saturation Pressure (psia) Exp. Data S.F. Exp. S.F.
-15922 0.31 38.92 17.31 3.22 18.97 16.39 4.84
-17000 0.30 37.00 17.40 2.80 19.50 17.50 5.50
Figure 33. Simulation of the Swelling Test with Natural Gas.

Table 7. Compositional Gradient for the South Area of the Carito-

Mulata Field.

DEPTH C7+
N2 C1 CO2-C3 C4-C6
(TVDss) HYP 01 HYP 02 HYP 03

-13300 0.11 26.11 22.73 10.28 20.23 16.22 4.32

-15072 0.14 22.8 16.31 7.81 23.89 21.74 7.30
-15628 0.52 29.12 27.72 8.87 18.23 13.01 2.49

Figure 34. Simulation of the Coreflood Test using a 1-D Model.