ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.

3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92

Energy & Fuels XXXX, xxx, A

1 Analysis and Simulation of Steam Distillation Mechanism during the

2 Steam Injection Process
3 Mohammad T. Vafaei, R. Eslamloueyan, L. Enfeali, and Sh. Ayatollahi*
4 EOR Excellence Research Centre, College of Petroleum and Chemical Engineering,
5 Shiraz UniVersity, Shiraz, Iran

6 ReceiVed July 28, 2008. ReVised Manuscript ReceiVed October 31, 2008

8 Steam distillation could improve the oil recovery efficiency during the steam injection enhanced oil recovery
9 process. Because of its immense effects on oil recovery, it is important to investigate the main parameters of
10 steam distillation as well as the effects of oil and reservoir properties during this thermal process. In this work,
11 the simulation of batch steam distillation is performed on 18 sets of crude oil found in the literature. The
12 developed model is highly compatible with respect to the input oil properties that can also characterize the oil
13 with minimum entry. The calculated distillates were compared to the experimental data, and the results show
14 an average relative error of 13.74% for 15 sets of crude oil data, each calculated at 20 different points. According
15 to this study, the superheat conditions of steam and the amount of light oil fractions have the greatest effect
16 on the distillation yields, while the steam saturation conditions have less considerable effects. It was also
17 found that the steam injection rate has almost no effect on the distillate recovery. Butler’s correlation for
18 steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) recovery was modified to evaluate the effects of the steam distillation
19 mechanism during the SAGD process. The results reveal that almost 10-30% of the oil recovery is because
20 of the steam distillation mechanism during the steam injection process.
21
22

23 Introduction
24 Steamflooding, a thermodynamically complex oil displace-
25 ment process, is currently used as one of the most successful
26 enhanced oil recovery methods for heavy oil production.1 This
27 process involves simultaneous heat, mass, and fluid transport
28 in the heavy oil reservoir, which aims to increase the oil recovery
29 efficiency. Although it has been widely claimed that viscosity
30 reduction plays a key role in increasing the oil recovery
31 efficiency during thermal processes, including steamflooding,
32 this process differs markedly in performance from other thermal
33 methods.2-4 Experimental studies are performed to study the
34 effect of different mechanisms during steamflooding, such as
35 viscosity reduction, thermal expansion, gas drive, extraction Figure 1. Schematic of steam distillation.
36 effects, steam distillation on oil recovery efficiency, and
37 wettability alteration of the reservoir rock.5,6 According to these
main difference between steamflood and other thermal methods 42
38 studies, the residual oil after steamflooding is essentially inde-
of oil recovery is the condensation and/or vaporization of steam 43
39 pendent of the initial oil saturation and the oil recovery efficiency
and the crude oil constituents, as schematically shown in Figure 44
40 is higher for lighter hydrocarbons because they contain a greater
1.2,7 45
41 fraction of distillable components.5 It is widely known that the
Steam distillation, the process of separating light fractions 46
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Telephone: +98- of crude oil by direct steam injection into the crude oil, is a 47
9171184379. E-mail: shahab@shirazu.ac.ir. well-known process in the oil refining industry. The partial 48
(1) Butler, R. M. Thermal RecoVery of Oil and Bitumen; GravDrain,
Inc.: Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1997. pressure of steam in the gas phase enables the hydrocarbon 49
(2) Prats, M. Thermal RecoVery, SPE Monograph; Society of Petroleum components to evaporate at a lower boiling point temperature. 50
Engineering: Richardson, TX, 1986. The condensable hydrocarbon components return to liquid phase 51
(3) Farouq Ali, S. M. Heavy oil-evermore mobile. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2003,
37, 5–9. again, where the steam does likewise at the condensation front 52
(4) Nabipour, M.; Escrochi, M.; Ayatollahi, S.; Boukadi, F.; Wadhahi, (Figure 2). Several authors have described the effects of steam 53
M.; Maamari, R.; Bemani, A. Laboratory investigation of thermally-assisted distillation on oil recovery. Wu and Brown experimentally 54
gas-oil gravity drainage for secondary and tertiary oil recovery in fractured
models. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2007, 55, 74–82. investigated steam injection and concluded that steam distillation 55
(5) Willman, B. T.; Valleroy, V. V.; Runberg, G. W.; Cornelius, A. J.; yields were independent of porous medium, the steam injection 56
Powers, L. W. Laboratory studies of oil recovery by steam injection. J.
Pet. Technol. 1961, 222, 681–690.
(6) Ayatollahi, Sh.; Lashanizadegan, A.; Kazemi, H. Temperature effects (7) Wu, C. H. A critical review of steamflood mechanisms. SPE 6550,
on heavy oil relative permeability during gas-oil gravity drainage (GOGD). 47th Annual California Regional Meeting of the Society of Petroleum
Energy Fuels 2005, 19 (3), 977–983. Engineering, Bakersfield, CA, April 13-15, 1977.

10.1021/ef800602w CCC: $40.75  XXXX American Chemical Society

PAGE EST: 6.3

 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92
B Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX
Figure 2. Steam distillation mechanism in steamflooding.
Figure 3. Batch steam distillation apparatus.
Figure 4. Schematic of the stage-wise steam distillation process.
57 rate, and the amount of initial oil.8 They showed that oil
58 composition has a greater effect on the oil recovery efficiency
59 than American Petroleum Institute (API) gravity through the
60 distillation process. It was also concluded that the superheat
61 conditions of steam significantly affect recovery efficiency.
62 Considering different practical aspects of the recovery of oil
63 by steamflooding, Wu stated that, even though oil viscosity
64 reduction is the major mechanism in charge of enhanced oil
65 recovery, steam distillation and in situ solvent drive are critical
66 functioning means, responsible for low residual oil saturations
67 and gravity segregation of fluids in the porous media.7 The
68 mentioned convenient aspect of steamflooding made it practi-
69 cally important in the oil recovery by thermally induced gravity
70 drainage techniques that have recently received considerable
71 attention.4
72 Steam distillation has been simulated through different
73 methods. The old simple mathematical descriptions are exten-
74 sively described in the literature.9-11 The widely used method
(8) Wu, C. H.; Brown, A. A laboratory study on steam distillation in
porous media. SPE 5569, 50th Annual Fall Meeting of the Society of
Petroleum Engineering, Dallas, TX, 1975.
(9) Bailey, A. E. Steam deodorization of edible fats and oilssTheory
and practice. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1941, 33, 404–408.
(10) Holland, C. D.; Welch, N. E. Steam batch distillation calculations.
Pet. Refin. 1957, 36, 251–253.
Vafaei et al.
of Holland and Welch developed for calculating steam distil- 75
lation yield10 was applicable only at saturated steam tempera- 76
tures, where the mutual solubility of hydrocarbon and water is 77
negligible. Wu and Elder proposed several correlations to 78
estimate steam distillation yields with basic oil properties 79
separately at saturated steam conditions.12 80
Duerksen and Hsueh showed, experimentally, that the steam 81
distillation yields at steamflood conditions are significant, even 82
for heavy crude oils.13 They provided correlations for the 83
prediction of the steam distillation yield with different crude 84
oil properties and operating conditions. They also found that 85
the steam distillation yield correlates very well with API gravity 86
and wax content. Holland and Welch’s approach received 87
considerable attention recently.14,15 Langhoff and Wu stated that 88
the simple and practical method of Holland and Welch, with 89
extensions made to account for the condensation effects, predicts 90
the steam distillation yield with an average relative error of 91
12%.15 Northorp and Venkatesan presented an analytical mul- 92
ticomponent model to predict the steam distillation yield of a 93
specified thermal enhanced oil recovery (EOR) process16 by 94
modifying the Van Winkle approach.11 Their model shows that 95
the distillation yield increases as the temperature increases. It 96
also predicts the residual oil saturation successfully, although 97
the values of the experimental outcomes are totally apparatus- 98
dependent.16 The consequence of steam distillation on the 99
extremely low residual oil saturation observed during the Kern 100
River field steamflood process was found to be of great 101
importance.17 It was shown that steam distillation imposes large 102
compositional changes in the reservoir. Moreover, it was found 103
that superheat steam has significant effects on oil recovery 104
efficiency using steam injection.17,18 105
The steam distillation mechanism was recently investigated 106
in fractured reservoirs, and it has been found that steam 107
distillation is the dominant mechanism for the increased oil 108
recovery by steam injection in the Qarn Alam oil field in 109
Oman.19 It is reported that the main mechanism of oil recovery 110
from a matrix block of a typical fractured reservoir during 111
steamflooding is the integrated action of steam distillation and 112
solution gas drive.20 113
The previous models demonstrate specific cases requiring 114
efficiency factors that should be obtained through experimental 115
tests or correlations to be able to predict steam distillation yields 116
correctly. However, because they cannot generally predict crude 117
(11) Van Winkle, M. Distillation; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1967.
(12) Wu, C. H.; Elder, R. B. Correlation of crude oil steam distillation
yield with basic crude oil properties. SPE J. 1983, December, 937–945.
(13) Duerksen, J. H.; Hsueh, L. Steam distillation of crude oils. SPE J.
1983, April, 265–271.
(14) Rhee, S. W.; Doscher, T. M. A method for predicting oil recovery
by steamflooding, including the effects of distillation and gravity override.
SPE J. 1980, August, 249–266.
(15) Langhoff, G. A.; Wu, C. H. Calculation of high-temperature crude
oil water vapor separations. SPE ReserVoir EVal. Eng. 1986, September,
483–489.
(16) Northrop, P. S.; Venkatesan, V. N. Analytical steam distillation
model for thermal enhanced oil recovery processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
1993, 32, 2039–2046.
(17) Richardson, W. C.; Beladi, M. K.; Wu, C. H. Steam distillation
studies for the Kern River field. SPE ReserVoir EVal. Eng. 2000, 3, 13–22.
(18) Richardson, W. C.; Deemer, C. E.; Nelson, C. E. Composition of
remaining oil in a mature steamflood. Presented at the 10th Symposium of
Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, OK, April 21-24, 1996.
(19) Babadagli, T.; Al-Bemani, A. Investigations on matrix recovery
during steam injection into heavy-oil containing carbonate rocks. J. Pet.
Sci. Eng. 2007, 53, 259–274.
(20) Hernandez, M.; Trevisan, O. V. Heavy oil recovery mechanisms
during steam injection in naturally fractured reservoir. Presented at Society
of Petroleum Engineering Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, April 15-18, 2007.
 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92

Steam Distillation Mechanism Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX C

Table 1. Crude Oil Bulk Propertiesa

number field reservoir county gravity (°API) kinematic viscosity at 37.8 °C (m2/s) characterization factor
1 South Belridge Tulare Kern (CA) 12.4 0.4085 9.7
2 Winkleman Dome Nugget Freemont (WY) 14.9 0.0488 9.6
3 White Castle Central “V” Iberville (LA) 16.0 0.0308 9.7
4 Edison Kern River Kern (CA) 16.1 0.0397 9.7
5 Red Bank Creek (CA) 17.1 0.03 9.9
6 Slocum Carrizo Anderson (TX) 18.8 0.0395 10.0
7 Hidden Dome Tensleep Washakie (WY) 20.7 0.0086 10.1
8 Toborg Pecos (TX) 22.2 0.0036 10.1
9 Brea Lower B Orange (CA) 23.5 0.0039 10.0
10 Shannon Shannon Natrona (WY) 24.7 0.0032 10.2
11 Robinson Robinson Crawford (IL) 26.0 0.0029 10.3
12 El Dorado Butler (KS) 32.5 0.0005 10.1
13 Shiells Canyon Zone 203 Ventura (CA) 33.0 0.0006 10.2
14 Teapot Dome Shannon Natrona (WY) 34.5 0.0006 10.4
15 Rock Creek Roane (WV) 38.2 0.0005 10.4
16 Plum Bush J&J Washington (CO) 39.9 0.0006 10.5
a Obtained from ref 12.

118 oil behavior, they face considerable errors when applied to new rate. As the equilibrium condition is reached, the vapor phase, which 165
119 crude samples. Therefore, proposing a general model for the includes steam and light hydrocarbons, exits this stage from the 166
120 prediction of the yields in a variety of conditions and crude top and the remaining oil enters the next stage to be contacted again 167
121 properties is essential. In the current study, a practical model is with fresh steam at the same flow rate and conditions. This process 168

122 proposed that can predict distillation yields according to the continues until the last stage is reached. 169
P-H (adiabatic) flash calculation22 is performed in each stage 170
123 conditions of injected steam, using a generally applicable and to determine the product condition and phases using a suitable 171
124 validated simulator. The model is practical because of the nature equation of state. Then, water is separated from the distillate by 172
125 of the oil characterization technique and the equation of state performing mass balance, and the volume of the remaining 173
126 approach used for the prediction of steam distillation yields. hydrocarbon at standard conditions is calculated with the selected 174
thermodynamic model. A ratio of cumulative water distilled to the 175
127 Theoretical Model initial oil volume, Vw/Voi, is the vital parameter for correlating steam 176
distillation yield Vo/Voi.8,13,16 It is worth mentioning that, in this 177
128 Steam distillation tests are usually performed to evaluate the study, all of the volumes are calculated on the basis of standard 178
129 distillate yield in a batch distillation apparatus as shown in Figure conditions (T ) 15 µC and P ) 1 atm). 179
130 3. The apparatus is made of a still or column filled with a specified To mimic the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process, 180
131 amount of oil.8,12,13 The column could be considered a packed bed the results of the previous simulation are used. For this purpose, 181
132 or tank separator, because the steam distillation yield is independent viscosity changes of the initial oil because of mixing with distilled 182
133 of the media of the model.8 The column is placed in an oven or hydrocarbon are studied. Because distilled hydrocarbon has much 183
134 has a jacket that keeps its temperature uniformly at steam lower viscosity compared to the initial oil in the reservoir, it acts 184
135 temperature, and this results in the elimination of the viscosity like a solvent and reduces the initial oil viscosity after mixing 185
136 reduction effect because of a temperature increase. A steam occurs. 186
137 generator provides steam at a slightly higher temperature from the It is obvious that the oil viscosity is reduced by two mechanisms: 187
138 saturation condition to prevent condensation. Steam enters the (1) temperature increase, which is known as a viscosity reduction 188
139 column from the bottom and distills the oil. A collection system is mechanism, and (2) distilled hydrocarbon mixing, which is based 189
140 used to collect the distillate and determine its composition. The on a steam distillation mechanism. 190
141 system is usually composed of a condenser, a backpressure Butler’s model1 for predicting oil recovery in the SAGD 191
142 regulator, a gas-liquid separator, and a wet test meter. The distillate process has considered only the first mechanism. In the present 192
143 is collected in graduate cylinders, and the distillation yield is model, the effect of the steam distillation mechanism on oil 193
144 calculated in several successive intervals. viscosity reduction is added to Butler’s model and the contribu- 194
145 The first step in simulation of the steam distillation process is to tion of this mechanism to total recovery is evaluated. According 195
146 evaluate the oil characterization. This task was performed on the to Butler’s correlation, total recovery is reversely proportional 196
147 basis of the data available for each set of oil. These data are usually to the square root of oil viscosity at steam temperature (eqs 1 197
148 distillation test data, average molecular weight, API, characterization and 2). Consequently, the effect of the steam distillation 198
149 factor, mass density, and viscosity values. It should be noted that mechanism can be obtained from eq 3. 199
150 all of the mentioned data are not usually available; therefore, the
151 oil is characterized according to available data. To characterize the Q ) √(2φ∆S0kgRh)/(mνs) (1) 200
152 oil, at least two parameters out of the available characteristics,
153 namely, average molecular weight, API, and characterization factor, Q ∝ √1/νs (2) 201
154 are needed. On the basis of these data, true boiling point curves
155 and, consequently, molecular weight, density, and viscosity working Q′/Q ) νs/ν′s (3) 202
156 curves are produced. The oil is then cut into 50 pseudo-components
where Q is the oil recovery without considering the steam distillation 203
157 with definite physical and critical properties calculated by the
158 available correlations and generated working curves.21 mechanism, Q′ is the oil recovery including the steam distillation 204
159 To simulate the steam distillation process, the batch distillation mechanism effect, νs is the oil viscosity at steam temperature before 205
160 is converted into a stage-wise continuous process, in which the mixing with distilled hydrocarbon, and ν′s is the oil viscosity at 206
161 number of stages is set according to the steam flow rate. The steam temperature after mixing with distilled hydrocarbon. 207
162 procedure is shown in Figure 4, with each stage representing a It is assumed that the produced distillate from each stage mixes 208
163 time interval for the steam distillation process. Oil is injected into with the original oil, having amounts and specifications that are 209
164 the first stage and comes into contact with fresh steam at a constant the same as the initial oil used in the process. Kay’s mixing rule is 210

(21) Whitson, C. H. Characterizing hydrocarbon plus fractions. SPE J. (22) Walas, S. M. Chemical Process Equipments; Butterworth-Heine-
1983, August (23), 683–694. mann: Boston, MA, 1990; pp 377-378.
 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92

D Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX Vafaei et al.

Table 2. Crude-Oil-Simulated Distillation Dataa

temperature (°C) gas-chromatograph-simulated distillation yields (%)
for yields for temperatures (°C)
number field 5% 10% 20% 30% 229.4 262.8 287.8 321.1
1 South Belridge 271.7 310 360 405.6 1.1 3.2 7 12.5
2 Winkleman Dome 221.1 260 315.6 362.8 6 10.5 15 21.5
3 White Castle 222.2 254.4 304.4 337.8 6 11 17 26
4 Edison 235 271.1 321.1 361.1 4.1 8.5 13 20
5 Red Bank 176.7 237.8 311.1 365.6 9 12.8 16.1 22
6 Slocum 266.7 304.4 343.3 379.4 2.2 4.5 8 14.5
7 Hidden Dome 176.7 221.1 293.3 343.3 11 15.5 19.5 26
8 Toborg 154.4 198.9 260 310 15 21 25.5 32.5
9 Brea 132.2 171.1 232.2 286.7 19.2 25.8 30.5 37
10 Shannon 210 243.3 293.3 326.7 8.2 13.5 19 28.5
11 Robinson 182.2 215.6 260 298.3 13 20.5 27 37.5
12 El Dorado 123.9 132.2 160 193.3 41.5 51.2 57.5 67.5
13 Shiells Canyon 93.3 110 148.9 190.6 39.2 47 52.5 61
14 Teapot Dome 104.4 143.3 198.9 243.3 27 35.5 41.5 53
15 Rock Creek 101.7 121.1 154.4 190.6 41.2 51 57 66
16 Plum Bush 96.1 115.6 160 201.7 36 45.5 51.5 61
a Obtained from ref 12.

Table 3. Crude Oil Propertiesa Table 5. Comparison between the Proposed and Langhoffa
viscosity Models
(kg m-1 s-1) percent error for yields at Vw/Voi ) 10
average
molecular gravity crude oil Langhoffa model our model
number crude oil weight (°API) 25 µC 60 µC 93.3 µC
South Belridge 23.17 24.18
1 N. South Belridge 359 13.6 4.373 0.2302 0.0427 Winkleman Dome 25.38 17.78
a White Castle 35.16 31.68
Obtained from ref 16.
Edison 2.5 2.41
Red Bank 8.55 11.39
Table 4. Steam and Oil Simulation Conditionsa
Slocum 31.16 11.55
number crude oil pressure (atm) temperature (°C) Hidden Dome 5.01 2.98
1 Red Bank 13.6 198.9 Toborg 8.24 8.7
2 N. South Belridge (1)b 14.7 198 Brea 7.76 5.15
3 N. South Belridge (2)b 7.9 170.2 Shannon 21.58 6.55
4 Others 15 198.9 Robinson 14.88 26.92
El Dorado 43.09 44.79
a Obtained from ref 16. b Experiments are performed at two different Shiells Canyon 9.92 10.89
conditions. Teapot Dome 6.98 6.42
211 employed to determine the viscosity of the oil after mixing. The Rock Creek 38.14 49.82
Plum Bush 20.73 34.46
212 extra oil produced because of the steam distillation mechanism is
total average 18.89 18.48
213 calculated by means of eq 3.
a Obtained from ref 15.
214 The steam distillation experimental data available in the literature
215 consist of 18 sets that are shown in Tables 1-3. Table 4 shows the
216 operating conditions of steam and oil for each test retrieved from calculated on the basis of a single-point estimation of Vo/Voi 229
217 the experimental conditions in the literature. are shown in Table 5.15 The calculated results generated from 230
218 Results and Discussion the proposed model were in good agreement with the previous 231
work. Table 6 shows the average relative error calculated on 232
219 In the first step, the best equation of state to predict the the basis of 20 different Vw/Voi compared to the experimental 233
220 distillation yield according to the experimental data was data for each crude oil. The highlighted gray cells indicate the 234
221 investigated. To do this, the following equation of states were lowest error for each calculation. According to these results, 235
222 tested for all 18 data sets: (1) modified Peng-Robinson23 the modified Peng-Robinson equation of state seems to generate 236
223 (MPR), (2) Peng-Robinson24 (PR), (3) Soave-Redlich- better results. The average relative error for each oil data set is 237
224 Kwong25 (SRK), (4) Peng- Robinson-Stryjek-Vera26 (PRSV), calculated by the following equation: 238
225 (5) Kabadi-Danner27 (KD), (6) Lee-Kesler28 (LK), and (7)
226 Zudkevitch-Joffee29 (ZJ). n

227 The only tabulated results found in the literature were used ∑ |(V /Vo oi)sim - (Vo/Voi)exp|/(Vo/Voi)exp
here to check the validity of the model. The reported errors 1
228 average relative error )
n
(23) Mathias, P. M.; Copeman, T. W. Extension of the Peng-Robinson (4) 239
equation of state to complex mixtures of the various forms of the local
composition concept. Fluid Phase Equilib. 1983, 13, 91. It is important to note that no estimation for binary interaction 240
(24) Peng, D. Y.; Robinson, D. B. A new two constant equation of state.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1976, 15, 59–64. coefficients has been made for the Lee-Kesler equation of state 241
(25) Soave, G. Equilibrium constants from a modified Redlich-Kwong
equation of state. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1972, 27, 1197–1203. (28) Plocker, U.; Knapp, H.; Prausnitz, J. Calculation of high-pressure
(26) Stryjek, R.; Vera, J. H. PRSV: An improved Peng-Robinson vapor-liquid equilibria from a corresponding-states correlation with
equation of state for pure components and mixtures. Can. J. Chem. Eng. emphasis on asymmetric mixtures. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. DeV. 1978,
1986, 64. 17, 3–324.
(27) Kabadi, V. N.; Danner, R. P. A modified Soave-Redlich-Kwong (29) Zudkevitch, D.; Joffee, J. Correlation and prediction of vapor-liquid
equation of state for water-hydrocarbon phase equilibria. Ind. Eng. Chem. equilibria with the Redlich-Kwong equation of state. AICHE J. 1970, 16,
Process Des. DeV. 1985, 24, 537–541. 112–119.
 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92

Steam Distillation Mechanism Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX E

Table 6. Average Relative Errors between Simulation Results

and Experimental Data for 20 Points on Each Oila
average relative error (%)
number crude oil MPR PR SRK LK KD ZJ PRSV
1 South Belridge 19.78 33.97 33.57 93.19 49.08 45.30 35.32
2 Winkleman Dome 19.87 33.74 32.69 61.23 43.15 41.22 34.41
3 White Castle 30.84 42.00 41.31 59.24 54.36 54.42 42.16
4 Edison 14.29 19.64 18.54 41.09 27.40 28.38 20.14
5 Red Bank 11.38 9.56 8.28 30.28 14.58 10.46
6 Slocum 9.25 6.15 6.51 37.26 14.35 14.29 6.30
7 Hidden Dome 2.80 12.40 11.32 30.71 19.73 18.29 13.17
8 Toborg 8.58 9.19 8.15 20.28 14.04 14.03 9.64
9 Brea 9.90 22.16 21.13 32.76 28.00 26.63 22.77
10 Shannon 11.67 11.34 10.47 20.29 16.63 18.22 11.76
11 Robinson 28.00 37.26 36.98 45.37 48.56 47.33 37.57
12 El Dorado 42.60 50.15 49.94 51.29 55.42 55.59 50.35
13 Shiells Canyon 13.77 20.91 19.61 23.50 25.14 24.96 21.20
14 Teapot Dome 9.24 15.18 15.05 17.59 21.89 21.16 15.53
15 Rock Creek 45.89 53.78 56.59 58.35 60.26 59.49 54.17
16 Plum Bush 33.46 39.54 40.49 42.74 47.57 46.30 40.96
17 N. South 10.59 13.27 14.62 41.86 23.07 18.88 15.17
Belridge (1) Figure 6. Effect of the steam saturation conditions on the distillation
18 N. South 5.47 17.33 19.77 47.77 24.98 27.87 20.81 yield.
Belridge (2)
19 total average 18.19 24.87 24.85 42.20 33.74 31.76 25.69
a Minimum values for each row are in bold.

Figure 7. Effect of the superheat steam conditions on the distillation

Figure 5. Effect of the steam flow rate on the distillation yield. yield.

242 because of the lack of a suitable estimation method for water of stages is increased. The oil “N. South Belridge” was chosen 266

243 and hydrocarbon binary interaction coefficients in the range of as a reference to study the effect of steam saturation and 267

244 available pseudo-components in this study.28 superheat conditions on oil recovery. Figure 6 shows the effect 268

245 The data source used in this study indicated that the three of steam saturation conditions on the distillation yield of “N. 269

246 most deviated results shown in Table 6 are attributed to South Belridge” oil. The tests were performed at three steam 270

247 experimental inaccuracies.8 When these three data sets are saturation conditions: (1) T ) 100 µC and P ) 1 atm, (2) T ) 271

248 deleted, the overall error is reduced to about 13%. 170.2 µC and P ) 7.85 atm, which shows an average increase 272

249 In the next step, the effects of steam and oil properties on of 60.36% in the distillation yield compared to the previous 273

250 the distillation yield are investigated. This study includes the condition, and (3) T ) 198 µC and P ) 14.7 atm, which shows 274
251 effect of the steam injection rate, steam saturation conditions, an average increase of 92.8% in the distillation yield compared 275
252 superheat steam conditions, and crude oil properties. Figure 5 to the first condition. 276
253 illustrates the effect of the steam flow rate on the steam Figure 7 shows the effect of the superheat steam conditions 277
254 distillation yield. For this purpose, the number of stages is set on the distillation yield. Two different superheat conditions were 278
255 according to the steam flow rate. The oil flow rate is set to 0.003 considered in this study: (1) T ) 170.2 µC and P ) 1 atm, 279
256 m3/h at standard conditions. Four different results out of the showing an average increase of 170.5% in the distillation yield, 280
257 simulation are presented here: (1) 4 stages with a steam flow and (2) T ) 198 µC and P ) 1 atm, showing an average increase 281
258 rate of 0.015 m3/h, (2) 10 stages with a steam flow rate of 0.006 of 256.5% in the distillation yield. The results were compared 282
259 m3/h, (3) 15 stages with a steam flow rate of 0.004 m3/h, and to the saturated steam conditions at T ) 100 µC and P ) 1 283
260 (4) 20 stages with a steam flow rate of 0.003 m3/h. atm. 284
261 Figure 5 clearly shows that the steam flow rate has no effect Figure 8 shows the effect of the crude oil properties on the 285
262 on the distillation yield if it does not disturb the equilibrium distillation yield. Six different calculation results are presented 286
263 conditions. The small deviations relate to model accuracy here. It has been found that there is a direct correlation between 287
264 because of the number of stages used. Because steam is injected the API degree and the distillation yield, although it seems that 288
265 continuously, the results will be more accurate if the number the API is not the only effective parameter for this study. 289
 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92

F Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX Vafaei et al.

Figure 8. Effect of the crude oil properties on the distillation yield.

Figure 10. Solvent effect on oil viscosity.

Figure 9. Temperature effect on oil viscosity.

290 Steam Distillation Mechanism in the SAGD Process. The Figure 11. Steam distillation effect on total recovery in the SAGD
291 results of the simulation of the steam distillation mechanism in process.
292 the SAGD process are presented here. N. South Belridge (1) is
293 used for this investigation. Figure 9 shows the viscosity recovery of new oils with a reasonable accuracy. Another 317
294 reduction because of the temperature increase generated from advantage of this model is its simple approach employing 318
295 the following equation using the same constant as suggested in equations of state. Because the process is simulated by succes- 319
296 the SAGD process:1 sive separation processes in steady-state conditions, the recovery 320
of each stage can be determined by a simple adiabatic flash 321
297 νs/ν ) [(T - TR)/(TS - TR)]m (5) calculation instead of using multicomponent separation calcula- 322
298 Figure 10 illustrates the additional viscosity reduction because tions in the steam distillation process. Finally, the contribution 323
299 of steam distillation and subsequent hydrocarbon mixing. In this of the steam distillation mechanism on the oil recovery factor 324
300 figure, it is assumed that the volume of the initial oil to be is estimated through viscosity reduction. 325
301 distilled by steam is the same as the amount of oil in which
302 distilled hydrocarbon is dissolved using Kay’s mixing rule. This Conclusions 326
303 figure clearly shows that there is a significant change in the
304 viscosity up to Vw/Voi ) 5. This would affect the optimum (1) A model based on the equation of state approach is 327
305 amount of steam to be injected into the reservoir. proposed to simulate steam distillation of crude oil. This model 328
306 Figure 11 indicates the additional oil recovery through the considers the dynamic steam distillation process as steady-state 329
307 steam distillation mechanism during the SAGD process. The successive separation processes to calculate the distillate 330
308 data for this figure is generated from eqs 2 and 3. According to recovery. (2) The model is checked with 18 sets of experimental 331
309 this figure, about 70% of the total recovery is because of the data available in the literature. Seven different equation of states 332
310 viscosity reduction effect, while the solvent mixing effect are tested, and the modified Peng-Robinson equation of state 333
311 contributed to the remaining 30% of the total oil recovery. is found to predict the distillate yields with the least errors. (3) 334
312 In comparison to previous work, the current investigation is The effects of the steam injection rate, steam saturation and 335
313 distinctive because of its flexible data input capability and superheat conditions, and oil composition on distillate recovery 336
314 predictive characteristic. According to the Tables 2 and 3, the are studied. Results reveal that the steam injection rate has nearly 337
315 input data for characterizing N. South Belridge oil is different no effect on the distillate recovery, while the recovery increases 338
316 from 16 other oils. This model can predict the steam distillation with the increase of the saturation pressure and temperature. 339
 ohio2/yef-yef/yef-yef/yef99907/yef3252d07z xppws 23:ver.3 11/27/08 0:25 Msc: ef-2008-00602w TEID: nlr00 BATID: ef1a92
PAGE EST: 6.3

Steam Distillation Mechanism Energy & Fuels, Vol. xxx, No. xx, XXXX G

340 Steam superheat conditions show a greater effect on the recovery n ) number of data points in each oil data set 358
341 in comparison to the steam saturation conditions. It is also found N ) number of oil data sets 359
342 that the distillate recovery is highly dependent upon the oil P ) pressure 360
343 composition. (4) A simple model is also proposed to evaluate Q ) oil recovery flow rate without considering steam distillation 361
344 the effect of the steam distillation mechanism on the oil recovery effects 362

345 during the SAGD process considering the effect of viscosity Q′ ) oil recovery flow rate including steam distillation effects 363
∆S0 ) change in oil saturation 364
346 reduction because of both a temperature increase and solvent
T ) temperature 365
347 mixing in the crude oil. (5) The effect of solvent mixing on the
TR ) reservoir temperature 366
348 viscosity reduction decreases significantly when the ratio of cold Ts ) steam temperature 367
349 water equivalent steam injected into the initial oil in place Vo ) volume of distilled oil 368
350 exceeds 5 (Vw/Voi > 5). Voi ) initial oil volume 369
Vw ) volume of injected steam based on cold water equivalent 370
351 Acknowledgment. This research work was supported by the R ) thermal diffusivity 371
352 National Iranian Oil Company Research and Technology Directorate. φ ) porosity 372
νs ) kinematic viscosity of oil at steam temperature before mixing 373
353 Nomenclature with distilled hydrocarbon 374
354 g ) gravity acceleration ν′s ) kinematic viscosity of oil at steam temperature after mixing 375
355 h ) reservoir height with distilled hydrocarbon 376
356 k ) permeability
357 m ) viscosity parameter (3 < m < 4 for heavy oils) EF800602W 377