This paper describes a simulation study of the low-salinity effect in sandstone reservoirs. The proposed mechanistic model allows differentiation of water composition effects and includes multi-ionic exchange and double layer expansion. The manifestation of these effects can be observed in coreflood experiments.
We define a set of chemical reactions, to describe the contribution of van der Waals forces, ligand exchange, and cation bridging to mobilization of residual oil. The reaction set is simplified by incorporating wettability weighting coefficients that reflect the contribution of different adsorbed ions to the wettability of the rock. Changes in wettability are accounted for by interpolation of the relative permeability and capillary pressure curves between the low and high salinity sets. We also construct and test simplified phenomenological models, one relating the change of the relative permeability to the concentration of a dissolved salinity tracer and another one to the concentration of a single adsorbed tracer.
The full mechanistic model, with multiple ion tracking, is in good qualitative agreement with experimental data reported in the literature. A very close agreement with the mechanistic model was obtained for a coreflood simulation using single tracer phenomenological models. The similarity of the results is explained by the fact that the most critical factor influencing the flow behavior was the function used to interpolate between the oil- and water-wet sets of saturation curves. Similar interpolation functions in different models lead to similar oil recovery predictions.
This study has developed a detailed chemical reaction model that captures both multicomponent ion exchange and double layer expansion effects, and can be used to improve understanding of low-salinity recovery mechanisms by analyzing their relative contributions. The approach of matching a tracer model to a detailed mechanistic model promises a route to the development of simplified, less computationally demanding proxy models for full field simulation studies.
Drilling horizontal wells in low permeability coal seams is a key technology to increase the drainage area of a well, and hence, decrease costs. It’s unavoidable that some parts of the horizontal section will be drilled outside the targeted coal seam due to unforeseen subsurface conditions, such as sub-seismic faulting, seam rolls, basic geosteering tools, drilling practices and limited experiences. Therefore, understanding the impact of horizontal in-seam drilling performance on coal seam gas (CSG) production and remaining gas distribution is an important consideration in drilling and field development plans. This study presents a new workflow to investigate the impact of horizontal in-seam performance on CSG production and gas distribution for coal seams with different porosity, permeability, permeability anisotropy, initial gas content (GC), initial gas saturation and the ratio of in-coal length to in-seam length (RIIL). First, a box model with an area of 2 km × 0.3 km × 6 m was used for conceptual simulations. Reduction indexes of the cumulative gas production at the end of 10 years of simulations were compared. Then, a current Chevron well consisting of a vertical well and two lateral wells, was selected as a case study in which the impact of outside coal drilling on history matching and remaining gas distribution were analysed. Results show that the RIIL plays an increasing role for cases with decreasing permeability or initial gas saturation, while it plays a very similar role for cases with varied porosity, permeability anisotropy and GC. The size and location of outside coal drilling will affect the CSG production and remaining gas distribution.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.