Research Papers: Underground Injection and Storage

Well Injectivity Decline for Nonlinear Filtration of Injected Suspension: Semi-Analytical Model

[+] Author and Article Information
A. S. L. Vaz

 North Fluminense State University, Avenida Alberto Lamego 2000, Campos dos Goytacazes, 28013-602 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

P. Bedrikovetsky

SPE, Australian School of Petroleum, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australiapavel@asp.adelaide.edu.au

C. J. A. Furtado, A. L.S. de Souza

 Petrobras/CENPES, Av. Horatio Macedo 950, Cidade Universitaria, 21941-915 - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

J. Energy Resour. Technol 132(3), 033301 (Oct 07, 2010) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4002242 History: Received January 01, 2009; Revised June 07, 2009; Published October 07, 2010; Online October 07, 2010

Injectivity decline due to injection of water with particles is a widespread phenomenon in waterflood projects. It happens due to particle capture by rocks and consequent permeability decline and also due to external cake formation on the sandface. Since offshore production environments become ever more complex, particularly in deep water fields, the risk associated with injectivity impairment due to injection of seawater or re-injection of produced water may increase to the point that production by conventional waterflood may cease to be viable. Therefore, it is becoming increasingly important to predict injectivity evolution under such circumstances. The work develops a semi-analytical model for injectivity impairment during a suspension injection for the case of filtration and formation damage coefficients being linear functions of retained particle concentration. The model exhibits limited retained particle accumulation, while the traditional model with a constant filtration coefficient predicts unlimited growth of retained particle concentration. The developed model also predicts the well index stabilization after the decline period.

Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Suspended and retained particle concentrations in porous space

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic for injected suspension propagation between injection and production well: (a) contour radius is equal to half-distance between injector and producer; (b) profile of suspension concentration is steady state behind the concentration front; (c) gradual accumulation of retained particles behind the concentration front

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Concentration front and characteristic line on the plane (X,tD)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Dynamics of (a) suspended and (b) retained concentration profiles during suspension injection in vertical well

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Effect of two formation damage coefficients β and β2 on well impedance curve: (a) impedance versus real time; (b) impedance versus p.v.i.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Sensitivity of impedance curve to variation in filtration function: impedance versus p.v.i.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Monotonic and nonmonotonic impedance curves

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Nonmonotonic behavior of reciprocal to formation damage function due to linear interpolation of formation damage coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Overestimated value of maximum retained concentration due to linear approximation of the filtration function

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Injectivity decline analysis using well index curves

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Using the three-point-pressure tool at sea platform




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In