SPE-196916-MS

Practical Application of High-Resolution Reservoir Simulation and

High-Performance Computing for Accurate Modeling of Low Permeability
Gas Condensate Reservoirs Production

Ruslan Sharafutdinov, Victor Tyurin, Dmitry Fateev, Sergey Skvortsov, Yuriy Dolgikh, and Denis Tokarev, Gazprom
Geologorazvedka; Dmitry Shakhov, Alexander Voznyuk, Larisa Pyatkevich, and Elena Kovaleva, Schlumberger

Copyright 2019, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference held in Moscow, Russia, 22 – 24 October 2019.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
One of the main aspects that is worth paying attention to when planning the development of gas-
condensate (GC) fields is accounting for and reproducing gas-liquid phase transitions that affect the flow
of hydrocarbons (HC) in the reservoir as well as gas and condensate production indicators during the
entire life cycle of the field. Undoubtedly, this effect will be more significant for cases with a complex gas
component composition, high condensate content, as well as under conditions of low reservoir formation
permeability and a high degree of areal and vertical heterogeneity. Compositional hydrodynamic modeling
is a comprehensive tool for assessing hydrocarbon production capabilities, taking into account the phase
behavior for GC field. The purpose of this work is to compare the various methods of improving the accuracy
of numerical simulations and the reliability of the hydrodynamic modeling results for this type of reservoirs.
Using a high-resolution hydrodynamic simulator and a high-performance cluster system, multivariate
simulations were performed to evaluate the effect of various parameters and options on the results of
numerical simulations. The simulations were carried out using a compositional model, which is an analogue
of a gas-condensate fields in Western Siberia within Yamalo-Nenetsky Autonomous Okrug (YNAO), based
on geology, PVT and core, production history and well test data for vertical and subhorizontal wells,
accounting for the presence of hydraulic fracturing. The work started with a detailed study of the challenge
while the GC systems modeling on local sectors with further transition to a larger scale models using the
results obtained on the previous step, taking into account their cross-validation.
Based on the results of the work, several important decisions (observations) were made, allowing
determining the potential limits and the technical capability of modeling the GC systems with the required
accuracy of phase transitions. In addition, the degree of influence if the numerical grid resolution and
detalization of the PVT model (up to 50 components inclusive) on the gas and oil production and the pressure
behavior was estimated. The simulation run time with various numerical schemes were also considered as
factors affecting the simulation results on the sector and full-scale models. The analysis carried out and
the results obtained can be further used by engineers dealing with GC field development as a guideline
2 SPE-196916-MS

for choosing the modeling method depending on the complexity of the task and available computational
resources.

Introduction
Currently while field development planning of gas fields with a high content of heavy hydrocarbon
components, compositional hydrodynamic modeling is the most robust forecasting tool. When using a
compositional model, an engineer must deal with significant range of parameters and settings affecting the
simulation results and, therefore, decisions in the process of reservoir development. In this paper, the authors
analyzed the main parameters and approaches to building a three-dimensional compositional hydrodynamic
model using the example of a large oil and gas condensate field in Western Siberia.
The field is characterized by the following parameters:
– significant propagation area (lateral dimensions of 170 × 70 km) and the depth (over 3 km);
– the presence of abnormally high reservoir pressure (anomaly factor of 1.6);
– high potential condensate content in the gas phase (more than 300 g/m3) with the distribution of
composition and properties versus depth;
– low permeability of reservoir rocks (from 0.1 to 10 mD);
– the presence of several deposits separated from each other by faults or by pinch-out and shaly layers;
– wells of various designs, including vertical, slanted with and without hydraulic fracturing), sub-
horizontal (with and without hydraulic fracturing);
– the total number of wells exceed 2000.
A reservoir area in combination with significant anisotropy of properties requires a step-by-step approach
to justification of the methods for selecting the parameters of the hydrodynamic model of such an object.

Gas Condensate systems modeling challenges

The main challenge in modeling gas and GC fields is the correct accounting for fluid mobility, due to its high
variability at different reservoir conditions. Gas and GC fluids are characterized by high compressibility
and, as a result, high variations in viscosity and density depending on the reservoir pressure. However, a
specific challenge of the GC fields is the possibility of condensate dropping with a decrease in pressure in
some areas of the formation below the dew point pressure. In this case, obviously, not only the mobility of
the reservoir fluid significantly changes, but the phase transition itself becomes complicated: first, when the
condensate drops out, the relative permeability of both condensate and gas changes (in case of single-phase
gas flow, this component of mobility is practically negligible) and secondly, a change in the composition
of the gas and liquid hydrocarbon phases leads to a nonlinear dependence of the compressibility and the
viscosity from the reservoir pressure (this is the main reason why the GC field are better characterized using
compositional fluid models rather than black-oil PVT in 3D simulation models).
Based on the logarithmic form of pressure drawdown, it is known that the most intense condensate loss
(and, accordingly, the highest intensity of the changes described above) occurs in a relatively small zone
near the well bottom hole. Having said that and considering a relatively large grid cell size (50 m and above,
usually around 100 m) makes it particularly crucial to account for the changes in fluid mobility in the bottom
hole zone. The simplest way to address this issue is to use the special inflow equations. For GC reservoirs
with a high content of heavy hydrocarbon components, the inflow equation with a generalized pseudo-
pressure (GPP), based on C.Whitson, Ø.Fewang (Whitson et al., 1997), is commonly used. The GPP flow
equation takes into account both the non-linearity of the highly compressible fluid phase mobility changes
(dry and wet gas) and the effect of condensate dropping in the bottom hole zone on the well productivity due
to the change in the total mobility in the penetrated cells. The inflow to the well according to the generalized
pseudo-pressure equation is expressed as follows:
SPE-196916-MS 3

where B is the blocking factor, the integral value of the mobility function, calculated by refining the
drawdown area from the bottom hole pressure to the cell pressure, and determining how many times the
mobility of the fluid moving towards the well is less compared to the average mobility in the cell, accounting
for the condensate banking as well. The application of this equation makes it possible to estimate the effect of
condensate dropping in the area nearby the wellbore much smaller than the cell horizontal size, which may
simplify and speed up the simulation while ensuring acceptable accuracy of well performance forecasting.
However, as the practice shows, in the case of multiwell and multilayer models, this method also has
certain limitations:

• a large number of penetrated cells can lead to an excessive amount of recalculation of the blocking
factor, which may lead to slowing down the simulation, in some cases even more compared to the
use of local grid refinements;
• the number of points at which it is necessary to recalculate pressure complicates the simulation
process and also may lead to a slowing down;
• In case of a long simulation period, multiple recalculations can also take considerable time.

Another reason of the nonlinearity of the fluid flow in GC reservoirs is high flow rate, which leads, on the
one hand, to the presence of the inertial flow component (Forchheimer's effect) reducing the productivity,
and, on the other hand, to an increase in the relative permeabilities values for gas and condensate (so-called
"velocity-dependent" saturation function based on the capillary number model) increasing the mobility of
hydrocarbon phases. Thus, correct modeling of the fluid flow in the GC formations requires consideration
of all the above effects, which is quite difficult from practical point of view for the following reasons:

• the mathematical models existing at this stage for describing these effects are not generalized and
depend on certain empirical coefficients;
• velocity-dependent saturation functions lead to increase of the productivity, whereas the
Forchheimer's effect and the usage of GPP equation reduce fluid mobility, i.e. these effects may
be partially or completely contradicting each other.
In practice, this means that simulation models matching against the well test data does not have a
single solution, and this makes it difficult to describe the behavior of reservoir processes. As a result, even
simulation models that are perfectly match to production data may raise doubts at the forecasting stage.
However, all the models discussed above have one thing in common - the described effects tend to zero
with increasing detalization of the reservoir description (i.e., when the grid is refined).
Indeed, the use of grid refinement in a direction perpendicular to the flow into the well is equivalent to
the discretization used in the GPP equation (therefore, the local gridding method is traditionally used to
check the adequacy of the GPP model), and reduces the amount of the flow per cell (i.e., effectively reduces
the flow velocity in this cell and, as a result, reduces the Forchheimer's and velocity dependent saturation
functions effects). At the same time, the refinement of the grid has an obvious drawback - complication of
the model and a corresponding increase in simulation time.
Summarizing the above, we can draw the following conclusion: the modeling of the GC reservoir systems
is associated with a number of effects causing deviations from the traditional inflow equation according
to the Darcy law. These effects can be approximated by grid detalization and refinement cells in the near-
wellbore zone, or using some techniques that, however, require preliminary calibration. It is also worth
noting that a combination of grid detalization and the usage of the described techniques is also possible
and quite robust.
4 SPE-196916-MS

Hydraulic fracturing modeling techniques for the GC fields

As a method for modeling the effects of hydraulic fracturing on well productivity and fluid influx in
the simulation model, during this work we used the method of creating additional connections in grid
cells penetrated by the hydraulic fracture (HF) area. The productivity of wells with hydraulic fracturing
is calculated depending on the reservoir properties and the parameters of the fracture, a more detailed
description is given in the published work (Economides et al., 2002). The calculated productivity index is
converted into connection factors for each cell completed with a fracture, taking into account the uneven
distribution of the proppant along the fracture, choke restriction effect, as well as the dimensions of the
cells. Comparison of this technique with fractures modeling in an explicit form by grid detalization in the
near-wellbore zone is also available in a number of sources (Shakhov et al., 2014). The advantage of this
method compared to the explicit modeling is that there is no need to create a large number of small cells
describing the fracture; the modeling takes place on cells of standard sizes (with a horizontal resolution of
25 × 25, 50 × 50, 100 × 100 m) at half-length of fracture 50 – 150 m. This greatly simplifies the modeling
process, and also allows the fractures to be oriented in the model regardless of the grid cells orientation,
which makes the method most suitable for simulating full-scale models.
As practice shows, this technique if good enough to predict the well performance with either hydraulic
fracturing or multi-stage hydraulic fracturing in case of a single-phase or two-phase oil-water inflow.
However, its use may have limitations for cases of GC systems for the following reasons:

• the use of large cells in the bottom hole zone of wells with hydraulic fractures does not allow to
explicitly simulate condensate dropping in the well vicinity;
• the use of additional connections does not allow explicitly modeling condensate dropping inside
the fracture and the multiphase flow, because the well connections "transport" the fluid from the
connected cell directly to the well.
The issues described in the first bullet point is standard while modeling the behavior of two-phase GC
systems in the near-wellbore zone (described in more detail above). One of the solutions to this problem
is the refinement of the bottom hole zone in order to more accurately account for the dynamics of changes
in reservoir pressure inside the drainage zone. This method allows to simulate condensate dropping in the
bottom hole zone, particularly for wells with hydraulic fractures as well.
The degree of influence of the effects described in the second bullet point depends on the specific
conditions, such as the average permeability of the reservoir, the condensate content in the fluid, the
productivity of the hydraulic fractures and the flow rate of the gas.
Let us consider an example on a simplified single-wellbore model, the parameters of which are close to
the conditions of the object in this study. In this example, an explicit method of modeling fracture will be
compared with a method based on creating additional connections that simulate a fracture. For both models,
a high-resolution simulator was used to ensure more efficient simulation of local grids and small cells with
a high degree of permeability heterogeneity.
The main parameters of the reservoir, fracture and well operation are shown in Table 1.
SPE-196916-MS 5

Table 1—The main parameters of the reservoir, fracture and the well operation for analyzing
the impact of the method of modeling the hydraulic fracturing on the behavior of GC systems

Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of the fracture in both cases.

Figure 1—Fracture model: a) in an explicit form (top view); b) by creating additional connections

Explicitly, the fracture is represented as refined cells (highlighted in red on the permeability scale in
Figure 1a). The size of the cells that represent the fracture is 0.5 m. The transition from large-scale cells to
the cells that represent the fracture is implemented in the form of logarithmic refinement. To preserve the
conductivity value, the permeability value in the cells in the direction of flow in the fracture is assumed to
be 5600 mD. The horizontal size of global cells in the model is 50 × 50 m, but in the near-wellbore zone it
is refined to a size of 5 m along the fracture for a more detailed description of the flow inside it.
In Figure 1b, cells connected to the fracture are visualized, there additional connections will be created
using the second method. In order to take into account condensate loss in the near-wellbore zone, cells were
6 SPE-196916-MS

refined from the size of 50 × 50 m horizontally to the size of 5 × 5 m. The final representation of the refined
near-wellbore zone is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2—Refinement of cells in the near-wellbore zone of a well with hydraulic fracture

The use of the method of additional connections with local gridding to medium cell sizes (5–10 m) allows
to solve the problem of modeling condensate dropping in the near-wellbore zone for wells with hydraulic
fractures, while avoiding the need to create very small cells with high permeability contrast to simulate a
fracture in an explicit form, which would otherwise greatly complicate the hydrodynamic computations and
therefore is practically inapplicable for full-scale modeling of reservoirs with a large number of wells with
hydraulic fractures.
Comparison of the simulation results for different methods of fracturing modeling is shown in Figure 3.
SPE-196916-MS 7

Figure 3—Comparison of the HF modeling methods

As can be seen from the comparison, both methods give comparable results both before the start of
condensate dropping in the reservoir, and after it. Figure 4 shows the visualization of the depleted pressure
area in the middle of the simulation for the two methods.

Figure 4—Comparison of the depleted area (on the left - the fracture model by the
method of additional connections, on the right - the fracture model in an explicit form)

From Figure 4 it follows that for both methods the pressure in the near-wellbore zone is equally
distributed, which leads to the same volume of condensate deposited in the formation.
Figure 5 shows the oil saturation distribution in the cells, representing the fracture in the explicit form
in the middle of the simulation.
8 SPE-196916-MS

Figure 5—Condensate saturation inside the fracture

When modeling hydraulic fractures using the method of additional connections, as described above, the
flow of fluids in the fracture is not modeled, this model assumes that all gas and condensate entering the
fracture, a priori, goes further into the well.
As can be seen from Figure 5, the condensate saturation is insignificant, the entire volume of condensate
deposited in the fracture is concentrated in the lower layer of cells with low HC saturation, which decreases
towards the well. From the practical point of view, this means that at a given production rate and,
accordingly, flow velocities inside the fracture, almost all condensate entering the fracture is successfully
removed from it, without leading to condensate accumulation and gas blocking inside the fracture. For the
same reasons (maximizing the flow velocity of gas in a fracture and reducing the effects of multiphase flow)
when conducting hydraulic fracturing in GC fields with middle-range permeabilities (Butula et al., 2015),
it is advisable to focus on achieving maximum fracture conductivity, for example, by using specialized
hydraulic fracturing technology with channels. It will also allow to achieve a more significant effect from
the use of fractures with large half-lengths and, accordingly, increase the well operation period at a pressure
above the dew point, which, in turn, will reduce condensate losses in the reservoir, prolong the level of gas
production plateau, and, as a result, will increase the accumulated condensate production.
Figures 6 and 7 show the results of historical data reproduction for two wells of the studied object using
the hydraulic fracturing model by the method of additional connections.
SPE-196916-MS 9

Figure 6—Comparison of the results of the simulation model with hydraulic fracturing with observed data for well 1

Figure 7—Comparison of the results of the simulation model with hydraulic fracturing with observed data for
well 2 (actual data on bottom hole pressures are absent, but the obtained values correspond to typical values)

As can be noted from the presented figures, the method of additional connections is not only in good
agreement with the explicit fracture model, but also makes it possible to accurately reproduce the actual
performance of the well in the specified conditions.
Based on the above, it can be concluded that the influence of simultaneous gas and condensate flow
inside a fracture for these conditions is negligible, which ensures almost perfect match between the results
10 SPE-196916-MS

of modeling of hydraulic fracturing using the method of additional connections and the results of simulation
the fracture in an explicit form, as well as adequate reproduction of historical observed data. In this case, the
most important factor is the correspondence of the total volumes of condensate dropping out in the bottom
hole formation zone (which is achieved due to the moderately refined cells), which ensures the correct
production dynamics.
Under other conditions, for example, in the case of large values of the condensate factor, at a lower gas
flow velocity inside the fracture (lower production rates), as well as at much lower permeability values, the
effect of condensate dropping inside the fracture may be much more significant, since then the condensate
may start accumulating in the fracture, thereby partially blocking the gas flow. In such cases, modeling
of hydraulic fracturing using the method of additional connections may not be applicable or may require
additional studies in order to successfully use it.
Thus, we can draw the following conclusions:

• The use of the method of additional connections for modeling HF with moderate grid cell
refinement of the bottom hole formation zone (up to 5–10 m horizontally) allows adequately
describe the well performance within the framework of typical technological operation modes
when developing a medium permeability GC reservoir. This method is applicable, since under
conditions similar to those of the object under study, the effects of multiphase flow inside the
fracture are negligible and do not have a significant impact on the operation of the well. The overall
dynamics and volumes of condensate dropped out in the bottom hole zone are taken into account
correctly. Further in this work this method will be used to simulate hydraulic fracturing on the
sectors and on a full-scale model, since it is flexible and less demanding in terms of computing
resources.
• In practice, to increase the production of gas and condensate of similar reservoirs, it is advisable
to strive to increase the fracture conductivity for more effective condensate removal, which will
consequently allow more effectively increase the half-length of the fracture and therefore reduce
the pressure drop in the near-wellbore zone during well operations.

Basis preparation for simulation studies

The traditional approach to the simulation studies for full-scale models involves preliminary stage with the
scale of individual wells to determine various parameters of the model. In this paper, two representative
sectors were chosen, characterizing different geological and hydrodynamic conditions.
The geological grid is built with high vertical resolution – 0.5 m, however, the lateral resolution is 200
× 200 m, which is insufficient to thorough describe the GC systems due to the substantial simplification
of the phase behavior when the temperature and pressure conditions in the system change. Therefore, the
simulations were performed on these elements with different lateral cells resolution to determine the optimal
dimensions of the grid.
Evaluation of the different grid resolutions should be performed relative to some reference case. Often,
this reference is considered to be the analytical flow equation; in this case, the high reservoir heterogeneity
combined with various well completion options (sub-horizontal, vertical wells and hydraulic fracturing)
does not allow using the analytical approach as a reference.
Comparison of numerical schemes, methods for modeling condensate dropout, analysis of the influence
of the grid resolution and the fluid composition on the results were performed. At each stage of work, gas
production, condensate production, well bottom hole pressure and simulation time (as an important factor
while working with full-scale models) were estimated.
As a hardware platform for all simulations during the study, a modern computing cluster was used,
consisting of several computing nodes connected by a high-speed InfiniBand FDR channel. A typical node
SPE-196916-MS 11

configuration consists of 2 Intel Xeon processors (14 cores each), DDR4 RAM with the amount of 200 GB
or more per node.
During testing of the scalability, model run time acceleration at increasing number of computing cores
was analyzed. This was done for a sector with a detailed grid, the dimension of which was 25 × 25 m. The
total number of cells was 8.6 million with 4.6 million active. Table 2 and figure 8 show the simulation time
and the acceleration at different number of used cores.

Table 2—Comparison of the simulation time at different number of cores

Figure 8—Comparison of the number of used cores and the corresponding

acceleration of the simulation relative to the serial run (on 1 core)

Choosing a numerical scheme

The fully implicit method (FULLY IMPLICIT) is the default for Black oil models, while it can also be used
in compositional simulations. This method implies that the final system of linear equations is constructed
with respect to the variables P (pressure), Ci (the fraction of the i-th component in the flow), Sw (water
saturation). Thus, for the number of components equal to Nc, the total number of variables with respect to
which the linearized system of equations is solved will be Nc + 2. The advantage of this method is that its
stability to the potential convergence issues during the simulation, the disadvantage is the large size of the
equation's matrix and, as a consequence, the increased consumption of RAM and longer simulation time.
Alternatives to the fully implicit method are semi-implicit, particularly IMPES, IMPSAT, AIM IMPES,
AIM IMPSAT methods. These methods are based on the assumptions that part of the initial set of Nc + 2
variables can be conditionally accepted as constant, which reduces the system of equations and speeds up
12 SPE-196916-MS

its processing, after which the variables excluded from the implicit procedure are recomputed using explicit
equations based on the obtained solution of the implicit simplified system. Such a two-step procedure,
if necessary, is repeated until the convergence of the values of the variables is achieved. In general, for
semi-implicit methods a larger number of iterations (due to lower stability) are common, with a significant
reduction in the simulation time and the size of the problem within a single iteration.
The IMPES method (IMPlicit Pressure Explicit Saturation) is based on the assumption that within the
time step the saturation and the components concentration can be taken constant, This allows building a
system of equations only for pressure, saturation and components concentration, which are computed based
on the obtained implicit solution of the system of equations relative to pressure by explicit equations. Thus,
the size of the system of equations decreases by Nc + 2 times. This method is the most simplified and
the fastest, but also the least stable. Practice shows that in case of insignificant flows and/or changes of
variables during the simulation, it significantly speeds up the run, however, with significant changes in cells
conditions, this method may experience convergence problems and slow down the simulation compared to
FULLY IMPLICIT.
The IMPSAT (IMPlicit SATuration) method is more stable: from a fully implicit system of equations, only
the components concentrations are excluded, which are then computed at the stage of explicit calculations.
Thus, the linear system is 2 times bigger than in the case of IMPES, but, obviously, this solution will be
more stable.
A hybrid combination of these classes of methods (implicit and semi-implicit) are the so-called adaptive
implicit methods. The main disadvantage of semi-implicit methods is their instability if there are cells in
the model with significant changes (pressure, flow, saturation, component concentrations) during the time
step. However, it is obvious that the percentage of such cells usually is rather small (less than 5% of the
total number of cells). Thus, the basic idea of adaptive-implicit schemes is as follows: there is no need to
compute the entire model in implicit mode, at each step the flow in the cells of different sizes is evaluated to
make a decision whether each particular cell should be solved in either fully implicit or semi-implicit mode.
This method is very flexible because at each step the cells to be solved in fully implicit and semi-implicit
modes are re-evaluated, so the system adapts to the model dynamics. Practically, this approach makes it
possible to significantly stabilize the model simulation and eliminate the non-convergences typical for the
semi-implicit methods with a negligible increase in the size of the equations system (in most cases 1–2%
of the total number of cells).
In modern simulators, there are 2 types of adaptive implicit methods implemented - AIM_IMPES (as
the name suggests, this method is a combination of the fully implicit method and the IMPES method)
and AIM_IMPSAT (similarly, the combination of the fully implicit method and the IMPSAT method). For
compositional simulation, the default method is AIM_IMPES.
Thus, in terms of increasing speed and reducing stability, the methods can be arranged in the following
order: FULLY_IMPLICIT - AIM_IMPSAT - AIM_IMPES - IMPSAT - IMPES.
To analyze the influence of the numerical scheme, base models of the study objects were built, with a grid
resolution of 200 × 200 m and with 8 components in the PVT model. Based on these models, fully implicit
and both adaptive-implicit numerical schemes (FULLY_IMPLICIT, AIM_IMPES and AIM_IMPSAT)
were tested.
One of the criteria for choosing a numerical scheme is the total simulation time if the production rates
are equal. Figure 9 shows a comparison of the simulation time using three different numerical schemes for
the simulation models of sectors 1 and 2, respectively. As can be seen from the presented figures, the best
scheme in terms of the simulation time for both sectors is AIM_IMPES scheme. When it is used, the semi-
implicit IMPES scheme is used for most of the cells, and the fully implicit FULLY_IMPLICIT scheme is
used for high-throughput cells, as well as for all cells connected to the well. The number of cells calculated
by the fully implicit method in the adaptive scheme was about 0.45% of the total number of cells, due to
which it gains the speed compared to the fully implicit method. The AIM_IMPSAT scheme for the studied
SPE-196916-MS 13

objects, with their specific challenges, showed the worst performance. During the simulation, there were
non-convergences in composition concentrations solution, leading to time steps chopping, therefore the
total simulation time increased.

Figure 9—Comparison of the model simulation time in seconds using

different numerical schemes on the sector model 1 (a) and 2 (b)

Thus, based on the performed series of simulations, an adaptive numerical scheme AIM_IMPES with the
highest simulation speed was chosen, which is extremely important for full-scale modeling of reservoirs.

Selection of grid block dimensions

As noted above, on a full-scale hydrodynamic model, with lateral dimensions of cells over 100 m, it is rather
difficult to simulate the effects of decreasing the well productivity caused by condensate dropout, since
this effect is observed only in a small area near the wellbore. When using large cells, the phase behavior is
simplified, which affects the accuracy of the obtained results.
The considered sectors with individual wells have a lateral dimension of 200 × 200 m. During the study,
the sizes of the grid blocks were successively reduced from 200 m to 1 m in the lateral direction. The
14 SPE-196916-MS

results of the simulations were analyzed at each stage in comparison with the most detailed grid, which is
considered a reference case. When the minimum acceptable deviation of the simulation results is achieved,
meaning that the results are stable, the corresponding grid dimension will be considered optimal.
When performing the series of simulations, a basic 8 component PVT model was used to facilitate and
speed up the evaluation of the influence of the dimension of grid blocks on the results. The AIM_IMPES
scheme selected at the previous stage was used as a numerical simulation scheme.
Grid blocks refinement and models building were performed in the commercial seismic-to-simulation
software package. The refinement started from the basic dimension of the grid 200 × 200 m. At each step,
the grid size was reduced about two times, after which the obtained results were analyzed for stability.
Deviations in cumulative gas and condensate production, as well as standard deviation of bottom hole
pressure at representative wells for both sectors were analyzed.
Figure 10 shows the graphs with gas (left) and condensate (right) production deviations (in % from the
reference case) as functions of the cell size used.1. The cell size on both graphs decreases from right to left.
For this sector 1, the grid was refined down to a dimension of 5 × 5 m, simulation results obtained at this
grid dimension were taken as the reference case. From the graphs below it follows that the more detailed
the grid, the smaller the deviation in the cumulative production of gas and condensate is observed (Table
3). It is worth noting that all simulations with the grid resolution finer than 200 × 200 m fall within the 5%
deviation range, the latter, in turn, gives the greatest discrepancy in the results.

Figure 10—Cell size versus the deviation of the cumulative production of gas and condensate for sector 1

Table 3—Percentage deviation of the cumulative production of gas and condensate

in comparison with the reference case with a cell dimension of 5 m for sector 1

In the down left corner in the graphs in the Figure 10 there is a deviation plateau meaning the achievement
of the solution stability. Stability is observed between the results at cell sizes of 12.5 m and 5 m. Therefore,
it is not needed to refine the grid any further, since the necessary accuracy has been achieved.
The workflow on the sector 2 is similar, however, the simulation results on a model with a grid of 5 ×
5 m cells size do not reach the deviation plateau, resulting that the refinement was made up to 1 m in the
SPE-196916-MS 15

lateral direction. The graphs of the used cell dimension versus the percentage deviation of the cumulative
gas and condensate production are shown in Figure 11. It is worth noting that in this case, the X axis (cell
dimension) for clarity of the results obtained is presented in logarithmic form.

Figure 11—Graph of the cell size used versus the deviation of the cumulative production of gas and condensate for sector 2

In general, the results obtained in sector 2 are comparable with those obtained for sector 1: the more
detailed grid, the more accurate the obtained result. The 5% range of acceptable deviation from the reference
case of the most detailed grid (1 × 1 m) encompasses the models with 2 × 2 m, 3 × 3 m, 5 × 5 m cells (table 4).

Table 4—Percentage deviation of cumulative gas and condensate production

in comparison with the reference case with a cell dimension of 1 m for sector 2

It should be noted that, in contrast to sector 1, the simulation results in sector 2 are more sensitive to
the cell size, which may be due to the different distribution of the reservoir properties and, therefore, the
fluid phase behavior in the near-wellbore zone. However, summarizing the simulation results obtained for
both sectors, a grid with a cell size of 5 × 5 m can be considered as the most acceptable and satisfying the
stability criteria on both sectors.

Comparison of methods for modeling GC systems using special inflow

equations
As noted earlier, in modern simulators, it is possible to account for condensate dropping effects in the bottom
hole formation zone using special inflow equations, particularly the inflow equations with generalized
pseudo pressure (GPP). The application of this equation makes it possible to estimate the effect in the area
16 SPE-196916-MS

around the wellbore much smaller than the size of the connected cell itself, thereby reducing the influence
of the grid dimension on the result. That, in turn, can simplify and speed up the simulation of the model.
In both sectors, for each grid dimension, simulations were additionally performed using the GPP pseudo-
pressure equation considering the velocity effect.
Figure 12 shows a graph of cell size versus percentage deviation of the cumulative gas and condensate
production for sector 1 while using the GPP inflow equation in comparison to the standard inflow equation.
The results of simulations using the GPP equation are less sensitive to changes in the grid dimension, the
difference in deviations values is significantly less (all values are in the 5% range deviation of the results
using the standard equation on the detailed grid 5 × 5 m, which is considered the reference case for this
sector). In addition, we estimated the deviations of the simulation results in comparison with the standard
equation on identical grids (with the same cells size), as well as relative to the most detailed grid using GPP.
As can be seen from table 5, when using the GPP inflow equation, the largest but satisfactory deviation of
5% for all three criteria is a grid of 50 × 50 m.

Figure 12—Graph of cell size versus deviation of cumulative gas and condensate
production for sector 1 using the standard inflow equation and special GPP inflow equation

Table 5—Percentage deviation of results using the GPP inflow equation for cumulative gas and condensate production for sector 1

For sector 2, the picture is similar, the application of the GPP equation on all grid dimensions is compared
to the reference case on a 1 × 1 m grid with a standard inflow equation, which is shown in Figure 13.
SPE-196916-MS 17

Thus, the sensitivity of the results to the grid detalization is greatly reduced. For grids with a cell
size from 1 to 25 m, the overall trend of the model's behavior remains, the results of these simulations
approximate good enough the reference case with the standard inflow equation on a 1 × 1 m grid. If you
additionally compare the deviation criteria of the standard and pseudo-pressure equations on the same grids,
and simulation results on all grids with the GPP equation in comparison with the most detailed one, then
the largest cell that satisfies all the error criteria is the 12.5 × 12.5 m grid (table 6).

Figure 13—Graph of cell size versus deviation of cumulative gas and condensate
production for sector 2 for standard inflow equation and GPP inflow equation

Table 6—Percentage deviation of results using the GPP inflow equation for cumulative gas and condensate production for sector 2

Summarizing the simulation results for the two sectors, it is possible to choose the most detailed grid,
with minimal errors in the results for further application on the full-scale model. If we consider the explicit
modeling of the bottom hole formation zone, i.e. refinement the grid itself using the standard inflow
equation, the best solution is a grid with cell size of 5 × 5 m. Simulations using the special GPP inflow
18 SPE-196916-MS

equation on large cells reduce the sensitivity of the results to the grid detalization, but increase the sensitivity
to the effects of the GPP option itself. These effects are minimal and acceptable with a cell dimension of
12.5 × 12.5 m, which is typical for both sectors.

Assessment of the influence of the PVT model detalization

It should be noted that one of the most important elements of the simulation model is the phase equilibrium
and thermophysical properties of a multicomponent system, which includes the PVT properties of reservoir
fluid. Depending on the degree of knowledge about the reservoir fluid and the reservoir modeling objectives
two approaches to PVT modeling are used:
– three-phase simulation model;
– compositional modeling.
Despite the fact that reservoir simulation using a compositional approach makes it possible to
more accurately describe the thermodynamics of in-situ processes based on the equations of state of
multicomponent systems, there are a number of challenges mostly related to the multiple increase of
computational resources requirements in comparison to the three-phase simulation model. It should be
noted that one of the main factors influencing the amount of time spent and computational resources when
performing simulations of the production indicators is the number of components in PVT compositional
model. In this regard, it is of a particular interest to estimate the number of components that are optimal
both in terms of the accuracy of the results and the simulation time.
To assess the effect of the PVT model detalization on the simulation results and the simulation time, 4
compositional PVT models of reservoir fluid containing 50, 30, 15, and 8 components, respectively, were
prepared. The reduction in the number of components from the original composition was done by successive
pairwise combining fractions into pseudo-fractions, according to the scheme presented in Figure 14.
SPE-196916-MS 19

Figure 14—Component Grouping Scheme

Each of the described models of reservoir fluid was individually matched against the lab results to
determine the dew point pressure, the PVT properties of stable condensate and the parameters of the CVD
experiment (Table 7). The results of the models matching to the actual data are presented in Table 8 and
in Figure 15, from which it can be seen that each of the models reproduces the experimental data with
sufficient accuracy.
20 SPE-196916-MS

Table 7—The initial data for the PVT models matching

Table 8—The results of PVT model matching against the lab data
SPE-196916-MS 21

Figure 15—The results of the PVT models matching against the CVD data

Using PVT models of reservoir fluid, numerical simulations were performed using the simulation model
of sector 2 with a grid dimension of 12.5 × 12.5 m in the lateral direction to more accurately describe the
phase behavior of the reservoir fluid. As can be seen from Figures 16, 17 and Table 9, decreasing the number
of components in the PVT model from 50 to 8 leads to increasing deviation of the cumulative gas and
condensate production, however, the resulting deviation does not exceed 5%. Note that the results of the
simulation performed using the most detailed PVT model with 50 components (model No. 1) were taken
as the reference case.

Table 9—Percentage deviation of cumulative gas and condensate production in

comparison with the reference case with 50 components for the studied PVT models
22 SPE-196916-MS

Figure 16—Cumulative gas production values for simulations with a different number of components of the PVT model

Figure 17—Cumulative condensate production values for simulations with a different number of components of the PVT model

In addition to analyzing the cumulative hydrocarbons production, an analysis was made for the influence
of the PVT model on the bottom hole pressure behavior with an example presented for well 1 in sector 2
(Figure 18). The value of the root mean-square (RMS) deviations of the bottom hole pressure values from
the reference case for PVT models No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4 was, respectively, 1.7, 2.7 and 6.7 bar (Table 10).
SPE-196916-MS 23

Figure 18—Dynamics of bottom hole pressure for well 1 (sector 2) for

simulations with a different number of components in the PVT model

Table 10—RMS deviation of the bottom hole pressure from the reference case with 50 components for the studied PVT models

Summarizing the results of the analysis, it can be concluded that for detailed modeling of phase
transitions, hydrocarbon components extraction and pressure dynamic during field development, it is
recommended to use the most detailed composition of formation fluid possible, however, using PVT models
with a reduced number of components (from 50 to 8) allows more rapid assessment of development
indicators with enough accuracy. Also, when choosing the number of components used in the fluid model,
it is necessary to take into account the capabilities of computing systems, the amount of RAM and the total
simulation time. Table 11 shows the total simulation time for the considered models running on a computing
cluster with 4 nodes (112 cores).

Table 11—Comparison of the total simulation time of models using a different number of components in the PVT model

At each stage of the study, certain results were selected for further implementation on a full-scale
simulation model in order to obtain more accurate results in less time with less work effort. The last stage
24 SPE-196916-MS

of work with the sectors of the object under study was an analysis of the selected parameters, i.e. cross-
validation with reference solutions to confirm that the previously selected decisions are still correct.
According to the results of multivariate simulations performed on the sectors, the following parameters
were obtained for numerical modeling:

• numerical scheme – AIM_IMPES;

• grid discretization for explicit modeling – 5×5 m;

• grid discretization for simulations with GPP and velocity effects in the near-wellbore zone –
12,5×12,5 m;
• number of components in the formation fluid model – 8.

Let us consider the cross-validation on the example of sector 2. The verification of the chosen numeric
scheme is made by running simulation on a selected grid with a dimension of 5 × 5 m. Figure 19 shows the
total simulation time when using one node with 28 cores for the three variants of the numerical schemes
(FULLY_IMPLICIT, AIM_IMPES, AIM_IMPSAT). As you can see, the simulation with the numerical
scheme AIM_IMPSAT is not completed due to the convergence issues. The best option from the simulation
speed point of view on the selected grid remains the previously chosen solution scheme AIM_IMPES, which
confirms the previous decision.

Figure 19—Total simulation time using various numerical schemes

Among other things, cross-validation of the selected grid was performed. To do this, simulation results
comparison was made for the two selected grids with the most detailed grid, in this case with the dimension
of 1 × 1 m. The percentage deviation of the cumulative gas and condensate production is given in Table
12. It should be emphasized that the GPP option reduces the difference in results from fine grid, i.e., quite
accurately simulates changes occurring in the near-wellbore zone.
In general, both models accurately approximate the results of simulations on the most detailed grid and,
therefore, can be recommended for use on a full-scale model.
SPE-196916-MS 25

Table 12—Comparison of two models with recommended grids to the most detailed grid 1 × 1 m

The final step is to validate the fluid model on an already selected 5 × 5 m grid using the recommended
numerical scheme. The obtained comparison results also confirm the assumptions made earlier are correct
and the 8 component PVT model quite accurately approximate the most detailed fluid model with
50 components, therefore, when choosing a reservoir fluid model, additional parameters must also be
considered, such as simulation time and available computing resources. An acceptable fluid model for a
full-scale model based on a complex estimate is the 8-component model.

Table 13—Comparison of two models with recommended grids to the most detailed grid 1 × 1 m

Table 14—Comparison of the simulation time of the model with selected grid using
a different number of components of PVT model (the number of cores used is 112)

Performed studies and analysis of the representative sectors made it possible to identify important
characteristics for simulation modeling, which can then be applied on a larger object or, directly, on a full-
scale model of GC systems. The degree of influence of the grid resolution and the PVT model detalization
on the simulation results in terms of gas production, condensate production and bottom hole pressure was
estimated. The simulation time was also considered as an important aspect influencing the choice of the
parameters for modeling sectors and full-scale models.

Conclusions
Thus, it was shown in this study that the simulation of GC reservoir systems is associated with the need
to take into account a number of effects caused by the deviation of the fluid inflow behavior from to the
26 SPE-196916-MS

Darcy's law. These effects can be described by either grid detalization and refining the cells in the near-
wellbore zone or by using special techniques requiring preliminary calibration.
Comparison of numerical schemes, methods for modeling GC systems, analysis of the influence of grid
dimensions and PVT model detalization on the obtained results were performed. At each stage of work, gas
and condensate production, well bottom hole pressure and also simulation time were estimated to compare
against reference cases.
According to the results of simulation studies, it was shown that for reservoirs of this type the
recommended grid size when describing the effects of the near wellbore zone is 12 × 12 m using GPP inflow
equation, or 5 × 5 m using the standard inflow equation. It is noted that the size of global cells does not
significantly affect the results of simulation, while respecting the required size of the cells in the bottom
hole zone.
As a numerical scheme based on a series of simulations, it is recommended to use an adaptive numerical
scheme AIM_IMPES with the highest simulation speed, which is extremely important for full-scale
modeling of reservoirs.
The influence of the PVT model components number on the simulation results is estimated, the optimal
grouping into the pseudo-components is justified.
The method of modeling of hydraulic fracturing with the help of additional connections is validated,
which allows to adequately simulate well performance while developing GC reservoirs with medium
permeability. It is shown that the effects of multiphase flow inside the fracture are negligible and do not
have a significant effect on the operation of the well.
The obtained results of the studies during this work became a basis for running simulations on a larger
scale full-field reservoir model.

References
1. M. Economides, R. Oligney, P. Valko. Unified Fracture Design. Bringing the Gap Between
Theory and Practice. Orsa Press, Alvin, Texas, 2002.
2. D. Shakhov, M. Yaryshev. SIMULATION OF THE EFFECTS OF HYDRAULIC
FRACTURING ON FULL-SCALE MODELS USING THE METHOD OF CREATING
ADDITIONAL CONNECTIONS. Burenie & neft. Dec 12/2014.
3. ECLIPSE Version 2018.1 Technical Description. Schlumberger.
4. K. Butula, A. Yudin, I. Magdeev, V. Chernyak, M. Samoilov. Fracturing Considerations in Mid
Permeability Gas Condensate Formations. SPE-176577
5. Whitson, C. H. and Fevang, Ø. "Generalised Pseudopressure Well Treatment in Reservoir
Simulation," Presented at the IBC Technical Services Conference on Optimisation of Gas
Condensate Fields, Aberdeen, UK (June 26-27, 1997).
6. Whitson, C. H. and Fevang, Ø. "Modeling Gas Condensate Well Deliverability," paper SPE
30714, SPE Reservoir Engineering (1996) 11, No. 4, 221-230; also presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA (October 22-25, 1995).
7. Whitson, C.H., Fevang, Ø., and Saevareid, A. "Gas Condensate Relative Permeability for Well
Calculations," paper SPE 56476, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference, Houston,
Texas, USA (October 3-6 1999).
8. Henderson, G.D., Danesh, A., Tehrani, D.H., and Al-Kharusi, B. "The Relative Significance
of Positive Coupling and Inertial Effects on Gas Condensate Relative Permeabilities at High
Velocity," paper SPE 62933, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Dallas, Texas, USA (October 1-4 2000).
SPE-196916-MS 27

9. Güyagüler, B. and Byer, T., "A New Rate-Allocation-Optimization Framework," paper PE

105200, SPE Production & Operations (2008), 23, No. 4, 448–457; also presented at the SPE
Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Houston, Texas, USA (February 16–28, 2007).