0 views

Uploaded by Nilesh Singhal

Intro Res sim

Intro Res sim

© All Rights Reserved

- Application of DCA in Fractured Reservoirs Field Case Studies
- ch1-chap1v2pres-mj3m
- Fluid Mechanical Interaction
- Mathematical Geoscience.pdf
- Oil and Gas Accounting
- Reservoir Engineer Development Manager In Houston Texas Resume R Yvonne Scherz
- 02 SPE 164657-MS Advances on Partial Coupling in Reservoir Simulation NATC 2013-Libre
- 1__ResSimCh2
- 40 - Estimation of Oil and Gas Reserves
- Shale terminology & engineering concept
- Cretan Gas Fields – A new perspective for Greece’s hydrocarbon resources
- Ivsinovic Engl
- Welltesting for Non Reservoir Enginners
- Basement
- Session_1
- Pages From Chapter 8 Gas Well Performance-4c592002ebde4d7067a054a8d70da19a
- Well Test Results and Reservoir Performance for a Carbon Dioxide Injection Test Michigan Basin
- Oil Recovery by Imbibition Austin and Buds Water Flooding in the Formations
- Section 2
- helaly2013

You are on page 1of 137

Reservoir Engineering

Knut–Andreas Lie

Department of Mathematical Sciences, NTNU, Norway

June 26–29, 2017, Hasselt, Belgium

1 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

2 / 66

Petroleum reservoirs

I Originating from organic sediments that have been compressed and ’cooked’ to

form hydrocarbons that migrated upward in sedimentary rocks until limited by

a trapping structure

I Found in shallow reservoirs on land and deep under the seabed

I Only 30% of the reserves are ’conventional’; remaining 70% include shale oil

and gas, heavy oil, extra heavy oil, and oil sands.

I Fuel (gas, liquid, solid)

I Alkenes manufactured into

plastics and compounds

I Lubricants, wax, paraffin wax

I Pesticides and fertilizers for

Johan Sverdrup, new Norwegian ’elephant’ discovery, 2011.

agriculture Expected to be producing for the next 30+ years

3 / 66

Production processes

Gas

Oil

k

Caproc

in e

r w/br

Aquife

When the first well is drilled and opened for production, trapped hydrocarbon

starts flowing toward the well because of over-pressure

4 / 66

Production processes

Gas

injection

Gas

Oil

Water

injection

As pressure drops, less hydrocarbon is flowing. To maintain pressure and push

more profitable hydrocarbons out, one starts injecting water or gas into the

reservoir, possibly in an alternating fashion from the same well.

4 / 66

Production processes

Gas

injection

Gas

Oil

Water

injection

Even more crude oil can be extracted by gas injection (CO2 , natural gas, or

nitrogen), chemical injection (foam, polymer, surfactants), microbial injection,

or thermal recovery (cyclic steam, steam flooding, in-situ combustion), etc.

4 / 66

Why reservoir simulation?

regarding recovery processes

I understand reservoir and fluid behavior

I assess and optimize various recovery techniques

I quantify uncertainty

I test hypotheses and compare scenarios

I assimilate data

Is a statutory requriement and recognized as evidence by banks and other

funding organizations

5 / 66

Reservoir models

6 / 66

Reservoir models

cell/face properties describing the porous

rock formation

6 / 66

Reservoir models

cell/face properties describing the porous

rock formation 1

0.8

0.6

∂t (φbw Sw ) + ∇ · (bw ~

uw ) = bw qw

2 a flow model – describes how fluids flow ∂t [φ(bw So + bg rv Sg )] 0.4

+ ∇ · (bo ~

uo + bg rv ~

ug ) = bo qo + bg rv qg

in a porous medium (conservation laws + ∂t [φ(bg Sg + bo rs So )]

0.2

ug + bo rs ~

uo ) = bg qg0 + bo rs qo

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

6 / 66

Reservoir models

cell/face properties describing the porous

rock formation 1

0.8

0.6

∂t (φbw Sw ) + ∇ · (bw ~

uw ) = bw qw

2 a flow model – describes how fluids flow ∂t [φ(bw So + bg rv Sg )] 0.4

+ ∇ · (bo ~

uo + bg rv ~

ug ) = bo qo + bg rv qg

in a porous medium (conservation laws + ∂t [φ(bg Sg + bo rs So )]

0.2

ug + bo rs ~

uo ) = bg qg0 + bo rs qo

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

of the reservoir, in the wellbore, flow

control devices, surface facilities

6 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

7 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Transported by wind or water to a place where they settle and accumulate into

a sediment, building up in lakes, rivers, sand deltas, lagoons, choral reefs, etc

8 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Ero

De sion

pos

itio

n

Flood plain

Mud

Sand

Gravel

Layered structure with different mixtures of rock types with varying grain size,

mineral type, and clay content

or at a small angle. Gradually buried deeper and consolidated

8 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Geological activity will later fold, stretch, and fracture the consolidated rock

8 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Sandstone encased

Gas in mudstone

Unconformity

Oil

le rock

eab

erm Pinch out

Imp e

rin

hb

wit

rock

ble

mea

Per

Fault

Impermeable

salt

8 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

8 / 66

Geologic model: sedimentary rocks

Layered geological structures typically occur on both large and small scales

8 / 66

Porous media flow – a multiscale problem

The scales that impact fluid flow in subsurface rocks range from

I the micrometer scale of pores and pore channels

I via dm-m scale of well bores and laminae sediments

I to sedimentary structures that stretch across entire reservoirs

Porous rocks are heterogeneous at all length scales (no scale separation)

−→

9 / 66

Porous media flow – a multiscale problem

−→

9 / 66

Flow model: representative elementary volume

Porosity:

Vv

φ=

Vv + Vr

sentative elementary volume

(REV) is essential in macro-

scale modeling of porous

media, here illustrated for

porosity.

10 / 66

Grids: volumetric representation of the reservoir

The structure of the reservoir (geological surfaces, faults, etc) + well paths

11 / 66

Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66

Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x

z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66

Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x

z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66

Grids: mimicking geological processes

Deposition

x

z

Erosion

Petrophysics

Deformation

12 / 66

Petrophysical parameters

4

3500 x 10

3

Horizontal

Tarbert

Vertical Ness

3000

2.5

2500

2000

1.5

1500

1

1000

0.5

500

0 0

−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4 −8 −6 −4 −2 0 2 4

13 / 66

Research challenge: complex grid and strong heterogeneity

Grid dictated by geology, not chosen freely to

maximize accuracy of numerical discretization

Topology is generally unstructured, non-neighboring

connections

Cells deviate strongly from box shape, high aspect

ratios, many faces/neighbors, small faces, . . .

Potential inconsistencies: bilinear vs tetrahedral

surfaces

Petrophysics:

Many orders of magnitude variations

Strong discontinuities

No clear scale separation (long and short correlations)

14 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

15 / 66

Governing equations for fluid flow

I Conservation of mass

∂

Z I Z

m dx + F~ · ~n ds = r dx

∂t V ∂V V

16 / 66

Governing equations for fluid flow

I Conservation of mass

∂

Z I Z

m dx + F~ · ~n ds = r dx

∂t V ∂V V

I Darcy’s law:

~u = −K(∇p − ρg∇z)

empirical law for describing processes on an unresolved scale.

Similar to Fourier’s law (heat) [1822], Ohm’s law (electric current) [1827], Fick’s law

(concentration) [1855], except that we now have two driving forces

16 / 66

Darcy’s law and permeability

In reservoir engineering:

K

~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z

µ

Intrinsic permeability K measures ability to transmit fluids

Anisotropic and diagonal by nature, full tensor due to averaging.

Reported in units Darcy: 1 d = 9.869233 · 10−13 m2

Fluid velocity:

Darcy’s law is formulated for volumetric flux, i.e., volume of fluid per total area per

u

~

time. The fluid velocity is volume per area occupied by fluid per time, i.e., ~v = φ .

Darcy’s law derived from the Navier–Stokes equations by averaging, neglecting

intertial and viscous effects

17 / 66

Single-phase, incompressible flow

∂(φρ) K

+ ∇ · ρ~u = q, ~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z

∂t µ

18 / 66

Single-phase, incompressible flow

∂(φρ) K

+ ∇ · ρ~u = q, ~u = − ∇p − ρg∇z

∂t µ

Assume constant density ρ, unit fluid viscosity µ, and neglect gravity g

−→ flow equation on mixed form

∇ · ~u = q, ~u = −K∇p

−∇ K∇p = q

18 / 66

Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

dφ dρ

= cr φ, = cf ρ

dp dp

19 / 66

Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

dφ dρ

= cr φ, = cf ρ

dp dp

Insert into conservation equation

∂(φρ) K

= ∇ · ρ ∇p

∂t µ

∂p cf ρ ρ

(cr + cf )φρ = ∇p · K∇p + ∇ · (K∇p)

∂t µ µ

19 / 66

Single-phase, slightly compressible flow

dφ dρ

= cr φ, = cf ρ

dp dp

Insert into conservation equation

∂(φρ) K

= ∇ · ρ ∇p

∂t µ

∂p cf ρ ρ

(cr + cf )φρ = ∇p · K∇p + ∇ · (K∇p)

∂t µ µ

∂p 1

= ∇ · K∇p , c = cr + cf

∂t µφc

19 / 66

Numerical discretization

Ωi

~

ni,k

Γi,k

20 / 66

Numerical discretization

Z I Z

∇·~u dx = ~

u · ~n ds = q dx

Ωi ∂Ωi Ωi

Ωi

X

ui,k = qi ~

ni,k

k

Γi,k

Pressure is cell-wise constant, flux is continuous

across cell interfaces

20 / 66

Numerical discretization

Z I Z

∇·~ u dx = ~

u · ~n ds = q dx

Ωi ∂Ωi Ωi

Ωi

X

ui,k = qi ~

ni,k

k

Γi,k

Pressure is cell-wise constant, flux is continuous

across cell interfaces

Z

ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k

Γik Kk

Ki

(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k

≈ Ak K · ~nik

|~cik |2

= Ti,k pi − πi,k

20 / 66

Numerical discretization

Z

ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k

Γik Kk

Ki

(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k

≈ Ak K · ~nik

|~cik |2

= Ti,k pi − πi,k

Next, we use continuity of flux and pressure to eliminate the interface pressures

ui,k = Tik pi − pk

20 / 66

Numerical discretization

Z

ui,k = − K∇p · ~nik ds Ai,k

Γik Kk

Ki

(pi − πi,k )~cik ~ci,k ~ni,k

≈ Ak K · ~nik

|~cik |2

= Ti,k pi − πi,k

Next, we use continuity of flux and pressure to eliminate the interface pressures

ui,k = Tik pi − pk

P

Mass conservation qi = k ui,k gives a linear system

(P

j Tij , k = i,

Ap = q, where Aij =

−Tik , k 6= i.

20 / 66

Research challenge: efficient solvers

Large coefficient variations, complex sparsity patterns, etc. Call for efficient

iterative solvers and preconditioning methods −→ good test problems for

multigrid methods

21 / 66

Research challenge: consistent discretizations

Problem: standard finite-volume methods are

not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

22 / 66

Research challenge: consistent discretizations

Problem: standard finite-volume methods are

not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk

K Ωi ~

ci,k ~

ni,k Ωk

Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik

Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→

inconsistent scheme

22 / 66

Research challenge: consistent discretizations

Problem: standard finite-volume methods are

not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk

K Ωi ~

ci,k ~

ni,k Ωk

Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik

Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→

inconsistent scheme

(mortar) mixed finite elements

multipoint flux approximation (MFPA)

mimetic finite difference

vertex approximate gradient (VAG)

nonlinear TPFA

22 / 66

Research challenge: consistent discretizations

Problem: standard finite-volume methods are

not consistent unless the grid is K orthogonal

pi πi,k pk

K Ωi ~

ci,k ~

ni,k Ωk

Γi,k

R

uik = − Γik

Kxx ∂x p + Kxy ∂y p + Kxz ∂z p ds

−→ transverse flux Kxy py and Kxz pz neglected −→

inconsistent scheme

(mortar) mixed finite elements

multipoint flux approximation (MFPA)

mimetic finite difference

vertex approximate gradient (VAG)

nonlinear TPFA

22 / 66

Example: comparison of consistent methods

Example: 3D Voronoi

grid adapting to

branching well.

Anisotropic and

spatially varying

permeability

TPFA 9026 126002 13.96 9.64e+02

NTPFA 11920 280703 23.55 2.92e+07

MFD 60321 1538305 25.50 9.37e+15

VEM1 52350 3404977 65.04 4.91e+11

VEM2 227459 38770593 170.45 —

23 / 66

What can you do with single-phase flow?

connections, measures of dynamic heterogeneity, etc

u · ∇h = f (x)

transport equations ~

24 / 66

What can you do with single-phase flow?

connections, measures of dynamic heterogeneity, etc

u · ∇h = f (x)

transport equations ~

24 / 66

Flow diagnostics

< 1%

20% 22%

< 1% I1, P1

I2, P1

I1, P2 3%

I2, P2

I1, P3

I2, P3

23%

I1, P4

I2, P4 18%

13%

25 / 66

Flow diagnostics

Allocation by connection Allocation by connection

Well allocation factors Well allocation factors

P6 2 P4 2

4 4

6 6

Connection #

Connection #

8 8

P5 P3

10 10

P2

12 12

14 P3 14

16 16

18 18

P4 20 20

0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000

Well: I6 Accumulated flux [m3/day] Well: I4 Accumulated flux [m3/day]

25 / 66

Flow diagnostics

qi F

normalize

Vi Φ

25 / 66

Flow diagnostics

F 1−F Ev

Φ td td

F-Φ diagram Fractional recovery Sweep efficiency

25 / 66

Model reduction: flow-based upscaling

−∇ · (K∇p) = f, in Ω

For each block B, we seek a tensor

K∗ such that

Z Z

K∇p dx = K∗ ∇p dx,

B B Typical approach: flow-based upscaling

coarse scale

ū = −K∗ ∇p

to relate the net flow rate ū through Many alternatives, few are sufficiently

accurate and robust

B to the average pressure gradient

∇p inside B. More about this on Wednesday

26 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

27 / 66

Multiphase flow

chemical species like methane, ethane, Water

propane, etc. Common modelling practice

to group fluid components into phases, i.e.,

Oil

a mixture of components having similar

flow properties.

Grain

Most common phases:

aqueous, liquid, and vapor

28 / 66

Fundamental physics: wettability

surface tension

Water wet Oil wet

Oil

σow

Water

θ θ

σos σws σos

Solid

Young’s equation (energy balance): σow cos θ = σos − σws

Water generally shows greater affinity than oil to stick to the rock surface −→

reservoirs are predominantly water-wet systems

29 / 66

Fundamental physics: capillary pressure

pc = pn − pw = 2

= = 2

= ∆ρgh

| πr{z } r | πr

{z }

upward force downward force

θ

θ

30 / 66

Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest

non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim

ary

drain

a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66

Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest

non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim

ary

drain

a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66

Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest

non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim

ary

drain

a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66

Fundamental physics: drainage (primary migration)

Drainage: non-wetting fluid displacing wetting fluid, controlled by widest

non-invaded pore throat

pcnw

prim

ary

drain

a ge

Swr pe

Sw

31 / 66

Fundamental physics: imbibition (hydrocarbon recovery)

Imbibition: wetting fluid displaces non-wetting fluid, controlled by the size of

the narrowest non-invaded pore.

Will not follow the same capillary curve −→ hysteresis (cause: trapped oil

droplets, different wetting angle for advancing and receding interfaces)

pcnw

Snr

prim

ary

prim drain

ary age

imb

ibit

ion

Swr pe

Sw

EOR: inject substances to alter wetting properties to mobilize immobile oil, Sor → 1

32 / 66

Extensions of model equations to multiphase flow

Kα (Sα )

~

uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z

µα

Assuming each phase consists of only one component, the

mass-balance equations for each phase read (Muskat, 1945):

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~

uα = qα

∂t

r

φ

pc (Sw ) = J σ cos θ

K

33 / 66

Relative permeability

krw kro

phase is reduced by the presence of other

0.8

phases. Relative permeabilities

0.6

krα = krα (Sα1 , . . . , Sαm ),

0.4

account for this effect. Notice that

0

X 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

krα < 1

α

34 / 66

Relative permeability

krw kro

phase is reduced by the presence of other

0.8

phases. Relative permeabilities

0.6

krα = krα (Sα1 , . . . , Sαm ),

0.4

account for this effect. Notice that

0

X 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

krα < 1

α

1

krw kro

0.8

This gives Darcy’s law on the form

0.6

Kkrα

~

uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z 0.4

µα

0.2

= −Kλα ∇pα − ρα g∇z

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

34 / 66

General flow equations for two-phase flow

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~uα = qα , α = {w, n}

∂t

Kkrα

~uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z

µα

pc = pn − pw , Sw + Sn = 1

35 / 66

General flow equations for two-phase flow

∂(φρα Sα )

+ ∇ · ρα ~uα = qα , α = {w, n}

∂t

Kkrα

~uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z

µα

pc = pn − pw , Sw + Sn = 1

and ρα and φ as function of pα , and discretize with backward Euler in time and

the two-point scheme in space

In academia: common practice to rewrite the equations to better reveal their

mathematical nature

35 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

un + ~

uw ) = qn + qw

∂t

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~

u=q

∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }

≡1 =~

u =q

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~

u=q

∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }

≡1 =~

u =q

~

u=~

un + ~

uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~

u=q

∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }

≡1 =~

u =q

~

u=~

un + ~

uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

| {z }

=λ

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~

u=q

∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }

≡1 =~

u =q

~

u=~

un + ~

uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

| {z }

=λ

Inserted into ∇ · ~

u = q gives pressure equation

−∇ · (λK∇pn ) = q − ∇ λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

constant and can be divided out)

∂Sα

φ +∇·~

uα = qα .

∂t

Sum mass-conservation equations:

∂

φ (Sn + Sw ) + ∇ · (~

u +~ u ) = qn + qw −→ ∇·~

u=q

∂t | {z } | n {z w} | {z }

≡1 =~

u =q

~

u=~

un + ~

uw = −(λn + λw )∇pn + λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

| {z }

=λ

Inserted into ∇ · ~

u = q gives pressure equation

−∇ · (λK∇pn ) = q − ∇ λw ∇pc + (λn ρn + λw ρw )g∇z

| {z } | {z }

Poisson only function of Sw

36 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

λn ~

uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

37 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

λn ~

uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

Solve for ~

uw and insert into conservation equation

∂Sw

u + λn ∆ρg∇z = qw − ∇ · fw λn Pc0 ∇Sw

φ + ∇ · fw ~

∂t

37 / 66

Fractional flow formulation

λn ~

uw − λw ~un = λw λn K ∇pc + (ρw − ρn )g∇z]

Solve for ~

uw and insert into conservation equation

∂Sw

u + λn ∆ρg∇z = qw − ∇ · fw λn Pc0 ∇Sw

φ + ∇ · fw ~

∂t

−∇ Kλ(S)∇p) = q, ~

u = −Kλ(S)∇p,

φ∂t S + ∇ · (~

uf (S)) = 0

equation. Typically: solved sequentially with specialized methods

37 / 66

Buckley–Leverett solution for 1D displacement

M =1

M =5

M = .2

S2

St + f (S)x = q, f (S) = , M = µw /µn

S2 + M (1 − S)2

Here, M = .2 gives poor local displacement efficiency, M = 5 gives very good

38 / 66

Simulation examples: quarter-five spot

t=0.20 PVI t=0.40 PVI t=0.60 PVI t=0.80 PVI Sw

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

5

x 10 1

Sw in completion

2.5 Water cut

initial oil in place 0.8

te

ra 0.6

o il

al

iti

2

in 0.4

0.2

1.5

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

250

water breakthrough

1

200

150

0.5

100

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

39 / 66

Simulation examples: quarter-five spot

4 years 8 years 12 years 16 years 20 years

0.9

ratio 1:10

0.8

0.7

0.6

ratio 1:1

0.5

0.4

0.3

ratio 10:1

0.2

0.1

39 / 66

Simulation examples: quarter-five spot

wcut: Water fraction at reservoir conditions

18000 1

initial oil in place

P (Ratio 1:10)

0.8

16000 P (Ratio 1:1)

14000

0.4

12000 0.2

10000 0

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Time (days)

x 10

6000 2.5

P (Ratio 1:10) 2

4000 P (Ratio 1:1)

1.5

P (Ratio 10:1)

2000 1 P (Ratio 1:10)

P (Ratio 1:1)

0.5

0 P (Ratio 10:1)

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0

Time (days) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Time (days)

6000 7000

39 / 66

150 days 670 days

40 / 66

High permeability on top Low permeability on top

40 / 66

Numerical errors

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport

separately

Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

41 / 66

Numerical errors

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport

separately

Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

41 / 66

Numerical errors

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport

separately

Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

0.9

Water cut for M=0.1 0.9

0.8 Water cut for M=10.0

0.8

0.7

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

P (3) P (3)

0.4 0.4

P (12) P (12)

0.3 P (48) 0.3 P (48)

0.2 P (192) P (192)

0.2

P (768) P (768)

0.1 0.1

P (rampup) P (rampup)

0 0

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

41 / 66

Numerical errors

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport

separately

Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

100 100 200

50 50 150

0 0 100

0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

100 100 1

50 50 0.5

0 0 0

0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

41 / 66

Numerical errors

Operator splitting errors introduced by solving flow and transport

separately

Grid-orientation errors introduced by numerical method

100 100 200

50 50 150

0 0 100

0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

100 100 1

50 50 0.5

0 0 0

0 100 200 300 400 0 100 200 300 400

41 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

42 / 66

Compressible, multicomponent, multiphase flows

Notation: c`α mass fraction of component ` in phase α

Equations: conservation for phases or components?

Choose components to avoid source terms for mass transfer

∂ X ` X X

φ cα ρα Sα + ∇ · c`α ρα ~uα + J~α` = c`α ρα qα ,

∂t α α α

43 / 66

PVT behavior of petroleum fluids

stock tank

separator

Christmas

tree

pse , Tse ps , Ts

wellhead

−∆p

pr , T r

44 / 66

Phase diagrams for a single component

Gibbs’ phase rule (without reactions):

F = 2 + nc − np

Pressure

solid

Melting

supercritical

liquid

fluid

Pcp

critical point

on

i

at

oriz

p

Va

triple point

Ptp

vapor

ion

at

blim

Su

45 / 66

Phase diagrams for a single component

Pressure

critical

point

n

3

tio

i za

3: gas and liquid 4 5

or

gas

ap

Vo

V

lum

e

liquid re

atu

dewpoint curve

m per

mercury bubblepoint curve Te

45 / 66

Binary substances

cricondenterm

pressure (p)

liquid critical

point

cricondenbar

100%

90%

80%

70%

60% 50%

vapor

40% 0%

30% 20% 10%

temperature (T)

depends on the composition of the binary mixture

46 / 66

Gas reservoirs: dry/wet gas

depletion

n

tio

duc

o

pr

on

as

tg

cti

we

du

ro

separator

sp

ga

y

0%

dr

100%

separator

temperature (T)

47 / 66

Gas reservoirs: retrograde condensate

separator

depletion

100%

0%

temperature (T)

47 / 66

Oil reservoirs: black-oil

100%

separator

0%

temperature (T)

48 / 66

Oil reservoirs: volatile oil

pressure (p)

initial state

100%

separator

0%

temperature (T)

48 / 66

Black-oil models

Hydrocarbon components lumped together to a

A X

light ’gas’ and a heavier ’oil’ pseudocomponent

at surface conditions L X X

V X X

Simple PVT:

ρws

ρW = = bw ρws

Bw

ρos + Rs ρgs

ρO = = bo (ρos + Rs ρgs )

Bo

ρgs + Rv ρos

ρG = = bg (ρgs + Rv ρos )

Bg reservoir

surface

ρs

Formation-volume factor: Bα = VVαs = ρα

α

α

Shrinkage/expansion factor: bα = 1/Bα

Dissolved gas in oil: Rs

Oil vaporized in gas: Rv

49 / 66

Black-oil: PVT functions

Bg

pressure, p

50 / 66

Black-oil: PVT functions

Rs

Rv

pb pressure, p

50 / 66

Black-oil: PVT functions

Bt

2

Bo

1

pb pressure, p

50 / 66

Black-oil: PVT functions

10−3

co

10−7

pb pressure, p

50 / 66

Black-oil: PVT functions

µo

pb pressure, p

50 / 66

The black-oil equations

Conservation equations:

∂t φbo So + ∇ · bo ~ uo = bo qo

∂t φbw Sw + ∇ · bw ~ uw = bw qw

∂t φ bg Sg + bo Rs So + ∇ · bg ~ ug + bo Rs ~

uo = bg qg + bo Rs qo

Darcy’s law:

Kα (Sα )

~

uα = − ∇pα − ρα g∇z

µα

Closure relationships

So + Sw + Sg = 1

Plus expressions for capillary pressures and relative permeabilities

51 / 66

Three-phase relative permeability

In principle, one could imagine all three phases flowing simulataneously.

However, more common to assume that flow is essentially two-phase

Swc 1 − So − Swc So

1

Sg

Sg +Sw −Swc

gas

oil

Sw −Swc

Sg +Sw −Swc water

0

1 − So So

kro (Sg , Sw ) = + ,

Sg + Sw − Swc Sg + Sw − Swc

52 / 66

Example: fluid model from SPE9

1

Oil−Water system

Oil−Gas system

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

kr

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Oil saturation

J. E. Killough (1995). Ninth SPE comparative solution project: A reexamination of black-oil simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

53 / 66

Example: fluid model from SPE9

Water formation volume factor

1.007

1.006

1.005

1.003

1.001

1.12

1

0.999

0 100 200 300 400 500

1.1

d

Gas formation volume factor

te

0.018

ra

0.016

u

at

1.08 0.014

-s

saturated

er

0.012

d

un

0.01

1.06

Bo

0.008

0.006

1.04 0.004

0.002

0

0 100 200 300 400 500

1.02 Rock compressibility

1.005

1.004

1 1.003

1.002

0.98 1.001

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

1

Pressure [bar]

0.999

0.998

simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

0 100 200 300 400 500

53 / 66

Example: fluid model from SPE9

Viscosities:

−3 Water viscosity

x 10

1.5

−3

x 10 Oil viscosity

1.2

1.15

0.5

1.1

0

0 100 200 300 400 500

−5 Gas viscosity

x 10

o

µ

2.2

2.1

1.05

2

1.9

1.8

1 1.7

1.6

1.5

1.4

0.95

1.3

0 100 200 300 400 500

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

J. E. Killough (1995). Ninth SPE comparative

Pressure solution project: A reexamination of black-oil simulation. SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

53 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

54 / 66

Wells: flow in and out of the reservoir

5–40 in

2rw

20–200 m

Inflow and outflow take place on a subgrid scale, with large variations in

pressure over short distances.

55 / 66

Wells: flow in and out of the reservoir

5–40 in

2rw

20–200 m

Inflow and outflow take place on a subgrid scale, with large variations in

pressure over short distances.

Solution: use a linear inflow-performance relation

q = J pR − pbh

55 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra

−4 −2 0 2 4

pbhp

1 ∂(ru)

=0 −→ u = C/r.

r ∂r

56 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra

−4 −2 0 2 4

pbhp

1 ∂(ru)

=0 −→ u = C/r.

r ∂r

Integrating around a small cylinder surrounding the well,

I

q= ~ u · ~n ds = −2πhC

56 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra

−4 −2 0 2 4

pbhp

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius

rd at which p = pd is constant:

Z pd Z rd

q K dp dp dr

u=− =− −→ 2πKh =

2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

56 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra

−4 −2 0 2 4

pbhp

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius

rd at which p = pd is constant:

Z pd Z rd

q K dp dp dr

u=− =− −→ 2πKh =

2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

Solution

2πKh

q= pd − pbh

µ ln(rd /rw )

56 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pa

ra

−4 −2 0 2 4

pbhp

Insert into Darcy’s law and integrate from wellbore radius rw to drainage radius

rd at which p = pd is constant:

Z pd Z rd

q K dp dp dr

u=− =− −→ 2πKh =

2πrh µ dr pbh qµ rw r

2πKh 2πKh

q= pd − pbh = pa − pbh

µ ln(rd /rw ) µ ln(rd /rw ) − 0.75

56 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pN

Producer

pW p pE

Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y

pS

Kh qµ

4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→

µ 4Kh

57 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pN

Producer

pW p pE

Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y

pS

Kh qµ

4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→

µ 4Kh

Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks

qµ qµ

p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw −

2πKh 4Kh

57 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pN

Producer

pW p pE

Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y

pS

Kh qµ

4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→

µ 4Kh

Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks

qµ qµ qµ

ln e−π/2 ∆x/rw

p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw − = pbh +

2πKh 4Kh 2πKh

57 / 66

Wells: analytic subscale model

pN

Producer

pW p pE

Injector

Quarter five-spot ∆y

pS

Kh qµ

4p − pW − pN − pW − pS = q p = pE −

− −→

µ 4Kh

Analytic model valid in neighboring blocks

qµ qµ qµ

ln e−π/2 ∆x/rw

p = pbh + ln ∆x/rw − = pbh +

2πKh 4Kh 2πKh

Peaceman’s formula:

2πKh π

re = e− 2

p p

q= p − pbh , ∆x∆y ≈ 0.20788 ∆x∆y

µ ln re /rw

57 / 66

Wells: many complications

p

Diagonal permeability tensor K → Kx Ky

Rectangular grid cells (more complex formula for re )

Horizontal wells, off-centered wells, multiple wells, . . .

Near-well effects (permeability increase/reduction)

Other grid types and discretization schemes

Despite obvious limiting assumptions, Peaceman’s model is used rather

uncritically in industry. Need for more accurate/robust/versatile models. . .

In general: need to describe flow within wellbore and annulus, downhole

equipment, surface facilities, control strategies (choking, reinjection) involving

complex logic, . . .

58 / 66

Multisegment wells

– Network models – pressure p

– Represent annulus – mass fractions xm

w,

o , xg

59 / 66

Multisegment wells

– Network models – pressure p

– Represent annulus – mass fractions xm

w,

o , xg

V

xc ρ − x0c ρ div vcm qcm

+ − =0

|∆t {z } | {z } |{z}

in- and outflux to source term (well

accumulation

neighboring nodes control, connections)

h v m , uw(ρ), uw(µ) = 0

grad(p) − g avg(ρ) grad(z) −

| {z } | {z }

gravity term heuristic pressure

drop term

59 / 66

Outline

2 Geological models

3 Single-phase flow

6 Well models

7 Reservoir simulation

60 / 66

Black-oil: discretization and linearization

with upstream mobility in space.

∂E i

Newton’s method for nonlinear equation: δx = E(xi )

∂xi

∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂

∂po ∂sw ∂sg ∂sg s

∂qw ∂qos ∂qgs ∂pbh

Eo

Eg

Ew Eqw

s

Eqos

Eqgs

Eg

Ectrl

61 / 66

Black-oil: solution strategies

Solution procedure

1. Eliminate well variables qos , qw

s

, qgs ,

and pbh

2. Set first block-row equal to sum of

block-rows, leave out rows that may

harm diagonal dominance in block

(1,1)

3. Set up two-stage preconditioner:

– M−11 : solves pressure subsystem

– M−12 : ILU0 decomposition of the

full system

4. Solve full system with GMRES using

preconditioner M−12 M1

−1

62 / 66

Black-oil: solution strategies

1. Eliminate well variables qos , qw

s

, qgs , should be solved with algebraic

and pbh multigrid

block-rows, leave out rows that may chop if too large changes in

harm diagonal dominance in block variables

(1,1)

chop if convergence failure

3. Set up two-stage preconditioner:

more advanced logic to maintain

– M−11 : solves pressure subsystem targeted iteration count

– M−12 : ILU0 decomposition of the

full system Elaborate logic for well control and

4. Solve full system with GMRES using surface facilities

preconditioner M−12 M1

−1

62 / 66

Example: SPE 9 benchmark

Grid with 9000 cells

1 water injector, rate controlled, switches to bhp

25 producers, oil-rate controlled, most switch to bhp

Appearance of free gas due to pressure drop

Production rates lowered to 1/15 between days 300

and 360

7

x 10 PROD13 PROD13

2.5

2.5

Gas rate (m3/s)

Pressure (Pa)

2 2

1.5

1.5

1

1 0.5

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Time (years) Time (years)

7

x 10 PROD18 PROD18

2.5 2.5

MRST

ECLIPSE 2

Gas rate (m3/s)

Pressure (Pa)

2

1.5

1.5 1

MRST

1 0.5

ECLIPSE

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Time (years) Time (years)

63 / 66

Example: the Voador field

prod 7

prod 1 prod 2

Validate: open-source / commercial simulator: prod 4, 5 injector

– virtually identical results

– main challenge: needed to reverse-engineer

description of wells. . .

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

producer 2 producer 3 producer 2 producer 3

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

producer 4 producer 5 producer 4 producer 5

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

producer 6 producer 7 producer 6 producer 7

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Example: effect of modeling annulus

4

×10

6

Gas production [Mscf/day]

3 Uniform, no annulus

Uniform, annulus

Thief zones, no annulus

2 Thief zones, annulus

SPE10, no annulus

SPE10, annulus

1

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Time [days]

65 / 66

Summary

having many obscure challenges

Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character

Well models: subscale models, complex logic,

strong impact on flow

Validation and availability in software

Challenges:

Main point of grid: describe stratigraphy and structural

architecture, i.e., not chosen freely to maximize accu-

racy of numerical discretization

Industry standard: corner-point / stratigraphic grids

Grid topology is generally unstructured, with non-

neighboring connections

Geometry: deviates (strongly) from box shape, high

aspect ratios, many faces/neighbors, small faces, . . .

Potential inconsistencies since faces are bilinear or

tetrahedral surfaces

66 / 66

Summary

1

krw

0.9

kro Geological models: complex unstructured grids

0.8 krog

k

having many obscure challenges

row

0.7 k

rg

Flow models: system of highly nonlinear parabolic

0.6

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character

0.5

0.3 strong impact on flow

0.2

Validation and availability in software

0.1

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Challenges:

Delicate balances: viscous forces, gravity, capillary, . . .

Strong coupling between ’elliptic’ and ’hyperbolic’ vari-

ables (small scale: capillary, large scale: gravity)

Large variation in time constants and coupling

Orders-of-magnitude variations in permeability

Parameters with discontinuous derivatives

Path-dependence: hysteretic parameters

Sensitive to subtle changes in interpolation of tabulated

physical data

Monotonicity and mass conservation

66 / 66

Summary

producer 1 injector

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

having many obscure challenges

producer 2 producer 3

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

producer 4 producer 5

Well models: subscale models, complex logic,

strong impact on flow

0 2000 4000

producer 6

6000 8000 0 2000 4000

producer 7

6000 8000

Validation and availability in software

Challenges:

prod 7

Near singular radial flow in near-well zone (much larger

prod 3

flow than inside reservoir)

Induce nonlocal connections

prod 6

prod 4, 5 injector

Coupling to surface facilities

Abrupt changes in driving forces

Control strategies with intricate logic which is highly

sensitive to state values

.

.

.

66 / 66

Summary

producer 1 injector

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

having many obscure challenges

producer 2 producer 3

PDEs with elliptic and hyperbolic sub-character

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

producer 4 producer 5

Well models: subscale models, complex logic,

strong impact on flow

0 2000 4000

producer 6

6000 8000 0 2000 4000

producer 7

6000 8000

Validation and availability in software

Challenges:

prod 7

New methods tend to be immature and too simplified

prod 3 Researchers: incompressible flow and explicit methods.

Industry: implicit methods for compressible flow

prod 6

prod 4, 5 injector strong faith in software with (undocumented) safe-

guards and algorithmic choices

Oil companies seldom give away data

Realistic models involve a large number of intricate de-

tails (Eclipse has 2–3000 keywords. . . )

66 / 66

- Application of DCA in Fractured Reservoirs Field Case StudiesUploaded byner68
- ch1-chap1v2pres-mj3mUploaded byDanOtah
- Fluid Mechanical InteractionUploaded byAmit Kumar Das
- Mathematical Geoscience.pdfUploaded byjimdabrond
- Oil and Gas AccountingUploaded bymike8895
- Reservoir Engineer Development Manager In Houston Texas Resume R Yvonne ScherzUploaded byR Yvonne Scherz
- 02 SPE 164657-MS Advances on Partial Coupling in Reservoir Simulation NATC 2013-LibreUploaded bytomk2220
- 1__ResSimCh2Uploaded byweldsv1
- 40 - Estimation of Oil and Gas ReservesUploaded byrizal tri susilo
- Shale terminology & engineering conceptUploaded byJae Yoon Jung
- Cretan Gas Fields – A new perspective for Greece’s hydrocarbon resourcesUploaded byΑετοί Ολύμπου
- Ivsinovic EnglUploaded byLaw
- Welltesting for Non Reservoir EnginnersUploaded byDavid Lutmang
- BasementUploaded byTHANGVU
- Session_1Uploaded bySpecule
- Pages From Chapter 8 Gas Well Performance-4c592002ebde4d7067a054a8d70da19aUploaded byAzakura1988
- Well Test Results and Reservoir Performance for a Carbon Dioxide Injection Test Michigan BasinUploaded byMonica Urbieta
- Oil Recovery by Imbibition Austin and Buds Water Flooding in the FormationsUploaded byJohns
- Section 2Uploaded byRyan
- helaly2013Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- SPE-185363-MSUploaded byIkhwanHafiz
- SCA2010-13Uploaded byRosa K Chang H
- 00 EIA ARI Study Methodology June 2013 FINALUploaded byKeith Moodhe
- The Petroleum System a New Classification Scheme bUploaded byabi zarkasyi
- Gw Model Course Note OutlineUploaded byDanny Subramaniam
- Oil and Gas AccumulationsUploaded byabnou_223943920
- Liga ArdenUploaded byTaisa Pacheco
- sand control -DITUploaded byTamil Selvan
- Cra PorosityUploaded byVanessa A. Godoy
- PETSOC-92-73-PUploaded byMuhammed Al-Bajri

- A case study of 3-MW scale grid-connected solar photovoltaic power plant at Kolar, KarnatakaUploaded byAnant Joshi
- Your Career on Target BrochureUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- nkUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Earth System Science and EngineeringUploaded byمحمد عبدالرازق عبدالله
- F1430Uploaded byNilesh Singhal
- PresentationUploaded byAnna Trubetskaya
- Park Jin HyokUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- ADTIUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- final PG information brochure 2019.pdfUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Chapter 04 - Data ImportUploaded bybella_ds
- Defining-Well-Testing.pdfUploaded byJulian Aux Millan
- SPEUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Minor Project Final ReportUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Installation_Troubleshooting_Fracpro_2012.pdfUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Cmm RecoveryUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- SGS MIN WA308 Coal Petrographic Analysis en 11Uploaded byNilesh Singhal
- OGJ1989ZfactorUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- AcademicCalendar2018-19juneUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Per Era 2015Uploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Signature Bridge ArticleUploaded byArzia Parveen
- Fuel Volume 78 Issue 11 1999 [Doi 10.1016_s0016-2361(99)00055-1] C.R. Clarkson; R.M. Bustin -- The Effect of Pore Structure and Gas Pressure Upon the Transport Properties of Coal- A Laboratory AUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Field Visit Report_Jharia FieldUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- Surface area and pore size determination.pdfUploaded byOtávio Augusto Titton Dias
- qt1dt494d8Uploaded byNilesh Singhal
- 367301141-Numerical-Solutions-of-Partial-Differential-Equations-Finite-Difference-Methods-3e-G-D-Smith.pdfUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- SPE-170039-MSUploaded byNilesh Singhal
- cm903785rUploaded byNilesh Singhal

- Section e Solids Gases Liquids Revision GuideUploaded byCoolman Poon
- Determination of Valley Ande Ridge of Isobaric Vapor Liquid Equilibrium for Ternary SystemUploaded byJosemarPereiradaSilva
- RAC Question and AnsUploaded byAshif iqubal
- Boilers and Their TypesUploaded byHatem Jafoura
- Pump_Graph.pdfUploaded byJohan Carranza Alvarez
- BleveUploaded byGalih Sukma
- Ammonia Mass BalanceUploaded byaskaridumbo
- BET Theory - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaUploaded byconstantine234
- ngprocessUploaded byj,007
- Advantages AbsorbUploaded byheroocruse
- Phase Diagram ReportUploaded byGlënn Märk Prësörës
- CH3080 Boilers and CondensersUploaded byRicardo Franco Arboleda
- SEPCODESIGNMANUAL.pdfUploaded byAnonymous v5uipH
- 1_States of MattersUploaded byMostafa Barakat
- marcet boiler experiment.docxUploaded bySatiah Wahab
- 179970787-DESIGN-GUIDE-FICHTNER-pdf.pdfUploaded byAnonymous knICax
- Data RD Ethyl Acetate SystemUploaded byAntarim Dutta
- Colligative PropertiesUploaded byprabs20069178
- Summary of Problem and PFDUploaded byKyle Nguyen
- YES-PLEASE.docxUploaded byjaime1234
- Steam GeneratorsUploaded bysbmmla
- 10.1016@j.cherd.2016.05.020Uploaded bynimzai
- Numerical Simulation on Heat Transfer Phenomena in Microchannel Evaporator of A CO2 Air Conditioning SystemUploaded byAJER JOURNAL
- Oil TechnologyUploaded byGOO
- Process Engineering Design Manual (Gasco).pdfUploaded bymarmaduke32
- Paperfor ReadUploaded byhariaero1
- CH2ch11_1Uploaded byRoberto Pereira
- CrystallizationUploaded bykriss Wong
- dos and Donts in FlowUploaded byPatricia Reyes
- turbine blades.pdfUploaded byAjit Singh