Reservoir Simulation Grids:
Opportunities and Problems
Summary
Grid selection is one of the most difficult
and time-consuming tasks in the simulation
of geologically complex reservoirs.
A grid is imposed on a reservoir so that
we can solve the nonlinear flow equations
that predict the reservoir's response to
changes at wells or other boundaries.
Therefore, I first discuss the role of grid
geometry in the evaluation of each term in
the flow equations. Then I describe several
conventional and some new gridding tech-
niques, as well as their advantages and dis-
advantages. Next I make recommendations
based on my own experience and discussions
with colleagues. My assessment is that grids
should be as close to orthogonal as possi-
ble. Also, local grid refinement should be
used with care; its inappropriate use can be
counterproductive. Considerable progress
has been made recently on the use of flexi-
ble grids, but efficient use of unstructured
locally orthogonal grids requires further re:
search. Techniques that automatically align
the grid with major reservoir features (e.g.,
faults) are being developed and are expect-
ed to simplify grid generation.
Introduction
A reservoir simulator predicts reservoir per-
formance by solving flow equations on a dis-
crete grid chosen by the simulation engineer
to represent the reservoir. The grid normally
is selected with one or more of the follow-
ing considerations in mind.
1. Reservoir geology and size and the data
available for reservoir description.
2. Type of fluid displacement or depletion
process to be modeled.
3. Past and anticipated field development
(location and type of wells).
4. Numerical accuracy desired.
5. Available software options.
6. Objectives of the simulation study.
7. Competence of the simulation engineer
or team.
8. Available computer resources, time
constraints, or project budget.
In the early days of reservoir simulation,
the last consideration often determined the
number of gridblocks, and the available soft-
ware limited the choice of grid type, usually
to block-centered Cartesian or cylindrical
grid. Research in reservoir simulation and
hardware developments, especially over the
past 10 years, has greatly extended the grid-
ding options available. Modern commercial
Copyright 1993 Society of Petroleum Engineers
658
Khalid Aziz, SPE, Stanford U.
Khalid Aziz is the Otto N. Miller professor of Earth Sciences
and Professor of chemical and petroleum engineering
at the U. of Calgary and manager of the Computer
Modelling Group. He has held several other academic
and industrial positions in North America. In Pakistan, he
~orke? for t~e Karachi Gas Co. in various capacities,
including chief engineer. At Stanford, Aziz has served as
Assoc. Dean for Research (School of Earth Sciences) and chairman of
the Petroleum Engineering Dept. Aziz received his engineering
e?ucation at the U. of Michigan, U. of Alberta, and Rice U. A
Distinguished Member, Aziz has received the Cedric K. Ferguson
Medal, and th~ Re~ervoir Engineering, Lester C. Uren, and Distinguished
Petroleum Engineering Faculty awards. His main research interests are
reser.voir si.mulation, .natural gas engineering, multi phase flow in porous
media, flUid properties, ond multi phase flow in pipes.
simulators typically offer local grid refine- TC,Pi.j = (fcAkkrpwc,pILJ.tp);,j' .... (2)
ment, hybrid grid, curvilinear (stream-tube)
For each block, one equation of this type
grid, Voronoi or perpendicular bisector grid
(generalization of point-distributed grid), is written for each component or pseudo-
component, c, in the system. The required
corner-point geometry, dynamic grid, or
automatic grid generation. Some research geometric properties of the gridblock are
simulators also offer elastic grid-adjustment block volume, Vb; the area of each block
face, A; and the distance between i and j for
methods, control-volume finite-element
(CVFE) methods, and free Lagrangian each connection, L. This method of writing
flow equations, the control-volume finite-
methods.
While this abundance of options provides difference (CVFD) method, reduces to the
standard finite-difference method for Carte-
flexibility, it can also make choosing the ap-
propriate grid bewildering for the simulator sian grids. An important characteristic of
this method is that in Eq. 1 the flow across
user. This paper provides a short description
of some common gridding techniques avail- the gridblock face between i andj depends
only on the component of the potential gra-
able in commercial and research simulators.
Where possible, experience with various dient in the i-j direction. For nonorthogonal
coordinate systems, the flow calculation
gridding techniques also is discussed. The
fluid flow equations are considered before across a block face would depend on all
components ofthe gradient of the potential
gridding techniques are discussed so that the
advantages and disadvantages of various on the surface. Hence, an error in flow cal-
gridding techniques can be understood culations results if only the component of
the gradient in the i-j direction is considered
better.
in a nonorthogonal grid.
Flow Equations The terms in Eq. 1 represent net flow into
Block i, accumulation of mass in Block i,
The conservation of mass for Component c and flow from wells within the block, re-
(for black-oil models, c=oil, gas, and water spectively. The indexj is for blocks connect-
at standard conditions) combined with Dar- ed to Block i, the block for which the mass
cy's law yields the following set of flow balance is written. Note that the connections
equations:
of Block i need not be neighbors of this
Nj Np block. The gridblock shape and gridpoint lo-
E E TC,Pi)cf>P,j-cf>p,i) cation within the block influence the evalu-
} p ation of each term. The flow between blocks
is calculated by multiplying the interblock
Vb,; transmissibility with the difference in poten-
=-[(M .)n+1-(M .)n]+q .
At C,l C,l C,l' tial between the blocks (Fig. 1).
This flow term depends on both the grid
.................. (1)
geometry and the gridpoint location in the
where the transmissibility between Nodes i block. The gridpoints should be selected so
andj is that the finite-difference approximation of
July 1993 • JPT
 "A reservoir simulator
predicts reservoir
performance by
solving flow equations
on a discrete grid
chosen ... to represent
the reservoir."

",! ~.,: ,~ ir it :j1 it ·1

.: ~.,
i,. ,f. ,r : .:•,. ,!. '.:i ,l.·.
· ..,: .... :·.·1., .

". ',: :. ":; ,:; : ': : ' : : t : '.:.!..

.
.'.i.t".:::,! ,:

Fig. 1-Gridblock ; and its connections.

pressure gradient is as accurate as possible.
In other words, the difference in potential
between the two nodes on either side of a
boundary divided by the distance between
the nodes should be a good approximation
at the boundary for the average potential gra-
dient normal to the boundary. The accumu-
lation term uses the gridblock volume and
the pressure at the node to calculate the mass
in the block at different times. For this pur-
pose, the gridpoint should be as close to the
mass center of the block as possible. Finally,
for calculation of well flow, a well model
is required to relate the wellblock pressure
to the well pressure. The well model de-
pends on the grid type, and for certain kinds
of grid, the well model must be adjusted as
the flow field in the reservoir changes. 1
Simulation Grids
Globally Orthogonal Grids. Most com-
monly used grids are constructed by aligning
the gridblocks along orthogonal coordinate ing to some rules, as in point-distributed
directions and then distorting the grid where grids. Nacul and Aziz 3 investigated the use
necessary to fit major reservoir features of these two grids and four other related
(e.g., dip). Fig. 2 shows examples of these grids that try to take advantage of the best
kinds of grids, the standard Cartesian block- features of the block-centered and point-
centered and point-distributed grids. distributed grids. They also provided a prac-
The block-centered grid is advantageous tical approach to constructing point-
for calculating accumulation terms, while distributed grids. The idea is first to divide
the point-distributed grid is more accurate the reservoir into blocks and then to adjust
for calculating flow between blocks. When the grid to meet the requirements of the
the grid is almost uniform, the differences point-distributed grid. Nacul and Aziz 3
between these two types of grids are insig- showed that for some problems increasing
nificant. For highly irregular grids, how- the number of gridblocks by subdividing
ever, the r~sults obtained are strongly blocks in some regions for block-centered
influenced by grid type. Even though Settari grids can actually yield worse results than
and Aziz 2 demonstrated the superior ac- if a uniform grid with fewer blocks (without
curacy of the point-distributed grid in 1972, subdivision) is used. It is interesting that,
its use in commercial models has been rather in the examples that Nacul and Aziz tried,
limited. The primary reasons probably are point-distributed grid always produced im-
tradition and the fact that most engineers find proved results with grid refinement.
it easier to think of dividing the reservoir
into blocks rather than choosing gridpoints Local Grid Refinement. For large reservoir
that automatically generate blocks accord- simulation problems, fine grid is needed

- r--~- - - r - - - -~ -- - -y
ij+l b- -
~ - - - - -~ - -- - - ~
~-b----
lij+l
~- --b- - - - - 6
I I , 1 1 1
I I I
I 1 1
b- - ~-b-- - - 1--- - b- - - - -6
. 1. 6-
1- J 1
- - - - -6-:-.-
1 1J
---- .6. l'
11+ J
1i-lj I ij 1i+lj 1
1 I I I
I I I
1 I I I
1 1 I 1
0- - - - - -0- -
ij-l - - - - -0
1
1
I
I 1
I 1

a) Block-centered grid x
b- - - ~j-~ - - 1- _ _
- b- - - - -6 ...
x
b) Point-distributed grid

Fig. 2-Block-centered and point-distributed grids (from Settari and Aziz2).

JPT • July 1993 659


"The need to satisfy in
field-scale applications
a variety of constraints
that often are
conflicting makes grid
generation difficult and
time-consuming."
I(®) I~
I'). ~ 'X! X
I.'" ~
"" /'
Fig. 3-Hybrid grid (from Pedrosa and
AZiz 8 ).
only in the parts of the reservoir where satu-
rations or pressures change rapidly. Using
the standard irregular grid leads to unwanted
small blocks in some parts of the reservoir.
While Cartesian refinement within a Carte-
sian grid appears to be attractive,4-7 it does
not always improve the solution. 3 Here,
the problem is accurate calculation of flow
between blocks at the intersection of coarse
and fine grids. The problem is less severe
when hybrid grids (cylindrical or other cur-
vilinear grids) are used in the region of one
or more Cartesian blocks, as Pedrosa and
Aziz 8 proposed, for greater accuracy
around wells. Even for hybrid grids, cer-
tain assumptions must be made to evaluate
transmissibilities for flow to and from the
irregular blocks between the two types of
grids (Fig. 3). Eikrann 9 developed similar
grids that provide a smooth transition from
an almost cylindrical grid to the surrounding
Cartesian grid. Hybrid grids, however, are
useful for accurate calculation of WOR and
GOR.
Locally Orthogonal Grids. Voronoi grid,
defined in 1908, is extremely flexible and
locally orthogonal. It has been used exten-
sively in many branches of science and en-
gineering. lO A Voronoi block is defined as
the region of space closer to its gridpoint
than to any other gridpoint. Consequently,
a line that joins gridpoints of any two con-
nected gridblocks is perpendicular to the
660
(a) Cartesian
(c) Cylindrical (d) Hexagonal
M
v.a
I--J
(f} Hybrid-Cartesian
Fig. 4-Examples of Voronoi grids (from Palagi and Aziz11).
gridblock boundary between these two grid-
points and is bisected into two equal parts
by that boundary. Voronoi grid can be
viewed as a generalization of the point-
distributed grid. Heinemann and his col-
leagues,S-7 who pioneered its use for petro-
leum reservoir simulation, called it the PEBI
grid. PalagilO and Palagi and Aziz ll - 13 re-
solved some ofthe problems with its use in
heterogeneous reservoirs. Fig. 4 shows ex-
amples of Voronoi grids.
Voronoi grid provides a natural way to
construct hybrid grids, grids aligned with
wells and major geological features, and lo-
cally refined grids. It can be used easily by
constructing and combining modules (Fig.
5). These modules can be moved, scaled,
rotated, and placed anywhere in the domain
of interest. Furthermore, the geometric fac-
tor in transmissibilities, which depends on
rock permeability and grid geometry, can
be calculated automatically for any
grid. 9 •10 Because the flow across a bound-
ary is assumed to be proportional to the pres-
sure difference between the gridpoints on
either side of the boundary, flow calculation
is most accurate when the line joining these
gridpoints is bisected at its midpoint by the
boundary, as in Voronoi grid. Only a limited
amount of work has been done to establish
practical guidelines for using various grids
that are special cases of Voronoi grid. The
flexibility provided by Voronoi grid is par-
ticularly useful for modeling coning phe-
t-
(b) locally refined Cartesian
(e) Curvilinear
(g) Hybrid-hexagonal
nomenon in vertical and horizontal wells.
Our preliminary results show that for homo-
geneous reservoirs the number of blocks in
refined regions, not the block shape, has the
most influence on results. 14 Also, to obtain
both the magnitude and shape of the WOR
curve correctly, refinement in the aerial
plane has to be balanced carefully with ver-
tical refinement in the region of the
producer. Other advantages are that
(1) these grids provide the possibility of very
accurate computations for the simulation of
well tests in complex reservoirs and (2) they
reduce the grid-orientation effect. II One
drawback is that they result in much more
complex Jacobian matrices than standard
grids. Efficient solution techniques for
sparse linear systems generated by unstruc-
tured grids are needed. Fig. 6 demonstrates
the great flexibility of this grid.
Even greater accuracy and the same flex-
ibility are possible with finite-element and
CVFE methods, 15-17 but the computational
cost resulting from the additional complexity
of the flow equations probably is not justi-
fied for general field-scale applications.
Corner-Point Geometry. Complex reser-
voir geometries can be represented accurate-
ly by specifying the corners of each
gridblock. This is known as corner-point ge-
ometry. 18 While the calculations are more
involved than in standard Cartesian grids,
all the geometric quantities in Eq. 1 can be
July 1993. JPT

~
~
(b) Cartesian
(d) cylindrical
Fig. 5-Modules for constructing Voronoi grids (from Palagi and
Azizl1).
calculated. The real problem with this type
of grid is that flow across a block face now
depends on more than two pressures on
either side of that face. This complicates the
flow term in Eq. 1. The reason is that, when
the grid is skewed, connections between
blocks are no longer orthogonal to the block
faces . Unless all components of the poten-
tial gradient at the block face are considered,
this kind of nonorthogonal grid can lead to
serious errors in the calculation of interblock
flow. Almost the same flexibility can be
achieved with Voronoi grid , which always
satisfies the condition of local orthogonality.
Orthogonal and Almost-Orthogonal Cur-
vilinear Grids. Curvilinear grids have been
used to simulate flow in elements of sym-
metry of pattern floods. 19-22 The grid is
constructed by solving the potential flow
equation for streamlines and equipotential
lines , which are mutually orthogonal. All
Fig. 7-Nearly orthogonal grid for a field (from Sharpe and
Anderson 23).
JPT • July 1993
( a) hexagonal
(c) irregular
Fig. 6-Flexibility of Voronoi grid (from Palagi and Aziz 11).
geometric factors in Eq. I can be calculated
by transforming the flow equations to the
curvilinear coordinates. As long as the or-
thogonality condition is satisfied , no addi-
tional connections beyond those for
Cartesian grids are introduced. Because the
potential solution is used only to construct
the grid, flow across streamlines is allowed.
This is the main difference between using
curvilinear grids and using streamtube
models that do not allow flow along equi-
potential lines. Sharp and Anderson 23 •24
developed an intriguing method of generat-
ing curvilinear grids that conform to ar-
bitrary internal and external boundaries .
They solved- a set of quasilinear parabolic
partial-differential equations (as opposed to
the elliptic potential equation for standard
curvilinear grid). This method generates
nearly orthogonal grids even for complicated
reservoir problems. But in trying to satisfy
the orthogonality condition, dense grids may
Fig. a-Blocks as homogeneous as possible (from Garcia et
al. 25 ).
be generated in regions where they are not
needed. Once this kind of grid is generated
and appropriate geometric factors are cal-
culated, a standard simulator can be used.
Fig. 7 shows a grid generated by this tech-
nique for a field-scale problem.
- This algorithm may produce a skewed
(nonorthogonal) grid when the orthogonality
condition cannot be satisfied , so it has some
of the same problems as the corner-point ge-
ometry in terms of flow dependence on all
components of the gradient of the potential.
The main advantage of Sharp and Ander-
son's method is that it tries to make the grid
as orthogonal as possible.
Automatic Grid Generation With Homo-
geneous Blocks. In the transmissibility cal-
culation (Eq. 2), an effective value of
permeability between Gridpoints i and j is
needed. This calculation is simplified if the
blocks are homogeneous. Techniques are
661
available for automatically generating grids
that are as homogeneous as possible. Garcia
et ai. 25 developed a grid-adjustment meth-
od that associates an elastic band with each
block edge of all blocks. The potential ener-
gy of an edge is assumed to be proportional
to the square of the length of the edge and
a coefficient of elasticity. This coefficient
of elasticity is made a function of heteroge-
neity of the gridblocks adjacent to the edge.
Starting with an initial regular grid, a grid
that is as homogeneous as possible is gener-
ated by minimizing the potential energy of
the overall grid system. The reSUlting grid
is not constrained to any orthogonality con-
dition. Fig. 8 shows an example of this
method.
Farmer et ai. 26 used another approach to
achieve the same objective. Methods of this
type have yet to be applied to field-scale
reservoir problems. Such grid-adjustment
methods could be the first step in the gener-
ation of locally orthogonal Voronoi grid.
Dynamic Grid. In principle, all the static
grid-generation techniques can be combined
with dynamic block addition and removal.
Questions of accuracy and computational ef-
ficiency must be resolved for grids that
change with time. Several authors 5,27,28
have discussed dynamic Cartesian grids.
The most practical approach seems to be to
use a base grid that is fixed and allow dy-
namic refinement or coarsening of some
blocks within the base grid. Hydrodynamic
models for 3D atmospheric flows have been
developed using dynamic Voronoi
grid. 29 ,30 Conservation equations are
solved explicitly by moving particles of
fixed mass. This is called the "free Lagran-
gian method." Some of the gridding tech-
niques developed for other fluid flow
problems may prove useful in reservoir
simulation.
Practical Use
The need to satisfy in field-scale applications
a variety of constraints that often are con-
flicting makes grid generation difficult and
time-consuming. This is particularly true of
geologically complex fields like the Gullfaks
in the Norwegian sector of the North
Sea. 31 To represent the complex system of
faults in this field, several months are re-
quired to develop an appropriate grid. For
such reservoirs, comer-point geometry and
Voronoi grids provide the required flexibil-
ity, but the simulation engineer normally
will select the one that is easier to use. As
Petterson 31 pointed out, tools that can help
the reservoir engineer to build a grid quickly
that accurately computes flow in the reser-
voir are much more important than small
savings in computer time during simulation
runs. Data integration tools and 3D visuali-
zation tools are indispensable for grid gener-
ation and analysis of results. Such tools are
just starting to appear on the market. Even-
tually, expert systems should be available
to help the engineer integrate reservoir
description, generate grids, and make
history matches. In the meantime, selecting
a type of grid and the number of blocks re-
662
mains an art. Understanding flow equations
(Eq. 1) will help minimize errors caused by
the use of inappropriate grids. To select the
best grid for modeling a heterogeneous
reservoir, one must decide on the scales of
heterogeneities that should be represented
implicitly through effective parameters 32
and the method for calculation of the con-
nection transmissibilities. 33
Concluding Remarks
The simulation engineer has the opportunity
to use many kinds of flexible grids. How-
ever, from a practical standpoint, the most
important problem is selecting a grid for a
specific problem. As mentioned, an increase
in the number of gridblocks does not auto-
matically translate into increased accuracy.
Here are some comments and guidelines.
1. Local grid refinement (Cartesian or
hybrid) improves WOR and GOR predic-
tion when sharp saturation gradients exist
near wells, as in coning problems. The re-
fined region should be large enough to in-
clude the extent of the reservoir with sharp
saturation gradients.
2. Unless there are compelling reasons,
the grid should be orthogonal, at least lo-
cally, and as uniform as possible. Large
blocks next to small blocks should be avoid-
ed. Irregular Voronoi grid (generalization
of point-distributed grid) usually is more
reliable than block-centered grid.
3. So far, dynamic grids have proved to
be of limited value in field applications. The
ability to add or remove blocks efficiently
with opening or shutting wells, however, is
useful.
4. Unstructured Voronoi grids require
special matrix solution techniques. Domain
decomposition is useful for taking advantage
of the grid structure. A large problem can
be reduced into several smaller problems.
This also provides a natural approach for
parallel computations and local time-
stepping.
5. Expert systems are needed for interac-
tive grid generation to take advantage of
available gridding possibilities and to reduce
the time involved in building grids for geo-
logically complex reservoirs.
6. Analysis of results requires powerful
3D flow visualization on complex grids.
Software for visualizing flow over irregu-
lar grids is needed.
Nomenclature
A = block-face area, L
Ie = transmissibility correction
factor
k = absolute permeability, L2
kr = relative permeability, L2
L = distance between gridpoints, L
Me = mass of c in block, M
N j = number of connected blocks
N p = number of phases
p = phase index
qe = flow rate from well, L3 It
T = transmissibility
f1t = timestep, t
Vb = block volume, L3
<l> = potential
we,p = concentration of c in Phase p
Subscripts
i = block for which equation is
written
j = block connected to i
Superscript
n = timestep
Acknowledgment
Reservoir simulation research at Stanford U.
is supported by an international consortium
of organizations through the Stanford U.
Reservoir Simulation Industrial Affiliates
Program (SUPRI-B).
References
1. Palagi, C.L. and Aziz, K.: "Handling of
Wells in Simulators," paper presented at the
1992 Fourth IntI. Forum on Reservoir Simu-
lation, Salzburg, Aug. 31-Sept. 4.
2. Settari, A. and Aziz, K.: "Use ofIrregular
Grid in Reservoir Simulation," SPEJ (April
1972) 103-14.
3. Nacul, E.C. and Aziz, K.: "Use ofIrregu-
lar Grid in Reservoir Simulation, " paper SPE
22886 presented at the 1991 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Oct. 6-9.
4. Quandalle, P. and Besset, P.: "The Use of
Flexible Gridding for Improved Reservoir
Modeling," paper SPE 12239 presented at
the 1983 SPE Reservoir Simulation Sympo-
sium, San Francisco, Nov. 15-18.
5. Heinemann, Z.E., Gerken, G., and Han-
tiemann, G.: "Using Local Grid Refinement
in Multiple-Application Reservoir Simula-
tor," paper SPE 12255 presented at the 1983
SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, San
Francisco, Nov. 15-18.
6. Heinemann, Z.E. and Brand, C.W.: "Grid-
ding Techniques in Reservoir Simulation,"
paper presented at the 1988 IntI. Forum on
Reservoir Simulation, Alpbach, Austria, Sept.
12-16.
7. Heinemann, Z.E. etal.: "Modeling Reser-
voir Geometry With Irregular Grid," SPERE
(May 1991) 225-32; Trans., AIME, 291.
8. Pedrosa, O.A. Jr. and Aziz, K.: "Use of
Hybrid Grid in Reservoir Simulation,"
SPERE (Nov. 1986) 611-21; Trans., AIME,
282.
9. Eikrann, S.: "A Coordinate System for Local
Grid Refinement Close to Wells," In Situ
(1992) 16, No.1, 75-87.
10. Palagi, C.L.: "Generation and Application
of Voronoi Grid to Model Flow in Hetero-
geneous Reservoirs," PhD dissertation, Stan-
ford U., Stanford, CA (May 1992).
11. Palagi, C.L. and Aziz, K.: "Use ofVoronoi
Grid in Reservoir Simulation," paper SPE
22889 presented at the 1991 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Oct. 6-9.
12. Palagi, C.L. and Aziz, K.: "The Modeling
of Horizontal and Vertical Wells With
Voronoi Grid, " paper SPE 24072 presented
at the 1992 SPE Western Regional Meeting,
Bakersfield, March 30-April 1.
13. Palagi, C.L. and Aziz, K.: "A Dual
Timestepping Technique for Modeling Tracer
Flow, " paper 24220 available at SPE,
Richardson, TX.
14. Consonni, P. et at.: "Flexible Gridding Tech-
niques for Coning Studies in Horizontal and
July 1993 • JPT
 Vertical Wells," SUPRI-B report, Stan-
ford/AGIP Project (June 1992).
15. Forsyth, P.A.: "A Controlled-Volume,
Finite-Element Method for Local Mesh
Refinement in Thermal Reservoir Simula-
tion," SPERE (Nov. 1990) 561-66; Trans.,
AIME,289.
16. Fung, L.S., Hiebert, A.D., and Nghiem,
L.X.: "Reservoir Simulation With a Control-
Volume, Finite-Element Method," SPERE
(Aug. 1992) 349-57.
17. Kocberber, S. and Collins, R.E.: "Gas-Well-
Test Analysis in Complex Heterogeneous
Reservoirs," paper SPE 21512 presented at
the 1991 SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Houston, Jan. 23-25.
18. Eclipse 100, V. 91A, reference manual, ECL
Petroleum Technologies, Highlands Farm,
Heuley, Oxon, U.K.
19. Hirasaki, G.J. and O'Dell, P.M.: "Represen-
tation of Reservoir Geometry for Numerical
Simulation," SPEJ (Dec. 1970) 393-404;
Trans., AIME, 249.
20. Wadsley, W.A.: "Modeling Reservoir Ge0-
metry With Non-Rectangular Coordinate
Grids," paper SPE 9369 presented at the 198G
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
21. Aziz, K. and Settari, A.: Petroleum Reser-
voir Simulation, Applied Science Publishers,
London (1979) 235-41.
22. Fleming, G.C.: "Modeling the Performance
of Fractured Wells in Pattern Floods Using
Orthogonal, Curvilinear Grids," paper SPE
16973 presented at the 1987 SPE Annual
JPT • July 1993
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dal-
las, Sept. 27-30.
23. Sharpe, H.N. and Anderson, D.A.: "A New
Adaptive Orthogonal Grid Generation Proce-
dure for Reservoir Simulation," paper SPE
20744 presented at the 1990 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Sept. 23-26.
24. Sharpe, H.N. and Anderson, D.A.: "Or-
thogonal Curvilinear Grid Generation With
Preset Internal Boundaries for Reservoir
Simulation," paper SPE 21235 presented at
the 1991 SPE Reservoir Simulation Sympo-
sium, Anaheim, Feb. 17-20.
25. Garcia, M.H., Journel, A.G., and Aziz, K.:
"Automatic Grid Generation for Modeling
Reservoir Heterogeneities," SPERE (May
1992) 278-84.
26. Farmer, C.L., Heath, D.E., and Moody,
R.O.: "A Global Optimization Approach to
Grid Generation," paper SPE 21236 present-
ed at the 1991 SPE Reservoir Simulation
Symposium, Anaheim, Feb. 17-20.
27. Mulder, W.A. and Meyling, R.H.J.G.: "Nu-
merical Simulation of Two-Phase Flow Using
Locally Refined Grids in Three-Space Dimen-
sions," paper SPE 21230 presented at the
1991 SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium,
Anaheim, Feb. 17-20.
28. Biterge, M.B. and Ertekin, T.: "Develop-
ment and Testing of a Static/Dynamic Local
Grid-Refmement Technique," JPT (April
1992) 487-95.
29. Sahota, M.:. "Three-Dimensional Free-
Lagrangian Hydrodynamics," Los Alamos
Nati. Laboratory, LA-UR-89-11-79, Albu-
querque, NM (April 1989).
30. Advances in the Free-Lagrange Method, H.E.
Trease, M.J. Fritts, and W.P. Crowley,
(eds.) Springer-Verlag, New York City
(1991).
31. Pettersen, 0.: "The Gullfaks Field-A
Modeling Challenge," paper presented at the
1992 Fourth Inti. Forum on Reservoir Simu-
lation, Salzburg, Aug. 31-Sept. 4.
32. Wattenbarger, C., Orr, F.M., and Aziz, K.:
"Optimal Scales for Representing Reservoir
Heterogeneity," paper presented at the 1991
Inti. Reservoir Characterization Technical
Conference, Tulsa, Nov. 3-5.
33. Palagi, C.L. and Aziz, K.: "The Modeling
of Flow in Heterogeneous Reservoirs With
Voronoi Grid," paper SPE 25259 presented
at the 1993 SPE Symposium on Reservoir
Simulation, New Orleans, Feb. 28-March 3.
Provenance
Original SPE manuscript, Reservoir Simu-
lation Grids: Opportunities and Prob-
lems, received for review Feb. 28, 1993.
Revised manuscript received May 11, 1993.
Paper accepted for publication May 11,
1993. Paper (SPE 25233) first presented at
the 1993 SPE Symposium on Reservoir Sim-
ulation in New Orleans, Feb. 28-March 3.
JPT
663