Finite Element Methods for

Flow in Porous Media

John Chapman and Max Jensen
john.chapman@durham.ac.uk
m.p.j.jensen@durham.ac.uk
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Durham University

where is a Lipschitz domain of Rn, f L2().

Multiply (4)1 by a smooth test function v
H01() and integrate by parts to find
Z
Z
p v dx =
f v dx
(5)

Fluid Flow in
Porous Media
A porous medium contains at least one non solid
phase in a solid matrix where the pores comprising the void space are interconnected. The
porosity, of the medium at a point x0 is the
ratio of void space to total volume in a neighbourhood of x0, known as a representative elementary volume (REV) as shown in Figure 1.

where the boundary terms have vanished because of the boundary condition (4)2. The equation (5) is known as the weak formulation of
the problem (4) for p H01() and for all
v H01(). This process can be generalised
for Lp = f where L is an elliptic differential operator with the associated bilinear form B given
by
B[p, v] :=

Z X
n

+
Figure 1: A porous medium filling with
REV centred on x0
Consider a porous medium filling a domain
R3. Conservation of mass in implies
()
+ (u) = q in
t

(1)

where the first term represents mass accumulation due to changes of fluid density in the
porous medium, the second mass inflow or outflow from the volume and the RHS sources and
sinks within . is the density of the fluid and u
is the macroscopic velocity. Darcys Law, given
by (2), can be derived from the Navier-Stokes
equations and is valid in regions of slow, viscous
flow. This is the case in most oil reservoir problems.
K
(2)
u = (p g)

Here p is the fluid pressure which is to be determined, the dynamic viscosity and K(x) a tensor of absolute permeability. Combining equations (1) and (2) gives


()
K
+ (p g) = q in (3)
t

which is a parabolic equation in general, but reduces to elliptic form if the density is constant
i.e. the equations model an incompressible fluid.

Weak
Formulation

(aij (x))pxi vxj

i,j=1
n
X

(4)

where aij , bi, c are given coefficient functions. By the Lax-Milgram Theorem the equation B[p, v] = (f, v) (where ( , ) denotes the inner product in L2) has a unique solution under
certain conditions on B (see [5], p.298). Applying these results to the fluid flow problem
(3) and looking for a weak solution for p in the
case of incompressible flow gives the coefficients
a = (K)/, b = (K)/ and c = 0.

Finite Element
Methods
In most cases solving B[p, v] = (f, v) explicitly
is impossible as the solution space V is infinite
dimensional (e.g. V above is H01()) . One approach to this is to solve the problem in a finite
dimensional subspace VN and demonstrate that
the solution in VN is a valid approximation to the
solution in V . In general the solution pN VN
and p V are not the same, but by taking successively larger subspaces VN1 VN2 . . . V
the solutions pNi converge to the true solution.
This method is known as the Galerkin method.
We assume that B is a bounded and elliptic bilinear form. If VN is taken as piecewise polynomials on a polygonal discretization (or triangulation) of , then the method is a finite element
method. The Lax-Milgram Theorem again guarantees the problem
pn Vn, B[pn, vn] = (f, vn),

Consider the partial differential equation


p = f in
p = 0 on

Figure 2: Finite element mesh refinement

at a corner

bi(x)pxi v + c(x)pv dx (6)

i=1

(7)

has a unique solution.

Consider a problem of the form (7) on a region
given in Figure 2 where triangular elements have

MAGIC 2009: Complexity, algorithms and methods.

been used to form a mesh. In order to refine a

finite element method on the region there are
three obvious choices: To increase the degree of
the polynomial interpolant (p-method); to refine
the mesh size (h-method); or to do both (hpmethod). The left hand side of Figure 2 shows
the original mesh, and the RHS shows a refinement of the triangulation round a reentrant corner.

Every type of problem will require a different

approach to mesh refinements and polynomial
degree, although some general principles can be
applied based on the smoothness of the solutions. Unfortunately this smoothness may not
be known a priori.
On a practical and theoretical level it is often easier to solve the equations on a reference element
and then transform the solution (and any associated error) to the triangulation of the problem
in question. Choosing basis functions on the reference elements is usually more straightforward
than on a general element, and the functions only
have to be determined once. It is important to
pick basis elements with small supports across
the finite element space as this can considerably
reduce computational difficulty as it results in
matrices that are sparse.
As with any numerical method it is essential to
bound the error incurred by approximating the
true solution p with pN . With finite elements
the fundamental result is Ceas inequality
kp pN kV c inf kp vkV
vVN

(8)

with c a constant. Ceas inequality is the basis for proving the convergence of finite element
methods.
References:
[1] Atkinson, K. and Han, W., Theoretical Numerical Analysis:
A Functional Analysis Framework, Springer-Verlag, New York,
2001.
[2] Bastian, P., Numerical Computation of Multiphase Flows
in Porous Media, Habilitationsschrift, Christian-AlbrechtsUniversitat Kiel, 1999.
[3] Bear, J., Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media, Dover Publications, New York, 1988.
[4] Braess, D., Finite Elements: Theory, Fast Solvers, and Applications in Solid Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
[5] Evans, L.C., Partial Differential Equations, American Mathematical Society, Rhode Island, 2008.