SPE 69724
Thermodynamic Characterization of a PVT of Foamy Oil
Douglas J. Romero and Belkis Fernandez, SPE, Schlumberger, and Gonzalo Rojas,SPE, UDO
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2001 SPE International Thermal Operations
and Heavy Oil Symposium held in Porlamar, Margarita Island, Venezuela, 12-14 March 2001.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position
of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE
meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for
commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836,
Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
This work is based on theoretical studies and/or experimental
observations carried out diverse authors whom have
investigated on the " foamy oil phenomenon " developing a
methodology to characterize these crude oils
thermodynamically, taking as bases nonconventional PVT
analysis and using as research tool the application of equations
of state and methods known for the determination of the
equilibrium constants liquid-gas. It is presented two new
correlations developed in this work for the calculation of the
viscosity of heavy crude oils, which are based on values of
molar fractions of liquid and gas in equilibrium. The proposed
methodology was validated using conventional and
nonconventional PVT data of wells located in the Orinoco
Belt, Jobo Field, Morichal Area obtaining excellent results and
showing that the proposed methodology is applicable to
conventional and nonconventional heavy crude oils in all the
possible scenes, that is to say, whether necessary information is
available.
Introduction
When we analyse foamy crude oils under the optics of primary
production mechanisms known traditionally, have not been
able to explain with exactitude the production behavior in these
reservoirs1; this has given basis to many people to do research
with the objective of explainning the origin of this atypical
behavior. To such extreme to establishment the theory of
"foamy oil phenomenon ", which considers a transient state or
supersaturation condition, in which take place the
characteristics named " atypical " that identify to this type of
heavy crude oils. Its of extreme importance for the petroleum
industry to model the thermodynamic behavior of foamy oils
reservoirs, since a good characterization fluid increases the
probabilities to obtain better numerical reservoir simulations of
and thus to be able to consider with most exactitude the total
recovery.
Characterization of Foamy Oils
The foamy oil phenomenon has appeared only in heavy and
extra-heavy crude oils, since in these crudes the viscous forces
surpass to the gravitational forces on the productive life of
reservoirs, reason why this phenomenon goberns the
production behavior of these reservoirs. This phenomenon to
appear after that reservoir pressure reaches the bubble point
pressure, from this pressure the petroleum production
increases, the gas bubbles expand to displace petroleum
towards wells quickly. Depending of pressure and extraction
rate of wells placed in the reservoir is possible that gas bubbles
be produced with the oil. With the purpose to characterize the
ability that have some heavy crudes to show the foamy oil
behavior and entrap gas that is released by each decrease of
pressure. Nonconventional PVT analysis were developed
which defer from the method used traditionally. The
conceptual difference between this analysis and the method
used conventionally, is that the flash and differential liberation
tests are carried out without agitation of the cell2. Generally,
the results obtained by means of conventional and
nonconventional PVT analysis differ remarkably mainly in the
values of bubble point pressure obtained by both methods for
foamy oils. Frequently values of bubble point pressure smaller
are obtained in nonconventional PVT analysis because occurs
entrapping of gas within the oleic phase of the crude reason
why its deduced that supersaturation phenomenon occurs, the
gas bubbles released to pressure far below the bubble point
pressure are dissolved and/or dispersed within the phase of
petroleum in a perfect hydrodynamic equilibrium. It later on
that such hydrodynamic equilibrium should be broken to obtain
free gas.
It had been determinate by laboratory experiences that
viscosity of foamy crude oils obtained using capillary
viscometers are more suitable to make reservoir numerical
simulations than those obtained with rotational viscometers, in
this case, strench caused by shaking the crude sample breaks
the dispersion gas/oil and release bubble gas to build a free gas
cap separated of the crude oil.
2 D. ROMERO, B. FERNANDEZ AND G. ROJAS
Methodology
A set of correlations were selected to be used in the
determination of thermodynamic properties of heavy and extra
heavy crude oils, throw an analysis of correlations presented in
texts of reservoirs engineering4, also were considered diverse
methods to determine the equilibrium constants of
hydrocarbons systems and several correlations published to
calculate the viscosity of those crudes. The criteria used for the
selection was the range or conditions for which these
correlations can be used, the cut parameter was the value of
gravity API of the crude.
Worksheets were created to study the correlations, with the
purpose of choosing those that displayed minor percent error
with respect to PVT conventional and nonconventional data.
Afterwards of selecting the correlations to be used, a
methodology to calculate fluid thermodynamics properties was
development which may be applicable in all the possible
scenes, that is to say, whether necessary data is available from
a conventional or no-conventional PVT test. The methodology
proposed (Fig. 2), shows two options to use depending of the
case is analysed.
Option 1
From data PVT (conventional or nonconventional) the
equilibrium constants condition by the method proposed by
Zhou3 are determined, which are modified to supersaturation
condition (foamy oil) by Sheng and Maini method5 to
determine gas and liquid molar fractions at different pressure
and temperature conditions, for both, differential and viscosity
test. Then the crude thermodynamic properties are determined
according to the following expressions:
X=1/K (1)
R * T * o * 5.6146
a= (2)
MWo * P
X *a
Rs = (3)
1 X
Option 2
With data obtained from separator test, GORs are calculated
to pressure and temperature required using Milln6 equation
developed specifically for heavy oils, afterwards to determine
gas and liquid molar fractions in equilibrium condition
applying method proposed by Zhou3, this to be modifycated to
foamy oil condition according to Sheng and Maini5 method ,
finaly the thermodynamic properties and viscosity of the crude
oils are caculated.
In the determination of other thermodynamic properties of
fluids as Bo, Bg, o, Co,etc, both options use the same
correlations, basically the difference between both options is in
the calculation of solution GOR, depending on the available
information (Fig.2).
To determine formation volumetric factor of oil (FVFo) at
pressures below bubble point pressure, a modification of
SPE 69724
Standing4 correlation is recommended:
Bo=0.972+0.000147*(Rs*(g/o)0.5+1.25*T)1.175 (4)
the oil density at different pressures was determined using
Milln6 correlation by heavy oils. The compressibility and
viscosity, two very important properties to study the behavior
of foamy oil under pressure and temperature variations. The
compressibility was caculated according to Sheng and Maini5,
whereas for viscosity no one of the correlations found in the
bibliography yields good results since the error with respect to
experimental values were superior to 98%.
The complet set correlations used in this work are showed in
Appendix A.
Viscosity
Given the situation that not exist reliable mathematical
correlation for calculation viscosity of foamy crudes oil, two
new correlations were developed for the calculation of the
viscosity of heavy crude oils and foamy oils, which are based
on values of molar fractions of liquid and gas in equilibrium.
One to be used at pressures below or equal to bubble point
pressure and the another one at pressures above bubble point
pressure. These correlations are the following:
At pressures below or equal bubble point pressure:
= 0.5*( liqY+gX)+0.25((Y* liq + X* g)+( liqY*gX)) (5)
At pressures above bubble point pressure:
= 0.55* X*(P Pb ) + ob (6)
liq values used are reported in experimental tests as average
values for each field in study. The criteria raised by Smith1 was
considered widely for development of these new correlations.
Mathematical and statistical algorithms and sensitivities
analyses were applied to obtain a mathematical expression
based on molar fractions of gas and liquid in equilibrium and
viscosities of liquid and gas values respectively. These new
equations reproduce with greater exactitude the viscosity
behavior with respect to pressure variation, above and below of
bubble point pressure.
Validation of Mathematic Model
The validation of the selected mathematical model was made
from a group of 8 conventional and nonconventional analyses
PVT pertaining to reservoirs of the Orinoco Oil Belt and to the
Jobo Field of the Morichal area. The PVT analyses used in the
validation of the model correspond to following wells:
Well 1 (conv. and nonconv.). Bare Field Hamaca Area
Well 2 (conv.). Bare Field Hamaca Area
Well 3 (conv.and nonconv.) Cerro Negro Field Morichal
SPE 69724 THERMODINAMIC CHARACTERIZATION A PVT OF FOAMY OIL
Well 4 (conv. and nonconv.) Arecuna Field Hamaca
Well 5 (conv.) Jobo Field Morichal Area
Figure 3 shows results obtained in GOR calculation for the
conventional tests, is observed a good match with respect to the
experimental values, average error percent was 4,5 %. Whereas
for nonconventional tests, the average error percent was 6.4 %,
graphically can be observed in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows
compare results obtained for GOR calculation in all the
possible scenes for well 1. Values obtained through Option 2 of
proposed methodology are named synthetic PVT, these results
obtained are very reliable because are very close to
experimental values.
FVFo results obtained, both, for no-conventional PVT test of
Well 1 (Fig 6), like for all possible scenes in which the
methodology proposed can be applied (Fig 7), in these cases
the error percentage not surpass 1%. In validation of
correlations developed and presented in this paper (4 & 5), a
comparison between this and other recommended correlations
by others authors to calculate viscosity of foamy oil and heavy
oil crudes was made. As its displayed in Figures 8 and 9, a
much better match with experimental values of all PVT
analyses used was obtained applying correlations developed in
this job (4 & 5), in comparison with those results obtained
using others correlations. The average relative error for the
developed correlations (4 & 5) was 10,8%, in comparison with
obtained by other correlations, which were superior to 98%.
Viscosity tests in PVT analysis used for validation are different
between themselves, only three were made using capillary
viscometer and the other were made with rotational viscometer,
all results show that these correlations have a good confiability
grade, considering that viscosity is a property very difficult to
determinate in heavy oils and foamy oils.
The compressibility of foamy oil crudes presumes that its
between 5 to 10 times greater than conventional heavy oil
crude, nevertheless this hypothesis has not been verified
experimentally. The calculations of isothermal compressibility
was made by Sheng and Maini5 method proposed for foamy
crude oils, introducing values of liquid and gas molar fractions
in equilibrium determined according to proposed methodology,
was obtained compressibility of foamy oil much greater than
conventional heavy oils, in three analyzed cases, as its
showed in Figure 10.
Conclusions
1. The correlations developed in this work for calculation
viscosity of heavy oils provide good results for any heavy
crude type, conventional or foamy oil. The average error
percentage is located between 10 and 20 %, considering that
viscosity is one of the most difficult property to predict.
2. The developed methodology reproduces in very acceptable
degree the behavior of the fluids with respect to the variations
of pressure and temperature and is applicable for conventional
or foamy heavy crude oils in spite of the little existing
information.
3. A reliable synthetic PVT can be made, applying the
3
developed methodology, avoiding the accomplishment of PVT
tests, which reduces the total costs of a developing project.
Nomenclature
= Viscosity, cps
Y = Molar fraction of liquid phase in equilibrium, adim.
X = Molar fraction of gas phase in equilibrium,adim.
K = Equilibrium constant, adim.
GOR, Rs = Solution gas-oil ratio, scf/STB.
= Specific gravity, adim.
FVF = Formation volume factor, bbl/STB.
P = Pressure, psia.
T= temperature, F.
Kv1, Kv2, Kv3, Kv4 and Kv5: Constant values for each
hydrocarbons system
K(p): Equilibrium constants modified for foamy oils,
adim.
K(p): Equilibrium Constant for convencional crude oils,
adim.
psc: Normal pressure, 14.7 psia.
Subscripts
o = oil
g = gas
ob= bubble point oil
b = bubble point
liq = liquid
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Schlumberger and Universidad de
Oriente for permission to publish this work. We also with to
thank engineers Juan Cova, Cesar Diez and Marcelo Laprea,
for his assistance as well as numerous practicing engineers who
provided us data for the study.
References
1. Smith, G.E. :Fluid Flow and Sand Production in Heavy Oil
Reservoirs Under Solution Gas-Drive, SPE 15094, (1986)
2. Huerta, M.; Otero, C.; Rico, A.; Jimenez, I.; Mirabal, M. y
Rojas, G. : Understanding Foamy Oil Mechanisms for Heavy
Oil Reservoirs During Primary Production, SPE 36749,
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibitio,.
Denver,Colorado,USA.6-9 October 1996.
3. Zhou, X.: Computin and Selecting Parameters in
numeriacal Modelling of Oil Field Thermal Recovery, Special
Oil & Gas Reservoirs , 2 (3) 15-22, (1995)
4. McCain, W: The Properties of Petroleum Fluids,
PennWell Books, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA (1973)
5. Sheng, J.; Maini, B. y Hayes, R.E.: A Dynamic Model to
Simulate Foamy Oil Flow in Porous Media, SPE 36750,
(1996).
6. Milln, E: Correlaciones para Crudos Pesados
Venezolanos, Thesis, Universidad de Oriente.
4 D. ROMERO, B. FERNANDEZ AND G. ROJAS SPE 69724

Appendix A Correlation Set. Modification of equilibrium constants at foamy oil

state:Sheng and Maini method
Solution GOR ( Rs ).
Extra heavy oils: Milln correlation
K(p) = K(p), (p > pb) (A-9)
Rsb ( P / Pb)^0.83 (A-1)
Rs =
1.031
K(p) = K(pb), (psb> p> pb) (A-10)
When PVT analyses report dont displayed results of
separators test, Standing correlation is recomended to
determinate GOR at temperature differents. This calculation is K(pb)- K(psb) ,(psc> p> psb) (A-11)
' (p) = K(p)+ * (p - psc)
made to determinate equilibrium constants coeficients psb psc
(Kvalues) for obtain equilibrium constants (K), Standing
correlation are following:

P
Rs = g (( + 1.4 ) 10^ (0.0125 API 0.00091 Ty ))^1.2048
18.2
(A-2)

OFVF (Bo): Standing & Beggs correlation at pressures

below bubblepoint pressure

Bo = 0.972 + 0.000147 F ^1.175

g (A-3)
F = Rs ( )^ 0 .5 + 1 .25 T
o

Density extra heavy oils:

At bubbepoint pressure: Milln correlation

(1 .2353 * Pb ^ 0 .02483 )
ob = (A-4)
e ^ ( 0 .00075 * T )

Below bubblepoint pressure:Milln correlation

ob * 1 . 6499 (A-5)
o =
e ^ ( 0 . 50074 * ( Bo / Bob )

Above bubblepoint pressure

o = ob * e ^ ( Co * ( P Pb )) (A-6)

Isothermal compressibility
Vasquez & Beggs correlation

1433 + 5 Rsb + 17 . 2 Ty 1180 g 12 . 61 API . (A-7)

Co =
P * 10 ^ 5

Equilibrium constants: Sheng & Zhou method

Kv4
Kv 2 e (A-8)
K = Kv1 + * T + Kv5
P
SPE 69724 THERMODINAMIC CHARACTERIZATION A PVT OF FOAMY OIL 5

Sucre
Define Input
Anzotegui Data
Monagas
Delta
Gurico Amacuro Option 2:
Option 1: Input Data To Use
Input Data from Laboratory Correlations
and define analysis type

ELT
OCO B
N ORIN Calculate Equilibrium GOR Calculation by
Constants Coefficients( K - value ) Correlations

Define Pressure Stage of

LD, CCE, and Viscosity
Tests

Determination of
Equilibrium Constants
Yes ( K ) in Foamy Oil State to
Determination of Equilibrium
Constants ( K ) at Pressure of Viscosity Test
LD test andTyac.

Thermodynamics Properties To Consider This Crude No

Crude Determination of LD in Foamy Oil State
o,etc)
Test (GOR, Bo,
CERRO
NEGRO Determination of
HAMACA Thermodynamics Properties Equilibrium Constants
MACHETE ZUATA Crude Determination of CCE ( K ) at Pressures of
Test (Co, V.
rel) Viscosity Test Calculate Viscosity. Show Results

Figure 1. Orinoco Belt localization Figure 2. Methodology proposed diagram

120
120

100 100

80 80
GOR , scf/stb
GOR, scf/stb

60
60

Well 1 Calc. Well 1 Exp.

Well 4 Calc. Well 4 Exp. 40
40
Well 3 Calc. Well 3 Exp. Well 4 Calc Well 4 Exp.
Well 5 Calc. Well 5 Exp.
Well 1 Calc Well 1 Exp
Well 2 Calc. Well 2 Exp. Well 3 Calc Well 3 Exp
20
20

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Pressure , psia
Pressure, psia
Figure 4. GOR results obtained for
nonconventional tests
Figure 3. Validation of methodology,GOR results
obtained from conventional PVT tests.
6 D. ROMERO, B. FERNANDEZ AND G. ROJAS SPE 69724

120 1.2

100 Well 1 Calc. Well 1 Exp.

1.15
Well 3 Calc. Well 3 Exp.
Well 4 Calc. Well 4 Exp.
80

OFVF (Bo), bbl / STB

1.1
GOR ,scf/stb

60

1.05
Calc.PVT Conv
40
Exp.PVT Conv

Calc.PVT Sintetic Conv

Calc.PVT No-Conv 1
20
Exp.PVT No-Conv

Calc.PVT Sintetic No-Conv

0 0.95
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Pressure , psia Pressure, psia

Figure 5. GOR results for well 1 Figure 6. Oil formation volume factor results
(all possible scenes) obtained for nonconventional tests

1.15 4000
Smith.(1)
3500 Visc. Exp.
Smith.(2)
1.1
3000 Maini
Correl. Developed
OFVF (Bo) , bbl / STB

2500
Viscosity ( cps )

2000
1.05

1500
Calc.PVT Conv
Exp.PVT Conv 1000
1 Calc.PVT Sintetic Conv
Calc.PVT No-Conv 500
Exp.PVT No-Conv
Calc.PVT Sintetic No-Conv 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0.95
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Pressure ( psia )
Pressure , psia
Figure 8. Comparison between correlations developed in
Figure 7. FVFo results for well 1 this job and others correlations recomended by
(all possible scenes) others authors to calculate heavy oils viscosity

5000 0.0016

4500 Well 1 Exp. Well 1 Calc.

0.0014
Well 2 Exp. Well 2 Calc.
Isothermal Compressibility (Co) , 1 / psia

4000
Well 3 Exp. Well 3 Calc.
0.0012
Well 4 Exp. Well 4 Calc.
3500
Well 5 Exp. Well 5 Calc. Well 1 Conv
0.001 Well 1 Foamy
Viscosity , cps

3000 Well 4 Conv

Well 4 Foamy
0.0008 Well 3 Conv
2500
Well 3 Foamy

2000 0.0006

1500
0.0004

1000

0.0002
500

0
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Pressure , psia Pressure , psia

Figure 9. Results obtained for all PVT analises used in Figure 10. Isothermal compressibility results
validation of new viscosity correlations obtained for nonconventional tests