You are on page 1of 8

Study of Enhanced-Oil-Recovery Mechanism of Alkali/Surfactant/Polymer Flooding in Porous Media From Experiments

Pingping Shen, SPE, Jialu Wang, SPE, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, PetroChina; Shiyi Yuan, SPE, Taixian Zhong, SPE, PetroChina; and Xu Jia, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, PetroChina

Summary The fluid-flow mechanism of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in porous media by alkali/surfactant/polymer (ASP) flooding is investigated by measuring the production performance, pressure, and saturation distributions through the installed differentialpressure transducers and saturation-measurement probes in a physical model of a vertical heterogeneous reservoir. The fluidflow variation in the reservoir is one of the main mechanisms of EOR of ASP flooding, and the nonlinear coupling and interaction between pressure and saturation fields results in the fluid-flow variation in the reservoir. In the vertical heterogeneous reservoir, the ASP agents flow initially in the high-permeability layer. Later, the flow direction changes toward the low- and middle-permeability layers because the resistance in the high-permeability layer increases on physical and chemical reactions such as adsorption, retention, and emulsion. ASP flooding displaces not only the residual oil in the high-permeability layer but also the remaining oil in the low- and middle-permeability layers by increasing both swept volume and displacement efficiency. Introduction Currently, most oil fields in China are in the later production period and the water cut increases rapidly, even to more than 80%. Waterflooding no longer meets the demands of oilfield production. Thus, it is inevitable that a new technology will replace waterflooding. The new technique of ASP flooding has been developed on the basis of alkali-, surfactant-, and polymer-flooding research in the late 1980s. ASP flooding uses the benefits of the three flooding methods simultaneously, and oil recovery is greatly enhanced by decreasing interfacial tension (IFT), increasing the capillary number, enhancing microscopic displacing efficiency, improving the mobility ratio, and increasing macroscopic sweeping efficiency (Shen and Yu 2002; Wang et al. 2000; Wang et al. 2002; Sui et al. 2000). Recently, much intensive research has been done on ASP flooding both in China and worldwide, achieving some important accomplishments that lay a solid foundation for the extension of this technique to practical application in oil fields (Baviere et al. 1995; Thomas 2005; Yang et al. 2003; Li et al. 2003). In previous work, the ASP-flooding mechanism was studied visually by using a microscopic-scale model and double-pane glass models with sand (Liu et al. 2003; Zhang 1991). In these experiments, the water-viscosity finger, the residual-oil distribution after waterflooding, and the oil bank formed by microscopic emulsion flooding were observed. In Tong et al. (1998) and Guo (1990), deformation, threading, emulsion (oil/water), and strapping were observed as the main mechanisms of ASP flooding in a waterwetting reservoir, while the interface-producing emulsion (oil/waCopyright 2009 Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper (SPE 126128) was revised for publication from paper IPTC 11257, first presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, 46 December 2007. Original manuscript received for review 2 June 2007. Revised manuscript received for review 13 March 2008. Paper peer approved 19 March 2008.

ter), bridging between inner pore and outer pore, is the main mechanism of ASP flooding in an oil-wetting reservoir. For a vertical heterogeneous reservoir, ASP flooding increases displacement efficiency by displacing residual oil through decreased IFT, simultaneously improving sweep efficiency by extending the swept area in both vertical and horizontal directions. Some physical and chemical phenomena, such as emulsion, scale deposition, and chromatographic separation, occur during ASP flooding (Arihara et al. 1999; Guo 1999). Because ASP flooding in porous media involves many complicated physicochemical properties, many oil-recovery mechanisms still need to be investigated. Most research has been performed on the microscopic displacement mechanism of ASP flooding, while the fluid-flow mechanism in porous media at the macroscopic scale lacks sufficient study. In this paper, a vertical-heterogeneous-reservoir model is established, and differential-pressure transducers and saturationmeasuring probes are installed. The fluid-flow mechanism of increasing both macroscopic sweep efficiency and microscopic displacement efficiency is studied by measuring the production performance and the variation of pressure and saturation distributions in the ASP-flooding experiment. An experimental database of ASP flooding also is set up and provides an experimental base for numerical simulation. Experimental Apparatus and Method Experimental Apparatus. The experimental apparatus is composed of six subsystems: a driving pump, the physical model, a saturation-measurement system, a pressure-measurement system, a liquid-collection system, and a control and data-acquisition system. The experimental apparatus is illustrated in Fig. 1. The driving pump is one set of ISCO 500D syringe pumps. The control and measurement system is composed of 25 differentialpressure transducers, 37 saturation-measuring probes, a pressure transducer, a temperature-measuring probe, an HP75000 dataacquisition set, and a Pentium II processor. The liquid-collection system is composed of three oil/water two-phase flowmeters that can measure the quantity of water and oil automatically with high precision. The range of the 25 differential-pressure transducers is DP = 070 kPa, and the precision is 2.5%. The range of the 37 saturation-measuring probes is Sw = 01.0, and the precision is 3.4%. The whole process of experiment and data acquisition is controlled automatically by a computer. The automation reduces errors and improves measurement precision. The physical model is a heterogeneous sand-packing model with a vertically positive rhythm. The model-geometry size is length L = 0.5 m, width W = 0.5 m, and height H = 0.1 m. The model is divided into three layers with the same width and different permeabilities. The permeability K of these three layers is 0.15, 0.55, and 2.1 mm2, respectively. The heterogeneity-variation factor is 0.72. The three layers are separated by nonpermeable boards. A vertical injection well injects fluid into the three layers simultaneously, and the produced liquid is collected at the outlets of the three layers. The model simulates the unified injection and separated production in an interbedded heterogeneous reservoir.
237

June 2009 SPE Journal

Fig. 2Sketch of experimental model and location of transducers. Fig.1Schematic of the experimental apparatus.

The thick black lines in the model represent the borders of the three different layers, as shown in Fig. 2. Thirty-seven saturation-measuring probes and 25 differentialpressure transducers are installed in the model. Among them, 10 differential-pressure transducers and 11 saturation-measuring probes are in the high-permeability layer, five differentialpressure transducers and 14 saturation-measuring probes are in the middle-permeability layer, and 10 differential-pressure transducers and 12 saturation-measuring probes are in the low-permeability layer. In Fig. 2, the points marked by only a number are the differential-pressure transducers and the points marked with a number plus a are the saturation-measuring probes. Experimental Procedure. Quartz sands of different sizes were mixed together and placed into a tube to measure permeability. The quartz sands of different sizes were used as the experimental porous media and were mixed with brine in the model. The grain size with permeability K = 0.15 mm2 was a mixture of 50% grain of 80100 mesh and 50% grain of 160180 mesh. The grain size with permeability K = 0.55 mm2 was a mixture of 75% grain of 80100 mesh and 25% grain of 160180 mesh. The grain size of permeability K = 2.1 mm2 was a mixture of 80% grain of 80100 mesh and 20% grain of 160180 mesh. After the model was saturated with brine, simulated oil was used to displace the water. The injection and production wells were exchanged during the oilsaturating process until there was no displaced water in the production well. The irreducible water saturation in the model was approximately 25%. During the ASP-flooding experiment, 0.3 pore volumes (PV) of ASP solution was injected when the water cut reached 95%. After the ASP slug was injected, 0.2 PV of polymer solution was injected as a protecting slug. Waterflooding followed the polymer slug. The experiment was ended when the water cut reached 95% again. In the experiment, data from the 25 differential-pressure transducers and the 37 water-saturation-measuring probes were collected every 5 seconds with inlet pressures and volumes of produced water and oil. The chemical concentration of the ASP agents used for the experiment was 0.15 wt% 2600E polyacrylamide, 0.1 wt% sodium hydroxide (NaOH), and 0.35 wt% of heavy alkyl-benzene sulfonate surfactant. The viscosity of the ASP solution was m = 4344 mPas, and the IFT of the ASP flooding was s = 5.510-3 mN/m. The oil used in the experiment was a simulated oil with viscosity m = 10.0 mPas. The brine used to make the solution and drive the water consisted of pure water and 2 wt% sodium chloride (NaCl). Saturation-Measurement Method. The electric-resistivity difference between brine and oil is large. For brine, it is quite low, and, for oil, it almost reaches infinity at approximately
238

10 1016 Om. The electrical property of a reservoir reflects the water-saturation variation. When an electrical current I is supplied between Electrodes A and B, an electric field is established in the reservoir. The electrical-potential difference between the two measuring electrodes M and N is measured, and the difference reflects electrical-resistivity variation in the reservoir, as shown in Fig. 3. The electrical current I is a low-frequency rectangle-wave alternating current and is adjustable. The electrical-potential difference between M and N, DUMN, is measured, and resistivity R is calculated with the following equation: Rb DUMN ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1) I

where b is the electrode-system coefficient, which is related only to the dimension and type of electrode system. b is determined in a uniform medium with known electric conductivity. After measuring the electrical resistivity of a reservoir, the saturation is calculated according to Archies law: Sn w bRo ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) Rt

where Rt is the resistivity of rock saturated with oil (measured resistivity), Ro is the resistivity of rock saturated with water, Sw is the water saturation, b is a coefficient, n is the saturation index, and b and n are determined through a coreflooding experiment. In an ASP-flooding experiment, b and n should be modified by the ASP-flooding displacement (Shen et al. 2002). On the basis of the electrode-measurement theory, the small saturation probes were made to measure the water-saturation variation in 3D physical modeling with advanced techniques, such as double molding, and antioxidization and anticorrosion materials. The shape and size of the probe is shown in Fig. 4. The probe is

Fig. 3Schematic of saturation-measuring mechanism. June 2009 SPE Journal

Experimental Results and Discussion Many physical modeling experiments have been conducted recently on EOR by ASP flooding. The experimental results showed that ASP can enhance oil recovery greatly. In this paper, an ASP-flooding experiment is taken as an example to study the fluid-flow mechanism of ASP flooding, such as the enhancement of both displacement and sweep efficiency, by analyzing production performance and the variation of pressure and saturation distributions.
Fig. 4Sketch of saturation-measuring probe.

composed of three parts: (1) a coupling section, which connects electrodes and saturation-measuring system with a cable (Fig. 1); (2) a sealing section, which seals the probe when it passes through the physical model; and (3) electrodes, which measure the electrical resistivity of the reservoir. The diameter of the probe is 5 mm, and the distance between electrodes is 15 mm. The width of each electrode is 1.8 mm, and the measuring error of a probe is less than 3.4%. The detailed structure of a probe is shown in Shen et al. (2002) and the patent by Wang and Shen.

Production Performance. As illustrated in Fig. 5a, under the conditions of this experiment, the oil recovery is 54% for waterflooding and 70.6% at the end of ASP flooding. The EOR is 16.6% after ASP flooding. In the water-cut curve (Fig. 5c), it is shown that water begins to break through to the production well when the injected volume reaches 0.25 PV and that water cut reaches approximately 97% at the end of waterflooding. When the ASP slug is injected, the water cut declines gradually to its lowest point of 52%, then rises again sharply until it reaches 100%. As illustrated by the recovery curve (Fig. 5b), oil recovery rises slowly during ASP flooding and rises quickly in the follow-

Fig. 5Production-performance curves of ASP flooding. (a) Production performance of ASP flooding. (b) Oil recovery of three different permeability layers. (c) Water cut of three different permeability layers. (d) Produced-liquid percentage of three permeability layers. June 2009 SPE Journal 239

up waterflooding by 12.6%. The inlet pressure during waterflooding remains stable at approximately 15 kPa and increases greatly to a peak of 150 kPa during ASP flooding. Even though the pressure decreases during the follow-up waterflooding, it is still higher than that during waterflooding alone. The reason is that the synergistic effect of adsorption, retention, and emulsion of ASP agents increases residue resistance. The oil-recovery curves of the three permeability layers are shown in Fig. 5b. During ASP flooding, the recovery from the highpermeability layer rises first approximately 15.9% then the recovery from the middle-permeability layer rises approximately 17%. Last, the recovery from the low-permeability layer slowly rises approximately 12.6%. When the ASP solution enters the high-permeability layer, the enhancement extent of recovery is larger in the highpermeability layer and smaller in the middle- and low-permeability layers. In the follow-up waterflooding, the recovery enhancement is relatively larger in both the middle- and low-permeability layers and is smaller in the high-permeability layer. This trend will be clearer from the illustration of pressure and saturation variations. The water-cut curves of the three permeability layers are shown in Fig. 5c. The water cut of the high-permeability layer drops first to its lowest point of 42%. The water cut of the middlepermeability layer does not drop until the follow-up waterflooding, but the drop to the lowest point of 5% is the greatest. The

water cut of the low-permeability layer drops even later than that of the middle-permeability layer; but, the curve fluctuation of the low-permeability layer is large and the drop is small. The liquid-production percentage curves of the three layers are shown in Fig. 5d. The liquid volume produced from the three permeability layers shows that the liquid-production-percentage curves of the three layers remain constant before water breaks through into the production wells (injected volume < 0.25 PV). In this period, the produced liquid is the greatest, approximately 42%, in the high-permeability layer while it is the least, approximately 22%, in the low-permeability layer. After water breaks through in the high-permeability layer (0.25 PV injected volume 0.9 PV), the produced liquid increases rapidly and then remains at 55%. The liquid in the middle-permeability layer also decreases and remains at 27%, while the produced liquid in the low-permeability layer drops to 18%. Because of the ASP agents effect, the flow resistance increases and adjusts the flow profile in the high-permeability layer, which makes the produced liquid in the high-permeability layer decrease and the liquid in the middle- and low-permeability layers increase. During the followup waterflooding, the liquid produced in the high-permeability layer increases rapidly again but decreases in the middle- and low-permeability layer as the ASP solution is displaced gradually out of the high-permeability layer.

Fig. 6Pressure variation at different locations in the model. (a) Pressure variation in high-permeability layer. (b) Pressure variation in middle-permeability layer. (c) Pressure variation in low-permeability layer. (d) Pressure difference between inlet and outlet in three different permeability layers. 240 June 2009 SPE Journal

Pressure Variation. The pressure variation in the model is shown in Fig. 6. (The locations of the differential-pressure transducers are shown in Fig. 2.) In the high-permeability layer, during waterflooding, the pressures of three points in the model are stable (Fig. 4 a). The value of the P1 transducer near the injection well is higher than that of the P5 transducer near the production well. During ASP flooding, displacing pressure increases because of the high viscosity of the ASP solution. Thus, the pressure of the P1 transducer, which is closest to the injection well, increases earliest. The pressure of the P4 transducer, which is in the middle of the model, is higher than that of the P5 transducer, which is close to the production well. Through comparing the pressure variation of three positions, the gradual movement of the ASP solution from the injection well to the production well is observed. Because of physicochemical reactions such as adsorption, retention, and emulsion of ASP agents in reservoir, the pressure in the highpermeability layer becomes lower gradually from the injection well to the production well during the follow-up waterflooding. But, it is still higher than that of waterflooding alone, which means a higher residual resistance in the follow-up waterflooding. The variations of pressure in the middle- and low-permeability layers are close to that of the high-permeability layer (Figs. 6b and 6c). The differential pressures between the inlet and outlet of the high-, middle- and low-permeability layers are shown in Fig. 6d. (DP1 = P1-P5 in the high-permeability layer. DP2 = P13-P15 in the middle-permeability layer. DP3 = P21-P25 in the low-permeability layer). During waterflooding (injected volume < 0.96 PV), the differential pressure of the three layers varies moderately without serious fluctuations. The differential pressure is the highest in the high-permeability layer, is intermediate in the middlepermeability layer, and is lowest in the low-permeability layer. After the injection of the ASP slug, the differential pressure in these three layers increases almost simultaneously. This means that the ASP solution enters the three layers almost simultaneously. After that, the differential pressure in these three layers begins to increase differently. The differential pressure increases rapidly, and the gradient is highest in the high-permeability layer. The differential pressure increases most slowly and the gradient is least in the low-permeability layer. In the follow-up waterflooding, the ASP solution flows fast in the high-permeability layer, so the oil bank in this layer is displaced earliest and the differential pressure gradient decreases fastest. The differential-pressure of the low-permeability layer decreases slowest. The pressure distribution in the high-permeability layer is obviously higher than that in the middle- and low-permeability layers (Fig. 7) because the high-viscosity ASP solution enters the high-permeability layer more than it does in the middle- and lowpermeability layers (Fig. 5d). In Fig. 7, a dense contour-lines zone, which is a high-pressure gradient, is formed during ASP flooding. This zone extends gradually from the high-permeability layer to the middle- and low-permeability layers and moves faster in the high-permeability layer than that it does in the middle- and low-permeability layers (Figs. 7b and 7c). The formation time and moving velocity in the high-pressure-gradient zone are almost the same as those in the oil bank (Figs. 9b and 9c) of the reservoir. Accordingly, the movement of the pressure-gradient zone reflects the movement of the oil bank. The pressure gradient between two points in the oil bank increases while the pressure outside the oil bank, such as near an injection well, is high and the gradient is not. Water-Saturation Variation. Fig. 8a shows the water-saturation curves of three pointsnear the injection well, in the middle of the model, and near the production welland the water-cut curve of the production well in the high-permeability layer. The average irreducible water saturation measured by Probes a1, a3, and a7 is 0.35. After waterflooding, water saturations measured by Probes a1, a3, and a7 are 0.64, 0.69, and 0.52, respectively. During the ASP flooding, Probe a1 detects the oil bank first, and water saturation drops rapidly from 0.64 to 0.46 when the injected volume is 1.02 PV. The water saturation rises to 0.85 after the oil bank
June 2009 SPE Journal

Fig. 7Pressure distribution of ASP flooding. (a) Waterflooding (0.0 PV). (b) Waterflooding (0.9 PV). (c) ASP flooding (1.39 PV). (d) ASP flooding (1.35 PV). (e) Follow-up waterflooding (1.45 PV). (f) Follow-up waterflooding (1.93 PV).

leaves Probe a1. When the injected volume reaches 1.18 PV, Probe a3 detects that water saturation drops from 0.69 to 0.48, which indicates that the oil bank has moved to the middle of the model near Probe a3. Then, the water saturation of Probe a3 probe rises again to 0.87 after the oil bank moves away from Probe a3. When the oil bank moves near the production well, Probe a7 detects the oil bank by measuring a water-saturation drop from 0.52 to 0.38 when the injected volume is 1.36 PV. The water saturation then rises again to 0.84. When the oil bank reaches the production well as the injected volume is 1.48 PV, the water cut of the production well drops rapidly from 97 to 42% and the recovery increases by 15.7%. The water saturations in the middleand low-permeability layers have the same variation, but the oilbank formation time lags and the moving velocity slows down (Figs. 8b and 8c). Comparing the water-saturation curves of each layer, it is seen that the formation of the oil bank in the high-, middle-, and lowpermeability layers occurs at approximately the same time but that the moving velocities are different. The ratio of the moving velocities in the high-, middle-, and low-permeability layers is V1:V2: V3 = 2.6:1.4:1. (The oil-bank-moving velocity is V = DL/Dt, where DL is the distance between two saturation-measuring probes and Dt is the time of oil-bank movement). From the data, the moving velocity of the oil bank in the high-permeability layer is 2.6 times that in the low-permeability layer. The movement of the front edge of the oil bank according to the saturation of each point is shown in Fig. 8d. The horizontal axis is the ratio of the coordinate of the front edge l of the oil bank and the distance between the injection and production well L (i.e., l/L). The vertical axis is the injected volume (after ASP solution is injected). When the injected volume of ASP solution reaches 0.44 PV, the oil bank in the high-permeability layer moves to the production well of the model. At the same time, the front edges
241

Fig. 8Water-saturation variation of ASP flooding. (a) Water-saturation variation in high-permeability layer. (b) Water-saturation variation in middle-permeability layer. (c) Water-saturation variation in low-permeability layer. (d) Front-edge movement of oil bank of ASP flooding.

in the middle- and low-permeability layers reach 0.6 L and 0.4 L, respectively. The oil bank in the middle-permeability layer reaches the production well when the injected volume is 0.57 PV and the front edge of the oil bank in the low-permeability layer is at 0.6 L. Last, the oil bank in the low-permeability layer reaches the production well when the injected volume is 0.91 PV. Fig. 9 is a contour map of water-saturation distribution during ASP flooding. The formation and the moving velocity of the oil bank can be observed through water-saturation variation. The formation of time of the oil bank in the reservoir is nearly the same in these three permeability layers, but the movement of oil bank in the high-permeability layer is faster than it is in the middle- and low-permeability layers. The water saturation increases rapidly after the oil bank flows over. Therefore, only when the oil bank moves to the production well can ASP flooding enhance oil recovery greatly. Comparison and Analysis. Comparing the production performance (Fig. 5), the pressure variation (Figs. 6 and 7), and water saturation variation (Figs. 8 and 9) of the ASP flooding in the vertical-heterogeneous-layer model, we find that the fluid-flow distribution in the reservoir is the main mechanism of production performance variation. For example, when the oil bank in the high-permeability layer is close to the production well (Fig. 8a, the injected volume is approximately 1.48 PV), the pressure at all points in the reservoir reaches the highest values (Fig. 6a), the
242

water cut of the production well starts to drop (Fig. 5c), and the oil recovery begins to rise (Fig. 5b). During ASP flooding, the ASP solution initially moves faster in the high-permeability layer than it does in the middle- and low-permeability layers because complex physicochemical reactions, such as adsorption, retention, and emulsion of the ASP solution, cause the flow resistance and the pressure to increase. Therefore, the pressure difference in the high-permeability layer becomes higher than those in the middle- and low-permeability layers, as shown in Fig. 6d, which results in the fluid changing flow direction from the high-permeability layer toward the middle- and low-permeability layers. The flow rate and the produced liquid decrease in the high-permeability layer, but they increase in the middle- and low-permeability layers (Fig. 5d). In the follow-up waterflooding, when the ASP solution flows out of the model, the flow resistance and pressure in the highpermeability layer decrease (Fig. 6d) and the fluid flow turns toward the high-permeability layer. Then, the flow rate and the produced liquid increase again in the high-permeability layer and decrease in the middle- and low-permeability layers (Fig. 5d). Therefore, the variation of flow paths in the reservoir is the important factor to enhance oil recovery greatly by ASP flooding. Experimental Database. A series of chemical-flooding experiments have been conducted, such as 1D, 2D, and 3D experiments, polymer flooding, and ASP flooding. All the experimental data
June 2009 SPE Journal

layers. So, the oil recovery of the high-permeability layer increases and the water cut decreases earlier than those in the middle- and low-permeability layers. In a vertical heterogeneous reservoir, the mechanism of ASP flooding to enhance oil recovery is that the recovery enhancement in the high-permeability layer is by means of displacing residual oil (i.e., by means of increasing displacement efficiency). The variation of flow paths causes ASP agents to sweep into the middle- and low-permeability layers and displace the remaining oil there. Therefore, the oil recovery of the middleand low-permeability layers is enhanced by improving efficiency of both sweeping and displacing. Nomenclature b = coefficient H = height I = electrical current K = permeability l = coordinate L = length n = saturation index P = pressure Rt = resistivity of rock saturated with oil Ro = resistivity of rock saturated with water Sw = water saturation t = time V = velovity W = width b = electrode-system coefficient m = viscosity s = interfacial tension Acknowledgments This research was conducted with the financial support of National Key Fundamental Research Program of China under grants 2005CB221300 and G1999022511. The support is gratefully acknowledged. References
Arihara, N., Yoneyama, T., Akita, Y., and XiangGuo, L. 1999. Oil Recovery Mechanisms of Alkali-Surfactant-Polymer Flooding. Paper SPE 54330 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, 2022 April. doi: 10.2118/54330-MS. Baviere, M., Glenat, P., Plazanet, V., and Labrid, J. 1995. Improved EOR by Use of Chemicals in Combination. SPE Res Eng 10 (3): 187193. SPE-27821-PA. doi: 10.2118/27821-PA. Guo, S. 1990. Physical Chemical Fluid Flow in Porous Media: Microscopic Mechanism. Beijing: Science Press. Guo, W. 1999. Status and development direction of tertiary oil recovery technique in Daqing Oilfield. Petroleum Geology and Production of Daqing Oilfield 18 (3): 2426. Li, H., Liao, G., Han, H., et al. 2003. Alkaline/Surfactant/Polymer(ASP) Commercial Flooding Test in Central Xing 2 Area of Daqing Oilfield. Paper SPE 84896 presented at the SPE International Improved Oil Recovery Conference in Asia Pacific, Kuala Lumpur, 2021 October. doi: 10.2118/84896-MS. Liu, W., Li, L., Tong, Z., et al. 2003. Microscopic Permeability Mechanism of ASP Flooding of Daqing Oilfield. Transactions of Chongqing University (Natural Science) 23 (1): 119121. Shen, P., and Yu, J., 2002. Fundamental research on enhanced oil recovery in large scale. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Publication Company. Shen, P., Wang, J., et al. 2002. Research of physical modeling and similarity theory of complex displacing system. Summary report of national fundamental key research project. Sui, J., Yang, C.-Z., Yang, Z.-Y., et al. 2000. Surfactant-Alkaline-Polymer Flooding Pilot Project in Non-Acidic Paraffin Oil Field in Daqing. Paper SPE 64509 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 1618 October. doi: 10.2118/64509-MS. 243

Fig. 9Water-saturation distribution of ASP flooding. (a) Waterflooding (0.3 PV). (b) Waterflooding (0.92 PV). (c) ASP flooding (1.21 PV). (d) ASP flooding (1.35 PV). (e) Follow-up waterflooding (1.45 PV). (f) Follow-up waterflooding (1.93 PV).

are collected in databases, such as physical-model parameters (e.g., permeability, porosity, relative permeability, irreducible water saturation, residual-oil saturation, heterogeneity-variation factor, physical-model size, and heterogeneous-reservoir type), fluid properties (e.g., density; viscosity; chemical concentration including polymer, alkaline, and surfactant; and IFT), chemicalinjecting schemes, production performance (e.g., oil recovery, water cut, and inlet-pressure variation), pressure distribution, and saturation distribution in the reservoir. The experimental data can provide the experimental base for numerical simulation. Conclusion Because physicochemical reactions such as adsorption, retention, and emulsion of ASP solution cause flow resistance and pressure to increase, the fluid flow changes direction from the high-permeability layer to the middle- and low-permeability layers. The flow rate and the produced liquid decrease in the high-permeability layer and increase in the middle- and lowpermeability layers. Consequently, the macroscopic sweep efficiency increases. A high-pressure gradient zone is formed in the model during ASP flooding. The formation time and moving velocity of the high-pressure gradient zone are almost the same as those of the oil bank. Accordingly, variations in the pressure-gradient zone reflect the movement of the oil bank. Because ASP agents reduce IFT, the residual oil of each layer is displaced to form an oil bank. The formation time in each layer is nearly the same, and the movement velocity in the highpermeability layer is faster, so the oil bank reaches the production well earlier than in the middle- and low-permeability
June 2009 SPE Journal

Thomas, S. 2005. Chemical EOR: The PastDoes It Have a Future? Paper SPE 108828 presented as an SPE Distinguished Lecture, 200506. Tong, Z., Yang, C., Wu, G., Yuan, H., Yu, L., and Tian, G. 1998. A Study of Microscopic Flooding Mechanism of Surfacant/Alkali/Polymer. Paper SPE 39662 presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, 1922 April. doi: 10.2118/39662-MS. Wang, D., Cheng. J., Li, Q., Jiang, Y., Sun, Y., and He, Y., 2000. Experience of IOR Practices from Large-Scale Implementation in Layered Sandstones. Paper SPE 64287 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, 1618 October. doi: 10.2118/64287-MS. Wang, D., Sun, Y., Wang, Y., and Tang, X. 2002. Producing More Than 75% of Daqing Oil Fields Production by IOR, What Experiences Have Been Learnt? Paper SPE 77871 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, 810 October. doi: 10.2118/77871-MS. Wang, J., and Shen, P. Saturation measuring method and measuring probe. China Patent No. ZL 01123944.1. Yang, X.M., Liao, G., Han, P., Yang, Z., and Yao, Y. 2003. An Extended Field Test Study on Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flooding in Beiyiduanxi of Daqing Oilfield. Paper SPE 80532 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, 911 September. doi: 10.2118/80532-MS. Zhang Jingcun. 1991. Study of enhanced oil recovery. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Publication Company.

Pingping Shen is a professor at the Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development (RIPED). An SPE distinguished member, he holds a BS degree in fluid mechanics from Fudan University in Shanghai. He has worked with PetroChina for more than 40 years. He has been vice president of PetroChina Company Limited and president of RIPED. His interests include fluid mechanics in porous media, petrophysics, EOR, resource usage, and underground storage of CO2 in EOR. He has published six books and more than 60 papers. Jialu Wang is a professor at RIPED. He holds a PhD degree in fluid mechanics from Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. He is the deputy director of production engineering at RIPED. His interests include fluid mechanics in porous media, low-permeability reservoirs, horizontal well production, and EOR. He has published two books and more than 40 papers. Shiyi Yuan is a member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and a professor at RIPED. He is the president of the Science & Technology Management Department of PetroChina. He holds a PhD degree in reservoir engineering from the French Institute of Petroleum. His research interests include reservoir engineering, numerical simulation, and EOR. He has published three books and more than 40 papers. Taixian Zhong is a senior engineer at RIPED. He works in the Science & Technology Management Department of PetroChina. He holds a PhD degree in reservoir engineering from the China University of Geosciences. His interests include phase behavior, reservoir description, and EOR. He has published more than 20 papers. Xu Jia is a senior engineer at RIPED. He holds an MS degree in reservoir engineering from RIPED. His interests include EOR and physical modeling.

244

June 2009 SPE Journal

You might also like