IATMI 2005-18
PROSIDING, Simposium Nasional Ikatan Ahli Teknik Perminyakan Indonesia (IATMI) 2005
Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), Bandung, 16-18 November 2005.
RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR
INCREASING OIL REQUESTS ON BOTTOM WATER DRIVE RESERVOIR:
CASE STUDY FOR CUBBONATE TUBAN
Taufan Marhaendrajana; Institut Teknologi Bandung
Pudji Permadi; Institut Teknologi Bandung
Ayub Hartono; Petrochina
Wandy Hendrawan; Institut Teknologi Bandung
Abstract
Reservoir management needs to be done in a planned
manner from the first time it will be produced. Within
this scope, efforts are aimed at obtaining maximum oil
recovery from a reservoir, which ultimately results in
maximum profit. One of the factors that need to be
considered in the management of the reservoir is the
problem of water coning and gas coning.
Water coning and gas coning are issues that need to be
anticipated and addressed on oil wells produced from
reservoirs that have gas caps, water drives or both.
Although there have been many studies on this issue,
few have reported strategies to address gas and water
coning problems in a single reservoir (dual coning).
The field subjected to the study is produced from a
carbonate reservoir layer where there is a gas cap and
a bottom-water drive. Because carbonate reservoirs
can have substantial vertical permeability, water con-
cing and especially gas con- cing may occur earlier
which will result in lower oil yields due to water
mobility and especially gases much higher than oil.
This paper presents the application of analytical
methods in establishing a comparative strategy
(optimum perforation interval) that proved successful
in increasing oil acquisition and maintaining oil
production with zero water-cut. In addition the
production of two wells in this field is in accordance
with the predictions that have been made.
Reservoir Description
The discovery of hydrocarbons in this reservoir was
characterized by Well-1 well drilling between April
and July 2001. Well Well Well 2 which was appraisal
well was drilled between July and September 2001.
From the hashes of both wells
it proved the existence of oil at the flow rate that is
considered economical.
Geology
The vertical reservoir is divided into two facies. The
bottom reservoir is deposited as a sand flat facies
when the sea level decreases in the middle miocene.
While the top is deposited as an open platform during
the transgression process. Based on the log
interpretation and the dominant core facies are flat
sand which constitutes 65% of the total volume of
rocks in this reservoir.
Laterally, the distribution of properties is controlled
by the differences in facies above which cause
differences in the quality of the reservoir. Well-1 lies
in a build-up margin that has a smaller permeability.
While Well-2 penetrate zone sand flat facies that have
high permeability.
Contac Fluid
Log data and FMT data indicate that this reservoir
has gas cap, oil zone and bottom water. Well Well-1
only penetrate the oil zone and bottom water due to
its location towards the flank. While Well-2 wells
penetrate all three zones because of its more central
location to the structure.
Estimated GOC and WOC depths are determined
based on log and FMT data. WOC depth is 6530 ft
TVDSS (6618 ft TVD) and GOC depth is 6035 ft
TVDSS (6123 ft TVD)
Core data
The relationship between permeability and porosity
for both facies in this reservoir shows a fairly good
correlation (Figure 1). This shows that the
classification of flow units based on the two existing
facies is sufficient.
The vertical permeability of the core data shows a
considerable price and can be said to have a 1: 1
ratio. See the gas stamp and
bottom water, this situation has the potential for the the position and the optimum perforation interval are
occurrence of coning gas and water early so that the determined based on the largest and most rapid
oil production becomes not optimal. recovery value of oil.
Sumur Well-1
Poros ity vs Pe rm e ability

10000 For Well Well 1, where there is bottom water without

y = 0.2591e 0.2795x
R2 gas-cap, oil recovery factor reaches 28% (Figure 3).
= The position and interval of the optimum perforation
is the upper third of the oil zone (6291 - 6400 ft
0.7725
1000 y = 1.2099e 0.2199x
TVD). While the optimum total rate based solely on
R2 = 0.8117
y = 0.0328e 0.3193x
reservoir performance using this coning model is
R2 = 0.9995 8000 bbl / d (Figure 4). As a comparison of critical
Pe rmeability to air, m

100

flow rates calculated by the Hoyland method,

10
Papatzacos and Skjaeveland are amounted to 7370
1
bbl / d.

0.1

0.01
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
He lium Poros ity, %
Sand Flat & Open Platform Facies Sand Flat Facies Open PlatformFacies

Picture 1. Cross-plot permeabilitas dan porositas

dari data core.

Picture. 3. Influence of position and perforation

interval to the oil recovery factor, Well-
1 well.

Picture. 2. The correlation between vertical permeability

and horizontal permeability is based on data
from cores.

Interpretation of log data shows a thin, discontinous shale

break intermediate, especially in areas near the fluid
contact line. The existence of this shale break can help
delay the occurrence of water and gas coning breaktrough,
by providing a vertical flow resistance (small vertical
permeability). Based on this observation, although the
micro (core) vertical permeability is quite large, but the
macro vertical permeability is smaller than the Picture. 4. Effect of production rate on oil recovery
measurement performed on the core.
factor, Well-1 well.
Optimization of Sumuran Production
To determine the performance of wells more fully, it
The model used in determining the well production is necessary to do nodal analysis. On the basis of this
profile over time is a simultaneous dual model (gas analysis for well Well-1 obtained system performance
and water) coning [Pitrarue, 1996]. This model can of 5980 bbl / d.
also be used if only one type of coning happens. With Based on gas / water coning, and nodal analysis, it is
this model, determined that the optimum well production is 6000
bbl / d with a perforation interval of 6291 - 6400 ft
TVD. This rate of production also meets criteria
criteria.
Sumur Well-2
For Well-2 wells, where there is bottom water and gas
-cap, oil recovery factor only reaches 7.8% (Figure 5). The
optimum perforation position and interval is 6308 - 6550
ft TVD (3 / 8h - 7 / 8h). The perforation position for Well-
2 well is more down to the water zone than the gas zone.
This is because gas has a mobility that is much larger than
oil so it has more potential coning (although the density is
smaller).
The optimum total rate based on this coning analysis is
8000 bbl / d (Figure 6). While the critical flow rate is
calculated by Meyer, Gardner and Pirson methods is 2770
bbl / d. This price is much smaller than the critical flow
rate at well Well 1 because Well-2 well there are two
possible coning, that is gas and water coning.
for production below the optimum rate can be done
with consideration to avoid large water and gas
production at the beginning of production.
Comparison of Reality and Planning
Based on the above mentioned well production
optimization planning, the implementation is
implemented with some modifications in accordance
with the enabling conditions in the field. For well
Well-1 realization of perforation interval conducted at
depth 6460 - 6510 ft TVD, with production in the
first year ranged between 4000 - 5000 bbl / d (zero
water cut). As for Well-2 wells, the perforation
intervals are placed at 6351 depth
- 6534 ft TVD, with average production close to 3000
bbl / d (zero water cut).
Evaluation is done by comparing production
performance of optimization planning result with
actual production performance during one year of
production (July 2004 - July 2005). The
aforementioned comparison is shown in Figures 7
and 8 for Well Well Wells and Well Well 2 wells.
10000
Prediksi Kondisi Optimum

9000 Prediksi Kondisi

Aktual
Produksi Aktual

8000

7000
Oil,STB/D

Picture. 5. Influence of position and interval of 6000

perforation against oil recovery factor,

Produksi

5000

sumur Well-2. 4000

3000

2000

1000

0
1-Jul-04 9-Oct-04 17-Jan-05 27-Apr-05 5-Aug-05 13-Nov-05 21-Feb-06 1-Jun-06 9-Sep-06
Date

Picture. 7. Produksi sumur Well-1.

10000
Prediksi Kondisi Optimum
9000 Prediksi Kondisi Aktual
Produksi Aktual
8000

7000
Oil,STB/D

6000
Produksi

5000

Picture. 6. The effect of production rate on oil 4000

recovery factor, sumur Well-2. 3000

2000

The nodal analysis for this well yields a system 1000

performance of 6240 bbl / d. 0

1-Jul-04 9-Oct-04 17-Jan-05 27-Apr-05 5-Aug-05 13-Nov-05 21-Feb-06 1-Jun-06 9-Sep-06

Based on gas / water coning, and nodal analysis, it is Date

determined that the optimum well production is 6240 bbl /
d with perforation interval
6308 - 6550 ft TVD. Given that the optimum rate is
greater than the critical rate (2770 bbl / d), it is possible
Picture. 8. Produksi sumur Well-2.
It can be seen in Figures 8 and 9 that the estimated
production profile under optimum planning
conditions is different from actual production. This is
due to adjustments made during realization
production, both perforation intervals and production
arrangements. With the adjustment, the prediction using
dual coning model (Pitrarue) in accordance with actual
production.
Conclusion
From this case study it is concluded that Well-1 and Well-
2 well production from Tuban Carbonate reservoir can be
maintained in zero water cut condition with high enough
oil production (5000 STB / D and 3000 STB / D). This is
made possible by the application of production
optimization planning which involves the integration of
geological, reservoir and production analysis. With such
practitioners the reservoir management to maximize oil
recovery can be achieved.
Ucapan Terimakasih
Kami mengucapkan terimakasih kepada Petrochina
atas ijin yang diberikan untuk menggunakan
datanya dalam paper ini.
Reference
Joshi, S. D.: “Horizontal Well Technology”,
PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma,
1991.
Pietraru, V.: ”About Kind of Breakthrough and
Maximum Recovery Factor in Dual Coning”, Paper
SPE 37049, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Calgary, Alberta,
November 18-20, 1996.