While simulating
toe-to-heel air injection (THAI), which is a variant
of conventional in situ combustion that uses a horizontal producer
well to recover mobilized partially upgraded heavy oil, the chemical
kinetics is one of the main sources of uncertainty because the hydrocarbon
must be represented by the use of oil pseudo-components. There is,
however, no study comparing the predictive capability of the different
kinetics schemes used to simulate the THAI process. From the literature,
it was determined that the thermal cracking kinetics schemes can be
broadly divided into two: split and direct conversion schemes. Unlike
the former, the latter does not depend on the selected stoichiometric
coefficients of the products. It is concluded that by using a direct
conversion scheme, the extent of uncertainty imposed by the kinetics
is reduced as the stoichiometric coefficients of the products are
known with certainty. Three models, P, G, and B, each with their own
different kinetics schemes, were successfully validated against a
three-dimensional combustion cell experiment. In models P and G, which
do not take low-temperature oxidation (LTO) into account, the effect
of oil pseudo-component combustion reactions is insignificant. For
model B, which included LTO reactions, LTO was also found to be insignificant
because only a small fraction of oxygen bypassed the combustion front
and the combustion zone was maintained at temperatures of over 600°C.
Therefore, in all the models, it is observed that coke deposition
was due to the thermal cracking taking place ahead of the combustion
zone. During the first phase of the combustion, peak temperature curves
of models P, G, and B closely matched the experimental curve, albeit
with some deviations by up to 100°C between 90 and 120 min. After
the increase in the air injection flux, only the model P curve overlapped
the experimental curve. The model P cumulative oil production curve
deviated from the experimental one by only a relative error of 4.0%
compared to deviations in models G and B by relative errors of 6.0
and 8.3%, respectively. Consequently, it follows that model P provided
better predictions of the peak temperature and cumulative oil production.
The same conclusion can be drawn with regard to the produced oxygen
concentration and combustion front velocity. With regard to American
Petroleum Institute (API) gravity, it is found that all the three
models predicted very similar trends to the experiment, just like
in the case of the oil production rate curves, and therefore, no model,
in these two cases, can be singled out as the best. Also, all the
models’ predictions of the produced CO
X
concentration prior to the increase in the air flux closely
match the experimental curve. There are, however, serious differences,
especially by model P, from the reported experimental curve by up
to 15% after the increase in the air flux.