You are on page 1of 8

A Simple Method for Controlling Gas Percolation in Numerical Simulation of Solution Gas Drive Reservoirs

J. G. McCREARY JUNIOR MEMBER AIME I CONTINENTAL OIL CO. HOUSTON, TEX.

ABSTRACT The gas percolation problem occurs in jinite di//ererzce simulation of solution gas drive reservoirs with several cells or nodes in the vertical direction. As the pressure drvps in the vicinity of a producing welI near the bottom of the oil column, gas comes out of solution. Because of the low density of the gas in comparison with the oi[, there is a high potential gradient for upward gas flow. Since tb e gas viscosity is low, the upward flow rate of gas is often high enough to deplete all the gas in the finite cell during a time step. In fact, more gas may /low out o/ the cell than actually is present. This phenomenon causes a numerically calculated negative gas saturation at the end of the time step. The result is oscillations in the saturations and numerical instability. A method for controlling this numerical phenomenon is presented that retards vertical gas flow to the amount available within the ceiis. The amount oj gas available within each cell is calculated at tbe beginning of each time step and compared with the expected flow rate based on the last time-step ., .L - ~VCWG.=J..., J+oA+o A 11 LrJCS ]or gas polentiai g~adieni~. II VtZIUes flow is greater than the amount present, the vertical gas transmissibility is adjusted to retard the flow. The solution calculated by this method is Gl. ....L .r.f? 1.,+4 m *i,it~*lt cQntrQi and the S0.=..=8. ------C.5T@iZ?ed .w.br, solutions calculated by a method recently suggested by Coats, * The method of this paper is shown to be superior in numerical stability. Tbe comparisons are made with a ~ne-dirnensional vertical simulation of natural depletion, solution gas drive, of a pinnacle reef structure.

INTRODUCTION The problem of gas percolation in multidimensional, multiphase mathematical reservoir simulators is concerned with the extremely unstable conditions that exist when low density, low viscosity gas is percolating upward through less mobile oiI. In many the gas being released from solution is cases, flowing upward while the oil is flowing down toward a well perforation. This problem often severely limits the size of the time steps used in the simulation and therefore greatly increases the number of time steps, the computer time and the cost of simulation. Basically, this problem arises when large volumes of fluid, in time-varying-phase ratios, flow through a relatively small finite volume of reservoir. A typical problem is as follows. Consider an oil a production well simulation, with reservoir completed near the bottom of the oil column, wirhout any gas or water injection to maintain reservoir As oil is produced, rhe pressure drops in pressure. the cell containing the well and gas is released from solution to partially replace the volume of oil produced. InitialIy, the gas in the producing cell is present below the critical gas saturation and is therefore immobile. Gradually, this gaa accumulates to the point where the gas saturation is above the critical saturation and the gas phaae becomes .,. k Kimsity mobile. Becauae of the iarge diff~i~fi~~ of oil and gas, there is a large gravitational effect which causes the gas to rise through the oil column from one cell to the next. In addition, since the viscosity of gas is very !CW in re! a~i~n to the viscosity of oil, even though the relative permeability to gas is low, there is a large mobility for gas flow. At the beginning of the finite time step, @xN&tiofis exist that specify a large flow rate of gas upward in the producing cell. If the relative permeability is calculated explicitly and left at time step initial conditions, this flow rate is not cut back as the cell is depleted of gas. If the time step is too large, this large flow rate completely depletes the gas and in the extreme case even more gas may flow than is actually present. This leads to calculated oil saturations greater than 100 percent. All of rlis gas flows into the finite cell above the 8s

Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office Dec. 4, 1969. Revised manuscript received Aug. 6, 1970. Paper (SPE 2808) was presented at the Second Symposium on Numerical Simulation of Reservoir Performance, held in Dallas, Tex., Feb. 5-6, 1970. @ Copyright 1971 American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. This paper WI11 be printed in Tr.msa ctions will cover 1971. VOIUM e 251, which

Costs, K. H.: 41A Treatment of the Gas Percolation Problem in Simulation of Three-Dimensional, Three-Phase Flow in Reservoirs p, Sot. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec., 1968) 413-419. MARCH, 1971 &~Y

producing well and may raise the gas saturation in this cell above the critical gas saturation. On the next time step, a large flow rate of gas from this cell into the next higher cell is predicted. The net effect is a gradual accumulation of gas low in the reservoir until the crirical gas saturation is exceeded. At this point, a bubble of gas percolates upward, one cell per time step, to the top of the reservoir. This leaves the bottom of the reservoir with too little gas, but gas continues to be released until the process is repeated. This causes a series of gas slugs to move up the oil column. A simple method of controlling this source of instability in reservoir simulation was tested anti --.1:-. . ..a*kn.-l~,,ome=re~ UIC.WU --55---the results compared to afi ~ZUllc. by Coats.
~lscus~ioN

psi/ft downward. Since the difference in flow potentials is 0.347 in this example, the gas flow gradient would be 0.339 psi/ft upward. This gas flow potential is more than 40 times the oil flow potential, but in the opposite direction. By Darcys law the flow rate of a given phase is defined by Eq. 5.

F,= .0011275 ~
Fi = flow rate kri A1-20i = relative of Phase md permeability

A-* @i
i, B/D of Phase sq it

. . (5)

K = permeability, A = cross-sectional

area,

= difference in flow potential from Point I co Point 2 for Phase i, psi pi = viscosity
L = length

THE

BASIC

PROBLEM

of Phase

i, Cp between Points 1 is

In the finite-cell potential is defined

reservoir by Eq. 1.

simulator,

the

oil

or distance and 2, ft

@o= Po-poh
00
P.

. . . . . . . . . ...(l)
psi psi psi/ft reference elevation, by Eq. 2. ft is defined

The ratio of flow of the gas phase therefore calculated by Eq. 6.

to oil phase

~
= oil potential,
= oil

krg SOA-* @g

. . . . . . .

(6)

pressure, below

F. = k,. P9A-S @o
Suppose for our typical example, the critical gas saturation is 3 percent and the finite cell averaged gas saturation is 4 percent. A typical relative permeability to gas is 0.001, while the relative permeability to oil is 0.73. The viscosity of gas might be O.O16 cp while the oil viscosity is 1.3 cp. If these values are substituted into Eq. 6, the ratio of gas to oil flow is calculated as follows.

p.

= oil density,

h = depth

The gas potential

*g=

PQ-pgh....(2)2)

In the absence of capillary pressure, the two-phase are equal and the difference in phase pressures potentials may be calculated from Eq. 3.

+=-

0
The difference in gas potential at two points, ~, may be ~aiculated by Eq. 4. 1 and

.00! x i.3 x .339 .75 x,016x .008

. .

(7)


. . . . . .
(8)

Thus, ~1-q)
A1-2@~

the gas flow is in the opposite

direction

to

~~ p~ifl~
are

~ minus
equivalent

@g at Point functions.

2.

an~gA1-2/r

The gas percolation problem is most important when the reservoir is near gravity equilibrium with the oil flow down, the gas flow up, and the pressure dropping slightly in the lower part of the reservoir releasing solution gas. An example with typical reservoir properties wiii illustrate the prObielm. H the gas weighs 0.05 lb/cu ft at reservoir conditions and the oil weighs 50 lb/cu ft, then A1-2h(p -po) is equal to 0.347 psi/ ft. Suppose we look ac a pinnacle reef-type structure 2,500 it in diametei containing a 1.31-cp oil. If the vertical permeability were 20 md, the average relative permeability to oil 0.75, and 500 STB of oil were produced from low in the reef, then the oil flow potential gradient in the vertical direction would average about 0.008
IK6

the oil flow, and its rate is approximately 4.6 times as large. Ar the same time, rhe mobile gas is only ~resenr wtile the oil 1 percent of the VOiUtll~ occupies 96 times as much volume. Even if the finite time step were small enough so that only one-tenth volume of oil flows downward, 0.46 cell volumes of gas flow upward during the time step. Since only 0.01 cell volumes of gas are initiaHy present as mobile gas, trouble would be expected. ... ., .E -- --- cl ...= ;tfi UDVJOUSIy, Ir nu g~a a.vw= . ... ,h~ . ..- fjnite celi from other sources, which is often the case for at least the bottom cells of the simulation model, the gas saturation calculated may be negative at the end of .1. ~,,e ~im= ~tep- The ~niy other possibility is that the pressure solution
THE

drops enough to supply the extra gas in the oil. This is not the usual case.
MODEL

from

TEST

The computer
SOCIETY

program
OF

used

to test

the percolation
JcI~JRNAL

PET ROLEt!M

ENGINEERS

~cfitrc] ~erhnds WaS a three-dimensional, gas-oil ... . . ....reservoir simulator with solution gas drive. In this the inter-cell relative permeabilities are model, . . . . . . , .,.-p~~se~ on the calculated DefoK t}le fiiiit~ ti~le. -.saturation of the cell the phase is expected to flow from. The two-phase flow equations in finitedifference form are added to eliminate saturations one equation for each cell implicit in giving potential. These potential equations are solved by Alternating Direction Implicit Procedure (ADIP) or Successive Overrelaxation (SOR) with iterative updating of reservoir volume factors and solurion Ar the end of the finite time step, the gas rarios. difference of the two-phase flow equations are used to explicitly update saturations with the new phase potentials. Since the gas percolation problem is mostly a problem of vertical flow, the program was used as a small one-dimensional model for testing the various methods. The percolation control methods were tested on a vertical column of cells 2,327 by 2,327 by 135 ft tall. The porosity was 4 percent, so initial oil in place was 4,440,000 bbl. Vertical permeability was 20 md. The relative permeabilities used are shown in Table 1. Reservoir volume factors and solution gas ratios are shown in Table 2. This column was broken into 9 cells, each 15 ft thick. This reservoir was produced at 500 STB/D of oil out of the lowest cell in the reservoir. The oil viscosity was 1.3 cp and the gas viscosity 0.016 cp. Initially, 30-day beyond which time steps were used Up to 360 days, point the time step was 90 days. ~ni$ ~~~~~~~~~n model was used for testing all the methods of control discussed in this paper. For comparison, one run was made with no percolation control of any sort. This run generated and was aborted at 36o negative oil saturations The nine finite-cell oil saturations are days. tabulated in Table 3 for several time steps. Notice that at the 240-day level, which is the end o f the first time step with relative permeabilities based on saturations with mobile gas, trouble has already started. Cells 2 and 3 have been drained of too much gas. Meanwhile, Cells 4 and s have gone above the critical gas saturation. On the next time
TABLE -----1 RELATIv E Fttd~ABiLiTY USED FOR TESTING CONTROL METHODS Oil Permeability (red)
0.0000 0.0005 0.0006 0.0008 0.0020 0.0090 0.0180 0.0310 0.0450 0.0860 0.1510 0.2650 0.4550 0.6900 0.8100 1.0000 1971

step, the gas in Cells 4 and 5 dumps By 300 days, the solution is completely
THE COATS Pimmb%rim{ METHOD OF CCXWROL

into Cell 3. erroneous.

Coats developed a procedure for gas percolation control. The method used here is a slight modification of the Coats method to take into account the critical gas saturation. The control by Coats method is invoked if the gas flow, as calculated from Eq. 5, exceeds the total mobile gas volume in the cell, as calculated from Eq. 9.

v6=#(s@-SJ/At

. . . . . . . . . . (9)
day

Vg = volume of mobile gas free to flow each during the finite time step @ = the volume of the finite cell in barrels S= = the oil sarurarion associated with critical gas saturation, 1 - .$gc SO = the finite-cell of the time At = the length oil saturation step time

the

at the beginning step in days

of the finite

If the flow rate is less than Vg, the gas transmissibility is not modified. However, when control is invoked, the entire method of calculating vertical gas flow is changed. The interlock gas transmissibility is set to zero and the expected gas flow is calculated explicitly and introduced into or production tile equatlms as p~eudo-inj ection terms. This makes the vertical gas flow an explicit rather than an implicit calculation. The method has the advantage that large volumes of gas starting at the bottom of the oil column and moving to the top do not flow through the intermediate cells. Instead, this volume is handled as if it had been produced
TABLE Pressure (psi)
400 520 652 777 900 1,025 1,150 1,275 1,300 1,800

2 PRESSURE VARIABLE FOR TESTING


B.

PROPERTIES

USED R. scf/STB 102


127 155 180 204 226 249 270 270 270

B/STB 1.123 1.133 1.144 1.154 i.i63 1.172 1.181 1.189 1.188 1.183

13/Mcf 7.28 5.54 4.36 3.62 ~.~c) 2.70 2.38 2.17 2.12 1.57

lb
(Cp) E
1.65 1.56 1.47 ~.4Q 1.34 1.29 1.27 1.28 1.32

1+2
(Cp)
0.0122 0.0125 0.0128 0.0130 &o133 0.0135 0.0138 0.0141 0.0142 0.0156

Saturatian

Gas Permeability (red)


0.595 0.533 0.495 0.470 ihiixi 0.297 0.245 0.207 0.178 0.125 0.077 0.041 0.013 0.002 0.000 0.000

0.3895
0.4000 0.4100 0.4200 0.4600 0.5400 0.5900 0.6300 0.6600 0.7200 0.7800 0.8400 0.9000 0.9500 0.9700 1.0000 MARCH,

TABLE Cel I Number

3 BASE RUN WITH NO PERCOLATION 180 !kYz


0.970 0.972 0.973 0.975 0.977 0.978 0.980 0.982 0.983

CONTROL
330 !zE 0.121 1.25 1.44 0.473 1.43 0.980 0.953 0.955 1.00

1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

210 !&42 0.966 0,967 0.969 0.971 0.973 0.974 Q.976 0.978 0.979

240 QQYS 0.927 0.987 0.976 0.967 0.969


0.970 0.972 0.974 0.975

270 k 0.923 0.983 0.931 0.986 0.983 0.967 0.968 0.970 0.971

300 !kzs 0.919 0.461 1.45 0.982 0.932 0.985 0.987 0.968 0.967

87

from the lower patts of the reservoir and injected directly into the higher parts. Since large gas flows are not calculated in the intermediate cells, the method is much more stable than the calculation additional control. An percolation without stabilizing factoris introduced into the calculations by extrapolating the interlock gas relative permeability into the future. The basic equation used is simply a gas material balance for the cell.

unknown

is So~+l, which

may be solved

for as Eq. 15.

+ s:/At s~+=[q~~+qk+,
+ .0011275 AK 8Ak-(k-) @g/pgL3 /[.0011275 -~At]
Knowing ~a!c,J!a~ed

AK8Ak-(k-1) O@gL
. . . . . . . .. (15)

qk+l

Tz,kA h-(ii-i)

@g-qxy
. . . . . . (10)

the future oil saturation, from. F.a. l. 16. ---

the gas

flow is

+*(s@ m+l-sQm)/At
or

qk = .0011275 AK8(S~- -Sc) Ak-@ll@Q/pOL . . . . . . . . (I@

qk+l=

Tx,k

A k-(k-l)~g-qxy
. . . . . . (II)

-*(som+l-sem)/At.

The net injection of gas into the finite cell is then calculated from Eq. 17 and the interlock gas transmissibility above and below the cell are set to zero.

~xy = the gas flow during the time step from the horizontal direction, estimated from initial relative permeabili ties and gas potenplus any true well tials, production qk+l = the gas flow into the bottom of kth block, the the from the Tz, ~+1 A(k+lJ-@g block just below flow out of the top of the finite block gas and oil saturations at the end of the finite Som = the gas and oil the beginning time step time step saturations at of the finite

qnot=qk+i-~ti

. . .

. . s , . (17)

Tz, kAk-(k-l) .$ m+l, g

@g = the
Som+l = be

it is actually a pseudoIf qnet is negative, production from the cell but is handled algebraically as a negative injection. This method of control is a big improvement over the no-control calculation. This may be seen from Table 4, which is a tabulation of oil saturations at the same time levels as Table 3, which is the ~o!utien ~enerated with no gas percolation control. The results are smooth and reasonable and the calculation is stable. Later in the calculation, when the gas saturations are higher in the lower part of the oil column, the pseudo-injection and production terms become large and the Coats method becomes unstable. Table 5 contains the oil saturations and the wetting-phase material balance (perfect material balance gives 1.0) for several time steps as the Coats method becomes unstable. This solution is erroneous at 990 days. The saturation at which oil becomes immobile is 0.3895. The top cell in the reservoir drops below this. This is because the gas flow is explicit or based on an time-level flow potential. During the time old step from 900 to 990 days, gas is injected into the top cell even though oil cannot flow out to make

S;,

TX=

.0011275 AK hr~
P9

. . . . . . .

(12)

The assumption is made that the gas relative permeability is a linear function of the oil saturation. This function has k,g equal to zero at S=, the critical saturation for gas flow, and a known value, kr~, at Sem. Thus, k,~+l, the estimated gas relative permeability at the end of the finite time step is calculated from Eqs. 13 and 14. ~fi+l

=a(s~+~-sc)

, . . . . . . . (13)

TABLE 4PERCOLATION Cell Number . 1 180 Oays 0.970


0.972 ().973 0.975 0.977 0.978 0.980 0.982 0.983 SOCIETY

THE COATS METHOD OF CONTROLOIL SATURATIONS 240 Days =9


0.966 0.966 0.967 0.969 0.970 0.972 .0.974 0.975

210 Oays =6
0.967 Q,969 0.971 0.973 0.974 0.976 0.978 0.979

270 Days 0.943


0.965 0.966 0.966 0.966 0.967 0.940 0.970 0.971

300 Days KO
0.964 0.965 0.965 0.966 0.966 0.966 0.966 0.967

330 Days G9
0.964 0.964 0.964 0.965 0.965 6.%6 0.966 0.966

where

8=-

k?

s:-s~

. . . . . . . . . .. (14

2 ~ 4 5 6 7 8 9

If this expression for k~+~ is used in Eq. 12 to T=, and this calculate the gas transmissibility, expression is used for Tz in Eq. 11, the only
Sa

OF

PET ROLEIJM

ExC1~EERS

JoIIRN~l-

room for this gas. The next time step the gas flow is actually downward out of the cell in an attempt to relieve the high pressure created. By 1,170 days the pressure had dropped enough in this cell that gas again flowed upward in large amounts. This second jolt was too large for recovery. The solution because of the explicit is completely unstable nature of the gas flow calculation.
THE SIMPLE METHOD
G

TABLE 6 THE SIMPLE METHOD OF PERCOLATION CONTROL-OIL SATURATIONS


Cell 180

Number

Days
0.970 0.972 0.973 0.975 0.977 0.978 0.980 0.982 C.9C3

210 Days 0.966 0.967 0.969 0.971 0.973 0.974 0.976 0.978 ~:g7$l

240

270

300

330

Days
0.959 0.965 0.966 0.967 0.969 0.970 0.972 0.974 0.975

Days
0.950 0.962 0.963 0.965 0.966 0.967 0.968 0.970 0.971

Days =
0.958 0.961 0.962 0.963 0.964 0.966 0.966 0.947

Days
0.921 0.956 0.958 0.958 0.960 0.962 0.963 0.963 0.967

1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

l-:. LhQ - ran rnn;f-1 movement Since the basic prob,cu, ,= .V- .-=..-----------of gas, an obvious control method is simply to S1OW down the gas flow. Only the mobile gas available before the time step in any given ceii is aiio~-ed to .-, epll during a Riven time A; ,ha rlow out of tiile top v. . ... ----step. This method of control may b; justified several ways. It is obvious that in the case of a cell with no gas flowing in, the maximum amount that ~-n ~~y~~caiiy flow out is the mobile volume

estimated flow mobile gas.

will

be

equal

to

the

volume

of

Tz =

.0011275 AK krg . . . . . . .
/AgL

(12)

plus any additional gas released from solution. Since the gas is usually released from solution slowly, a reasonable estimate of this total is the mobile gas initially in the cell. If gas is being released from solution or flowing into the bottom of :-:.: 11.. : a cell, this gas either repiaces tbe gas XMI,L. WY AZ. .r. flows on UP the next ~,,e ceil ~r ~ccUw_Uia~es and time step. This means that che net e~fect is to retard the movement of gas about one time step and ,.., law-r ~~ii~= accumulate a llttle extia gas iil dR -----The justification of the method is that without control no stable solution may be generated. With this simple method of control mathematically stable, ~ciu~ien~ may be generated physi~aii~ ieaiis:~~ that ptmvide useful answers to reservoir engineering problems. The formulation of this control is as follows. The gas ficw is fir~c predicted from Eq. 5.

T)=

TzVg/Fg.
vertical

. . . G . . . . .(18)
gas transmissibility used

T= = original T==

adjusted vertical gas transmissibility pfOCdiii~ in the caicularion

Vg = v(sc-so)/Af

. , . . . . . . (9)

F~=

.0011275 ~

A-* @i

, (5J

Notice that F is only an estimate are both since k,g an $ A1-2@ beginning of the time s!ep. If the gas flow is downward or mobile gas in the cell divided then no control is exercised. predicted
~a~, ~h~ fiow

of the gas flow evaluated at the less than Vg, the by the time step, However, if the
VGiUtRC d

If T= is used in the calculation advancing potentials and saturations one finite time step and if the potential difference does not change, then the vertical gas flow will equal exactly the free gas initially in the celi. This method of ~OntiOi h,mit~ ...-{ ~-~n. --fi~w to be rate that gas is -. the ii~==k -- J L-Lreleased from solution and flows into the bottom of the cell. The method was tested with 80 and 90 T ;fiae~~ of J -- --1-..1-. percent of Vg being uses m ca,~u.abe . z ..a-the 100 percent factor used in Eq. 18. The solution A slightly greater amount was nor greatly affected. of gas was held in the bottom of the reservoii with the lower percentage of Vg being used for control. The solution for 180 to 330 days is shown in Table 6 and compared to the Coats method in Fig. 1. &
SMALLTIME STEP

I
o

COATS METHOD SIMPLE METIIOO

relative .-----.

is greater thafi permeability

the is

~.Obii~ so the

CE[m ,,!

adjusted

11 Iti-1 i--t--i
I [

TABLE 59EEC~LAT!QN Cel i Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Materia! Balance


MARCH,

cONTROL

THE COATS METHOD OF OIL sATURATION 1,080 Days 0,367 0,627 0.969 0.969 0.970 0.970 0.970 0.966 0.966 0.981 1,170 Oays . 0.367 0.588 0.959 0.959 9.960 0.960 0.960 0.960 0.961 0.983 1,260 Days 0.374 0.669 0.926 0.928 0.929 0.930 0.930 0.935 0.938 0.984 1,350 Days G -0.06 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.06 0.005 2.06 0.864

41 51

\\\ I
I

~~~ a

900 Days 0.433 0.811 0.957 0.958 0.958 0.958 0.959 0.958 0.957 0.998
1971

990 Days 0.368 0.807 0.952 0.952 0.953 0.953 0.953 0.954 0.953 0.998

I mlI

1 Lo

I .90

I I I .95 300 MYS

I Lo

I ~5

I q

.95 .~ 330 DAYS

FIG.

CULATED

COMPARISON OF OIL SATURATIONS CALBY COATS METHOD AND SIMPLE METHOD.

89

Uniik-e die base case with no control, tabulated stable. In in Table 3, this method remains comparison with the Coats method, Tabie 4, it may be seen that gas flow is being retarded. By 330 days, the simple method predicts 4 percent less gas in the top cell and about 1 percent more gas in Cells 2 through 4. It would be nice if the gas were simply a time step behind, the top cell gas saturation nearly matches this ideal, but the problem is not that simple. At this point in time, the explicit calculation from the Coats method is a better solution than the simple method. The Coats method, simple method solution, and a solution solution, with 1.25-day time step in which no percolation control was required, are compared in Fig. 1. By 900 days the two solutions are quite different as may be seen comparing Table 7 with Table 5. This comparison is aiso illustrated in Fig. 2 which shows the two solutions plus the solution for 1.25day time steps without percolation control. Since the 990-day solution by <he Coats method is erroneous, any comparison must be made at the 900-day leveI. At this point, the simple method has 10.4 percent less gas saturation than the small time step solution in the top cell which is considerable. .However, :hi~ difference in gas volume is spread out over the entire oil column so that difference in other than the top cell is small. In addition, as might be expected, the small time step solution which should approach the correct solution lies between the two-control method solution for this top cell. The Coats method solution has 3.6 percent -all. . too much gas in the --top L= It may be noted that the simple method actuaIly has less gas in the bottom cell than the Coats method solution. This may be because the ninth cell is producing gas and oil. The Coats method takes this gas production into account and reduces the vertical gas flow accordingly. The simple method does not. In this case, the Coats method is retarding the gas flow too much. However, since the difference is less than I percent, it can be considered negligible. The implicit calculation of fluid flow in the simple method gives a stable solution with slower oil drainage from the top cells of the reservoir. This simple method of control is not as accurate as the explicit Coats method but does provide a much more stable solution.

An intuitively obvious improvement over the Co fitiCl iS cc ~110~ che simple method Ot percolation gas f~~~~fig ~,~~ of rhe tLMY of a giV1311 finite cell to . equal the mobile gas initially in the cell plus any is equivalent to gas flowing in the bottom. This assuming that the gas volume free to flow out the top of each cell is equal to not only the free gas in the cell at the beginning of the time step, but also the amount of gas that is expected to flow into the cell from the bottom during the time step. Thus, any gas starting at the bottom of the reservoir may move all the way up to the gas cap at the top of the reservoir in one finite time step. This modification method was tested but did not of the simple calculate stable results. continues to calculate a The simple method stable day~e solution with 90-day time steps out to 4,320 BY this time, 49 percent of the original oil in

place has been produced, the oil saturation in the bottom cell of the reservoir is dropping rapidly and the GOR is ,T, cre than ~,00() scf/STB. At this point, the reservoir
TIME STEP

is assumed
SENSITIVITY

ro be depleted.

Since the simple method allows all the gas present to flow during a finite time step, it is possible that rhis method might be titne step sensitive. That is, the solution generated mighr be a strong function of the size of the finite rime step chosen. The time step sensitivity was tested by making several runs with smaller time steps. The oil saturations at several time levels are in Table 8, At 1,080 and 2,070 days, the oii saturaii~fi is lower in the top and higher in the middle of the reservoir. This is exactly the effect that would be expected when the gas percolation rate is retarded in inverse ratio to the size of the finite time step. The difference is at most 19.5 percent oil saturation between the 90-day and minimum step runs and 8.2 percent between 45-day and minimum step runs at This error is in the most the 1,080-day level.

A CELL I 2 3

SNALL TIME STEP SOLUTION

n o

COATS UETHOO SIMPLE METHOD

TABLE 7PERCOLATION
Cel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

THE SIMPLE METHOD OF CONTROLOIL SATURATION 1,080 Oays


0.484 0.739 0.889 0.906 0.921 0.932 0.944 0.954 0.965 1,0003

4 5
1,350

Number

900 Days 0.560 0.873 0.898 0.899 0,917 0.930 0.943 0.954 0.965

990 Days

1,170 Days 0.466 0.654 0.884 0.910 0.921 0.934 0.944 0.956 0.965
1,0003

1,260 Days 0.453 0.576 0.869 0.909 0.923 0.933 0.94s 0.956 0.965 1,0001

Days
0.443 0.526 0.826 0.910 0.922 0.935 0.945 0,956 0.964

6 7 8 9 0.4 0s 0s 0.7 0.s OIL SATURATIONS 900 MYS 0s 1.0

0.514 0.819 0.886 0.905 0.918 0.932 0.943 0.955 0.964 1.0003

Material ~e}e.==
90

FIG. 1.0016

COMPARISON OF COATS t(SIMPLEt ~ METHOD. OF PETROLEUM

METHOD

WITH

SOCIETY

EXGIXEERS

JOURNAL

..
. :,-. ,

-:~Ai3LE

TIME STEP SENSITIVITYOIL SATURATIONS FOR SELECTED TIME LEVELS 1,080 Days

.. * ~ ,.;$.

~:.~

A?=J.25

~t=2.5

At=7.5 0.452 0.554 0.932 0.965 0.966 0.967 0,968 0.968 0.969 2,070
Days

~t=22.5 0.456 0,577 0.937 0.955 0,958 0,960 0.963 0.965 0.968

~t=45 0.463 0.627 0.926 0.940 0.946 0.951 0.956 0.962 0.967

3t=90 0,484 0.739 0.889 0.906 0.921 0.932 0.944 0.954 0.965

0,450

.,
4 5 67 8 9 0.969 0.969 0.969 0.969 0.970 0,970

0.548 0.923 0.968 0.969 0.969 0.969 0.969 0.970

Cot I -i--

At=2.5
0.403 0.436 0.465 0.550 0,931 0,969 0.969 0.970 0,970

At=7.5
0.403 0.436 0.466 0.553 0.936 0.967 0.968 0.969 0.969

At=22.5 0.403 0.436 0.466 0,560 0.936 0.962 0.964 0.966 0.968 3,240

At=45 0.403 0.436 0.466 0.572 0.932 0.953 0.958 0.962 0.967

At=90 0.400 0.431 0.465 0.606 0.912 0.937 0.946 0.956 0.964

producing gas-oil ratio is lower. Therefore, less gas has been produced, the pressure %s higher, and the gas occupies less volume. These effects are cumulative, so by 3,240 days the ,.solutions are not identical but still within 1.5 percent oil~shuration ,.. .. of each other in the 90- to 45-day step ~m~arison and within 0.8 percent oil saturation of ,$$~ -other in the 45- to 22.5-day time step ~~arl level of time near depletion, th sensitivity is negligible and the solut~ similar. It must be remembered that illustrated time step sensitivity is caused by implicit relative permeabiiities and is not related to percolation control. CONCLUSIONS It is necessary to exercise some sort of control over the gas percolation problem. Without control, the time step required for stabili~ is too small and the computer time necessary to simulate the life of a reservoir is prohibitively high. It may be necessary to depart slightly from the basic flow equations to maintain this control; but this is justified since without such control no solution may be generated. A simple method of control is discussed in this paper. This method is simply limiting the upward interlock flow of gas to the free volume of gas in the lower finite cell. This delays the gas flow slightly in time and keeps the gas saturation mf the ~e~ervoir. However, siigiitiy high in .kLUV h-.~-~ U..v... the results are entirely realistic since gas can flow up the oil column almost as fast as it is released from solution. This method is generally not as accurate as the Coats method for large rime steps but has the impottant advantage of being much more stable and does approach the correct solution at reservoir depletion. ***

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Days

Cell

At=2.s
0.388 0,401 0,425 0.445 0.464

At=7.s
0.389 0.401 0.424 0.445 0.464 0.520 0.868 0.969 0.969

At= 22.5
0.389 0.400 0.423 0,443 0,463 0,538 0,866 0,967 0.969

At=45 0.389 0.396 0.420 0.441 0,461 Q.~~A 0.860 6.964 0.968

At=90 0.388 0.389 0.398 0.424 0.451 0.500 0.845 0.956 0.967

1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

o.5i9
0.863 0.970 0.970

. rapidly changing area of the reservoir. By 3,240 days, che shorrer time step run has greater oil saturation everywhere. This is caused by the fact that because the gas saturation in the bottom cell is lower for the shorter time step, the .

.. . ...> ..-

MARCH.

1971

91

-<

SOCI~Y OF PETROLEUM .<: J*q* OF AIME %.2 -. ~. -.-*

ENGINEERS

,..

announces

lSCBLE
PROCESSES
Transactions Reprint Series No. 8

CONTENTS:
ALCOHOL.WATERDISPLACEMENT The Afcohol Slug Process for Increasing Oil Recovery by Csirl Gatlh
and R. L SlobOd. - K.. ~A,.= * ,.,L.-a.., U r+,, IIV ~ ~~lu~le in oil and Water by L W. Oii M23VGIJ w ~ul.=nw .-

Miscible Fluid Displacement Prediction of Miscibility by A. L Benham, W. E. Oowden and W. J. Kunzman. A Laboratory Study of Solvent flooding by H. N. Hall and T. M. Geffan. Miscible Slug Process by H. A Koch, Jr., and R. L Slobod. THEORETICAL AND MATHEMATICAL STUDfES Mathematical Model of an Unstable Miscible Displacement by E. L Dougheriy. ~ @mericel Calculation of Muftidimansional Miscible Displacement by ~..-+tbe Method of Characteristics by A, O. Garder, Jr., D. W. PeaceMan :?.+: ~ @md A. L Pozzi, Jr. .&~ethod for Predicting the Performance of Unstable Miible Dia.. : <~lac$ment in Heterogeneous Media ~ E. J.f(~al. Designof Laboratory Models for Study of Miscible Displacement by A. L Pozzi, Jr. and R. J. BlackwelL VISCOUS FINGERING Factors Influencing the Efficiency of Miscible Oiaplacement by R. J. Blackwell, J. R. Rayne and W. M. Terry. The Efficierrcy of Miscible Displacement as a Function of Mobilff Rstio by B. Habermann. Effect of Bank Size on Oif Recovary in the High.Pmesura Gas-Oriin LPG.Bank process by J. W. LeceY, J. E. Faris and F. H. Bfinkman. Displacement of Oil from Porous Madia by Misable Liquids by J. Offerings and C. van de peal. SELECTEfl BIBLIOGRAPHY

Helm and A. K. Cssszar. The Deterioration of Miscible Zones in Porous Media fry J. A Sievert, J. N. Dew and F. R. Conley. Mechanism of Alcohol Oisplacament of Oil from Porous Medi?by J. J. Taber, L S. K. Kamath and R. L Reed. lnvesNgations of Miscible Displacements of Aqueous and Oieic Phases fmm Porous Media by J. J. Taber and W. K. Meyer. DIFFUSION AND DISPERSION ..

Laboratory Studies of Microscopic Dispersion Phenomena by R. J. Blackwell. A Review of Oiffuaion and Dispersion in Porous Media by T. K. Perkins and O. C. Johnston. Effect of Lateral Diffusivity on Miscible Displacement in Horizontal Reservoirs by C. van der Peel. LPG-GAS DISPLACEMENT Recovery of Oil by Displacement with Water-Solvent Mixtures by R. J. Blackwell, W. M. Terry, J. R. Rayne, D. C. Lindley and J. R. Henderson. Improving Miscible Displacement by Gas-Water Injedton by B. H. Caudle and A B. Dyes. MISCIBLE Oispiacemeirt of ON and D. L. LuffeL
tij RkMas

Banks by C. !?. Arnold, H. L Stone

Salacted List of Additional Papers on Tbeea Subjacte from SPE Liieratureo

You might also like