Chemical Flooding for Oil Production

Nasir Atallah Houady Ketab Hassan Khoudhr Karrar Alaa Ibrahim

College of Petroleum Engineering, College of Petroleum Engineering, College of Petroleum Engineering,
Al-Ayen University, Al-Ayen University, Al-Ayen University,
Thi-Qar, Iraq Thi-Qar, Iraq Thi-Qar, Iraq
[Link]@[Link] katobikatobi@[Link] kararangel95@[Link]

Murtadha Ali Mhuan Hussein Hameed Gatie Asaad Shaheed Kadhim

College of Petroleum Engineering, College of Petroleum Engineering, College of Petroleum Engineering,
Al-Ayen University, Al-Ayen University, Al-Ayen University,
Thi-Qar, Iraq Thi-Qar, Iraq Thi-Qar, Iraq
murtaza.a.m.93@[Link] hussein1992hk@[Link] asadshhyd988@[Link]

Nawar Jassim Hanoun Mustafa Naeem Kadhim

College of Petroleum Engineering, College of Petroleum Engineering,
Al-Ayen University, Al-Ayen University,
Thi-Qar, Iraq Thi-Qar, Iraq
nawary640@[Link] soppoxc11@[Link]

Abstract—The enhanced oil recovery phase of oil fluids, contain surfactant, hydrocarbon and water. Surfactant
reservoirs production usually comes after the water/gas The surfactant and/or an alkali are used in the injected chemical
injection (secondary recovery) phase. The main objective solution to reduce the IFT between the oil and water in the
of EOR application is to mobilize the remaining oil through reservoir . Polymers may also be employed to improve the
enhancing the oil displacement and volumetric sweep mobility ratio, and consequently, the displacement sweep
efficiency. The oil displacement efficiency enhances by efficiency. A tremendous amount of work has beenpublished in
reducing the oil viscosity and/or by reducing the interfacial the area of chemical flooding for enhancing the oil recovery. It
tension, while the volumetric sweep efficiency improves by is beyond the scope of this article to provide a review of all the
developing a favorable mobility ratio between the published works.
displacing fluid and the remaining oil. It is important to
identify remaining oil and the production mechanisms that Micellar polymer and alkaline flooding are regarded as the two
are necessary to improve oil recovery prior to major chemical flooding processes. Micellar flooding (also
implementing an EOR phase. Chemical enhanced oil known as micro emulsion flooding or surfactant flooding) is a
recovery is one of the major EOR methods that reduces the process in which a surfactant slug is injected into the formation
residue al oil saturation by lowering water-oil interfacial followed by a larger slug of water containing polymer.
tension (surfactant/alkaline) and increases the volumetric The traditional injection scheme for a surfactant-based
sweep efficiency by reducing the water-oil mobility ratio chemical flooding process includes injecting a preflush, a
(polymer). In this research, the basic mechanisms of chemical solution, a mobility buffer, and finally, a driving
different chemical methods have been discussed including fluid, which displaces the chemicals and the developed oil bank
the interactions of different chemicals with the reservoir towards producer. It should however be noted that the modern
rocks and fluids. In addition, an up-to-date status of surfactants have made it possible to design formulations for the
chemical flooding at the laboratory scale, pilot projects and injected chemical solution without the need for a preflush. [1]
field applications have been reported.
B. EOR
Keywords—chemical flooding, reservoir, EOR, production,
recovery The Average oil recovery after the primary recovery phase is
about 5–20% of the original oil in place (OOIP) and can be
I. INTRODUCTION increased by applying the secondary recovery phase up to 40%.
Usually, the EOR application stage will be after the secondary
A. Chemical Flooding recovery when the main challenge is not the reservoir pressure
only, but also the reservoir fluids relative
The chemical flooding is a general term for the processes that mobility compared to the injected fluids during the secondary
inject surfactant contained chemical solutions (or slugs) into recovery phase[1-2]. There are different EOR methods such as
the reservoir for enhancing the oil [Link] processes thermal recovery, miscible Gas Injection, Chemical flooding
aim at producing the trapped, residual oil after the water and Microbial EOR [1-2].
flooding. The micro emulsions, which are used to lower the The feasibility study and design for EOR projects require
Interfacial tension (IFT) between the displacing and displaced integrated work between different disciplines such as reservoir
engineers, petroleum geologists, petrophysits, geomodellers, For any EOR project, the initial stage is the screening criteria
chemical engineers, and production engineers whom are in order to identify the best EOR application for the candidate
responsible to start with the screening phase of the different reservoirs in terms of incremental recovery that will be added
EOR methods and come up with the shortlisted one in order to and the economics of the project. The screening criteria is
go for the next step which is lab testing phase that requires based on both reservoir rock and fluids properties such as oil
PVT/core labs capable to implement the various EOR lab tests, gravity, oil viscosity, oil composition, remaining oil saturation
then, analyze the lab scale results to be coupled with the (target), formation type, reservoir thickness, depth, and
reservoir simulation model in order to estimate the incremental temperature. In Table 1, a summary of screening criteria for the
recovery for the different EOR methods under study. For any chemical EOR methods based on lab and applied field data.
EOR project, the initial stage is the screening criteria in order So, in this chapter we are assuming that the screening criteria
to identify the best EOR application for the candidate reservoirs was done and it has been found that the chemical flooding is
in terms of incremental recovery that will be added and the the optimum EOR method that can be applied for the reservoir
economics of the project [1-3]. under study [1].

Figure I-1 Oil production mechanism

Table I-1 A Summary of screening criteria for the chemical EOR methods
So we can say the enhanced oil recovery is generally EOR is the existing oil saturation of the reservoir. The investor
considered as the third, or last, phase of useful oil production, must weigh the estimated recoverable oil by EOR against the
sometimes called tertiary production. The first, or primary, total cost of implementing these newer, or developing,
phase of oil production begins with the discovery of an oilfield technologies.
using the natural stored energy to move the oil to the wells by The choice of the process also is dependent upon the amount
expansion of volatile componentsand/or pumping of individual of oil in place as well as other considerations such as depth, oil
wells to assist the natural drive. viscosity, etc. Consequently, numerous new logging methods
When this energy is depleted, production declines and a have been developed recently as well as other methods, such as
secondary phase of oilproduction begins when supplemental the single well tracer, for the accurate deter mention of
energy is added to the reservoir by injection of water. As the reservoir oil saturation.
water to oil production ratio of the field approaches economic The general procedure for chemical EOR, using the specific
limit ofoperation, when the net profit diminishes because the case of the alkaline polymer technique. In general, the
difference between the value of the produced oil introduction of chemicals to a petroleum reservoir is preceded
and the cost of water treatment and injection becomes too by a preflush (the injection of a low-salinity or controlled
narrow, thetertiary period of production begins. Since this last tapered salinity water) to place a compatible aqueous buffer of
period in the history of the field commences with the fluid betweenthe highly saline reservoir brine and the chemical
introduction of chemical and thermal energy to enhance the solutions, which may be adversely affected by the dissolved
production of oil, it has been labeled as enhanced oil recovery salts. Chemical additives are detergent-type compounds
(EOR). (frequently petroleum sulfates), organie polymers (to increase
sweep efficiency in a heterogeneous reservoir), and micellar
Actually, EOR may be initiated at any time during the history solutions.
of an oil reservoir whenit becomes obvious that some type of
chemical or thermal energy must be used to stimulate The alkaline or other chemical solution is injected after the
production. The combined total oil production by primary and reservoir conditioning preflush, as illustrated in Fig. 2-1.
secondary methods is generally less than 40% of the original oil Injection of the chemical solutions is followed by theinjection
in place. Thus, the potential targetfor EOR is greater than the of a polymer solution (usually a polyacrylamide or a
reserves that can be produced by conventional methods. Before polysaccharide) to in- crease fluid viscosity, to aid in
initiating EOR, the operator must start from status quo and displacement of the chemicals through the reservoir and to
obtain as much information as possible about the reservoir and minimize loss due to dilution and channeling. Finally, the
its oil saturation. salinity of the injected water following injection of the polymer
is gradually increased to the normal concentration of the
This body of information furnishes the rational basis for oilfield fluids.
prediction of recoverable oil reserves by various proven
techniques for EOR. The EOR procedures involve the injection Another EOR technique utilizes the injection of gas for
of chemical compounds dissolved in the injection water, pressure maintenance and oil displacement by miscible or
miscible gas injection alternating with water injection, the solution drive [1].
injection of micellar solutions (micro emulsions composed of
surfactants, alcohols, and crude oils), the injection of steam,
and in-situ combustion. Perhaps the most critical datum for

Figure I-2 Schematic diagram of chemical flooding (alkaline)

 to the displacing fluid. However, producing remaining oil by
this strategy is the goal of low tension surfactant flooding
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
Polymer flooding could neither lower the interfacial tension to
adequately low value nor sufficiently rises the viscous to
A. Mechanism of Polymer Flooding capillary pressure more economically balance between water
and oil phases in the displacement process, without which the
Polymer flooding is an isothermal EOR process originated to remaining oil cannot be displaced. Therefore, the aim of
relieve the issue coupled with conventional water flood polymer flooding is to produce that percentage of oil that left
depletion as a consequence of unfavorable mobility ratio. behind upon water flood but does not include remaining oil
Polymer flooding is a process of adding polymer to the water Even though polymer flooding cannot lower the remaining oil
of a water flood, in order to decrease its mobility. Adding a saturation, it’s still a practical method way to attain the So
polymer leads to an increase in viscosity, as well as to a more economically.
decrease in aqueous phase permeability and a lower mobility According to Needham and Doe (1987), high oil recovery
ratio. The remaining oil saturation decreases, due to the obtained from polymer flooding over that of a conventional
increased efficiency of the water flood, even if the irreducible mean could be achieved through the effects of polymer on
oil saturation is not affected by this technique. Schematic of fractional flow, through more efficient oil displacement in the
polymer flooding mechanism is shown in Figure (II-1) swept zone, and by lowering water-oil mobility ratio.
Because oil and water are immiscible fluids, none of them can In order to completely understand the mechanism of polymer
completely sweep the other under reservoir conditions [4]. flooding, it is very important to review some key concepts
Oil is remaining behind in the porous media after water flood related to polymer flooding, such as mobility ratio, fractional
either water bypassed oil, or the oil got trapped due to capillary flow, displacement efficiency, volumetric sweep efficiency,
pressure. In order to resweeps the remaining oil, the interfacial and resistance factor [4].
tension between oil and water phases should be reduced to a
certain lowered value. This can be done by adding a Surfactant

Figure II-1 Polymer flooding mechanism (Lindley, 2001)

𝛌w is the mobility of water phase, displacing fluid and 𝛌o is

B. Mobility Ratio the mobility of oil phase, displaced.
μo and μw are the viscosities of oil and water respectively. Ko
Mobility ratio, M, is the faction of mobility of injecting fluid and Kw are the effective permeabilities of oil and water phases
to the to the mobility of the displaced fluid. It is defined as respectively. If a mobility ratio is greater than one, water is
follows: more mobile than oil. In this case, water fingers through the oil
𝑀= λw/λo=(Kw/μw)/(ko/μo) zone causing early breakthrough. As a result, low
displacement efficiency would take place. On the other hand,
 if the mobility ratio is equal to or less than one, it would delay laboratory experiments to study the performance of waterflood
breakthrough time due to what is called favorable motility under unfavorable mobility ratios [4].
ratio. This is where adding polymer play its role. As discussed They summarized that the sweep was controlled by viscous
earlier, one of the advantages of polymer flooding is lowering fingering, with movable water dramatically lowering the oil
mobility ratio which would improves sweep efficiency and oil recovery, and they highly recommended lowering the mobility
displacement over waterflooding. Figure (II-2) demonstrates ratio by adding polymer would enhance oil sweep and
how mobility ratio improves oil recovery [4]. recovery efficiency significantly. When polymer is added to
As demonstrated in Figure (II-2) (a), The Buckley-Leverett the displacing fluid, the mobility ratio would be effectively
theory of immiscible displacement anticipates that at lowered and resulting in more piston-like displacement and
unfavorable motility ratios the displacing fluid arrival the higher sweep efficiency. This scenario is depicted in Figure.
producing well faster due to its lower viscosity resulting (II-2) (b).
breakthrough with period of two-phase production.

Figure II-2 Favorable and unfavorable mobility ratio influences on sweep efficiency

denominator in Equation is the value of denominator increases,

the fractional flow of water decreases, which will enhance the
C. Fractional Flow oil recovery efficiency [4].

Fractional flow is another key concept related with polymer D. Resistance Factor
flooding. In two-phase immiscible flow, the mobility ratio
does not stay constant. It changes as the saturation of flowing The resistance factor is a term that represents the resistance in
phase changes. the flow of polymer solution due to the decrease in the number
The fractional flow equations for water and oil as they flow of flow paths by polymer retention. For example, a resistance
with one another through a reservoir are written as follows: factor of 10 times means that it is 10 times harder for polymer
solution to flow through porous media than plain water. While
water has a viscosity of 1 cp in the standard conditions,
polymer solution has an apparent viscosity higher than the
actual viscosity measured in viscometer. Resistance factor
provide a good estimation of the apparent viscosity of polymer
solution Resistance factor, Rf, is defined as the fraction of
mobility of water to the mobility of a polymer solution .
Whereas the residual resistance factor, Rrf, is the ratio of the
permeability of water before the filtration of a polymer
As explained earlier, adding polymer to the displacing water,
solution to that of after a polymer solution.
would increase water viscosity, μw, and lower the relative
permeability to water. This can be explained more through the
 E. Sweep Efficiency

Sweep efficiency is an important factor that, in coupling with

𝑅𝑓= (𝑘𝑤/μ𝑤)/(𝑘𝑝/𝜇𝑝) mobility ratio, determines the success of a flooding process.
The total efficiency factor, E, symbolize the ratio of initial oil
The residual resistance factor measures the ability of the in place at the start of a secondary or tertiary displacement
polymer to absorb into the pores throats till partly block the process, that can be produced [4] .
porous medium. This provides a sing that resistance factor has
a significant effect on the permeability of the porous medium. E = [Link]
According to studies by several authors, the permeability
depends on resistance factor and that has been proved through Figure(II-3) represents all three efficiencies. Where:
correlations. This influence is a required phenomenon in
ED: displacement efficiency
flooding processes as it shows the advantages of the polymer
flood [4]. EAS: Aerial sweep efficiency
EVS: vertical sweep efficiency

Figure II-3 Sweep efficiencies

1. Displacement Efficiency (ED) polymer). Volumetric Sweep Efficiency is the total of the
aerial sweep efficiency and vertical sweep efficiency
Displacement efficiency, known as microscopic sweep
EA = EAS + EVS
efficiency, is defined as the ratio of the portion of oil displaced
from the swept zone by the injected fluid. In waterflooding and Aerial Sweep Efficiency (EAS)
polymer flooding operations, ED is calculated using water
saturation (Sw) behind the front at the time of breakthrough It is defined as the fraction of the area swept to total area that
and initial water saturation (Swi) [4]. is contacted by the displacing fluid. It is function of time,
volume injected, well pattern, and mobility ratio. It increases
ED = (Sw−Swi)/(1−Swi ) steadily from the start of water flood till the breakthrough, and
then it continues to increase with slow rate.
2. Volumetric Sweep Efficiency (Ev)
Figure (II-4) demonstrates the aerial sweep efficiencies at
Volumetric sweep efficiency is the ratio of total reservoir three different periods of a waterflood operation.
volume that is swept by the displacing fluids (water or
 The aerial sweep efficiency equations at different stages of a uniform movement of the front and are mischievous to sweep
waterflood operation can be written as following : . In many situation, vertical sweep efficiency dominates the
efficiency of a waterflood more than any other factors [4].
One of the major kind of Heterogeneity is where high
permeability strata be next to much lower permeability layers.
Vertical (or invasion) Sweep Efficiency (EVS) This kind of heterogeneity causes an early water breakthrough
and consequently poor vertical sweep efficiency. The purpose
It is defined as the ratio of vertical height swept to the total
of polymer in flooding process is to lower the mobility ratio to
vertical pay zone height. It is functional of the vertical
favorable value, which enhances the vertical sweep because of
heterogeneity which include different permeability, strata,
viscous cross-flow influences .
drains and fractures of the reservoir. These factors prevent the

Figure II-4 Aerial sweep efficiency for a five-spot pattern waterflood operation

F. Selection of an EOR Process and Polymer Screening or two criteria. Each prospect should be studied on its own
Criteria eligibility by analyzing the many reservoir operational and
economic variables.
All the strategies explained have limitations in application.
Screening is the prime footstep in the enhanced oil recovery
These restrictions have been obtained partly from theory,
application series. The next stage would be a further estimation
partly from laboratory experiments, and partly from field
of potential processes if more than one fulfills the screening
experiences. Prospect screening composes of the following:
criteria. Following steps could compose a pilot test design,
1. Evaluating available information about the reservoir, oil, pilot test application, pilot test evaluation, and a commercial
rock, water, geology, and previous performance. project.

2. Supplementing available information with certain brief Table (II-1) presents screening criteria based upon oil
laboratory screening tests. properties for application of different enhanced oil recovery
strategies. The criteria compose the gravity, viscosity, and
3. Selecting those processes that are potentially applicable and saturation of the oil [4].
eliminating those that definitely are not.
A potential reservoir for one or more enhanced oil recovery
processes should not be rejected because it does not fulfill one
 Table II-1 Screening criteria for Enhanced Oil Recovery processes based on oil properties

Table II-2 Screening criteria for Enhanced Oil Recovery processes based on oil properties

To satisfy this requirement, the reservoir has to be deep enough

to achieve the minimum miscibility pressure. For an example,
Steam flooding is mainly used to viscous oils in massive, high the minimum miscibility pressure for West Texas CO2 floods
permeability sandstones or unconsolidated sands. It is is around 1,500 psi at depths of more than 2,000 ft. On the
restricted to shallow formations due to heat losses from the other hand, more than 4,500 ft. deep reservoirs are needed for
wellbore. Heat is also transferred to the adjacent formations effective NO and high-pressure hydrocarbon miscible floods.
once steam contacts the oil-bearing formation. Therefore, Table (II-3) presents screening criteria based upon reservoir
adequately high steam injection rates are required to offset for characteristics for application of the various enhanced oil
heat losses. The minimum miscibility pressure for effective recovery processes. The criteria include formation type, net
CO2 flooding ranges widely. The required pressure can be thickness, average permeability, depth, and temperature [4].
1,200 psi for high gravity oil (more than 30 °API) at lower
temperatures to more than 4,500 psi for heavy crudes at higher
temperatures.
 Table II-3 Screening criteria for Enhanced Oil Recovery processes based on reservoir properties.

Table II-4 Screening criteria for Enhanced Oil Recovery processes based on reservoir properties.

one or two standards. Each prospect should be estimated on its

Thermal floods are mainly used with heavy viscous oils. Steam own eligibility by analyzing several oilfield operational and
floods are used for oil with gravity less than 25 °API, viscosity economic variables Figure (II-5) shows a proposal from
more than 20 cp, and oil saturation more than 40% PV. Higher Kaminsky et al. who organized a process for EOR application
viscosity with less than 100 cp may be applied for combustion analysis and development.
floods. Hydrocarbon, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and surfactant
floods are usable to higher oil gravities and lower oil saturation After a decision to go ahead and apply polymer flooding, all
than that for steam floods. Evaluating of those operations that possible EOR polymers should be evaluated and screened.
are possibly applicable for enhanced oil recovery methods is a Because not all polymers are applicable for every oilfield, it is
substantial step, as a result excluding those that absolutely are very necessary to perform a detailed feasibility study before
not [4]. choosing a polymer for the given reservoir conditions. In
Figure (II-6) detailed Screening parameters for polymers are
A candidate reservoir for one or more enhanced oil recovery shown[4].
methods should not be rejected because it does not match with
 Figure II-5 Organized process for EOR application analysis and development (Kamisnky et al., 2007)

evolution is performed. In 2007, Kaminsky et al concluded an

Polymer screening is the prime step in a polymer flooding organized process for polymer flood evaluation and
project. Once the first screening is achieved, a detailed project development and it is shown in Figure.(II-6)

Figure II-6 Polymer project evaluation and development steps

 B. Basic Flood Patterns

III. FLOOD PATTERNS Although many older fields were developed using an irregular
well spacing, a better understanding of reservoir mechanics
A. Introduction and conservation principles in recent years has resulted in
relatively uniform well spacing and drilling patterns. At the
time a water flood begins, a field is generally completely
The frontal advance theory assumes that flow between
injections and producing wells is linear (all flow paths are developed. Since infill wells are expensive to drill and equip,
straight lines) and that 100 percent of the reservoir pore we will generally have to work with the well patterns that exist.
Accordingly, field should be developed on a pattern that will
volume is contacted by injected water. Although this behavior
be suitable for subsequent enhanced recovery operations.
may be approximated in some elongated reservoirs, ideal
For this reason, a basic understanding of the commonly used
linear flow would be possible only if fluids could be injected
flood patterns is needed [5].
into, and produced from, the entire reservoir cross section
rather than through the limited area of a wellbore. This
problem is complicated further by the fact that most fields are 1. Direct line drive
developed, and water flooded, using some regular well pattern.
Looking at these fields areally, both injection and production As noted previously, the only way to achieve 100 percent areal
take place at points. If the patterns are symmetrical, the sweep at the time of breakthrough would be to inject fluid over
shortest travel path and the largest pressure gradient will occur an entire vertical plane. This is not physically possible but can
along a straight line between producers and injectors. be approached somewhat with a pattern where the producing
Accordingly, the injected water which travels along this and injection wells directly offset each other. The sweep
streamline will reach the producing wells first. Water traveling efficiency of this pattern, depicted by Fig. (III-1), improves as
along longer streamlines will not have reached the producing the d/a ratio increases, where d is the distance between
well at the time of breakthrough and, consequently, part of the adjacent rows of producers and injectors, and a is the distance
reservoir will not have been contacted by water at that time. between adjacent wells in a row. The relationship between
That fraction of a water flood pattern which has been contacted (d/a) and areal sweep efficiency is presented in Fig. (III-2) for
by water at a given time during a flood is referred to as the a unity mobility ratio. It should also be noted that the ratio of
pattern sweep efficiency, Ep or areal sweep efficiency, producers to injectors is unity for this pattern [5].
Technically, pattern sweep efficiency should be used when
referring to field applications, and areal weep efficiency
should only be used when referring to the results of model
studies; practically, however, most engineers use the term
areal sweep efficiency for all situations.
In general, areal sweep efficiency will depend upon the
mobility ratio, the geometric configuration of the flood pattern,
reservoir heterogeneities and the amount of water injected into
the pattern area.
Also it known as injection pattern, the particular arrangement
of production and injection wells.
The injection pattern for an individual field or part of a field is
based on the location of existing wells, reservoir size and
shape, cost of new wells and the recovery increase associated Figure 0-1 Direct line drive
with various injection patterns. The flood pattern can be
altered during the life of a field to change the direction of flow
in a reservoir with the intent of contacting upswept oil.
It is common to reduce the pattern size by infill drilling, which
improves oil recovery by increasing reservoir continuity
between injectors and producers. Common injection patterns
are direct line drive, staggered line drive, two-spot, three-spot,
four-spot, five-spot, seven-spot and nine-spot. Normally, the
two-spot and three-spot patterns are used for pilot testing
purposes. The patterns are called normal or regular when they
include only one production well per pattern.
Patterns are described as inverted when they include only one
injection well per pattern [5].

Figure 0-2 Flooding efficiency of direct line

 2. Staggered line drive One of the major advantages of the nine spot is flexibility.
Directional movement of water and premature breakthrough in
As shown by Fig. (III-3), the staggered line drive is simply a certain wells can necessitate major conversions in flooding
modification of the direct line drive where rows of producing patterns. Some patterns are very difficult and expensive, to
and injection wells are moved in such a manner that wells in convert, and may require extensive infill drilling. The inverted
alternate rows are displaced one-half the inter-well distance nine-spot, however, can be revised to result in a 1:1 injector-
[5]. producer ratio pattern, either five-spot or line drive, with
minimum effort.

Figure 0-3 Staggred line

Figure 0-5 Nine Spot

3. Five-Spot
This pattern, depicted by Fig (III-6), has two injection wells
The five-spot pattern, depicted by Fig. (III-4), is a special case per producer and has merit where injectivity is low. Very
of the staggered line drive where the d/a ratio is 0.5. This is the seldom, however, will a field that is already developed have
most commonly used flooding pattern resulting primarily from this pattern.
the regular well spacing required, or at least used, in most The pattern required is an equilateral triangle, or can be
areas. Note that the drilling pattern required to have a five-spot considered a staggered line pattern with a d/a ratio of 0.866. If
is square, and that the ratio of producers to injectors is unity. a field is not developed on this pattern, too many infill wells
The five-spot is a highly conductive pattern since the shortest are generally required to make the pattern feasible.
flow path is a straight line between the injector and producer. An inverted seven-spot is also used occasionally. This pattern,
Also, the pattern gives good sweep behavior. The square also termed a four a pot, has two producers per injector [5].
drilling pattern which yields the five spot is also flexible
enough that other flood patterns can be generated simply by
rearranging the position of the injection and production well
like the nine-spot [5].

Figure 0-6 Seven Spot

Figure 0-4 Five Spot

4. Nine-Spot IV. CLASSIFICATION OF CHEMICAL FLOODING

The chemical flooding EOR can be categorized into the
This pattern, illustrated by Fig. (III-5), can be developed from Following :
a square drilling pattern. The injection well placement for this 1. Polymer flooding.
pattern leads to an injection-production well ratio of three. 2. Surfactant flooding.
This type of system is very useful if a high injection capacity 3. Surfactant-polymer flooding.
is needed due to low permeability or similar problems. The 4. Alkaline flooding.
inverted nine-spot is probably used more than the normal nine- 5. Alkaline-surfactant-polymer flooding.
spot. In this case, producing wells outnumber injection wells
by a factor of three. The inverted pattern is useful where fluid
injectivity is high [5].
A. Polymer flooding Mw : the water mobility
Mo : the oil mobility
In concept, a water-soluble polymer is used to reduce the Kw : the effective permeability to water, mD
mobility ratio of water-oil by increasing the water viscosity Ko : the effective mobility to oil, mD
which improves the volumetric sweep efficiency. The μo : the oil viscosity, cP
mechanism of polymer flooding is to increase the water μw : the water viscosity, cP
viscosity and also to reduce the permeability of the rock to Krw : the relative permeability to water
water, in other words, to reduce the water-oil mobility ratio Kro : the relative permeability to water
close to unity or less [1-6].
Over the past years, polymer floods projects have been applied As per this equation, it is clear that in order to drive the
over a wide range of conditions: mobility ration to be unity or less, the water viscosity is
• Reservoir temperatures [46–235] °F. increased by adding the water-soluble polymers to the injected
• Average reservoir permeability [0.6–15,000] mD. water as shown in Figure (IV-1), when the displacing fluid
• Oil viscosity [0.01–1494] cP. (water) viscosity is lower than the oil, the recovery efficiency
• Net pay thickness [4–432] ft. decreases as the remaining oil after this flooding is about 45%
• Remaining oil at start-up [36–97] % of OOIP. of the OOIP at 0.1 viscosity ratio. On the other hand, once the
viscosity ratio reached to 1 (polymer added to water) the
Polymers have been used in oil production in three modes; as remaining oil after the flooding will be reduced to 20% of the
near-well treatments to improve the performance of water OOIP. As summary, the highest viscosity ratio is the highest
injectors or watered out producers by blocking off high oil recovery [9].
conductivity zones, agents that may be cross-linked in situ to
plug high conductivity zones at depth in the reservoir and 2. Polymer flooding advantages
agents to lower water mobility or water-oil mobility ratio.
Polymer flooding is suited for reservoirs where normal water The advantages of polymer flooding could be summarized as
floods fail due to one of the two reasons: High Heterogeneity following: [10]
and High oil water mobility ratio which is targeting the oil in 1. Applicable over a wide range of conditions.
areas of the reservoir that have not been contacted efficiently 2. A reduction in the quantity of water required to reduce
[1-7]. the oil saturation to its residual value in the swept portion
The main economic limitation is the cost of polymers is. For of the reservoir.
example, if the cost of acrylamide/acrylate copolymers and 3. An increase in the areal and vertical coverage in the
xanthan polymers were substantially lower and higher reservoir due to a reduced water flood mobility ratio
polymer concentrations with larger polymer flood bank sizes 4. Diverting the injected from swept zones.
could be granted in a given application. It would improve oil- 5. Promising for heavy oil application.
recovery efficiencies, wider ranges of potential applications, 6. Cost-effective.
and higher profits. Polymer flooding is showing promising
results, specifically, if flooding projects are started at high
3. Polymer flooding limitations
remaining oil saturations. Polymer flooding has been
conducted in sandstone and carbonate reservoirs, and oil-wet,
1. High oil viscosities require a higher polymer
water-wet, and mixed-wettability reservoirs [1-8].
concentration.
2. Results are normally better if the polymer flood is started
1. Mechanism before the water oil ratio becomes excessively high.
3. Clays increase polymer adsorption.
The main effect of the polymer is the enhancement of the 4. Some heterogeneity is acceptable, but avoid extensive
water-oil mobility ratio to be unity or less, the mobility is fractures.
calculated from the following equation: [6] 5. Lower injectivity than with water can adversely affect oil
production rates in the early stages of the polymer flood.
6. Xanthan gum polymers cost more, are subject to
microbial degradation, and have a greater potential for
wellbore plugging.
where A summary statistical data for field projects of polymer
Mw−o : the water − oil mobility ratio flooding as shown in table (IV-1)
 Figure 0-1 Effect of viscosity ratio on the fractional flow curve.

Table 0-1 A summary of statistical data for field projects.

B. Surfactant flooding active at reservoir conditions which could by at higher

pressure, temperature and water salinities [11].
Correctly designed surfactants can create micro emulsions In the surfactant flooding the phase behavior is the most
at the interface between oil and water phases, which cause important factor to make it successful. Currently, there is no
a reduction in the interfacial tension (IFT) that consequently EOS model to describe the phase behavior in these systems.
will mobilize the residual oil which improving the oil Consequently, phase behavior studies should be observed
recovery as shown in Figure (IV-2) This method of EOR is a experimentally which is challenging to mimic the reservoir
challenging one by many factors such as rock adsorption conditions. Surfactant solutions are used to reduce the oil-
of the surfactant and co-surfactant, and the chromatographic water IFT, while the co-surfactants are mixed with these
separation of the surfactant during the injection in the solutions in order to enhance the properties of the surfactant
reservoir. The designed surfactants should be resistant and solutions. The co-surfactants added to the solutions are serving
as an active agent or a promoter.
 Figure 0-2 Principle of flooding

where residual oil is trapped in the reservoir, for the movement 1. Very effective in lab test [high oil recovery].
of oil through the narrow capillary pores, very low oil/water 2. Surfactant modeling is relatively simple with only a few
interfacial tension (IFT) is required in the mixed solution in well-designed experiments needed to provide the most
order to enhance the surfactant effectiveness with respect to important simulation parameters.
temperature and water salinity as it is well known that 3. Recent developments in surfactants solutions for EOR
surfactant flooding is sensitive to reservoir temperature and have effectively reduced the required surfactant
salinity [6]. concentration which lowering the chemical costs
required.
1. Mechanism 4. Recently, new and effective surfactants are derived from
plant resources such as sunflower oil, soy and corn oil. It
A surfactant is added to an aqueous fluid and co-surfactant is is non-toxic, non-hazardous, and readily biodegradable.
also added in order to prepare the surfactant solution and
injected into the reservoirs as surfactant flooding reduces the 3. The disadvantages of surfactant flooding
interfacial tension between the oil and water phases and also
alters the wettability of the reservoir rock in order to mobilize 1. Complex and expensive system.
the residual oil trapped in the reservoir which improves the oil 2. Possibility of chromatographic separation of chemicals.
recovery as shown in Figure (IV-2) 3. High adsorption of surfactant.
The surfactant selection is a critical stage in designing the 4. Losing its effectiveness at higher pressure, temperature,
surfactant flooding projects as the Anionic surfactants and salinity.
preferred due to the following reasons:
C. Surfactant-polymer (SP) flooding
1) Low adsorption at neutral to high pH on both
sandstones and carbonates. Surfactant-polymer flooding process is injecting a chemical
2) Can be tailored to a wide range of conditions slug that contains water, surfactant, electrolyte (salt), usually a
3) Widely available at low cost in special cases. co-surfactant (alcohol), followed by polymer-thickened water.
4) Sulfates for low temperature applications. In this process a surfactant is added to the polymer solution
5) Sulfates for high temperature applications. that has the affinity for both water and oil. The use of the
6) Cationics can be used as co-surfactants. micellar solution is to reduce the interfacial tension of the
water-oil system in the reservoir in order to displace the
On the other hand, the Non-ionic surfactants have not residual oil.
performed as well for EOR as anionic surfactants. Sulfonated SP flooding method was patented for Marathon Oil co. by
hydrocarbons such as alcohol propoxylate sulfate or alcohol Gogarty and Tosch known as Mara-flood. The injection profile
propoxylate sulfonate are commonly used for Surfactant of the method consists of injecting a pre-flush (to achieve the
flooding. desired salinity environment), followed by micellar slug
(surfactant, co-surfactant, electrolyte), and followed by
2. Surfactant flooding advantages polymer solution along with drive water. The micellar solution
composition that ensures a gradual transition from the
The surfactant flooding has several advantages and some of displacement water to the displaced oil without interface is as
them are listed below: [12] following: [1]
 • Surfactant 10–15%. low oil-water IFT and controls the mobility ratio which
• Water 20–60%. forming a considerable oil bank to be produced [11].
• Oil 25–70%.
• Co-surfactant 3–4%.
Usually, the co-surfactant is alcohol which enhances the
possibility for the micellar solution to include oil or water. This 2. Surfactant-polymer flooding advantages
surfactant-polymer flooding reduces the oil-water IFT through
the surfactant portion and reduces the mobility ratio through The SP flooding advantages are listed below:
presence of polymer. • Interfacial tension reduction (improves displacement sweep
efficiency).
1. Mechanism • Mobility control (improves volumetric sweep efficiency).
• Reduce adsorption of expensive surfactants.
The micellar solution is prepared using inorganic salts (water-
soluble electrolytes) in order to gain better viscosity control of 3. Surfactant-polymer flooding disadvantages
the solution. A polymer slug is used to drive the micellar
solution slug in order to get a mobility control. The injection • Complex and expensive system.
process is shown in Figure (IV-3) The technique establishes • Possibility of chromatographic separation of chemicals.

Figure 0-3 Surfactant-polymer injection process

.
1. Mechanism
• High adsorption of surfactant.
• Interactions between surfactant and polymer. In the Alkaline flooding process, the alkaline agents such as
• Degradation of chemicals at high temperature. sodium hydroxide solution is injecting into the reservoirs
which react with the naturally occurring organic acids in the
oil in order to produce surfactants or soaps at the oil-water
D. Alkaline flooding interface. However, the alkaline agents are less expensive than
the surfactant agents, the expected incremental oil recovery by
Alkaline flooding is one of the EOR methods in which alkaline alkaline flooding has not been confirmed by field results and
agents are injected into the reservoir to produce in situ still remains possibility as the process is mainly dependent on
surfactants, so the alkaline flooding will eventually have the the mineral composition of the reservoir rock and its oil [11].
same effect of the surfactant flooding.
2. Alkaline flooding advantages • Alkali is inexpensive, so it is cost reduction factor.
• Alkali reacts with acid in oil to form soap.
This EOR method has the same advantages of the surfactant • Provide lower IFT in a wide salinity range.
flooding in addition to that its main advantage over the • Soaps and surfactants produce emulsions that improve the
surfactant is the cost of the alkaline agents are cheap compared sweep efficiency.
to the surfactant agents [1-12]. • Polymer and alkaline are reducing the surfactant adsorption.
• The polymer addition improves the sweep efficiency of the
E. Alkaline-surfactant-polymer (ASP) flooding ASP solution.
• Carbonate formations are usually positively charged at
Individual chemical flooding processes, alkaline flooding, neutral pH, which
surfactant flooding and polymer flooding, can be combined favors adsorption of anionic surfactants. However, when
differently. The three-component combination, alkaline (Na2CO3) is present, carbonate surfaces (calcite, dolomite)
surfactant-polymer (ASP). The ASP method represents a cost- become negatively charged and adsorption decreases several
effective chemical EOR method that yielding high oil recovery fold.
(mostly for sandstone reservoirs). ASP flooding is utilizing the • High pH also improves micro-emulsion phase behavior.
benefits of three flooding methods, where oil recovery was
enhanced, by reducing IFT, improving mobility ratio, and 3. The limitations and challenges for ASP flooding
improving microscopic displacement efficiency [1] The ASP
projects in China shows that the incremental oil recovery over • Severe scaling in the injection lines with strong
water-flooding is 18.9% on the average. emulsification of the produced fluid.
• Polymers are less effective under high water salinity
conditions, as the high salt waters degrade the viscosity
1. Mechanism of polymers.
• Mobility control is critical.
Alkaline injection reduces surfactant adsorption and the • Laboratory tests must be done with crude and reservoir rock
combination of soap and synthetic surfactant results in low under reservoir conditions and are essential for each
interfacial tension (IFT) in a wider range of salinity. Soap and reservoir condition.
surfactant make emulsions stable through reduced IFT which
improve the sweep efficiency. There is a competition of
adsorption sites between polymer and surfactant. Therefore,
addition of polymer reduces surfactant adsorption, or vice V. FIELD PROJECTS USING EOR
versa and improves the sweep efficiency of ASP solution [5].
1. Field projects statistical data of some polymer flooding:
2. Alkaline surfactant-polymer flooding advantages
A summary statistical data for field projects of polymer
flooding as shown in bellow: [1]
Several advantages can be summarized as follows:

Parameters (s) No. of projects Mean

Depth, ft 87 4000
Temperature, F 88 117
Permeability, mD 80 453
Oil Viscosity, cP 82 21.5
Polymer Concentration, ppm 48 279
Oil Recovery, %OOIP 20 4

Table V-1 A summary of statistical data for field projects

. should be less than 20,000 ppm and divalent ions (Ca++ and
Mg++) should be less than 500 ppm. The problems
2. Field projects of the surfactant flooding: encountered with some of the old pilots are well understood
and have been solved and the new generation surfactants will
Many technically successful pilots have been done in addition tolerate high salinity and high hardness so there is no practical
to several small commercial projects have been completed and limit for high salinity reservoirs [13].
several more are in progress. Relatively, homogeneous
reservoir formation is preferred. The presence of high amounts 3. Field project of the surfactant-polymer flooding:
of clays, gypsum, or anhydrite is undesirable. For
commercially available surfactants, formation-water chlorides
 Since 1990, polymer flood and SP flood have been applied in There are large field trials that already implemented
a few field pilots and expanded field tests [1]. worldwide showing encouraging results. The following table
(Table V-2) shows a summary for the ASP projects or
4. Field project of the surfactant-polymer flooding: underway since 1980 including the start-up date, oil gravity,
Oil viscosity, implementation phase as secondary or tertiary,
There were several pilot tests worldwide such as in Russian oil recovered in % of OOIP, and the chemical cost in USD/bbl.
Tpexozephoe Field, Hungarian H Field, Whittier Field in In Figure 3, the production results after applying the ASP
California, and North Gujarat Oil Field, India [1]. flooding at the end of the water-flooding phase [14].

5. Field projects of the alkaline surfactant-polymer flooding:

Table V-3 Field cases of ASP EOR.

2. Chemical EOR, especially ASP, is a complex technology
requiring a high level of expertise and experience to
VI. CONCLUSIONS
successfully implement in the field.
1. Chemical EOR technology is dramatically better than 30 3. At current oil prices, oil companies operating can make a
years ago due to more experience, better understanding, high rate of return using chemical EOR methods.
better modeling, better enabling technologies and better 4. Many of the mature oil fields appear to be suitable
chemicals at lower cost adjusted for inflation in its in the candidates for chemical flooding.
aforementioned methods, which are as follows: 5. Many ASP floods made money even at $20/Bbl oil but
• Surfactants to lower the interfacial tension between the were under designed for current oil prices.
oil and water or change the wettability of the rock. 6. Operators can both increase oil recovery and make more
• Water soluble polymers to increase the viscosity of the profit by using:
water. • larger amounts of surfactant and polymer than used
• Surfactants to generate foams or emulsions. in projects designed in the 90s
• Polymer gels for blocking or diverting flow. • better geological characterization
• Alkaline chemicals such as sodium carbonate to react • better reservoir modeling and engineering design
with crude oil to generate soap and increase pH. • better well technologies
 • better monitoring and control similar to what
evolved over many decades with steam drives and
CO2 floods.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Who doesn't thank the creature doesn't thank the Creator we thank first and finally the God Almighty, who enable us to complete this
research, To the honorable Lecturer Nasser Atalla, the research supervisor, to our distinguished lecturers at the College of Petroleum
Engineering \ Al-Ayen University, those who shouted out their voices, and struggled with their hands so that we might enjoy the
blessing of knowledge, To all of our colleagues, At every stage of our studies …. Gratitude, so thank you all.

REFERENCES

[1] Ragab, A., & Mansour, E. M. (2021). Enhanced Oil Recovery: Chemical Flooding. Geophysics and Ocean Waves Studies..
[2] Mansour E, Al-Sabagh A, Desouky S, Zawawy F, Ramzi M. A laboratory investigation of carbon dioxide-enhanced oil recovery by focusing on CO2-oil
phyisical properties. Egyptian Journal of petroleum. 2019;28(1):21-26.
[3] Tunio SQ, Tunio AH, Ghirano Na, El Adawy ZM. Comparison of different enhanced oil recovery techniques for better oil productivity. International Journal of
Applied Science and Technology. 2011;1(5).
[4] Ghwel, A. (2018). Using polymer gels for improving water performance in high permeability reservoirs (Doctoral dissertation).
[5] Smith, J. T., & Cobb, W. M. (1997). Waterflooding. Midwest Office of the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council.
[6] Abidan A, Puspasari T, Nugroho W. Polymers for enhanced oil recovery technology. Procedia Chemistry. 2012;4:11-6.
[7] Cankara I. Polymer/Oil Relative Permeabilities in Carbonate Reservoirs [M. S. thesis]. Ankara, Turkey; Middle East Technical University; 2005.
[8] Sun C, Hou J, Pan G, Xia Z. Optimized Polymer enhanced foam flooding for ordinary heavy oil reservoir after cross-linked polymer flooding. Journal of
petroleum Exploration and Production Technology. 2016;6(4):777-785.
Mansour E, Al-Sabagh A, Desouky S, Zawawy F, Ramzi M. Experimental approach of minimum miscibility pressure for CO2 miscible flooding: Application to
Egyptian oil fields. International Journal of New Technology and Research. 2016;2(5).
[9] Sheng J. Modern Chemical Enhanced Oil Recovery: Theory and Practice. Oxford, United Kingdom: Gulf Professional Publishing, 2010.
[10] Cockcroft P, Anli J, Duignan J. EOR Potential of Indonesian Reservoir; Annual Convention Proceedings, IPA 1988,03:21-88.
[11] Raffa P, Broekhuis AA, Picchioni F. Polymeric surfactants for enhanced oil recovery: A review. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2016;145:723-
733.
[12] Taber JJ, Martin F, Seright R. EOR screeining criteria revisited- part1: Introduction to screening criteria and enhanced recovery field projects. SPED Reservoir
Engineering. 1977;12(03):189-198.
[13] Sheng JJ, Status of surfactant EOR technology. Petroleum. 2015;1(2):97-105.