Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Many experimental studies and field evidences show that Non- Substitute Equation (2) into Equation (5):
Darcy behavior would take place in both gas and liquid
reservoirs under practical conditions. It is no secret that the ρ ∂P µ ∂V ∂ρ ∂ 2 ρ ∂V ∂ρ ∂2 ρ
empirical Darcy law is no longer accepted to fully describe + V + ρβV 2 + +V 2 + = −φ (6)
µ ′ ∂X K ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂X ∂t∂X
fluid flow in porous media. This led the investigation of
modifying Darcy’s equation and deriving better alternative
governing equation that may represent fluid flow in Re-arrange:
porous media.
ρ ∂P ρµ ρ 2 β 2 ∂V ∂ρ ∂2 ρ
In this investigation, a practical and reliable model is + V+ V + +V +
presented to describe Darcian and non-Darcian fluid flow
µ ′ ∂X µ ′K µ′ ∂X ∂X ∂X 2
(7)
behavior in porous media. The model has been numerically ∂V ∂ρ ∂2 ρ
simulated and tested with very encouraging results. Although, = −φ
the model has been designed for single phase linear flow, ∂X ∂X ∂t∂X
modification of this model to cover multi-phase and both
radial and spherical flow is expected to be achieved with the ∂2ρ
Using chain rule for: we get:
same accuracy and less effort. ∂X 2
Governing Equation
∂2ρ ∂ ∂ρ ∂ ∂ρ ∂P
The pressure gradient in the suggested alternative form of = = =
equation is affected by the very well known viscous term in ∂X 2
∂X ∂X ∂X ∂P ∂X
Darcy’s equation, the inertial term in Forchheimer’s equation (8)
∂ ∂P ∂2P
and the second viscous term in Brinkman’s equation that ρC = ρC
describes frictional forces among the layers of flowing fluid ∂X ∂X ∂X 2
and between fluid and the media. The new diffusivity equation
is derived from the simplest form of this equation for single
∂2ρ
phase and linear flow system. The pressure gradient in the X- As well for: we get:
direction can be expressed by the following equation: ∂t∂X
∂P µV ∂ 2V ∂2ρ ∂ ∂ρ ∂ ∂ρ ∂P
=− − ρβ V 2
+ µ′ (1) = = =
∂X K ∂X 2 ∂ t∂ X ∂t ∂X ∂t ∂P ∂X (9)
∂ ∂P ∂2P
Re-arrange: ρC = ρC
∂t ∂X ∂ t∂ X
∂ 2V 1 ∂P µ 2
= + V + ρβ V (2) ∂ρ
∂X 2 µ ′ ∂X K And for: we get:
∂X
We have: ∂ρ ∂ρ ∂P ∂P
= = ρC (10)
∂X ∂P ∂X ∂X
∂ (Vρ ) ∂ρ
= −φ (3)
∂X ∂t 1 ∂ρ
C= (11)
ρ ∂P
∂V ∂ρ ∂ρ
ρ +V = −φ (4)
∂X ∂X ∂t
∂2ρ ∂2ρ ∂ρ
Substitute for , and from Equations (8), (9)
Take the derivative of both sides of Equation (4) with respect ∂X 2
∂t∂X ∂X
to X: and (10) respectively into Equation (7):
∂ 2V ∂V ∂ρ ∂ 2 ρ ∂ρ ∂V ∂2ρ ρ ∂P ρµ ρ 2β 2 ∂V ∂P
ρ + +V + = −φ (5) + V + V + 2 ρC +
∂X 2 ∂X ∂X ∂X 2 ∂X ∂X ∂t∂X µ ′ ∂X µ ′K µ′ ∂X ∂X (12)
∂ P 2
∂ P 2
VρC = − φρ C
∂X 2
∂ t∂ X
SPE 84879 3
Equation (17) is the diffusivity equation in the X-direction, for Figure 3 shows a comparison between the predictions of
the Y-direction we get: Darcy’s diffusivity equation model versus the suggested
model in Equation (19). It is very clear that at low velocity
both models prediction is almost identical, but as the flow
1 ∂P 1 ρβ 2 V ∂ 2 P ∂ 2 P
− − V− V − = (18) velocity increases the proposed model predicts higher pressure
Cµ ∂Y CK Cµ φ ∂Y 2 ∂t∂Y gradient than Darcy’s model. This fact suggests that the
proposed model would be favorable in representing flow
The summation of Equations (17) and (18) gives the behaviors in gas reservoirs, highly fractured reservoirs and in
diffusivity equation in two dimensions: the vicinity of the wellbores where high flow rates
are expected.
4 SPE 84879
Further verification of the proposed model can be inferred by direction of the other two terms (lower pressure gradient) and
comparing its predictions with another comprehensive model that this term expresses the frictions between fluid layers and
based on the Navier-Stokes equation that has been derived and fluid and media makes it very important when multi-phase flow
numerically modeled to represent fluid flow in porous is encountered. The authors believe that having more than one
media8,9. This model includes all of the terms mentioned in the fluid flowing in the reservoir simultaneously, which is the case
basic equation (Eq. 1) that our diffusivity equation (Eq. 19) in most reservoirs or during reservoir injection process, the
has been derived from in addition to another convective term frictional term (Brinkman’s term) role becomes more
drawn from the original Navier-Stokes equation. The significant. The authors also believe that the phenomenon of
comprehensive model predicts flow velocity in the X-direction viscous fingering and channelling that take place during
at any time using the following equation: miscible and immiscible displacement in oil reservoirs can be
explained and understood by implementation of the frictional
∂U µ ∂ 2U µφ viscous term of Brinkman.
= − U − βφ U 2
−
∂t ρ ∂Y 2
ρK (20) An experimental program has been run in the laboratory
1 ∂U ∂U φ ∂P specifically to compare its results with the proposed model
U +V − predictions. Real cut samples from two outcrops of prospective
φ ∂X ∂Y ρ ∂X
formations in the Windsor area, Nova Scotia, Canada have been
tested. Figures 5, 6, 7 and 8 show how the experimental results
In the Y-direction, the flow velocity at any time can be
compared with numerical model predictions in terms of flow
predicted by this model:
velocity versus pressure drop. It can be easily seen from these
plots that the numerical model proposed in this study matches
∂V µ ∂ 2V µφ fairly well with the experimental results suggesting serious
= − V − βφ V 2
−
∂t ρ ∂X 2
ρK (21) consideration of field implementation.
1 ∂V ∂V φ ∂P
U + V − Conclusions
φ ∂X ∂Y ρ ∂Y Lots of criticism has been reported against the use of Darcy’s
equation to represent all aspects of porous media flow. In this
If we drop the convective term ∂U ∂U and study rather than addressing particular case, a general solution
U +V
∂ X ∂Y has been introduced through the use of a single model capable
∂V ∂V from the comprehensive model expressed by of representing both Darcian and non-Darcian flow in porous
U +V
∂X ∂Y media. The proposed numerical model includes the
Equation (20) and Equation (21) respectively, then the resultant conventional Darcy’s viscous term in addition to
model should be equivalent and gives the same solution of the Forchheiemr’s inertial term and Brinkman’s frictional term.
diffusivity model introduced by Equation (19). Having done
that, Equations (20) and (21) become: The proposed model has been compared to Darcy’s model and
another comprehensive model based on Navier-Stokes
equations. Predictions of the proposed model match Darcy’s
∂U µ ∂ 2U µφ φ ∂P
= − U − βφ U 2
− (22) model predictions at low spatial velocity but in high flow
∂t ρ ∂Y 2
ρK ρ ∂X velocity it predicted higher pressure gradient than Darcy’s to
account for the non-Darcian flow effect. Meanwhile, almost
identical prediction has been noticed when compared with the
∂V µ ∂ 2V µφ φ ∂P comprehensive model. The proposed model has been tested
= − V − βφ V 2 − (23)
∂t ρ ∂X 2
ρK ρ ∂Y against experimental data and shows excellent agreement.
Y
∂P
=0
Y=H ∂Y
1,m ∆Y n,m
∆X
∆
P = Pi 1,j+1 ∆ P = Po
1,j i,j
1,j -1
1,2 X
1,1 2,1 ∂P i-1,1 i,1 i+1,1 n,1 X=L
=0
∂Y
1.E+06
Darcy's viscous term
3.E+05
1.E+05
-1.E+05
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
V, cm/sec
60000
ρ = 1 gr/cc
µ = 0.01 gr/cm sec
k = 100 md
φ = 0.236
Pressure Gradient, MPa/M
20000
0
0 50 100
V, cm/Sec
Fig. 3 Comparison between the predictions of Darcy’s model against the proposed model
1.E+07
r = 1 gr/cc
Pressure Gradient, MPa/m
4.E+06
2.E+06
0.E+00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
V, cm/sec
Fig. 4 Comparison between the proposed model and the model represented by Eqs. 22 & 23
SPE 84879 7
1.E+04 12000
Sample 1 Sample 2
9.E+03
10000
8.E+03
7.E+03
8000
6.E+03
5.E+03 6000
4.E+03
4000
3.E+03
2.E+03
2000
1.E+03
0.E+00 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
V, cm/sec V, cm/sec
Fig. 5 Numerical predictions versus experimental Fig. 6 Numerical predictions versus experimental
results, Sample # 1. results, Sample # 2.
18000 8000
Sam ple 3 Sample 4
16000 7000
14000
Pressure Gradient, kPa/m
6000
Pressure Gradient, kPa/m
12000
5000
10000
4000
8000
3000
6000
4000 2000
2000 1000
0 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
V, cm/sec
V, cm/sec