Abstract
Gas-condensate flow is a critical process in the near-well region where the well production efficiency is strongly affected by the production of condensate dropout. Pore-scale simulations have provided an understanding of the underlying processes such as snap-off and the effect of the interplay between viscous and capillary forces on gas-condensate flow and its induced blockage within the pore spaces. Among various modeling approaches used to explore these phenomena, pore-network modeling, due to its computational efficiency and the ability to simulate relatively large sample sizes, has appealed to researchers. This article presents a review of the development of pore-network models to simulate gas-condensate flow, particularly in the near wellbore regions. This contribution reviews pore-scale mechanisms that should be included in simulating the gas-condensate flow, together with the involved processes and the peculiarities pertinent to such modeling efforts. After a brief review of different pore scale studies and their differences, advantages, and disadvantages, the review focuses on pore-network modeling, and the application of pore-network modeling in gas-condensate flow in the recent studies. The employed methodologies, highlights, and limitations of each pore network study are examined and critically discussed. The review addresses pore-space evolution, flow mechanisms, and the involved flow and transport parameters. The formulations of capillary entry pressure in different pore geometries, the corresponding conductance terms, snap-off criteria, and conditions for the creation of condensate bridging in different pore structures are presented. Additionally, three major approaches used in pore-network modeling of gas condensation, namely quasi-static, dynamic methods and dynamic compositional pore-network modeling, are presented and their main governing equations are provided using various tables. Finally, the significance of gas-condensate flow modeling including its modeling challenges together with the main similarities and differences among pore-network studies are provided.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 211693 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-34 |
| Journal | Geoenergy Science and Engineering |
| Volume | 226 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jul 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The authors would like thank the constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers as well as Prof. Masa Prodanovic of The University of Texas at Austin for her notes on the comparison of direct numerical methods and pore-network models as well as Dr. Pooyan Broumand of Shiraz University for his comments on the advantages and disadvantages of phase field method. The authors have special thanks to Prof. Holger Steeb from University of Stuttgart for his comments on different approaches in smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH). Finally, Dr. Arman Khoshghalb of University of New South Wales is acknowledged for his pointer to fractal models of porous media.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
Funding
The authors would like thank the constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers as well as Prof. Masa Prodanovic of The University of Texas at Austin for her notes on the comparison of direct numerical methods and pore-network models as well as Dr. Pooyan Broumand of Shiraz University for his comments on the advantages and disadvantages of phase field method. The authors have special thanks to Prof. Holger Steeb from University of Stuttgart for his comments on different approaches in smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH). Finally, Dr. Arman Khoshghalb of University of New South Wales is acknowledged for his pointer to fractal models of porous media.
Keywords
- Compositional pore-network modeling
- Condensation
- Gas-condensate flow
- Pore-network modeling
- Snap-off
