Upscaling of Geocellular Models for Flow Simulation Louis J. Durlofsky Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University ChevronTexaco ETC, San Ramon, CA.

Download Report

Transcript Upscaling of Geocellular Models for Flow Simulation Louis J. Durlofsky Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University ChevronTexaco ETC, San Ramon, CA.

Upscaling of Geocellular Models for
Flow Simulation
Louis J. Durlofsky
Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University
ChevronTexaco ETC, San Ramon, CA
Acknowledgments
• Yuguang Chen (Stanford University)
• Mathieu Prevost (now at Total)
• Xian-Huan Wen (ChevronTexaco)
• Yalchin Efendiev (Texas A&M)
2
(photo by Eric Flodin)
Outline
• Issues and existing techniques
• Adaptive local-global upscaling
• Velocity reconstruction and multiscale solution
• Generalized convection-diffusion transport model
• Upscaling and flow-based grids (3D unstructured)
• Outstanding issues and summary
3
Requirements/Challenges for Upscaling
• Accuracy & Robustness
– Retain geological realism in flow simulation
– Valid for different types of reservoir heterogeneity
– Applicable for varying flow scenarios (well conditions)
• Efficiency
Injector
Producer
Producer
Injector
4
Existing Upscaling Techniques
• Single-phase upscaling: flow (Q /p)
– Local and global techniques (k  k* or T *)
• Multiphase upscaling: transport (oil cut)
– Pseudo relative permeability model (krj  krj*)
• “Multiscale” modeling
– Upscaling of flow (pressure equation)
– Fine scale solution of transport (saturation equation)
5
Local Upscaling to Calculate k*
or
Local
Global domain
Extended Local
Solve (kp)=0 over local region
for coarse scale k * or T *
• Local BCs assumed: constant pressure difference
• Insufficient for capturing large-scale connectivity in
highly heterogeneous reservoirs
6
A New Approach
• Standard local upscaling methods unsuitable for
highly heterogeneous reservoirs
• Global upscaling methods exist, but require global
fine scale solutions (single-phase) and optimization
Adaptive Local-Global Upscaling
• New approach uses global coarse scale solutions to
determine appropriate boundary conditions for local
k* or T * calculations
– Efficiently captures effects of large scale flow
– Avoids global fine scale simulation
7
Adaptive Local-Global Upscaling (ALG)
Well-driven global coarse flow
y
Local fine scale calculation
Coarse pressure
Interpolated pressure
gives local
LocalBCs
BCs
Coarse scale properties
x
k* or T * and upscaled well index
• Thresholding: Local calculations only in high-flow
regions (computational efficiency)
8
Thresholding in ALG
Regions for
Local calculations
Permeability
Streamlines
• Identify high-flow region,
•
•
Coarse blocks
|q c|
|q
>  (  0.1)
c|
max
Avoids nonphysical coarse scale properties (T *=q c/p c)
Coarse scale properties efficiently adapted to a given
flow scenario
9
Multiscale Modeling
• Solve flow on coarse scale, reconstruct fine
scale v, solve transport on fine scale
S
*
c
   ( vS )  0
  k  p   0
t
• Active research area in reservoir simulation:
– Dual mesh method (FD): Ramè & Killough (1991),
Guérillot & Verdière (1995), Gautier et al. (1999)
– Multiscale FEM: Hou & Wu (1997)
– Multiscale FVM: Jenny, Lee & Tchelepi (2003, 2004)
10
Reconstruction of Fine Scale Velocity
  k  p   0
*
c
Partition coarse
S
   ( vS )  0
t
flux to fine scale
Upscaling, global
coarse scale flow
Solve local fine scale
(kp)=0
Reconstructed
fine scale v
(downscaling)
• Readily performed in upscaling framework
11
Results: Performance of ALG
Pressure Distribution
Channelized layer (59) from 10th SPE CSP
Averaged fine
Upscaling 220  60  22  6
25.0
Q (Fine scale) = 20.86
Flow rate for specified
pressure
ALG, Error: 4%
20.0
Coarse: extended local
• Fine scale: Q = 20.86
15.0
Q
• Extended T *: Q = 7.17
10.0
Extended local,
•5.0 ALG
upscaling: Q = 20.01
Error: 67%
0.0
0
1
2
Iteration
3
4
Coarse: Adaptive local-global
12
Results: Multiple Channelized Layers
10th SPE CSP
Extended local T *
Adaptive local-global T *
13
Another Channelized System
100 realizations
120  120  24  24
k * only
T * + NWSU
ALG T *
14
Results: Multiple Realizations
Fine scale
BHP (PSIA)
100 realizations
mean
90% conf. int.
Time (days)
• 100 realizations conditioned to seismic and well data
• Oil-water flow, M=5
• Injector: injection rate constraint, Producer: bottom hole
pressure constraint
• Upscaling: 100  100  10  10
15
Results: Multiple Realizations
Coarse: Adaptive local-global
BHP (PSIA)
BHP (PSIA)
Coarse: Purely local upscaling
Time (days)
Time (days)
Mean (coarse scale)
Mean (fine scale)
90% conf. int. (coarse scale)
90% conf. int. (fine scale)
16
Results (Fo): Channelized System
Oil cut from reconstruction
Fractional Flow Curve
1.2
1
220
 60  22  6
0.8
ALG T *
Fo 0.6
Flow rates
• Fine scale: Q = 6.30
• Extended T *: Q = 1.17
Extended local T *
0.4
0.2
Fine scale
0
0
0.2
0.4 PVI 0.6
0.8
1
• ALG upscaling: Q = 6.26
17
Results (Sw): Channelized System
1.0
0.5
0.0
Fine scale streamlines
Fine scale Sw (220  60)
Reconstructed Sw from
Reconstructed Sw from
extended local T * (22  6)
ALG T * (22  6)
18
Results for 3D Systems (SPE 10)
50 channelized layers, 3 wells
pinj=1, pprod=0
Typical layers
P1
P2
I
Upscale from
6022050  124410
using different methods
19
Results for Well Flow Rates - 3D
4000
Fine
Standard k*
T*+NWSU
ALG
3500
Well Rate
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
I
P1
P2
Average errors
• k* only: 43%
• Extended T* + NWSU: 27%
• Adaptive local-global: 3.5%
20
Results for Transport (Multiscale) - 3D
Producer 2
Producer 1
fine scale
Fo
ALG
T*
local T * w/nw
Fo
standard k*
standard k*
local T * w/nw
PVI
•
fine scale
ALG T *
PVI
Quality of transport calculation depends on the
accuracy of the upscaling
21
Velocity Reconstruction versus
Subgrid Modeling
• Multiscale methods carry fine and coarse grid
information over the entire simulation
• Subgrid modeling methods capture effects of fine
grid velocity via upscaled transport functions:
- Pseudoization techniques
- Modeling of higher moments
- Generalized convection-diffusion model
22
Pseudo Relative Permeability Models
•
Coarse scale pressure and saturation equations of same
form as fine scale equations
• Pseudo functions may vary in each block and may be
directional (even for single set of krj in fine scale model)
   (x, S )k  p   0 ,
*
c
*
c
S c
   F* ( x , S c )  0
t
*
k rw
*
k
* ( x, S c ) =
 ro , Fi*  v ic f i * ( x, S c )
 w μo
( k ) μw
fi (S )  *
( k rw )i μw + ( k ro* )i μo
*
c
*
rw i
*  upscaled function
c
 coarse scale p, S
23
Generalized Convection-Diffusion
Subgrid Model for Two-Phase Flow
•
Pseudo relative permeability description is convenient but
incomplete, additional functionality required in general
•
Generalized convection-diffusion model introduces new
coarse scale terms
- Form derives from volume averaging and
homogenization procedures
- Method is local, avoids need to approximate vi(x)vj ( y )
- Shares some similarities with earlier stochastic
approaches of Lenormand & coworkers (1998, 1999)
24
Generalized Convection-Diffusion Model
•
Coarse scale saturation equation:
S c
   G(x, S c )    D(x, S c )  S c 
t
(modified convection m
and diffusion D terms)
G(x, S c )  v c f ( S c )  m(x, S c )
•
Coarse scale pressure equation:
  * (x, S c )k *  p c   0
“primitive” term
GCD term
*   ( S c )  W1 (x, S c )  W2 (x, S c )  S c
(modified form for total
mobility, Sc dependence)
25
Calculation of GCD Functions
•
D and W2 computed over purely local domain:
D( S )   S  v f ( S )  vf ( S )
p=1
S=1
p=0
(D and W2 account for
local subgrid effects)
• m and W1 computed using extended local domain:
m( S )  v f ( S )  vf ( S )  D( S )   S
(m and W1 - subgrid effects due
to longer range interactions)
target coarse block
26
Solution Procedure
•
Generate fine model (100  100) of prescribed parameters
•
Form uniform coarse grid (10  10) and compute k* and
directional GCD functions for each coarse block
•
Compute directional pseudo relative permeabilities via total
mobility (Stone-type) method for each block
•
Solve saturation equation using second order TVD scheme,
first order method for simulations with pseudo krj
fine grid: lx  lz
Lx = Lz
27
Oil Cuts for M =1 Simulations
Oil Cut
lx = 0.25, lz= 0.01, s =2, side to side flow
 100 x 100
 10 x 10 (GCD)
 10 x 10 (primitive)
 10 x 10 (pseudo)
PVI
•
GCD and pseudo models agree closely with fine scale
(pseudoization technique selected on this basis)
28
Results for Two-Point Geostatistics
• Diffusive effects only
x =0.05,  y = 0.01, slogk = 2.0
10
5
0
100x100  10x10, Side Flow
29
Results for Two-Point Geostatistics (Cont’d)
• Permeability with longer correlation length
x =0.5,  y = 0.05, slogk = 2.0
10
5
0
100x100  10x10, Side Flow
30
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M =1)
lx = 0.25, lz= 0.01, s =2
p=1
S=1
 100 x 100
 10 x 10 (GCD)
lx = 0.25, lz= 0.01, s =2
 10 x 10 (primitive)
 10 x 10 (pseudo)
p=0
Oil Cut
0  t  0.8 PVI
p=0
p=1
S=1
t > 0.8 PVI
PVI
31
Corner to Corner Flow (M = 5)
Oil Cut
Total Rate
lx = 0.2, lz= 0.02, s =1.5
PVI
 100 x 100
 10 x 10 (GCD)
 10 x 10 (pseudo)
PVI
• Pseudo model shows considerable error, GCD model
provides comparable agreement as in side to side flow
32
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M = 5)
Oil Cut
Total Rate
lx = 0.2, lz= 0.02, s =1.5
PVI
 100 x 100
 10 x 10 (GCD)
 10 x 10 (pseudo)
PVI
• Pseudo model overpredicts oil recovery, GCD model
in close agreement
33
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M = 5)
Oil Cut
Total Rate
lx = 0.5, lz= 0.02, s =1.5
PVI
 100 x 100
 10 x 10 (GCD)
 10 x 10 (pseudo)
PVI
• GCD model underpredicts peak in oil cut, otherwise
tracks fine grid solution
34
Combine GCD with ALG T* Upscaling
Coarse scale flow:
Pseudo functions:
GCD
model:
  *k*  p c   0
* ( S c )
* (S c , S c )
T * from ALG, dependent on global flow
*, m(S c) and D(S c)
• Consistency between T * and * important for highly
heterogeneous systems
35
ALG + Subgrid Model for Transport (GCD)
• Stanford V model (layer 1)
• Upscaling: 100130  1013
• Transport solved on coarse scale
t < 0.6 PVI
t  0.6 PVI
flow rate
oil cut
36
Unstructured Modeling - Workflow
fine model
upscaling
coarse model
gridding
info. maps
Gocad
interface
flow simulation
flow simulation
diagnostic
37
Numerical Discretization Technique
k
Primal and
dual grids
i
• CVFE method:
j
– Locally conservative; flux on a face expressed as linear
combination of pressures
– Multiple point and two point flux approximations
qij = a pi + b pj + c pk + ... or qij = Tij ( pi - pj )
• Different upscaling techniques for MPFA and TPFA
38
3D Transmissibility Upscaling (TPFA)
Primal grid
connection
Dual cells
p=1
fitted
extended
regions
Tij*=
p=0
-
<qij>
<pj> - <pi>
cell j
cell i
39
Grid Generation: Parameters
• Specify flow-diagnostic
cumulative frequency
1
Pb
• Grid aspect ratio
• Grid resolution constraint:
Pa
– Information map (flow rate, tb)
– Pa and Pb , sa and sb
a
min
b
property
– N (number of nodes)
max
resolution constraint
Sb
Sa
min
a
property
b
max
40
Unstructured Gridding and Upscaling
velocity
grid density
Upscaled k*
(from Prevost, 2003)
41
Flow-Based Upscaling: Layered System
• Layered system: 200 x 100 x 50 cells
p=1
p=0
1
0. 5
0.25
• Upscale permeability and transmissibility
• Run k*-MPFA and T*-TPFA for M=1
• Compute errors in Q/p and L1 norm of Fw
42
Flow-Based Upscaling: Results
6 x 6 x 13 = 468 nodes
8 x 8 x 18 = 1152 nodes
1
1
Reference (fine)
TPFA
MPFA
0.8
Fw
0.8
Fw
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0
0
PVI
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
PVI
error in Fw
error in Q/p
TPFA
7.6%
-1.2%
MPFA
17.9%
-25.2%
error in Fw
error in Q/p
TPFA
16.8%
-5.9%
MPFA
21.3%
-31.7%
43
(from M. Prevost, 2003)
Layered Reservoir: Flow Rate Adaptation
sa
• Grid density from
flow rate
log |V|
grid size
sb
• Flow results
1
reference
uniform coarse (N=21x11x11=2541)
flow-rate adapted (N=1394)
0.8
0.6
Fw
F
w
Qc=0.99
0.4
Qc=0.82
(Qf = 1.0)
0.2
0
0
(from Prevost, 2003)
0.2
0.4
PVI
PVI
0.6
0.8
1
44
Summary
• Upscaling is required to generate realistic coarse
scale models for reservoir simulation
• Described and applied a new adaptive local-global
method for computing T *
• Illustrated use of ALG upscaling in conjunction with
multiscale modeling
• Described GCD method for upscaling of transport
• Presented approaches for flow-based gridding and
upscaling for 3D unstructured systems
45
Future Directions
• Hybridization of various upscaling techniques
(e.g., flow-based gridding + ALG upscaling)
• Further development for 3D unstructured systems
• Linkage of single-phase gridding and upscaling
approaches with two-phase upscaling methods
• Dynamic updating of grid and coarse properties
• Error modeling
46