Transport in Porous Media

, Volume 113, Issue 1, pp 29–50 | Cite as

Scale-Dependent Mixing for Adverse Mobility Ratio Flows in Heterogeneous Porous Media

Article

Abstract

Mixing is a scale-dependent phenomenon that has been shown to increase with increasing heterogeneity, mobility ratio, longitudinal correlation length, aspect ratio and distance traveled. The interface between miscible fluids may be dilated by velocity variations, which are promoted by certain characteristics of a porous medium, or by a high mobility ratio. Here we use a high-resolution numerical scheme to compute local dispersivities by fitting grid-block concentration histories to the 1D convection–diffusion equation. We provide new insights on the scale dependence of local dispersivity in heterogeneous porous media. We explain that irreversible mixing only increases monotonically with increasing longitudinal correlation length (layering) for unit mobility ratio displacements. The combination of an adverse mobility ratio and reservoir layering causes mixing to increase, peak and then decline with distance traveled by the injectant. We show that mixing evolves non-monotonically in layered porous media due to the effect of channeling (and not viscous fingering) at adverse mobility ratios. We also examine the effect of diffusion on local dispersivity as modeled in Eulerian simulation. The level of dispersivity is increased when diffusion is explicitly modeled, although molecular diffusion is much smaller than numerical diffusion, even in our high-resolution simulations. Diffusion is more important to consider when sharp concentration gradients exist, as is the case when mobility ratio is large and permeabilities are highly correlated in the longitudinal direction (i.e., layered). This combination gives rise to pronounced channelized flow in which a sharp concentration gradient drives diffusion over a large area of contact between fluids.

Keywords

Heterogeneous porous media EOR processes Viscous fingering Miscible flows Dispersion 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the funding support by the Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) consortium in the EMS Energy Institute at The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. Dr. Russell T. Johns is Chair of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Program and holds the Victor and Anna Mae Beghini Faculty Fellowship in Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University.

References

  1. Adepoju, O.O., Lake, L.W., Johns, R.T.: Investigation of anisotropic mixing in miscible displacements. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 16(1), 85–96 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alavian, S.A., Whitson, C.: Scale dependence of diffusion in naturally fractured reservoirs for \({{\rm CO}}_{2}\) injection. In: SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium (2010)Google Scholar
  3. Alkindi, A., Al-Wahaibi, Y., Bijeljic, B., Muggeridge, A.: Investigation of longitudinal and transverse dispersion in stable displacements with a high viscosity and density contrast between the fluids. J. Contam. Hydrol. 120, 170–183 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aris, R., Amundson, N.R.: Some remarks on longitudinal mixing or diffusion in fixed beds. AICHE J. 3(2), 280–282 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arya, A., Hewett, T., Larson, R., Lake, L.: Dispersion and reservoir heterogeneity. SPE Reserv. Eng. 3(1), 139–148 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker, L.: Effects of dispersion and dead-end pore volume in miscible flooding. SPE J. 17(3), 219–227 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bear, J.: Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Elsevier, New York (1972)Google Scholar
  8. Blunt, M., Christie, M.: How to predict viscous fingering in three component flow. Transp. Porous Media 12(3), 207–236 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bolster, D., Vald{\’e}s-Parada, F.J., LeBorgne, T., Dentz, M., Carrera, J.: Mixing in confined stratified aquifers. J. Contam. Hydrol. 120, 198–212 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brigham, W., Reed, P., Dew, J.: Experiments on mixing during miscible displacement in porous media. SPE J. 1(1), 1–8 (1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chang, Y.B., Pope, G.A., Sepehrnoori, K.: A higher-order finite-difference compositional simulator. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 5(1), 35–50 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang, Y.B., Lim, M., Pope, G., Sepehrnoori, K., et al.: \({\rm CO}_{2}\) flow patterns under multiphase flow: heterogeneous field-scale conditions. SPE Reserv. Eng. 9(03), 208–216 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleary, R.W., Ungs, M.J.: Analytical models for groundwater pollution and hydrology. Water Resources Program, Department of Civil Engineering, Princeton University (1978)Google Scholar
  14. Coats, K., Whitson, C., Thomas, K.: Modeling conformance as dispersion. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 12(1), 33–47 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. Computer Modeling GroupLtd.: GEM User’s Guide (2013)Google Scholar
  16. Dagan, G.: Statistical theory of groundwater flow and transport: pore to laboratory, laboratory to formation, and formation to regional scale. Water Resour. Res. 22(9S), 120S–134S (1986)Google Scholar
  17. Dagan, G.: Time-dependent macrodispersion for solute transport in anisotropic heterogeneous aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 24(9), 1491–1500 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dagan, G.: Flow and Transport in Porous Formations. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  19. Dentz, M., Le Borgne, T., Englert, A., Bijeljic, B.: Mixing, spreading and reaction in heterogeneous media: a brief review. J. Contam. Hydrol. 120, 1–17 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ding, E.R., Harrison, P.F., Dozzo, J.A., Lin, C.Y., et al.: Prudhoe bay: rebuilding a giant oil and gas full field model. In: SPE Western Regional Meeting, Society of Petroleum Engineers (2009)Google Scholar
  21. Ewing, R.E.: The Mathematics of Reservoir Simulation. SIAM, Bangkok (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fick, A.: V. on liquid diffusion. Lond. Edinb. Dublin Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 10(63), 30–39 (1855)Google Scholar
  23. Fiori, A., Dagan, G.: Transport of a passive scalar in a stratified porous medium. Transp. Porous Media 47(1), 81–98 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fiori, A., Jankovic, I., Dagan, G.: The impact of local diffusion upon mass arrival of a passive solute in transport through three-dimensional highly heterogeneous aquifers. Adv. Water Resour. 34(12), 1563–1573 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gardner, J., Orr, F., Patel, P.: The effect of phase behavior on \({\rm CO}_{2}\)-flood displacement efficiency. J. Pet. Technol. 33(11), 2067–2081 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Garmeh, G.: Investigation of scale dependent dispersivity and its impact on upscaling miscible displacements. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin (2009)Google Scholar
  27. Garmeh, G., Johns, R.: Upscaling of miscible floods in heterogeneous reservoirs considering reservoir mixing. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 13(5), 747–763 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gelhar, L., Mantoglou, A., Welty, C., Rehfeldt, K.: A review of field scale subsurface solute transport processes under saturated and unsaturated conditions. Electric Power Research Institute EPRI EA-4190 (1985)Google Scholar
  29. Gelhar, L.W.: Stochastic Subsurface Hydrology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1993)Google Scholar
  30. Gelhar, L.W., Axness, C.L.: Three-dimensional stochastic analysis of macrodispersion in aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 19(1), 161–180 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. GeoQuest, S.: Eclipse reservoir simulator, manual and technical description (2010)Google Scholar
  32. Gharbi, R., Peters, E., Elkamel, A.: Scaling miscible fluid displacements in porous media. Energy Fuels 12(4), 801–811 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gharbi, R.B.: Dimensionally scaled miscible displacements in heterogeneous permeable media. Transp. Porous Media 48(3), 271–290 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Haajizadeh, M., Fayers, F., Cockin, A., Roffey, M., Bond, D.: On the importance of dispersion and heterogeneity in the compositional simulation of miscible gas processes. In: SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery Conference (1999)Google Scholar
  35. Haajizadeh, M., Fayers, F., Cockin, A., et al.: Effects of phase behavior, dispersion and gridding on sweep patterns for nearly miscible gas displacement. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers (2000)Google Scholar
  36. Harten, A.: High resolution schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws. J. Comput. Phys. 49(3), 357–393 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hidalgo, J.J., Fe, J., Cueto-Felgueroso, L., Juanes, R.: Scaling of convective mixing in porous media. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109(26), 264,503 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hoteit, H., Firoozabadi, A.: Numerical modeling of diffusion in fractured media for gas-injection and-recycling schemes. SPE J. 14(2), 323–337 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Javandel, : Groundwater Transport: Handbook of Mathematical Models. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jennings, J., Ruppel, S., Ward, W.: Geostatistical analysis of permeability data and modeling of fluid-flow effects in carbonate outcrops. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 3(4), 292–303 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jessen, K., Stenby, E., Orr, F.: Interplay of phase behavior and numerical dispersion in finite-difference compositional simulation. SPE J. 9(2), 193–201 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jessen, K., Gerritsen, M.G., Mallison, B.T., et al.: High-resolution prediction of enhanced condensate recovery processes. SPE J. 13(02), 257–266 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jha, B., Cueto-Felgueroso, L., Juanes, R.: Fluid mixing from viscous fingering. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(19), 194,502 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jha, B., Cueto-Felgueroso, L., Juanes, R.: Quantifying mixing in viscously unstable porous media flows. Phys. Rev. E 84(6), 066,312 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jha, B., Cueto-Felgueroso, L., Juanes, R.: Synergetic fluid mixing from viscous fingering and alternating injection. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111(14), 144,501 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jha, R.K., John, A.K., Bryant, S.L., Lake, L.W., et al.: Flow reversal and mixing. SPE J. 14(01), 41–49 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jha, R.K., Bryant, S., Lake, L.W.: Effect of diffusion on dispersion. SPE J. 16(01), 65–77 (2011c)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jiao, C.Y., H{\"o}tzl, H.: An experimental study of miscible displacements in porous media with variation of fluid density and viscosity. Transp. Porous Media 54(2), 125–144 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. John, A., Lake, L., Bryant, S., Jennings, J.: Investigation of mixing in field-scale miscible displacements using particle-tracking simulations of tracer floods with flow reversal. SPE J. 15(3), 598–609 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Johns, R., Fayers, F., Orr Jr., F.: Effect of gas enrichment and dispersion on nearly miscible displacements in condensing/vaporizing drives. SPE Adv. Technol. Ser. 2(2), 26–34 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Johns, R., Sah, P., Solano, R.: Effect of dispersion on local displacement efficiency for multicomponent enriched-gas floods above the minimum miscibility enrichment. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 5(1), 4–10 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kitanidis, P.K.: The concept of the dilution index. Water Resour. Res. 30(7), 2011–2026 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Koval, E.J.: A method for predicting the performance of unstable miscible displacement in heterogeneous media. SPE J. 3(02), 145–154 (1963)Google Scholar
  54. Lake, L.W., Johns, R.T., Rossen, B., Pope, G.: Fundamentals of Enhanced Oil Recovery. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inverurie (2014)Google Scholar
  55. Langston, M., Hoadley, S., Young, D., et al.: Definitive\({\rm CO}_{2}\) flooding response in the SACROC unit. In: SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Society of Petroleum Engineers (1988)Google Scholar
  56. Lantz, R.: Quantitative evaluation of numerical diffusion (truncation error). SPE J. 11(3), 315–320 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Le Borgne, T., Dentz, M., Villermaux, E.: Stretching, coalescence, and mixing in porous media. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110(20), 204,501 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. LeBlanc, D.R., Garabedian, S.P., Hess, K.M., Gelhar, L.W., Quadri, R.D., Stollenwerk, K.G., Wood, W.W.: Large-scale natural gradient tracer test in sand and gravel, Cape Cod, Massachusetts: 1. experimental design and observed tracer movement. Water Resour. Res. 27(5), 895–910 (1991)Google Scholar
  59. Liu, J.: High resolution methods for enhanced oil recovery simulation. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin (1993)Google Scholar
  60. Liu, J., Delshad, M., Pope, G.A., Sepehroori, K.: Application of higher-order flux-limited methods in compositional simulation. Transp. Porous Media 16(1), 1–29 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Magruder, J.B., Stiles, L.H., Yelverton, T.D., et al.: Review of the means san andres unit \({\rm CO}_{2}\) tertiary project. J. Pet. Technol. 42(05), 638–644 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mahadevan, J., Lake, L., Johns, R.: Estimation of true dispersivity in field-scale permeable media. SPE J. 8(3), 272–279 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Marle, C.M.: Multiphase Flow in Porous Media. Gulf Publishing, Houston (1981)Google Scholar
  64. Moreno, L., Tsang, C.F.: Flow channeling in strongly heterogeneous porous media: a numerical study. Water Resour. Res. 30, 1421–1421 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Moulds, T.P., McGuire, P.L., Jerauld, G., Lee, S.T., Solano, R., et al.: Pt. mcintyre: a case study of gas enrichment above MME. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 8(03), 182–188 (2005)Google Scholar
  66. Nicolaides, C., Jha, B., Cueto-Felgueroso, L., Juanes, R.: Impact of viscous fingering and permeability heterogeneity on fluid mixing in porous media. Water Resour. Res. 51(4), 2634–2647 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Panda, M., Ambrose, J.G., Beuhler, G., McGguire, P.L., et al.: Optimized eor design for the Eileen west end area, Greater Prudhoe bay. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 12(01), 25–32 (2009)Google Scholar
  68. Perkins, T., Johnston, O.: A review of diffusion and dispersion in porous media. SPE J. 3(1), 70–84 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pickens, J.F., Grisak, G.E.: Scale-dependent dispersion in a stratified granular aquifer. Water Resour. Res. 17(4), 1191–1211 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pietrzak, J.: The use of tvd limiters for forward-in-time upstream-biased advection schemes in ocean modeling. Mon. Weather Rev. 126(3), 812–830 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Plumb, O., Whitaker, S.: Dispersion in heterogeneous porous media 1. Local volume averaging and large-scale averaging. Water Resour. Res. 24(7), 913–926 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rajaram, H., Gelhar, L.W.: Plume-scale dependent dispersion in aquifers with a wide range of scales of heterogeneity. Wat. Resour. Res. 31(10), 2469–2482 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sajjadi, M., Azaiez, J.: Scaling and unified characterization of flow instabilities in layered heterogeneous porous media. Phys. Rev. E 88(3), 033017 (2013)Google Scholar
  74. Shook, M., Li, D., Lake, L.W.: Scaling immiscible flow through permeable media by inspectional analysis. In Situ 16(4), 311–349 (1992)Google Scholar
  75. Smith, L., Schwartz, F.W.: Mass transport: 1. A stochastic analysis of macroscopic dispersion. Water Resour. Res. 16(2), 303–313 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Solano, R., Johns, R., Lake, L.: Impact of reservoir mixing on recovery in enriched-gas drives above the minimum miscibility enrichment. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 4(5), 358–365 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sorbie, K., Feghi, F., Pickup, G., Ringrose, P., Jensen, J., et al.: Flow regimes in miscible displacements in heterogeneous correlated random fields. SPE Adv. Technol. Ser. 2(02), 78–87 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Stalkup, F.: Carbon dioxide miscible flooding: past, present, and outlook for the future. J. Pet. Technol. 30(08), 1–102 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stalkup, F.: Effect of gas enrichment and numerical dispersion on enriched-gas-drive predictions. SPE Reserv. Eng. 5(4), 647–655 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Stalkup, F.: Predicting the effect of continued gas enrichment above the MME on oil recovery in enriched hydrocarbon gas floods. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers (1998)Google Scholar
  81. Sweby, P.K.: High resolution schemes using flux limiters for hyperbolic conservation laws. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 21(5), 995–1011 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Todd, M., Longstaff, W.J.: The development, testing, and application of a numerical simulator for predicting miscible flood performance. J. Pet. Technol. 24(7), 874–882 (1972)Google Scholar
  83. Waggoner, J., Castillo, J., Lake, L.W.: Simulation of EOR processes in stochastically generated permeable media. SPE Form. Eval. 7(02), 173–180 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Walsh, B., Orr Jr., F.: Prediction of miscible flood performance; the effect of dispersion on composition paths in ternary systems. Situ 14(1), 19–47 (1990)Google Scholar
  85. Welch, B.L.: The generalization of student’s problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 34(1/2), 28–35 (1947)Google Scholar
  86. Welty, C., Gelhar, L.W.: Stochastic analysis of the effects of fluid density and viscosity variability on macrodispersion in heterogeneous porous media. Water Resour. Res. 27(8), 2061–2075 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Yanze, Y., Clemens, T.: The role of diffusion for nonequilibrium gas injection into a fractured reservoir. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 15(1), 60–71 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zikanov, O.: Essential Computational Fluid Dynamics. Wiley, London (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Energy Resources EngineeringStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.John and Willie Leone Family Department of Energy and Mineral EngineeringThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations