See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337646287

Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in

the channel

Article  in  Materials Today: Proceedings · November 2019

DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101

CITATION READS

1 44

4 authors, including:

Zhibek Akasheva Bakhytzhan Assilbekov

Satbayev University Kazakh-British Technical University
16 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    26 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Aziz Kudaikulov
Satbayev University
14 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pore-scale modeling View project

Pore-scale modelling of fluid flow in porous media using the projection method for incompressible Navier-Stokes equations in irregular domains View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Aziz Kudaikulov on 03 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase

flow in the channel
Zhibek Akasheva a,b,⇑, Bakhytzhan Assilbekov a,b, Aziz Kudaikulov b, Iskander Beisembetov a
a
Satbayev University, 22a Satbayev St., Almaty 050000, Kazakhstan
b
‘‘KBTU BIGSoft” LLP, 140 Baitursynov St., of.502, Almaty 0500000, Kazakhstan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Two-phase flow through a channel is considered for different viscosity ratios, surface tension (r) and
Received 28 August 2019 types of displacement (drainage or imbibition). The simulation is based on the numerical solution of
Received in revised form 8 November 2019 the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations. Numerical calculation results of the relative phase perme-
Accepted 11 November 2019
ability are compared for different mesh sizes. For calculation of relative phase permeability there is a
Available online xxxx
problem with calculation of the average pressure gradient. Following approaches for calculation of aver-
age pressure gradient had been chosen: velocity weighted average of the pressure gradient and velocity
Keywords:
weighted average of the viscous force. The approach of velocity weighted average of the viscous force
Two-phase flow
Relative phase permeabilities
gives more accurate results than the approach of velocity weighted average of the pressure gradient.
Fingering Fingering instability was observed depending on the viscosity ratio and surface tension. All numerical cal-
Mesh size culations are performed using OpenFOAM finite volume library.
Numerical simulation Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Pore-scale modeling Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 7th International Con-
ference on Nanomaterials and Advanced Energy Storage Systems.

1. Introduction
Understanding of fluid flow mechanics through a porous med-
ium is important in petroleum engineering, environmental engi-
neering, medicine and design of many porous materials [1]. Pore-
scale modelling of two-phase flow through a porous medium
allows predicting key flow properties such as relative phase per-
meability without conduction of physical experiments. In order
to better understand the two-phase flow process, it is necessary
to investigate the influence of factors such as fingering instability,
capillary number and, contact angle on the flow behavior.
There are exist two types of displacement: drainage and imbibi-
tion. Drainage displacement occurs when the non-wetting phase is
displacing by wetting phase. Imbibition displacement occurs when
the wetting phase is displacing by non-wetting phase. Relative
phase permeabilities of these displacements begins to differ when
fingering pattern is appeared.
Flow of two immiscible fluids in porous media is usually driven
by forces such as rock adhesion (wettability), gravity or by pres-
sure gradients caused by pressure differences on the boundaries
⇑ Corresponding author at: Satbayev University, 22a Satbayev St., Almaty 050000,
Kazakhstan.
E-mail address: zhibek_akasheva@mail.ru (Z. Akasheva).
of the flow domain. Viscous forces, on the other hand, are always
resistive forces, trying to slow down the flow. The balance of these
forces control the pore-scale processes, and determine the macro-
scopic behavior of the flow [2]. To describe the macroscopic behav-
ior of a fluid, it is enough to know (determine) two parameters:
absolute and relative phase permeabilities. In determining these
parameters, a problem arises in calculating the average pressure
gradient. Raeini et al. determined average pressure gradient for
one- and two-phase fluids [2]. Afkhami et al. presented a mesh-
dependent dynamic contact angle model, that is based on funda-
mental hydrodynamics and serves as a more appropriate boundary
condition at a moving contact line [3]. Riaz et al. analyzed nonlin-
ear evolution of viscous and gravitational instability in two-phase
immiscible displacements in porous media with a high-accuracy
numerical method [4]. Berg et al. used a model description assum-
ing flow in capillary tubes with a slip boundary condition. This
model predicts that the flux increase due to slip depends on the
equivalent capillary radius of the flow channels [5].
Suekane et al. examined the three-dimensional structure of the
fingering pattern at the viscous fingering to gravitational segrega-
tion boundary using X-ray microtomography on a packed bed of
particles [6]. Casademunt studied the Saffman–Taylor instability
beyond linear stability analysis by means of a weakly nonlinear

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 7th International Conference on Nanomaterials and Advanced Energy Storage Systems.

Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
2 Z. Akasheva et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

analysis and the exact determination of the subcritical branch [7]. For calculation of relative phase permeability there is a problem
Raeini et al. presented a stable and efficient method for modeling with calculation of the average pressure gradient. For calculation of
two-phase flow at low capillary numbers. In this study the average pressure gradient following approaches had been chosen
Navier–Stocks equations are discretized using a finite volume [2]:
approach and capillary forces are computed using a semi-sharp 1) Velocity weighted average of the pressure gradient (APG):
surface force model, in which the transition area for capillary pres- Z
1 !
sure is limited to one grid block [8].  u  ðrPÞdV ð5:1Þ
Q V
In this work, two-phase flow through a channel is considered
for different viscosity ratios and surface tension. The novelty of this where V = L*H; L is the length of the channel; Q is the volumetric
paper is that relative phase permeabilities for various viscosities flow rate.
and surface tension were determined using calculation of average 2) Velocity weighted average of the viscous force (AVF):
pressure gradient. As shown by the calculation results approach Z
1 !
of velocity weighted average of the viscous force are most pre-  u  ðr  TÞdV ð5:2Þ
Q V
ferred. The simulation is based on the numerical solution of the
incompressible Navier–Stokes equations. Numerical calculation where T is the viscous stress tensor:
results of the relative phase permeability are compared for differ-  
T ¼ l ru þ ðruÞ0 ð6Þ
ent mesh sizes. All numerical calculations are performed using
OpenFOAM (interFoam) library. Z
!
Q¼ u dV ð7Þ
V
2. Formulation of the problem
Eq. (1.1)–(2.4) are solved using following initial and boundary
Navier–Stokes equations for incompressible, two immiscible conditions (for L = 10, H = 1):
viscous fluids in 2D channel are considered in this work [3]. Initial conditions are:
"
!
# u ¼ 0; m ¼ 0 ð8:1Þ
@ u
! 
! !
q þ u  r u ¼ qg  rP þ lr2 u ð1:1Þ
@t P¼0 ð8:2Þ

x 2 ½0; 0:5
r!
1;
u ¼0 ð1:2Þ a¼ ð8:3Þ
0; otherwise
!
u ¼ fu; mg ð1:3Þ Boundary conditions are:
Inlet boundary condition is:

0; nw
a¼ ð2:1Þ uin ¼ 104 ; min ¼ 0 ð9:1Þ
1; w
Outlet boundary conditions are:
q ¼ qw a þ qnw ð1  aÞ ð2:2Þ !
@ u out
¼0 ð9:2Þ
@x
l ¼ lw a þ lnw ð1  aÞ ð2:3Þ
Pout ¼ 0 ð9:3Þ
@a !
þ r  ða u Þ ¼ 0 ð2:4Þ Wall boundary condition is:
@t !
uw ¼ 0 ð9:4:1Þ
where q is the density of the phase; u, v is the velocity of the
phase; g is the gravity acceleration; P is the pressure of the phase;
awall ¼ 1 ð9:4:2Þ
m is the dynamic viscosity of the phase, a is the indicator function
representing the volume fraction of one of the fluids in each grid hwall ¼ 90 ð9:4:3Þ
cell in the volume-of-fluid method. For our case a = 1 for wetting
phase and a = 0 for non-wetting phase (see formula 8.3). At the At the interface between the two phases:
interface between two phases the value of a is calculated using !
u ¼ 0 ð9:5Þ
Eq. (2.4) and lies between 0 and 1. S

Absolute permeability is calculated using following formula for h i

! !
single-phase flow between parallel plates:  p þ 2l n  T  n ¼ rk ð9:6Þ
S

H2 !
K¼ ð3Þ k ¼ r  n ð9:7Þ
12
h ! i !
where H is the channel’s width. For our case we calculated abso- !
2l t  T  n ¼ t  rS r ð9:8Þ
lute permeability as K = 1/12 (for H = 1). S

Relative phase permeability is calculated using the Darcy’s law where r is the surface tension, k is the curvature, n is the nor-
for multiphase flow through porous media [9]: mal vector to the interface S, and t is the tangent vector to the
D E K K interface S.
! ri
ui ¼ rP i ð4Þ Contact angle hwall is the angle at which an interface appears to
li
intersect with a solid boundary [3], which is set to 90 degrees in all
where Kri is the relative phase permeability of the phase i = w our simulations. Fig. 1 demonstrates inlet and outlet boundary
(wetting) or nw (non-wetting) phase. conditions for this problem.

Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
 Z. Akasheva et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

we present a comparison of relative phase permeability curves of

wetting and non-wetting phases calculated using velocity
weighted averaging of viscous force (Eq. (5.2)) and using velocity
weighted averaging of the pressure gradient (Eq. (5.1)) for different
mesh sizes (l = 100; r = 0.1, drainage displacement). In the follow-
Fig. 1. Inlet and outlet boundary conditions. ing text l stands for l = mnw/mw. In the subsequent sections, only
the approach of the velocity weighted averaging of viscous force
is used. In Section 3.2 the relative phase permeability curves of
Saturation of the phase is calculated using following formula: wetting and non-wetting phases for different mesh sizes
R (l = 100; r = 0.1, imbibition displacement) are presented. In Sec-
adV
S¼ V
ð10Þ tion 3.3 we compare the relative phase permeability curves of wet-
V ting and non-wetting phases for drainage and imbibition
displacements (l = 100, r = 0.1 and r = 1, mesh 1280  128). In
Section 3.4 relative phases permeability curves of wetting and
3. Results non-wetting phases for drainage and imbibition displacements
(l = 1, r = 0.1 and r = 1, mesh 320  32) are compared. Same ini-
In the following sections, the numerical solution of the incom- tial and boundary conditions were used for all simulations.
pressible Navier–Stokes equations are presented. In Section 3.1

Fig. 2. The relative phase permeabilities of wetting (Krw) and non-wetting phases (Krnw) as a function of saturation (S) for drainage displacement (l = 100; r = 0.1) using
different mesh resolutions as indicated. AVF means that the relative permeability of wetting fluid is calculated by velocity weighted averaging of the viscous force and APG
implies that the relative permeability of the wetting fluid is calculated using the velocity weighted averaging of the pressure gradient.

Fig. 3. The relative phase permeabilities of wetting (Krw) and non-wetting phases (Krnw) as a function of saturation (S) for drainage displacement (l = 100; r = 0.1) using
different mesh resolutions as indicated.

Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
4 Z. Akasheva et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 4. Pressure, velocity and gradient of the velocity in slicing y = 0 and y = 0.5 for mesh 1280  128.

Fig. 5. The relative phase permeabilities of wetting (Krw) and non-wetting phases (Krnw) as a function of saturation (S) for the imbibition displacement (l = 100, r = 0.1) using
different mesh resolutions as indicated.

3.1. Comparison of relative phases permeability curves of wetting and
non-wetting phases calculated using 2 different approaches of average
pressure gradient calculation for different mesh sizes (l = 100; r = 0.1,
drainage displacement)
Relative phase permeabilities of wetting and non-wetting
phases for drainage displacement were observed in this sec-
tion. The procedure is following: relative phase permeabilities
of wetting and non-wetting phases were calculated using
coarse mesh (160  16); then mesh was made finer till
1280  128; then calculation results of the relative phase per-
meabilities of wetting and non-wetting phases were compared.
Figs. 2a, b, and 4a, b demonstrate relative phase permeabilities
of wetting and non-wetting phases calculated using two differ-
ent approaches of average pressure gradient calculation,

Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
 Z. Akasheva et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 5

permeabilities using approach of weighted average of the viscous

force gives more accurate results (inaccuracy 102).

3.2. Relative permeability curves for different mesh sizes (l = 100;

Fig. 6. Saturation of phases for meshes 320  32 and 1280  128.
r = 0.1, imbibition displacement).

respectively (m = 100; r = 0.1, drainage displacement) for
meshes 160  16, 320  32, 640  64 and 1280  128.
As it can be seen from Figs. 2 and 3, the relative phase perme-
abilities are more accurately calculated using the AVF approach
than using the APG approach. According to the calculation results,
it was decided to use the approach of velocity weighted average of
the viscous force (AVF) in the following calculations.
Fig. 4 demonstrates pressure, velocity and gradient of velocity
for the slicing y = 0 and y = 0.5 for mesh 1280  128. The pressure
at the interface of two phases undergoes a break (because of the
capillary pressure); therefore, the calculation of relative phase per-
meabilities using approach of velocity weighted average of the
pressure gradient gives incorrect results (inaccuracy 102). Veloci-
ties of phases do not undergo a break, but its gradient has a break,
however the length of a break in comparison with the pressure
10,000 times smaller; therefore, the calculation of relative phase
Fig. 5a and b demonstrate relative phase permeabilities of wet-
ting and non-wetting phases the for imbibition displacement (non-
wetting phase displaces wetting phase) for meshes 160  16,
320  32, 640  64 and 1280  128, respectively (m = 100;
r = 0.1). The deviation of the relative phase permeabilities on
Fig. 5b occurs due to fingering. There is a piston-like displacement
for S = 0.8 for meshes 320  32 and 1280  128, and there is a fin-
gering for S = 0.3 for mesh 1280  128, which decreases the effi-
ciency of displacement, i.e. the relative phase permeability
(Fig. 6) [1].
3.3. Comparison of relative permeability curves of wetting and non-
wetting phases for the drainage and imbibition displacements
(l = 100, r = 0.1 and r = 1, mesh 1280  128).
Fig. 7a demonstrates relative phase permeabilities of wetting
and non-wetting phases for the drainage and imbibition displace-

Fig. 7. Comparison of the relative phase permeabilities of wetting and non-wetting phases between drainage and imbibition displacements (mesh 1280  128, l = 100 and
r = 0.1 and r = 1).

Fig. 8. Comparison of the relative permeabilities of wetting and non-wetting phases between drainage and imbibition displacements (mesh 320  32, l = 1, r = 0.1 and
r = 1).

Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
6 Z. Akasheva et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
ments for m = 100; r = 0.1 mesh 1280  128. Fig. 7b demonstrates
relative phase permeabilities of wetting and non-wetting phases
for the drainage and imbibition displacements for m = 100; r = 1
mesh 1280  128. In Fig. 7b oscillations occur due to inaccurate
calculation of capillary pressure [8].
3.4. Comparison of relative permeability curves of wetting and non-
wetting phases for the drainage and imbibition displacements (l = 1,
r = 0.1 and r = 1, mesh 320  32).
Fig. 8a and b demonstrate relative phase permeabilities of wet-
ting and non-wetting phases force for the drainage and imbibition
displacements for a relatively coarse mesh (mnw/mw = 1; r = 1, mesh
320  32).
The simulation results are for Fig. 8a and b are not much differ-
ent, as there is a piston-like displacement. The mesh 320  32 is
used in simulation since for these specified parameters it gives reli-
able results.
4. Conclusion
Calculated relative phase permeabilities (of wetting and non-
wetting phases) based on numerical solution of the incompressible
Navier–Stokes equations are compared for different mesh sizes,
viscosity ratios and surface tension. Fingering instability was
Please cite this article as: Z. Akasheva, B. Assilbekov, A. Kudaikulov et al., Numerical calculation of relative phase permeabilities for two-phase flow in the
channel, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.101
View publication stats
observed depending on the viscosity ratio, surface tension and type
of displacement (drainage or imbibition). For the calculation of
average pressure gradient, the approach of velocity weighted aver-
age of the viscous force gives more accurate results than the
approach of velocity weighted average of the pressure gradient.
This approach can be extended to investigate the effect of these
parameters in three dimensional geometries including images of
natural or synthetic porous media.
Acknowledgements
We thank PhD Ali Qaseminejad Raeini for his insightful com-
ments on this work.
References
[1] M.J. Blunt, Multiphase Flow in Permeable Media. A Pore-scale Perspective,
Cambridge University Press, 2017.
[2] A.Q. Raeini, M.J. Blunt, B. Bijeljic, Adv. Water Resour. 74 (2014) 116–126.
[3] S. Afkhami, S. Zaleski, M. Bussman, J. Comput. Phys. 228 (2009) 5370–5389.
[4] A. Riaz, H. Tchelepi, Phys. Fluids 18 (2006) 014104.
[5] S. Berg, A.W. Cense, J.P. Hofman, R.M.M. Smits, Transp. Porous Media 74 (2008)
275–292.
[6] T. Suekane, T. Koe, P.M. Barbancho, Fluids 4 (2019) 130.
[7] J. Casademunt, Chaos: an interdisciplinary, J. Nonlinear Sci. 14 (2004) 809.
[8] A.Q. Raeini, M.J. Blunt, B. Bijeljic, J. Comput. Phys. 231 (2012) 5653–5668.
[9] S. Whitaker, Transp. Porous Media 1 (1986) 105–125.