Coupled Reservoir Geomechanical Simulations For the SAGD Process
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Conventional reservoir simulation may not fully characterize the recovery mechanism of the SAGD process in uncemented oil sands reservoirs. Uncemented oil sands exhibit significantly different geomechanical behaviour from that of their cemented counterpart. Therefore, to fully explore the SAGD recovery process, coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations are required. This simulation technique can characterize both the multiphase fluid flow and reservoir parameter variations based on certain stress-strain relationships of oil sands in the SAGD process. In this paper, sequentially coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations are conducted. It is based on both the reservoir simulator, EXOTHERM, developed by T.T. &Associates Inc. and the geotechnical simulator, FLAC, developed by Itasca Consulting Group Inc. This paper discusses the strategies and methodology of the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations for the SAGD process based on these two simulators. Meanwhile, the results of the conventional reservoir simulations and the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations are compared. These comparisons are conducted based on initial stress conditions of K0= 1.0. The simulation results show that differences exist between coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations and conventional reservoir simulations under certain SAGD operation conditions. Introduction Canada has huge oil sand resources. Development technologies of oil sand resources include world-class surface mining, SAGD, Vapex, and cold production. The SAGD process has proven to be a promising technology and will play a critical role in the development of oil sand resources. In addition to reliable reservoir characterization and production facilities, realistic predictions of production performance are an important component in the design of commercial-scale SAGD projects. The realistic predictions of SAGD performance by numerical simulation are an integral component in the design and management of a SAGD project. Conventional reservoir numerical simulation emphasizes multiphase flow in porous media but generally does not take the interactions between fluids and solids into account. Unfortunately, this treatment is not correct for oil sand material. Oil sands are locked sands(1), which have very high rates of dilation at failure. In Athabasca deposits, McMurray Formation oil sands display a high incidence of tangential contacts as well as common straight and interpenetrative contacts(2). Owing to the grain-to-grain contacts observed in locked oil sands, it shows the following characteristics: absence of cohesion, highly quartzose mineralogy, high strength, steeply curved failure envelopes, low porosities, lack of interstitial cement, brittle behaviour, and exceptionally large dilation rates at failure(3). These properties are the basis of large variations of reservoir parameters and processes in the SAGD process. In the SAGD process, continuous steam injection and fluid flow can change reservoir pore pressure and temperature, which can increase or decrease the effective stress in the reservoir. Thus, deformations can occur in some regions. Likewise, the deformations of the oil sand material (skeleton and pores) changes the fluid flow-related reservoir parameters(4). This is obviously a coupled problem. Therefore, coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations are required. In this paper, two existing well-established simulator codes, EXOTHERM and FLAC, are explicitly coupled to characterize both the fluid flow and geomechanical behaviors in the SAGD process.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».