Abstract
Dispersivity data compiled over many lengths show that values at typical
interwell distances are approximately two to four factors of 10 larger than
those measured on cores. Such large dispersivities may represent significant
mixing in the reservoir or they may be a result of convective spreading driven
by permeability heterogeneity. The work in this paper uses the idea of flow
reversal to resolve the ambiguity between convective spreading and mixing. We
simulate flow-reversal tests for tracer transport in several permeability
realizations using particle-tracking simulations (free from numerical
dispersion) on 3D, high-resolution models at the field scale.
We show that convective spreading, even without local mixing, can result in
dispersion-like mixing-zone growth with large dispersivities because of
permeability heterogeneity. But, for such cases, the dispersivity estimated on
flow reversal is zero. With local mixing (diffusion or core-scale dispersion),
the dispersivity value on flow reversal is nonzero and much larger than typical
core values. Layering in permeability, while increasing the convective
contribution to transport, also enhances mixing by providing larger area in the
transverse direction for diffusion to act. This suggests that in-situ mixing is
an important phenomenon affecting the transport of solutes in permeable media
even at large scales. Dispersivity values increase with scale mainly because of
the increase in the correlation in the permeability field, but they could also
apparently appear to do so because the Fickian model fails to capture the
mixing-zone growth correctly at early times.
The results and approach shown here could be used to differentiate between
displacement and sweep efficiency in field-scale displacements, to ensure
accurate representation of dispersive mixing in reservoir simulation, and to
guide upscaling workflows. The flow-reversal concept motivates a new line of
inquiry for laboratory- and field-scale experiments.
© 2010. Society of Petroleum Engineers
View full textPDF
(
927 KB
)
History
- Original manuscript received:
13 February 2008
- Meeting paper published:
24 April 2008
- Revised manuscript received:
26 September 2009
- Manuscript approved:
9 October 2009
- Published online:
28 April 2010
- Version of record:
22 September 2010