Foam Generation in Flow Across a Sharp Permeability Transition: Effect of Velocity and Fractional Flow
- Swej Y. Shah (Delft University of Technology) | Herru As Syukri (Delft University of Technology) | Karl-Heinz Wolf (Delft University of Technology) | Rashidah M. Pilus (Universiti Teknologi Petronas) | William R. Rossen (Delft University of Technology)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Journal
- Publication Date
- February 2020
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 451 - 464
- 2020.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- snap-off, foam generation, layered porous media, foam enhanced oil recovery, coreflooding
- 11 in the last 30 days
- 141 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
Foam reduces gas mobility and can help improve sweep efficiency in an enhanced-oil-recovery (EOR) process. For the latter, long-distance foam propagation is crucial. In porous media, strong foam generation requires that the local pressure gradient exceed a critical value (∇Pmin). Normally, this happens only in the near-well region. Away from wells, these requirements might not be met, and foam propagation is uncertain. It has been shown theoretically that foam can be generated, independent of pressure gradient, during flow across an abrupt increase in permeability (Rossen 1999). The objective of this study is to validate theoretical explanations through experimental evidence and to quantify the effect of fractional flow on this process.
This article is an extension of a recent study (Shah et al. 2018) investigating the effect of permeability contrast on this process. In this study, the effects of fractional flow and total superficial velocity are described. Coreflood experiments were performed in a cylindrical sintered-glass porous medium with two homogeneous layers and a sharp permeability jump in between, representing a lamination or cross lamination. Unlike previous studies of this foam-generation mechanism, in this study, gas and surfactant solution were coinjected at field-like velocities into a medium that was first flooded to steady state with gas/brine coinjection. The pressure gradient is measured across several sections of the core. X-ray computed tomography (CT) is used to generate dynamic phase-saturation maps as foam generates and propagates through the core. We investigate the effects of velocity and injected-gas fractional flow on foam generation and mobilization by systematically changing these variables through multiple experiments. The core is thoroughly cleaned after each experiment to remove any trapped gas and to ensure no hysteresis.
Local pressure measurements and CT-based saturation maps confirm that foam is generated at the permeability transition, and it then propagates downstream to the outlet of the core. A significant reduction in gas mobility is observed, even at low superficial velocities. Foam was generated in all cases, at all the injected conditions tested; however, at the lowest velocity tested, strong foam did not propagate all the way to the outlet of the core. Although foam generation was triggered across the permeability boundary at this velocity, it appeared that, for our system, the limit of foam propagation, in terms of a minimum-driving-force requirement, was reached at this low rate. CT images were used to quantify the accumulation of liquid near the permeability jump, causing local capillary pressure to fall below the critical capillary pressure required for snap-off. This leads to foam generation by snap-off. At the tested fractional flows, no clear trend was observed between foam strength and fg. For a given permeability contrast, foam generation was observed at higher gas fractions than predicted by previous work (Rossen 1999). Significant fluctuations in pressure gradient accompanied the process of foam generation, indicating a degree of intermittency in the generation rate—probably reflecting cycles of foam generation, dryout, imbibition, and then generation. The intermittency of foam generation was found to increase with decreasing injection velocities and increasing fractional flow. Within the range of conditions tested, the onset of foam generation (identified by the rise in ∇P and Sg) occurs after roughly the same amount of surfactant injection, independent of fractional flow or injection rate.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||14|
Almajid, M. M. and Kovscek, A. R. 2016. Pore-Level Mechanics of Foam Generation and Coalescence in the Presence of Oil. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 233: 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2015.10.008.
Almajid, M. M. and Kovscek, A. R. 2019. Pore Network Investigation of Trapped Gas and Foam Generation Mechanisms. Transp Porous Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-018-01224-4.
Apaydin, O. G. and Kovscek, A. R. 2001. Surfactant Concentration and End Effects on Foam Flow in Porous Media. Transp Porous Media 43 (3): 511–536. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010740811277.
Armstrong, R. T., McClure, J. E., Berrill, M. A. et al. 2016. Beyond Darcy’s Law: The Role of Phase Topology and Ganglion Dynamics for Two-Fluid Flow. Phys Rev E 94 (4): 043113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.94.043113.
Ashoori, E., Marchesin, D., and Rossen, W. 2012. Multiple Foam States and Long-Distance Foam Propagation in Porous Media. SPE J. 17 (4): 1231–1245. SPE-154024-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/154024-PA.
As Syukri, H. 2018. Experimental Study: Foam Generation and Propagation in Flow Across a Permeability Contrast. Master’s thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:961bf2b5-28d5-41e4-9283-a20e1c5d672b.
Berg, S., Armstrong, R., Ott, H. et al. 2014. Multiphase Flow in Porous Rock Imaged Under Dynamic Flow Conditions With Fast X-Ray Computed Microtomography. Petrophysics 55 (4): 304–312. SPWLA-2014-v55n4a3.
Chambers, D. J. 1994. Foams for Well Stimulation. In Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry, ed. L. L. Schramm, Vol. 242 of Advances in Chemistry, Chap. 9, 355–404. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/ba-1994-0242.ch009.
Chambers, K. and Radke, C. 1990. Capillary Phenomena in Foam Flow through Porous Media. In Interfacial Phenomena in Oil Recovery, ed. N. Morrow, Vol. 36 of Surfactant Science Series, Chap. 6, 191–256. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Chen, M., Yortsos, Y., and Rossen, W. 2005. Insights on Foam Generation in Porous Media From Pore-Network Studies. Colloids Surf A 256 (2–3): 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2005.01.020.
Chen, X., Kianinejad, A., and DiCarlo, D. A. 2016. An Extended JBN Method of Determining Unsteady-State Two-Phase Relative Permeability. Water Resour Res 52 (10): 8374–8383. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019204.
Dake, L. P. 1994. The Practice of Reservoir Engineering. In Developments in Petroleum Science, Vol. 36. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Falls, A., Hirasaki, G., Patzek, T. et al. 1988. Development of a Mechanistic Foam Simulator: The Population Balance and Generation by Snap-Off. SPE Res Eng 3 (3): 884–892. SPE-14961-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/14961-PA.
Farajzadeh, R., Krastev, R., and Zitha, P. 2008. Foam Films Stabilized With Alpha-Olefin Sulfonate (AOS). Colloids Surf A 324 (13): 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COLSURFA.2008.03.024.
Friedmann, F., Chen, W., and Gauglitz, P. 1991. Experimental and Simulation Study of High-Temperature Foam Displacement in Porous Media. SPE Res Eng 6 (1): 37–45. SPE-17357-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/17357-PA.
Gauglitz, P. A., Friedmann, F., Kam, S. I. et al. 2002. Foam Generation in Homogeneous Porous Media. Chem Eng Sci 57 (19): 4037–4052. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2509(02)00340-8.
Gupta, D. V. S. 2009. Unconventional Fracturing Fluids for Tight Gas Reservoirs. Paper presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 19–21 January. SPE-119424-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/119424-MS.
Hartkamp-Bakker, C. 1993. Permeability Heterogeneity in Cross-Bedded Sandstones: Impact on Water/Oil Displacement in Fluvial Reservoirs. PhD dissertation, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:be8ffa8f-5b66-4c46-932b-56d3eab5823e.
Hirasaki, G. J., Jackson, R. E., Jin, M. et al. 2000. Description of Surfactant/Foam Process and Surfactant-Enhanced Aquifer Remediation. In NAPL Removal: Surfactants, Foams, and Microemulsions, ed. S. Fiorenza, C. Miller, C. Oubre, and C. Ward, Chap. 1, 7–10, Boca Raton: AATDF Monograph Series, CRC Press.
Hirasaki, G. J., Miller, C. A., Szafranski, R. et al. 1997a. Field Demonstration of the Surfactant/Foam Process for Aquifer Remediation. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 5–8 October. SPE-39292-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/39292-MS.
Hirasaki, G. J., Miller, C. A., Szafranski, R. et al. 1997b. Surfactant/Foam Process for Aquifer Remediation. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, USA, 18–21 February, 471–480. SPE-37257-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/37257-MS.
Huh, D. and Handy, L. 1989. Comparison of Steady and Unsteady-State Flow of Gas and Foaming Solution in Porous Media. SPE Res Eng 4 (1): 77–84. SPE-15078-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/15078-PA.
Jenkins, M. 1984. An Analytical Model for Water/Gas Miscible Displacements. Paper presented at the SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 15–18 April. SPE-12632-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/12632-MS.
Kahrobaei, S., Vincent-Bonnieu, S., and Farajzadeh, R. 2017. Experimental Study of Hysteresis Behavior of Foam Generation in Porous Media. Sci Rep-UK 7 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09589-0.
Kam, S. and Rossen, W. R. 2003. A Model for Foam Generation in Homogeneous Media. SPE J. 8 (4): 417–425. SPE-87334-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/87334-PA.
Katz, A. J. and Thompson, A. H. 1986. Quantitative Prediction of Permeability in Porous Rock. Phys Rev B 34 (11): 8179–8181. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.34.8179.
Kharabaf, H. and Yortsos, Y. C. 1998. A Pore-Network Model for Foam Formation and Propagation in Porous Media. SPE J. 3 (1): 42–53. SPE-36663-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/36663-PA.
Kirkpatrick, S. 1973. Percolation and Conduction. Rev Mod Phys 45 (4): 574–588. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.45.574.
Kovscek, A. R., Patzek, T. W., and Radke, C. J. 1995. A Mechanistic Population Balance Model for Transient and Steady-State Foam Flow in Boise Sandstone. Chem Eng Sci 50 (23): 3783–3799. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(95)00199-F.
Kovscek, A. R. and Radke, C. J. 1994. Fundamentals of Foam Transport in Porous Media. In Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry, ed. L. Schramm, Vol. 242 of Advances in Chemistry, Chap. 3, 115–163, Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/ba-1994-0242.ch003.
Kovscek, A. R. and Radke, C. J. 1996. Gas Bubble Snap-Off Under Pressure-Driven Flow in Constricted Noncircular Capillaries. Colloids Surf A 117 (1–2): 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0927-7757(96)03637-0.
Kovscek, A. R. and Radke, C. J. 2003. Pressure-Driven Capillary Snap-Off of Gas Bubbles at Low Wetting-Liquid Content. Colloids Surf A 212 (2–3): 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7757(02)00302-3.
Lenormand, R., Zarcone, C., and Sarr, A. 1983. Mechanisms of the Displacement of One Fluid by Another in a Network of Capillary Ducts. J Fluid Mech 135: 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112083003110.
Leverett, M. 1941. Capillary Behavior in Porous Solids. J Pet Technol 142 (1): 152–169. SPE-941152-G. https://doi.org/10.2118/941152-G.
Li, Q. and Rossen, W. R. 2005. Injection Strategies for Foam Generation in Homogeneous and Layered Porous Media. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA, 9–12 October. SPE-96116-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/96116-MS.
Lyons, W. C., Guo, B., Graham, R. L. et al. 2009. Air and Gas Drilling Manual, third edition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-370895-3.X0001-6.
Ma, K., Farajzadeh, R., Lopez-Salinas, J. L. et al. 2014. Non-Uniqueness, Numerical Artifacts, and Parameter Sensitivity in Simulating Steady-State and Transient Foam Flow through Porous Media. Transp Porous Med 102 (3): 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-014-0276-9.
Ma, K., Lopez-Salinas, J. L., Puerto, M. C. et al. 2013. Estimation of Parameters for the Simulation of Foam Flow through Porous Media. Part 1: The Dry-Out Effect. Energy Fuels 27 (5): 2363–2375. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef302036s.
McCool, C. S., Parmeswar, R., and Willhite, G. P. 1983. Interpretation of Differential Pressure in Laboratory Surfactant/Polymer Displacements. SPE J. 23 (5): 791–803. SPE-10713-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/10713-PA.
Mees, F., Swennen, R., Geet, M. V. et al. 2003. Applications of X-Ray Computed Tomography in the Geosciences. Geol Soc Spec Publ 215: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.2003.215.01.01.
Nabawy, B. S., Géraud, Y., Rochette, P. et al. 2009. Pore-Throat Characterization in Highly Porous and Permeable Sandstones. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 93 (6): 719–739. https://doi.org/10.1306/03160908131.
Persoff, P., Radke, C. J., Pruess, K., et al. 1991. A Laboratory Investigation of Foam Flow in Sandstone at Elevated Pressure. SPE Res Eval & Eng 6 (3): 365–372. SPE-18781-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/18781-PA.
Ransohoff, T. and Radke, C. 1988. Mechanisms of Foam Generation in Glass-Bead Packs. SPE Res Eng 3 (2): 573–585. SPE-15441-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/15441-PA.
Reineck, H. E. and Singh, J. B. 1980. Depositional Sedimentary Environments. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-96291-2.
Roof, J. G. 1970. Snap-Off of Oil Droplets in Water-Wet Pores. SPE J. 10 (1): 85–90. SPE-2504-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/2504-PA.
Rossen, W. R. 1990a. Minimum Pressure Gradient for Foam Flow in Porous Media: Effect of Interactions With Stationary Lamellae. J Colloid Interface Sci 139 (2): 457–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(90)90118-8.
Rossen, W. R. 1990b. Theory of Mobilization Pressure Gradient of Flowing Foams in Porous Media. I. Incompressible Foam. J Colloid Interface Sci 136 (1): 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(90)90075-Y.
Rossen, W. R. 1996. Foams in Enhanced Oil Recovery. In Foams: Theory, Measurements and Applications, eds. R. K. Prud’homme and S. A. Khan, Vol. 57 of Surfactant Science Series, Chap. 11, 413–464. New York: Marcel Dekker. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203755709.
Rossen, W. R. 1999. Foam Generation at Layer Boundaries in Porous Media. SPE J. 4 (4): 409–412. SPE-59395-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/59395-PA.
Rossen, W. R. 2003. A Critical Review of Roof Snap-Off as a Mechanism of Steady-State Foam Generation in Homogeneous Porous Media. Colloids Surf A 225 (1–3): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7757(03)00309-1.
Rossen, W. R. and Gauglitz, P. A. 1990. Percolation Theory of Creation and Mobilization of Foams in Porous Media. AIChE J 36 (8): 1176–1188. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690360807.
Rossen, W. R. and van Duijn, C. J. 2004. Gravity Segregation in Steady-State Horizontal Flow in Homogeneous Reservoirs. J Pet Sci Eng 43 (1–2): 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PETROL.2004.01.004.
Schindelin, J., Arganda-Carreras, I., Frise, E. et al. 2012. Fiji: An Open-Source Platform for Biological-Image Analysis. Nat Methods 9 (7): 676–682. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019.
Schowalter, T. T. 1979. Mechanics of Secondary Hydrocarbon Migration and Entrapment. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 5 (149): 723–760. https://doi.org/10.1306/2F9182CA-16CE-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
Shah, S. Y., Wolf, K.-H., Pilus, R. et al. 2018. Foam Generation by Capillary Snap-Off in Flow Across a Sharp Permeability Transition. SPE J. 24 (1): 116–128. SPE-190210-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/190210-PA.
Simjoo, M., Dong, Y., Andrianov, A. et al. 2013. CT Scan Study of Immiscible Foam Flow in Porous Media for Enhancing Oil Recovery. Ind Eng Chem Res 52 (18): 6221–6233. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie300603v.
Stone, H. L. 1982. Vertical, Conformance in an Alternating Water-Miscible Gas Flood. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 26–29 September. SPE-11130-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/11130-MS.
Tanzil, D., Hirasaki, G. J., and Miller, C. A. 2002a. Mobility of Foam in Heterogeneous Media: Flow Parallel and Perpendicular to Stratification. SPE J. 7 (2): 203–212. SPE-78601-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/78601-PA.
Tanzil, D., Hirasaki, G. J., and Miller, C. A. 2002b. Conditions for Foam Generation in Homogeneous Porous Media. Paper presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 13–17 April. SPE-75176-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/75176-MS.
Yang, J. and Siddiqui, S. 1999. The Use of Foam to Improve Liquid Lifting from Low-Pressure Gas Wells. Paper presented at the Petroleum Conference of the South Saskatchewan Section, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada, 18–21 October. PETSOC-99-126. https://doi.org/10.2118/99-126.
Yortsos, Y. C. and Chang, J. 1990. Capillary Effects in Steady-State Flow in Heterogeneous Cores. Transp Porous Media 5 (4): 399–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01141993.
Yu, G., Vincent-Bonnieu, S., and Rossen, W. 2019. Foam Propagation at Low Superficial Velocity: Implications for Long-Distance Foam Propagation. Paper presented at the IOR 2019–20th European Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Pau, France, 8–11 April. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201900108.