Computational Geosciences

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 171–185 | Cite as

On a universal structure for immiscible three-phase flow in virgin reservoirs

  • Pablo Castañeda
  • Eduardo Abreu
  • Frederico Furtado
  • Dan Marchesin
ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

We discuss the solution for commonly used models of the flow resulting from the injection of any proportion of three immiscible fluids such as water, oil, and gas in a reservoir initially containing oil and residual water. The solutions supported in the universal structure generically belong to two classes, characterized by the location of the injection state in the saturation triangle. Each class of solutions occurs for injection states in one of the two regions, separated by a curve of states for most of which the interstitial speeds of water and gas are equal. This is a separatrix curve because on one side water appears at breakthrough, while gas appears for injection states on the other side. In other words, the behavior near breakthrough is flow of oil and of the dominant phase, either water or gas; the non-dominant phase is left behind. Our arguments are rigorous for the class of Corey models with convex relative permeability functions. They also hold for Stone’s interpolation I model [5]. This description of the universal structure of solutions for the injection problems is valid for any values of phase viscosities. The inevitable presence of an umbilic point (or of an elliptic region for the Stone model) seems to be the cause of this universal solution structure. This universal structure was perceived recently in the particular case of quadratic Corey relative permeability models and with the injected state consisting of a mixture of water and gas but no oil [5]. However, the results of the present paper are more general in two ways. First, they are valid for a set of permeability functions that is stable under perturbations, the set of convex permeabilities. Second, they are valid for the injection of any proportion of three rather than only two phases that were the scope of [5].

Keywords

Wave curve method Riemann problem Umbilic point WAG injection Corey, Stone, and Brooks-Corey relative permeability models Immiscible flow 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abreu, E.: Numerical modeling of three-phase immiscible flow in heterogeneous porous media with gravitational effects. Math. Comput. Simulation 97, 234–259 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abreu, E.: Numerical simulation of three-phase flow in heterogeneous media with spatially varying nonlinear hyperbolic-parabolic flux functions, 14th International Conference: Theory, Numerics and Applications of Hyperbolic Problems 2012. AIMS Appl. Math. 8, 233–240 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abreu, E., Conceição, D.: Numerical modeling of degenerate equations in porous media flow. J. Sci. Comput. 55, 688–717 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abreu, E., Douglas Jr., J., Furtado, F., Marchesin, D., Pereira, F.: Three-phase immiscible displacement in heterogeneous petroleum reservoirs. Math. Comput. Simulation 73, 2–20 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Azevedo, A.V., de Souza, A., Furtado, F. , Marchesin, D., Plohr, B.: The solution by the wave curve method of three-phase flow in virgin reservoirs. Transp. Porous Media 83, 99–125 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Azevedo, A.V., de Souza, A., Furtado, F., Marchesin, D.: Uniqueness of the Riemann solution for three-phase flow in a porous medium. SIAM J. Appl Math. 74, 1967–1997 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Azevedo, A.V., Marchesin, D., Plohr, B., Zumbrun, K.: Capillary instability in models for three-phase flow. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 53, 713–746 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooks, R.H., Corey, A.T.: Properties of porous media affecting fluid flow. J. Irrig.. Drain. Div. IR 2, 61–87 (1966)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bruining, J.: Multiphase Flow in Porous Media. TU-Delft, Lecture notes. (94pp.) (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bruining, J., van Duijn, C.J.: Uniqueness conditions in a hyperbolic model for oil recovery by steamdrive. Comput. Geosci. 4, 61–98 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bruining, J., van Duijn, C.J.: Traveling waves in a finite condensation rate model for steam injection. Comput. Geosci. 10, 373–387 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Castañeda, P., Furtado, F., Marchesin, D.: The convex permeability three-phase flow in reservoirs. IMPA Preprint Série E, 1–34 (2258)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castañeda, P., Furtado, F., Marchesin, D.: On singular points for convex permeability models,” 14 th International Conference: Theory, Numerics and Applications of Hyperbolic Problems 2012. AIMS Appl. Math. 8, 415–422 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Castañeda, P., Furtado, F.: The role of sonic shocks between two- and three-phase states in porous media, (Accepted in the 15 th International Conference of Hyperbolic Problems 2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Castañeda, P.: Dogma: S-shaped. (In press in The Mathematical Inteligencer) (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Souza, A.: Stability of singular fundamental solutions under perturbations for flow in porous media. Mat. Aplic. Comp. 11, 73–115 (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Falls, A.H., Schulte, W.M.: Theory of three-component, three-phase displacement in porous media. SPE Reserv. Engng. 7, 377–384 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Falls, A.H., Schulte, W.M.: Features of three-component, three-phase displacement in porous media. SPE Reserv. Engng. 7, 426–432 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fayers, F.J.: Extension of Stone’s method 1 and conditions for real characteristic three-phase flow,SPE Reserv. Engng., November (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gomes, M.E.: Singular Riemann Problem for a Fourth-Order Model for Multi-Phase Flow, DSc Thesis, PUC-Rio. (In Portuguese.) (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guzman, R.E., Fayers, F.J.: Mathematical properties of three-phase flow equations. SPE J. 2, 291–300 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guzman, R.E., Fayers, F.J.: Solutions to the three-phase Buckley-Leverett problem. SPE J. 2, 301–311 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Isaacson, E., Marchesin, D., Plohr, B., Temple, J.B.: The Riemann problem near a hyperbolic singularity: the classification of quadratic Riemann problems I. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 48, 1009–1032 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Isaacson, E., Temple, B.: The Riemann problem near a hyperbolic singularity II. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 48, 1287–1301 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Isaacson, E., Temple, B.: The Riemann problem near a hyperbolic singularity III. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 48, 1302–1318 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Isaacson, E., Marchesin, D., Plohr, B.: Transitional waves for conservation laws. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 21, 837–866 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Isaacson, E., Marchesin, D., Plohr, B., Temple, B.: Multiphase flow models with singular Riemann problems. Comp. Appl. Math. 11, 147–166 (1992)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jackson, M.D., Blunt, M.J.: Elliptic regions and stable solutions for three-phase flow in porous media. Transp. Porous Media 48, 249–269 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Juanes, R., Patzek, T.: Relative permeabilities for strictly hyperbolic models of three-phase flow in porous media. Transp. Porous Media 57, 125–152 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lax, P.: Hyperbolic systems of conservation laws II. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 10, 537–566 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liu, T.-P.: The Riemann problem for general 2 ×2 conservation laws. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 199, 89–112 (1974)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu, T.-P.: The Riemann problem for general systems of conservation laws. J. Differ. Equ. 18, 218–234 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Marchesin, D., Plohr, B.: Wave structure in WAG recovery. SPE J 6, 209–219 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Matos, V., Castañeda, P., Marchesin, D.: Classification of the umbilic point in immiscible three-phase flow in porous media, 14 th International Conference: Theory, Numerics and Applications of Hyperbolic Problems 2012. AIMS Appl. Math. 8, 791–799 (2014)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Matos, V., Azevedo, A.V. , da Mota, J.C., Marchesin, D.: Bifurcation under parameter change of Riemann solutions for nonstrictly hyperbolic systems, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. (On-line.) (2014)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Medeiros, H.: Stable hyperbolic singularities for three-phase flow models in oil reservoir simulation. Acta Appl. Math. 28, 135–159 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nessyahu, N., Tadmor, E.: Non-oscillatory central differencing for hyperbolic conservation laws. J. Comput. Phys. 87, 408–463 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oleı̆nik , O.A.: Discontinuous solutions of non-linear differential equations. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk. 12, 3–73 (1957). English translation in AMS Transl. (1963) 26: 95?172Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rodríguez-Bermúdez, P., Marchesin, D.: Loss of strict hyperbolicity for vertical three-phase flow in porous media, 14 th International Conference: Theory, Numerics and Applications of Hyperbolic Problems 2012. AIMS App. Math. 8, 881–888 (2014)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schaeffer, D.G., Shearer, M.: Riemann problems for nonstrictly hyperbolic 2×2 systems of conservation laws. Trans. Amer.Math. Soc. 304, 267–306 (1987)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schaeffer, D.G., Shearer, M. (appendix with Marchesin, D., Paes-Leme, P.): The classification of 2×2 systems of non-strictly hyperbolic conservation laws, with application to oil recovery. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 40, 141–178 (1987)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schecter, S., Marchesin, D., Plohr, B.: Structurally stable riemann solutions. J. Differ. Equations 126, 303–354 (1996)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Shearer, M.: Loss of strict hyperbolicity for the Buckley-Leverett equations of three phase flow in a porous medium. IMA Math. Appl. 11, 263–283 (1988)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shearer, M., Schaeffer, D.G., Marchesin, D., Paes-Leme, P.: Solution of the Riemann problem for a prototype 2×2 system of non-strictly hyperbolic conservation laws. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 97, 299–320 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shearer, M.: The Riemann problem for 2×2 systems of hyperbolic conservation laws with case I quadratic nonlinearities. J. Diff. Equat. 80, 343–363 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shearer M., Trangenstein, J.: Loss of real characteristics for models of three-phase flow in a porous medium. Transp. Porous Media 4, 499–525 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smoller, J.: Shock waves and reaction-diffusion equations. Springer-Verlag (1994)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Stone, H.: Probability model for estimating three-phase relative permeability. J. Petr. Tech. 22, 214–218 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Trangenstein, J.: Three-phase flow with gravity. Contemp. Math. 100, 147–160 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    van Dijke, M.I.J., Sorbie, K.S., McDougall, S.R.: Saturation-dependencies of three-phase relative permeabilities in mixed-wet and fractionally wet systems. Adv. in Water Res. 24, 365–384 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wendroff, B.: The Riemann problem for materials with nonconvex equations of state I: isentropic flow; II: general flow. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 38, 454–466; 640–658 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pablo Castañeda
    • 1
    • 4
  • Eduardo Abreu
    • 2
  • Frederico Furtado
    • 3
  • Dan Marchesin
    • 4
  1. 1.Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de MéxicoMéxicoMéxico
  2. 2.Department of Applied MathematicsIMECC, University of Campinas (UNICAMP)CampinasBrazil
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsUniversity of WyomingLaramieUSA
  4. 4.Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada (IMPA)Rio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations