71 views

Uploaded by Jorge Freire

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- 57901608 Eclipse Project1 JuLy 2010
- Reservior Simulator Overview
- Reservoir Senior Project 2012
- Principles of Reservoir Simulation
- Well Performance and Artifical Lift Rev 3
- Module 8 Relative Permeability
- Reservoir Engineering Overview
- Feketes Course Notes
- FFO
- -production-petroleum-software.pdf
- 05 Capillary Pressure
- Kappa
- Roussennac01
- Capillary+Pressure+Exercise
- Bomba Oilmaster 2.5
- Jet Pump Engineering
- 03 Permeable Zone Logs SP
- Design of Jet Pumps
- reservoir engineering
- Heriot-Watt University - Reservoir Simulation

You are on page 1of 21

PURPOSE

Present a brief overview of reservoir model history Show the evolution of computing power from 1950`s to present Discuss future reservoir simulation

1. Introduction

Reservoir modeling, using physical models, began in the 1930`s. Reservoir simulation using computer models began in 1950`s. Advancement of reservoir simulation has essentially paralleled that of computers. This module outlines the development history of both simulation models and computers. This helps to put into perspective the power of present models, as well as to project what models will be like in a few years.

Much of the material in this module is based on a paper by Donald W. Peaceman, one of the pioneers of reservoir simulation (Peaceman, D. W.: A Personal Retrospection of Reservoir Simulation, Proceedings, First and Second International Forums on Reservoir Simulation, Alpbach Austria, 12-16 Sept. 1988 and 4-8 Sept. 1989).

Physical models were used to fluid flow mechanisms for which there was no obvious mathematical solution, such as: Sweep efficiency for various well patterns Crossflow between layers of different permeability Gravity segregation Coning Pressure transient effects

Types of physical models included: Porous media models. These included sand packs, glass bead packs, sandstone cores and slabs, etc. Some of these models were very large, for example a sand pack model of a entire field with actual well locations, etc. Electrolytic models. These took advantage of the analogy between electric current flow and Darcy flow through sand. One example was an elaborate electrolytic model of the East Texas field. This was a non-conductive plastic sheet covered with an electrolyte solution. The plastic was contoured to represent the shape and permeability distribution of the field. The depth of electrolyte solution above the plastic was proportional to the field Kh. The electric potential distribution in the solution was representative of the field steady state pressure distribution.

Thermal models. These took advantage of the analogy between heat conduction and flow in porous media. For example, a plastic box filled with a heat-conductive powder of know a thermal property was used to study transient pressure effects. Nichrome wires embedded in the box represented wells; these were heated by a electric current. Temperature changes of the powder at various locations (measured by thermocouples) represented transient pressure changes. Electric reservoir analyzers. These were networks of electrical resistors and capacitors. Voltages represented pressure; current flow represented fluid flow; resistors corresponded to Kh; and capacitors corresponded to hc.

Compared to computer simulation models, physical models suffer from several severe disadvantages, such as: Scaling. The results of physical models, particularly sand packs and similar, were not easily scale to actual porous media. Pore-scale flow effects were particularly difficult to scale.

Steady vs. unsteady state. Some models (such as electrolytic models) were only applicable to steady state single phase flow. Multiphase flow. Although some models (such as the electric reservoir analyzer) could model transient flow, they were only applicable to singlephase flow. Cost. Physical models were expensive and time-consuming.

Much work has been done on solving linear partial differential equations for fluid flow in porous media. One example is the work of Hurst and van Everdingen on water influx. Development of pressure transient solutions is still an active area. The main disadvantages of analytical models is that only linear differential equations can only be solved, and only for ideal conditions such as uniform properties and simple geometries. The equations for multiphase fluid flow in reservoirs are non-linear, and properties and geometry are very non-uniform.

The first computer reservoir simulation models were developed in early 1950 by researchers at Humble Oil and Refining Company (Exxon). The pioneers included Donald Peaceman and Henry Rachford. Early work was on IBM accounting machines with punched-card input and output, which were programmed by re-wiring plug boards. Problems solved were very simple, such as the non-linear equation for one-dimensional gas flow. Solution required much manual work in rewiring the plug boards, reading in card decks punching new decks for the next iteration, etc. Later work in the 1950`s, using more advanced computers (see below), included a pioneering paper in two-dimensional, two-phase, incompressible, immiscible (water-oil) displacement. At this time many of the iterative numerical solution methods were worked out, in addition to stability analyses which determined whether a particular solution method would be stable.

The early 1960`s a saw continued development of simulation models still quite simplified compared to today`s models. The first transistorized computers with magnetic disk storage became available in the early 1960`s. The first commercial reservoir simulation models became available in the late 1960`s. These included: Intercomp a variety of relatively simple models, such as: 2-D, phase incompressible 3-D compressible Single well model (coning) Scientific software McCord Core Labs

Advances in simulation models and computers continued. Full 3-D, 3-phase models became standard. Specialized models such as compositional and thermal were developed. Because of limited computer speed and memory, model formulations were partially explicit. Solutions methods were primarily iterative. Models often had stability problems, or required input of complicated sequences of iteration parameters. Sometimes, just obtaining a successful solution of a problem was such effort that it outweighed the reservoir engineering aspects. Reservoir models were generally very small by today`s standards. A model with more than 1000 blocks was very large.

A primary advancement of this period was the ability to run simulation models on other than mainframe computers. Workstations became popular; some of these rival mainframes in speed and memory (see below). Models were developed that could be run on PC`s.

This period also saw the development of models that use a fully implicit solution technique (such as Eclipse). This eliminated most of the stability problems (at the expense of greater numerical dispersion). Specialized models such as compositional and thermal became more flexible and stable.

Present black-oil model such as Eclipse are very flexible and can handle almost any type of black-oil reservoir simulation task. Because of this flexibility, ease of learning suffers. However, input pre-processors and output post-processors continue to become more powerful and flexible. Advancement also continues in development of more complex models such as compositional. For example, the more equation-of-state compositional model uses new solution and programming techniques that greatly accelerate computing speed. Reservoir simulation on mainframe computers is becoming obsolete (as is mainframe computers). Most simulation is now on workstations, which are much cheaper and just as fast as all but the most powerful mainframes.

Advances which we will see in reservoir simulation technology in the next few years include:

Computer reservoir description models Such programs divide the reservoir into a 3-dimensional grid of cells (which may be much smaller than reservoir model grid blocks). A 3-D distribution of rock properties (permeability, porosity, etc.) is calculated for the cells based on 1) honoring well data, 2) a statistical database incorporating information on depositional environment, and 3) geological knowledge of the reservoir. The resulting 3-D distribution of rock properties is a statistical estimate, but should be more realistic than simply contouring well data. The program should also generate model grid block data based on the geological model, taking into account the proper averaging methods to obtain grid block properties.

More flexible simulators Simulators will be increasingly flexible in well controls, data input and output, and special options (pseudo functions, relative permeability scaling, etc). This will probably make models more difficult to learn.

More gridding options Models will have more flexible gridding options, such as local grid refinement. Special grids such as shown below may be better for some types of problems. Such grids will be generated automatically by the model or pre-processor.

Improved pre- and post- processors Data input and output processors such as Eclipse (GRID and GRAF) will become more flexible and hopefully easier to use.

Three-dimensional visualization programs Visualization programs such as InteraView will become common. These allow a 3-D model grid to be sliced to view internal details such as oil saturation distribution. Such programs are valuable both for analyzing model results and or preparing management presentations.

Faster models Workstations continue to increase in speed, but it is likely that there will be no order-of-magnitude speed improvements within the next few years. One possibility is parallel computing on workstations with multiple CPU`s. Models will have to be modified to take advantage of parallel computing. Faster computers will allow models with smaller grid blocks, to better describe reservoir heterogeneity. Increased use of local grid refinement, for better grid definition around vertical and horizontal wells, will also be possible.

The following table shows the tremendous computing speed advances since reservoir simulation began in the 1950`s. Through the mid-1980`s, large reservoir models had to be run on mainframe computers costing millions of dollars. Presently, workstations such as the HP-755 are as fast as some supercomputers, at a cost of well under $ 50,000.

Computer

Date

Comments

IBM CPC** 1952 Vacuum tubes, punched card storage Bendix G-15 1955 Magnetic drum storage IBM 704 1956 Vacuum tubes, magnetic core memory IBM 7040 1962 Mainframe, transistors, disk drives IBM 360/65 1967 Mainframe IBM 370/168 1975 Mainframe IBM 3081 1982 Mainframe Cray 1S 1982 Supercomputer Cray C90 1993 Supercomputer IBM PS/2 77 486 1993 Personal computer HP 755 1993 Workstation, semiconductor memory * Floating-point operations per second ** CPC = Card Programmed calculator (accounting machine)

PURPOSE

Show development of simulation equations for a simple 1-D model Demonstrate Darcy`s law as the basic equation in simulators Show how wells are included in grid block equations Show how simulation equations are solved in models Illustrate how grid block properties such as pressure are block averages

1. Problem

Determine the pressure distribution in a linear (1-D) reservoir in which permeability varies with position in reservoir. Fluid is injected at one end of the system. Assumptions made for this simple derivation are: Single phase flow Steady state (no change in pressure with time) Incompressible Flow obeys Darcy`s law

2. Darcy`s law

Darcy`s law for linear flow is:

flow rate, bbl/day permeability, md flow area, ft2 pressure drop across L, psi viscosity, cp length, ft

a) Divide reservoir into seven cells of equal size

The model equations are derived by writing a material balance around each cell, including the injection term in the first cell and the production term in the last cell. (Any number of cells could be used).

Flow in:

Flow out:

The average permeability between cell centers is a series average of the two cell permeabilities: ( )

The material balance is (Flow in = Flow out). There is no accumulation term since flow is steady state.

Let:

(Note:

(Note: )

Exercise 1 If q, C, and the permeabilities of each cell are specified, the resulting 7 equations appear to have 7 unknowns (pressures p1 through p7). However, the equations are not independent. Show this by trying to solve the two material balance equations for a 2-cell system.

e) Specify one of the cell pressures The 7 equations cannot be solved for all 7 pressures because the basic equation, Darcy`s Law, relates q to the pressure drop, . To solve for either pressure in , the order pressure must be specified. In the system of 7 equations above, one of the pressures must be specified in one of the equations. We will choose the downstream pressure, p7. Thus, the equation for Cell 7 becomes: Cell 7:

Note: Since we have specified one of the cell pressures, the system of equations could be reduced to six equations for simultaneous solution. However, we will retain seven equations.

The coefficient matrix K, containing the known permeabilities, is a tri-diagonal matrix. The matrix Q contains the know injection rate q and the known constant C. The matrix equation can be solved for the pressure vector P containing pressures p1 through p7. P = K-1 Q Where K-1 is the inverse of the coefficient matrix K. Included as attachments are examples of the solution for the pressure distribution using a spreadsheet (Excel) and reservoir simulator (Eclipse).

5. Examples

The 7-cell linear system is solved for the 7 pressures by spreadsheet (using matrix inversion and multiplication functions) and by numerical model (Eclipse). The following data is common:

Example 1: All cell permeabilities are 100 md Example 2: Cell perms. are 100, 10, 700, 1000, 400, 5, 300 md Example 3: Cell perms. are 106, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 106 md

Exercise 2

Given the injection and production pressures from the spreadsheet solutions, calculate the flow rate q for the 7-cell linear system by Darcy`s Law (page 2), for Example 1 and Example 3. What value of L should be used?

Similar development of equations for 2-D and 3-D single phase, steady state systems give five-diagonal and seven-diagonal coefficient matrices.

Example 1

Solution of 7-cell linear steady state model

Assumptions: 7 cells with constant delta-x, block centered grid Steady state, incompressible single phase flow Inject at rate Q into Cell 1; produce from Cell 7 Specify pressure in Cell 7 Cells can have different permeabilities

Data:

50 75 25 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 500 100 0.5

ft ft ft md md md md md md md bbl/day psi cp

Constant C = 0.0845

Coefficient Matrix:

Constant Matrix:

Solution:

Example 2

Solution of 7-cell linear steady state model

Assumptions: 7 cells with constant delta-x, block centered grid Steady state, incompressible single phase flow Inject at rate Q into Cell 1; produce from Cell 7 Specify pressure in Cell 7 Cells can have different permeabilities

Data:

delta-x = 50 delta-y = 75 delta-z = 25 K1 = 100 K2 = 10 K3 = 700 K4 = 1000 K5 = 400 K6 = 5 K7 = 300 Q = 500 P7 = 100 = 0.5

ft ft ft md md md md md md md bbl/day psi cp

Constant C = 0.0845

Coefficient Matrix:

Constant Matrix:

Solution:

Example 3

Solution of 7-cell linear steady state model

Assumptions: 7 cells with constant delta-x, block centered grid Steady state, incompressible single phase flow Inject at rate Q into Cell 1; produce from Cell 7 Specify pressure in Cell 7 Cells can have different permeabilities

Data:

50 ft 75 ft 25 ft 1E +06 md 100 md 100 md 100 md 100 md 100 md 1E +06 md 500 bbl/day 100 psi 0.5 cp

Constant C = 0.0845

Coefficient Matrix:

Constant Matrix:

Solution:

- - ***Example 1*** - - Eclipse data file - - Linear, single -phase (water) flow --7x1x1 - - Simulate to steady state by running until no change in pressures -- - CLH 10/25/93 -- - All cells have permeability of 100 md RUNSPEC FIELD 08 : 53 21 OCT 93 LINEAR SINGLE PHASE, STEADY STATE FLOW = NDIVIX NDIVIY NDIVIZ QRDIAL NUMRES QNNC MXAQN MXAQC QPORO QPERM NFSEG 7 1 1 F 1 F 0 0 F F 0 / = OIL WAT GAS DGAS VOIL API PLY BRI NOTRC NWTRC NGTRC MISC GI SOLV SFT F T F F F F F F 0 0 0 F F F F / = UNIT CONVENTION `FIELD` = NRPVT NPPVT NTPVT NTROCC QROCKC QRCREV QROCKH QVE02D QSURFT QMDIFF 20 20 1 1 F T F F F F / = NSS NTS DIRK REVK VEOP HYST SCAL SDIR SREV NSEND NTEND 2PT NS MIS NTMIS 20 1 F T F F F F T 20 1 F 20 1 / = NDRXVD NTEQUL NDPRVD QUIESC QTHPRS QREVTH QMOBIL NTTRVD NSTRVD 20 1 100 F F T F 1 20 / =NTFIP QGRAID QINTRP QTDISP NTFREG QTDISK NRFREG NMFIPR NETRAC 1 F F F 0 F 0 1 0 / = NWMAXZ NCWMAX NGMAXZ NWGMAX MAXLGR MAXCLS MCOARS LSTACK 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 10 / = QEXGOP NWFRIC NUPCOL F 0 3 / = MXMFLO MXMTHP MXMWFR MXMGFR MXMALQ NMMVFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 / = MXSFLO MXSTHP NMSVFT 0 0 0 / = NANAQU NCAMAX NIFTBL NRIFTB NSUMMX 0 0 0 0 3000 / = DAY MONTH YEAR 1 `JAN` 1993 / = QSOLVE NSTACK QFMTOU QFMTIN QUNOUT QUNINP NGDISK IDYNAM QOPT9P NDMAIN T 10 F F T T 0 0 F 1 / GRID ========================================================================= DX FIELD 08 : 08 21 OCT 93 7 * 50 / DY FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 75 / DZ FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 25 / TOPS FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 7 * 1000 / PERMX FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 7 * 100 / PORO FIELD 08 : 11 21 OCT 93 7 * 25 / PROPS ========================================================================== PVTW 1TABLES 20 P NODES 20 R NODES FIELD 08 : 17 21 OCT 93 100.00000 1.00000 .100E-05 .50000 .00E+00 / DENSITY 1TABLES 20 P NODES 20 R NODES FIELD 08 : 18 21 OCT 93 62.4000 62.4000 1.00000 / ROCK 1TABLES 20 P NODES 20 R NODES FIELD 08 : 20 21 OCT 93 100.000 .1000E-05 / SOLUTION ========================================================================== PRESSURE FIELD 08 : 22 21 OCT 93 7 * 100 / SUMMARY ========================================================================== BPR FIELD 08 : 24 21 OCT 93 Example 1

- - ***Example 2*** - - Eclipse data file - - Linear, single -phase (water) flow --7x1x1 - - Simulate to steady state by running until no change in pressures -- - CLH 10/25/93 -- - All cells have variable permeability RUNSPEC FIELD 08 : 53 21 OCT 93 LINEAR SINGLE PHASE, STEADY STATE FLOW = NDIVIX NDIVIY NDIVIZ QRDIAL NUMRES QNNC MXAQN MXAQC QPORO QPERM NFSEG 7 1 1 F 1 F 0 0 F F 0 / = OIL WAT GAS DGAS VOIL API PLY BRI NOTRC NWTRC NGTRC MISC GI SOLV SFT F T F F F F F F 0 0 0 F F F F / = UNIT CONVENTION `FIELD` = NRPVT NPPVT NTPVT NTROCC QROCKC QRCREV QROCKH QVE02D QSURFT QMDIFF 20 20 1 1 F T F F F F / = NSS NTS DIRK REVK VEOP HYST SCAL SDIR SREV NSEND NTEND 2PT NS MIS NTMIS 20 1 F T F F F F T 20 1 F 20 1 / = NDRXVD NTEQUL NDPRVD QUIESC QTHPRS QREVTH QMOBIL NTTRVD NSTRVD 20 1 100 F F T F 1 20 / =NTFIP QGRAID QINTRP QTDISP NTFREG QTDISK NRFREG NMFIPR NETRAC 1 F F F 0 F 0 1 0 / = NWMAXZ NCWMAX NGMAXZ NWGMAX MAXLGR MAXCLS MCOARS LSTACK 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 10 / = QEXGOP NWFRIC NUPCOL F 0 3 / = MXMFLO MXMTHP MXMWFR MXMGFR MXMALQ NMMVFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 / = MXSFLO MXSTHP NMSVFT 0 0 0 / = NANAQU NCAMAX NIFTBL NRIFTB NSUMMX 0 0 0 0 3000 / = DAY MONTH YEAR 1 `JAN` 1993 / = QSOLVE NSTACK QFMTOU QFMTIN QUNOUT QUNINP NGDISK IDYNAM QOPT9P NDMAIN T 10 F F T T 0 0 F 1 / GRID ========================================================================= DX FIELD 08 : 08 21 OCT 93 7 * 50 / DY FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 75 / DZ FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 25 / TOPS FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 7 * 1000 / PERMX FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 100 10 700 1000 400 5 300 / REST OF DATA SAME AS EXAMPLE 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SUMMARY OF RUN 7 POINT_EX2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TIME BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR WBHP WBHP DAYS PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA

1 1 1 / 2 1 1 / 3 1 1 / 4 1 1 / 5 1 1 / 6 1 1 / 7 1 1 / / WBHP FIELD 08 : 25 21 OCT 93 / RUNSUM SCHEDULE ========================================================================= - - Set BHP reference depth to mid-point of block to be sure that -well BHP is at same depth as mid-point of cell WELSPECS FIELD 09 : 06 21 OCT 93 ` INJ ` , `LINEAR ` 1 1 1012.5 ` WAT ` 1* ` STD ` ` SHUT ` , ` YES ` 1* ` SEG ` 1* / / - - Set connection Kh very large to insure a large connection factor, -so that FBHP and block pressure will be essentially equal. COMDAT FIELD 09 : 14 21 OCT 93 ` INJ ` 1* 1* 1 1 ` OPEN ` 1* 1* 5.0000 1E+08 1* 1* `Z` / ` PROD ` 1* 1* 1 1 ` OPEN ` 1* 1* 5.0000 1E+08 1* 1* `Z` / WCONINJ FIELD 09 : 14 21 OCT 93 ` INJ ` , ` WAT ` , ` OPEN `, ` RATE ` 500.00000 1* 1* ` NONE ` 5000.000 1* 1* 1* / / - - Set FBHP of producer to 100 psi, produce on BHP control WCONPROD FIELD 08 : 50 21 OCT 93 ` PROD ` , ` OPEN ` , ` BHP ` 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 100.0000 1* 1* 1* / / RPTSCHED FIELD 08 : 54 21 OCT 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

/ TSTEP FIELD 09 : 38 21 OCT 93 10 * 0 . 10 / END ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SUMMARY OF RUN 7 POINT_EX1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TIME BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR WBHP WBHP DAYS PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA

- - ***Example 3*** - - Eclipse data file - - Linear, single -phase (water) flow --7x1x1 - - Simulate to steady state by running until no change in pressures -- - CLH 10/26/93 -- - Infinite permeability in first and last cells RUNSPEC FIELD 08 : 53 21 OCT 93 LINEAR SINGLE PHASE, STEADY STATE FLOW = NDIVIX NDIVIY NDIVIZ QRDIAL NUMRES QNNC MXAQN MXAQC QPORO QPERM NFSEG 7 1 1 F 1 F 0 0 F F 0 / = OIL WAT GAS DGAS VOIL API PLY BRI NOTRC NWTRC NGTRC MISC GI SOLV SFT F T F F F F F F 0 0 0 F F F F / = UNIT CONVENTION `FIELD` = NRPVT NPPVT NTPVT NTROCC QROCKC QRCREV QROCKH QVE02D QSURFT QMDIFF 20 20 1 1 F T F F F F / = NSS NTS DIRK REVK VEOP HYST SCAL SDIR SREV NSEND NTEND 2PT NS MIS NTMIS 20 1 F T F F F F T 20 1 F 20 1 / = NDRXVD NTEQUL NDPRVD QUIESC QTHPRS QREVTH QMOBIL NTTRVD NSTRVD 20 1 100 F F T F 1 20 / =NTFIP QGRAID QINTRP QTDISP NTFREG QTDISK NRFREG NMFIPR NETRAC 1 F F F 0 F 0 1 0 / = NWMAXZ NCWMAX NGMAXZ NWGMAX MAXLGR MAXCLS MCOARS LSTACK 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 10 / = QEXGOP NWFRIC NUPCOL F 0 3 / = MXMFLO MXMTHP MXMWFR MXMGFR MXMALQ NMMVFT 0 0 0 0 0 0 / = MXSFLO MXSTHP NMSVFT 0 0 0 / = NANAQU NCAMAX NIFTBL NRIFTB NSUMMX 0 0 0 0 3000 / = DAY MONTH YEAR 1 `JAN` 1993 / = QSOLVE NSTACK QFMTOU QFMTIN QUNOUT QUNINP NGDISK IDYNAM QOPT9P NDMAIN T 10 F F T T 0 0 F 1 / GRID ========================================================================= DX FIELD 08 : 08 21 OCT 93 7 * 50 / DY FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 75 / DZ FIELD 08 : 14 21 OCT 93 7 * 25 / TOPS FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 7 * 1000 / PERMX FIELD 08 : 10 21 OCT 93 1000000 5*100 1000000 / REST OF DATA SAME AS EXAMPLE 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SUMMARY OF RUN 7 POINT_EX3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TIME BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR BPR WBHP WBHP DAYS PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA PSIA

- 57901608 Eclipse Project1 JuLy 2010Uploaded byabdounou
- Reservior Simulator OverviewUploaded byaksasingh
- Reservoir Senior Project 2012Uploaded byKhalid Diab
- Principles of Reservoir SimulationUploaded byJawad Farid
- Well Performance and Artifical Lift Rev 3Uploaded bysaladinayubi1234
- Module 8 Relative PermeabilityUploaded bysaladinayubi1234
- Reservoir Engineering OverviewUploaded byAgMyat Kyaw
- Feketes Course NotesUploaded byketatni
- FFOUploaded byBhakti Mahbubani
- -production-petroleum-software.pdfUploaded byStan Andrei
- 05 Capillary PressureUploaded byMohamed Tarek
- KappaUploaded byAvinash_Negi_7301
- Roussennac01Uploaded by13670319
- Capillary+Pressure+ExerciseUploaded byAhmed Raafat
- Bomba Oilmaster 2.5Uploaded byAgustin Ordoñez
- Jet Pump EngineeringUploaded byRohit Sharma
- 03 Permeable Zone Logs SPUploaded byaricng
- Design of Jet PumpsUploaded byKartikeya Sachan
- reservoir engineeringUploaded byshanecarl
- Heriot-Watt University - Reservoir SimulationUploaded byTabassum Vahora
- _CFXTutorialUploaded byNarendra Kumar Dewangan
- Chemical Engineering.pdfUploaded byAjitsingh Jagtap
- Flu Jo MultiUploaded byAdrian Martínez Contreras
- Amao Abiodun ThesisUploaded byRami M. Alloush
- Mtech Mde Syllabus v5 FinalUploaded byyathish
- API Tank DesignUploaded byDD3NZ
- Chapter1-cfdUploaded byMohammed Gamal
- 1-D Model Extension to Ejector Performance at Secondary Flow ChokingUploaded byVirendra Kumar
- SGC2014 Dassault Judex 0Uploaded byEvgeny Shavelzon

- LM629 SALIDA PWMUploaded byLuis Varela
- Data Warehousing ConceptsUploaded byVikram Reddy
- Compound SentenceUploaded bykhusni Mubarok
- MTCNA 2Uploaded byYiannis Neocleous
- chapter_1_2.pdfUploaded byKrishna Chaitanya
- Abap Ex Db ConnectUploaded byjana
- E-commerce: big dataand big security dissertationUploaded byluche
- Subnetting IP AddressesUploaded byDuts117
- MS-ExcelUploaded byapi-3697540
- Simple c ProgramsUploaded byKARUNA KIRAN MALSHET
- DsoUploaded bynareshnellikonda
- SPK1_Quick_Start_Guide.pdfUploaded byjaggve
- icUploaded bycengz
- Md. Imranul SazzadUploaded byMaria Sima
- evmdm642_QuickStartGuideUploaded byĐăng Toàn
- Whole-Of-Government Common Operating Environment PolicyUploaded bycsau123
- R12 Accounts Receivable EnhancementsUploaded byRBalaji
- Samsung PN43E450A1FXZA Fast Track Cr60512Uploaded byavi1991
- BArring PArametersUploaded byQasim Abbas Alvi
- Finite Element Analysis Using ANSYS Mechanical APDL & WorkbenchUploaded bynapinnvo
- Qualification_of_Equipment_core_document.pdfUploaded byParkhomyuk
- 41565dUploaded bysebastianvaca
- Building and Process ModelingUploaded bySumanth
- Android App ClonesUploaded byecm33922
- SoftwareUploaded byPuneeth Gowda
- Manual Isagraf 256 e CrUploaded bygalvangrr
- Final Report AkshayUploaded byAkshay Agrawal
- Microgrid Test Bed Implementation at the PPL Electric Utilities Power LabUploaded byameya_chandrayan
- A MPDU Should Not Be Used With Applications That Require Low Latency Such as VOIP Since the PriceUploaded bytoraferdes
- Manual de MIDASUploaded byJuan Gomez