SPE-172599-MS

Distribution of New Horizontal Wells by the Use of Artificial Neural Network

Algorithm
Diyar H. Ali, Baker Hughes Company; Mohammed S. Al-Jawad, University of Technology; Craig W. Van Kirk,
Colorado School of Mines

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Bahrain, 8 –11 March 2015.

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 have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract
It is an established fact that substantial amounts of oil usually remain in a reservoir after primary and
secondary processes. Therefore; there is an ongoing effort to sweep that remaining oil. Field optimization
includes many techniques. Horizontal wells are one of the most motivating factors for field optimization.
The selection of new horizontal wells must be accompanied with the right selection of the well locations.
However, modeling horizontal well locations by a trial and error method is a time consuming method.
Therefore; a method of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) has been employed which helps to predict the
optimum performance via proposed new wells locations by incorporating reservoir properties and
production data of previous wells.
This study used the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) that has been programmed in a manner to predict
the cumulative oil produced for a certain grid by providing the corresponding properties of the grid. The
network has been validated with real data collected from a number of drilled hypothetical wells.
Furthermore; the validated network used to simulate the field parts that have not been drilled yet, to
predict the corresponding cumulative oil for each grid. Field-scale simulation has been carried out and
new horizontal wells have been allocated using the validated prepared data by the Artificial Neural
Network Algorithm and an approved Iraqi reservoir model. Finally, different optimization scenarios have
been investigated on the overall field recovery performance.

Introduction
Indeed, during the processes of oil recovery, both primary and secondary, substantial amounts of oil
usually remain in a reservoir. Therefore, field optimization was always harnessing efforts and techniques
to sweep that remaining oil. When a satisfactory history match is achieved, the reservoir model may be
used to predict reservoir performance. From the objectives of the simulation study, the prediction case is
developed. Predictions give the engineer a chance to visualize the future performance of a well or of a
reservoir under different operating strategies.
Recent interest in the modeling and numerical simulation of horizontal wells in petroleum reservoirs
has rapidly increased because of improved drilling technology and the increased efficiency and economy
of oil recovery operations, and it has become of great importance to the energy industry. The selection of
2 SPE-172599-MS

new horizontal wells must be accompanied with the right selection of well locations. However, modeling
horizontal well locations by a trial and error method is a time consuming method. Therefore, new
techniques, such as Artificial Neural Network (ANN), have been investigated for this purpose.
Nowadays progress in the available computational power and better understanding of the theory of
neural networks has gained increasing attention of engineers and researchers working in the petroleum
industry. The neural networks technique has provided a new means of addressing complex processes. It
has showed an ability to work with noisy data and solve problems even if information related to detailed
physics of the system are not known or the system is too complex to be solved by traditional formal
methods. Artificial intelligence, and neural networks in particular, can give the petroleum industry new
tools for better understanding and controlling the distribution of horizontal wells and therefore achieving
efficient and profitable oil recovery.
This paper employed programmed Artificial Neural Network (ANN) to predict the optimum production
via proposed new well locations by incorporating reservoir properties and production data of previous
imposed wells. Real data from a number of drilled hypothetical wells have been used to validate the
network. This validated network was used to predict corresponding cumulative oil for each grid by
providing the corresponding properties of the grid for the non-drilled field parts. Furthermore, an
approved Iraqi reservoir model has been used to carry out a field-scale simulation with new horizontal
wells that have been allocated using the prepared data by the validated Artificial Neural Network
Algorithm. Finally, different optimization scenarios have been investigated on the overall field recovery
performance.

Reservoir Simulation Model

CMG-Builder/IMEX 2010 simulator has been used to build a three dimensional three phase black oil dual
porosity (Gilman and Kazemi shape factor) model and to predict the future performance of the Oil Field.
The field has been represented by three dimensions with a grid system of 49 grid elements along the x-axis
and 18 grids along the y-coordinate with 32 layers for the z-direction. The overall reservoir simulation
model consisted of 28224 grid blocks, with an aquifer in the bottom of the field. The reservoir is
subdivided into 32 layers. The first reservoir of the field is represented by layer one to layer three, and
the second reservoir is represented by layers twenty to thirty one.
The production from this field goes back to 1952 and continues until now. Successful history-match
was achieved in this field, starting from 1952 to 2012. The model was ready for future performance
development predictions.

Reservoir Performance Predictions

Achievement of the objective of the current study is performed according to the future performance
predictions by assuming new horizontal wells. To conduct the schemes for future prediction, neural
network (NN) has been used to assess the goal of selecting the optimum locations for the new wells.

Neural Network Model

The Matlab-Neural Network Toolbox 2012 program was used to build the NN model. To construct a NN
model, several steps should be followed, as follows:
1. Collect data
2. Create the network
3. Configure the network
4. Initialize the weights and biases
5. Train the network
6. Validate the network
SPE-172599-MS 3

7. Use the network.

First of all is the data collection. Because there are no horizontal wells previously drilled in the field,
we assume several horizontal wells in different directions to get the required data to train the network.
Thirty hypothetical wells have been completed in the twentieth layer of the second reservoir. The selection
of the second reservoir is because the reserve of the second reservoir is about 5.885 times the reserve of
the first reservoir, according to the current study as the initial oil in place are 114360000 and 673047000
STB for the first and second reservoirs, respectively. Layer number twenty was chosen because it is far
away from the OWC and has good net reservoir.
New horizontal well locations are illustrated in Fig. 1 from which one can notice that there are a lot
of wells close to each other. But, not all wells are run in the same time, and two wells are run together
in the simulator. Table 1 shows the group of wells in each run. Each well is completed in one grid-block.
The blocks are chosen to have the same length of 650 feet. The same production rates apply to all wells
to show the ability of each well under the same conditions of completion length and production rate. The
data that are used as input data for the network of each grid block completed are:

Figure 1—Locations of imposed horizontal wells

Table 1—Wells grouping according to the runs

Run Number Wells Name Run Number Wells Name Run Number Wells Name

1 H-1, H-20 6 H-10, H-23 11 H-14, H-16

2 H-8, H-24 7 H-4, H-6 12 H-13, H-12
3 H-18, H22 8 H-5, H-21 13 H-29, H-30
4 H-15, H-25 9 H-7, H-19 14 H-9, H-11
5 H-17, H-26 10 H-2, H-3 15 H-27, H-28
4 SPE-172599-MS

● Porosity
● Fracture porosity
● Matrix permeability
● Water saturation
● Fracture water saturation
● Pressure
These data are shown in table 2. The output of the horizontal wells from the simulator is considered
as the cumulative oil produced during ten years, which is used as an output of the training phase of the
NN. Table 3 shows the cumulative oil produced from the wells. When the input and output data for
training NN become ready, the NN can be constructed.

Table 2—Inputs data for training the Neural Network

Well Name Porosity Fracture Porosity Permeability (md) Pressure (psi) Sw Fracture Sw

H-1 0.096213 0.0403 3.82737 2827.27 0.250572 0.382599

H-2 0.079646 0.043626 1.4277 2749.68 0.200283 0.338348
H-3 0.117852 0.041536 1.16272 2791.14 0.2084 0.36382
H-4 0.095965 0.042822 1.31123 2988.78 0.337982 0.445636
H-5 0.100768 0.0446 0.565001 2697.62 0.200298 0.31177
H-6 0.118873 0.04335 1.03179 2701.46 0.200303 0.306366
H-7 0.081233 0.039515 0.485312 2814.84 0.200347 0.3362
H-8 0.152772 0.044568 0.305068 2764.83 0.200362 0.340894
H-9 0.119956 0.043952 1.31123 2734.59 0.200282 0.330347
H-10 0.101363 0.0403 1.31123 2756.61 0.20028 0.341351
H-11 0.098419 0.040386 0.012922 2828.2 0.253374 0.383856
H-12 0.129256 0.04425 1.36853 2711.61 0.200289 0.318459
H-13 0.112541 0.044371 0.269731 2757.99 0.200355 0.340526
H-14 0.083947 0.04175 0.542127 2723.92 0.200322 0.314305
H-15 0.112639 0.0446 0.805336 2707.09 0.200291 0.316167
H-16 0.117583 0.040064 1.04057 2822.19 0.200338 0.349279
H-17 0.095813 0.043 0.246243 2758.95 0.200353 0.344619
H-18 0.120597 0.0439 1.06755 2693.88 0.200293 0.307324
H-19 0.10382 0.040064 0.547713 2804 0.200337 0.314305
H-20 0.120104 0.042849 1.04814 2787.46 0.200322 0.344116
H-21 0.093569 0.039496 1.29009 2881.04 0.279852 0.395637
H-22 0.087739 0.039724 0.547713 2749.6 0.200337 0.31603
H-23 0.084842 0.039776 0.485312 2753.51 0.200335 0.311
H-24 0.084937 0.0396 0.543126 2771.31 0.200345 0.320453
H-25 0.082159 0.0396 0.485312 2779.3 0.200344 0.317113
H-26 0.101363 0.038514 1.31123 2902.25 0.238671 0.3773
H-27 0.085938 0.0396 0.485312 2747.32 0.20034 0.309664
H-28 0.098364 0.03759 1.31123 2924.65 0.275282 0.393602
H-29 0.098364 0.042076 1.31123 2792.03 0.200346 0.322148
H-30 0.093566 0.042593 1.31123 2913.5 0.230337 0.373588
SPE-172599-MS 5

Table 3—Cumulative oil produced of the horizontal wells

Well Cumulative Oil Well Cumulative Oil Well Cumulative Oil
Number Produced(STB*106) Number Produced(STB*106) Number Produced(STB*106)

H-1 10.4473 H-16 13.5701 H-21 8.6117

H-2 10.1469 H-17 12.5011 H-22 19.0701
H-3 9.66973 H-18 19.808 H-23 19.435
H-4 5.53835 H-19 20.0189 H-24 19.5255
H-5 19.886 H-20 14.7654 H-25 19.9407
H-6 20.8038 H-16 13.5701 H-26 12.2183
H-7 19.2695 H-17 12.5011 H-27 19.081
H-8 14.2271 H-18 19.808 H-28 9.95726
H-9 9.14394 H-19 20.0189 H-29 16.7499
H-10 13.0714 H-20 14.7654 H-30 13.1926

A plot will be show which contains the slope, y-intercept, and correlation coefficient (R) as shown in
Fig. 2. The correlation coefficient represents the output of the neural network match with the target. When
results of the training are validated, new inputs for the cells that not contain wells in layer twenty are
entered into the program and simulated to get the corresponding output for each grid.
6 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 2—Correlation coefficient of neural network

Finally, the output of the neural network will be exported to the CMG program. Neural Network when
constructed, the following points are taken into account:
● Number of inputs
● Number of outputs
● Number of layers
● Number of neurons in each layer
● Type of the network used
As mentioned earlier, the number of inputs and output are defined as six and one respectively. Number
of layers are 2, one hidden layer and one output layer. Number of neurons in the hidden layer is 22.
Number of neuron in output layer is one and the type of the network is Back Propagation.
SPE-172599-MS 7

The choice of two layers of the network are because of back propagation type with two layers has the
power to solve most of the non-linear problems. The number of the neurons in the hidden layer is selected
according to the performance of the network and there is no rule that defines the number of the neurons,
this number is gotten after several trials.
The number of the neurons in the output layer should be the same as the number of outputs; therefore
there is one neuron in the output layer. Fig. 3 shows the neural network. After the network is constructed,
by the use of the available data it becomes ready for training the NN. Several trainings are made until the
desired output is obtained. During the training phase, network initialization made which helps to improve
the training performance. When the output of the network becomes approximately the same with the
results of the data that is used as input for the trained network, then the network is ready to simulate any
input data and give corresponding output.

Figure 3—Schematic of neural network architecture

The neural network becomes ready for use; the input properties of each grid-block are entered in the
network and simulated to give cumulative oil produced for each corresponding grid. Cumulative oil
produced for each grid block plotted as a mesh map by using CMG Builder program. Fig. 4 illustrates the
cumulative oil produced from NN.
8 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 4 —Cumulative oil produced from neural network

Well Configurations
Production from wells is controlled by either their flow rates, or their wellhead or bottom-hole pressures.
The main constrains suggested for optimum well development and operation are:
1. A minimum imposed bottom hole pressure of 1100 psi. This pressure is higher than the bubble
point of the produced region (P ⫽1030 psi for the produced region) to insure that there will be no
gas liberation during the production period.
2. Maximum oil rate production per well is set according to the well productivity.
3. Maximum allowable water cut is 40 %
The same simulator which was used during the history matching is utilized to predict the future
performance of the field in terms of the production and the above mentioned well constraints using the
dynamic reservoir model and the model parameters adjusted accordingly.
Prediction in the field starting from 1-7-2013 to 1-1-2027. Production data available until the end of
2011, therefore, production from 1-1-2012 to 1-7-2013 was assumed to be the same as the production rate
at the end of 2011.
During the prediction period, two horizontal wells are suggest for oil production to predict the future
performance in the field. Well name HH1 are completed and put on production in 1/7/2013, and well name
HH2 are completed, and start to produce oil in 1/10/2013. No more wells could be drilled due to the
interference effects of the wells on each other. Distributions of these wells are according to the result that
was gotten from the neural network. On this basis, four different locations are suggests for the reentry and
new wells to get the optimum location for each well. In the following, details of each scenario are
presented as follows:
SPE-172599-MS 9

Performance Prediction

Scenario 1:
in this scenario the well name HH1 is recompleted from AA-12 and HH2 is recompleted from AA-16.
Both wells are drilled parallel to the X-axis of the grid blocks. The length of the horizontal section of wells
named HH1 and HH2 are 3950 ft and 3380 ft respectively as shown in Fig. 5.

Figure 5—Horizontal wells distribution, Scenario 1

Scenario 2:
two new wells are completed. The direction of the wells is parallel to the Y-axis of the grid blocks, HH1
horizontal length is 3330 ft and HH2 horizontal length is 3250 ft as clarify in Fig. 6.
10 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 6 —Horizontal wells distribution, Scenario 2

Scenario 3:
wells in this case HH1 and HH2 are recompleted from wells AA-17 and AA-13 respectively. Orientation
of the wells is from North-East to South-West. The well horizontal lengths are 3180 ft and 4750 ft as
demonstrated in Fig. 7.
SPE-172599-MS 11

Figure 7—Horizontal wells distribution, Scenario 3

Scenario 4:
recompletion of HH1 and HH2 are made from AA-21 and A-16 respectively. The wells direction parallel
to the diagonal of the grid blocks, from North-West to South-East. Their horizontal lengths are 4990 ft and
4000 ft as shown in Fig. 8.
12 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 8 —Horizontal wells distribution, Scenario 4

Prediction Scenarios Results

The most important part of the reservoir simulation study is the future prediction of the field, where the
objective of the study is achieved. The production rate in all cases is set equal to show which case will
give the best results. The production rate of HH1 and HH2 are assumed 8500 STB/D and 7500 STB/D
respectively, and the type of both wells in all cases are medium radius wells. The results of the predicted
scenarios are presented and discussed as follows:
Scenario 1
In this case the production is continued until the end of 2027 before water cut reaches approximately 40%
in both wells. The recovery factor during the prediction period is 10.0672 % and the cumulative oil
produced is 79269900 STB. Pressure drop during the production time is 140 psi. Figs. 9 and 10 illustrate
the results of this case.
Scenario 2
In this case the water cut reaches the maximum allowable amount of 40 % at the beginning of 2026. At
this time the recovery factor is 8.7708 % and the cumulative oil produced is 69062100 STB. Pressure drop
during the production time is 145 psi. Figs. 11 and 12 show these results.
Scenario 3
In this case, the production continues until the beginning of 2027 where water cut rise to 40 %, cumulative
oil produced approaches 75784000 STB and the recovery factor for the same period is 9.6324 %. Pressure
drop for this case is 141 psi. Figs. 13 and 14 demonstrate these results.
Scenario 4
In this case the oil is produced until the mid of 2026 where the water cut reaches 40 %, the recovery factor
becomes 9.2016 % and the cumulative oil produced is 72454000 STB. Pressure drop in this case is 145
psi. Figs. 15 and 16 clarify these results.
SPE-172599-MS 13

Figure 9 —Oil rate and water cut of Scenario 1

Figure 10 —Pressure and recovery factor of Scenario 1

From the pre mentioned Scenarios can notice that there is a minor difference in the results of all cases.
This is because the selected locations of the new wells were not randomly, but depending on the basis of
the employing of neural network to find the optimum position. Therefore, the similarity in the results was
14 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 11—Oil rate and water cut of Scenario 2

Figure 12—Pressure and recovery factor of Scenario 2

found. However, scenario 1 can be considered as the best case which shows the longest production period
with maximum recovery factor. This is due to the completion of both wells are located in the grids that
SPE-172599-MS 15

Figure 13—Oil rate and water cut of Scenario 3

Figure 14 —Pressure and recovery factor of Scenario 3

have the highest volume of oil and the location of both wells in this case is far away from the water
encroachment as compared to other cases which is clarified in Fig. 17. Wells in this case are chosen to
be reentry rather than new wells to reduce the drilling cost.
16 SPE-172599-MS

Figure 15—Oil rate and water cut of Scenario 4

Figure 16 —Pressure and recovery factor of Scenario 4

SPE-172599-MS 17

Figure 17—Water saturation distributions in layer 20

Conclusion
Following conclusions can be drawn from the present study:
1. Neural Network is a powerful tool which can be used for predicting the optimum locations for
production in reservoir modeling.
2. Applying horizontal wells have a great improvement in oil recovery in the field as the recovery
factor for the previous 60 years was 29.3964% while during the production from the horizontal
wells for the next 14 years the recovery factor is 10.0672%
3. The optimum scenario to develop the oil field is scenario 4, where the production is from two
reentry horizontal wells which are completed in layer 20 with a plateau of 16000 STB/D during
the prediction period of 14 years, with the highest recovery factor of 10.0672%.
18 SPE-172599-MS

Acknoledgement
We would like to thanks Mr. Ramyar A. Suramairy for his assistance in this work.

Nomenclature
ANN ⫽ Artificial Neural Network
NN ⫽ Neural Network
CMG ⫽ Computer Modelling Group
IMEX ⫽ Black Oil Simulator
STB ⫽ Stock Tank Barrel
OWC ⫽ Oil Water Contact
R ⫽ Correlation Coefficient of the Neural Network
P ⫽ Pressure (psi)
psi ⫽ Pound per Square Inch
ft ⫽ Foot
D ⫽ Day

References
1. Adebola, A. 1999. Active Learning Algorithms for Multilayer Feed Forward Neural Networks,
MSc. Dissertation, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
2. Beale, M.H., Hagan, T.M., and Demuth, H.B. 1996. Neural Network Design, PWS Publishing
Company, China.
3. Beale, M.H., Hagan, T.M., and Demuth, H.B. 2012. Neural Network Toolbox, User’s Guide of
Matlab Software.
4. Hara, P.S., Mondragon, J.J., Sun, H.H., Yang, Z.E., and Ershaghi, I. 2005. Applying a Reservoir
Simulation Model to Drill a Horizontal Well in a Post-Steamflood Reservoir, Wilmington Field,
California. SPE 94021.
5. Haykin, S. 1999. Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, Second Edition, New Jersey,
Prentice Hall International, Inc.
6. MacKay, V. 1994. Determination of Oil and Gas Reserves, The Petroleum Society of The
Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum, Petroleum Society Monograph No.1,
Calgary, Canada.
7. Mattax, C.C. and Dalton, R.L. 1990. Reservoir Simulation, First Printing, Society of Petroleum
Engineers, Richardson, TX, U.S.A.
8. Nakutnyy, P., Asghari, K., and Torn, A. 2008. Analysis of Waterflooding Through Application of
Neural Networks. PAPER 2008-190 presented at the Canadian International Petroleum Confer-
ence/SPE Gas Technology Symposium Joint Conference (the Petroleum Society’s Annual Tech-
nical Meeting), Calgary, Alberta, 17-19 June.
9. Nghiem, L., Collins, D.A., and Sharma, R. 1991. Modelling of Horizontal Wells in Reservoir
Simulation, SPE 2122.
10. Prasad, R.K. and Coble, L.E. 1990. Horizontal Well Performance Simulation. SPE 21087.