Development and Application of a Fully-Coupled Thermal Compositional Wellbore Flow Model

Livescu, Silviu; Aziz, Khalid; Durlofsky, Louis J.

doi:10.2118/121306-ms

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their work was followed by a series of publications in which the original model has been further modified or applied to other problems (Hasan and Kabir 2002;Hasan et al 2005;). Recently, Livescu et al extended their black-oil nonisothermal multiphase wellbore model, that was submitted for publication in 2008 and accepted in 2010, (Livescu et al 2010) to the compositional nonisothermal multiphase wellbore model (Livescu et al 2009); similar compositional wellbore simulations were also performed by other researchers (Stone et al 2002;Pourafshary et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The total pressure drop inside the wellbore tubing are attributed to the four major effects: hydrostatic, frictional, acceleration (kinetic), and unsteady-state and can be expressed as (Beggs and Brill 1973;Farouq Ali 1981;Hasan and Kabir 2002;Hasan et al 2005;Hasan et al 2007;Livescu et al 2008aLivescu et al , 2008bLivescu et al 2009;Livescu et al 2010…”

Section: Momentum Balance Equationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The energy balance equation for multi-phase flow inside the tubing can be expressed as (Farouq Ali 1981;Hasan and Kabir 2002;Hasan et al 2005;Livescu et al 2008aLivescu et al , 2008bLivescu et al 2009;Livescu et al 2010) ( ) ( )…”

Section: Energy Balance Equationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modeling along with the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although several models to determine the formation temperature in the modeling of thermal production and injection processes have already been suggested, there is no rigorous or systematic comparison between these models' predictions that can guide the choice of the most appropriate one. Another issue in thermal wellbore simulators is the commonly used assumption of steady-state heat transfer from the wellbore up to the cementing/formation interface. The effect of the steady-state assumption versus the unsteady-state assumption for the heat transfer from the wellbore up to the formation has not received much attention in the literature and can be important in some cases.The results of a detailed analysis of above two issues can be implemented in all thermal wellbore and reservoir simulators to increase their accuracy.The above stated issues will be addressed in the present work by developing a numerical non-isothermal two-phase wellbore simulator coupled with tubular and cement material; and surrounding formation. The first issue will be studied in detail by comparing five different models for the formation temperature treatment (FTT) plugged in the developed thermal wellbore simulator. Investigation of the second issue will be achieved by analyzing the three critical items: First, a 2D heat transfer PDE model of the formation is discretized in a general form; second, the gridding system is shifted from the formation towards the casing; third, an effective specific heat capacity for the casing is used. The effects of choosing different models for FTT and using either the unsteady-state or the steady-state assumption in the heat loss from the wellbore up to the formation will be investigated. The model will be validated against field data to show its merits in predicting the casing temperature. The entire wellbore system contains wellbore, tubing, insulation, annulus, casing, cementing, and formation. A fundamental understanding of this system is still a challenging issue in the petroleum industry, and its accurate modeling and coupling with reservoirs has become increasingly significant as more energy resources are sought.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Momentum Balance Equationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modeling along with the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The total pressure drop inside the wellbore tubing is attributed to four major effects: hydrostatic, frictional, acceleration (kinetic) and unsteady-state and can be expressed as [ (Beggs and Brill (36) , Ali (16) , Hasan and Kabir (28) , Hasan et al (29) , Hasan et al (37) , Livescu et al (38,39) , Hasan and Kabir (30) , Hasan et al (31) , Livescu et al (33) and Livescu et al (32) ]: The temperature rise of the cement and tubular material may be taken to be a fraction of the rise in the fluid temperature at any time [Hasan and Kabir (28) and Hasan et al (29) ]. In this case, the thermal storage parameter, C T , represents the capacity of the wellbore to store or release heat as a multiple of the fluid mass and fluid heat capacity.…”

Section: Momentum Balance Equationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modelling Along With the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

Bahonar

Azaiez

Chen

2011

Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although several models to determine the formation temperature in the modelling of thermal production and injection processes have already been suggested, there is no rigorous or systematic comparison between these models' predictions that can guide the choice of the most appropriate one. Another issue in thermal wellbore simulators is the commonly used assumption of semisteady-state heat transfer from the wellbore up to the cementing/formation interface. The effect of the semisteady-state assumption vs. the unsteadystate assumption for the heat transfer from the wellbore up to the formation has not received much attention in the literature and can be important in some cases.The results of a detailed analysis of the two previously described issues can be implemented in all thermal wellbore and reservoir simulators to increase their accuracy.The previously described stated issues will be addressed in the present work by developing a numerical nonisothermal twophase wellbore simulator coupled with tubular and cement material and surrounding formation. The first issue will be studied in detail by comparing five different models for the formation temperature treatment (FTT) plugged in the developed thermal wellbore simulator. Investigation of the second issue will be achieved by analyzing the three critical items: first, a 2D heat transfer partial differential equation (PDE) model of the formation is discretized in a general form; second, the gridding system is shifted from the formation toward the casing; and third, an effective specific heat capacity for the casing is used. The effects of choosing different models for FTT and using either the unsteady-state or the semisteady-state assumption in the heat loss from the wellbore up to the formation will be investigated. The model will be validated against field data to show its merits in predicting the casing temperature. The entire wellbore system contains wellbore, tubing, insulation, annulus, casing, cementing and formation. A fundamental understanding of this system is still a challenging issue in the petroleum industry, and its accurate modelling and coupling with reservoirs has become increasingly significant as more energy resources are sought.

show abstract

“…In contrast to the above mentioned models which were developed by employing a black oil approximation, Pourafshary, Varavei, Sepehrnoori and Podio [18] proposed a model based on a compositional approach, assumed to be under steady state conditions. Livescu, Aziz and Durlofsky [19] generalized their compositional models by adding time derivative terms to the governing equations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Compositional Thermal Multiphase Wellbore Model for Use in Non-Isothermal Gas Lifting

Sadri

Mahdiyar

Mohsenipour

2019

Journal of Energy Resources Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, a new compositional mechanistic wellbore model, including gas lifting parameters, is presented. In the governing equations of this model, new terms for mass transfer between phases and the enthalpy of phase change, which are important in non-isothermal gas lift systems, have been considered. These terms have been ignored in some recent research studies and subsequent results show that by ignoring them, serious errors may arise. In the current research study, using a mechanistic drift-flux approach, the pressure distribution in a wellbore was modeled. To verify the new simulator, the results were compared with those of commercial simulators. They were also verified against the phase behavior analysis of the fluid flowing in the wellbore. In addition, in order to show the novel aspects of the new simulator, the results of the presented simulator were compared with the results of a recently proposed model found in the literature. It was concluded that neglecting phase change effects may cause significant errors in calculating pressure and temperature values along wellbores. This error could be significant, up to 24% depending on conditions when flowing fluid pressure is close to its saturation point or in the case of simulating gas lift operation.

show abstract

Development and Application of a Fully-Coupled Thermal Compositional Wellbore Flow Model

Cited by 10 publications

References 13 publications

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modeling along with the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modeling along with the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

Two Issues in Wellbore Heat Flow Modelling Along With the Prediction of Casing Temperature in the Steam Injection Wells

A Compositional Thermal Multiphase Wellbore Model for Use in Non-Isothermal Gas Lifting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About