首页> 外文期刊>Energy Exploration & Exploitation >A comparison of accuracy and computational time for common and artificial methods in predicting minimum miscibility pressure
【24h】

A comparison of accuracy and computational time for common and artificial methods in predicting minimum miscibility pressure

机译:预测最小混溶压力的常用方法和人工方法的准确性和计算时间的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Minimum miscibility pressure is the least required pressure for complete mixing of gas and oil in the reservoir conditions. It is an important parameter in the processes of gas injection in a miscible manner and its precise determination is very vital in choosing the type of injecting gas and planning injecting equipment for increasing the recovery efficiency. The common method is determining MMP in slim tube or 1 -D simulation of slim tube. Usually determining the minimum miscibility pressure via slim tube apparatus is an expensive and time-consuming test and to carry it out it is necessary to have a sample of reservoir oil and suggested injecting gas. Occasionally it is possible that for some unknown reasons despite spending much time and money it won't bring up any result. As a result, for determining this parameter, finding another method which has a higher precision in addition to being swift and less expensive is very necessary. On the other hand, there are several simulation methods to determine minimum miscibility pressure. These methods are so fast rather than slim tube experiment and relatively precise. MMP can be estimated numerically using compositional simulation, method of characteristics (MOC), mixing-cell methods, intelligent methods, and empirical correlations. However, nowadays one dimensional (1-D) slim tube simulation based on compositional simulation is very common. In this paper a suggestive method is proposed for determining MMP. A mixing rule method coupled with artificial neural network model (ANN) based on a numerous experiment data. Accuracy and computational time of artificial neural network method were compared to common prior models and correlations. The results show although intelligent methods are so fast, 1-D slim tube simulation is still a proper method to determine MMP in high accuracy. Average absolute relative error for MMP value is 1.5% for 1-D slim tube simulation, while the number for ANN is 3.25%. However, ANN method is recommended for fast MMP estimation.
机译:最小混溶压力是在储层条件下完全混合天然气和石油所需的最低压力。它是混溶气体注入过程中的重要参数,其精确确定对于选择注入气体的类型和规划注入设备以提高采收率至关重要。常用的方法是确定细管中的MMP或细管的一维模拟。通常,通过细管设备确定最小混溶压力是一项昂贵且费时的测试,要执行该测试,必须有一个储层油样和建议的注入气体样本。有时候,尽管花费了很多时间和金钱,由于某些未知的原因,它还是不会带来任何结果。结果,为了确定该参数,非常需要找到一种除了快速且廉价之外还具有更高精度的方法。另一方面,有几种模拟方法可确定最小混溶压力。这些方法是如此快速,而不是细管实验,并且相对精确。 MMP可以使用组成模拟,特征方法(MOC),混合单元方法,智能方法和经验相关性以数字方式估算。然而,如今,基于成分模拟的一维(1-D)细管模拟非常普遍。本文提出了一种确定MMP的建议方法。基于大量实验数据的混合规则方法与人工神经网络模型(ANN)结合。将人工神经网络方法的准确性和计算时间与常见的先验模型及其相关性进行了比较。结果表明,尽管智能方法是如此之快,但是一维细管仿真仍然是确定高精度MMP的合适方法。一维细管仿真的MMP值的平均绝对相对误差为1.5%,而ANN的数字为3.25%。但是,建议使用ANN方法进行快速MMP估计。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号