Riley B. Needham is Manager of Drilling and Production Research and Services in the E&P Group of Phillips Petroleum Co.

, with responsibility for research

and service work in oil recovery processes, well completions, reservoir fundamentals, reservoir simulation, well simulation practices, and drilling fluids. He holds
BS and PhD degrees in petroleum engineering from the U. of Oklahoma.
Needham served as a 1985-86 SPE Distinguished Lecturer and a member of
the 1985-86 Engineering Manpower and 1983-84 Reprint Series committees.
Peter H. Doe is currently Staff Director, Drilling and Production in the Research
and Services Div. of Phillips Petroleum Co., with responsibility for research in
mobility control, drilling fluids, formation damage, and stimulation. He holds BS
and PhD degrees in chemistry from the U. of Bristol.
Needham

Doe

Polymer Flooding Review

Riley B. Needham, SPE, Phillips Petroleum Co.
Peter H. Doe, SPE, Phillips Petroleum Co.

Summary. This paper reviews published results of the use of polymers to improve oil recovery. A discussion of the capabilities
of the available types of polymers and where they have been successful is coupled with the principles of the mechanisms of polymer flooding to serve as a guide for future applications. The scope of this review is limited to case histories where full-scale polymer floods were applied, as opposed to near-well treatments.

Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to describe briefly the principles
involved in polymer flooding and to review field experience.
Earlier reviews by Jewett and Schurz 1 and Chang 2 have
covered much of this same ground. Chang, in particular,
presents an extensive review of the polymer flooding literature.
Therefore, we have updated the list of literature rather than
repeating those included in these previous papers. We have
tried to summarize the major points, particularly in relation to
the most recent field case histories. The scope of this review is
limited to what we refer to as "full-scale" polymer floods.
This includes those cases where crosslinking agents have been
used to produce an in-depth permeability contrast correction,
but excludes near-well, low-volume polymer gel treatments.
Consequently, all results of treatments of producing wells have
been excluded from this review.

Definition and Mechanisms of Polymer Flooding

Oil and water are immiscible fluids. As a result, neither can
completely displace the other from an oil reservoir. This is
reflected in the irreducible water and residual oil saturations
(ROS's) on a relative-permeability curve. Regardless of the
amount of water cycled through the system, the oil saturation
will not be reduced below the ROS. In polymer flooding, a
water-soluble polymer is added to the flood water. This
increases the viscosity of the water. Depending on the type of
polymer used, the effective permeability to water can be
reduced in the swept zones. Polymer flooding does not reduce
the ROS, but is rather a way to reach the ROS more quickly
or to allow it to be reached economically.
There are three potential ways in which a polymer flood can
make the oil recovery process more efficient: (1) through the
effects of polymers on fractional flow, (2) by decreasing the
water/oil mobility ratio, and (3) by diverting injected water
from zones that have been swept.

Copyright 1987 Society of Petroleum Engineers

Journal of Petroleum Technology, December 1987

Fractional Flow. The way in which a section of reservoir

approaches its ultimate ROS is a function of the relative
permeability relationships and of the viscosities of the oil and
water phases. These are combined in the concept of fractional
flow. By applying Darcy's law to the oil and water phases
flowing simultaneously through a segment of a porous
medium, the fractional flow of oil, fo' can be derived as

fo=

(1)

1+ J.Lok w/J.Lwko

Any change that reduces the ratio J.Lok w/J.Lwko will improve the
rate of oil recovery by increasing the fractional flow of oil.
Polymers can do this by increasing the viscosity of the water,
J.Lw' Once they have flooded a zone, some polymers also
reduce the relative permeability to water, kW'
This effect applies to any part of the reservoir where there is
a mobile oil saturation-Le., anywhere that the relative
permeability to oil is greater than zero. However, if k o is
already small because the mobile oil saturation is low, then fo
will remain small at any achievable k w or J.Lw' The fractional
flow effect therefore is more significant for polymer floods
conducted early in the life of a waterflood while the mobile oil
saturation is high.
An additional consideration is the oil viscosity, J.Lo' All else
being equal, the fractional flow of water will be greater in
reservoirs where the oil viscosity is high. This leads to early
water breakthrough and relatively high water production when
there is still a significant mobile oil saturation. Fractional flow
effects are thus likely to be more significant in viscous oil
reservoirs.
Mobility Ratio. Real reservoirs cannot be swept uniformly.
Even a homogeneous reservoir suffers from less than 100%
areal sweep at water breakthrough and at economically
achievable water/oil ratios (WOR's). The primary determinant
1503

of areal swee~ for a given well pattern and spacing is the

mobility ratio of the flood, defined for waterflooding as
kw/Lo

M=--

(2)

/Lwko

For a given reservoir situation, the oil recovered before

water breaks through to the producing wells decreases as M
increases. Recovery at any later stage of the flood is also less
for a given volume of water injection. Polymers may improve
the mobility ratio of a flood by the same effects described
above-that is, by reducing k w or increasing /Lw' Again, there
is more potential for improvement when the mobile oil
saturation, and hence ko ' is relatively high. This again favors a
secondary over a tertiary application for a polymer flood.

Fluid Diversion Effects, We have identified two beneficial

effects of polymer flooding: a more rapid oil displacement
through improved fractional flow characteristics and improved
areal sweep efficiency through improved mobility ratio. Both
of these could be effective in homogeneous reservoirs, but both
act only on a mobile oil saturation in the polymer-flooded
zone. Perfectly homogeneous reservoirs do not exist. Most
reservoirs contain significant heterogeneities in the areal and
particularly in the vertical sense. This leads to preferential
water entry into the more permeable zones and to a more rapid
sweepout of these zones. In the areas of the reservoir that are
contacted by the flood water, oil recovery may be very
efficient. The problem is that much of the reservoir remains
untouched.
A polymer injected into the flooded-out zone of such a
reservoir may recover very little oil from that zone. The effect
of the polymer can be very beneficial, however, because of the
fluid diversion it produces. The polymer will build up flow
resistance in the portions of the reservoir it penetrates through
the permeability reduction or viscosity increase discussed
earlier. This increased resistance to flow will divert
subsequently injected water into unswept or poorly swept
areas.
In most floods that are initiated at high WOR's, fluid
diversion will be much more significant than fractional flow or
mobility ratio effects. Maximum benefits will likely be
achieved if the effects of the polymer can be sustained over a
long time. This tends to place a premium on permeability
reduction as opposed to straight viscosity improvement because
permeability reduction can be very long-lasting. Optimized
permeability reduction may make crosslinking of the polymer
desirable.
Methods of crosslinking polymers in situ have been known
and practiced in the field for more than a clecade. The
crosslinking can be achieved in a number of ways, including
the use of multivalent cations and organic compounds. The
crosslinking causes the polymer to be linked into a network
that results in greater reductions in water permeability as well
as longer-lasting permeability reductions in the part of the
reservoir where the crosslinking occurs. The resultant
permeability reduction causes subsequently injected water to be
diverted into zones that have not been completely flooded.
These fluid diversion effects would be expected to be most
important for floods initiated at high WOR's, where it is
already too late for fractional flow and mobility ratio
improvements to be of much significance because of the
prevailing low values of k o in the swept zones.
In the literature on the behavior of polymer solutions in
porous media, "resistance factor" and "residual resistance
factor" are frequently used as measures of the effectiveness of
polymer solutions compared with that of water. By definition,
the resistance factor is the ratio of the mobility of water to the
mobility of a polymer solution. Such a property depends on
the poro\.lS medium, the particular polymer used, the
concentration of the polymer, and the salinity and hardness of
1504

the water used to dissolve the polymer. Similarly, the residual

resistance factor is the ratio of the mobility of water measured
before the injection of the polymer solution to the mobility of
water after polymer injection.
With these definitions, the benefits of fluid diversion are
achieved by high, long-lasting residual resistance factors.
Crosslinking of the polymer in situ can result in higher,
longer-lasting residual resistance factors compared with the use
of polymer solutions alone.

Polymer Types and Properties

Polymers that have been used in actual polymer floods
comprise the two general types of synthetic polymers and
biopolymers.
A synthetic polymer almost always means polyacrylamides.
A variety of these are available from several manufacturers. In
general, the performance of a polyacrylamide in a flooding
situation will depend on its molecular weight and its degree of
hydrolysis. In a partially hydrolyzed polyacrylamide, some of
the acrylamide is replaced by, or converted into, acrylic acid.
This tends to increase viscosity in fresh water, but to reduce
viscosity in hard waters. All else being equal, a highmolecular-weight polymer will produce higher viscosities and
resistance factors than a low-molecular-weight polymer for a
given concentration. These potential advantages may be offset
by a greater tendency for shear degradation, which reduces
molecular weight, and by a reduced injectivity, which can be
significant in low-permeability formations. For large-scale
applications, polyacrylamides are available in powder form
(90% + active), in the form of a pumpable inverse emulsion
(33 to 55% active), or can be manufactured on site in a
concentrated solution form.
Biopolymers are derived from a fermentation process, rather
than by direct synthesis from their monomers in a chemical
reactor. The most commonly encountered biopolymer is
xanthan gum, which is produced by the bacterium
Xanthomonas campestris. The bacteria are cultured in a
suitable fermentation medium and produce the biopolymer as a
byproduct of their metabolic processes. The polymer is
separated from the rest of the cell material and sold for use in
the form of a cQncentrated broth, typically containing 3 to
13 % active polymer. In terms of molecular weight,
biopolymers fall toward the low end of the range encountered
with polyacrylamides. Their molecular structure gives the
molecule great stiffness. This characteristic gives biopolymers
excellent viscosifying power in high-salinity waters and makes
them very resistant to shear degradation. In very fresh waters,
however, they have less viscosifying power than
polyacrylamides.
Each polymer type has advantages and disadvantages.
Polyacrylamides have a relatively low price, develop good
viscosities in fresh waters, and adsorb on the rock surface to
produce a long-lasting permeability reduction (the residual
resistance effect). Their primary disadvantages are a tendency
to shear degradation at high flow rates and poor performance
in high-salinity water (low viscosity and frequently excessive
retention) .
The primary advantages of biopolymers are their excellent
viscosifying power in high-salinity waters and their resistance
to shear degradation. Biopolymers are not retained on rock
surfaces and thus propagate more readily into a formation than
polyacrylamides. This can reduce the amount required for a
flood but also means that there is no residual resistance effect.
It is therefore a questionable advantage.
Both polymer types are restricted in the range of reservoir
conditions where they can be effective. Biopolymers thermally
degrade too fast at temperatures above 200F [93C]. At
temperatures above 170F [nC], polyacrylamides may
precipitate in waters containing too much calcium. In principle,
this does not prevent their being used successfully in fresh
water, but it makes control of the salinity of the flood water
much more critical.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, December 1987

TABLE 1-POLYMER FLOOD CASE HISTORIES-KEY PARAMETERS

Project

Reference

Flood Type

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2,8
2
2
2,4
2,S
2,6
2,7

Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Tertiary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Tertiary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Tertiary
Secondary
Tertiary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary

Northeast Hallsville
Vernon
Huntington Beach
Brea Olinda
Taber Manville South
Skull Creek South
Brelum
Wilmington
North Burbank
North Alma Penn
Pembina
West Semlek
North Stanley
West Yellow Creek
East Coalinga
Skull Creek Newcastle
Sage Spring Creek Unit A
Eliasville Caddo
Chateaurenard
Storms Pool
Oerrel
Hankensbuettel
Owasco
Stewart Ranch
OK
Hamm
Kummerfeld

9
10
11
12
13
14
14
1S
4

4
4
4

Starting
WOR

Lithology

<1
<1
1
1.2
1
0
<1

Carbonate
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone

Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/salt'
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamidelfresh
Polyacrylamide/'
Polyacrylamide/fresh'
Polyacrylamide/fresh'

100
3

Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Carbonate
Sandstone
Sandstone'
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sandstone
Sl:lndstone
Sandstone
Sandstone

Polyacrylamide' '/fresh
Biopolymer/salt
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Biopolymer/'
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide' '/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Biopolymer/'
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide/fresh
Polyacrylamide '/fresh'
Polyacrylam ide '/fresh '
Polyacrylamide '/fresh'

9
0
70
3

9
3
<1
32

9
4
S
<1
1

PolymerlWater
Type

Amount of
Polymer Used
(Ibm/acre-tt)

Recovery
(%OOIP)

12
136
26

13
30
4

20
32
70

2
8

9'
0
2.S

63
18
22
6
2S

0
S
1.1

2
28
S
S6
188'
100'
46

0
10
1.2
1.8
2.S'
0'
23
13
7
8
3

21
2S
16
21
7

9
6

'Information uncertain or unavailable.

"Crosslinked flood.

More advanced polymers, both synthetic and natural, that

remove many of these temperature and salinity limitations have
been developed. Their high cost generally makes them of
questionable utility in today's economic situation, and they are
considered outside the scope of this review.

>

1.0

Z
0

0.6

DYKSTRA-PARSONS METHOD

:::.:::

r-

Field Experience
A number of papers have been published on field applications
of polymer flooding. Ref. 2 lists 15 field applications. Updates
have subsequently appeared on four of these projects 4-7 and
one has been expanded from pilot to commercial scale. 8
Twelve case histories were added to this list,4,9-15 giving a
total of 27 floods to consider. Table 1 summarizes results of
these applications. In some cases, the values appearing in the
table were not explicitly presented in the referenced paper. In
those instances, we have estimated the parameters shown using
the relevant data presented in the appropriate paper. An
asterisk has been used to indicate that a value is considered
particularly uncertain, or that a value cannot be calculated.
Of the 27 floods, 23 were essentially secondary operations,
initiated at WOR < 10. The average polymer flood recovery
from these case histories is approximately 8 % of the original
oil in place (OOIP) (counting apparent failures as zero
recovery). The average amount of polymer injected is around
30 Ibm/acre-ft [0.011 kg/m 3 ] of reservoir.
Four of the floods were tertiary applications, initiated at
WOR's of 30 to 100. One was a failure. 7 The other three
produced an average of 1.8% OOIP for a polymer usage of
approximately 50 Ibm/acre-ft [0.018 kg/m 3 ] of reservoir.
Averages like these should be treated with caution.
However, they do illustrate some important aspects of polymer
flood applications.
1. Polymer flooding has much greater potential as a
secondary process than in postwaterflood applications. The
averages presented above indicate roughly four times the
potential recovery for a secondary compared to a tertiary
flood.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, December 1987

-0::<l:

0.6

>
>r-

0.4

<l:

-.l

-CO
<l:

0.2

100

0::
W

0...

10

20

30

40

"'"

50

OIL RECOVERY, % OOIP

60

Fig. 1-From Fig. 3 of Ref. 16 with Sw =O.35-the economic

limit is for WOR 25.

2. A technically successful tertiary polymer flood requires

more polymer per barrel of oil recovered. The amount of
polymer used to recover a barrel of oil appears to have been
about six times greater in tertiary than in secondary
applications (2 Ibm/bbl compared with 0.3 lbm/bbl [5.7 kg/m 3
compared with 0.1 kg/m 3 ]).
Only two of the 27 field projects were in limestones. Both
were successful, however, and they include one secondary and
one tertiary application. The conclusion must be that polymer
flooding is applicable to both sandstones and carbonates, but
has been less widely applied in carbonates.
The case histories include only three biopolymer floods. The
remainder were all polyacrylamide floods in relatively fresh
injection water. The most saline water used appears to have
1505

contained 400 ppm calcium, which is well within the tolerance

limits of polyacrylamides at low temperatures. None of the
biopolymer floods can be clearly identified as a success. Two
were clearly failures, although it is not certain that the polymer
should be implicated as the cause of the failure.
Five of the case histories (four secondary, one tertiary) used
aluminum citrate crosslinking to enhance permeability
reduction effects. 4 ,8,10 The reported recoveries from the
secondary floods are about 1.5 times higher than for the
noncrosslinked floods per pound of polymer used. The tertiary
flood recovery appears comparable to noncrosslinked
applications.
This survey is by definition selective. It includes only case
histories that can be documented by publications. A much
larger number of polymer projects have been run and not
reported. Not all parameters of interest can be determined,
even for the published cases. For instance, some publications
do not indicate how much polymer was injected or how much
oil was recovered. Some major gaps in our knowledge stand
out. Are there any successful biopolymer case histories and
have polyacrylamides been successfully used in high-hardness,
high-salinity injection waters, for example?

In the field practices reviewed, all the successful applications

used polyacrylamides in relatively fresh water. They would
therefore have included permeability-reduction effects,
regardless of whether these were part of the design philosophy
of the flood. Simulation results indicate that a two- to five-fold
reduction in the permeability of the highest-permeability zones
produces the most significant effects. Noncrosslinked
polyacrylamide floods in fresh water can reach the middle of
this range.
An additional parameter that is always significant in
simulation studies is the retention level of the polymer on the
reservoir rock. The lower the retention level, all else being
equal, the better the flood performance. Biopolymers do not
adsorb and polyacrylamides in fresh water have moderate
adsorption, but polyacrylamides in salt water generally show
very high retention levels, without any corresponding benefit in
terms of improved permeability reduction. This may be the
reason why no successes have been reported with
polyacrylamides in highly saline brines. There have certainly
been some unreported failures.

Guidelines for Polymer Application

1. Economic and technical successes have been reported for

polymer floods in both secondary and tertiary applications and
in both sandstones and carbonates.
2. Secondary floods recover substantially more oil for less
polymer usage than tertiary floods. Polymer flooding is
therefore best applied early in the life of a waterflood. The
average performance of floods initiated at WOR> 10 appears
to be significantly lower.
3. On the basis of published results to date, all successful
applications have used polyacrylamides in relatively fresh
water. These floods would have the combined effects of an
increase in the water viscosity and a reduction in the
permeability to the injected water.
4. Our experience in simulation of the results of polymer
floods indicates that mobile oil saturation is a key variable that
determines whether a polymer flood can be successful.
Heterogeneous reservoirs or those containing viscous oils will
reach high WOR with significant remaining mobile oil.

Field case histories are not sufficiently complete or extensive

to provide solid guidelines for identifying suitable candidates
for polymer flooding. Filling in the gaps requires some kind of
model study. The use of a model to design a successful
polymer flood requires that the objective of the polymer flood
be clearly identified and that the critical reservoir parameters
be established. Fig. 1 qualitatively shows the interaction of the
important parameters of mobility ratio and reservoir
heterogeneity as reflected in the coefficient of permeability
variation, K v. The information 16 is for the performance of a
waterflood and can be used to identify the particular parameter
that is primarily limiting the oil recovery from water injection.
Frequently, it is not just one parameter, and the relative
importance of each parameter needs to be considered to
determine whether a polymer flood that has a long-lasting
residual resistance effect or a large increase in water viscosity
is more advantageous.
In addition, where available, the waterflood history can be a
very good indicator of the reservoir heterogeneity and its effect
on the oil recovery.
Simulations of the performance of polymer floods indicate
that the mobile oil saturation present at the initiation of the
polymer flood is a key variable in determining the
effectiveness of the flood. In general, a high mobile oil
saturation will be encountered in three situations: (1) in any
secondary flood (low WOR at flood initiation); (2) in a tertiary
flood in a viscous oil reservoir (high WOR caused primarily
by adverse mobility ratio and fractional flow characteristics for
waterflood); and (3) in a tertiary flood in any heterogeneous
reservoir (high WOR caused primarily by poor vertical
conformance of the waterflood).
The first two cases are considerations for mobility-control
type of polymer floods and would be expected to place a
premium on viscosity development by the polymer used. The
third can be successful only through fluid diversion, which
tends to emphasize permeability reduction. Cases 1 and 2
should be candidates for polyacrylamide in freshwater floods
or for biopolymer floods in waters with a wide range of
salinities and hardness. Case 3 is a candidate only for a
polyacrylamide flood, and performance might be enhanced by
crosslinking to obtain more permeability reduction.
One clear precaution is required when considering
application of polymer flooding to reservoirs that contain
viscous oils and that also exhibit a high degree of
heterogeneity. As shown in Fig. 1, success would require a
very large decrease in the mobility ratio, starting at a ratio of
100 and a permeability variation of 0.8 or higher. Such
increases may not be economically achievable using available
polymers in available injection waters.
1506

Conclusions

Nomenclature
fa
ko
kw
Kv

= volumetric fraction of the total flow that is oil

= permeability to oil
= permeability to water
=

Dykstra-Parsons coefficient of permeability variation

M = mobility ratio (water mobility/oil mobility)

!-to = viscosity of oil
!-tw = viscosity of water

References
I. Jewett, R.L. and Schurz, G.F.: "Polymer F1ooding-A Current
Appraisal," JPT (June 1970) 675-84.

2. Chang, H.L.: "Polymer Flooding Technology-Yesterday, Today, and

Tomorrow," JPT (Aug. 1978) 1113-28.
3. Craig, F.F. Jr.: The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding,
Monograph Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1980) 3, 45-47.
4. Mack, J.: "Process Technology Improves Oil Recovery," Oil & Gas
J. (Oct. I, 1979) 67-71.
5. Smith, RV. and Burtch, F.W.: "Study Shows N. Stanley Field Polymer
Flood Economics," Oil & Gas J. (Nov. 24, 1980) 127-34.
6. Gordon, S.P. and Owen, O.K.: "Surveillance and Performance of an
Existing Polymer Flood: A Case History of West Yellow Creek," paper
SPE 8202 presented at the 1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
7. Peterson, J.E.: "Coalinga Polymer Demonstration Project," DOE/SAN/
1556-5, Final Report, Natl. Technical Information Service, Springfield,
VA (July 1976-Dec. 1980).
8. Zornes, D.R., Cornelius, A.J., and Long, H.Q.: "Overview and
Evaluation of the North Burbank Unit Block A Polymerflood Project,
Osage County, Oklahoma," paper SPE 14113 presented at the 1986
SPE IntI. Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, Beijing, March 17-20.
Journal of Petroleum Technology, December 1987

9. Janeczko, M.A.: "Skull Creek Newcastle Sand Unit-A Successful

Polymer Flood," paper SPE 8380 presented at the 1979 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.
10. Mack, J.C. and Warren, J.: "Performance and Operation of a
Crosslinked Polymer Flood at Sage Spring Creek Unit A, Natrona
County, Wyoming," lPT (July 1984) 1145-56.
II. Weiss, W.W. and Baldwin, R.W.: "Planning and Implementing a LargeScale Polymer Flood," lPT (April 1985) 720-30.
12. Labastie, A. and Vio, L.: "The Chateaurenard (France) Polymer Field
Test," Enhanced Oil Recovery, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., New
York City (1981) 213-22.
13. Craig, F.F. III: "Enhanced Oil Recovery By Improved Waterflooding,"
DOE/ET/12065-66, Final Report, Natl. Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA (Feb. 1984).
14. Maitin, B.K. and Volz, H.: "Performance of Deutsche Texaco AG's
Oerrel and Hankensbuettel Polymer Floods, " paper SPE 9794 presented
at the 1981 SPEIDOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, April
5-8.

Journal of Petroleum Technology, December 1987

15. Weiss, W.W. and Chain, J.: "Owasco Unit Polymer Flood Increases
Oil Recovery," Oil & Gas 1. (Aug. 7, 1978) 80-82.
16. Johnson, C.E. Jr.: "Prediction of Oil Recovery by Waterflood-A
Simplified Graphical Treatment of the Dykstra-Parsons Method,"
Trans., AIME (1956) 207,345-46.

51 Metric Conversion Factors

acre-ft x 1.233 482
ibm x 4.535 924

E+03
E-Ol

m3
kg

JPT
This paper is SPE 17140. Distinguished Author Series articles are general, descriptive
presentations that summarize the state of the art in an area of technology by describing
recent developments for readers who are not specialists in the topics discussed. Written
by individuals recognized as experts in the area, these articles provide key references to
more definitive work and present specific details only to illustrate the technology. Purpose:
To inform the general readership of recent advances in various areas of petroleum engineering. A softbound anthology, SPE Distinguished Author Series, Dec. 1981-Dec. 1983,
is available from SPE's Book Order Dept.

1507