fugacity coefficient
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

22
(FIVE YEARS 5)

H-INDEX

4
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Zhao ◽  
Ryosuke Okuno

Abstract Equation-of-state (EOS) compositional simulation is commonly used to model the interplay between phase behavior and fluid flow for various reservoir and surface processes. Because of its computational cost, however, there is a critical need for efficient phase-behavior calculations using an EOS. The objective of this research was to develop a proxy model for fugacity coefficient based on the Peng-Robinson EOS for rapid multiphase flash in compositional flow simulation. The proxy model as implemented in this research is to bypass the calculations of fugacity coefficients when the Peng-Robinson EOS has only one root, which is often the case at reservoir conditions. The proxy fugacity model was trained by artificial neural networks (ANN) with over 30 million fugacity coefficients based on the Peng-Robinson EOS. It accurately predicts the Peng- Robinson fugacity coefficient by using four parameters: Am, Bm, Bi, and ΣxiAij. Since these scalar parameters are general, not specific to particular compositions, pressures, and temperatures, the proxy model is applicable to petroleum engineering applications as equally as the original Peng-Robinson EOS. The proxy model is applied to multiphase flash calculations (phase-split and stability), where the cubic equation solutions and fugacity coefficient calculations are bypassed when the Peng-Robinson EOS has one root. The original fugacity coefficient is analytically calculated when the EOS has more than one root, but this occurs only occasionally at reservoir conditions. A case study shows the proxy fugacity model gave a speed-up factor of 3.4% in comparison to the conventional EOS calculation. Case studies also demonstrate accurate multiphase flash results (stability and phase split) and interchangeable proxy models for different fluid cases with different (numbers of) components. This is possible because it predicts the Peng-Robinson fugacity in the variable space that is not specific to composition, temperature, and pressure. For the same reason, non-zero binary iteration parameters do not impair the applicability, accuracy, robustness, and efficiency of the model. As the proxy models are specific to individual components, a combination of proxy models can be used to model for any mixture of components. Tuning of training hyperparameters and training data sampling method helped reduce the mean absolute percent error to less than 0.1% in the ANN modeling. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first generalized proxy model of the Peng-Robinson fugacity that is applicable to any mixture. The proposed model retains the conventional flash iteration, the convergence robustness, and the option of manual parameter tuning for fluid characterization.


2019 ◽  
pp. 239-250
Author(s):  
John Newman ◽  
Vincent Battaglia
Keyword(s):  

Respuestas ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-41
Author(s):  
Miguel Fernando Palencia Muñoz ◽  
Natalia Prieto-Jiménez ◽  
Germán González Silva

This paper is related to the procedure for calculating curves dew point and bubble point of a binary system, consisting of the methanol and benzene mixture to 45°C, using the Peng-Robinson cubic equation to calculate the fugacity coefficient of gas i in the mixture, and Van Laar model to calculate the activity coefficient of component i in the liquid mixture. Then a comparison between the theoretical data with the experimental data and later with the commercial simulator Hysys-Aspen, which applies the model of Wilson. The simulation was validated with experimental data,in addition to comparing the results with a commercial simulator.


Author(s):  
Dennis Sherwood ◽  
Paul Dalby

Up to this point, the analyses throughout the book have related to ideal states – in particular, ideal gases and ideal solutions. This chapter shows how the theory developed for ideal states can be modified for real states, and introduces the concepts of fugacity, the fugacity coefficient, activity, the activity coefficient and ionic strength.


Daxue Huaxue ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 66-70
Author(s):  
Fei-Wu CHEN ◽  
◽  
Cong Qian Gu ◽  
Wei-Lan Qian ◽  
Xu-Qin Li

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinz Gamsjäger ◽  
John W. Lorimer ◽  
Pirketta Scharlin ◽  
David G. Shaw
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 326 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Amaya-Tapia ◽  
S.Y. Larsen ◽  
M. Lassaut

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document