Emeraude v2.60 – Doc v2.60.01 - © KAPPA 1988-2010
Guided Interpretation #10 B10 - 11/12
Fig. B10.15 • Final temperature match solution (energy equation model)
You can build a user view to compare the rates obtained with both interpretations (QGZT under
‘Schematic output’) and you will see that they are fairly close. The energy equation model should
nevertheless be preferred as it represents physically what is happening in the reservoir. The
segmented model is by comparison lumping all reservoir effects into a Joule-Thomson process,
itself a function of a pressure drop that is non-physical. If this pressure drop can be estimated
from the data for the lowest zone, this is not the case elsewhere where it
de facto
behaves as an
additional degree of freedom.
The next plot illustrates the QGZT for the two interpretations (segmented model in green, energy
model in blue) compared to the reference solution obtained from Rubis (numerical simulation, in
red).