|
Claims  |
|
|
What is claimed is:
1. A method of evaluating a sample of an underground formation to determine
the producibility of any hydrocarbons present in the formation, which
comprises:
solvating a known volume of sample in a known volume of a polar solvent
which will solvate asphaltenes;
solvating a known volume of said sample in a known volume of an aliphatic
solvent which will solvate paraffinics and naphthenics found in
underground hydrocarbons without substantially solvating asphaltenes, said
sample volume equal to polar solvent sample volume, said aliphatic solvent
volume equal to polar solvent volume;
quantitatively measuring the emission fluorescence below about 400 nm of
both solvated samples at an excitation wavelength at which most petroleum
compounds fluoresce; and
determining the producibility of any hydrocarbon present in the sample by
calculating the ratio of the emission fluorescence of said polar solvent
sample to said aliphatic solvent sample and comparing said ratio to
previous correlations drawn from known samples,
said previous correlations drawn between known producibility of samples and
the ratios of the emission fluorescence of the known samples in said polar
solvent to the emission fluorescence of the known samples in said
aliphatic solvent.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the hydrocarbons are producible if said
ratio is less than three.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the hydrocarbons are non-producible if
said ratio is greater than five.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the polar solvent is methylene chloride,
chloroform, or 1,1-dichloroethane.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is hexane, heptane,
or pentane.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the samples are drill cuttings.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the emission fluorescence is measured
between about 250 and about 400 nm.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the solvated samples are excited between
about 250 and about 310 nm.
9. A method of evaluating a sample of an underground formation to determine
the producibility of any hydrocarbons present in the formation, which
comprises: polar solvent sample volume, said aliphatic solvent volume
equal to polar solvent volume;
quantitatively measuring the emission fluoroscence at a fixed wavelength
below about 400 nm of both solvated samples at a fixed excitation
wavelength at which most petroleum compounds fluoresce; and
determining the producibility of any hydrocarbon present in the sample by
taking the ratio of the emission fluorescence of said polar solvent sample
to said aliphatic solvent sample and comparing said ratio to previous
correlations drawn from known samples,
said previous correlations indicating that if said ratio is greater than
five, the formation hydrocarbons are non-producible, and if said ratio is
less than three, the formation hydrocarbons are producible.
10. A method of evaluating a sample of an underground formation to
determine the producibility of any hydrocarbons present in the formation,
which comprises:
solvating a known volume of sample in a known volume of a polar solvent
which will solvate asphaltenes;
solvating a known volume of said sample in a known volume of an aliphatic
solvent which will solvate paraffinics and naphthenics found in
underground hydrocarbons without substantially solvating asphaltenes, said
sample volume equal to polar solvent sample volume, said aliphatic solvent
volume equal to polar solvent volume;
quantitatively measuring the emission fluorescence below about 400 nm of
both solvated samples at an excitation wavelength at which most petroleum
compounds fluoresce; and
determining the producibility of any hydrocarbon present by comparing the
difference in emission fluorescence between the fluorescence of said polar
solvent sample and the fluorescence of said aliphatic solvent sample to
previous correlations,
said previous correlations drawn between known producibility of samples and
the differences of emission fluorescence observed for each of the known
samples between the fluoresence of the samples in said polar solvent and
in said aliphatic solvent. |
|
|
|
|
Claims  |
|
|
Description  |
|
|
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention is related to techniques for evaluating the hydrocarbon
content and composition of an underground formation. More particularly,
the invention offers a method for determining from samples such as drill
cuttings whether the asphaltene content of a hydrocarbon formation is high
enough to cause the formation to be non-producible.
Because of the difficulties and cost involved in producing highly viscous
oils, it is frequently desirable to know the producibility of a
hydrocarbon formation without placing a well on test. This is particularly
true in geographical areas such as California which have a relatively high
percentage of viscous hydrocarbons. Current logging techniques are often
ineffective in evaluating the producibility of an underground formation
prior to placing a well on test.
In some situations, electric logs do not effectively differentiate between
hydrocarbons and water, and rarely between non-producible and producible
oil. Even though electric logs may correctly identify the presence of
pore-filling carbonaceous material, they are unaffected by the viscosity
of the oil which is a significant factor in determining whether oil will
flow into the wellbore.
Mud log data is commonly used instead of wireline log data in an attempt to
evaluate a formation prior to an expensive DST (Drill Stem Test) or
putting a well on production test. The mud logs leave a great deal to be
desired as an accurate indicator of the presence of petroleum, and if
present, of productive formations.
Fluorescence has been used as a logging technique for detecting oil in
drill cuttings for decades. However, the method used to determine the
fluorescence of samples at a rig site is a crude method which has not
improved appreciably and is severely limited in its usefulness and
applicability. At present, fluorescence is determined when an operator
shines a broad spectrum ultraviolet light source on cuttings in the hope
of seeing substantial fluorescence to indicate the presence of oil. See
U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,311,151; 2,337,465; 2,459,512; 2,951,940 and Re. No.
22,081.
There are several inherent problems in current fluorescence logging which
make it nonquantitative at best and misleading at worst. First, the
excitation source is not concentrated in the spectral region where the oil
is most likely to absorb radiation and re-emit that radiation as
fluorescence. Second, the oil is quite likely to emit fluorescence at
wavelengths predominantly, if not totally, unseen by the human eye. Third,
the fluorescence observed by the operator is influenced by the presence of
fluorescent minerals such as fluorite. Fourth, the presence or amount of
oil on the surface of the cuttings samples may not be representative of
the oil in the pore structure of the formation. The mud logger sees only
the surface of the samples with this technique. Fifth, operators'
description of such fluorescence phenomena is highly subjective. Such
commonly used words as strong, weak, bright, dull, yellow, and gold
prohibit any quantitative analysis of the data.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,696,903 discloses shining UV light on formation samples and
visually noting the color of the fluorescence as well as taking video
pictures of the fluorescence for later study. U.S. Pat. No. 4,248,599
discloses a process for determining the API gravity of oil by the use of a
flame ionization detector. In this method, the volatile and pyrolyzable
components of oil are vaporized. A measurement is made of the ratio of the
amount of hydrocarbon vapor produced at temperatures within a selected
high temperature range to the total amount of vapor produced. A ratio of
fluorescence measured under two conditions is taken in conjunction with
the use of the flame ionization detector.
The emission fluorescence of crude oil samples has been studied and
recorded over various wavelengths, including ultraviolet wavelengths below
400 nm. Studies which have taken place at the Bartlesville Energy
Technology Center have been basically "fingerprint" studies wherein the
emission fluorescence of various types of crude oils has been recorded at
different excitation wavelengths. This Department of Energy research was a
spin-off from earlier efforts by the Bureau of Mines to try to identify
crude oil by emission fluorescence for purposes of pollution control.
Please see Chisholm, B. R., Eldering, H. G., Giering, L. P., and Hornig,
A. W., Total Luminescence Contour Spectra of Six Topped Crude Oils,
BETC/RI-76/16, a paper prepared for ERDA for the Bartlesville Energy
Research Center in Bartlesville, Okla., November 1976; and Brownrigg, J.
T. and Hornig, A. W., Low Temperature Total Luminescence Contour Spectra
of Six Topped Crude Oils and their Vacuum Distillate and Residuum
Fractions, BETC/RI-78/13, a paper prepared for DOE for the Bartlesville
Energy Technology Center, Bartlesville, Okla., July 1978. Similar,
non-published fingerprinting work of crude oils by total luminescence
spectra has also been performed in unpublished work at Texas A. & M.
University.
There is one recently developed process which employs fluorescent
measurement to test for the presence of hydrocarbons within drill
cuttings. But this process does not give an indication of viscosity or
producibility. Further, U.S. Pat. No. 4,609,821 is applicable only to oil
base mud drill cuttings. The cuttings are excited with a wide range of UV
wavelengths and the emitted radiation is recorded over a wide range of
wavelengths to produce an analytical chemical profile. This profile of
intensity over multiple wavelengths of excitation and emission radiation
is compared with previous profiles to determine the presence of
hydrocarbons not associated with the oil base mud.
Molecular fluorescence is discussed in general in Skoog, Douglas,
Principles of Instrumental Analysis, Sanders College Publishing,
Philadelphia (3rd ed. 1985), pp. 225-240. The reference indicates that the
greatest fluorescence behavior occurs with compounds containing aromatic
functional groups and offers a table which indicates the UV fluorescence
wavelengths associated with numerous benzene derivatives in ethanol
solution. Several analytical profiles of hydrocarbons are disclosed
wherein fluorescence intensity is plotted over multiple excitation and
emission wavelengths.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The invention is a method of evaluating a sample of an underground
formation such as drill cuttings to determine the producibility of any
hydrocarbons present in the formation. This decision of producibility is
based upon the hydrocarbon asphaltene content, which is usually
determinative of whether the hydrocarbon that is present is producible or
non-producible.
The method comprises the steps of solvating a sample in a polar solvent
which will solvate all petroleum fractions including asphaltenes,
solvating a volume of the sample in an aliphatic solvent which will
solvate most fractions of crude such as paraffinics, naphthenics and
aromatics without substantially solvating asphaltenes, quantitatively
measuring the emission fluorescence at a wavelength below 400 nm of both
solvated samples at an excitation wavelength at which most petroleum
compounds fluoresce, and determining the producibility of any hydrocarbon
present in the sample by comparing the emission fluorescence of the two
samples to previous correlations made between fluorescence and known
producibility. The excitation and emission wavelength bands are preferably
fixed and narrow to yield a single fluorescence intensity measurement.
By calculating the ratio of the emission fluorescence of said polar solvent
sample to said aliphatic solvent sample and comparing that ratio to
previous correlations made with samples of known producibility, the
producibility of hydrocarbons that are present can be determined.
Alternately, the fluorescence influence of the asphaltenes and associated
producibility can be isolated by taking the difference in emission
fluorescence between the fluorescence of said polar sample and the
fluorescence of said aliphatic solvent sample and comparing that
difference to previous correlations.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
Fluorescence is a phenomena wherein compounds, containing molecular
arrangements generally referred to as chromophores, emit fluorescent
radiation when excited by incoming light of certain wavelengths. The
chromophores contained in compounds such as the asphaltenic, aromatic and
resin fractions of crude, fluoresce in the UV portion of the
electromagnetic spectrum when bombarded with radiation of the proper
excitation wavelength.
Generally, asphaltenes have high levels of chromophores and high levels of
fluorescence. Paraffinic and naphthenic fractions of crude have relatively
low levels of chromophores, and associated low levels of fluorescence.
A technique known as total scanning fluorescence or 3-D fluorescence has
been developed, wherein a sample is excited over a range of discrete
wavelengths and the emitted radiation is recorded at various wavelengths.
Total scanning fluorescence has indicated that the optimum excitation and
emission wavelengths for most crude oils fall below 400 nm. This is a
region where the human eye has no response. The optimum excitation
wavelengths for most crude oils are in the region of about 250 to about
310 nm. The predominant portion of emitted radiation falls in the
non-visible ultraviolet region of about 250 to about 400 nm.
By using a scale of fluorescence intensity and instrumentally measuring the
fluorescence of a formation sample from a core or drill cuttings, with and
without the presence of substantial asphaltenes, we have discovered that
we can determine whether or not a formation crude is producible without
putting a well on test. In general, quantitative fluorometer readings are
obtained which are related to the amount of asphaltenes in the hydrocarbon
being checked. A high asphaltene content makes the oil too viscous to be
produced. Thus, the asphaltene content of hydrocarbon is usually
determinative of whether or not hydrocarbons are producible.
For the present invention, the determination of whether an oil is
producible or non-producible is based on the hydrocarbon asphaltene
content. Of course, the formation may contain hydrocarbons with a very
high API gravity, but an insufficient volume or saturation of hydrocarbons
to be producible. Thus, we assume that the formation samples being checked
with the invention contain a sufficient volume of hydrocarbons to be
recoverable, and that there are no porosity or permeability problems which
would prevent a formation from being produced. "Producibility" when used
herein, means that the asphaltene content and related viscosity, is
insufficient to create a problem in producing the hydrocarbons.
Conversely, an invention determination that hydrocarbons are
non-producible means that the asphaltene content is too high for the
hydrocarbons to be produced by usual recovery methods. The use of some
thermal methods such as steam and hot solvent injection will, of course,
change what is producible, and what is non-producible.
As detailed below, we have developed two related methods of evaluating
formation samples such as drill cuttings to determine the producibility of
any hydrocarbons present in the formation. Both methods involve measuring
the fluorescence of the sample in two solvents, a first solvent which will
substantially solvate asphaltenes, and a second solvent which will solvate
most crude oil fractions without substantially solvating asphaltenes.
The first and preferred method calculates the ratio of the fluorescence of
the polar solvent sample to the aliphatic solvent sample and compares that
ratio to previous correlations developed between known producibility and
said fluorescence ratios. The second method takes the difference between
the fluorescence of the two solvated samples and compares that to previous
correlations drawn between known producibility and the differences in
sample fluorescence. Other methods with different mathematical
relationships may also be used, provided that the method in some way
isolates the fluorescence due to asphaltenes as do the above ratio and
difference methods.
Both methods require that a sample be solvated in two environments, a polar
solvent which will solvate asphaltenes and an aliphatic solvent which will
solvate most of the fractions of crude oil without substantially solvating
asphaltenes. To improve accuracy, a known volume of sample should be
solvated in a known volume of solvent In addition, the solvents employed
should preferably be the same solvents that were used to develop the
previous correlations.
The emission fluorescence is preferably measured instrumentally at a fixed,
narrow, emission wavelength below about 400 nm. This quantitative
measurement for both solvated samples occurs preferably from a fixed,
narrow excitation wavelength at which most petroleum compounds fluoresce.
The difference or ratio of the measured emission fluorescence of the two
samples is then calculated to yield a value which is proportional to
producibility. By comparing the ratio of the emission fluorescence of the
polar solvent sample to that of the aliphatic solvent sample, or the
difference in emission fluorescence between the two samples to previous
correlations, the producibility of the crude may be determined. The
difference method is believed to be less sensitive to asphaltene content
and producibility than the ratio method. Consequently, the ratio method is
preferred.
Preferably, a single fluorescence intensity measurement is obtained for
each sample rather than multiple intensity measurements at multiple
excitation wavelengths. However, since different crude components and
minerals fluoresce at different wavelengths, it may be desirable to obtain
multiple intensity measurements of one sample at different wavelengths in
order to decrease the influence of a particular component in the drill
cuttings.
We have discovered that when the instant ratio is less than three, the
hydrocarbons involved are most likely producible. When the ratio is
greater than five, the hydrocarbons are most likely non-producible, except
under substantial thermal or solvent stimulation. When the ratio is
between three and five, the hydrocarbons may or may not be producible as
defined herein. It is believed that this correlation will not vary
significantly with different crudes.
Both the ratio and the difference method of isolating fluorescence due to
asphaltenes give excellent results. If the measured fluorescence
intensities of the two samples are relatively close together, the
asphaltene content of the sample will be low, and will not be a
significant factor in determining producibility. The invention method has
greater precision if the asphaltene content of the crude is substantial
enough to affect producibility of the formation. With a high asphaltene
content there will be a substantial difference between the fluorescence
values of the two samples.
Preferred polar solvents for solvating all the fractions of crude including
asphaltenic are methylene chloride, chloroform and dichloroethane.
Preferred aliphatic solvents for solvating most of the crude fractions
without solvating asphaltenes are hexane, heptane, and pentane. The
straight chain isomers are most preferred. Other solvents, of course, may
be employed.
The following examples will further illustrate the novel method of
determining producibility of hydrocarbons from formation samples by the
present invention. These examples are given by way of illustration and not
as limitations on the scope of the invention. Thus, it should be
understood that the steps of the invention method may be varied to achieve
similar results within the scope of the invention.
EXAMPLES 1-4
Drill cuttings from four different formations known to contain hydrocarbons
were analyzed using the invention method in Examples 1-4. A Sequoia Turner
Model 112 fluorometer was employed to determine the producibility of the
formations from which the samples came. The Turner Model 112 fluorometer
consists basically of an ultraviolet light source, an excitation radiation
filter between the light source and the sample, a photomultiplier tube
which reads the intensity of radiation emitted by the sample at right
angles to the excitation radiation, and an emission filter placed between
the sample and the photomultiplier tube. A reference light path between
the light source and the photomultiplier is also provided so that the
difference between emitted radiation and exciting radiation can be easily
determined.
The light source employed for these examples was a far ultraviolet source U
tube having Turner Model No. 110-851, GE No. G4T4/1 or equivalent. 95% of
the radiation from this light source is at 254 nm, with some output at
297, 313, 405, 436 and 546 nm.
The excitation radiation filter employed was a Turner No. 7-54 filter which
has a bell-shaped radiation transmission curve. This filter transmits
about 80% of the radiation which strikes it from about 290 to about 360
nm, and 40% or more of incident radiation from about 250 nm to about 390
nm. Only 10% of incident radiation is transmitted at 236 nm and 400 nm.
The end result of this combination of light source and excitation
radiation filter is that 99% of the excitation radiation used in Examples
1-4 was at 254 nm.
The emission filter employed was a 320 nm narrow band filter. The
transmission curve of this emission filter allows 25% transittance of
incident radiation at 320 nm, dropping steeply to 20% transmittance at 313
nm and 327 nm. Transmittance is only 4% at 310 nn and 330 nm.
The invention method is by no means limited to the combination of filters
and light source employed with the Turner Model 112 fluorometer. Other
fluorometers, light sources including lasers, and filters may be employed
with the invention method with equal success. What the invention requires
is that the solvated samples be radiated at an excitation wavelength at
which most petroleum compounds fluoresce, generally below about 400 nm,
and preferably about 250 nm to about 310 nm. The emission fluorescence
must be measured below about 400 nm, preferably within the region of about
250 nm to about 400 nm. Although these examples were run with an
excitation radiation of 254 nm and emission radiation measured at 320 nm,
it may be desirable to change the wavelengths employed to better eliminate
the effect of fluorescence from other components present in the drill
cuttings, such as minerals, pipe dope, or filtrate of oil base muds.
As indicated in Table 1, the solvents employed for Examples 1-4 were hexane
and methylene chloride (CH.sub.2 Cl.sub.2). The ratios of the methylene
chloride to hexane fluorescence for Examples 1 and 2 were 0.8 and 2.85,
respectively. Both of these ratios are below 3, and it was predicted from
drill cuttings that the formations would be producible. The formations
from which the drill cuttings came were indeed producible formations.
On the other hand, Examples 3 and 4 with methylene chloride/hexane ratios
of 4.7 and 277, respectively were predicted to be non-producible. In the
field, these formations were determined to be non-producible.
TABLE l
______________________________________
Ratio
Fluorometer Reading
CH.sub.2 Cl.sub.2 /
Prediction
Ex. No.
Hexane CH.sub.2 Cl.sub.2
Hexane and Result
______________________________________
1 9800 7680 0.8 Producible
2 516 1470 2.85 Producible
3 2.2 l0.3 4.7 Non-Producible
4 11 3050 277 Non-Producible
______________________________________
Many other variations and modifications may be made in the concepts
described by those skilled in the art without departing from the concepts
of the present invention. Accordingly, it should be clearly understood
that the concepts disclosed in the description are illustrative only and
are not intended as limitations on the scope of the invention.
* * * * *
|
|
|
|
|
Description  |
|