A Non-equilibrium Model to
Calculate Foamy Oil Properties
J.J. SHENG, B.B. MAINI
Petroleum Recovery Institute
R.E. HAYES, W.S. TORTIKE
University of Alberta
Abstract
A number of heavy oil reservoirs under solution gas drive
show anomalously good primary performance. Foamy oil behav-
iour is believed to be one of the reasons. Several previous inves-
tigators have developed numerical models to simulate the foamy
oil flow. These models account for the presence of foamy oil
effects by modifying the equilibrium properties of the rock-fluid
system, such as the PVT characteristics and relative permeabili-
ty. Their approach does not account for the time (or rate) depen-
dent changes in foamy oil characteristics. This paper proposes a
methodology for including the non-equilibrium processes in cal-
culating the foamy oil properties.
The basic foundation of this model rests on theories of bubble
nucleation and bubble growth. However, several simplifying
assumptions have been used to keep the mathematical treatment
tractable and to maintain consistency with reported experimental
observations. The model is verified by matching our calculated
results with the experimental data.
The results calculated from this model show how the foamy
oil properties vary with pressure and time. The volumes and
compressibilities of foamy oil increase to their maximum values
before they decrease with time. The maximum values strongly
depend on the amount of the gas that can be entrained in the liq-
uid oleic phase. The amount of entrained gas is a key parameter
in foamy oil flow.
This method of calculating foamy oil properties provides the
basics for developing numerical simulation models of foamy oil
flow. The results from this model may also be useful for well
testing analysis in foamy oil reservoirs.
Introduction
A number of heavy oil reservoirs under solution gas drive show
anomalously good primary performance: high oil production rates,
low produced GOR and high recovery(1, 2) . These reservoirs show
“foamy-oil” behaviour in wellhead samples produced under solu-
tion gas drive. The oil is produced in the form of an oil-continu-
ous foam which has the appearance of chocolate mousse and con-
tains a high volume fraction of gas(3).
Foamy oil may be defined as a heavy oil containing dispersed
gas bubbles(4). In the context of solution gas drive, its physical
form could be a dispersion of gas bubbles flowing with the oil; a
foam in which the continuous phase is oil; or any other form
which causes trapping of a large volume of gas within porous
media. Foamy oil flow was defined by Maini(5) as an unusual form
of two-phase (oil/gas) flow in porous media which can be invoked
to explain the high solution-gas-drive recovery in some heavy oil
38
reservoirs. To study the foamy oil flow, it is important to first
understand the foamy oil properties. The most important proper-
ties related to flow are the compressibility and viscosity.
The compressibility of a foamy oil (oil containing dispersed
gas bubbles) would obviously be much higher than the compress-
ibility of the same oil containing only dissolved gas. Since the gas
compressibility is much higher than the liquid compressibility, the
total compressibility of the dispersion would be dominated by the
gas, once a significant volume fraction of gas has evolved.
Moreover, since the ideal gas compressibility varies as inverse of
the pressure, the compressibility of a foamy oil would be approxi-
mately equal to the volume fraction of gas divided by the absolute
pressure. Smith(1) proposed that the compressibility of foamy oil
can be estimated as:
κ
c fo =
p ...............................................................................................(1)
For a Lloydminster oil, κ is about 0.25 to 0.4, so the oil/gas
combination is about one-fourth as compressible as an ideal gas.
The compressibility of a dispersion of gas bubbles in liquid can
be calculated from the knowledge of the volume fraction of gas
present and the compressibility of the liquid and the gas.
Secondary effects, such as the difference in the pressure between
the gas and the oil due to capillarity and the change in gas solubil-
ity with pressure should also be accounted for in computations of
the foamy oil compressibility. This requires a knowledge of the
equilibrium PVT behaviour and the interfacial tension behaviour.
Finally, some deviations from the equilibrium behaviour may also
be important. In experiments using binary mixtures of C1/n-C10
with a constant rate of expansion, Firoozabadi et al.(6) observed
that, immediately below a bubblepoint pressure of 1,071 psia and
above a nucleation threshold pressure, the measured PVT data
showed the same behaviour as in the undersaturated region. This
behaviour implies that the fluid in the porous medium had the
same compressibility as the liquid. Only at the minimum pressure
of 1,013 psia did the pressure begin to rise because of gas bubble
formation. But unlike supersaturation in open space where a sharp
rise in pressure occurs, there was a gradual pressure increase in
the porous medium.
Kraus et al.(7) calculated the foamy oil compressibility using
their pseudo-bubble point model. One of their assumptions, that
all of the solution gas that theoretically can be released between
the bubble point pressure and pseudo-bubble pressure becomes
entrained gas is not consistent with Firoozabadi et al.’s(6) experi-
mental observation. Moreover, their model was not designed to
simulate the time-dependent changes in foamy oil characteristics.
Since the entrained gas will gradually disengage from the liq-
uid oleic phase, the volume of foamy oil is not only pressure-
Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
dependent, but also time-dependent. Islam and Chakma(8) mea-
sured the volume changes of a high pressure live oil sample after
its pressure was suddenly reduced to one atmosphere. The vol-
umes of the sample first reached a maximum value, then
decreased with time due to the release of gas. An important obser-
vation was that the rate of release was much slower for the crude
oil compared to other oils without asphaltene. McCaffrey and
B o w m a n ( 9 ) presented similar experimental data for volume
changes with time.
Viscosity of the gas-liquid dispersion flowing as a pseudo-sin-
gle phase fluid is an important parameter in modelling the flow
behaviour. Unfortunately, experimental measurements of its value
have not been reported. Because of the unstable nature of the dis-
persion and the possible influence of the flow geometry on appar-
ent viscosity, it may be difficult to obtain reliable measurements.
Smith(1) used a modified buildup analysis to infer apparent in
situ viscosities for the foamy oil. He found that the apparent vis-
cosities were much below those of live single-phase oil, but were
higher than those of gas. He suggested that the slug flow correla-
tions developed for viscosity in pipe systems could be used to
quantify the oil-gas mixture viscosity in porous media. Islam and
Chakma(8) treated the viscosity of oil-gas mixture as µm = µl (1-γ)
µgγ. Here γ is the gas volume fraction. Poon and Kisman(10) pro-
posed that the dilatant (shear thickening) effects of non-
Newtonian fluids can provide an explanation for low apparent vis-
cosities at a distance from the wellbore where shear rates are low.
The viscosity of foamy oil was considered to be equal to the liquid
phase viscosity in the pseudo-bubble point model(7), while it was
assumed to be slightly below that of the liquid phase in another
simulation study(11).
Maini et al.(3) reported that the oil mobility did not increase as
the gas came out of solution. However, their measurements do not
provide a reliable measure of the effect of bubble nucleation on
the viscosity of the flowing gas-oil dispersion since the increase in
the volumetric flow rate resulting from the gas nucleation was not
measured.
Claridge and Prats ( 1 2 ) postulated that the viscosity of oil
decreases as the gas comes out of solution in the form of a large
number of very small bubbles. They suggested that the mecha-
nism responsible for such reduction in viscosity is the adherence
of asphaltenes present in the crude to the nucleated gas microbub-
bles. This adherence of asphaltenes to bubble surface stabilizes
the bubbles at a small size and the bubbles can then be transported
through the rock pores with the crude oil. The removal of
asphaltenes as dispersed matter from the bulk oil reduces the vis-
cosity of the oil. However, no experimental verification of the
proposed mechanism was attempted.
In this paper we present a method to calculate the volume
changes and the compressibilities of foamy oils, as the reservoir
pressure declines with time. Simple functional relationships are
proposed to describe the rates of growth and decay of foamy oil
volume and validated with experimental data. Experimental mea-
surements of the growth and decay of foamy oil volume, follow-
ing a sudden change in pressure are presented. The proposed
model was used to history match this experimental data and pro-
vided excellent matches.
The Proposed Model
Pressure reduction below the bubble point creates supersatura-
tion. For a specific reduction in pressure, ∆p, a certain level of
supersaturation is created, and some fraction of the total nucle-
ation sites become active. The microbubbles originating from
these sites will grow in size and their number will change with
time. The macroscopic gas volume will continue to increase until
thermodynamic equilibrium is reached. It will be shown that this
increase in the gas volume can be modelled as a power law func-
tion of time. The gas bubbles are all initially entrained in the liq-
uid oleic phase. However, these gas bubbles will eventually disen-
gage from the liquid and become free gas. The disengagement of
bubbles from the liquid to form free gas results in a reduction of
April 1999, Volume 38, No. 4
FIGURE 1: Schematic description of the treatment in our model.
foamy oil volume. We will show that this reduction can be mod-
elled as an exponential function of time.
The nucleation, growth and bubble disengagement processes
occur simultaneously. In systems undergoing a gradual reduction
in pressure, the total pressure drawdown can be modelled as a
series of small step reductions in pressure. The processes control-
ling the foamy oil volume are considered for each step change in
pressure. Then the effect of the total pressure change is the sum-
mation of effects of these small step changes in pressure. These
ideas are schematically described in Figure 1.
Assumptions
The calculation of foamy oil volume is based on the following
assumptions:
1. A fraction of the released gas is entrained in the form of tiny
bubbles in the viscous oil when the reservoir pressure drops
below the nucleation threshold pressure. This assumption is
based on the experimental observation of Firoozabadi et
al.,(6) showing that, below the bubble-point pressure and
above some threshold pressure, the measured data show the
same behaviour as in the undersaturated region.
2. The oleic phase consists of three components: dead oil, solu-
tion gas, and entrained gas.
3. The volume of foamy oleic phase can be calculated using a
simple rule that combines the contributions of the three com-
ponents in the foamy oleic phase.
4. The volume of entrained gas is assumed to be equal to the
volume it would have as a free gas at the system pressure
and temperature.
5. Entrained gas is assumed to be an ideal gas.
Modification of Gas Solubility
The dissolved gas may not evolve from liquid oleic phase until
the reservoir pressure declines to a nucleation threshold pressure,
pn. Therefore, the Rs values from the standard PVT data need to
be modified. At the nucleation threshold pressure, the modified Rs
value should be equal to that measured at the bubble point pres-
sure (pb) in the laboratory tests; and at the atmospheric pressure
(psc), the modified Rs value should be equal to that measured in
the standard PVT tests. At atmospheric pressure, the supersatura-
tion nearly disappears and most of the dissolved gas comes out
from the liquid oleic phase. Although, in reality, a small amount
of gas remains dissolved and a small supersaturation may persist,
we assume that all supersaturation disappears at the atmospheric
pressure. Between the nucleation threshold pressure and the
atmospheric pressure, it is assumed that the difference between
the modified Rs value and the standard PVT value decreases lin-
early. Therefore, Rs values are modified as follows:
39
 ' R s( p b)- Rs ( pn ) gas. Experimentally measured rates at which the entrained gas
Rs(p) = Rs (p)+ .( p -psc ) ( psc < p< p n) , separates from the oil to become free gas have not been reported
p n - p sc
..(2) in the literature. However, there are good reasons, which will be
discussed later, to propose that

'
Rs ( p ) =Rs (p) (p = p sc), α eg = e- keg t eg , ...................................................................................(13)
..................................................(3)
where αeg is defined as

( p n ≤ p ≤ pb ),
'
Rs ( p ) =Rs ( pb ) amount of gas entrained in foamy oil
........................................(4) α eg = ,
amount of gas evolved from solution
..........................(14)
'
Rs ( p ) =Rs (p) ( p >p b). and k eg is the entrained gas evolution constant, teg is the age of
...................................................(5)
the entrained gas. Note that αeg is one when teg equals zero and
zero when teg is infinite.
For the volume of gas ∆Vngi, j , evolved between tj-1 and t j, the
Estimation of Evolved Gas Volume effective age, tegj, at a later time tn, may be approximated as
For one unit volume of dead oil at the standard conditions, the
volume of gas evolved, ∆Vi, due to a decrease in pressure from pi- t j-1 + tj
1 to pi, at thermodynamic equilibrium would be j
t eg = tn - .
2 ..............................................................................(15)

∆ V i ( pi ) = [ sR( pi-1 ) − Rs( pi )].

' '
.........................................................(6) Then the entrained gas volume will be

However, as stated earlier, the equilibrium is not reached  n 

instantaneously; the evolved gas volume increases with time. For
this change in pressure, the evolved gas volume Vngi, j at the stan -
(
∆ Vieg pn , t n ) = ∑
 j=i
∆ V ng
i, j
. αjeg  . Bg p n .

( )
dard conditions and till time t j (j ≥ i) will be ..................................(16)

(
V i,ngj pi , t j ) = ∆ Vi α i,ngj.
.....................................................................(7)
The total volume of entrained gas until the time of interest tn
will be

Here αng is the gas bubble growth fraction, defined as  n n 

Cumulative amount of gas evolved

(
V neg pn , t n ) =
 i=1
∑∑ ∆ V ngi, j . α eg
j
( )
. B g p .

n

α ng = . j=i
...............................(17)
Gas evolved thermodynamically ...............................(8)
The rates of bubble nucleation, growth and coalescence could
We propose that be dependent on the pressure decline rate, pressure drop, nucle-
ation site distribution etc. Therefore a correction factor is needed
b
 ti,ngj  to account for such effects. We may modify the amount of the
α i,ngj = .
 teq  entrained gas by a correction factor, f, which represents the devia-
....................................................................................(9) tion for a specific pressure drop from the average reservoir perfor-
mance. Thus, the amount of the entrained gas may be modified as
Here teq is the time required to reach equilibrium, b is gas bub-
ble growth index, and t ng is the effective time after the step change
 n 
in pressure. For the gas ∆Vi flashed from pi-1 to pi, tngi, j (j ≥ i) may
be approximated as (
∆ Vieg pn , t n ) ∑
=  ∆ V ng
 j=i
α eg f i . B g pn .
i, j j


( )
................................(18)
t i + ti-1
t i,ngj = t j - , It has been suggested that there may be an upper limit for the
2 .............................................................................(10)
volume fraction of gas that can be entrained. This fraction of gas
and tng satisfies the condition: may be described by a parameter, say, the maximum entrained gas
quality Γmax. The quality in the foamy oil phase Γeg is defined as:
 t eq if t ng ≥ teq
t ng =  Veg
 t ng if t ng < t eq. Γ eg = .
............................................................(11) V fo
.......................................................................................(19)
From the time t j-1 to tj, the volume increase of evolved gas is
Γ max may be approximately equal to 0.5, since Islam and
Chakma(8) reported that it was difficult to maintain the gas phase
∆ V ng
i, j
= V ngi, j - V ng
i, j-1
= ∆V i
( αi,ngj - α i,ngj-1). in microbubbles when the gas volume fraction was beyond 0.5.
.................................(12)
However, the actual value of Γmax will be system specific.
Also, there is probably a minimum entrained gas quality Γmin,
below which the entrained gas will remain perpetually entrained
Estimation of the Volume of Entrained Gas in the liquid phase, because these microbubbles are so far separat-
When the reservoir pressure declines below the nucleation ed that they cannot coalesce. Obviously, Γmin is related to the oil
threshold pressure pn, the dissolved gas starts to evolve from liq- viscosity, the distribution of nucleation sites, etc. and would also
uid oleic phase, and a fraction of the evolved gas is entrained in be system specific.
the viscous oil phase. It is apparent that given sufficient time, the When Γegn is greater than Γmax, V egn is adjusted so that the fol-
entrained gas will disengage from the viscous oil to become free lowing condition is satisfied:

40 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

V neg = Γ max ( Veg
n
+ V nsg +V ndo), 1   ∂ V do  V do
.........................................................(20) c fo ( p , T , ) t = -  T. +
V fo   ∂p  V do
that is
 ∂ V sg  V sg  ∂ V eg  V eg 
. + . ,
 ∂p  T
V sg  ∂p  T
V eg  ................................(28)
Γ max (Vsg V do)
n + n
V neg = .
(1- Γ max) .................................................................(21) that is,

(V do . cdo + V sg. csg +V eg. ceg ).

1
V fo (p, T, t)=
Estimation of the Volumes of Free Gas, V fo .........................(29)
Solution Gas, and Dead Oil
If the entrained gas is assumed to be an ideal gas, under
The total volume of free gas at the time of interest tn is isothermal conditions, its formation volume factor and compress-
ibility are
 n n 
( ) ∑ ∑ ∆V ( p ),
psc
V nfg p n, t n = ng (1- α eg ). Bg
i, j j n Beg = Bg = ,
p ...........................................................................(30)
 i=1 j=i 
......................(22)
and
or
1
C eg = Cg = ,
p .............................................................................(31)
 n i, n 
(
V nfg p n, t n ) =
 i=1
∑ - . n
Vng V eg  Bg ( p )

n
respectively.
......................................(23)

The total volume of solution gas at time tn is

( )
V nsg pn , t n, T =[ Rs p n +
n
Verification of the Model
Before presenting the comparisons between the calculated
( ) results and the experimental data, a discussion of the assumed
functional forms for the growth of evolved gas and the decay of

)](ρg ) [ ][
entrained gas volume will be presented.
∑ (∆ V - V i i, n
ng /ρ sg . 1- C sg ( p n - p sc) . (1+ β sg( T -T sc) ,
sc
]
...................(24)
Justification of αng
i=1

where ρg and ρsg are the densities of the free gas component For a constant supersaturation ∆Cs, if the bubble growth is con-
and the liquid solution gas component at standard conditions, trolled by diffusion, Moulu(13) derived a relationship which shows
respectively. that the bubble radius r is proportional to the square root of the
age of the bubble t:
Note that the solution gas component comprises two parts. The
first part is that from thermodynamic equilibrium, and the second 1/2
part is that from non-equilibrium which may be either positive or  2DR(T+273.15)
∆ C s]  1 / 2
r = .t
negative. This way, the free gas is allowed to redissolve into the  ps 
oleic phase when the reservoir pressure goes up. ..........................................(32)
The volume of the dead oil at the time of interest tn is The bubble growth in porous media at isothermal conditions
under solution gas drive is believed to be mainly controlled by
[
V ndo ( pn , T ) =1- cdo ( p n - p sc) [1+ βdo ( T -T sc )]. ] ...........................(25)
diffusion(14). However, because of the complexity of real reser-
voirs, the relationship between r(t) and t for the diffusion con-
trolled bubble growth may not be directly applied. Kashchiev and
Firoozabadi(15) pointed out that the different regimes of growth
Estimation of Foamy Oil Compressibility result in different r(t) dependencies which, in general, are rather
complicated. However, when the effects of the bubble-liquid
The foamy oil isothermal compressibility needs to be calculat- interface curvature on chemical potential are neglected, at con-
ed at different pressures and at different times. The isothermal stant supersaturation many of these dependencies show exact or
compressibility is defined as approximate proportionality of r to some power of t. They pointed
out that this finding was supported also by available experimental
r(t) data.
1  ∂ V f  According to Li and Yortsos’s(16) study, for a single cluster
c f (p,T,t) = - . ,
V f  ∂p  T
......................................................(26)
bubble, the radius of the bubble increases with a power function
of t. For multiple clusters, gas saturation and t have a more com-
plex power function.
where the subscript f represents fluids. It could be fo, sg, eg, or Therefore, as an approximation, it appears reasonable to sug-
do in this model. gest that the total volume of gas phase formed Vg (t) is proportion-
If we assume that al to some power of t:

V g(t) = at b ,
V fo = V do + V sg + V eg , ......................................................................................(33)
....................................................................(27)
where a and b can be found by fitting the experimental data or
then history matching the field production data.

April 1999, Volume 38, No. 4 41

 TABLE 1: Data used in the calculations.

Gas bubble growth index, dimensionless 0.65

Entrained gas evolution constant, s-1 3.0 × 10-4
Initial pressure, kPa 4,830.0
Nucleation threshold pressure, kPa 4,830.0
Equilibrium time, s 2,400.0
Rs difference from 700 to 350 psi, m3/m3 8.0
Dead oil compressibility, kPa-1 1.0 × 10-6
Solution gas liquid compressibility, kPa-1 7.0 × 10-6
Initial live oil volume, m3 20.0 × 10-6

foam studies, many investigators have used exponential decay

FIGURE 2: Measured non-equilibrium gas saturation.
Although, theoretically, the approach to equilibrium may be
asymptotic, for all practical purposes the equilibrium is reached in
a finite time. If it takes teq time for the dissolved gas Veq to be
released from the supersaturated oil, at time t ≤ teq, the evolved
gas volume will be
b exponential function may be appropriate to describe the decay of
t 
V g(t) = V eq . .
 teq 
........................................................................(34)
By adjusting teq and b to history match the field performance,
we may be able to account for the non-equilibrium phenomenon
under heavy oil solution gas drive.
To verify the proposed power function relationship, Kortekaas
and van Poelgeest’s (17) experimental data were used. Their experi-
ments were carried out on a 550-md core saturated with connate
water and C1-C3 mixtures. Since the pressures declined linearly,
the variable t can be replaced by the pressure p. After some
manipulation, the final form is
S g = a′ ( 1 - p p/ b ) .............................................................................(35)
b times, the foamy oil volumes were recorded. Table 1 shows the
Figure 2 shows their experimental data and our fitted curves.
The points where the gas saturation data start to deviate from the
curves is explained by the flow of gas out of the core. Beyond
these points, we do not know how much gas was actually pro-
duced. Before the gas begins to flow out of the core, Figure 2
shows that the gas saturations, and hence the released gas vol-
umes, do follow the power function model.
Justification of αeg
We have proposed that the volume of gas entrained (out of the
volume evolved from tj-1 to tj) at time tn will be
functions to describe the rates of decay for foams(18-23). For flow
of aqueous foams in porous media, the coalescence rate of the gas
bubbles is proportional to the number of flowing bubbles(24).
These research results may be applied mutatis mutandis to non-
aqueous foams(25, 26).
Figure 3 presents typical results from our experimental study of
the decay of foamy oil volume. The foamy oil volumes at differ-
ent times were measured after the pressure was reduced suddenly
from 700 psi to 350 psi (further details presented in the next sec-
tion). Figure 3 shows that after the gas evolution has subsided
(corresponding to the maximum volume point), the volume of
foamy oil decays exponentially with time. Therefore, the proposed
entrained gas volume in flow through porous media.
Matching the Experimental Results
The proposed non-equilibrium model to calculate foamy oil
properties was verified by comparing the calculated foamy oil
volumes with our experimental data. Lindbergh crude oil was
used in the experiment. The crude oil was saturated with methane
at a pressure of 700 psi, and transferred to a high pressure cell
equipped with a glass window and height graduations. Then the
pressure was reduced suddenly to 350 psi, and this pressure was
maintained with a back pressure regulator. The initial live oil vol-
ume was 20 cm3. By reading the heights of foamy oil at different
conventional PVT data and the parameters used in our calculation.
The nucleation threshold pressure was assumed to be same as the
initial pressure. The equilibrium time of 2,400 sec. (40 min.), was
approximately equal to the experimental time to reach the maxi-
mum foamy oil volume. To match the experimental volume data,
the gas bubble growth index b and the entrained gas evolution
constant k eg were adjusted. Their adjusted values are 0.65 and 3.0
× 10-4 s-1, respectively. The calculated volumes and the experi-
mental data are compared in Figure 4, which shows that they are
well matched.

 n 
(
∆ Vieg pn , t n ) =

∑
j=i
( )
∆ V ngi, j . α egj . B g pn .
 ...................................(36)

By substituting the previously defined terms, the above equa-

tion can be expressed as

(
∆ Vieg pn , t n ) = ∆ V eg
i
(t n-1). e- k eg( t n-t n-1) . B g pn + ( )
 tn - tn-1 
(V i, n
ng - V ng . )
i, n-1 e-k eg 
 2  . Bg

 ( p ).
n
........................(37)

This equation shows that, at constant pressure, the total amount

FIGURE 3: Experimental data on growth and decay of foamy oil
of the entrained gas decays exponentially. Such an exponential
volume.
decay can be justified by analogy to aqueous foams. In aqueous

42 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology


FIGURE 4: Comparison of calculated and measured foamy oil
volume.
Calculation Results
Calculated results, using the adjusted parameters listed above
and the oil sample data, are shown in Figures 5 through 9. Figure
5 shows that evolved gas volume increases till the equilibrium
time. Figures 6 and 7 show the fractions of dead oil component
and the solution gas component in the foamy oil phase, respec-
tively. Their fractions decrease as more gas is entrained before the
equilibrium time, and increase as gas is separated from the oleic
phase. Figure 8 shows the fractions of entrained gas component
with time. Before the equilibrium time, the rate of growth is faster
FIGURE 5: Gas evolution with time.
FIGURE 6: Change in volume fraction of dead oil with time.
April 1999, Volume 38, No. 4
than the rate of decay, more and more gas is entrained in foamy
oil. After the equilibrium time, no more gas is released from solu-
tion and the entrained gas fractions decrease as the gas comes out
of the foamy oil. Figure 9 shows how the foamy oil compressibili-
ty varies with time. The compressibility follows the trend of
entrained gas volume fraction. It shows that the foamy oil com-
pressibility is mainly dependent on the amount of entrained gas.
Figure 9 also shows that the foamy oil compressibility could pos-
sibly reach as high as a hundred times that of the dead oil.
Discussion and Concluding Remarks
The main objective of this work was to develop a methodology
for including the effects of non-equilibrium processes in simula-
tion of foamy oil flow. It is believed that the rate processes
involved in nucleation, growth and coalescence of gas bubbles
and also in the entrainment and separation of gas bubbles from the
liquid phase play important roles in cold production of foamy
heavy oils. However, perhaps due to the limitations of available
reservoir simulation programs, most of the previous studies have
neglected the role of rate processes and assigned time independent
properties to foamy oil. We have attempted to include the time
effects in calculations of foamy oil properties.
We have only tested the model against experimental data
obtained with bulk samples of foamy oil, i.e., under conditions not
involving two-phase flow through porous media. Although the
model provided very good fits of the volume changes of foamy oil
with time in a windowed cell, its performance in porous media has
not been examined. The calculated results show that the foamy oil
properties are strongly dependent on the volume fraction of
FIGURE 7: Change in volume fraction of solution gas with time.
FIGURE 8: Change in volume fraction of entrained gas with time.
43
 Superscripts
i = ith time step
j = jth time step
n = nth time step

Subscripts
b = bubble point or bubble
do = dead oil
eg = entrained gas in oleic phase
eq = equilibrium
f = fluid
fg = free gas
fo = foamy oil
g = gas
l = liquid
m = mixture
n = nucleation
FIGURE 9: Change in foamy oil compressibility with time. ng = nucleated gas
s = supersaturation or saturation
entrained gas. It is also apparent that even in porous media, the sc = standard conditions, i.e., 15.6˚ C and 101 kPa
entrained gas fraction could change with time. Therefore, inclu- sg = solution gas in oleic phase
sion of time dependent effects in simulation of foamy oil flow is
important. REFERENCES
The model presented here provides the basics for developing
1. SMITH, G.E., Fluid Flow and Sand Production in Heavy Oil
more sophisticated numerical simulation models of foamy oil Reservoirs Under Solution Gas Drive; SPE Prod. Eng., 169-180,
flow. The results from this model may also be useful for well test- May 1988.
ing analysis in foamy oil reservoirs. However, considerable fur-
2. LOUGHEAD, D.J., and SALTUKLAROGLU, M., Lloydminster
ther research is needed to apply the ideas presented here to reser- Heavy Oil Production: Why So Unusual?; Presented at the 9th
voir scale simulations. Annual Heavy Oil and Oil Sand Symposium, Calgary, AB, March 11,
1992.
3. MAINI, B.B., SARMA, H.K., and GEOGE, A.E, Significance of
Acknowledgements Foamy-oil Behaviour in Primary Production of Heavy Oils; Journal
of Canadian Petroleum Technology, Vol. 32, No. (9), November
The authors wish to thank F. Nicola for the set-up of the exper- 1993.
imental facilities. They also thank the Petroleum Recovery 4. SHENG, J.J., MAINI, B.B., HAYES, R.E., and TORTIKE, W.S,
Institute for its support. Foamy Oil Flow—A Review; Presented at the International
Symposium on Petroleum and Petrochemical Engineering, Beijing,
NOMENCLATURE China, September 14 – 17, 1994.
5. MAINI, B.B, Foamy Oil Flow; teaching notes at a workshop for PRI
a = coefficient of the power function, m3/sb members, April 27, 1994.
a' = coefficient of the power function, fraction 6. FIROOZABADI A., OTTESEN, B., a n d MIKKELSON, M.,
b = gas bubble growth index, dimensionless Measurements of Supersaturation and Critical Gas Saturation;
B = volume factor, m3/m3 SPEFE, 337-343, December 1992.
c = compressibility, kPa-1 7. KRAUS, W.P., MCCAFFREY, W.J., and BOYD, G.W., Pseudo-
C = solute concentration, kg-mole/m3 bubble Point Model for Foamy Oils; Petroleum Society Paper 93-45
D = diffusion coefficient, m2/s presented at the Petroleum Society 1993 Annual Technical
Conference, Calgary, AB, May 9 – 12, 1993.
keg = entrained gas evolution constant, s-1
p = pressure, kPa 8. ISLAM, M.R., and CHAKMA, A., Mechanics of Bubble Flow in
Heavy Oil Reservoirs; Paper SPE 20070 presented at the 60th
r = bubble radius, m California Regional Meeting, Ventura, CA, April 4 – 6, 1990.
R = universal gas constant, 8.3143 kPa . m3 . (kg-mole)-1. 9. MCCAFFREY, W.J., a n d BOWMAN, R.D., Recent Success in
˚ K-1 Primary Bitumen Production; Paper No. 6 presented at 8th Annual
Rs = solution gas/oil ratio, m3/m3 Heavy Oil & Oil Sands Technical Symposium, Calgary, AB, March
Rs' = modified solution gas/oil ratio, m3/m3 14, 1991.
S = saturation 10. POON, D.C., and KISMAN, K., Non-Newtonian Effects on the
t = time, s Primary Product ion of Heavy Oil Reservoirs; P e t r o l e u m
teg = age of the entrained gas bubbles, s Society/AOSTRA paper 91-33 presented at the Petroleum
Society/AOSTRA 1991 Technical Conference, Banff, AB, April 21 –
tng = effective nucleation and growth time, s 24, 1991.
T = temperature, ˚ C
11. LEBEL, J.P., Performance Implications of Various Reservoir Access
V = volume, m3 Geometries; Presented at the 11th Annual Heavy Oil & Oil Sands
Technical Symposium, March 2, 1994.
Greek Symbols 12. CLARIDGE, E.L,. a n d PRATS, M., A Proposed Model and
αeg = entrained gas fraction, dimensionless Mechanism for Anomalous Foamy Heavy Oil Behaviour; Paper SPE
29243, USMS, 1994.
αng = gas bubble growth fraction, dimensionless
13. MOULU, J.C., Solution Gas Drive: Experiments and Simulation;
β = isobaric thermal expansion coefficient, ˚ C-1
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2, pp. 379-386,
Γ = entrained gas quality, fraction 1989.
γ = gas volume fraction, fraction 14. FIROOZABADI, A., and KASHCHIEV, D., Pressure and Volume
κ = constant coefficient, dimensionless Evaluation During Gas Phase Formation in Solution Gas Drive
∆ = difference Process; Paper 26286, USMS, 1993.

44 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

 15. KASHCHIEV, D., and FIROOZABADI, A., Kinetics of the Initial
Stage of Isothermal Gas Phase Formation; Journal of Chemical
Physics 98 (6), 4690-4699, March 15, 1993.
16. LI, X., and YORTSOS, Y.C., Critical Gas Saturation: Modelling and
Sensitivity Studies; Paper SPE 26662 presented at the 68th Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition of SPE of AIME, Houston, TX,
October 3 – 6, 1993.
17. KORTEKAAS, T.F.M., and VAN POELGEST, F., Liberation of
Solution Gas During Pressure Depletion of Virgin Watered-out Oil
Reservoirs; SPERE, pp. 329-335, August 1991.
18. CLARK, N.O., A Study of Mechanically Produced Foam for
Combating Petro Fires; D.S.I.R., Chemistry Research, Special Report
No. 6, H.M.S.C. London, 1947.
19. ROSS, S., Bubbles and Foams; Ind. Eng. Chem., 61 (10), pp. 48-57,
October 1969.
20. BIKERMAN, J.J., Foams; Springer-Verlag New York, Heidelberg,
Berlin, 1973.
21. MAINI, B.B., a n d MA, V., Laboratory Evaluation of Foaming
Agents for High Temperature Applications—I. Measurements of
Foam Stability at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures; Paper 84-
35-07 presented at the 35t h Annual Technical Meeting of the
Petroleum Society and the Canadian Association of Drilling
Engineers, Calgary, AB, June 10 – 13, 1984.
22. MAINI, B.B., and MA, V., Relationship Between Foam Stability
Measured in Static Tests and Flow Behaviour of Foams in Porous
Media; Paper SPE 13073 presented at the 59th Annual Technical
Meeting of SPE of AIME, Houston, TX, September 16 – 19, 1984.
23. CALLAGHAN, I.C., LAWRENCE, F.T., and MELTON, P.M., An
Equation Describing Aqueous and Non-aqueous Foam Collapse;
Colloid & Polymer Sci., 264, pp. 423-434, 1986.
24. ETTINGER, R.A., and RADKE, C., Influence of Texture on Steady
Foam Flow in Berea Sandstone; SPERE, 7(1), pp. 83-90, 1992.
25. ROSS, S.; Chem. Eng. Progr., 63, 41, 1967.
26. CALLAGHAN, I.C., and NEUSTADTER, E.L., Foaming of Crude
Oils: a Study of Non-aqueous Foam Stability; Chemistry and
Industry, 17, pp. 53-57, January 1981.
Provenance—Original Petroleum Society manuscript, A Non-
equilibrium Model to Calculate Foamy Oil Properties, (95-19),
first presented at the 46th Annual Technical Meeting, May 14 –
17, 1995, in Banff, Alberta. Abstract submitted for review
November 15, 1994; editorial comments sent to the author(s)
April 6, 1998; revised manuscript received October 22, 1998;
paper approved for pre-press November 23, 1998; final approval
March 26, 1999.M
April 1999, Volume 38, No. 4
Authors’ Biographies
James Sheng obtained a B.Sc. (1983) from
the University of Petroleum in China, a
M.Sc. (1992) and a Ph.D. (1996) from the
University of Alberta, all in petroleum
engineering. He worked for China National
Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) before
coming to Canada for graduate studies in
1990. He has also worked for SCMK
Development and Engineering Ltd. and the
Petroleum Recovery Institute in Calgary.
He has recently authored over ten papers on reservoir engineering,
reservoir simulation, well testing, and foamy oil flow. He is a
member of the Petroleum Society and SPE.
Brij Maini obtained his B.Tech. degree
from the Indian Institute of Technology,
Kanpur, India, and a Ph.D. in chemical
engineering from the University of
Washington, Seattle. Currently a senior
staff research engineer at the Petroleum
Recovery Institute, he specializes in experi-
mental research in heavy oil recovery
processes. He also holds adjunct professor
positions at the University of Calgary and
the University of Regina. He is a registered
professional engineer in Alberta and is a member of the Petroleum
Society and SPE.
R.E. Hayes is a professor in the department
of chemical and materials engineering at
the University of Alberta. His research
interests include numerical modelling with
a focus on transport in porous media. Dr.
Hayes holds B.Sc. and B.Eng. degrees in
chemical engine ering from Dalhousie
University and obtained his Ph.D. from the
University of Bath (UK) in 1983. He is a
member of CSChE and is a registered pro-
fessional engineer with APENS.
Simon Tortike is currently manager, engi-
neering business development for Mincom
Pty Ltd. in Brisbane, Qld. He holds a B.Sc.
(Hons) from Imperial College, England,
and an M.Eng. and Ph.D. from the
University of Alberta; all in petroleum
engineering. Dr. Tortike is a member of the
SPE, APEGGA, and the Institute of
Engineers, Australia. His current research
interests include the development of
unstructured meshes for reservoir simula-
tion, carried out at the Queensland University of Technology, and
the optimization of oil and gas field production systems, embod-
ied in the software development at Mincom Pty Ltd.
45