Introduction to Flow Simulation as Used in

Reservoir Engineering

Knut–Andreas Lie

Department of Mathematics and Cybernetics, SINTEF Digital/

Department of Mathematical Sciences, NTNU, Norway

Multiscale Methods Summer School

June 26–29, 2017, Hasselt, Belgium

1 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

2 / 66
Petroleum reservoirs

Naturally occurring flammable liquid/gases found in geological formations

I Originating from organic sediments that have been compressed and ’cooked’ to
form hydrocarbons that migrated upward in sedimentary rocks until limited by
a trapping structure
I Found in shallow reservoirs on land and deep under the seabed
I Only 30% of the reserves are ’conventional’; remaining 70% include shale oil
and gas, heavy oil, extra heavy oil, and oil sands.

Uses of (refined) petroleum:

I Fuel (gas, liquid, solid)
I Alkenes manufactured into
plastics and compounds
I Lubricants, wax, paraffin wax
I Pesticides and fertilizers for
Johan Sverdrup, new Norwegian ’elephant’ discovery, 2011.
agriculture Expected to be producing for the next 30+ years

3 / 66
Production processes

Gas

Oil
k
Caproc

in e
r w/br
Aquife

Primary production – puncturing the ’balloon’

When the first well is drilled and opened for production, trapped hydrocarbon
starts flowing toward the well because of over-pressure

4 / 66
Production processes

Gas
injection
Gas

Oil
Water
injection

Secondary production – maintaining reservoir flow

As pressure drops, less hydrocarbon is flowing. To maintain pressure and push
more profitable hydrocarbons out, one starts injecting water or gas into the
reservoir, possibly in an alternating fashion from the same well.

4 / 66
Production processes

Gas
injection
Gas

Oil
Water
injection

Enhanced oil recovery

Even more crude oil can be extracted by gas injection (CO2 , natural gas, or
nitrogen), chemical injection (foam, polymer, surfactants), microbial injection,
or thermal recovery (cyclic steam, steam flooding, in-situ combustion), etc.

4 / 66
Why reservoir simulation?

To estimate reserves and support economic and operational decisions

regarding recovery processes

To this end, reservoir engineers need to:

I understand reservoir and fluid behavior
I assess and optimize various recovery techniques
I quantify uncertainty
I test hypotheses and compare scenarios
I assimilate data
Is a statutory requriement and recognized as evidence by banks and other
funding organizations

5 / 66
Reservoir models

Somewhat simplified, consist of three parts:

6 / 66
Reservoir models

Somewhat simplified, consist of three parts:

1 a geological model – volumetric grid with

cell/face properties describing the porous
rock formation

6 / 66
Reservoir models

Somewhat simplified, consist of three parts:

1 a geological model – volumetric grid with

cell/face properties describing the porous
rock formation 1

0.8

0.6

∂t (φbw Sw ) + ∇ · (bw ~
uw ) = bw qw
2 a flow model – describes how fluids flow ∂t [φ(bw So + bg rv Sg )] 0.4

+ ∇ · (bo ~
uo + bg rv ~
ug ) = bo qo + bg rv qg
in a porous medium (conservation laws + ∂t [φ(bg Sg + bo rs So )]
0.2

appropriate closure relations) + ∇ · (bg ~

ug + bo rs ~
uo ) = bg qg0 + bo rs qo
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

6 / 66
Reservoir models

Somewhat simplified, consist of three parts:

1 a geological model – volumetric grid with

cell/face properties describing the porous
rock formation 1

0.8

0.6

∂t (φbw Sw ) + ∇ · (bw ~
uw ) = bw qw
2 a flow model – describes how fluids flow ∂t [φ(bw So + bg rv Sg )] 0.4

+ ∇ · (bo ~
uo + bg rv ~
ug ) = bo qo + bg rv qg
in a porous medium (conservation laws + ∂t [φ(bg Sg + bo rs So )]
0.2

appropriate closure relations) + ∇ · (bg ~

ug + bo rs ~
uo ) = bg qg0 + bo rs qo
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

3 a well model – describes flow in and out

of the reservoir, in the wellbore, flow
control devices, surface facilities

6 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

7 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Mineral particles broken off by weathering and erosion

Transported by wind or water to a place where they settle and accumulate into
a sediment, building up in lakes, rivers, sand deltas, lagoons, choral reefs, etc

8 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Ero
De sion
pos
itio
n

Flood plain

Mud
Sand

Gravel

Layered structure with different mixtures of rock types with varying grain size,
mineral type, and clay content

Thin beds that stretch hundreds or thousands of meters, typically horizontally

or at a small angle. Gradually buried deeper and consolidated

8 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Normal dip-slip fault Reverse dip-slip fault Strike-slip fault

Geological activity will later fold, stretch, and fracture the consolidated rock

8 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Structural trap: anticline Stratigraphic traps

Sandstone encased
Gas in mudstone
Unconformity
Oil
le rock
eab
erm Pinch out
Imp e
rin
hb
wit
rock
ble
mea
Per

Fault trap Salt dome

Fault

Impermeable
salt

8 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Outcrops of sedimentary rocks from Svalbard, Norway. Length scale: ∼100 m

8 / 66
Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Layered geological structures typically occur on both large and small scales

8 / 66
Porous media flow – a multiscale problem

The scales that impact fluid flow in subsurface rocks range from
I the micrometer scale of pores and pore channels
I via dm-m scale of well bores and laminae sediments
I to sedimentary structures that stretch across entire reservoirs
Porous rocks are heterogeneous at all length scales (no scale separation)

−→

9 / 66
Porous media flow – a multiscale problem

−→

9 / 66
Flow model: representative elementary volume

Porosity:
Vv
φ=
Vv + Vr

The assumption of a repre-

sentative elementary volume
(REV) is essential in macro-
scale modeling of porous
media, here illustrated for
porosity.

10 / 66
Grids: volumetric representation of the reservoir
The structure of the reservoir (geological surfaces, faults, etc) + well paths

The stratigraphy of the reservoir (sedimentary structures)

Petrophysical parameters (permeability, porosity, net-to-gross, . . . )

11 / 66
Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66
Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x
z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66
Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x
z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66
Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x
z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66
Petrophysical parameters

4
3500 x 10
3
Horizontal
Tarbert
Vertical Ness
3000
2.5

2500

2000

1.5

1500

1
1000

0.5
500

0 0
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 −8 −6 −4 −2 0 2 4

13 / 66
Research challenge: complex grid and strong heterogeneity

Complex, unstructured grids with many obscure challenges

Grid dictated by geology, not chosen freely to
maximize accuracy of numerical discretization
Topology is generally unstructured, non-neighboring
connections
Cells deviate strongly from box shape, high aspect
ratios, many faces/neighbors, small faces, . . .
Potential inconsistencies: bilinear vs tetrahedral
surfaces

Petrophysics:
Many orders of magnitude variations
Strong discontinuities
No clear scale separation (long and short correlations)

14 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

15 / 66
Governing equations for fluid flow

In its simplest form – two main principles

I Conservation of mass

∂
Z I Z
m dx + F~ · ~n ds = r dx
∂t V ∂V V

m=mass, F~ =flow rate, r=fluid sources

16 / 66
Governing equations for fluid flow

In its simplest form – two main principles

I Conservation of mass

∂
Z I Z
m dx + F~ · ~n ds = r dx
∂t V ∂V V

m=mass, F~ =flow rate, r=fluid sources

I Darcy’s law:
~u = −K(∇p − ρg∇z)
empirical law for describing processes on an unresolved scale.

Similar to Fourier’s law (heat) [1822], Ohm’s law (electric current) [1827], Fick’s law
(concentration) [1855], except that we now have two driving forces

16 / 66
Darcy’s law and permeability

In reservoir engineering:
K

~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z
µ
Intrinsic permeability K measures ability to transmit fluids
Anisotropic and diagonal by nature, full tensor due to averaging.
Reported in units Darcy: 1 d = 9.869233 · 10−13 m2

Fluid velocity:
Darcy’s law is formulated for volumetric flux, i.e., volume of fluid per total area per
u
~
time. The fluid velocity is volume per area occupied by fluid per time, i.e., ~v = φ .

Theoretical basis (M. K. Hubbert, 1956):

Darcy’s law derived from the Navier–Stokes equations by averaging, neglecting
intertial and viscous effects

17 / 66
Single-phase, incompressible flow

Model equations for single-phase flow:

∂(φρ)
K

+ ∇ · ρ~u = q, ~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z
∂t µ

18 / 66
Single-phase, incompressible flow

Model equations for single-phase flow:

∂(φρ)
K

+ ∇ · ρ~u = q, ~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z
∂t µ
Assume constant density ρ, unit fluid viscosity µ, and neglect gravity g
−→ flow equation on mixed form

∇ · ~u = q, ~u = −K∇p

or as a Poisson equation with variable coefficients

−∇ K∇p = q

18 / 66
Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

Introduce compressibilities for rock and fluid

dφ dρ
= cr φ, = cf ρ
dp dp

19 / 66
Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

Introduce compressibilities for rock and fluid

dφ dρ
= cr φ, = cf ρ
dp dp
Insert into conservation equation

∂(φρ)  K 
= ∇ · ρ ∇p
∂t µ
  ∂p cf ρ ρ
(cr + cf )φρ = ∇p · K∇p + ∇ · (K∇p)
∂t µ µ

19 / 66
Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

Introduce compressibilities for rock and fluid

dφ dρ
= cr φ, = cf ρ
dp dp
Insert into conservation equation

∂(φρ)  K 
= ∇ · ρ ∇p
∂t µ
  ∂p cf ρ ρ
(cr + cf )φρ = ∇p · K∇p + ∇ · (K∇p)
∂t µ µ

If cf is sufficiently small, so that cf ∇p · K∇p  ∇ · (K∇p), we get

∂p 1

= ∇ · K∇p , c = cr + cf
∂t µφc

19 / 66
Numerical discretization

Assumption: a grid G consisting of a collection of polyhedral cells {Ωi }

Ωi
~
ni,k

Γi,k

20 / 66
Numerical discretization

Assumption: a grid G consisting of a collection of polyhedral cells {Ωi }

Mass conservation per grid cell:

Z I Z
∇·~u dx = ~
u · ~n ds = q dx
Ωi ∂Ωi Ωi
Ωi
X
ui,k = qi ~
ni,k
k
Γi,k
Pressure is cell-wise constant, flux is continuous
across cell interfaces

20 / 66
Numerical discretization

Mass conservation per grid cell:

Z I Z
∇·~ u dx = ~
u · ~n ds = q dx
Ωi ∂Ωi Ωi
Ωi
X
ui,k = qi ~
ni,k
k
Γi,k
Pressure is cell-wise constant, flux is continuous
across cell interfaces

Assume K is constant within each cell

Z
ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k
Γik Kk
Ki
(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k
≈ Ak K · ~nik
|~cik |2


= Ti,k pi − πi,k

20 / 66
Numerical discretization

Assume K is constant within each cell

Z
ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k
Γik Kk
Ki
(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k
≈ Ak K · ~nik
|~cik |2


= Ti,k pi − πi,k

Next, we use continuity of flux and pressure to eliminate the interface pressures


ui,k = Tik pi − pk

20 / 66
Numerical discretization

Assume K is constant within each cell

Z
ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k
Γik Kk
Ki
(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k
≈ Ak K · ~nik
|~cik |2


= Ti,k pi − πi,k

Next, we use continuity of flux and pressure to eliminate the interface pressures


ui,k = Tik pi − pk
P
Mass conservation qi = k ui,k gives a linear system
(P
j Tij , k = i,
Ap = q, where Aij =
−Tik , k 6= i.

20 / 66
Research challenge: efficient solvers

Large coefficient variations, complex sparsity patterns, etc. Call for efficient
iterative solvers and preconditioning methods −→ good test problems for
multigrid methods

21 / 66
Research challenge: consistent discretizations
Problem: standard finite-volume methods are
not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

22 / 66
Research challenge: consistent discretizations
Problem: standard finite-volume methods are
not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk
K Ωi ~
ci,k ~
ni,k Ωk
Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik
Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

Here, ∂y p and ∂z p cannot be estimated from pi and pk

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→
inconsistent scheme

22 / 66
Research challenge: consistent discretizations
Problem: standard finite-volume methods are
not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk
K Ωi ~
ci,k ~
ni,k Ωk
Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik
Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

Here, ∂y p and ∂z p cannot be estimated from pi and pk

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→
inconsistent scheme

Many methods developed to amend this

(mortar) mixed finite elements
multipoint flux approximation (MFPA)
mimetic finite difference
vertex approximate gradient (VAG)
nonlinear TPFA

22 / 66
Research challenge: consistent discretizations
Problem: standard finite-volume methods are
not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk
K Ωi ~
ci,k ~
ni,k Ωk
Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik
Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

Here, ∂y p and ∂z p cannot be estimated from pi and pk

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→
inconsistent scheme

Many methods developed to amend this

(mortar) mixed finite elements
multipoint flux approximation (MFPA)
mimetic finite difference
vertex approximate gradient (VAG)
nonlinear TPFA

22 / 66
Example: comparison of consistent methods

Example: 3D Voronoi
grid adapting to
branching well.
Anisotropic and
spatially varying
permeability

Method dof nnz ratio cond

TPFA 9026 126002 13.96 9.64e+02
NTPFA 11920 280703 23.55 2.92e+07
MFD 60321 1538305 25.50 9.37e+15
VEM1 52350 3404977 65.04 4.91e+11
VEM2 227459 38770593 170.45 —

23 / 66
What can you do with single-phase flow?

Run basic diagnostics of your model to establish basic timelines, volumetric

connections, measures of dynamic heterogeneity, etc

Forward time of flight Residence time

Can be computed by tracing streamline or by finite-volume methods solving steady

u · ∇h = f (x)
transport equations ~

24 / 66
What can you do with single-phase flow?

Run basic diagnostics of your model to establish basic timelines, volumetric

connections, measures of dynamic heterogeneity, etc

Influence regions Well-pair regions

Can be computed by tracing streamline or by finite-volume methods solving steady

u · ∇h = f (x)
transport equations ~

24 / 66
Flow diagnostics

< 1%

20% 22%

< 1% I1, P1
I2, P1
I1, P2 3%
I2, P2
I1, P3
I2, P3
23%
I1, P4
I2, P4 18%

13%

25 / 66
Flow diagnostics
Allocation by connection Allocation by connection
Well allocation factors Well allocation factors
P6 2 P4 2
4 4
6 6

Connection #

Connection #
8 8
P5 P3
10 10
P2
12 12
14 P3 14
16 16
18 18
P4 20 20
0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000
Well: I6 Accumulated flux [m3/day] Well: I4 Accumulated flux [m3/day]

25 / 66
Flow diagnostics

qi F

normalize

Vi Φ

25 / 66
Flow diagnostics

F 1−F Ev

Φ td td
F-Φ diagram Fractional recovery Sweep efficiency

25 / 66
Model reduction: flow-based upscaling

−∇ · (K∇p) = f, in Ω

Subdivide grid into coarse blocks.

For each block B, we seek a tensor
K∗ such that
Z Z
K∇p dx = K∗ ∇p dx,
B B Typical approach: flow-based upscaling

That is, we use Darcy’s law on the

coarse scale

ū = −K∗ ∇p

to relate the net flow rate ū through Many alternatives, few are sufficiently
accurate and robust
B to the average pressure gradient
∇p inside B. More about this on Wednesday

26 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

27 / 66
Multiphase flow

Hydrocarbon typically consists of different

chemical species like methane, ethane, Water
propane, etc. Common modelling practice
to group fluid components into phases, i.e.,
Oil
a mixture of components having similar
flow properties.
Grain
Most common phases:
aqueous, liquid, and vapor

28 / 66
Fundamental physics: wettability

Immiscible phases separated by a infinitely thin surface having associated

surface tension
Water wet Oil wet

Oil
σow

Water
θ θ
σos σws σos
Solid

Contact angle θ: determined by balance of adhesive and cohesive forces

Young’s equation (energy balance): σow cos θ = σos − σws

Water generally shows greater affinity than oil to stick to the rock surface −→
reservoirs are predominantly water-wet systems

29 / 66
Fundamental physics: capillary pressure

Different equilibrium pressure in two phases separated by curved interface:

2πr σ cos θ 2σ cos θ πr2 gh(ρl − ρa )

pc = pn − pw = 2
= = 2
= ∆ρgh
| πr{z } r | πr
{z }
upward force downward force

θ
θ

30 / 66
Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Saturation: fraction of pore volume filled by a given fluid phase

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest
non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim
ary
drain
a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66
Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Saturation: fraction of pore volume filled by a given fluid phase

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest
non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim
ary
drain
a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66
Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Saturation: fraction of pore volume filled by a given fluid phase

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest
non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim
ary
drain
a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66
Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Saturation: fraction of pore volume filled by a given fluid phase

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest
non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim
ary
drain
a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66
Fundamental physics: imbibition (hydrocarbon recovery)
Imbibition: wetting fluid displaces non-wetting fluid, controlled by the size of
the narrowest non-invaded pore.
Will not follow the same capillary curve −→ hysteresis (cause: trapped oil
droplets, different wetting angle for advancing and receding interfaces)

pcnw

Snr

prim
ary
prim drain
ary age
imb
ibit
ion
Swr pe

Sw

EOR: inject substances to alter wetting properties to mobilize immobile oil, Sor → 1
32 / 66
Extensions of model equations to multiphase flow

Three-phase Darcy velocities (Muskat, 1936):

Kα (Sα )

~
uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z
µα
Assuming each phase consists of only one component, the
mass-balance equations for each phase read (Muskat, 1945):

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~
uα = qα
∂t

Macro-scale capillarity concept (Leverett, 1941):

r
φ
pc (Sw ) = J σ cos θ
K

33 / 66
Relative permeability

Effective permeability experienced by one 1

krw kro
phase is reduced by the presence of other
0.8
phases. Relative permeabilities
0.6
krα = krα (Sα1 , . . . , Sαm ),
0.4

are nonlinear functions that attempt to 0.2

account for this effect. Notice that
0
X 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
krα < 1
α

34 / 66
Relative permeability

Effective permeability experienced by one 1

krw kro
phase is reduced by the presence of other
0.8
phases. Relative permeabilities
0.6
krα = krα (Sα1 , . . . , Sαm ),
0.4

are nonlinear functions that attempt to 0.2

account for this effect. Notice that
0
X 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
krα < 1
α
1
krw kro
0.8
This gives Darcy’s law on the form
0.6

Kkrα

~
uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z 0.4
µα

0.2
= −Kλα ∇pα − ρα g∇z
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

34 / 66
General flow equations for two-phase flow

Gathering the equations, we have

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~uα = qα , α = {w, n}
∂t
Kkrα

~uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z
µα
pc = pn − pw , Sw + Sn = 1

35 / 66
General flow equations for two-phase flow

Gathering the equations, we have

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~uα = qα , α = {w, n}
∂t
Kkrα

~uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z
µα
pc = pn − pw , Sw + Sn = 1

Commercial reservoir simulators: insert functional relationships pc = Pc (Sw )

and ρα and φ as function of pα , and discretize with backward Euler in time and
the two-point scheme in space
In academia: common practice to rewrite the equations to better reveal their
mathematical nature

35 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
un + ~
uw ) = qn + qw
∂t

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~
u=q
∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }
≡1 =~
u =q

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~
u=q
∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }
≡1 =~
u =q

Sum Darcy equations

~
u=~
un + ~
uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~
u=q
∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }
≡1 =~
u =q

Sum Darcy equations

~
u=~
un + ~
uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z
| {z }
=λ

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~
u=q
∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }
≡1 =~
u =q

Sum Darcy equations

~
u=~
un + ~
uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z
| {z }
=λ

Inserted into ∇ · ~
u = q gives pressure equation
 
−∇ · (λK∇pn ) = q − ∇ λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Choose Sw and pn as primary unknowns, consider incompressible flow (i.e., ρ is

constant and can be divided out)
∂Sα
φ +∇·~
uα = qα .
∂t
Sum mass-conservation equations:
∂
φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~
u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~
u=q
∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }
≡1 =~
u =q

Sum Darcy equations

~
u=~
un + ~
uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z
| {z }
=λ

Inserted into ∇ · ~
u = q gives pressure equation
 
−∇ · (λK∇pn ) = q − ∇ λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z
| {z } | {z }
Poisson only function of Sw

36 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Multiply phase velocity by mobility of other phase and subtract


λn ~
uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

37 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Multiply phase velocity by mobility of other phase and subtract


λn ~
uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

Solve for ~
uw and insert into conservation equation
∂Sw
u + λn ∆ρg∇z = qw − ∇ · fw λn Pc0 ∇Sw



φ + ∇ · fw ~
∂t

37 / 66
Fractional flow formulation

Multiply phase velocity by mobility of other phase and subtract


λn ~
uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

Solve for ~
uw and insert into conservation equation
∂Sw
u + λn ∆ρg∇z = qw − ∇ · fw λn Pc0 ∇Sw



φ + ∇ · fw ~
∂t

Setting Pc ≡ 0 and g ≡ 0 for simplicity

−∇ Kλ(S)∇p) = q, ~
u = −Kλ(S)∇p,
φ∂t S + ∇ · (~
uf (S)) = 0

System of one elliptic pressure equation and one hyperbolic saturation

equation. Typically: solved sequentially with specialized methods

37 / 66
Buckley–Leverett solution for 1D displacement

M =1
M =5
M = .2

S2
St + f (S)x = q, f (S) = , M = µw /µn
S2 + M (1 − S)2
Here, M = .2 gives poor local displacement efficiency, M = 5 gives very good

38 / 66
Simulation examples: quarter-five spot
t=0.20 PVI t=0.40 PVI t=0.60 PVI t=0.80 PVI Sw
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

5
x 10 1
Sw in completion
2.5 Water cut
initial oil in place 0.8

te
ra 0.6
o il
al
iti
2
in 0.4

0.2

1.5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

250
water breakthrough

1
200

150

0.5
100

50 Oil rate [m3/day]

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

39 / 66
Simulation examples: quarter-five spot
4 years 8 years 12 years 16 years 20 years

0.9
ratio 1:10

0.8

0.7

0.6
ratio 1:1

0.5

0.4

0.3
ratio 10:1

0.2

0.1

39 / 66
 Simulation examples: quarter-five spot

cumulative oil production

wcut: Water fraction at reservoir conditions
18000 1
initial oil in place
P (Ratio 1:10)
0.8
16000 P (Ratio 1:1)

0.6 P (Ratio 10:1)

14000
0.4

12000 0.2

10000 0
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Time (days)

8000 −5 Oil surface rate [m3/s]

x 10

6000 2.5

P (Ratio 1:10) 2
4000 P (Ratio 1:1)
1.5
P (Ratio 10:1)
2000 1 P (Ratio 1:10)
P (Ratio 1:1)
0.5
0 P (Ratio 10:1)
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0
Time (days) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (days)
6000 7000

39 / 66
150 days 670 days

810 days 1020 days

1500 days 4500 days

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

40 / 66
High permeability on top Low permeability on top

120 days 120 days

360 days 360 days

1500 days 1500 days

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

40 / 66
Numerical errors

There are two main sources of errors one should be wary of

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport
separately
Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

41 / 66
Numerical errors

There are two main sources of errors one should be wary of

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport
separately
Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

1 steps 4 steps 16 steps 64 steps

41 / 66
Numerical errors

There are two main sources of errors one should be wary of

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport
separately
Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

0.9
Water cut for M=0.1 0.9
0.8 Water cut for M=10.0
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
P (3) P (3)
0.4 0.4
P (12) P (12)
0.3 P (48) 0.3 P (48)
0.2 P (192) P (192)
0.2
P (768) P (768)
0.1 0.1
P (rampup) P (rampup)
0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

41 / 66
Numerical errors

There are two main sources of errors one should be wary of

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport
separately
Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

TPFA: 250 days Mimetic: 250 days

100 100 200

50 50 150

0 0 100
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

100 100 1

50 50 0.5

0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

41 / 66
Numerical errors

There are two main sources of errors one should be wary of

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport
separately
Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

TPFA: 500 days Mimetic: 500 days

100 100 200

50 50 150

0 0 100
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

100 100 1

50 50 0.5

0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

41 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

42 / 66
Compressible, multicomponent, multiphase flows

System with N phases and M components

Notation: c`α mass fraction of component ` in phase α
Equations: conservation for phases or components?
Choose components to avoid source terms for mass transfer
∂ X `  X  X
φ cα ρα Sα + ∇ · c`α ρα ~uα + J~α` = c`α ρα qα ,
∂t α α α

where J is diffusion, e.g., Fickian

J~α` = −ρα Sα D`α ∇c`α ,

43 / 66
PVT behavior of petroleum fluids

stock tank
separator
Christmas
tree
pse , Tse ps , Ts
wellhead

−∆p
pr , T r

44 / 66
Phase diagrams for a single component
Gibbs’ phase rule (without reactions):

F = 2 + nc − np

F = degrees of freedom, nc = components, and np = phases

Pressure

solid

Melting
supercritical
liquid
fluid

Pcp
critical point

on
i
at
oriz
p
Va
triple point
Ptp
vapor
ion
at
blim
Su

Ttp Tcp Temperature

45 / 66
Phase diagrams for a single component

1: all liquid 4: last droplet

2: first bubble 5: all gas

Pressure
critical
point

n
3

tio
i za
3: gas and liquid 4 5

or
gas

ap
Vo

V
lum
e
liquid re
atu
dewpoint curve
m per
mercury bubblepoint curve Te

45 / 66
Binary substances

cricondenterm
pressure (p)
liquid critical
point
cricondenbar

100%

90%

80%

70%

60% 50%
vapor
40% 0%
30% 20% 10%

temperature (T)

Bubblepoint and vaporization curve no longer coincide. Phase diagram

depends on the composition of the binary mixture
46 / 66
Gas reservoirs: dry/wet gas

pressure (p) initial state

depletion
n
tio
duc
o
pr

on
as
tg

cti
we

du
ro
separator

sp
ga
y
0%
dr

100%
separator

temperature (T)

47 / 66
Gas reservoirs: retrograde condensate

pressure (p) initial state

separator

depletion
100%

0%

temperature (T)

47 / 66
Oil reservoirs: black-oil

pressure (p) initial state

100%

separator
0%

temperature (T)

48 / 66
Oil reservoirs: volatile oil

pressure (p)

initial state

100%

separator
0%

temperature (T)

48 / 66
Black-oil models

Three phases: aqueous, liquid, and vapor W O G

Hydrocarbon components lumped together to a
A X
light ’gas’ and a heavier ’oil’ pseudocomponent
at surface conditions L X X
V X X
Simple PVT:
ρws
ρW = = bw ρws
Bw
ρos + Rs ρgs
ρO = = bo (ρos + Rs ρgs )
Bo
ρgs + Rv ρos
ρG = = bg (ρgs + Rv ρos )
Bg reservoir
surface
ρs
Formation-volume factor: Bα = VVαs = ρα
α
α
Shrinkage/expansion factor: bα = 1/Bα
Dissolved gas in oil: Rs
Oil vaporized in gas: Rv

49 / 66
Black-oil: PVT functions

Bg

pressure, p

50 / 66
Black-oil: PVT functions

Rs

Rv

pb pressure, p

50 / 66
Black-oil: PVT functions

Bt
2

Bo

1
pb pressure, p

50 / 66
Black-oil: PVT functions

10−3

co

10−7
pb pressure, p

50 / 66
Black-oil: PVT functions

µo

pb pressure, p

50 / 66
The black-oil equations

Conservation equations:



∂t φbo So + ∇ · bo ~ uo = bo qo



∂t φbw Sw + ∇ · bw ~ uw = bw qw



∂t φ bg Sg + bo Rs So + ∇ · bg ~ ug + bo Rs ~
uo = bg qg + bo Rs qo

Darcy’s law:
Kα (Sα )

~
uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z
µα
Closure relationships
So + Sw + Sg = 1
Plus expressions for capillary pressures and relative permeabilities

51 / 66
Three-phase relative permeability
In principle, one could imagine all three phases flowing simulataneously.
However, more common to assume that flow is essentially two-phase
Swc 1 − So − Swc So
1

Sg
Sg +Sw −Swc
gas

oil

Sw −Swc
Sg +Sw −Swc water

0
1 − So So

Relative permeability of oil:

Sg krog (So ) (Sw − Swc ) krow (So )

kro (Sg , Sw ) = + ,
Sg + Sw − Swc Sg + Sw − Swc

52 / 66
Example: fluid model from SPE9

Relative permeability for oil

Oil relative permeability curves

1
Oil−Water system
Oil−Gas system
0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
kr

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Oil saturation

J. E. Killough (1995). Ninth SPE comparative solution project: A reexamination of black-oil simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

53 / 66
Example: fluid model from SPE9
Water formation volume factor
1.007

1.006

1.005

Formation-volume factors (inverse densities): 1.004

1.003

Oil formation volume factor 1.002

1.001
1.12
1

0.999
0 100 200 300 400 500
1.1
d
Gas formation volume factor
te

0.018
ra

0.016
u
at

1.08 0.014
-s

saturated
er

0.012
d
un

0.01
1.06
Bo

0.008

0.006

1.04 0.004

0.002

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
1.02 Rock compressibility
1.005

1.004

1 1.003

1.002

0.98 1.001
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
1
Pressure [bar]
0.999

0.998

J. E. Killough (1995). Ninth SPE comparative solution project: A reexamination of black-oil0.997

simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium
0 100 200 300 400 500

53 / 66
Example: fluid model from SPE9

Viscosities:
−3 Water viscosity
x 10
1.5
−3
x 10 Oil viscosity
1.2

1.15

0.5

1.1
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
−5 Gas viscosity
x 10
o
µ

2.2

2.1
1.05
2

1.9

1.8

1 1.7

1.6

1.5

1.4
0.95
1.3
0 100 200 300 400 500
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
J. E. Killough (1995). Ninth SPE comparative
Pressure solution project: A reexamination of black-oil simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

53 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

54 / 66
Wells: flow in and out of the reservoir
5–40 in

2rw

20–200 m

Inflow and outflow take place on a subgrid scale, with large variations in
pressure over short distances.

55 / 66
Wells: flow in and out of the reservoir
5–40 in

2rw

20–200 m

Inflow and outflow take place on a subgrid scale, with large variations in
pressure over short distances.
Solution: use a linear inflow-performance relation


q = J pR − pbh

Here, pbh is flowing pressure in wellbore and pR average pressure in cell

55 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra
−4 −2 0 2 4
pbhp

−100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Pseudo-steady, radial flow. Mass conservation in cylinder coordinates

1 ∂(ru)
=0 −→ u = C/r.
r ∂r

56 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra
−4 −2 0 2 4
pbhp

−100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Pseudo-steady, radial flow. Mass conservation in cylinder coordinates

1 ∂(ru)
=0 −→ u = C/r.
r ∂r
Integrating around a small cylinder surrounding the well,
I
q= ~ u · ~n ds = −2πhC

56 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra
−4 −2 0 2 4
pbhp

−100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius
rd at which p = pd is constant:
Z pd Z rd
q K dp dp dr
u=− =− −→ 2πKh =
2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

56 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra
−4 −2 0 2 4
pbhp

−100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius
rd at which p = pd is constant:
Z pd Z rd
q K dp dp dr
u=− =− −→ 2πKh =
2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

Solution

2πKh

q= pd − pbh
µ ln(rd /rw )

56 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra
−4 −2 0 2 4
pbhp

−100 −80 −60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius
rd at which p = pd is constant:
Z pd Z rd
q K dp dp dr
u=− =− −→ 2πKh =
2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

Solution (volumetric average pressure p = pa at ra = 0.472rd )

2πKh
2πKh

q= pd − pbh =
pa − pbh
µ ln(rd /rw ) µ ln(rd /rw ) − 0.75

56 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model
pN

Producer
pW p pE
Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y
pS

Repeated five-spot −→ symmetric solution. Discretize Poisson’s equation:

Kh  qµ
4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→
µ 4Kh

57 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model
pN

Producer
pW p pE
Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y
pS

Repeated five-spot −→ symmetric solution. Discretize Poisson’s equation:

Kh  qµ
4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→
µ 4Kh
Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks
qµ
qµ
p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw −
2πKh 4Kh

57 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model
pN

Producer
pW p pE
Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y
pS

Repeated five-spot −→ symmetric solution. Discretize Poisson’s equation:

Kh  qµ
4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→
µ 4Kh
Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks
qµ qµ qµ
ln e−π/2 ∆x/rw



p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw − = pbh +
2πKh 4Kh 2πKh

57 / 66
Wells: analytic subscale model
pN

Producer
pW p pE
Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y
pS

Repeated five-spot −→ symmetric solution. Discretize Poisson’s equation:

Kh  qµ
4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→
µ 4Kh
Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks
qµ qµ qµ
ln e−π/2 ∆x/rw



p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw − = pbh +
2πKh 4Kh 2πKh
Peaceman’s formula:
2πKh π
re = e− 2

p p
q=
p − pbh , ∆x∆y ≈ 0.20788 ∆x∆y
µ ln re /rw

57 / 66
Wells: many complications

There are several known extensions to Peaceman’s well model:

p
Diagonal permeability tensor K → Kx Ky
Rectangular grid cells (more complex formula for re )
Horizontal wells, off-centered wells, multiple wells, . . .
Near-well effects (permeability increase/reduction)
Other grid types and discretization schemes
Despite obvious limiting assumptions, Peaceman’s model is used rather
uncritically in industry. Need for more accurate/robust/versatile models. . .
In general: need to describe flow within wellbore and annulus, downhole
equipment, surface facilities, control strategies (choking, reinjection) involving
complex logic, . . .

58 / 66
Multisegment wells

More accurate modelling: In nodes:

– Network models – pressure p
– Represent annulus – mass fractions xm
w,

– Flow inside wellbore xm m

o , xg

– (Autonomous) inflow control devices In segments:

– Artificial lift, etc – mass rates v m

59 / 66
Multisegment wells

More accurate modelling: In nodes:

– Network models – pressure p
– Represent annulus – mass fractions xm
w,

– Flow inside wellbore xm m

o , xg

– (Autonomous) inflow control devices In segments:

– Artificial lift, etc – mass rates v m

Discrete mass conservation in nodes:

V
xc ρ − x0c ρ div vcm qcm



+ − =0
|∆t {z } | {z } |{z}
in- and outflux to source term (well
accumulation
neighboring nodes control, connections)

Discrete pressure drop equations in segments:

h v m , uw(ρ), uw(µ) = 0


grad(p) − g avg(ρ) grad(z) −
| {z } | {z }
gravity term heuristic pressure
drop term
59 / 66
Outline

1 Introduction to petroleum reservoirs

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

4 Two-phase incompressible flow

5 Multiphase compressible flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

60 / 66
Black-oil: discretization and linearization

Discretization: backward Euler in time, two-point flux-approximation

with upstream mobility in space.
∂E i
Newton’s method for nonlinear equation: δx = E(xi )
∂xi
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
∂po ∂sw ∂sg ∂sg s
∂qw ∂qos ∂qgs ∂pbh

Eo
Eg

Ew Eqw
s

Eqos

Eqgs
Eg
Ectrl

61 / 66
Black-oil: solution strategies

Solution procedure
1. Eliminate well variables qos , qw
s
, qgs ,
and pbh
2. Set first block-row equal to sum of
block-rows, leave out rows that may
harm diagonal dominance in block
(1,1)
3. Set up two-stage preconditioner:
– M−11 : solves pressure subsystem
– M−12 : ILU0 decomposition of the
full system
4. Solve full system with GMRES using
preconditioner M−12 M1
−1

5. Recover remaining variables

62 / 66
Black-oil: solution strategies

Solution procedure For larger models, pressure subsystem

1. Eliminate well variables qos , qw
s
, qgs , should be solved with algebraic
and pbh multigrid

2. Set first block-row equal to sum of Time-step control

block-rows, leave out rows that may chop if too large changes in
harm diagonal dominance in block variables
(1,1)
chop if convergence failure
3. Set up two-stage preconditioner:
more advanced logic to maintain
– M−11 : solves pressure subsystem targeted iteration count
– M−12 : ILU0 decomposition of the
full system Elaborate logic for well control and
4. Solve full system with GMRES using surface facilities
preconditioner M−12 M1
−1

5. Recover remaining variables

62 / 66
Example: SPE 9 benchmark
Grid with 9000 cells
1 water injector, rate controlled, switches to bhp
25 producers, oil-rate controlled, most switch to bhp
Appearance of free gas due to pressure drop
Production rates lowered to 1/15 between days 300
and 360

7
x 10 PROD13 PROD13
2.5
2.5
Gas rate (m3/s)
Pressure (Pa)

2 2

1.5
1.5
1

1 0.5

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time (years) Time (years)
7
x 10 PROD18 PROD18
2.5 2.5
MRST
ECLIPSE 2
Gas rate (m3/s)
Pressure (Pa)

2
1.5

1.5 1
MRST
1 0.5
ECLIPSE
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time (years) Time (years)

63 / 66
Example: the Voador field
prod 7

South wing of the reservoir (Petrobras) prod 3

Gradients obtained through adjoint simulations prod 6

prod 1 prod 2
Validate: open-source / commercial simulator: prod 4, 5 injector

– 20 years of historic data

– virtually identical results
– main challenge: needed to reverse-engineer
description of wells. . .

producer 1 injector producer 1 injector

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
producer 2 producer 3 producer 2 producer 3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
producer 4 producer 5 producer 4 producer 5

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
producer 6 producer 7 producer 6 producer 7

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

bottom-hole pressure water rate 64 / 66

Example: effect of modeling annulus

4
×10

6
Gas production [Mscf/day]

3 Uniform, no annulus
Uniform, annulus
Thief zones, no annulus
2 Thief zones, annulus
SPE10, no annulus
SPE10, annulus
1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Time [days]
65 / 66
Summary

Geological models: complex unstructured grids

having many obscure challenges
Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic
PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character
Well models: subscale models, complex logic,
strong impact on flow
Validation and availability in software

Challenges:
Main point of grid: describe stratigraphy and structural
architecture, i.e., not chosen freely to maximize accu-
racy of numerical discretization
Industry standard: corner-point / stratigraphic grids
Grid topology is generally unstructured, with non-
neighboring connections
Geometry: deviates (strongly) from box shape, high
aspect ratios, many faces/neighbors, small faces, . . .
Potential inconsistencies since faces are bilinear or
tetrahedral surfaces

66 / 66
Summary
1
krw
0.9
kro Geological models: complex unstructured grids
0.8 krog
k
having many obscure challenges
row
0.7 k
rg
Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic
0.6
PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character
0.5

0.4 Well models: subscale models, complex logic,

0.3 strong impact on flow
0.2
Validation and availability in software
0.1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Challenges:
Delicate balances: viscous forces, gravity, capillary, . . .
Strong coupling between ’elliptic’ and ’hyperbolic’ vari-
ables (small scale: capillary, large scale: gravity)
Large variation in time constants and coupling
Orders-of-magnitude variations in permeability
Parameters with discontinuous derivatives
Path-dependence: hysteretic parameters
Sensitive to subtle changes in interpolation of tabulated
physical data
Monotonicity and mass conservation
66 / 66
Summary
producer 1 injector

Geological models: complex unstructured grids

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
having many obscure challenges
producer 2 producer 3

Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
producer 4 producer 5
Well models: subscale models, complex logic,
strong impact on flow
0 2000 4000
producer 6
6000 8000 0 2000 4000
producer 7
6000 8000
Validation and availability in software

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Challenges:
prod 7
Near singular radial flow in near-well zone (much larger
prod 3
flow than inside reservoir)
Induce nonlocal connections
prod 6

prod 1 prod 2 Completely different multiphase flow inside wellbore

prod 4, 5 injector
Coupling to surface facilities
Abrupt changes in driving forces
Control strategies with intricate logic which is highly
sensitive to state values
.
.
.

66 / 66
Summary
producer 1 injector

Geological models: complex unstructured grids

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
having many obscure challenges
producer 2 producer 3

Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
producer 4 producer 5
Well models: subscale models, complex logic,
strong impact on flow
0 2000 4000
producer 6
6000 8000 0 2000 4000
producer 7
6000 8000
Validation and availability in software

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Challenges:
prod 7
New methods tend to be immature and too simplified
prod 3 Researchers: incompressible flow and explicit methods.
Industry: implicit methods for compressible flow
prod 6

prod 1 prod 2 Industry relies on a few software providers and has

prod 4, 5 injector strong faith in software with (undocumented) safe-
guards and algorithmic choices
Oil companies seldom give away data
Realistic models involve a large number of intricate de-
tails (Eclipse has 2–3000 keywords. . . )

66 / 66