Sie sind auf Seite 1von 28

1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN GEOMECHANICS


Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256 (DOI: 10.1002/nag.174)

A fully coupled hydro-thermo-poro-mechanical model for black


oil reservoir simulation
W. K. S. Pao, R. W. Lewis* R and I. Masters
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Wales Swansea, Swansea SA2-8PP, U.K.

SUMMARY
A fully coupled formulation of a hydro-thermo-poro-mechanical model for a three-phase black oil reservoir
model is presented. The model is based upon the approach proposed by one of the authors which fully
couples geomechanical e!ects to multiphase #ow. Their work is extended here to include non-isothermal
e!ects. The gas phase contribution to the energy equation has been neglected based on a set of assumptions.
The coupled formulation given herein di!ers in several ways when compared to the earlier work and an
attempt is made to link the #ow based formulation and mixture theory. The Finite Element Method is
employed for the numerical treatment and essential algorithmic implementation is discussed. Numerical
examples are presented to provide further understanding of the current methodology. Copyright  2001
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS:

coupled model; petroleum reservoir; hydro-thermo-poro-mechanical; "nite element

1. INTRODUCTION
As recognised by Gutierrez and Lewis [1], the role of geomechanics in petroleum reservoir
engineering is becoming increasingly important as deeper formations are detected and explored.
The stress, #uid pressure and temperature conditions encountered at large depth give rise
to a range of situations where conventional reservoir modelling fails to provide an accurate
analysis [2].
Since the pioneering work to Biot [3] on isothermal consolidation theory, many advances has
been made by various researchers with applications in civil engineering and hydrology. By
drawing the analogy between thermoelasticity and poroelasticity, the Biot equations were
extended by many workers to include thermal e!ect, e.g. References [4}7]. A direct application of
geomechanics to hydrocarbon reservoirs is relatively rare but can be tracked in the earlier work of

* Correspondence to: R. W. Lewis, Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Wales Swansea,


Swansea SA2-8PP, U.K.
R E-mail: R.W. Lewis@swansea.ac.uk
Contract/grant sponsor: Fractures Reservoir Project, University of Wales (under the control of Norwegian Geotechnical
Institute) BP-AMOCO, ELF and Norwegian Research Council

Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 11 November 1999


Revised 2 March 2001

1230
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Geertsma [8,9], Gassman [10] and later, by other (see References [11}24]). A more exhaustive
literature review on the subject can be found in Lewis and Schre#er [25].
Based on the above literature study, we see that, although geomechanics aspects have been
applied to petroleum reservoirs since 1957, these models only make use of the pore compressibility as a sole coupling factor. The heuristicity of this approach cannot be justi"ed
analytically or rationally. On the other hand, for coupled formulations, a discrepancy of opinion
still exists among reservoir engineers, who prefer #ow based formulation rather than those based
on the theory of mixtures, as discussed by Chen and Teufel [26]. We therefore feel that there is
a need to settle this problematic issue and provide a consistent geomechanics integration into
so-called &traditional' petroleum reservoir simulators. Also, we are of the opinion that extending
this rationale to take into account thermoelastic e!ects is highly desirable.

2. PRELIMINARY SUPPOSITION
In a multi-components model, we assume that water, an evolving original heavy crude oil in place
(OOIP) and an organic gaseous phase co-exist in the porous arc. The gaseous phase consists of
both the original organic gas in place ( OGIP) and the fragmentation of long hydrocarbon chains
into shorter components below the bubble point pressure. As far as the gas phase is concerned, no
distinction is made in between these two gas components at the present stage. We further assume
that there are two distinct zones which exist in the porous continua, namely a dominant water}oil
zone and a dominant oil}gas zone. We suppose that in the water}oil zone, the system is
water-wet, while in the oil}gas zone, the system is oil-wet.
According to standard petrology for immiscible #uids, each phase will occupy a partial pore
volume S "d / such that
G
N G
N
S #S #S "1




(1)

in which S is termed the saturation of phase i. The subscript i"w, o and g denotes water, oil and
G
gaseous phase, respectively.
2.1. Capillary pressure relationship
In order to specify the interacting motion of each phase (not including skeleton constituents), one
requires equations which link the evolution of the partial pressures of each phase to their
saturation values. According to Hassanizadeh and Gray [27], the most practical method in
characterizing this interacting motion is to use an empirical correlation relating the capillary
pressure, p and the saturation, S. In this sense, the correlation may be thought of as being

representative equations which account for all e!ects and processes that in#uence the #uid
distribution. This argument is strongly supported via the Buckingham  analysis carried out by
Slattery [28], and is favourably viewed amongst practicing reservoir engineers [29]. It should be
noted that at the macroscopic level, the capillary pressure is the di!erence of averaged pressures
and not the average of their di!erence.
Following this, we can write
S "F (P ,)
G
G
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(2)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1231

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Partially di!erentiating Equation (2) one obtains, for an oil}water system

(3)

S
S p
p
S 
" 
!  # 
t
t
p
t
 t


(4)

dS
dS
dS
"! ! 
dt
dt
dt

(5)

S
p
S 
p
S
!  # 
" 
p
t
t
 t
t

Similarly, for an oil}gas system,

From Equation (1)

Using Equations (3) and (4), and substituting into Equation (5) results in

 

S
p
S
p
S 
S
p
p
S
"! 
!  ! 
!  !
# 
(6)
p
t
p
t
 t
t
t
t



Simplifying, and letting S "S /p , S "S /p , S "S / and S "S / one

  
  2

2

obtains





 


p
S
p

!  #S
"S

2
t
t
t
t

(7)

S
p
p

"S
!  #S

2
t
t
t
t

(8)

S
p
p
"!S
!  !S
 t

t
t

p
p

!  !(S #S )
2
2 t
t
t

(9)

2.2. Average pore pressure relationship


The e!ective pore pressure, pN , has been de"ned in di!erent ways by many authors based on a set
of arguments. Tortike and Farouq-Ali [30], for example, argued that in a tar sand, the grains are
entirely encapsulated by water and therefore, the water phase pressure is the only in#uencing
mechanism on the skeleton. This argument has been adopted by many researchers, particularly
those in the area of hydrology. Here, we attempt to show a derivation which will be consistent
with those used by petroleum reservoir engineers.
Let p be de"ned as the molar pressure of the #uid in an in"nitesimal pore volume  . Then, the
G

volume averaged pore pressure pN , can be written as
1 A
pN "

p n d
(10)
G 2

 G 
in which n is the total mole number and c is the number of components. The total mode number
2
is related to the mole fraction via

n
x" G
G n
2
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(11)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1232
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

where n is the mole number of species i. Substituting Equation (11) into (10), one obtains
G
n
1 A
p G d
(12)
pN "

G
x

G
 G 
Equation (12) can be written as

n
1 A
p G
pN "
Gx

 G
G

d

(13)




But
A
d" 
G


G
Substituting Equation (14) into (13) yields

(14)

n
1 A
p G
pN "
(15)
Gx G

G
 G
However S " / . Realising that n /x "1, and replacing i"w, o, g, one obtains
G
G 
G G
pN "S p #S p #S p
(16)
 
 
 
This derivation is consistent with the thermodynamic pressure usually employed in physical
chemistry. On totally di!erentiating Equation (16), we have
dpN "S dp #p dS #S dp #p dS #S dp #p S
 
 
 
 
 
 
Making use of the relationships from Equations (7)}(9) and simplifying by de"ning
S"S !p S !p S


 
 
S "S #p S


 
S"S #p S


 
S "p S !p S
2
 2
 2

(17)

(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)

one obtains
pN "S p #S p #S p #S 
(22)
 
 
 
2
Equation (22) has been obtained by considering small perturbation hypothesis in which the
convective component is assumed to be zero.

3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOVERNING EQUATIONS


3.1. Equilibrium equation
The starting point of the equilibrium equation is the skeleton momemtum balance, which reads
div !f"0
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(23)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1233

in which  is the total stress and f represents the external forces. The total stress is related to the
e!ective stress via the following state law:
"!IpN

(24)

where the #uid is assumed to be mechanically perfect as indicated by a second order identity
tensor, I, in front of the volume averaged pore pressure, pN . From Equations (23) and (24), two
options exist. One can either formulate the equilibrium equation in terms of the total or e!ective
stress. Here, we shall choose the e!ective stress formulation. The constitutive equation relating
the e!ective stress to the strain is given by Lewis and Schre#er [25] as
d"C : (d!d !d )
(25)

2
when C is the drained consistent tangent of the skeleton and  is the total strain of the skeleton.
The quantity  represents the volumetric strains caused by uniform compression of the skeleton

matrix due to a con"ning pressure, which can be given as
I
dpN
(26)
d "!
N
3K

where K is the bulk modulus of the matrix, which may well be di!erent from the bulk modulus of

the skeleton. The quantity  is the volumetric thermal strain of the skeleton due to temperature
2
changes, i.e.,
I
d "  d
2 3 

(27)

Here,  is the thermal coe$cient of expansion of the skeleton and d is de"ned w.r.t. a reference

temperature at a reference con"guration. Making use of the state equations given by (22),
(24)}(27), Equation (23) reads
div C : !S  ) grad p !S  ) grad p





!S  ) grad p !  C : I ) grad !f"0

 3

(28)

where  is the usual Biot coe$cient. If C is isotropic, we have


K
"1!
K

where K is the skeleton bulk modulus. However, if C is anisotropic, then
C:I
"I!
3K

(29)

(30)

3.2. Continuity equations


There are many ways to derive the volumetric balance equations for the #uids. One of those has
been previously described by Pao et al. [31]. Here, we cast the volumetric equations in
a terminology which is familiar to petroleum reservoir engineers.
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1234
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Consider a region of rock with bulk volume  , whose pore space contains an amount of #uid

mass M . If the density of this particular #uid is denoted by , the volume occupied by this #uid is
G
G
M / . If the pore volume is partially saturated with the #uid phase i, the pore volume occupied by
G G
this #uid is therefore,

 

M
G
(31)

G
where Equation (31) is expressed at reservoir conditions. In order to express Equation (31) into
the stock tank conditions, stc, w.r.t. the hydrocarbon component, we write
d (S  )"d
G 

 

MB
G G
(32)

'
where B is the formation volume factor and is the density of phase i at stc. Totally
G
'
di!erentiating Equation (32), and multiplying both sides by gives
'
S d #  dS "B dM #M dB
(33)
' G

'  G
G
G
G G
Dividing Equation (33) by  , we obtain

d
B dM

M
" G
G!  dS # G dB .
S
(34)
'
G 
G
' G 





where
d (S  )"d
G 

 "




(35)

and
M
G"
S
(36)
G '


where
is the porosity. It should be noted that in Equation (36), the #uid mass is expressed at stc,
and not at the reservoir condition. Equation (34) describes a very interesting relationship, where
the partial pore volumetric change per unit of bulk volume can be broken into three parts on the
RHS. The "rst term is due to the additional #uid mass dM that moves into the pore volume per
G
unit of bulk volume. The second term is due to the extraction of the #uid mass from the pore
volume due to the change in saturation dS , a phenomena known as drainage. Finally, the third
G
term is due to the compression of the #uid phase i that is already in that region.
Following Biot's methodology, we introduce
dM
G
d
"
(37)
G


Substituting expressions (35), (36) and (37) into Equation (34) and rearranging will yield the
following:



d


1
# '
dS #
S d
d
" ' S
G
'
G
G B G 
B
B
G

G
G
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(38)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1235

Now, the quantity dS has been de"ned previously and the derivative of B is easily determined.
G
G
However, we need an expression for d / . Let us write
 

d
"d
! d
(39)





According to Charlez [2]

1 1
1
dpN
d
"
!
(d N #dpN )!
(40)

K K
K




in which K is the bulk modulus of the skeleton whose expression can be obtained from the
consistent tangent matrix C. The value of K has to be determined from the jacketted test of the

core samples. In Equation (40), is the so-called con"ning total stress, whose expression can be
obtained via
1
" tr 
3

(41)

Multiplying (40) by  / , one gets


 
d
1
1
dpN
" !
(d N #dpN )!


K K
K



We now make use of the mean total stress equation, i.e.

K
dpN
d "d ! 1!
K

Substituting Equation (43) into (42), one "nally "nds the following relationship:

d
"

1
1
1
K
!
d #
!
dpN
K K
K
K


(42)

(43)

(44)

and
d
dpN
"
(45)

K


It should be noted that Equation (44) is signi"cantly di!erent from the commonly accepted
relationship used in an uncoupled petroleum reservoir simulation, (see e.g. References [16, 30]),
which is given by
d
"c dpN
(46)

where c is commonly known as the pore compressibility. The validity of equation (46) is doubtful

since it is in fact a linear equation relating
to pN . Experimental evidence, however, suggests that
no such relationship exists, see Figure 1. Equation (44) can also be cast, using the terminology of
Lewis and Schre#er [25], as
1
1
1
I : C : d!
I : C : I dpN #
dpN
d
"d(tr )!
3K
9K
K



Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(47)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1236
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 1. Evolution of con"ning yield pressure versus porosity, adapted from Reference [32].

Note that if K "R, then the evolution of


is simply the volumetric strain of the skeleton.

Therefore, Equation (39) will not, after taking into account the volumetric thermal strain
component, read as

 

d

!

" dtr #
dpN !(!
)  d

3
K


(48)

Equation (48) can now be substituted into (38) to give

 




!



1
d
" ' S  dtr #
dpN !(!
)  d # '
dS #
S d
G B G
G
' G
K
3
B
B
G

G
G

(49)

To obtain the volumetric balance equation, we use


div M #mR "q
G
G
G

(50)

where M is the mass #ux vector of phase i, q is the volumetric source/sink and the overdot
G
G
denotes partial time derivative. We now de"ne dm as
G
dM
G
dm "
G


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(51)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1237

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Utilizing the fact that for a small perturbation, d(*)/dt+(*)/t, and substituting Equation (49)
into (51), one obtains

 



div M # ' S tr  #
G B G
G

# '
SQ #
S
G
' G
B
G
By assuming Darcy's law, the mass #ux vector


!

pNQ !(!
)  Q
K
3

1
"q
G
B
G
takes the form


(52)

Kk
(53)
M " ' G grad p
G
G
B
G G
in which K is the intrinsic permeability and k is the relative permeability. Since M , pNQ , SQ and etc.
G
G
G
are all known, the derivation of the #uid phase equation is now straight forward. For the water
phase, we obtain
div

  
   


Kk
S S !

p
 grad p #Q #  

#
S B ! S


  B  t
 B
B
K
 

K

S S !

p
S !
p

# 

#  
# S
B
K
B U t
B
K
t





S
S S !

 S 
#  2
!  (!
) #
S B
#  "0

 2 t
B
B t
B
K



K

  
  

(54)

in which

 

(55)

 

(56)


1
B "
 p B
 
and

1
B "
2  B

The source term is de"ned as
q
Q " 

 
Similarly, the oil equation can be derived as
div

  
  

(57)

Kk
S S !

p

 grad p #Q #  

# S


B
B
K
B  t
 




S S !

p

#  
! (S !S )#
S B




B
B
K
t



Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1238
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

  
 

S p
S !



! 
B
K
B
t



S !

 S 
# 
!(!
) #
S B
#  "0

 2 t
B t
B
K



#

(58)

in which



(59)

 1
B "
2  B




(60)

q
Q" 

 

(61)

 1
B "
 p B
 
and

Similarly, the source term is de"ned as

The gas equation can be given as


div

Kk
R Kk
 grad p #   grad p #Q



B
B
 
 
!

R S p

# S 
#  

B
K
t



S
R

S
!

p

# S
! !  (S !S )#  R #
R S B




   t
B
B
B
K




!

R S

p

# S 
!  # S #
S B




B
B
K
t



!

S

# 
S !(!
) #
S B #  R #
R S B
2

 2
2
  2 t
B
K


!

#
"0
K
t






 
 
 


 

(62)

in which




"

B "
 p

1
,
B
 
R
R "  ,
 p


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

S
RS
#  
B
B



(63)



 1
B "
2  B

R
R " 
2 

(64)
(65)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1239

The source term for the gas reads


q
(66)
Q "  #R Q
 

 
In Equations (62)}(65), R is the volume of the dissolved gas in the oil phase per unit volume of oil

at stc.
Before we proceed, it is important to observe that the formulation provided by Equations (54),
(58) and (62) is valid irrespective of whether the "nal consideration requires a coupled or
uncoupled solution. For an uncoupled model, we need to eliminate the partial time derivative
term of the volumetric strain, i.e. /t. Under the assumption that the rate of change of total
stress is zero, i.e. "constant, we can write, making use of Equation (24)
  IpNQ
div v" "
K K

(67)

where  is the skeleton velocity and an overdot denotes time derivative. Equation (67) can be used
to eliminate the time derivative of the volumetric strain term in Equations (54), (58) and (62)
resulting in a decoupling of the #ow equations from the equilibrium equations.
3.3. Energy balance equation
By enforcing the local postulate that the #uid reaches thermal equilibrium instantaneously with
the reservoir rock, then the only relevant mechanisms of energy transport are conduction and
convection. Neglecting kinetic energy, viscous and intrinsic dissipation, the energy balance on an
in"nitesimal reservoir element can be written as

!div ( grad )# c v ) grad#Q !Q c " ( c)
G  G

G G
t

(68)

in which v "K(k / ) grad p , is the velocity of the #uid phase i. In Equation (68), Q is the
G
PG G
G

external volumetric heat input into the system, e.g. via wellbore heating, etc. The quantity Q c is
G G
the energy density of the #uid phase i entering/leaving the system via a production or injection
well. On the RHS of Equation (68), the quantity c dt d represents the increase, or decrease, of
the internal energy of the system due to a temperature evolution "! . Note that the

intensive quantity has been de"ned with respect to a reference temperature, and in Equation
(68), is taken to be zero. The bulk quantity c in Equation (68) represents an averaged heat

storage capacity of the reservoir system. For a microscale problem, unlike a petroleum reservoir,
e.g. brick drying, the determination of the bulk value of c is possible via experimentation. For
a reservoir, this is impossible as our only window into the reservoir formation is via the outcrops
and cores, drilled via a tiny hole of the wellbore. In addition, the sample size obtained from a "eld
investigation may not be representative due to the chaotic distribution of reservoir material and
the heterogeneity of the formation. In this case, the bulk heat storage capacity has to be expressed
in terms of the heat capacity of the pure substances. The time derivative of the heat capacity can
now be expressed as


( c)" [(1!
) c #S
c #S
c #S
c  ]
 
  
  
  
t
t
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(69)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1240
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

In Equation (69), instantaneous local thermal equilibrium has been enforced. If the time derivative on the RHS of Equation (69) is taken into account, the resulting equation system will be
prohibitively large. A simpli"cation can be made w.r.t. Equation (69), by "rst observing that
; in which the subscript l denotes the liquid phase. For most organic gases, c +c up to




5003F, from 15 to 3000 psia, see Reference [33]. Hence, the heat capacity of the gas phase can be
neglected (the ratio of the heat contributed by gas to the liquid phase is approximately 1 : 1000)
and Equation (69) now reads


( N c)" [(1!
) c #S
c #S
c  ]
 
  
  
t
t

(70)

A consequence of this assumption is that the application of Equation (70) is limited to a speci"c
range of material and conditions. Provided that the saturation of the gas phase is small relative to
the liquid phase (as in most of the cases in black/green oil reserves), this assumption is justi"able.
Following this, the energy equation can be derived as, after taking the time derivative of Equation
(70) and neglecting 
/t, the mechanical heating term
!div ( ) grad )#( c v # c v ) grad
  
  




# (1!
)c

p



 S #S
c  !
c S #
c S
K 
 K
  
   t



# (1!
)c



p
 S#S
c  #
c S !
c S

K 
 K
  
   t



S
S
!
c

# !S
c  !S
c  #
c
   
   
  
  
#(1!
) c #S
c #S
c !(1!
) c 
 
  
  
  
#(1!
)c



 S
#Q !Q c !Q c "0
 K 2 t

 
 


(71)

We may safely ignore the work contribution due to pore evolution and this can be justi"ed by
studying Equation (47), in which if K "R, the magnitude of 
is of the same order of

magnitude as tr .
Equations (28), (54), (58), (62) and (71) represent a set of highly non-linear partial di!erential
equations for three-phase #ow coupled with the consolidation behaviour occurring in a deformable petroleum reservoir. The major non-linearities, i.e. the phase saturation S , relative permeabG
ility k , formation volume factor B , viscosities  and porosity
, are strongly dependent on the
G
G
G
primary unknowns and therefore should be updated at appropriate time intervals. In order to
complete the descriptions of the above governing equations, we need the initial and boundary
conditions. The initial conditions is given by
u"u; p "P; " ;
G
G
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

x at t"0

(72)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1241

on the domain . The boundary conditions can be prescribed as, t;


u"u x3 , n; " x3

O
Kk
G grad p "Q (x, t) x3
p "pN x3p, n;
G
G
G
G
B
G G
"M x3 , ( c v ! grad ) ) n; "q (x, t) x3
2
G G G



(74)

  ",   ",   "



O

G
2


(76)

(73)

(75)

with

in which L.

4. SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL DISCRETISATION


The "nite element discretisation of the balance equations may now be expressed in terms of the
nodal displacements, u; , nodal #uid pressure, i.e. P< , and nodal temperature T< , by using Galerkin's
G
method. The unknowns are related to their nodal values by the following expressions:
u"Nu; ,

"Bu;

(77)

P "NP< ,
"NT<
(78)
G
G
where N and B are standard "nite element shape functions and linear operator, respectively. The
displacement and pressure equations are discretised using the Bubnov}Galerkin method, while
the energy equation is discretised using an upwinded Petrov}Galerkin technique [34].
The application of the "nite element method results in the following semi-discrete equation:
A

dX
#BX"f
dt

(79)

where X is the solution vector and f is the prescribed nodal force and source/sink. Using
a variable- scheme for the time stepping algorithm, one arrives at
(80)
[A#tB]L> X "[A#t(1!)B]L> X #t f L>
R> R>
R
R
R>
where t and n are time step and iteration counter, respectively. The resulting equation is solved
using a relaxation based iterative method, which in its symbolic form can be given as
XL>"X #(1!)XL
(81)
R>
R
R>
in which  is termed the relaxation parameter. If "1, the method is exact relaxation and if
(1 this is known as under relaxation. Over relaxation can only be used when convergence is
ensured. The convergence criteria is set as
XL>!XL
"
XL
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(82)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1242
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

in which  is the prescribed tolerance. The overall algorithm for this procedure is given as
a pseudo code in Box 1.
Box 1. Relaxation based iteration algorithm.
DO WHILE n)NITER
xS>"x #(1!) xL
R>
R
R>
UPDATE Eq. (28), (54), (58), (62) and (71)
SOLVE Eq. (80) for xL>
R>
CHECK xL>!xL /xL )
R>
R>
R>
CHECK % !%)r
IF (CONVER. TRUE.) THEN
EXIT
ELSE
nQn#1
xLQxL>
ENDIF
ENDDO

It is observed that the internal and external #uxes, %  and % are simply Equations (28), (54),
(58), (62) and (71). During the checking procedure, the calculated primary unknowns are used to
evaluate the #ux terms such as , M , etc. to ensure #ux balance.
G
5. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
This section presents some numerical examples to test the validity of our model and compare it
with a known closed form solution.
5.1. Hot water injection
This section serves to validate the #ow side of the formulation, i.e. the #uid and energy #ow
equations, by "xing the displacement degrees of freedom equal to zero. The example considered in
convection caused by movement of #uids inside the reservoir and was "rst proposed by Aktan
and Farouq-Ali [11]. The reservoir has a dimension of 30 ft by 90 ft with a thickness of 100 ft.
Two wells, one injector and one producer, were located at opposite ends of the resevoir and
operated under a constant pressure maintenance of 2200 and 2000 psia, respectively. The
formation was fully penetrated. Incoming water was maintained at a constant temperature of
5503F with an initial reservoir temperature of 1003F. The reservoir was composed of Berea
sandstone. The following equations of state were used in the modelling:
B "B [1#K (p!p)! (! )]





(83)

"2.185/(0.04012#0.0000051547!1)

(84)

and

together with reservoir properties tabulated in Table I.


The results obtained from our simulation are shown in Figures 2 and 3. During the initial
period, the temperature of the reservoir is low and thus the viscosity of the #uid is high. The #ow
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1243

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Table I. Reservoir data for hot water injection case.


Sandstone density, 1b m/ft
Thermal conductivity of sandstone, Btu/D ft 3F
Speci"c heat of sandstone, Bru/1b m 3F
Total pore compressibility, vol/vol psi
Porosity, %
Absolute permeability, darcy
Coe$cient of thermal expansion, vol/vol 3F
Density of #uid at stc, 1b m/ft
Speci"c heat of #uid, Btu/1b m 3F
Coe$cient of thermal expansion for #uid, vol/vol 3F
Fluid compressibility, vol/vol psi

148.95
35
0.2
10;10\
18.67
0)089
15;10\
62.4
1
490;10\
3;10\

Figure 2. Convection and conduction transport for pressure versus distance, compared to
Aktan and Farouq-Ali [11].

within the reservoir is hence subject to viscous resistance. When water is injected, the pressure
builds up immediately, which is obvious at a 20 day period where the pressure at the inlet section
is higher than in the rest of the formation. A continuous injection of #uid at constant temperature
heats up the formation, thus reducing the viscosity of the original #uid in place. The resulting #ow
of #uid o!ers less resistance, hence the pressure drops. A steady state solution is attained after 160
days of injection where the pressure gradient across the formation is the same as the prescribed
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1244
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 3. Convection and conduction transport for temperature versus distance, compared to
Aktan and Farouq-Ali [11].

pressure at the wells. After that period, the formation temperature becomes constant at 5503F. We
observed a slight discrepancy in these "gures, both for the pressure and temperature values when
compared to Reference [11]. A close study of Figure 2 will reveal that the greatest discrepancy
occurred at approximately 100 days, i.e. during the transient period of the reservoir. The pressure
solution from Reference [11] is still within the transient regime at 100 days, while the pressure
solution from our own prediction is already near steady state conditions at that time. The
superiority of our results can be justi"ed by studying the temperature evolution curve at 100 days
in Figure 3, where the overall formation temperature is near to the injection temperature. When
the overall formation is heated up su$ciently, resistance to #ow due to the viscosity changes will
be minimized, hence the pressure across the domain must be equal to the imposed pressure
gradient at the ends of the reservoir. This example suggests that pressure-temperature coupling
becomes signi"cant at the later stages when the overall formation has been heated up su$ciently
by the incoming water. On the other hand, it also illustrates that a leap-frog coupling methodology may cause a lag in the pressure evolution.
Another simulation was also performed by considering the heat transport via conduction
e!ects only, and the results are shown in Figures 4 and 5 for the pressure and temperature versus
distance, respectively. The use of a Petrov}Galerkin upwinding scheme did not e!ect the solution
at all in this case. This might be due to the relatively small Peclet number used for this simulation.
An interesting feature is to note the huge di!erence in the pressure-temperature pro"le in Figures
4 and 5 when convection is neglected.
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1245

Figure 4. Conduction transport for pressure versus distance.

Figure 5. Conduction transport for temperature versus distance.


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1246
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 6. (a) Mandel's problem and (b) Finite element mesh and boundary conditions.

5.2. The non-isothermal mandel problem


The Mandel poroelasticity problem is well known for its non-monotonic pressure increase during
a sudden loading cycle. A typical Mandel problem is illustrated in Figure 6(a).
May researchers have considered this problem extensively, see Reference [35] and the references cited therein. However, no numerical solution has been found for Mandel's thermoporoelasticity problem, as far as the authors' are aware. Here, we intend to investigate the
so-called Mandel e!ects when temperature is also considered. The material properties required
for the isothermal simulation are given as follows: shear modulus G"1;10 N/m, undrained
Poison ratio, v "0.5, drained Poison ratio, v "0.2, K/"1;10\ m/Pa s. The porosity is set


arbitrary as
"0.2. For the non-isothermal test, "0.5 MW/m\K\, C "3 M J m\ K\,
 
C "4 MJ m\ K\,  "3 "0.9;10\ K\. The impermeable plate is assumed to be
 


connected to a "lament which supplies the heat at 1000 MJ D\. The initial temperature was
assumed to be 03C and the temperature at the permeable boundary was assumed to be at
constant room temperature of 203C. A modi"ed Mandel problem is illustrated in Figure 6(a),
while Figure 6(b) shows the "nite elements were mesh used in this example where a"b"1m and
F"1;10 N. Linear quadrilateral elements were used in this case. Since the problem is
symmetrical, only one quarter of the domain was considered. The displacement and excess pore
pressure pro"les at the center of the mesh for both the isothermal and non-isothermal cases are
compared in Figures 7 and 8 while Figure 9 illustrates the temperature increase at the centre of
the mesh.
It was found that the displacements and maximum excess pore pressure values were insensitive
to the temperature e!ects and both the isothermal and non-isothermal cases were almost
identical. Even though convection was taken into account, the maximum excess pore pressure
values are still the same. To further consolidate this supposition, the value  was multiplied by

Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1247

Figure 7. Displacements for isothermal and non-isothermal evolution.

Figure 8. Excess pore pressure for isothermal and non-isothermal evolution.


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1248
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 9. Temperature evolution at the centre of the mesh.

2 and then 3. The maximum excess pore pressures and displacements were still identical. There
may be two reasons which collectively contributed to this abnormal behaviour. Firstly,
the applied loading was too large and dominates the thermal straining. Second, the porosity
used in this example is below the critical porosity, an aspect pointed out by Bai and
Roegiers [36].
Figures 10 and 11 illustrate the pore pressure contours at di!erent time steps while Figures 12
and 13 compare the conductive temperature evolution at di!erent times when convection was
taken into account. It is seen that conduction dominates the heat transport process during the
initial period (Figure 12) while convection takes over during the later stages. This is because in the
beginning, the pore pressure gradient is non-uniform in the domain, thus disrupting the convective mechanism. During the later period, a consistent pressure gradient is established thus
enhancing the convective transport.
5.3. Partially saturated soil column compaction
The last example is very much similar in nature to the previous case except that the problem is
a simpli"ed one-dimensional column undergoing compaction. Two cases are investigated,
a single phase #ow and a two phase #ow. The geometry and boundary conditions used in this case
are shown in Figure 14. The top soil is subjected to a traction loading with an intensity of , and
a prescribed temperature of 503C. The initial stress, pressure and temperature values are
everywhere equal to zero for the single phase case. For the two phase problem, the initial gas
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1249

Figure 10. Excess pore pressure at (a) 0.0001 days and (b) 0.0005 days.

Figure 11. Excess pore pressure at (a) 0.001 days and (b) 0.006 days.

pressure is prescribed as being atmospheric everywhere and the corresponding water phase
pressure can be calculated using Equation (86) with a saturation of 92.0 per cent. The boundary
condition for the gas phase is such that it is equal to the atmospheric pressure at the top surface
and the water saturation there is prescribed as 98.8 per cent. A water saturation value of unity
cannot be prescribed there because of the limitation imposed by Equation (86). All the sides of the
domain are adiabatic and impermeable except the top surface.
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1250
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 12. Temperature evolution at (a) 0.011 days and (b) 0.291 days.

Figure 13. Temperature evolution at (a) 1.291 days and (b) 2.291 days.

The material properties for this example are tabulated in Table II.
However, the following equations of state are employed.
 "661.2 (!229)\ 

Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

(85)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1251

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Figure 14. Finite element mesh and boundary conditions for two phase #ow.
Table II. Material properties for two phase soil column compaction.
Drained elastic modulus, Pa
Drained Poison ratio
Matrix bulk modulus, 1/Pa
Density of soil at stc, kg/m
Thermal conductivity, kJ/m 3C s
Speci"c heat of soil, kJ/kg 3C
Thermal expansion for soil, vol/vol 3C
Porosity, %
Absolute permeability, m
Viscosity of water, Pa s
Residual water saturation, %
Initial water saturation, %
Density of water at stc, kg/m
Thermal expansion for water, vol/vol 3C
Water bulk modulus, 1/Pa
Gas viscosity, Pa s
Density of gas at stc, kg/m

6;10
0)4
0.14;10
2000
1.15
125
1.0;10\
30.0
0.46;10\
1.0;10\
20.0
92.0
1000
2.1;10\
0.43;10\
1.0;10\
1.22

in which is given in kelvin and  as cP. The saturation capillary relationship is obtained from

Brooke and Corey [37], i.e.,
S "S


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1.68;10 
#S

P


(86)

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1252
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

in which S is the maximum saturation in the domain and S is the maximum residual water


saturation. The compressibility of gas is taken into account via the perfect gas law conversion, as
P
B" 
(87)
 P 

in which P"P and "273 K. Note that in this example, R "0, c "0 and the initial gas




saturation is very small relative to the liquid phase, i.e. 8 per cent. With the experience gained
from the Mandel case, the applied traction , has to be small relative to the thermal stress so that
the thermal strain can be observed. This can be estimated heuristically from Equation (28).
Setting p "0, f"0, and applying the divergence theorem to the internal stress, we have
G

 C : I ) grad d
n; d"
(88)

 C

Substituting the values from Table II, we "nd that under isochoric conditions, the thermal stress
will cause an internal stress of approximately 100 KPa. Therefore we choose "1 KPa, which is
well below the thermal stress value.
Figure 15 shows a comparison of the compaction pro"le for a saturated case and a two phase
case at various selected points within mesh. A very pronounced compaction was observed in the
two phase problem where the gas phase is very compressible relative to the liquid phase. Figure 16
compares the solution obtained in the present model with those obtained by Schre#er et al.

Figure 15. Compaction pro"le for single phase (circle) and two phase #ow (solid line). 7}6.8 m from bottom,
27}6 m from bottom, 37}4 m from bottom and 42}2 m from bottom.
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1253

Figure 16. Comparison of two phase #ow solution (solid line) with Schre#er et al. [38] (circle). All the
location are counted from bottom of the mesh.

[38]. It may be observed that due to the prescribed pressure boundary conditions, the gas phase is
experiencing drainage while the liquid phase is experiencing imbibition into the mesh, i.e. there is
a constant #ow of liquid phase into the domain. This case is of practical interest in overburden
modelling where there is a constant intrusion of sea water into the seabed overburden. We
observed that immediately after the loading, the column moves downward vertically due to the
collective compressibility of the solid, liquid and gas. In the subsequent period, the column moves
vertically upward, a trend obvious in Figure 15 when compared to results of Schre#er's et al. At
approximately 1000 s, the thermal strain creeps in since the temperature in the column is now
su$ciently great to cause volumetric expansion of the material. Figure 17 illustrates the saturation evolution over the period 1.0E#07 s. Note that the saturation pro"le after 1.0E#5 s is
experiencing some oscillation, shown as a zig-zag pattern in Figure 17. This is because after that
period, the liquid}gas movement has almost reached equilibrium and thus the domain is under
a drainage-imbibition cycle. The temperature pro"le is shown in Figure 18 as compared to results
of Schre#er et al. A close agreement is observed in this case, even though the contribution due to
the gas phase has been neglected in the present model.

6. CONCLUSION
A formulation for a fully coupled hydro-thermo-poro-mechanical model for the simulation of
a three-phase black oil model has been presented. A critical analysis regarding the in#uence of
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1254
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

Figure 17. Saturation pro"le versus time at various selected points.

Figure 18. Temperature pro"le versus time at various selected points.


Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

A FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-THERMO-PORO-MECHANICAL MODEL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

1255

utilizing either a coupled or uncoupled formulation has also been discussed. An attempt has been
made to achieve a balance of formulation where neither the skeleton deformation nor the #uid
#ow regime have been given priority. With this, we hope that the di!erence of opinion by these
two schools of thought may be bought closer together. By making appropriate assumptions on
the gas phase, the formulation of the energy balance equation has also been simpli"ed. This
assumption places a restriction on the applicability of the energy equations within a range of
speci"c material and conditions. However, the gas contribution can easily be taken into account.
Various numerical examples have been presented and studied, and of particular interest is the
observation that the Mandel problem is insensitive to temperature, particularly with respect to
the non-monotonic pressure increase and the maximum excess pressure attained. A two phase
#ow example, which was used to illustrate the in#uence of seabed overburden compaction was
demonstrated via a simple uni-dimensional column problem. Water imbibition into the column
caused a very small, but identi"able, upward displacements. At steady state, the column experienced a imbibition-drainage cycle which caused the saturations to oscillate. The examples
presented were used either to validate the model or to study the numerical behaviour described by
the governing equations. Further work will be done in the future to illustrate the applicability of
the present model in simulating &real life' reservoir problems.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the support given by the University of Wales, the Fractured Reservoir
Project (under the control of Norwegian Geotechnical Institute) in particular BP-AMOCO, ELF and
Norwegian Research Council. Thanks are also due to Dr. M. Gutierrez and Dr. F. Cuisiat for many helpful
discussions on technical issues.

REFERENCES
1. Gutierrez M, Lewis RW. The role of geomechanics in reservoir simulation. Proceedings of the SPE/ISRM
E;ROCK198, (SPE paper 47392), Trondheim, Norway, 1998.
2. Charlez PhA. Rock Mechanics, <olume I: Theoretical Fundamentals. Editions Technip, France, 1991.
3. Biot MA. General theory of three dimensional consolidation. Journal of Applied Physics 1941; 12:155}163.
4. Schi!man RL. A thermoelastic theory of consolidation. Environmental Geophysics Heat ransfer Division ASME
1972; 4:78}84.
5. Brownell Jr DH, Grag SK, Pritchett JW. Governing equations for geothermal reservoir. =ater Resources Research
1977; 13:929}934.
6. Bear J, Corapcioglu MY. A mathematical model for consolidation in a thermoelastic aquifer due to hot water
injection or pumping. =ater Resources Research 1981; 17:723}736.
7. McTigue DE. Thermoelastic response of #uid saturated porous rock. Journal of Geophysical Research 1986;
91:9533}9542.
8. Geertsma J. The e!ect of #uid pressure decline on volumetric changes of porous rocks. Petroleum ransactions AIME
1957; 210:331}340.
9. Geertsma J. Problems of rock mechanics in petroleum production engineering. Proceedings of the 1st Congress of
International Society of Rock Mechanics, Lisbon, 1966; 585}594.
10. Gassman F. UD ber die ElastizitaH t poroH ser Medien. Vierteljahrsschrift der Naturforschenden Gessellshaft in ZD 'urich,
Mitteilungen aus dem Institut fu& r Geophysik 1956; 17.
11. Aktan T, Farouq Ali SM. Finite element analysis of temperature and thermal stresses induced by hot water injection.
SPEJ December 1978; 457}469.
12. Rattia R. Numerical simulation of steam injection into a compacting reservoir under non-newtonian #ow condition.
PhD Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1980.
Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256

1256
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

W. K. S. PAO, R. W. LEWIS AND I. MASTERS

13. Ito Y. The introduction of the microchannelling phenomenon to cyclic steam stimulation and its application to the
numerical simulator (sand deformation concept). SPEJ August 1984; 417}429.
14. Noorishad J. Tsang CF, Witherspoon PA. Coupled thermal-hydraulic-mechanical phenomena in saturated fractured
porous rock: numerical approach. Journal of Geophysical Research 1984; 89:365}373.
15. Vaziri HH. Coupled #uid #ow and stress analysis of oil sands subject to heating. JCP 1988; 27:84}91.
16. Settari A. Physics and modelling of thermal #ow and soil mechanics in unconsolidated porous media. SPE 18420
presented at the 10th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation, Houston, TX, 6}8 February 1989.
17. Settari A, Ito A, Jha KN. Coupling of a fracture mechanics model and a thermal reservoir simulator for tar sands.
JCP 1992; 31:9}20.
18. Li XK. Multiphase #ow in deforming porous media*a "nite element approach. PhD Dissertation, University of
Wales Swansea, 1991.
19. Fung LSK, Buchanan L, Wan RG. Coupled geomechanics-thermal simulation of deforming heavy-oil reservoir.
Proceedings of the CIM Annual echanical Conference, Clagary, June, 1992.
20. Beattie CI, Boberg TC, McNab GS. Reservoir simulation of cyclic steam stimulation in the cold lake oil sands.
SPERE 1991; 6:200}206.
21. Tortike WS. Thermal #ow in a deforming oil reservoir. PhD Dessertation, Department of M.M.P.E., University of
Alberta, Canada, 1991.
22. Lewis RW, Sukirman Y. Finite element modelling of three-phase #ow in deforming saturated oil reservoir. International Journal for Numerical Analytical Methods in Geomechanics 1993; 17:577}598.
23. He!er KJ, Last NC, Koutsabeloulis NC, Chan HCM, Gutierrez M, Makurat A. The in#uence of natural fractures,
faults and earth stresses on reservoir performance-analysis by numerical modelling. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on North Sea Oil and Gas Resevoir, Trondheim, Norway, 1992.
24. Gutierrez M, Makurat A. Coupled HTM Modelling of Cold Water Injection in Fractured Hydrocarbon Reservoirs.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mineral Science 1997; 34:492.
25. Lewis RW, Schre#er BA. he ,nite element method in the static and dynamics deformation and consolidation of porous
media (2nd edn). Wiley: England, 1998.
26. Chen HY, Teufel LW. Coupling #uid-#ow and geomechanics in dual-porosity modeling of naturally fractured
reservoirs. Paper SPE 38884 presented at SPE Annual Techanical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, 1997.
27. Hassanizadeh SM, Gray WG. Thermodynamic basic of capillary pressure in porous media. =ater Resources Research
1993; 29:3389}3405.
28. Slattery JC. Interfacial transport phenomena. Chemical Engineering Communications 1980; 4:149}166.
29. Aziz K, Settari A. Petroleum Reservoir Simulation. Applied Science Publishers: London, 1979.
30. Tortike WS, Farouq Ali SM. Saturated steam property functional correlations for fully implicit thermal reservoir
simulation. SPE Reservoir Engineering 1989; 4:471}474.
31. Pao WKS, Masters I, Lewis RW. Integrated #ow and subsidence simulation for hydrocarbon reservoir. 7th Annual
Conference of ACME+99, 1999; 175}178.
32. Havmoller O. Foged N. Reviews of rock mechanics data for chalk. Danish Geotechnical Institute, Joint Chalk
Research IV, Project 4.1, report released to the "rst author in memo form by NGI without date.
33. Prats M. hermal Recovery, SPE Monograph, Henry L. Doherty Series, vol. 8, AIME: New York, 1982.
34. Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL. he Finite Element Method (4th edn), vols 1 and 2. McGraw-Hill: London 1989.
35. Abousleiman Y, Cheng AHD, Cui L, Detournay E, Roegiers JC. Mandel's problem revisited. Geotechnique 1996;
46:187}195.
36. Bai M, Roegiers JC. Fluid #ow and heat #ow in deformable fractured porous media. International Journal of
Engineering Science 1994; 32:1615}1633.
37. Brooks RH, Corey AT. Properties of porous media a!ecting #uid #ow. Journal of Irrigation Drainage Division, ASCE
1966; 92:61}88.
38. Schre#er BA, Zhan XY, Simoni L. A coupled model for water #ow, air #ow and heat #ow in deformable porous
media. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Heat and Fluid Flow 1995; 5:531}547.

Copyright  2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 2001; 25:1229}1256