-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 151
Reservoir coupling: make a master group's injection target reflect what the slaves are actually producing #7366
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
+383
−66
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7e9be57
RESCOUP: do not report an unsolved new well's target as achieved prod…
hakonhagland d0f4b6e
Keep a master group's injection target in step with slave production
hakonhagland f78037f
RESCOUP: remove a declaration left without a definition
hakonhagland 8f64ead
Extract the per-well contribution to a group rate sum
hakonhagland 36d5269
Remove exactly what the group rate sum added for an unsolved new well
hakonhagland ae617f5
Say why the new-well correction reads the live schedule events
hakonhagland File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the comment. I checked it on our coupled model and the premise does not hold:
NEW_WELLis not still set on the later sync steps of a report step. We read the liveschedule[report_step].wellgroup_events(), and that flag is cleared after the first time step of the report step — which is also whyBlackoilWellModelkeeps a separatereport_step_start_events_snapshot for the code that does need it to survive.Measured on a report step with seven sync steps, probing every call:
hasEvent(NEW_WELL)is 1 on the first sync step and 0 on the other six, and the amount actually subtracted is the well's target on the first and exactly 0.0 on each of the others. So the correction fires once per newly opened well and never removes a solved rate.That said, you are pointing at something real. The correctness of the gate depends on that clearing, and nothing in the code said so. Someone reaching for
reportStepStartEvents()— the more obviously correct-looking source, since it is a stable snapshot — would reintroduce exactly the behaviour you describe, becausewellsSolvedThisSyncStep()is cleared before the pre-solve send of every sync step. I have written that down at the point where the events are read, in ae617f5 ("Say why the new-well correction reads the live schedule events").