Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the First International Oil Conference and Exhibition
in Mexico held in Cancun, Mexico, 31 August2 September 2006.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
A black oil reservoir simulator has been used to determine the
reservoir management and production strategies to optimize
the oil recovery from an offshore low porosity, low
permeability carbonate reservoir with permeability of 1-3 md
and porosity of 5-20%. This reservoir is a candidate for an
EOR process, because the reservoir production rate has been
declined rapidly to about half of the initial production rate
within four years. The injection techniques that were used in
this study include: (1) water injection, (2) gas injection, (3)
water alternating gas injection (WAG), (4) simultaneous water
alternating gas injection (SWAG), (5) gas injection in the top
of the reservoir with water injection in the reservoir bottom
and (6) gas injection in the bottom of the reservoir with water
injection in the reservoir top. Specific strategy that was used
includes the use of horizontal injectors and producers. This
well configuration has been shown to yield the best oil
recovery compared to other well configurations. Simulation
results show that the most economical method to produce this
reservoir is WAG. This production strategy has resulted in
better efficiency and therefore higher oil recovery and good
economics.

Introduction
The goal of this study is investigation of several production
strategies in order to optimize the recovery of a limestone field
with very low porosity and permeability that has been named
Sirri-A. Sirri-A is a large offshore producing field which is
located in the Persian Gulf, in Iranian sector, close to Iran-
Emirates border and around 100 km off the Iranian shore.
Main reservoir in this field is Ilam Formation with Santonian
age which is divided into 8 layers, of which the uppermost
levels are oil bearing formation. From top to bottom, these
layers are Channel, A-upper, A-lower, B, C, DEF, G and H.

Exploration for oil was started as early as 1968 when well
SIA-1 was drilled down to the Ilam formation. After these
explorations, thirteen wells were drilled by Total between
1997 and the middle of 2000. Now, Sirri-A has two platform
called SIAG and SIAH. SIAG platform has five producing
wells called SIAG-01, SIAG-02, SIAG-03, SIAG-04, and
SIAG-05. SIAH platform also has six producing wells called
SIAH-01, SIAH-02, SIAH-03, SIAH-04, SIAH-05, and SIAH-
06. The configuration of all of these wells is horizontal and the
use of this kind of well configuration is common, because of
very low porosity and permeability of this reservoir.
Three different estimates have been reported for the OOIP.
The value of 1340 MMSTB has been estimated by SOFIRAN
in 1975, while two different estimates in the range of 1573 and
2072 MMSTB were reported by TOTAL in 1998 and 2001
respectively. From the estimated OOIP of 2072 MMSTB by
TOTAL, 1863 MMSTB is attributed for the layers A to C. The
increase in OOIP estimated by TOTAL is essentially related to
the increase in porosity for the Northern part of the field,
based on DPH wells results.
Various rock samples from this reservoir and also well test
data shows that the porosity range of the reservoir is around 3-
21 percent with a permeability range of 0.1- 3 md. Also well
test data reveals no major contribution of fracture. In general,
this reservoir is considered as a low porosity and low
permeability reservoir and it has a single porosity system. In
spite of evidence of local fracturing in the vicinity of faults
based on the FMI results, the reservoir appears very
homogeneous. The OWC lies below the base of Ilam and was
kept at 2140 m TVD/MSL. The reservoir has no initial gas cap
and the size and permeability of aquifer is too low to maintain
pressure of the reservoir. Based on the production behavior of
the field and the material balance calculations, Sirri-A is an
undersaturated oil reservoir.
Recently, the field initial production rate of around 20000
BOPD declined rapidly to around 9000 BOPD within four
years. The sharp decline was common in all wells and in both
platform. Therefore, it can not be considered to be local well
and / or formation damage. To illustrate this more vividly, bar
charts of initial and a later time (J une 2003) daily production
rates of each individual wells for both platforms have been
generated and presented in Figures 1 and 2. So it is clear that
optimization of oil recovery from this field is necessary. In
this study by using simulation methods, various EOR methods
that can be used for increasing oil recovery in this field will be
discussed.


SPE 101976
Use of Reservoir Simulation for Optimizing Recovery Performance of One of the
Iranian Oil Fields
A. Taheri and V.A. Sajjadian, SPE, NIOC
2 SPE 101976
Data Gathering and Preparation
The first step in reservoir simulation is data gathering and
preparation. In below section the various data that were used
for reservoir simulation is presented.

Reservoir Geometry Data

Previously it is demonstrated that this reservoir consists of 8
layers. So, 9 structural contour maps for depth were used for
preparation of reservoir geometry. These maps were digitized
and used for geological modeling.

Petrophysics
Porosity and Permeability

8 contour maps for porosity and permeability were used. After
digitizing, these maps have been used for reservoir modeling.
Also the reported k
v
/k
h
are 0.01, 0.1 and 1, but k
v
/k
h
=0.1 is a
common one and it is considered for this study.

Relative Permeability and Capillary Pressure
Geologists determined five classes of capillary pressure curves
depending on the rock porosity. These curves that are used for
water saturation distribution in the reservoir were put into the
reservoir model without any changes. (Figure 3)
Also water/oil relative permeability and gas/oil relative
permeability curves for this reservoir are shown in Figures 4
and 5. These curves are related to various connate water
saturations.
Based on geologist reports in the carbonate fields of the
Middle East, a tabulation for critical water saturation based on
porosity and initial water saturation can be used for rock-type
determination. Based on this Table (Table 1), 16 rock-types
must be determined. The rock-type will be determined based
on porosity and connate water saturation.


Reservoir Fluid Characterization
Based on the existing PVT report, the required properties for
oil and gas can be prepared. In initial reservoir conditions, the
reservoir oil is undersaturated. The oil properties of this oil
with API gravity of 32.9 at 197
o
F (reservoir temperature) are
given in Figures 6 and 7. The properties of the released gas
with specific gravity of 1.052 (related to air) are given in
Figures 8, 9 and 10. It must be noted that these properties are
related to the gas released from undersaturated oil. It is
assumed that these properties are constant in all the
processess. Finally the formation water properties with
specific gravity of 1.13 (related to pure water) and also rock
compressibility are given in Tables 2 and 3.

Initialization Data
The initial reservoir conditions are as below:
Initial Reservoir Temperature: 197
o
F
Initial Reservoir Pressure: 3490 psia @ 6693 ft
WOC Depth: 7021 ft

Simulator will calculate initial water saturation in the reservoir
by using capillary pressure curves and this assumption that
capillary pressure on WOC is zero.


Model Description
For simulation study of Sirri-A field, Eclipse 100 module
(black oil model) in Geoquest 2002 software will be used.
After inserting the digitized contour map (depth, porosity and
permeability) in GRID module in Geoquest software, the
initial geological model was created. The type of griding was
selected as corner point geometry. It can be seen that this
model consists of very fine grids for better visualization of
various process. (Figures 12 to 15)
In this study, for more accurate investigation of various
processes and parameters on Sirri-A field, a sector model was
prepared. In fact, this simulation study starts with a 3D fine
grid sector model of a small representative element of the
reservoir. Figure 11 represent the location of this sector model
in the full-field model. This sector is in a part of the reservoir
that SIAG platform and its related wells were drilled in this
section. So there are not any limitations for the spaces between
different wells.
This sector model is a 6 km*6 km model, that its dimensions
are as below:
N
x
(the number of grids in x-direction) =60, each one
is about 100 m
N
y
(the number of grids in y-direction) =60, each one
is about 100 m
N
z
(the number of grids in z-direction) =8

So this model consists of 28800 grids, while only 24462 ones
are active.
After inserting the above petrophysics, PVT and initialization
data in the model, and also rock-type determination of grids in
the model (that depends on the grid porosity and initial water
saturation), the model is ready for various studies. Figures 12
to 15 shows the various properties of the sector model like
depth, permeability, porosity and initial oil saturation.
The calculated OIP of this sector is 791.6591 MMSTB that is
more than one third of the total OIP of Sirri-A field. So the
increasing oil recovery in this sector will have great influence
on the total oil recovery.

Reservoir Simulation Scenarios
In this sector model study, the single well pattern like the
nine-spot with wells SIA-1 to SIA-9 is selected, but it must be
noticed that each well can be injector or produced and there is
no limitation for their types. This means that in this study, the
location of the wells are known, but their type (producer or
injector) based on the various processes may be changed. All
wells configuration are horizontal, because the use of this well
configuration for low porosity and permeability reservoir is
usual. The schematic of well location and configuration is
shown in Figure 16. Also Figures 17 and 18 and Table 4
demonstrate that use of horizontal wells for natural depletion
is better than the vertical ones. The wellbore diameter is 0.6 ft
in all the cases and all the wells have skin factor of (-3) that is
the results of well stimulation.
The minimum bottom-hole pressure in all cases was set to
1000 psia. But it must be noticed that this bottom-hole
pressure can not transfer the reservoir fluids to the surface. So
one kind of artificial lift (ESP can be a good candidate) must
be used for oil recovery.
SPE 101976 3
The economical limits for shutting the wells in all scenarios
are given below:
Maximum GOR: 50000 MSCF/STB
Maximum Water-Cut: 95%
Minimum Oil Production Rate: 50 STB/D

After selecting the use of horizontal wells for natural depletion
scenario, the investigation of various possible EOR methods
that can be used for optimum method of EOR in this low
porosity, low permeability field is started.
Because this field is offshore, all EOR methods that use water
and gas can be applied. These methods consists of water
injection, gas injection, water alternating gas injection
(WAG), simultaneous water alternating gas injection
(SWAG), gas injection in the top of the reservoir with water
injection in the reservoir bottom and gas injection in the
bottom of the reservoir with water injection in the reservoir
top. In all the scenarios, the field produces naturally until
2018, and in 2019 injection will be started. It must be noted
that except than the water injection and gas injection
scenarios, all the scenarios are related to three phase flow that
are very sensitive to three phase reltive permeability model.
So in all of them STONE 1 is selected as three phase relative
permeability model.
In all the cases the maximum allowable injection pressure is
6000 psia and like the natural depletion, minimum bottom-
hole pressure is 1000 psia.

Water Injection
In this EOR scenario, down-dip wells like SIA-1, SIA-7, SIA-
8, and SIA-9 are injector and wells SIA-2, SIA-3, SIA-4, SIA-
5, and SIA-6 are producer. The production wells are controlled
by oil rate as given in Table 5 and the injector wells are
controlled by injection volume rate of 1200 rb/day. Figure 19
shows the final oil saturation of this sector of the field.

Gas Injection
In this EOR scenario, up-dip wells like SIA-2, SIA-3, SIA-5,
and SIA-6 are injector that are controlled by injection volume
rate of 1200 rb/day and wells SIA-1, SIA-4, SIA-7, SIA-8,
and SIA-9 are producer the are controlled by oil rate as given
in Table 6. Figure 20 shows the final oil saturation of this
sector of the field.

Gas Injection in the top and Water Injection in the bottom
of the Reservoir
In this EOR scenario, down-dip wells like SIA-1, SIA-7, and
SIA-9 are water injector, up-dip wells SIA-2, SIA-3, and SIA-
6 are gas injector and wells SIA-4, SIA-5, and SIA-8 are
producer that are controlled by oil rate as given in Table 7.
The injection wells are controlled by injection volume rate of
800 rb/day. Figure 21 shows the final oil saturation of this
sector of the field.

Gas Injection in the bottom and water Injection in the top
of the Reservoir
In this EOR scenario, up-dip wells like SIA-2, SIA-3, and
SIA-6 are water injector, down-dip wells like SIA-1, SIA-7,
and SIA-9 are gas injector and wells SIA-4, SIA-5, and SIA-8
are producer that are controlled by oil rate as given in Table 7.
The injection wells are controlled by injection volume rate of
800 rb/day. Figure 22 shows the final oil saturation and final
reservoir pressure of this sector of the field.

Water alternating Gas Injection (WAG)
In this EOR scenario, down-dip wells like SIA-1, SIA-7, SIA-
8, and SIA-9 are injector (water and gas) that are controlled by
injection volume rate of 1200 rb/day and wells SIA-2, SIA-3,
SIA-4, SIA-5, and SIA-6 are producer that are controlled by
oil rate as given in Table 8. Figures 23 and 24 represent the
injection rate of one of the injectors in WAG injection in the
sector of Sirri-A field. It can be seen that the control of water
and gas injection can not be done as calculated ones. In fact
the injection technique that is used in this scenario is tapering.
Also Figure 25 shows the final oil saturation of this sector of
the field.

Simultaneous Water alternating Gas Injection (SWAG)
In this EOR scenario like the previous one, down-dip wells
like SIA-1, SIA-7, SIA-8, and SIA-9 are injector (water and
gas) that are controlled by injection volume rate of 600 rb/day
(1200 rb/day for both gas and water) and wells SIA-2, SIA-3,
SIA-4, SIA-5, and SIA-6 are producer that are controlled by
oil rate as given in Table 8. Figure 26 shows the final oil
saturation and final reservoir pressure of this sector of the
field.

Figures 27 and 28 and also Table 9 represent the comparison
among various EOR scenarios than can be used for more oil
recovery in Sirri-A field. But plateau rate of 3800 bbl/d can
not be continued more than the natural depletion scenario.
This is because of the low porosity and low permeability of
the reservoir that harden pressure maintenance in the reservoir.
Table 9 demonstrates that by using WAG or SWAG, the more
oil recovery can be resulted. Also Figures 25 and 26
demonstrate that WAG and SWAG can deplete the reservoir
better that the other EOR scenarios. By considering the
operational problems of SWAG, it can be said that WAG is
the best EOR scenario for more oil recovery in Sirri-A field.
But it must be said that Figure 27 shows that in short time, gas
injection is the best scenario and WAG, SWAG, and water
injection in top and gas injection in bottom are the next ones
that this is because of the characteristics of the field that is low
porosity and low permeability. But because of the shortage of
gas sources in offshore, the small differences among oil
recoveries of theses methods and operational problems of
SWAG, WAG is considered as the best one.

Conclusion
1. WAG is one of the common EOR methods that is
used for various reservoir conditions.
2. Sirri-A oil field is one of the Iranian offshore oil field
that requires a suitable EOR method for more oil
recovery.
3. The main characteristic of this field is its low
porosity and low permeability. This characteristic
limits the efficiency of various EOR methods.
4 SPE 101976
4. Simulation study of a sector of Sirri-A field (6
km*6km) demonstrates that among various possible
EOR methods, WAG is the best one.
5. The plateau rate of 3800 bbl/d can not be continued
more than the natural depletion scenario. This is
because of the low porosity and low permeability
characteristic of this field. So some stimulation
methods like hydraulic fracturiung for lowering the
skin effect around the wells can be useful for
improving oil recovery.

Acknowledgement
The authors thank the R&D section of the Iranian Offshore Oil
Company (IOOC) for supporting this work by giving the
required data for this project.

References
1. Sofiran, Commercially Report, SIRRI A, December,
1975.
2. Iranian Offshore Oil Company (IOOC), Depth,
Porosity, Permeability Maps of SIRRI A Field, 2005.
3. Total SIRRI, Full Field Reservoir Simulation Model,
SIRRI A, September 2001.
4. ELF-R.E., ETUDES SPECIALES SUR LES
CAROTTES DU SNNDQGE DE SIIRRI A 4, No.
03. E.10-0/2.91.
5. Total SIRRI, PVT Laboratory Study Report, SIRRI
A, DPG 2 Pilot, ILAM A & C, Iran, 5 April, 98.


Table 1: Rock-Type Criteria
0<<8
(percent)
8<<12
(percent)
12<<16
(percent)
16<<20
(percent)
20<
(percent)
S
wi
<30% S
wc
=30% S
wc
=30% S
wc
=30% S
wc
=25%
30%<S
wi
<40% S
wc
=40% S
wc
=40% S
wc
=40% S
wc
=40%
40%<S
wi
<50% S
wc
=50% S
wc
=50% S
wc
=50% S
wc
=50%
S
wc
=5%
50%<S
wi
S
wc
=60% S
wc
=60% S
wc
=60%


Table 2: Formation Water Properties
P
r
(psia)
B
w
(bbl/stb)
c
w
(psia
-1
)

w

(cp)
C
v

(psia
-1
)
3488 1.03 3.05E-06 0.40 4.03E-06



Table 3: Rock Compressibility
P
r
(psia) c
r
(psia
-1
)
3488 3.50E-06




Table 4: Comparison of Ultimate Oil Recoveries
(Natural Depletion Scenarios)
Kinds of Wells Ultimate Recovery (%)
9 Horizontal Wells 7.6
9 Vertical Wells 4.2





Table 5: Well Oil Production Rate in
Water Injection Scenario

















Table 6: Well Oil Production Rate in
Gas Injection Scenario



















Well Name Production Rates (STB/D)
SIA-2 750
SIA-3 450
SIA-4 900
SIA-5 1250
SIA-6 450
Total Sector 3800
Well Name
Production Rates
(STB/D)
SIA-1 850
SIA-4 850
SIA-7 700
SIA-8 700
SIA-9 700
Total Sector 3800
SPE 101976 5

Table 7: Well Oil Production Rate in Gas Injection in
the top and Water Injection in the bottom and the
reverse Scenario















Table8: Well Oil Production Rate WAG and SWAG
Scenarios















Table 9: Comparison of Ultimate Oil Recoveries (EOR Scenarios)
EOR Scenarios
Ultimate Recovery
(%)
Water Injection 10.75
Gas Injection 11.2
Water injection in Bottom and Gas Injection in Top 11
Water injection in Top and Gas Injection in Bottom 10.5
WAG 11.5
SWAG 11.5











Figure 1: Initial and Last Production Rates of each well
for Sirri A (Platform G)





Figure 2: Initial and Last Production Rates of each well
for SirriA (Platform H)





Well Name Production Rates (STB/D)
SIA-4 1200
SIA-5 1600
SIA-8 1000
Total Sector 3800
Well Name Production Rates (STB/D)
SIA-2 750
SIA-3 450
SIA-4 900
SIA-5 1250
SIA-6 450
Total Sector 3800
6 SPE 101976
SIRRI A - Capillary pressure curves
per porosity class
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
water saturati on (Sw)
C
a
p
illa
r
y
p
r
e
s
u
s
r
e
(p
s
i)
Poro 0-0.08
Poro 0.08-0.12
Poro 0.12-0.16
Poro 0.16-0.20
Poro 0.20-

Figure 3: Capillary Pressure Curves per Porosity Class


Oil / Gas Relative Permeability
per connate water saturation class
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Sg
k
r
g
/ k
r
o
g
krg-Swc=5%
krog-Swc=5%
krg-Swc=25%
krog-Swc=25%
krg-Swc=30%
krog-Swc=30%
krg-Swc=40%
krog-Swc=40%
krg-Swc=50%
krog-Swc=50%
krg-Swc=60%
krog-Swc=60%

Figure 5: Gas/Oil Relati ve Permeability Curves per
Connate Water Saturation Class

Solution GOR
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Pressure (psi a)
R
s


(
M
S
C
F
/
S
T
B
)

Figure 7: Solution GOR of Reservoir Oil @197
o
F


Oil Viscosity
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Pressure (psi a)

o

(
c
p
)

Figure 9: Viscosity of Reservoir Oil @197
o
F
Water / Oil Relative Permeability
per Connate water saturation class
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Sw
k
r
w
/ k
r
o
w
krw-Swc=5%
krow-Swc=5%
krw- Swc =25%
krow- Swc =25%
krw- Swc =30%
krow- Swc =30%
krw- Swc =40%
krow- Swc =40%
krw- Swc =50%
krow- Swc =50%
krw- Swc =60%
krow- Swc =60%

Figure 4: Water/Oil Relati ve Permeability Curves per
Connate Water Saturation Class

Oil Formation Volume Factor
1.100
1.120
1.140
1.160
1.180
1.200
1.220
1.240
1.260
1.280
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Pressure (psi a)
B
o

(
b
b
l
/
s
t
b
)

Figure 6: Formation Volume Factor of Reservoir Oil @197
o
F


Gas Formation Volume Factor
0.000
2.000
4.000
6.000
8.000
10.000
12.000
14.000
16.000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Pressure (psi a)
B
g

(
b
b
l
/
M
s
c
f
)

Figure 8: Gas Formation Volume Factor @197
o
F


Gas Viscosity
0.00800
0.00900
0.01000
0.01100
0.01200
0.01300
0.01400
0.01500
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Pressure (psi a)

g

(
c
p
)

Figure 10: Gas Viscosity @197
o
F





SPE 101976 7


Figure 11: The Location of the Sector Model in the
Full-Field Model







Figure 12: Depth Property in Sector Model




Figure 14: Porosity Property in Sector Model


Figure 13: Permeability Property in Sector Model




Figure 15: Initial Oil Saturation Property in Sector Model





8 SPE 101976




Figure 16: The Location and Position of Horizontal Wells in
Horizontal Wells Scenario of Natural Depletion













Figure 17: Comparison between Field Oil Production rate (Vertical and Horizontal Wells)













SPE 101976 9



Figure 18: Comparison between Oil Recovery (Vertical and Horizontal Wells)






Figure 19: Final Oil Saturation-Water Injection



Figure 21: Final Oil Saturation- Gas Injection in the top and Water
Injection in the bottom




Figure 20: Final Oil Saturation-Gas Injection



Figure 22: Final Oil Saturation- Gas Injection in the bottom and
Water Injection in the top




10 SPE 101976





Figure 23: Well SIA-8 Gas Injection Rate WAG




Figure 25: Final Oil Saturation- WAG


Figure 24: Well SIA-8 Water Injection Rate WAG



Figure 26: Final Oil Saturation- SWAG




Figure 27: Comparison among Various EOR Scenarios- Oil Recoveries





SPE 101976 11







Figure 28: Comparison among Various EOR Scenarios- Field Oil Production Rates