The University of Sirte

Faculty of Engineering
Petroleum Engineering Department

An Engineering Seminar
Fluid Displacement Fractional flow curve
for water injection

This seminar was submitted to the petroleum engineering

Department to partially fulfil the B.Sc degree requirments

Prepared by:
Ali Ahmed Gaddafi

Supervised by :
Dr.Tariq Al Kaseh

Academic year:2021 -2022

 Faculty of Engineering
Petroleum Engineering Department

Title
Fluid Displacement Fractional flow curve
for water injection

Submitted by . Ali Ahmed Gaddafi

Supervised by Mr. Tariq Al Kaseh

Approved by Examiners Committee

Name Signatune
Dr.Mohammed Al Siwi
Mr.Abdullah Bashir
Mr. Tariq Al Kaseh
Table of contents
Abstract .................................................................................................. 1
1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 2
2.Water Injection ................................................................................... 4
2.1 Water Injection Mechanism. ........................................................... 5
2.2 Water Injection Methods ................................................................. 6
Improved Oil Recovery .3 ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
5. Central and peripheral flooding ........................................................ 8
7. Fluid Displacement .......................................................................... 11
Buckley-Leverett Theory ................................................................. 11
Welge’s Method ............................................................................... 15
8.Problem: ............................................................................................ 18
Conclusion ............................................................................................ 23
References ............................................................................................ 24
 Abstract
Water injection is one of the most useful techniques for enhancing the
production of oil from petroleum reservoirs. This is not only because of the low cost
of water but also because of the characteristics of the water which help sweep the
trapped oil efficiently. The immiscible displacement of oil by water through a porous
and permeable reservoir rock can be described by the use of a fractional flow curves
(fw versus Sw). Water flooding project parameters can be obtained from the fractional
flow curve. However, developing a representative fractional flow curve for a specific
reservoir can be quite challenging when fluid and special core analysis data is limited
or compromised. Bucklett-Leverett fractional flow equation and Wegle’s correlation
have been applied on a real field data..

1
1. Introduction

The oil field productivity depends on the reservoir size, complexity, primary
mechanisms and the type and quantity of fluids it contains. Thereby, it is essential to
define the formation characteristics and prediction of the production with the view to
establish the feasibility in the oil exploration. For this reason, reservoir simulation is
widely used to analyze the reservoir behavior and to set and optimize a development
plan for increasing the oil recovery efficiency. Further, simulation studies assists in
reservoir development decisions, information about the porous media, its geology,
and its degree of het-erogeneity and production–injection history, considering the
importance of the time and pressure in reservoir to evaluate the potential applicability
of different recovery processes. [1]
When the reservoir pressure is reduced and decreases the produced oil rate, water
or gas is injected to increase the reservoir pressure, wherewith some production wells
are converted to injection wells. The mechanism for pressure maintenance in the
reservoir has been designated as secondary oil recovery, and presents recovery factor
ranging from 20 to 50%, depending the porous media properties and fluid
characteristics. On the other hand, water injection is largely employed due ‘to the
general availability of water, the relative ease with which water is injected and the
ability with which water spreads through an oil-bearing formation and water’s
efficiency in displacing oil.
Thus, this seminar intent to study fluid displacement in oil reservoirs and applying
fractional flow curve of water injection on homogeneous reservoir saturated by oil.
Using Bucklett Leverett fractional flow equation and Wegle’s correlation on a real
field data. The displacement of oil by water from a porous and permeable rock is an
unsteady state process because of the change in saturations with time and distance
from the injection point. These changes in saturation cause the relative permeability
values and pressures to change as a function of time at each position in the rock.
Figure illustrates the various stages of an oil/water displacement process in a
homogeneous linear system.

2
2.Improved Oil Recovery
Primary production usually only recovers some 30 to 35% of the oil in place.
Although the effectiveness of water injection varies according to the formation
characteristics, a waterflood can recover anywhere from 5% to 50% of the oil that is
remaining in the reservoir, greatly enhancing the productivity and economics of the
development.

This form of EOR is typically more productive when there are relatively small
amounts of primary production, and the process becomes uneconomical when the
water cut reaches the 90 to 99% level. Some waterfloods may take up to two years of
injection before production is increased; and some reservoirs do not have the right
characteristics, and water injection is not a viable option for increasing production
from waning wells. (For example, water injection is never used on natural gas wells.)

Figure 1. water injection is never used on natural gas wells

3
3.Water Injection
Water flooding is inexpensive and simple to use. Thus, it is dominant among fluid
injection methods and is without question responsible for the current high oil
producing rate within the America and Canada. Water injection is a technique that
uses injection wells and production wells to avail the energy with the water injected
for displace oil to the production wells. Figure 1 shows a scheme of water injection:
In water flooding, water would displace oil from pores in a formation in a manner
representing a leaky piston. ‘In addition, the higher viscosity of crude oil in
comparison to water will contribute to non-ideal displacement behavior. Several
concepts will be defined in order that an understanding of displacement efficiencies
can be achieved [5]. Accomplishes that the viscosity contrast between the water and
oil in the displacement of oil by water is a problem often. Thereby, the adverse
mobility ratios that result promote fingering of water through the more viscous
crude oil and can reduce the oil recovery efficiency. A viscous fingering is shown in
Figure 2

Figure 1. Water injection Scheme

4
 Figure 2. Viscous fingering

3. Water Injection Mechanism.

While primary production refers to oil that is recovered naturally from a producing
well, Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) improves the amount of oil recovered from a
well by using some form of additional engineering technique. Water injection, also
known as waterflood, is a form of this secondary EOR production process.

Used in onshore and offshore developments, water injection involves drilling

injection wells into a reservoir and introducing water into that reservoir to encourage
oil production. While the injected water helps to increase depleted pressure within the
reservoir, it also helps to move the oil in place.

Whether water injection occurs after production has already been depleted or before
production from the reservoir has been drained, waterflood sweeps remaining oil
through the reservoir to production wells, where it can be recovered.

5
 Figure 3. Baobab Subsea Production System

4. Water Injection Methods

The water used for water injection is usually some sort of brine, but it can also be
made up of other sources that are treated. For example, in some reservoirs water is
produced with the hydrocarbons, removed from the production and re-injected into
the formation.

It is important that the water being injected works within the formation. Filtration and
processing of the water that will be injected are sometimes necessary to ensure that no
materials clog the well pores and that bacteria is not permitted to grow. In an effort to
reduce any corrosion within the reservoir, oxygen is often removed .

6
 Figure 4. from the water, as well.

While production wells can be converted into injection wells, water-injection wells
are also drilled specifically for this purpose. Water is then pumped into the reservoir,
or gravity can help to push the liquid into the formation. This solution positions water
tanks on hills or somewhere above the well, and the water simply is fed into the
wellbore.

There are a number of techniques for determining where the water-injection wells
should be drilled, as well as established patterns for water-injection wells in relation
to production wells. One popular pattern, called the five-spot pattern, involves drilling
four water-injection wells in a square around a production well. This is repeated
around each production well on the reservoir, resulting in four production wells
surrounding each water-injection well, as well.

Other drilling techniques include the seven-spot pattern, which has six water-injection
wells surrounding a production well, and the inverted seven-spot pattern, which
describes six production wells surrounding one water-injection well.

Also, wells can be drilled in line patterns, rather than spot patterns, where a direct line
or staggered line of production wells is followed by a similar line of water-injection
wells, and so on. In an edge waterflood, water-injection wells are drilled along the
outside borders of the field, and water is injected, with production flowing toward the
production wells in the center of the reservoir. [6]

7
5. Injection Well Location

The relative location of injection and production wells depends on the geo-Logy of
the reservoir, its type, and the volume of hydrocarbon-bearing rock required to be
swept in a time limited by economics.
It is advantageous, where possible, to make use of any favourable influence of
gravity, for example in inclined reservoirs, reservoirs with a gas-cap or with an
underlying aquifer. [6]
This leads to two types of injection well location:
(a) Central and peripheral flooding, in which the injectors are grouped together.
(b) Pattern flooding, in which the injectors are distributed amongst the pro-diction
wells.

6. Central and peripheral flooding

This type of injection occurs in the following cases:
(a) Reservoir with a gas-cap in which gas injection is taking place. If the reservoir
is a fairly regular anticlinal structure, the injection wells are normally grouped
in a cluster around the top of the anticline (Fig.6).

Fig 6. a

Fig 6. b

Figure 6: Central and peripheral flooding

8
(b) Anticlinal reservoir with an underlying aquifer in which water injection is taking
place. In this case the injectors will form a ring around the reservoir (Fig.6).

(b) Monoclonal reservoir with gas-cap or aquifer undergoing gas or water injection.
The injectors are grouped in one or more lines located towards the base of the
reservoir in the case of water injection, towards the top in the case of gas injection
(Fig.6).

7. Pattern flooding

Pattern flooding is principally employed in reservoirs having a small dip and a large
surface area. In order to ensure a uniform sweep the injection wells are distributed
amongst the production wells. This is done either by converting existing production
wells into injectors or by drilling infill injection wells. In both cases the aim is to
obtain as uniform a distribution of wells as was used for the natural recovery phase.

Historically, due to the fact that the oil leases were divided into square miles and
quarter square miles, US fields were developed in a very regular fashion. The various
regular well patterns have been much documented and studied. [3]

The most common patterns are the following:

7.1. Direct line drive

The lines of injection and production wells are directly opposed. The system is
characterised by the two parameters:

a = spacing between wells of the same type,

d = spacing between lines of injection and production wells.

7.2- Staggered line drive

The wells are in lines as before, the injectors and producers being no longer directly
opposed but laterally displaced, normally by a distance of a/2.

9
7.3- Five-spot

This is a particular case of staggered line drive in which d/a = 1/2, and is the most
well-known pattern. Each injection well is located at the centre of a square defined by
four production wells. In patterns A, B and C the injection and production wells are
equal in number (I/P = 1).

7.4- Seven-spot

The injection wells are located at the corners of a hexagon with a production well at
its center. There are twice as many injection wells as production wells (I/P = 2).

Fig. 7 : Well Patterns for Flooding

7.5- Nine-spot

The pattern is similar to that of a five-spot, but with an extra injection well drilled at
the middle of each side of the square. There are three times as many injection wells as
production wells (I/P =3).

Notes

It is usual to name a regular pattern by the number of injection wells surround- ding
each producer plus one.

There are also inverted patterns in which the injection and production well locations
are reversed with respect to the classical patterns:

Classical seven-spot I/P =2.

Inverted seven-spot I/P = 1/2.

10
In practice, the choice of pattern is normally limited to either a line drive or a five-
spot, since other patterns may require the drilling of additional wells.

8. Fluid Displacement

Fluid displacement processes require contact between the displacing fluid and the
displaced fluid. The movement of the interface between displacing and displaced
fluids and the breakthrough time associated with the production of injected fluids at
producing wells are indicators of sweep efficiency. This chapter shows how to
calculate such indicators using two analytical techniques: the Buckley-Leverett theory
with Welge’s method for immiscible fluid displacement, and solution of the
convection-dispersion equation for miscible fluid displacement.

8.1 Buckley-Leverett Theory

One of the simplest and most widely used methods of estimating the advance of a
fluid displacement front in an immiscible displacement process is the Buckley-
Leverett method. The Buckley-Leverett theory [1942] estimates the rate at which an
injected water bank moves through a porous medium. The approach uses fractional
flow theory and is based on the following assumptions:
1- Flow is linear and horizontal
2- Water is injected into an oil reservoir
3- Oil and water are both incompressible
4- Oil and water are immiscible
5- Gravity and capillary pressure effects are negligible

The following analysis can be found in a variety of sources, such as

Collins [1961], Dake [1978], Wilhite [1986], Craft, et al. [1991] and
Towler [2002].
qt = qo + qw (1)

11
where q denotes volumetric flow rate at reservoir conditions and the subscripts {o, w,
t} refer to oil, water, and total rate, respectively. The rate of water entering the
element on the left hand side (LHS) is:

qt fw = entering LHS (2)

for a fractional flow to water fw. The rate of water leaving the element on the right
hand side (RHS) is

qt(fw+▲fw) = leaving RHS (3)

Figure 8. Flow Geometry

The change in water flow rate across the element is found by performing a mass
balance. The movement of mass for an immiscible, incompressible system gives
water rate = water entering - water leaving

12
qt fw – qt (fw + Δqt fw)

= - qt Δfw (4)

The change in water saturation per unit time is the water rate in Eq. (4)

divided by the pore volume of the element, thus

ΔSw qtΔfw
=− (5)
Δt A ∅ Δx

In the limit as Δt → 0 and Δx → 0, we pass to the differential form of Eq.(5) for the
water phase:

𝛛𝐒𝐰 𝐪𝐭𝚫𝐟𝐰
= (6)
𝛛𝐭 𝐀 ∅ 𝚫𝐱

A similar equation applies to the oil phase:

𝛛𝐒𝐨 𝐪𝐭𝛛𝐟𝐨
= (7)
𝛛𝐭 𝐀 ∅ 𝛛𝐱

Since fw depends only on Sw, we can write the derivative of fractional flow as

𝛛𝐅𝐰 𝛛𝐅𝐰 𝛛𝐒𝐰

= (8)
𝛛𝐱 𝛛𝐒𝐰 𝛛𝐱

Substituting ∂fw/∂x into ∂Sw/∂x yields

𝛛𝐒𝐰 𝐪𝐭 𝐝𝐅𝐰 𝛛𝐒𝐰

= − 𝐀 ∅ 𝐝𝐒𝐰 𝛛𝐱 (9)
𝛛𝐭

It is not possible to solve for the general distribution of water saturation Sw(x, t) in
most realistic cases because of the nonlinearity of the problem.

13
For example, water fractional flow is usually a nonlinear function of water saturation.
It is therefore necessary to consider a simplified approach to solving Eq. (.9).

We begin by considering the total differential of Sw (x, t):

dSw ∂Sw dx ∂Sw

= + (10)
dt ∂x dt ∂t

Equation (10) can be simplified by choosing x to coincide with a surface of fixed Sw

so that dSw/dt = 0 and

∂Sw
dx ( )
∂t
( dt ) Sw = − ∂Sw (11)
( )
∂x

Substituting Eqs. (8) and (.9) into Eq. (11) gives the Buckley-Leverett frontal advance
equation:

dx qt dFw
( dt ) Sw = − (dSw )sw (12)
A∅

The derivative (dt / dx ) is the velocity of the moving plane with water saturation Sw,
and the derivative ( dFw / dSw ) is the slope of the fractional flow curve. The integral
of the frontal advance equation gives

Wi dFw
Xsw = ( )sw (13)
A∅ dSw

Where:

Xsw: distance traveled by a particular Sw contour (ft)

Wi: cumulative water injected (cu ft)

(dfw / dsw): slope of fractional flow curve

14
8.2 Water Saturation Profile

A plot of Sw versus distance using Eq. (13) and typical fractional flow curves leads to
the physically impossible situation of multiple values of Sw at a given location. A
discontinuity in Sw at a cutoff location xc is needed to make the water saturation
distribution single valued and to provide a material balance for wetting fluids. The
procedure is summarized below.

8.3 Welge’s Method

In 1952, Welge published an approach that is widely used to perform the Buckley-
Leverett frontal advance calculation. Welge's approach is best demonstrated using a
plot of fw versus Sw (Figure 9).

Figur 9. Welge's Method

A line is drawn with its intercept at the irreducible water saturation Swirr – the water
saturation Sw in front of the waterflood – and tangent to a point on the fw curve. The
resulting tangent line is called the breakthrough tangent, or slope. It is illustrated in

15
Figure 2. Water saturation at the flood front Swf is the point of tangency on the fw
curve. The water-oil flood front is sometimes called a shock front because of the
abrupt change from irreducible water saturation in front of the waterflood and Swf.
Fractional flow of water at the flood front is fwf and occurs at the point of tangency
Swf on the fw curve. In Figure 4-2, Swf is 62% and fwf is 92. Average water
saturation behind the flood front Swbt is the intercept of the main tangent line with
the upper limiting line where fw = 1.0.

In Figure 8, average Swbt is 65%. In summary, when injected water reaches the
producer, Welge’s approach gives the following results:

- Water saturation at the producing well is Swf

- Average water saturation behind the front is Swbt

- Producing water cut at reservoir conditions is fwf

Welge’s approach can be used to obtain other useful information

about the waterflood. The time to water breakthrough at the producer is

LA∅
Tbt = qi (dfw/dSw)sw (14)

Where:

qi: injection rate

(dfw / dsw): slope of main tangent line

L: linear distance from injection well to production well

Cumulative water injected is given by

1
Qi = (15)
(dFw/dSw)swf

16
where Qi is the cumulative pore volume of injected water. The slope of

the water fractional flow curve with respect to water saturation w w df dS

evaluated at the water saturation at breakthrough wbt S gives cumulative

water injection Qi at breakthrough.

The following data is taken from Craft and Hawkins (1959).

Oil formation volume factor (Bo) 1.25 bbl/STB

Water formation volume factor (Bw) 1.02 bbl/STB
Formation thickness (h) 20 ft
Cross sectional area (A) 26,400 ft2
Porosity 25%
Injection rate (iw) 900 bbl/day
Distance between producer and injector (L) 660ft (20 ac)
Oil viscosity (μo) 2.0 cp
Water viscosity (μw) 1.0 cp
Dip angle 0
Connate water saturation (Swc) 20%
Initial Water Saturation (Swi) 20%
Residual oil saturation (Sor) 20%

Table 1:Relative Permeability vs. Water Saturation.

Sw 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75
Kro/Krw 30.23 17 9.56 5.38 3.02 1.70 0.96 0.54 0.30 0.17 0.10

17
9.Problem:
a) Calculate and plot the water saturation profile after 60, 120 and 240 days .

Solutions:
Step 1: Plot the relative permeability ratio kro/krw vs. water saturation on a semi-log
scale. The relative permeability vs. Sw curve can be described mathematically.

Where:
Kro: relative permeability to oil.
Krw: relative permeability to water.
Sw: water saturation at the production wells.

From the linear segment of the graph of Kro/Krw vs. Sw (Figure 10).

Figure 10: Relative Permeability Ratio vs. Water Saturation

Step 2:
Assume several Sw values and calculate the fractional flow curve at its derivatives
using the following equation:

𝟏
𝑭𝒘 =
𝑲𝒐 𝝁𝒘
𝟏+( )( )
𝑲𝒘 𝝁𝒐
eq.2

18
Differentiating Eq. 2 with respect to Sw give the slope of the fractional flow curve.
Step 3: Plot fw and (dfw/Sw) vs. Sw (Figure 11)

Table 2: calculate the fractional flow curve

Sw Kro/Krw Fw dFw/dSw
0.25 30.06 0.062 0.675
0.30 16.94 0.106 1.08
0.35 9.54 0.173 1.64
0.40 5.38 0.271 2.26
0.45 3.03 0.398 2.74
0.50 1.71 0.540 2.85
0.55 0.96 0.675 2.51
0.596 0.57 0.779 2.97
0.60 0.54 0.787 2.92
0.65 0.30 0.868 2.31
0.70 0.17 0.921 0.83
0.75 0.10 0.954 0.506

19
 Fig. 11: Fractional Flow Curve

Figure 11 indicates that the leading edge of the flood front has a water saturation of
59.6%, which means that the water saturation behind the flood front has a minimum
water saturation of 59.6%.

5.615×𝑖𝑤×𝑡
(x)Sw=( ) × 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝
∅×𝐴

Using the values given in the data set above, this reduces to:

(x)Sw=(0.77)×slop

20
The exercise on the following page illustrates the physical locations of the flood front
in the reservoir for t = 60, 120 and 240 days after initial water injection.

Using Eq. 5 and the data from Table 2 above, we can calculate the distance (feet)
from the injection well to the producing well at Sw from 60% to 75%.

Table 3: the distance (feet) from the injection well to the producing well

dFw/dSw t = 60 t = 120 t = 240 Sw

1.925 88 177 354 0.60

1.318 61 121 242 0.65

0.837 38 77 154 0.70

0.506 23 46 93 0.75

21
Now we can visualize the flood front at 60, 120 and 240 days:

Figure 12. Sw vs Time

The flood front will eventually reach the producing well at which time water
breakthrough will occur. Note that the value of the water saturation in the water-
invaded portion of the reservoir at the time the water breaks through to the producing
well will be about 70%.

22
Conclusion

Always remember that even the most sophisticated reservoir simulators tend to give
optimistic results, for a couple of reasons. First, the theories presented above include
several simplifying assumptions that are necessary so that the mathematics are not
overwhelming. Secondly, all the reservoir heterogeneities in a given rock volume
cannot be quantified and reduced to bytes in a computer program. Always try to
compare simulation results to empirical data such as historical production data trends
and analogies from similar fields. Of course, a good history match is fundamental to
any forecast.

23
References
1. Buckley, S.E., and Leverett, M.C., “Mechanism of Fluid Displacement in Sands”,
Trans. AIME 1942 .

2. Craig, F., Geffen, T., and Morse, R., “Oil Recovery Performance of Pattern Gas or
Water Injection Operations from Model Tests”, JPT, Jan. 1955.

3. Craig, F., The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding, Society of

Petroleum
Engineers, 1971.

4. Smith, C.R., Mechanics of Secondary Oil Recovery, Robt. E. Krieger Publishing,

1966.

5. Stiles, W.E., “Use of Permeability Distribution in Waterflood Calculations,”Trans.

AIME,1951.

6. Welge, H.J., “A Simplified Method for Computing Oil Recovery by Gas or Water
Drive”,Trans. AIME 1952.

7. Willhite, G.P., Waterflooding. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1986.

8. World Oil (editorial), “Practical Waterflooding Shortcuts”, December 1966.

24