Compatibility Evaluation for Glutenite Oil Reservoir in Karamay

Abstract:

In this paper, a systemic and experimental research is performed on the compatibility for glutenite oil reservoir in Karamay. The velocity sensitivity is not strong in microscopic scale and not weak in macroscopic scale; strong stress sensitivity; medium water sensitivity; varied compatibilities of injected water with stratum in different blocks. Causes: badly sorted source and small pore throat; high content of varied clay minerals. Authigene sodium montmorillonite comes in large quantity and varied occurrences, water swelling and easily dispersed. The kaolinite is easy to swell, be dispersed and transferred. As the research shows, it is very important to keep the solid particle diameter shall be limited within 2μm in the injected water, maintain a high degree of mineralization of the injected water, recycle the waste water as much as possible, control the production pressure for effective development of glutenite oil reservoir in Karamay. The difference of compatibility in macroscopic scale results from the fact that Block E has high permeability but large throat radius while Block W1 and Block W2 have low permeability but small throat radius..

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 1092-1093)
• Pages: 1383-1387
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1092-1093.1383
• Online since: March 2015
• Authors: He Wang*, Xue Wei Liu, He Kun Guo
• Keywords: Assessment for Velocity Sensitivity Experiments, Compatibility Experiment, Formation Damage, Sensitivity Analysis, Statistic

References

[1] Amaefule, J.O. , Kersey, D.G. , Norman, D. L., & Shannon,P. M.: Advances in Formation Damage Assessment and Control Strategies CIM 88-39-65 paper, 39th Annual Technique Meeting of Petroleum Society of CIM and Canadian Gas Processors Association, June 12-16, 1988, Calgaly, Albert, 16p.

DOI: 10.2118/88-39-65

[2] Xi ng-hui Liu, Civian Faruk , U. of Oklahoma. Characterization and prediction of formation damage in two phase flow systems [ J ] . SPE25429 , (1993).

[3] WR Almn , DK Davies. Formation Damage and the Crastal Chemistry of Clay s [ J ] . Mineralogical Association of Canada, 1985 ( 7 ).

[4] R. F Scheuerman, M Barbaba Bergersen: Injection Water Salinity Formation Pretreatment and Well Operations Fluid Selection Guidelines. . (1990).

DOI: 10.2118/18461-pa

[5] Zuguo Jiang, Yicai Wang, Runjing Han, Tianxue Huang, Guoliang Wei, Enpeng Qin: Water injection for illite and montmorillonite interlayer minerals in reservoir in tuha oilfield damage research within the laboratory. [J]XinJiang Petroleum Geology 2000(8). Vol. 21, No. 4. (in chinese).

[6] J. Masikevich &D.B. Bennion: Fluid Design to Meet Reservoir Issues-A Process[J]Canadian Petroleum Technology, Vol. 38, No. 5, May 1999, pp.61-67.

DOI: 10.2118/99-05-05

[7] A.K. Wojtanowicz,Z. Krilov, &J.P. Langlinais: Study on the Effect of Pore Blocking Mechanisms on Formation Damage, SPE 16233 paper Society of PetroleumEngineers Symposium, March 8-10, 1987, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, pp.449-463.

DOI: 10.2118/16233-ms

[8] O.J. Vetter, et al: Particles Invasion into Porous Medium and Related Injetivity Problems. SPE Paper 16625, presented at the SPE international Symposium on Oilfield and Geothermal Chemistry in San Antonio, Texas, February 4-6, (1987).