Upscaling of Geocellular Models for

Flow Simulation



Louis J. Durlofsky


Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University
ChevronTexaco ETC, San Ramon, CA
2
Acknowledgments
• Yuguang Chen (Stanford University)
• Mathieu Prevost (now at Total)
• Xian-Huan Wen (ChevronTexaco)
• Yalchin Efendiev (Texas A&M)
(photo by Eric Flodin)
3
• Issues and existing techniques
• Adaptive local-global upscaling
• Velocity reconstruction and multiscale solution
• Generalized convection-diffusion transport model
• Upscaling and flow-based grids (3D unstructured)
• Outstanding issues and summary
Outline
4
Requirements/Challenges for Upscaling
• Accuracy & Robustness
– Retain geological realism in flow simulation
– Valid for different types of reservoir heterogeneity
– Applicable for varying flow scenarios (well conditions)
• Efficiency
Injector
Producer
Injector
Producer
5
Existing Upscaling Techniques
• Single-phase upscaling: flow (Q /Ap)
– Local and global techniques (k ÷ k
*
or T
*
)

• Multiphase upscaling: transport (oil cut)
– Pseudo relative permeability model (k
rj
÷ k
rj
*
)
• “Multiscale” modeling
– Upscaling of flow (pressure equation)
– Fine scale solution of transport (saturation equation)

6
Local Upscaling to Calculate k
*

• Local BCs assumed: constant pressure difference
• Insufficient for capturing large-scale connectivity in
highly heterogeneous reservoirs
or
Local Extended Local
Solve V·(k·Vp)=0 over local region
for coarse scale k
*
or T
*


Global domain
7
A New Approach
• Standard local upscaling methods unsuitable for
highly heterogeneous reservoirs
• Global upscaling methods exist, but require global
fine scale solutions (single-phase) and optimization
• New approach uses global coarse scale solutions to
determine appropriate boundary conditions for local
k
*
or T
*
calculations
– Efficiently captures effects of large scale flow
– Avoids global fine scale simulation
Adaptive Local-Global Upscaling
8
Adaptive Local-Global Upscaling (ALG)
Well-driven global coarse flow
• Thresholding: Local calculations only in high-flow
regions (computational efficiency)





y
x
Coarse scale properties
k
*
or T
*
and upscaled well index
Local fine scale calculation
Interpolated pressure
gives Local BCs
Coarse pressure
Local fine scale calculation
Interpolated pressure
gives local BCs
Coarse pressure
9
Thresholding in ALG
Permeability Streamlines Coarse blocks
Regions for
Local calculations


• Avoids nonphysical coarse scale properties (T
*
=q
c
/Ap
c
)
• Coarse scale properties efficiently adapted to a given
flow scenario



• Identify high-flow region, > c (c ~ 0.1)


|q
c
|
|q
c
|
max
10
Multiscale Modeling
( ) 0 = V · · V
c
p
*
k
0 ) ( = · V +
c
c
S
t
S
v
• Solve flow on coarse scale, reconstruct fine
scale v, solve transport on fine scale
• Active research area in reservoir simulation:
– Dual mesh method (FD): Ramè & Killough (1991),
Guérillot & Verdière (1995), Gautier et al. (1999)
– Multiscale FEM: Hou & Wu (1997)
– Multiscale FVM: Jenny, Lee & Tchelepi (2003, 2004)
11
Reconstruction of Fine Scale Velocity
( ) 0 = V · · V
c
p
*
k 0 ) ( = · V +
c
c
S
t
S
v
Upscaling, global
coarse scale flow

Solve local fine scale
V·(k·Vp)=0
Partition coarse
flux to fine scale
Reconstructed
fine scale v
(downscaling)
• Readily performed in upscaling framework
12
Results: Performance of ALG
Averaged fine

Pressure Distribution

Coarse: extended local

Coarse: Adaptive local-global

Channelized layer (59) from 10th SPE CSP
Flow rate for specified pressure
• Fine scale: Q = 20.86
• Extended T
*
: Q = 7.17
• ALG upscaling: Q = 20.01
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
0 1 2 3 4
Iteration
Q
Q (Fine scale) = 20.86
ALG, Error: 4%
Extended local,
Error: 67%

Upscaling 220 × 60 ÷ 22 × 6
13
Results: Multiple Channelized Layers
Extended local T
*
Adaptive local-global T
*

10th SPE CSP
14
Another Channelized System
100 realizations
120 × 120 ÷ 24 × 24
ALG T
*
T
*
+ NWSU k
*
only
15
Results: Multiple Realizations
• 100 realizations conditioned to seismic and well data
• Oil-water flow, M=5
• Injector: injection rate constraint, Producer: bottom hole
pressure constraint
• Upscaling: 100 × 100 ÷ 10 × 10
100 realizations
Time (days)

B
H
P

(
P
S
I
A
)



Fine scale

mean
90% conf. int.
16
Results: Multiple Realizations
Coarse: Purely local upscaling Coarse: Adaptive local-global
Time (days)

B
H
P

(
P
S
I
A
)



Mean (coarse scale)
90% conf. int. (coarse scale)
Time (days)

B
H
P

(
P
S
I
A
)



Mean (fine scale)
90% conf. int. (fine scale)
17
Results (F
o
): Channelized System
220 × 60 ÷ 22 × 6
Fractional Flow Curve
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PVI
Fo
Fine scale
ALG T
*
Extended local T
*

Flow rates
• Fine scale: Q = 6.30
• Extended T
*
: Q = 1.17
• ALG upscaling: Q = 6.26
Oil cut from reconstruction
18
Results (S
w
): Channelized System
Fine scale S
w
(220 × 60)
Reconstructed S
w
from
extended local T
*
(22 × 6)
0.5
1.0
0.0
Reconstructed S
w
from
ALG T
*
(22 × 6)

Fine scale streamlines
19
Results for 3D Systems (SPE 10)
I
P2
P1
50 channelized layers, 3 wells
p
inj
=1, p
prod
=0
Typical layers
Upscale from
60×220×50 ÷ 12×44×10
using different methods
20
Results for Well Flow Rates - 3D
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
I P1 P2
W
e
l
l

R
a
t
e
Fine
Standard k*
T*+NWSU
ALG
Average errors
• k* only: 43%
• Extended T
*
+ NWSU: 27%
• Adaptive local-global: 3.5%
21
Results for Transport (Multiscale) - 3D
fine scale
ALG T
*
local T
*
w/nw
standard k
*

Producer 1
F
o

PVI
fine scale
ALG T
*
standard k
*

Producer 2
local T
*
w/nw
F
o

PVI
• Quality of transport calculation depends on the
accuracy of the upscaling
22
Velocity Reconstruction versus
Subgrid Modeling
• Multiscale methods carry fine and coarse grid
information over the entire simulation
• Subgrid modeling methods capture effects of fine
grid velocity via upscaled transport functions:
- Pseudoization techniques
- Modeling of higher moments
- Generalized convection-diffusion model
23
• Coarse scale pressure and saturation equations of same
form as fine scale equations
• Pseudo functions may vary in each block and may be
directional (even for single set of k
rj
in fine scale model)
Pseudo Relative Permeability Models
( ) , 0 ) , (
* *
= V · · V
c c
p S k x ì 0 ) , (
*
= · V +
c
c
c
c
S
t
S
x F

) ( ) (
) (
) (
) , ( , = ) , (
* *
*
c *
c * *
* *
c *
o i ro w i rw
w i rw
i
i
c
i i
o
ro
w
rw
μ k + μ k
μ k
S f
S f F
μ
k k
S
=
= + x v x
µ
ì
* ¬ upscaled function
c
¬ coarse scale p, S
24
Generalized Convection-Diffusion
Subgrid Model for Two-Phase Flow
• Pseudo relative permeability description is convenient but
incomplete, additional functionality required in general
• Generalized convection-diffusion model introduces new
coarse scale terms
- Form derives from volume averaging and
homogenization procedures
- Method is local, avoids need to approximate
- Shares some similarities with earlier stochastic
approaches of Lenormand & coworkers (1998, 1999)
) ( ) ( y x
j i
v v
' '
25
• Coarse scale saturation equation:
Generalized Convection-Diffusion Model
( )
c c c
c
S S S
t
S
V · · V = · V +
c
c
) , ( ) , ( x D x G
) , ( ) ( ) , (
c c c c
S S f S x m v x G + =
• Coarse scale pressure equation:
c c c c
S S S W S V · + + = ) , ( ) , ( ) (
2 1
*
x W x ì ì
(modified convection m
and diffusion D terms)
(modified form for total
mobility, VS
c
dependence)
“primitive” term
GCD term
( ) 0 ) , (
* *
= V · · V
c c
p S k x ì
26
• D and W
2
computed over purely local domain:
Calculation of GCD Functions
p = 1
S = 1
p = 0
) ( ) ( ) ( S f S f S S v v D ÷ = V ·
• m and W
1
computed using extended local domain:
(D and W
2
account for
local subgrid effects)
S S S f S f S V · ÷ ÷ = ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( D v v m
(m and W
1
- subgrid effects due
to longer range interactions)
target coarse block
27
Solution Procedure
• Generate fine model (100 × 100) of prescribed parameters
• Form uniform coarse grid (10 × 10) and compute k
*
and
directional GCD functions for each coarse block
• Compute directional pseudo relative permeabilities via total
mobility (Stone-type) method for each block
• Solve saturation equation using second order TVD scheme,
first order method for simulations with pseudo k
rj
fine grid: l
x
> l
z

L
x
= L
z

28
Oil Cuts for M =1 Simulations
• GCD and pseudo models agree closely with fine scale
(pseudoization technique selected on this basis)

l
x
= 0.25, l
z
= 0.01, o =2, side to side flow
÷ 100 x 100
÷ 10 x 10 (GCD)
÷ 10 x 10 (primitive)
÷ 10 x 10 (pseudo)
O
i
l

C
u
t

PVI
29
Results for Two-Point Geostatistics
ì
x
=0.05, ì
y
=0.01, o
logk
=2.0
100x100 ÷ 10x10, Side Flow
10
0
5
• Diffusive effects only
30
Results for Two-Point Geostatistics (Cont’d)
ì
x
=0.5, ì
y
=0.05, o
logk
=2.0
100x100 ÷ 10x10, Side Flow
10
0
5
• Permeability with longer correlation length
31
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M =1)
p = 1
S = 1
p = 0
0 s t s 0.8 PVI
p = 1
S = 1
t > 0.8 PVI
p = 0
l
x
= 0.25, l
z
= 0.01, o =2
O
i
l

C
u
t

PVI
÷ 100 x 100
÷ 10 x 10 (GCD)
÷ 10 x 10 (primitive)
÷ 10 x 10 (pseudo)
l
x
= 0.25, l
z
= 0.01, o =2
32
Corner to Corner Flow (M = 5)
÷ 100 x 100
÷ 10 x 10 (GCD)
÷ 10 x 10 (pseudo)
O
i
l

C
u
t

PVI
T
o
t
a
l

R
a
t
e

PVI
l
x
= 0.2, l
z
= 0.02, o =1.5
• Pseudo model shows considerable error, GCD model
provides comparable agreement as in side to side flow

33
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M = 5)
÷ 100 x 100
÷ 10 x 10 (GCD)
÷ 10 x 10 (pseudo)
O
i
l

C
u
t

PVI
T
o
t
a
l

R
a
t
e

PVI
l
x
= 0.2, l
z
= 0.02, o =1.5
• Pseudo model overpredicts oil recovery, GCD model
in close agreement

34
Effect of Varying Global BCs (M = 5)
l
x
= 0.5, l
z
= 0.02, o =1.5
• GCD model underpredicts peak in oil cut, otherwise
tracks fine grid solution

÷ 100 x 100
÷ 10 x 10 (GCD)
÷ 10 x 10 (pseudo)
O
i
l

C
u
t

PVI
T
o
t
a
l

R
a
t
e

PVI
35
) , (
* c c
S S V ì
( ) 0
* *
= V · · V
c
p k ì
Coarse scale flow:

Pseudo functions:

GCD
model:

T
*
from ALG, dependent on global flow

ì
*
, m(S

c
) and D(S

c
)
• Consistency between T
*
and ì
*
important for highly
heterogeneous systems
Combine GCD with ALG T* Upscaling
) (
* c
S ì
36
ALG + Subgrid Model for Transport (GCD)
t < 0.6 PVI t > 0.6 PVI
• Stanford V model (layer 1)
• Upscaling: 100×130 ÷ 10×13
• Transport solved on coarse scale

flow rate oil cut
37
flow simulation
flow simulation
upscaling
gridding
diagnostic
Gocad
interface
coarse model
info. maps
fine model
Unstructured Modeling - Workflow
38
Numerical Discretization Technique
• CVFE method:
– Locally conservative; flux on a face expressed as linear
combination of pressures
– Multiple point and two point flux approximations

• Different upscaling techniques for MPFA and TPFA
i
j
k
q
ij
= a p
i
+ b p
j
+

c p
k
+ ... or q
ij
= T
ij
( p
i
- p
j
)
Primal and
dual grids
39
3D Transmissibility Upscaling (TPFA)
Dual cells Primal grid
connection
p=1
p=0
fitted
extended
regions
cell j cell i
Tij
*
= -
<q
ij
>
<p
j
> <p
i
> -
40
Grid Generation: Parameters
• Specify flow-diagnostic
• Grid aspect ratio
• Grid resolution constraint:
– Information map (flow rate, t
b
)
– P
a
and P
b
, s
a
and s
b
– N (number of nodes)

min max
1
property
cumulative frequency
a b
Pa
Pb
min max
Sa
Sb
property
resolution constraint
a b
41
velocity
grid density
Upscaled k
*

Unstructured Gridding and Upscaling
(from Prevost, 2003)
42
Flow-Based Upscaling: Layered System
• Layered system: 200 x 100 x 50 cells





• Upscale permeability and transmissibility
• Run k*-MPFA and T*-TPFA for M=1
• Compute errors in Q/Ap and L
1
norm of F
w
p=0
p=1
1 0. 5
0.25
43
Flow-Based Upscaling: Results
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
PVI
Reference (fine)
TPFA
MPFA
8 x 8 x 18 = 1152 nodes
6 x 6 x 13 = 468 nodes
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
F
w

error in Fw
error in Q/Ap
TPFA 7.6% -1.2%
MPFA 17.9% -25.2%
error in Fw
error in Q/Ap
TPFA 16.8% -5.9%
MPFA 21.3% -31.7%
PVI
F
w

(from M. Prevost, 2003)
44
Layered Reservoir: Flow Rate Adaptation
• Grid density from
flow rate








log |V|
grid size
s
b

s
a

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
PVI
F
w

reference
uniform coarse (N=21x11x11=2541)
flow-rate adapted (N=1394)
Q
c
=0.82
Q
c
=0.99
PVI
F
w

• Flow results








(from Prevost, 2003)
(Q
f
= 1.0)
45
Summary
• Upscaling is required to generate realistic coarse
scale models for reservoir simulation
• Described and applied a new adaptive local-global
method for computing T
*

• Illustrated use of ALG upscaling in conjunction with
multiscale modeling
• Described GCD method for upscaling of transport
• Presented approaches for flow-based gridding and
upscaling for 3D unstructured systems
46
Future Directions
• Hybridization of various upscaling techniques
(e.g., flow-based gridding + ALG upscaling)
• Further development for 3D unstructured systems
• Linkage of single-phase gridding and upscaling
approaches with two-phase upscaling methods
• Dynamic updating of grid and coarse properties
• Error modeling