TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 1/9

Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

BUCKLEY-LEVERETT ANALYSIS

Derivation of the fractional flow equation for a one-dimensional oil-water system

Consider displacement of oil by water in a system of dip angle α

We start with Darcy´s equations

kkro A ⎛ ∂Po ⎞
qo = − ⎜ + ρ o gsin α ⎟
µ o ⎝ ∂x ⎠
kk A ⎛ ∂P ⎞
qw = − rw ⎜ w + ρ w gsin α ⎟ ,
µ w ⎝ ∂x ⎠

and replace the water pressure by Pw = Po − Pcow , so that

kkrw A ⎛ ∂ (Po − Pcow ) ⎞

qw = − ⎜ + ρ w gsin α ⎟ .
µw ⎝ ∂x ⎠

After rearranging, the equations may be written as:

µo ∂P
−qo = o + ρ o gsin α
kkro A ∂x
µ ∂P ∂ P
−qw w = o − cow + ρ w gsin α
kkrw A ∂x ∂x

Subtracting the first equation from the second one, we get

1 ⎛ µw µ ⎞ ∂P
− ⎜ qw − qo o ⎟ = − cow + Δρgsin α
kA ⎝ krw k ro ⎠ ∂x
Substituting for
q = qw + qo
and
q
fw = w ,
q
and solving for the fraction of water flowing, we obtain the following expression for the
fraction of water flowing:

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 2/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

kk ro A ⎛ ∂Pcow ⎞
⎜ − Δρgsin α ⎟ 1+
qµo ⎝ ∂x ⎠
fw =
kro µw
1+
µo k rw
For the simplest case of horizontal flow, with negligible capillary pressure, the expression
reduces to:

1
fw =
k µ
1+ ro w
µo k rw

Typical plots of relative permeabilities and the corresponding fractional flow curve are:

Typical oil-water relative permeabilities Typical fractional flow curve

1
1

0,9
0,9
Kro
0,8 Krw
0,8

0,7
0,7
Relative permeability

0,6
0,6

0,5
fw

0,5

0,4
0,4

0,3
0,3

0,2
0,2

0,1
0,1

0
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Water saturation
Water saturation

Derivation of the Buckley-Leverett equation

For a displacement process where water displaces oil, we start the derivation with the
application of a mass balance of water around a control volume of length Δx of in the
following system for a time period of Δt :

qw
qρww
The mass balance mayρ be written:
w

[(qw ρw ) x − (qw ρw ) x +Δx ]Δt = AΔxφ [(Sw ρw ) t +Δt − (Sw ρw ) t ]

which, when Δx → 0 and Δt → 0 , reduces to the continuity equation:

∂ ∂
− (qw ρ w ) = Aφ (Sw ρ w )
∂x ∂t

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 3/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

Let us assume that the fluid compressibility may be neglected, ie.

ρ w = constant

Also, we have that

qw = f w q

Therefore
∂f w Aφ ∂Sw
− =
∂x q ∂t
Since
f w (Sw ) ,

the equation may be rewritten as

df w ∂Sw Aφ ∂Sw
− =
dSw ∂x q ∂t

This equation is known as the Buckley-Leverett equation above, after the famous paper by
Buckley and Leverett1 in 1942.

Derivation of the frontal advance equation

Since
Sw (x,t)

we can write the following expression for saturation change

∂S w ∂S
dSw = dx + w dt
∂x ∂t

In the Buckley-Leverett solution, we follow a fluid front of constant saturation during the
displacement process; thus:
∂S ∂S
0 = w dx + w dt
∂x ∂t

Substituting into the Buckley-Leverett equation, we get

dx q df w
=
dt Aφ dSw

Integration in time

1
Buckley, S. E. and Leverett, M. C.: “Mechanism of fluid displacement in sands”, Trans.
AIME, 146, 1942, 107-116
Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe
Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 4/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

dx q df w
∫ dt
dt = ∫ Aφ dS dt
t t w

yields an expression for the position of the fluid front:

qt df w
xf = ( )f
Aφ dSw

which often is called the frontal advance equation.

The Buckley-Leverett solution

A typical plot of the fractional flow curve and it´s derivative is shown below:

Fractional flow curve and it's derivative

1 4

fw
0,9
dfw/dSw

0,8
3
0,7

0,6
dfw/dSw

0,5 2
fw

0,4

0,3
1
0,2

0,1

0 0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Water saturation

Using the expression for the front position, and plotting water saturation vs. distance, we get
the following figure:
Clearly, the plot of saturations is showing an impossible physical situation, since we have two
saturations at each x-position. However, this is a result of the discontinuity in the saturation
function, and the Buckley-Leverett solution to this problem is to modify the plot by defining a
Computed water saturation profile

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5
Sw

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
x

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 5/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

saturation discontinuity at x f and balancing of the areas ahead of the front and below the
curve, as shown:

The final saturation profile thus becomes:

Balancing of areas

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5
Sw

0,4 A2

0,3

A1
0,2

0,1

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
x

Final water saturation profile

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5
Sw

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
x

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 6/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

The determination of the water saturation at the front is shown graphically in the figure below:

Determination of saturation at the front

0,9

0,8 f wf

0,7

0,6

0,5
fw

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1
Swf
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Water saturation

The average saturation behind the fluid front is determined by the intersection between the
tangent line and f w = 1:
Determination of the average saturation
behind the front
1

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5
fw

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1
Sw
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Water saturation

At time of water break-through, the oil recovery factor may be computed as

Sw − Swir
RF =
1− Swir

The water-cut at water break-through is

WCR = f wf (in reservoir units)

q wS 1
Since qS = qR /B, and f wS = we may derive f wS =
q wS + qoS 1+
1− f w Bw
f w Bo

or

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 7/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

1
WCS = (in surface units)
1− f w Bw
1+
f w Bo

For the determination of recovery and water-cut after break-through, we again apply the frontal
advance equation:

qt df w
x Sw = ( )S
Aφ dSw w

At any water saturation, Sw , we may draw a tangent to the f w − curve in order to determine
saturations and corresponding water fraction flowing.

Determining recovery after break-through

0,9

0,8

0,7

0,6
fw

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

Sw Sw
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Water saturation

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 8/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

The effect of mobility ratio on the fractional flow curve

The efficiency of a water flood depends greatly on the mobility ratio of the displacing fluid to
k k
the displaced fluid, rw / ro . The lower this ratio, the more efficient displacement, and the
µw µo
curve is shifted right. Ulimate recovery efficiency is obtained if the ratio is so low that the
fractional flow curve has no inflection point, ie. no S-shape. Typical fractional flow curves for
high and low oil viscosities, and thus high or low mobility ratios, are shown in the figure below.
In addition to the two curves, an extreme curve for perfect displacement efficiency, so-called
piston-like displacement, is included.
Effect of mobility ratio on fractional flow
1
Low oil viscosity
0,9 High oil viscosity
Piston displacement
0,8

0,7

0,6
Fw

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Sw

Effect of gravity on fractional flow curve

In a non-horizontal system, with water injection at the bottom and production at the top, gravity
forces will contribute to a higher recovery efficiency. Typical curves for horizontal and vertical
flow are shown below.

Effect of gravity on fractional flow

1

0,9 Horizontal flow

Vertical flow
0,8

0,7

0,6
Fw

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
Sw

Effect of capillary pressure on fractional flow curve

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum
TPG4150 Reservoir Recovery Techniques 2017 9/9
Hand-out note 4: Buckley-Leverett Analysis

As may be observed from the fractional flow expression

kk ro A ⎛ ∂Pcow ⎞
1+ ⎜ − Δρgsin α ⎟
qµo ⎝ ∂x ⎠
fw = ,
kro µw
1+
µo k rw
∂Pcow
capillary pressure will contribute to a higher f w (since > 0 ), and thus to a less efficient
∂x
displacement. However, this argument alone is not really valid, since the Buckley-Leverett
solution assumes a discontinuous water-oil displacement front. If capillary pressure is included
in the analysis, such a front will not exist, since capillary dispersion (ie. imbibition) will take
place at the front. Thus, in addition to a less favorable fractional flow curve, the dispersion will
also lead to an earlier water break-through at the production well.

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Professor Jon Kleppe

Department of Geoscience and Petroleum