Erhu Liu
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Interests
Erhu Liu has a total of 5 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Xiong Liu
School of Petroleum Engineering, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an 710065, China
1 shared publication - Yu Chen
School of Petroleum Engineering, Xi’an Petroleum University, Xi’an 710065, China
1 shared publication - Yuchan Cheng
Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Advanced Stimulation Technology for Oil & Gas Reservoirs, Engineering Research Center of Development and Management for Low to Ultra-Low Permeability Oil & Gas Reservoirs in West China, Xi’an Petroleum University, Ministry of Education, Xi’an 710312, China
1 shared publication - Yun Li
Resources and Exploration Development Department, Shaanxi Yanchang Petroleum (Group) Co., Ltd., Xi’an 710065, China
1 shared publication - Zhiyuan Du
Shaanxi Yanchang Petroleum (Group) Co., Ltd. Gas Field Company, Yan’an 716001, China
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
Effect of Osmotic Pressure on Huff-n-Puff Performance Under Fractured Conditions
Water retention after imbibition and the recovery response to low-salinity injection suggest that capillarity alone does not describe all fluid exchange in tight formations. How osmotic forces influence successive injection, soaking, and production stages in a fractured reservoir therefore requires further examination. We constructed a simulator that combines aqueous salt transport with two-phase flow and represents hydraulic fractures by assigning equivalent properties to the intersected grid cells. A comparison with an independent simulator was used to assess the computed saturation response. Sensitivity cases varied in brine salinity, shut-in duration, injection rate, branch position, and network geometry; pressure, aqueous saturation, salt distribution, and produced oil were examined together. With 4800 m3 injected at 80 m3/d and a subsequent 40 d soak, the 1000 mg/L case produced 13,741.24 m3 of oil and recovered 17.28% of the initial oil volume. The corresponding values at 50,000 mg/L were 9507.86 m3 and 11.95%. Thus, reducing salinity added 4233.38 m3 of oil and 5.33 percentage points of recovery, equivalent to a 44.60% increase relative to the reported high-salinity recovery factor. Extending shut-in beyond 40 d provided progressively smaller benefits. A faster injection schedule reduced the operating time at a fixed water volume but also favored early water return; 80 m3/d provided a useful compromise within the tested range. Placing branches close to the well raised recovery to 22.35%, versus 17.28% for the unbranched fracture. This improvement was 5.07 percentage points, or 29.34% relative to the baseline. In the network cases, matrix blocks enclosed by fractures supplied most of the recovered oil, while more isolated rock retained substantial oil. Taken together, the simulations link the benefit of dilute injection water to fracture access and the time available for matrix exchange. For the assumptions and cases examined, a 1000 mg/L brine, an 80 m3/d injection schedule, a 40 d soak, and branches close to the well provide a favorable operating combination.
Open AccessEffect of Osmotic Pressure on Huff-n-Puff Performance Under Fractured Conditions
Water retention after imbibition and the recovery response to low-salinity injection suggest that capillarity alone does not describe all fluid exchange in tight formations. How osmotic forces influence successive injection, soaking, and production stages in a fractured reservoir therefore requires further examination. We constructed a simulator that combines aqueous salt transport with two-phase flow and represents hydraulic fractures by assigning equivalent properties to the intersected grid cells. A comparison with an independent simulator was used to assess the computed saturation response. Sensitivity cases varied in brine salinity, shut-in duration, injection rate, branch position, and network geometry; pressure, aqueous saturation, salt distribution, and produced oil were examined together. With 4800 m3 injected at 80 m3/d and a subsequent 40 d soak, the 1000 mg/L case produced 13,741.24 m3 of oil and recovered 17.28% of the initial oil volume. The corresponding values at 50,000 mg/L were 9507.86 m3 and 11.95%. Thus, reducing salinity added 4233.38 m3 of oil and 5.33 percentage points of recovery, equivalent to a 44.60% increase relative to the reported high-salinity recovery factor. Extending shut-in beyond 40 d provided progressively smaller benefits. A faster injection schedule reduced the operating time at a fixed water volume but also favored early water return; 80 m3/d provided a useful compromise within the tested range. Placing branches close to the well raised recovery to 22.35%, versus 17.28% for the unbranched fracture. This improvement was 5.07 percentage points, or 29.34% relative to the baseline. In the network cases, matrix blocks enclosed by fractures supplied most of the recovered oil, while more isolated rock retained substantial oil. Taken together, the simulations link the benefit of dilute injection water to fracture access and the time available for matrix exchange. For the assumptions and cases examined, a 1000 mg/L brine, an 80 m3/d injection schedule, a 40 d soak, and branches close to the well provide a favorable operating combination.