Numerical Simulation of ES-SAGD Process in Athabasca Oil Sands with Top Water and Gas Thief Zones
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Overlying top water and gas thief zones have a detrimental effect on the Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) recovery process since steam penetrates into these zones which results in great heat loss. Due to the presence of these top thief zones, recovering bitumen by the SAGD process has become challenging for the Athabasca oil sands. Numerical simulations, laboratory experiments and field production data have demonstrated that oil production tends to decrease as the depletion of top gas occurs; also, heat loss to the overlying thief zone will be more significant when a top water zone is present. Indeed, SAGD is a coupled geomechanical, thermal and fluid flow problem because continuous steam injection changes reservoir pore pressure and temperature, which can alter the effective stress in-situ. Therefore, to represent the physics of thermal flow and soil geomechanics, a coupled geomechanical simulation that solves the flow and stress equation simultaneously in the reservoir is crucial for modeling the SAGD process. The objective of this paper is to construct a 3D geostatistical model for the Surmont pilot and implement coupled geomechanical modeling for the SAGD process aiming at investigating the impact of dilation and thermal expansion on the surface subsidence and bitumen recovery. Reasonable history match of oil and water rates has been achieved and steam chamber profiles have been conformed to the field data from the observation wells. An Expanding Solvent Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (ES-SAGD) process has been investigated on a full field-based heterogeneous simulation model using an optimal solvent mixture. Finally, geomechanical effects on the ES-SAGD process are investigated through an iterative coupling approach. Introduction The negative impacts of top water and gas cap on SAGD performance have been previously presented and discussed in the literature (Good et al. 1997; Nasr et al. 2000; Law et al. 2000). Both experimental and simulation approaches were conducted to determine SAGD steam chamber growth in the presence of a top thief zone. It was observed that the overlying top water and gas thief zones have a detrimental effect on the Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) recovery process since steam penetrates into these zones and results in great heat loss (AEUB, 1998). Thermal SAGD simulations models have been constructed and successfully matched using the computer assisted history-matching approach. The optimization strategies have been proposed in terms of the operating pressure and subcool control. Furthermore, ES-SAGD possibilities have been investigated using different solvent mixture co-injected with steam. Through a sensitivity study, an optimal solvent mixture has been proposed for this case with a top thief zone. SAGD is a coupled geomechanical, thermal and fluid flow problem because continuous steam injection changes reservoir pore pressure and temperature, which can alter the effective stress in-situ. Dilation behavior associated with volumetric strains is triggered by the continuous steam injection, which causes the increase of porosity and permeability. Therefore, the fluid flow behavior must be coupled to the geomechanical behavior of the oil sands. Investigating the interaction between the cap rock integrity, dilation and thermal expansion under the continuous steam injection is the motivation of this study. ES-SAGD Investigation ES-SAGD is the co-injection of small amount solvent additive with steam in the SAGD process. Solvent will condensate at the boundary of the steam chamber and diffuse into bitumen, which will reduce the oil viscosity, yield the higher oil drainage and reduce the amount of steam required.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».