Sign

INSTITUTE OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT
THERMODYNAMICS AND PHASE BEHAVIOR – W6104

Term Project
Final Report
ZAKARIYA YOUSEF ABU GRIN
St.Num: 451369
3/2/2015

Ref: Gyulay, 1967

In this project, full PVT data is given to be simulated using EOS model in PVT Package IPM software. The
full composition was grouped into 30 components then lumped to 6. The phase envelope has not been
affected by reducing the components number for Psat matched by BIC’s models, while large changes
are noted for Psat matched by Tc-Pc- AF models. Afterwards, Psat matched by BIC’s models showed
superior match with lab data (CCE and DLE). Final tuning has been achieved for lab data including
separator test with a maximum AAE≅5%. In these tunings, suitable weighting factors were allocated,
volume shift was also implemented to enhance initial EOS results and density calculations. Pseudo
components properties were used as regression parameters in a small range (0.9-1.1).
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Contents
1
1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................2
2. Task (a) ...................................................................................................................................................3
2.1 Composition Input..........................................................................................................................3
2.2 Grouping ........................................................................................................................................5
2.3 Entering Lab Saturation Pressure, Density and Tuning .................................................................7
3. Task (b) .................................................................................................................................................10
4. Task (c) .................................................................................................................................................12
3. Task (d) .................................................................................................................................................14
5. Task (e) .................................................................................................................................................16
6. Task (f) .................................................................................................................................................19
7. References.............................................................................................................................................22
8. Appendix A...........................................................................................................................................23
9. Appendix B ...........................................................................................................................................24

Figures
Figure 1: Adding components to the database. ................................................................................................3
Figure 2: Entering the composition as table. ...................................................................................................3
Figure 3: Entering pseudo component Mw......................................................................................................4
Figure 4: Entering pseudo component properties. ...........................................................................................4
Figure 5:Calculating Psat and API using EOS. ...............................................................................................5
Figure 6:Grouping approach. ...........................................................................................................................6
Figure 7: Grouping heavy components. ...........................................................................................................6
Figure 8: Entering lab data – Psat. ...................................................................................................................7
Figure 9: Regression for matching Psat. ..........................................................................................................7
Figure 10: Choosing EOS regression parameters for pseudo components. .....................................................8
Figure 11: Regression tab options. ..................................................................................................................8
Figure 12: Matching Psat using BIC’s pseudo components. ...........................................................................9
Figure 13: Matching density separately using Vsh. .........................................................................................9
Figure 14: 30 components composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models. ........................10
Figure 15: Lumping the original composition to 6 components. ...................................................................10
Figure 16: 6 component lumped composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models. ...............11
Figure 17: Naming fluid models. ...................................................................................................................11
Figure 18: 30 component and lumped composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models. ......12
Figure 19: Entering CCE lab data. .................................................................................................................12
Figure 20: Entering CCE lab data points for EOS calculations. ....................................................................13
Figure 21: The difference between the experimental results and EOS model. ..............................................13
Figure 22: Entering DLE lab data. .................................................................................................................14
Figure 23: Entering DLE lab data points for EOS calculations .....................................................................14
Figure 24: The difference between DLE lab data and EOS results. ..............................................................16
Figure 25: Entering SEP temperature and pressure. ......................................................................................16
Figure 26: EOS separator results. ..................................................................................................................17
Figure 27: Entering separator test data. .........................................................................................................17
Figure 28: Export data window. ....................................................................................................................19
Figure 29: Export data option. .......................................................................................................................19

1
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

2. Task (a)
2.1 Composition Input

1. Some components are not included in the database such as Benzene, Toluene. A new database “user
database” is needed for such task in PVTP. Database in the main bar menu is simply used to create
and edit the database. The most important data is entered manually in this table as shown next graph.

Figure 1: Adding components to the database.

2. Open “ ” or Data >> Enter composition as table to enter the composition as reported in the
spreadsheet, then Verify button is used to link the components with the database. Finally, Enter
Composition is pressed.

Figure 2: Entering the composition as table.

3
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

As more information is required, another window is opened, reference data represents sampling
conditions and C+ (Pseudo component) Mw are entered.

Figure 3: Entering pseudo component Mw.

Pseudo Props button is pressed to enter C+ data “Mw, SG, Tb”. Calc Values is used to calculate C+
properties using its Mw and SG. Auto Match is pressed to match EOS density at standard condition,
with empirical correlations (Standing-Katz or Costald) that are proven to be reliable references, using
pseudo component properties, Change button can be used for more options. Store then Use Original
Pseudo Props from store. Advanced button is used for splitting techniques.

Figure 4: Entering pseudo component properties.

4
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Exit and Save button is pressed for the two windows to save data and close. This composition saved as
wellstream (1).

3. Some properties can be calculated by EOS such as Psat and API° using “ ” or Data >> View
Properties, windows for Quick Calc and Oil Properties buttons are shown below. For this 30
component composition, Psat =1201 psia at 122 deg F, and API°= 73.8048.

Figure 5:Calculating Psat and API using EOS.

2.2 Grouping

1. Since just 30 components are required in this task, some heavy component will be lumped using
Whitson1 method as following:

𝑁𝐻 = 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟[1 + 3.3 log(𝑁𝑒𝑛𝑑 − 𝑁𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡 )] → 𝑁𝐻 = 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑒𝑟[1 + 3.3 log(30 − 14)] = 5

𝑀𝑤𝑒𝑛𝑑 𝑖⁄ 580 𝑖⁄ 𝑖
𝑀𝑖 = 𝑀𝑤𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡 ( ) 𝑁𝐻 → 𝑀𝑖 = 190( ) 5 → 𝑀𝑖 = 190(3.0526) ⁄5
𝑀𝑤𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑡 190

Group#, i Upper Mi Components in Group

1 238 C14 C17
2 297 C18 C21
3 371 C22 C26
4 464 C27 C29
5 580 C30+ C30+

 This method is used to represent the C7+ fraction of a mixture, which should contain more than C20+, into
few pseudo components.

5
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

2. Grouping technique can be done in PVTP using “ ” or Data >> Grouping, and then Group button
is pressed.

Figure 6:Grouping approach.

Another window will pop-up, all components are added as a single component group excluding the
components that were chosen to be in groups, which will be grouped in 5 multi-component groups as
indicated. Then click OK and Exit and Save.

Figure 7: Grouping heavy components.

3. After applying grouping, the properties changed slightly. Psat= 1207 psi and API°= 72.7164. This
composition saved as wellstream (2).

6
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

2.3 Entering Lab Saturation Pressure, Density and Tuning

1. Lab data can be entered using “ ” or Data >> Enter Lab Data. The reported saturation pressure at
Tres (psat= 1650 psia and Dsat = 0.765 gm/cc at 50° C = 122 F) is entered as shown below. Since it is
recommended to give 40 weighting factor to Psat, note that saturation pressure has been given a high
weighting factor due to its significant important in any tuning process.

Figure 8: Entering lab data – Psat.

Note: EOS usually predicts saturation pressure with ± 10% error2. Since heaviest pseudo component
properties are the least reliable data, it will be used as tuning parameters. For better EOS initial
prediction, Volume Shift is implemented. All pure component properties will be excluded from tuning.

2. Tuning or Regression process can be done in PVTP using “ ” or Data >> Regression. Several
models are available; all models may result matching although the second one is not recommended.
After choosing the suitable type, Regress button is pressed.

Figure 9: Regression for matching Psat.

7
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Regress window will open for matching properties selection and options. For better EOS initial prediction,
Volume Shift is implemented.

Figure 10: Choosing EOS regression parameters for pseudo components.

Change button can be used to choose some important options. In regression tab, pure component can be
excluded from tuning. However, pure component will not be chosen. Multipliers limit can also be entered
for BICs and properties used in tuning. Since small tuning is recommended small range is used (0.9 – 1.1).

Figure 11: Regression tab options.

8
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Since it is usually recommended to choose the most effective and the least number of parameters, EOS
parameters will be tested separately.

Firstly, saturation pressure was matched by just BIC’s for pseudo component from group 2 till C30+ and
saved as wellstream (3).

Figure 12: Matching Psat using BIC’s pseudo components.

Secondly, for C30+ pseudo component, OmegaA alone was enough to match saturation pressure with small
limit change (0.9–1.1), the same effect with Tc. Unfortunately, the phase behavior was misleading while
OmegaB and Pc have a moderate effect. Finally, the most suitable choice is to choose the 4 th model and
regress Psat using Tc Pc AF multipliers for pseudo component from group 2 till C30+ and saved as
wellstream (4). For both saved choices density was matched separately using C30+ Vsh.

Figure 13: Matching density separately using Vsh.

9
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

This table illustrates the chosen parameters which give matched results and proper phase behavior.

Saturation Pressure Density

WellStream Comp Num APIº
Psat, psi Matched by for Dsat, gm/cc Matched by for
1 42 1200.8 - - - - 46.1704
2 30 1207 - - - - 45.3823
3 30 1650 BIC's G2 to C30+ 0.765 Vsh C30+ 37.3983
4 30 1650 Mult Tc Pc AF G2 to C30+ 0.765 Vsh C30+ 40.2461

3. Phase envelope is drawn for both matched composition wellstream 3 and 4. Note the intersect between
the two phase behaviors was exactly at saturation pressure, which indicate several matching choices for
Psat, but the most suitable one that can match the other lab data more accurate,

Figure 14: 30 components composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models.

3. Task (b)
1. Lumping the composition to 6 components can be obtained from the original fluid description. Using
Data >> Lumping|Delumping for IPM. Lumping window will open then Lump stream, components
are chosen for each lumped group. Lump is pressed then To Stream to apply the lumping process.

Figure 15: Lumping the original composition to 6 components.

10
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

The components were lumped as following:

Group.Num Components in Group

1 N2+C1
2 CO2+C2
3 C3+iC4+nC4
4 iC5+nC5+C6+Methylcyclopenta+Benzene+Cyclohexane
5 C7+Methylcyclohexa+Toluene+C8+Ethylbenzene+M-&P-Xyl+C10→C17
6 C18+C19+C20+C21+C22+C23+C24+C25+C26+C27+C28+C29+C30+

2. This lumped fluid has been matched throughout the last pseudo component (Group 6) by two
ways, the first using BIC’s (by the value 0.1779144 between group 1 and 6) and the second using
Tc, Pc AF. As mentioned before density is matched separately using Vsh for the last pseudo
component. Next figure shows the different between the two options.

Figure 16: 6 component lumped composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models.

3. Since more than one fluid may be confused with the current PVTP file, the fluids are renamed

using “ ” by described names as following:

Figure 17: Naming fluid models.

11
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

4. P-T Phase behavior diagram can be obtained using “ ” or Calculation >> Phase Envelope.
Fluids can be chosen from the left side menu, and then Calc is pressed. Set Test Pts. button is
used to add the saturation pressure in the diagram. After choosing the required fluids, Expand
button is pressed.

Figure 18: 30 component and lumped composition phase behavior for different matched Psat models.

Although all fluid models match the bubble point at 1650 psi, different phase envelopes were generated,
except the ones which were matched using BIC’s. Hence, reducing the components number does not have
an effect on the phase envelope for saturation pressure matched by BIC’s, while big change may exist for
the saturation pressure matched by Tc, Pc, and AF.

4. Task (c)
1. All experiment data can be entered using “ ” or Data >> Enter Lab Data, CCE for the Psat
matched fluids are chosen. Enter temperature and pressure with relative volume. It is not necessary
to enter the temperature for each point because CCE is isothermal experiment. OK is pressed.

Figure 19: Entering CCE lab data.

12
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Note: Semi medium weighting factor (around 5) has been introduced for CCE volume relation as
recommended in different PVT textbooks. Weighting factor allocation can be done by selecting the cell
(single weighting factor) or all cells (globule weighting factor) for data (relative volume) in the previews
window and press Set Weighting. Data will appear with different colure (Blue).

2. After adding lab data, CCE experiment can be simulated by EOS using “ ” or Calculation >>
Constant Composition Expansion. To simulate CCE experiment exactly at the same lab data
points User Selected option is chosen. Here the data is entered in each 10 rows, in this case just
the first 2 columns is used. Required fluid models are also chosen. Then Calc is pressed.

Figure 20: Entering CCE lab data points for EOS calculations.

Another window will open to show the results after Calc is pressed again. Lab data (observation data) and
calculated data (simulated data by EOS) can be compared using plot button. Relative volume relation is
chosen from variables in the main bar menu in the plot window.

Figure 21: The difference between the experimental results and EOS model.

CCE data is matched without any regression for both 6 components fluid models (AAE=0.51% for 6 Comp
matched by BIC’s and 0.36% for 6 Comp matched by Tc, Pc, AF), which indicates the reliability of both
lab data and the used EOS models.

13
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

3. Task (d)
1. DLE data is also entered using “ ”. Enter temperature, pressure, solution GOR “Rsd”, oil FVF
“Bod”, Oil density, and oil viscosity “μo”. It is not necessary to enter the temperature for each
point because DLE is isothermal experiment. OK is pressed.

Figure 22: Entering DLE lab data.

Note: Medium weighting factor (5) has been introduced for density, from 1 to 3 for GORd and Bod, and 1
for viscosity as recommended in different PVT textbooks (Ali Danesh1, Whitson3). Oil density was
excluded from regression, because it is matched using just CCE.

Oil Viscosity at DLE pressure points were enterpolated.

2. After adding lab data, DLE experiment can be simulated by EOS using “ ” or Calculation >>
Differential Expansion. To simulate DLE experiment exactly at the same lab data points, User
Selected option is chosen. Required fluid models are also chosen. Then Calc is pressed twice.

Figure 23: Entering DLE lab data points for EOS calculations

14
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

Another window will open to show the results after Calc is pressed again. Lab data (observation data) and
calculated data (simulated data by EOS) can be compared by calculating AAE%. Initial results were not
bad, slight tuning is needed to match GOR. Both fluid models have shown near results.

AAE % - 6Comp Matched by BIC's AAE % - 6Comp Matched by Tc, Pc, AF

Points Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour) Points Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour)
n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error
1 0.0976 0.0226 0.0001 1 0.1034 0.0341 0.0001
2 0.0925 0.0219 0.0004 0.0021 2 0.0968 0.0317 0.0014 0.0034
3 0.1579 0.0327 0.0113 0.0087 3 0.1590 0.0403 0.0072 0.0096
4 0.2675 0.0379 0.0174 0.0073 4 0.2636 0.0438 0.0114 0.0079
5 0.4397 0.0334 0.0133 0.0065 5 0.4298 0.0385 0.0062 0.0070
6 0.0203 0.0063 0.0081 6 0.0252 0.0014 0.0085
Sum 1.0553 0.1688 0.0488 0.0327 Sum 1.0527 0.2136 0.0276 0.0363
Error% 21.11% 2.81% 0.81% 0.65% Error% 21.05% 3.56% 0.46% 0.73%

3. Since tuning is required, DLE and CCE data is matched again using the weighting factors as
mentioned before. Oil density and viscosity are matched separately using Vsh and Vcrit
respectively. In this tuning, EOS parameters just for pseudo components were used in a small
range limit (0.9-1.1).

For the 1st model (6 Comp Psat matched by BIC’s), lab data was matched accurately using Tc, Pc, AF and
BIC (1st model in regression) for the last two pseudo components. Then Oil density at saturation pressure
from CCE is matched separately using the last pseudo component Vsh (without including DLE oil density).
For DLE, AAE% was as following:

AAE % - 6Comp Matched by BIC's

Points Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour) Oil Viscosity
n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error
1 0.0002 0.0029 0.0000 0.0015
2 0.0287 0.0019 0.0004 0.0225 0.0038
3 0.0082 0.0112 0.0115 0.0202 0.0028
4 0.0010 0.0188 0.0179 0.0146 0.0084
5 0.0016 0.0165 0.0135 0.0130 0.0086
6 0.0188 0.0027 0.0188 0.0150
Sum 0.0398 0.0701 0.0460 0.0891 0.0403
Error% 0.80% 1.17% 0.77% 1.78% 0.67%

Since other different methods are available for viscosity calculation, Little Kennedy was chosen instead of
Pederson to enhance viscosity calculations to low AAE (0.67% instead of 4.09%). While CCE is kept
matched (AAE=0.62%).

While for the 2nd model (6Comp Psat matched by mult Tc,Pc,AF), lab data were matched using multiplier
Tc, Pc, AF for the two last pseudo component with low weighting factor for GOR. Density and viscosity
were matched by the last pseudo components using Vsh and Vcrit respectively. Little Kennedy correlation
was chosen for viscosity.

AAE % - 6Comp Matched by Tc, Pc, AF

Points Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour) Oil Viscosity
n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error
1 0.0934 0.0297 0.0001 0.0010
2 0.0881 0.0283 0.0007 0.0077 0.0036
3 0.1518 0.0378 0.0084 0.0117 0.0005
4 0.2511 0.0416 0.0129 0.0090 0.0051
5 0.4051 0.0366 0.0078 0.0079 0.0052
6 0.0244 0.0002 0.0099 0.0082
Sum 0.9894 0.1982 0.0301 0.0462 0.0236
Error% 19.79% 3.30% 0.50% 0.92% 0.39%

Since the 1st model is more accurate, this model will be chosen. Hence matching saturation pressure using
BIC’s for pseudo component is recommended as a first tuning step.

15
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

4. First model shows accurate results comparing with lab results. These plots show the difference
between lab data and EOS results.

Figure 24: The difference between DLE lab data and EOS results.

5. Task (e)
1. Separator test can be simulated using EOS by “ ” or Calculation >> Separator to calculate
separator GOR (RsSb) and BoSb at each separator stage. Enter temperature and pressure values
and press Calc.

Figure 25: Entering SEP temperature and pressure.

16
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

2. Another window appears to show the results, press Calc. Repeat the last steps for the other stations
to see the different from lab data and EOS results.

Figure 26: EOS separator results.

3. Lab data shows the optimum separator condition at 233-15 psi and 40-27 Cº respectively, while
EOS model shows the second separator stage as the optimum condition at 160-15 psi and 40-27
Cº. However, lab data should always be used as reference guide line.
4. AAE% for all experiment shows that RsSb needs to be matched. In this final matching, oil FVF
and oil density in separator test will be excluded because they are already matched in DLE.

AAE % - 6Comp Matched by BIC's

DLE CCE Separator test
Points
Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour) Oil Viscosity Rel.Vol RsSb BoSb Oil Dens
n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error
1 0.0002 0.0029 0.0000 0.0015 - - - -
2 0.0287 0.0019 0.0004 0.0225 0.0038 - - - -
3 0.0082 0.0112 0.0115 0.0202 0.0028 - - - -
4 0.0010 0.0188 0.0179 0.0146 0.0084 - - - -
5 0.0016 0.0165 0.0135 0.0130 0.0086 - - - -
6 0.0188 0.0027 0.0188 0.0150 - - - -
Sum 0.0398 0.0701 0.0460 0.0891 0.0403 0.0927 - - -
Error% 0.80% 1.17% 0.77% 1.78% 0.67% 0.62% 8.19% 0.83% 1.07%

5. Separator data is also entered using “ ”. Enter separator temperature, pressure, solution GOR
“RsSb”, oil FVF “BoSb”, Oil and gas density. OK is pressed. Note that oil FVF and oil density are
excluded from tuning (Bo is matched throughout DLE and oil density throughout CCE).

Figure 27: Entering separator test data.

17
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

6. Separator data with CCE and DLE were matched together, using Original Tc, Pc, AF and Vsh for
the last two pseudo component (with no limit). The viscosity is matched separately by Vcrit for
just the last pseudo component.

AAE% was accepted for all simulated results. Next table shows the results:

AAE % - 6Comp Psat Matched by BIC's

DLE CCE Separator test
Points
Gas Oil Ratio Oil FVF Oil Density Z Factor (Vapour) Oil Viscosity Rel.Vol RsSb BoSb Oil Dens
n ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error ABS. Error
1 0.0031 0.0046 0.0103 0.0034 - - - -
2 0.0362 0.0040 0.0118 0.0349 0.0024 - - - -
3 0.0258 0.0162 0.0021 0.0258 0.0048 - - - -
4 0.0372 0.0231 0.0030 0.0176 0.0085 - - - -
5 0.0687 0.0203 0.0023 0.0155 0.0067 - - - -
6 0.0212 0.0182 0.0227 0.0145 - - - -
Sum 0.1710 0.0894 0.0478 0.1166 0.0403 0.1002 - - -
Error% 3.42% 1.49% 0.80% 2.33% 0.67% 0.67% 4.98% 0.95% 2.59%

7. The solution gas-oil ratio and FVF data can be adjusted to the separator as following:

Separator Test Data

Adjustment of the Differential Liberation Data to Separator Condition RsSb
BoSb
54.6 (sm3/sm3)
1.16 (bbl/STB)

Temp Pressure Rel.Vol Corection Adjusted Oil FVF Test Gas Oil Ratio Adjusted Gas Oil Ratio Test Total FVF Adjusted Total FVF (CCE&DLE)
Test

Calculated Total FVF using just (CCE)

deg F psia - factor (bbl/STB) (sm3/sm3) (sm3/sm3) (bbl/STB) (bbl/STB)
T - Vrel (CCE) BoSb Bo = Vrel x BoSb - Rs = RsSb - Bt1 = Bo = Vrel x BoSb Pressure Vrel (CCE) Bt1 = Vrel * BoSb
220 - farc (bbl/STB) (bbl/STB) - Rs = Optimum Sep GOR - (bbl/STB) psia farc (bbl/STB)
9000 0.949354 1.16 1.101 - 54.6 - 1.101 9000 0.949354 1.101
5000 0.970672 1.16 1.126 - 54.6 - 1.126 5000 0.970672 1.126
CCE data at P > Pb

4000 0.977887 1.16 1.134 - 54.6 - 1.134 4000 0.977887 1.134

3500 0.981907 1.16 1.139 - 54.6 - 1.139 3500 0.981907 1.139
3000 0.986251 1.16 1.144 - 54.6 - 1.144 3000 0.986251 1.144
2500 0.990966 1.16 1.150 - 54.6 - 1.150 2500 0.990966 1.150
2000 0.996109 1.16 1.155 - 54.6 - 1.155 2000 0.996109 1.155
1900 0.997195 1.16 1.157 - 54.6 - 1.157 1900 0.997195 1.157
1800 0.998302 1.16 1.158 - 54.6 - 1.158 1800 0.998302 1.158
1700 0.99943 1.16 1.159 - 54.6 - 1.159 1700 0.99943 1.159
Pb 1650 1 1.16 1.160 - 54.6 - 1.160 1650 1 1.160
T - BoD (DLE) Sod = BoD/BoDb Bo = Sod x BoSb RsD (DLE) Rs = RsSb - (RsDb-RsD)(BoSb/BoDb) BtD=BoD+(BgD/5.615)(RsDb-RsD)*5.61 Bt2 = BtD * BoSb / BoDb 1500 1.02994 1.195 BgD Bt3 = Bo+(BgD/5.615)(Rsb-Rs)*5.61
220 - (bbl/STB) frac (bbl/STB) (sm3/sm3) Rs = 54.6 - ( 59.86 - RsD ) ( 1.16 / 1.169 ) (bbl/STB) Bt = BtD * 1.16 / 1.16959 1250 1.10418 1.281 cu ft/SCF (bbl/STB)
DLE data at P < Pb

Pb 1660 1.16959 1 1.160 59.866 54.6 1.17 1.160 1000 1.22874 1.425 0 1.160
1200 1.13539 0.970758984 1.126 44.7286 40 1.31 1.303 500 1.93731 2.247 0.011796 1.303
700 1.09698 0.937918416 1.088 28.1028 23 1.78 1.761 0.021398 1.761
300 1.06581 0.911268051 1.057 14.9786 10 3.41 3.383 0.052288 3.383
100 1.04826 0.896262793 1.040 8.0484 3 9.35 9.278 0.16045 9.278
15 1.01989 0.87200643 1.000 0 0 65.17 64.639 1.07258 59.511
BoSb bubble-point oil formation volume factor from the separator test, bbl of the bubble-point oil/STB (=1.474) Bt1 Bt1 equal to Bo, which is calculated from CCE data and separator test data at Press below and above Pb
RsSb bubble-point solution gas-oil ratio from the separator test, scf/STB (=768) Bt2 Bt2 is calculated using DLE data and SEP data at Press below Pb (Corrected Bt)
BoDb differential relative oil volume factor at the bubblepoint pressure pb, psia, bbl/STB (=1.6) Bt3 Bt3 is calculated using the adjusted DLE for SEP data at Press below Pb
RsDb solution gas-oil at the bubble-point pressure as measured by the differential liberation test, scf/STB (=854) Sod The differential shrinkage factor.
* Red values are manually adjusted at atmospheric pressure. Bo=1 and Rs = 0.

Oil Formation Volume Factor Gas Oil Ratio Total Formation Volume Factor
1.18 70 3.00
2.80 BtD=BoD+(BgD/5.615)(RsDb-RsD)*5.61
1.16 60 Adjusted Total FVF (CCE&DLE)
1.14 2.60 Calculated Total FVF using just (CCE)
50 2.40
1.12
GOR, (sm3/sm3)

2.20
Bo, RB/STB

40
Bt, RB/STB

1.1
2.00
1.08 30
1.80
1.06
20 1.60
1.04 RsD (DLE) 1.40
BoD (DLE)
10
1.02 Adjusted Gas Oil Ratio 1.20
Adjusted Oil FVF
1 0 1.00
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Pressure, psi Pressure, psi Pressure, psi

The adjustment were applied to EOS results (CCE and CVD) using both RsSb and BoSb, which obtained in
optimum separator test condition. Input data in this spreadsheet is indicated in yellow.

18
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

8. Comparing the corrected Bo and Rs with the results from the Separator Corrected Differential
Depletion Data (Lab), acceptable AAE% was found.

Separator corrected Differential Depletion data

Gas/Oil Gas/Oil Corrected Formation Volume Formation Volume Corrected
Pressure Pressure Ratio (Lab) Ratio (EOS) Rs Factor (Lab) Factor (EOS) Bo
(psia) Bar (sm3/sm3) (sm3/sm3) ABS. Error (bbl/stb) or (bbl/stb) (bbl/stb) or (bbl/stb) ABS. Error
5003.80 345 54.6 54.6 0 1.131 1.126 0.00446
4003.04 276 54.6 54.6 0 1.139 1.134 0.00411
3495.41 241 54.6 54.6 0 1.142 1.139 0.00258
3002.28 207 54.6 54.6 0 1.146 1.144 0.00172
2494.65 172 54.6 54.6 0 1.15 1.150 0.00036
2001.52 138 54.6 54.6 0 1.155 1.155 0.00041
1899.99 131 54.6 54.6 0 1.156 1.157 0.00065
1798.47 124 54.6 54.6 0 1.158 1.158 0.00004
1653.43 114 54.6 54.6 0.0 1.16 1.16 0.00000
1203.81 83 37.8 39.7 0.05 1.125 1.126 0.00115
696.18 48 22.1 23.0 0.04 1.101 1.088 0.01217
304.58 21 9.3 10.3 0.10 1.077 1.057 0.01819
101.53 7 2.3 3.3 0.43 1.056 1.040 0.01533
AAE% : 4.80% 0.47%

6. Task (f)
1. Generating a compositional PVT data file for the ECLIPSE 300 reservoir simulator can be done
from the main menu. File >> Export. Another window will appear, the export file type number 8
is chosen. Ok is pressed.

Figure 28: Export data window.

2. Export data options window allowing to choose the units of export. Field unit is chosen

Figure 29: Export data option.

19
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

3. PVO file was generated for E300 for 6 component matched model in a field unit:
-- Petroleum Experts - PVTp Export File
--
--
-- Export File Signature
-- #PetexECL300
-- Export File Version
-- #2
-- 2 has increased accuracy (no of decimal places) of output values
-- UNITS
--FIELD
-- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PVT FILE DETAILS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- PVT FILE NAME : 5_Term Project(C30+)AllMatched.pvi
-- STREAM : 6Comp-Matched by BIC's
-- Exported :Mon Mar 02 22:29:26 2015
-- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
NCOMPS
6/
EOS
PR /
-- Peng Robinson correction
PRCORR
-- Standard temperature and pressure in Deg F and PSIA
STCOND
60.0200 14.6960 /
-- Component names
CNAMES
N2C1
CO2C2
C3IC4NC4
IC5NC5C6METHY++
C7METHYLCYCLO++
C18C19C20C21C++
/
-- Critical temperatures Deg R
TCRIT
3.42921198e+002 5.49415125e+002 7.45389757e+002 9.24647325e+002
9.94765154e+002 1.82550301e+003
/
-- Critical pressures PSIA
PCRIT
6.72718384e+002 7.17500488e+002 5.52807129e+002 5.06895630e+002
4.02294067e+002 1.38930161e+002
/
-- Critical volumes FT3/LBMOLE
VCRIT
1.58868933e+000 2.35359621e+000 4.02083254e+000 5.32031965e+000
1.02359457e+001 2.24441814e+001
/
-- Reservoir 3-Parameter EoS Shift Coefficients
SSHIFT
-1.53999999e-001 -1.00199997e-001 -7.05393329e-002 -2.17463728e-002
5.63572347e-001 -8.10160860e-003
/
-- Critical volumes for LBC Viscosities FT3/LBMOLE
VCRITVIS
1.58868933e+000 2.35359621e+000 4.02083254e+000 5.32031965e+000
1.02359457e+001 2.24441814e+001
/
-- Acentric factors
ACF
1.10554304e-002 1.02514647e-001 1.89455450e-001 2.54017651e-001
3.91309820e-002 1.18171144e+000
/
-- Molecular Weights
MW
1.60636978e+001 3.04492054e+001 5.64661255e+001 8.22998123e+001
1.49269562e+002 3.81107819e+002
/
-- fluid sample composition
ZI
3.15100789e-001 6.80842445e-003
4.66116450e-002 1.05275896e-001 3.80357166e-001 1.45846080e-001
/
-- Boiling point temperatures Deg R
TBOIL
2.00758135e+002 3.32736406e+002 4.76812227e+002 6.07030382e+002
8.28216082e+002 1.23133962e+003
/
-- Reference temperatures Deg R
TREF
5.19690000e+002 5.19690000e+002 5.19690000e+002 5.19690000e+002
5.19690000e+002 5.19690000e+002
/
-- Reference densities LB/FT3
DREF
2.62205992e+001 2.99663993e+001 1.56075000e+001 2.49720004e+001
3.17144410e+001 3.51480914e+001
/
-- Parachors (Dynes/cm)
PARACHOR
6.99809952e+001 1.14071129e+002 1.89919632e+002 2.61760895e+002
4.52601807e+002 9.56223389e+002
/
BIC
-- Binary Interaction Coefficients
0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
1.35247087e-001 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000
/
-- Reservoir temperature in Deg F
RTEMP
122 /

20
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

4. Another PVO file was generated for E300 for 6 component matched model in a metric unit:
-- Petroleum Experts - PVTp Export File
--
--
-- Export File Signature
-- #PetexECL300
-- Export File Version
-- #2
-- 2 has increased accuracy (no of decimal places) of output values
-- UNITS
--METRIC
-- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PVT FILE DETAILS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- PVT FILE NAME : 5_Term Project(C30+)AllMatched.pvi
-- STREAM : 6Comp-Matched by BIC's
-- Exported :Mon Mar 02 22:36:57 2015
-- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
NCOMPS
6/
EOS
PR /
-- Peng Robinson correction
PRCORR
-- Standard temperature and pressure in Deg C and BARSA
STCOND
15.5667 1.0133 /
-- Component names
CNAMES
N2C1
CO2C2
C3IC4NC4
IC5NC5C6METHY++
C7METHYLCYCLO++
C18C19C20C21C++
/
-- Critical temperatures deg K
TCRIT
1.90511777e+002 3.05230625e+002 4.14105421e+002 5.13692958e+002
5.52647308e+002 1.01416834e+003
/
-- Critical pressures BARSA
PCRIT
4.63835114e+001 4.94712095e+001 3.81157055e+001 3.49501364e+001
2.77379241e+001 9.57914763e+000
/
-- Critical volumes
VCRIT
9.91813983e-002 1.46934305e-001 2.51019369e-001 3.32145960e-001
6.39027019e-001 1.40118351e+000
/
-- Reservoir 3-Parameter EoS Shift Coefficients
SSHIFT
-1.53999999e-001 -1.00199997e-001 -7.05393329e-002 -2.17463728e-002
5.63572347e-001 -8.10160860e-003
/
-- Critical volumes for LBC Viscosities
VCRITVIS
9.91813983e-002 1.46934305e-001 2.51019369e-001 3.32145960e-001
6.39027019e-001 1.40118351e+000
/
-- Acentric factors
ACF
1.10554304e-002 1.02514647e-001 1.89455450e-001 2.54017651e-001
3.91309820e-002 1.18171144e+000
/
-- Molecular Weights
MW
1.60636978e+001 3.04492054e+001 5.64661255e+001 8.22998123e+001
1.49269562e+002 3.81107819e+002
/
-- fluid sample composition
ZI
3.15100789e-001 6.80842445e-003
4.66116450e-002 1.05275896e-001 3.80357166e-001 1.45846080e-001
/
-- Boiling point temperatures deg K
TBOIL
1.11532297e+002 1.84853559e+002 2.64895682e+002 3.37239101e+002
4.60120046e+002 6.84077565e+002
/
-- Reference temperatures deg K
TREF
2.88716667e+002 2.88716667e+002 2.88716667e+002 2.88716667e+002
2.88716667e+002 2.88716667e+002
/
-- Reference densities KG/M3
DREF
4.19999987e+002 4.79999989e+002 2.50000000e+002 4.00000006e+002
5.08000016e+002 5.63000023e+002
/
-- Parachors (Dynes/cm)
PARACHOR
6.99809952e+001 1.14071129e+002 1.89919632e+002 2.61760895e+002
4.52601807e+002 9.56223389e+002
/
BIC
-- Binary Interaction Coefficients
0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
1.35247087e-001 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000 0.00000000e+000
0.00000000e+000
/
-- Reference temperatures Deg C
RTEMP
50 /

21
 Term Project
March 2, 2015

7. References
1
Ali Danesh: “PVT and Phase Behavior of Petroleum Reservoir Fluids,” Elsevier (2003).
2
Whitson, C.H.: “PHASE BEHAVIOR, Ch.4: Equation-of-State Calculations,” SPEJ (2000).
3
Whitson, C.H.: “Characterizing Hydrocarbon Plus Fractions,” SPEJ (August 1983) 683; Trans., AIME, 275.

22