COMPARISON OF TWO TIME-STEPPING METHODS FOR COMPOSITIONAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION

COMPARISON OF TWO TIME-STEPPING METHODS FOR COMPOSITIONAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION

Fernandes, B. R. B.; Varavei, A.; Marcondes, F.; Sepehrnoori, K.

Full Article:

In this paper, a comparison of two compositional reservoir simulation formulations is presented. The first formulation is based on an implicit pressure and explicit concentration (IMPEC) procedure and the second formulation uses an implicit pressure and implicit saturation (IMPSAT) for the solution of the governing partial differential equations. Our main goal was to compare the formulations in terms of computational times for solving 2D and 3D compositional reservoir simulation case studies. Both single point upstream weighting and third-order schemes for discretization of the partial differential equations were implemented for the formulations. The computational results for the abovementioned formulations for several case studies involving homogeneous and heterogeneous reservoirs are presented in this paper.

In this paper, a comparison of two compositional reservoir simulation formulations is presented. The first formulation is based on an implicit pressure and explicit concentration (IMPEC) procedure and the second formulation uses an implicit pressure and implicit saturation (IMPSAT) for the solution of the governing partial differential equations. Our main goal was to compare the formulations in terms of computational times for solving 2D and 3D compositional reservoir simulation case studies. Both single point upstream weighting and third-order schemes for discretization of the partial differential equations were implemented for the formulations. The computational results for the abovementioned formulations for several case studies involving homogeneous and heterogeneous reservoirs are presented in this paper.

Palavras-chave:

DOI: 10.5151/meceng-wccm2012-18202

Referências bibliográficas

• [1] Watts, J. W., “A Compositional Formulation Based on Pressure and Saturation Equations.” SPE Reservoir Engineering Journal 1, No 4, 243-252, 1986.
• [2] Ács, G., Doleschall, S., and Farkas, E., “General Purpose Compositional Model.” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. 25, No 4, 543-553, 1985.
• [3] Chang, Y. B., “Development and Application of An Equation of State Compositional Simulator.” (PhD. Thesis) Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 1990.
• [4] Spillette, A. G., Hillestad, J. G., and Stone, H. L., “A High-Stability Sequential Solution Approach to Reservoir Simulation.” Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1973.
• [5] Branco, C. M. and Rodriguez, F., “A Semi-Implicit Formulation for Compositional Reservoir Simulation.” SPE Advanced Technology Series 4, No 1, 171-177, 1996.
• [6] Chang, Y. B., Pope, G. A., and Sepehrnoori, K., “A higher-order finite-difference compositional simulator.” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 5, No 1, 35-50, 1990.
• [7] Runbin, B. and Blunt, M. J., “Higher-Order Implicit Flux Limiting Schemes for Black Oil Simulation.” 11th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, USA, 219-229, 1991.

Como citar:

Fernandes, B. R. B.; Varavei, A.; Marcondes, F.; Sepehrnoori, K.; "COMPARISON OF TWO TIME-STEPPING METHODS FOR COMPOSITIONAL RESERVOIR SIMULATION", p-932-951. In: In Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Computational Mechanics [= Blucher Mechanical Engineering Proceedings, v. 1, n. 1]. São Paulo: Blucher, 2014.
ISSN 23580828, DOI 10.5151/meceng-wccm2012-18202