Development of a Coupled Geomechanics-Thermal Reservoir Simulator Using Finite Element Method
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract This paper presents a discussion on the development of a coupled geomechanics-thermal reservoir simulator using finite element method (FEM). The Galerkin's least square (GLS) technique is employed to discretize the saturation equation in order to stabilize the solutions. Unlike the conventional thermal reservoir simulators which are usually developed using finite deference method (FDM), the proposed FEM models have the advantage of easily incorporating the full permeability tensor. A numerical example is presented to evaluate the suitability and the validity of the developed coupled simulator. Introduction The coupling between the processes of heat transfer, multiphase fluid flow and stress/deformation has become an increasingly important subject in the area of the oil industry(1). Particularly, the coupling is crucial in such problems as borehole stability, hydraulic fracturing and injection orproduction induced deformation on the ground surface during the thermal recovery processes in the heavy oil or oil sand reservoirs. Numerical modeling of the coupled processes is complex, and has been historically carried out in the areas of geomechanics modeling and the reservoir simulation. Theformer is to compute the stress-strain behavior, therefore the deformation; the latter is to essentially model the multiphase flow and heat transfer in porous media. Each of these disciplines simplifies the part of the problem that is not of primary interest. These approaches are unacceptable in situations where the coupling is strong and the changes of porosity and permeability cannot be accounted by rock compressibility alone. Gutierrez and Lewis(2) extend Biot's theory to multiphase fluid flow in deformable porous media. Based on their formulation, they conclude that the coupling between the geomechanics and the multiphase flow occurs simultaneously. Thus, fully coupled system equations of deformations, multiphase flow and heat transfer should be solved simultaneously. Development of such kinds of fully coupled geomechanics-multiphase flow-heat transfer simulators needstremendous effort, since the existing FEM geomechanics codes and the FDM reservoir simulators cannot be used. Settari and Mourits(3) present an approach to couple the stress-strain behavior to multiphase flow, heat transfer usingporosity as a coupling parameter. The geomechanics module and the thermal reservoir simulator are used in a staggered manner. Pore pressure and temperature changes are calculated from the thermal reservoir simulator and transferred to the geomechanics module. The stress changes and the displacements are then calculated in the geomechanics simulation. An iterative algorithm is used to ensure that theporosity calculated from the geomechanics module is the same as that from the thermal reservoir simulator. The staggered technique employed to solve the coupled system equations allows for the use of the existing geomechanics codes in conjunction with a standard reservoir simulator. Currently, most of the commercial coupled geomechanics-multiphase flow-heat transfer simulators are developed in this way. The disadvantage of these kinds of coupled simulators is that the thermal reservoir module, usually developed using finite difference method (FDM), cannot accommodate the full permeability tensor, since they adopt the standard discretization scheme such as 5-spot for 2-D problems and 7-spot for 3-D problems.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».