Petroleum Reservoir

Simulation
Modeling Multiphase, Multi-Component Fluid Flow in
Complex Geological Rocks

Khalid Aziz
Engineering Resources Engineering
Reservoir and Facilities

El Shargi field, Occidental

 Deepwater Challenge
• BP operated Thunder
Horse field lies
beneath some 6000m
of mud, rock and salt,
topped by 1900m of
ocean
• Reservoir at over 1200
bar and 135°C
• Advanced wells are
required
 Motivation
• Development costs for typical oil fields are
many billions of dollars
• Every field is different
• Development and operating actions are
irreversible
• Models are needed to develop “optimum”
strategies
• Annually around $10 billion spent on
reservoir models, and it is increasing
 Growing Energy Demand
• Energy demand is
outpacing new discoveries 800.0
700.0 Total World Energy

• By 2030 energy demand

600.0

Q u a d r illio n B T U
500.0

will increase by 50% 400.0

300.0

• Only about 35%

200.0
100.0

of OOINP is recovered 0.0

1990 2002 2003 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

• Impact of technology Year

can be huge (~30-70%)

• Technology can also reduce
environmental footprint
UGS Estimates
• About half the
reserves of
conventional oil
have been
produced
• Unconventional
oil much harder
to recover
We are not likely to be free of oil
soon!
• 85 million
barrels/day
now
• 120 million
barrels/day by
2030
 Outline
• What is reservoir simulation?
• Underlying equations and solution
techniques
• Use
 Reservoir Simulation

Gringarten, 2002

Integration of data
from all sources
(wells, cores,
seismic, outcrops,
well tests, etc.)
 Data to Decisions
Geosciences Engineering
Simmodels

Geomodels
History Matching
and
Data Collection, Predictions
Interpretation
and Integration
Analysis,
Optimization and
Control (Decisions)
 Characteristics of the System
• Complex and generally
unknown geology
• Multicomponent, multiphase
flow
– Poorly understood fluid
mechanics
– Thermodynamic complexity
Stanford VI reservoir model
• Complex wells and reservoir 6 million nodes – Castro et al.
well interactions
– Multiphase flow
• Strong connections to facilities
and surroundings
 Data
• Many sources
• Many scales (10-5 to 108 cm)
• Sparse
• Not always reliable
10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 1010

Simulation
Cells

Geological
Model Cells
Thin
Sections
Well Test
Core
Data

Well Log
Seismic Data
Upscaling Downscaling Hamdi Tchelepi
Pipat 2006
 Process
• Build one or more geological descriptions on a
fine scale
• Upscale to a computational grid
• Establish boundary conditions and choose
development and operating strategies
• Solve appropriate equations describing flow
• Predict reservoir performance
• Maximize or minimize some objective function
• Estimate uncertainty
 GeoModel and
Upscaling
• Optimum level of
and techniques
for upscaling to Gurpinar, 2001

minimize errors
• Gridding and
upscaling are
interconnected
 Gridding
• Honor geology
• Preserve numerical
accuracy Gurpinar, 2001

• Be easy to
generate

Castellini, 2001

Prevost 2003 Wolfsteiner et al., 2002

 Equations
• Mass balance for
each component in
the system in each
block (CVFD)
• Additional
Constraints
OGJ
• Wells and Facilities
• Large number of
non-linear equations
 Simulator Equations
∑∑ mcn,,pnl+,,1i − ∑∑ mcw, ,pni +1 =
1
Δt
∑ ( M cn,+p1i − M cn, pi ) i
 

l p

w p

 

Flow Rate into Flow Rate out of Accumulation Rate in Block i

Block i from Block i through
Connected Blocks l Well w in i

p - phase
c - component i l
 Definitions
• Flow Rate mc , p l ,i = ( ϒ c , p )l ,i ⎡⎣ Φ p ,l − Φ p ,i ⎤⎦

• Mass Accumulation M c , p = V (φ S pω c , p )

• Rock φ = φ [1 + c R ( p − p
o o
)]
kA
ϒ c , p = ωc , p λ pT , T = α
Δx
kr , p
ωc , p = ρ p yc , p , λ p =
μp
 Methods of Solution
∑∑ mcn,,pnl+,,1i − ∑∑ mcw, ,pni +1 =
1
Δt
∑ ( M n +1
c , pi − M cn, pi ) i
 
 

l p w p
 

Flow Rate into Flow Rate out of Accumulation Rate in Block i

Block i from Block i through
Connected Blocks l Well w in i

= ( ϒ c , p )l ,i
n ,n +1 n ,n +1 n +1
mc , pl ,i ⎡⎣Φ p ,l − Φ p ,i ⎤⎦ i l
• Explicit impractical
• Fully implicit most robust, but expensive
• Partially implicit (IMPES, IMPEC) cheaper
• Adaptive implicit is generally the optimum
approach
 General Formulation
G G
Non-linear equations set: F ( X ) = 0
G G G
Rewrite it as: ⎧
⎪ Fp ( X p , X s ) = 0 ⎧ p: primary
⎨G G G ⎨ s:
⎪⎩ Fs ( X p , X s ) = 0 ⎩ secondary

• Appropriate variables, equations and

alignment
• All primary variables or a subset treated
implicitly
 Equations
• Number of equations per block varies from 3 to
around 10 (nc)
• Number of blocks hundred thousand to several
million (nb)
• Optimum time step is selected automatically
• Number of nonlinear equations to be solved
every timestep: nc x nb
• Equations are linearized using Newton’s method
• Typical problems take about 3 iterations per
timestep, difficult problems may not converge
 Linearized Equations
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0
⎡ ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
200
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
400
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
600
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ →
⎟ ⎜ →
⎟
⎢ ⎥ • ⎜ X ⎟ = −⎜ R ⎟
800
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
1000
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
1200
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
1400
⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎣ ⎦ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
nz = 74960

From Jiang 2006

 Multi-level Sparse Block Matrix
0

200 • R ~ reservoir
400
• F ~ facilities and wells
600

800

1000

RR RF
1200
RW1

1400
RW2
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
nz = 74960

FR FF

From Jiang 2006

 Process
1. Create one or more images of the reservoir
based on available data
2. Set objectives
3. Create a grid
4. Select time step
5. Iteratively solve equations to advance solution
6. Go to 3 and continue until
• Desired time is reached, or
• Some constraint is violated
7. Go to 2
 Block-Based Linear Solvers
• Block Solvers
– GMRES & BiCGstab (from IML)

• Multi-Level Block Preconditioners

– CPR
– BILU(0)
– BILU(k)

From Jiang 2006

 Performance of Block Solvers
9 components, 100x100x5 grid (FIM), solver time
18
14.9
15
Speedup Factor

12

9
8.3
6

3 1 1.6
0
PGMRES+ BGMRES+ PGMRES+ BGMRES+
ILU BILU CPR(ILU) CPR(BILU)

From Jiang 2006

 Other Complications
• Fractured Systems
• Mutiphase flow in wells and facilities
• Complex recovery processes
• Unconventional resources
• Geomechanics
 Modeling Fractures
Image source: http://210.42.35.8/ybs/images/jcz/lar7.jpg

From: Bin Gong 06

• Most reservoirs are fractured

• Modeling individual fractures is neither
possible or desirable
• Usually dual media approach is used
 Dual Porosity Model
Real fractured system Idealized sugar-cube model

matrix matrix block

fracture
fracture

(Aziz & Settari, 1979, after Warren & Root, 1963)

From: Bin Gong 06

ƒ Main transport through fractures

ƒ Flow between matrix and fracture
is modeled by transfer functions
ƒ Number of equations doubles
Enhancements to Dual Porosity
Models

Matrix

Fracture

From: Bin Gong 06

• May allow flow between matrix blocks
• Subgrid matrix blocks
 Modeling Fine Scale Features

• Explicitly model major

faults and fractures
• Near well modeling

Karimi Fard 2006

Discrete Feature Model
Features are represented as interfaces
between matrix control volumes

Matrix

Fracture

Karimi Fard 2006

 Treatment of Intersections
Fractures

Grid domain Computational domain Connectivity list Modified connectivity list

Intermediate control-volume Star-Delta transformation

Karimi Fard 2006

Well Model in Reservoir Simulator

• Predicting pressure drop in wellbores is

an important component
• Wellbore flow model needs to be simple,
continuous, and differentiable
 Gas-Liquid Flow in Pipes
Horizontal Flow

Stratified Smooth Flow

Stratified Wavy Flow

Elongated Bubble
Flow

Slug Flow

Annular Flow

Dispersed Bubble
Bubble Slug Churn Annular Flow
Flow Flow Flow Flow

Figures from
Shoham (1982)
 Modeling of Complex Processes

• Limited ability to
model processes
involving
– Fast phase changes
– Chemical reactions
(in situ upgrading)
– Unstable fronts
• Unconventional
Resources
 Rock Deformation
Coupled Geomechanics and Fluid Flow

⎡ K L Δ δ
⎤⎡ t ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
F Geomechanics Simulator
=
⎢ LT E⎥ ⎢Δ P ⎥ ⎢ R⎥ Flow Simulator
⎣ ⎦⎣ t ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
Subsidence in North Adriatic

From ENI
 General Purpose Research
Simulator (GPRS) Design
field belonging
inheritance
SimMaster

core concepts
facilities solvers reservoir

other surfac wells wellgroup grid

stdwell … fluid

mswell smart wells rock

From Jiang 2006
 Object Oriented
Design
field

SimMaster SimMaster SimMaster

facilities solvers reservoir facilities solvers reservoir facilities solvers reservoir

surfac wells grid surfac wells grid surfac wells grid

stdwells rock stdwells rock stdwells rock

mswells …… mswells …… mswells ……

smart wells smart wells smart wells

reservoir 1 reservoir 2 reservoir 3

From Jiang 2006

 Concluding Remarks
• There have been continuous
improvements in simulation techniques
over the past 50 or so years
• Many challenges remain to make reservoir
simulators more accurate, efficient and
robust
• Benefits can be huge
 Acknowledgements
• Based on the work of many students and
colleagues
• Supported by SUPRI-B and SUPRI-HW
consortia, and the new Smart Fields
Consortium (SUPRI-SFC)
• Additional support from DOE and several
oil companies