The lecture of Tarek Ahmed about EOS and Production Analysis

© All Rights Reserved

10 views

The lecture of Tarek Ahmed about EOS and Production Analysis

© All Rights Reserved

- Section 7.5 Page 393 to 407
- Crude Tower Simulation Using Aspen HYSYS
- GS4
- 40
- SEG-2010-2459 Correlations Density Temperature
- OIL-SD-07 Rev 0
- Distillation Control
- Appraisal Work 2011
- Azeri (Ceyhan) Jul 2013
- Hot Heated Tanks eBook
- Acetic Acid Mrs Gadekar SV
- OS Coll. Vol. 9 p186-Cyclohexenedione
- Gas Behaviour
- Lab 1 Simulation
- Re Gresi
- Design and control of an ideal reactive divided-wall distillation process.pdf
- SPE-483-G Engineers as Managers
- lactic acid
- 0c96053c9b0ed2b72b000000.pdf
- D 20 â€“ 99 ;RDIWLTK5

You are on page 1of 93

On the Misuse of

Equations of State, Upscaling & Decline Curve Analysis

Emeritus Professor of Petroleum Engineering

25326 Metzler Creek Drive

Houston, Texas 77389

Tahmed@Mtech.edu

www.TarekAhmedAssociates.com

1

7/2/2017

1) 5 years

2) 10 Years

3) 15 Years

4) 20 Years

2

7/2/2017

On Equations of State

3

7/2/2017

RT RT a

Ideal EOS: p p 2

V Vb V

Dutch

1910 Nobel Prize in Physics

R 2 Tci2 R Tci

ai a & bi b

pci pci

4

7/2/2017

p 2 p

Equations of State [ ]T , p ,V 0 &

V c c c

[ ]T , p ,V 0

V 2 c c c

p = prepulsive - pattractive

idea RT 0 0 0 -

V

vdW RT a R 2 Tc2 R Tc -

a b

V b V 2 pc pc

RK RT a R 2 Tc2.5 R Tc -

a b

V b V (V b ) T pc pc

RT a b

V b V (V b ) pc pc

PR a (T ) R 2 Tc2 R Tc f(T,Tc,)

RT a b

V b V ( V b ) b (V b ) pc pc

5

7/2/2017

PV=ZnRT

Imagine:

A grid block in the reservoir:

yi

Ki

xi

6

7/2/2017

Equations of State

Why Tuning ?

7

7/2/2017

1. The Plus-Fraction & Lumped Components

2. The Methane Problem

p 2 p

[ ]T , p ,V 0 & [ ]T , p ,V 0

V c c c V 2 c c c

R 2 Tci2 R Tci

ai a & bi b

pci pci

R 2 (Tc2 ) c 7 R (Tc ) c 7

ac 7 a & bc 7 b

( pc ) c 7 ( pc ) c 7

8

7/2/2017

p 2 p

[ ]T , p ,V 0 & [ ]T , p ,V 0

V c c c V 2 c c c

R 2 (Tc2 ) c 7 R (Tc ) c 7

ac 7 a & bc 7 b

( pc ) c 7 ( pc ) c 7

9

7/2/2017

10

7/2/2017

1. Saturation Pressure

2. Separator Test

3. Constant Volume Depletion Test CVD

4. Differential Expansion Test DE

5. Constant Composition Expansion CCE

6. Swelling Tests

7. Slim-Tube Test

8. Minimum Miscibility Pressure

9. etc.

11

7/2/2017

Tuning of EOS

Minimize one of the following two objective functions:

W exp pred

min F ( pc , Tc , , BIC , c)

i i i

i iexp

W exp pred

min F ( a , b , , BIC , c)

i i i

i iexp

Where:

Wi = Weight factor

i = PVT data, e.g. pb, pd, Bo,etc

a= EOS parameter

b= EOS parameter

= Acentric factor

12

7/2/2017

Tuning Strategy

W exp pred

min F ( pc , Tc , , BIC , c)

i i i

i iexp

1. Conduct several SENSITIVITY RUNS to evaluate the impact of individually shifting EOS

parameters, i.e. pc,Tc, , a, b,etc., on the predicted PVT Data. This step might reveal that

changing pc has no significant impact on the results as compare with adjusting Tc.

13

7/2/2017

W exp pred

min F ( pc , Tc , , BIC , c)

i i i

i exp

i

1. Saturation Pressure

2. Separator Test

3. Constant Volume Depletion Test CVD

4. Differential Expansion Test DE

5. Constant Composition Expansion CCE

6. Swelling Tests

7. Slim-Tube Test

8. Minimum Miscibility Pressure

14

7/2/2017

Example 1:

CCE & DE Laboratory Data

Pi> Pb Pb P<Pb P <<Pb P <<<Pb

100 %

Oil Vt Vsat Vt Vt Vt

Hg

Vt

Vrel Notice, reference volume is Vsat

VSat

15

7/2/2017

CCE DE

31 data points 11 data points

(Vt ) p,T

Vrel

(V ) Psat ,T

(Vo ) p,T

Vrel

(V )14.7,60 o

16

7/2/2017

167 oF

17

7/2/2017

170 oF

18

7/2/2017

175 oF

19

7/2/2017

168 oF

20

7/2/2017

Comment:

Why using Vsat; why not Vi ?

Vt (error ) V

Vrel t The problem is the

VSat (error ) VSat reference volume Vsat

21

7/2/2017

Example 2:

Z-Factor Related Laboratory Data

CVD, CCE

22

7/2/2017

23

7/2/2017

p Ma

ZRT

because you had a perfect match

of Z-Factor

24

7/2/2017

RF is a function of Z-factor

p Zi

RF 1 [ ]

Z pi

25

7/2/2017

from a correlation?

26

7/2/2017

27

27

7/2/2017

Wi iexp ipred

F (a, b, , BIC )

i iexp

Viscosity

Weight 10 0 0 0 1

Factor

p Zi

RF 1 [ ]

Z pi

( MW ) P

g

Z RT

Lee-Gonzalez Method

(9.4 + 0.02 M a ) T 1.5 0.001494 M p Y

g= exp X a

0.0209 + 0.0019 M a + T Z T

197.2

Y = 1 .7 0.002 M a

T

28

28

7/2/2017

Differential Rs and Bo With EOS

Challenges associated with measuring the liquid volume at reference temperature and

pressure, i.e. stock-tank.

EOS simulation might not replicate the final depletion point of the laboratory process.

29

7/2/2017

To eliminate the propagation of errors and for better match with EOS;

consider using the following conversions:

Rsb Rs

( Rs ) cum Scf/bbl to eliminate the ST:

Cumulative gas solubility is referenced to Bubble point volume

Bob

Bo

Bo bbl/bbl to eliminate the ST:

Bob Dimensionless Bo is referenced to Bubble point volume

30

7/2/2017

Rs

Rsb Rs

( Rs ) cum

Bob

Pressure

Reserved.

31

7/2/2017

Bo

Bo

Bo

Bob

Pb

Pressure

32

7/2/2017

An Alternative Approach

Instead of:

a, b, and m = f (pC, TC, )c7+

replace with :

a, b, and m = f (MW, sp.gr)C7+

measurable properties

33

7/2/2017

Paper # 18532

3 c4 6 c

a or b [ (ci D i )] [ (ci 7i 4 )] 7 ,

i 0 D i 5 7

M 7

D

7

34

7/2/2017

12

10

Modified EOS

LDO, % 6 Exp. Data

PVTSim

WinProp

0

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Pressure

CVD for Gas 5

35

7/2/2017

4000

3500

3000

2500

Rsd; 2000

PVTSim

scf/STB

WinProp

Modified EOS

1500

Exp. Data

1000

500

0

0.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 4,000.00 5,000.00

Pressure

36

7/2/2017

All Rights Reserved.

37

7/2/2017

Nitrogen Injection

% LDO

38

7/2/2017

Lean Injection

% LDO

39

7/2/2017

a) Gas injection volume on vaporizing LDO

b) Gas Composition on vaporizing/reducing LDO

c) Timing of gas cycling; delay suggests more heaving components to vaporize

40

7/2/2017

1- LDO curve !

2- dewpoint pressure !

41

7/2/2017

Pd = 6750 psi

T = 280 oF

Max LDO = 21.6%

C1 = 73.19%

C7+ = 8.21%

42

7/2/2017

25

20

Liquid Drop Out, %

15

10

0

0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Pressure, psig

43

7/2/2017

at 4300 psig.

25

Liquid Drop Out, %

Original

20

500 scf/bbl

15

1000 scf/bbl

10

1500 scf/bbl

2000 scf/bbl

5

0

0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Pressure, psig

44

7/2/2017

at 3100 psig (500 scf/bbl).

30

25

20

Liquid Drop Out, %

15

10

5

0

Injected Gas

45

7/2/2017

at 1200 psig (500 scf/bbl).

Liquid Drop Out, %

40

20

0

Original N2/CO2/C1 N2/C1 CO2/C1 N2/CO2 N2 CO2 C1

Injected Gas

46

7/2/2017

Hysis Simulation Data

47

7/2/2017

Central Processing Facilities

CPF

Stripper Column

(19 distillation trays)

80-250oc

55oc 1500 KPA

Oil Composition !!!

1st Stage 250oc

80oc 1300 KPA Stock-Tank

(Tray-20) Gradual changes in the

temperature in the flow line

48

7/2/2017

Distillation Column

Temp profile is

Described

by single value of

150oc

150oc

700 KPA

55oc 1500 KPA

Oil Composition !!!

1st Stage

80oc 1300 KPA Stripper Column Stock-Tank

(19 distillation trays)

2nd Stage

The study suggests that the current treatment of the Column in the FFM

overestimates the liquid shrinkage; i.e. it underestimates STOIP and ST oil

produced

2006Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

49

7/2/2017

The Eagle Ford shale is one of the newest shale plays. Located in S. Texas, it extends over

an area of about 20,000 square miles

6 Hydrocarbon Windows

50

7/2/2017

STB/MMscf SCF/STB

Dry Gas - > 100,000 -

Wet Gas 10-15 70,000- > 60

100,000

Retrograde 15-300 3,300-70,000 > 50

Gas

Near Critical >300 > 3,300 > 50

Ordinary Oil - 200-1,000 < 45

Oil

51

7/2/2017

C1+N2

A

A- Dry Gas

D

B- Wet Gas

C- Retrograde Gas

D- Near Critical

E- Volatile Oil

F- Ordinary Oil C B

G- Low Shrinkage Oil

C7+ C2-C6+CO2

2006 Tarek Ahmed & Associates, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

52

7/2/2017

Qo Qg

CGR The stream from a

Well or PVT cell

Qg Qo

Qo Qstream CGR

Y Qg

Qstream

Qstream Veq QO (Qg ) sep scf/day Qo

Qo

Y

Veq Qo Qg o

Veq 133,000 ; scf / STB

Hg Mo

CGR

Y

Veq CGR 1

Y < CGR

53

7/2/2017

54

7/2/2017

Arps Decline Curve Methodology

Arps Decline Curve Analysis DCA has been the standard for evaluating the expected ultimate recovery EUR in

conventional gas and oil wells since 1950s.

Arpss equations were developed based on the assumptions that wells are producing under the Boundary

Dominated Flow BDF and past well performance trend will continue in the future .

qi

qt

(1 bDi t ) 1 / b

The curvature of decline b in the production rate vs. time curve can be expressed mathematically by one of

the following three hyperbolic family of equations:

Harmonic decline: b=1

Hyperbolic decline: 0<b<1

PROBLEMS: b>1

55

7/2/2017

o Arps equation has been often misused and applied to model the performance of

oil and gas wells whose flow regimes are in a transient flow. Arps approach is

strictly applicable ONLY when the well is under boundary-dominated flow

conditions

o When b >1; Arps decline curve approach will OVER ESTIMATE RESERVES

56

7/2/2017

Total Time b Di qi

Days Day-1 Mscf/day

qi

0- 365 2.93 0.0164 2025

qt

(1 bDi t ) 1 / b

0-730 3.00 0.0171 2030

0-1095 3.02 0.0173 2031

1825 2.96 0.0164 2023

3650 2.59 0.0114 1945

7300 1.9 0.0045 1675

57

7/2/2017

It is common in tight and oil and gas wells that the best fit to the production data requires values of

b > 1, beyond the application limit of Arps equation. Main reasons that the best-fit to the observed

data requires a value of b>1 is that:

1. The observed production data are collected under the unsteady-state (transient) flow regime

2. Production is commingled from multilayered formations that are hydraulically fractured with

multiple stages. Lower permeability zones maybe in transient flow, while higher-permeability

zones have established stabilized boundary-dominated flow.

58

7/2/2017

1) Boundary Dominated b

2) Modified Arps Method

3) Duongs Approach

4) Logistic Growth Model

5) Power Law Exponential Decline

6) Simplified Stretched Exponential Production Decline

7) Stretched Exponential Production Decline

59

7/2/2017

60

7/2/2017

Recommended Approach

A. Regress and Match Cumulative Production; i.e. Gp or Np, NOT THE RATE

B. Regress and Match ONLY 80% of Observed Data; keep the 20% for Validation

C. Apply and Compare Different Methodologies to Provide with a Range of Answers

D. Using a Sufficient Sample of Wells that Represent the Field and Develop Type Curves

E. Express Results in Terms of P90, P50, and P10

61

7/2/2017

Boundary Dominated b

Under boundary dominated flow, the best oil or gas flow rate equation is give by:

n

Qo or Qg C p r pwf

2

log p r pwf

2

2 2 1 1

log Qo log C

n n

1 p

2

b (2 n 1) wf

2n pi

For a gas reservoir and based on the dependency of the parameter b on fluid and

production conditions, a model to estimate average b as a best approximation during

boundary-dominated depletion as given by:

( g c g ) i m( pi ) m( pwf )

b 1

2 pi pwf

( )

Z i Z wf

62

7/2/2017

The logistic growth model LGM is a mathematical expression that used to forecast growth in numerous

applications, e.g. model population growth.

( EUR ) t n EUR

Np

n

at

N P ( EUR ) n a t n 1

qt

t

a tn

2

63

7/2/2017

q a 1 m

N P oMax exp

a

t

1 m

1

N P

t

a 1 m

qo qoMax t m exp

1 m

t

1

qo = oil orate

Np = Cumulative oil

qoMax = Maximum anticipated oil rate

Regression variables:

1) qoMax

2) a (recommended range 0.5< m <6)

3) m (recommended range 1.1< m <4)

64

7/2/2017

SEPD

t

n

qi 1 1 t

n

qt qi exp & Np ,

n n n

1 1 139 571

( x 1) x x e x 2 x 1 2

3

4

12 x 288 x 51840 x 2488320 x

g 1 ( g 1) ( g 2) ( g 1) ( g 2) ( g 3)

1 h h2

h3

( g , h) h g 1 e h

( g 1) ( g 2) ( g 3) ( g 4)

h4

65

7/2/2017

66

7/2/2017

Nameless Field

67

7/2/2017

Nameless Field

Upper TAGI Formation , Described by Four Zones

1) U4: 10 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale Layer

2) U3: 15 Fine scale layers 2 coarse scale layers

3) U2: 5 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale layer

4) U1: 23 Fine scale layers 3 coarse scale layers

1) M2: 5 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale Layer

2) M1: 35 Fine scale layers 5 coarse scale layers

1) L3: 20 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale Layer

2) L2: 20 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale layers

3) L1: 40 Fine scale layers 4 coarse scale layers

68

7/2/2017

69

7/2/2017

2)Averaging Technique

3)Downscaling !

70

7/2/2017

A. Power Average

B. Arithmetic (Volumetric) Average

C. Root-Mean-Square RMS Average

D. Tensor Averaging

E. Renormalization

71

7/2/2017

72

7/2/2017

1) U4: 10 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale Layer

2) U3: 15 Fine scale layers 2 coarse scale layers

3) U2: 5 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale layer

4) U1: 23 Fine scale layers3 coarse scale layers

23 layers 3 layers

73

7/2/2017

1) U4: 10 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale Layer

2) U3: 15 Fine scale layers2 coarse scale layers

3) U2: 5 Fine scale layers 1 coarse scale layer

4) U1: 23 Fine scale layers 3 coarse scale layers

15 layers 2 layers

74

7/2/2017

Sector Modeling

75

7/2/2017

76

7/2/2017

77

7/2/2017

Lower TAGI Formation

6Layers Coarse System vs. 80 Layers Fine System

78

7/2/2017

VERDICT

1)19 Layers are Not Sufficient, Downscaling

79

7/2/2017

On Relative Permeability

80

7/2/2017

81

7/2/2017

Reservoir Simulation

All Rights Reserved.

82

7/2/2017

83

7/2/2017

84

7/2/2017

Simulator

1) TA (this is the driver program)

2) TAREK (The simulator)

TA.dat (Initialization File)

TA.Sim (Simulation File)

TA.out (Output File)

TA.dat & TA.sim (Remember that PLEASE)

85

7/2/2017

Step 1: Step 2:

a) Click on the application file: TA a) Click on the application file: TA

b) Select: Initialization Run b) Select: Simulation Run

c) Follow instruction and answer all questions and c) Follow instruction and answer all questions and CLICK

CLICK ON THE ENTER KEY TO CLOSE ON THE ENTER KEY TO CLOSE

d) At the end of step (C); Open TA.dat with Notepad d) Open: TA.sim with Notepad; this file contains wells info

and Enter Missing Reservoir Data.

e) Save and close the file

e) Save and close the file

f) Click on: Tarek.exe to run the simulator (this is a MUST

f) Click on the application file : Tarek (this is a MUST STEP)

STEP); simulator WILL NOT RUN WITHOUT THIS STEP

g) Results of the run are given in TA.OUT as well as other

files

a) answers all questions

b) close the software by pressing the <ENTER> key

c) Open TA.dat with Notepad and enter missing data

d) Clicking on Tarek.exe

e) Observed the reported OOIP or OGIP

f) If you did not see OOIP or OGIP, something wrong in TA.dat

86

7/2/2017

! 3) Reservoir Model Grid Dimensions

! **********************************

100 100 10 ! x,y, and z blocks

! *********************************

Each time you see

! Warning Warning Warning The Warning message;

! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you must enter some data

! Please, enter below the x-direction grid dimension (length)

! for each grid block. 100 values MUST BE entered :

! *************************************************

100*300 You enter the data

! 5) y-direction Grid Block Lengths

! *********************************

! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

! Please, enter below the y-direction grid dimension (length)

! for each grid block. 100 values MUST BE entered :

! *************************************************

100*300 You enter the data

2006 Tarek Ahmed & Associates Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

87

7/2/2017

(e.g. GasRec.dat, FieldQg.dat,etc)

-------------------------- ---------------------------------------------

1) Summary.dat > History Matching info.& Well data

2) DailyQ.dat > Field Daily Flow Rates

3) OilRec.dat > Field Oil Recovery Factor

4) GasRec.dat > Field Gas Recovery Factor

5) FieldQg.dat > Field Monthly Flow Rates

6) WellQw.dat > Well Monthly Water Flow Rates

7) GasQ.dat > Field Total Daily Gas Flow Rate

8) WellQg.dat > Monthly Gas Flow Rates/well

9) Pmap.dat > Pressure Map

10) Sgmap.dat > Gas Saturation Map

11) Swmap.dat > Water Saturation Map

12) Layers.dat > Performance of layers, cross flow,etc

13) LayerRate.dat > Production/injection rate/layer

88

7/2/2017

Grid dimensions= 30 x 30 x 3

Reservoir dimensions= X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft

Initial # of wells= 3 wells

Depth to top= 5000 ft

Start date= Jan 1, 1990

Total Thickness = 100 ft

Temperature 200 oF

Initial Pressure 4000 psi @ 5020 ft

Sgi= 0.70

Simulation time= 7200 days

89

7/2/2017

Grid dimensions= 30 x 30 x 5

Reservoir dimensions= X=300 ft, Y=300 ft, Z=20 ft

Initial # of wells= 8 wells

Depth to top= 5000 ft

Start date= Jan 1, 1990

Total Thickness = 100 ft

Soi= 0.70

Simulation time= 7200 days

90

7/2/2017

35o API

Temperature 200 oF

Gas gravity=0.75

GOR=500 scf/STB

Model will calculate Pb

Pressure at 5020 ft =4500 psi

Minimum Pwf = 300 psi

91

7/2/2017

Kx, md 20 15 35 12 10

Ky, md 15 12 30 10 5

Kz, md 1.7 1.3 3.0 1.0 0.7

0.25 0.20 0.30 0.15 0.12

h, ft 20 20 20 20 20

Z, ft 20 20 20 20 20

1 x-direction (columns) 30

1 z=20 ft

y-direction (rows)

30 z=20 ft

1 z=20 ft 100 ft

z=20 ft

z=20 ft

92

7/2/2017

Objectives:

1) Maximize Oil Recovery

2) Open Summary.dat to exam the performance of each layer and where the injected water is going

3) Important that you open Sgmap.dat , Swmap.dat & Pmap.dat with Excel

4) Open with Excel: Oilrec.dat to to plot RF & average P vs. time

5) Open with Excel: WellQg.dat, WellQo.dat & WellQw.dat to plot well rates vs. time

6) Open with Excel: WellGOR.dat & WellWOR.dat to plot well rates vs. time

7) Compare Water Injection with Gas Injection

8) Balance Production-Injection rate VRR

9) Drill Horizontal injectors /producers and:

test completion in Layer 1,2,3,4, and 5

Effect of horizontal well orientation

document the difference in RF

10) Stimulate Wells

11) Miscible Displacement

12) Document your Team Results Graphically

13) Team Presentation

93

- Section 7.5 Page 393 to 407Uploaded byKnoll711
- Crude Tower Simulation Using Aspen HYSYSUploaded byTouhid Islam
- GS4Uploaded byrodofgod
- 40Uploaded bymukulkuriyalgeotech
- SEG-2010-2459 Correlations Density TemperatureUploaded byCèsar Rivero
- OIL-SD-07 Rev 0Uploaded byHossein
- Distillation ControlUploaded byAnkit Kala
- Appraisal Work 2011Uploaded byGhosalkar Sachin
- Azeri (Ceyhan) Jul 2013Uploaded byRorryHaulana
- Hot Heated Tanks eBookUploaded byTissa1969
- Acetic Acid Mrs Gadekar SVUploaded bykarunajanakiraman
- OS Coll. Vol. 9 p186-CyclohexenedioneUploaded bysunil_vaman_joshi
- Gas BehaviourUploaded byEZWAN
- Lab 1 SimulationUploaded bysedamyrul
- Re GresiUploaded byHilmi El Hafidz Fatahillah
- Design and control of an ideal reactive divided-wall distillation process.pdfUploaded byatomixman
- SPE-483-G Engineers as ManagersUploaded byÓscar Medina
- lactic acidUploaded byBrooke Sampson
- 0c96053c9b0ed2b72b000000.pdfUploaded byDaniela
- D 20 â€“ 99 ;RDIWLTK5Uploaded byAngel Aliaga
- Crude DistillationUploaded bymihir kumar
- Calculate Vapor Loss _ UNIMACUploaded byahxiang90
- 2010-ST-28-spa.pdfUploaded byAlberto Sanchez
- A Practical Study for New Design of Essential OilsUploaded byEmmanuel Plaza
- 1-s2.0-S187661021201048X-mainUploaded byMuhammad Aizuddin Zainal Abidin
- Sr. High Teachers GuideUploaded byNItin Raut
- # 4 and 7 Distillation (1 &2) [Compatibility Mode]Uploaded byjesi
- ethanol-aUploaded byRyan Wahyudi
- Pressure Measurement for Real Gases.pdfUploaded byBramJanssen76
- Air flow calculation of reverse circulation drilling technique with air DTH hammer.pdfUploaded bySathishKumar Arumugam

- seismic interpretation .pptxUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- WQU Econometrics Group Work ProjectUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C8 Hydraulic FracturingUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C7 Matrix AcidizingUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- L - MOCUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C6 Sand ControlUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C5 Formation DamageUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C4 PerforatingUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C3 Well PerformanceUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C2_Wellbore Completion ConfigurationsUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- C1_Wellbore Completion ConceptsUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Shell DTS PrimerUploaded byshatalin
- WangZhe2012Uploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Coiled-Tubing.pdfUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- 51_63Carbon Reservoir Stimulkation SLBUploaded byNoha Najem
- 9120Uploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Matrix StimulationUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Alex University CourseUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Pipe - It Software AssistantUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- introductiontocustodytransfer-161204083749Uploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Monte Carlo - EgemenUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- Monte Carol MethodUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- R - Wrap UpUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- P - Texas CityUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- N - Legal&PSMUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- M - ER II AuditUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- K - Human FactorsUploaded byNguyễnTrường
- J - OperateUploaded byNguyễnTrường

- Logistic RegressionUploaded byKongkiti Liwcharoenchai
- Differential EqUploaded byanc62
- García - Unifying Sigmoid Univariate Growth EquationsUploaded byRipIxi
- LogisticUploaded bysalak946290
- Population EcologyUploaded bygenetik52
- sports_articles_listUploaded byjohnnyent
- populations.pdfUploaded byMonalisa Pertiwi
- 31295013268429Uploaded bybriofons
- 7.6-sol6Uploaded byYun Yu
- Exercises SolutionsUploaded byRahul Malhotra
- Sigmoid Functions and ExplanationsUploaded byGanugio Miriani
- Autonomous EquationsUploaded byAnkitSisodia
- Sharman2005Uploaded byhaiarshad
- Types and Patterns of Innovation.pdfUploaded byKazi Md Imran
- Class7.pptUploaded byrishabh
- 5.1_NotesUploaded byKelsey Koehler
- The Hanoverian Supply Chain Model.pdfUploaded byDiego Cortez Granados
- CSIS 5420 Final Exam - Answers (13 Jul 05)Uploaded bysiddiquentc
- Zwietering Et Al - Modeling of the. Grow Bacterial PDFUploaded byGabriel Peralta Uribe
- 27519839 Period Doubling Bifurcation and Chaos in Duffing Oscillator System by Subash BUploaded byRicardo Batista
- Modeling of the Bacterial Growth Curve.Uploaded byAdrian Bermudez Loera
- 3 theories of Population growth.Uploaded byTshepo Hope Nophali
- WorldBank 2010- Will the CDM Mobilize Anticipated Levels of MitigationUploaded byMarcelo Buzzatti
- kargiUploaded byMilo Kai Hee
- On the Idea Indigenous by JB Childs and Guillermoe DelgadoUploaded byLorraine M. Del Rosario
- The Final Energy CrisisUploaded byAdela
- 351_01Uploaded bysmithams90
- Hydrogel Drug Delivery-diffusion ModelsUploaded byRavi Ayyavu
- Robust Prediction of Full Creep Curves From Minimal Data and Time to Rupture ModelUploaded byFarzad Sadr
- Analysis of a Prey-Predator System with Modified Transmission FunctionUploaded byAJER JOURNAL