SPE/DOE ‘US. Department Patou Engineers ‘tne SPE/DOE 20262 Injection/Production Monitoring: An Effective Method for Reservoir Characterization M.M. Honarpour and L. Tomutsa, Nall. Inst. for Petroleum & Energy Research SSPE Members “Ts pape ws roared er preset at ha SEEIDGE Senin Symoceum on Enhanced OF Recovery Nel In Tus, Okahoma, Ape 23-25, 190 ‘his paver was select e presentation by an SPE Progr Carne folowing review! nrmationcotalne in an abeac submited by he ahr), Cotes oe pas Tretia haat bee evcned by he Soouy ol atau Engiass ante sj aeton by ha ater) Theatr reset, dons ot nce fart Upfront rns sacley a Peter peor cies er manors, Seprs prensa a SPE moving are sate! pubcaon reve by Earl Cornons lhe Sooay Teed Eeinsas Pemesen econ rescledta an stereo marten 00 war. ugeone ney tot easiest shoud conan cnepiiae eknowo3ar=n Satie ses OP ohn te poe sone Wits Pubes Manage SPE, P.O, Got 83585, chrason, Tx To060088. Toles 70H” SPEOAL pastRact ‘obtained from geological, petrophysical, and petrographical analyses. They also indicate that Geological heterogeneities controlling fluid the effects of micellar and polymer adsorption flow paths in the Departnent of Energy Tertiary [retention on Fluid Flow charcteristics of a Incentive Project (TIP) area. in Unit "AY of Bell reservoir can be quantified using the Hall plot Creek (WI) field were identified and described method. using injection, production, pressure, pressure falloff, and pulse test data. Monthly’ tnJect fon Analyzing injection-production-pressure data rate and pressure data, over a period of 10 years and front monitoring during waterflooding proved of Tinedrive waterflooding Followed by 6 years of to be an effective method for characterizing Sbeacren” Tvecspot, water and mice’ lar-polyper candidate reservoirs for enhanced recovery and injection, ere analyzed. using “the Hatt plot for monitoring their performance in @ continuous ethos. 1” Mater production | front tracking and snanner. mathematical simulation results were integrated Tithe information. obtalned «from. geological | INTRODUCTION analysis. and provided an improved interwe!! formation characterization, This _ integrative The primary objective of this engineering approach provided information about | interwel study” was to. show that through integrated reservoir "properties such as directional analysis of well testing and transmissivities, fluid flow patterns, residual production/injection/pressure monitoring methods UT eittration: degree ‘of continuity, presence oF fan. improved reservoir evaluation is obtainable. Flow barriers, ‘and permeability condutts. Thus, the influence of various geological heterogeneties on fluid flow during waterf looding In the TIP area, analysis of the injection and. the implementation of chemical flooding can data with the Hall method provided distinct, be Identified. directional formation transmissivity for the preflush, micellar, and polymer stages of In this paper, we will show that front Injection. “analyses of “pressure-pulse and advancenent. monitoring and Hall plot analysis are falloff tests conducted before the application of effective and useful tools for evaluating ‘the “chemical flood provided a baseline for performance of injection wells and identifying comparing directional Flow characteristics. The interweT] geological heterogeneities." In jnfluence of various geological heterogeneities conjunction” with production/injection data, such as faults/permeabllity variations on fluid perlodical pressure falloff tests and pulse tests Flow characteristics of the reservoir at various can provide adequate information for refined stages of linedrive waterflooding and chemical analysts of in-situ reservoir properties. Flooding was identified. The results. show good agreenent with any complement information Many infill dritting, completion, stim/lation, and enhanced of1 recovery operat fons are inefficient because of insufficient reservoir characterization. Refined knowledge of | the References and iltustrations at end of paper. distribution of reservoir properties, critical heterogeneities, and potential formation damageMJECTION-PRODUCTION MONITORING =~ aN EFFROTIVE 1s needed to reduce risk and improve productivity." The main challenge of __reservoir. characterization 1s to obtain information about Teservoir architecture, continuity, and intervell fluid flow patterns within a reservoir through integrated "geologicai/engineering analysis of reservoir data so that a plan can be developed for selecting the most favorable location and optimum completion and injection methods for wnaximim resource utiTization. The development of reltable geological and engineering models requires data collection, organization, evaluation, reconcitation, and integration’ of geological, petraphysical, diagenetic, rock-fluid, production, injection, and pressure data.! Volumes, rates, pressures, cuts, fluid samples, Fluid evel monitoring, ‘pressure transient testing, tracer testing, and production logging have been enployed for determination of productivity/injectivity indices, location of Fronts, transmissivities, reservoir discontinuities, distance to fronts, and interwel] pressure conmunication.? Regular systenatic and consistent product ton/ injection monitoring and testing have provided a basis for decisions involving field” development, more effective reservoir management, and improved recovery efficiency.*? Because each of these techniques provides “an average property around a well, in the drainage area of a well, or between wells, the data represent the combined effect of several ‘reservoir paraneters in a heterogeneous reservoir.®7 Complementary techniques must be utilized and integrated to identity the influence of various heterogeneities on fluid Flow. Integrative analysis of well tests has not received adequate attention? even though this type of approach is needed for improved characterization of a reservoir. Integrative analysis of well tests 1s necessary to identity and evaluate the effects. of various heterogeneities on fluid flow in_a reservoir at various stages of production. The integrative approach 1s most effective when it is based on a detailed geological model of a reservoir. Bell Creek (NT) field was selected for characterization using product ion/injection Monitoring, and pressure transient testing (see Fig. 1). "Fairly complete product ion/inject ion and’ welihead pressure data were recorded while the ‘field was under primary and secondary recovery and chemical flooding. Good geological data of the central part of Unit ‘A’ were already available based on detailed core descriptions and analyses.® Several falloff and pulse tests for evaluation of reservoir anisotropy were conducted in the TIP area prior to the initation of a chemical flood project. However, no integrative analysis was available in the literature to evaluate in situ flow behavior and identify the role of various heterogeneities on waterflood and ER performance. Injection and production data over 10 years of inedrive waterFicoding and 6 years of micellar-polymer injection for Unit ‘A’ of Bell Creek (NT) field were analyzed using front advancement monitoring and Hall plot analysis. The results were integrated with geological information to characterize a project area for geological heterogeneities and to determine their influence on vwaterfload and chemical EOR performance. Preflush waterflood performance and late waterflood performance of chemical injection wells were ‘compared with the performance of Surrounding water injection wells to evaluate the ‘overall performance of these wells as compared to that of similar injection wells in the TIP area. Component parts of this study include analysis of front advancenents at low and high water cuts (20-704), production, injection, wellhead pressure information, pressure transient data, and mathenatical Simulation. The Production and injection data are analyzed in Vight of a thorough geological, model of the reservoir which was developed's*-"" through a detailed analysis of cores and wireline Togs. Sone of the geological and. engineering information about Bell Creek field ts discussed in the following section to provide a basis for analysis of production, injection, and pressure data. RESERVOIR PROPERTIES OF THE STUDY AREA The reservoir used for the application of the injection-product ion monitoring method is in Unit 'A' of Bell Creek field in Carter and Powder River counties, Montana, on the northeastern flank of Ponder River basin (Fig. 1). The data presented in this paper are mostly from the Department of Energy Tertiary Incentive Project (11?) area located in the central part of Unit "a". Production and injection data and pressure data were obtained by regular monthly well tests of all wells. — Rock, fluid properties, and Production data are sumiarized in Table 1.° Reservoir Geology ‘The Lover Cretaceous Muddy formation at Bel] Creek field is composed of two genetically different sandstone reservoir units: (1) barrier island sediments which conformably overly the marine Skull Creek shale or loner quality Jagoonal/estuarine shaley and silty sandstones and (2) nonnarine and marine valley F111 sediments, which are stratigraphically younger and were unconformably deposited in erosional cuts ‘Into the top of barrier island sandstones. Typically, the Muddy formation in the studied area fs at least 45 ft (13.7 m) thick and occurs at an average depth of 4,500 ft (1,372 m). The thickness of the barrter island sandstones within the area studied varies from 12 to 32 ft (3.6 to 9.8 m), and the overlying valley 111 sandstones are from 3 to 11 ft (1 to 3.4 m) thick.® The nonbarrier (zone 1) sandstones either directly overlie the barrier sandstones (zone 2) or are separated froa then by a few feet of tight, nonreservoir rocks of varying origin.”spe 20262 vate M, Honarpour and Livia Tomutea The productive thickness (net pay) of the Muday formation in the TIP area is controlled by the sedimentary pattern and postdepositiona? diagenetic and structural effects and varies from 15 to nearly 27 Ft (4.6 to 8.3m). Formation transaissivity, the product of average horizontal air permeability tines net pay (ky © h) (Fig. 2) in productive intervals varies frBa"10,000 £6 100,000 md-Ft (3,000 to 15,000 un- nm). “The single most dominant effect "on permeabi]ity in barrier island sandstones is clay Cenent. Smal} -anounts of clay cement cause Severe reduction in permeability. In addition, decreases in permeability are associated with Poorer sorting. and with increased Meroporosity./®" The spatial variations in the distribution of the clay within the TIP area tend to correspond with faults present. It has been Shown. that faults have provided pathways for Giagenetic fluids which resulted in the precipitation of diagenetic clay.? The Muddy formation in Unit ‘A‘ of Bell Creek Field generally strikes in a NE-SW direction and dips northwest on an average of 100 ft/nile (50 n/kn), or 6°. Detailed structural analyses Fevealed, however, several faults in the TIP and adjacent’ area (Fig 3). The faults are discontinuous and are generally parallel to the NW and” NE trending lineaments recognized throughout Powder River Basin. Figure 3 shows ‘two cross sections of the Muddy sandstone along the dip (x - X') and the strike (¥ - Y') in the TIP area (see Fig. 1). The most comon vertical displacenents of these postdepositional fauits are fron 10 to 20 ft (3 to 6 m), although displacements greater than 40 ft (12 a) were also fdentified in section 27. Separation of the barrier island reservoir’ into smail tectonic blocks has influenced the continuity of flow path. Natural fractures have not been reported from core examination, but their presence has been inferred from exceptionally high productivity and injectivity of some well: well as pressure analyses of well test data. ' For these wells, the measured permeabilities on core Samples go’ not in thenselves Justify such behavior.® Production/Injection History The primary production mechanism in Unit 'A' of Bell Creek field was solution-gas depletion drive, Recovery efficiency of more than 17% was accomplished in less than 3 years of primary production, before reservoir pressure dropped by 1,000 ‘ps: Waterflooding was begun in August 1970 and proved to be an efficient recovery mechanism in Bell Creek field. An ofl bank as formed, maintained, and moved at a high rate (up to 14 #t/0-4.3. w/D) by using a downdip-located, Vinedrive water injection system. The initial rate ranged from 20 to 200 BHPD per foot of productive sand at surface injection pressures of 1,470 to 0 psig.® Secondary production performance was nighly influenced by Structural dip of the reservoir. Wells. located updip of the water Injection’ linedrive pattern showed increasingly higher cumulative production eastward. Based on production data, the total primary and secondary Fecovery is about, 554 of the original ofl-in- place in Unit 'A'.€ The first 160-acre, micellar-polymer pilot project was inplenented’ in the northern portion Of Unit 'A' (Fig. 1) using Union O11 Company's Uniftood™. This project had recovered 28 to 34% of the ofl-in-place at the beginning of the tertiary preflush in February 1979. The second nnicellar-polywer flood, installed under the DOE Tertiary Incentive Program (TIP), enconpassed 179 acres of the total 400-acre project area and was jnitiated In February 1981 in Unit ‘A’, 3.6 miles to the south of the first pilot. The Uniflood™ process was again used in a nine ‘injector-center, 2o-acre, five-spot pattern. The entire area was surrounded by 16 water—inject ion wells to prevent the escape of injected chemicals and mobilized crude of) (Fig 1). Four five-spot, 20-acre patterns were created in the southwestern part of fhe TIP area to study the performance of pattern waterflooding (Fig 1)."? A total of 38% of all injected fluids left the project area during the project life. This corresponds to 61% of all the Water injected in the surrounding water injection wells. ANALYSES OF WATERFLOOD DATA DURING LINEDRIVE WATER INJECTION An attempt was made to relate water advancenent information to geological heterogeneities in the TIP area. water advancenent map was constructed on the basis of the monthly production data from the whole Unit 'A‘" Construction of a fault map was based on more detailed core data and wireline log data and fegional geology data that were available after infil] drilling in the TIP area.® Advancenent of the 20 and 70% water-cut production in Unit 'A' of Bell Creek field from the initiation of linedrive injection tn the western part of the field through January 1981 Was examined. The water movenent in the 4 Section area which contains the TIP area ranged From 0 to 14 #t/0 (0-4.3 m/D). The fault map was superimposed with the 70% waterfront advancenent, information (Fig. 4). This map clearly demonstrates that _southwestern-northeasternly faults have locally acted as sealing/semtsealing discontinuities and have impeded fluid Communications toward the southeast, whereas northwesterly oriented faults have enhanced the Advancenent of the water front. Fig. 4A also indicates that faults and associated flow conduits extend laterally beyond the faults as they appear in the background fault map. This may be taken as evidence for fauits and flow conduits which extend beyond the zones of formation offset that cannot be demonstrated by og correlations. Mathematical simulation of _linedrive waterflooding in this region confirmed theINJECTTON-PRODUCTION MONITORING -~ AN EPFECTIVE METHOD FOR RRSPRVOTR CHARACTERIZATION SPE 20262 presence of flow barrier and assoctated flow conduits.’ The simulated waterflood advancement based on matrix permeability alone proved to be faster than the actual water advancenent in the TIP area. This means that flow barriers associated with faults played an important role in impeding waterfront advancement in the TIP area. Fig. 48 shows vesults of mathematical Simulation of the Tinedrive waterflood based on 10 years of history matching with the inclusion of one sealing fault in the northwest corner of TIP area in the model. A closer correspondence between simulated and actual front advancerent was observed in the western part of the TIP. Moreover, the eastern part of the TIP shows faster Simulator front. advancenent than the actual one (Fig. 48), meaning that faults have definitely slowed the waterfront movenent. The 1980 residual of) saturation for the TIP area was obtained from areal field simulation without (Fig. 6A) and with (Fig. 58) the inclusion of one sealing fault in the northwest corner of the TIP area in the model. Comparison of the spatial distribution of the ‘residual of] saturation for the two cases indicates that the Presence of faults has influenced the residual Of saturation distribution in the TIP area. Accurate distribution of residual of! saturation requires the inclusion of all faults and high- Permeability condufts in the simulation model. Several pressure-pulse and falloff tests were conducted in the TIP area prior to the initiation of micellar-polymer Flooding. The pulse tests provided information that indicated the degree of sealing across some of the faults where measurements were conducted® (Fig. 6). The variation of water transmissivities in the TIP area is just under 700%. A large part of this variation is due to the presence of a diagenetically affected area. When areas with Similar ‘natrix" permeabilities are compared, Flow conduit seens to decrease the permeability to water only @ few hundred percent. ANALYSES OF WATER AND CHEMICAL INJECTION WELLS DURING EOR PROCESS Injection, production, pressure, and fluid samples during the chemical injection process from all injection and production wells in the TIP area were examined. Performances of chemical’ injection wells as well as surrounding water injection wells in the TIP area were analyzed by ‘the Hall plot method. The objectives of this analyses were to identify the influence of any geological heterogeneities on fluid Flow path and to compare the early performance of chemical injection wells with their later performance and to compare the performance of chenical injection wells with that of surrounding water injection wells. Development of the Hall Plot Technique The Hal]. plot!? is based on Darcy's equation (Eq. 1) and, thus, is applicable for steady- state, radial flow of a Newtonian fluid. Tt ts used for performance analysis of water injection wells. a) ue (In [ +s) Eq! 1 with respect to time Integrating results in Eq. 2. 3 7.08 x 10°? kgh Q= Saat I (Pup - Pp) at (2) va (tn [-2] +5) Eq. 2 may be rearranged to separate bottomhole inlection pressure (Pye) from statfe reservoir pressure (P.). UaL.2 8 (un [EE] #5) Peet EI tt) Flowing. bottonhoje pressure may be determined from welThead “Inject fon pressure’ (Py) Using. the FotToving relat fone Pag = Pgy ~ Op + 00 «) where aPp {5 the pressure loss due to friction and og0' is hydrostatic head based on true vertical depth (0) to the midpoint of perforattons. Substitution of Eq. 4 in Eq. 3 results in Eq. 141.2 v8 (In [22] + 5) JPyydt = oF Q +f (Pye aPg= 090) at 6) Traditionally, the integral on the, right-hand side “of the eduation” ts dropped” andthe integral of wellhead pressure with respect. to Hime 1s plotted against cumulative ‘injection. This plot fs refered to as tall plot” and 1s used "to evaluate. conditions ‘around. the wellbore. Even though the Hall plot can be used to Sdentify any stimlation or ‘wellbore ‘danege through “a change ‘in slope, the dropping of the integral term 1s” not. often negligible in comparison to other terms and results in iniscalculation of wellbore transmissivity." For valid" quantitative calculations, the Hall integral {(Pyg ~ Pa)ét should be plotted versus cumative ifectiof. The slope of this plot is given by Eq. 6. Otherwise, appreciable changes ‘in injection rate result in changes in slope, Higher injection rates produce Tower Hall’ plot slopes, and loyer ‘injection rates produce higher Slope "values." Once the Hall integral "ts Plotted versus cumulative Injection, changes in Slope may be related to” changes in” fluid mobility, skin factor, and/or” dimensionless Pressure, changes in opérating practices or the addition oF offset wells. 80spe 20262 Matt tl Honarpour and Liviu Tomtsa (6) Because the Hall plot 1s a. steady-state method of analysis, unlike transient pressure analysis, it 18a continuous monitoring method and provides the measurenent of reservoir properties over a period of months or years. However, the Hall plot provides combined effects of the skin (s) and the transmissivility (keh/u) and there is a need for an independent method Such as falloff, injectivity, or pulse tests to determine individual values of transmissibility and skin periodicaily. Inexpensive acquisitions of data such as wellhead pressure and cumulative injection for the Hall plot are the greatest advantage of this method. NelIhead pressure, then, 1s converted to bottomhote pressure using frictional loss in the well and hydrostatic correct tons. Waterflooding of an of] reservoir in the very early stage creates a two-phase flow condition in ‘the near wellbore region, and as a result, water and ofl banks form. "Buell et al.'*’ using mathematical simulation showed that as the of? bank {s pushed further away fron the wellbore, ‘the water bank in contact with the wellbore will dominate the well perfornance. Therefore, the Hail plot slope and the single-fluid " bank analysis method can be used with good accuracy. This means that the Hall plot method may be used for quantitative analysis of water injection wells except at the very early stage of waterflooding and at a very high ofl viscosity Where a two-phase Flow condition persists over a Jonger period of tine. The injection of fluids with non-Newtonian rheology in a hydrocarbon reservoir takes place as part of chemical enhanced oi1 recovery processes. [t is posstble to take into account the variation of. apparent viscosity during the injection of polymer solution ané stil] use the Hal? plot method of analysis.?»'* However, Buell et al.'* have shown that the actual change in apparent viscosity within the polymer bank through space is smal1 and may be approximated by a constant value. Once the bank in contact with the wellbore is ‘moved away a few feet from the wellbore, slope fluctuations cease to exist. This means that conventional Hall plot analysis 1s applicable to reservoirs under’ chemical injection. Analysis _of Water Injection Wells Using Hall Wethod Five-spot_ pattern water injection was initiated In February 1981 in Bel! Creek field in all TIP wells after the reservoir was flooded extensively using —_linedrive pattern waterflooding. Eighteen water injection wells (W wells) surrounding the project area and three originally designed chemical injection wells (C- 10, C-11, C-12) in the southeastern part of the TIP ared were used as water injection wells. nese wells experienced simflar completion methods and were located at sinilar depths (4,299, to 4,524 ft or 1,310 to 1,379 m). Hall plots of water injection wells (W-l = W- 18, and C-10 - C-12) based on calculated bottonhole pressure from wellhead pressure data with the Inclusion of friction and cumulative water Injection were prepared (Fig. 7) for the entire 6-year (1981-1987) project. history. Linear trends, as noticed in all the wells, indicate no permeability reduction as a result of tong-term water injection. However, diagenetic and structural heterogeneities in the drainase area of some wells caused sudden changes in the Slope of sone wells. Northwestern and Southwestern wells showed greater magnitudes of Slopes and, therefore, lower permeabilities as Compared to that of northeastern and southeastern wells. Wells Wl, W-3, and 8 exhibited extremely Tow slopes’ indicating the presence of high-permeabiTity conduits. Similar behavior was jéentified by monitoring the waterfront advancement during linedrive secondary recovery fn this area, Wells WI, W-5, W-6, H-8, Well, 15, K-14, Wei8, and C-11'show change of 'slope due to’ changes in’ transmissivity in thelr drainage area resulting fron the presence of semisealing faults. The estimated transmissivity across these semisealing faults are close to one-half of the formation transmissivity. This value is obtained based on Buell's quantitative analysis fof Hall plot, and it 1s in agreenent with the Fate of front advancement in Fig. 4A and common vertical displacenents of fauits in the TIP area. Wells C-10, W-6, W-1D, We13, W-14, W-15 and W-16 showed extrenely high slopes throughout their water injection histories. All of these wells are in a highly diagenetically affected area of the TIP having comparatively lower permeability. ‘Analysis of Chenical Injection Wells Using Hall Hethod AIL chemical injection wells underwent 4 months of preflush, 4 months of soluble-of! icellar injection, and 40 months of viscosity- graded, emulsion-type polyacrylamide polymer injection. Polymer solution was used as a mobility buffer behind the micellar slug and Finally was followed by water injection for close to 2 years (Table 2). Hal) plots of chemical injection wells (C-1 -C-3) based on calculated bottonhole pressure and cumulative water, micellar, and polymer injection were prepared for the entire 6-year (1981-1987) project history of the TIP area (Fig. 8). The early part of the plot (about 20 months) {s expanded in Fig. 9. Well C-2 showed sone plugging soon after initiation of polymer Fngection, and was lost during the cleanup process. Kell C-2x was drilled 50 ft north of C~ Bt replace this well. The | injection performance of well C-2 was combined with that of Well C-2x for overall analysis of TIP wells and is included in Fig. 8 An increase in slope of 300 to 400% at an average of 360% was noticed in all the wells. when a micellar slug (45 cp ellhead viscosity) was injected. The estimated raENJECTION-PRODUCTION MONITORING ~~ AN EFFECTIVE MENOD FOR RESHRVOTR CHARACTERLZATTON sre 20262 in situ visosity of the micellar siug calculated based on Hall plot slopes is in the range of 55- 75 cp. This value is close to the measured wellhead value of 45 cp. The calculated value takes into account a decrease in oi] saturation and corresponding increase in water relative Permeability resulting from miscible displacement of of] around the welibores. The slopes of the Hall plots decrease to values closer to those of original pref lush slopes when polymer injection is initiated. Polymer injection started with 75-cp fluid at the wellhead condition and gradually reduced to a 3- cp level over a perfod of 4 years and was followed by injection of water (1p viscosity). Partial mproverent in apparent permeability after the micellar injection is attributed to the lover in situ polymer viscosity as a result of temperature increase, salinity of formation water, and shear thinning and shear degradation. The estimated value for the in situ apparent viscosity of polymer solution based on Hall plot analysis is in the range of 12-25 cp; whereas, the ‘calculated value based on the polymer’ and brine concentration in the Bell Creek Field with the consideration of shear thinning is in the range of 3.3 - 21 cp. This behavior has been, reported by’ Buell et al.'* and Todd et al.'© The final Hall plot slope (Fig. 8) is an average of 316 % greater than the original slope during preflush period, indicating a gradual plugging effect of the ‘formation by long-tera, low-concentration polymer solution injection (Table 3). Gradual reduction in apparent permeability of chemical injection wells during polymer Flooding was unlike’ the linear behavior of any water injection wells in the TIP area (Fig. 7). Minor criss-crossing of performance lines occurred during the preflush, micellar, and early polymer injection, meaning that ' reservoir discontinuities ardund the chemical injection wells played minor roles during their early Chenical injection history. Reservoir Permeability and clay content variation were also ‘important in dictating the degree of permeability eduction during long-term injection, Compar'ison_of Liriedrive With Five-Spot Pattern Injection WelTs Possible variations in slope due to any modification of flow path were examined for a few wells in the TIP area. Wells 27-3 and 27-9 were Converted to pattern water injectors after 1.7 million Bb! of water had been injected in these well Water” injection in well 27-3 was initiated in May 1976 and in well 27-9 "in September 1978, Well 27-3 and 27-9 were shut. in jin April 1980" and Decenber 1980, respectively, and were converted to five-spot’ pattern water injectors in February 1981. Hall plots of the combined data from well 27-9/N-12 are shown in Fig. 10. The continuity of the pattern of injection performance of this well indicates that ro major change in flow path occurred as a result ‘of the change in injection pattern and/or a few months shut-in period. Similar plots were prepared based on Vinedrive water injection data for wells 22-16, 27-1, and 27-8 that were later converted to C-3, C5," and C-7, respectively. These wells went through more’ than a year” of Tinedrive water injection. They were shut in for a 3-month period and went’ through 4 months of ‘preflush injection before they received micellar-polymer solution. A Hall plot of the combined data from well 27-9/C-5 is shown in Fig. 10. The performance of this well is consistent with those of 27-3 and 27-9 (Fig. 10). This comparison indicates that no change in fiow path was created by changing the waterflood injection pattern. Furthermore, shut-in of these wells did not alter the flow "pattern once the injection was restablished after a period of shut-in, INTEGRATION OF PRODUCTION, INJECTION AND PRESSURE DATA FOR DYNAMIC CHARACTERIZATION OF TIP AREA Front advancement monitoring confirmed the presence of sealing/semisealing faults mapped by geological analysis. In addition, {t showed the perferential flow direction and’ indicated the ‘overall prominent role of sealing and semisealing faults in the TIP area. Analyses of the performance of chemical injection wells by Hall's method show no other heterogeneities except the presence of clay and permeability variations around chemical injection wells. Applications of pattern Flooding and mmiceTiar-pelymer injection after the linedrive injection did not change the effective flow pattern appreciably, as evidenced in the plots of the chemical injection performance using Hall's method. Permeability variation as a result of barrier/semibarrier and flow conduit dictated the time of arrival of sulfonate in the producing wells from surrounding chemical injector wells. Tt seems that high-perneability conduits have influenced the Hall's plot performance of sone "WH wells (W-1, W-3, and W-8). Sudden increases in slopes of some water injection wells such as Wel, WS, W-6, WB, HO, W-11, WH13, W-14, W18, and’ C-li are attributed to the’ surrounding semisealing faults. Interwell_transnissivities have commonly dropped by half and agree with the vertical displacenent equal to half of the Format ion thickness. 8y combining the performance of water injection wells with the early performance of chemical injection wells, a map was prepared showing the ‘distribution of Hall plot slopes in the TIP area (Fig. 11). This map identifies the western corner of the TIP area as well as the regions around wells W-6 and W-7 that are diagentically affected and have lower permeabililties and correspondingly higher slopes. The high-transmissivity region in the northeastern portion of the TIP area coincides with the low sTope values on this map. An elongated portion in the central part of the TIP area around wells W-9, P-12, C-9, P14, and C-11 exhibit low values of slopes in the region where transmissivities based on core measurenents (Fig. 2) do not. support this behavior. Examination of total fluid production during the EOR operation Shows correspondingly highest values of totalsee 20262 Matt M, Honarpour and Iviw Tomatsa fluid production in this area. Ihts area has been characterized as a region that is strongly affected by high-permeabiTity conduits orthogonal to ‘the. direction of sealing/semisealing faults (Fig. 4A). Similar areas with Tow values. of slopes appear in'the southeastern edge of the TIP area. gain, this area. 1s_also associated with Faulé/nigh-permeabi ity. conduits and Tow values of Hall slopes. Water injection wells such as W- & We9, W-10, Weld, Hol5, W-16, Wel7, and W-18 had higher sfopes in Hall's plot. Ali of these wells are located in highly diagenetic affected areas, as indicated sy the low values. in the transmissivity map (Fig. 2). Vartation in water transnissivity (kyh) calculated from the analysis of pressure pulst and falloff tests before’ the initiation of the TIP project (Fig. 6) 1s due to the conbined effects of structural discontinuity and variation of transnissivities in the area. The ‘contribution of fauits, however, hardly exceeded that of the role diagenesis has played in creating varfation in permeabilities. Water relative permeabilities based on transtent well tests and Hall plot analyses were compared with those fron laboratory-measured values on several W-5 core samples (Table 4). Results of this comparison show that calculated water transmissivity values based on well test analyses are influenced by _high-permeabi lity Conduits in the vicinity of sone of the wells (C- 4, C-6 and C-8). The presence of these high- permeability ‘channels was described previously (Fig. 4a). Long-term, predicted performances of _'C! wells based on short-term preflush performances (Region I) and Tong-term actual performances of ‘ch welts (Region II) when water injection was resumed after chenical injection were prepared. They’ were superimposed on long-term, water” injection performances of all water. injection wells (Fig. 12). The result. showed that chemical injection” wells were initially simfiar in performance to. water injection (Region 1) wells. In fact, they exhibited better Derformance than most of the water- injection wells. The late water injection performance of henica} injection wells (Region II) was. similar to the performance of lower quality, diagenet ically affected wells in TIP area. The ‘application of the micellar-polymer process reduced permeability contrast and magnitude of permeabitity by factors of 3 to 5. These performances resulted from filtering/adsorption Tretention of the injected polymer and permeabiTity modification as a result of chemical ‘injection. RESULTS AND CONCLUSTONS 1. Mater front advancement monitoring when integrated with fault maps based on geological analyses provides useful information about flow characteristics associated with faults. Tt was concluded fron this work that sealing or partially sealing faults in a southwest-northeast direction and. highly conductive channels perpendicular to this direction have influenced Flow paths appreciably. Seal ing/semisealing Faults slowed waterfront” advancement all through ‘the TIP area during linedrive waterflooding. 2. The Hail plot. 4s a good diagnostic method for performance evaluation of waterfloods and miceliar-polymer floods. It gives _ strong indication of permeability, skin effect, and vartation 1n drainage area for improved reservoir character izat ion. 3. Application of the Hall plot method showed that —micellar-polymer injection drastically reduced both the magnitude of the permeability and the permeability contrast. The in situ apparent residual resistance factor for polymer injection could be calculated. 4 The presence of high-permeab!1ity conduits and sealing/semisealing faults in drainage areas Of sone wells in the TIP area has influenced their pressure transient behavior. The presence of tectonic discontinuities in the vicinities of Sone chemical injection wells has only a moderate effect, whereas in vicinities of some water injection wells, a pronounced effect on Hall plot slopes due to ‘the local variation in tectonic intensity. 5. In the TIP area of Bell Creek field, faults behaved as sealing or semisealing in the SH-NE direction and as a permeability conduit in tthe NW-SE direction. 6, The presence of faults contributed to variations in residual of] saturation distribution during 40-acre-spacing, Vinedrive waterflooding. 7. Improved reservoir evaluation for designing successful recovery projects is obtainable through systematic collection and integration of inexpensive convent ional reservoir data if knowledge of geological heterogeneities is provided. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was performed for the U.S. Department ‘of Energy under Cooperative Agreement DE-FC22-83FE60149. The authors would like to thank NIPER management for permission to publish this paper. Special thanks are extended to Thomas €. Burchfield, Win K. Tham, Michael P. Madden, B17] Linville, Richard A. "Schatzinger, and Michael J. Szpakiewicz of NIPER and Edith Allison of the DOE Bartlesville Project Officer for their valuable suggestions and recommendations. ur thanks to Edna Hatcher for typing the well data and the manuscript. NOMENCLATURE ‘time increment, days true vertical depth, ft acceleration of gravity, 32.2 ft/sec Formation thickness, ft absolute permeability, md effective permeability, md relative permeability to water, dinensioniess relative perneabiTity to water at residual of] saturation8 RAJBCTION-PROOUCTTON MONITORING =~ AN "BCEIVE METHOD FOR RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION ™ = slope of the Hall plot, (psta~ days) /db1 pressure, psia Pressure ’@ the external radtus of a well, psla bottoahole injection pressure, psia wellhead injection pressure rates, bbI/day cumilative injection, bb! = external radius, ft = wellbore radius, ft skin factor, dimensionless injection tine, day $3 Greek Symbols 5 = fluid formation volume factor, scf/STB ° = fluid density, vom/Ft x = viscosity, cp REFERENCES 1. Honarpour, M. M., Burchfield, T. Es» Linviite, 8111: Help Recovery Efficiency, Reporter (Sept. 1989), 9-i6. 2, Talashy AL W “an Overview of Waterflood Surveillance ‘and Monitoring." SPE Distinguished Author Series, J. Pet. Tech., (Dec. 1988) 1539-1543. Reservoir Characterization Can ‘american O11 & Gas 3. Ramey, dre, H. Juz "Pressure Transtent, Testing," SPE Distinguished Author Series, J. Pet. Tech. (July 1982) 1407. 4. Talash, A. W. and Strange, Le Ket "Summary of Performance and Evaluations in the West Burkburnett Chenical Waterfiood Project," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1982) 2495-2502. 5. Moffitt, P. D. and Nenzie, D. E.: "well Injection Tests’ of Non-Newtonian’ Fiutd." SPE paper 7177 (1978). 6. Honarpour, M. M., Szpakiewicz, Me Jey Schatzinger, R. Az, Tomutsa, T. Carroll, dre, H B.: “Integrated GeologicalEngineering Hodel’ for Barrier Island Deposits in Sell Creek Field, Montana." Pres. at SPE/DOE Enhanced O11 Recovery Symposium, Aprit 17-20, 1988, Tulsa, OK. SPE/DOE paper 17366. 7. Mishra, S. and Ramey, He Jz "A Comparison of Pressure Transient and” Tracer Concentration Tine Data for Layered Reservoirs Under Injection." Pres. at SPE Ann, Tech. Conf. and Exhid., Las Vegas, Sept. 1985, SPE paper 14170. 8. Szpaktewicz, M. Js, Schatzinger, R.A. Honarpour, M. M.» Tham, M."K., and Tillman, "Geological and Engineering Evaluation of Barrier Island) and VaTley-FI1]Lithotypes in Muddy Formation, Bell Creek Field, Montana." In: The Rocky Mountain Association of “Geologists” Guidebook" Sandstone Reservoirs of the Rock Mountains. (1 182. 9. Sharma, Bey Sapakiewicz, M. J. and Schatzinger, RB. "critical eterogeneities in a Barrier island Deposit and Their Influence on Primary, Waterflood and Chemical EOR Operations." Pres: at SPE Tech. Conf. and Exhib., Dallas, TX, Sept. 27-30, 1987. SPE paper 16749. Honarpour, Mm. M. 10. Sharma, B., Honarpour, M. M., Jackson, S$. Rez Schatzinger, R. and Tomtsa, L "Determining the Productivity of a Barrier Island Sandstone Deposit Fron Integrated Facies Analysis Based on ‘Log and Core Data. and Fluid Production." Pres. at SPE Ann. Tech. Conf. and Exhib.s San Antonio, TK., Oct. 8-11, 1989.” SPE paper i9s84, IL. Jackson, S$. R., Tomutsa, Le, Szpakiewicz, M. J, ‘Chang, M. M., Honarpour, M. and Schatzinger, R. Ac: “Application of an Integrated Methodology for Construction of a Quantitative Transmissivity Model-Bel! Creek Field, a Barrier Island Reservoir." Pres, at the Second Internat ional NIPER/DOE Reservoir Characterization Symposium, Dallas, Tk, dune 25- 28, 1989. 12, Hartshorne, J. M. and Nikonchik, J. S.t "Micellar Polymer’ Flood Success in Beli Creek Field," Pres. at SPE Ann. Tech. Conf. and Exhibition, “Houston, TX Sept. 6-9, 1969. SPE paper 13122, 13. Hall, H. N.z "How to Analyze Waterflood Injection Well Performance." World O41 (Oct. 1963) 128-130. 14, Buell, R. S., Kazemi, R., and Poettmann, BK, “analyzing Injectivity of Polyner Solutions With Hall Plot.* Presented at the 62nd SPE Ann. Tech. Conf. and Exhib., Dallas, Tk, Sept. 27-30, 1987. SPE paper 16963. 15. Earlougher,Jr, R. Ce "Advances in Wel Test "Analysis," Mongraph Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1977) 5, 47-89, 105-158, 16. Todd, M. R., Dietrich, J. K., Goldburg, A. and Larson, R. G.: "Nunerical Simulation of Computing Chemical Flood Designs." Pres. at SPE Symp. on Improved Methods of O11 Recovery, Tulsa, Ok, Aprit 16-19, 1978. SPE paper 7077. SPE 20262‘WME 1 Reka paperseg an erocton Exe FOMATION Formtion Artrene ara ze, ft ievoluey see Pia rohit wutbeontprettare, ata, oft Gravity, * net Solution ‘ak, ser/o Fira Seat of tater ood Wiscoeity at instal reserve PAT it ive ere, op injected water 108. B00 ack WO ROK-FLID PROPERTIES Eregrttecancet, prceet Iterage tanto perostty fem cores, X ered ye generic mann SPE 20262 Hen pert tm om ‘nuddy Sindstone (Lower Cretaceous) Beaches Be om graaie (at wens PE re 25 (range 31.500) Pv ios faro-i203 serait BGS (range 6.26) Bis ge sie, co0p Bao (ange 9,588) 355 (rages 32005)” 2 ring te) er) 358) WME 2. = Samy of stil Infection pacts, ues Tu Futile, cp tarele nner 10 was 8? ae.spisel—eetivn 1 so we sn-sees —Meaar water 1.0 asso sreetonet 6 wraiesm pear ner 10 loyemnaysee foyer hae 1 1685.1) tespse—peler mse 238.2.) ANslonye2 —Polyer Phase 3 (40.8AS) SIRI 1oye-1/91/82Poyer ase 4 (2.627), 7 ye/8-71/83 Polym Poase §——(8.426.8) 1,7. ise.2//08 Polymer Phe 6 (14ST) T128 ansmeesrarn polar mae? (8.09.9) 87 ypeeosi2/ee Polar Pe 8 (4452) OSD WALZ/S/S — lye wartentce | 5-4) towne 2.8 vs Phase (Cel, C-§ & C-6) ans(e-12/00186 wer Infection 1.0 aera 280 eretary fore Volo = 8,596,000 mb (386 Fg. 1)SPE 20262 WUE 9. = ifectity rt in at ante of cnt tneetion, cite i) siege, HRS siege, ant oft a piltayerer” fetsayeybol go intela Spe el es ” Be wes core/log pressure"transient Hall"plot_ Skin pressure transient wan ot et wen Sapte a Teefetgaetae i ea 72,000 2,060 128 93 4 Ls) ce 38,000 5.78 hm 187 46 6 42,00 8,420 3,900 srt 20.0 oa ce 52,300 one 1.60 at ». at "steady state relative persability and naste fend measurements conducted on core samples fronuali 285 (es): FQURE 1. Location map of Bal Crk lt Un A tery Inca erect (i) ata Lact ot Brett wn, cheat rcton (ye ane Ioeaion sf cross aeclon X= and Y= (2.9).SPE 20262 x Ateienta rem noun" Spierace eure caratdays ‘Sum (Pwi-PeyT, ‘Rorosen aoa fest rasta. g E & g 5 a 0240 0e+0 FIGURE 7. - Hal plot of Injection SPE 20262 1e+6 2046 = Se6 4048 Cumulative injection, bbis tre ijscuon wells nib areas © Paer™ e-6 o000. renee pak 505 2066. Begeng ot Pyne Sp Scien twtr Sea ~\ mooie, tes 2808 dae an Cumulative Injection, bole FQURE 8. - Hal lt of jesion pertarmance of al hamicl ‘Gi Sremicat njecuan wets w shown Pig 9. tes5 2e5 deu5 doe Sent Cumulative injection, bois la plot ofentypatormance ofall chamieal nection wets bP aresSum (Pwf-Pe)"T, psia-days ‘Sum (Pwf-Pe)'T, psia-days 3046 2046 1046 0e+0 r Oe+0 = te+6 = ee SeHG den Cumulative Injection, bbl FIGURE 10. - Hall plot of nesve-natr lection well 279 that ting Sonera ta verapet WS water ection Ud ine grve, water tjection well 271 tha was ‘Bnverted to fveapot 6 chameal injection wl 0e10 © te+6 «= ev5 Ses6 AO ‘Cumulative Injection, bb! ston of projected Hal plot chemical wets (Region based on tet ety franca and Bt tual pertormance figion Manan plot f wate ection wel. FroURE 12-8 SPE 20262