sooiety ofPetrolwn -s

SPE

029567

Viscosity Behavior of Carbon Dioxide Treated Cut Bank Crude Oil

G. V. Cady*, Montana Tech and Houssain Mosawi*, University of

Oklahoma *SPE Members

Copyright 19S5, SOOkfY Of PStmleuM EWinW% ific. RegionaULwParmadtiW followiWravkwof Reaamim SymPium heM in Mnver, co, U. S.A., *Z Much 1~5.

This paper was

prepared for presentation forpraaatatio+lby

at the SPE RockY Mountain an SPEPrWramCommfflW

T~sp@arwaSadS121~

informetionmnttin~

inantirati~bminti

bytheatih~s).co~ene Oftheww,

aepraaantad,hsve netbeanrav~ bythe%cietyof PatroteumEn9i-re andareaubjatto corraotionbytk aufhof(a).Thematerial ,aapf-nt~,~s @~lYre* any poaitkm of the Sociaiy of Petroleum Engineers, its otfkera, or mambara. Papers praaantad at SPE maetirwa are aublWf to PuMicatbn ravlaw by Edifotial COrnmMWs ~ the SIJOW not W COPM. tir~ 1SS245 s~~SPEUT. ~~in ~~us ~k~~g~ of patrofaum Enginaara. parmiaaion to copy is raatrictad to an abawaot of not more than SCCIwwds. llluatmfioIw may WSS4SSS, U.S.A. The Telex, of tie and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. SOX SSSW6 R~hwdwJn, ~ 7

Abstract

Carbon dioxide injection, either by huff and puff or displacement operations, results in a crude oil viscosity reduction at pressures below the miscibility conditions carbon dioxide miscibility occurs in reservoirs at miscible
temperature and press-are, blUt

degree of viscosity reduction at the reservoir temperature and pressure. A recovery projects success depends on the interaction between the carbon dioxide and the reservoir system. A research project carried out at ~on~arla ~~~p~ ~~ study the viscosity reduction and carbon dioxide volubility in Cut Bank crude oil at the reservoirs prevailing temperature and near fracture pressure shows a viscosity reduction ratio (crude-carbon dioxide mixture to original dead oil viscosity) of 0.22 at a pressure of 1000 psig and 243

these conditions are not possible in shallow reservoirs. Improved oil recovery in a shallow reservoir depends on the

90F. An original mobility of 20 Md/cp improves to 91 Md/cp under a carbon dioxide recovery process at or near the reservoirs fracture pressure. Based on our research, improved oil recovery operations in the Cut Bank Field, Montana, is viable when using a commercial on site carbon dioxide recovery or generating system to minimize the cost of C02 transportation. The major benefits ar oil viscosity reduction, mobility ratio improvement, gas driver and crude oil swelling.
Introduction

swelling, and density for immiscible oil-COL mixtures. The report gives a viscosity correlation for predicting the viscosity reduction caused by C@-oil mixtures. He concluded that C02 immiscible displacement is a potential heavy oil recovery method. He also concluded that elevated pressures extracted highmolecular weight compounds from the oils which improves the C02 phase mobility. Two field test of the immiscible C02 displacement involved the Salt Creek Field in Wyoming (8) and the Wilmington Field in California (9). Reservoir temperature was on the order of 90 to 120 F at depths from 1500 feet in Wyoming to 2500 feet lil California. The oil gravity was 38 API in Wyoming and 14 API in California. Both field test used the WAG process to displace the C02. The injection pressure varied widely from about 550 to 1000 psi. In the Wilmington test, the injection pressure climbed to 1400 psi immediately following the water injection periods, but decreased rapidly as gas permeability developed. The conclusion from both field tests indicated the viability for immiscible C02 flooding.
Statement of Theorv Definitions and

Carbon dioxide injection to enhance oil recovery was presented by Pirson (1) at the Central Appalachian Section AIME meeting on June 26, 1941. Since that time, several applications for carbon dioxide injection to increase oil recovery appeared in the literature (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9). One application of interest for shallow low pressure-low temperature reservoirs is the immiscible method presented by Chung (5). Bargas et. al.(8) and Scarier et. al. (9) reported on field tests involving immiscible C02 displacement. Chung (5) observed that C02 displacement was influenced by 1) viscosity reduction, 2) oil swelling, 3) COL volubility, and hydrocarbon extraction. His study concentrated on heavy oils (10 to 20 API) and the change in viscosity, 244

The fundamental theory and definition for phase behavior and petroleum system thermodynamics has been defined in the literature since Muskat (10) published

his book on the physical principles of oil production in 1929. The physical and chemical behavior of gasliquid systems evolved from concepts in physical chemistry and physics involving Daltons, Amagats, and Henrys laws as well as several equations for describing the physical properties of liquids and gases. These concepts are presented in several correlations for petroleum crude oils! gases and condensates which are too numerous to review in this paper. Important to this study ad was the w-cIrk by- siimn Graue (11). Volubility, swelling, and viscosity for COL-crude oil systems in general was presented by Simon and Graue (11) with a review of the early published data available for COZ injection project design. Their work shows the changes in volubility, swelling and viscosity for 40 different CO~-crude oil mixtures at temperatures from 110 to 250 F and pressures up to 2300 psia. However, several reservoirs which may benefit from COZ injection contain crude oils that were not tested by Simon et.al. are at very low pressure and temperature compared to ranges defined above. This work extends the correlation to pressures and temperature not covered by Simon.

Equipment Description Application

and

Four main divisions for the equipment include the Ruska High pressure mercury pump, a Ruska visual liquid cell and oil bath, a Ruska high pressure/temperature rolling ball viscometer, a Ruska flash separator with a wet test meter, and all necessary pressure indicating and control equipment. A schematic diagram showing the between the parts of the apparatus is shown in Figure 4. The parts of the apparatus were connected with 1/8 SS tubing and high press-ure fittings. The mercury pump (Ruska model 2251-01055) supplied pressure to the window cell and changed the volume in the cell. Pump pressure was indicated by a Heise, model 71OB, 10,000 psi digital pressure gauge through a Ruska 45301 diaphram. The mercury pump is operated by hand or with a motor and controller set up. The volumetric mercury pump has a precision scale to determine volume displacements to .001 cc . The high pressure window cell was mounted in a Ruska 2318 oil bath for temperature control to 1 F. The inside oil bath diameter was 18 inches and the bath holds 18 gallons of heating oil. The oil bath is equipped with an auxiliary oil chamber to allow a Pmp to raise or lower the oil surface in the window cell chamber. The window cell is a high pressure vessel with a
245

tempered glass window for visual observation of gas/oil and oil mercury interfaces. The cell operates at pressures up to 10,000 psi and temperature to 300 F. The cell window is 1.75 by 3/16 inches and faces the rear of the oil bath. Interface observations are made through a mirror mounted to the oil bath to allow viewing without looking directly into the window. The high pressure viscometer is a Ruska Model 1620-820 rolling ball viscometer with a series 230 LFE controller. The viscometer determines the sample viscosity at the reservoir temperature and pressure. The viscometer has itis own heating jacket to maintain the reservoir temperature during viscosity measurement. Two leveling screws and a level vial provide necessary leveling capability for the instrument. ---4-I 1..-,4 ~~ ~JQ~cj ~~.~ is Uacu A solelluLu hall ~~ ~h~ ?_op Qf the barrel -u.. until the operator is ready to measure the viscosity. The controller releases the ball and times the balls fall through the liquid to eliminate timing errors. A Ruska model 2353-803 flash separator is used to measure the gas in solution. The separator is a graduated glass cylinder equipped with a pressure regulator, pressure gauge, and valves. The separator is used to depressure the sample and measure the gas and liquid drawn from the instrument as
246

the pressure on the sample is reduce to atmospheric pressure. The gas is discharged to the atmosphere through a Precision Scientific 14AM5 wet test meter. Dead oil after the gas is separated is measured in a graduate cylinder.
Experimental Procedure

The apparatus was cleaned between each experiment by flushing the entire system with hexane. With the window cell full of mercury, hexane was drawn into to cell by removing the mercury from the cell while a 200 ml graduate cylinder was placed on a fill tube at the top of the window cell. The cell was then A lJp4~~~ ~~.~ fl-usFled and reflllsu hexane became clear. Following a similar procedure the lines leading to the viscometer and the viscometer were cleaned whiie the soivent was bled from the viscorneters lower .U.v=. Similar-y the flash separator was cleaned with hexane. Following the hexane flushing the instruments are placed under a vacuum to remove the solvent wetting the interior surfaces.
172 1 Trn

The visual cell was filled with the oil sample by attaching a 1/8 stainless steel U-tube to the top of the cell and inserting the open end to the bottom of a graduate cylinder filled with 200 cc of the dead oil. Mercury, which was previously positioned at the top of the window during the cleaning process, was drawn out of the

bLA.L

Pal 1

1.1+ th VV-LLAA

~~~~

~L~~_1J~}7

~l&~L~

Lla< ..W

flnl ..VWUlaet=cl

at u.

2 u

n~ca==llw= JFJ--=V--

until the entire 200 cc oil sample was in the visual cell. Removing the U-tube with the top cell valve shut, a direct line was connected to a C02 bottle and a slight positive pressure was applied to inject C02 into the cell. With the cell valve open, a 117 cc C02 sample was drawn into the window cell at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. The cells temperature was increased to 90F using the oil bath and the cell pressure was increased to experimental conditions of 200, 400, 600 800, and 1000 psi over the course of the test using the mercury pump. Once the objective pressure was set, the visual cell was rocked for 12 hours to achieve equilibrium between the COZ gas phase and the crude oil. Any excess gas phase was removed from the cell and the liquid mixture was transferred to the viscosimeter in 10 psi over pressure steps which kept the experimental pressure in the cell at or above the objective test pressure. The 60 cc sample in the viscometer was allowed to equilibrate for 2 hours at the test condition set for the visual cell. The fall time at 23 45; &lD.d 70 w~~~ taken-= -,. With the viscometer isolated from the system, the bottom discharge valve was slowly opened to the flash separator and a sample of the test fluid
247

equal to the test pressure or at 600 psig (whichever was smallest) . The separators pressure was then lowered to atmospheric pressure while the gas was metered through a wet test meter. The remaining dead oil in the separator, after complete pressure depletion, was measured in a graduate --l 2-3-. cylmaer. These experimental steps were followed at each objective pressure set in the visual cell. Occasionally the experiments were duplicated to test the datas precision.
Data and Results

Table 1 shows the Cut Bank crude oil properties for the oil sample from SCCBSU/well 21-1 used in these studies. Table 2 gives the fractional analysis up to C30+ for SCCBSU well 50-5. The crude is a 30.5 API, 9.12 cp (100 F) black oil with a 1.49% sulfur content. Our data for viscosity, swelling, and solution gas are given in table 3 at the various test conditions. In general, we found that the carbon dioxide saturated Cut Bank crude oil at 90 F and 1000 psi has a solution gas/oil ratio of 429 scf/bbl, a 36.7 API gravity, a 1.1502 swelling factor, and a mixture-to-dead oil viscosity ratio of 0.375. Data trends at the individual test conditions are shown in figures 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Data

Interpretation

The viscosity and solution gas behavior shown in figure 1 for Cut Bank crude is normal compared to other empirical studies. A comparison of the viscosity ratio to Simons et al (11) work is presented in figure 2. One must bear in mind that Mosawis (12) data is based on 90 F and 1000 psig for a 30.5 gravity crude oil and Simons data was based on 120 F and 1000 psia for a 33.3 gravity refined oil in this viscosity range. Simons crude oil with a similar gravity to Cut Bank only had a dead oil viscosity of 4.4 cp at 120 F. Viscosity correction suggested by Simon aid not account for the difference between the Cut Bank Crude and Simonss correlations. The swelling factor was 1.1502 as reported by Mosawi (12). Using the correlations by Nelson (13) to find molecular weight from Saybolt viscosity, the approximate swelling factor from Simon is 1.18.
Conclusions

Correlation to Simon et. al. (11) is difficult due to differences in base data. However, the correlation appears to be quite adequate for preliminary investigation of COZ injection feasibility. We recommend actual PVT test on the oil sample before the final pilot or full scale project design. Attention is required for differences in temperature and saturation pressure, but the definition of the oil viscosity, gravity and UOP characterization factor prove to be more difficult when using the correlations.
Acknowledgment ts
mha

J.LLG

=~~+hn~c UULAAWA

nw+epA~ ti.-ti

thei -..-+-

appreciation to Harry Flook, Ruska Instrument Corp., for his help on experimental procedures, solutions to instrument problems, and safe laboratory operations. We also thank John Finstad for his valuable help in obtaining data and an oil sample from the Cut Bank field.
References

Cut Bank Crude oil responds to C02 treatment in a normal manner as indicated by correlations. The empirical data indicates that the reservoir conditions of 90 F and 1000 psig will yield a crude viscosity of 3.821 cp as compared to a dead oil viscosity of 17.64. The crude oil will swell by 15% of the original volume and the COZ solution gas is 429.3 scf/bbl. 248

1.

Pirson, S. J.:Tertiary Recovery of Oil, Paper presented before the Cen. Appalachian Sec., AIME, June 26, 1941 Welker, J. R. and Dunlop, D. D.: Physical Properties of Carbonated Oils, JPT, (Aug 1963), 873-874 Kokal, S.L. and Sayegh S.

2.

3.

Phase Behavior and G .. Physical Properties of C02 Saturated Heavy Oil and Constitutive Fractions: Experimental and Correlations, ii Elsevior, Amsterdam, JPSE, 9, 1993, 289-302 4. Helm, L.W. and Josendal, V. A.:Mechanism of Oil Displacement by Carbon Dioxide, JPT, (Dec. 1974), 1427-38 Chung, T. H.:Heavy oil Recovery by CO? Immiscible Displacement Method, USA DOE, Bartlesville, Niper-76 (DE86000281), Cont. DEFCOl-83FE60149,Apr. 1986. Johnson, W.E, MacFarlane, R.M., and Breston,J.N. : Change in Physical Properties of Bradford Crude Oil When Contacted with Dioxide and Carbonated Water, Prod. Me., (Nov. 1952), 16-22. Yelliq( W.F.: Effect of Mobile Water on Multiple Contact Miscible Gas Displacement, SPE/DOE paper 10687 Presented at the 3rd Joint SPE/DOE Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Apr 4-7, 1982.
~~ff~p+i ~.L. and

9.

Scarier, W. B. and Patton, J. T.:C02 Recovery of Heavy Oil: The Wilmington Field Test, SPE 12082, presented at the 58th
.atlIludJm--..-l Illn-kn.i

leullll-1-ba~

-.1

~op~f

and Exhibition, SpE/AIME~ San Francisco, CA, Oct. 5-8, 1983

10.

Muskat, M:Physical Principles of Oil Production, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1949. Simon, R. and Graue, D. J .:Generalized Correlations for Predicting Volubility, Swelling and Viscosity Behavior of CO~-Crude Oil Systems, JPT, (Jan. 1965), Pg 102-106 Mosawi, H. H.:ViscositY Determination of COZ Saturated Cut Bank Oil,, Master Thesis, Montana Tech, (July 1994) Nelson, W. L.:Petroleum Refinery Engineering, McGraw-Hill; New York, 1958.

5.

11.

6.

12.

13.

r.

8.

Bargas, C.L., Montgomery, H. D., Sharp, D. H., and Voslka, J.L. :Immiscible COZ Process for the Salt Creek Field, SPE Res. Eng., (November 1992), pg 397-402 249

Table 1- Cut Bank Crude Oil Analysis; well SCCBSU21 -I API gravity @ 60 OF .................................................................... 30.S Specific Gravity 60/60F .............................................................. 0.874 Sulfur, % by weight ...................................................................... 1.49 Pour Point, F.............................................................................. -15. Color ........................................................................................... Black
viscosity: w 1uu r U1.u
@120 F alnAOPL IA

CT TCOl

aud,

q.7.1A Cp

52.7 SUS, 6.98 CP

nlL.. XTAl.. _-

Hemple distillation @ 26.5 in Hg

70 Uy v Ululllc C-*A4G* OpcLlllu
Ulcl

Pw..;

v lcy

+.,

Gasoline @?392 F I Kerosene @ 500 F Reduced Crude Loss

25.5 11.6 59.8 3.1

0.718 0.802 0.955 ..........

250

Table 2- Cut Bank Crude Oil Composition; well SCCBSU 5 O\O HC by volume Carbon Number 8.200 c 1-C5 . ... ... ... ...... ........ ..................... ... ........ ... ... .........
C6 C7 ~~
....... ... ... ..... ..... ...................... ........... ... ... ......... ...... ... ............... ...... .. .... ........... ................ .... .... . . . ..O .-. ..O ...............=O. ......,. :==: ,= ==:= ,,, ,=, ,=, ,,, ,, .........

C9 ....................................................................... Clo ....................................................................... Cll ....................................................................... C12 ....................................................................... C13 ....................................................................... C14 ....................................................................... C15 ....................................................................... C16 ....................................................................... C17 ....................................................................... C18 ....................................................................... C19 ....................................................................... C20 ....................................................................... C21 ....................................................................... C22 ....................................................................... C23 ....................................................................... C24 ....................................................................... C25 ....................................................................... C26 ....................................................................... C27 ....................................................................... C28 ....................................................................... C29 ....................................................................... C30+ ......................................................................

6.200 5.900 12.500 2.800 4.800 7.200 5.500 5.100 4.900 3.400 3.500 3.900 2.900 3.100 2.900 2.500 2.300 2.000 1.300 1.400 1.500 1.200 2.000 0.600 2.400

251

Table 3- Cut Bank Crude Oil and Caibon Dioxide Mixture Properties Pressure PSIG 14.7
200 400 600 .A Wu 1000

Viscosity centipoise 17.64

15.35 11 8.65 6.75 3.821

Viscosity Reduction POj Pm ---------0.87 0.62 0.49 0.38 0.22

Solution gas scfhbl ---------11.1 71.6 142.8 286.2 429.3

Swelling factor ---------1.0039 1.0251 1.0501 I.iwz 1.1502

Gas-Oil Ratio scfhbl ---------9.9 15.9 25.3 45.4 47.7

252

18 16

500 400 300 200

[ .

[
t

I /---

.... ~.,

,>

--u..,,

+
. . . . %., -

4 2
im-

100

-+1

200

600 400 Pressure, psig

800

0 1000
1

Figure 1- Cut Bank Crude and Carbon Dioxide Mixture Properties

.4= \

)9

.*

I ..
., , -.

0 0 200 400 600 8001000 Pressure, psia

:

,Figure 2- Viscosity Ratio for C02/Crude mixtures at 120 and 90 F

253

I
!

+ .
I .
I

j
.

!
I
! ,... .,-.

~
I
... -, /--..

,.=--f

I
I I

i
1000

1.02 1

~~

I I

200

600 Pressure, psig 400

800

Figure 3- Cut Bank Crude Oil Swelling Factor when saturated with carbon dioxide.

.0:%,,,,

T-y -
iOutlet~ HG supply

Flash Separatox (~ ~

c)

a%

[---T L Graduate
Cylinder p

e
1

r,
~+

Mercury
Pump

Figure

4 - Schematic

diagram

showing

the

experimental

apparatus