Mpfad +FR/CPR

High Order Methods (>2) for the solution of the Oil and
Water Displacement in Petroleum Reservoirs
Gustavo Galindez Ramirez.
Supervisor: Paulo R. M. Lyra.

Co-advisor: Darlan K. E. de Carvalho.
Federal University of Pernambuco UFPE
March 11, 2016
Gustavo Galindez R (UFPE) Qualify Exam submitted to PPGEM March 11, 2016 1/1
Outline
Introduction
Introduction
Motivation.
Objectives.
Introduction Motivation
Numerical dissipation effects
Water saturation profile with capillarity pressure and gravity effects using SFVM
16 NDOFs
0.9
SFVM, k=1
SFVM, k=2
0.8
SFVM, k=4
Reference
0.7
0.6
Sw
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X
Figure 1: 1D water saturation

profile with capillary pressure
and gravity effects using the
SFVM with 16 NDOFs.
16 NDOFs
0.9
0.8
SFVM, k=1
SFVM, k=2
Breakthrough
SFVM, k=4
Reference
0.7
Water inrush times for producer well.
0.6
Sw
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
X

SFVM with 16 NDOFs.
16 NDOFs
0.9
0.8
SFVM, k=1
SFVM, k=2
Breakthrough
SFVM, k=4
Reference
0.7
0.6
Sw
0.5
0.4 The Grid Orientation Effect

0.3
0.2
Strong dependence of the numerical results
0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
on the orientation of the grid adopted.
X

SFVM with 16 NDOFs.
16 NDOFs
0.9
0.8
SFVM, k=1
SFVM, k=2
Breakthrough
SFVM, k=4
Reference
0.7
0.6
Sw
0.5
0.4 The Grid Orientation Effect

0.3
0.2
Strong dependence of the numerical results
0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
on the orientation of the grid adopted.
X
Figure 1: 1D water saturation Wrong oil recovery prediction

profile with capillary pressure Causing inaccurate economic evaluation in
and gravity effects using the real oil reservoirs.
SFVM with 16 NDOFs.
Introduction Objectives
Objectives
Objectives
General Objective
Applying high-order discretization techniques for the modeling and simula-
tion of two-phase flows in petroleum reservoirs.
Objectives
General Objective
Applying high-order discretization techniques for the modeling and simula-
tion of two-phase flows in petroleum reservoirs.
Specific Objectives
Using MPFA-D method to solve pressure equation.
2D full implementation of CPR method to solve saturation equation.
Coupling through the total reconstructed velocity field via IMPES.
Evaluate the performance of the coupled scheme, using two-phase
flow benchmark problems, wherein pressure and streamline
reconstructed velocities are analyzed.
State of Art
State of art.
Table 1: Review of state of art of high-order methods and its applications in

petroleum engineering.
Method Author Advantages Disadvantages
MUSCL Durlofsky (1993). -Robust. -Inability to extend to higher-order accuracy on general unstructured grids.
k+1=2 Carvalho (2005). -Accurated in comparison with FOM. -Large stencil and difficult for general implementation.
Riviere and Wheeler (2002). -Robust -High computational cost.
DG
Bastian (2002). -High Accuracy in comparison with FOM and MUSCL. -Explicit volume and surface integrations.
MUSCL Lamine and Edwards (2013). -Large local system of linear algebraic equations.
-Accurated in comparison with MUSCL of second order.
k+1>2 Souza(2015) -Computational cost is very high.
-Avoidance of the volume or surface integrations.
CPR
-Compact stencil.
Governing Equation.
Model of immiscible flow (water and oil).
Pressure Equation.
~ ~v = Q with ~v = K p.
(1)

Saturation Equation.
Sw ~ w (Sw ) + Qw
~ F ~ w (Sw ) = fw ~v .
= with F (2)
t
Proposed methodology
Coupling via IMPES of the MPFA-type methods with

spectral/nodal formulations, such as, SV/SD and CPR
INITIAL CONDITION
CALCULATE EXPLICIT SOLUTION

IMPLICIT SOLUTION OF THE VELOCITY FIELD OF THE
THE PRESSURE EQUATION USING SATURATION
DARCY'S LAW EQUATION
END
Figure 2: IMPES Methodology Algorithm, adapted from [Souza, 2015].
Numerical Formulation. MPFA-D Method
Figure 3: Part of a polygonal

mesh, illustrating the diamond
path. [Souza, 2015,
Contreras et al., 2016].
Integrating the pressure equation on CV

Z Z
~v ~ndA = Qk . (3)
k

path. [Souza, 2015,

Z Z
~v ~ndA = Qk . (3)
k
RHS
Z
~ IJ
X
~v ~nk = ~vIJ N (4)
k IJk

path. [Souza, 2015,

Z Z
~v ~ndA = Qk . (3)
k
RHS
Z
~ IJ
X
~v ~nk = ~vIJ N (4)
k IJk

mesh, illustrating the diamond LHS
path. [Souza, 2015, Z
Contreras et al., 2016]. Qk = Qk Vk (5)
k

path. [Souza, 2015,
Gustavo Galindez R (UFPE) Qualify Exam submitted to PPGEM March 11, 2016 10 / 1
The average mid-edge velocity

1
Z
~vIJ = ~v , (6)
~ IJ
N

path. [Souza, 2015,

1
Z
~vIJ = ~v , (6)
~ IJ
N
Injection/production average terms

1
Z
Qk = Qk . (7)
Vk k

path. [Souza, 2015,

1
Z
~vIJ = ~v , (6)
~ IJ
N
Injection/production average terms

1
Z
Qk = Qk . (7)
Vk k

mesh, illustrating the diamond The continuity equation is expressed, as
path. [Souza, 2015,
Contreras et al., 2016]. ~ IJ
~vIJ N = IJ [pR pL fIJ (pJ pI )], (8)
Numerical Formulation. Reconstruction of Darcy Velocity Inside the Elements.
Figure 5: Part of a
polygonal mesh, illustrating
the Kuznetsov-Repin
reconstruction.
Raviart-Thomas Point-velocity.

3 N
X ~ IJ
i
vE (x) |T = ~
v (x xi ). (9)
2AT T ,( IJ )i ( IJ )i
i=1
Figure 5: Part of a
the Kuznetsov-Repin
reconstruction.
Raviart-Thomas Point-velocity.

3 N
X ~ IJ
i
vE (x) |T = ~
v (x xi ). (9)
2AT T ,( IJ )i ( IJ )i
i=1
Kuznetsov-Repin reconstruction.

~ 12 ~ 23

~v(
N ~v(
N

12) 23)
~v(
=
13)

~ +

~

Figure 5: Part of a AT123 N13 AT123 N13
~ ~
the Kuznetsov-Repin ~v(
N
14) 14 ~
v N
34
+ (34)

reconstruction. +
~ ~ .
(10)
AT134 N 13 A T134 N 13
= (|T123 | |T134 | / |T123 | + |T134 |) .
Numerical Formulation. CPR Method
The weighted residual form of water saturation equation.

Sw
Z
W + ~ w (Sw ) dV = 0.
~ F (11)
t
Integrating by parts and applying the Gauss Divergence theorem.
Z Swh (i) Z
W dV + ~ w (S h ) ~ndA
WF w (i)
i t i
Z
~ w (S h )dV = 0.
~ W F (12)
w (i)
i
Common Riemann flux.

~ w (S h ) ~n F(S h , S h
F w (i) w (i) w (i+1) , ~
n). (13)
Applying integration by parts and the Gauss Divergence theorem.
Swh (i)
Z ! Z
W ~
+ ~ w (S h )
F dV + W [F norm ] dA = 0, (14)
w (i)
i t i
Jump on the flux.

~ w (S h ) ~n
[F norm ] F(Swh (i) , Swh (i+1) , ~n) F (15)
w (i)
Lifting operator i .
Z Z
W i dV = W [F norm ] dA, (16)
i i
The substitution of Eq. 16 into Eq. 14 gives,

Swh (i)
Z !
+ ~ w (S h ) + i
~ F WdV = 0. (17)
w (i)
i t
Differential formulation of saturation equation.

Swh (i)
+ P( ~ w (S h )) + i = 0.
~ F (18)
w (i)
t
Approximate solution in the discrete cell [Wang et al., 2011].

Swh (i,j) ~ w (S h
F w (i,j) )
+ Pj + i,j = 0. (19)
t x
Numerical Formulation. Recovery of existing methods
Nodal discontinuous Galerkin Scheme.
Correction Function and its Derivative, k=2

PHxL
1.0
0.5 SP
SP
x
-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0
-0.5
g'DG
-1.0
gDG
-1.5
-2.0
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
SP(j) 0 0 0 0 0
gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j
1 -2.0 -4.5 -8.0 -12.5 -18.0
2 1.0 0.75 0.8944 1.0714 1.2591
3 - -1.5 -0.8944 -0.9375 -1.0399
4 - - 2.0 1.0714 1.0399
5 - - - -2.5 -1.2591
6 - - - - 3.0
Uni-dimensional correction function [Huynh, 2007].

PHxL
1.0
0.5 SP
0 0
[F norm ]L + gR,j [F norm ]R ).
SP
-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

x i,j = (1/hi )(gL,j (20)
-0.5
g'DG
-1.0
gDG
-1.5
-2.0
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
SP(j) 0 0 0 0 0
1 -2.0 -4.5 -8.0 -12.5 -18.0
2 1.0 0.75 0.8944 1.0714 1.2591
3 - -1.5 -0.8944 -0.9375 -1.0399
4 - - 2.0 1.0714 1.0399
5 - - - -2.5 -1.2591
6 - - - - 3.0

PHxL
1.0
0.5 SP
0 0
SP
-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

x i,j = (1/hi )(gL,j (20)
-0.5
g'DG
-1.0
gDG
The RR,k (Right Randau) polynomial.

-1.5
-2.0
SP(j)
P1
0
P2
0
P3
0
P4
0
P5
0
gDG,k = RR,k = ((1)k /2)(Pk Pk1 ). (21)
1 -2.0 -4.5 -8.0 -12.5 -18.0
2 1.0 0.75 0.8944 1.0714 1.2591
3 - -1.5 -0.8944 -0.9375 -1.0399
4 - - 2.0 1.0714 1.0399
5 - - - -2.5 -1.2591
6 - - - - 3.0

PHxL
1.0
0.5 SP
0 0
SP
-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

x i,j = (1/hi )(gL,j (20)
-0.5
g'DG
-1.0
gDG
The RR,k (Right Randau) polynomial.

-1.5
-2.0
SP(j)
P1
0
P2
0
P3
0
P4
0
P5
0
gDG,k = RR,k = ((1)k /2)(Pk Pk1 ). (21)
1 -2.0 -4.5 -8.0 -12.5 -18.0
2 1.0 0.75 0.8944 1.0714 1.2591
3 - -1.5 -0.8944 -0.9375 -1.0399
4 - - 2.0 1.0714 1.0399 Derivative of correction function.
5 - - - -2.5 -1.2591
6 - - - - 3.0
0
gDG = 0.5 (1 + 3x ) . (22)
SD/SV and CPR-g2 methods.
Table 2: Constant lifting Table 3: Constant lifting

0 0
coefficients-g(SD/SV)L,j , for linear coeffients-g2(L,j) , for linear element
element [-1,1]. [-1,1].
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
SP(j) 0 0 0 0 0 SP(j) 0 0 0 0 0
gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j gL,j
1 -3.5 -6.5 -10.5 -15.5 -21.5 1 2.0 4.5 8.0 12.5 18.0
2 -0.5 0.75 1.39 1.9129 2.3821 2 -1.0 -0.75 -0.5938 -0.2612 0.2513
3 - 0.5 -0.3945 -0.9375 -1.3859 3 - 1.5 0.9688 0.9375 0.8518
4 - - -0.5 0.2296 0.6939 4 - - -2.0 -1.1451 -1.1244
5 - - - 0.5 -0.1350 5 - - - 0.5 -1.3103
6 - - - - -0.5 6 - - - - -3.0
Numerical Formulation. Extension to 2D problems
Figure 6: Legendre-Lobatto points in quadrilateral element for (a) Comp.

Domain and (b) P 1 , (C) P 2 and (d) P 3 reconstruction
Explicit Time Discretization
Stability regions of the RungeKutta method in the complex tplane.

Equation (19) can be written in compact form as
3 RK1
Rk2 dSw
2
Rk3
= R(Sw ). (23)
1
Rk4
dt
0
x
1 Explicit Runge-Kutta method

2
3
y
5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2
Sw(1) = Swn + tR(Swn )
3 n 1 1
Figure 7: Stability regions Sw(2) = S + S 1 + tR(Sw1 ) (24)
of the Runge-Kutta method 4 w 4 w 4
1 n 2 2
in the complex t-plane, Swn+1 = Sw + Sw2 + tR(Sw2 )
from 1 to 4 stages. 3 3 3
Preliminary Results Uni-dimensional Problems
Table 4: Accuracy study for 1-D CPRg2 SV/SD and DG, for the advection
equation, using Gauss-Lobatto distribution to localize SPs and CVs (Control
Volumes).
L error L order L1 error L1 order
k +1 x NDOF
CPRg2 SV/SD DG CPRg2 SV/SD DG CPRg2 SV/SD DG CPR SV/SD DG
1.00e-1 20 5.50e-2 5.34e-2 1.52e-2 - - - 9.80e-3 3.29e-2 9.8e-3 - - -
5.00e-2 40 5.50e-3 1.41e-2 5.50e-3 1.45 1.92 1.45 3.60e-3 8.72e-3 3.60e-3 1.46 1.92 1.46
2.50e-2 80 1.70e-3 3.56e-3 1.70e-3 1.69 1.99 1.69 1.10e-3 2.24e-3 1.10e-3 1.71 1.96 1.71
2
1.25e-2 160 4.72e-4 8.94e-4 4.70e-4 1.86 1.99 1.87 3.00e-4 5.65e-4 3.00e-4 1.86 1.99 1.86
6.25e-3 320 1.23e-4 2.24e-4 1.24e-4 1.94 2.00 1.93 7.84e-5 1.42e-5 7.86e-5 1.94 1.99 1.93
6.67e-2 30 3.90e-3 2.58e-3 3.90e-3 - - - 1.60e-3 1.07e-3 1.60e-3 - - -

3.33e-2 60 5.09e-4 3.45e-4 5.23e-4 2.92 2.90 2.89 2.06e-4 1.36e-4 2.06e-4 2.95 2.97 2.95
3 1.67e-2 120 6.44e-5 4.46e-5 7.89e-5 2.98 2.95 2.73 2.57e-5 1.73e-5 2.58e-5 3.00 2.97 2.99
8.33e-3 240 8.07e-6 5.67e-6 1.01e-5 3.00 2.98 2.97 3.21e-6 2.18e-6 0.33e-5 3.00 2.99 2.97
1.25e-2 480 1.00e-6 7.14e-7 1.27e-6 3.00 2.99 2.99 4.02e-7 2.74e-7 0.41e-6 3.00 2.99 3.00
1.00e-1 20 2.60e-3 2.23e-3 2.60e-3 - - - 8.43e-4 6.77e-4 8.31e-4 - - -

5.00e-2 40 1.94e-4 1.53e-4 1.81e-4 3.75 3.86 3.82 6.07e-5 4.61e-5 5.81e-5 3.80 3.88 3.84
2.50e-2 80 1.23e-5 9.52e-6 1.31e-5 3.98 4.00 3.79 3.72e-6 2.95e-6 0.40e-5 4.03 3.97 3.86
4
1.25e-2 160 7.75e-7 6.00e-7 0.85e-6 3.99 3.99 3.95 2.32e-7 1.86e-7 0.26e-6 4.00 3.99 3.94
6.25e-3 320 4.86e-8 3.75e-8 2.35e-6 4.00 4.00 3.97 1.45e-8 1.17e-8 0.16e-7 4.00 3.99 4.02
pRefinement pRefinement
0
SV/SD 6.2 SV/SD
1 DG DG
CPRg2 6.4 CPRg2
2 6.6
3 6.8
log (L error)
log10(L error)
7
4

7.2
5
10
7.4
6 7.6
7 7.8
8
8
8.2
9
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7.5 8 8.5 9
Order of Accuracy Order of Accuracy
(a) (b)
Figure 8: Demonstration of the spectral accuracy of the SV/SD, DG and CPR
schemes using p-refinement, for the advection equation (a) A close-up view of
spectral accuracy test (b).
Velocity Distribution and Streamlines Velocity Distribution and Streamlines

1 1
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
(a) (b)
Figure 9: Uni-dimensional single-phase flow problem (a) Homogeneous and (b)
Heterogeneous
Preliminary Results Bi-dimensional problems
This test case, adapted from [Engquist et al., 2009, p. 16].
Pressure
16
0.9
0.5
14
0.8
1
12
0.7
10 1.5 0.6
0.5
8 2
0.4
6 2.5
0.3
4
3 0.2
2 0.1
3.5
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
(a) (b)
Figure 10: Homogeneous quarter of a five spot problem (a) Pressure contours
and (b) Velocity field and Streamlines
This test case, adapted from [Srinivasan and Lipnikov, 2013, pp. 348-349].
Pressure Velocity Field and Streamlines

18
0.5
16 3.5
1
14 3
1.5
12 2.5
2
10
2
2.5
8
1.5
3
6
1
4 3.5
0.5
2 4
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
(a) (b)
Figure 11: Heterogeneous quarter of five a spot problem with low-permeability
region in domain (a) Pressure contours and (b) Velocity field and Streamlines
This test case, adapted from [Matringe et al., 2006, p. 1010].
Pressure Velocity Field and Streamlines

12
1 0.9
11
2 0.8
10
9 3
0.7
8 4
0.6
7 5
0.5
6
6
0.4
5
7
4 0.3
8
3 0.2
9
2
0.1
10
1
2 4 6 8 10 12 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
(a) (b)
Figure 12: Heterogeneous quarter of five a spot problem with dual
low-permeability barriers (a) Pressure contours and (b) Velocity field and
Streamlines
Pressure 11 Velocity Field and Streamlines

x 10
11
0.2 0.9 7
10
0.4 0.8 7.5
9
0.6 0.7 8
8
8.5
7 0.8 0.6
9
6 1 0.5
9.5
5 1.2 0.4
10
4 1.4 0.3
10.5
3
1.6 0.2
11
2
1.8 0.1
11.5
1
2 4 6 8 10 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
(a) (b)
Figure 13: Heterogeneous quarter of five a spot problem with 85 layer of the
SPE-10 field permeability (a) Pressure contours and (b) The log-permeability
distribution, Velocity field and Streamlines
Methodology
Methodology of research used in this work includes the

following stages:
1 Attending doctoral classes of disciplines.

2 Review of the technical literature.
Table 5: Schedule of
activities to be carried out
3 Implementation of relevant formulations
by the doctoral student. will be carried out in this stage.
Semester
4 Physical quantities such as, effects of
Stage
2016.1 2016.2 2017.1 2017.2 gravity and capillary forces will be
1
2
considered in the computational model.
3
4
5 Full publication of the methodologies
5
6
developed and results obtained will be
carried out.
6 Thesis writing and defense.
References
References I
Contreras, F., Lyra, P., Souza, M., and Carvalho, D. (2016).

A cell-centered multipoint flux approximation method with a diamond
stencil coupled with a higher order finite volume method for the
simulation of oilwater displacements in heterogeneous and
anisotropic petroleum reservoirs.
Computers & Fluids, 127:116.
Engquist, B., Ltstedt, P., and Runborg, O. (2009).
Multiscale modeling and simulation in science, volume 66.
Springer Science & Business Media.
Huynh, H. (2007).
A flux reconstruction approach to high-order schemes including
discontinuous galerkin methods.
AIAA paper, 4079:2007.
References
References II
Matringe, S. F., Juanes, R., and Tchelepi, H. A. (2006).

Robust streamline tracing for the simulation of porous media flow on
general triangular and quadrilateral grids.
Journal of Computational Physics, 219(2):9921012.
Souza, M. R. (2015).
Simulao Numrica de Escoamento Bifsico em Reservatrios de
Petrleo Heterogeneos e Anisotrpicos Utilizando um Mtodo de
Volumes Finitos Verdadeiramente Multidimensional com Aproximao
de Alta Ordem.
PhD thesis, Tese de Doutorado, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
(UFPE), Recife.
Srinivasan, G. and Lipnikov, K. (2013).
On the reconstruction of darcy velocity in finite-volume methods.
Transport in porous media, 96(2):337351.
References
References III
Wang, Z., Gao, H., and Haga, T. (2011).

A unifying discontinuous formulation for hybrid meshes.
Adaptive High-Order Methods in Computational Fluid Dynamics,
Edited by ZJ Wang, World Scientific Publishing.
References
Thank you for your attention!

Questions and comments?

Mpfad +FR/CPR

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Mpfad +FR/CPR

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

High Order Methods (>2) for the solution of the Oil and

Water Displacement in Petroleum Reservoirs

Gustavo Galindez Ramirez.

Supervisor: Paulo R. M. Lyra.

Federal University of Pernambuco UFPE

March 11, 2016

Numerical dissipation effects

Figure 1: 1D water saturation

Numerical dissipation effects

Figure 1: 1D water saturation

Numerical dissipation effects

0.4 The Grid Orientation Effect

Figure 1: 1D water saturation

Numerical dissipation effects

0.4 The Grid Orientation Effect

Figure 1: 1D water saturation Wrong oil recovery prediction

Table 1: Review of state of art of high-order methods and its applications in

Model of immiscible flow (water and oil).

Coupling via IMPES of the MPFA-type methods with

CALCULATE EXPLICIT SOLUTION

Figure 2: IMPES Methodology Algorithm, adapted from [Souza, 2015].

Figure 3: Part of a polygonal

Integrating the pressure equation on CV

Figure 3: Part of a polygonal

Integrating the pressure equation on CV

Figure 3: Part of a polygonal

Integrating the pressure equation on CV

Figure 3: Part of a polygonal

Figure 4: Part of a polygonal

The average mid-edge velocity

Figure 4: Part of a polygonal

The average mid-edge velocity

Injection/production average terms

Figure 4: Part of a polygonal

The average mid-edge velocity

Injection/production average terms

Figure 4: Part of a polygonal

= (|T123 | |T134 | / |T123 | + |T134 |) .

The weighted residual form of water saturation equation.

Integrating by parts and applying the Gauss Divergence theorem.

Common Riemann flux.

Applying integration by parts and the Gauss Divergence theorem.

Jump on the flux.

The substitution of Eq. 16 into Eq. 14 gives,

Differential formulation of saturation equation.

Approximate solution in the discrete cell [Wang et al., 2011].

Nodal discontinuous Galerkin Scheme.

Correction Function and its Derivative, k=2

Nodal discontinuous Galerkin Scheme.

Uni-dimensional correction function [Huynh, 2007].

-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

Nodal discontinuous Galerkin Scheme.

Uni-dimensional correction function [Huynh, 2007].

-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

The RR,k (Right Randau) polynomial.

Nodal discontinuous Galerkin Scheme.

Uni-dimensional correction function [Huynh, 2007].

-1.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0

The RR,k (Right Randau) polynomial.

SD/SV and CPR-g2 methods.

Table 2: Constant lifting Table 3: Constant lifting

Figure 6: Legendre-Lobatto points in quadrilateral element for (a) Comp.

Stability regions of the RungeKutta method in the complex tplane.