Petroleum Science and Technology, 32:11681174, 2014

C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Copyright 
ISSN: 1091-6466 print / 1532-2459 online
DOI: 10.1080/10916466.2011.569811

The Prediction of Bubble-point Pressure and Bubble-point Oil

Formation Volume Factor in the Absence of PVT Analysis
S. Elmabrouk,1 A. Zekri,2 and E. Shirif3
1

Faculty of Engineering, University of Tripoli, Tripoli, Libya

Faculty of Engineering, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
3
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Regina, Canada

Up to now, there has not been one specific correlation published to directly estimate the bubble-point
pressure in the absence of pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) analysis. Presently, there is just one
published correlation available to estimate the bubble-point oil formation volume factor (FVF) directly
in the absence of PVT analysis. Multiple regression analysis technique is applied to develop two novel
correlations to estimate the bubble-point pressure and the bubble-point oil FVF. The developed correlations can be applied in a straightforward manner by using direct field measurement data. Separator gas
oil ratio, separator pressure, stock-tank oil gravity, and reservoir temperature are the only key parameters
required to predict bubble-point pressure and bubble-point oil FVF.
Keywords: bubble-point correlation, formation volume factor, gas-oil ratio

1. INTRODUCTION
Ideally, reservoir fluid properties are determined from laboratory studies on live oil samples collected
from the bottom of the wellbore or from the surface. Standard reservoir pressure-volume-temperature
(PVT) fluid studies are designed to simulate the simultaneous fluid flow of oil and gas from the reservoir to the surface. The production path of reservoir fluids from the reservoir to surface is simulated
in the laboratory at reservoir temperature. During this process, the bubble-point pressure (pb ) is measured. Likewise, the oil volumes and the amount of gas released are measured and used to determine
oil formation volume factor (FVF; Bo ) and solution gas oil ratio (GOR) (Rs ) as functions of pressure.
In the absence of such experimental analysis, empirical PVT correlations can be used to estimate
the reservoir fluid properties. Reasons for using empirical PVT correlations could be (a) economic
issues, (b) poor sample quality due to nonrepresentative fluid, human error during sampling or field
transfers, (c) insufficient sample volume to obtain a complete analysis, or (d) errors in laboratory
analysis.
2. LITERATURE SURVEY
Several correlations within the oil and gas industry for obtaining bubble-point pressures (pb ) and
bubble-point oil FVF (Bob ) of reservoir oils already exist. The correlations are essentially based
Address correspondence to S. Elmabrouk, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tripoli, Tripoli, Libya. E-mail:
saber elmabrouk@yahoo.com
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/lpet.

1168

ABSENCE OF PVT ANALYSIS

1169

on the assumption that pb and Bob are strong functions of the bubble-point solution GOR (Rsb ),
the reservoir temperature (T R ), the gas specific gravity (g ), and the stock-tank oil specific gravity
(oST ). Bubble-point solution GOR can be obtained as the sum of the stock-tank vent GOR (RST ;
seldom field measurement) and the measured separator gas oil ratio (RSP ). This is valid only if the
RSP and RST are measured while the reservoir pressure is above the pb . Sometimes, the sums of
the two producing gas-oil ratios are called flash bubble-point solution GOR (RsFb ) or total GOR.
Some correlations used differential bubble-point solution GOR (RsDb ) rather than RsFb . Among those
were Borden and Rzasa (1950), Knopp and Ramsey (1960), Vasquez and Beggs (1980), Al-Marhoun
(1988), Dokla and Osman (1992), Elsharkawy and Alikhan (1997), Almehaideb (1997), Hanafy et al.
(1997), McCain et al. (1998), Velarde et al. (1999), Boukadi et al. (2002), Gharbi and Elsharkawy
(2003), and Mazandarani and Asghari (2007). Others preferred to use flash bubble-point solution
GOR (RsFb) as in Standing (1947), Lasater (1958), Tehrani (1967), Glaso (1980), Macary and
El-Batanoney (1992), Al-Marhoun (1992), Frashad et al. (1996), Petrosky and Frashad (1998), and
Ikiensikimama and Oboja (2009).
Moreover, several correlations by Labedi (1990), Rollins et al. (1990), Dokla and Osman (1992),
Macary and El-Batanoney (1992), Velarde et al. (1999), Petrosky and Farshad (1998), and McCain
et al. (1998) used flash separator gas specific gravity (gSP ), while others used total gas specific
gravity as in Standing (1947), Borden and Rzasa (1950), Lasater (1958), Elsharkawy and Alikhan
(1997), Glaso (1980), and Mazandarani and Asghari (2007). Other correlations used weight average
specific gas gravity of the separator and stock-tank vent gas. Among those were Al-Marhoun (1988),
Frashad et al. (1996), Al-Marhoun (1997), Al-Shammasi (1999), Hemmati and Kharrat (2007), and
Ikiensikimama and Oboja (2009). Few methods required first to adjust gas gravity to separator
pressure at 100 psig before being used in the correlations to be correlated as in Vasquez and Beggs
(1980). Labedi (1990) proposed a bubble-point pressure correlation based on: separator GOR (RSP ),
separator temperature (T SP ), separator gas specific gravity (gSP ), stock-tank API gravity and reservoir temperature (T R ). McCain (1991) provided guidance on the application of the PVT correlations.
To estimate bubble-point pressure and bubble-point oil FVF, he suggested using Standing (1977)
correlations, in conjunction with Rollins et al.s (1990) stock-tank vent GOR correlation.
3. NEWLY DEVELOPED CORRELATIONS
The main objective of this study is to overcome the limitations faced by previous correlations by
building regression models using direct measured field parameters as input variables to estimate pb
and Bob . Two correlations are proposed as a function of four directly measured field parameters (RSP ,
PSP , oST , and T R ). By using the four parameters, engineers can estimate pb and Bob for crude oil
straightforwardly in the absence of PVT analysis.
The PVT data used in this study were obtained from two-stage and single-stage flash separation
tests. A total of 118 reservoir fluid studies (476 data points) were collected from various Libyan oil
fields in the Sirte Basin. The majority of the data points are taken from two-stage flash separation
tests (355 data points). In the single-stage separation test, the separator pressure is atmospheric
pressure and the stock-tank vent GOR value is equal to zero. In order to study the validity of the
proposed correlations, the 476 data points were divided into two groups randomly. Group A includes
a total of 413 data points. Group B data (62 data points) were used to test the validity of the newly
developed correlations and were not switched.
4. BUBBLE-POINT PRESSURE CORRELATION
Numerous models were tried as regression equations. Equation (1) was found to be very accurate.
The natural logarithm of bubble-point pressure was regressed against the natural logarithms of

1170

S. ELMABROUK ET AL.

separator GOR, separator pressure, of stock-tank oil gravity, and reservoir temperature.
0.18 4.98 0.658
pb = R0.683
SP PSP oST TR

(1)

An additional important application of the proposed pb correlation is to check the validity of the
bottom-hole PVT samples and to select the most representative sample. Since the representativeness
of a PVT study greatly depends on sampling conditions, and the first and most important operation,
before running a complete reservoir fluid study, is to check the validity of the samples. The bottomhole sample, used for PVT study, is selected according to the results obtained during the verification
of sample validity.

5. BUBBLE-POINT OIL FVF CORRELATION

Usually, the oil FVF obtained from a differential vaporization test should be adjusted using flash
separation oil FVF to properly approximate a combination liberation system. However, at bubblepoint pressure, Bob is equal to BoFb . Accordingly, by using a multiple regression analysis technique,
the Bob was correlated as a function of PSP , RSP , oST , and T R . After trying many models, the
following model was found to be a very good prediction equation of bubble-point oil FVF (Eq. [2]).
Bob = 1.6624 + 0.000512RSP + 0.00015PSP 0.802oST + 0.000501TR

(2)

6. CORRELATION VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION

Statistical correlation verification and validation are the most important step in the correlation
development process. Both quantitative and graphical analysis of the residual are used to verify
the accuracy of the proposed correlations. Quantitative error analysis is determined in terms of
correlation coefficient (R2 ), standard deviation (SD), average percent relative error (ARE), and
absolute average percent relative error (AARE). Table 1 summarizes the quantitative statistical error
analysis for the proposed correlations.
Following the estimation of a regression model, the graphical error analysis was established
by analyzing the residuals. The residual distribution for pb and Bob correlations were performed.
Both distributions indicated that the error is normally distributed and we can conclude that both
correlations satisfy the normality assumption. Figures 1 and 2 present the computed values from the
TABLE 1
Quantitative Statistical Error Analysis
Statistical Criterion
R2 , %
SD
AE
Min. AE
Max. AE
ARE, %
Min ARE, %
Max ARE, %
AARE, %
Min AARE, %
Max AARE, %

pb Model

Bob Model

95.67
435.6
17.72
2112.8
1172.8
2.83
54.37
120.82
16.757
0.05
120.816

96.3
0.0291
0.0
0.06411
0.11087
0.038
8.399
5.255
1.6874
0.0122
8.3989

ABSENCE OF PVT ANALYSIS

FIGURE 1

1171

A 45 straight line cross-plot for bubble-point pressure correlation.

regression models versus the experimental values. Both figures show all points are scattered around
the y = x line.

7. COMPARISON WITH OTHER CORRELATIONS

The correlations need first to estimate Rsb and gSP or obtained experimentally. Therefore, none
of the published bubble-point correlations were subjected to test its accuracy against the proposed

FIGURE 2

A 45 straight line cross-plots for bubble-point oil FVF correlation.

1172

S. ELMABROUK ET AL.

TABLE 2
Comparison of Proposed Bubble-point Oil FVF Correlation
T his Study Eq. (11)
Error SD, bb/STB
AE, bbl/STB
Max. AE, bbl/STB
Min. AE, bb/STB
ARE, %
Max. ARE, %
Min. ARE, %
A ARE, %
Max. AARE, %
Min. AARE, %

0.02322
0.00412
0.05286
0.05351
0.335
3.635
3.548
1.412
3.635
0.028

Labedi 1990 Eq. (4)

0.02793
0.00418
0.07064
0.0589
0.241
4.757
4.4165
1.617
4.757
0.036

bubble-point correlation in this study. However, the proposed Bob correlation was subjected to
evaluation and validation. Its accuracy was tested solely against Labedis correlation due to the fact
Labedis bubble-point oil FVF is presently the only published correlation available in the literature
to estimate bubble-point oil FVF directly in the absence of PVT analysis. The Group B data set
(62 data points) were used in this test. However, these data points were not switched in the model
derivation process. AE, ARE, AARE, SD, and a 45 line cross-plot were used as comparative criteria.
Figure 3 compares the behavior of the proposed Bob regression model to Labedi (1990). It shows the
produced model in this study provides more reliable results. The majority of the estimated points
of the proposed correlation fall very close to the 45 line with less AE, less ARE and less AARE.
Table 2 demonstrates the statistical analysis of this comparison.

FIGURE 3

Evaluation and validation of bubble-point oil FVF correlation.

ABSENCE OF PVT ANALYSIS

1173

8. CONCLUSIONS
A correlation to predict the bubble-point pressure and bubble-point FVF in the absence of PVT
analysis is developed. The proposed bubble-point pressure correlation can be used to check the
validity of the bottom-hole PVT samples in order to select the most representative sample before
running the PVT laboratory analysis.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the management of the following oil companies for providing
the data and permission to publish this work: AGOCO, Sirte Oil, Waha Oil, Millita Oil and Gas,
Repsol Oil, and Harouge Oil.

FUNDING
The authors wholeheartedly thank and appreciate FGSA, University of Regina for their generous
financial support.

REFERENCES
Al-Marhoun, M. (1988). PVT correlations for Middle East Crude oils. J. Pet. Technol. 40:650666.
Al-Marhoun, M. A. (1992). New correlations for formation volume factors of oil and gas mixtures. J. Can. Pet. Technol.
31:2226.
Almehaideb, R. A. (1997). Improved PVT correlations for UAE crude oil. SPE paper no. 37691. Middle East Oil Conference
and Exhibition, Manama, Bahrain March 1720.
Al-Shammasi, A. A. (1999). Bubble point pressure and oil formation volume factor correlations. SPE 53185, SPE Middle
East Oil Show, Bahrain, February 2023.
Borden, G., and Rzasa, M. J. (1950). Correlation of bottom hole sample data. Trans. AIME 189:345348.
Boukadi, F. H., Bemani, A. S., and Hashmi, A. (2002). PVT empirical models for saturated Omani crude oils. J. Pet. Sci.
Technol. 20:89100.
Dokla, M. E., and Osman, M. E. (1992). Correlation of PVT properties for UAE crudes. SPE Form. Eval. 7:4146.
Elsharkawy, A. M., and Alikhan, A. A. (1997). Correlation for predicting solution gas/oil ratio, formation volume factor, and
undersaturated oil compressibility. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 17:291302.
Frashad, F., LeBlanc, J. L., Gruber, J. D., and Osorio, J. G. (1966). Empirical PVT correlations for Colombian crude oils. SPE
36105, Fourth Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, April 2326.
Gharbi, R., and Elsharkawy, A. A. (2003). Predicting the bubble-point pressure and formation-volume-factor of worldwide
crude oil systems. Pet. Sci. Technol. 21:5379.
Glaso, O. (1980). Generalized pressurevolume temperature correlations. J. Pet. Technol. 32:785795.
Hanafy, H. H., Macary, S. M., ElNady, Y. M., Bayomi, A. A., and El Batanoney, M. H. (1997). Empirical PVT correlations
applied to Egyptian crude oils exemplify significance of using regional correlations. SPE 37295, 1997 SPE International
Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, February 1820.
Hemmati, M. N., and Kharrat, R. (2007). A correlation approach for prediction of crude-oil PVT properties. SPE 104543,
15th SPE Middle East Show and Conference, Bahrain, March 1114.
Ikiensikimama, S. S., and Ogboja, O. (2009). New bubble-point pressure empirical PVT correlation. SPE 128893, Nigeria
Annual International Conference and Exhibition, Abuja, Nigeria, August 35.
Knopp, C. R., and Ramsey, L. A. (1960). Correlation for oil formation volume factor and solution gas-oil ratio. J. Pet. Technol.
12:2729.
Labedi, R. M. (1990). Use of production data to estimate the saturation pressure, solution GOR, and chemical composition
of reservoir fluids. SPE 21164, SPE Latin American Petroleum Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 1419.
Lasater, J. A. (1958). Bubble-point pressure correlation. Trans. AIME 231:379381.

1174

S. ELMABROUK ET AL.

Macary, S. M., and El-Batanoney, M. H. (1992). Derivation of PVT correlations for the Gulf of Suez crude oils. EGPC 11th
Petroleum Exploration and Production Conference.
Mazandarani, M. T., and Asghari, S. M. (2007). Correlations for predicting solution gas-oil ratio, bubble-point pressure and
oil formation volume factor at bubble-point of Iran crude oils. European Congress of Chemical Engineering (ECCE-6),
Copenhagen, Denmark, September 1620.
McCain, Jr., W. D. (1991). Reservoir fluid properties correlations: State of the art. SPE Res. Eng.266270.
McCain, Jr., W. D., Soto, R. B., Valko, P. P., and Blasingame, T. A. (1998). Correlations of bubble pressures for reservoir
oilA comparative study. Paper no. SPE 51086. SPE Eastern Regional Conference and Exhibition, Pittsburgh, PA,
November 911.
Petrosky, G. E., and Farshad, F. F. (1998). Pressurevolumetemperature correlations for Gulf of Mexico crude oils. SPE
Res. Eval. Eng. 1:416420.
Rollins, J. B., McCain, W. D. Jr., and Creager, J. T. (1990). Estimation of the solution GOR of black oils. J. Pet. Technol.
42:9294.
Standing, M. B. (1947). A pressurevolumetemperature correlation for mixtures of California oils and gases. Drill. Prod.
Pract.275287.
Standing, M. B. (1977). Volumetric and phase behaviour of oil field hydrocarbon systems. Richardson, TX: SPE.
Tehrani, H. D. (1968). Bubble-point pressure correlation for reservoir fluids of Southwest Iran. Second AIME Regional
Technical Symposium, Saudi Arabia, March 2729.
Vasquez, M., and Biggs, H. D. (1980). Correlation for fluid physical property prediction. J. Pet. Technol. 32:968970.
Velarde, J., Blasingame, T. A., and McCain, W. D. Jr. (1999). Correlation of black oil properties at pressures below bubble
point pressurea new approach. J. Can. Pet. Technol., Spec. Ed. 38:6268.

NOMENCLATURE
AE
ARE
AARE
SD
S
pb
TR
Bo
Bob
BoFb
BoDb
Rs

average error
average relative error, %
absolute average relative error, %
standard division
standard error of estimate
bubble-point pressure, psia
reservoir temperature, F
oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
bubble-point oil formation volume
factor, bbl/STB
flash bubble-point oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
differential bubble-point oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
solution gas oil ratio, Scf/STB

Rsb
RsFb
RsDb
RSP
RST
PSP
TSP
API
oST
gSP
gTotal

bubble-point solution gas oil ratio,

Scf/STB
flash bubble-point solution gas oil ratio, Scf/STB
differential bubble-point solution gas
oil ratio, Scf/STB
separator gas oil ratio, scf/STB
stock-tank vent gas oil ratio, scf/STB
separator pressure, psia
separator temperature, F
API stock tank oil gravity
stock-tank oil specific gravity,
water = 1
gas specific gravity, air = 1
total gas specific gravity, air = 1