SPE 87032
"State-of-the-Art" Integrated Studies Methodologies - An Historical Review
Vernon S. Breit SPE, Joe A. Dozzo SPE - International Reservoir Technologies, Inc.
Copyright 2004, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Asia Pacific Conference on Integrated
Modelling for Asset Management held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 29-30 March 2004.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
An integrated reservoir study represents the one reservoir
modeling technique available to a reservoir management team
that incorporates ALL of the information available regarding a
petroleum reservoir. As such, the integrated study has the
potential to provide the team with the highest resolution most
accurate description of their field that is currently available.
However, that high resolution comes at the expense of a
highly complex, data intensive process. This paper was an
attempt to simplify and codify the complex process of
performing an integrated reservoir study.
The paper presents an overview of the integrated reservoir
modeling process including how that process has changed
from the early days of reservoir simulation to the present day.
Two models are presented that illustrate the study process for
a 1980 time frame multi reservoir study and a 2002 time frame
geostatistically based compositional reservoir model..
Emphasis is placed on the changes in workflows from the
early models -- simple mapping of properties and manual
digitization of maps to simulation model grids -- to the more
complex models of today -- with property distributions based
on object modeling and geostatistical analysis to distribute
reservoir properties.
Through the examples, the paper illustrates the point that
reservoir studies have evolved from a time when the
geologists and engineers often knew more about their
reservoirs than the available modeling tools would allow them
to implement in their models – dual porosity and flow across
faults, for example – to the point where today we often have
the modeling capability to model more complex phenomena
than our knowledge of the reservoir may warrant – for
example, object modeling with no data on the characteristics
of lithofacies in our reservoir, or dual porosity flow models
with no data on fracture spacing and distribution.
The Integrated Study Conceptually
Although the term “Integrated Study” only gained widespread
use in the 1990’s 2,3,4, the conceptual tasks needed to build a
model of a reservoir have been identified and performed since
the advent of multi-well full field simulation studies. Those
tasks -- structural interpretation, petrophysical analysis,
stratigraphic analysis, fluid PVT analysis, and reservoir
simulation – have formed the basis for building models since
the 1970’s and continue today to be the backbone of the
“Integrated Study” concept.
What has changed in the Integrated Study concept is:
• The switch from the analog to digital form for the data
input and analysis results of the “geo-science” tasks of
the studies
• The development of ever more mechanistically
sophisticated analysis tools, for example
• Object modeling in facies identification work
• Geostatistical methods in distributing
petrophysical properties inter-well,
• Arbitrary connections in simulators to allow
modeling of faults and fractures
• Many orders of magnitude faster computers and
greater data storage capacity
As a result of the sophisticated tools and greater computing
capacity, the focal point of all of the model building process
has moved from the reservoir simulation ”dynamic” model in
the integrated study concept of the 1980’s, Figure 1, to the
geologic “static” model today. This movement of the focal
point is, we believe, a major reason for the greater interaction
between the disciplines and tasks that is the emphasis of the
2003 integrated study concept, Figure 2.
Integrated Study Tasks
All of the disciplines identified in Figure 2 that contribute to
an integrated study have specific tasks that MUST be
performed if the Integrated Study is to be successful. They
also have a timing interdependence so that the results of one
2 SPE 87032
analysis – such as production well test analysis – will be
available for other tasks – such as stratigraphic analysis. The
specific tasks for each discipline in a typical Integrated Study
are detailed below and their inter-relationships in time are
shown in the accompanying Gantt chart, Fig. 3.
Data Review
Static Model
Geophysical analysis
Calibrate seismic to wells, vsp’s, and synthetics
Horizon picks – key third order surfaces
Fault interpretation including well ties
Structural analysis integrated with wells and dip meter
Complete fault-juxtaposition studies
3D Velocity modeling
Generate 3D velocity model – time/depth tied to wells
Sedimentology
Core description on 1 or 2 wells
Core/log comparisons
Interpretation of depositional environments
Map depositional environments for reservoir units
Condition geo-statistical object models
Sequence Stratigraphy
Construct a comprehensive grid of cross sections
Structural
Stratigraphic
Integrate with seismic data
Integrate with petrophysics and engineering contacts
Petrophysics
Digitize all appropriate log traces
Log editing, environmental corrections, normalization
Permeability transforms by litho-facies
Depth shifting of core data
Core/log and log/log porosity transforms, if required
Shale volume, effective porosity, water saturation
Well History Reviews by Well
Review Completion data
Workovers and re-completions
Stimulations and blow-outs
Verify bottom hole locations
Locate fault cuts in logs
Calculate TVD’s
Production History Analysis
Decline curves by well
Decline curves by reservoir area
Evaluate potential coning/creating problems
Pressure test analysis
Build a database of pressure data
Correct to datum
Interpret data tests for pressure and reservoir properties
PVT Analysis
Determine areal and vertical variations in properties
Correlate fluid properties to flow units
Develop EOS or black oil tables for use in modeling.
Relative Permeability & Capillary Pressure Analysis
Establish rock types
Correlate to sedimentological & petrophysical analysis
Determine end points and hysteresis
Zonation and Contact Definition
Correlate reservoir flow units to stratigraphy
Set contact levels by fault block and flow unit
Integration of all disciplines
Material Balance Calculations by Zone
Construct coarse models for material balance analysis
Develop corner point grids for sloping faults
Make final list for zonations in history match model
3D Structural/Stratigraphic Framework
Depth convert faults & horizons using velocity model
Apply residual ties to horizons& faults from well control
Populate model with stratigraphic surfaces
Zone Mapping for Model Gridding
Net-to-gross ratio
Porosity
Permeability
Contacts
Depositional environments (Facies)
Geo-statistical Modeling
Determine methodology to quantify depositional model
Assess existing data quality and distribution
Calculate geo-statistical property distributions
Condition distribution of log-derived parameters
With seismic attributes,
Well test analysis, etc.
Sensitivities of OOIP to geo-statistical realizations and
contact uncertainty
Original Oil-In-Place Calculations
Determine OOIP by zone, and by fault block
Production allocations by flow unit
Recovery to-date by flow unit
Simulation Model
Model Construction
Up-scaling of porosity and net-to-gross
Up-scaling of permeability
Grid-size sensitivity analysis
History Matching to the Well Level
Match overall field pressure levels to total fluid
withdrawals
Match overall field w-cut and GOR by changes in
Relative permeability,
PVT and
Overall Kv /Kh ratios
Match individual well responses by
localized horizontal permeability changes and
vertical permeability changes
Prediction of Future Performance
Well productivity tuning
Well-bore and surface facilities model set-up
Multiple prediction cases
Reserve and Costs Analysis for Each Case Studied
Economic Analysis of all Cases
Final Report in Printed and HTML Electronic Form
SPE 87032
Detailed Task Dexcriptions
Phase I - Data Review
The first phase of the Full Field Review should be a thorough
multi-disciplinary review of both the quantity and quality of
all seismic, geologic and engineering data available.
METHODOLOGY
A multi-disciplinary team consisting of geoscientists,
reservoir, and facilities engineers evaluates the data available
in digital form. Further, the team should identify key data
requiring conversion to digital form and refine the initial
estimate of the time and cost required to convert the requisite
data for further use.
The team will assess the status of the current 3-D seismic
volume, determine if inversion of the existing volume would
be cost effective and/or if further reprocessing is required.
The team reviews the petrophysical data available digitally as
well as the availability of special and conventional core data in
digital form to calibrate a petrophysical model. Finally, assess
the engineering data available in digital form for the field to
build a static model and conduct a simulation study. These
data include fluid properties, pressure measurements, well
tubing configurations, production and perforation/workover
histories. The facilities engineer reviews field operations to
identify potential bottlenecks and identify any opportunities to
increase either efficiency or capacities.
Phase II - Static Model
The objective of Phase II is to develop a geologic model of the
reservoir that is of high enough resolution to be the basis for
both future full field modeling efforts and high resolution
mechanistic modeling efforts..
METHODOLOGY 5
This section presents a discussion of the methods and
workflow for the generation of a 3-D high-resolution
structural framework. The structural frame will consist of a
model that contains all the fault planes and geologic layers in
depth. Then the calculation of properties to fill the structural
framework is detailed.
Geophysics / structural frame
An integrated geologic-geophysical workflow should be used
to build the 3-D structural model.. This method will be
progressive in that it will advance from a coarser to
finer scale.
The first and coarsest scale of modeling is at the seismic
horizon level. We start with these horizons because these
horizons are controlled by seismic and the stratigraphic picks
in wells, they provide the most accurate structural
representation. Initial seismic and well log interpretations are
developed, and differences are resolved during the iterative
integration process.
3
Figure 4 shows the workflow to integrate and perform
quality control of the geophysical and geologic interpretations.
There are two main QC procedures that will be used to find
differences in interpretations, a visual QC of every well tie on
the seismic section, then after the seismic interpretation is
depth converted, the elevation differences between
stratigraphic and fault picks on logs and on seismic are
calculated. Then any differences greater than a predefined
cutoff are determined and remedied.
Synthetics, time depth tables and velocity model
An extensive integrated workflow is used to generate the final
3-D velocity model., Figure 5, for the seismic data volume
over the field. This process uses all well logs, synthetics,
seismic, and time-depth tables in the field. The model is
initiated using the time-depth tables. These time-depth tables
will then be modified during the horizon interpretation as
necessary, starting in the shallow horizons and working down.
The resulting adjusted time-depth tables will be used to create
the 3-D velocity model.
Fault interpretation
If the faults are high angle, and no fault picks need to be
honored in the wells, a vertical fault model may be built in the
interests of time and budget. Alternatively, if the exact fault
geometry is determined to be critical to modeling reservoir
pressures, fluid flow or individual well performance, the study
will use a complex workflow, Figure 6, that utilizes a 3-D
mapping package to model faults. The final product is an
integrated fault model that exactly honors the faults picked
on logs.
Interpret selected horizons
Integrated geologic-geophysical horizons provided a coarse
structural frame for the overall horizon model. Figure 7 shows
the workflow to construct the integrated horizons. Shown in
the figure are the visual and the digital QC processes that will
be used to verify that the interpretations and velocity model
are valid. The horizons will be interpreted in all usable well
logs and in the 3-D seismic volume in the field. Stratigraphic
units will be tied to previous historical studies and correlated
in well logs. The correlation is based on sequence stratigraphic
concepts. Key horizons will be picked in the seismic data. The
integration of these horizons with stratigraphic picks on the
well logs will be validated with synthetics. The integration of
the geological and geophysical horizon interpretations will
provide an ongoing quality check. To the extent possible, the
geologist and geophysicist will work concurrently on the same
horizons to maximize interaction and enhance quality of each
other’s efforts. Additionally, isopach maps will be
constructed periodically to ensure that trends and thickness
variations are reasonable.
Petrophysics / Log Analysis
Build and QC log database
Corrected log curves should be converted to LAS format.
Where unedited logs exist, these curves will be checked and
any errors noted. Gamma Ray curves will be normalized and
the normalized curves used in developing the
stratigraphic model.
4 SPE 87032
Add production logs to database and analysis
Cased-hole logs may add important value to saturation
calculations, fluid contact tracking and monitoring well /
casing integrity. All pertinent cased hole logs will be added to
the logging database.
Facies model, correlate core phi-k to facies
Facies identified in core will be compared to log data to
determine log signatures of each facies. Further, core porosity
versus permeability correlations will be investigated to see
how / if they vary by facies.
Build & calibrate petrophysics model to core data, run
model in all wells
A petrophysical model will be developed using all the wells
with both wire-line logs and core data. Corrected wire-line
logs will be analyzed for porosity, net sand thickness and
permeability. The resulting values will be used during the
property-mapping phase of the project.
Build HTML log displays
An HTML based tools share up-to-date data and
interpretations to all team members. The tool we construct is
typically called the Data-Viewer and contains log displays,
maps, production plots, text and tables. The Data-Viewer
provides a highly interactive user-friendly environment for
viewing and comparing project data and is an invaluable aid to
all phases of a project.
Geology/Stratigraphy
Build stratigraphic model
Integrated geologic-geophysical horizons provide a coarse
structural frame for the overall horizon model. The horizons
are interpreted in all usable well logs and in the 3-D seismic
volume in the field. Stratigraphic units should be tied to the
historical studies and correlated in well logs. The correlation is
based on sequence stratigraphic concepts. Conceptual
depositional models will be developed using observations
from core descriptions, log character, and available literature.
Key horizons will be picked in the seismic data. The
integration of these horizons with stratigraphic picks on the
well logs will be validated with synthetics. The integration of
the geological and geophysical horizon interpretations will
provide an ongoing quality check..
Review correlations for consistency with engineering data
Just as significant effort will be devoted to ensure consistency
between the geophysical and well log derived horizons,
appropriate effort must devoted to integrate stratigraphic
horizon picks and geologic layers with engineering data.
RFT’s static pressures and pressure build-up data can all be
used to help validate the horizon picks and geologic layer
definition.
Build structural model
As the development of horizons and structural frame from the
geo-science and stratigraphic team members converges, a
final integrated structural model will be constructed. This
final integrated, internally consistent and quality checked
model will be the basis for the high resolution 3 dimensional
static model to be delivered at the end of Phase II.
Map properties (true vertical thickness, net to gross,
porosity, permeability)
Property maps will be generated for all geologic layers. The
properties will be deterministically mapped honoring the
conceptual depositional models developed for each layer. The
properties will include: geologic layer true vertical thickness,
depositional facies if appropriate, net to gross, porosity
and permeability.
True vertical thickness maps will be generated for each
geologic layer. The structural mapping of each geologic layer
will be a complex iteration between using the seismically
derived structure maps as a guide for the infill geologic layer
structures and isopach maps. The resulting structural
framework will tie all stratigraphic picks in wells
Depositional facies maps will be created for each of
the geologic layers. Basis for input for these maps will be
the existing core descriptions within this study area.
Facies identified in core will be compared to log data to
determine log signatures of each facies and
deterministically mapped.
Net/gross ratio values for each well in each geologic layer
will be calculated using the interpreted petrophysical curves
and the stratigraphic picks for each geologic layer. . The
product of the net/gross sandstone maps and interval
true vertical thickness maps produce the net sandstone
maps required for simulation. These maps will also
provide rock volumes that are permeable to reservoir
fluids, regardless of structural position.
Porosity and permeability will be determined from the
logs at all wells, correlated to facies or reservoir quality,
and distributed stochastically between wells using geo-
statistical software. Porosity and permeability will be
distributed within the framework of the true vertical
thickness, net-to-gross and facies maps.
Contact review and definition
Fluid contact definition is essential for both a correct OOIP
determination and an accurate history match during the
reservoir simulation phase of the study. The depths to the free
(100%) water zones are used directly in the model, along with
J-function relationships, to determine the heights of the oil-
water transition zone in each grid cell. Well logs and
engineering data should be used to identify the fluid contacts.
RFT pressures, and relative differences in observed contacts
will be used to identify vertical seals that isolate groups of
geologic layers within fault blocks.
Basic Production and Reservoir Engineering
Build well histories
A production and completion database will be generated from
well and production reports. Perforation and sleeve history
data are entered into database for retrieval during electronic
reporting and for use in preparing the history match recurrent
SPE 87032
data. Perforation and pressure information is also entered into
the database and is plotted along with wire-line logs to be used
to identify compartmentalization and behind pipe reserves.
Reconcile monthly production to well histories
An independent quality check is performed on the monthly
production data and perforation / workover histories
developed from the well files. This step ensures all well
activity is captured for use in the simulation model.
Production log analysis
All available production logs will be included in the full field
review. During this phase of the study, the production logs
will be used to help identify fluid contacts and their movement
over time. Further, the production logs will be examined for
evidence of perforation / casing integrity and identification of
potential behind pipe opportunities.
Review and mapping of static pressure data
All static pressure data will be reviewed, quality checked and
datum corrected for used in identifying hydraulic
compartmentalization within the geologic model. These data
will also be entered into the database for use in the
history match.
RFT/MDT– all RFT/RIF/MDT
Pressure data will be reviewed, quality checked and datum
corrected for used in identifying hydraulic
compartmentalization within the geologic model. These data
will also be entered into the Schedule database for use in the
history match.
DST and PBU analysis
All static pressure data will be reviewed, quality checked and
datum corrected for used in identifying hydraulic
compartmentalization within the geologic model. If sufficient
digital rate, time and pressure data are available, updated
analyses will be conducted and the resultant KH’s will be used
to help independently validate the up-scaled Integrated 3D
Static Model simulation layer KH’s.
PVT data review and basic analysis
The PVT sample reports will be analyzed and prepared for use
in all engineering calculations, including reservoir simulation.
SCAL data review and basic analysis
Special core data - relative permeability and capillary pressure
- are used to provide engineering data necessary for reservoir
simulation is performed during this phase. These data, along
with analysis of open and cased-hole wire-line logs, will also
be used to determine displacement endpoints and efficiencies.
SCAL lithofacies correlations
Additionally, the special core analysis data will be evaluated
as part of the facies model to ensure displacement efficiencies
are modeled properly throughout the reservoir.
5
DCA and material balance studies
During Phase II of the Study, conventional engineering
calculations will be performed to establish initial estimates of
both ultimate and remaining reserves based on updated In-
Place volumes from the new Integrated 3D Static Model.
Integrated 3 Dimensional Static Model
Create a 3-D modeling grid based on fault model and
stratigraphic horizons
The 3-D modeling grid is the framework in which the
reservoir properties will be distributed. First a 3-D fault
model will be constructed by reconciling all intersections
among fault surfaces and horizons. A 3-D grid is then
designed with an appropriate layering scheme and resolution
to capture the geologic variability.
Establish facies proportions from well data & facies maps
The distribution of reservoir facies is performed with a geo-
statistical technique known as object modeling. For each
geologic layer, global facies proportions will be determined
from the well observations. Facies maps will be generated to
examine regional trends and global facies proportions may be
adjusted if maps reveal a sampling bias. The facies maps will
be used in the object modeling to control the lateral
distribution of facies within a given geologic layer.
Create vertical trends from well data & relative depth
The vertical distribution of facies within a geologic layer will
be examined from the well observations. Facies proportions
are evaluated as a function of depth, either relative to the top
and base of the geologic layer or relative to a reference
horizon. These vertical trends are calculated for each facies
for each zone and used to control the vertical distribution
of facies.
Generate well statistics and establish object geometry
In object modeling, the facies are represented as geometric
objects, which represent geologic bodies. A conceptual model
will be developed to describe the geometry (size, shape,
orientation) of the facies bodies. These geometric parameters
are generally specified as probability functions that describe
the range of possible values. Insight for the conceptual model
can be gained by examination of the well logs and cross-
sections. Analogue data may also be used.
Perform object-based facies modeling
The facies will be distributed within each zone using an
object-modeling algorithm. The algorithm honors the well
observations, facies trends, global facies proportions, and
geometric parameters. The resulting 3-D facies model will
describe the primary reservoir architecture within each
geologic layer.
Perform porosity, permeability and saturation modeling
The facies model provides a template for distributing
petrophysical properties. The petrophysical properties will be
mapped within each facies using a geo-statistical technique
called sequential Gaussian simulation (SGS). The SGS
algorithm honors well observations and specified variograms.
The variograms, which describe the spatial variation of a
6 SPE 87032
given property, will be interpreted from the log data.
Correlations will be developed for initial and residual fluid
saturations as a function of rock quality and depth utilizing
SCAL data, where available. The correlations will be applied
to the property arrays in the static model to estimate the
original fluid distribution and the saturation end-points.
Upscale fine grid static model for use in history match
Once completed, the static model will be used in the
initialization of the history match model. Properties in the
static model will be up-scaled to the flow simulation grid
using techniques that preserve the geologic heterogeneity.
Phase III - Dynamic Model
Phase III is the development and history matching of a full
field model and execution of various prediction cases to
optimize a future operating strategy. Typically, the history
match and prediction cases are the exclusive domain of
production and reservoir engineers. The continued tight
integration of the static and dynamic models is required to
achieve the highest quality history match and maintain the
integrity of all the underlying data analysis.
METHODOLOGY
Fluid properties for reservoir modeling
The fluid samples from the field will be modeled and EOS
package. The PVT sample analysis will be reviewed and the
best samples will be used in the theoretical modeling.
Laboratory measured properties will be used to tune the
equation of state describing the reservoir fluids. The EOS
software will then be used to generate the PVT properties for
reservoir simulation. The oil, water and gas properties will be
used in all calculations and for all phases of project work
when fluid properties are required.
Relative permeabilities for reservoir modeling
Existing SCAL data from the field is reviewed to determine
the endpoints under water displacement and gas displacement
drive mechanisms. Water-Oil and Gas-Oil relative
permeability tables can be constructed for reservoir modeling
using various Corey exponents as sensitivities. An end point
rescaling option can be used in the simulator to handle
sensitivities in relative permeabilities. Relative permeability
endpoints may be correlated separately by facies if needed.
Build model and initialize
When the geological structural model is complete, the
reservoir geometry model can be constructed, Figure 8. The
advantage of a full field model will be that accurate and proper
constraints can be applied at the well, platform and field
levels in the model.
Fault planes and their throws will be incorporated in the
simulation model via the 3 dimensional structural framework.
Layer thickness will be determined after the completion of the
facies modeling. With current hardware and software
capabilities, black oil reservoir simulation models of up to
500,000 cells can be handled in a timely manner. Properties
from the 3D static model will be up-scaled and input to the
simulation model. This will include porosities, net to gross
ratios, permeabilities and water saturations.
Build simulation rate deck
The production history of field should be updated and then
output in a suitable format for a deck building software such
as SCHEDULE. Workover histories will also be
incorporated here.
History match model
The dynamic reservoir simulation model will be used for
history matching after initializing and all parameters in the
model checked and verified. The model is pressure matched
first and then the matching of the well water cuts and gas-oil
ratios follows. An important factor in the history match can be
the accounting of extraneous fluid flow between horizons
behind pipe. Therefore, accurate and proper accounting of the
workover history in each well will be important.
Construct and run prediction cases
When the history match is complete, the model will be used
for future prediction runs. An initial prediction case will be
defined and liaison with and feedback from field personnel
will be required to define the initial prediction cases and any
alternative exploitation schemes to be analyzed.
Integrated Study Examples
1980 Model
The study objective was to determine whether gas injected in
one reservoir has migrated to a second reservoir in the
Cretaceous reservoirs in the study area. A geologic model
based on a “bird foot delta” depositional model, Fig. 9, was
based on the self-potential and resistivity log response curves.
In the resulting geologic model the bar fingers and the channel
fill sands each have their preferred grain-size gradation with a
logical relation to shaliness, saturation, porosity, and
permeability. This model exhibited a strong change in rock
properties laterally form the axis of the channels, Fig. 10.
Several faults were indicated in the area and the faults
appeared .to be sealing and separate the reservoirs into local
traps. Well log and/or core data was available on 201 wells;
that data was normalized and log porosities adjusted to match
core values. Permeabilities for the modeling effort were
derived from a core porosity/permeability relationship based
on core data from 61 wells. All the geologic and
petrophysical data analysis was incorporated into 18 hand
drawn maps of structure, sand thickness, porosity
and saturation.
The geologic model showed that two sand bodies were
present in most but not all areas. The two sands were
separated by shales in most locations with a very few
exceptions. A simulation model of the two sand bodies was
built using the geological model’s value of net thickness,
structure, porosity and water saturations as a starting point.
The geologic properties were transformed from the hand
drawn maps to a simulation grid by hand digitization, Fig. 11.
SPE 87032
Vertical permeabilities were set to zero in all areas except for
those where the two layers were in vertical contact – see gray
areas on the grid map.
The resulting simulation model contained 2244 grid cells.
Two models were built, one with flow between reservoirs and
one with sealing faults between reservoirs. Following a
lengthy history match, during which horizontal and vertical
permeabilities were manually adjusted, the model was able to
satisfactorily reproduce the observed pressure behavior of the
reservoirs, Fig. 12, and the oil, water and gas production at the
field level but not at the well level.
The time necessary to perform the structural interpretation,
stratigraphy, petrophysics, and simulation described was
1.5 years.
2002 Model
An updated integrated study of an Eocene age reservoir was
performed in 2001 and 2002. The reservoir had a depositional
environment that was interpreted to be a tide-dominated
deltaic system not unlike the depositional environment in the
1980 model discussed earlier in this report. The study was
undertaken to identify opportunities to increase oil production
and locate additional reserves. Specifically, the study was to
recommend improved recovery techniques to maximize the
field's potential. The study followed the study methodology
also discussed earlier in the report.
Petrophysical modeling had been performed on the first 80
wells in a previous study. A review of those results showed
that modeled total porosity was essentially effective in clean
sands, however, a V-shale correction needed to be applied in
shalier sands. When calibrated to pressure-corrected core
porosities, the Steiber Vshale method worked best as
a correction.
Nine flow units were correlated in 95 wells in the field.
Eight flow units were mapped across the entire field. The
correlations were based on maximum flooding surfaces and
pressure barriers and included sands of similar petrophysical
properties, but were independent of individual facies. They
were not correlated based on solely depositional environments
that may lump sands of differing petrophysical properties or
flow behavior within a single well. Facies maps were made to
ensure the proper distribution and orientation of sand bodies as
well as assigning the proper petrophysical properties within
those sands.
Facies were interpreted for each well from the log curves.
Deterministic facies maps reflecting a tide-dominated
environment and honoring regional depositional trends were
made for each flow unit.
The structural framework consisted of nine structural
meshes, one on top of each flow unit along with the bottom of
the reservoir porosity. Faults were modeled as having
consistent dip and slip vectors. In general, the seismic quality
in un-deformed regions was good, but the entire volume is
under-migrated, which made mapping exact fault locations
and correlating seismic horizons near faults difficult. The
7
resulting structure is shown in the view of the simulation grid,
Fig. 14. Once stratigraphic correlations were complete, the
picks were posted on the 3D seismic volume to ensure that
stratigraphic continuity and faults were honored.
A detailed three-dimensional full-field geologic static
model was built to characterize the structural and
petrophysical parameters controlling fluid flow in the
reservoir. A hybrid stochastic/deterministic method for
distributing reservoir facies and petrophysical properties was
developed to facilitate the conditioning of the model to a large
number of wells (91). Modeling regions were defined from
traditional facies maps and an object-based facies model was
developed for each region. The technique also allowed inter-
fingering at facies boundaries. The model was further
constrained by vertical proportion curves, which controlled the
vertical distribution of facies within a zone, Fig 13.
Petrophysical properties were then distributed within each
facies using a sequential Gaussian technique. There were
approximately 8.6 million cells in the model in 315 layers.
The modeling was performed using RMS v5.1.1.
Construction proceeded in three major phases: structural
modeling (gridding), facies modeling (large-scale
heterogeneity), and petrophysical modeling (fine-scale
heterogeneity). The eight reservoir zones, representing the
major flow units and flow barriers in the reservoir, were
modeled independently to allow greater specificity of the
modeling parameters to the depositional processes. The
parameters that were varied between zones included facies
maps, global facies volume fractions, vertical facies trends,
sand body geometry, and direction of sediment transport.
The reservoir simulation grid followed the same reservoir
zonation (eight zones) as the geologic modeling grid.
However, the areal resolution was reduced to 150m x 150m
from 50m x 50m, i.e., approximately nine cells in the geologic
grid for every one cell in the simulation grid. The vertical
resolution was also reduced such that as few as four or as
many as twenty-five layers were in the fine-scale model for
each layer in the coarse-scale model. The resulting simulation
model contained approximately 111,000 cells, Fig. 14.
The up-scaling from the 8.6 million cells in the static
model to the 111,000 cells in the simulation exercise targeted
four effective properties: porosity, net-to-gross ratio,
horizontal permeability and vertical permeability. For the
calculation of porosity and net-to-gross, a net-reservoir
parameter was defined such that it was equal to one if porosity
≤ 6% and otherwise equal to zero. The effective porosity was
then calculated as the arithmetic average porosity for the net-
reservoir cells. The net-to-gross ratio was then calculated as
the (bulk-rock) volume-weighted average of the net-reservoir
parameter. A diagonal-tensor type pressure-solver was used to
determine the effective permeability. The method is aimed at
finding the permeability of the homogeneous medium (coarse
cell) that gives the same flux as the heterogeneous medium
(fine-scale) under the same boundary conditions.
The resulting thirty-layer simulation model was
history matched to historical pressure and production
8 SPE 87032

data. The history match of observed liquid production, in

the reservoir was excellent, Fig. 15.

The history matched simulation model was used to

evaluate a "Base Case" or continued current operations for 20
years. To evaluate a full field WAG in the reservoir, the
history-matched model was converted to a compositional
model. The compositional model was used to predict recovery
for many different implementation schemes: including flank
injection. Cases were evaluated using natural gas and nitrogen
injection. The results of predictions for several gas injection
and water injection schemes are shown in Fig. 16.

The time necessary to perform the structural interpretation,

stratigraphy, petrophysics, and simulation described was
1.4 years.

References

1. Galloway, W.E. 1975. Process framework for describing the

morphologic and stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional
systems, In: Deltas, Models for Exploration, M.L. Broussard
(ed.) Houston Geological Society.

2. Grant, I., Marshall, J.D., Dietvorst, P., Hordijk, J., “Improved

Reservoir Management by Integrated Study Cormorant Field,
Block 1”, SPE Paper 20891, Europec 90, The Hague
Netherlands, Oct. 1990.

3. Hampton, D.W., et. al., “An integraged Study of a Campeche Bay

Fracture Carbonate Reservoir”, SPE Paper 28672, SPE
International Petroleum Conference of Mexico, Veracruz,
Mexico, Oct. 1994.

4. Schildberg, Y., Poncet, J., Bandiziol, D., Deboanisne, R., Vittori, J.

“Integration of Geostatistics and well Test to Validate a Priori
Geological Models for the Dyanmic Simulation: Case Study”,
SPE Paper 38752, SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, Oct, 1997.

5. Taboada, R., Condat, P., et.al., “El Tordillo Reservoir Static

Characterization Study: El Todillo Field, Argentina” SPE Paper
69660, SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, Mar. 2001.
SPE 87032 9

Seismic
Interpretation
Drilling/
Production
Structural
Geology

Reservoir Field
Simulation Development
Petrophysics Plan
Model

Stratigraphy Facilities
Fluid
Properties

FIGURE 1: 1980 INTEGRATED STUDY SCHEMATIC

Seismic
Interpretation Structural
Stratigraphy Geology

Pattern
High Simulation
Petrophysics Models
Resolution
Reservoir
Static Model
Full Field
Drilling /Prod Reservoir
Testing Simulation
Model

Facilities Field
Development
Plan

FIGURE 2: 2003 INTEGRATED STUDY SCHEMATIC

10 SPE 87032

FIGURE3: TYPICAL STUDY TIMELINE

SPE 87032 11

To p Ho rizo n
Ho rizo n 2
Mo ve to ne xt
Faults Ho rizo n 3
S e is mic Ho rizo n
.
S e is mic .
Data
Bas e Ho rizo n
Ho rizo ns

Pas s , Tie We ll
Vis ual QC, Build Ve lo c ity De pth Co nve rt
and S e is mic in
Adjus t T-D Table s Mo de l S e is mic Inte rp.
S truc tural Mo de l

Mo de l S e is mic
Ho rizo ns
Ho rizo ns and Faults
Dip Me te rs
We ll Lo g s Pas s
Dig ital QC o f
Faults S e is mic and Lo g QC
Inte rpre tatio n Fail

Fail, Fix Inte rpre tatio ns

and/o r T-D Table s
and re pe at Dig ital QC

FIGURE 4: INTEGRATED GEOLOGIC/GEOPHYSICAL WORKFLOW

Interpret
Well
Horizon
Logs
Pick
Horizon
Elevations
Create
Synthetics

Time Depth Obtain Develop

Tables Grid
Time/Depth Velocity-Time
Time
Pairs Function

Tie Synthetics, Time and Depth Determine

3-D Interpret
Identify Shift T-D tables, Psuedo well
Seismic Horizon
Horizon
Populate wells locations

Generate and
Populate T-D tables,
Initialize 3-D For psuedo wells
Velocity Model

FIGURE 5: 3-D VELOCITY MODEL WORKFLOW

12 SPE 87032

Seismic
Borehole
Fault
Trajectories
Interpret.

Increase data density Calculate Load

Depth Convert Export using Model
and calculate tip loop Borehole Intersections
in TDQ FIE Fault Frame
polygons in Excel Intersections into OW

QC difference
Velocity Well Log between seismic
Model Faults and well log faults
in Excel

No, Fix Interpretations

and/or T-D Tables OK?
and redo process

Yes, Adjust
Seismic Faults
to Honor Well
Log Faults

FIGURE 6: INTEGRATED 3-D FAULT FRAMEWORK WORKFLOW

g
Well Log Redo Fault
Interpret. Framework

No, review
and fix
interpretations
Visual QC, adjust
T-D Tables, rebuild
velocity model

QC difference
between seismic
OK?
Seismic and well log interp.
Depth Convert on map, Excel
Horizon
in TDQ
Interpert.

Export, adjust Model and Calculate elevation Yes, adjust

datum, merge correct for survey of seismic horizon seismic horizon
surveys mis-ties at each pick honor well picks

Load
seismic elev
into OW

FIGURE 7: INTEGRATED 3-D HORIZON FRAMEWORK WORKFLOW

SPE 87032 13

Fault Traces Structural

SCALE-UP
FLOGRID
Grid

SIMULATION MODEL
HIGH Structural Data
RESOLUTION
STATIC Grid
Matrix properties
MODEL Properties
Fracture properties

PVT Equation-of-
DATA State
Fluid-Rock
Relative permeability
SCAL Properties
DATA capillary pressure

PROD/INJ Separator Model

DATA Dynamic
Perforated Intervals
Model
WELL TEST Production Rates
DATA
VFP Tables

FIGURE 8: SIMULATION MODEL CONSTRUCTION WORKFLOW

Sediment Input-
Dominated

Wave- Tide-
Dominated Dominated

FIGURE 9: CONCEPTUAL 1980 FACIES MODEL

14 SPE 87032

FIGURE 10: EXAMPLE 1980 PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION

Boundary of Hydro- Area of Communication

Carbon Accumulation Between Layers

FIGURE 11: EXAMPLE 1980 SIMULATION GRID

SPE 87032 15

1700
OBSERVED PRESSURE RANGES
1600
MODEL 1 CALCULATED AVERAGE PRESSURE
1500 MODEL 2 CALCULATED AVERAGE PRESSURE

1400

1300
PRESSURE @ DATUM, PSIG

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
YEARS
FIGURE12: EXAMPLE 1980 MODEL PRESSURE MATCH

FACIES AT TOP OF STRATIGRAPHIC INTERVAL

CHANNEL (29.9%) MUD (23.7%)

Z02 - C-20 PROXIMAL (20.5%) MUD2 (P) (16.8%)
Vertical Facies Proportions, Well Data DISTAL (3.2%) MUD3 (D) (5.9%)

0.05

Lyr 13
0.15

0.25

0.35
Relative Depth, ZDEP

0.45

0.55

0.65

0.75

0.85
Lyr 30
0.95

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Facies Proportion [%]

FIGURE13: EXAMPLE 2002 PROPERTY DISTRIBUTION

16 SPE 87032

FIGURE 14: EXAMPLE 2002 SIMULATION GRID

SPE 87032 17

90000

80000 Simulated Oil Rate

Observed Oil Rate
70000 Simulated Water Rate
Observed Water Rate
60000

50000
STB/Day
40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Fraction
0.3

0.2

0.1 Simulated Water Cut

Observed Water Cut
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Year
FIGURE 15: EXAMPLE 2002 HISTORY MATCH

70000
Flank WAG 1:3
Flank WAG 1:3 Nitrogen
60000
Gas Injection
Water Injection - VREP
50000 Water Injection
INCREMENATAL Cumulative Oil Recovery, MSTB

40000

30000

20000

10000

-10000

-20000
0 5 10 15 20

FIGURE 16: EXAMPLE 2002 PREDICTED INCREMENTAL RECOVERIES