SPE 14129 The Role of Reservoir Simulation in Optimal Reservoir Management

by G. W. Thomas, Scientific Software-intercomp
SPE Member

Copyright 1X,



Petroleum Enginaara

This paper was proaantd at the SPE 19SS International Meeting on petroleum Engineeringheld in Beijing, CMaMarch 17-20, 19SS. The material is subject to correctionby the author. Permission to COPY restrictedto an ab.str~ OfMt more than 300 words, Write SPE. P.O. Sox S33S3S, Richardson. is Taxas 7SCSMS3S. Telex 730SS9 SPE DAL.

SIMULATION AND VIRGIN RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT ABSTRACT This paper discusses the role reservoir simulators play in formulating initial development plans, history matching and optimizing future production and in planning and designing enhanced oil recovery projects. The Hibernia Field in Canada and the Hassi R’Mel in AIgeria illustrate how simulation can be used to asdst in initial reservoir development. The Lookout Butte F.undle (Alberta) and others are cited to exemplify Optimhsl,fon of future production plans with the aid of simutetion. Finally, applications to several reported EOR projects are briefly discussed with major emptux~is concentrating on the Bati Raman Field in Turkey. INTRODUCTION ‘he purpose of this paper is to provide an overview on the role of reservoir simulation in managing hydrocarbon reservoirs. As pointed out by Coatsl, reservoir simulation, in the broad sense, has been practiced since the 1930%, when some of the first calculetionaI procedures were deveIoped to predict reservoir performance. Here, however, we take a narrower view, and restrict our discussion to applications of numerical reservoir simulation. ‘his involves solving targe s~ algebraic equations on digitaI computers to approximate transient, multiphaee or muIticomponent flow in heterogeneous media. ‘I?tis technoIgy started in the mid to late 1950% and, within the last twenty years, has played an increasingly important-role in the development, planning and management of gas and oiI reservoirs. In the folluwing, we first discus~ the role of reservoir simulation as a tool in planning the initia 1 development of a reservoir. The discussion then turns to their uses as predictive tools when investigating various future operating strategies. Finally, some attention is devoted to their utility in planning and executing enhanced oil recovery schemes. Illustrations in the form of case histories are provided, albeit these are necessarily not detailed because of space limitations. Neverthele$w, sufficient references to recent literature on the subject are given for the interested reader. When a reservoir simulator is employed to assist in ptenning the development of a virgin reservoir, the reservoir description is typically limited. Consequ@ly, only a minimal degree of opt imisat ion is poa%ible. Nevertheless, some useful insights can be cbtained with the aid of a simulator that can minimise the number of decisions one must make in planning field development. In perticuter, the simulator can end should be used to a$sesa sensitivity in computed results to uncertainties in It is the reservoir description and rock-fluid data. surprising how often variations in input data over reasonable ranges of uncertainty, for some reservoirs, yield modest changes in the computed results. On the other hand, it is useful to know, in the early stages of development, where the greatest effort should be concentrated to obtain those data that affect calculated performance the most. Simulation studies at the development stage, because of the uncertainties involved, are regarded as preliminary. Npically, they are periodically updated as more information becomes available; This means that early development plans arising from the first sim’?!ation studies should be sufficiently flexible to accom mudate future contingencies as one learns more about the reservoir. This presents a severe challenge where the reservoir in question is highIy complex, large in extent or in a hostiIe environment - all of which may require large investments to put it on production. In cases where the reservoir description and roekfluid properties are reasonably defined, one can we a simutetor to plan well locations and densities aswtming voidege replacement by injection to maintain pres..ure. Such strategies can be compared to primary depletion through the same number of wells to arrive at the best development policy for the reservoir. Arwlication to the Hibcrnia FieId To illustrate, we cite the Hibernia Field off the Ccest of Canada2. me fjeId lies abut 32tI km southeast of St. John%, Newfoundland in a water depth of 80 m. Five welts were drilIed to confirm the existence of substantial hydrocarbon reserves in at least two reservoirs, the Avalon and the Hibernia sendstones. The


2 THEROLEOF RZSEPSfOIR SIMULATION OPTIMAL IN RSSERVOIR . 21and 5-layer models. In one. In the other fault block. square grid blocks 569 m on a side were employed. where pert inent. an ambitious development plan was executed in the earIy 1970%baaed on a bleck-oit simulation study. EventuaNy.7 x 1012 mS of retrograde condensate gas at 32x10S kPa. and G. Applications to Gas Condensate Systems In the Hibernia Field. however. Correlations of the limited porosity . probably a volatile oil. can the oil be recovered through displacement or vapouriaat ion by selective completion of dry gas injection welLs. Some of the results of the study are shown in Figs. PVT properties for the hydrocarbon were obtained from a drill stem The Hibernia reservoir has more test fluid sample. black-il simulators can still provide usefuI information in such systems at substantially lea. employed in a 28 x 23 x 2 AvaIon model and a 24 x 20 x 2 Hibernia model. This 1s frequently done even though the reservoir may contain fluids that undergo substantial compositional changes during production. For the Hibernia. In the Hibernia. it was found that an ultimate recovery level of 50% of the original oil-in-place may be achieved through an optimised production/injection strategy. It is seen that in the AvaIon.hence Haasi RIMel can be regarded as a volatile oil reservoir with a huge rich gas cap. refer to flank water and crestal gas injection. Again. a saturated crude. the seismic surveys and state-of-the-art simulation tooLs. cost than a compositional simuIator5. differences in the water and gas injection cases were insignificant with the present geological description of the reservoir. verticaI/horizontal permeability ratios were used in a similar manner.~timum is to maximise Iiquid revapouriaation. market scma of the. The uncertainties in these reauIts are linked to the geological model. the oil appears to be undersaturated having a relative density of 0. respectively. In particular. The motivation for doing so is most often due to lack of data precisely defining the compositional behaviour of the fluids in the early development stages. a line drive gas injection scheme was implemented. For were generated using this block the fluid properties correlations assuming an initial seturat ion pressure of 40x10 end a sclut ion gasail ratio of 356 m‘/m’.. During the development drilling. the effects of the faults and retrograde condensation and revapourisation need to be examined in detail. At the time.873.the probebitity of coning can be high should producing weila be completed in the oil zone. undersaturated crude oil with a relative density of 0. The appropriatenes~ of the line drive is aLsc in question. The reservoir has a surface area of 4800 km’. only 20 wells had been drilIed and the geological description was limited. For this purpose. full continuity of the reservoir was assumed. he can use previous seismic. we cite two large gas condensate reservoirs. was minimised. h each case. A porosity cutoff of 13% was used to define the net pay in the Avalon while 10% was employed in the Hibernia. In the~ figures W. the effect of liquid dropout on well deliverability is also an important issue. resources must be devoted early on to the correct characterisation of the fluids and definition of their phase behaviour. as an alternative to producing directly from the oil zone? 14 . Because of its vast reserves and closeness to ports.I.82 relative density and 15. were used to generate These subsequently were pseudo relative permeabiIities. 1-3.850. The subsequent need is to @rform a major update using information from all welt. A fault system was also discovered that was subsequently better defined by seismic investigation. AH evidence indicates that the two reservoirs are The Avalon ccntains an apparent non-corn municating. The field was discovered in 1953 and contained about 1. were scenarios Four production/injection investigated in the Avalon while four and five were considered for each of the fault blocks in the Hibernia reservoir. whereas the deeper Hibernia is more homogeneous. connate water varied from 11 to 15% while 30% average residual oil saturation was assumed.825. of relative density. in reservoirs with thin oil zones overlain by massive gas reserves . is apparently overlain by what appears to be a gas condensate with a liquid gas content of 0. The first. As”the latter is improved in the early development planning process. a black-oil reservoir simulator was employed to arrive at preliminary development decisions.and possibly underlying water .dry gas end reinject the rest to recover any condensate dropout that might occur.NANAGENENT SPE 14129 Avalon reservoir appears to be heterogeneous with wide variations in the porosity and permeability. a drill stem test fluid was analysed to determine the PVT properties. Moreover. production todate is 5 to 6% of the initial gas reserves. Well locations were originally selected to give reasonable pettern coverage over thoseregions where the oil accumulations were considered to be greatest. the production history. Haaei R’Mel now has about 200 welLs and giant plants for ga? treatment and gas injection. the Has. The objective was to produce a fixed daily rate of rich gas.I. extract the condensate. With regard to a retrograde condensate.001 m#/m*.. if any. The question arises. Some revisions were made in the geological description of the field when 100 weUa were in place.. Moreover. there again.i R’Mel is located in Algeria6.2 m thickness was discovered . one would like to know what the . geological and petrophysical interpretations. Average connate and residual oil saturations in the Avalon were estimated at 25%. complicated fluid propties in two separate fault blocks. Completion intervals for producers and injectors were selected such that oil production would be favoured while production of gas and water. where cycling is performed. As exampIes.permeability data were used to extrapolate Correlations of into areas where data were lacking. en oil ring of 0. one first determines to what extent. respectively. In such an update. optimum recovery schemes can be desigiwd to account for the reservoir complexities. 0. Consequently. The first simulation runs involved 2-dimensional cross-sect ions to generate pseudo functions3~4 for subsequent use in 3+3imensional model% For the Avalon and Hibernia.

laboratory analysis. Unfortunately.SPE 14129 G. at times. long dMsnce transport.w.is it the optimum in view of possible geological discontinu{ties such as faults. and. An effort is then made to determine the most likely case between these extremes (this could be the average of the extremes). these have not found Iairge scale use on a commerical basis to+ate. It is important in such applications that data errors (from sampling. fie reservoir dips to the west end north and is delineated by en extensive aquifer on the west. then one need not concern himself about defining the most likely case since averages from the eXtrema would be sufficient. from Fig. an effort is made to reproduce the curves in Fig. Such data are derived from constant volume depletion experiments under controUed laboratory conditions on what presumably are representative fluid semples7. However. even though aided by sophisticated tools. it is not a priori calibrated to a particular reservoir% characteristics. and a fault on the east (see Fig 5). revapourisation. during the early stages. fluid samples from different wells wiU. Here we’ve just conveyed the flavour for some particular cases.those with little or no productive history. The reservoir is a tight. one seeks to reproduce the field-wide pressure. this is not always the case. 4 one cannot easily decide which well sample is representative. Thomas 3 Finally. This history matching involves trial-end-error runs with the simulator in which input data adjustments are made within reasonable bounds until a satisfactory match is achieved.1 to 0. the simulator is applied in a qualitative sense. respectively. assuming retrograde liquid condensation occurs in the reservoir prior to fluid entry into the welLs. SIMULATORS AS PREDICTIVE TOOLS IN DEVELOPED RESERVOIRS.i. and unique results are not guaranteed. end w this tuned result in the simulator for the moat Iikely scenario. The issues of lSquid dropout. the simutator is used in a predictive mode to investigate various production alternatives. and effort is first devoted to the task of calibrating the simulator such that it reproduces the response . 15 . Unfortunately. Obviously. * TypicaUy. given a certain well pattern . 4 (shown by the dashed line). have similar or neer+imilar characteristics such that a representative or several regional representatives can be used to typify the whole. It contains a dry gas In concluding this section we emphasise two things: (1) ‘llIere are many different waya in which a reservoir simulator can play a vital role in optimum reservoir *Efforts have been made to deveIop software ~ams that automate the history matching t-e=. the past production history. pinchouts etc? These and similar issues constitute the natural province for reservoir simulators and sometimes definitive answers can emerge from carefully constructed models. However.3 md. one might take some curve weighted in favour of the pIots that are closest together in Fig.. In a sense. In the latter. the objective is to optimise future operations of the reservoir. fit the phase beheviour package to this. one can divide reservoirs into two categories . end those that have produced for some period of time. The approach one takes is of course problem+ependent and may be unique for a given reservoir. etc. Otherwise. ‘Jly. In the former case. a reaourcefuI engineer with in-depth understanding of reservoir behaviour can achieve meaningful matches. Canada~4. However. (2) The devebpment plan. Such simulators internaUy generate the PVT characteristics of the hydrocarbon fluids using a “tuned” phase behaviour package. fluid 10ss. development of a reservoir is an on-going process that continues over its productive life.). h Fig. me ‘tuning” as performed prior to the simulations by adjusting certain coefficients and/or parameters in the phase behaviour package such that it reproduces. development. Furthermore. it can be time consuming. i. Effort should be made. to endow it with maximum flexibility and continually upd&te it with additional simulation studies as new data are obtained. However. interbedded limestone having an average porosity of 6.e. Performing Evaluation of the Lookout Eutte RundleA Pool Once a satisfactory match is achieved. etc. coatty. one frequently empIoye a simulator in worst caee/beet case scenarios. may at some point require application of a compositional wimulator. As a consequence. should be regarded as tentative. ‘Ihe distinction is particularly clear with regard to reservoir simulation. in development planning. if one considers depletion without cycling. we cite the Lookout Butte Rundle A Pool located in Alberta. 4’we djspley plots of retrograde liquid dropout (as percentage of hydrocarbon pore volume) as functions of pressure for several fluid samples taken from a large (2000 km*) lean gas retrograde condensate reservoir (the name and location are witheld for proprietary reasons). water-oil ratio and ges+il tatio performance and also match individual weU behaviour for the asme vnriables. Should the resuIts from the subsequent simulations for each scenario not differ subetant. within acceptable limits? the results of a particular laboratory experiment on the hydrocarbon fluid. Here again. The phase behaviour package is then tuned to each situation. In this context. frustrating. 4 for WeUs 1 end 6 to characterise the hydrocarbon properties for the worst end best case situations. the response of the reservoir to some predecided development plan is presumably known. For example. etc) be kept to en absolute minimum. As an example of such an appUcation.5% and permeabilities in the range 0. The proper choke becomes even more cIouded given the poasibititiea for eempting errora (contamination.e.like the line drive in the Has$i R’Mel .e. The coefficient adjustment is accomplished using regression analysis5 or trial-and+rror computer runs. the procedure frequently involves iuconditioned systems. men the data from WeUe 1 and 6 clearly define the worat and best cases. and then plan the development around the latter. since these are largely unknown. hopeful~y. i.

Dry gas was injected into one weU(We114-13 in Fig. gasand water+il ratios was largely for the secondary recovery phase (1962-1972) in which water was injected. of continued Predictions included the possibility waterflood operations and inject ion of carbon dioxide.. The case history is significant in that it documents how reIevant computer simulations can. The utility of a reservoir simulator should be recognised in this brief case history. lead to safe and economic gas storage operations. The simulator was a useful tool in the ccmprehensi /e analysis required to understand. however. To determine if water production was caused by water coning or fingering. were started. The total field deliverability for each case is shown in Fig. Moreover. three-phase black oil model and is of interest since it involves a complex and unusually shaped reservoir.88 relative density. 6 and 7 we show typical matches of pressure and watergas ratio for one of the wells in the field. It provides engineering answers to certain questions that one might pose regarding future exploitation of a reservoir. FinalIy. both the reservoir and surface system were simulated simultaneously. However. 4 SIMULATION OPTIMAL IN IWSERVOIR MANAGEMENT THEROLEOF RJZSERVOIR SPE 14129 condensate underIain by the aquifer. cannot make the decision as to which possibility is the optimum. The other treats the Sawtelle Field in California 18. thereafter experienced water production that increased steadily until the water-gas ratio averaged 1 x 10-5 m‘/m 1 by June.15 x 106 m‘/D or when the gas-water contact reached the bottom perforations. This study is of intereat since it involves a rather old reservoir for which few data exists for the primary production phase (1949-1962). should be drilled to recover gas from the southern portion of the reservoir. The prediction phase of the study involved choosing one or more optimum infill drilling locations from among the four possible sites indicated by the arrows in Fig. One involves the Leroy Gas Storge Facility in Wyoming16. 1972. The 15-29 weIl is located in that part of the reservoir which is poorly defined. Consequently. However. The judgment. Well 14-13 shouId be drilled even though it constitutes a high risk because of substantial water influx. For the predictions. The objectives of the study were to determine the mechanisms causing the water production. The field was produced at the maximum of the production facilities. the well watered out at Lfie end of 1978. There was. Both invoked history matching the performance data. with no infiU drilling was also run. Other interesting case histories involving history matching and predictions have appeared in the recent literature. 5. Two other recent studies akc are of interest. Well 14-13 initially increased the field deliverability about 3 x 106 m‘/D over the other cases and 5. gas in the North may be trapped otherwise by the incoming water. As a result. It was concluded from the history match runs that water coning was the cause of the water production in the reservoir. without it. after history matching. 5)untiIlate 1967 at which time it was converted to a producer and blowdown Prior to this. Wells were shut in when their production declined below 0. 8. the adequacy of the reservoir description required to match the history was evaluated. A base case.8 x 106 ma/D over the base case. only minor amounts of water. In addition. it is aIso regarded ashight’isk since it is near to Well 4-32 which was shut in because of high water production. The EI Gueria is a moderately to highly fractured nummulitic limestone originaUy containing an undersaturated oil of 0. 16 . commenced by depletion coupled with gaa cycling. The reservoir is produced with injection of seawater to maint~in pressure above the bubblepoint pressure. and evaIuate the surface facilities required to carry out the depletion plan. four producing welL~ produced. It. this is regarded as a high risk well. ‘Ihe model was also augmented by wellbore hydraulics routines to simulate vertical or inclined flow to the surface. fie Sawtell study employed a two+imensional. This region has limited communication with the northern and southern parts. was coupled with a gas gathering system simulator to optimise the surface faciUtiea15. The results of the history match were used to determine the distribution of gas-in-place and the water influx in the prediction and optimisation phases of the study. Moreover. with other engineering studies. A three+imensional model was constructed to perform the history match and predictions. develop an optimum depIetion plan for the reservoir. This remains within the realm of human judgment (thankfully). the water influx rate was very high as the contact rebounded. and crossaectional studies to evaluate fingering. This well is in communication with some other wetls in the field and was considered as a future drilling location.4 x 106 m:/D over the productivity in 1972 (the year the study was performed). one shouId abandon Well 15-29 as a poasibilit y and re+vaIuate drilling of Well 13-32 after more history becomes available. we cite the simulation study of the East Velma West Block Sims Sand Unit in 0klahoma19. Because the gas-water contact had been depressed by gas-injection in the proximity of this location. Well 5-21 presents a low risk end is necessary to drain gas from the tighter portions of the reservoir in the south. monitor and control the leakage. The 13-32 location gives the highest cumulative gas production and increases field deliverability 3. because of Iow risk. GeoIogicaI and core data indicate the reservoir is extensively fractured and that In late 1963 production vertical fractures dominate. some concern because of its proximity to the fault on the east. In Figs. however. two types of modeI studies were executed: Individual well coning studies using a radial gas-water simulator. calibration of the simulator was accomplished by matching the pressure history of the entire field and the individual well performances. In addition the reservoir simulator. Finally. Finally. was that Well 5-21. One describes application of a black OK simulator to the El Gueria reservoir in the Ashstart Field of offshore Tunisia17. in this case. A simulator wqa used to match the pressure history of the reservoir incIuding the effect of a time-and pressure-dependent leak to the surface. The latter exercise involved examining various possible effective line diameters and welI connections to yield a maximum in deliverability. The history match of field pressures.

to Predict Deliverability Eng. Predictions were then made to determine steam requirements in certain portions of the reservoir. 3. J. Iffly. enables him to probe deeper. 1975). R.all pumping . D. Sixth SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation. J. (August. Tech (Aug. especially in complex systems where simpler reservoir engineering methods are found wanting. Simulation has been used to design. recovery must . Thomas 5 APPLICATIONS TO EOR PROJECTS Sometimes reservoir simulators are used to assess the relative merits of various enhanced oil recovery (EOR) schemes. J. The estimated primary recovery is 1. A pilot waterflood indicated that an additional 3. reservoir prewre was 11. Frazier and Todd 2 employed a simulator to design and evaluate an application of Iiquified petroleum gas (LPG) in a reservoir that had previously been waterflooded. Aydelotte and Pope20 and George. The amount of gas in solution at the bubble point pressure is quite low. We have seen how they can be used in the infancy. CONCLUSIONS Reservoir simulators play an active and important role in the optimum management of oil and gas reservoirs.: ‘Simulation of Gas Condensate Reservoir Performance”.. and gain a larger measure of “understanding. There is no natural At discovery in 1961 the water intlux into the reservoir. Gondouin. 1982. 63. 1982) 1633-1642.D.with a total production rate of 413 m‘/D. 4. The reservoir contains substantial reserves (2. it appeared as though the process was working as predicted by the simulation study. Indeed.2 m‘/m 1. (June. the opt imisation must be done on that level. Coats. REFERENCES 1.modeLs for steamfloodin ~ and micell ar~lymer flooding. the matches are remarkably good.: “An Attempt the Time Dependence of Wetl in Gas Condensate Fields. J. Coats. they have indicated the existence of additional oil reserves which were later ‘discovered” by subsequent However. monitor and evaluate several steam in”ection projects23-27. .e. hopefully. In particular. l%e project was initiated in the field with propane As of injection in three wells starting in July.” Sot. Costs.: ‘me Use of VerticaI Equilibrium in TwoDimensional Simulation of Three-DimensionaI Reservoir Performance”. W.H. H. and to ascertain where new injection welLs and infill producers should be located.e. -3 Feb. et a121 report on the novel use of reservoir simulators to validate and assist in the development of simplified. maturity and final days of a reservoir% life. Nevertheless.rely almost entirely on external means. 1980.. Early indications are that 17.ist production.5% of the original oil in-place. A suite of simulation studies were executed to screen various EOR processes. The reservoir presents an intriguing and difficult challenge for two reasons: (1) lt is Turkey?? largest single oil reserve. From an economic viewpoint. Paper SPE 10512.9 x 108 m‘) of a heavy crude oil (relative density = 0.H. to arrive at a plan for future project expansion.. J. D. 17 “-. 269. K. Pet. Eng. i. J.758 kPa. production history over 10 years.W. substitute for sound engineering judgment.32% recovery can be expected. The choice was to either abandon the field or attempt an EOR process. and Husson.K. i. Sot. K. In such cases. and Chipman. Kyte. 113-124. i. a large reservoir simuiat ion study using a fractured reservoir simuIator capable of handling carbon dioxide diffusion into the heavy oil is being executed. and Henderson. the latter process is the most feasible because of a nearby carbon dioxide gas reserve and the high initiaI investment requirements for steam injection.R. 82-32-24. Sot. Ultimately.5% could be recovered by this means. A very interesting application of the use of reservoir simulators in the management of reservoirs is provided by the Bati Raman Field in Turkey 28. December 1981.032 kPa.e. no history match runs were employed to calibrate the simutator.: “New Pseudo Functions To Control Numericai Dispersion”. this process and immiscibIe carbon dioxide injection appear the most favorable. The Georgsdorf Field in Germany A presents an interesting case 7 history. There are 103 wells . 2.aome parts. reliable inexpensive predictive. Cmada 6-9 June. Eng.R. 1971). J. 1967). including six was satisfactorily matched. 31 Jan.! SPE 14129 G. A reservoir simulator is just another tool in the engineer% arsenal that.: “Reservoir Simulation: State~f-theArtn. M. R . K. Presented at the 33rd Annual Technical Meeting of the PetroIeum Sociey of CIM. . They prGvide insights which could not otherwise be obtained.I. New Orleans. At the same time a field pilot project is being planned to assist in optimum development of the reservoir. Recently. we emphasise that there is no driIling30.986) with a bubble point pressure of 1103 kPa. ‘fhe reservoir presents other complexities in that it is fractured and displays dual porosity29 characteristics in . Pet. Simulation of water flooding led to a prediction of 5% recovery. confirming the field pilot tests. (2) It has essentially no internal energy to as. steam injection. Calgary.. Pet.H. Paper No. Here. La. 3. in some instances... Currently. (March. The simulation study indicated that an additional 7% of the original oil in-place could be me predictions recovered from a miscible LPG flood. Currently. it is 2. and Berry. Handyside. with Considering the usual reservoir complexities and the difficulties associated with nonisothermaI operations. Simulation of steam flooding indicates 32% recovery if the system behaves like a single poiosity system whereas only half this amount is recoverable by steam if it is indeed a dual system throughout. J. 1982. Dempsey. involved use of the best available reservoir description.: “A Preliminary Study of the Hibernia Fieldw. 5. Pet. the simulator is used in a predictive mode both with or without prior history matching.

1983). Te@h. (Nov.W.. Anz.: ‘Steam ftccd Pilot Design for a Massive.: “Gas Cycling in the Lockout Butte J.~ (July . Presented at the 21st Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum Scciet y of CIM. Gavalas.L. Pet..Design and Performance Evaluationn.: ‘The Behaviour of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. J. 991-1002.. J.” Sot.610-620. D. 25. J. Ca. 23. Leskova. PET.. Ott.O. 5-7. (March. Hnatiuk. J. R. and ENOUZ. Patterso~ J... G. (JuIY. TECH (Jan. Inc. 3-6. 29. Vol. R. et al. Williams. J. (March. AIME. Tech. Tech. and Tek.W. Ashtart Field Offshore Tunisia”. M. Watson. 11. and CNektuyi. New Orleans. 1965). Pet.: “Numerical Simulation of Steam Displacement-Field Performance Applications. A. Emanuel.: ‘Sawtelh Field. R.J. Trans. Units County.” J. 481487. Moughamian. and Coats. R. Karcuguz. D. J.. and Pope. 30. Tech. 9. P.H. G.D. New York City (1981) Chapt.. and Greebe..F. 24-26 . J. Eng.: “Numerical Simulation of Steam Drive in the Tia Juana M-6 Project. 19.Can. Quinn. (MC. J. J.E. Wiling. J. Tech.S. 6. K. H.: “Simulation and Design of Steam Drive in a Vertical Reservoir.L. H.: Bayesian Matching by “Reservoir “. (June 1975) 765-776.” J. Paper SPE 10733. 17. (Sept. D. Tech. 20. and Porx. Pet: Eng. and Hoist.T. and Torp.(Feb. and Seinfeld. Benefie?d. J. Eng. and Thomas. J/of Pet. No.. Tech. 21. 1952-1964.: “A Direct Approach for History Matching.E. (May.. 12.259.” & Pet. Steeply Dipping Reservoir.. Aydelotte. Wyoming: A Case History of Attemptec Gas-Migration Control”. J. Veatch. Tech.S. AIME. H..: “A Simplified Predlcltve Model for Steamdrive Performance.” Sec. 17. H. R. and Seinfeld. Lake.. Trans. Munoz. Oct. Rundle Pod”. Paulj G. Tech. C. A. California: Simulation of a Complex am Unusually Shaped Reservoir”. P. and Trimble. J. 119-131 Chu. H. L. Bes. (December 1976) 337350.H.: “Alvord (3000 ft $trawn) LPG F1ccd . Ashbcurne. Shah.” paper SPE 10321 presented at the 1981 SPE Annual Technical Conference. K. 18. San Antonio. Eng. K. Pet.Sept. K. Canada.C. 1970 Calgary. van Den Bosch. and Todd. Tech. 13.. Whitson. Pet.H.R. J.: “History Reservoir-: matcting ii T’wo-Phase Petroleum Incompres. G.: tlpra~tical Applications of optimal Control Theory to Historv-Matchin$l Multiphase Simulator Models.enyei.. 398-406.: ‘TIevetopment anc Operation of the El Gueria Reservoir.. 1984).4. ‘!The Future of Heavy Crude and Tar Sands. H..: ~!ldentifiability of Estimates of Two-Phase Reservoir Properties in History Matching” Sec. F. G.S. May. Nigeria”. D. Vol 259. and Root. Sims Sand Unite Reservoir”. Frazier.W. J.. Tech.: ‘tA Simplified Predicative Model for Micellar-Polymer Flooding”. 687-706.R.: ‘Leroy Storage. and Vrana. 1984) 671-677. 1984) 132-140. K. 28.z (December 1977). McGraw-Hilt Bock Co. M..A. T. J.: !~A Rigourousand Ef~lcient Method fOr Gas Field Gathering System Design and Compression Studies”.R. G. M. 1985) 275-283. and Seinfeld.W. Issever. Eng. 15. P.r 6 THE ROLE OF RESERVOIR SIMULATION IN OPTIMAL RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT SPE 14129 7. D. 47.: “History Matching by Use of Optimal Control Theory. Wasserman. vol.P. J. 261. Dupuy. Tech. 8.. Pet.ible flow:’ Sec.” Paper SPE 3515 presented at SPE-AIME 46th Annual Fall Meeting.. EnE..J.E. (Marct 1985). 1429-1440. 26. AIME. 16. 1971... Sobocinski. P. 1973). (Jan.. M. 1984). D.B. J.” WH~~t~e{. Chavent.: ’’Evacuating Constant volume DepIetion Data”. Warren. (February 1975) 74-86.! Coats. Araktingi. Z. M. 1982) 1546-54. J. J. Avon. J.: ‘Design Concepts of a Heavy-Oil Recovery Procesq by an.: ‘tThe Secondary Recovery Project at Ogharete Field. Engineer. G. Estimation.lmmiscib[e Applicatio~”.March 1982. Pet. S. J. Gavalas. and Seinfeldt J. Pet... ~ Pet. and Lemonnier. C. Pet. 488-498. J. B. Pet. ‘( Augus~ 1975 347-355. 27. Federal Republic of Germany”.” ~ Pet. Dempsey. Pet. R. A. 1984). 22. M. presented at the 1982 California Regional Meeting of the SPE. M.: “Simulating a Steamflood at the Georgsdorf Field. C. J. 18 . Pet. San Franchco. Kantar.: ‘A Full Field Model-Study of the Ms1 Velma West Block. 24.. Pet. L. H.W.R. 1. 10. 1985). (April. (Aug:. 1985). 1963) 24S-255.

WE 14129 .

.. ---069s ..“ .—.. —— .. .— 19... W... q I Fig S .ab. h. . .- q6. * .n.# !.[ . -.. .. 12 !wfamllm 6/ M 7 .*...00. -768 i AOUIFER -t L \ ALL* I \ \ : \ \ \ \ R M . ‘Do... . b {.. {2 . ...* . h.. . 0...1 ..

A.B. — 9 11-11 Cucwmo Omcmto I ___l___ I 24. 1970 (va***t TIME Flg s . lNIT’ LOOKWT BUTTE 11-31 I I I I 1/ Fig 7 WM.

67 — -u I 4 [ 0.28 J .~ 14129 — - — q — 0 q — 0.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful