Mobility control in the displacement of residual oil by an unstable foam

AIChE Journal ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 1029-1035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pil-Soo Hahn ◽  
T. R. Ramamohan ◽  
J. C. Slattery
SPE Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (06) ◽  
pp. 2243-2259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pengfei Dong ◽  
Maura Puerto ◽  
Guoqing Jian ◽  
Kun Ma ◽  
Khalid Mateen ◽  
...  

Summary Oil recovery in heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs is typically inefficient because of the presence of high-permeability fracture networks and unfavorable capillary forces within the oil-wet matrix. Foam, as a mobility-control agent, has been proposed to mitigate the effect of reservoir heterogeneity by diverting injected fluids from the high-permeability fractured zones into the low-permeability unswept rock matrix, hence improving the sweep efficiency. This paper describes the use of a low-interfacial-tension (low-IFT) foaming formulation to improve oil recovery in highly heterogeneous/fractured oil-wet carbonate reservoirs. This formulation provides both mobility control and oil/water IFT reduction to overcome the unfavorable capillary forces preventing invading fluids from entering an oil-filled matrix. Thus, as expected, the combination of mobility control and low-IFT significantly improves oil recovery compared with either foam or surfactant flooding. A three-component surfactant formulation was tailored using phase-behavior tests with seawater and crude oil from a targeted reservoir. The optimized formulation simultaneously can generate IFT of 10−2 mN/m and strong foam in porous media when oil is present. Foam flooding was investigated in a representative fractured core system, in which a well-defined fracture was created by splitting the core lengthwise and precisely controlling the fracture aperture by applying a specific confining pressure. The foam-flooding experiments reveal that, in an oil-wet fractured Edward Brown dolomite, our low-IFT foaming formulation recovers approximately 72% original oil in place (OOIP), whereas waterflooding recovers only less than 2% OOIP; moreover, the residual oil saturation in the matrix was lowered by more than 20% compared with a foaming formulation lacking a low-IFT property. Coreflood results also indicate that the low-IFT foam diverts primarily the aqueous surfactant solution into the matrix because of (1) mobility reduction caused by foam in the fracture, (2) significantly lower capillary entry pressure for surfactant solution compared with gas, and (3) increasing the water relative permeability in the matrix by decreasing the residual oil. The selective diversion effect of this low-IFT foaming system effectively recovers the trapped oil, which cannot be recovered with single surfactant or high-IFT foaming formulations applied to highly heterogeneous or fractured reservoirs.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-90
Author(s):  
Yani Faozani Alli ◽  
Edward ML Tobing ◽  
Usman Usman

The formation of microemulsion in the injection of surfactant at chemical flooding is crucial for the effectiveness of injection. Microemulsion can be obtained either by mixing the surfactant and oil at the surface or injecting surfactant into the reservoir to form in situ microemulsion. Its translucent homogeneous mixtures of oil and water in the presence of surfactant is believed to displace the remaining oil in the reservoir. Previously, we showed the effect of microemulsion-based surfactant formulation to reduce the interfacial tension (IFT) of oil and water to the ultralow level that suffi cient enough to overcome the capillary pressure in the pore throat and mobilize the residual oil. However, the effectiveness of microemulsion flooding to enhance the oil recovery in the targeted representative core has not been investigated.In this article, the performance of microemulsion-based surfactant formulation to improve the oil recovery in the reservoir condition was investigated in the laboratory scale through the core flooding experiment. Microemulsion-based formulation consist of 2% surfactant A and 0.85% of alkaline sodium carbonate (Na2CO3) were prepared by mixing with synthetic soften brine (SSB) in the presence of various concentration of polymer for improving the mobility control. The viscosity of surfactant-polymer in the presence of alkaline (ASP) and polymer drive that used for chemical injection slug were measured. The tertiary oil recovery experiment was carried out using core flooding apparatus to study the ability of microemulsion-based formulation to recover the oil production. The results showed that polymer at 2200 ppm in the ASP mixtures can generate 12.16 cP solution which is twice higher than the oil viscosity to prevent the fi ngering occurrence. Whereas single polymer drive at 1300 ppm was able to produce 15.15 cP polymer solution due to the absence of alkaline. Core flooding experiment result with design injection of 0.15 PV ASP followed by 1.5 PV polymer showed that the additional oil recovery after waterflood can be obtained as high as 93.41% of remaining oil saturation after waterflood (Sor), or 57.71% of initial oil saturation (Soi). Those results conclude that the microemulsion-based surfactant flooding is the most effective mechanism to achieve the optimum oil recovery in the targeted reservoir.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taniya Kar ◽  
Abbas Firoozabadi

Abstract Improved oil recovery in carbonate rocks through modified injection brine has been investigated extensively in recent years. Examples include low salinity waterflooding and surfactant injection for the purpose of residual oil reduction. Polymer addition to injection water for improvement of sweep efficiency enjoys field success. The effect of low salinity waterflooding is often marginal and it may even decrease recovery compared to seawater flooding. Polymer and surfactant injection are often effective (except at very high salinities and temperatures) but concentrations in the range of 5000 to 10000 ppm may make the processes expensive. We have recently suggested the idea of ultra-low concentration of surfactants at 100 ppm to decrease residual oil saturation from increased brine-oil interfacial elasticity. In this work, we investigate the synergistic effects of polymer injection for sweep efficiency and the surfactant for interfacial elasticity modification. The combined formulation achieves both sweep efficiency and residual oil reduction. A series of coreflood tests is performed on a carbonate rock using three crude oils and various injection brines: seawater and formation water with added surfactant and polymer. Both the surfactant and polymer are found to improve recovery at breakthrough via increase in oil-brine interfacial elasticity and injection brine viscosification, respectively. The synergy of surfactant and polymer mixed with seawater leads to higher viscosity and higher oil recovery. The overall oil recovery is found to be a strong function of oil-brine interfacial viscoelasticity with and without the surfactant and polymer in sea water and connate water injection.


Processes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leiting Shi ◽  
Shijie Zhu ◽  
Zhidong Guo ◽  
Wensen Zhao ◽  
Xinsheng Xue ◽  
...  

It has been proven that polymer injection at early times is beneficial to offshore heavy oil recovery. It is of significant importance to optimize the polymer injection timing and decide the residual oil distribution after polymer flooding. Aiming at a specific offshore heavy oil reservoir in Bohai, China, the optimum polymer injection timing is investigated through laboratory experiments. The influence of polymer injection timing on oil displacement and remaining oil distribution is analyzed by combining macroscopic and microscopic flooding experiments. The results reveal that the optimum polymer injection timing should be close to the water breakthrough, i.e., just before the waterflooding front reaches the outlet of the core. In addition, the waterflooding front position is analytically solved by using the Buckley–Leverett method and verified by experimental results, which supply an approach to predict the polymer injection timing. When polymer is injected before the waterflood front reaches the outlet of the core, the mobility control ability of polymer solution can reduce the fraction of bypassed volume of the reservoir by waterflooding. The early injected polymer mainly enters the high permeability zone, which works positively in two ways. Firstly, it improves the oil displacement efficiency of the high permeability zone. Secondly, the polymer establishes a flow resistance in the high permeable zones, thus improving the sweep efficiency in the low and medium permeability zones. However, our residual oil distribution experiments illustrate that there is still a large amount of oil remaining in the low and medium permeability zones. Therefore, it is necessary to explore additional EOR methods to recover the abundant residual oil.


1998 ◽  
Vol 1 (02) ◽  
pp. 161-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Maldal ◽  
E. Gilje ◽  
R. Kristensen ◽  
T. Karstad ◽  
A. Nordbotten ◽  
...  

Abstract This paper presents parts of the work performed in order to develop and qualify a Polymer Assisted Surfactant Flooding (PASF) system for economical use in the Gullfaks Field. The paper addresses experimental work done in the laboratory, numerical simulation of PASF, and the evaluation of the potential for PASF in full field scale. The experimental part comprises core flooding experiments at different temperatures, pressures, and gas-oil ratios in order to optimise the PASF system for the Gullfaks Brent formation conditions. The surfactant in the PASF system is a branched sulphonate (5000 ppm) and xanthan (500 ppm). The surfactant-polymer slug is followed by a slug of xanthan (500 ppm) for mobility control. No cosolvent is used. In coreflood experiments more than 70 percent of the waterflood residual oil was recovered. By using reservoir simulation a suitable pilot area was found in the Brent reservoir. Additional results from simulations were the amount of chemicals, the time needed for the pilot test, and additional oil recovery. Much effort was put into estimating the full field PASF potential. Firstly, the areas of the field where PASF possibly could be used were selected. Key factors were existing and planned well locations, production data, and long term production forecasts. Then the amount of chemicals needed and the expected technical efficiency for each area were calculated. To verify these calculations, an area of the field containing two possible injection wells, and three producers, was selected for a simulation study. This area was considered as the most promising area for PASF. The main conclusion from this work is that, with the present crude oil price and chemical costs, the PASF process is not economical attractive for use in the Gullfaks field, mainly because the residual oil was considerable lower than believed at project start. Introduction The Gullfaks field is located in the north-eastern part of block 34/10 in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. The oil production started in December 1986 and the cumulative oil production to date is 168 mill. Sm3 or 59 % of recoverable reserves. Water injection is the current drive mechanism, aiming at maintaining reservoir pressure above the bubble point. At the project start in 1989, the Gullfaks field was from a technical standpoint a prime target for enhanced oil recovery . The residual oil saturation after waterflooding was believed to be about 0.35, which indicated a high technical potential for surfactant flooding. Most of the reservoir characteristics are favourable for PASF, i. e. multidarcy sands, low oil viscosity (1.5 cP), relatively low reservoir temperature (70 C) and low salinity of the formation water (42000 ppm) and moderate low clay content (5-10 %). A single well injection test with surfactant alone was performed during the first half of 1992. The surfactant was successfully injected without any special treatment of the injection water, and the test confirmed that residual oil was mobilised by the surfactant. Exxon conducted a series of five pilot tests in the Loudon field from 1980 to 1989. The test sizes ranged from a single pattern of 2800 m2 to multi-pattern tests with pilot areas of 161600 m2 and 323200 m2 areas, respectively. For the 2800 m2 pilot, recovery was 68 % of the waterflood residual oil. In the larger multi-pattern floods, oil recovery dropped to 26.9 % in the 161600 m2 and 33.4 % in the 323200 m2 project. The tests showed that the use of polymer in the injection water is crucial for obtaining a successful surfactant flooding. An other observation in these field tests was that the surfactant retention was less than half of that measured in conventional laboratory coreflood experiments. This was explained by a change of wettability from aerobic, oxidising conditions, in the laboratory, to the anaerobic, reducing conditions, in the reservoir.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 018-030 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Maurich

Surfactant can displace oil which trapped by capillary effect, make it easier to be produced and finally improve oil recovery factor. However, the effectiveness of surfactant injection depends on many parameters such as surfactant-reservoir fluids properties and interaction, reservoir characteristics and its interaction with surfactant and also surfactant injection scenario or operational methods. This paper discusses about the effect of continuous surfactant injection alternating huff & puff stimulation on oil recovery factor from a quadrant of five-spot pattern in a 3D physical model made from a mixture of sands, cement and water with dimension of 15 cm x 15 cm x 2.5 cm to serve as the surrogate for oil reservoir in laboratory. In order to simulate the oil recovery from a secondary waterflooding process, 0.17 PV of formation water was injected into 3D reservoir physical model. This process could recover about 25.5% OOIP from the physical model, however the injection then shortly terminated due to a drastically increase of watercut. Residual oil then be recovered by a sequence of continuous surfactant injection alternating huff and puff stimulation method. The recovery factor by continuous surfactant injection combine with chase water drive gave a 5.5 % OOIP additional recovery and another 6.8 % OOIP after 24 hours surfactant huff & puff stimulation in the first sequence. After conducting 3 series of a combination of continuous surfactant injection alternating huff & puff stimulation, the total oil recovery from overall processes was about 51.7% OOIP. We presume that the lack of mobility control on macroscopic sweep efficiency in a 3D reservoir physical model is the rationale behind this moderate oil recovery which only produced by surfactant microscopic displacement efficiency. Nevertheless, the research shows that the combination of continuous surfactant injection alternating huff & puff stimulation obviously improve the recovery factor to some extent.


1977 ◽  
Vol 17 (05) ◽  
pp. 358-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmoud K. Dabbous

Abstract Injection of polymers in advance of a micellar fluid slug has been considered to improve reservoir volumetric sweep in a tertiary-mode micellar flood. An investigation was made of the injection of polyacrylamide-type polymers in waterflooded polyacrylamide-type polymers in waterflooded porous media and its effects on a subsequent porous media and its effects on a subsequent micellar flood. It was found that the presence of waterflood residual oil saturations in the porous medium increased the flow resistance and residual resistance factors (2- to 3.5-fold) compared with their corresponding values when the rock was free of residual oil. Inaccessible pore volume to polymer flow also appeared to be larger when waterflood residual oil saturations were present. These effects have been attributed to wettability and phase distribution of fluids in the porous medium. phase distribution of fluids in the porous medium. The study emphasized basic differences in the flow behavior of polymer injected ahead of a micellar slug (to improve sweep) and behind the micellar fluid (to control mobility). Both effects are for improved oil-recovery efficiency. Water mobility was greatly reduced following the displacement of polyacrylamide polymers in the waterflooded cores, yet mobility of the oil-water bank in a subsequent micellar flood was reduced to a lesser degree than the water bank. For a residual resistance factor to water ranging from 2 to 7, mobility control of a subsequent micellar flood could be achieved with a 22- to 39-percent increase in polymer concentration in the mobility buffer bank. This increase is in excess of the concentration required for a flood not preceded with polymer injection. Polymer preinjection had no adverse effects on oil displacement characteristics of the micellar fluid and appeared to reduce surfactant adsorption on the rock for the polymer-micellar system studied. Some experimental data indicated that the oil bank breaks through earlier and at a slightly higher oil cut in linear core floods. Such a result is theoretically feasible if the reduced-mobility water is not completely displaced at the front end (immiscible portion) of the oil-water bank. Oil-bank breakthrough probably would be delayed in the reservoir because of the action of the preinjected polymer to decrease the flow of fluids in polymer to decrease the flow of fluids in high-permeability zones. Introduction In a previous paper, preinjection of polymers in advance of a micellar slug was proposed as a means for improving reservoir volumetric sweep and oil recovery by a micellar flood. Increased flooding efficiency should result from reduced interwell permeability contrast in the reservoir following the polymer treatment. Preinjection of polymers also should result in better preflushing polymers also should result in better preflushing efficiency in displacing incompatible formation brines over "conventional" water preflushes. Thus, an improved oil-recovery method designed to increase reservoir volumetric sweep and miscibly recover tertiary oil consists ofpreinjection of a carefully designed slug of preinjection of a carefully designed slug of high-molecular-weight polyacrylamide polymers followed by a water-bank spacer to displace the polymer in the interwell area, andinjection of polymer in the interwell area, andinjection of a surfactant (micellar) slug followed by a polymer mobility buffer bank and chase water. The fluid banks that are injected or developed during the process are illustrated in Fig. 1. Mixing and process are illustrated in Fig. 1. Mixing and interaction zones at fluid-bank boundaries are not shown in the schematic. The preinjection of a polymer is intended to rectify interwell permeability variation. The polymer is injected in reservoir rock that has waterflood residual oil saturations. SPEJ p. 358


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document