International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Volume 10, Issue 01, January 2019, pp. 2032–2038, Article ID: IJMET_10_01_198
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
WATER CUT COMPARISON FOR A REALLY
SIMILAR GRIDDING SYSTEM
(LINE DRIVE PATTERN)
Jihad Husain Al-Joumaa
University of Technology, Petroleum Technology Department
Mohammed S. Al-Jawad
Baghdad University, Petroleum Engineering Department
ABSTRACT
Reservoir simulation is a very wide science. The main advantage of making a
simulation model is to predict the behavior of the case reservoir and treat all the
problems that may occur before occurring in the real reservoir.
In this paper we took a section model with certain area and depth. Remodeled it
into three different layers vertically and keeping the areal gridding the same to
compare the water cut and behavior.
The comparison point used was the waterflooding pattern. The pattern used was
line drive using one producing well to one injection well. The injection wells were
placed on the same line of the production well. The water saturation behavior was
also observed.
The resulted behavior was very similar which indicates that the models with the
same properties and same areal gridding will endure the same water behavior no
matter how many vertical gridding it has within same depth.
Key words: Simulation, CMG, Gridding, Water cut, Water Behavior.
Cite this Article: Jihad Husain Al-Joumaa, Mohammed S. Al-Jawad, Water Cut
Comparison for a Really Similar Gridding System (Line Drive Pattern), International
Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 10(1), 2019, pp. 2032–2038.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=1
1. INTRODUCTION
Waterflooding is a very common enhanced oil recovery process (EOR), where to increase the
pressure, water is injected into the oil reservoir, and sweep the hydrocarbons, and thereby
supporting production which increases recovery. The injection patterns vary widely
depending on the field development plan, costs, availability, practicability and many other
factors. (1)
Secondary recovery method where the water is injected or pumped inside the formation to
replace residual oil is another definition. The displaced oil to near production wells is swept
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2032
editor@iaeme.com
Water Cut Comparison for a Really Similar Gridding System (Line Drive Pattern)
by the water from injection wells. Bad recovery because of variance in permeability, early
water breakthrough which may lead to surface processing and production problems, or similar
conditions that affect the fluid transport inside the reservoir, all are possible problems that
occur with waterflood techniques. (2)
One of the most common issues when implementing this method is the early water
breakthrough, which means the period of which the injected water in the injection wells is
produced (breaks through) in the producing wells, hence, reducing hydrocarbon production
rates, and reducing lift efficiency, leading to the undesired state of reduces total recovery. (3)
One of the common patterns is the Line drive pattern; An injection pattern with 1to 1 ratio
(injector to producer), where the production wells are located in a straight line parallel to the
injection wells. In this pattern, the injected fluid (water, gas or steam), makes a nearly linear
frontal movement. Direct line drive is another name for line drive pattern. (4)
2. CASES OF STUDY
Taking the same volume of the reservoir sector (same area and depth), the area is 1125*1125
ft2 which was chosen according to the original wells on the maps with no other wells
interfering. This area was treated as 3*3 which represents the x and y directions and indicates
that each block is 375*375 ft2 gridding system.
The depth which is the z direction was 192 ft and it was treated 4 times according to the
gridding systems created. The 192 ft was taken as 192 grids then as 64 grids then 21 and
finally 3 grids.
The only difference between the cases is the vertical number of layers (z direction), all
other properties used was the same for all the grids. All the cases have two years running time
(from 1-1-2018 to 1-1-2020) to predict the difference in water flooding behaviors and the
breakthrough times.
These cases are: Case-1 - 3*3*192 grids, Case-2 - 3*3*64 grids, Case-3 - 3*3*21 grids
and Case-4 - 3*3*3 grids
For the line drive patterns models one production well on the south of the model and one
injection well at the north of the model (areally) on the same horizon line n-s
the production rate of the producing well was chosen to be 477 m3/ day based on the
average production available data for the chosen wells case, so the injection wells was chosen
to have the same rate considering that in line drive models the ratio of production to injection
must be 1. (taking into consideration the Bo value which is 1.1)
We can notice that when the number of grid blocks is higher than the running time can be
longer. Run time for each of the above models are listed below
Table 1 Run time for the line drive models
Case ID
1
2
3
4
Total Number of gridblocks
1728
576
192
27
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2033
elapsed time (sec.)
123.98
108.23
14.68
8.41
editor@iaeme.com
Jihad Husain Al-Joumaa, Mohammed S. Al-Jawad
3. WATER CUT COMPARISON
Take all the cases 1,2,3 and 4 which have the same areal properties with different vertical grid
number and draw the water cut percentage for each group of the above, it can be seen that the
group have the same response, Figure 1. All other details of the cases and water saturation are
found in the appendix
5.00%
4.00%
3.00%
2.00%
1.00%
0.00%
case 1
case 2
case 3
case 4
Figure 1 Water cut comparison for cases 1, 2, 3 and 4
4. CONCLUSIONS

Relative permeability curves wont effect by the number of grids or the type of water flooding
pattern.

The water cut for the finer models (192 layer vertically for example) is larger than the water
cut of the upscaled model (21 layer vertically for example), for the same shape and properties
when the vertical scale is finer then the water cut is bigger

The breakthrough time is almost similar for the models of the same areal gridding
REFERENCES
[1]
Rose, S.C., Buckwalter, J.F., and Woodhall, R.J,” The Design Engineering Aspects of
Waterflooding”, Monograph Series, SPE 1989
[2]
Marcel Latil., “Enhanced oil recovery” ,1980
[3]
Aurel Carcoana, “Applied enhanced oil recovery”, 1992
[4]
Y. AZOUG, D. TIAB, “Scaling-Up Fine Grid Models Using Pseudo Functions in
Heterogeneous Porous Media”, Canadian International Petroleum Conference, 2004
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2034
editor@iaeme.com
Water Cut Comparison for a Really Similar Gridding System (Line Drive Pattern)
APPENDIX
Figure 2 Case 1 3d view
Figure 3 Case 2 3d model view
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2035
editor@iaeme.com
Jihad Husain Al-Joumaa, Mohammed S. Al-Jawad
Figure 4 Case 3 3d view
Figure 5 Case 4 3d view
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2036
editor@iaeme.com
Water Cut Comparison for a Really Similar Gridding System (Line Drive Pattern)
Figure 6 Case 1 water saturation
Figure 7 Case 2 water saturation
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2037
editor@iaeme.com
Jihad Husain Al-Joumaa, Mohammed S. Al-Jawad
Figure 8 Case 3 water saturation
Figure 9 Case 4 water saturation
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp
2038
editor@iaeme.com