Material Balance Analysis Theory

Material Balance Analysis

Material balance analysis is an interpretation method used to determine original fluids-in-place
(OFIP) based on production and static pressure data. The general material balance equation
relates the original oil, gas, and water in the reservoir to production volumes and current pressure
conditions / fluid properties. The material balance equations considered assume tank type
behavior at any given datum depth - the reservoir is considered to have the same pressure and
fluid properties at any location in the reservoir. This assumption is quite reasonable provided that
quality production and static pressure measurements are obtained.
Consider the case of the depletion of the reservoir pictured below. At a given time after the
production of fluids from the reservoir has commenced, the pressure will have dropped from its
initial reservoir pressure pi, to some average reservoir pressure p. Using the law of mass balance,
during the pressure drop (p), the expansion of the fluids leftover in the reservoir must be equal to
the volume of fluids produced from the reservoir.

The simplest way to visualize material balance is that if the measured surface volume of oil, gas
and water were returned to a reservoir at the reduced pressure, it must fit exactly into the volume
of the total fluid expansion plus the fluid influx.

The general form of the equation can be described as net withdrawal (withdrawal - injection) =
expansion of the hydrocarbon fluids in the system + cumulative water influx. This is shown in the
equation below.

Each term in the equation can be grouped based on the part of the system it represents. The table
below shows the terms and a simplified version of the general equation based on the terms.

Summary of Terms in the Material Balance Equation

Term

Description
Simplified
general
equation.
Volume of
withdrawal
(production
and injection)
at reservoir
conditions is
determined by
the oil, water
and gas
produced at
the surface.
Total
expansion.

If the oil
column is
initially at the
bubble point,
reducing the
pressure will
result in the
release of gas
and the
shrinkage of
oil. The

remaining oil
will consist of
oil and the
remaining gas
still dissolved
at the reduced
pressure.
Gas
expansion
factor. For
example as
the reservoir
depletes, the
gas cap
expands into
reservoir
volume
previously
occupied by
oil.
Even though
water has low
compressibilit
y, the volume
of connate
water in the
system is
usually large
enough to be
significant.
The water will
expand to fill
the emptying
pore spaces
as the
reservoir
depletes. As
the reservoir
is produced,
the pressure
declines and
the entire
reservoir pore
volume is
reduced due
to
compaction.
The change in
volume expels
an equal
volume of fluid
as production
and is

therefore
additive in the
expansion
terms.
Ratio of gas
cap to original
oil in place. A
gas cap also
implies that
the initial
pressure in
the oil column
must be equal
to the bubble
point
pressure.
If the reservoir
is connected
to an active
aquifer, then
once the
pressure drop
is
communicate
d throughout
the reservoir,
the water will
encroach into
the reservoir
resulting in a
net water
influx. To
calculate the
amount of
water influx,
either the
Fetkovich,
Carter Tracey,
Not all terms will be used at any one time, but the purpose of a complete equation is to provide a
basis from which to analyze many types of reservoirs: gas expansion, solution gas drive, gas cap
drive, water drive, etc. Terms that are not needed for a particular reservoir type will cancel out of
the equation. For example, when there is no gas cap originally present, the G and Bgiterms are
zero.

Application of Material Balance

Material balance is an important concept in reservoir engineering since it is a performance-based
tool used to establish the original volume of hydrocarbons-in-place in a reservoir that typically

contains many wells. Additionally, the process of matching pressure-based depletion trends
between wells gives the reservoir engineer the ability to create a performance-based view of the
connected pore volume in the reservoir. Consequently, it is important that:
1. All fluids taken from or injected into the reservoir be measured accurately.
2. Pressure, volume, and temperature characteristics (PVT properties) be measured and
validated. Subsurface samples from several properly conditioned wells are preferred.
3. At least one static pressure from each well prior to production and several after production
has commenced are required to achieve good results.
The establishment of original-in-place fluid volumes and connected pore volume are critical to the
development of ongoing depletion plans, especially where secondary or tertiary recovery methods
are being considered.

Gas Material Balance

Gas material balance is a simplified version of the general material balance equation. When the
general equation is reduced to its simplest form containing only gas terms, it appears as shown
below:

In this equation, it is assumed that gas expansion is the only driving force causing production. This
form is commonly used because the expansion of gas often dominates over the expansion of oil,
water, and rock. Bg is the ratio of gas volume at reservoir conditions to gas volume at standard
conditions. This is expanded using the real gas law.

The reservoir temperature is considered to remain constant. The compressibility factor (Z) for
standard conditions is assumed to be 1. The number of moles of gas do not change from reservoir
to surface. Standard temperature and pressure are known constants. When Bgis replaced and the
constants are cancelled out, the gas material balance equation then simplifies to:

When plotted on a graph of p/Z versus cumulative production, the equation can be analyzed as a
linear relationship. Several measurements of static pressure and the corresponding cumulative
productions can be used to determine the x-intercept of the plot - the original gas-in-place (OGIP),
shown as G in the equation.

Advanced Gas Material Balance

For a volumetric gas reservoir, gas expansion (the most significant source of energy) dominates
depletion behaviour; and the general gas material balance equation is a very simple yet powerful
tool for interpretation. However, in cases where other sources of energy are significant enough to
cause deviation from the linear behaviour of a p/Z plot, a more sophisticated tool is required. For
this, a more advanced form of the material balance equation has been developed, and the
standard p/Z plot is modified to maintain a linear trend with the simplicity of interpretation.

In his work on CBM, King (1993) introduced p/Z* to replace p/Z. By modifying Z, parameters to
incorporate the effects of adsorbed gas were incorporated so the total gas-in-place is interpreted
rather than just the free gas-in-place; and a straight line analysis technique is still used. This
concept has been extended to additional reservoir types with Fekete's p/Z** method (Moghadam
et al. 2009).
The reservoir types considered in the advanced material balance equation are: overpressured
reservoirs, water-drive reservoirs, and connected reservoirs. The total Z** equation is shown
below with the modified material balance equation.

Overpressured Reservoir
At typical reservoir conditions, gas compressibility is orders of magnitude greater than that of the
formation rock or residual fluids. In reservoirs at high initial pressures the gas compressibility is
much lower, in the same order of magnitude as the formation. A typical example of this would be
an overpressured reservoir, which is a reservoir at a higher pressure than the hydrostatic column
of water at that depth - in other words, a higher than expected initial pressure given the depth. In
this situation, ignoring the formation and residual fluid compressibility will result in over-prediction
of the original gas-in-place. The initial depletion will show effects of both depletion and reservoir
compaction and the slope of a p/Z plot will be shallower. Once the pressure is much lower than the
initial pressure, gas expansion is dominant and a steeper slope is observed on the p/Z plot. When
matching on the shallower slope of this bow-shaped trend, all later pressure data will be lower
than the analysis line, and the estimated original gas-in-place will be higher than the true original
gas-in-place. The plot below shows an overpressured reservoir matched on the initial data and the
analysis line of the advance material balance method.

Based on the definition of compressibility, the following equation represents the total effect of
formation and residual fluid compressibility:

The approximate form of this equation, found by considering compressibility for oil, water, and the
formation as constant; and e as 1 + x, is:
x

In order to use this compressibility in the material balance equation, the change in pore volume is
taken relative to the initial pore volume. The rigorous and approximate forms are shown below.
Rigorous form:

Approximate form:

Water-Drive Reservoir
Some gas reservoirs may be connected to aquifers that provide pressure support to the gas
reservoir as it is depleted. In this case, the pressure decrease in the gas reservoir is balanced by
water encroaching into the reservoir. As this happens, the pore volume of gas is decreasing and
the average reservoir pressure is maintained. Often this reservoir will show a flat pressure trend
after some depletion. An example of this behaviour on a p/Z plot is shown below.

The change in reservoir volume due to net encroached water can be determined from the
following equation:

To use this in the material balance, the change in pore volume is taken relative to the initial pore
volume, shown below.

When dealing with this equation, the major unknown value to be determined is water
encroachment from the aquifer (W e). Two aquifer models are provided to determine net
encroached water: Schilthuis Steady-State Model and Fetkovich Model.

Schilthuis Steady-State Model

This is the simplest aquifer model and assumes the rate of water influx is proportional to pressure
drawdown. In this model it is assumed that the aquifer volume is much larger than the gas
reservoir and remains at the initial pressure.

Using this model, the only parameter to solve for is the transfer coefficient (J).

Fetkovich
In the Fetkovich aquifer, the aquifer is assumed to be in pseudo-steady state and deplete
according to the material balance equation. In this model, both the aquifer volume and transfer
coefficient must be determined. The equations are shown below.

While the transfer coefficient is defined, the required inputs to calculate the transfer coefficient are
often not known. More commonly the transfer coefficient is determined as part of matching the p/Z
plot.

Connected Reservoir
Another scenario which will appear as pressure support on the p/Z plot is the connected reservoir
model. The generic description is that two gas reservoirs are connected, described by a transfer
coefficient between them, and gas feeds from one tank to the other as one of the tanks is
depleted. This can be observed with two gas reservoirs with some communication, two zones in a
reservoir with different permeability or some barrier between them, or even another way of
considering the situation of free and adsorbed gas in a reservoir. Because both water-drive and
connected reservoirs show pressure support, it can be easy to mistake which model should be
used. In a connected reservoir, the influx into the main reservoir is gas as compared to influx of
water in water-drive. So the pressure support will be accompanied by more gas in the reservoir
rather than a shrinking reservoir as in water-drive. Typically if the initial p/Z trend points to an
original gas-in-place smaller than the cumulative production, a connected reservoir will be the
appropriate model to use.

For a connected reservoir, the material balance equation is written as shown below to account for
gas influx.

This can be converted into a dimensionless term similar to the terms describing relative change in
pore volume (cwip, cep, and cd) for other models, as shown below.

Similar to the water-drive model, the influx of gas from the second reservoir (G ) is likely not a
T

known value, and so must be determined based on the size of the connected reservoir and the
transfer coefficient between the reservoirs. The equation for gas influx is shown below.

Oil Material Balance

As seen in the general material balance equation there are many unknowns, and as a result
finding an exact or unique solution can be difficult. However, using other techniques to help
determine some variables (for example, m or original gas-in-place from volumetrics or seismic),
the equation can be simplified to yield a more useful answer. Various plots are available to
conduct an oil material balance rather than calculating an answer from individual measurements of
reservoir pressure. The primary analysis plot is the

Havlena-Odeh (All Reservoir Types)

Similar to the interpretation of gas material balance, oil material balance uses plotting techniques.
However, unlike the equation for single-phase gas expansion, the standard form of the material
balance equation for oil reservoirs does not easily yield a linear relationship. The equation can be
organized to show linear behavior. Based on the rearrangement below, the large combinations of
terms are used as x and y while G is the slope and N is the intercept. This of course implies that
water influx term for each data point is a known value, or the simpler scenario that there is no
water influx. Additionally, if the water influx is neglected in calculating the terms the result will be
non-linear behavior on the plot. This can be a diagnostic to determine the presence of water drive.
In practice, the scatter in the data may be great enough and the signature of water drive subtle
enough that deviation from linear behavior on the Havlena-Odeh plot may go unnoticed.

An example of the plot is shown below. The scatter shown in the data points demonstrates the
difficulty in determining trends in the reservoir behaviour.

This method works for most reservoir types. In the case of an undersaturated reservoir (above
bubble point) the Eg + Bgi * Efw term will be zero and this plot will not be as useful. The standard
Havlena-Odeh plot can be substituted for one that excludes free gas terms.

Havlena-Odeh F vs. Et(No Initial Gas Cap)

If the reservoir to be analyzed has no initial free gas, the free gas terms of the equation can be
eliminated. This equation is now much simpler to linearize. In the equation shown below, the total
expansion term is split into the oil and water / formation expansion terms. Once again, the
inclusion of water influx is such that it is assumed to be known.

In this form of the equation, N is the slope on a plot of expansion terms versus withdrawal and
influx terms. There is no intercept so the analysis line is typically forced through zero. Similar to
the Havlena-Odeh plot that includes gas terms, if water influx is neglected and a non-linear trend
results, this can be a diagnostic for observing water drive effects. An example of the plot is shown
below.

N vs. Time
Using plots of various terms in the material balance equation can be used for overall analysis, but
each pressure measurement can be independently used for material balance calculation.
Comparing the results of overall analysis and single-point calculations demonstrates whether there
is consistency between the methods. It is expected that the single-point calculations will remain in
a trend around the original oil-in-place determined from the overall analysis. This comparison can
be plotted as a series of original oil-in-place results displayed at the point in time of the pressure
measurement, with a continuous line at the value of original oil-in-place from the overall analysis.
The plot is shown below.

This plot is also useful as a diagnostic to determine if the correct reservoir type has been
assumed, and also to assess the data quality. An inconsistent trend usually indicates that the
quality of the pressure measurements are not good, or the definition of the wells in the reservoir
should be reviewed. A consistent upward trend indicates that another drive mechanism may be
present, whereas a downward trend indicates that not all wells in the reservoir have been included
in the analysis.

Pressure History Match

The pressure match method employs an iterative procedure that uses the values of original oil-inplace, original gas-in-place, and W to calculate the reservoir pressure versus time. The pressure
match is then plotted against the real measured static reservoir pressures and compared. This is
by far the most robust and easily understood material balance technique, as:
4. Pressure and time are easily understood variables, and so sensitivity analysis can be
conducted relatively easily.
5. Use of time allows the analyst to see directly the impact of:

Changing withdrawal rates, especially shut-ins on reservoir pressure decline

Injection operations on pressure response

Water drive and connected reservoirs on reservoir depletion, especially since

these are both cumulative withdrawal and time-based processes.

6. A relatively simple, iterative process is used to achieve a unique solution wherein:

Start with the simplest solution (oil and/or gas depletion only) and then
proceed to more complex models only if demonstrated to be required

Employ a left-to-right matching technique (early-time to late-time), wherein

initial reservoir pressure is matched first, followed by early-time depletion
response, and then late-time responses. Since water drive and connected
reservoir models are cumulative withdrawal and time-based, their responses
are minimal at early-times and maximized at late-times.

7. Major changes to depletion, such as conversion to storage or blowdown, can be both

segregated (time) and integrated in a single analysis method.
An example of a pressure history match is shown below:

Drive Indices
Drive indices for oil reservoirs indicate the relative magnitude of the various energy sources acting
in the reservoir. A simple description of a drive index is the ratio of a particular expansion term to
the net withdrawal (hydrocarbon voidage). These drive indices are cumulative and will change as
the reservoir is produced. A plot of drive indices and the details of specific drive indices are shown
below.

Summary of Drive Indices

Drive Index

Description
Depletion Drive Index

Segregation (Gas Cap) Drive Index

Water Drive Index

Formation and Connate Water Compressibility Index

If the drive indices do not sum to unity (or very close to 1), the correct solution to the material
balance has not been obtained.

Diagnostics - Dake and Campbell

Dake and Campbell plots are used as diagnostic tools to identify the reservoir type based on the
signature of production and pressure behaviour. The plots are established based on the

assumption of a volumetric reservoir, and deviation from this behaviour is used to indicate the
reservoir type.
In the Dake plot, the simplest oil case of solution gas / depletion drive (no gas cap, no water drive)
is used to determine the axes of the plot. The material balance equation is rearranged as shown
below.

In a volumetric reservoir producing due to depletion drive only, production is balanced by the oil
and water/formation expansion and the original oil-in-place is constant. If a plot of cumulative oil
production versus the net withdrawal over expansion is created with this reservoir type's data, the
points will remain along a horizontal line.
If a gas cap is present, there will be a gas expansion component in the reservoir's production. As
production continues and the reservoir pressure decreased, the gas expansion term increases
with an increasing gas formation volume factor. To balance this, the withdrawal over
oil/water/formation expansion term must also continue to increase. Thus in the case of gas cap
drive, the Dake plot will show a continually increasing trend.
Similarly, if water drive is present the withdrawal over oil/water/formation expansion term must
increase to balance the water influx. With a very strong aquifer the water influx may continue to
increase with time, while a limited or small aquifer may have an initial increase in water influx that
eventually decreases.

The Campbell plot is a very similar diagnostic to Dake, with the exception that it incorporates a gas
cap if required. In the Campbell plot, the withdrawal is plotted against withdrawal over total
expansion, while the water influx term is neglected. If there is no water influx, the data will plot as a
horizontal line. If there is water influx into the reservoir, the withdrawal over total expansion term
will increase proportionally to the water influx over total expansion. The Campbell plot can be more
sensitive to the strength of the aquifer. In this version of the material balance, using only ET
neglects the water and formation compressibility (compaction) term. The Campbell plot is shown
below.

Voidage Replacement Ratio

Water injection is a secondary recovery technique that is often employed as a means for pressure
maintenance to re-energize a reservoir. There are many easy-to-use techniques for monitoring a
water injection/waterflood project, (Hall plot, WOR,

Voidage replacement ratio is defined as the ratio of injected reservoir volume to produced
reservoir volume.

Typically, waterflooding commences after a period of primary production. The purpose of

waterflooding is to enhance recovery by maintaining reservoir pressure, or when necessary,
increasing reservoir pressure so that it approaches the bubble point pressure to maintain solution
gas. Consequently, instantaneous voidage replacement ratio often commences at values greater
than one, and then declines gradually to one as the target reservoir pressure is achieved. On the
other hand, cumulative

Voidage replacement calculations are often conducted on the entire reservoir. Since reservoirs are
more heterogenous than homogenous, even though the
Use of voidage replacement calculations is an excellent way to better understand connectivity
within a reservoir.

Volatile Oil - Walsh Formulation

Volatile oil is also called high shrinkage crude oil, or near-critical oil. It contains relatively fewer
heavy molecules and more intermediates than black oils. It has a higher API (typically greater than
44), and is typically lighter in color.
A small reduction in pressure below the bubble point causes the release of a large amount of gas
in the reservoir. An additional property is used to the describe volatile oil - the volatile oil ratio Rv.
The volatile oil ratio describes the amount of volatilized oil in the reservoir gas phase and is
typically expressed in

Regular material balance does not account for volatile oil. In a reservoir containing volatile oil, the
Walsh formulation is used to calculate original oil-in-place. The equations which are modified from
standard material balance are shown below.

Terms

Descripti
on
Modified
withdrawa
l term for
volatile
oil.
Modified
oil
expansion
term for
volatile
oil.
Modified
gas
expansion
term for
volatile
oil.

CBM Material Balance

There are three forms of the material balance available for CBM analysis:

King (1993)

Seidle (1999)

Jensen and Smith (1997)

King (1993)
The gas material balance equation can be expressed in general terms as:
Gp = G G r
The material balance proposed by King (1993) is the most comprehensive, and considers the
following with respect to the gas material balance equation:

Gas adsorbed in the coal matrix

Gas contained in the cleats (fracture system)

Water compressibility

There are two sources of gas in CBM reservoirs, the gas adsorbed in the matrix, and the gas
stored in the cleat space:
Gtotal = Gadsorbed + Gcleats
The gas adsorbed in the coal matrix can be described by the Langmuir isotherm:

As the above equation expresses volume in scf/ton, the total volume of adsorbed gas in the
reservoir can be found by the following equation:

Where:
A = area (acres)
h = net pay (ft)
Gadsorbed = volume of adsorbed gas (mmscf)
P = pressure (psia)
PL = Langmuir pressure (psia)
VL = Langmuir volume (scf/ton)
b = bulk density (g/cm3)
The gas contained in the cleat volume is described by the equation for volumetric storage in the
pore space:

Where:
A = area (acres)
Bg = gas formation volume factor (ft3/scf)
Gcleats = volume of gas stored in the cleats (mmscf)
h = net pay (ft)
Sw = water saturation
= porosity
Adding the two gas volumes results in the following expression for the total gas content:

The above equation can be used to calculate the initial gas in place (G i) by using the pressure,
porosity, and water saturation at initial conditions. The remaining gas (Gr) can be calculated using
pressure, porosity, and water saturation at the current average reservoir pressure. Substituting the
original gas in place, and the remaining gas at the current conditions into the general gas material
balance equation will yield:

In the above equation, three terms change with pressure:

Sw (water saturation)
(porosity)
Bg (gas formation volume factor)
The water saturation in the cleats, as well as the cleat volume itself, changes with pressure and
water influx/efflux. The water saturation in the cleats is affected by three mechanisms:

The expansion of water due to its compressibility

Water influx (from an aquifer), and efflux (from production)

The change in pore volume caused by the formation compressibility

In mathematical terms, this is expressed by the following equation:

Where:
A = area (ft2)
Bw = water formation volume factor (ft3/scf)
cw = water compressibility (1/psia)
cf = formation compressibility (1/psia)
h = net pay (ft)
p = pressure (psia)
pi = initial reservoir pressure (psia)
= average water saturation

Swi = initial water saturation

W e = encroached water (bbls)
W p = produced water (bbls)
i = initial porosity
The porosity changes with pressure as a result of the formation compressibility, and can be
expressed by the following equation:

The gas formation volume factor can be expressed using the gas real gas law as follows:

Substituting these three equations into the gas material balance equation yields the following:

With Z* defined as:

OGIP can be calculated from the above equation when p = 0 (implying the pressure has been
completely depleted, and all the gas has been produced):

Dividing the Gp equation by the expression for OGIP yields a more useful form of the material
balance equation:

Plotting P/Z* versus Gp yields the familiar graphical representation of the material balance
equation, with a y-intercept at Pi/Zi*, and an x-intercept at OGIP.

Seidle (1999)
Seidle (1999) suggested using a similar material balance as that developed by King, but with the
simplifying assumption that the water saturation is constant. This simplification is justified by the
assumption that the water saturation in CBM reservoirs have little impact on the calculations as
the term in which it appears is small in comparison to the one in which it is added to. For much of
the producing life a well, the expression for Z* is dominated by the ratio of sorbed to free gas in the
denominator. Formation and water compressibilities are also assumed to be negligible. These
assumptions result in the following expression for Z*:

This definition of Z* can be used in the same material balance equation derived by the King
method:

Jensen and Smith (1997)

The Jensen and Smith (1997) method assumes that the gas stored in the cleat space is negligible
(1-2%), resulting in the complete omission of water saturation effects. In this case, the gas content
is described solely by the adsorbed volume:

Where:
A = area (acres)
h = net pay (ft)
Gadsorbed = volume of adsorbed gas (mmscf)
P = pressure (psia)
PL = Langmuir pressure (psia)
VL = Langmuir volume (scf/ton)
b = bulk density (g/cm3)
The gas material balance equation can be expressed as:
Gp = G G r
which becomes,

Dividing by (1.3597 x 10-3) VLAhb, and rearranging gives:

Plotting
OGIP.

versus Gp yields a straight line with a y-intercept at

, and an x-intercept at the

Copyright 2012 Fekete Associates Inc.