1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. IOR 2019 – 20th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

In most of transient foam core-flood studies, it is observed that multiple pore volumes of foam injection are needed before reaching the steady-state. The pore volumes needed appear to change with the degree of homogeneity of the porous media, orientation of the core, type of surfactant and the total injected flow rate. This is contrary to the foam-model results, which usually predict reaching the steady-state after approximately a single moveable pore volume of gas injection. It is important to understand whether this is a laboratory artifact due to core scale and/or gravity segregation, or could it also be present at reservoir scale, in order to have the reliable foam rheology predictive tools at reservoir scale.

We designed the experimental set-up to investigate the phenomenon. In order to mitigate the gravity segregation in typical sand-pack systems, as well as to study the scale effect, we used slim-tubes of 1-ft and 6-ft length to understand the pore volumes needed to reach steady-state. Silica-sand-packed cylindrical slim tubes with an inner diameter of 0.66 inch were used in the foam flood experiments. Foaming surfactant solution and gas were co-injected into the slim-tube apparatus until a steady state is reached. Transient and steady-state pressure gradient data were recorded to investigate foam flow in the slim tube at a variety of injection conditions.

Foam experiments with foot-long and 6-ft long slim tubes were compared in order to understand the effect of system length on foam generation and transport. One of the most important findings in this study is that the 6-ft long slim-tube requires significantly fewer pore volumes to reach a steady state than foot-long one under the same foam injection scheme. The analysis of our results revealed several key factors that played important roles in triggering foam generation in the slim tube. We found that the vertical configuration with gas and surfactant solution co-injected from the bottom significantly promoted foam generation in a relatively homogeneous system compared with the horizontal configuration. Foam generation in the slim tube was also facilitated by wider sand grain-size distribution in our tests possibly due to more favorable pore throat-to-body ratios for the snap-off mechanism. Additionally, higher injection velocity helped triggering foam generation in the slim tube.

The results obtained in this study can be therefore used not only for improving fundamental knowledge of foam transport but also for upscaling foam models.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
2019-04-08
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alkan, H., A.Goktekin and A.Satman
    (1991). A Laboratory Study of CO2-Foam Process for Bati Raman Field, Turkey. Middle East Oil Show, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alvarez, J. M., H. J.Rivas and W. R.Rossen
    (2001). “Unified Model for Steady-State Foam Behavior at High and Low Foam Qualities.”SPE Journal6(3): 325–333.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Apaydin, O. G. and A. R.Kovscek
    (2001). “Surfactant concentration and end effects on foam flow in porous media.”Transport in porous media43(3): 511–536.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bernard, G. G. and W. L.Jacobs
    (1965). “Effect of Foam on Trapped Gas Saturation and on Permeability of Porous Media to Water.”Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal5(4): 295–300.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Blaker, T., M. G.Aarra, A.Skauge, L.Rasmussen, H. K.Celius, H. A.Martinsen and F.Vassenden
    (2002). “Foam for Gas Mobility Control in the Snorre Field: The FAWAG Project.”SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering5(4): 317–323.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Casteel, J. and N.Djabbarah
    (1988). “Sweep improvement in CO2 flooding by use of foaming agents.”SPE reservoir engineering3(04): 1,186–181,192.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, Y., A. S.Elhag, L.Cui, A. J.Worthen, P. P.Reddy, J. A.Noguera, A. M.Ou, K.Ma, M.Puerto and G. J.Hirasaki
    (2015). “CO2-in-water foam at elevated temperature and salinity stabilized with a nonionic surfactant with a high degree of ethoxylation.”Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research54(16): 4252–4263.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen, Y., A. S.Elhag, P. P.Reddy, H.Chen, L.Cui, A. J.Worthen, K.Ma, H.Quintanilla, J. A.Noguera and G. J.Hirasaki
    (2016). “Phase behavior and interfacial properties of a switchable ethoxylated amine surfactant at high temperature and effects on CO 2-in-water foams.”Journal of Colloid and Interface Science470: 80–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cui, L., A.Klimenko, F.Dubos, M.Lagorse and M.Bourrel
    (2018). Novel Switchable Alkyl-Amine Surfactants for CO 2 Emulsion (SPE-190252). SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, Oklahoma, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Cui, L., K.Ma, M.Puerto, A. A.Abdala, I.Tanakov, L. J.Lu, Y.Chen, A.Elhag, K. P.Johnston, S. L.Biswal and G.Hirasaki
    (2016). “Mobility of Ethomeen C12 and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Foam at High Temperature/High Salinity and in Carbonate Cores.”SPE Journal21(4): 1151–1163.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Ettinger, R. A. and C. J.Radke
    (1992). “Influence of Texture on Steady Foam Flow in Berea Sandstone.”SPE Reservoir Engineering7(1): 83–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Falls, A. H., G. J.Hirasaki, T. W.Patzek, D. A.Gauglitz
    , D. D. Miller and T. Ratulowski (1988).
     [Google Scholar]
  13. ”Development of a Mechanistic Foam Simulator: The Population Balance and Generation by Snap-Off.” SPE Reservoir Engineering 3(3): 884–892.
  14. Farajzadeh, R., A.Andrianov, H.Bruining and P. L.Zitha
    (2009). “Comparative Study of CO2 and N2 Foams in Porous Media at Low and High Pressure- Temperatures.”Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research48(9): 4542–4552.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Farajzadeh, R., A.Andrianov, R.Krastev, G.Hirasaki and W.Rossen
    (2012). “Foam-oil interaction in porous media: Implications for foam assisted enhanced oil recovery.”Advances in Colloid and Interface Science183–184: 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gauglitz, P., C.St Laurent and C.Radkle
    (1987). “An experimental investigation of gas-bubble breakup in constricted square capillaries.”Journal of Petroleum Technology 39(09): 1,137–131,146.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gauglitz, P. A., F.Friedmann, S. I.Kam and W. R.Rossen
    (2002). “Foam generation in homogeneous porous media.”Chemical engineering science57(19): 4037–4052.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Hirasaki, G. J. and J. B.Lawson
    (1985). “Mechanisms of Foam Flow in Porous Media: Apparent Viscosity in Smooth Capillaries.”Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal25(2): 176–190.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hudgins, D. and T.Chung
    (1990). Long-distance propagation of foams (SPE/DOE20196). SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, OK, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Huh, D. and L.Handy
    (1989). “Comparison of steady and unsteady-state flow of gas and foaming solution in porous media.”SPE reservoir engineering4(01): 77–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Irani, C. and C.Solomon Jr
    (1986). Slim-tube investigation of CO2 foams (SPE/DOE14962). SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, OK, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jiménez, A. I. and C. J
    . Radke (1989). Dynamic Stability of Foam Lamellae Flowing Through a Periodically Constricted Pore. Oil-Field Chemistry, American Chemical Society. 396: 460–479.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Kovscek, A. and C
    . Radke (1994). Fundamentals of foam transport in porous media. Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry. Washington DC, American Chemical Society. 242: 115–163.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kovscek, A. and C.Radke
    (1996). “Gas bubble snap-off under pressure-driven flow in constricted noncircular capillaries.”Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects117(1–2): 55–76.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Kovscek, A. R., T. W.Patzek and C. J.Radke
    (1995). “A Mechanistic Population Balance Model for Transient and Steady-State Foam Flow in Boise Sandstone.”Chemical Engineering Science50(23): 3783–3799.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Li, R. F., W.Yan, S.Liu, G.Hirasaki and C. A.Miller
    (2010). “Foam Mobility Control for Surfactant Enhanced Oil Recovery.”SPE Journal15(4): pp. 928–942.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Liontas, R., K.Ma, G. J.Hirasaki and S. L.Biswal
    (2013). “Neighbor-induced bubble pinch-off: novel mechanisms of in situ foam generation in microfluidic channels.”Soft Matter9(46): 10971–10984.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lopez Salinas, J.
    (2013). Transport of Components and Phases in a Surfactant/Foam. Doctoral Thesis, Rice University.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. M'barki, O., K.Ma, G.Ren, K.Mateen, G.Bourdarot, D. C.Morel and Q. P.Nguyen
    (2017). Repeatable steady-state foam experimental data and investigations of foam hysteresis in a sand pack. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA: SPE-187084-MS.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Ma, K., J. L.Lopez-Salinas, M. C.Puerto, C. A.Miller
    , S. L. Biswal and G. J. Hirasaki (2013).
     [Google Scholar]
  31. ”Estimation of Parameters for the Simulation of Foam Flow through Porous Media. Part 1: The Dry-Out Effect.” Energy & Fuels 27(5): 2363–2375.
  32. Ma, K., K.Mateen, G.Ren, G.Bourdarot and D.Morel
    (2018). “Modeling foam flow at achievable flow rates in the subterranean formation using the population-balance approach and implications for experimental design.”Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics254: 36–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Ma, K., K.Mateen, G.Ren, H.Luo, G.Bourdarot and D.Morel
    (2018). Mechanistic Modeling of Foam Flow Through Porous Media in the Presence of Oil: Review of Foam-Oil Interactions and an Improved Bubble Population-Balance Model. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers: SPE-191564.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Ma, K., G.Ren, K.Mateen, D.Morel and P.Cordelier
    (2015). “Modeling techniques for foam flow through porous media.”SPE Journal20(03): 453–470.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Mannhardt, K. and I.Svorstøl
    (2001). “Surfactant concentration for foam formation and propagation in Snorre reservoir core.”Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering30(2): 105–119.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Minssieux, L.
    (1974). “Oil displacement by foams in relation to their physical properties in porous media.”Journal of Petroleum Technology26(1): 100–108.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Moradi-Araghi, A., E. L.Johnston, D. R.Zornes and K. J.Harpole
    (1997). Laboratory Evaluation of Surfactants for CO2-Foam Applications at the South Cowden Unit (SPE37218). International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry. Houston, Texas.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Mukherjee, J., Q. P.Nguyen, J.Scherlin, P.Vanderwal and P.Rozowski
    (2016). CO2 Foam Pilot in Salt Creek Field, Natrona County, WY: Phase III: Analysis of Pilot Performance (SPE-179635). SPE Improved Oil Recovery Conference, Tulsa, Oklahoma, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Myers, T. J. and C. J.Radke
    (2000). “Transient foam displacement in the presence of residual oil: Experiment and simulation using a population-balance model.”Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research39(8): 2725–2741.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Osterloh, W. T. and M. J.Jante Jr
    . (1992). Effects of Gas and Liquid Velocity on Steady-State Foam Flow at High Temperature. SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium (SPE24179). Tulsa, Oklahoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Ransohoff, T. C. and C. J.Radke
    (1988). “Mechanisms of Foam Generation in Glass-Bead Packs.”SPE Reservoir Engineering3(2): 573–585.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ren, G., Q. P.Nguyen and H. C.Lau
    (2018). “Laboratory investigation of oil recovery by CO2 foam in a fractured carbonate reservoir using CO2-Soluble surfactants.”Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering: DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.2018.1004.1053.
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.1004.1053 [Google Scholar]
  43. Roof, J.
    (1970). “Snap-off of oil droplets in water-wet pores.”Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal10(01): 85–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Rossen, W. and P.Gauglitz
    (1990). “Percolation theory of creation and mobilization of foams in porous media.”AIChE Journal36(8): 1176–1188.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Rossen, W. R.
    (1990). “Theory of mobilization pressure gradient of flowing foams in porous media: I. Incompressible foam.”Journal of Colloid and Interface Science136(1): 1–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. (1996). Foams in enhanced oil recovery. Foams: theory, measurements, and applications. R. K. P. h. a. S. Khan. New York, Marcel Dekker: 413–464.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. (2003). “A critical review of Roof snap-off as a mechanism of steady-state foam generation in homogeneous porous media.”Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects225(1–3): 1–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Sanders, A., R. M.Jones, A.Rabie, E.Putra, M. A.Linroth and Q. P.Nguyen
    (2012). Implementation of a CO2 foam pilot study in the SACROC field: performance evaluation (SPE-160016). SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Stevens, J.
    (1995). “CO2 Foam Field Verification Pilot Test at EVGSAU: Phase IIIB--Project Operations and Performance Review.”SPE Reservoir Engineering10(04): 266–272.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Tanzil, D. (2001). “Foam generation and propagation in heterogeneous porous media.”
  51. Tanzil, D., G. J.Hirasaki and C. A.Miller
    (2002). Conditions for foam generation in homogeneous porous media. SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Vassenden, F. and T.Holt
    (1998). Experimental foundation for relative permeability modeling of foam (SPE-39660). SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Wang, D., M.Maubert, G. A.Pope, P. J.Liyanage, S. H.Jang, K. A.Upamali, L.Chang, M.Tagavifar, H.Sharma and G.Ren
    (2018). “Reduction of Surfactant Retention in Limestones Using Sodium Hydroxide.”SPE Journal.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Wong, H., C. J.Radke and S.Morris
    (1995). “The motion of long bubbles in polygonal capillaries. Part 2. Drag, fluid pressure and fluid flow.”Journal of Fluid Mechanics292: 95–110.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Yang, S. H. and R. L.Reed
    (1989). Mobility Control Using CO2 Forms. Paper SPE19689. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
Loading
Experimental Investigation of Multiple Pore Volumes Needed to Reach Steady-state Foam Flow in a Porous Media
Conference Proceedings 2019, 1 (2019); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201900148
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error