A laboratory feasibility study of dilute surfactant injection for the Yibal field, Oman

Tayfun Babadagli, A. Al-Bemani, F. Boukadi, R. Al-Maamari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Yibal field, the largest oil field in Oman, comprises 15% of the oil production of the country. The field has had a high ultimate recovery factor and in order to maintain the current recovery trend, different management strategies have been sought. One of the options is the injection of a dilute surfactant in addition to the current waterflooding. The cores from the chalky Shuaiba formation were saturated with brine and oilflooded to restore the initial reservoir condition after cleaning. Nineteen samples were waterflooded followed by dilute surfactant injection. Eight samples were flooded with dilute surfactant. The reason for this scheme is that some parts of the reservoir under study were totally watered out while others are still untouched. In addition to these experiments, nine capillary (static) imbibition experiments were conducted to treat fractured zones where recovery by capillary imbibition during injection is a possibility. Twelve different surfactants (at different concentrations) were tested. Five surfactants were non-ionic, two cationic, four anionic, and one was a mixture of anionic and non-ionic. The selection of the optimum concentrations was based on IFT values at different concentrations. The results were evaluated in terms of the final oil recovery. The average waterflooding recovery was found to be 75.1% of OOIP (out of 19 experiments) whereas surfactant injection yielded an average of 69.9% of OOIP (out of 8 experiments). This indicates that the surfactant injection is not preferable and not recommended over waterflooding for the untouched portion of the reservoir where the rock matrix dominates the flow (unfractured portions). An additional recovery by surfactant solution injection succeeding waterflooding was obtained and found to vary between 0% and 7.4% of OOIP. The surfactant injection is, therefore, recommendable in the pre-waterflooded unfractured zones as long as the proper surfactant type is selected. Half of the surfactant solutions yielded higher and faster capillary imbibition recovery than brine. For the untouched fractured zones of the chalky reservoir, it is more effective to start the injection with surfactant addition rather than waterflooding alone. Surfactant types and concentrations yielding the best performances were identified and listed in this paper.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)37-52
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Petroleum Science and Engineering
Volume48
Issue number1-2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 30 2005

Fingerprint

feasibility study
surfactant
Surface active agents
Well flooding
Recovery
imbibition
laboratory
brine
experiment
Experiments
Oil fields
oil production
oil field
Cleaning
Rocks

Keywords

  • Chalk
  • Mature fields
  • Naturally fractured reservoirs
  • Secondary oil recovery
  • Surfactant injection
  • Tertiary oil recovery
  • Water injection
  • Yibal oil field

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
  • Fuel Technology

Cite this

A laboratory feasibility study of dilute surfactant injection for the Yibal field, Oman. / Babadagli, Tayfun; Al-Bemani, A.; Boukadi, F.; Al-Maamari, R.

In: Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, Vol. 48, No. 1-2, 30.07.2005, p. 37-52.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b837f36e03f94b4d9a65f8a3eb894999,
title = "A laboratory feasibility study of dilute surfactant injection for the Yibal field, Oman",
abstract = "The Yibal field, the largest oil field in Oman, comprises 15{\%} of the oil production of the country. The field has had a high ultimate recovery factor and in order to maintain the current recovery trend, different management strategies have been sought. One of the options is the injection of a dilute surfactant in addition to the current waterflooding. The cores from the chalky Shuaiba formation were saturated with brine and oilflooded to restore the initial reservoir condition after cleaning. Nineteen samples were waterflooded followed by dilute surfactant injection. Eight samples were flooded with dilute surfactant. The reason for this scheme is that some parts of the reservoir under study were totally watered out while others are still untouched. In addition to these experiments, nine capillary (static) imbibition experiments were conducted to treat fractured zones where recovery by capillary imbibition during injection is a possibility. Twelve different surfactants (at different concentrations) were tested. Five surfactants were non-ionic, two cationic, four anionic, and one was a mixture of anionic and non-ionic. The selection of the optimum concentrations was based on IFT values at different concentrations. The results were evaluated in terms of the final oil recovery. The average waterflooding recovery was found to be 75.1{\%} of OOIP (out of 19 experiments) whereas surfactant injection yielded an average of 69.9{\%} of OOIP (out of 8 experiments). This indicates that the surfactant injection is not preferable and not recommended over waterflooding for the untouched portion of the reservoir where the rock matrix dominates the flow (unfractured portions). An additional recovery by surfactant solution injection succeeding waterflooding was obtained and found to vary between 0{\%} and 7.4{\%} of OOIP. The surfactant injection is, therefore, recommendable in the pre-waterflooded unfractured zones as long as the proper surfactant type is selected. Half of the surfactant solutions yielded higher and faster capillary imbibition recovery than brine. For the untouched fractured zones of the chalky reservoir, it is more effective to start the injection with surfactant addition rather than waterflooding alone. Surfactant types and concentrations yielding the best performances were identified and listed in this paper.",
keywords = "Chalk, Mature fields, Naturally fractured reservoirs, Secondary oil recovery, Surfactant injection, Tertiary oil recovery, Water injection, Yibal oil field",
author = "Tayfun Babadagli and A. Al-Bemani and F. Boukadi and R. Al-Maamari",
year = "2005",
month = "7",
day = "30",
doi = "10.1016/j.petrol.2005.04.005",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "37--52",
journal = "Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering",
issn = "0920-4105",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1-2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A laboratory feasibility study of dilute surfactant injection for the Yibal field, Oman

AU - Babadagli, Tayfun

AU - Al-Bemani, A.

AU - Boukadi, F.

AU - Al-Maamari, R.

PY - 2005/7/30

Y1 - 2005/7/30

N2 - The Yibal field, the largest oil field in Oman, comprises 15% of the oil production of the country. The field has had a high ultimate recovery factor and in order to maintain the current recovery trend, different management strategies have been sought. One of the options is the injection of a dilute surfactant in addition to the current waterflooding. The cores from the chalky Shuaiba formation were saturated with brine and oilflooded to restore the initial reservoir condition after cleaning. Nineteen samples were waterflooded followed by dilute surfactant injection. Eight samples were flooded with dilute surfactant. The reason for this scheme is that some parts of the reservoir under study were totally watered out while others are still untouched. In addition to these experiments, nine capillary (static) imbibition experiments were conducted to treat fractured zones where recovery by capillary imbibition during injection is a possibility. Twelve different surfactants (at different concentrations) were tested. Five surfactants were non-ionic, two cationic, four anionic, and one was a mixture of anionic and non-ionic. The selection of the optimum concentrations was based on IFT values at different concentrations. The results were evaluated in terms of the final oil recovery. The average waterflooding recovery was found to be 75.1% of OOIP (out of 19 experiments) whereas surfactant injection yielded an average of 69.9% of OOIP (out of 8 experiments). This indicates that the surfactant injection is not preferable and not recommended over waterflooding for the untouched portion of the reservoir where the rock matrix dominates the flow (unfractured portions). An additional recovery by surfactant solution injection succeeding waterflooding was obtained and found to vary between 0% and 7.4% of OOIP. The surfactant injection is, therefore, recommendable in the pre-waterflooded unfractured zones as long as the proper surfactant type is selected. Half of the surfactant solutions yielded higher and faster capillary imbibition recovery than brine. For the untouched fractured zones of the chalky reservoir, it is more effective to start the injection with surfactant addition rather than waterflooding alone. Surfactant types and concentrations yielding the best performances were identified and listed in this paper.

AB - The Yibal field, the largest oil field in Oman, comprises 15% of the oil production of the country. The field has had a high ultimate recovery factor and in order to maintain the current recovery trend, different management strategies have been sought. One of the options is the injection of a dilute surfactant in addition to the current waterflooding. The cores from the chalky Shuaiba formation were saturated with brine and oilflooded to restore the initial reservoir condition after cleaning. Nineteen samples were waterflooded followed by dilute surfactant injection. Eight samples were flooded with dilute surfactant. The reason for this scheme is that some parts of the reservoir under study were totally watered out while others are still untouched. In addition to these experiments, nine capillary (static) imbibition experiments were conducted to treat fractured zones where recovery by capillary imbibition during injection is a possibility. Twelve different surfactants (at different concentrations) were tested. Five surfactants were non-ionic, two cationic, four anionic, and one was a mixture of anionic and non-ionic. The selection of the optimum concentrations was based on IFT values at different concentrations. The results were evaluated in terms of the final oil recovery. The average waterflooding recovery was found to be 75.1% of OOIP (out of 19 experiments) whereas surfactant injection yielded an average of 69.9% of OOIP (out of 8 experiments). This indicates that the surfactant injection is not preferable and not recommended over waterflooding for the untouched portion of the reservoir where the rock matrix dominates the flow (unfractured portions). An additional recovery by surfactant solution injection succeeding waterflooding was obtained and found to vary between 0% and 7.4% of OOIP. The surfactant injection is, therefore, recommendable in the pre-waterflooded unfractured zones as long as the proper surfactant type is selected. Half of the surfactant solutions yielded higher and faster capillary imbibition recovery than brine. For the untouched fractured zones of the chalky reservoir, it is more effective to start the injection with surfactant addition rather than waterflooding alone. Surfactant types and concentrations yielding the best performances were identified and listed in this paper.

KW - Chalk

KW - Mature fields

KW - Naturally fractured reservoirs

KW - Secondary oil recovery

KW - Surfactant injection

KW - Tertiary oil recovery

KW - Water injection

KW - Yibal oil field

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21644443632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21644443632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.petrol.2005.04.005

DO - 10.1016/j.petrol.2005.04.005

M3 - Article

VL - 48

SP - 37

EP - 52

JO - Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

JF - Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

SN - 0920-4105

IS - 1-2

ER -