Numerical Modelling of Geomechanical Response of Sandy Shale Formation in Oil Sands Reservoir During Steam Injection
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In this study, we conducted numerical simulations of steam injection into a horizontal well. A sandy shale layer with thickness of 1 meter is overlain 2 meters away from the injection well. The numerical simulation aims at studying the variations of the stress state and the permeability in the sandy shale layer during steam injection, and to provide useful effective stress paths for laboratory experiments to follow when testing material properties of the sandy shale. Introduction Sandy shale formations of several meters in thickness frequently exist in oil sands deposit. Their material properties, sedimentary characteristics and distribution in a SAGD reservoir are important factors that determine SAGD performance and strategies of positioning horizontal well pairs. It has been confirmed that sandy shale formation is usually very sandy and discontinuous; therefore, they are expected to be permeable to variable degrees during SAGD operations. This is completely different from the shale interbed which has extremely low permeability and can be considered as impermeable. Analysis of stress state change and anisotropic permeability variation in the sandy shale requires conducting coupled simulation of geomechanics and thermal reservoir flow. Numerical modeling of the coupled processes is historically carried out in the areas of geomechanics modeling and the reservoir simulation. Gutierrez and Lewis(1) 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 needs tremendous effort, since the existing FEM geomechanics codes and the FDM reservoir simulators cannot be used. Settari and Mourits(2) present an approach to couple the stress-strain behavior to multiphase flow, heat transfer using porosity 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 and the displacement changes are then calculated in the geomechanics simulation. An iterative algorithm is used to ensure that the porosity 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. Much effort has been made in developing a coupled geomechanics-reservoir simulator using finite element methods (FEM) by Du and Wong (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). The developed simulator has the capability of handling full permeability tensor and strain-induced permeability model.
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 | 0,001 | 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 ».