1. CONING CONTROL AND RECOVERY
IMPROVEMENT IN BOTTOM WATER
DRIVE RESERVOIR VIA DOWNHOLE
WATER SINK AND DOWNHOLE WATER
LOOP
MOHD RUZAINI BIN RUSLI
A11KP0030

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE
• INTRODUCTION
• OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
• RESULT AND DISCUSSION
• CONCLUSION

3. INTRODUCTION
WATER CONING
-The change in the oil-water contact profile as a result of
drawdown pressures during production.

4. DOWNHOLE WATER SINK
-Downhole water sink (DWS) is a technique for minimizing water
cut in wells producing hydrocarbons from reservoirs with
bottom water drives and strong tendencies to water coning.

5. DOWNHOLE WATER LOOP
A natural extension of the water sink technology for small
aquifers is the concepts of returning the drained water to the
same aquifer using triple-completed wells with downhole water
loop (DWL) technology .

6. OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
• To examine the potential of DWL for improving oil recovery
factor and produced water reduction.
• To compare the recovery performance of conventional, DWS
and DWL wells in the reservoir with bottom water coning.
• To determine which method is the most efficient in controlling
the water coning with most high value of oil recovery factor
and less in economical factor.

7. METHODOLGY
RESERVOIR MODEL
• A black-oil commercial simulator (IMEX) by CMG was used.
• The ‘layer cake’2D reservoir model was used in this study.
• No flow outer boundary condition.
Oil Zone Grid
• 20X55
Water Zone Grid
• 60X55

9. PARAMETERS INVOLVED
1. Type of completion
• Single completion for conventional
• Dual completion for DWS
• Triple completion for DWL
2. Effect of initial reservoir pressure
• Initial pressure gradient; 0.40, 0.45 and 0.5 psi/ft
3. Effect of penetration interval
• Length of perforation; 10, 20 and 30 ft

10. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
BASE CASE
DATA UNIT VALUES
Datum depth ft 9265
Thickness of oil zone ft 40
Thickness of water zone ft 120
Initial reservoir pressure psia 3706
Position of water drainage completion from WOC ft 10
Horizontal permeability md 35
Vertical permeability md 38.5
Porosity fraction 0.164
Well radius ft 0.292
Outer radius of oil zone ft 1000
Capillary pressure 𝑝𝑠𝑖−1 Ignored

11. MODEL OIL PRODUCTION (bbl)
Conventional 1 755 486
DWS 2 481 541
DWL 1 801 892
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
CumulativeOil(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Oil Production
DWL Model
DWS Model
Conventional

12. 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000
CumulativeWater(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Water Production
DWL Model
DWS Model
Conventional
MODEL WATER PRODUCTION (bbl)
Conventional 16 140 046
DWS 15 364 982
DWL 16 068 897

13. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
WaterCut(%)
Time (day)
Water Cut
DWL Model
DWS Model
Conventional
MODEL WATER CUT (%)
Conventional 93.86
DWS 92.74
DWL 93.79

14. EFFECT OF INITIAL RESERVOIR PRESSURE
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
CumulativeOil(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Oil with Pi = 4170psia
DWL Model
DWS Model
Pi (psia) MODEL OIL PRODUCTION
(Mbbl)
4170 DWS 2.51
DWL 1.82
4633 DWS 2.53
DWL 1.83
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
CumulativeOil(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Oil with Pi = 4633 psia
DWL Model
DWS Model

15. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.1 10 1000 100000
WaterCut(%)
Time (day)
Water Cut for Pi = 4170 psia
DWL Model
DWS Model
Pi MODEL WATER CUT (%)
4170 DWS 92.7
DWL 93.8
4633 DWS 92.6
DWL 93.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.1 10 1000 100000
WaterCut(%)
Time (day)
Water Cut for Pi = 4633 psia
DWL Model
DWS Model

16. EFFECT OF PENETRATION INTERVALS
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
CumulativeOil(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Oil for Perforation
Length of 20 ft
DWL Model
DWS Model
LENGTH OF
PERFORATION (ft)
MODEL OIL PRODUCTION
(Mbbl)
20 DWS 2.48
DWL 1.81
30 DWS 2.49
DWL 1.82
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
CumulativeOil(Mbbl)
Time (day)
Cumulative Oil for Perforation
Length of 30 ft
DWL Model
DWS Model

17. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.1 10 1000 100000
WaterCut(%)
Time (day)
Water Cut for Perforation Length of
30 ft
DWL Model
DWS Model
LENGTH OF
PERFORATION (ft)
MODEL WATER CUT (%)
20 DWS 92.8
DWL 93.8
30 92.8
93.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001 0.1 10 1000 100000
WaterCut(%)
Time (day)
Water Cut for Perforation Length
of 20 ft
DWL Model
DWS Model

18. CONCLUSION
• In bottom water drive reservoir, the oil recovery was significantly limited by the
aquifer strength.
• The effect of initial reservoir pressure for both DWS and DWL models was nearly
to nothing because it just had a little effect of the shape of oil water contact and
water encroachment.
• Similar to the initial reservoir pressure, penetration interval or length of
perforations also had a little effect on the oil recovery since it provided energy
for the oil flowing to the production well.
• If there was a disposal zone existed in the reservoir, DWS was a better choice
than DWL and conventional models because of its fast recovery process and low
water cut in the produced fluids.
• DWL model was considered for a better choice because it produced less water to
the surface by reinjected those water produced into the reservoir, thus
controlled the water coning and prevented quick pressure depletion in reservoir.

19. THANK YOU