SPE

SPE 24367

Waterflooding Heavy Oils

G.E. Smith, Consultant
SPE Member

Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting held in Casper. Wyoming, May 18-21, 1992.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program CommMee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(@. Contents of the paper,
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author@).The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of PetroleumEngineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by EditorialComminees of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permissionto copy is restrictedto an abstract of not morethan 300 words. Illustrationsmay not be copied. The abstract shouldcontain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836,Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT in the Uoydminster Region of Alberta. Two in particular

Medium/heavy oils are successfully waterflooded in the
Uoydminster region of Alberta. Two major areas are
Wainwright and Wildmere. This paper gives an
explanation as to how and why those waterfloods work
well and the insights gained from a theory of fractal flow.
Oil is gradually "wrung" out of the formation while water is
circulated for some pressure support but primarily for gas
saturation control. Injection water is quite dirty and plugs
the formation. Induced fracture networks allow the
formation to simultaneously filter the input water and
dispose of the filtrate, a procedurewhich would otherwise
be quite costly. Differences between fractal flow and
frontal displacement are discussed along with the various
mechanisms of pressure support , gas saturation control,
mixed phase flow, imbibition and emulsification.
Conclusions are drawn which include expected
pressures, errors and special care required in voidage
calculations. A schematic analogue of the life history of
the injection/production interchange and suggestions for
well and pattern conversions are also made. In difficult
economic times, optimizing current production by
altering the pressure gradients in the reservoir can yield a
good return.
Heavy oil waterfloods are operated by several companies
1References and illustrationsat end of paper
are the Wainwright Field near Wainwright, Alberta and the
Wildmere Field west of Uoydminster. Heavy oil water
floods are different from those in lighter oils due to the
relatively high absolute permeability of the reservoir and
large pore throats with low aspect ratios, the
displacement instability resulting from an adverse
mobility ratio, the poor economics and therefore poor
injection water quality, the weak nature of the rock matrix
and several other factors. The differences in mechanisms
lead to differences in performance, some of which are
unexpected and yield a very effective process in some
cases.
FRONTAL DISPLACEMENT
The theory of waterflooding is quite old in industry terms.
Buckley & Leverett pioneered the theory and our applied
understanding has changed little since their time. In their
theory, displacement starts with only connate water and
oil as incompressible phases. The shock front divides a
region with only movable oil (being displaced), from one
with only movable water. Only oil is produced prior to
breakthrough and only water after.
For partially depleted core, the notion of the
displacement of one fluid by another is represented by a
leaky piston (Figure I). The oil bank which builds in front
of the displacing water is viewed as completely saturating
the porous medium up to an immobile (connate) water
saturation, just as in Buckley-Leverett theory.
 2 Waterflooding Heavy Oils
The "leakage" of the piston is the oil left behind in the
swept matrix, in the form of discontinuous ganglia* . It
can also be viewed as injection water which "leaks"
through the piston by virtue of a small continuous mobile
water saturation within the bank. In the region between
the oil bank (piston) and the producing well, water and
oil/gas are continuous phases and all can move, as the
piston displaces the current saturations. Oil, water and
gas are produced and oil production (& WOR) is
relatively constant until the oil bank reaches the
producer. At bank arrival there is a surge of oil
production (with little or no water or gas) and then the
producer breaks to water.
Continued injection cannot drive residual oil from the
reservoir because it is tied up in discontinuous ganglia
which cannot be re-mobilized at easily achievable
pressures. Further recovery awaits a mobilization
mechanism which can be a miscible solvent, a surface
tension reducing surfactant, a thermal front or a
gaslwater interface which the oil can spread upon, etc.
In less ideal displacements in more heterogeneous
media, some pores or layers form continuous parallel
flow paths for water and injected water is produced long
before the oil bank arrives. Displacement is none-the-less
frontal and stable; however, the graph of production is
much less abrupt.
Also, in low rate displacement, capillary imbibition is a
significant process and after early arrival of the displacing
water (down the smaller pores) oil production continues
to ultimately yield a very high recovery (see collinsl, p
161). Water invades progressively larger pores and oil
retreats to the largest pores, but saturations remain
almost constant with distance. This is a "wringing"
process or a "sideways displacement".
UNSTABLE DISPLACEMENT
There are many unstable processes which occur in
nature and in engineered systems. Figures 3ad from
show the results of chemical dissolution. The pattern
formed, and shown, is called a "Fractal". A fractal is
defined as a pattern, (2-D or 3-D) which is self-similar at
any level of magnification and from any viewpoint. No
matter how closely you look at it, it looks the same.
The randomness of the dendritic structure is the result of
local heterogeneities (static or dynamic), at any point, as
the process proceeds. If a low viscosity fluid is injected
* The process of ganglia formation is often visualized as snap-off and
short circuiting in pore doublets as shown on Figure 2. It is a less
important trapping mechanism in rocks with low aspect ratios @ore
body/pore throat) like Wainwright.
SPE 24367
into a high viscosity fluid, even in an otherwise empty
container where the fluids are apparently completely
homogeneous, the displacing fluid will channel through
the resident fluid in a manner identical to the chemical
dissolution shown. The injected low viscosity fluid will
"fracture" the resident fluid in a fractal pattern. In high
mobility ratio displacements, in a Hele-Shaw cell, viscous
fingering will also occur in a fractal pattern even in an
apparently homogeneous medium. In real reservoirs the
presence of both large and small scale heterogeneity will
only aggravate the instability and result in even more
driving mechanisms for fractal development.
Not all aspects of fractal displacement are bad. The
sweep, in a displacement sense, can obviously be poor
but, as the varying images (Figures 3ad) show, it can
also be quite reasonable. Because the fractal channels
are a gross form of the doublet mechanism, they are not
themselves subject to residual trapping but rather the
residual is oil which is bypassed and unswept. It may still
be a continuous phase however. Oil production therefore
continues, often at economic rates, long after
breakthrough of water. (Compare Figure 4 Oil
Production [%PV] vs. Cumulative effluent [PV] where
there is no oil produced after 0.5 PV injection and Figure
5 for a Wainwright preserved core from 3).
The continued production of oil is sometimes visualized
as "drag"; the oil being viscously dragged or emulsified
and carried by the large volumes of water being
circulated in the system. In my view these mechanisms
are not the whole story and other important ones are:
Pressure support
Multi-phase (gasloil) expansion and flow
Gas/Oil (GOR) control
Imbibition
Gravity drainage
* PRESSURE SUPPORT
The most obvious mechanism of (oil) flow enhancement
in dendritic or fractal displacement is the external
provision of energy to the flow process. In frontal
displacement we view pressure as a connecting-rod
pushing on a piston. In the unstable process the water
injection is more of a pair of hands surrounding and
squeezing the oil out of the pores. Drive energy is
provided by an external means. Pressure in the water
phase is supported and is transferred to the oil phase.
Pressure drives both phases independently toward a
pressure sink at the producers.
SPE 24367 G.E. Smith
The low flood rate in Figure 4 (frontal vel. 0.1 mid) allows
frontal displacement. Figure 5 shows the continued oil
production in unstable displacement. Figure 5 also
shows the reducing pressure as the permeability to water
increases but oil still keeps flowing at high WOR and
chemical slugs don't improve things much (see 3). In
fact, judging from pressure, the chemicals, rather than
displacing oil, permanently imped the flow of water while
pressure displaces the oil.
The disadvantage of the dendritic geometry is that water
can develop short circuits directly from injection to
production. These could result in the need to circulate
large amounts of water at high velocities in order to raise
the pressure much above that imposed by the producers.
An advantage of the dendritic geometry is that oil remains
a continuous phase throughout the majority of the
reservoir and continues to be produced, albeit at high
WOR.
MULTlPHASE (GAS /OIL) EXPANSION & FLOW
Under primary depletion the gas saturation eventually
becomes large enough that gas becomes a continuous
phase and moves independently of the oil, at least near
the producers. If gas is lost from the hydrocarbon phase
the viscosity increases and the phase shrinks. In a
gas/oil/water system, as gas is lost the pressure must
decline and as pressure declines so goes the drive
energy and productivi. In light oils and reservoir rocks
with small pore throats, gas bubbles cannot form and
move in the reservoir. As pore throats become larger
(-lOum ) in higher permeability rocks large numbers of
small bubbles (-2um ) can form and move without
blocking throats. Also, as the viscosity of the oil
increases, the ability of the bubbles to separate and drift
to the top of the reservoir diminishes (the boyancy is
small and the viscous resistance to movement within the
oil is large). The bubbles that do form in the reservoir can
block small pore throats easier than larger ones and so
tend to do so. This results in a displacement of the flow
from the smaller to the larger pores; from water filled
ones to oil/gas filled ones.
In high permeability viscous oil reservoirs therefore, the
oil and some gas move as a mixture phase which
expands in bulk as pressure drops. This seems to be a
beneficial phenomenon overall (see 4). If the gas phase
becomes too large, it separates into a continuous phase.
This continuous gas phase originates at the producer and
grows outwards, again dendritically, and drains gas and
energy at a rapid and wasteful rate.
3
GAS (GOR) CONTROL
Water injection, properly balanced, can be used to
prevent this continuous gas phase from developing.
When water injection is used in that sense, most of the
drive energy comes from internal gas drive (expansion of
the gas/oil phase) and water provides the control. The
energy is internal, the control is external. If a material
balance calculation is done on a heavy oil waterflood, as
normally operated, it can be seen that around 75% of the
energy is internal and 25% is from the water injection.
The attempt in gas saturation control is to keep the gas
saturation small but non-zero. This is difficult especially
around wells which are pumped-off. There can therefore
be a balancing act between:
- maximum well productivi, as a pressure sink,
- low pressures resulting in large bubbles, possibly
blocking pore throats, and
- developing a continuous dendritic gas phase out
into the reservoir.
IMBIBITION
The imbibition process in unstable displacements is
much the same as it is in naturally fractured reservoirs.
The invading water is imbibed into the matrix blocks from
the fractures (high water saturation, injection, fingers) and
oil flows into the fractures (high oil saturation, production,
fingers).
DRAG
Thickening and slip of the wetting phase at the oil water
interface result in the squeezing and drag of the
hydrocarbon phase to the pressure sinks. In this
mechanism the oil and water phases do not move
independently as visualized in the relative permeability
concept. The oil moves relative to water, which is also
moving in the thin film of the wetting interface.
EMULSIFICATION
Some of the hydrocarbon becomes suspended in the
water phase as a result of native surfactant and in-situ
foam formation. This forms a very weak emulsion or
micro-emulsion which is effective in transporting oil and
in improving displacement.
GRAVITY EFFECTS
A primary effect of gravity drainage in heavy oil
watetfloods is in film spreading of the oil on the water
phase as a free gas phase forms. Over geologic time,
even discontinuous oil ganglia, trapped in a segregating
gas phase, can drain out leaving a very low residual oil
saturation in the gas zone.
4 Waterflooding Heavy Oils
In general, heavy oil reservoirs are not trapped by
completely tight caprocks. It is usually the capillary entry
pressure that prevents further upward migration of the oil.
Thus, gas is not effectively trapped and it long ago
escaped upwards, except for that in solution. Heavy oil
reservoirs are usually initially saturated at the prevailing
reservoir pressure.
During primary depletion secondary gas caps can form.
Since the displacement of viscous oil by gas is inefficient,
high residual oil saturations probably still exist in
secondary gas caps unless the film spreading
mechanism allows for the almost complete drainage of
the oil phase sufficiently quickly. It is possible for
secondary gas caps to have very high oil saturations as
well as high permeability to gas.
INJECTION INTO GAS
When injecting into such a gas cap there is a large
specific surface area between the oil and gas phases.
Water entering, squeezes the gas back into solution in
the oil. The resulting loss of volume is very much larger
than when gas is simply compressed and, therefore, it is
easy for water to channel through such gas with very
small pressure gradients. The gas goes into solution
leaving water in its place, locally at very high saturation,
again in a dendritic network and possibly occupying the
largest (previously gas/oil foam filled) pores. As a result
of the above, it is not recommended that injection be
undertaken within gas cap zones unless it is believed that
the gas saturation can be completely displaced and the
zone re-pressurized prior to being put on production.
WATERFLOOD LIFE CYCLE
The life cycle of a heavy oil waterflood usually begins with
primary depletion. During that time a gas/oil mixture
phase develops and flows to the wells. Pores and layers
with large pore throats pass the majority of this low-
quality hydrocarbon foam. Much of the rest of the
reservoir plugs up with gas bubbles getting caught in
small pore throats. When water injection begins, it
channels unstably into the foam filled pores, driving the
gas into solution and the oil into smaller pores or less
permeable regions. This compounds the normal viscous
instability that also results in a similar dendritic
encroachment of injected water into the reservoir.
The pressures, initially and ideally, would be high in a
radial region surrounding the injectors. Similarly the
pressures would be low in a region dominated by the
producers which are producing at conditions
substantially below the saturation pressure. Figure 6
shows the situation diagramatically. A large portion of
the reservoir is at a pressure close to the saturation
SPE 24367
pressure (which is between the injection and producing
pressures). This part of the reservoir sees very small
gradients and flow rates.
Because of generally poor economics, injection water
quality is not usually very good. The slow "drag" process
has large amounts of water being pumped through the
reservoir and, as a conservation effort, most of the
produced water is recycled back to injection. Gradually
the formation plugs off at the injection points and
continued injection results in high pressures and
fracturing. When these formations, which are generally
uncemented or weakly cemented, fail, at high pore
pressure, a great deal of deformation and fabric damage
takes place. Again the process is unstable and shifts at
the whim of local heterogeneityto yield dendritic zones of
enhanced permeability access to the formation. These
too plug off eventually and a highly resistant "skin" forms
between the injection at high pressure and the majority of
the reservoir at a much lower pressure.
THE END IS HERE
Jumping straight to the ultimate end of the process, a
large area of skin prevents access by the pressure source
to the formation and an effective network of dendritic
drainage (now water filled) keeps the bulk of the reservoir
at the low bottom hole producing pressure imposed by
high-volume lift at the producers (Figure 7). The reservoir
is all at a low pressure so oil production cannot occur
and injection at reasonable rates cannot raise that
pressure because of the large resistance between the
water channels and the matrix in general. The low
resistance dendritic drainage adds up to be a fracture like
system and linear flow predominates at both injectors
and producers.
Oil production ceases quite a bi before one gets to this
situation. The point is: that the injection of pore
plugging water and production at low bottom hole
pressures results in a gradual drop in average
reservoir pressure which cannot be economically
prevented.
Figure 8 shows an analogue of the system. Initially the
injection potential is felt at Node (2) [average reservoir
potential] because the resistance 1 / k is small. If the
short circuit resistance (1/L&, is large (open circuit: no
channel), there is a large gradient between Node (2) [the
oil bearing formation] and the producing well and good
production. If a channel (short circuit) develops [(I /k),
is small] then the producer goes to the injection potential
and oil production ceases. Even in the absence of a
short circuit, as injection continues the resistance l/b
becomes larger due to plugging and the resistance 1/16,
SPE 24367 G.E. Smith
becomes smaller due to depletion (saturation changes).
Eventually the average reservoir potential is close to that
at the producers and depletion is complete.
Gradual pressure depletion means that a primary source
of drive energy remains internal gas expansion and that
production at GOR's exceeding solution, is necessary. It
also means that the use of the Voidage Replacement
equation:
Voidage = NpBo + Np(Rp-R&Bg + Wp - Wi
is not correct (derivation requires pressure=constant)
and in order to calculate voidage or voidage replacement
ratio a full material balance must be done. This is not
difficult and it is always correct. In the absence of a gas
zone, the equation which must be used is:
Voidage = N(Boi-Bo) + NpBo + WpB, - Wi - compaction
Reservoirs such as Wainwright and Wildmere will
always have GOR's above solution.
Pressure must decline in these reservoirs as
there is no economical way to maintain it and
there may not be any benefit in trying.
Maintaining zero voidage is probably impossible
(and detrimental) however voidage must be kept
small. Excess injection will either flow to the
aquifer or will drive oil out of the developed field
boundaries.
The voidage equation:
Voidage = NpBo + Np(Rp-R&Bg + Wp - Wi
normally used is alwavs incorrect in these
situations.
Since displacement is not frontal, there is much
to be gained just by changing things around
(changing injection or producing rates,
exchanging injectors for producers, drilling in-fill
wells, etc.).
Changes to line drive (or converting channeled
injectors to producers) is probably the only
reasonable way to negate short circuits.
Additional producing wells may be required to
restore productivii and overall injection rates
should drop by the short circuiting volume.
5
7) Continuous careful management and analysis will
keep these reservoirs producing economically,
for a long period of time.
NOMENCLATURE
-effective permeability to oil
-resistanceto flow of oil
-effective permeability to water
-resistance to flow of water
-resistanceto flow of water in a short circuit
-gas formation volume factor
-oil formation volume factor
-initial oil formation volume factor
-water formation volume factor
-original oil in place
-oil produced
-initial reservoir pressure
-saturation pressure
-injection pressure
-well flowing pressure
-pore volume
-radius - injection/production influence
-producing Gas/Oil
-solution Gas/Oil
-water produced
-water injected
REFERENCES
1 Collins, R.E., FLOW OF FLUIDS through Porous
Media, Reinhold, New York, 1961.
2 Daccord G. & Lenormand, Fractal patterns from
chemical dissolution, Nature. 325,Jan 1987.
3 Hawkins, B.F, Taylor, K., 81 Nasr-El-Din, H.A.,
MECHANISMS OF SURFACTANT AND POLYMER
ENHANCED ALKALINE FLOODING:
APPLICATIONS TO DAVID LLOYDMINSTER AND
WAINWRIGHT SPARKY FIELDS, CIM/AOSTRA
Technical Conference, April, 1991, Banff
4 Smith, G.E., Fluid Flow and Sand Production in
Heavy Oil Reservoirs Under Solution Gas Drive,
SPE Production Engineering, May 1988 pp169-180
& CHOA Reservoir Handbook, p113, Canadian
Heavy Oil Association, 1991
 xorr
Water Flood Residual Oil Bank Primaw Residual

(Oil becomes discontinuous

by snap olf)

Figure I:Frontal displacement Figure 2: Pore doublet

- 4 k z m m
Figure 3a: 2D pattern grown Figure w: Pattom
radially from a point from the inside cylinder

Figure ?Ic: 2.7 cm3Imin Figure 3d: 40 cm31min

 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 25 3
Curnulaih Core Effluent [PI/)

Figure 4: Heavy Oil Flood in Berea o 0.1 mld

100 400
90 350
80
300
70
5
--
60 250
X 50 zoo 5
40
30
150 g
20
loo h
10 50
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Curnulaik Core Effluent (W)
Figure 5: Heavy Oil Flood in Preserved Core
2.3 mld
Figure 7: Pressure zones late in the life of a
Heay~Oil waterflood

Wh ,I, of the dl
(2) bearing formation
Figure 8: Analogue of system