Upload
julian-austin
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
© IFP 3 Applications Basin simulation Reservoir simulation C02 geological storage simulation
Citation preview
CO2 maîtrisé | Carburants diversifiés | Véhicules économes | Raffinage propre | Réserves prolongées
Écrire ici dans le masque le nom de votre Direction – Écrire ici dans le masque le titre de la présentation – Date de la présentation
© IF
P© IF
P
Cell centered finite volume scheme for multiphase porous media flows with applications
in the oil industry
International Conference Scaling Up and Modelingfor transport and flow in porous media
Dubrovnik, Croatia October 13rd-16th 2008
Léo Agelas, Daniele di Pietro, Roland Masson (IFP)Robert Eymard (Paris East University)
2
© IF
P©
IFP
Outline
Finite volume discretization of compositional models
Cell Centered FV discretization of diffusion fluxes on general meshes
3
© IF
P©
IFP
Applications
Basin simulation
Reservoir simulation
C02 geological storage simulation
4
© IF
P©
IFP
Compositional Models
Pore
ii Vol
VolSmmCfixedTP
,),(,
),,(),,,(),,,(
CTPfCTPCTP
),,(),,,( ,, xSPxSk cr
,0,,
,1
1
)( ,,
Sff
C
S
QVCdivCS
gPPKk
V
ii
ii
iiit
cr
Phases: = water, oil, gasComponents i=1,...N (H2O, HydroCarbon species, C02, ...)
Unknowns
Thermodynamics laws (EOS):
Hydrodynamics laws:
present phases
present phases
absent phases
mass conservation of each component
pore volume conservation
thermodynamic equilibrium
Darcy phase velocities
5
© IF
P©
IFP
Discretization of compositional models
Main constraints Must account for a large range of physics Robustness and CPU time efficiency Avoid strong time step reduction
Cell centered FV discretization in space
Euler fully or semi implicit schemes in time Thermodynamic equilibrium and pore volume conservation are implicit
6
© IF
P©
IFP
Finite Volume Scheme
Discretization
Discrete conservation law
0)(11
1
dtdxQPKSMdivStt
n
n
t
t Ktnn
K
nK
nKnn
nK
nK dxQdsnPKSMm
ttSS
K
11*1
1
.)(
TM
MMKLKK PTSSMdsnPKSM ),(.)(
0 ML
MK TT
LK
Kx
LxKn
K
KKx
LK
K
,
7
© IF
P©
IFP
Discretization of compositional models
KnKi
KLKLLKKLiK
nKi
nKi mQGXXMCm
tXmXm
K
1,
**,
1
),()()( ,*
TMMLKKLMc
nM
MKKL gZXXSPPTG ),()( **
,*
,1
ii CSPCXm ),()(
),(),(
1
1
11,11,
1,,
1,
nK
nKi
nK
nKi
i
nKi
nK
PCfPCf
C
S
CSPX ,, present phases
present phases
present phases
),()()(PC
SkrXM
Component mass conservations
Pore volume conservation and thermodynamics equilibrium
8
© IF
P©
IFP
Finite Volume discretization of diffusion fluxes
Cell centered schemes Linear approximation of the fluxes Consistent on general meshes Cellwise constant diffusion tensors Cheap and robust
Compact stencil Coercivity Monotonicity
TCSPPu ic ,),(, ,
TM
MMKK uTdsnuK ,,
LK
Ku
LuKn
LGR
Fault
9
© IF
P©
IFP
Reservoir and basin simulation meshesThe mesh follows the directions of anisotropy using hexahedra but is locally non orthogonal due to
- Faults
- Erosions (pinchout)
- Wells
10
© IF
P©
IFP
CPG faults
11
© IF
P©
IFP
Corner Point GeometriesStratigraphic grids with erosions
Examples of degenerate cells (erosions)
• Hexahedra• Topologicaly Cartesian• Dead cells• Erosions• Local Grid Refinement (LGR)
12
© IF
P©
IFP
Near well discretizations
Multi-branch well
Hybrid mesh using Voronoi cells
Hybrid mesh using pyramids and tetraedra
13
© IF
P©
IFP
Cell centered finite volume schemes on general meshes
O and L MPFA type schemes Piecewise constant gradient on a subgrid
Cellwise constant gradient construction Success (Eymard et al.): symmetric coercive but not compact
Ku
' su '
ssu
14
© IF
P©
IFP
Discrete cellwise constant gradient
x
K
KKK
K nuummu
,)()(
dKK
K
vallforvvxxnmm
K
)(,
Cellwise constant linear exact gradient
KKu
u
center of gravity of the facex
15
© IF
P©
IFP
Hybrib bilinear form
KKK
KK
KKKKK
K
vRuRdm
vumvua
)()(
)()(),(
,,,
)()()()(, KKKK xxuuuuR
with
HFV (Eymard et al.) or MFD (Shashkov et al.)
16
© IF
P©
IFP
Elimination of the face unknowns using interpolationsuccess scheme (Eymard et al)
ext
MMM
for
foruuu
0
)(int
)()())(()(, KKKK xxuuuuR
K
KKK
K nuummu
,))(()(
17
© IF
P©
IFP
Success scheme: discrete variational form
onuonfuKdiv
0
hh VvdxvfvuatsVu ),(..
KKKh uuuV ,)(
KKK
KK
KKKKK
K
vRuRdm
vumvua
)()(
)()(),(
,,,
18
© IF
P©
IFP
Success scheme: fluxes
0)()( uFuF LKKL
Stencil FKL :
LK
Fluxes in a general sense between K and L s.t.
LK
KorL
K
L
with
K
KKKL
LKKLKext
vuFvvuFvua
)())((),( ,int
19
© IF
P©
IFP
Success scheme
Advantages Cell centered symmetric coercive scheme on general meshes Increased robustness on challenging anisotropic test cases
Drawbacks Discontinuous diffusion coefficients Fluxes between cells sharing e.g. only a vertex Large stencil
Non symmetric formulation with two gradients
20
© IF
P©
IFP
Consistent gradient
)(, uK
K
KKKK
K nuummu
,, ))(()(
LK
Kx
LxKn
x,Kd
interpolation using only neighbors of K
21
© IF
P©
IFP
Interpolation
• Potential u linear in each cell K, L, M
• Flux continuity at the edges
• Potential continuity at the edges
',
',
s
Ku
Lu
Mu'
x
)(, UK
The scheme reproduces cellwise linear solutions for cellwise constant diffusion tensor
Use an L type interpolation (Aavatsmark et al.) using only neighbouring cells of K
22
© IF
P©
IFP
A "weak" gradient
ext
KL
LKKL
KKK
K
ddudud
u
nuummu
K
,0
,)(
))(()~(
int,,
,,
,
LK
Kx
LxKn
x,Kd
23
© IF
P©
IFP
Compact cell centered FV scheme: bilinear form
K KKK
KKKKKK
K
vRuRdmvumvua
)()()~()(),( ,,,
)()())(()( ,, KKKKK xxuuuuR with
24
© IF
P©
IFP
Compact cell centered FV scheme: discrete variational formulation
hh VvdxvfvuatsVu ),(..
KKKh uuuV ,)(
onuonfuKdiv
0
25
© IF
P©
IFP
Compact cell centered FV scheme: fluxes
K
KKKL
LKKLKext
vuFvvuFvua
)())((),( ,int
Stencil of the scheme: neighbors of the neighbors
13 points for 2D topologicaly cartesian grids
19 points for 3D topologicaly cartesian gridsK
L
0)()( uFuF LKKLwith
26
© IF
P©
IFP
Convergence analysis
2/1
2,
,
))((
TK KKK
KV
uudmu
h
hdd VLLuCuu
))(())(( 22
~
2),(hV
uuua
Stability of the gradients
Coercivity (mesh and K dependent assumption)
27
© IF
P©
IFP
Weak convergence property of the weak gradient
dxudivdxuhh )(.~lim 0
thenMuhVhHh supandLinuuif hh )(lim 2
0
K
KKK
K nuummu
,))(()~(
28
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case CPG 2DCPG meshes of a 2D basin with erosions
2 km
20 km
Mesh at refinement level 3
10001
K
Smooth solution
29
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case CPG 2D
Solver iterations (AMG preconditioner)
L2 error
30
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case: Random Quadrangular Grids
1000001
K
Mesh at refinement level 1
Smooth solution
Domain = (0,1)x(0,1)
Random refinement
31
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case Random Grid
L2 error Solver iterations (AMG preconditioner)
32
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case: random 3D
Diffusion tensor Smooth solution
2000010001
K
33
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case random 3D
L2 error
34
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case random 3D
Solver iterations using AMG preconditioner
35
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case random 3D
L2 error on fluxes
36
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case: random 3D aspect ratio 20
zoom
37
© IF
P©
IFP
Test case random 3D with aspect ratio 20
L2 error
38
© IF
P©
IFP
Conclusions
There exists so far no compact and coercive (symmetric) cell centered FV schemes consistent on general meshes
Among conditionaly coercive cell centered FV schemes GradCell Scheme exhibits a good robustness with respect to the anisotropy of K
and to deformation of the mesh Compact stencil 2 layers of communication in parallel
To be tested for multiphase Darcy flow