FLOW GEOMETRIES & DIMENSIONS

1. RECTANGULAR FLOW GEOMETRY

2. RADIAL CYLINDRICAL FLOW
GEOMETRY
3. ELLIPTICAL CYLINDRICAL FLOW
GEOMETRY
4. SPHERICAL FLOW GEOMETRY
5. CURVILINEAR FLOW GEOMETRY

Flow Geometries and Dimensions

The same factors that dictate our choice of
coordinate systems play a dominant role in
our deciding how many dimensions to assign
to a problem.

Engineering, to a large extent, is a marriage

between pure science and practical
reality. In other words, selecting a higher
number of dimensions to represent a system
may be scientifically correct, but we may lack
the
information
or
the
computational
overhead needed to assign this many
dimensions. So, we assign fewer dimensions
and settle for a less-than-ideal problem
definition. Such compromise may seem
drastic. But in reality, for most engineering
problems, we can generate an adequate
amount of information even within these
limitations.

(1)RECTANGULAR FLOW GEOMETRY

Rectangular geometry is the one that is most
familiar to us, as engineers, dating back to
our high school calculus. In reservoir
modeling we often use this familiarity to
our advantage, since most field-scale
multi-well studies are done in this coordinate system.

As Figure below illustrates, we can consider

the reservoir to be a rectangular box with the
fluid particles moving in straight lines,
perhaps at different speeds in different
directions and locations.

Figure 1

In this case, the streamlines are parallel to

the three principal axes (x, y, and z), which
are orthogonal.

Figure above also shows the partition of the

box into many smaller boxes, which are
rectangular prisms. Each of these rectangular
prisms represents a certain portion of the
reservoir, about which we can procure
information through simulation studies. We
use this smaller element of dimensions, ( x,
y, z) as a control volume to set up and
discretize the governing equations.

NOTE:
We should emphasize that a fluid particle
entering an elemental volume in one
direction does not necessarily exit in the
same direction; by the same token, the
fluid particle leaving the elemental
volume
in
one
direction
did
not
necessarily enter it in the same direction.

Formation
characteristics,
(such
as
heterogeneity, permeability contrasts and the
force fields imposed by the conditions at the
boundaries) dictate the flow path once the
element enters the control volume. This is the
essence of flow multi-dimensionality.

Figure below illustrates the concept of onedimensional flow along the x-direction.
Although it is difficult to find real-world
examples of truly one-dimensional flow, many
types of analyses and systems do lend
themselves to description as one-dimensional.

The flow structure shown in Figure above

precludes (forbids) flow in any other direction,
which implies there is no property
variation along the y and z directions.

Therefore, if we take a section perpendicular

to the indicated flow direction, there will not
be any property variation across the plane.

Similarly, any cross section taken in the x-z or

x-y planes (parallel to the streamlines) will
reveal the uniformity of the flow structure.

More explicitly, the pressure profiles of flow

paths will be similar. A long, skinny reservoir
that is confined between two closely spaced,
parallel faults fits this description.

The next level of description used in reservoir

simulation is two-dimensional flow. Many
reservoir simulation studies employ twodimensional Cartesian coordinate systems.
This makes sense when we consider the large
lateral extent of most reservoirs compared
with their thicknesses. Figure below illustrates
a two-dimensional flow structure along the x
and
y
directions.

This

precludes

flow

in

the

z-direction.

Therefore, any slice taken parallel to the x-y

plane will not show any variation in terms of
property and fluid distribution such as
porosity, permeability and saturations.

The introduction of the second dimension

allows us to describe a wide variety of
problems. We can, for instance, account for
directional permeability (HT, Define ?)
variation and lateral (directed to a side) well
distributions.

Moreover, a two-dimensional approach allows

us to represent a variety of well completion
strategies (e.g., vertical wells, horizontal
wells, stimulated wells). Thin, blanket sands
that tend to display large areal coverage are
ideally suited for description by a twodimensional model.

The best representation of flow is the threedimensional model, because it allows us to

procure the most information about the
reservoir.

Unfortunately, it also requires the largest

amount of input information and a higher
level of computational power and overhead.
Still, incorporating a third dimension gives us
the latitude we need to include all the
property variations in all three spatial
directions.

This means that if we take two parallel slices

perpendicular to the third dimension, they will
exhibit property and flow differences. Figure
below illustrates a three-dimensional flow
structure.

Figure 4

A three-dimensional representation allows us

to accommodate a wide variety of problems of
practical interest, such as layered reservoirs
(with
or
without
crossflow),
partially

penetrating wells, multi-layered production

schemes,
and
thick
reservoirs
where
gravitational forces could be significant.

A three-dimensional model makes it possible

for us to come up with more realistic
representations of drive mechanisms (or any
combination thereof), such as gas cap
expansion (?), bottom water drive (?), and so
forth. (Def. of Gas cap expansion)Process of reservoirliquids displacement by the natural expansion of the reservoir gas cap to fill the
voids vacated by recovered liquids.

In spite of a three-dimensional models many

advantages, it is less often used in practice
than we might expect.

This is because we have to weigh such

factors as cost, data availability and
marginal utility.

In many cases a three-dimensional model

may be a luxury that we can ill afford. On the
other hand, there are certain problems in
which it is a technical necessity.

Consider, for instance, a thick reservoir with

no significant property variation in the vertical
direction; while a two-dimensional model
would appear adequate based on this
description, it may turn out that the
gravitational field contribution may be so
significant
as
to
require
a
third
dimension.

RECTANGULAR FLOW GEOMETRY AND VOLUME ELEMENT

DETAILS : (a) 1D FLOW, x DIRECTION ONLY
(b) 2D FLOW, x AND y DIRECTION ONLY
(c) 3D FLOW, x, y AND z DIRECTIONS

(2) RADIAL CYLINDRICAL FLOW GEOMETRY

The radial-cylindrical coordinate system is
particularly appealing for describing singlewell problems.
Figure below shows the principal directions of
this flow geometry and its elemental volume.

Figure 5

The three principal flow directions are radial

(r), vertical (z) and tangential ().

To visualize this flow structure, imagine a

single well located in the center of a circular
reservoir, such that the wellbore and the
reservoir boundary are two concentric
circles.

If we assume a reservoir of uniform

thickness, then the system becomes two
concentric cylinders of the same height.

A particle moving in a three-dimensional

radial-cylindrical flow geometry can be
illustrated as in Figure below .

Figure 6

A typical one-dimensional, radial-cylindrical

flow model is the classical representation

used in well test analysis. In this case, flow is

constrained to the r-direction such that
streamlines are rays converging towards the
center of the well ( Figure below ).

Figure 7

Studying the problem along one trajectory is

sufficient because of symmetry. Any particle

located on any of the trajectories will
experience similar forces.

By neglecting the flow in angular () and axial

(z) directions, we introduce a series of
assumptions, such as no permeability
gradation along the -direction and no
gravitational effect along the z-direction.

As we can imagine from looking at Figure ,

one-dimensional flow representations in the
- and z-directions have no practical
significance in reservoir studies.
The two-dimensional (r-z) representation is
appealing for single-well problems where
gravity and/or layering effects are
significant ( Figure below ).
This r-z plane can be taken at any location
without changing the problem because of its
axis-symmetric
nature.

Figure 8

The three-dimensional flow structure in

radial-cylindrical coordinate system admits
property variation in all three directions.
Figure below shows this system.

Figure 9

CYLINDRICAL FLOW GEOMETRY AND VOLUME ELEMENTS (a) 1D FLOW, r

DIR. ONLY (b) 2D FLOW, r AND THETA DIR. ONLY (C) 3D FLOW, r, THETA & Z
DIRS.

ELLIPTICAL CYLINDRICAL FLOW GEOMETRY

We sometimes use elliptical-cylindrical flow
geometry in single-well studies when a strong
permeability contrast exists in two principal
directions on the lateral plane.

Another common application of this

coordinate system is when a vertical well is
intercepted
by
a
vertical,
highconductivity
fracture
(theoretically
presumed to be of infinite conductivity).

Under
these
conditions,
the
normally
concentric
equipotential
contours
degenerate
into
confocal
ellipses.
Similarly,
the
streamlines
become
distorted into confocal hyperbolas.
Figure below depicts this flow structure.

Figure 10

SPHERICAL FLOW GEOMETRY

Although not commonly used for general
simulation, the spherical coordinate system
provides a good representation of some
specific reservoir engineering problems.
Two examples are partial penetration to a
thick formation by a production well, and flow
around perforations.

The principal flow directions in spherical

coordinates are radial (r), tangential () and
azimuthal (), as shown in Figure below .

Figure 11

CURVILINEAR FLOW GEOMETRY

The most generalized coordinate system is
curvilinear. In fact, all of the coordinate
systems (previously discussed) constitute a
subset of the curvilinear system.

A curvilinear coordinate system allows a

better representation of the flow geometry, as
well as the boundary geometry where the
latter dictates the former.

With the flow geometry more accurately

represented, the results obtained with a
curvilinear coordinate system do not get
distorted by grid orientation effects, as
often happens with other coordinate systems.

Another advantage is that curvilinear systems

may help reduce the number of grid blocks
needed for the same level of accuracy.
Figure below shows the areal implementation
of curvilinear coordinates to a five-spot
injection/production
pattern.

Figure 12

Note that the streamlines and equipotential

contours define the curvilinear elemental
volume.

Although curvilinear coordinate systems offer

attractive advantages, their use is limited
because of the added mathematical and
interpretational complexity they introduce.

Choosing the appropriate coordinate system

and number of dimensions is not only
paramount to a simulation studys success,
but also to its relative simplicity. It is thus
essential that we use sound engineering
judgment and perform thorough analyses
throughout this process.

We must answer questions pertaining to the

reservoirs approximate geometry, possible
drive mechanisms, well and completion
configurations, level of detail required, type
and amount of data available, and so on.

As far as reservoir simulation is concerned,

bigger is not necessarily better. We must
exercise good engineering judgment in
establishing the scope of our study.

We need to avoid overkill, but at the same

time, understand that under-representing the
needed details is dangerous. Simply put, we
must strike a balance.

____________________

Comparison between Cartesian and

Curvilinear grids
Comparison between Cartesian and Curvilinear
grids shows that in Cartesian grid cells are
wasted in dealing with objects. The distribution
of function is very fine in curvilinear grid. The
resources required in curvilinear grids are less
as compared to Cartesian grids thus saving lots
of memory. Therefore we can say that coarse
grids are able to capture flow details efficiently.

Disadvantages of Curvilinear grids

Difficulties associated with the curvilinear grids
are
related
to
equations.
While in Cartesian system the equation can be
solved easily with less difficulty but in

curvilinear coordinate system it is difficult to

solve the complex equations. Difference
between various techniques lies in the fact that
what type of grid arrangement is required and
the dependent variable that is required in
momentum equation. To generate meshes so that
it includes all the geometrical features mapping
is very important. In mapping Physical
geometry is mapped with computational
geometry. There are difficulties which we face
in generating the body fitted grids in geometries
like IC engine combustion chamber. For
example the Valve mapping in Internal
Combustion Engine is done very carefully so
that the region of one type is mapped carefully
with another type of regions. There are regions
where dense mesh is done deliberately to
accommodate complex features. But this results
in unnecessary grid resolution which leads to
local variation of solution domain.

__________________