Solution-Gas Drive in Heavy Oil: Field Prediction and Sensitivity Studies Using Low Gas Relative Permeability
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The favourable behaviour of heavy oil reservoirs under solution- gas drive has intrigued the oil industry for a long time. Many mechanistic models have been proposed to explain this behaviour. This paper investigates one of the theories that attributes the low producing GOR and high recovery of heavy oil to low gas mobility. A simulation study was carried out on a commercial black oil simulator to match the "typical" production data of heavy oil fields in Lindbergh and Frog Lake. Sensitivity studies were carried out to investigate the effect of gas relative permeability on oil recovery. The effect of sand production, which is an integral part of heavy oil production in Western Canada, was also investigated. A parameter was used in the simulator to account for the increased permeability due to sand production. The results indicate that the field performance can be matched by using low gas mobility and incorporating improved permeability due to sand production. Neither of them alone was sufficient for matching the field performance. The use of a low gas mobility was successful to explain high pressure-gradients in the field, by acting as a pressure maintenance mechanism, and leading to a high recovery under solution-gas drive. Intruduction PanCanadian has been one of the major operators in the Lindbergh and Frog Lake heavy oil fields of northeast Alberta(1). The production in these fields is from the Upper Mannville group. The producing formations contain oil of 12 – 14 ° API with in situ viscosities of 3,000 – 10,000 cp. The fields have shown recovery much in excess of what can be predicted by applying conventional flow equations. Many heavy oil wells under primary production have produced about 15% of the original oil in place (OOIP) in 10 years(1). The primary oil production in these fields is accompanied by sand production and is called "Cold Production." A typical well in the Lindbergh and Frog Lake fields under depletion has produced an average of 9,200 m3 of oil and about 230 m3 of sand in 1,000 days(1). Several tests have been carried out to determine the mechanism responsible for the favourable behaviour of these reservoirs. Metwally and Solanki(1) presented a simulation model to match the field production behaviour. The authors postulated that reservoir porosity and permeability are increased due to sand production. Additionally, the authors showed that a pressure support mechanism needs to be incorporated to match recovery data; an external aquifer was therefore incorporated into the model. Similar to Metwally and Solanki(1), we use a commercial simulator to match the production data. We show that the use of low values for gas relative permeability results in pressure maintenance and substantial oil production. Accounting for the low gas mobility along with the improved permeability resulted in a match of the field data. Sensitivity studies are reported, which show that both the effects of low gas mobility and improved permeability are required for a match.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».