-.

(.
!,

..

%PG y9# -,

1-

,,

~,
1

Evaluation of Scale-Up Laws for Two-Phase Flow

Through Porous Media

RUSSELL

L, NIELSEN
M. R. TEK

THE U. OF MfCHIGAtd
ANN ARBOJt

MEMBER AIME

The scaling laws as formulated by Rapoport relate

dynamically
similar flow systems
in porous media
each invo(ving two immiscible,
incompressible
fluids..
A two-dimensional
numerical technique
for solving
the differential
equat idns descnbing systems of this
type has been employed to assess
the practical
value of the scaling laws in light of the virtually
unscalable
nature of relative permeabi[it y and capillary pressure curves and boundary conditions.
Two hypothetical
systems a gas reservoir subject to water drive and the la borato~ scaled model
with emphasis
of that reservoir tiere investigated
placed
on water coning near a production
welL
Comparison
o/ the computed behavior of these pap
ticular systems shows that water coning in the
rekervo i; wordd be more severe than one wo rdd expect [rem an tixperimental study ofa laboratory model
dcaled wit bin ~ractical limits to thereseweir system.
This $aper ,fflso presents
modifications
of the
8 kaling
laws tubjcb are available
for systems
that
can be described adequately
in two-dimensional
Cartesian coord(,natek.

INTRODUCTION
Present.
day digital computing equipment and
methods of numerical analysis allow realistic and
quantitative
studies to be carried out ior many twophase flow systems in porous media. Before these
tools became available ?je anticipated behavior of
systems
of this ty+e cou!d be inferred only from
anal ytic al solutions
of simplified
mathematical
models or from experimental studies performed on
laboratory models.
To reproduce the behavior of a reservoif system
on the laboratory scale, certain relationships
must
be satisfied between physical and geometric proper ties of the reservoir and laboratory systems. Where
the reaertioir fluids may be considered as two immiscible and incompressible
phaaes, the necessary
relationships
have been formulated by Rapoportl
,,and .others,
. 2-5 Rapoportss scaling laws foil ow from
Oriaf&t
manuscript
office
Sept. S, 1962.

received

fn Society
mmuscrfpt
SPE-AtChE

Rethed

Paper presented atJoint

29, 1962, fn Denver, Cob.

of Petroleum
received Feb.

,%mposiumheld

Ei-@ineers

27, 1963.
AUS.

..

MII=H.

ABSTRACT

26

inspectionel
analysis of the differential
equation
describing
phase s=~racion distribution
in such
systems.
It will be recalled that these scaling laws preauppo se three conditions: (1) the relative permeabiIiiy curves must be identical for the pod+ and
prototype; (2) the capillary pressure curve (function
of phase saturation) for the model must be linearly
related to that of the prototype; ad (3) bound-y
conditions
imposed on the model must duplicate
those existing at the boundaries of the prototype.

These three requirements seldom if ever can be

satisfied in scaling an actual reservoir to the laboratory system because: (1) The laboratory medium
normally will be unconsolidated
(glass beads or
sand) while the reservoir usually is consolidated.
Relative permeability and capillary pressure curves
are usually quite different for consolidated
and
unconsolidated
porous media. (2) The ,reservoir
,.,
usually will be surrounded by a large aquifer which
.
could be simulated in the laboratory only to a limited
extent. (3) Wells present in the reseryoir would
scaIe to microscopic dimensions in the, laboratory
if geometric similarity is to be maintained.
In view of these considerations,
rigorous scaling
of even a totally defined reservoir probably would
never be possib+.
The purpose of this paper is to assess the practical value of the scaling laws in the light of the .
unscalable
variabJ,es. This has been done by cqrr ying out numerical solutions in two dimensions to
the clifferential equations describing the flow of
two immiscible,
incompressible
fluids in porous
media for a field scale reservoir end a laboratory
model of. that reservoir. While both the reservoir
and the laboratory model w=e purely fictional,
each has been made as realistic and representative
as poasibIe.
The field probletri selected as the basis for the,
investigation
was an inhomogeneou~ layered gas
reservoir initially at capillzuj gravitational equilibrium and sub sequenrl y produced ifi the presence of
water drive, The laboratory model of this reservoir
was designed to utilize oil- knd water in a glass
bead. pack.
The numerical treatment employed was similar
to that of Douglas, Peaceman and Rachford6 and it
end
.included .both. ca@lfiy
. .. gravitational forces ss
....
SOCIETY
OF PETROLEUM
ENGINEERS
JO U12NAL
-,

...-...

.-.
t

,.,

.
,/.

well as the effects of relative permeability.

It will be recalled that Douglas, et al, b tested
their techniques
on two laboratory displacements
and found good agreement with the experiment al
data. Further experimental co@tmation of the Qumerical techniques used here will be presented at
a later date by the present authors.
It must be [ecognized that experimental displac~
ments perfornied on two or more mutually scaled
Iaborstay
systems would merely provide a Iesa
direct means of testing the vaIidity of the describing
differential equations. An analysis of the importance
of the unscalable
variables cart be accomplished
only on a mathematical basis.
.. .,

THEORETICAL

DIFFERENTIAL

EQUATIONS

vr#i
...........

with (i subscripts
phase i)

.(1)

denote propetty of or applying to

= velocity vector
& = relative permeability
~ = viscosity

;i

/% = Pi + Pigb = ~tentia~
Pi = pressure
.
:r
pi = density
, ,1.
4,
~ g = gravitationisl constant
.
b = height above datum
K = permeability of mediirm D
For the special case of the flow of two immiscible,
incompressible
phases, volumetric material balance
about a differential volume element yields the following system of differential equations,
k
V.K

Substitution
of Eq. 4 into Eqa. 2 and 3 yields a
of two
system
simultaneous
non-linear
partial
differential
equations in the dependent variables
#n and +W.

,.

The differential equations describing multiphase

flow in porous merKa follow from the generalized
form of Darcys law.b~
?i,=-K:

,. . . . . . . . . . ....(4)

P* - Pw =p=(so)

DEVELOPMENTS

partial differe~tisl
equations
Two sirnuhaneous
describing the flow of two immiscible, incompressible phases through po~ous media are formulated.
These equations ate combined into a single equation
permitting formulati~n of, scale-up laws through
dimensional
analysis,
Another combination of the
differential equations is used as a basis for numeric al computations through the application of finite
difference techniques.
PARTIAL

/ = porosity of medium.
Potentials
qbn and & are related through capillary pre~sure, a function of the wetting+hase
saturat ion.

._Ev$n.=f>=_f~

SCALING CONSIDERATIONS

Rapopatl
has combined Eqsi 5 and 6 in a general
three-di~ension al Cartesian system. Through dimensional analysis he has determined a set of relationships among the fluid and rock properties
which
must be satisfied for homologous behavior in two
flow systems.
+
Where a three-dimensional
reservoir system can
be reduced to two-dimensional,
one scaling restriction can be relaxed. Namely, the third or invariant
dimension may be scaled independent of scaling in
the other two dimensions. That is, length scali&
in the third dimension can be different from the scaling
in the other two dimensions,
This study is performed within a two-dimensional
system of Cartesian coordinates
with the .X-axis
inclined by the angle 6 from the horizontal.
In, such a two-dimensional
coordinate
system,
Eqs. 5 and 6 combine to yield

kn
-~APW

asw

dSw

d$
[

sho~+

coso~

Using Rapoports nomenclature

+, u and v, p are defined

=0

. .(7)

to functions

,,.

+,

, . ; . (2)

asw

k
Vq5w=f~

%K~

..

. ..(3?

....

u:
I

where (subscript
w pertains
nonwetting phase)
S = saturation

.... . .

to wetting

phase;
.

n,

total velocity
x direction

U=uni-uw.

.. . .

component,
.
16S

,,

v .

Eqs. 5 and 6 ate combined to achieve a more efficient

form by adding Eqs. 6 and 5 and subtracting Eq. 6
from Eq. 5. Using a symbolism of the above authora,
the equations become

total veIocity component ~

y direction

Vm+vw=

Ap = pw - pm.
This differential
equation corresponds
to that
obtained by Rapoport for an inclined t we-dimensional
system.
Defining the scale ratios between the rdservoir
(unprimed) and laboratory (primed) systems
x/x =y/y = Al
(vitriant dimensions)
. . . . . . . (8)

V.

MVP+V~NVR=

. . . . . . .

MvR=-4f~~

(21)

dR

*..

(22)

c
where

M=K

dimension)

..
dsw

v. NflP+v.

Z[z = A2

(invariant

O......

(9)

kk
fli-fl
()P.

Pw
I

99= B
(injection

or production rate)

. . . . (10)

//{ =

(porosity)............(n)
KIK=D

(permeability)

. . . . . . . . . . . (12)

Ap/Ap = E

(density difference)

(viscosity)

.(N
dpc

dpc

z:

3-

Eqs. 21 and 22 are wrjtten in an iniplicit finite

difference form and solved in leap frog fashion
using the alternating direction iteration procedure
due to Douglas.1 By leap frog fashion ir is meant
that a time step consists of updating the P and R
vafiables separately.
The major differences from the Douglas, P eaceman
and Rachford procedure lie in the treatment of boundary conditions, selection of iteration parameters in
the computation of P and averaging of the coefficient in the computation of R.
A detailed description of the rnurnerical treatment
has been included in Appendix.
-

. . . . . . . . (13)

. . . . . . . . . . . . (14)

=G

(capillary

pre5stie)

. . . . . . . . (15)

velocity and time scale rtttios ate

u/u = (q/yz)/(q2y
v/v

z) = BiA1A2

= (q/xz)/(g/xz3=

t/t = (xyz//q)

BfA1A2

. . . (10
. . . (17)

/ (x y z / 7q) = A; A2 C\B

APPLICATIONS
In order to test the effect of>deviations from the
requirements
of scaling laws necessitated
for reasons of geometry and physical properties, a realistic
field problem was selected for detailed study. The
effect of having somewhat clifferent capillary pres.&e
and relative permeability y functions. for the
field and laboratory systems . was quantitatively
investigated
for the problem selected.
The effect
of the distortion arising from inability to match the
field boundary conditions in the laboratory was also
evaluated in the course of the study.

. (W

Proceeding in the manner demonarrated by Rapopert, the following scaling requirements will resuk.
.

G=

EAR

FB 1DGA2

. . . . . . . ......

..

(19)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(201

--In -addition the -relative.. -permeability

functions
and boundary conditions must be identical, for the
two syatema if homologous behavior is to be attained.
These above modifications to Rapoports Cbaaic
scaling laws are used in this investigation.
This type of analysis aIso shows that scaIing in
the x ana y directions must be the same, and that
the angle of inclination
6 csmoc be changed by
scaling, That is, if a scale ratio RI is defined for
the y direction, RI must equal Al.; che x direction
scale ratio. Additional y, if a scale ratio R2 is
defined for angular scaling, R2 must equal uaity.
NUM~RICAL

SOLUTION

DESCRIPTION OF THJl\ FIELD .AND

LABORA TORY MODELS
-,!

The field svstem

selected
was a hwothetical
.
..
The
n star al gas reservoir subject to waterdrive.
assumptions of immiscibility and incompressibility
should be approximated closely at the postulated
pressure level of 1,260 psia, Specifically the prob
Iem centered on determining the transient phaae
saturation
diatributiona
neas a producigg welI - as
gas was withdrawn at a constant rate at the sahd
face. The section of the reservoir considered appears
in Fig. L It consists Of five layers of consolidated
rock, each layer of different permeability but aH
having the same porosity. The right+and, boundary
...
-.
..
.
. ... . . . .-t.... .
..-

The method of solution used in this study is based

upon the work of Douglas, Peaceman . and Rachford.g

SOCIETY

.,

,.
.-=

.. .

. .

.-

. ..

..

OF
.,

. --,.

PETROLEUM
.
...

.. ---.

ENCINEt&
...
---., -.-,,
:: ..+.,
..

JOURNAL
- ...:
,

,
.. . .
,.

.
J

;
.

-..:.: .. -~.-,,
-..

...

~~1

j.-o.?s
TOP

-----i==--f-

VIEW

S& FT

-t

~.i
TOP VIEW

AL

FRONT VIIIW

FIG.

FRONT

VIEW

FIG. 1 TOP AND SIDE VIEWOF THE GAS RESERV&?.

represents
no discontinuity
and may be crossed by
both phases at all levels. Practically
speaking,
the field would correspond either to a gas reservoir
located between parallel faults or, alternatively,
to
a reservoir of large areaI extent produced by a series
of aligned wells in line-drive fashion. The treatment
of this reservoir with rwo*dimensionaI
Cartesian
coordinates implies that no significant flow of either
phase occurs in the third dimension. As shown in
Fig. 1, the reservoir is inclined by 1 from the
horizontal.
The phases initially existed at the .capillsrygravitational
equilibrium distribution shown in Fig.
5a. Gas was produced at 7,800 Mscf/D through the
partially penetrating 6-in. diameter well. The properties of the reservoir fluids are listed in Table L
TASLE

1 .-SPECIFICATIONS
OF FIELD
LABORATORY
SYSTEMS

Property
Length
Height
Thickness
. .
Angle of Inclination
Pressure
Tamporature

Field

400 ft
50 f?
500 ft

0.75 in.
(45 Irr.)

1260 pSiO

14.7 psia
70 F

68F.

Gas Gravity (Referred

to Air)

0.70i19rav~ty

Water Gravity

101

Gas viscosity

0.0135

Water Viscosity

1.5 Cp

1/8 in.
(.0450 in.)
,!.S

1.1
cp oil viscosity

$,5

alar:::

2.5 darcies
1 darcy

Poresi$y (Uniform)

0.15

surface

,72 dynes/cm int$rfacial

tension

,00

Gas Production Rata

7800 Mscf/D

Operation Tim. . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . .

30 days
.. ..

TABLE

2 INJECIVOIQ

RATES AT OIL AND

glass beads

md
md
md
md

Contact Angle

0.6 cp

,.
I.-., ~~~
. ..

The gas gravity is defined in the normal sense with

the density of the gas phase being 0.0813 gin/cc at
(58 F and 1,760 psia. The imbibition capillary pres- .
sure curve shown in Fig. 3a was taken horn Katzl 1
while the relative permeability curves shown in. Fig.
4a were determined by Botset 12 for gas, and water
in consolidated media,
The laboratory medium designed to represent the
gas reservoir is sh~wn in Fig. 2. For ease of construction, glass beads were used in the model as
the specified permeability y values could be achieved
by using lay~rs of beads of reasonable diameters.
The porosity of 40 per cent generally results for
any pack of uniformly sized beads regardless
of
diameter. At the right boundary of the model; four
fluid injection ports were provided, with ~ upper
two for oil and the lower two for water. Rates of
injection through each port were assigned according
.to Table 2 in an effort to reproduce the out-flow
boundary of the reservoir as closely as possible.
These rates were based on those computed for the
corresponding
boundary of the reservoir; however,
they would be fixed from purely experimental kriowl- edge of the phase distributions
existing near Ch;,s
boundaryi ... . ~,
Fluid properties are indi~ated in Table 1. The
~esited oil density would be obtained by blending
a heavy fluid into a hydrocarbon such as octane.
Surface active agents would be used to adjust interracial tension, The required .wrrterphase viscosity
would be obtained through the use of a thickening
agent such as glycerine. The contact angle was
taken to be zero degrees a.i was apsumed the case
in the reservoir.

75.8 cp

sandstone
400
2S0
50
20

36 in.
4.5 in.

6 in.

, ~ Permeabi 1Ny
.(Layered)

Laboratory

Wel I bore Diameter

Medium

ANO

2 TOP AND SIDE VIEW OF THE SCALED

Laboratory
MODEL.

.0.40

0.295 dyne$/cm

.;

. .. . . . ..

29.9 cc/hr
(l,795c~hr)
43.7 haur~
. . .. . . . . .

t Tim:

Pert O I

Port Q

Port WI

Port WA

Interval

OilRate

Oil Rate

Water Rate

Water Rata

o -0.39
0.39-0.60
0.60-0.84
0.S4-L09
1.09-1.33
. 1.33-1.57
1,57-1.81

17.8

11.9

17.s
17,8
17.s
17.s
17.8
17.6
.

11.9

,0.119
0.110
0.117
0.1,16
0.115
10.114
0.113
.

11.9
11.9
li.9
11.9

. .

11.9

0.068
0.068
0.068
.
0.067.
0.066
0,066
0.065
., :.,
..- .

-,

.,

,..

.{

,/

.,

,,

,,

injection at these points have been inferred from

the computations of the rates occurring in the field
model. It must be noted, however, that these ratea
could also be inferred in a putel y experimental work
from knowledge of the asturation distribution existing
in the vicinity of that boundary.
.
i.
The capillary pressure and relative permeability
curves
used for the model wer~ obtained fmm
Csrpenter13 and they apply to an oil-water system
in glass beads. They appear in Figs. 3b and 4b.
The dashed curve in Fig, 3b shows the scsled
capillary pressure relationship.
In the proposed laboratory model Fig. 2, the
condki~ns
prevailkg
at the artificial boundary of
the reservoir have been approximate%
matched
through the use of two oil injection and two water
injection
provisions.
The individual rates of the
a20

SEQUENCE

14,
.
w
a3 0,10.

f= 15%
UX72 DYNES/cm

OF INVESTIGATION

Computations
were
performed to simulate the
operation of the fieId scale system and for several
different scaled laborato~
models of that system.
Compstison of the resulting phase saturation distributions at several corresponding stations in time
shows how closely the model performance would
be expected to conform to that of the reservoir. All
systems were treated with a two-dimensional Csrtesisn grid subdivided @to 16 horizontal by 16 vertical
increments
with aIl grid elements of equal size.
Element indesing has been indicated on all phase
2.5

= 0.15

2,0 -

\
\

L
K=20

..

u
E
a
W
~
K
a.
>
a
q

Z 0.05
4
J
~
&
~
o

d
E.
u
o

1.0

0.5 .

DARCYS

f*40%
k:

~,5

u)
(n
w
a
R-

0.295

OYNE /cm

--

0 - ---

A
\

LABORATORY CURVE
LINEAR TRANSFORMATION
OF FIELO CURVE

\
\
\

0.4

Lo

O,a

0.6

-0.5 I
o

1,

0.:

0.2
WATER

WATER SATURATION

FIG. 3a PROPERTIES Ot? FIELD, MODEL CAPILLARY PRESSURE CURVE.

0.6

0.s

1.0

SATURATION

FIG. 4; PROPERTIES bF LABORATORY MEDIU.M

CAPILL&?Y PRESSURE CURVE.

I,0

0.8

*
~
g
~ 0.6
u
:

CONSOLIDATE

,,

w
+

,.

Wo A.
~
.
k
u
c!
a o.2

0
0.2

0
+
- FIG.

,-

3b

0.4
WATER

9.6

. -

1.0

o.a

WATER SATURATION

SATURATION.

PROPERTti
OF FIELD MODEL - RELATIVE PERMEAB~Y
CURVE
.,
.
.
.
. . . ..
.

16a
,-

.-,

-.

PkoPERTI~
@LABORA~ORy ~DIm

RELATIVR PERMEABILITY, c_mVEsP

,, ...3
. ..
~ SOCIETY OP:PETRO@UMti~~~N~~~S JOURNAL

FIG.

4b

, ~- -

.,

., .

,,
saturation contour plots flow~r left element indexed
2.2). The sequence was be following.
Case 1 The Reservoir Over a 30-Day
Product ion Period
The computed sr&tration distributions
are listed
in Tabies 3a, 3b and 3C of Appendix
at 6.5, 14
and 30 days, respectively.
Cross plots of the initiai
distribution
and those at 14 and 30 days are presented ,itr Figs. 5a; 5b and 5C where attention has
been focused on the levels in which the sharpest
saturation gradients deveioped.
Case 2 Three Models of the Reservoir
the Homologous

Period

over

of Time of 43.5 Hours

These modds will be recognized as practically

unattainable
because of the relative permeability y
and capiliaty
pressure
curves
and/or boundary
conditions employed.
a. Scaled in accordance with the three-dimensional
scaling Iawe, employing relative permeability y curves
identical to and capiilary pressure curve transfo~med
from the reservoir, relationship@ sad with boundary
conditions identical to those of the reservoir. The
water saturation distribution calculated at 9.41 hours
(equivalent to 6.5 days of reservoir time) is listed
in Table 4a.
b. Scaied in accordance with the two-dimensional
ecaling laws (stated in Eqs. 19 and 20) with relative
permeability and capiliaty
preseure
curves ,and
WtL

-t

boundary cmxiici&s corresponding to the reservoir.

The water saturation
distribution
at 9.4~ hours
appears in Tabie 4b.
~
c. Scaled in accordance with the two-dimensionhi
scaling laws with relative permeability and capiilary
pressure curves for the unconsolidated
bead pack
(Figs. 3b and 4b) but with the boundary conditions
corresponding to the reservoir. The water saturation
distribution at 9.41 hours appt$ars in Table 4c.
Case

3 The Pra.jically
Model

Described

Attainable
in the Previous

Laboratory
Section

This model was scaied in accordance with the

two-dimensional
scaiing laws but with relative.
permeability
and capillary
pressure
curves and
boundary conditions conforming to the postulated
laboratory
modei. The computed distributiona at
9.41, 20.3 and 43.5 hours are listed in Tables 5a,
5b and 5c. The contours ezisting initially and at
20.3 and 43.5 hours appear in Figs. ha, 6b and 6c,
reepectivel y.
..
t
INTERPRETATION

OF RESULTS

The accuracy of numerical solutions to differential equations is governed primarily by the size of
the space-time grid utilized. While higher accuracy
should have resulted from a more finelv, divided mid. ,
it is felt that the concisions
drawn from compari~ons
among these patticui ar computations would be unaffected since the space-time mesh used for all model
WEL

400md

20MRCYS

Somd

+
Z00~Rc~8

-i
IM DkRCYS

+
2SOIW$

FIG.

5a SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS IN FIELD

RESERVOIR INtTJAL.

W*LL

FIG. 6a SATURATION DISTRIBUTION IN LABORA.,

T6RY MODEL INITIAL.
WL

ZO0&RGY5
,.
--l
ZO0&RCV3
--t
12.906RN5

FIG.

5b SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS IN FIELD

RESERVOIR Al 14 DAYS.

WE

FIG, 6b Saturation
DISTRIBUTION IN LABORATORY MODEL AT 0.S4 DAYS.
WEL

A.;,

OO.?A

4-

-t

Sofmd

..

?.S0AkCY8

,2.sOmcm

290md

,..

)
FIG.

JilNE,

5C

1963

SATURA-TION DISTRIBUTIONS IN FIELD

RESERVOIR AT 30 DAYS.
..1

FIG, 6C Satiation
DISTRIBUTION IN LiBORATCKY MODEL AT 1.S1 DAYS.
.
.
., .
.
.
..

.. ----

..

.,-

--------

-.
.

:---.

..

. .

169.-

...:.

.:-.:

,,

calculations

was scaled to that used for the reserAdditionally, it is felt that any
error introduced through considering the gas phase
to be incompressible
would be slight in view of the
specified pressure level of the reservoir ( 1,260 psia).
Comparison of the saturation distributions obtained
for Case 1 end Case 2a which are listed in Tables
Sa and 4a at hothologous times shows the solutions
for the two cases to be in excellent
agreement.
This indicates that a laboratory model scaled ri~rously within the three-dimenaional
scaling laws to
a reservoir would reproduce the reservoir behavior.
Excellent agreement is also between the distributions listed in Tablea 3a end 4b for Cases 1 and
2b. This shows that for a reservoir whidh can be
described adequately in two-dimensional Cartesian
coordinates, a laboratory model may be scaled to
the reservoir with equal validity through use
of the
.
two-dimensional scaling laws.
Comparison of the listings of Tables 4C and 5a
for Cases 2C and 3 shows the effect of distorted,
laboratory boundary conditions. For this particular
system, the enlargement of the producing well from
its rigorously scaled diameter and the replacement
of the communicating right or h-flow boundary of
the reservoir by four injection ports appeared to
have no significant ef feet on the phaae distributions
res r.dting during operation of the laboratory model.
The mo+ pronounced effect of the unscaled variables & seen by comparing the water saturation
contours presented for the reservoir in Figs. 5a,
5b and 5C (Case 1) to the contours at the corresponding laboratory times of Figs. 6a, db end 6C
for the model (Case 3). A more quantitative set of
comparisons for these cases ca6 be made from the
lisringa of Tables 3a, 3b and 3C against Tables
5a, 5b and 5c. The effect of the non-linearly related
capillary pressure curves alone is reflected in the
initial distributions
for the two systems (Figs. . 5a
and 6a). The remaining compexi sons betweeti Cases
1 and 3 exhibit the combined effects of relative
permeability
and capillary pressure curves for the
two syst~ms. The net result cauaed by the urrscalsble variablea is that water coming nest the producing well. would be more severe in the reservoir
than would be expected on the basis of laboratory
information alone.

voir computations,

in ill other respects.

3. The behavior of a model rigorously scaled to
a reservoir though the three-cIimensionaI
scaling
laws will be homologous to that of the reservoir.
4. When a reservoir may be described adequately
in two-dimensional
Cartesian coordinates,
the laboratory model may be scaled to the reservoir with
equal validity according to the two-dimensional
scaling.1 aws. Two-diqrensional scaling allows greater
flexibility in model design.
It is hoped that these conclusions may serve as
a guide in the design and interpretation
of scaled
experiments studies.
the reservoir

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The computing time provided by The U. of Michigan
Computing Center and financial aaaistance by the
Michigan Gas Association
Fellowship Program are
gratefully
acknowledged.
The authors would also
like to acknowledge many suggestions
md advice
provided by Dr. K. H. Coats of the Jersey Production
Resemch
Co. during the early phases of this
investigation.

REFERENCE3

1. Rapoport, L. A.: Scaling Lawa for Use in Design

and Operation of Water-Oil Flow Modelst, Trans.,
AIME(19S.5)Vol. 204, 143.
2. Leverett, M. C., Lewis, W. B. end True; M. E.:
~cJ)~en~ionsl.MO&l Studies of Oilfield Behavior,

4,

s.

6.

7.
8.

CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions which ha,ve been drawn from the
results of the investigatioti
are etated in what is
felt to be tbeir order of importance.
1. Vioiation of the necessary relationships
between the two sets of relative permeability
and
cspillesy
pressure curves can 1ead to significant
,deviations between reservoir and model performance.
2.. At least in some cases it appesrs t~~t distor-

.9.
10,
11.

12,

tions of bpundary conditions existing in the laboratory model which are necessary because of <pfacii~al

considerations
(i. e., .enlarged well diam~ters and
approximate simulation of di strlbuted in-flow or outflow boundaries) will not introduce significant anomal~es int? the performance of the model scaled to
. ... . . .. .. . . . . .. . . ......... . .
. ... .-

(1942) Vol. 146, 175.

W. F. end Klhrtrenbert, L. J.: Proc.
Third world Pat. Congress (1951).
Rose, W. end Gilchrist, R. E.: The Uae of Models
in Reasrvotr Engineering Studies An Apprataal,
Psper 134-G, presented at 26th Annual Fall Meeting
of SPE, Ctklshoma City, Okla. {Oct. 3-5, 1951),
Rapoport, L, ,A, and &as, W, J.:, Properties of
Linear Waterflood, Trans., AIME (i953) vol. 198;
139.
Douglaa, J.; Jr., Peaceman, D. W. and Rachford, H.
i-r.: ~<A Method f~~ calculating Multi-Dimensional
Immiscible
Diaplscement,
Trans.,. AIME (1959)
Vol. 216, 297.
Muskat, hf. and Mores, M. W,: Physics (1936) Vol. 7,
346.
Muskat, M,, Bots&, H, G,, Mores, W W. and Wyckoff,
R. D.: Flow of Gaa-Liquid Mixturee Through Sanda,
Trans., AIME (1937) VOL 123, 69.
~verett,
M. D.: ~~capillary Behavior i; %XOlla
Solids, Trans., AIME (1941) Vol. 142, 152,
DougIsa, J.: ]oar. .90c.Id. Appl. MafkL (1958) Vol.
4-20.
Kets, D. L., et ak Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N. Y. (19S9)
59.
Botset, H, G,: ~FIow of Gaa-Liquid MfsturesThrough
Conaolidsted Sand, frans., AIME (1940) Vol. 136,
91.
Capenier, C. W., Jr,: Private Communication,,,Jersey
r?U)tS.,
MMK

3. Engleberts,

Ii.

,
I

>:

Production Research Co., Tulsa, Okla,

14. Musket, Td.: P@sicat Principles of Oil Production,

.,

McGtaw-Hill Book Co., Inc., N, Y. (1949) 650.

.
..
80-CIETWctF PETROLEUMENCINEERsSOURNXL- -

..

170

-...

... ...
. .

.
..--..

-.-. . . .. . .. . .
-.

.. ... . .. .

. .. . . . .. . ..
,-

- ......
,

.,

H = iteration

APPENDIX

WATER SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS

, TABULAR FORM

IN
Short hand notation

NUMERICAL METHODS EMPLOYED

DIFFERENCE

EQUATIONS

The implicit finite difference

23 is
P equation, x-direction

K*)f,j

.(.A.P.+l
-

.,

i+J~,j + W i-%~ Pn+l,

pK

p~+!!

n+l, i,j

?Zt1,i,j-

R equation,

j 1

.,. + Ay(NnAyRfl)j,.j.

i-1,

ITERATION

n+l,

. (lA-a)

y-direction

+ H ~K+l
n-tl, i,j

- n, i+, j

i,j

(Q ---,+ Qw)i~
~AyAZ

+ (
P equation,

fotmof Eqs. 22 ~d

=-Ayff#?:i~,,,

Ax, Y(NaAz,YRJi,j

#(+1

parameter

PK+%
ra+l,i,j

(lA-b)

x-direction

PROCEDURE

The iteration parameter H corresp(mds to placing

a pseudo time derivative onthe right side of Eq. 22.
Thus, pseudo time advances during each iteration
until the P matrix has converged upon the pseudo
steady state.
This parameter is varied in cycles repeating
every seventh iteration. For the first iteration of
each cyc Ie, H assumes its minimum value. It is
increased by a constant multiplying factor for each,
successive
iteration until it reaches its maximum
on the seventh it erat ion of each cycle.
Values for the miniinum and maximum are obtained
by treating the difference equations lA-a and lA-b
, as if the coefficients
were constant. with this simplification,
separation of variables with reflecting
boundary conditions yields the following minimum
and maximum values.

4A.R@i*i
AY(M.A,RJJ
- Ax, $NflAx, ~Pn+l)i,i

- 8ti
. ~ s*K+l
n+..,
As

(Qn - Qu)i,j
AzbyAz

RK+%
- R
n,i, j
i, j ( n+l, i, j

(2A-a)

HKmax = max
R equation,

I/2(2 - #/2imax2)

I./A#

- #/2jmax2) I/Ay2 ~
{
. 1/2(2
.
. (3A-a)
. . . . . . . . . . . . ....

y-ditection

)
1/2(rr2/2irnax2)
HK

_8{~,j

At

~)K+l

RK+l

n+%, i, j

n+l, f,j

nvi, j)

. (2A-b)

subscripts
x-index (x = iA.v)
y-index (y = jAy)
time index (t = 2AtJ

Sup~rscriprs
K = iteration

number

Variables
Q, Qw = volumetric injection rate from an e~ernal
source into block. i, j (n and w signify
non-wetting and we;tikg phases)

where
H = HKXM = ffK(4Mavg)

With
i =
j =
n .

l/Ax2[

min = in l/2(rr2/2jmax2)
I/Ay2 \
{
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3$b)

= %%i,j

+ Miah, j + Mi, j+

i- Mi,jah,

Iteration cm Eqs. 2A-a and 2A-b involves improvement of the coefficient S. For the general case
$
s K+l
n#2, i, j =

@+l,f,/- (R.,i,j)
-K
n+l,i,j

whese

.,

.,

(4A) ~:.
j

n,

i,j

..

b
.
..:,

TABLE 3 COMPUTED WATER SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS,

FIELD SYSTEM

a. Wpter Saturation Dlstribtiimn

Y.lridax
X.lndcx
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16
17

Fer Timo Stop4, Advancing Timofrom 3.50 DaYst06.SO Days

Wifii16X.lncr*mtntsof
25.00ft, 16Y-lncromonts of3.12ft, and Harlzontal Thickness of5OO.OOh
Block (2,2) - Lotsm Ldt Comer
Bleck(17,2) -Lower Righ?Cwnet
An@loof Incl inaNon -1 *O Dagrnts (From Loft Edge)
9
11
12
6
10
14
13
15
16
,9367
,936Q
.9370
,9373
.9375
,9378
09381
.9384
.9386

.9341
.934s
.9352
.9361
,9372
.9382
.9391
.9397
.9404

.9389,
.9391
.9393
.939s
.9397
.9390
.9400

.9410
.9413
,9418
.9424
.9431
.9437
.9443

.8362
.9059
.9154
.9217
9274
.9296
.9309
.9322
.9335
.9347
.9$59
.9370
.9380
.9390
.9396
.9402

.4744
.5318
,57s1
.6443
.7470
.8304
.8820
.9047
9144
.9182
.9216
, .9248
;9272
.9287
,9294
9299

.2208
.2295
,2377
,2497
.,2773
,3100
.3580
.4140
.4791
.5501
.6231
,7286
.8224
.8751
.9033
.9122

.1185
.1194
.1200
.1210
.1220
.1231
.1242
, 12S3
.1263

.1263
.1271
.1278
.12B7
.1298
.1326
*1359
.1391
. i435
.1483
.1532
.1581
,1631

*1107
,1116
.1123
.1132
.1143
.1153
.1164
.1175
.1186
.1197
.1207
.1218
,1229
.1241
.1251
.1261

,1274
.1285
.1296
,1321
.1354
.1387
.1424

.1681
. 1?29
.1788

.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.Iloo
.1100
.1100
. I 100
.1108
.1119
.1130
.1141
.1152
,1163
.1174
.1184

17
*I1OO
~~ .1100
. I 100
.1100
;1100
.1100
.1100
I1OO
.1100
.1100
.1100

,1100
.1100
.1100
,1100
.1106

b. Water Saturation Dlstributlon

Y.lirdcx
X.lrrdox
2
3
4
s
6
7
0

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
J6
17

.For TimGStep6, Advancing Timo from 10.00 Doysto 14.00 Days

With 16 X-lncrcmants of =.00*,
16Y.lncrements of3.12ft, and Horizontal Th1cknsssef5OOft
BIock (2,2) -Lower Left Cornor
61eck (17,2) -Lower Right Co&er
Angle of Incllnatidn = -1,0 DeorceB (From Loft Edge)
14
11
6
9
)0
12
13
15
,9374
.9371
,9371
.9373
,9376
,9378

.9370
.9355
.935s
.9363
.9373
.93s3

.9261
.9180
.9177
.9227
.9277
.9297

.6663
.5902

.2540.
.24(I3

.1289
.1280

.5971
.6586
.7556
08341

.2418
.2S31
.2795
.3132

.9381
.9384

.93?t
.9398

.9~lo
,9323

.885S
.9053

.9336

.9150
.9184
,9218
.9250 .-.
.9273 a
,9288
,9295
.9300

.9387
,93s9
.9391
.9393
.9395
.9397
;9399
.9400

.9404
.9410
.9413
.9418
,9425
.9431
.9438
, *9444

.9348
.9359
.9371
.9381
.9390
,9397
,9403

16

17

.1281
.1289
.1299
.1328

.1211
.1202
,1203
.1211
.1221
.1232

.1134
.?125
.1126
.1133
01143
.1154

.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100

.1,100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100

.3610
.4178

.1361
.1393

,1243
,1253

.1165
,i176

.ll~
.1100

.1100
,1100

.4826
.5535
.6269
.7339
,8261
%8791
.9038
.9130

.1438
.1486
.1534

.1264
,1275
.1285
,1296
.1323
.1357
.1388
.1428

,1186
.1197
.1208

.1109
.1120
!1130
.1141
,1153
,1164
.1174
,1184

, I 100
.1100
-9I1OO
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1107

16

17

.1182
.1146
A .1137
.1139
.1146

,1105
.1100
.1100
, I 100
.1100

.1156
,1167

.1100

.Iloo
. I 100
.1100
,1100
.1100
*1100

.15s3
.1634
.1685
,1732
.1793

,1219
.1230
.1241
; 1252
.1262

<

c. Wat~r Sewratimr Distribution

Y-Index
X.lndcx
2
3
4
5
6.
7
~ 8
9
10
11

g
\4
15
16
17

F~Tims Step 10,. Advcmelng Tfmefrom 26.00 Dayktw30J0

Days
With 16 X.lrr.rcmmtsof 25.Wft, 16 Y.lncr*mants ef3.12ft,
and Horizontal Thickness of500.00ft
Bleek (2,2) -Loww Loft Cerntir
Black (17,2) - Lew.r Right Cc.rn~
Anglo ef Inclinati.an = -1.0 Dmgrem (From Loft Edge)
14
15
9
6
10
11
12
13
.9386
*9377
.937s
.937s
.9377
,9379
,4384.
.9387
.9389
.9391
.9393
,9395
.9397
*9399
.9400

,9403
.9379
.936s
.9369
.9376
,9385
.9392
.9398:
,9405
.9411
*9414
..9419
,9426
.9432
.9438
9444

.933s
.9292
. ~f9260
,9266
,9287
.9300
,9312
,9325
.9337
*9349
,9361
.9372
,9383
~ .9391
,9397
.9403

.9143
.7912
.6954
.7144
.7871
.8448
.8938
.9066

.4578
.2870
.2622
.2678
.28n
;3227

.14!9
.1304
.1292
.1294
.1305
.J334

.1260
.1224
*li14
.1217
.1224
.J234

,3683
i4261

,1366
.1397

.1244
.1255

.91s4
.9188
.9222
.92S4
.9275
.9289
.9295
.9300

.4904
.5615
.638)

* 1443
.1491

.1265
.1276
.1287 ~
.1298
.1328
.136f
,1392

.7467
.8339.
8861
904a
,9134

* 1539
.1589
.1642
.1691
*1739
*1796

.1430

1177
.1188
.1198
.1209
.1220
~,1232
;1243
.1253
.1262

.1100
,1100
,Ilto
.1121
*1131
.1143
,1154
.1165
.1175
.1185

.1100
,ltoo
,.1100
llW
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1107

:.

!.

TABLE 4 COMPUTED WATER SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS, UNATTAINABLE LABORATORY SYSTEMS

a. R}gareuaThrao.Dimondenal Sc.allngLaws

Y-lndcx
X4nd.x
2
3.
4
5
6

,.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

WaterSaturationOistrib@lan
/
FOr Time Stcp4, A~vancing Tlmsfrom S.07hrsta 9.41 hrs
With 16 X.lncrcmontsc.f 2.25 in., 16 Y.lnerwnomsef .28 in., and Hc.rlzmmtlThickntsaef 45.00 in.
Black (2,3) - Law-r Lsft Carnsr
Sleek (17,2) - Lew.r Right Cerrmr
Anglo of Inclinetien = -1.0 Dqracs (From Loft Edoc)
13
9
10
11
6
12
14
15
M
,9$67
,9369
,9370
,9373
,9375
,9378
,9381
.9384
.9386
,92s9
,9391
.9393
.9395
.9397
.9398
.9400

,9341
,9348
-.9852
,9361
.9372
.9382
.9391
.9397
.9404
.9410
.9413
.9418
.9424
.9431
,9437
.9443

.8362
,9059
.9154
.9217
,9274
.9296
.9309
.9322
.9335
.9347
.93s9
.9370
.9380
,9390
.9396
.9402

,4744

,5318
.5751
.6443
.7470
.8304
,8B19
,9047
.9144
.9182
.i216
,9248
.9272
.9287
.9294
.9300

.2208
,2295
,,2373 1
.2497
.2772
.3100
.35s0
,4140
.4791
.5501
.6232
.~28b
,822s
.8752
.9033
.9123

,1263
,1271
.1278
,1287
.1298
,1326
,13s9
.1391
.1435
.1483
. 1S32
.1581
.1631
.1681
.1729
.1289

,118s
.1194
.1200
.1210
.122Q
.1231
,1242
.1253
.1263
.1274
.1285
. J296
.1321
.1355
.1387
.1435

.? 107
.1116
.1123
.1132
,1143
,11$3
.1164
.1175
,1186
.1197
.1207
.1218
.1229
.1241
.1251
.1261

1?

.IIM
*1 100
II!M
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
,1100
,1108
.1119
.1130
.1141
.1152
.1163
.1174
.1184

.1100
.1100
.1.100,
.1100
..1100
...1100
.1100
.1100
.1 ioo
.1100
.1100
.i 109
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1106

16

17

.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1108
,1119
.1130
.1141
,1152
.1163
.1174
.1184

, I 100
,1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1100
.1106

b. Rigwous Tw-Dimcnsienal Scaling Laws

Watcr$aturetlon Distribution

Y-Index

Fnr Time Stsp4, Advancing Tlmcfrem 5.07 hrsto 9.4} hrs

With 16 X.lncrmn.ntsof 2.25 In., 16 Y-lncrammts of.28 in., and Horizontal Thickness of .75 in.
Black (2,2) - Lowcr Laft Corner
Block (17t2)- Lowar Right Corn.r
Angl@@fInclination = -1.0 Dqrec. (Frorn Loft Edge)
10
11
13
14
15
9
12
6

X40dc~
2
.3
4
5
6
,7
8
9

10
11
12
13
- .14
?5
16
17

.9367
.9369
.9370
.9373
.9375
.9378
.9381
.9384
.9384
.9389
.9391
, .9393
,9395
.9397
.9398
..9400

.9341
.9348
.9352
.9361
.9272
.9382
.9391
.9397
.9404
.9410
.9413
.9418
.9424
.9431
.9437
.9443

.8362
.9058
.9154
.9217
.9274
.9296
.9309
;9322
.9335
.9247
.93s9
%9370
.9300
.9390
.9396
.9402

.4744
.5318
.5751
.6443
.7470
.8304
.8819
.9047
.9144
.9182
.9216
,9248
.9272
.9287
.9294
, .931X2

.2208
.2295
.2378
.2497
.2772
.3100
.3580
.4140
.4791
.s501
.6232
.7287
.8225
,87S2
.9034
.9125

,1263
,1271
.1278
.1287
.1298
,1326
.1359
.1391
.1435
,1483
.1532
.1S81
.1631
.1681,
,1730
,1790

.1185
.1194
,1200
,1210
.122U
.1231
.1242
.1253
.1263
.1274
.1235
.1296
.1321
,1355
,1387
.1426

.1107
.1116
.1123
.1132
,1143
.1153
.1164
1175
.1186
,1197
.1207
*1218
,1229
.1241
.1251
.1261

c. Tw~.Dimensional Scaling Luws with Laboratory Relativo Pcrmoability and Capillary Pressuro Relationships
Watu Suturat]enDistribution

Y. Index
X.lndax
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
io
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Fer Tires Step4, Advancing Timcfrom 5.07 hrst.a 9.41 hrs

W}th 16 X.lncramentsof 2.25 ire,, 16 Y.lricr.m.nisef
.28 in,, Ondf+orixotal Thicka**ef
.75 In,
Black (2,2) - Lewcr Left Cerrmr
Bloek (17,2)- Lewar Right Corner
. Aqlooflnelinafinn =-l. ODtgrccs (Frem Lcfi Edg.)
6
9
10
11
13
14
15
12
.85S6
.8617
.8684
.8/04
,8749
.8797
.884s
.8899
.89S4
.900T
.9057
.9105
.91ss
.9205
.92s?
.9301

.836 I
.8361
.8555
.8552
,8692
.8854
.9033
.9213
.9394
,9573
.9787
.9946
1.0000
1.0000
1,0000

1.0000

.7194
.820S
.8341
.8350
.8357
.8359
.8360
.8360
.6361
.8361
.8496
.8661
.8829
.9003
.9194
.9352
.-,
.

.4574
.5305
.6165
.6506
.7043
.7584
.8039
.6223
.8299
.8323
.8345
.8354:
.8357
,8359
.8359
,8S60
-

.2000
.2172.
.2439
.2592
.2820
.3098
.3516
.4118
;4823
.5S61
.6336
.6898
.7481
.7979
.8208
.8290

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.107O
.1070 ~
,1.070
.1070
.1070
.1071
i i232

01070
.1070
.1070
.1070.
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

,1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
:1070
.1070
.1070
.1070.
. T070
,1070
.1070
.1070 .
1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

16

17

,1070

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

.lom
.1070
1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070,
.1070
,1070
.1070
1070
.1070
. ...1070
.1070 ,

.1070
.1070
.1070

..

,.

.,

..-

.,

,,

1.

/.

:.

TABLE S _

COMPUTED WATER SATURATION DISTRIBUTIONS; PRACTICAL LABORATORY SYSTEM

a. Watw SaturONOnDistribution
Fer Time Step4, Advancing Ti.nokm5.07hrs
to 9.41 hrs.
With 16 X-lncrcmsnts of 2.2S in., 16 Y.lncromontaol~28 in., and HnrisOntal Thicknes; ef .7S in.
BIock (2,2) - Lowor Left Corner
Block (17,2) - Lewm Right Cenmr
Angle of Inclhwiien = -1.0 Dmgram (From Laft Edg~)
9
10
11
12
14
15
6
13

Y.lndox
X.lnd.u
2
3.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 ~
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

.8556
.8617
.8684
.8704
,8749
.8797
.8848
,8899
.8950
.9001
.9057
.9106
.91ss
.92Q6
.9257
.9303

.7194
.8205
,8341
,8350
.83S7
.8359
,8360
.8360
.8361
.8361
.8497
.8667
.8830
.9008
,9189
.934s

,8361
.8361
,855s
.8%52
.8692
.8854
.9033
.9213.
.9394
.9.573
.9788
.9956
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000

,.
-

.4574
.5305
.6165
,6506
.7043
.7S84
.8039
.8223
.8299
,8323
.8345
.8354
,83S7
.8359
,83S9
.8360

.2000
.2172
.2439
,2592
,2820
.3098
.3516
.4118
.4823
.5562
.6337
.6903
.748S
.7987
.8207
.8288

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
1070
I .1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
; 1070
,1070

.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
. !070
,

* 1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
1070
,1070
.1224

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

16

17

1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
*1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.lwio
. to70
.1070

,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070

1
b. Water Snturatien Disfributim
FOr Tima Step6, Advancing Time fr.am.60Days te.84 Days
With 16 X.lncrementsef 2.25 in., 16 Y-lncremantsaf .28 in., and Horizontal Thickness of ,75 in.
Block (2,2) - Lowar Left Corner
Bleck (17,2) - Lower Ri9ht Cerner
An91a of Incl inaticm = -1.0 Degrees (From Left Edge)
9
1s
6
10
12
13
14
11

Y. Index
X.ldsx
2

.8607
.8686
.8682
.871,5
.8758
.B801
.88S2
.0903
.8954
.9005
.9065
,9112
.9159
.9209
.9259
.9294

3
4
5
6
7.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1s
16
17

.8361
.8626
,8517
,8599

;8248
.83S1
.8346
.8354
.8358
.8359
.8360
.8360
.8361
.8361
.8537
.8691
.8848
,9024
.9198
. ,9327

.8725
.8874
,9052
.9231
.9413
.9s9s
z .9827
.9984
I ,0000
1.0000
1.0000
:.0000

.5475
,6338
,6392
,66S(3
.7143,

,7649
.B066
.8235
.8302
.8326
.8348
.83S5
,8357
.8359
.8359
.8360

.2216
.2497
.2534
.2647
.2872
.313s
.3554
.4185
.4887
.5619
.6407
i6986
.754s
. .8019
.8210
.8284

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
. to70
.1070
.1070
,1075
.1212

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070

.1070
.1070
,1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
. 107D
,1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

16

17

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.io70
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
;1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

,,

I
c. Water SeturatiOn Distribufieri
Fer Time St~p 10/ Advancing Time fr~ml.57Dayst.a
1.81 Days
With 16 X.lncremmntsof 2.25 in,, 16 Y.lncrarnentsef .28 in,, and Horizontal Thickness sf.75 in,
Block (2,2) - Lower Left Corner.
Block (17,2) -L6wer Right.Carner
Y.Index
X.index
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
,12
13
14

. ...

.9436
.8927
.8679
.8687
,8788
.8923
a ,9096
.9276
,9457
,9642
.9905

:8842
.8761
.8725
,8739
.8772
.8812
.8861
.8913
.8964
,9016
.9082
.9122
.9 r66
.9213
.9268
.9267

15
16
t?

f,~,.

. ..

Angle eflnclinafion =-l.OD@gr&us

10
11
12

,9

.8361
.8360
.8357
.83.S7
.63s9
.8360
.8360
.8360
.8361
~ ,8361
.8611
.8729
,8880
.9041
.9191
.9279

1.0000
1,0000
1,0000
1.0000
1.0000.

. . ...-

. . . . .. .

.
. ...

.,.:
..
.,

--------

;._

,.
. ..

.8294
.7708
.696S
.7020
.7359
.7794
.8125
.8260
.8308
.8332
.8351
.835s
.83S8
.8359
.8359
,8359

.4424
..3117
,2761
.2794

(Frem Left Edge)

14
13
.1070
.1070
.1070
. Iwo
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
,1070
1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1178

,2971
.3249
,3648
.4328
.5046
,5765
.656)
.7140
.7663
.8051
.8206,
.8271

,1070
,1070
~lo70
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.,I070
.1070
.1070
.1070
,1.070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070

15

,16,

,1070
.1070
.1070
,1070

17

.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070

.1070
.-1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
.1070
; .1070
.1070
.1070

.1070
.1070
,1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
,1070
.1070
.1070
107O
.1070
.107D
.1070
.1070

.1070
1070
.s070
.1070
* 1070
.1070
. ii170
107O
.1070
*1070
.1070
,1076

-.

,
,

,,
.,

S6ClETY-UF.*ET-tiOLSdrn

jHVGiNEERSJ

. ..
. ..<

>

.
OiiRNA-E

--

,,
../

.-..

:.

.-

----

-----

. .. . .
-.

.-

.. .
.
,.

...
.,i

.> ,,,.

.-.
. .

..-.

--

..:...

...

.
i

. ..

:. ._..
.

-.

--

6 . ...
I

I
.,/

~K
n+l,

Using

f,j

For a circular well at the center of the volume

increment, the factor C haa the value

%(

. . ..
~+1, i. j +RK-ln+l, a,l
1

this method,

special

ttnd second iterations.

S&.j

,.

.,

cases

These

arise for the first

are treated

~1

. . . . . . . . ,(12A)

sin b ~(d + rw)

F = log

@~+l,i,.j)- (R@,
i,j)

~42
.
n+% ,i, ~ =

. . .

with

. . . . . . . . . . (5A)

= S(Rn, i,~

C=21rA/F,

. (6A)

n+l, i,j -Rn, i,j

sin b ~rw

sinb~ [rw - (m- l)dl sin h; [rw +(m - I)dl

H.

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

m=l

Each boundary is treated as reflecting with assignment of injection (or production) rates to appropriate points.
.
Two types of injectidn-production
bound sries are
used.

The Iayer-wi se distribution of the total injection

or production race is obtained from as aumption of a
constant wellbore potential and use of coefficients
appI yln,g at the beginning of Xe time step. Produc.
tion of both phases into a well is allowed, with
injection limited co a single phase.

Within the
presstire.

wellbore

. . . . . . ..o.
both phases

iire at the

same

o (8A-a)

~w,wb = wb

o 8A-b)

where pavF = average den s~ty of wellbore fluid.

For an Injection well at the edge i = 1, the total
injection rate of non-wetting phases QT is specified.
o
-n,l, j = l,j

k.
Jdd
pn

(~n, ~,j - +., wb)C . (9A-4

The potential of the non-wetting

the begirming of the time step.
= n,l,~

+ n,l,~

. . . . . . .

(1OA)

. . . . . , ..

. .

(11A)

where A is the fraction of [he total area of the well.,

bore open to fIow.
.
.
. . .. . . .
.. +......
. . . . . . . ..
JUNE,

1963

>

. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . (12A)

and
rw = wellbore radius

,.

d=Ax
a = Az,

Eqs. 12 and ,13 follow from the relationship pre-sented

by Muskat 14 which ezpresses
the pressure
distribution in a direct linedrive network. One unit
of the direct IineArive network is ~aa logous to the
flow, system existing for the circular well within a
voluttie increment.
Using the proper value of the gecmekric shape
factor C, Eq. 9A-b is solved for the wellbore
potential, @wb from the desired. injection rate QT.,
~he layer-wise diatributi qn of the rate is obtained
from Eq. 9A-a.
The distribution is computed in the same manner
for a production well with the & stribution of the
wetting phase following from Eq. 9A-a written for
the wetting phase.
.,
Aquifer

phase is taken at

The constant multiplying factor C is a. geometric

factor depen~g
upon the shape of the well, thd
size of the voIume increment and the fraction of the
wellbore area opeh for flow.
For a rectanghla~ well extending across the total
thickness of the volume increment,
C=2AyAzA/Az.

sinh~ (iv,+ d) sinh~ (rw - ti

B
m=z sinb~ [rw-(m-l)d] sinh~ [rw +(m+ l)dl

. .(9A-b)

~Qn,l,j=Q~I.......

~n,l,j

indices

(7A)

~n, wb = Wb + Pn - Pavg)g}
+ ~w - %g)~b

odd

(?W+md)sinb~(rw-md)

! even
indices

Well Boundary

@wb =pwb+pavggb

sinh~

Bouna2rry (at i = imax)

This type of boundary is especially

convenient
for use in field problems where the grid network
encompaaa es only part of the two-phase region. At

thie. boundary the total injection or production is

eqwil but opposite in sign to the sum of the injection
or production terms over the whole system, This is
a consequence of, the incompressibility
restrictiork
The distribution is taken to be proportional to the
inter block flow between the blocks along the boundary and in the adjacent column (i = i max and i = i
msx - 1) at rhe end of the previous time step.
,.
3
SEQUENC~

The
.

.&.-...-.

OF COMPUTATION

computation
.

.. . .

sequence
. . . ..

within
.

a
..:

time

,step
-

~g

~
._..::

.,

..,+

.
,,

.,

..m

,,
,,

follows:
(1) Coefficients
M and N are computed
from ezisting saturation distribution;
(2) injectionproduction terms are computed from existing salutation qnd potential distribution%
(3), P matrix la
updated by cyclic iteration on E qs. lA-a and 1A-Ix
(4) R matrix is updated by iteration on Eqs. 2A-a
snd 2A-b.

Solution of Eqs. lA-a, lA-b, 2A-a and 2A-b involve the straight -forwsrd inversion of tridiagonal
matrices.
,

of 50 increments by 20 increm~nts could ,be handled.

Here, however, a 16 x 16 grid was used. The solutions for both field and laboratory problems were
carried through 10 time steps. For these particular
problems one time step was found to take approximately three minutes executian time.
Relative
permeability
and capillary
pressure
curves were handled by tabular means. Relative
permeability tablea had 51 entries on equally spaced
increments of wetting-phase
saturation (2 per cent).
The capillary pre ssute table was used to obtain
wetting ephas e saturation

GENERAL REMARKS

from capilku y pressure.

In. this study an l13M 709 computer with 32,000

word core-storage was used. By utilizing this space

This table utilized5 1 entries of saturation on semievenly s.. Iced increments of capikt y pre 5stICe~
(Near re~idual saturations
coarser spacing was

as economically

used.)

as possible,

a maximum grid

size

***

,,,

,.

,,

. .

.. .
-176--

.. . .
-