Coreflood experiments are an integral part of the selection and optimisation of scale inhibitor treatments, providing information on formation damage, inhibitor return profiles and dynamic retention isotherms. Comparative returns are often used to select the chemical for field treatments. However, significant discrepancies can arise between core and field in particular due to test methodology.
Here we describe advances over previous work when we demonstrated that test methodology can have significant consequences for the comparative inhibitor returns, particularly with respect to oversaturation. It was shown that many of the limitations can be overcome through appropriate simulation techniques (see SPE 131131).
Here, we present the results of laboratory core flood tests designed to examine the effect of core flood test methodology on the derived return isotherm. This work clearly identifies certain test artefacts, in particular inhibitor oversaturation, which can impact simulation from core to field, and presents supportive core flood data with respect to the modelled isotherms. Thus the paper directly addresses the procedures involved in core flooding, recommends approaches and test protocols which allow more appropriate product ranking and allow improved simulation from core to field.