Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3710
tory techniques of Lindsly12~l. led to the present methods of ing conditions may change as well as the nature of the reservoir
reservoir fluid analysis. Such improved techniques make pos- fluid: thus, new PVT analyses will take into account these
sible the quantitative inve~tjgation of re~ervoir prohlem~ now factnr~ which were not anticipated in prior tests.
taking place.
Modern laboratory procedures still do not truly represent
reservoir behavior. This paper will present some proposals to
help correct these discrepancies. Bottom-H ole Samples
Many types of bottom-hole samplers have been devised and
de,cribed in the literature.",]·"·,24,25,,. The mechanical nature of
the devices introduces some error into the sampling operation;
however, these errors are probably of less importance than
those resulting from the other difficulties.
RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE
It is often questionable whether the fluids in the tubing at
SURVEYS, SAMPLING OF RESERVOIR FLUIDS
the point where a bottom-hole sample is taken are representa-
The applicability of the results of laboratory PVT deter- tive of the reservoir hydrocarbons. This is particularly true if
minations to problems in reservoir behavior depends upon there has been considerable drawdown of the well prior to
field information. To use the laboratory results in reservoir sampling, if several zones containing fluids of dissimilar prop-
studies it is necessary to have accurate field temperature, pres- erties are produced together, if the gas and liquid are not
rates of liquid and its formerly associated gas to the well bore;
t~~~-~ -~
such a condition would obviously render a sample combined
on the basis of the primary trap gas-oil ratio inaccurate. The
necessity for accurate gauging and steady-state well conditions _ u un--+----
is immediately apparent. (If the well is producing both gas
from a gas cap and gas released from solution, the proper
combination of the fluid samples will depend on other infor-
;60oL--:--_______
a: I
I ______
I :
~
f L-- ~
mation besides the primary separator gas-oil ratio. General
correlations concerning the properties of reservoir fluids may
be useful in this regard"-30).
The economy resulting from the use of recombined well fluid
V t,
:3
a:
400
COMPOSITE UBERATION-
SEPARATOR
I
CONDITIONS 100 PStG, eOOF~
TANK CONDITIONS
.~ I
I 0 PSIG:, 80 0 r
I
i
all the fluid entering the flow-string must be removed from
it at the surface and there is sufficien~ agitation in the flow-
SEPA~A -I
::J
<.> string to induce equilibrium. There are several differences,
w
::; FLASH TlON however, between this flow·string liberation and a laboratory
-~
::J
..J
i TEMPERATURE 140·
flash liberation. The laboratory flash liberation allows only the
o I
> II gas liberated from the sample to stay in contact with the re-
<.>
i;: .0300 maining liquid until certain conditions are reached. This is
'\
<3
w usually done under isothermal condition". In the well bore,
Q. I
I
27TI gas from oil other than that in the well bore may be present,
en I
~ 1
/BUBBLE TINT PSIG AND ,
0.02241 CU FT/LB
resulting in differences from the laboratory results in both
the gas and oil characteristics. This is particularly true in
.0200
i I 'I gas injection where part of the injected gas is by. passin•
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 through partially depleted pores. Also separation of some gas
PRESSURE CPSIG)
from the liquid hydrocarbons at th~ tubing shoe may occur.
~
The differential liberation of tile oil in the main test cell
Q.
Ul· ---....,
is continued with removal of portiulls of the differentially lib- 0 0
I---.,
0.6
erated oil at selected pressures. Each portion removed is Hashed 1000 2000 ~OOO 4000
PRESSURE (PSIG)
through what approximates the surface trapping arrangement.
Near the end of the composite liberation process the main
cell pressure may drop below the initial assumed trap pressure fIG. 5 - GAS SPECIFIC GRAVITY.
>- 36,5
I- may then be compared to the deviation factors as determined
:>
<t by the Brown'" or some other similar method." A formation
a: ,
'" volullle factor for the gas (space in barrels (.ccupied in the
36~4 - ----- , -t---·--·~------+------- --- reservoir at a certain pressure bv one standard cubic foot of
gas that is not in solution') mav he computed using the devia-
tion information and gas laws. Use of the gas formation vol-
363
0 1000 2000 3000 lime factor. ,olution gas·oil ratio. and li(plid volume factor
PRESSURE (PSIG)
readilv gives the two.phase formation \'olume farto]'. To be of
"ignifican('(~ this two.phase factor must he romputed from the
FIG. 6 - GRAVITY OF COMPOSITE-LIBERATION TANK OIl. ('ompositt- liberation data and should not he obtained from
Table 2 -_. Well Sampling Data ,ite methud were 100 psig and /:lO°F for the oeparator, and
Total Dppth: S,:JHO fl. I'lu,.:,.:t'd to: S.2:-lh 1'1.
o psig and 80°F for the tank.
Compj P tiol1: Date: ])PI·. I. 11)42. From tlH~ dat a (Tahles I through 4 J curves were constructed
( :a~i ng ~iZf~: hllt If!. (I-'i/-!:,. I Ihrollgh 61. It is to he noted that only three poinls
ll .. pth: S,:'7:1 fl. ',('n' ddt'rllli" .. d hy tlw composite method. The general form
I't~rlo,.aliofl: Clln pt"rforatl·(1.
Intpr\,al: S.II7·S.IS1 1'1.
of till' ,'.omposil(~ liheration curves was dictated hy the three
Tuhin,.: Size: 21f2 in. poinls ohtaine!1 and the shape of the differential curves. The
ll"pt It of tubi 11": ;;IJOe: :-;.1 ()O I!. shape of Ihe composite curves in the under-saturated area
Packer: S,074 ft. wa" determined hy the linear relationship of the differential
Commenb: Pack!'r "PI to i"olatt' IIl'l'er 1\ att'r ,allik
Samplin,.: Date: ,\1ay I, 19S1. ('urve; an offset was made to allow for the different final
I'rodlll'tion Data: (Durin,.: "amplin,.: I properties, The symhols, abhreviations, and suhscripts used are
Tuhin~ Prf's~tlrt': 480 I'sig Ihose given in the appendix.
(:asin,.: Pressure: Not recorded
~"parator Data
\faterial halance techniques were used in conjunction with
Pn"':-.:--lIn-· T'-llIperature the PVT data to calculate the tank oil uriginally in place in
Fi rst Sta~~: "l01lf' \j,,",- Ihe reservoir. The equation employed, production clata used,
Second Sta,.: .. : 'iOIlt' \jOlW
and rt";ults obtained are shown in Table 6. Note that at a
Tank: ~flt n-'(·ordt·d 'iot rPI'ord"d
Oil and (;a, Halt' pre.;surt' of 2,070 ]>~ig the tank oil initially in place for the
composite data was 292.9 x 10'; bbl against 231.8 x 10" bbl for
Table 5 - Compressibility and Specific Velume Data regard to gas-cap properties may be quite inaccurate. partic-
Type of Sample: Recombined ularly where gas injection operations are occurring.
Specific Volume No determination of the physical behavior of a reservoir fluid
At Bubble Point Conditions: 2,730 poig and 140°F as far as the authors know has considered the effect of gas
Measured: 0.02241 eu ftjlb injection on the results of the analysis. An answer to the ques-
Calculated by Composition: 0.02190 cu ftjlh
Calculated by Flash Vaporization: Not Run tion of whether the present methods of approximating reservoir
Calculated by Stage Separations gas liberations are applicable when gas of non-equilibrium
at 100 psig and 0 psig 0.02119 cu ftjlb composition is coming in contact with the oil (i.e., by-passing)
Unsaturated Oil Above Bubble Point Pressure would be extremely helpful in laboratory work and in the
Specific Volume at 4964 psig and 140°F: 0.02188 cu ftjlb
Thermal Expansion: Not run application of the results of laboratory tests.
Compressibility at 140°F:
from 2,730 psig b) 3,414 psig. 10.937 x lO- G hhl
per bbl per psi
from 3,414 psig to 4,002 psig. 11.880 x 10-· bbl
per bbl per psi
from 4,002 psig to 4,964 psig. 9.815 x 10- 6 bbl
per bbl per psi
NOMENCLATURE
Symbols
39. Standing, M. B., and Katz, D. L.: "Density of Natural liberation method during approximately the first third of
Gases," Trans. AIME, (1942) 146, 140. pressure depletion below the bubble point, breaking up toward
40. Hocott, C. R.: "Interfacial Tension Between Water and the differential liberation curve during the second third of
Oil Under Reservoir Conditions," Trans. AIME, (1939) pressure depletion where gas is being removed approximately
132, 184. as fast as it is liberated in the reservoir, and during the
41. Espach and Fry, J.: "Variable Characteristics of the Oil last third, the formation-volume probably would remain well
in the Tensleep Sandstone Reservoir, Elk Basin Field, above the composite liberation curve and probably closer to
Wyoming and Montana," Trans. AIME, (1951) 192, 75. the differential liberation curve since large quantities of com-
42. Graybeal, O. A.: "California's Prolific Potrero Oil Field," paratively dry (largely methane) reservoir gas would be pass-
Oil and Gas Jour., (1951) 50, (10), 80. ing through the surface separators in intimate contact with
43. Cupps, c. Q., Lipstate, P. H., Jr., and Fry, J.: "Variance the oil, causing an abnormal amount of shrinkage of the
in Characteristics of the Oil in the Weber Sandstone Res· separator oil. There is no discussion in the paper of this
ervoir, Rangely Field, Colo." R.I. 4761, USBM, (1951). last effect (large amounts of excess gas production above
44. Sage, B. H., and Lacey, W. N.: "Gravitational Concentra- the solution GOR) on the formation-volume factor of the
tion Gradients in Static Columns of Hydrocarbon Fluid," oil during the last stages of depletion; in fact, it is neglected
Trans. AIME, (1939) 132, 120. in the laboratory method.
45. Burtchaell, E. P.: "Reservoir Performance of a High Since the formation volume factor is by definition a ratio
Relief Pool," Trans. AIME, (1949) 186, 171. of an end product (either tank oil or residual oil) to a
formation liberation. However, before equilibrium gas satura· A flashing of the produced oil will occur during the flow up
tion is reached, where the oil is of a highly volatile nature, the tubing and through the separators and tanks. If large
or where the producing gas-oil ratio is in excess of the amounts of gas are produced with the oil in the field, make-up
solution gas-oil ratio, the differential process is not completely gas can be injected into the auxiliary cell in the laboratory
representative of the formation liberation. along with the differentially liberated oil to make the flash
At conditions below the equilibruim gas saturation, a flash trapping stage of the composite liberation more representative.
liberation best represents the formation process. Special tech· The liberation to which any produced oil is subjected i~ a
niques must be used to simulate the formation liberation composite of the vaporization in the formation and that
when the re'3ervoir contains oil of high volatility; the paper occurring from well bore to stock tank. This dual process
of Cook, Spencer and Bobrowski (ref. 34 above) outlines a of vaporization occurring during production must be con-
method that will approximate the formation vaporization under sidered in any laboratory technique seeking to similate actual
,;nch circumstances. production.
Conservation of reservoir energy usually dictates that no It is recognized that the oil residual in the reservoir does
well or pool will be produced at gas·oil ratios greatly exceed· not undergo the composite vaporization. However, material
ing the solution gas·oil ratio. However, during production of' balance techniques commonly involve the tank oil in place
depletion type pools and when gas is being injected into ~t any time despite the fact that all this oil in place actually
the reservoir, the gas-oil ratio sometimes may be high. Under will not be produced to the ~tock tanks. Such balance cal-
these circumstances the differential vaporization is not en- culations, therefore. must use volume data that is hased