Exercises for ECLIPSE Simulation Special Course

Introduction
This exercise document is sent with a number of data files, which contain information for
making an ECLIPSE model. However, you are allowed to modify these files, e.g., by
implementing data (e.g., fluid models, altering grid designs, new relative permeability
models, etc.) from other sources.

There are four exercise problems. Each group needs to complete problem 1 and two other
problems from problems 2 to 4. Each group needs to submit a final report documenting the
basics of reservoir simulation (exercise 1) along with their own simulation results. In
addition, each group needs to prepare an oral presentation based on the simulation results.

1. Reservoir simulation basics

To carry out reservoir simulation it is important to understand the basics of reservoir
simulation. It is useful to know the equations used to describe the reservoir simulation and
how these are developed into a numerical model. Furthermore it is useful to know how the
used reservoir simulator is built, what it is strong at and what it is not strong at.

Tasks:
1. Describe the mathematical model of a reservoir. Starting from the conservation
equations and constraints give a brief description of how a numerical model can be
developed.
2. What are the important physical properties for reservoir simulation. Describe the
necessary rock and fluid properties which are necessary for accurate reservoir
simulation and how these are included in the developed numerical model.
3. Modern reservoir simulators contain a large number of complex options. Choose ONE
topic and describe it in more detail. This does not have to be a fully developed study,
just enough to demonstrate sufficient knowledge with a subject of interest.

Topics:
 Composition simulation (how the compositional model is developed, the meaning and
use of equations of state, the advantages and disadvantages compared to black oil,
etc).
 Advanced gridding techniques (what these are, how they can be achieved in ECLIPSE
and other simulators, what are their advantages and disadvantages compared to simple
Cartesian grids).
 Fracture modelling (discrete fracture networks, dual porosity dual permeability, grid
refinement, advantages and disadvantages).
 Modelling of enhanced oil recovery techniques (e.g. miscible food, solvent modelling,
ASP (alkaline surfactant polymer) simulation, thermal simulation, etc.) - it is not
necessary to describe all of them.
 Any other suitably detailed advanced section of reservoir simulation, which you wish
to describe in detail (e.g. well modelling, reservoir optimisation, numerical methods
(IMPES, AIM, FIM, solvers - GM-RES, Orthomin, CPR, multigrid, etc), diffusion).

1
2. Water flooding and gas injection in 2D reservoir
A 2D oil reservoir model with the permeability field presented in figure 1 is given in
Depletion2D.zip. The model gives a depletion case, which runs for 5 years until production
has almost ceased. However, there is still significant reserves of oil remaining in the reservoir
which can be accessed using improved or enhanced oil recovery techniques.

Figure 1. Permeability of the 2D model

Tasks:
1. Try to run the simulation and checking that you can understand the results. Modify
some of the properties in the input files to test how they change the production (for
example try modifying the initial reservoir pressure; oil viscosity; well BHP; make the
relative permeabilities linear, uniform permeability, etc). Investigate how each of
these changes affects the results (in particular the production rates and ultimate
recovery factors) and explain why the results are a_ected in such a way.
2. After 5 years of depletion recovery has almost ceased. Try to change the input to the
simulation to enhance oil recovery. Add a new well, which will maximize the possible
recoverable oil.
3. Inject water at a reasonable pressure to enhance oil production. Try different modes of
control for the water injector (e.g. BHP control, rate control at e.g. 0.1PVI/year). Run
the simulation for an additional 15 years and present the results.
4. Modify the controls on the producer well to ensure that it will close when it is no
longer economic to recover oil (e.g., a water cut of 0.98).
5. Instead of water injection, gas injection can be tested. Inject gas at a suitable pressure
over the same time period and compare the results from water injection and gas
injection. How does the ultimate recovery change, how does the production rate
change, how much gas do we have to inject compared to oil etc.
6. Change the wells to a 5 spot pattern (4 producers in the corners with one injector in
the middle). Again try producing through depletion for 5 years, then try injection with
water and gas. Turn off the wells individually as the water cut goes to above 0.98 in
the gas injection case. Compare the recovery rates, and ultimate recovery to that when
using horizontal wells.
7. Try to change the solver between IMPES, FIM and AIM for the runs and compare the
results and simulation times.

2
3. Compositional simulation
The SPE-9 comparative solution project uses ECLIPSE 100 with a black oil model to
simulate injection and production from an oil reservoir. Attached in CompSim.zip is an
example of a black oil simulation which is simulated for 30 years of water injection using a
9-spot pattern into the SPE-9 reservoir.

Tasks:
1. Try running the simulation and checking that you can understand the results. Modify
some of the properties in the input files to test how they change the prodution (for
example try modifying the initial reservoir pressure; oil viscosity; well BHP; make the
relative permeabilities linear, uniform permeability, etc). Investigate how each of
these changes affects the results (in particular the production rates and ultimate
recovery factors)
2. and explain why the results are affected in such a way. black oil=ECLIPSE
3. A compositional model is described in table 1. Change the black oil simulation to a
compositional simulation (note that the fluids are not the same and the results will
differ). Compare the results and computational times for the two simulations. Note it
may be necessary to change the TUNING keyword to achieve convergence (or other
convergence helping parameters).
4. Instead of pure water injection attempt a case with WAG injection. Inject alternating
slugs of gas and water in suitable time-periods and compare the results with those of
the simple water injection simulation.

Table 1. Fluid description

Component mole Tc (K) Pc (bar) Acentric MW Vol. shift
fraction factor parmeter
C1 0.152 190.600 46.002 0.008 16.043 0.023
C2-C3 0.130 329.210 46.479 0.118 34.077 0.067
iC4-nC4 0.043 416.650 37.237 0.185 58.123 0.090
iC5-nC5 0.076 466.971 33.770 0.244 72.150 0.116
C6 0.054 507.400 29.688 0.296 86.177 0.147
C7 0.190 528.329 30.937 0.462 94.000 0.093
C8-C9 0.204 567.496 28.660 0.520 113.515 0.114
C10-C11 0.086 614.233 26.932 0.599 141.515 0.102
C12-C80 0.063 684.770 26.356 0.739 190.000 0.022

4. 1D constant volume diffusion experiment

Diffusion is an important mass transfer mechanism, and it is important to determine diffusion
coefficients in order to evaluate its contribution in a specific production scenario. Diffusion
coefficients can be determined in the lab using the so-called constant volume diffusion
(CVD) experiment—do not mix the term with constant volume depletion used for gas
condensate. In the experiment, pure gas, such as methane, and an oil sample (or a pure liquid)
are loaded sequentially into a vertically placed PVT cell situated in a constant temperature

3
environment. The volume of oil and gas is fixed but the system pressure will decrease with
the progress of diffusion. A pressure decay curve will be measured, which can be used to
determine the magnitude of diffusion coefficients.
This problem requires the use of the E300 simulator to perform compositional simulation of a
CVD experiment.
Tasks:
1. Read the Eclipse technical description, and describe the available diffusion models in
E300 and their relations.
2. A 1D binary CVD simulation model (1D_CVD_C1C16_25C100bar.data) is provided.
Run and make sure you understand the simulation. Modify the data file and test how
the change affects the results (mainly the pressure curve). Some candidate parameters
to adjust include: initial pressure, reservoir temperature, porosity, and permeability.
Discuss why the results change in such a way.
Try to modify the input file so that you can check more results (for example, the
methane concentration profile in both the gas and oil phases).
3. Try to adjust other parameters, for example, the initial oil/gas volume ratio (1:1, 1:2,
1:3), and check the influence on the results (e.g., the pressure curve).
4. Investigate the influence of different diffusion coefficients on the pressure curve. The
diffusion coefficients for gas are typically on the order of 10-5 m2/s and those for
liquid on the order of 10-9 m2/s. You can try to use diffusion coefficients at a different
order of magnitude.
5. The phase equilibrium can be reached after diffusion for a long time. The pressure
curve becomes horizontal at the equilibrium. You can adjust the simulation time (incl.
the time steps) to get equilibrium pressure. Check how long it needs to reach the
equilibrium. You can also investigate how the parameters studied in (2) and (3)
influence the equilibration time.
6. Change the system to methane+n-decane. This requires a change of the fluid
description part (component name, molar mass, critical properties etc.). What is the
influence of changing the component from n-hexadecane to n-decane?
7. Optional: The current model is a 1-D simulation, try to change the simulation to 2-D.
If you keep the gas and oil zones uniform, the simulation should essentially give you
the same results as 1-D simulation.