Abstract

This paper presents methods for evaluating constantvolume depletion (CVD) data obtained from experimental
analyses of gas condensates and volatile oils. Theoretical and practical developments are supported by
experimental data from a North Sea gas-condensate fluid.
The three major contributions of the work are: (1) presentation of material-balance equations to calculate fluid
properties from measured CVD data, (2) a simple method for calculating black-oil formation volume factors and
solution GOR's using material-balance results and a separator flash program, and (3) investigation of the PengRobinson (PR) equation of state (EOS) as a tool for matching measured PVT data and studying vapor/liquid
phase behavior during CVD.
Introduction
CVD experiments are performed on gas condensates and volatile oils to simulate reservoir depletion
performance and compositional variation. Measured data can be used in a variety of reservoir engineering
calculations, among the most useful being material-balance calculations, generating black-oil PVT properties
and, more recently, the tuning of empirical EOS. All these applications are addressed in this paper.
Few engineers are aware of useful fluid properties that can be derived from CVD data--e.g., liquid composition
(and therefrom K-values), density, and molecular mass of the C7+ fraction, vapor density, and total system
molecular mass. Only experimental CVD data and simple material-balance equations are used to calculate
these data. A procedure outlining these calculations was first presented by Reudelhuber and Hinds. Their
description, however, is somewhat difficult to follow and not extensively known or used by petroleum engineers.
The material-balance relations are presented here in equation form using current SPE nomenclature.
Based on material-balance-derived properties, a method is proposed for calculating black-oil PVT properties-i.e., FVF's and solution GOR's used in two- phase flow equations and reservoir material balances. The method
was first suggested by Dodson et al. in 1953 for solution-gas/crude-oil systems. Their method, however,
requires expensive and time-consuming liquid sample removals and experimental flash separations. The
proposed method follows the Dodson et al. procedure but uses experimentally determined vapor corp.
positions and material-balance-derived liquid compositions together with a multistage separator flash program.
PVT properties calculated using this method are compared with those predicted by the PR EOS.
Though more complicated, empirical equations of state are also used to evaluate CVD data. Several
investigators have used the PR EOS to simulate PVT studies of light gas condensates and crude oils.
Unfortunately most studies have emphasized K-value predictions instead of volumetric predictions, and most
have avoided systems operating near the critical point. Results have varied considerably, depending on which
properties are compared. Conrad and Gravier propose a method to improve liquid-density estimations by
adjusting properties of the heaviest-plus fraction (boiling point and methane interaction coefficient). Firoozabadi
et al. studied another lean gas condensate and found that by adjusting only the methane-heavy fraction
interaction coefficient, the PR EOS highly overestimated liquid volumes.
About 30 CVD studies performed by commercial and private laboratories were analyzed using the materialbalance approach.
ABSTRACT

This paper presents results of analyzing constant volume depletion dataobtained from experimental analyses
of gas condensates and volatile oils.Theoretical and practical developments are supported by analyses
ofexperimental data from two North Sea condensate reservoirs.

The three major contributions of this work are: (1) presentation of materialbalance equations used to calculate
fluid (particularly liquid) properties frommeasured constant volume depletion data (2) a simple method for
calculating"black oil" formation volume factors and solution gas-oil ratios for volatilesystems using material
balance results and a separator flash program, and (3)investigation of the Peng-Robinson equation of state as
a tool for matchingmeasured PVT data and studying vapor-liquid equilibria phenomena duringconstant volume
depletion.

The main example presented is a rich gas condensate whose measured,calculated and simulated phase
behavior are fully documented in tables andfigures. Complete description of the heptanes-plus fraction is also
included sothat other engineers can check, modify and hopefully improve fluidcharacterization using the PengRobinson (or any other) equation of state.

INTRODUCTION

Constant volume depletion (CVD) experiments are performed on gas condensateand volatile oil fluids to
simulate reservoir depletion performance andcompositional variation. Resulting data can be used in a variety of
reservoirengineering calculations, among the most useful being material balancecalculations, generating "black
oil" PVT properties and more recently, thetuning of empirical equations of state. All of these applications are
addressedin the present work.

il reservoirs are classified according to their fluid type. There are three broad oil classes. In order of
increasing molecular weight, they are volatile oil, black oil, and heavy oil. Heavy-oil reservoirs are of
minor interest during pressure depletion because they typically yield only marginal amounts of oil
because of their low dissolved-gas contents and high fluid viscosities. The distinguishing characteristic
between volatile and black oils is the stock-tank-oil content of their equilibrium gases. Equilibrium gases
liberated from volatile oils contain appreciable stock-tank or condensable liquids whereas the gases from
black oils contain negligible stock-tank liquids. While this distinction leads to only slightly different
recovery strategies, it leads to very different methods of analysis and mathematical modeling
requirements.
Contents
[hide]

1 Volatile and black oil fluid characteristics

2 Oil fluid properties

3 References

4 Noteworthy papers in OnePetro

5 External links

6 See also

Volatile and black oil fluid characteristics

The petroleum fluid spectrum is gradational. There is no strict definition of volatile and black oils; there
are only general guidelines and characteristics. Despite this lack of precision and the occasional
confusion it brings, classification is quite useful and popular.
Molecular weight is a useful yardstick. Black oils typically range from 70 to 150 in molecular weight but
may range as high as 190 to 210. In contrast, volatile oils are lower in molecular weight than black oils
and typically range from 43 to 70. Oils with molecular weights greater than 210 usually are classified as
heavy oils. Fluids with molecular weights of less than 43 are generally gases, which include gas
condensates, wet gases, and dry gases. A molecular weight of 43 marks the lower molecular-weight limit
of volatile oils.
Black and volatile oils are sometimes subdivided into different fluid types. For instance, volatile oils
include near-critical fluids and high-shrinkage oils. Near-critical fluids represent light volatile oils and can
include some very rich condensates. High-shrinkage oils represent the high-molecular-weight end of
volatile oils and can include some light black oils.
Volatile and black oils are characterized in terms of a number of different properties. Table 1 summarizes
their characteristics. This table includes the properties of the full range of petroleum fluids, including
gases.

Table 1

The defining property that distinguishes black and volatile oils is the volatilized-oil content of their
equilibrium gases. The volatilized-oil content of a gas represents its condensable liquid portion.
Condensable refers to the portion that condenses or "drops out" during pressure reduction and ultimately
results as stock-tank liquid. Condensation may take place within the reservoir as the gas passes through
the lease separators. Physically, intermediate-hydrocarbon components, typically C 2 through C7,
dominate this fraction. Volatilized oil also is called lease condensate or distillate. Gas condensates and
wet gases also contain volatilized oil. Volatilized oil is reported conventionally as part of the crude-oil
reserves and production. It should not be confused with and is distinctly different from natural-gas liquids.
Natural-gas liquids are derived from the gas-processing plant and are called plant products.
The volatilized-oil content of gases is quantified in terms of their volatilized-oil/gas ratio, typically
expressed in units of STB/MMscf or stock-tank m3 per std m3 of separator gas. The volatilized-oil/gas
ratio of equilibrium gases of black oils is usually less than 1 to 10 STB/MMscf (approximately 0.04 to 0.4
gal/Mscf).The volatilized-oil content of these gases is so low that it usually is ignored. In contrast, the
volatilized-oil content of gases from volatile oils is much greater. Their volatilized-oil/gas ratio typically
ranges from 10 to 300 STB/MMscf or 0.4 to 8 gal/Mscf.
Several benchmark properties can be correlated with the reservoir fluids initial molecular weight. Fig.
1 plots the initial formation volume factor (FVF) and initial dissolved gas/oil ratio (GOR) as a function of
reservoir-fluid molecular weight for 36 reservoir fluids. The abscissa in Fig. 1 spans from a molecular
weight of 15 to 180. This range of molecular weights covers the full spectrum of petroleum fluids ranging
from dry gases to heavy oils.

Fig. 1 (a) Initial formation volume factor (FVF) and (b) initial dissolved GOR as a function of initial
fluid molecular weight.

Volatile oils exhibit an initial oil FVF in the range of 1.5 to 3.0. Black oils exhibit an initial oil FVF in the
range of 1.1 to 1.5. Volatile oils exhibit an initial GOR in the range of 900 to 3,500 scf/STB. Black oils
exhibit an initial GOR in the range of 200 to 900 scf/STB. These relations establish molecular weight as a
credible correlating parameter. McCain[1] has found success in the use of the heptanes-plus content as a
correlating parameter.
The inverse of the oil FVF yields a measure of the original oil in place (OOIP) per unit volume of reservoir
pore space. Because the oil FVF is greater for volatile oils than black oils, the latter yield greater OOIP

per unit volume. Black-oil reservoirs contain 850 to 1130 STB/acre-ft (bulk) while volatile-oil reservoirs
contain less, typically 400 to 850 STB/acre-ft.
Although volatile-oil reservoirs contain less oil per unit volume, they typically yield slightly higher oil
recoveries than black-oil reservoirs because of their higher dissolved-gas content and lower oil viscosity.
Ultimately, volatile-oil reservoirs may yield greater oil reserves than black-oil reservoirs. Light black oils
and heavy volatile oils are among the most economically attractive reservoir fluids.
There has been no systematic study to determine the relative percentage of black-oil and volatile-oil
reservoirs; however, an examination of the worlds 500 largest reservoirs reveals that black-oil reservoirs
overwhelmingly dominate the group. [2] One reason there are more black-oil than volatile-oil reservoirs is
that the latter are characteristically located at greater depths than the former. As exploration continues to
go deeper, more volatile-oil reservoirs can be expected to be discovered.

Oil fluid properties

Black and volatile oils, as well as other petroleum fluids, are characterized routinely in terms of their
standard pressure/volume/temperature (PVT) parameters:

Oil formation volume factor (FVF) (Bo)

Gas FVF (Bg)

Dissolved GOR (Rs)

Volatilized oil/gas ratio (Rv)

These fluid properties, in addition to some others, are prerequisites for a wide variety of reservoirengineering calculations, including estimating the original oil in place (OOIP) and original gas in place
(OGIP) and material-balance calculations.
Table 2 tabulates and Fig. 2 plots the standard PVT parameters as a function of pressure for a black oil
from a west Texas reservoir located at a depth of 6,700 ft with an initial pressure of 3,100 psia and a
temperature of 131F. Only the PVT properties below 2,000 psia are listed. The fluid exhibited
a bubblepoint at approximately 1,688 psia and had a molecular weight of 81. Table 3 summarizes its
compositional analysis. The fluid has an initial oil FVF of 1.467 RB/STB and dissolved GOR of 838
scf/STB. The equilibrium gas contains negligible volatilized oil. Fig. 3 plots the oil and gas viscosities as
a function of pressure.

Fig. 2 Standard PVT properties as a function of pressure for a west Texas black oil.

Fig. 3 Oil and gas viscosities as a function of pressure for west Texas black oil.

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4 tabulates and Fig. 4 plots the standard PVT parameters for a volatile oil from a north-central
Louisiana reservoir located at a depth of approximately 10,000 ft with an initial pressure of 5,070 psia
and a temperature of 246F. [3][4] The fluid exhibited a bubblepoint at approximately 4,677 psia and had a
molecular weight of 47. Table 5 summarizes the initial fluid composition. The fluid has an initial oil FVF of
2.704 RB/STB and dissolved GOR of 2,909 scf/STB. The bubblepoint gas had a volatilized-oil/gas ratio
of approximately 120 STB/MMscf. The volatilized-oil/gas ratio decreases with pressure until a pressure of
998 psia is reached. At pressures between 998 and 598 psia, the volatilized-oil/gas ratio increases
slightly.

Table 4

Fig. 4 Standard PVT properties as a function of pressure for a Louisiana volatile oil.

Table 5

The standard PVT parameters of volatile and black oils are determined experimentally with different
laboratory procedures. Black oils are evaluated with a differential-vaporization (DV) experiment;
contrast, volatile oils are evaluated with constant volume depletion (CVD).

[7][8]

[5][6]

in

Sometimes, however,

volatile oils use a specialized DV experiment[9] instead of a CVD experiment. The specialized DV
experiment includes a step to measure the volatilized-oil content of equilibrium gases.
The standard PVT parameters for black oils are specified routinely in commercial PVT reports. McCain
provides some example PVT reports. [10] The reported PVT parameters, however, may or may not be
adjusted for the effects of surface separators. Surface separators maximize the stock-tank liquid yield as
fluids pass through them. The oil FVF and dissolved GOR of adjusted properties are characteristically
less than unadjusted properties. If the PVT report specifies the adjusted parameters, then no further
adjustment is required. If only the raw parameters are specified, then adjustment is needed. > Various
empirical methods are used to correct the standard PVT parameters for the effects of separators.
[5]

[11][12]

Generally, correction is very important. For example, the unadjusted bubblepoint oil FVF and the

dissolved GOR for the example black oil in Table 1 are 1.584 RB/stock tank barrels (STB) and 1,007
scf/STB, respectively. On adjustment for separators at 100 psia, the corresponding oil FVF and dissolved
GOR are 1.467 RB/STB and 838.5 scf/STB, reflecting increased stock-tank-liquid recovery. Failure to
correct the standard PVT parameters for separators can lead to substantial errors in subsequent

reservoir-engineering calculations including the volumetric OOIP and OGIP calculations. Volatile oils are
even more sensitive to the effects of separators than black oils. Volatile oils, however, are subjected to an
entirely different laboratory procedure for measurement.
The standard PVT parameters for volatile oils rarely are given in commercial PVT reports. They must be
calculated from CVD measurements. In order of increasing complexity, the three methods to calculate
standard PVT parameters are:

Walsh-Towler algorithm [13]

Whitson-Torp method [7]

Equation-of-state (EOS) method [14][15]

The Walsh-Towler algorithm uses recovery data directly from the CVD measurement and computes the
corresponding properties. This method is suited for spreadsheet calculation and is fast and simple. The
Whitson-Torp method, in contrast, uses equilibrium gas-composition data and computes the properties
with Standings[16] low-pressure K- values and a stock-tank-liquid density correlation such as the AlaniKennedy EOS. [17] This method requires iterative, K -value flash calculations. Although this method is
more computationally intensive than the Walsh-Towler algorithm, it is more versatile because it allows for
arbitrary separator conditions. The EOS method is much more computationally intensive than the other
methods. This method tunes a cubic EOS to the attending phase behavior and then uses the EOS to
simulate the CVD numerically and estimate the PVT parameters. This method regularly uses commercial
software. The methods yield virtually identical results despite their differences.