Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

APPLIED GEOPHYSICS, Vol.5, No.4 (December 2008), P. 340 - 349 , 9 Figures.


Numerical simulation of downhole temperature

distribution in producing oil wells
Shi Ying1,2, Song Yanjie1, and Liu Hong2

Abstract: An improved numerical simulation method is presented to calculate the

downhole temperature distribution for multiple pay zones in producing oil wells. Based
on hydrodynamics and heat transfer theory, a 2-D temperature field model in cylindrical
coordinates is developed. In the model, we considered general heat conduction as well as the
heat convection due to uid ow from porous formation to the borehole. We also take into
account the uid velocity variation in the wellbore due to multiple pay zones. We present
coupled boundary conditions at the interfaces between the wellbore and adjacent formation,
the wellbore and pay zone, and the pay zone and adjacent formation. Finally, an alternating
direction implicit difference method (ADI) is used to solve the temperature model for the
downhole temperature distribution. The comparison of modeled temperature curve with
actual temperature log indicates that simulation result is in general quite similar to the actual
temperature log. We found that the total production rate, production time, porosity, thickness
of pay zones, and geothermal gradient, all have effects on the downhole temperature
Keywords: oil well, downhole temperature distribution, heat transfer, numerical simulation

Introduction by many researchers (Sagar and Dotty, 1989; Corre et

al., 1984; Stone and Bennett, 2002; Hasan and Kabir,
1991a and b; Song and Shi, 2007), mainly based on
The temperature log is used not only to study formation Rameys theory (Ramey, 1962). Ramay was the first to
temperature (Kutasov and Eppelbaum, 2005), but also develop a theoretical solution for estimating wellbore uid
to evaluate production well performance by analyzing temperature. He presented an approximate solution of the
anomalous temperature behavior. It can provide an wellbore heat transfer problem involving injection of hot
important basis for dynamic analysis and wellbore or cold fluids. The solution provides an estimate of the
technology diagnosis of production wells (Zhang et al., uid, tubing and casing temperatures as functions of depth
2004). Many analysts are paying more attention to the study and time. Fagley and Scott (1982) presented an improved
of downhole temperature distribution of production wells, injection-well temperature simulator. Their simulator offers
because it reects production or injection history, contains an advantage over previous ones in that the wellbore water
extremely abundant information (Jin et al., 2003), and is heat transfer is modeled both before and after shut-in of
especially useful for interpreting problem wells. Numerical the well. Hasand and Kabir (1991) constructed an one-
simulations of downhole temperature distributions for dimentional radial heat transfer model with proper initial
various kinds of wells have been previously developed and boundary conditions. Frdric et al. (1994) described

Manuscript received by the Editor September 17, 2008, revised manuscript received October 24, 2008.
* This work was sponsored by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 40830424).
1.School of Geoscience, Daqing Petroleum Institute, Daqing 163318, China.
2.Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China.

Shi et al.

a new temperature model that takes into account the temperature eld models are solved simultaneously. To describe
temperature effect due to the uid decompression and the the subsurface temperature distribution, we chose equidistant
frictional heating occurring in the formation. Feng et al. radial grid spacing for the wellbore, and logarithmic grid
(1996) constructed a mathematical model in the injection spacing for the formation. Our results should be very useful for
well and discussed the numerical arithmetic. Farshad et determining pay zone locations, analyzing produced uids, and
al. (2000) developed two articial neural network models nding leaking layers. It can also provide a reliable theoretical
(ANN) that predicted the temperature of the owing uid basis for establishing oilfield exploitation schemes. The
at any depth of the oil well. Using the wellbore temperature prediction of flowing fluid temperature profiles in the wells is
recovery data after drilling mud circulation, Lee et al. (2003) essential for solving and optimizing design problems in oil well
presented a method based on a genetic algorithm to calculate production.
the formation temperature and thermal conductivity. Gao et
al. (2008) developed a temperature distribution model for
deepwater drilling pipe, annulus, and insulating layer and Temperature eld model
obtained the deepwater wellbore temperature distribution
during circulation and non-circulation.
Because temperature logs in producing oil wells are After the fluid in a pay zone enters the wellbore, it
more complicated with many inuencing factors and the will mix with uids from lower pay zones which cause
temperature difference between wellbore and formation its temperature to be higher than that of the adjacent
is quite small, numerical simulations for such cases are formation (Hill, 1995). Because of such temperature
rare. Although there have been calculations of wellbore difference, there is heat transfer between the fluids
fluid temperature for producing oil wells, they do not in the wellbore and the adjacent formation by way of
consider the heat transfer between pay zone and adjacent conduction and convection. Heat transfer due to radiation
formation. Most temperature models focused on the can be neglected since it is comparatively insignicant.
wellbore thermal exchanges due to conduction and We assume the downhole temperature distribution to
convection and assumed that the produced fluid enters be axial symmetric. Hence, the three-dimensional heat
the wellbore at geothermal temperature. transfer model can be simplified to a two-dimensional
Using hydrodynamics and heat transfer theory and one. Figure 1 shows our 2-D temperature eld model in
considering actual operating conditions, we develop a 2-D cylindrical coordinates for a wellbore with production
temperature field model for production wells in cylindrical fluid flow and the surrounding formation with two pay
coordinates with initial and boundary conditions. For zones. For multiple pay zones, the change of uid velocity
complicated heat transfer such as convection, we used the nite in the wellbore is considered with uid owing upward.
difference method to solve the temperature model. Dynamic As illustrated in Figure 2, uid 1 from zone 1 enters the
downhole temperature distributions are simulated for different wellbore, and mixes with uid 2 from the lower zone 2.
production and formation conditions with multiple pay zones. Hence, the uid ow over zone 1 in the borehole equals
We also consider the variation of uid velocity in the wellbore the sum of flows of fluids 1 and 2, causing the fluid
to reflect the actual production conditions of multiple pay velocity to increase. Here, we regard two-phase mixed
zones. The coupled wellbore, pay zone and adjacent formation two phase mix ow as a weighted single-phase ow.
Mixed uid


Adjacent formation
Pay zone

Adjacent formation
Fluid 1
Pay zone
z r
Adjacent formation

Fluid 2
Fig. 1 Schematic of ow in a production well. Fig. 2 Schematic of two-phase uid ow in the wellbore.
Downhole temperature distribution in producing oil wells

Assumptions of the model If we neglect the pressure effect in the formation while
assuming the oil and water velocities are the same in
the pay zone, we can obtain the seepage velocity for the
We have made the following assumptions in our uid in the pay zone as
model: ql
Xl . (4)
1. J o u l e - T h o m s o n e ff e c t o n t h e t e m p e r a t u r e 2 S rD I 1
distribution in the wellbore and formation is neglected.
2. Original temperature distribution in the formation For the adjacent formation regions above and below
changes linearly with depth and the thermodynamic the pay zone, we assume that the heat transfer is solely
parameters in the equation do not change with due to conduction, not convection (Fagley and Scott,
temperature. 1982). The temperature eld for the adjacent formation
3. Pay zones and adjacent zones are isotropic in can be written as
their thermal properties and borehole radius remains w wT w wT 1 w wT
unchanged with depth. (O l )  (O l ) (O l T ) U l cl , (5)
wz wz wr wr r wr wt
4. Frictional heating is negligible.
5. The thermal property of the mixture of the two- where
phase uid is homogenous. Or O(s12I ) (O w s w 2  Oo s o 2 )I ,
2 2

6. Fluid is not compressible, i.e., fluid density is

constant. ( Uc) ** (1  I 2 )( U s 2 c s 2 )  I 2 ( U o co so 2  U w c w s w 2 ) .
Because uid does not ow in the interval between the
Governing equations lowest pay zone and the bottom of the borehole, there is
no heat transfer by convection, and only heat transfer by
conduction is considered. The heat transfer in the interval
We consider the heat transfers in the wellbore as is unsteady, and the equations (1) and (2) can be simplied
continuous medium conduction and convection in a into the equations (6) and (7), respectively, as follows:
vertical tube while the well is producing. Considering w wT w wT 1 w wT
only the vertical component and ignoring the radial (O l )  (O l ) (O l T ) U l cl ,(6)
component of the fluid velocity, we can express the wz wz wr wr r wr wt
temperature eld model in the wellbore as w wT w wT wT
(Ol )  2 (Ol ) U l cl . (7)
wT w
)  (Ol
wT 1 w
) (Ol T )U l cl
 U l clQ z
, wz wz wr wr wt
wz wz wr wr r wr wt wz
and the temperature eld model at the center axis(r=0) of Initial and boundary conditions
the wellbore as
w wT w wT wT wT
(Ol )  2 (Ol ) U l cl  U l clQ z . (2) Initial temperature of the formation and wellbore is at
wz wz wr wr wt wz
the geothermal condition. Thus, the initial condition can
We assume that fluids in the formation flow radially be written as
through porous media, with oil and water velocities
being the same in the pay zones. The heat transfers in T t 0 a  bz . (8)
the pay zones are treated as conduction and convection
in porous media. Neglecting the pressure effect and We further assume that no heat transfer occurs at the
frictional heating from fluid flow, we can express the top and bottom of the modeled borehole and formation.
temperature eld in the pay zones as Their boundary conditions can be written as equations (9),
(10), (11) and (12). The adiabatic boundary condition at
wT o o
( U c )* ( U l clXl ) gradT  div (Oc gradT ) , (3) the well axis can be described as equation (13). The outer
wt boundary of the formation is maintained at the geothermal
where temperature when the value of r is sufficiently large. Its
Oc O(s11I ) (O w s w1  Oo s o1 )I ,
1 1 boundary condition is given in equation (14).
( Uc) (1  I1 )( U s1c s1 )  I1 ( U o co s o1  U w c w s w1 ) . Ol z z max ; r d rb 0, (9)
Shi et al.

wT h by convection is obtained as the following.

Ol z 0 ;r d rb 0, (10) From Dittus-Boelter equation,
wT N uf 0.023Ref0.8 Pefn ,
Or z z max ;rb  r  re 0, (11)
wz and non-dimensional denition of Nusselt number,
Or z 0;rb  r  re 0, (12)
N uf
wz Ol
wT we have,
Ol 0, (13)
r 0
h 0.023 Ref0.8 Pefn .
T a  bz . (14) d
r re
Here, we let n = 0.3.
The dynamic coupling boundary conditions at
interfaces between the wellbore and adjacent formation,
the wellbore and pay zone, and the pay zone and Inuence factor analysis
adjacent formation can be described as equations (15),
(16), and (17), respectively.
The nite difference method is used to solve the above
wT set of second-order partial differential equations with the
h(Tlr  Tr ) Or wr
r rb prescribed initial and boundary conditions. Details of the
nite difference solution are given in the Appendix. We
Tlr Tr r r assume that the modeled region is consisted of a well,
b (15)
two pay zones, and three shoulder beds, with the well
wT wT * radius being 0.1m. The parameters for the simulation
Oc wr r rb Ol wr r rb  Ul clX r (Tc  Tlc' ) r rb are given in Tables 1 and 2. We use these parameters
, to investigate factors that influence the downhole
Tlc Tc r r temperature distribution. The modeled results follow.
b (16)

wT wT Table 1 Thermal parameters for water and oil

Or wz z zi Oc
z zi Density Specic heat Thermal conductivity
. Fluid
kg/m3 J/(kg K) W/(m K)
T1 z z T2
i z zi (17)
Water 1000 4220 0.622

Combining the Dittus-Boelter equation and the Oil 800 1920 0.148
denition of Nusselt number, the heat transfer coefcient

Table 2 Formation parameters

Density Specic heat Thermal conductivity
Zone number Water saturation Porosity
kg/m3 J/(kg K) W/(m K)
1 2650 802 2.8 100% 30%
2 2450 820 2.1
3 2650 802 2.8 100% 30%
4 2450 820 2.1
5 2650 802 2.8 100% 30%

Effect of total production rate and production zones are 20% and 80%, respectively, the thickness of
the two pay zones are 5 m.
time Assuming the production time is 200 days,we modeled
We assume porosity and water saturation of both pay the downhole temperature distribution with different
Downhole temperature distribution in producing oil wells

production rates as shown in Figure 3.. The result shows result shows that the longer the production time, the
that the higher the total production rate, the wider the wider the separation between the downhole fluid
separation between the downhole uid temperature and the temperature curve and the geothermal gradient line, as
geothermal temperature. The conclusion is consistent with shown in Figure 4. However, we find that the curves
the result of Ramey's equation. of 400 d and 1000 d overlap, which indicates that the
Suppose that total production rate is kept constant at temperature in the wellbore does not change much over
16 m3/d, and production time is varied. The modeled long production times.

900 900

920 920

940 940
Depth (m)

Depth (m)
960 960

Geothermal gradient Geothermal gradient

980 16 m3/d 980 5d
25 m3/d 400 d
40 m3/d 1000 d
1000 1000
40 41 42 43 40 41 42 43
Temperature ( ) Temperature ( )
Fig. 3 Effect of total production rate Fig.4 Effect of production time on the
on the temperature prole. temperature prole.

Effect of oil saturation and porosity of pay zone shown in Figure 5 for pay zone oil saturations of 10%,
50%, and 80%. The result indicates that the variation of
We now assume that production time is 400 days, total
oil saturation has little effect on the downhole temperature
production rate is 16 m3/d, porosity of the pay zones is
profile. This may be due to the fact that we assume the
20%, and the thicknesses of the two pay zones are all 5 m.
produced uid as a single phase uid.
We obtain the downhole temperature distributions as
900 900

920 920

940 940
Depth (m)

Depth (m)

960 960

Geothermal gradient Geothermal gradient

980 Oil saturation 10% 980 5%
Oil saturation 50% 20%
Oil saturation 80% 35%
1000 1000
40 41 42 43 40 41 42 43
Temperature ( ) Temperature ( )

Fig. 5 Effect of pay zone oil saturation on Fig. 6 Effect of pay zone porosity on
the temperature prole. the temperature prole.

When the pay zone oil saturation is kept constant the downhole temperature. The higher the porosity, the
at 0.8, and their porosity is varied, we modeled the bigger the temperature profile anomaly. For the same
downhole temperature distribution with the result shown production rate, the higher the porosity, the smaller the
in Figure 6. This indicates that porosity has an effect on seepage velocity in the pay zone, leading to a smaller

Shi et al.

flow velocity at the exit of the pay zone. Because the anomalies for thicker pay zones are more obvious. The
uid can mix sufciently well with the uids of higher seepage velocity of fluid in the pay zones decreases
temperatures from the lower zones, larger anomalies are as the pay zone thickness increases holding the total
formed on the temperature prole. production rate constant. Thus, the uid at the pay zone
exit can mix very well with uids of higher temperature
Effect of bed thickness and original geothermal from lower zones, leading to higher downhole fluid
temperature for thicker pay zone.
gradient We now assume that the pay zone thickness is 5
Assume that production time is 200 days, total m, while keeping other parameters the same, and
production rate is 16 m 3 /d, and the porosity and investigate of the effect on downhole temperature
oil saturation of both pay zones are 20% and 20%, distribution when the geothermal gradient is varied.
respectively. As shown in Figure 8, we find that the downhole
Figure 7 shows the downhole temperature distributions temperature increases as the geothermal gradient
for two cases when the two pay zones are either 5 m or increases. This is because when geothermal gradient
8 m thick. The two pay zones are located at 925 to 930 increases, the formation temperature increases, leading
m and 965 to 970 m for 5 m thick pay zones, or 925 to to uid temperature increase in the pay zone as well as
933 m and 965 to 973 m for 8 m thick pay zones. The in the wellbore.
modeled result shows that the downhole temperature

900 900
0.025 /m geothermal
0.025 /m prole
920 920 0.032 /m geothermal
0.032 /m prole
Depth (m)

940 940
Depth (m)

960 960

980 Geothermal gradient 980

1000 1000
40 41 42 43 40 41 42 43 44
Temperature () Temperature ()
Fig.7 Effect of bed thickness on the Fig.8 Effect of original geothermal
temperature prole. gradient on the temperature prole

Real data example The equivalent thermal capacitances (c)* in the pay
zone and (c)** in the adjacent formation are the same
as that dened in the model. From Figure 9, we notice
Our temperature field model was applied to that the simulation curve is in general quite similar to
producing oil well #1 in Daqing Oil Field to calculate the actual temperature log, except the anomaly at the
the downhole temperature distribution. The simulation pay zone is not as big. The possible reasons are: (1)
curve from the model calculation is compared with The actual production rate was not constant. (2) We
actual temperature log in Figure 9. The well radius is ignore the frictional heating between uid and matrix
0.1 m, and the production time is 100 d. Table 2 lists which can cause downhole uid temperature increase.
the thermal conductivities of the matrix of the pay (3) We neglect that the Joule-Thomson effect. As the
zone s1 and the adjacent formation s2, the specific fluid exited the pay zone, it experienced a pressure
heats of the matrix of the pay zone cs1 and the adjacent drop which led to a sudden temperature increase,
formation c s2, and the densities of the matrix of the affecting the fluid temperature next to the pay zone.
pay zones s1 and the adjacent formation s2. Other All these factors contributed to larger temperature
parameters used in the simulation are given in Table 3. anomaly near the pay zone.

Downhole temperature distribution in producing oil wells

Table 3 Parameters for Well #1

Interval Oil saturation Water saturation Porosity Production rate Adjacent formation or pay
m so sw m3/d zone

970.0-996.2 0 100% 30% 0.0 Adjacent formation 1

996.2-996.9 16% 84% 31.5% 11.9 Pay zone 1
996.9-1003.5 0 100% 30% 0.0 Adjacent formation 2
1003.5-1004.8 16% 84% 26.3% 6.2 Pay zone 2
1004.8-1020.0 0 100% 0.0 0.0 Adjacent formation 3

44.2 44.8 45.4

Actual prole
Simulation prole
This work was sponsored by the National Nature
Science Foundation of China (No. 40830424). The
990 authors are thankful to Daqing Oil Field Company
Depth (m)

Limited for providing the temperature log data and

also thank anonymous reviewers for their comments to
1000 improve the original manuscript.

Temperature () o thermal conductivity of oil, W/(m K)
Fig.9 Comparison of the modeled temperature curve w thermal conductivity of water, W/(m K)
with the actual temperature log for Well #1. l thermal conductivity of uid in wellbore, W/(m K)
s1thermal conductivity of matrix in pay zones,
W/(m K)
Conclusions s2thermal conductivity of matrix in adjacent
formation, W/(m K)
c thermal conductivity of pay zones, W/(m K)
We proposed a temperature field model to calculate
r thermal conductivity of adjacent formation,
the temperature distribution with multiple pay zones in
W/(m K)
producing oil wells. In the model, we considered the
fluid flowing through porous pay zones, the change of
1porosity in pay zones
fluid velocity in the wellbore with multiple pay zones,
2porosity in adjacent formation
and heat convection. The alternating direction implicit
s1matrix density in pay zones, kg/m3
(ADI) finite difference method was used to solve the
s2matrix density in adjacent formation, kg/m3
temperature field model. The comparison of modeled
o density of oil, kg/m3
temperature curve with actual temperature log indicates
w density of water, kg/m3
that simulation curve is, in general, quite similar to the
l uid density in wellbore, kg/m3
temperature log, except for the anomaly near the pay
cs1specic heat of matrix in pay zones, J/(kg K)
zones is not as large. Total production rate, production
cs1specific heat of matrix in adjacent formation,
time, porosity, thickness of pay zones and geothermal
J/(kg K)
gradient have varying degrees of effects on the downhole
co specic heat of oil, J/(kg K)
temperature distribution, except the oil saturation whose
cw specic heat of water, J/(kg K)
effect is minor. The simulation results should be quite
cl specic heat of uid in wellbore, J/(kg K)
useful for evaluating producing oil well and providing
so1oil saturation in pay zones,
insights for designing the exploitation scheme.

Shi et al.

sw1water saturation in pay zones, wells using artificial neural networds: Engineeing
so2oil saturation in adjacent formation, Computations, 17(6), 735 754.
sw2water saturation in adjacent formation, Feng, N. M., Yan, G. F., AND Hu, Z.R., 1996, Numerical
zuid velocity in wellbore, m/s simulation and optimization for the ooding temperature
r seepage velocity of uid in pay zones, m/s elds:Acta Petrolei Sinica (in chinese), 17(1), 96 101.
rb well radius, m Frdric, M., Michel, P.D., and Martyn, B.B., 1994,
re a sufcient distance far away from wellbore, m Temperature model for flow in porous media and
h heat transfer coefficient by convection at wellbore: SPWLA, 35th, Annual Logging Symposium,
wellbore and formation interface, W/(m2 K) Tulsa, klahoma, USA, June 19 22.
Gao, Y. H., Sun, B. J., Wang, Z. Y., Cao, S. J., Song, L.
Tlr fluid temperature at the coupling boundary
S., and Cheng, H. Q., 2008, Calculation and analysis of
between wellbore and adjacent formation,
wellbore temperature eld in deepwater drilling: Journal
Tl'r fluid temperature next to coupling boundary
of China University of Petroleum (Natural Science
between wellbore and adjacent formation,
Series)(in Chinese), 32(2), 58 62.
Tl'c fluid temperature next to coupling boundary Hasan, A. R., and Kabir, C. S., 1991, Heat transfer during
between wellbore and pay zone, two-phase flow in well bores: Part I Formation
Tlc fluid temperature at the coupling boundary Temperature: The SPE 66th Annual Technical Conference,
between wellbore and pay zone, Dallas, Texas, SPE-22866, 469 487.
Ref Reynolds number Hasan, A.R., and Kabir, C.S., 1991, Heat transfer during
Prf Prandtl number two-phase flow in well bores:Part Well bore Fluid
Nuf Nusselt number Temperature: The SPE 66th Annual Technical Conference,
T r formation temperature at the coupling Dallas, Texas,SPE-22948, 695 708.
boundary between wellbore and adjacent formation, Hill, A.D., 1995, Production logging: theoretical and
Tc formation temperature at the coupling interpretive Elements: Petroleum Industry Press, Beijing.
boundary between wellbore and pay zone, Jin, N.D., Nie, X.B., Yin, Z., and Zhao, F. H., 2003,
T 1T 2formation temperature at the coupling Investigation on the applicability of oil/water two-
boundary between pay zone and adjacent formation, phase profiles interpretation based on temperature and
z depth, m owmeter logs: Proceedings of the Second International
zi the boundary between adjacent formation and Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Xi
pay zone, m an, 390 395
z vertical grid spacing, m Kutasov, I.M., and Eppelbaum, L.V., 2005, Determination
formation temperature at z = 0, of formation temperature from bottom-hole temperature
b geothermal gradient, /m logsa generalized horner method: J. Geophys. Eng, 2,
90 96, doi: 10.1088/1742-2132/2/2/002.
qo oil production rate, m3/d
Lee,T.C., Duchkov, A.D., and Morozov, S.G., 2003,
qw water production rate, m3/d
Determination of thermal properties and formation
D thickness of pay zones, m
temperature from borehole thermal recovery data:
r radial grid spacing in the wellbore, m
Geophysics, 68(6),1835 1846.
ri radial distance from well axis at node (i, j), m Ramey, H.J.,Jr., 1962, Well bore Heat Transmission:
t time, s Journal of Petroleum Technology, Apr., 427 435.
t time increment per time step, s Sagar, R.K., and Dotty, D.R., 1989, Predicting Temperature
Proles in a Flowing Well: 1989 SPE Annual Technical
Conference & Exhibition, Paper SPE 19702.
References Song, Y. J., and Shi, Y., 2007, Numerical simulation of
downhole temperature distribution in polymer injection
well: Progress in Geophysics (in Chinese), 22(5), 1533
Corre, B., Eymard, R., and Guenot, A., 1984, Numerical 1538.
computation of temperature distribution in a wellbore Stone, T. W., and Bennett, J., 2002, Thermal Simulation
while drilling: SPE-13208, 1 9. With Multisegment Wells: SPE Reservoir Evaluation &
Fagley, J., and Scott F. H., 1982, An Improved Simulation Engineering (June ), 206 218.
for Interpreting Temperature Logs in Water Injection Zhang, S.Y., Guo, Q., and Zhu, Y., 2004, Application of
Wells: SPEJ (Oct), 709 718. temperature logging data of logging interpretation of
Farshad, F. F., Garber, J. D., and Juliet, N. L., 2000, ultra-deep viscous oil wells in Tahe oilfield: Journal of
Predicting temperature profiles in producing oil Jianghan Petroleum Institute (in Chinese), 26(1), 66 68.

Downhole temperature distribution in producing oil wells

The nite difference expressions

An alternating direction implicit (ADI) difference described as follows.

method was used to solve the set of second partial The finite difference equations for the wellbore are
differential equations. Their difference expressions are written as

1 1 k
2 2 Ul cl k  12 1 1 k
(  )T 2
i 1, j  (  )T  (  )T 2
i 1, j
('r ) 2 2ri 'r ('r ) 2 Ol 't ('r ) 2 2ri 'r
i, j

1 U cX 2 2U c U c X 1
(  l l z )Ti ,kj 1  (  l l  l l z )Ti ,kj  Ti ,kj 1 , (A-1)
( 'z ) 2
Ol 'z ('z ) 2
Ol 't Ol 'z ('z ) 2

1 U cX 2 2U c U c X 1
(  l l z )Ti ,kj11  (  l l  l l z )Ti ,kj1 Ti ,kj11
( 'z ) 2
Ol 'z ( 'z ) 2
Ol 't Ol 'z ('z ) 2
1 1 k
2 2 Ul cl k  12 1 1 k

(  )T 2
i 1, j  (  )T  (  )T 
j . (A-2)
('r ) 2 Ol 't ('r ) 2 2ri 'r
i , j i 1,
('r ) 2 2ri 'r

The finite difference equations for the well axis are written as

2 k
4 2 Ul cl k  12 2 k
T 2
i 1, j  (  )T  T 2
i 1, j
('r ) 2 ('r ) 2 Ol 't ('r ) 2
i, j

1 U cX 2 2U c U c X 1
(  l l z )Ti ,kj 1  (  l l  l l z )Ti ,kj  Ti ,kj 1 , (A-3)
('z ) 2
Ol 'z ('z ) 2
Ol 't Ol 'z ( 'z ) 2

1 U cX 2 2U c U c X 1
(  l l z )Ti ,kj11  (  l l  l l z )Ti ,kj1  Ti ,kj11
('z ) 2
Ol 'z ('z ) 2
Ol 't Ol 'z ('z ) 2
2 Ul cl k  12
1 1
2 k 4 2 k
 (  )T  T 
('r ) 2 Ol 't ( 'r )
i 1, j
( 'r ) 2
i 1, j i , j 2

The finite difference equations for the pay zones are written as

1 U l clX l

1 1
k ri Oc 1 1 2( U c )* k  12
T 2
i 1, j (    )T
'ri ( 'ri 1  'ri ) 'ri 1 'ri 1 ( 'ri 1  'ri ) 'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) Oc 't i , j
1 U l clX l

1 ri Oc k
1 2 2( U c )* k 1
(  )Ti 1, 2j  Tk (
2 i , j 1
 )Ti , j  Ti ,kj 1, (A-5)
'ri 1 ( 'ri 1  'ri ) 'ri 1 ( 'z ) ( 'z ) 2
Oc 't ('z ) 2

2( U c)* k 1
1 2 1 1 k
T k 1  (
2 i , j 1
 )Ti , j  T k 1 
2 i , j 1
Ti 1, 2j
('z ) ('z ) 2
Oc 't ('z ) 'ri ('ri 1  'ri )
1 Ul clXl 1 Ul clXl
ri Oc 1 1 2( U c)* k  12 1 ri Oc k

(    )Ti , j (  )Ti 1, 2j . (A-6)

'ri 1 'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) Oc 't 'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri 1

Shi et al.

The finite difference equations for the adjacent formation are written as

1 k
1 1 1 2( U c)** k  12 1 1 k
Ti 1, 2j  (    )Ti , j  (  )Ti 1, 2j
'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri 1ri 'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) Or 't 'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri 1ri
1 2 2( U c)** k 1
 T k
2 i , j 1
 (  )Ti , j  Ti ,kj 1 , (A-7)
('z ) ('z ) 2
Or 't ( 'z ) 2

1 k 1 2 2( U c)** k 1 1
Ti , j 1  (  )T  T k 1
('z ) 2 ( 'z ) 2 Or 't i , j ('z ) 2 i , j 1

1 k
1 1 1 2( U c)** k  12
 Ti 1, 2j  (    )Ti , j
'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) ri 'ri 1 'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) 'ri ('ri 1  'ri ) Or 't
1 1 k
(  )Ti 1, 2j . (A-8)
'ri 1 ('ri 1  'ri ) ri 'ri 1

where, ri+1 = ri+1ri and ri = ri ri1, and ri denotes the wellbore and formation is equidistant with a size of 1 m.
radial distance from the well axis at node (i, j).
We obtain the tridiagonal linear set consisting of the
coefcients of these equations. The solution can be derived
by the tridiagonal forward and back substitution algorithm. Shi Ying graduated from DaQing Petroleum University in
In order to facilitate accurate representation of the radial 1999 with a Bachelors degree.
heat transfer terms and consider the variation of heat Currently she is studying for her
characteristics in the wellbore and formation, we used PhD at Institute of Geology and
an equidistant radial grid spacing for the wellbore and a Geophysics, Chinese Academy
logarithmic grid spacing in the formation. The size of the of Sciences, majoring in reservoir
radial gird step is 0.01 m in the wellbore, and the radial geophysics.
distance ri from the well axis is ri =rbeei in the formation. E-mail: yingshi@mail.iggcas.
Here, we let ee =1.1. The vertical grid spacing for the