Binshan Ju1

School of Energy Resources, Key Laboratory of Marine Reservoir Evolution and Hydrocarbon Accumulation Mechanism, Ministry of Education, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China e-mail: jubs2936@163.com

Xiaofeng Qiu
Block 1, Building 10, Unit 2, House 202, China University of Petroleum (East China), 271 Beier Road, Dongying, Shandong 257062, P.R.C.

Shugao Dai
Shengli Oil Field Dongsheng Jinggong Petroleum Development Group Co. Ltd., Dongsheng Mansion, Xisi Road, No. 266, Dongying, Shandong 257000, P.R.C.

A Study to Prevent Bottom Water From Coning in Heavy-Oil Reservoirs: Design and Simulation Approaches
The coning problems for vertical wells and the ridging problems for horizontal wells are very difcult to solve by conventional methods during oil production from reservoirs with bottom water drives. If oil in a reservoir is too heavy to follow Darcys law, the problems may become more complicated for the non-Newtonian properties of heavy oil and its rheology. To solve these problems, an innovative completion design with downhole water sink was presented by dual-completion in oil and water columns with a packer separating the two completions for vertical wells or dual-horizontal wells. The design made it feasible that oil is produced from the formation above the oil water contact (OWC) and water is produced from the formation below the OWC, respectively. To predict quantitatively the production performances of production well using the completion design, a new improved mathematical model considering non-Newtonian properties of oil was presented and a numerical simulator was developed. A series of runs of an oil well was employed to nd out the best perforation segment and the ttest production rates from the formations above and below OWC. The study shows that the design is effective for heavy oil reservoir with bottom water though it cannot completely eliminate the water cone formed before using the design. It is a discovery that the design is more favorable for new wells and the best perforation site for water sink (Sink 2) is located at the upper 1/3 of the formation below OWC. DOI: 10.1115/1.2955560 Keywords: water coning, bottom water, non-Newtonian oil, improve oil recovery

Tailiang Fan
School of Energy Resources, Key Laboratory of Marine Reservoir Evolution and Hydrocarbon Accumulation Mechanism, Ministry of Education, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China

Haiqing Wu
Shengli Oil Field Dongsheng Jinggong Petroleum Development Group Co. Ltd., Dongsheng Mansion, Xisi Road, No. 266, Dongying, Shandong 257000, P.R.C.

Xiaodong Wang
School of Energy Resources, Key Laboratory of Marine Reservoir Evolution and Hydrocarbon Accumulation Mechanism, Ministry of Education, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China

Introduction

Water coning has been regarded as the biggest problem during oil production from a reservoir with bottom water. The phenomenon has been known for at least 100 years. Smith 1 in 1963 and some other previous researchers before him discussed the theory of water coning. Resumptively, the occurrence of water coning is due to pressure gradients resulting from well production from the pay zone. The pressure gradients result in a water cone to rise toward the bottom of the producing interval. The tendency of the water to cone is offset or partially offset by gravity force since
1 Corresponding author. Contributed by the Petroleum Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received April 8, 2007; nal manuscript received April 20, 2008; published online August 11, 2008. Review conducted by Faruk Civan. Paper presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, November 2123, 2005.

water has a higher specic gravity than that of oil. A dynamic balance exists between the gravitational force and the pressure gradient caused by well production. If the pressure gradient exceeds the gravitational force, water coning to the wellbore will occur. Although the theory is not difcult to understand for a reservoir engineer, it is very difcult to control water coning, especially for heavy oil reservoirs with bottom water since the difference in specic gravities of oil and water is very small. Most of previous studies focused on the prediction of critical production rate of water coning and water coning process to control water coning by analytical models 26, physical laboratory simulation 79 or numerical simulation technique 1014, articial barriers 1517 for controlling water coning, and prevention by injection heavy uids or chemicals 18,19 such as cross-linking polymers or gels. In the past 100 years, reservoir engineers tried to look for some effective techniques to control water coning during exploiting oil SEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-1

Journal of Energy Resources Technology Copyright 2008 by ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 1 The principle of TSIOF

from reservoirs with bottom water. Unfortunately, only a few successful oil-eld examples were reported. Wojtanowicz et al. 20 and Shirman and Wojtanowicz 21 reported that downhole water sink technology is a feasible operation to control water coning. Moreover, some oil-eld examples were given and analyzed in their published papers. The thought is to design two sinks in one formation TSIOF. One locates above OWC Sink 1 and the other locates below OWC Sink 2. From the view of the theory for the ow in sand formation, the design is novel because pressure gradients in the vicinity of producing interval can be modied by changing the production rates of two sinks. Although the thought can be traced back to about 50 years ago 22, the applications of the thought in oil elds were reported in recent ten years, and some reservoir engineers did not accept the idea yet. Among the oil-eld examples given by Shirman and Wojtanowicz 21, the specic gravity of oil is from 0.865 to 0.93 21 deg 32 deg API and the maximum viscosity is 033102-2 / Vol. 130, SEPTEMBER 2008

17 mPa s downhole. Currently, there is no report that TSIOF technology is used in heavy oil reservoirs with bottom water to prevent water coning. As the analysis above, for a heavy reservoir with bottom water, generally, the critical production rate is too small to gain a prot on its operating cost. If it keeps a rate above the critical production rate, water coning results in production with high water-cut. One oil reservoir located in H.K., Shandong, China is a typical heavy-oil reservoir with bottom water. The specic gravity of degassed crude oil is 0.988, and the viscosity of degassed crude oil is 7337 mPa s at 20 C. The viscosity of the crude oil under the reservoir condition is 710 mPa s. Therefore, the ratio of oil viscosity to water viscosity in formation condition is still quite adverse for water displacement. The current water-cut is up to 90% while oil recovery is only 1.0%. The object of this paper is to study the feasibility of TSIOF technology to enhance oil recovery of heavy-oil reservoirs with bottom water. Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 3 The relation of apparent viscosity and pressure gradient

fore, the uid produced from oil pay zone ows through tubing and the uid produced from bottom water formation ow through annular space.

4
Fig. 2 Well completion conguration

Mathematical Model

Theory Analysis for Water Coning Control

Since oil recovery of the reservoir in this study depends on the ooding of the edge and bottom water, the three-dimensional three-phase black oil model is chosen to study the production performances. However, the rheology properties of the heavy oil must be considered for the oil in the reservoir one kind of nonNewtonian uids. 4.1 Assumptions for the Mathematical Model. The mathematical model was based on the following assumptions. 1 Assume that the multiphase ow is isothermal and three dimensional, and rock and uids are compressible. 2 The oil is non-Newtonian uid. 3 Capillary and gravity forces are considered. 4 Chemical reactions are neglected. 4.2 Multiphase Flow in Porous Media. The continuity equations of slightly compressible multiphase uid ow and Newtonian ow are given by the following expressions: div

Since water coning is caused by pressure gradients resulting from the sink above the OWC, pressure gradients in the whole formation can be also modied by a water sink below the OWC when gravity forces are not high enough to offset the pressure gradients induced by the sink above the OWC. Therefore, the mutual actions of the pressure gradients induced by two sinks and gravity forces control the evolvement of water coning and determine the shape of water coning. The unique design may restrain water coning or ridging by adjusting two sink production rates from the completion intervals above and below the OWC and enlarge the oil draining area, which in turn improves the oil recovery. Figure 1 shows the principle of TSIOF used in vertical and horizontal wells. Figure 1a is one part of a reservoir with bottom water and there is an original oil water contact OOWC in the mid of the formation. Figure 1b is one sink produced from a vertical well, and it shows that the current oil water contact COWC moves to the perforating interval. If two sinks see Fig. 1c are designed for production, theoretically, OWC can be kept horizontal by modifying the rates of two sinks. That is to say, OWC can coincide with OOWC. Figure 1d illustrates that one horizontal well interval is above the OWC and the other is below the OWC. Similarly, one sink production results in water ridging in three spaces, which looks like a water cone on crossing prole see Fig. 1e. Moreover, water ridging can be eliminated by modifying the production rates of two sinks Fig. 1g. Although the OWC can theoretically be kept horizontal by modifying the production rates of two sinks, it is very difcult to keep it horizontal for the reservoir with high viscosity ratio of crude oil to water. However, TSIOF technique can prevent water coning or ridging to some extent and put off water breakthrough time.

div

div

k krw grad w + qw = sw/Bw Bw w t k kro grad o + qo = so/Bo Bo o t

1 2

k kro Rs k krg grad g + grad o + qg Bg g B o o

s g/ B g + S oR s/ B o t

For the ows of the three phases of oil, water, and gas, we can dene So + Sw + Sg = 1 We dene the parameters in Eqs. 13 as o = po + o z w = pw + w z = po + pcwo + w z g = pg + g z = po + pcgo + g z 5 6 7 4

Completion Method

In order to realize the TSIOF technique, a special completion is adopted to separate production uids from the formations above OWC and below OWC. Figure 2 gives well completion conguration in a vertical well. The packers separate the uids produced from the pay zones above and below the OWC. Because the formation pressure is not high enough to lift uids onto the wellhead, one pump Pump 1 is set to pump oil into tubing and the other Pump 2 is used to pump uids into casing, respectively. ThereJournal of Energy Resources Technology

where t is time; is the porosity of the porous media; S, , and p are saturation, viscosity, and pressure of uids, respectively; k is the absolute permeability; kr is the relative permeability; B is the volume factor of uid; q is the production or injection rate of uid; Rs is the solution gas-oil ratio; is the specic gravity of uid; z is the distance from reference level; and pc is the capillary SEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-3

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 1 Parameters for numerical simulation Parameter names The length of geological model, m The average thickness of geological model, m The average thickness of oil zone, m The average thickness of bottom water, m The grids number, Nx Ny Nz The average porosity The average horizontal permeability, m2 The average oil saturation Initial pressure of the reservoir, MPa Bubble pressure, MPa The static viscosity of oil in reservoir, mPa s Volume factor of the crude oil Initial the solution gas-oil ratio The viscosity of formation water, mPa s Volume factor of formation water The values 300 17.0 10.0 7.0 15 15 17 37.99% 0.666 0.57 11.70 8.24 710 1.06 19.0 0.48 1.01

Fig. 5 The oil saturation in each layer from top to bottom

+1 gradin1 i, j ,k =

pin, j,k pin1, j,k 0.5 dxi, j,k + dxi1, j,k pin+1, j,k pin, j,k 0.5 dxi, j,k + dxi+1, j,k pin, j,k pin, j1,k 0.5 dxi, j,k + dx, j1,k pin, j+1,k pin, j,k 0.5 dxi, j,k + dx, j+1,k

9a 9b 9c 9 d

+1 gradin+1 i, j ,k =

force. The methods to obtain coefcients of Eqs. 13 except oil viscosity can be obtained from Ref. 23. The data from experiments in laboratories show that the crude oil viscosity in reservoir is a function of both reservoir pressures of oil phase and pressure gradients. Pressure is one factor to determine the viscosity of heavy oil for pressure has effects on both solubility of gas and the spaces between molecules. The effect of pressure on viscosity was studied by experimental approach. Pressure gradient is the other factor to inuence the viscosity of heavy oil for ow shearing. The characters of viscosity of heavy oil obtained by experiments in this study were shown in Fig. 3. When the pressure gradient is less than 0.04 MPa/m or higher than 0.13 MPa/m, the viscosity can nearly be regarded as a constant. As the pressure gradient falls in the interval of 0.04 MPa/m to 0.13 MPa/m, the viscosity of the heavy oil declines linearly. Experimental data were used in the simulator to represent the relationship between the viscosity of heavy oil and pressure gradient.

gradin,+1 j1 j ,k = gradin,+1 j+1 j ,k =

o = f po,grad po

The reservoir pressure determines the static viscosity, while pressure gradient determines the dynamic viscosity apparent viscosity. Viscosity is one of the properties of uid and it keeps constant at all directions at a certain grid node for Newtonian uid. It is true that the static viscosity does not depend on the direction at a certain grid node; however, the apparent viscosity of heavy oil also depends on pressure gradient for it belongs to non-Newtonian uids. Since the pressure gradients between adjacent blocks are different, the apparent viscosities may be different. For threedimensional case, one block has six surfaces through which uids can transfer. Therefore, there are six gradients between the block and other adjacent six blocks, i.e.,

Fig. 6 Grids on the plane

Fig. 7 The relative permeability of oil and water

Fig. 4 The rhythm of the sand formation

Fig. 8 Water-cut match

033102-4 / Vol. 130, SEPTEMBER 2008

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 9 Water coning process

gradin,+1 j,k1k =

pin, j,k pin, j,k1 0.5 dxi, j,k + dxi, j,k1

9e

gradin,+1 j ,k+1k =

pin, j,k+1 pin, j,k 0.5 dxi, j,k + dxi, j,k+1

9f

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

SEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-5

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

When we calculate the uids transferring through six faces, six apparent viscosities determined by gradients are needed. For instance, the apparent viscosity of oil between the grid i 1 , j , k and i , j , k can be expressed as
+1 in1, j ,k = f

pin1, j,k + pin, j,k +1 ,gradin1 i, j ,k 2

10

Numerical Simulation and Discussion

Fig. 10 The effects of production rate of Sink 2 on oil production of Sink 1

Based on the mathematical model above and the rheology properties of the heavy oil, a new black oil simulator is developed to study the feasibility of the TSIOF technique to improve recovery from the heavy-oil reservoir with edge and bottom waters. For a horizontal well, water ridging looks like a cone in the view of crossing prole. From the point of uids owing in formation, the bottom water ows upward for both vertical and horizontal wells, so the mechanisms are similar whether it is a vertical well or a horizontal well. Therefore, this paper focused on the feasible study of the TSIOF technique used in vertical wells. The main objectives of this section are as follows. a Prove if the TSIOF technique can be used in old wells to improve oil recovery for heavy-oil reservoir with strong bottom and edge waters when water coning occurred:

have a good agreement with water-cuts from production data except for the rst month. The relative high water-cut production data of the rst month is caused by well operation before production. Figure 9 gives the evolvement of water coning and indicates that a smaller water cone has been formed in the rst two months and a bigger water cone occurred after six months. Consequently, the dramatic increase in water-cut of the production well results from water coning. 5.1.2 Effects of Production Rate of Sink 2 on Oil Production, Water-Cut of Sink 1, and Water Coning Behavior. This section is designed to predict the production performances with and without the TSIOF technique. Supposing the production uid rate of Sink 1 is 20 m3 / day, only Sink 1 production i.e., the production rate of Sink 2 is 0.0 and three production rates 10 m3 / day, 20 m3 / day, and 30 m3 / day of Sink 2 are set for numerical simulation. Figure 10 shows that the increase in the production rates of Sink 2 results in obvious increase in cumulative oil production of Sink 1. The cumulative oil production of Sink 1 in ve years at four cases is given in Table 2. Figure 11 shows that the increase in the production rate of Sink 2 results in the reduction in water-cut of Sink 1. Figure 12 shows that the shape of water cone can be changed by the production of Sink 2. The production of Sink 2 induces the decline in the height of water cone. It implies that water cone can be alleviated by the production of Sink 2; however, it is very difcult to eliminate water cone for the severely adverse ratio of

1 historical matching for production wells 2971 and numerical simulation for water coning process 2 the effects of production rates of Sink 2 on oil production and water-cut of Sink 1 3 the effects of production rates of Sink 2 on the behaviors of water coning 4 the best location of perforating intervals of Sink 2 5 the economic feasibility of the TSIOF technique b Prove that the TSIOF technique is also an effective approach to prevent water from coning for new production wells:

1 the effects of production rate of sink 2 on oil production sink 1, and the total oil production of two sinks 2 the effects of production rate of Sink 2 on the ratios of cumulative water to oil 3 the comparison of oil production between implementing TSIOF in a new well and an old well To give the answers of the objectives of this paper, a single well model with ne grids was run on the numerical simulator developed in this paper. The main parameters of geology and reservoir uids are listed in Table 1. The parameters listed in Table 1 are obtained by well logging interpretation and experimental data of the reservoir located in H.K., Shandong, China. The geological model is heterogeneous. The rhythm of the reservoir is composite; however, we can regard the formation as an antirhythm as a whole see Fig. 4. The distributions of oil saturation from top to bottom of the formation are shown in Fig. 5. The average grid sizes of directions x and y are 20.0 m, and the average grid size in z direction is 1.0 m. To improve accuracy, ne grids are set on the plane in the vicinity of production well Fig. 6. 5.1 Prove That TSIOF Technique Fitting for Old Wells

Table 2 Cumulative oil production of Sink 1 ton Sink 2 rate 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 0.0 m3 / day 1038.0 1927.6 2693.8 3387.4 4013.5 10 m3 / day 1469.7 2660.1 3668.0 4554.4 5341.9 20 m3 / day 1916.5 3480.2 4843.8 6081.7 7229.1 30 m3 / day 2339.0 4173.5 5742.6 7144.9 8426.8

5.1.1 Historical Matching and Water Coning Process. The well has a production history of three years and four months. The formation pressure is almost constant due to the strong ooding by natural bottom and edge waters. Therefore, the pressure match is relatively easy and the water-cut match is the focus of historical matching. By modifying the relative permeabilities of oil and water, water-cuts are matched well. The relative permeability curves of oil and water are shown in Fig. 7, and the water-cut match is shown in Fig. 8. It indicates that the numerical simulation results 033102-6 / Vol. 130, SEPTEMBER 2008

Fig. 11 The effects of production rate of Sink 2 on water-cut of Sink 1

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 12 The effects of production rate of Sink 2 on the behaviors of water coning

oil viscosity to water viscosity. Inasmuch as the capacity of waste water treatment of this plant is limited, a rate of 20 30 m3 / day for Sink 2 is recommended. Journal of Energy Resources Technology

5.1.3 Optimization for the Best Perforating Location of Sink 2. To optimize the best perforating location of Sink 2, the equal production rates 20 m3 / day of Sinks 1 and 2 are set for simuSEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-7

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 5 Main parameters of economic evaluation of Zh2971 Capital investment of TSIOF completion, 104 RMB Cost of oil production per ton including the cost of treating the increased water produced Oil price, RMB/ton Cost of a remedial well treatment per year, 104 RMB Benchmark rate of return 100 1600 4000 15 0.12

pose a new well brings into production with two sinks. Numerical simulation by modifying the production rates of Sink 2 is used to study the feasibility of the TSIOF technique.
Fig. 13 The effect of perforation location on cumulative oil production

lation by changing the perforating location. Supposing that the perforating interval of Sink 2 locates at 1.0 m, 2.0 m, 3.0 m, 4.0 m, 5.0 m, 6.0 m, and 7.0 m, respectively, from OOWC, each case is run on the simulator for ve years. Figure 13 gives the cumulative oil production for each perforating location of Sink 2. It shows that perforating interval located at 2.03.0 m under the OOWC is the best location for the maximum cumulative oil production obtained. Therefore, the upper 1/3 of the thickness of bottom water is recommended as a perforating site for Sink 2. 5.1.4 Economic Feasibility of TSIOF Technique. In order to prove the feasibility of the TSIOF technique, economic evaluation was adopted to identify which is better for normal completion and the TSIOF technique. Static payback period of investment Table 3 and net present values Table 4 are calculated to demonstrate the economic feasibility of TSIOF. The main parameters of economic evaluation are listed in Table 5. From Table 3, the longest payback period of investment is less than three months. It shows that the technique is feasible from the view of investment. Table 4 shows that the net present values of the three cases of the TSIOF completion are all greater than that of the normal completion from the second year. 5.2 Prove That TSIOF Technique Fitting for New Wells. To prove that the TSIOF technique is also one effective approach to prevent water from coning for new production wells, we sup-

5.2.1 Effects of Production Rates of Sink 2 on Oil Production Performance. Supposing the production rate of Sink 1 is 12 m3 / day, and the production rates of Sink 2 are 0.0 m3 / day, 4.0 m3 / day, 8.0 m3 / day, and 12.0 m3 / day, respectively. The production time is three years and four months. Table 6 gives the simulation results for each case. The data show that more oil production and less water production of Sink 1 are realized by using the TSIOF technique. In addition, the ratios of total cumulative oil to cumulative water production also imply that the TSIOF technique can improve oil recovery and reduce water-cut for heavy-oil reservoir with edge and bottom waters. When the total cumulative uid production increases two times the rate of Sink 2 is 12.0 m3 / day, the total cumulative oil production increases from 4118 tons to 9568 tons. 5.2.2 Effects of Production Rates of Sink 2 on Water Coning Behavior. Figure 14 gives the original state of the formation and current states production for three years and four months at different production rates of Sink 2. When a production rate of Sink 2 is 0.0 i.e., normal completion, a big water cone forms. With the increase in production rates of Sink 2, the height of water cone reduces. When the production rate of Sink 2 is 12.0 m3 / day, water coning is alleviated to a great extent 5.2.3 Comparison of Oil Production Between Implementing TSIOF in a New Well and an Old Well. To compare which is better between the implementing TSIOF in a new well and an old well, cumulative oil productions of the old well and the new well obtained by numerical simulation are charted in Fig. 15. The production liquid rates of Sinks 1 and 2 for the new well and the old well are all 10 m3 / D. The two cumulative oil production curves

Table 3 Static payback period of investment Normal completion TSIOF completion Only one sink Production rate Production rate Production rate of Sink 2, of Sink 2, of Sink2, 10 m3 / D 20 m3 / D 30 m3 / D Payback period of investment month 0 2.8 2.0 1.7

Table 4 The results of net present values Net present value 104 RMB Time year Normal completion Only Sink 1 TSIOF completion Production Production rate rate of Sink 2, of Sink 2, 3 20 m / D 30 m3 / D 100 299.25 585.41 806.3 984.38 1131.09 100 396.05 736.01 992.92 1196.56 1361.83

Production rate of Sink 2, 10 m3 / D 100 198.35 411.27 570.52 694.48 791.97

0 1 2 3 4 5

0 202.92 357.05 474.56 568.93 644.42

033102-8 / Vol. 130, SEPTEMBER 2008

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 6 The effect of Sink 2 on the production performances of Sink 1 Production rates of Sink 2 m3 / day 0 4 8 12 Sink 1 Cumulative oil Cumulative water production production ton m 3 4118 5506 6957 8342 10654 9066 7816 6430 Sink 2 Cumulative oil Cumulative water production production ton m 3 0 287 637 1226 0 4760 9334 13670 Sink 1 + Sink 2 Cumulative oil Cumulative water production production ton m 3 4118 5793 7594 9568 10654 13826 17149 20099 The ratios of total cumulative oil to water production ton / m3 0.387 0.419 0.443 0.476

Fig. 14 The effects of production rate of Sink 2 on the behaviors of water coning for a new well

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

SEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-9

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Acknowledgment
The authors thank the International Petroleum Technology Conference Copyright IPTC for the permission for the use of the authors one-time journal publication rights for IPTC Paper 10521. The paper An Effective Method to Improve Recovery of Heavy Oil Reservoir With Bottom Water Drive was rst presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, November 2123, 2005.

References
1 Smith, C. R., and Pirson, L J., 1963, Water Coning Control in Oil Wells by Fluid Injection, SPE J., 3, pp. 314319. 2 Chierici, G. L., Sobocinski, D. P., and Cornelius, A. J., 1965, A Systematic Study of Gas and Water Coning by Potentiometric Models, JPT, 17, pp. 923928. 3 Wheatley, M. J., 1985, An Approximate Theory of Oil/Water Coning, The 60th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Las Vegas, NV, Sept. 2225, SPE Paper No. 14210. 4 Hoyland, L. A., Papatzacos, P., and Skjaeveland, S. M., 1989, Critical Rate for Water Coning: Correlation and Analytical Solution, SPERE, 4, pp. 495 499. 5 Guo, B., Abass, H. H., and Bass, D. M., A General Solution of Gas/Water Coning Problem for Horizontal Wells, The European Petroleum Conference, Cannes, France, Nov. 1618, SPE Paper No. 25050. 6 Shirif, E., Guo, B., and Lee, R. L., 2002, Waterooding Performance of Stratied Reservoirs With Bottom-Water Condition, The SPE Asia Pacic Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, Oct. 810, SPE Paper No. 77963. 7 Abass, H. H., Shirif, K. E., and Hromek, J. J., 1988, The Critical Production Rate in Water-Coning System, The SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, TX, Mar. 1011, SPE Paper No. 17311. 8 Khan, A. R., 1970, A Scaled Model Study of Water Coning, JPT, 22, pp. 711713. 9 Wibowo, W., Permadi, P., Mardsewojo, P., and Sukarno, P., 2004, Behavior of Water and Production Performance of Horizontal Well in Bottom Water Drive Reservoir: A Scaled Model Study, The SPE Asia Pacic Conference on Integrated Modeling for Asset Management, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Mar. 29 30, SPE Paper No. 87046. 10 Pirson, S. J., and Mehta, M. M., 1967, A Study of Remedial Measures for Water-Coning by Means of a Two-Dimensional Simulator, The 42nd Annual Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Houston, TX, Oct. 14, SPE Paper No. 1808. 11 MacDonald, R. C., and Coats, K. H., 1970, Methods for Numerical Simulation of Water and Gas Coning, SPE J., 10, pp. 425430. 12 Graue, D. J., and Filgate, R. A., 1971, A Study of Water Coning in the Kaybob South Beaverhill Lake Field, The 46th Annual Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, New Orleans, LA, Oct. 36, SPE Paper No. 3623. 13 Woods, E. G., and Khurana, A. K., 1977, Pseudofunctions for Water Coning in a Three-Dimensional Reservoir Simulator, SPE J., 21, pp. 251254. 14 Zakirov, S., Yulmetjev, T., and Zakirov, E., 2000, Enhanced Oil Recovery From Oil Fields With Bottom Water, The SPE European Petroleum Conference, Paris, France, Oct. 2425, SPE Paper No. 65130. 15 Karp, J. C., Lowe, D. K., Marusov, N., 1962, Horizontal Barriers for Controlling Water Coning, JPT, 14, pp. 783789. 16 Romero-Juarez, A., 1964, Characteristic of Oil Production Related to Water Coning, SPE Paper No. 1089. 17 Islam, M. R., and Farouq Ali, S. M., 1987, Improving Waterood Performance in Oil Reservoirs With Bottom Water, The 62nd Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas, TX, Sept. 2730, SPE Paper No. 16727. 18 Bowlin, K. R., Chea, C. K., Wheeler, S. S., and Waldo, L. A., 1997, Field Application of In-Situ Gravity Segregation to Remediate Prior Water Coning, The SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, CA, Jun. 2527, SPE Paper No. 38296. 19 Shirif, E., 2000, Mobility Control by Polymers Under Bottom-Water Conditions, Experimental Approach, The SPE Asia Pacic Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, Oct. 1618, SPE Paper No. 64506. 20 Wojtanowicz, A. K., Xu, H., and Bassiouni, Z. A., 1991, Oil Well Coning Control Using Dual Completion With Tailpipe Water Sink, The Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, Apr. 79, SPE Paper No. 21654. 21 Shirman, E., and Wojtanowicz, A. K., 1988, More Oil With Less Water Using Downhole Water Sink Technology: A Feasibility Study, The SPE Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, Oct. 2730, SPE Paper No. 49052. 22 Widmyer, R. H., 1995, Producing Petroleum From Underground Formation, U.S. Patent No. 2855047. 23 Peaceman, D. W., 1977, Fundamentals of Numerical Reservoir Simulation, Elsevier, New York.

Fig. 15 Comparison of numerical cumulative oil production of old well and new well

show that cumulative oil productions of the new well are far greater than that of the old well. It indicates that the TSIOF technique is more tted for a new well produced from a reservoir with bottom water.

Conclusion

The theory analysis for water coning control by the TSIOF technique is presented and a special well completion design for a vertical well is also given in this paper. A simulator considering the rheology of heavy oil is developed for the study of water coning problems. The results of ne simulation show that the TSIOF technique is tted for not only old wells that water cone occurred but also for new wells. There are an obvious increase in oil production and decrease in water-cut of Sink 1 with the TSIOF technique. TSIOF technique is effective for heavy-oil reservoirs with bottom water. Although the TSIOF technique can alleviate water coning problems, it is very difcult to eliminate completely for heavy-oil reservoirs.

Nomenclature
B k kr p q Rs S t Subscripts c g o w volume factor of uid absolute permeability of a porous media m2 relative permeability of a porous media pressure Pa production/injection rate m2 / s solution gas-oil ratio saturation times porosity of the porous media specic gravity of uids. viscosity of uid Pa s potential capillary gas oil water

SI Metric Conversion Factors 1.0 ton 1000 kg 1.0 MPa 106 Pa 1.0 mPas 103 Pa s

033102-10 / Vol. 130, SEPTEMBER 2008

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Binshan Ju (Ph.D., China University of Geosciences, Beijing, 2004) is a staff, who has 15 years experience in the elds of petroleum engineering, in School of Energy Resources, China University of Geosciences (Beijing). His research interests include (1) Oil and gas development, (2) Petroleum geology and reservoir description, (3) Enhanced oil recovery and (4) Percolation ow mechanics in petroleum engineering and environmental sciences. He has nished over 15research projects and two oil reservoir numerical simulators for (CGFORS and ORSCPPCFS) for oil companies such as CNPC, CNODC and SinoPec, published over 30 scientic and technical papers in authoritative journals, and gained many honors and awards such as excellent doctoral dissertation and excellent scientic research awards. e-mail: jubs2936@163.com

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

SEPTEMBER 2008, Vol. 130 / 033102-11

Downloaded 21 Nov 2010 to 124.16.168.130. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm