Fix bug for time-stepping when loading restart deck
This commit is contained in:
Joakim Hove
parent
719b05e93b
commit
d37389720f
@ -495,6 +495,7 @@ if(ENABLE_ECL_OUTPUT)
|
||||
tests/include_swof.txt
|
||||
tests/include_grid_3x5x4.grdecl
|
||||
tests/SPE1CASE2.DATA
|
||||
tests/SPE1CASE2_RESTART.DATA
|
||||
tests/SPE1CASE2_RESTART_SKIPREST.DATA
|
||||
tests/SPE1CASE2.X0060
|
||||
tests/PYACTION.DATA
|
||||
|
||||
@ -202,15 +202,20 @@ ScheduleDeck::ScheduleDeck(const Deck& deck, const ScheduleRestartInfo& rst_info
|
||||
this->skiprest = rst_info.skiprest;
|
||||
if (this->m_restart_offset > 0) {
|
||||
for (std::size_t it = 0; it < this->m_restart_offset; it++) {
|
||||
this->m_blocks.emplace_back(KeywordLocation{}, ScheduleTimeType::RESTART, start_time);
|
||||
if (it < this->m_restart_offset - 1)
|
||||
this->m_blocks.back().end_time(start_time);
|
||||
if (it == 0)
|
||||
this->m_blocks.emplace_back(KeywordLocation{}, ScheduleTimeType::START, start_time);
|
||||
else
|
||||
this->m_blocks.emplace_back(KeywordLocation{}, ScheduleTimeType::RESTART, start_time);
|
||||
this->m_blocks.back().end_time(start_time);
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (!this->skiprest) {
|
||||
this->m_blocks.back().end_time(this->m_restart_time);
|
||||
this->m_blocks.emplace_back(KeywordLocation{}, ScheduleTimeType::RESTART, this->m_restart_time);
|
||||
}
|
||||
} else
|
||||
this->m_blocks.emplace_back(KeywordLocation{}, ScheduleTimeType::START, start_time);
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
ScheduleDeckContext context(this->m_restart_offset > 0, start_time);
|
||||
ScheduleDeckContext context(this->skiprest, this->m_blocks.back().start_time());
|
||||
for( const auto& keyword : SCHEDULESection(deck)) {
|
||||
if (keyword.name() == "DATES") {
|
||||
for (size_t recordIndex = 0; recordIndex < keyword.size(); recordIndex++) {
|
||||
|
||||
370
tests/SPE1CASE2_RESTART.DATA
Normal file
370
tests/SPE1CASE2_RESTART.DATA
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,370 @@
|
||||
-- This reservoir simulation deck is made available under the Open Database
|
||||
-- License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Any rights in
|
||||
-- individual contents of the database are licensed under the Database Contents
|
||||
-- License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/dbcl/1.0/
|
||||
|
||||
-- Copyright (C) 2015 Statoil
|
||||
|
||||
-- This simulation is based on the data given in
|
||||
-- 'Comparison of Solutions to a Three-Dimensional
|
||||
-- Black-Oil Reservoir Simulation Problem' by Aziz S. Odeh,
|
||||
-- Journal of Petroleum Technology, January 1981
|
||||
|
||||
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
------------------------ SPE1 - CASE 2 ------------------------------------
|
||||
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
RUNSPEC
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
TITLE
|
||||
SPE1 - CASE 2
|
||||
|
||||
DIMENS
|
||||
10 10 3 /
|
||||
|
||||
-- The number of equilibration regions is inferred from the EQLDIMS
|
||||
-- keyword.
|
||||
EQLDIMS
|
||||
/
|
||||
|
||||
-- The number of PVTW tables is inferred from the TABDIMS keyword;
|
||||
-- when no data is included in the keyword the default values are used.
|
||||
TABDIMS
|
||||
/
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
OIL
|
||||
GAS
|
||||
WATER
|
||||
DISGAS
|
||||
-- As seen from figure 4 in Odeh, GOR is increasing with time,
|
||||
-- which means that dissolved gas is present
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
FIELD
|
||||
|
||||
START
|
||||
1 'JAN' 2015 /
|
||||
|
||||
WELLDIMS
|
||||
-- Item 1: maximum number of wells in the model
|
||||
-- - there are two wells in the problem; injector and producer
|
||||
-- Item 2: maximum number of grid blocks connected to any one well
|
||||
-- - must be one as the wells are located at specific grid blocks
|
||||
-- Item 3: maximum number of groups in the model
|
||||
-- - we are dealing with only one 'group'
|
||||
-- Item 4: maximum number of wells in any one group
|
||||
-- - there must be two wells in a group as there are two wells in total
|
||||
2 1 1 2 /
|
||||
|
||||
UNIFOUT
|
||||
|
||||
GRID
|
||||
|
||||
-- The INIT keyword is used to request an .INIT file. The .INIT file
|
||||
-- is written before the simulation actually starts, and contains grid
|
||||
-- properties and saturation tables as inferred from the input
|
||||
-- deck. There are no other keywords which can be used to configure
|
||||
-- exactly what is written to the .INIT file.
|
||||
INIT
|
||||
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
NOECHO
|
||||
|
||||
DX
|
||||
-- There are in total 300 cells with length 1000ft in x-direction
|
||||
300*1000 /
|
||||
DY
|
||||
-- There are in total 300 cells with length 1000ft in y-direction
|
||||
300*1000 /
|
||||
DZ
|
||||
-- The layers are 20, 30 and 50 ft thick, in each layer there are 100 cells
|
||||
100*20 100*30 100*50 /
|
||||
|
||||
TOPS
|
||||
-- The depth of the top of each grid block
|
||||
100*8325 /
|
||||
|
||||
PORO
|
||||
-- Constant porosity of 0.3 throughout all 300 grid cells
|
||||
300*0.3 /
|
||||
|
||||
PERMX
|
||||
-- The layers have perm. 500mD, 50mD and 200mD, respectively.
|
||||
100*500 100*50 100*200 /
|
||||
|
||||
PERMY
|
||||
-- Equal to PERMX
|
||||
100*500 100*50 100*200 /
|
||||
|
||||
PERMZ
|
||||
-- Cannot find perm. in z-direction in Odeh's paper
|
||||
-- For the time being, we will assume PERMZ equal to PERMX and PERMY:
|
||||
100*500 100*50 100*200 /
|
||||
ECHO
|
||||
|
||||
PROPS
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
PVTW
|
||||
-- Item 1: pressure reference (psia)
|
||||
-- Item 2: water FVF (rb per bbl or rb per stb)
|
||||
-- Item 3: water compressibility (psi^{-1})
|
||||
-- Item 4: water viscosity (cp)
|
||||
-- Item 5: water 'viscosibility' (psi^{-1})
|
||||
|
||||
-- Using values from Norne:
|
||||
-- In METRIC units:
|
||||
-- 277.0 1.038 4.67E-5 0.318 0.0 /
|
||||
-- In FIELD units:
|
||||
4017.55 1.038 3.22E-6 0.318 0.0 /
|
||||
|
||||
ROCK
|
||||
-- Item 1: reference pressure (psia)
|
||||
-- Item 2: rock compressibility (psi^{-1})
|
||||
|
||||
-- Using values from table 1 in Odeh:
|
||||
14.7 3E-6 /
|
||||
|
||||
SWOF
|
||||
-- Column 1: water saturation
|
||||
-- - this has been set to (almost) equally spaced values from 0.12 to 1
|
||||
-- Column 2: water relative permeability
|
||||
-- - generated from the Corey-type approx. formula
|
||||
-- the coeffisient is set to 10e-5, S_{orw}=0 and S_{wi}=0.12
|
||||
-- Column 3: oil relative permeability when only oil and water are present
|
||||
-- - we will use the same values as in column 3 in SGOF.
|
||||
-- This is not really correct, but since only the first
|
||||
-- two values are of importance, this does not really matter
|
||||
-- Column 4: corresponding water-oil capillary pressure (psi)
|
||||
|
||||
0.12 0 1 0
|
||||
0.18 4.64876033057851E-008 1 0
|
||||
0.24 0.000000186 0.997 0
|
||||
0.3 4.18388429752066E-007 0.98 0
|
||||
0.36 7.43801652892562E-007 0.7 0
|
||||
0.42 1.16219008264463E-006 0.35 0
|
||||
0.48 1.67355371900826E-006 0.2 0
|
||||
0.54 2.27789256198347E-006 0.09 0
|
||||
0.6 2.97520661157025E-006 0.021 0
|
||||
0.66 3.7654958677686E-006 0.01 0
|
||||
0.72 4.64876033057851E-006 0.001 0
|
||||
0.78 0.000005625 0.0001 0
|
||||
0.84 6.69421487603306E-006 0 0
|
||||
0.91 8.05914256198347E-006 0 0
|
||||
1 0.00001 0 0 /
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
SGOF
|
||||
-- Column 1: gas saturation
|
||||
-- Column 2: gas relative permeability
|
||||
-- Column 3: oil relative permeability when oil, gas and connate water are present
|
||||
-- Column 4: oil-gas capillary pressure (psi)
|
||||
-- - stated to be zero in Odeh's paper
|
||||
|
||||
-- Values in column 1-3 are taken from table 3 in Odeh's paper:
|
||||
0 0 1 0
|
||||
0.001 0 1 0
|
||||
0.02 0 0.997 0
|
||||
0.05 0.005 0.980 0
|
||||
0.12 0.025 0.700 0
|
||||
0.2 0.075 0.350 0
|
||||
0.25 0.125 0.200 0
|
||||
0.3 0.190 0.090 0
|
||||
0.4 0.410 0.021 0
|
||||
0.45 0.60 0.010 0
|
||||
0.5 0.72 0.001 0
|
||||
0.6 0.87 0.0001 0
|
||||
0.7 0.94 0.000 0
|
||||
0.85 0.98 0.000 0
|
||||
0.88 0.984 0.000 0 /
|
||||
--1.00 1.0 0.000 0 /
|
||||
-- Warning from Eclipse: first sat. value in SWOF + last sat. value in SGOF
|
||||
-- must not be greater than 1, but Eclipse still runs
|
||||
-- Flow needs the sum to be excactly 1 so I added a row with gas sat. = 0.88
|
||||
-- The corresponding krg value was estimated by assuming linear rel. between
|
||||
-- gas sat. and krw. between gas sat. 0.85 and 1.00 (the last two values given)
|
||||
|
||||
DENSITY
|
||||
-- Density (lb per ft³) at surface cond. of
|
||||
-- oil, water and gas, respectively (in that order)
|
||||
|
||||
-- Using values from Norne:
|
||||
-- In METRIC units:
|
||||
-- 859.5 1033.0 0.854 /
|
||||
-- In FIELD units:
|
||||
53.66 64.49 0.0533 /
|
||||
|
||||
PVDG
|
||||
-- Column 1: gas phase pressure (psia)
|
||||
-- Column 2: gas formation volume factor (rb per Mscf)
|
||||
-- - in Odeh's paper the units are said to be given in rb per bbl,
|
||||
-- but this is assumed to be a mistake: FVF-values in Odeh's paper
|
||||
-- are given in rb per scf, not rb per bbl. This will be in
|
||||
-- agreement with conventions
|
||||
-- Column 3: gas viscosity (cP)
|
||||
|
||||
-- Using values from lower right table in Odeh's table 2:
|
||||
14.700 166.666 0.008000
|
||||
264.70 12.0930 0.009600
|
||||
514.70 6.27400 0.011200
|
||||
1014.7 3.19700 0.014000
|
||||
2014.7 1.61400 0.018900
|
||||
2514.7 1.29400 0.020800
|
||||
3014.7 1.08000 0.022800
|
||||
4014.7 0.81100 0.026800
|
||||
5014.7 0.64900 0.030900
|
||||
9014.7 0.38600 0.047000 /
|
||||
|
||||
PVTO
|
||||
-- Column 1: dissolved gas-oil ratio (Mscf per stb)
|
||||
-- Column 2: bubble point pressure (psia)
|
||||
-- Column 3: oil FVF for saturated oil (rb per stb)
|
||||
-- Column 4: oil viscosity for saturated oil (cP)
|
||||
|
||||
-- Use values from top left table in Odeh's table 2:
|
||||
0.0010 14.7 1.0620 1.0400 /
|
||||
0.0905 264.7 1.1500 0.9750 /
|
||||
0.1800 514.7 1.2070 0.9100 /
|
||||
0.3710 1014.7 1.2950 0.8300 /
|
||||
0.6360 2014.7 1.4350 0.6950 /
|
||||
0.7750 2514.7 1.5000 0.6410 /
|
||||
0.9300 3014.7 1.5650 0.5940 /
|
||||
1.2700 4014.7 1.6950 0.5100
|
||||
9014.7 1.5790 0.7400 /
|
||||
1.6180 5014.7 1.8270 0.4490
|
||||
9014.7 1.7370 0.6310 /
|
||||
-- It is required to enter data for undersaturated oil for the highest GOR
|
||||
-- (i.e. the last row) in the PVTO table.
|
||||
-- In order to fulfill this requirement, values for oil FVF and viscosity
|
||||
-- at 9014.7psia and GOR=1.618 for undersaturated oil have been approximated:
|
||||
-- It has been assumed that there is a linear relation between the GOR
|
||||
-- and the FVF when keeping the pressure constant at 9014.7psia.
|
||||
-- From Odeh we know that (at 9014.7psia) the FVF is 2.357 at GOR=2.984
|
||||
-- for saturated oil and that the FVF is 1.579 at GOR=1.27 for undersaturated oil,
|
||||
-- so it is possible to use the assumption described above.
|
||||
-- An equivalent approximation for the viscosity has been used.
|
||||
/
|
||||
|
||||
SOLUTION
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
RESTART
|
||||
'SPE1CASE2' 60 /
|
||||
|
||||
RSVD
|
||||
-- Dissolved GOR is initially constant with depth through the reservoir.
|
||||
-- The reason is that the initial reservoir pressure given is higher
|
||||
---than the bubble point presssure of 4014.7psia, meaning that there is no
|
||||
-- free gas initially present.
|
||||
8300 1.270
|
||||
8450 1.270 /
|
||||
|
||||
SUMMARY
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
-- 1a) Oil rate vs time
|
||||
FOPR
|
||||
-- Field Oil Production Rate
|
||||
|
||||
-- 1b) GOR vs time
|
||||
WGOR
|
||||
-- Well Gas-Oil Ratio
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
-- Using FGOR instead of WGOR:PROD results in the same graph
|
||||
FGOR
|
||||
|
||||
-- 2a) Pressures of the cell where the injector and producer are located
|
||||
BPR
|
||||
1 1 1 /
|
||||
10 10 3 /
|
||||
/
|
||||
|
||||
-- 2b) Gas saturation at grid points given in Odeh's paper
|
||||
BGSAT
|
||||
1 1 1 /
|
||||
1 1 2 /
|
||||
1 1 3 /
|
||||
10 1 1 /
|
||||
10 1 2 /
|
||||
10 1 3 /
|
||||
10 10 1 /
|
||||
10 10 2 /
|
||||
10 10 3 /
|
||||
/
|
||||
|
||||
-- In order to compare Eclipse with Flow:
|
||||
WBHP
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WGIR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WGIT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WGPR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WGPT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WOIR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WOIT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WOPR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WOPT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WWIR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WWIT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WWPR
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
WWPT
|
||||
'INJ'
|
||||
'PROD'
|
||||
/
|
||||
SCHEDULE
|
||||
-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
RPTSCHED
|
||||
'PRES' 'SGAS' 'RS' 'WELLS' /
|
||||
|
||||
RPTRST
|
||||
'BASIC=1' /
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
TSTEP
|
||||
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
|
||||
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
|
||||
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
|
||||
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
|
||||
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 /
|
||||
|
||||
--Advance the simulator once a year for TEN years:
|
||||
--10*365 /
|
||||
|
||||
END
|
||||
@ -93,19 +93,42 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(LoadRST) {
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(LoadRestartSim) {
|
||||
auto python = std::make_shared<Python>();
|
||||
void compare_sched(const std::string& base_deck,
|
||||
const std::string& rst_deck,
|
||||
const std::string& rst_fname,
|
||||
std::size_t restart_step)
|
||||
{
|
||||
Parser parser;
|
||||
auto deck = parser.parseFile("SPE1CASE2.DATA");
|
||||
auto python = std::make_shared<Python>();
|
||||
auto deck = parser.parseFile(base_deck);
|
||||
EclipseState ecl_state(deck);
|
||||
Schedule sched(deck, ecl_state, python);
|
||||
|
||||
auto restart_deck = parser.parseFile("SPE1CASE2_RESTART_SKIPREST.DATA");
|
||||
auto rst_file = std::make_shared<EclIO::ERst>("SPE1CASE2.X0060");
|
||||
auto rst_view = std::make_shared<EclIO::RestartFileView>(std::move(rst_file), 60);
|
||||
auto restart_deck = parser.parseFile(rst_deck);
|
||||
auto rst_file = std::make_shared<EclIO::ERst>(rst_fname);
|
||||
auto rst_view = std::make_shared<EclIO::RestartFileView>(std::move(rst_file), restart_step);
|
||||
auto rst_state = RestartIO::RstState::load(std::move(rst_view));
|
||||
EclipseState ecl_state_restart(restart_deck);
|
||||
Schedule restart_sched(restart_deck, ecl_state_restart, python, {}, &rst_state);
|
||||
|
||||
// Verify that sched and restart_sched are identical from report_step 60 and onwords.
|
||||
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(restart_sched.size(), sched.size());
|
||||
for (std::size_t report_step=restart_step; report_step < sched.size(); report_step++) {
|
||||
const auto& base = sched[report_step];
|
||||
auto rst = restart_sched[report_step];
|
||||
|
||||
BOOST_CHECK(base.start_time() == rst.start_time());
|
||||
if (report_step < sched.size() - 1)
|
||||
BOOST_CHECK(base.end_time() == rst.end_time());
|
||||
|
||||
// Should ideally do a base == rst check here, but for now the members
|
||||
// wells, rft_config, m_first_in_year and m_first_in_month fail.
|
||||
// BOOST_CHECK(base == rst);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(LoadRestartSim) {
|
||||
compare_sched("SPE1CASE2.DATA", "SPE1CASE2_RESTART_SKIPREST.DATA", "SPE1CASE2.X0060", 60);
|
||||
compare_sched("SPE1CASE2.DATA", "SPE1CASE2_RESTART.DATA", "SPE1CASE2.X0060", 60);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user