See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]
net/publication/283509680
Effect of different water injection rate on reservoir performance: a case study of
Azadegan fractured oil reservoir
Conference Paper · January 2012
CITATIONS READS
0 665
1 author:
Mehdi Safari
32 PUBLICATIONS 44 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Effect of neglecting geothermal gradient on calculated oil recovery View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Mehdi Safari on 14 April 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
EFFECT OF DIFFERENT WATER INJECTION RATE ON RESERVOIR
PERFORMANCE: A CASE STUDY OF AZADEGAN FRACTURED OIL RESERVOIR
*Mehdi Safari, Petroleum University of Technology, Ahwaz, Iran
*Correspondence author: Fax: +981712321221 Email: safari_Mahdi64@[Link]
ABSTRACT
A naturally fractured reservoir may be divided INTRODUCTION
vertically into several zones, i.e. gas cap, gas The south-west of Iran is one of the areas that
invaded, undersaturated oil, water invaded, and has the highest number of carbonate fractured
aquifer. Gravity drainage is the main oil producing reservoir. A naturally fracture reservoir consists of
mechanism in gas invaded zone. Depending on the two distinct regions, a matrix region containing finer
wettability of the reservoir rock, the main recovery pores and having a high storage capacity, but a low
mechanism in water invaded zone will be gravity permeability, is interconnected with the fracture
drainage or imbibition for oil wet or water wet rock, network region, which has a low storage capacity,
respectively. but higher permeability.
When production from a reservoir starts after a Most reservoir rocks are to some extent
while, the production will decrease because of fractured, but the fractures have in many cases
reservoir depletion. To enhance the final recovery insignificant effect on fluid flow performance and
there are some scenarios, one of them is water may be ignored. In naturally fractured reservoirs,
injection. Water injection has been the most used defined as reservoirs where the fractures have a
recovery method in petroleum industries due to its significant impact on performance and oil recovery,
advantages. The injected water displaces oil from fracture properties should be evaluated because they
porous media to producing wells and maintains the control the efficiency of oil production. Fractures
reservoir pressure above of saturation pressure, are usually caused by brittle failure induced by
increasing the recovery process efficiently. One of geological features such as folding, faulting,
important variable is injection rate that influence the weathering and release of lithostatic (overburden)
water injection performance, therefore by simulating pressure [1].
the reservoir with different injection rate we could When production from a reservoir starts after a
obtain the proper one for reservoir development. while, the oil production will decrease because the
The goal of this work is to study the impact of reservoir pressure decreased. Water injection has
water injection rate on the reservoir performance and been the most used recovery method in petroleum
simulate the water injection performance in reservoir industries due to its advantages: operational
scale. This work is a case study on Azadegan oil simplicity, low cost and favorable characteristics of
reservoir. displacemen.
This work is done on investigation of water injection
in sector A of Azadegan oil reservoir that it has a dual Fracture reservoir zones and recovery
porosity manner. Water injection simulations were mechanisms A fractured reservoir may be divided
performed at different rates. Before any injections the vertically into several distinct zones sometime in its
plateau time is about 5000 days. After putting the depletion period. These zones are mainly: gas cap,
injection wells and applies the rates it is observed gas-invaded, gassing, under saturated oil, water
that the plateau time is increased. Higher water invaded, and water zone.
injection rates results in higher oil production so The gassing zone consists of the portion of the
water injection is suitable for this dual porosity case. reservoir where the pressure of the matrix is below
Because water moves through fractures quickly and the prevailing bubble-point pressure. In the lower
so capillary imbibition process can help push the oil portion of this zone, where Sg < Sgc, a solution gas
to producing well. drive mechanism takes place in the known sense of
it, except for the volume of gas transfer due to performed at different rates and water injection
diffusion. When free gas reaches its critical performance was studing. We used Eclipse 100
saturation in the upper portion of gassing zone, gas reservoir simulator.
moves upward due to its lower density than oil.
Therefore, the recovery due to the solution-gas drive STATE OF PROBLEM
mechanism is mainly a function of the rate of The reservoir under this study started production from
pressure drop and the resulting effect determines the 1927/01/01. After a while, the production had to be
final fluid saturation in the blocks. decreased because of high gas rate production and
In the under saturated portion of the reservoir this limitation in surface facilities is the main reason
two processes take place: a- expansion of the liquids to do the following study.
and b- diffusion of gas through oil from matrix to the To optimize our reservoir production, Water Injection
fracture. The diffusion process causes the oil in the scenarios is suggested.
matrix to lose some of its gas and therefore, oil from This reservoir has the capability to be modeled in
the fracture replaces the equivalent volume of lost both single porosity and dual porosity as it is not
gas. Gas and water-invaded zones are those portions completely proven to be one or the other, but my
of the reservoir in which oil saturated blocks are work is to do it in dual porosity.
surrounded by gas or water within the fractures. RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION
In a gas invaded zone, oil is draining out of these The Azadegan oil field is an oil field in Iran. The field
blocks essentially due to gravity drainage. is located 80 kilometres (50 mi) west of Ahvaz close
In a water invaded zone, for the case of water to the Iraqi border (figure 1). The field has an
wettability in addition to gravity segregation, approximate area of 900 square kilometres
capillary imbibition also influences the recovery The oil field was discovered in 1999. Iranian
performance. In a strongly oil-wet reservoir, oil can authorities claims that Azadegan field has oil-in-place
be displaced from the matrix by water only by gravity reserves of about 33.2 billion barrels (5.28×10^9 m3)
forces, with capillary forces trying to retain the oil. In and recoverable resources estimated at about 5.2
such case the water/oil gravity drainage process, as it billion barrels (830×10^6 m3). It is one of the NIOC
is taking place below the fracture oil/water contact, is Recent Discoveries and the biggest oil field found in
entirely analogous to the gas/oil gravity drainage Iran, in the last 30 years.
process.
Oil displaced into the fractures will not be re-
absorbed spontaneously by an overlying matrix block
if the block is water-wet. In this case the ultimate oil
recovery of a stack of blocks is equal to the movable
oil, since in this case there is no capillary hold-up of
oil. In a (strongly) water-wet reservoir the
displacement of oil from the matrix will often be
dominated by capillary force, and hence be called
water/oil imbibition, The rate at which oil is
produced from matrix block by this process depends
on a number of parameters: matrix permeability, fluid
viscosities, relative permeability’s, capillary pressure
and the dimensions of a matrix block.
Two different imbibition regimes can be
considered. The co-current and counter current flow.
Initially the flow regime is co-current i.e. oil and
water flow have the same direction then, as soon as Figure1
block is surrounded by water, the flow changes to Position of azadegan oil field in Iranian oil filed
counter current flow process, i.e. water and oil flow map
have two opposite direction [2].
In this study, simulation study results of the
Azadegan oil reservoir in the south – west of Iran is The reservoir is split into four sectors by means three
presented. Water injection simulations were big seal faults (figure 2), so our focus is mainly on
three sectors in which oil producers are located. The SCAL tests data including relative permeabilities i.e.
forth sector which does not have any producer will not krog, krow, krg, krog and capillary pressure i.e. Pc-
be developed in this work. All producers have simple ow, Pc-owi, Pc-og were normalized for sector model
completions like casing and perforation and they are and are given Tables 2 and 3.
all fully completed in reservoir thickness.
Table 2
SCAL tests data for gas oil system
Sg Krg Krog Pcog
0 0 0.72 0
0.02 0 0.622 0.034
0.05 0.015 0.498 0.061
0.07 0.026 0.427 0.073
0.1 0.042 0.338 0.09
0.12 0.056 0.288 0.095
0.15 0.078 0.226 0.102
s0.17 0.093 0.191 0.107
0.2 0.116 0.147 0.115
Figure 2 0.22 0.134 0.122 0.12
Reservoir sectors 0.25 0.161 0.091 0.128
0.27 0.178 0.073 0.133
Sector model description A part of 0.3 0.204 0.051 0.141
Azadegan reservoir was selected as sector model. 0.32 0.223 0.039 0.146
In this study we select sector A. 0.35 0.251 0.023 0.154
0.37 0.272 0.015 0.159
Fluid and Rock properties Flash and 0.4 0.303 0.007 0.167
differential PVT tests were performed on 0.42 0.325 0.003 0.173
samples from Sector A. The experimental data 0.45 0.359 0.003 0.183
was used for analysis by PVT software; the 0.47 0.383 0 0.193
simulated PVT data are given in below Table. 0.5 0.42 0 0.207
0.52 0.446 0 0.217
0.55 0.486 0 0.232
Table 1
0.57 0.514 0 0.242
Fluid properties
Pbub Bob (bbl/STB 0.6 0.557 0 0.256
Rs (SCf/STB) μo (cp) 0.62 0.59 0 0.276
(psia) )
2.725 18.24 1.017 0.88 0.65 0.64 0 0.305
14.14 32.03 1.045 0.823 0.67 0.673 0 0.329
24.85 45.82 1.07 0.772 0.7 0.723 0 0.364
36.28 60.64 1.096 0.721 0.72 0.756 0 0.409
46.68 74.09 1.119 0.678 0.75 0.806 0 0.476
56.35 86.5 1.14 0.641 0.77 0.84 0 0.571
66.93 99.94 1.164 0.603 0.8 0.89 0 0.713
75.12 110.3 1.181 0.577 0.82 0.924 0 1.312
85.88 123.7 1.205 0.545
111.4 155.1 1.259 0.482
165 1.249 0.55
175 1.239 0.6
Oil production rate in sector A is 40
Table 3 (sm^3/day).
SCAL tests data for oil water system
Table 4
Sw Krw Krow Pcow Injection wells geometry (x, y z)
0.18 0 0.72 0.61 Well Name Well Surface Surface TD
0.2 0.011 0.598 0.34 Type X Y (MD)
0.23 0.027 0.451 0.232 A_WINJ_01 Injection 543200 3764430 1500
0.25 0.038 0.373 0.16 water
A_WINJ_02 Injection 544791 3766915 1500
0.28 0.051 0.28 0.13 water
0.3 0.059 0.231 0.11 A_WINJ_03 Injection 545549 3766103 1500
0.33 0.074 0.175 0.092 water
0.35 0.084 0.146 0.08
0.38 0.1 0.112 0.068 Table 5
0.4 0.111 0.094 0.06 Wells properties
0.43 0.127 0.072 0.048 Well Name Complition TOP BOT
(MD) (MD)
0.45 0.137 0.06 0.04
A_WINJ_01 Casing 0 1500
0.48 0.154 0.045 0.036 A_WINJ_01 Perforation 893.34 985.72
0.5 0.165 0.035 0.034 A_WINJ_02 Casing 0 1500
0.53 0.183 0.023 0.031 A_WINJ_02 Perforation 914.78 971.73
0.55 0.195 0.015 0.029 A_WINJ_03 Casing 0 1500
0.58 0.223 0.007 0.027 A_WINJ_03 Perforation 916.62 970.21
0.6 0.242 0.003 0.025
0.63 0.277 0.002 0.023 Production wells Figure 9 shows the list of
0.65 0.3 0.001 0.021 wells present in the field. All producers have
0.68 0.341 0 0.019 simple completions like casing and perforation
0.7 0.369 0 0.017 and they are all fully completed in reservoir
0.73 0.406 0 0.015
thickness.
0.75 0.43 0 0.014
0.78 0.436 0 0.012
0.8 0.44 0 0.01
0.83 0.446 0 0.008
0.85 0.45 0 0.007
0.88 0.456 0 0.005
0.9 0.46 0 0.003
0.93 0.466 0 0.002
0.95 0.47 0 0.002
0.98 0.476 0 7E-04
Figure 3
1 0.48 0 0
List of production wells present in the field
Injection wells The injection wells are
drilled in below positions
Well-01 (x,y)=(22,81)
Well-02 (x,y)=(50,31)
Well-02 (x,y)=(65,57)
and perforated in block 14.
Data analysis In this project, we applied a dual
continuum approach in black oil simulator (ECLIPS
100) First of all we run the base case and see the
results. Then add 3 well to number of wells in data
file WELLDIMS.
The fifth record in WCONINJE is Surface flow
rate target or upper limit (BHP max=5000 psia). Each
time we change it and observe the results in office.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of simulation can be observed from Figure 6
Figures 4- 19. Water, gas and oil production rates without injection
Figures 4-8 show reservoir performance without
water injection. Fracture oil and gas saturation at the
end of production can be seen in Figure 4 and figure
5 respectively. It shows that there is a huge gas cap at
the end when there is not water injection.
Figure 4
Fracture oil saturation at the end (Without injection
well) Figure 7
FWC and FGOR without injection
Figure 5
Fracture gas saturation at the end (without injection
well)
Figure 8
Field pressure (FPR) without injection
Results of simulation after water injection can be
seen in figure 9-19.
Figures 9-13 show reservoir performance when we
have 50 SM^3/Day injection rate.
Figure 12
Fracture oil saturation at the end
Figure 9
Water, gas and oil production rates
Figure 13
Fracture gas saturation at the end
Comparison of figures 4, 5 with figures 12, 13
demonstrate that when we have water injection, Gas
Figure 10
cap decreased.
Field water cut (FWC) and field gas oil ratio (FGOR)
Figure 11
Field reservoir pressure (FPR)
Figure 14
Field Oil Production Rate (FOPR) for Qinj=5, 10,
15, 20, 25 SM^3/Day
Comparison of various scenarios can be seen In
figure 14. It shows that Plateau time increases by
increasing the injection rate. It demonstrate that
capillary imbibition will be developed and help push
the oil to producing well.
Figure 17
FGOR for Qinj=5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 SM^3/Day
Figure 15 Field gas production rate (FGPR) from figure 16
Field water production rate (FWPR) comparison for shows that gas produces has not significant change
Qinj=5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 SM^3/Day with various water injection rate but Field GOR is
rapidly decreased in water injection rate more than
As we can see from the figure of water production 15 SM^3/Day (figure 17).
curves (figure 15), water production in more than 15
SM^3/Day water injection rate,water injection rises
up rapidly.
Figure 16 Figure 18
Field Gas Production Rate (FGPR) for Qinj=5, 10, Comparison of field reservoir pressure (FPR) for
15, 20, 25, 30 SM^3/Day Qinj=5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 SM^3/Day
As figure 18 shows that water injection support the
reservoir pressure. So pressure maintenance occurs.
2. After water injection, breakthrough will be
sooner at fracture, but reservoir pressure will be
maintained and capillary imbibitions process will
be better so plateau time increase.
3. It is obvious when water rate increase,
producing GOR will be decrease so oil
production rate increase.
4. In a water invaded zone, for this case, in
addition to gravity segregation, capillary
imbibition also increase the recovery
performance so increase the plateau time.
KEYWORDS
Figure 19 Azadegan oil reservoir, water injection, reservoir
Field Oil Production Total (FOPT) for Qinj=5, 10, performance, fracture reservoir
15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50 SM^3/Day
Figure 19 shows that oil production increases from REFERENCES
96000 m3 to 120000 m3 by increasing the water [1] Miller, M. "Naturally Fractured Reservoir
injection rate. As it can be seen in 50 SM^3/Day Engineering", Reservoir Engineering Course
water injection rate is giving much better cumulative Handouts, HOT Engineering, Vienna, Austria, 2007
produced oil than other cases. [2] Sajjadian, V. A., Emadi, A. M., Khaghani, A.,
“Simulation study of secondary water and gas
CONCLUSIONS injection in a typical Iranian naturally fractured
Above the various scenarios of water injection is carbonate oil reservoir” 18th World Petroleum
discussed. Finally we conclude that: Congress, Johannesburg, South Africa,
1. Water production rate is very low till Qinj =15 September 25 - 29, 2005
SM^3/Day and doesn’t make significant problem.
So it will be Higher if we inject more water.
View publication stats