Advertisement

Vertical transmissibility assessment from pressure transient analysis with integration of core data and its impact on water and miscible water-alternative-gas injections

  • Mohammad Yunus Khan
  • Ajay MandalEmail author
Original Paper
  • 39 Downloads

Abstract

The major key uncertainty of complex carbonate reservoirs are the vertical transmissibility across the tight dense (stylolite) layers and areal distribution of high permeability streaks (HKS), which have major impact on reservoir management, well locations, and well completion design in water and miscible water-alternative-gas (miscible WAG) injection process. The present study presents interpretation methodology of vertical transmissibility through assessment of horizontal to vertical permeability ratio (Kv/Kh) from various dynamic data. The Kv/Kh range assessment was done after integration with whole core data and pressure transient data. The impact of Kv/Kh on water and miscible WAG injection processes has also been investigated. The result shows that good vertical communication between the bulk of the porous sub-units and all across stylolite layers except one stylolite layer which acts as field wide barrier. In addition, simulation result of water and miscible WAG injection with higher order of estimated Kv/Kh ratio (0.2 to 1 as found in good permeability porous layers of most of the carbonate reservoirs) indicates no major impact on water cut (WCT), gas oil ratio (GOR), water breakthrough (WBT), gas breakthrough (GBT), and expected ultimate recovery (EUR) in homogeneous area, while oil recovery acceleration with lower WCT/GOR and slightly early WBT/GBT time in heterogeneous area due to gravity or viscous effect suppressed by heterogeneity effect. However, the lower order of Kv/Kh ratio (~ < 0.05) provide delay in WBT/GBT and lower WCT / GOR production due to viscous dominant flow which results in lower gravity-viscous number.

Keywords

Kv/Kh ratio Anisotropy assessment Pressure transient analysis Miscible WAG Reservoir simulation model Stylolite layer Carbonate reservoir 

Nomenclature

Kv/Kh

Horizontal to vertical permeability ratio

OOIP

Original oil-in-place

EUR

Expected ultimate recovery

PBU

Pressure build-up test

PFO

Pressure fall off test

MRT

MultiMate test

VIT

Vertical interference test

RFT

Repeat formation tester

MDT

Modular formation dynamics testerSchlumberger

SCAL

Special core analysis

Kv

Vertical permeability

Kh

Horizontal permeability

PP

Packer probe

RRT

Reservoir rock type

Lwe

Effective well length

REV

Representative element volume

WAG

Water-alternative gas

HKS

High permeability streaks

q

Oil production rate (bbl/day)

μo

Oil viscosity (cp)

M

Mobility ratio (μog)

Bo

Oil formation volume factor

Lw

Horizontal well length (ft)

L

Reservoir length

Φ

Porosity (fraction)

Kx

Horizontal permeability (md) in X direction

Ky

Horizontal permeability (md) in Y direction

Kv

Vertical permeability (md) in Z direction

Ct

Formation compressibility (1/psia)

t

Time (hours)

terf

Time at which early radial flow and linear flow intersect

H

Reservoir thickness (ft)

HDw

Well eccentricity (horizontal well dimensionless location ad) = hw/h

Hw

Distance from no-flow boundary from horizontal length position = min (h1, h2)

h1 and h2

Distances from no flow boundaries to the horizontal well

D1, D2, D3, D4, and D5

Dense layers (stylolite intervals) of reservoir

M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, and M6

Porous layer of reservoir

M

Mobility ratio (μo/μg)

V

Vector of Darcy velocity

D

Dispersion tensor

c

Concentration

G

Dimensionless gravity-viscous number

Ht

Heterogeneity number

D

Symmetric dispersion tensor, [L2t-1]

Ω

Vorticity, [t-1]

Differential operator, [L-1]

hp

Length of the open zone between two straddle packers in VIT tool

rw

Wellbore radius

rsw

Spherical wellbore of radius

Ksp

Permeability in spherical flow regime

tsp

Time during spherical flow

tD

Dimensionless time in spherical flow

PD’

Dimensionless pressure derivative in spherical flow

(t*dp/d)sp

Logarithmic derivative in spherical flow

(t*dp/d)lr

Logarithmic derivative in late radial flow

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the management of KOC (Kuwait Oil Company), ZADCO (Zakum Development Company), and IIT-ISM (Indian Institute of Technology-Indian School of Mines) for their support and permission to publish this paper.

References

  1. Adeoye OM, Gerges N, Bin Ujal NN, Noordin FB, El Din SS, Ismail AM, Mbonu E et al (2015) Integrated evaluation approach and implications of high permeability streaks in Giant carbonate OilField. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference SPEGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguilera R, Ng MC (1991) Transient pressure analysis of horizontal wells in anisotropic naturally fractured reservoirs. SPE Form Eval 6(01):95–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akbar M, Petricola M, Watfa M, Badri M, Charara M, Boyd A, Kenyon B (1995) Classic interpretation problems: evaluating carbonates. Oilfield Rev 7(1):38–57Google Scholar
  4. Akbar M, Vissapragada B, Alghamdi AH, Allen D, Herron M, Carnegie A et al (2000) A snapshot of carbonate reservoir evaluation. Oilfield Rev 12(4):20–21Google Scholar
  5. Al Shateri AAQ, Tamura YU, Furuya K, Bellah S (2009) Successful application of 3-D seismic technology on middle cretaceous carbonate reservoir—significant OIP increasing. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/125399-MS
  6. Al-Ameri MB, Shebl HT (2011) Reservoir rock typing of a giant carbonate field. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/148073-MS
  7. Al-Ansari, F., Konwar, L. S., Urasaki, D., Parker, A., Takashi, H., & Hiroshi, M. (2000). Vertical transmissibility assesment across stylolites in stratified carbonate reservoir—a field experience. Paper presented at ADIPECGoogle Scholar
  8. Al-Suwaidi, M. H., Williams, M. P., & Ottinger, G. (2010). Application of digital core description methods in a reservoir characterisation study: a review of traditional versus potential future methods. SPE. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/137963-MS
  9. Awejori GA (2014). Integrated petrophysical evaluation of turbiditic sands in Niger Delta basin (doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
  10. Bachar S, Obara H, Watanabe M (2011, January 1) Modeling of a new field development plan for a giant offshore oilfield in the UAE. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/147956-MS
  11. Brantferger KM, Al-Jenaibi H, Patel H, Al-Harbi AS, Kompanik G, Mubarak MI (2011) A team-based approach to history matching a long-history, Giant Carbonate Reservoir Using Sector Models and a Domain Decomposition Workflow SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/148386-MS
  12. Brantferger KM, Kompanik G, Al-Jenaibi H, Dodge S, Patel H (2012) Impact and lessons of using high permeability streaks in history matching a Giant offshore Middle East carbonate reservoir. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/161426-MS
  13. Bremer RE, Winston H, Vela S (1983) Analytical model for vertical interference tests across low-permeability zones. SPE paper 11965, 58th annual fall meeting, San Francisco, CaGoogle Scholar
  14. Bushara MN, Baslaib SM (1997). Chronofacies discontinuities: precise approach for reservoir layering—an example from carbonate reservoir, offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/37700-MS
  15. Bushara MN, El Tawel A, Borougha H, Dabbouk C, Qotb M (2002) Effective Permeability Modeling: Geostatistical Integration of Permeability Indicators, OffshoreAbu Dhabi. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/78583-MS
  16. Carlson MR (1995) The effect of reservoir heterogeneity on predicted waterflood performance in the Dodsland field. J Can Pet Technol 34(10):31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen SM, Chen LW, George IR (1994) "Tertiary EOR design for vertical miscible floods," Paper SPE 27055 presented at Latin America/Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, 27–29 April 1994, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaGoogle Scholar
  18. Daviau F, Mouronval G, Bourdarot G, Curutchet P (1988) Pressure analysis for horizontal wells. SPE Form Eval 3(04):716–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ehlig-Economides CA, Ayoub JA (1984) Vertical interference testing across a low-permeability zone. XP.E. paper 13251, 59th Annual Technical Conference, Houston, TexGoogle Scholar
  20. Falade GK, Brigham WE (1974) The dynamics of vertical pulse testing in a slab reservoir. Paper presented at the Fall Meeting of the SPE of AIMEGoogle Scholar
  21. Falade G, Konwar L, Mohammed SAA (1998) New procedure for horizontal well test design and interpretation in heterogeneous reservoirs. Paper presented at ADIPECGoogle Scholar
  22. Fayers FJ, Muggeridge AH (1990) Extensions to Dietz theory and behaviour of gravity tongues in slightly tilted reservoirs. SPE Reserv Eng 5(4):487–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gasda SE, Nordbotten JM, Celia MA (2008) Determining effective wellbore permeability from a field pressure test: a numerical analysis of detection limits. Environ Geol 54(6):1207–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gasda SE, Celia MA, Wang JZ, Duguid A (2013) Well-bore permeability estimates from vertical interference testing of existing wells. Energy Procedia 37:5673–5680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ghedan SG, Thiebot BM, Boyd DA (2006, December 1) Modeling original water saturation in the transition zone of a carbonate oil reservoir. SPE. 9:681–687.  https://doi.org/10.2118/88756-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Giordano R, Salter S, Mohanty K (1985) "The effects of permeability variations on flow in porous media," Paper SPE 14365 presented at Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  27. Goode PA, Thambynayagam RKM (1987) Pressure drawdown and buildup analysis of horizontal wells in anisotropic media. SPE Form Eval 2(04):683–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. He Y, Cheng S, Li S, Huang Y, Qin J, Hu L, Yu H (2017) A semianalytical methodology to diagnose the locations of underperforming hydraulic fractures through pressure-transient analysis in tight gas reservoir. SPE J 22(03):924–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. He Y, Cheng S, Qin J, Wang Y, Chen Z, Yu H (2018) Pressure-transient behavior of multisegment horizontal wells with nonuniform production: theory and case study. Journal of Energy Resources Technology 140(9):093101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heller JP (1966) Onset of instability patterns between miscible fluids in porous media. J Appl Phys 37(4):1566–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hiraoka T, Parker A, Masuzawa T (1998) Estimation of in-situ vertical permeability through matching RFT data under dynamic conditions. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference. SPEGoogle Scholar
  32. Honarpour M, Chilingarian G, Mazzullo S (1992) Permeability and relative permeability of carbonate reservoirs. Dev Pet Sci 30:399–416Google Scholar
  33. Honarpour, M. M., Djabbarah, N. F., & Sampath, K. (2003). Whole core analysis-experience and challenges. Paper presented at the Middle East Oil ShowCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jackson RR, Banerjee R (2000) Advances in multilayer reservoir testing and analysis using numerical well testing and reservoir simulation. In SPE annual technical conference and exhibition. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  35. Jackson MD, Yoshida S, Johnson HD, Muggeridge AH, Næss A, Ringrose P (1999) Three-dimensional reconstruction, flow simulation and upscaling of complex bedform-scale sedimentary structures within tidal sandstone reservoirs. Paper presented at the advanced reservoir characterisation for the 21st century. Proceedings of GCS-SEPM research conferenceGoogle Scholar
  36. Jackson RR, Banerjee R, Thambynayagam RKM (2003) An integrated approach to interval pressure transient test analysis using analytical and numerical methods. In Middle East Oil Show. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  37. Joseph JA, Koederitz LF (1985) Unsteady-state spherical flow with storage and skin. Soc Pet Eng J 25(06):804–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Khan MY, Kohata A, Patel H, Syed FI, Al Sowaidi AK (2016) Water alternating gas WAG optimization using tapered WAG technique for a giant offshore Middle East Oil Field. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  39. Kohda A, Bellah S, Shibasaki T, Farhan ZA, Shibayama A, Hamami MA, Jasmi SA (2017) Characterization of high-permeability streaks associated with heterogeneous stromatoporoid reefal facies and establishment of modeling workflow in carbonate reservoir, Offshore Abu Dhabi. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/188530-MS
  40. Kuchuk FJ (1995) Well testing and interpretation for horizontal wells. J Pet Technol 47(01):36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kuchuk FJ, Goode PA, Wilkinson DJ, Thambynayagam RKM (1991) Pressure-transient behavior of horizontal wells with and without gas cap or aquifer. SPE Form Eval 6(01):86–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kuchuk FJ, Halford F, Hafez H, Zeybek M (2000) The use of vertical interference testing to improve reservoir characterization. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  43. Kulkarni MM (2003) Immiscible and miscible gas-oil displacements in porous mediaGoogle Scholar
  44. Landrum BL, Crawford PB (1960) Effect of directional permeability on sweep efficiency and production capacity. J Pet Technol 12(11):67–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Masalmeh, S. K., Hillgartner, H., Al-Mjeni, R. A.-M., & Jing, X. (2010). Simultaneous injection of miscible gas and polymer (SIMGAP) to improve oil recovery and sweep efficiency from layered carbonate reservoirs. Paper presented at the SPE EOR Conference at Oil & Gas West AsiaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miyamoto H, Kohda A, Alfarhan ZA, Shibasaki T, Bellah S, Al-Ameri MB, Jasem SM (2017) Maximize the value of 3D seismic with AVO inversion for reservoir modeling and field development optimizing, offshore Abu Dhabi, UAE. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/188778-MS
  47. Mohamed SSED, Dernaika M, Kalam MZ (2011) The impact of heterogeneity and multi-scale measurements on reservoir characterization and STOOIP estimations. Paper presented at the SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and ExhibitionGoogle Scholar
  48. Moran JH, Finlklea EE (1962) Theoretical analysis of pressure phenomena associated with the wireline formation tester. Trans AIME 225:899Google Scholar
  49. Naami AM, Cantania P, Islam MR (1999) Numerical and experimental modeling of viscous fingering in two-dimensional consolidated porous medium. In Technical Meeting/Petroleum Conference of The South Saskatchewan Section. Petroleum Society of CanadaGoogle Scholar
  50. Namba T, Hiraoka T (1995) Capillary force barriers in a carbonate reservoir under waterflooding. In Middle East Oil Show. Society of Petroleum Engineers.  https://doi.org/10.2118/29773-MS
  51. Nordahl K, Ringrose PS, Wen R (2005) Petrophysical characterization of a heterolithic tidal reservoir interval using a process-based modelling tool. Pet Geosci 11(1):17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Odeh AS, Babu DK (1989). Transient flow behavior of horizontal wells, pressure drawdown, and buildup analysis. In SPE California Regional Meeting. SPEGoogle Scholar
  53. Olukayode AO, Benourkhou N, Merzouk K, Auzias V, Klingensmith A, Habhouba EH (2009) A new core-log integrated method for deriving insitu reservoir permeability consistent with well test results in Berkine Basin, Algeria. In: Offshore Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition. Offshore Mediterranean ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  54. Ozkan E, Raghavan R, Joshi SD (1989) Supplement for SPE 16378, Horizontal-Well Pressure AnalysisGoogle Scholar
  55. Pan Y, Kamal MM, Narr W (2018) Fieldwide determination of directional permeabilities using transient well testing. SPE Reserv Eval EngGoogle Scholar
  56. Permadi AK, Yuwono IP, Simanjuntak AJS (2004) Effects of vertical heterogeneity on waterflood performance in stratified reservoirs: a case study in Bangko Field, Indonesia. In SPE Asia Pacific Conference on Integrated Modelling for Asset Management. SPEGoogle Scholar
  57. Poli E, Maza C, Virgone A, Gisquet F, Fraisse C, Pabian-Goyheneche C (2009) High permeability streaks characterisations in Middle East carbonate. In: International Petroleum Technology Conference. International Petroleum Technology ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  58. Rashid B, Bal A, Williams GJJ, Muggeridge AH (2012) Using vorticity to quantify the relative importance of heterogeneity, viscosity ratio, gravity and diffusion on oil recover. Comput Geosci 16(2):409–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ruelland PJ, Bu-Hindi H (2009) High permeability layers in carbonates: innovative 3D modeling approach in lower cretaceous reservoirs, offshore Abu Dhabi. International Petroleum Technology Conference.  https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-13393-MS
  60. Rui Z, Cui K, Wang X, Lu J, Chen G, Ling K, Patil S (2018) A quantitative framework for evaluating unconventional well development. J Pet Sci Eng 166:900–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shook MG, Mitchell KM (2009) A robust measure of heterogeneity for ranking earth models: the F-PHI curve and dynamic lorenz coefficient, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USAGoogle Scholar
  62. Skene K, Yamamoto K, Brantferger KM, Quintero M, Kompanik G, Ottinger G, Al Harbi M (2014) Accounting for multi-scale permeability systems in reservoir models of a giant offshore oil field, Abu Dhabi - Balancing Matrix Versus Excess Permeability and its Impact on Reservoir Performance. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/171876-MS
  63. Sultan AA, Sit KH, Alrougha HB, Khouri NA, Edwards HE (2005) Resolution of a multi-set, strike-slip dominated fault system, identified from 3D seismic, in early cretaceous carbonate reservoir sequences of a giant offshore field in Abu Dhabi. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/93489-MS
  64. Tham BK, Mehmet Raif BD, Mohd Saaid I, Abllah E (2011) The effects of kv/kh on gas assisted gravity drainage process. Int J Eng Technol 11(3):138–163Google Scholar
  65. Tiab D (1993) Analysis of pressure and pressure derivative without type-curve matching: 1- skin factor and wellbore storage. Paper presented at the Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK. SPE 25426, 203–216. Also. J Pet Scien Eng (1995) 12(3):171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tidwell V, Wilson J (2000) Heterogeneity, permeability patterns, and permeability upscaling: physical characterization of a block of Massillon sandstone exhibiting nested scales of heterogeneity. SPE Reserv Eval Eng 3(4):283 291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vahedian A, Clarkson CR, Ghanizadeh A, Zanganeh B, Song C, Hamdi H (2018) Use of rate-transient analysis techniques for evaluating experimental core permeability tests for unconventional reservoirs. In unconventional resources technology conference, Houston, Texas, 23-25 July 2018 (pp. 3379-3394). Society of Exploration Geophysicists, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  68. Venkitadri VS, Shebl HT, Shibasaki T, Dabbouk CA, Salman SM (2005) Reservoir rock type definition in a giant cretaceous carbonate. SPE.  https://doi.org/10.2118/93477-MS
  69. Voleti DK, Al Mazrooei S, Obaid Al Nuaimi L (2014) Water saturation modeling of complex carbonate reservoir: a case study of challenging highly impacted reservoir by diagenesis processes. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference. SPEGoogle Scholar
  70. Wu X, Ogbe D, Zhu T, Khataniar S (2004) Critical design factors and evaluation of recovery performance of miscible displacement and WAG process. Paper presented at the Canadian International Petroleum ConferenceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yamamoto K, Kompanik G, Brantferger K, Al Zinati O, Ottinger G, Al Ali A, ..., Edwards HE (2012) Permeability model conditioning of a thin, heterogeneous high-K dolomitized unit in a supergiant carbonate field, offshore Abu Dhabi. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition. SPEGoogle Scholar
  72. Yeskozha B, Aimagambetov M, Kabyshev P, Burlibayev A, Kulagina T, Kaipov Y et al (2017) Novel approach to data analysis of pressure transient testing in fractured carbonate reservoir. Ansagan Field Case (Russian). In: SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  73. Yuwono IP, Simanjuntak AJS (2004) Effects of vertical heterogeneity on waterflood performance in stratified reservoirs: a case study in Bangko field, Indonesia. SPE-87016-MSGoogle Scholar
  74. Zhou D, Fayers FJ, Orr FM Jr (1997) Scaling of multiphase flow in simple heterogeneous porous media. SPE J 12(3):173–178Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kuwait Oil Company-KOCAl AhmadiKuwait
  2. 2.Indian Institute of Technology (ISM)DhanbadIndia

Personalised recommendations