Smart Proxy Modeling. for Numerical Reservoir Simulations BIG DATA ANALYTICS IN THE EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDUSTRY
|
|
|
- Barnard Ronald Palmer
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Smart Proxy Modeling for Numerical Reservoir Simulations BIG DATA ANALYTICS IN THE EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDUSTRY Intelligent Solutions, Inc. & West Virginia University October 2015
2 Data Driven Analytics in E&P Early applications of Data Driven Analytics in the upstream oil and gas industry dates back to 1989 and early 1990s SPE 19619; Halliburton 1989 Well Log Interpretation SPE 19558; Exxon 1990 Drill Bit Diagnosis SPE 22843; Halliburton 1991 Formation Evaluation SPE 24287; Kappa 1992 Well Test Interpretation SPE 26427; USC 1993 Well Test Interpretation SPE 28237; WVU 1994 Reservoir Characterization SPE 28394; WVU 1994 Reservoir Characterization SPE 29220; WVU 1994 Reservoir Characterization SPE 29159; WVU 1994 Hydraulic Fracturing
3 Big Data in the E&P Applications of Big Data in the upstream Exploration & Production*: Drilling Operation: Using real-time drilling measurements (MWD & LWD) to predict drilling issues and guide the entire drilling operation for safety and efficiency. Smart Proxy: Using immense amount of data generated by numerical reservoir simulation models to better understand the reservoir and increase production & recovery. Smart Fields: Real-time, remote and efficient management of hydrocarbon reservoirs. *Not taking into account seismic surveys and equipment monitoring
4 SURROGATE RESERVOIR MODELING Smart Proxy of Numerical Reservoir Simulation and Modeling
5 Literature Hassani, et.al Amir Kabir University Iran Response Surface Model Yang, et.al ExxonMobil URC Reduced Physics Model Li, et.al Cal. Tech. Response Surface Model
6 Literature Mamonov, et.al Rice Univ. & Schlumb. Research Grid Coarsening Model Sampaio, et.al Universidad Federal de Rio de Janeiro Neural Network Model Jicong Hi, et.al Stanford University Reduced Order Model
7 Literature Not a Toy or an Academic Problem Mohaghegh & Abdulla 2014 Intelligent Solutions, Inc. & ADCO Surrogate Reservoir Model Study Completed 2005 Implemented 2006 Field Results published (SPE ) 2014 Size of the Full Field Model Formation Type Number of Wells 1MM Grid Blocks Naturally Fractured Carbonate 167 (Horizontal)
8 Literature Following four Ph.D. dissertations have recently been completed at West Virginia University, incorporating Smart Proxy Modeling: Masoud Kalantary (2013): Alireza Shahkarami (2014): Vida Ghoami (2014): Shohreh Amini (2015): Shale Numerical Modeling Assisted History Matching CO 2 -EOR of SACROC in West Texas CO 2 Storage in Geological Formations Electronic versions of these dissertations are available online for public use at WVU s Library Website.
9 Case Study: Giant Mature Oilfield Location: United Arab Emirates Operator: ADCO (Abu Dhabi Company for Onshore Oil Operations) Problem Definition: Water injection for pressure maintenance and sweep. Wells are choked back to avoid bypassing oil and high water cut Project Objective: Increase oil production from existing wells, while avoiding high water cut Identify best candidate wells for rate relaxation Numerical Model Characteristics: Naturally Fractured, Dual Porosity, Carbonate Model More than 165 wells One Million Grid Blocks Run time: 10 Hours on a cluster of 12 CPUs Intelligent Solutions, Inc. Number of Simulation Runs to Build the SRM: 8
10 Curse of Dimensionality To address curse of dimensionality, we have developed Fuzzy Pattern Recognition technology; 10
11 Fuzzy Pattern Recognition 11
12 Using SRM for Analysis Address uncertainties associated with the simulation model; Monte Carlo Simulation Identify wells that benefit from a rate relaxation program; To perform the above analyses millions of simulation runs were required. Upon development & validation, SRM provides accurate results in fraction of a second. 12
13 Optimal Production Strategy Well Ranked Well Ranked No. 100 No. 1 IMPORTANT NOTE: This is NOT a Response Surface SRM was run hundreds of times to generate these figures. 13
14 Optimal Production Strategy Wells were divided into 5 clusters Rate relaxation recommended for wells in clusters 1&2 without significant increase in water production Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 12 Wells 14 Wells 22 Wells 37 Wells 80 Wells Best Performance Avoid Rate Relaxation
15 Results From the Field Upon completion of the project management decided on allowing rate relaxation of some wells. From Jan. 1, 2006 to Feb. 17, 2007 production cap was relaxed on a total of 20 wells.
16 Results From the Field Rate Relaxation performed on 12% of Wells in the field 22 ISI Cluster No. Wells Subjected to Rate Relaxation % % % % % % % First Batch Second Batch (meters)
17 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE ADCO 1.6 Million Barrels %S w
18 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE ADCO 1.9 Million Barrels %S w
19 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE ADCO 0.6 Million Barrels %S w
20 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE ADCO 0.9 Million Barrels %S w
21 Impact of Rate Relaxation on WC 21
22 Incremental Revenue Post-Rate Relaxation Average Oil Price = $75.00/bbl 22
23 Case Study: Three Green Oilfields Intelligent Solutions, Inc. Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Operator: ARAMCO Problem Definition: New (Secondary) oilfields (Two offshore and One onshore) Small number of actual wells Geological models with large uncertainties Project Objective: Quantify uncertainties associated with the geological model Identify best development strategies Numerical Model Characteristics: As many as 6.5 Million Grid Blocks Run time: Too long for large number of simulation runs, even with extensive computing resources. Number of Simulation Runs to Build the SRM: 9 Run per SRM
24 Dynamic Data from NOC s In-House Simulator Run Number Bottom-Hole Pressure (psi) For all the wells in the field Maximum Liquid Rate (bbls/d) , , ,000 10, ,500 10, ,500 15, ,500 1, (variable in steps) 10, ,500 1, (variable in steps) 15, , (variable continuous) 10, , (variable continuous) 15,000 24
25 Model Representation Permeability Porosity SRM NOC s In-House Simulator SRM NOC s In-House Simulator
26 Oil Rate (bbls/yr) RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Cum. Oil Production (MMbbls) Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks 26
27 Oil Rate (bbls/yr) RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Cum. Oil Production (MMbbls) Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks
28 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks
29 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks
30 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks
31 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: POWERS SAUDI ARAMCO SRM Powers Black Oil Simulation Green Field 6.5 MM Grid Blocks
32 SRM New Production Strategy A Completely New Production Strategy that was not used during the Development and Training Process Run Number Bottom-Hole Pressure (psi) For all the wells in the field Maximum Liquid Rate (bbls/d) 10 1,000 15,000 32
33 Blind Simulation Run Results
34 Blind Simulation Run Results
35 Blind Simulation Run Results
36 Blind Simulation Run Results
37 Blind Simulation Run Results
38 Case Study: CO 2 Storage in Geological Formations Shohreh Amini Location: Australia Field: Otway Problem Definition: CO 2 being injected in a depleted gas reservoir After primary gas production Project Objective: Examine CO 2 plume extension as a function of different injection strategies. Use the proxy model as part of a complete system optimization. Numerical Model Characteristics: 100,000 Grid Blocks Heterogeneous model Combine Outer Boundary (No-Flow & Active Aquifer) Run time: Tens of hours
39 Otway CO 2 Seq. Project, Australia In south-western Victoria to demonstrate that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a technically and environmentally safe way to make deep cuts into Australia s greenhouse gas emissions. 39
40 Otway CO 2 Seq. Project, Australia 40
41 Otway CO 2 Seq. Project, Australia RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP History Matched Perm Permeability Maps High perm Low perm
42 SRM Results RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP 1 Month after injection Pressure psi CMG SRM Error psi Gas Saturation Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction CO2 Mole Fraction Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction 42
43 SRM Results RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP 4 Months after injection Pressure psi CMG SRM Error psi Gas Saturation Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction CO2 Mole Fraction Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction 43
44 SRM Results RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP 8 Months after injection Pressure psi CMG SRM Error psi psi Gas Saturation Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction CO2 Mole Fraction Fraction CMG SRM Error Fraction 44
45 Case Study: CO 2 EOR in Mature Oilfield Location: West Texas Field: SACROC Problem Definition: Considerable primary production and Water flooding WAG Enhance Oil Recovery Project Objective: CO 2 and Water injection Optimization Increasing Sweep efficiency Numerical Model Characteristics: Coarse (Low Resolution) Model Fine (High Resolution) Model Alireza Shahkarami Vida Gholami
46 SACROC Unit SACROC Unit Permian Basin West Texas
47 0-1,000-2,000-3,000-4,000 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP The Coarse Reservoir Model Pressure (kpa) K layer: ,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8, miles km 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000-5,000-4,000-3,000-2,000-1, ,000 File: input.irf User: PNGE-User Date: 4/2/2013 Scale: 1:51166 Y/X: 1.00:1 Axis Units: m 42,385 39,300 36,215 33,131 30,046 26,961 23,877 20,792 17,707 14,622 11,538 47
48 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results % Relative Error Water Saturation Distribution # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % SRM Data: Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 11, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % SRM Data: Realization # 11, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 12, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % SRM Data: Realization # 12, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= Absolute Error of SW % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 11, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= Absolute Error of SW % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 12, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= Absolute Error of SW % 48
49 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Pressure Distribution Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results % Relative Error # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 8, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) SRM Data: Realization # 8, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 9, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) SRM Data: Realization # 9, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 8, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Relative Error % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 9, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Relative Error % # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 10, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) SRM Data: Realization # 10, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) Realization # 10, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Relative Error % 49
50 Water Saturation: Blind Realizations- 9 years of Injection RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 17, Layer= 18, 9 years after Injection, Feature= SW % SRM Data: Realization # 17, Layer= 18,9 years after Injection, Feature= SW % Absolute Error # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Start of Simulation Start of Injection 01/01/ yrs after Injection 01/01/2181 Realization # 17, Layer= 18, 9 years after Injection, Feature= Absolute Error of SW % End of Injection 01/01/
51 Pressure: Blind Realizations- 9 years of Injection RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 9 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) SRM Data: Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 9 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) 2172 Start of Simulation Start of Injection 01/01/ yrs after Injection 01/01/2181 % Relative Error # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Realization # 1, Layer= 18, 9 yrs after Injection, Feature= Relative Error % End of Injection 01/01/
52 Water Saturation: Blind Realizations- 100 years after Injection RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 5, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % SRM Data: Realization # 5, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= SW % Absolute Error # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Start of Simulation Start of Injection 01/01/2172 Realization # 5, Layer= 18, 100 years after Injection, Feature= Absolute Error of SW % End of Injection 01/01/ Time Step= yrs after Injection 01/01/2272 End of Simulation 01/01/2222
53 Pressure: Blind Realizations- 100 years after Injection RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP Simulator (CMG) Results SRM Results # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Actual Data: Realization # 2, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) SRM Data: Realization # 2, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Pressure (psi) % Relative Error # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Start of Simulation Start of Injection 01/01/2172 Realization # 2, Layer= 18, 100 yrs after Injection, Feature= Relative Error % End of Injection 01/01/ Time Step= yrs after Injection 01/01/2272 End of Simulation 01/01/2222
54 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP The High Resolution Reservoir Model Permeability Porosity 54
55 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP High Resolution Model Pressure CO 2 Mole Fraction Water Saturation 55
56 SACROC CO 2 EOR Project, Texas RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: AMEX COMPUTER MODELING GROUP High Resolution Model CO 2 Mole Fraction Pressure Water Saturation 56
57 Case Study: Shale Gas Location: Southwestern Pennsylvania Field: Marcellus Shale Problem Definition: Modeling of massive hydraulic Fracturing in Horizontal Wells Project Objective: Develop SRM that can perform full field reservoir simulation Numerical Model Characteristics: Masoud Kalantari PETREL & Eclipse was used to model and history match on pad that included six laterals.
58 Marcellus Shale Asset 136 wells on 31 multi-wells pads in Pennsylvania covers an area of 190,000 acres
59 Cluster-Based SRM
![Matrix porosity [0.054-0.135] Hydraulic fracture height [100-125 ft] Matrix permeability [0.0001-0.00097(md)] Hydraulic fracture length [200-1100 ft] Natural fracture porosity [0.01-0.04] Hydraulic fracture conductivity [0.](/docs-images/78/77353234/images/60-2.jpg "5-5.4 (md-ft)] Natural fracture permeability [0.001-0.0.01 (md)] Rock Density [100-180(lb/ft3)] Sigma factor [0.005-0.6] Net to Gross ratio [0.75-0.")
60 Matrix porosity [ ] Hydraulic fracture height [ ft] Matrix permeability [ (md)] Hydraulic fracture length [ ft] Natural fracture porosity [ ] Hydraulic fracture conductivity [ (md-ft)] Natural fracture permeability [ (md)] Rock Density [ (lb/ft3)] Sigma factor [ ] Net to Gross ratio [ ] Longmuir volume [40-85 (scf/ton)] Longmuir pressure [ psi] Diffusion coefficient [ (ft2/day)] Sorption time [1-250(day)] Initial Reservoir Pressure [ (psi)]
61 Spatio-Temporal Database Wellbore Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 3 Type 1 Type 4 Wellbore Tier 2 Type 2 Type 3 Wellbore Model of a Cluster of Hydraulic Fractures
62 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE SCHLUMBERGER SRM Final Results
63 RESERVOIR SIMULATOR: ECLIPSE SCHLUMBERGER SRM Final Results
64 Thank You
Developing a Smart Proxy for the SACROC Water-Flooding Numerical Reservoir Simulation Model
SPE-185691-MS Developing a Smart Proxy for the SACROC Water-Flooding Numerical Reservoir Simulation Model Faisal Alenezi and Shahab Mohaghegh, West Virginia University Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum
A Data-Driven Smart Proxy Model for A Comprehensive Reservoir Simulation
A Data-Driven Smart Proxy Model for A Comprehensive Reservoir Simulation Faisal Alenezi Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering West Virginia University Email: falenezi@mix.wvu.edu Shahab Mohaghegh
SPE Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE 151994 Application of Surrogate Reservoir Model (SRM) to an Onshore Green Field in Saudi Arabia; Case Study Shahab D. Mohaghegh, Intelligent Solutions, Inc. & West Virginia University, Jim Liu, Saudi
AI-Based Simulation: An Alternative to Numerical Simulation and Modeling
AI-Based Simulation: An Alternative to Numerical Simulation and Modeling Shahab D. Mohaghegh 1,2 1 Intelligent Solutions, Inc. Shahab.Mohaghegh@IntelligentSolutionsInc.com 2 West Virginia University Shahab.Mohaghegh@mail.wvu.edu
SPE MS. SPE Eastern Regional Meeting Copyright 2016, Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Eastern Regional Meeting 2016 SPE-184069-MS Reservoir Simulation Using Smart Proxy in SACROC Unit - Case Study Qin He, Saint Francis University, Shahab D. Mohaghegh, Intelligent Solutions, Inc.& West
ANALTERNATIVE TO TRADITIONAL RESERVOIR MODELING
I N T E L L I G E N T S O L U T I O N S, I N C. AI-BASED RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT ANALTERNATIVE TO TRADITIONAL RESERVOIR MODELING 5 5 T A R A P L A C E M O R G A N T O W N, W V 2 6 5 0 5 USA AI- B A S E D
CO2 Sequestration Modeling Using Pattern Recognition and Data Mining; Case Study of SACROC field
CO2 Sequestration Modeling Using Pattern Recognition and Data Mining; Case Study of SACROC field Alireza Shahkarami a, Shahab D. Mohaghegh a, Vida Gholami a, Alireza Haghighat a, Daniel Moreno a a Petroleum
Optimizing Well Completion Design and Well Spacing with Integration of Advanced Multi-Stage Fracture Modeling & Reservoir Simulation
Optimizing Well Completion Design and Well Spacing with Integration of Advanced Multi-Stage Fracture Modeling & Reservoir Simulation Dr. Hongjie Xiong Feb 2018 Title Overview 2 Introduction the status
SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program
SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program Primary funding is provided by The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe The Society is grateful to those companies that allow
A Geostatistical and Flow Simulation Study on a Real Training Image
A Geostatistical and Flow Simulation Study on a Real Training Image Weishan Ren (wren@ualberta.ca) Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta Abstract A 12 cm by 18 cm slab
An Integrated Technique for Production Data Analysis with Application to Mature Fields.
An Integrated Technique for Production Data Analysis with Application to Mature Fields. Razi Gaskari Shahab D. Mohaghegh, Jalal Jalali West Virginian University SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta,
SMART WELL MODELLING. Design, Scenarios and Optimisation
Page 1 Introduction Smart or complex wells are in increasing use by operators as reservoir environments become more challenging. The wells include a number of smart devices installed to achieve a variety
SPE Abstract. Introduction
SPE 162699 Fast Track Analysis of Shale Numerical Models A. Kalantari-Dahaghi,SPE, S. Esmaili, SPE, West Virginia University, S.D. Mohaghegh, SPE, Intelligent Solution Inc. & West Virginia University Copyright
SPE Intelligent Time Successive Production Modeling Y. Khazaeni, SPE, S. D. Mohaghegh, SPE, West Virginia University
SPE 132643 Intelligent Time Successive Production Modeling Y. Khazaeni, SPE, S. D. Mohaghegh, SPE, West Virginia University Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper was prepared for presentation
High Resolution Geomodeling, Ranking and Flow Simulation at SAGD Pad Scale
High Resolution Geomodeling, Ranking and Flow Simulation at SAGD Pad Scale Chad T. Neufeld, Clayton V. Deutsch, C. Palmgren and T. B. Boyle Increasing computer power and improved reservoir simulation software
The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe
Primary funding is provided by The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their professionals to serve as
Synthetic, Geomechanical Logs for Marcellus Shale M. O. Eshkalak, SPE, S. D. Mohaghegh, SPE, S. Esmaili, SPE, West Virginia University
SPE-163690-MS Synthetic, Geomechanical Logs for Marcellus Shale M. O. Eshkalak, SPE, S. D. Mohaghegh, SPE, S. Esmaili, SPE, West Virginia University Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers This
B S Bisht, Suresh Konka*, J P Dobhal. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, GEOPIC, Dehradun , Uttarakhand
Prediction of Missing Log data using Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), Multi-Resolution Graph-based B S Bisht, Suresh Konka*, J P Dobhal Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, GEOPIC, Dehradun-248195,
A Soft Computing-Based Method for the Identification of Best Practices, with Application in the Petroleum Industry
CIMSA 2005 IEEE International Conference on Computational Intelligence for Measurement Systems and Applications Giardini Naxos, Italy, 20-22 July 2005 A Soft Computing-Based Method for the Identification
GAS PRODUCTION ANALYSIS:
New Mexico Tech THINKING FOR A NEW MILLENNIUM TIGHT-GAS GAS PRODUCTION ANALYSIS: User Guide for a Type-Curve Matching Spreadsheet Program (TIGPA 2000.1) Her-Yuan Chen Assistant Professor Department of
Automatic History Matching On The Norne Simulation Model
Automatic History Matching On The Norne Simulation Model Eirik Morell - TPG4530 - Norwegian University of Science and Technology - 2008 Abstract This paper presents the result of an automatic history match
Jasmine Reservoir Modelling and History Match. Zubin Jehangir, Kevin Ashton, Peter Henderson, Laura Armstrong
Jasmine Reservoir Modelling and History Match Zubin Jehangir, Kevin Ashton, Peter Henderson, Laura Armstrong Agenda Jasmine Field Introduction Post Production Data Acquisition Reservoir Modelling and History
SPE ), initial decline rate ( D
SPE 100562 An Integrated Technique for Production Data Analysis with Application to Mature Fields Gaskari, R., Mohaghegh, S. D. and Jalali, J., West Virginia University Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum
AUTOMATING UP-SCALING OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY CURVES FROM JBN METHOD ESCALAMIENTO AUTOMÁTICO DE CURVAS DE PERMEABILDIAD RELATIVA DEL MÉTODOS JBN
AUTOMATING UP-SCALING OF RELATIVE PERMEABILITY CURVES FROM JBN METHOD ESCALAMIENTO AUTOMÁTICO DE CURVAS DE PERMEABILDIAD RELATIVA DEL MÉTODOS JBN JUAN D. VALLEJO 1, JUAN M. MEJÍA 2, JUAN VALENCIA 3 Petroleum
We G Updating the Reservoir Model Using Engineeringconsistent
We G102 09 Updating the Reservoir Model Using Engineeringconsistent 4D Seismic Inversion S. Tian* (Heriot-Watt University), C. MacBeth (Heriot-Watt University) & A. Shams (Heriot-Watt University) SUMMARY
Modeling Uncertainty in the Earth Sciences Jef Caers Stanford University
Modeling response uncertainty Modeling Uncertainty in the Earth Sciences Jef Caers Stanford University Modeling Uncertainty in the Earth Sciences High dimensional Low dimensional uncertain uncertain certain
Geostatistical Reservoir Characterization of McMurray Formation by 2-D Modeling
Geostatistical Reservoir Characterization of McMurray Formation by 2-D Modeling Weishan Ren, Oy Leuangthong and Clayton V. Deutsch Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta
EarthStudy 360. Full-Azimuth Angle Domain Imaging and Analysis
EarthStudy 360 Full-Azimuth Angle Domain Imaging and Analysis 1 EarthStudy 360 A New World of Information for Geoscientists Expanding the Frontiers of Subsurface Exploration Paradigm EarthStudy 360 is
Pseudo Relative Permeabilities A means of more accurate reservoir simulations
Shell Exploration & Production Europe Pseudo Relative Permeabilities A means of more accurate reservoir simulations 1. History of pseudo relative permeability methods 2. Example of pseudos technology developed
ERM 2005 Morgantown, W.V. SPE Paper # Reservoir Characterization Using Intelligent Seismic Inversion
ERM 2005 Morgantown, W.V. SPE Paper # 98012 Reservoir Characterization Using Intelligent Seismic Inversion Emre Artun, WVU Shahab D. Mohaghegh, WVU Jaime Toro, WVU Tom Wilson, WVU Alejandro Sanchez, Anadarko
3D MULTIDISCIPLINARY INTEGRATED GEOMECHANICAL FRACTURE SIMULATOR & COMPLETION OPTIMIZATION TOOL
PETROPHYSICS RESERVOIR GEOMECHANICS COMPLETIONS DRILLING PRODUCTION SERVICE 3D MULTIDISCIPLINARY INTEGRATED GEOMECHANICAL FRACTURE SIMULATOR & COMPLETION OPTIMIZATION TOOL INTEGRATED GEOMECHANICAL FRACTURE
Consistently integrate static and dynamic data into reservoir models while accounting for uncertainty the ResX approach
Consistently integrate static and dynamic data into reservoir models while accounting for uncertainty the ResX approach FORCE Workshop Uncertainty handling in static-dynamic modelling workflows Jon Sætrom
Calibration of NFR models with interpreted well-test k.h data. Michel Garcia
Calibration of NFR models with interpreted well-test k.h data Michel Garcia Calibration with interpreted well-test k.h data Intermediate step between Reservoir characterization Static model conditioned
3D Inversion of Time-Domain Electromagnetic Data for Ground Water Aquifers
3D Inversion of Time-Domain Electromagnetic Data for Ground Water Aquifers Elliot M. Holtham 1, Mike McMillan 1 and Eldad Haber 2 (1) Computational Geosciences Inc. (2) University of British Columbia Summary
OPTIMIZATION FOR AUTOMATIC HISTORY MATCHING
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NUMERICAL ANALYSIS AND MODELING Volume 2, Supp, Pages 131 137 c 2005 Institute for Scientific Computing and Information OPTIMIZATION FOR AUTOMATIC HISTORY MATCHING Abstract. SHUGUANG
Simulation of Matrix-Fracture Interaction in Low-Permeability Fractured Unconventional Reservoirs
SPE-182608-MS Simulation of Matrix-Fracture Interaction in Low-Permeability Fractured Unconventional Reservoirs D. Y. Ding, N. Farah, and B. Bourbiaux, IFP Energies Nouvelles; Y-S. Wu, Colorado School
Advances of parallel computing. Kirill Bogachev May 2016
Advances of parallel computing Kirill Bogachev May 2016 Demands in Simulations Field development relies more and more on static and dynamic modeling of the reservoirs that has come a long way from being
Intelligent fracture creation for shale gas development
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Computer Science 4 (2011) 1745 1750 International Conference on Computational Science, ICCS 2011 Intelligent fracture creation for shale gas development
EFFICIENT PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION USING FLOW NETWORK MODELS. A Thesis PONGSATHORN LERLERTPAKDEE
EFFICIENT PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION USING FLOW NETWORK MODELS A Thesis by PONGSATHORN LERLERTPAKDEE Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
Tutorial 1: Standard usage
Introduction This tutorial details the following steps: importing an existing data set, editing the data, saving the project, running and monitoring simulation, viewing results vectors, and creating reports.
TPG4160 Reservoir simulation, Building a reservoir model
TPG4160 Reservoir simulation, Building a reservoir model Per Arne Slotte Week 8 2018 Overview Plan for the lectures The main goal for these lectures is to present the main concepts of reservoir models
Integration of Geostatistical Modeling with History Matching: Global and Regional Perturbation
Integration of Geostatistical Modeling with History Matching: Global and Regional Perturbation Oliveira, Gonçalo Soares Soares, Amílcar Oliveira (CERENA/IST) Schiozer, Denis José (UNISIM/UNICAMP) Introduction
PETROPHYSICAL DATA AND OPEN HOLE LOGGING BASICS COPYRIGHT. MWD and LWD Acquisition (Measurement and Logging While Drilling)
LEARNING OBJECTIVES PETROPHYSICAL DATA AND OPEN HOLE LOGGING BASICS MWD and LWD Acquisition By the end of this lesson, you will be able to: Understand the concept of Measurements While Drilling (MWD) and
Optimization of Vertical Well Placement for Oil Field Development Based on Basic Reservoir Rock Properties using Genetic Algorithm
ITB J. Eng. Sci., Vol. 44, No. 2, 2012, 106-127 106 Optimization of Vertical Well Placement for Oil Field Development Based on Basic Reservoir Rock Properties using Genetic Algorithm Tutuka Ariadji 1,
TMVOC Buckley-Leverett Flow
403 Poyntz Avenue, Suite B Manhattan, KS 66502 USA +1.785.770.8511 www.thunderheadeng.com TMVOC Buckley-Leverett Flow PetraSim 2016.1 Table of Contents 1. Buckley-Leverett Flow...1 Description... 1 Create
Step Into Full 3D Modeling with GOHFER 9.1. R. D. Barree February 20, 2017 Barree & Associates
Step Into Full 3D Modeling with GOHFER 9.1 R. D. Barree February 20, 2017 Barree & Associates GOHFER 9.0 Capabilities Multiple wells, including vertical and horizontal, in the same model Fracture stress-shadow
SPE Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
SPE 77958 Reservoir Modelling With Neural Networks And Geostatistics: A Case Study From The Lower Tertiary Of The Shengli Oilfield, East China L. Wang, S. Tyson, Geo Visual Systems Australia Pty Ltd, X.
A bold advance in reservoir simulation performance Parallel Interactive Reservoir Simulator
A bold advance in reservoir simulation performance Parallel Interactive Reservoir Simulator The industry first integrated modeling and data analysis framework centered on dynamic reservoir simulations
Downscaling saturations for modeling 4D seismic data
Downscaling saturations for modeling 4D seismic data Scarlet A. Castro and Jef Caers Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting May 2005 Abstract 4D seismic data is used to monitor the movement of fluids
EXTENDING THE PETREL MODEL BUILDER FOR EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH PURPOSES. A Thesis OBIAJULU CHUKWUDI NWOSA
EXTENDING THE PETREL MODEL BUILDER FOR EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH PURPOSES A Thesis by OBIAJULU CHUKWUDI NWOSA Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of
CCS activities at the oil field Sleipner monitoring, reporting and review under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol
Workshop on the implementation of 2006 IPCC Guidelines, EEA, Copenhagen, 30 October 2008 CCS activities at the oil field Sleipner monitoring, reporting and review under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol Audun
Development of Optimized History-Matched Models for Coalbed Methane Reservoirs
637 Development of Optimized History-Matched Models for Coalbed Methane Reservoirs Anne Y. Oudinot, Advanced Resources International Inc. Aiysha Sultana, Advanced Resources International Inc. Reynaldo
Improvement of Realizations through Ranking for Oil Reservoir Performance Prediction
Improvement of Realizations through Ranking for Oil Reservoir Performance Prediction Stefan Zanon, Fuenglarb Zabel, and Clayton V. Deutsch Centre for Computational Geostatistics (CCG) Department of Civil
IPTC Title: High Resolution, Simultaneous VSP and Land Seismic Acquisition. Scott Robinson, Qatar Petroleum
Title: High Resolution, Simultaneous VSP and Land Seismic Acquisition Authors Scott Robinson, Qatar Petroleum primary author o P. O. Box 47, Doha, Qatar; (+974) 440-1465; s_robinson@qp.com.qa Salva R Seeni,
A Parallel, Multiscale Approach to Reservoir Modeling. Omer Inanc Tureyen and Jef Caers Department of Petroleum Engineering Stanford University
A Parallel, Multiscale Approach to Reservoir Modeling Omer Inanc Tureyen and Jef Caers Department of Petroleum Engineering Stanford University 1 Abstract With the advance of CPU power, numerical reservoir
Rubis (NUM) Tutorial #1
Rubis (NUM) Tutorial #1 1. Introduction This example is an introduction to the basic features of Rubis. The exercise is by no means intended to reproduce a realistic scenario. It is assumed that the user
Model-Based Optimization and Control of Subsurface Flow in Oil Reservoirs
Model-Based Optimization and Control of Subsurface Flow in Oil Reservoirs Paul Van den Hof Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands with: Jan Dirk Jansen and Arnold Heemink, Delft Univ. Techn.
Ensemble-based decision making for reservoir management present and future outlook. TPD R&T ST MSU DYN and FMU team
Ensemble-based decision making for reservoir management present and future outlook TPD R&T ST MSU DYN and FMU team 11-05-2017 The core Ensemble based Closed Loop Reservoir Management (CLOREM) New paradigm
A009 HISTORY MATCHING WITH THE PROBABILITY PERTURBATION METHOD APPLICATION TO A NORTH SEA RESERVOIR
1 A009 HISTORY MATCHING WITH THE PROBABILITY PERTURBATION METHOD APPLICATION TO A NORTH SEA RESERVOIR B. Todd HOFFMAN and Jef CAERS Stanford University, Petroleum Engineering, Stanford CA 94305-2220 USA
PTE 519 Lecture Note Finite Difference Approximation (Model)
PTE 519 Lecture Note 3 3.0 Finite Difference Approximation (Model) In this section of the lecture material, the focus is to define the terminology and to summarize the basic facts. The basic idea of any
COPYRIGHT. Nodal Analysis Workshop. Horizontal and Fractured Wells. By the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
Learning Objectives Nodal Analysis Workshop Horizontal and Fractured Wells By the end of this lesson, you will be able to: Accurately represent horizontal well geometry inside SNAP Describe the Joshi equation
Study of real-time LWD data visual interpretation and geo-steering technology
DOI 10.1007/s12182-013-0298-x 477 Study of real-time LWD data visual interpretation and geo-steering technology Shao Cairui 1, Zhang Fuming 1, Chen Guoxing 1, Ji Jiaqi 2, Hou Qinggong 3, Tang Jianhong
PhD Student. Associate Professor, Co-Director, Center for Computational Earth and Environmental Science. Abdulrahman Manea.
Abdulrahman Manea PhD Student Hamdi Tchelepi Associate Professor, Co-Director, Center for Computational Earth and Environmental Science Energy Resources Engineering Department School of Earth Sciences
Hydraulic Fracturing: services & equipment Richard Spears Spears & Associates Tulsa. May 2018
Hydraulic Fracturing: services & equipment Richard Spears Spears & Associates Tulsa May 2018 This Tulsa company and its affiliated data mining firm, Oilfield Logix, worked for 350 clients in 2017. With
Relative Permeability Upscaling for Heterogeneous Reservoir Models
Relative Permeability Upscaling for Heterogeneous Reservoir Models Mohamed Ali Gomaa Fouda Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Heriot-Watt University School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure
403 Poyntz Avenue, Suite B Manhattan, KS PetraSim Example Manual
403 Poyntz Avenue, Suite B Manhattan, KS 66502-6081 1.785.770.8511 www.thunderheadeng.com PetraSim Example Manual July 2007 TMVOC Example Guide Table of Contents 1.... 1 Description... 1 Specify the Simulator
Robust Production Optimization with Capacitance-Resistance Model as Proxy
Robust Production Optimization with Capacitance-Resistance Model as Proxy What is Robust Production Optimization? Production Optimization: To optimize the objective by tuning the control variables (e.g.
Thermal Reservoir Simulator for Microsoft Windows TM
Thermal Reservoir Simulator for Microsoft Windows TM Designed for use with the Microsoft Windows XP TM, and later, operating systems: Simulator Features Simulator Applications Radial and Cartesian Coordinates
Attribute Expression of the Mississippi Lime. Attribute expression of the Mississippi Lime
Attribute Expression of the Mississippi Lime Kurt J. (The University of Oklahoma) Attribute expression of the Mississippi Lime Lithology Fractures o Strain o Thickness o Lithology Diagenesis Impedance
Marcellus Gas Shale Project
Marcellus Gas Shale Project 09122-04 Jordan Ciezobka Gas Technology Institute Summary of Results from Completed GTI Marcellus Shale R&D Project Controlled Fracturing of Naturally Fractured Shales May 7,
Closing the Loop via Scenario Modeling in a Time-Lapse Study of an EOR Target in Oman
Closing the Loop via Scenario Modeling in a Time-Lapse Study of an EOR Target in Oman Tania Mukherjee *(University of Houston), Kurang Mehta, Jorge Lopez (Shell International Exploration and Production
WPIMULT. The study by Voelker found the following heuristic relations for,, connected,
A Streamline Approach to Retain Extensive Discrete Fracture Networks from a Detailed Static Fracture Model D. Rojas, and J. Caers, Stanford University. Abstract When building a model of a naturally fractured
A Short Narrative on the Scope of Work Involved in Data Conditioning and Seismic Reservoir Characterization
A Short Narrative on the Scope of Work Involved in Data Conditioning and Seismic Reservoir Characterization March 18, 1999 M. Turhan (Tury) Taner, Ph.D. Chief Geophysicist Rock Solid Images 2600 South
Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting Stanford University. The Problem. Seismic Image (SI) Space. Training Image (TI) Space. Set of Realizations
Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting Stanford University Training Image (TI) Space The Problem? Seismic Image (SI) Space Set of Realizations The Problem Training Image Space Seismic Image Space -Metric
Applied Reservoir Simulation. Course. Workshop Problems
Applied Reservoir Simulation Course Workshop Problems Reservoir Simulation Application Training Course and (Eclipse) Workshop GeoQuest Training and Development, And NExT Denver and Houston March 06 Applied
Assessment of Israeli E&P supplier opportunities 2016 IHS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Assessment of Israeli E&P supplier opportunities 1 Key segments of the E&P supply chain: a critical analysis (1/3) Segments Rationale Recommendation Seismic services (Acquisition) Seismic services (Interpretation
TOUGH2 Example: Initial State and Production Analyses in a Layered Model
403 Poyntz Avenue, Suite B Manhattan, KS 66502 USA +1.785.770.8511 www.thunderheadeng.com TOUGH2 Example: Initial State and Production Analyses in a Layered Model PetraSim 5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements...
Predicting Porosity through Fuzzy Logic from Well Log Data
International Journal of Petroleum and Geoscience Engineering (IJPGE) 2 (2): 120- ISSN 2289-4713 Academic Research Online Publisher Research paper Predicting Porosity through Fuzzy Logic from Well Log
14MMFD-34 Parallel Efficiency and Algorithmic Optimality in Reservoir Simulation on GPUs
14MMFD-34 Parallel Efficiency and Algorithmic Optimality in Reservoir Simulation on GPUs K. Esler, D. Dembeck, K. Mukundakrishnan, V. Natoli, J. Shumway and Y. Zhang Stone Ridge Technology, Bel Air, MD
Contents Foreword...v Acknowledgments...vii 1. Introduction to Simulation and History Matching...1
Foreword Mathematical simulation of reservoir behavior may be used to help understand reservoir processes and predict reservoir behavior in addition simulation can be used as a tool for reservoir description
A012 A REAL PARAMETER GENETIC ALGORITHM FOR CLUSTER IDENTIFICATION IN HISTORY MATCHING
1 A012 A REAL PARAMETER GENETIC ALGORITHM FOR CLUSTER IDENTIFICATION IN HISTORY MATCHING Jonathan N Carter and Pedro J Ballester Dept Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London Abstract Non-linear
The Occurrence of Surface Casing Pressure in the Denver-Julesburg Basin
The Occurrence of Surface Casing Pressure in the Denver-Julesburg Basin (Airwatergas.org) Greg Lackey, Harihar Rajaram, Owen A. Sherwood, Troy L. Burke and Joseph N. Ryan Surface Casing Pressure Undesired
RM03 Integrating Petro-elastic Seismic Inversion and Static Model Building
RM03 Integrating Petro-elastic Seismic Inversion and Static Model Building P. Gelderblom* (Shell Global Solutions International BV) SUMMARY This presentation focuses on various aspects of how the results
Saphir NL (PTA) Tutorial #1
Saphir NL (PTA) Tutorial #1 1. Introduction This tutorial provides a description of the options and workflow in KAPPA-Workstation. This includes creation of new documents and analyses, loading of pressure
Multi-scale Geomechanics: How Much Model Complexity is Enough?
SPE Workshop OILFIELD GEOMECHANICS Slide 1 Multi-scale Geomechanics: How Much Model Complexity is Enough? Alejandro Ganzo Geomechanics Support Engineer March 27-28, 2017 Moscow, Russia Slide 2 Car Requirements
Satellite surveying. Presentation for ISCWSA. Over 550 global PhotoSat stereo satellite topographic mapping projects.
Satellite surveying Presentation for ISCWSA Over 550 global PhotoSat stereo satellite topographic mapping projects Basic proposition Satellite surveying has improved to a level where it may be used as
SPE demonstrated that quality of the data plays a very important role in developing a neural network model.
SPE 98013 Developing Synthetic Well Logs for the Upper Devonian Units in Southern Pennsylvania Rolon, L. F., Chevron, Mohaghegh, S.D., Ameri, S., Gaskari, R. West Virginia University and McDaniel B. A.,
TOUGHREACT Example: Aqueous Transport with Adsorption and Decay
403 Poyntz Avenue, Suite B Manhattan, KS 66502 USA +1.785.770.8511 www.thunderheadeng.com TOUGHREACT Example: Aqueous Transport with Adsorption and Decay PetraSim 2016.1 Table of Contents Overview...1
Digital Rock Physics for Coreflooding Simulations
Digital Rock Physics for Coreflooding Simulations Mahesh Avasare Masters in Petroleum Engineering, IST Lisbon Intern, R&D Center, CEPSA Experimental corefloodings have proved to be important tool for decades
3-D vertical cable processing using EOM
Carlos Rodriguez-Suarez, John C. Bancroft, Yong Xu and Robert R. Stewart ABSTRACT Three-dimensional seismic data using vertical cables was modeled and processed using equivalent offset migration (EOM),
SPE Copyright 1999, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
SPE 56733 Using Artificial Intelligence to Corellate Multiple Seismic Attributes to Reservoir Properties R. S. Balch, SPE, New Mexico Petroleum Recovery Research Center, and B. S. Stubbs, SPE, Pecos Petroleum
QUICK CORE ASSESSMENT FROM CT IMAGING: FROM PETROPHYSICAL PROPERTIES TO LOG EVALUATION
SCA2016-031 1/12 QUICK CORE ASSESSMENT FROM CT IMAGING: FROM PETROPHYSICAL PROPERTIES TO LOG EVALUATION Olivier Lopez, Carl F. Berg, Lars Rennan, Gunnar Digranes, Thibaut Forest, Anders Kristoffersen &
A041 Production Optimization under Constraints Using Adjoint Gradients
A041 Production Optimization under Constraints Using Adjoint Gradients P. de Montleau* (ENI SpA - E&P Div.), A. Cominelli (ENI E&P), K. Neylon (Schlumberger), D. Rowan (Schlumberger), I. Pallister (Schlumberger),
Fluid flow modelling with seismic cluster analysis
Fluid flow modelling with seismic cluster analysis Fluid flow modelling with seismic cluster analysis Laurence R. Bentley, Xuri Huang 1 and Claude Laflamme 2 ABSTRACT Cluster analysis is used to construct
A Really Good Log Interpretation Program Designed to Honour Core
A Really Good Log Interpretation Program Designed to Honour Core Robert V. Everett & James R. Everett CWLS Summary: Montney example illustrates methodology We have unique, focussed, log interpretation
A027 4D Pre-stack Inversion Workflow Integrating Reservoir Model Control and Lithology Supervised Classification
A027 4D Pre-stack Inversion Workflow Integrating Reservoir Model Control and Lithology Supervised Classification S. Toinet* (Total E&P Angola), S. Maultzsch (Total), V. Souvannavong (CGGVeritas) & O. Colnard
BETTER from TECHNOLOGIES.
Integrated static and BRIDGING dynamic THE modeling GAP TO BETTER from TECHNOLOGIES. reservoir to surface network Simple facts on Rock Flow Dynamics and tnavigator Rock Flow Dynamics is offering high performance
Highly Successful Reservoir Surveillance and Production Enhancement in a North Sea Brown Field Asset
Highly Successful Reservoir Surveillance and Production Enhancement in a North Sea Brown Field Asset Thistle Field Summary Thistle Field Northern North Sea oil field. Brent Group reservoir. First production
Sponsors: AGENDA October 1, 2014 Toftrees Conference Center State College, PA. Welcome
AGENDA October 1, 2014 Toftrees Conference Center State College, PA Welcome API Recommended Practice on Flash Fire Assessment, RJR Safety, Wayne Vanderhoff Wireline Safety 101, Nabors Completion & Production,
A Data estimation Based Approach for Quasi continuous Reservoir Monitoring using Sparse Surface Seismic Data Introduction Figure 1
A Data estimation Based Approach for Quasi continuous Reservoir Monitoring using Sparse Surface Seismic Data Adeyemi Arogunmati* and Jerry M. Harris, Stanford University, California, USA Introduction One