On Some Physical Properties of Oil from the Luginets Field

L. A. Pukhlyakov, G. N. Chertenkova
Submitted 1976 | SovietRxiv: ru-197601.12729 | Translated from Russian

Abstract Generated abstract

This paper examines physical properties of oil samples from two wells in the Luginetskoye field, using laboratory measurements on a UIPN-2M apparatus at reservoir temperature and pressure conditions. Pressure volume behavior, saturation pressure, gas content, formation volume factor, shrinkage, density, viscosity, associated gas composition, and stepwise degassing characteristics were determined and compared. The two samples differed markedly: oil from well 159 showed a saturation pressure near 104 ati, while oil from well 162 appeared to begin degassing above 200 atm, possibly even above reservoir pressure. The authors interpret these contrasts, together with differences in gas content, reservoir pressure, and methane-rich associated gas, as evidence that the wells may have penetrated different pools, with well 162 likely located near a gas-oil contact and influenced by gas-cap gas.

Full Text

ON SOME PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF OIL FROM THE LUGINETSKOYE FIELD

L. A. Pukhlyakov, G. N. Chertenkova

(Presented by Professor A. V. Aksarin)

To study the physical properties of the oil from the Luginetskoye field, samples were taken from two wells. The first was from well 159, horizon Yu-1, perforation interval 2,325–2,333 m, and the second from well 162, horizon Yu-1, perforation interval 2,342–2,348 m. In the card accompanying the first sample, the value 228.6 ati was indicated as the reservoir pressure; in the card accompanying the second sample, 243.2 ati. The reservoir temperature was the same in both cases—81°C. The samples were transferred into containers at a pressure of 220–232 ati and delivered to the laboratory of oil-reservoir physics of the Tomsk Polytechnic Institute, where they were studied.

The study was carried out on the UIPN-2M apparatus according to the procedure described by V. N. Mamuna et al. [1]. First of all, the saturation pressure was determined. For this purpose, the oil sample transferred into the apparatus press was heated to 81°C (reservoir temperature) and compressed to the value of the reservoir pressure; the resulting sample volume was recorded on the press scale. Then, using the manual drive of the press, the sample volume was increased in such a way that the pressure inside the press decreased by 10–20 atmospheres. At the same time, both the sample volume and the pressure inside the press were recorded. The operation was repeated several times.

The obtained changes in volume \(\Delta N\) were plotted along the abscissa axis, and the corresponding pressures \(\Delta P\) along the ordinate axis. As a result, two graphs were obtained which, strange as it may seem, differ fundamentally from one another.

The graph corresponding to the first sample (Fig. 1) consists of two slightly concave curves: one with a slope of 26.4 at/cm\(^3\) and the other with a slope of 2.75 at/cm\(^3\), or, taking into account that the sample volume was 145 cm\(^3\), and recalculating for a sample volume of 100 cm\(^3\)—38 at/cm\(^3\) and 4.0 at/cm\(^3\), respectively. The point of their intersection corresponds to a pressure of 104 ati. This value was adopted as the saturation pressure for the first sample. Thus, the curve with a slope of 38 at/cm\(^3\) was taken as the curve of the liquid state of the sample, and the curve with a slope of 4.0 at/cm\(^3\) as the curve of the two-phase state of the first sample.

On the graph of the second sample (Fig. 2), one curve was obtained with a continuously decreasing slope. In the first section its slope is 3.54 at/cm\(^3\), in the second 2.75 at/cm\(^3\), in the third 1.66 at/cm\(^3\), and in the last 1.14 at/cm\(^3\), or, taking into account that the sample volume was 106 cm\(^3\) and recalculating for a sample volume of 100 cm\(^3\), we obtain 3.75; 2.9; 1.76 and 1.2 at/cm\(^3\).

Figure 1. Graph for determining the saturation pressure of oil taken from well 159 of the Luginetskoye field. The graph shows a break in the curve corresponding to the moment at which gas bubbles appear in the oil.

Fig. 1. Graph for determining the saturation pressure of oil taken from well 159 of the Luginetskoye field. The graph shows a break in the curve corresponding to the moment at which gas bubbles appear in the oil.

In interpreting the data obtained, the authors’ opinions differed. In the opinion of G. I. Chertenkova, the point of intersection of the next-to-last and last segments of the given curve, which corresponds to a pressure of 209 atm, is the point at which degassing of the second sample begins.

In the opinion of L. A. Pukhlyakov, gas bubbles were already present in some quantity in this oil sample at the very beginning of the experiment, that is, at a pressure of 243 atm. Evidence of this is the fact that even on the first segment of the curve under consideration its slope, 3.75 atm/cm³, does not reach the value of the average slope of the second curve of the first sample (4.0 atm/cm³), which was taken above as the curve of the two-phase state of the sample. In other words, in L. A. Pukhlyakov’s opinion, the saturation pressure of this sample exceeds the reservoir pressure.

These samples differ sharply not only in the values of saturation pressure, but also in other parameters. Thus, the gas content, referred to unit volume, is 80.86 cm³/cm³ for the first sample and 116.99 cm³/cm³ for the second sample (Table 1); the formation volume factor is 1.297 for the first sample and 1.393 for the second. All this suggests that in the present case

Fig. 2. Graph for determining the saturation pressure of oil sampled from well 162 of the Luginetskoye field.

Table 1

Results of the study of the principal physical properties of oil from the Luginetskoye field

Parameters Units of measurement Oil sample from well 159 Oil sample from well 162
Perforation interval m 2325—2333 2342—2348
Sampling date 28 August 68 12 November 68
Reservoir pressure ati 228,6 243,2
Saturation pressure ati 104 more than 200
Compressibility coefficient 1/at 20,73·10⁻⁵ 20,52·10⁻⁵
Gas content, referred to unit volume m³/m³ 80,86 116,99
Gas content, referred to unit weight m³/t 97,19 140,29
Volume factor 1 1,297 1,393
Shrinkage % 22,90 28,17
Density of separated oil g/cm³ 0,832 0,838
Density of reservoir oil g/cm³ 0,715 0,704
Viscosity of separated oil centipoise 4,55 4,29
Average density of associated gas g/liter 1,133 1,215
Average gas solubility coefficient m³/m³·at 0,717 0,834
Final degassing temperature 20°C 21°C
Final degassing pressure ata 1 1

different wells penetrated different pools. This is also indicated by the considerable difference in reservoir pressures (228.6 atm for the first sample, 243.2 atm for the second).

A second conclusion also suggests itself. Well 159 penetrated an ordinary oil pool. Well 162 penetrated a gas-oil pool near the gas-oil contact. In accordance with this is the fact that in the associated gas of the second oil sample (taken from well 162) the proportion of methane is too high. It reaches 88.68 volume percent (Table 2). Meanwhile, in the associated gases of most oil fields of Tomsk Oblast, for example, Strezhevo, Pervomaiskoye, and others, the methane content lies within the range of 50–60 volume percent. The proportions of propane and butane are unusually small here (1.50 and 0.73 volume percent); they are smaller than the proportion of ethane (2.99 volume percent). But in the associated gases of the oils of most fields the proportions of propane and butane exceed the proportions of ethane. One gains the impression that the second sample of oil from the Luginetskoye field (taken from well 162) proved to be saturated with natural gas from the gas cap.

Table 2

Composition of the associated gas evolved from oil of the Luginetskoye field, taken from well 162

Components Volume percent with air Volume percent without air
Methane 74,67 88,68
Ethane 2,51 2,99
Propane 1,27 1,50
Isobutane 0,25 0,30
Normal butane 0,36 0,43
Isopentane 0,08 0,10
Normal pentane 0,10 0,12
Oxygen 3,32 ---
Nitrogen 16,84 5,17
Carbon dioxide 0,60 0,71

The results of stepwise degassing of both oil samples are given below (Tables 3 and 4).

Table 3

Results of stepwise degassing of oil from the Luginetskoye field, taken from well 159

Indices Degassing pressure, atm abs. Temperature, °C Amount of gas, cm³/cm³, in solution Amount of gas, cm³/cm³, free Gas solubility coefficient, m³/m³·atm Gas density, g/liter Volume coefficient Oil density, g/cm³
Reservoir pressure 229,6 81 80,86 --- --- — 1,297 0,716
Saturation pressure 105 81 80,86 --- 0,785 — 1,367 0,678
I stage 84 81 63,37 17,49 0,754 1,005 1,294 0,703
II stage 72 81 62,82 18,04 0,872 1,003 1,288 0,705
III stage 52 81 51,10 29,76 0,982 1,136 1,278 0,700
IV stage 45 81 43,00 37,86 0,955 1,140 1,271 0,698
V stage 34 81 39,29 41,57 1,155 1,140 1,258 0,701
VI stage 22 81 24,16 56,70 1,098 1,144 1,248 0,693
VII stage 19 81 20,62 60,24 1,085 1,190 1,154 0,746
VIII stage 1 81 0,00 80,86 --- 1,412 1,070 0,779
IX stage 1 20 0,00 80,86 — — 1,00 0,832

Table 4

Results of stepwise degassing of oil from the Luginetskoye field, sampled from well 162

Indicators Degassing pressure, atm Temperature, °C Amount of gas, m³/m³ in solution Amount of gas, m³/m³ free Gas solubility coefficient, m³/m³·atm Gas density, g/liter Oil volume coefficient Oil density, g/cm³
Reservoir pressure 244.2 80 116.99 0.00 — — 1.393 0.704
I stage 176 80 77.70 39.29 0.441 1.206 1.265 0.733
II stage 145 80 58.44 58.55 0.403 1.189 1.221 0.741
III stage 114 80 43.59 73.40 0.382 1.165 1.191 0.745
IV stage 83 80 28.50 88.49 0.343 1.160 1.166 0.746
V stage 52 80 21.08 95.91 0.405 1.179 1.148 0.750
VI stage 21 80 14.32 102.67 0.681 1.222 1.138 0.749
VII stage 1 80 0.00 116.99 — 1.303 1.066 0.783
VIII stage 1 20 0.00 116.99 — — 1.000 0.838

REFERENCES

  1. V. P. Mamuna, G. F. Trebin, B. V. Ulyaninskii, Experimental Study of Reservoir Oils. GOSINTI, Moscow, 1960.

Submission history

On Some Physical Properties of Oil from the Luginets Field