Review of the Intercept Method for Relative Permeability Correction a Variety of Case Study Data
- Jules Reed (Lloyd’s Register) | Jos Maas (Independent Consultant)
- Document ID
- Society of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts
- Publication Date
- April 2019
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 283 - 296
- 2019. Society of Petrophysicists & Well Log Analysts
- 1 in the last 30 days
- 96 since 2007
- Show more detail
A novel method of measuring steady-state relative permeability, called the intercept method (IM), was recently introduced. The IM entails a modification of a standard steady-state procedure that incorporates multiple total flow rates at each fractional flow rate. The objective of the method is to measure data at each fractional flow rate that will permit simple analytical calculations to correct differential pressure (hence relative permeability) and saturation data for the effects of capillary pressure. The IM is intended to provide a corrective technique without the need for additional supportive analyses, such as capillary pressure and in-situ saturation monitoring (ISSM), or as an alternative approach to the current considered best practice of numerical coreflood simulation, which generally requires the specified additional data.
Consequently, the IM is of interest to the global industry in regions and/or laboratories that do not possess state-of-the-art equipment, or for its cost-saving potential. However, before employing this new method, it was important to the authors to investigate its validity across a wider range of rock properties, sample dimensions and wetting states experienced in commercial special core analysis laboratory (SCAL) coreflood experiments. This study thus draws on a variety of relative permeability curves (and supporting data) from various global core studies, originally derived by typical relative permeability methods plus coreflood simulation. From these data, we use SCORES (an open-source coreflood simulation software) to simulate the expected results of multiflow-rate steady-state experiments and use the IM to derive and compare the corrected relative permeability curves. Results highlight criteria under which the method does not provide fully corrected data. The paper explores these criteria in more detail.
|File Size||10 MB||Number of Pages||14|