Methodologies and Robust Algorithms

for Subsurface Simulators

April 27, 2016

Mary F. Wheeler
 Acknowledge
•  Andro Mikelic (U. of Lyon)
•  Thomas Wick (Ricam and Ecole Polytechnique)
•  Ben Ganis
•  Sanghyun Lee
•  Baehyun Min
•  Jing Ping
•  Gurpreet Singh
•  Ashwin Venkatraman
 CSM Research Areas

§  CSM website: http://csm.ices.utexas.edu

3/37
BIG DATA: Cross-cutting Initiative

Exascale Computing

4/37
 UT Strategic Partners

Center for Subsurface Modeling Other Departments in UT

Director: Mary F. Wheeler

v  Faculty (6) v  Graduate Students (11) v  Aerospace Engineering
•  Laxminarayan Raja
•  Mary F. Wheeler •  Tameem Almani
•  Mark Mear
•  Todd Arbogast •  Yerlan Amanbek
•  Sanjay Srinivasan (Penn State U.) •  Mohammed Reza Beygi v  Bureau of Economic Geology
•  Ivan Yotov (U. of Pittsburgh) •  Saumik Dana •  Seyyed Hosseini
•  Andro Mikelic (U. of Lyon) •  Recheng Dong •  Susan Hovorka
•  Thomas Wick (Ricam) •  Mohammed Jammoul •  Alexander Sun
•  Tea Mikelic v  Civil Engineering
v  Research Associates (2) •  Morteza Naraghi •  Chadi El Mohtar
•  Ben Ganis •  Azor Nwachukwu
•  Gergina Pencheva •  Sogo Shiozawa v  Geosciences
•  Deandra White •  Mrinal Sen

v  Postdoctoral Fellows (5) v  Institute for Geophysics

•  Sanghyun Lee •  Nick Hayman
•  Baehyun Min v  Staffs (2)
v  Petroleum Engineering
•  Jing Ping •  Connie Baxter •  Matthew Balhoff
•  Gurpreet Singh •  Amy Manley •  David DiCarlo
•  Ashwin Venkatraman •  David Nicholas Espinoza

5/34
 Collaborators

S. Barbeiro H. Florez M. Parashar

Z. Benjelloun-To E. Gildin
T.F. Russell
uimi, I. Faille J. Killough

T. Dewers V. Girault S. Sun

B. Dindoruk R. Helmig R. Tavakoli

H. van Duijn K. Jordan M. Vohralík

J. Eaton K. Kumar T. Wick

P. Eiseman Y. Lee G. Wittum

A.  Elsheikh R. Liu I. Yotov

A. Firoozabadi A. Mikelić D. Zhang

6/37
 Research Topics Covered

1. Engineering and Geophysical Applications

•  Accurate physics-based simulation for realistic porous media models

ü  CO2 storage and EOR
ü  Polymer and surfactant flooding and foam
ü  Geomechanics: domain decomposition (DD), elasticity, plasticity, and hydraulic fracturing
•  History matching and reservoir characterization
ü  Parameter estimation
ü  Verification & Validation
ü  Uncertainty quantification

2. Mathematical and Computational Modeling

•  Formulation & implementation of efficient & accurate parallel multiscale & multi-physics
algorithms based on
ü  Efficient solvers: multi-grid, multi-level multiscale preconditioners, non-linear acceleration
ü  Unstructured gridding and multipoint flux and mimetic methods
ü  Transport: DG, EG, CG post-processing
ü  Phase-field

7/37
 Research Initiative: Closed-loop Workflow

I. FLUID-DRIVEN IV. UNCERTAINTY

FRACTURE PROPAGATION QUANTIFICATION

II. PHASE & CHEMICAL III. SIMULATOR

EQUILIBRIUM DEVELOPMENT

8/37
I. FLUID-DRIVEN FRACTURE PROPAGATION

Develop a fracture propagation method (phase field)

Objectives
driven by multiphysics, multiphase fluid flow

3-dimensional computations using mesh

adaptivity with coupling displacements,
phase field, and pressure system

In the phase field fracture propagation model,

primal-dual active set & fixed-stress
iteration is coupled to solve the whole system

Demonstrate the potential of the phase field Joining and branching of non-
planar hydraulic fractures in
for treating practical engineering applications 3D heterogeneous media.

by providing numerical examples

9/37
 Advantage of Phase Field Model

§  Classical theory of crack propagation [Griffith 1921]

§  Diffusive crack zones for free discontinuity problems

§  Γ-Convergent approximation [Ambrosio-Tortorelli 1992]

§  Variational methods based on energy minimization [Francfort
-Marigo 1998], [Miehe et al. 2010]

Variation methods based energy minimization

[Real fractures] [Interface approach] [Diffusive approach using Phase field]

10/37
 Advantage of Phase Field Model

§  Fixed-topology approach avoiding re-meshing

§  Determine crack nucleation, propagation, and the path automatically

§  Simple to handle joining and branching of (multiple) cracks

§  Promising findings for future ideas as an indicator function base
d on theory and numerical simulations

Before joining After joining Branching

11/37
 Governing System: Biot’s System

Biot’s system Fracture with maximum pressure

•  Pressure Diffraction System •  The pressure starts to decrease
when the fracture starts to propagate.

•  Mechanics and Phase Field

•  Linear Elasticity
•  Newton Iteration
•  Primal-dual Active Set Method (a) Phase Field (b) Pressure

12/37
 Numerical Examples of Phase Field

Multiple fractures propagating near the well bore

•  Fracture propagation •  Pressure distribution

13/37
 Numerical Examples of Phase Field

3 parallel fractures in 3D domain

•  Not all fractures are growing because of the stress-shadowed effect.

Horizontal well

Fractures

14/37
 Numerical Examples of Phase Field

Multiple fractures propagating near the well bore

•  Dynamic mesh adaptivity: predictor-corrector method [Heister-Wheeler-Wick, 2014]

Heterogeneous Young’s Modulus

Fracture

Adaptive Mesh

15/37
 Numerical Examples of Phase Field

A fracture in layered media with different fracture toughness values

Fracture

= 1 Pa-m

Injection well
= 100 Pa-m

16/37
II. GEOCHEMICAL REACTIONS

Model geochemical reactions of injected CO2

Objectives
in carbonate reservoirs during EOR or CO2 sequestration

In situ brines with reactive ionic species Gas Phase

CO2, nC14,
& H 2O

Oleic Phase
Study the effect of reactive species CO2, nC14,
& H 2O
on CO2 concentration

Aqueous Phase
CO2, CO32-, HCO3-, Ca2+, Cl-,
CaCO3, H+, OH-, & H2O
Quantify the effect using changes in miscibilit Solid Phase
y conditions during CO2 EOR CaCO3
[ Phase & Chemical Equilibrium of CO2 ]

17/37
 Coupling with a Compositional Simulator

Coupled phase and chemical equilibrium

•  Gibbs Free Energy Minimization

Gibbs free energy minimization

Reactions Phase behavior
Stochiometric approach

•  Equation of State (EOS)

where rij : rate of change of component i in phase j due to chemical equilibrium

(rij = 0 if no reaction)

18/37
 Example: Effect of Reactions on CO2 Concentration

Concentration Profiles at Pavg = 2,200 psi after 0.12 hours of CO2 injection
•  Red curve ( ): concentration profiles with equilibrium reactions
•  Black curve ( ): concentration profiles without equilibrium reactions
•  Reactions in aqueous phase consume CO2 altering phase equilibrium and hence miscibil
ity conditions.
•  Higher in situ water saturation results in lower CO2 concentrations.

CO2 w/ reaction CO2 w/ reaction

CO2 w/o reaction CO2 w/o reaction
C14 w/ reaction C14 w/ reaction
C14 w/o reaction C14 w/o reaction

Sw = 0.3 Sw = 0.5

19/37
III. SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT

Complete simulator development with numerical schemes f

Objectives
or coupled processes

Develop computational methods for coupled p

rocesses based on multiscale discretization fo
r flow, geomechanics & geochemistry

Development of efficient
solvers & pre-conditioners

Model CO2 storage field sites

& perform compositional simulations
Cranfield site, Mississippi

20/37
 Framework of IPARS

§  IPARS (Integrated Parallel Accurate Reservoir Simulator)

Development of integrated
flow, geochemistry, and geomechanics framework

21/37
 Upscaling: Bridging Lab to Field

Upscale measured rock properties (fluid flow & geomechanics) t

Objectives o scale relevant to field processes

Development of homogenization schemes c

ombining numerical and analytical approache
s, e.g. multiscale mortar method
⎧σ = C ε − αpc I
⎪
⎨
Particular emphasis will be put on including n ⎪⎩ϕ = pc / N + αε V
atural fractures in effective properties and lo
calization effects

Obtain field scale constitutive parameters to p

erform coupled fluid flow and geomechanic
al numerical simulation

22/37
 Model Field Sites

Modeling, simulation & uncertainty analysis with application to CO2

Objectives storage sites (Cranfield, MS & Frio, TX)

Measure mechanical properties in laboratory Site 1: Cranfield, MS

Collect other existing data

(seismic, well logs, etc.)

Measure impact of geochemical alteration on

mechanical properties

Site 2: Frio, TX
Study rock dissolution and its effect on weake
ning the rocks and creating leakage pathways

Enhanced simulation for studying and quantif

ying parameters, e.g. reservoir over pressure,
chemical and thermal loading

23/37
 Poro-plasticitiy

§  Geomechanical Effects of CO2 Injection with a Poro-plasticity Model

1 ✓ ◆
@(⇢( 0 + ↵"v + M (p p0))) K
Fluid Flow +r· ⇢ (rp ⇢grh) q=0
@t µ
r · ( 00 + o ↵(p p0)I) + f = 0
Stress Equilibrium ✓ ◆
@(⇢( 0 + ↵"v + M1 (p p0))) K
+ r · ⇢ (rp ⇢grh) q=0
@t 00 = De : (" µ"p)
00
Hooke’s Law 1 r · ( + o ↵(p p0)I) + f = 0 Druker-Prager Yield Surface
" = (ru + rT u)
00
2
= De : (" "p)

Strain-Displacement Relation
p @F (" =00) 1 (ru + rT u)00
"˙ = ,2 at Y ( ) =0
@ 00 00
@F ( )00
"˙p = "0,
˙p = at Y (00 , ) <
at Y0 ( 00
)=0
Plastic Strain Evolution @
p 00
"˙ = 0, at Y ( )<0

Y = q + ✓ m ⌧0
Yield and Flow Functions Y = q+✓ m 0
F =F q=+q + m m ⌧00
E 375581 [psi]
⌫ 0.25 24/37
 Domain Decomposition for Geomechanics
Pay-zone / Nonpay-zone
Advantages of fixed stress splitting Schematic of 3D domain
•  Mortar finite elements and interface iterati
ons are no longer required, but still
possible to use.

Reservoir
•  We have a new parallel poro-plasticity
model that may be coupled with elastic a
nd poroelastic subdomains. 2D cross-section
!e,e

•  Savings with multi-rate methods have b Ωe

H h
een demonstrated on poroelastic problem
np,e
!N
s. We foresee it would be even greater in
Ωp !p,e nΩ
poroelastic-elastic problems.
!D
!p,p

25/37
IV. UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION

§  Calibration process of rock and fluid properties in subsurface models

A Priori Model History Matching A Posteriori Model

(permeability, md) (permeability, md)

Multi-modal Gaussian Multi-modal

26/37
Carbon Capture & Storage Projects Worldwide

Snohvit

Sleipner Zama
K-12B Penn West
Alberta ECBM
RECOPOL
Weyburn
CO2 SINK Hokkaido Teapot Dome
Mountaineer
Sibilla Nagaoka Rangely
West Pearl Queen
Burlington
Qinshui Basin Cranfield
In Salah Frio
Abu Dhabi 1st
CO2 EOR in Middle East

Gorgon

Otway Basin

Cerro Fortunoso
Coal Bed EOR Projects
Depleted Oil Field Gas Production Fields
ECBM Projects Saline Aquifer

27/37
 Parameterization & Data Assimilation

§  History matching coupled w/ level-set parameterization, MFDFrac, and EnKF

1 Initialization 2 Level-Set Parameterization

•  Generate initial fractured realizations •  Convert non-Gaussian
Experiments Mesh generation Realization to Gaussian parameters
•  Φ: level set at the node
•  r: fracture length
•  θ: fracture orientation

3 Simulation using MFDFrac 4 Inverse Modeling using EnKF

•  Mimetic Difference Approach •  EnKF for updating Gaussian parameters

Internal Fracture Intersecting Flow Ensemble mean of Ensemble mean of

Boundaries Fractures initial fracture realizations final fracture realizations

28/37
 Parameterization & Data Assimilation

Experimental setup Numerical model

•  Collaboration w/ Dr. N. Espinoza •  Injector: 5
•  Producers: 2, 3, 8, 9

29/37
 Parameterization & Data Assimilation

Numerical results
•  Blue straight lines indicate major fractures that mostly affect production rate.

30/37
Parallel Multi-objective Optimization for CCS at Cranfield
Reservoir Characterization & Optimization
OS Algorithm Simulator Run Storage

• Global-objective • Parallel • Supercomputer

genetic GA Start
.exe
algorithm IPARS

Evaluate model

Evaluate model

Evaluate model

Evaluate model
…
• Global-objective
evolution ES
.exe Stop
strategy

• Multi-objective • Serial • PC

genetic NSGA-II Start
.exe
algorithm

Evaluate model
For i=1:N
• Multi-objective

Builder
evolution ε-MOES
.exe .exe Stop
strategy

31/37
 Simulation of Pulse Test for CO2 Leakage Detection

Permeability distribution in Cranfield, MS

•  661,760 = 20x188x176 grid cells
•  Grid size: 4 ft x 50 ft x 50 ft Permeability (md)

DAS (drilled area of study)

80 ft

x
z

32/37
 Simulation of Pulse Test for CO2 Leakage Detection

Bottomhole pressure match at the monitoring well

•  Reproduction of both amplitude and wavelength of pulse patterns

Amplitude

Wavelength

33/37
V. ONGOING WORKS

§  Modeling of proppant-filled fractures

Proppant-filled fractures in a poroelastic medium [L.-Mikelic-Wheeler-Wick 2016]

Fracture

Proppant

Proppant in a fracture

•  Transport system is coupled Proppant

•  Enriched Galerkin (locally conservative)
•  Non-Newtonian flow (power-law)

34/37
V. ONGOING WORKS

§  Modeling of viscous fingering

Experimental results [S. Malhotra – E.R. Lehman – M.M. Sharma 2014]

Simulation results

35/37
V. ONGOING WORKS

§  Stochastic fracture propagation

Coupling with probability map [L.-Wheeler-Wick-Srinivasan]

•  InSAR (surface deformation map) •  Initialize hydraulic fractures
•  Obtain probability map •  Interactions with natural fractures

36/37
 Concluding Remarks

Developing a coupled flow-geomechanics-geochemistry simulator

Capturing the coupled effect of non-ideal aqueous phase equilibrium

and reactions with traditional EOS calculations

Homogenization / Poro-plasticity / Fracture Propagation

/ Model calibration / Multi-rate coupling / Domain Decomposition

Synergy effects from combination of modules

37/37
 Acknowledgements

Thank you for your attention

Contact: mfw@ices.utexas.edu

38/37