Chapter l

Introduction

1.1 Background
Reservoir simulation in the oil industry has become the standard for solving reservoir
engineering problems. Simulators for various recovery processes have been developed
and continue to be developed for new oil recovery processes. Reservoir simulation is the
art of combining physics, mathematics, reservoir engineering, and computer programming
to develop a tool for predicting hydrocarbon reservoir performance under various oper-
ating strategies. Figure 1-1 depicts the major steps involved in the development of a reser-
voir simulator: formulation, discretization, well representation, linearization, solution, and
validation (Odeh, 1982). In this figure, formulation outlines the basic assumptions
inherent to the simulator, states these assumptions in precise mathematical terms, and
applies them to a control volume in the reservoir. The result of this step is a set of coupled,
nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs) that describes fluid flow through porous
media.
The PDEs derived during the formulation step, if solved analytically, would give reservoir
pressure, fluid saturations, and well flow rates as continuous functions of space and time.
Because of the highly nonlinear nature of the PDEs, however, analytical techniques cannot
be used and solutions must be obtained with numerical methods. In contrast to analytical
solutions, numerical solutions give the values of pressure and fluid saturations only at dis-
crete points in the reservoir and at discrete times. Discretization is the process of converting
PDEs into algebraic equations. Several numerical methods can be used to discretize the
PDEs; however, the most common approach in the oil industry today is the finite difference
method. The most commonly used finite difference approach essentially builds on Taylor
series expansion and neglects terms that are considered to be small when small difference in
space parameters is considered. This expanded form is a set of algebraic equations. Finite
element method, on the other hand uses various functions to express variables in the gov-
erning equation. These functions lead to the development of an error function that is
minimized in order to generate solutions to the governing equation. To carry out discretiza-
tion, a PDE is written for a given point in space at a given time level. The choice of time
level (old time level, current time level, or intermediate time level) leads to the explicit,
implicit, or Crank-Nicolson formulation method. The discretization process results in a
system of nonlinear algebraic equations. These equations generally cannot be solved with
linear equation solvers, and the lincarization of such equations becomes a necessary step
before solutions can be obtained. Well representation is used to incorporate fluid production
and injection into the nonlinear algebraic equations. Linearization involves approximating
2 Chapter 1 Introduction

C .......... ) C ............. ) C ............ ) ( ....... C °3

NONLINE/kR PDE'S NONLINEAR ALGEBRAIC LINEAR ALGEBRAIC SATURATION
EQUATIONS EQUATIONS DISTRIBUTIONS
& WELL RATES

C-............... .3
Figure 1-1 Major steps used to develop reservoir simulators.
Redrawn from Odeh (1982),
nonlinear terms (transmissibilities, production and injection, and coefficients of unknowns
in the accumulation terms) in both space and time. Linearization results in a set of linear
algebraic equations. Any one of several linear equation solvers can then be used to obtain the
solution, which comprises pressure and fluid saturation distributions in the reservoir and
well flow rates. Validation of a reservoir simulator is the last step in developing a simulator,
"after which the simulator can be used for practical field applications. The validation step is
necessary to make sure that no errors were introduced in the various steps of development or
in computer programming. This validation is distinct from the concept of conducting experi-
ments in support of a mathematical model. Validation of a reservoir simulator merely
involves testing the numerical code.
There are three methods available for the discretization of any PDE: the Taylor series
method, the integral method, and the variational method (Aziz and Settari, 1979). The first
two methods result in the finite-difference method, whereas the third results in the varia-
tional method. The "mathematical approach" refers to the methods that obtain the non-
linear algebraic equations through deriving and discretizing the PDEs. Developers of
simulators relied heavily on the mathematics in the mathematical approach to obtain the
nonlinear algebraic equations or the finite-difference equations. However, Abou-Kassem,
Farouq Ali, Islam, and Osman (2006) presented a new approach that derives the finite-dif-
ference equations without going through the rigor of PDEs and discretization. This
approach also uses fictitious wells to represent boundary conditions. This new tactic is
termed the "engineering approach" because it is closer to the engineer's thinking and to
the physical meaning of the terms in the flow equations. The engineering approach is
simple and yet general and rigorous, and both the engineering and m a t h e m a t i c a l
approaches treat boundary conditions with the same accuracy if the mathematical
approach uses second-order approximations. In addition, the engineering approach results
in the same finite-difference equations for any hydrocarbon recovery process. Because the
engineering approach is independent of the mathematical approach, it reconfirms the use
of central differencing in space discretization and highlights the assumptions involved in
choosing a time level in the mathematical approach.

1.2 Milestonesfor the Engineering Approach

The foundations for the engineering approach have been overlooked all these years. Tradi-
tionally, reservoir simulators were developed by first using a control volume (or elemen-
tary volume), such as that shown in Figure 1-2 for 1D flow or in Figure 1-3 for 3D flow,
that was visualized by mathematicians to develop fluid flow equations. Note that point x in
1D and point (x, y, z) in 3D fall on the edge of control volumes. The resulting flow equa-
 1.2 Milestones for the Engineering Approach 3

Flow in
I
) x
iiii!l I '°wou'
,I Ax I,
x x+Ax

Figure 1-2 Controlvolume used by mathematicians for 1D flow.

(x,y,z+Az) ~(,y+Ay,z+Az)

zj T
(x+Ax,y,z+Az.

(x+Ax,y+Ay, z)

Figure 1-3 Controlvolume used by mathematicians for 3D flow.

Redrawn from Bear (1988).
tions are in the form of PDEs. Once the PDEs are derived, early pioneers of simulation
looked to mathematicians to provide solution methods. These methods started with the
description of the reservoir as a collection of gridblocks, represented by points that fall
within them (or gridpoints representing blocks that surround them), followed by the
replacement of the PDEs and boundary conditions by algebraic equations, and finally the
solution of the resulting algebraic equations. Developers of simulators were all the time
occupied by finding the solution and, perhaps, forgot that they were solving an engi-
neering problem. The engineering approach can be realized should one try to relate the
terms in the discretized flow equations for any block to the block itself and to all its neigh-
boring blocks. A close inspection of the flow terms in a discretized flow equation of a
given fluid (oil, water, or gas) in a black-oil model for a given block reveals that these
terms are nothing but Darcy' s Law describing volumetric flow rates of the fluid at stan-
dard conditions between the block and its neighboring blocks. The accumulation term is
the change in the volume at standard conditions of the fluid contained in the block itself at
two different times.
More than 30 years ago, Farouq Ali was the first to observe that flow terms in the dis-
cretized form of governing equations are nothing but Darcy's Law describing volumetric
flow rate between any two neighboring blocks. Making use of this observation coupled
with an assumption related to the time level at which flow terms are evaluated, he devel-
oped the forward-central-difference equation and the backward-central-difference equation
4 Chapter I Introduction

without going through the rigor of the mathematical approach in teaching reservoir simula-
tion to undergraduate students (Farouq Ali, 1986). Ertekin, Abou-Kassem, and King (2001)
were the first to use a control volume represented by a point at its center in the mathemat-
ical approach as shown in Figure 1-4 for 1D flow and Figure 1-5 for 3D flow. This control
volume is closer to an engineer's thinking of representing blocks in reservoirs. The obser-
vation by Farouq Ali in the early seventies and the introduction of the new control volume
by Ertekin et al. have been the two milestones that contributed significantly to the recent
development of the engineering approach.
Overlooking the engineering approach has kept reserw)ir simulation closely tied with
PDEs. From the mathematician's point of view, this is a blessing because researchers in
reservoir simulation have devised advanced methods for solving highly nonlinear PDEs,
and this enriched the literature in mathematics in this important area. Contributions of res-
ervoir simulation to solving PDEs include the following:
• Treating nonlinear terms in space and time (Settari and Aziz 1975; Coats, Ramesh,
and Winestock 1977; Saad 1989; Gupta 1990).
• Devising methods of solving systems of nonlinear PDEs, such as the IMPES
(Breitenbach, Thurnau, and van Poollen 1969), SEQ (Spillette, Hillestad, and Stone,
1973; Coats 1978), Fully Implicit SS (Sheffield 1969), and Adaptive Implicit
(Thomas and Thurnau 1983) methods.
• Devising advanced iterative methods for solving systems of linear algebraic
equations, such as the Block Iterative (Behie and Vinsome 1982), Nested
Factorization (Appleyard and Cheshire 1983), and Orthomin (Vinsome 1976)
methods.

Well

I ~ , "J. .... ~" I

I I
..jpm m m m m m i
J
s
s Flow in Flow out

I X
)' x-Ax/2 x+Ax/2

Figure 1-4 Control volume for 1D flow.

1.3 Importance of the Engineering and Mathematical Approaches

The importance of the engineering approach lies in being close to the engineer's
mindset and in its capacity to derive the algebraic flow equations easily and without
going through the rigor of PDEs and discretization. In reality, the development of a res-
ervoir simulator can do away with the mathematical approach because the objective of
this approach is to obtain the algebraic flow equations for the process being simulated.
In addition, the engineering approach reconfirms the use of central-difference approxi-
 1.4 Summary 5

(x-~d2,y-Ay/2,z+Az/2) (x-,~x/2,y+Ay/2 ,z+,~./2 )

(x+~d2,y-Ay/2,z+~./2) /, d
(x+,Sx/2,y+,~y/2,

J ' z~z] (x-A~2,y-'Ay/2,z-Az./2) | .~l (x-Ax/2,y+Ay/2,z-Az/2)

x.- /1/t- I.,,'u
(x+,~x/2,y-Ay/2 ,z-~-/2 ) (x+Ax/2,y+,~y/2,z-~-/2)
Figure 1-5 Controlvolume for 3D flow.
mation of the second-order space derivative and provides interpretation of the approxi-
mations involved in the forward-, backward-, and central-difference of the first-order
time derivative that are used in the mathematical approach.
The majority, if not all, of the available commercial reservoir simulators were developed
without even looking at an analysis of truncation errors, consistency, convergence, or sta-
bility. The importance of the mathematical approach, however, lies within its capacity to
provide analysis of such items. Only in this case do the two approaches complement each
other and both become equally important in reservoir simulation.

1.4 Summary
The traditional steps involved in the development of a reservoir simulator include formu-
lation, discretization, well representation, linearization, solution, and validation. The
mathematical approach involves formulation to obtain a differential equation, followed by
reservoir discretization to describe the reservoir, and finally the discretization of the dif-
ferential equation to obtain the flow equation in algebraic form. In contrast, the engi-
neering approach involves reservoir discretization to describe the reservoir, followed by
formulation to obtain the flow equation in integral form, which, when approximated, pro-
duces the flow equation in algebraic form. The mathematical approach and engineering
approach produce the same flow equation in algebraic form but use two unrelated routes.
The seeds for the engineering approach existed a long time ago but were overlooked by
pioneers in reservoir simulation because modeling petroleum reservoirs has been consid-
ered a mathematical problem rather than an engineering problem. The engineering
approach is both easy and robust. [t does not involve differential equations, discretization
of differential equations, or discretization of boundary conditions.

1.5 Exercises

1-1 Name the major steps used in the development of a reservoir simulator using
the mathematical approach.
1-2 Indicate the input and the expected output for each major step in Exercise 1-1.
6 Chapter l Introduction

1-3 How does the engineering approach differ from the mathematical approach
in developing a reservoir simulator?
1-4 Name the major steps used in the development of a reservoir simulator using
the engineering approach.
1-5 Indicate the input and the expected output for each major step in Exercise 1-4.
1-6 Draw a sketch, similar to Figure l - l , for the development of a reservoir
simulator using the engineering approach.
1-7 Using your own words, state the importance of the engineering approach in
reservoir simulation.