PRELIMINARY EFFORTS TO COUPLE TETRAD WITH GEOPHYSICS MODELS

Similar documents
INTEGRATED NUMERICAL RESERVOIR MODELING COUPLED WITH GEOPHYSICAL MONITORING TECHNIQUES

Numerical Simulation Study of the Mori Geothermal Field, Japan

Thermal Modeling of the Mountain Home Geothermal Area

NOTICE CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS

Verification and Validation Calculations Using the STAR Geophysical Postprocessor Suite

Vapor Pressure Lowering in Brines and Implications for Formation of a High Temperature Reservoir

APPLICATION OF SELF-POTENTIAL MEASUREMENTS TO GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ENGINEERING: CHARACTERIZATION OF FRACTURED RESERVOIRS

CHARACTERIZATION OF FRACTURES IN GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIRS USING RESISTIVITY

Reservoir Monitoring in the Okuaizu Geothermal Field Using Multi-Geophysical Survey Techniques

New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO), Tokyo, Japan. Average power through the year Authorized rated output

Integration of Uncertain Subsurface Information For Reservoir Modeling. Ali Ashat Institut Teknologi Bandung Wednesday, March 5, 2013

NOTICE CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS

TOUGH2 Flow Simulator Used to Simulate an Electric Field of a Reservoir With a Conductive Tracer for Fracture Characterization

System Integration of Various Geophysical Measurements for Reservoir Monitoring

Assessing the Effect of Realistic Reservoir Features on the Performance of Sedimentary Geothermal Systems

Trevor M. Hunta and Warwick M. %slingb

SENSITIVITY OF A REACTIVE-TRACER BASED ESTIMATE OF THERMAL BREAKTHROUGH IN AN EGS TO PROPERTIES OF THE RESERVOIR AND TRACER

A HYBRID SEMI-ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL METHOD FOR MODELING WELLBORE HEAT TRANSMISSION

TWO DIFFERENT ROLES OF FRACTURES IN GEOTHERMAL DEVELOPMENT

INFERRING RELATIVE PERMEABILITY FROM RESISTIVITY WELL LOGGING

Lab-scale Investigation of a Multi Well Enhanced Geothermal Reservoir

NUMERICAL MODELING STUDY OF SIBAYAK GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR, NORTH SUMATRA, INDONESIA

EVALUATING HEAT FLOW AS A TOOL FOR ASSESSING GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES

Numerical Simulation of Devolution and Evolution of Steam-Water Two-Phase Zone in a Fractured Geothermal Reservoir at Ogiri, Japan

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

K. Pruess and Y. S. Wu

Pengcheng Fu, Yue Hao, and Charles R. Carrigan

COMPUTER MODELLING OF HEAT AND MASS FLOW IN STEAMING GROUND AT KARAPITI THERMAL AREA, NEW ZEALAND

2. Governing Equations. 1. Introduction

Prediction of Calcite Scaling at the Oguni Geothermal Field, Japan: Chemical Modeling Approach

PROCEEDINGS THIRD WORKSHOP GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ENGINEERING. December 14-15,1977

Hydrocarbon Fluid Wave and it's resonance G.K. Batta*, D.S. Manral, G.V.J. Rao, and S.K. Basha, Oil India limited, India

Estimating Permeability from Acoustic Velocity and Formation Resistivity Factor

THE ANALYSIS OF EXPANSION THERMAL RESPONSE TEST (TRT) FOR BOREHOLE HEAT EXCHANGERS (BHE)

Thermal Performance Implications of Flow Orientation Relative to Fracture Shear Offset in Enhanced Geothermal Systems

Modeling seismic wave propagation during fluid injection in a fractured network: Effects of pore fluid pressure on time-lapse seismic signatures

Reservoir Simulator Compaction Modelling: A Predictor for Accelerated Coupled Rock Mechanics -- Reservoir Simulation

AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF BOILING HEAT CONVECTION WITH RADIAL FLOW IN A FRACTURE

DISSOLUTION, TRANSPORT AND PRECIPITATION OF SILICA IN GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM

Introduction Theory Vulcano Model Results Conclusions Acknowledgements. Introduction Theory Vulcano Model Results Conclusions Acknowledgements

Long-Term Performance of Borehole Heat Exchanger Fields with Groundwater Movement

NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF ELECTROKINETIC POTENTIALS ASSOCIATED WITH SUBSURFACE FLUID FLOW. Tsuneo Ishido' and John W. Pritchett"

Hydrocarbon Reservoirs and Production: Thermodynamics and Rheology

SPE These in turn can be used to estimate mechanical properties.

kt r klim 9 = - KVT (3) Karsten Pruess Earth Sciences Division Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Berkeley, California 94720

Heat (& Mass) Transfer. conceptual models of heat transfer. large scale controls on fluid movement. distribution of vapor-saturated conditions

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF AMPLITUDE VARIATION WITH OFFSET (AVO) IN FRACTURED MEDIA

Integration of seismic and fluid-flow data: a two-way road linked by rock physics

INSTRUCTIONS FOR LABORATORY EXPERIMENT IN FLUID MECHANICS

Mark S. Nordberg Geology and Groundwater Investigations Section North Central Region Office California Department of Water Resources

Modelling of 4D Seismic Data for the Monitoring of the Steam Chamber Growth during the SAGD Process

Thermal and hydraulic modelling of road tunnel joints

Overview of geophysical methods used in geophysical exploration

Reservoir Modeling for Wabamun Area CO2 Sequestration Project (WASP) Davood Nowroozi

Uncertainties in rock pore compressibility and effects on time lapse seismic modeling An application to Norne field

Long-term Sustainability of Fracture Conductivity in Geothermal Systems using Proppants

OVERVIEW OF THE WAIRAKEI-TAUHARA SUBSIDENCE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

DIRECT MEASUREMENT OF IN-SITU WATER SATURATION IN THE GEYSERS ROCK

Using Fluid Inclusion Stratigraphy Analyses to Distinguish Producing Wells from Nonproducing Wells in the Coso Geothermal Field, California

Improvement of Calculating Formulas for Volumetric Resource Assessment

USING FULLY COUPLED HYDRO-GEOMECHANICAL NUMERICAL TEST BED TO STUDY RESERVOIR STIMULATION WITH LOW HYDRAULIC PRESSURE

A Geothermal Reservoir Simulator with AD-GPRS

ALTERATION ZONATION OF SILICA MINERALS IN A GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM A NUMERICAL SIMULATION BASED ON REACTION-TRANSPORT MODEL

Practical methodology for inclusion of uplift and pore pressures in analysis of concrete dams

Estimation of fracture porosity and permeability using radon as a tracer

STUDY AND SIMULATION OF TRACER AND THERMAL TRANSPORT IN FRACTURED RESERVOIRS

Storage 6 - Modeling for CO 2 Storage. Professor John Kaldi Chief Scientist, CO2CRC Australian School of Petroleum, University of Adelaide, Australia

EXPERIENCE FROM THE FIRST THERMAL RESPONSE TEST (TRT) EQUIPMENT IN FINLAND. N. Leppäharju, I. Martinkauppi, M. Nousiainen

The State of California s GeoSteam Database & Well Finder On-line Mapping System

ASSESSMENT OF GEOTHERMAL POTENTIAL AT UNGARAN VOLCANO, INDONESIA DEDUCED FROM NUMERICAL ANALYSIS

The Role of Magnetotellurics in Geothermal Exploration

Modeling Salinity of First-Year Sea Ice

Update on the Developments of Coated Conductor High Field Magnets in Japan

THREE DIMENSIONAL MODELING OF GEOELECTRICAL STRUCTURE BASED ON MT AND TDEM DATA IN MORI GEOTHERMAL FIELD, HOKKAIDO, JAPAN

A Data Management Plan created using DMPTool. Creators: James Evans, Kelly Keighley Bradbury. Affiliation: Utah State University (USU)

Effect of Sorption/Curved Interface Thermodynamics on Pressure transient

Current challenges at CO 2 Sites

Using Repeat Microgravity Measurements to Track Reinjection in Liquid-Dominated Fields

Modeling and Simulation of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs

Analysis of the Cooling Design in Electrical Transformer

Storage 4 - Modeling for CO 2 Storage. Professor John Kaldi Chief Scientist, CO2CRC Australian School of Petroleum, University of Adelaide, Australia

APPLICATION OF 1D HYDROMECHANICAL COUPLING IN TOUGH2 TO A DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY GLACIATION SCENARIO

Assignment 5: VBA Programming

Geologic and Reservoir Characterization and Modeling

GM 1.4. SEG/Houston 2005 Annual Meeting 639

THERMAL STIMULATION OF GEOTHERMAL WELLS: A REVIEW OF FIELD DATA. Auckland, New Zealand 2 Mighty River Power

Research Article. Experimental Analysis of Laser Drilling Impacts on Rock Properties

ANN ROBERTSON TAIT PRESENT POSITION. Business Development Manager / Senior Geologist EXPERTISE

Fujinuma Dam Performance during 2011 Tohoku Earthquake, Japan and Failure Mechanism by FEM

Reservoir Rock Properties COPYRIGHT. Sources and Seals Porosity and Permeability. This section will cover the following learning objectives:

PRESSURE PERTURBATIONS IN TWO PHASE GEOTHERMAL RESERVOIR ASSOCIATED WITH SEISMISITY

3D MAGNETOTELLURIC CHARACTERIZATION OF THE COSO GEOTHERMAL FIELD

pifreeze A Freeze / Thaw Plug-in for FEFLOW User Guide

1D-HAM. Coupled Heat, Air and Moisture Transport in Multi-layered Wall Structures. Manual with brief theory and an example. Version 2.

Multiphysics Modeling

Comparison of Heat and Mass Transport at the Micro-Scale

HEAT TRANSFER IN A LOW ENTHALPY GEOTHERMAL WELL

HYDRAULIC FRACTURE PROPAGATION NEAR A NATURAL DISCONTINUITY

Evaporation-driven transport and precipitation of salt in porous media: A multi-domain approach

6298 Stress induced azimuthally anisotropic reservoir - AVO modeling

Transcription:

PROCEEDINGS, Twenty-Seventh Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford University, Stanford, California, January 28-30, 2002 SGP-TR-171 PRELIMINARY EFFORTS TO COUPLE TETRAD WITH GEOPHYSICS MODELS G. Michael Shook and Joel L. Renner Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory PO Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2107 Ook@inel.gov, jlrenner@inel.gov ABSTRACT The Geothermal Program at Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory is enhancing our reservoir simulation capabilities by writing new subroutines within TETRAD that write necessary files for use with SAIC s geophysics models, including DC Resistivity, SP, and microgravity. This is part of long-term efforts to develop reservoir models that take advantage of various observations that are or can be made on both existing fields or during exploration efforts. These new routines will be made available to the TETRAD user community in 2002 through the next release of TETRAD 2002. INTRODUCTION Over the last several years, various papers have appeared in the literature that show reservoir simulation results being used in geophysical model postprocessing for improved reservoir management (e..g, Nakanishi et al., 2000; Pritchett et al., 2000). These efforts have grown from projects funded by the New Energy and Industrial Development Organization (NEDO, a Japanese Government agency). Through these efforts, a number of geophysical postprocessors have been developed that take results from reservoir simulation (primarily Star; Pritchett, 1995) and predict what changes in geophysical properties might be observable for a given reservoir management scheme. In theory, use of reservoir/geophysics models can provide a positive feedback that can be used to optimize field operations. Several months ago, in conversations with the geophysical models authors, INEEL researchers obtained permission to use these models for internal research purposes. The goal of this work was to write interfaces between our existing reservoir model, TETRAD (Vinsome and Shook, 1993) and the geophysical models. The resulting updated version of TETRAD would then be available to other TETRAD users from the code distributor, ADA International. SAIC s geophysical models remain private, and would be either purchased from or leased through SAIC. This report describes the efforts made to date in writing interfaces between TETRAD and STAR s geophysics postprocessors. To date, all code modifications are complete, and test cases have been run using the DC resistivity, SP, and microgravity models. Final validation of the work is ongoing, and is expected to be completed in Spring 2002. The revised TETRAD code will be available for release thereafter. TETRAD CODE REVISIONS In writing an interface between TETRAD and the geophysical models, several new features were implemented in TETRAD. Specifically changes were required that allow rock properties to be defined on a regional basis. The current implementation is such that a rock type is defined in the input file, and its regional distribution is specified. TETRAD then checks to see that all petrophysical properties within that rock domain are similar. A future version will allow all petrophysical properties to be defined with this new keyword ( ROXTYP ) as is done in other geothermal simulators in use. A second keyword was added to TETRAD that indicates a Geophysics output file is desired by the user. Upon reading GEOPHY and the print frequency (every NPRGEO) of output desired, TETRAD opens an output file with a.geo extension, loads the relevant petrophysical properties in storage, and verifies that all grid blocks within that rock type have identical properties (k, ϕ, Cp, etc.). The output file is opened, and static data is printed. Then, during the course of the simulation, dynamic data required by the geophysics models (e.g., phase volumes, component and phase fluxes, etc.) are written to the file every NPRGEO time steps, in addition to times explicitly stated in the input deck. Also, new subroutines (taken in part from the STAR source code) were added to TETRAD to calculate and output reservoir conditions required by the geophysics models. The balance of the code modifications required were conversions between

units, renumbering phases and spatial indices, adding new storage vectors for input, and the like, and are transparent to the user. New keywords and subroutines required to take advantage of SAIC s geophysics models are summarized in Table 1 below. An example of the top portion of the new *.GEO file is given in Table 2. RESTRICTIONS OF VERSION 1 Because of various differences between the two reservoir simulation codes from which the geophysics data is generated, several restrictions within TETRAD are required. The most significant of these are given below. no 2-D cross section simulations no dual porosity permeability, porosity, and thermal conductivity of rock is not a function of pressure or temperature. No solid precipitation These will be removed in Version 2, which is expected to be completed later in 2002. SUMMARY AND FUTURE WORK Testing and validation of Version 1 of this interface will be completed in February, 2002, and will be made available for distribution with the release of TETRAD 2002. Version 2 will be completed by Summer 2002 will be forwarded to ADA International for incorporation in the next release of TETRAD. An internal INEEL report will be completed documenting the changes necessary in TETRAD, and will present validation problems that demonstrate the utility of the enhanced simulation package. The linking of TETRAD results with SAIC s geophysics models (and others as the opportunity arises) is the first stage of an ongoing project at INEEL to enhance reservoir simulation capability. We have also begun the second part of this project, which is to develop an inverse model for reservoir parameter estimation (TET -1 ). The first version of is expected to be completed late this year. The third stage of the project is to develop a model that performs a joint inversion of TETRAD and geophysics models (TETGEO -1 ) by 2003. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding for this work was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Geothermal and Wind Technologies, under Contract DE-AC07-99ID13727. The authors wish to acknowledge John Pritchett, Sabodh Garg, and Purna Patnaik of SAIC for many useful discussions and use of the geophysical models, without with this would not have been possible. Table 1. Summary of Key Changes to TETRAD Subroutines Keywords Description GEOPHY Opens an output file for NPRGEO geophysics output (*.GEO) and writes output every NPRGEO timesteps ROXTYP Reads and stores rock types on a regional basis for each rock type GPHY Tests for constancy of petrophysical properties for each rock type, writes *.GEO header information STATIC Calculates grid boundaries, rock volumes and mass, etc., and prints static information to *.GEO DYNAMIC Calculates all required output for *.GEO every NPRGEO steps from existing TETRAD properties (e.g., mass fluxes from phase molar fluxes) and prints REFERENCES Nakanishi, S., J.W. Pritchett, and S. Yamazawa, 2000, Numerical Simulation of Changes in Microgravity and Electrokinetic Potentials Associated with the Exploitation of the Onikobe Geothermal Field, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan, Proc. 25 th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Jan. 24-26, Stanford, Ca. Pritchett, J.W., 1995, STAR: A geothermal reservoir simulation system, Proc. World Geothermal Congress 1995, Florence, pp. 2959-2963. Pritchett, J.W., J. Stevens, P. Wannamaker, S. Nakanishi, and S. Yamazawa, 2000, Theoretical Feasiblity Studies of Reservoir Monitoring Using Geophysical Surfey Techniques, Proc. World Geothermal Congress, Kyushu-Tohoku, pp. 2803-2808. Vinsome, P.K.W. and G.M. Shook, 1993, Multipurpose simulation, J. Petroleum and Engineering, 9, pp 29-38.

Table 2. Example (abridged) output from TETRAD for Geophysics Models (TEST.GEO). ####### ######### ######### ####### ######### ######### ######### ######## ## ### ## ## ## ## ######## ### ## ## ######## ######## ### ######### ####### ## ### ######### ## ## ######### ### ## ## ## ## ####### ### ## ## ## ## G E O P H Y S I C S D A T A Generated from a TETRAD simulation Double precision used for all floating point should consider writing tetrad version # here "SI" (systeme internationale) unit system employed Total number of pore-fluid components involved = 1: Component number 1: WATER Total number of dilute tracer species involved = 0: Number of possible pore phases involved = 2: Phase 1: Liquid Phase 2: Vapor Total number of geological formations involved = 5: Formation 1 (homogeneous porous medium): BASE1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Properties Region 1 Region 2 Volume fraction (dl) 1.0000000000000E+00 Initial Porosity (dl) 5.0000000000000E-02 Grain density (kg/m**3) 2.5000000000000E+03 Grain heat capacity (J/kg/K) 1.0000000000000E+03 Grain thermal cond. (W/m/K) 2.9999989440000E+00 Grain expansivity (1/K) 0.0000000000000E+00 Dry expansivity (1/K) 0.0000000000000E+00

Loading bulk modulus (Pa) 1.0000000000000E+20 Unloading bulk modulus (Pa) 1.0000000000000E+20 Shear modulus (Pa) 0.0000000000000E+00 Initial permeability (1) (m**2) 9.8692300000000E-17 Initial permeability (2) (m**2) 9.8692300000000E-17 Initial permeability (3) (m**2) 9.8692300000000E-17 Permeability coeff. "e1" (dl) 0.0000000000000E+00 Permeability coeff. "e2" (dl) 0.0000000000000E+00 Permeability coeff. "e3" (dl) 0.0000000000000E+00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 4 other formation blocks removed -------------------------------------- --- Problem geometry: 3-dimensional Cartesian with 20 divisions in x-direction ("I"-index), 20 divisions in y-direction ("J"-index), and 20 divisions in z-direction ("K"-index) Gravity acceleration in x-direction = 0.0000000000000E+00 m/s**2 Gravity acceleration in y-direction = 0.0000000000000E+00 m/s**2 Gravity acceleration in z-direction = -9.8100004196167E+00 m/s**2 Total number of non-void grid blocks = 8000 Grid block boundary locations in 1-index direction (meters): 0.0000000000000E+00 9.0000000000000E+02 1.6500000000000E+03 2.2500000000000E+03 2.7000000000000E+03 3.0000000000000E+03 3.3000000000000E+03 3.6000000000000E+03 3.9000000000000E+03 4.2000000000000E+03 4.5000000000000E+03 4.8000000000000E+03 5.1000000000000E+03 5.4000000000000E+03 5.7000000000000E+03 6.0000000000000E+03 6.3000000000000E+03 6.7500000000000E+03 7.3500000000000E+03 8.1000000000000E+03 9.0000000000000E+03 Grid block boundary locations in 2-index direction (meters): 0.0000000000000E+00 9.0000000000000E+02 1.6500000000000E+03 2.2500000000000E+03 2.7000000000000E+03 3.0000000000000E+03 3.3000000000000E+03 3.6000000000000E+03 3.9000000000000E+03 4.2000000000000E+03 4.5000000000000E+03 4.8000000000000E+03 5.1000000000000E+03 5.4000000000000E+03 5.7000000000000E+03 6.0000000000000E+03 6.3000000000000E+03 6.7500000000000E+03 7.3500000000000E+03 8.1000000000000E+03 9.0000000000000E+03

Grid block boundary locations in 3-index direction (meters): 0.0000000000000E+00 2.5000000000000E+02 5.0000000000000E+02 7.5000000000000E+02 1.0000000000000E+03 1.1250000000000E+03 1.2500000000000E+03 1.3750000000000E+03 1.5000000000000E+03 1.6250000000000E+03 1.7500000000000E+03 1.8750000000000E+03 2.0000000000000E+03 2.1250000000000E+03 2.2500000000000E+03 2.3750000000000E+03 2.5000000000000E+03 2.6250000000000E+03 2.7500000000000E+03 2.8750000000000E+03 3.0000000000000E+03 Grid Block Block Index Contains Total volume of grid Mass of rock in Number "I" "J" "K" formation block (cubic meters) grid block (kg) 7981 1 20 20 1 2.0250000000000E+08 4.8093750000000E+11 7982 2 20 20 1 1.6875000000000E+08 4.0078125000000E+11 19 19 1 1 5 8.4375000000000E+07 1.4765625000000E+11 20 20 1 1 5 1.0125000000000E+08 1.7718750000000E+11 Define: P-bar = pore-volume-average grid block pressure (Pa), T-bar = volume-average grid block temperature (C) Tf = fracture-zone temperature (C) Tm-bar = volume-average matrix region temperature (C) Tm-min = minimum matrix region temperature (C) Tm-max = maximum matrix region temperature (C) Pf = fracture-zone pressure (Pa) Pm-bar = matrix region pore-volume-average pressure (Pa) Vt = total volume (cubic meters) Mt = total mass (kilograms) Vf = fracture-zone volume (cubic meters) Mf = fracture-zone mass (kilograms) Cf = fracture-zone mass fraction FjP = fracture-zone mass flux in "j" direction at "plus-xj" perpendicular block face (kg/second/square meter total area) FjM = fracture-zone mass flux in "j" direction at "minus-xj" perpendicular block face (kg/second/square meter total area) {p"n"} = phase "N" {c"l"} = component "L" {t"k"} = tracer "K" Structure of remainder of this file: ------------------------------------- B L A N K L I N E Cycle {first} Time =?? seconds Grid Block 1 P-bar, T-bar Tf,Tm-bar,Tm-min,Tm-max

Pf{p1},Pm-bar{p1} Vt{p1},Mt{p1,c1},Mt{p1,c2},Mt{p1,c3},... Vf{p1},Mf{p1,c1},Mf{p1,c2},Mf{p1,c3},... F1P{p1},F1M{p1},F2P{p1],F2M{p1},F3P{p1},F3M{p1} Pf{p2},Pm-bar{p2} Vt{p2},Mt{p2,c1},Mt{p2,c2},Mt{p2,c3},... Vf{p2},Mf{p2,c1},Mf{p2,c2},Mf{p2,c3},... F1P{p2},F1M{p2},F2P{p2],F2M{p2},F3P{p2},F3M{p2} Grid Block 2 P-bar, T-bar....... -------------End-of-File------------- Cycle 1 Time =-4.7336399684424E+11 seconds Grid Block 7981 2.4538865275955E+07 1.9250000079606E+02 1.9250000079606E+02 1.9250000079606E+02 1.9250000079606E+02 1.9250000079606E+02 2.4538865275955E+07 2.4538865275955E+07 1.0125000000000E+07 8.8334221040018E+09 1.0125000000000E+07 8.8334221040018E+09-4.7988632277914E-18 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 4.7988632277914E-18 0.0000000000000E+00 6.1737481062611E-08 2.4538865275955E+07 2.4538865275955E+07 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 0.0000000000000E+00 Grid Block 7982 2.4538865275962E+07 1.9250000079606E+02