Spelling suggestions: "subject:"inje??o dde vapor, simula??o"" "subject:"inje??o dde vapor, primula??o""
1 |
Estudo param?trico da segrega??o gravitacional na inje??o cont?nua de vaporRodrigues, Marcos Allyson Felipe 18 August 2008 (has links)
Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T14:08:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
MarcosAFR.pdf: 4078279 bytes, checksum: 366f0859503e4c45e56db94e388e42e4 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2008-08-18 / Steam injection is the most used method of additional recovery for the extraction of heavy oil. In this type procedure is common to happen gravitational segregation and this phenomenon can affect the production of oil and therefore, it shoulds be considered in the projects of
continuous steam injection. For many years, the gravitational segregation was not adequately considered in the calculation procedures in Reservoir Engineering. The effect of the gravity causes the segregation of fluids inside the porous media according to their densities. The results of simulation arising from reservoirs could provide the ability to deal with the gravity, and it became apparent that the effects of the gravity could significantly affect the performance of the reservoir. It know that the gravitational segregation can happen in almost every case where there is injection of light fluid, specially the steam, and occurs with greater intensity for viscous oil reservoirs. This work discusses the influence of some parameters of the rock-reservoir in segregation as viscosity, permeability, thickness, cover gas, porosity. From a model that shows the phenomenon with greater intensity, optimized some operational parameters as the rate flow rate steam, distance between the wells injector-producer, and interval of completion which contributed to the reduction in gravity override, thus increasing the oil recovery. It was shown a greater technical-economic viability for the model of distance between the wells 100 m. The analysis was performed using the simulator of CMG (Computer Modeling Group-Stars 2007.11, in which was observed by iterating between studied variables in heavy oil reservoirs with similar characteristics to Brazilian Northeast / A inje??o de vapor ? o m?todo de recupera??o suplementar mais utilizado para a recupera??o de ?leos pesados. Neste tipo de processo ? comum acontecer a segrega??o gravitacional e este fen?meno pode afetar a produ??o de ?leo e, por isso, deve ser considerado nos projetos de inje??o cont?nua de vapor. Por muitos anos, a segrega??o gravitacional n?o era adequadamente considerada em procedimentos de c?lculo em Engenharia de Reservat?rios. O efeito da gravidade faz com que ocorra a segrega??o de fluidos, isto ?, os fluidos tendem a se
arranjar dentro do meio poroso de acordo com as suas densidades. Os resultados advindos de simula??o de reservat?rios forneceram a capacidade para lidar com a gravidade, e tornou-se aparente que os efeitos da gravidade poderiam afetar significativamente o desempenho do
reservat?rio. Sabe-se que a segrega??o gravitacional pode ocorrer em quase todos os casos onde h? inje??o de fluidos leves, especialmente o vapor, e ocorre com maior intensidade para reservat?rios de ?leos viscosos. Neste trabalho ? abordada a influ?ncia de alguns par?metros da rocha-reservat?rio na segrega??o como viscosidade, permeabilidade, espessura, capa de g?s e porosidade. A partir de um modelo que apresenta o fen?meno com maior intensidade, otimizaram-se alguns par?metros operacionais como vaz?o de inje??o de vapor, dist?ncia entre os po?os injetor-produtor e intervalo de completa??o que contribu?ram para a redu??o do efeito,
aumento assim o fator de recupera??o. Foi mostrada uma maior viabilidade t?cnica-econ?mica para o modelo de dist?ncia entre os po?os de 100 m. A an?lise foi realizada utilizando o simulador comercial da CMG (Computer Modelling Group) - Stars 2007.11, onde foi observada a intera??o entre as vari?veis estudadas em reservat?rios com caracter?sticas semelhantes aos encontrados no Nordeste brasileiro
|
2 |
An?lise de viabilidade de inje??o de fluidos alternativos ao vapor em reservat?rios de ?leo pesadoRodrigues, Marcos Allyson Felipe 03 September 2012 (has links)
Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T14:09:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
MarcosAFR_TESE.pdf: 4983695 bytes, checksum: 6cb8867b58e49a5dd6efc85191c6fa49 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2012-09-03 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior / Many of hydrocarbon reserves existing in the world are formed by heavy oils (?API
between 10 and 20). Moreover, several heavy oil fields are mature and, thus, offer great
challenges for oil industry. Among the thermal methods used to recover these resources,
steamflooding has been the main economically viable alternative. Latent heat carried by steam
heats the reservoir, reducing oil viscosity and facilitating the production. This method has many
variations and has been studied both theoretically and experimentally (in pilot projects and in full
field applications). In order to increase oil recovery and reduce steam injection costs, the
injection of alternative fluid has been used on three main ways: alternately, co-injected with
steam and after steam injection interruption. The main objective of these injection systems is to
reduce the amount of heat supplied to the reservoir, using cheaper fluids and maintaining the
same oil production levels. This works discusses the use of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, methane
and water as an alternative fluid to the steam. The analyzed parameters were oil recoveries and
net cumulative oil productions. The reservoir simulation model corresponds to an oil reservoir of
100 m x 100 m x 28 m size, on a Cartesian coordinates system (x, y and z directions). It is a semi
synthetic model with some reservoir data similar to those found in Brazilian Potiguar Basin. All
studied cases were done using the simulator STARS from CMG (Computer Modelling Group,
version 2009.10). It was found that waterflood after steam injection interruption achieved the
highest net cumulative oil compared to other fluids injection. Moreover, it was observed that
steam and alternative fluids, co-injected and alternately, did not present increase on profitability
project compared with steamflooding / Muitas das reservas de hidrocarbonetos existentes em todo o mundo s?o formadas por
?leos pesados (?API entre 10 e 20). Al?m disso, v?rios campos de ?leo pesado est?o maduros e,
portanto, oferecem grandes desafios para a ind?stria do petr?leo. Entre os m?todos t?rmicos
utilizados para recuperar estes recursos, a inje??o de vapor tem sido a principal alternativa
economicamente vi?vel. O calor latente transportado por meio de vapor aquece o reservat?rio,
reduzindo a viscosidade do ?leo, facilitando a produ??o. A fim de aumentar a recupera??o de
?leo e reduzir os custos inerentes ? inje??o de vapor, a inje??o de fluidos alternativos tem sido
utilizado em combina??o com o vapor das seguintes formas: alternadamente, coinjetados e ap?s a
interrup??o da inje??o de vapor. O objetivo principal destes sistemas de inje??o combinada ?
reduzir a quantidade de calor fornecida ao reservat?rio utilizando fluidos de menor valor
comercial, buscando manter os n?veis de produ??o de ?leo. Este trabalho analisa o uso do di?xido
de carbono, nitrog?nio, metano e ?gua como fluido alternativo ao vapor. Os par?metros
analisados foram a recupera??o de ?leo e a produ??o acumulada l?quida. O modelo de
reservat?rio analisado corresponde a um reservat?rio de dimens?es 100 m x 100 m x 28 m, num
sistema de coordenadas cartesianas ( dire??es x, y e z). ? um modelo semissint?tico com alguns
dados de reservat?rio semelhantes aos encontrados na Bacia Potiguar, Brasil. Todos os casos
estudados foram simulados utilizando o simulador STARS da CMG (Computer Group,
Modelagem vers?o 2009.10). Verificou-se que a inje??o de ?gua ap?s a interrup??o de inje??o de
vapor alcan?ou melhores resultados em termos de produ??o acumulada l?quida de ?leo em
rela??o a inje??o de outros fluidos. Al?m disso, foi observado que o vapor e os fluidos
alternativos, coinjetados e alternados, n?o apresentou aumento na rentabilidade do projeto em
compara??o com a inje??o cont?nua de vapor
|
Page generated in 0.0748 seconds