Fractional flow 2026-10-07
The fraction of total advective Darcy flux carried by one phase when capillary and gravity corrections are omitted. For two phases it is . This quantity lies between zero and one for nonnegative phase mobilities. Its nonlinear dependence on fluid saturation determines characteristic speeds and shocks in the Buckley-Leverett equation.
Saturation equation. Introduce intrinsic permeability of a porous medium and porosity . The relative porous permeabilities depend on the wetting fluid saturation. Define the phase mobilities and fractional flow
Use the conventional capillary pressure , generally decreasing as wetting saturation increases. Neglect gravity in this horizontal model. The two Darcy fluxes are and . Eliminate the common pressure gradient using to obtain
The wetting-phase mass conservation law is consequently
For , and the capillary pressure provides nonlinear diffusion. The initially uniform saturation is . Pure wetting-fluid injection prescribes and ; in the zero-capillarity, zero-residual-nonwetting idealization this corresponds to inlet saturation one. With residual nonwetting fluid, replace one by the appropriate maximum accessible saturation.
Shock formation and its speed. Neglect capillarity first. Smooth saturation values travel along characteristic curves at speed . When the trailing values have larger characteristic speeds than the values ahead, the curves intersect, and the Buckley-Leverett equation requires a shock selected as an entropy solution. This is typical for the increasing-convex part of a physical fractional-flow curve; shocks are not inevitable for every possible .
Integrating mass conservation across a shock from upstream to downstream gives the Rankine-Hugoniot condition
If an upstream rarefaction wave joins the shock smoothly in similarity coordinates, its terminal characteristic speed equals . Therefore the saturation at that join obeys the fractional-flow tangent construction
This is the printed equality. It is a tangent-selection condition, not the dimensional speed by itself; the speed includes . An arbitrary shock between prescribed constant states satisfies the jump condition but need not satisfy this additional tangency relation.
Positive capillary diffusion spreads a jump into a transition layer. For a travelling profile , integration gives
The endpoint states still satisfy the same Rankine-Hugoniot condition. Thus small capillarity primarily gives the front a finite thickness rather than changing the selected limiting speed; vanishing phase mobility at an endpoint can make the regularization degenerate.
The specified reciprocal fractional flow. On its stated branch, and . If extends continuously to the initial saturation and the inlet is at one, the decreasing saturation from behind to ahead makes characteristic speeds increase forwards: there is a rarefaction wave, not a compressive shock. Write and . The self-similar solution is
The fan connects continuously to the initial state and broadens linearly in time. This interpretation requires . A nonnegative physical fractional flow on the entire interval also requires .
The PDF specifies the formula only for and earlier calls residual. If that means an immobile wetting phase with , the endpoint is an extra constraint and the continuous-branch answer applies without conflict only at . For , the printed branch would give negative fractional flow for , so it cannot be the complete physical constitutive law. With an additional admissible extension, for example up to and the given positive branch above it, a compound fan–shock is possible. The tangent condition then gives
The fan ends at , followed by a jump to . This is a conditional physical extension, not data supplied by the question. For an immobile residual endpoint is likewise incompatible with a continuous version of the stated branch. These distinctions identify what is, and is not, determined by the printed constitutive assumption.