Steam Drive Correlation and Prediction PDF
Steam Drive Correlation and Prediction PDF
Steam Drive Correlation and Prediction PDF
Introduction
During the past 15 years, steam-injection processes have
become an important means of exploiting heavy oil reserves. Traditionally, these processes have been classified as either steam soaksor steam drives. With combinations, such as presoaking drive wells and partially
driving steam soaks, the distinction is not always applicable. Furthermore, our experience suggests that
oil/steam ratios from most mature processes converge to
a value determined only by reservoir and steam properties
and time.
To date, the steam-soak process has proven the more
attractive, partly because the immediate response allows
an early evaluation of a reservoir and partly because oil
rates from initial soak cycles tend to be better than later
cycles. Successful steam soaks are limited to reservoirs
where natural recovery mechanisms (gravity drainage,
pressure depletion, and solution gas drive) are ineffective
because of the low oil mobilities.
Successful steam drives require (1) good conformance, (2) a means of starting the process because high
oil saturations can limit injectivity severely and prevent
effective initial reservoir heating, and (3) sustained high
injectivity throughout the process life. Unlike steam
soaks, steam drives do not respond until built-up oil
banks and heat reach the production wells. Because peak
production rates may not be observed for several years
after the start of injection, piloting is expensive and
expansion to full scale is somewhat hazardous. For these
0149-2136/78/0002-5572$00.25
1978 Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME
173
Model
......
~IU)
ctS~
~~
U)
(\J
0)
co
0>
U)
Coalinga
2.6
1.20
0.175'
0.15
Midway-Sunset
1.0
0.75
0.459
0.40
Mt. Poso
(Low pressure)
0.72
0.88
0.535
0.57
Mt. Poso
(High pressure)
1.02
0.76
0.323
0.29
Schoonebeek
0.8
0.57
0.418
0.32
'"":.
Slocum
1.8
1.77
0.181 *
0.18
2.8
1.07
0.225*
0.16
co
(\J
~
(\J
~I
f?
=ai3:
<Ui
Q)
U)
ex:)
U)
0
-<i
a..
~IO
.~~
~
~IO
0..[
g
al
U)
-<i
(\J
(\J
co
co
U)
al
-<i
(\J
<ci
Iri
I'-
0
0
I'-
C\!.
co
U)
0
0>
(\J
(')
0
0
Q)
Cii
en
Z
(\J
co
(')
co
0
0
U)
0
U)
Tatums
(\J
co
0
0
0
. .:-1 ci
Q
Z
0
0
(J)
""0
>
.!!!
00(
a..
1::
Q)
a:
0.
~
~
(ij
0
::;)
en
'iii
.c
>.
0.
en
e
~
Qi
z a..
w
~
ii:
w
0
co
;::.
0
~
co
~I~
gj
(')
(')
(')
co
0
co
0
~I~
N~
-21 U)
N ~ (')
~
N.c
U)
co
U)
U)
0>
I'-
I'-
co
0>
(\J
~
0
0
0>
co
(')
co
(\J
0
(')
co
(')
co
co
co
co
U) U)
I'-
I'-
co
...I
.::.i=
(J)
.!!!
0.
(ij
....I
.c
a:
co
0
~t co
><
w
U)
U)
<110
~I
Q,
Cl)1~
I'-
1::
"':J
@.
I'-
"!
I'-
"!
I'-
C'?
I'-
(')
(')
(')
(')
"!
Q)
e
::E
a..
00(
:::.
N:J
en Q) Eo
"':J
~
f-
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(\J
~
@.
1.0
...I
m
00(
~
(J)
fL
I-
z
w
!;
U)
:::.
-:J
Eo ~
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
(')
a:
(')
"':J
@.
0.8
Q.
W
~
2
Q)
Q)
Qi
"~0
~
:J
(J)
(J)
(J)
:J
al
01
c
a;
0
<.)
en
:>,
al
3:
"
00.
(J)
3:
00
0.....1
~~
~
:J
~
00.
(J).c
001
a.. I
~~
E
~
Ii)
~
Q)
Q)
~
Q)
c
'0
~
E
:J
.c
C/)
CiS
al
0.
(J) (J)
1ii~
f-
0
:I::
ci
MT POSO
(LOW PRESS. I
a:
a:
:I::
a:
w 0.4
'0
I-
0'0
Q)
0-
'~
(J)
0.6
I-
o MIDIIAY-SUNSET
(J)
o..jjj
~~
I-
w
~
a:
>
:;
SCHOONEBEEK
MT.POSO
(HIGH PRESS. I
0.2
SLOCUM
00
TATUMS
COALINGA
(3
1.0
EQUIVALENT OIL/STEAM RATIO.
CALCULATED
Number
of
Injections
Brea
("B" sand)
10
Tf
("F)
175
Coalinga
(Section 27,
Zone 1)
40
96
EI Dorado
(Northwest pattem)
70
Field
Reference
----
Petrophysical Properties
Steam Parameters
z,
J!!L z./z,
~S
i,
P
(psig)
0.63
0.22
0.40
0.75
35
1.0
0.31
0.37
0.7
0.55
400
500
9.2
20
0.85
0.26
0.20
0.75
0.45
500
200
1.6
300
'"
f,d
0.54
2,000
500
10
8
4
Inglewood
100
43
1.0
0.37
0.40
0.75
0.7
400
1,100
2.6
KemRiver
85
90
55
1.0
0.32
0.40
0.7
0.5
100
360
2.5
Schoonebeek
100
83
1.0
0.30
0.70
0.85
0.7
600
1,250
Slocum
(Phase 1)
75
40
1.0
0.37
0.34
0.8
0.7
200
1,000
Smackover
110
50
0.5
0.36
0.55
1.0
0.8
390
2,500
10
Tatums
(Hefner steam
drive)
70
66
0.56
0.28
0.55
0.7
0.6
1,300
685
10
TiaJuana
113
200
1.0
0.33
0.50
1.0
0.8
300
1,400
12
5.3
110
32
1.0
0.30
0.31
0.8
0.7
200
850
35
4.5
Yorba Linda
("F"sand)
'M,
"ilS
35 Btu/eu ft-"F, M,
42 Btu/eu ft_oF,k,,,
15
5.65
6
2.5
1.2 Btu/ft-hr-oF.
~ (oil saturation at start of steaming change in oil saturation from estimated primary during steam-drive period) -
Quantity
of Steam
Injected
Field
(VpD)
SteamZone
Size
JV
PSD )
Calculated
Additional
Equivalent
Oil/Steam
Ratio
(vol/vol)
Field
Additional
Equivalent
Oil/Steam
Ratio
(vol/vol)
Field Total
Equivalent
Oil/Steam
Ratio
(vol/vol)
Brea
0.5
0.15
0.13
0.14
0.21
Coalinga
0.94
0.45
0.16
0.18
0.37'
EI Dorado
1.6
0.315
0.05
0.02
0.02
Inglewood
1.26
1.256
0.41
0.28
0.36
Kern River
1.92
1.139
0.32
0.26
0.26
Schoonebeek
0.95
0.617
0.43
0.35
0.35
Slocum
1.41
1.202
0.29
0.18
0.18
Smackover
1.23
0.756
0.27
0.21
0.28
Tatums
1.54
0.397
0.13
0.10
0.13
TiaJuana
0.47
0.551
0.59
0.37
0.53
0.54
0.280
0.16
0.17
0.21
FEBRUARY, 1978
175
r-------------------------------------,
1.0
>
">
ci
I-
0.8
1f
lI::
a:
LIJ
:;;
:J
0.6
o
IZ
LIJ
.J
a:
;:: 0.<4
::>
LIJ
I-
0.2
r----------------------------------------,
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.9
,_~
______
________
_ L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
10
TIME.
________
15
20
Yf.
a:
0.5
/STEAM SOAK
0.6
a:
I:
a:
w
I(f)
..J
:::
S
....
0.4
I-
60
0.5
"-
~ O. 4
a:
0.3
..J
::>
::>
I:
0:
a.
0.3
(J
-'
0
w 0.2
::....
0.2
cr
-'
::J
I:
::J
U
0-1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0
10
TIME.
15
yrs.
20
10
15
TIME. yn.
~
p,
v"
STEAM
ZO NE
---~ - -- -----
----------j~
Son
0.'
o.
o.
0. 0
L-L-L'-'-'--'-'-*'L,---'-L----Li~_===:E~~~~~
0.01
10
l OG
'0
177
o. ,
o.s
no
0.1
0.5
o. ,
'"
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.2
o.
t.o
0.0
0.01
'0
Fig. 8-Upper-minus-lower bound efficiency as a function of
dimensionless parameters.
4
Conclusions
1. Oil/steam ratios calculated with a simple mathematical model correlate well with experience from field
steam-drive projects and laboratory physical-model
experiments. The model, which predicts oil/steam ratio
from average reservoir and steam properties and project
2
.e. o
I S
1.
0.5
\.0
'0
f5
Nomenclature
0.4
0.3
0.2 3~0-----------------4~10~--------------~SO
HERT CAPAC lTV. BTU/ cu. fr, F
0
0.4
>:
a:
w-
>- >
"",
>
--1-
#.
>-
FEBRUARY, 1978
0.3
ZlL
W
--10
a:>>-a:
:::>0:
'"
W
0.20.~8~--~IL.0~--~I~.~2----~I.L4----~IL.6~------1I.B
THERMRL CONDUCT! VlTV. BTU If t - h, , F
>:
0.4
A = area/injector, acres/well
MI
~-;
>-,
~~
>-
0.3
~ u..
cfo
>5b:
",0:
w
0.2
90
100
110
120
130
FORMRTION TEMPERRTURE. OF
140
0.4
"-
'"
3....
0.3
a:
a:
~"
0.2
;:!
0
....z
0.1
.J
g:
::>
0
0.0
100
50
FORMATION THICKNESS.
(fT)
0.4
"-
",0
0.3
ci
....a:
a:
"
0.2
;:!
0
....
z
'j
0.1
g:
::>
:'.l
0.0
0
0.5
1.0
Subscripts
tCD
1 = steam zone
2 = cap and base rock
b = boiler
D = dimensionless
d = bottom-hole
e = equivalent
f= formation, original conditions
0= oil
s = steam
w = water
Acknowledgments
We wish to express our appreciation to Shell Development Co. and Shell Oil Co. for permission to publish this
paper. We also acknowledge the contribution of P. van
Meurs and C. W. Volek, who developed scaling rules
and supervised the laboratory experimental work.
References
I. Blevins, T. R., Aseltine, R. J., and Kirk, R. S.: "Analysis ofa
Steam Drive Project, Inglewood Field, California," 1. Pet. Tech.
(Sept. 1969) 1141-1150.
.
.
2. Hearn, C. L.: "The EI Dorado Steam Drive - A Pilot Tertiary
..
~
-> O. 5
>
>
a: 0.3
a:
a:
cr
a:
f-
I-
a:
w
(JJ
O. 2
"-'
...J
f-
I-
1000
500
PRESSURE.
(JJ
"-
a
w 0.0
0.0
->
0.5
0.5
ID
.. 0.4
0
l.J..
c:i
I-
cr O. 3
0:
a: 0.3
I:
IT
1:
0:
W
f-
I(JJ
O. 2
"- 0.2
-'
-"
;;
f-
I-
Z
w 0.1
-'
0:
>
01
.J
IT
_.
>
::>
=>
a
C)
L.I
0.5
;;
O. 4
a:
...J
0.0
1.0
"-
f-
STEAM QUALITY
L.,
1:
0:
I-
(pslgl
"-
0.1
:;
w 0.0
0
0:
>
0
l.J..
a:
a:
:;
->.
I-
...J
>
U1
O. 2
O. 2
z
w 01
z
w 0.1
...J
a:
0.3
1:
1:
I-
f-
>
"-
- O. 3
>
"~
0.4
L.,0
L.,
"-
~
0
: O. 4
O. 4
c:i
U1
0.5
"~
"-
0.5
w 0.0
8. 0
00
1.0
CUMULAT I VE STEAM INJECTED
2.0
IVpOI
2000
1000
I NJECT I ON RATE.
(BID I \JELl!
246.
15. Walsh, J. W.: Unpublished correspondence, Shell Development
Co., Houston.
16. Prats, M. and Vogiatzis, J. P.: Personal communication, Shell
Development Co., Houston.
17. Zaba, J. and Doherty, W. T.: Practical Petroleum Engineers
Handbook, Gulf Publishing Co., Houston (1951) 55.
18. Keenan, J. H. and Keyes, F. G.: Thermodynamic Properties of
Steam, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., London (1936).
19. Ramey, H. J.: "How to Calculate Heat Transmission in Hot
Fluid," Pet. Eng. (Nov. 1964) 110.
APPENDIX
= _1_
fetD erfc
tD \:
Vt;; + 2 ~
7T"
where
tcD
FEBRUARY, 1978
eU erfcVu
Vt D
where
__
1_ = etcD erfc'VlcD,
~t ..... .......... (A -5)
1 +hD
and
hD = fSdLV .................... (A-6)
CwLlT
(Note that the denominator in Eq. A-6 presumes a constant value for the heat capacity of water, C w , over the
temperature range. For a more precise calculation, the
differences in enthalpies of liquids at steam and at the
reference temperature should be used.) Prats and Vogiatzis also suggested a new weighting factor for the average
steam-zone thermal efficiency:
- _
( I+hD
1 ) LlE, ...... (A-7)
Ehs-Eupperbound-
Eupper bound -
Elower bound'
.....
(A-8)
For times greater than the critical time (tCD) , an approximate solution for average steam-zone thermal efficiency
has been given,13 using the arithmetic average of two
thermal efficiencies representing the upper and lower
bounds of steam-zone growth. The upper bound is calculated by assuming no heat flow across the condensation
front, which is the solution given in Eq. A-2. The lower
bound is calculated by assuming heat flow across the
1
2'V rttD _(2VtD - tCD
V-:;t D
1 + hD
~~~
VI =
MIAsztLlT(l/Ehs)
Pw(CwLlT + fSdLV)
, ............ (A-lO)
since
Fos
= Np/VI'
(A-ll)
Fos
= PwCw .(1 + h ). (t h ).
cPLlS(zn/Zt)
MID
hs D, D
............................. (A-I2)
If the ratio of heat capacities of water and the bulk steam
181
Cw(T l
1,000
Fos . ......... (A-13)
Tb) + ISbLv
A simple relationship between specific gravity and heating value of the oip7 is
Ho = 13,100 + 5,600/yo, .............. (A-15)
which further simplifies Eq. 14 to
ED = (l3.1yo +5.6)EbFose. .......... (A-16)
tD =
= 6.33.
Alternatively, tD can be calculated from steam-injection
rate and pore volume of steam injected:
744,750M
2kh2 (Zn/Zt) cpAVpD
tD = _---'-_
_-=-c~....:.::........:..:....-'---------"=-(Mlf Ztis
............................. (A-18)
2. Calculate hD from Eq. A-6 (or read approximately
from Fig. 9). Bottom-hole steam quality, Isd, can be
estimated by subtracting surface-line and injection-well
heat losses1 9 from boiler-exit quality. In this example,
fsd ;;; 0.7.
=
D
= 0.313.
Example Calculation
Yorba Linda "F" Sand Drive
Given the parameters listed in Table 3 and values from
standard steam tables,18
Lv
CwTs
=
w
Isb
CwD.T
---;yr-
361.91 - 77.94
387.9 - 110
= 0.8.
182
(l
=
+ 2.064)(0.313)
0.162.
1.022,
(0.7)(837.4)
- 2.064
(361.91 - 77.94)
0.163.
+ 5.6](0.8)(0.163)
= 2.3.
That is, even for this case of a fairly low oil/steam ratio,
the oil-heating value equal to 2.3 times the injected heat is
displaced from the steam zone.
JPT