Four models and/or software packages have been tested, the Brigham model, PORO software (Streamlines approach), and the simple diffusion model using two different CFD software packages (Comsol and Castem).

PORO software was used successfully to simulate the experimental data. Figure 119 shows the good agreement obtained for wells 1 and 2. These simulations permitted the estimation of the porosity of the sand bed as 40%. The dispersivity was estimated to be 6 mm, this value being consistent with the characteristic of the sand bed.

Figure 120 shows the good agreement between experimental data and CFD simulations using the two CFD codes (Castem CEA made, ‘finite element toolbox’ and Comsol multipurpose finite element package, Comsol group, Sweden). However, it should be pointed out that the CFD code will be time consuming and more difficult to use for actual complex oil field simulations.

Finally, Fig. 121 shows comparison between the PORO and Brigham models, with several dispersivities (from 1 to 100 m) for a five spot configuration. If the tendencies of the two models are similar, the dispersions of the curves are different due to the original hypothesis of the two models.

FIG 122. Theoretical example of a ‘compartmental model’ in the case of a fracture surrounded by porous media zones with different characteristics.