Foam Generation, Propagation and Stability in Porous Medium

Abstract

There have been several foam field applications in recent years. Foam treatments targeting gas mobility control in injectors as well as gas blocking in production wells have been performed without causing operational problems. The most widely used injection strategy of foam has been injecting alternating slugs of surfactant in brine with gas injection. This procedure seems to be beneficial as injection is easy to perform and control below fracturing pressure. Simultaneous injection of surfactant solution and gas may give difficulties, especially with interpretation of the tests, if fracturing pressure are exceeded during the injection period. This paper reviews critical aspects of foam for reservoir applications and intends to motivate for further field trials. Key parameters for qualification of foam are: foam generation, propagation in porous medium, foam strength and stability of foam. Stability is discussed, especially in the presence of oil at reservoir conditions. Data on each of these topics are included, as well as extracted summary of relevant literature. Experimental studies have shown that foam is generated at low surfactant concentration even below the CMC (critical micelle concentration). Results indicate that in situ foam generation in porous medium may depend on available nucleation sites. In situ generation of foam is complex and has been found to be especially difficult in oil wet carbonate rocks. Foam propagation in porous medium has been summarized, and propagation rate for a given experiment seems to be constant with time and distance. Laboratory studies confirm a propagation rate of 1-3 m/day. Field tests performed have not given reliable information of foam propagation rate, and future field pilots are encouraged to include observation wells in order to gain information of field-scale foam propagation. Foam strength is generally high with all gases. The exception is CO 2 at high pressure where CO 2 becomes supercritical. Stability of foam has been studied in laboratory and field tests, and has confirmed long-term stability of foam.

A Laboratory Approach on the Hybrid-Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques with Different Saline Brines in Sandstone Reservoirs

“…Regarding the non-uniform distribution size of the gas bubbles, large bubbles have lower pressure than small bubbles which can cause the chemical differences. Therefore, the gas would diffuse into the liquid phase from smaller to larger bubbles that have caused the coalescence [29][30][31][32].…”

A review of development methods and EOR technologies for carbonate reservoirs

“…Field applications of foam for EOR (Skauge et al 2020) (EDS) elemental analysis techniques, it was found that the blocking mechanism of PMs in the throat and cracks of cores is mainly manifested in three aspects: adsorption retention, mechanical retention and agglomeration. By dispersing nanoparticles in low-salinity water, most problems associated with rock/fluid interactions can be eliminated by improving the attractive force between fine particles and the particle surface (Arab and Pourafshary 2013) and preventing formation damage (Abhishek et al 2018).…”

N2-foam-assisted CO2 huff-n-puff process for enhanced oil recovery in a heterogeneous edge-water reservoir: experiments and pilot tests

“…The foamability and foam stability were tested using the Waring blender method at ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure. [40][41][42][43] The solution was rstly prepared with a mixture of formation water, SDS and HPAM. The concentration of SDS ranged from 0.1 wt% to 0.6 wt%, and the concentration of HPAM ranged from 0.1 wt% to 0.5 wt%.…”