Multiscale finite volume method with adaptive unstructured grids for flow simulation in heterogeneous fractured porous media

Mehrdoost, Zahra

doi:10.1007/s00366-021-01520-6

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different numerical schemes depend on the discretization method for simulating fluid transport in fractured media under the DFM (Formaggia et al 2020). They include the finite volume method (Mehrdoost 2022;Ahmed et al 2015;Gläser et al 2017), mimetic finite difference method (Huang et al 2014), the finite element method (Zhang et al 2013;Alotaibi et al 2022), mixed finite element method (Younes et al 2023;Fu and Yang 2022;He et al 2021a, b) and extended finite element method (Wang et al 2020;Mortazavi et al 2022) etc. Researchers are also looking into reduced-order models and machine-learning methods to speed up DFM simulations while maintaining accuracy (de Hoop et al 2022;He et al 2020;Liu et al 2017;Garipov et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling fluid flow in fractured porous media: a comparative analysis between Darcy–Darcy model and Stokes–Brinkman model

Dudun,

Feng

2024

J Petrol Explor Prod Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are limited comparative studies on modeling fluid transport in fractured porous media. Hence, this paper systematically compares the steady-state creeping flow Stokes–Brinkman and Darcy–Darcy models for computational efficiency and accuracy. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted on the effect of fracture orientations, fracture sizes, mesh resolution, and fractures with Local Grid Refinement (LGR) under the FEniCS computational framework. Both models were validated numerically, and the accuracy of their solution is compared using the R-squared metric and L2 norm estimates. Key results showed that both models have similar pressure and velocity field solutions for a given fracture orientation. The computational time required for solving the Stokes–Brinkman models for a single fracture case was unusually lower than that of the Darcy–Darcy model when the pressure and velocity terms in the Darcy–Darcy model were solved simultaneously using two equations, contrary to where only one equation solves for the pressure and the velocity is obtained by projecting the gradient of pressure onto a vector space. The Stokes–Brinkman model is more sensitive to mesh resolution, and as a result, the Darcy–Darcy model tends to be more accurate than the Stokes–Brinkman model at low resolutions. Local Grid Refinement (LGR) can improve the Stokes–Brinkman model's accuracy at low mesh resolution. Furthermore, both models showed similar results when compared for complex fracture systems such as multiple fracture cases: interconnecting and isolated fractured porous media systems under low-velocity and steady-state creeping flow conditions. The FEniCS code in this paper is shared for future researchers to reproduce results or extend the research work.

show abstract