SPE 153802

A New Method for Dynamic Calculation of Pattern Allocation Factors

in Waterflood Monitoring
Ehsan Saadatpoor, SPE, The University of Texas at Austin, Hossein Karami, SPE, Schlumberger, and Moudi
Fahad Al-Ajmi, SPE, Kuwait Oil Company

Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Eighteenth SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 14–18 April 2012.

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
Successful operation of a waterflood requires the ability to make informed decisions based on pattern voidage replacement
ratio (VRR), watercut, and water production rate. These performance measures are calculated from actual performance data
using predefined allocation factors. In a pattern, there are several producers, each contributing to the total pattern production.
The percentage of total volume produced from each producer is called the allocation factor.
Waterflood performance is commonly monitored and studied using static allocation factors. The monitoring workflow
uses the injection and production data from a database, and pattern allocation factors are assigned to production wells as
static values based on geometry of waterflood patterns. In fact, the pattern allocation factors are set as a fraction of the area of
a circle exposed to that pattern; hence they are constant. The allocation factors will not represent the real physics involved if
they are determined based merely on geometry of patterns. Some important parameters, such as water injection rates of
patterns, have a major effect on allocation factors. Based on specific assumptions, we have developed equations to define a
new allocation factor for production wells.
The dynamic method proposed in this paper includes several parameters that affect patterns—including well radius,
distance between wells, and injection rates—and leads to more realistic waterflood monitoring and more efficient decision
making with no extra cost or time needed for data gathering or model development and simulation. The effect of using new
allocation factors was studied on actual field data, and results verified the possible improvement in performance if dynamic
allocation factors are used.

Introduction
A pattern, or group of wells within a specific area, is used to monitor the amount of fluid produced from a common zone and
the amount of fluid injected into that zone. Patterns express the relationships of certain producing wells with injection wells
in a field, whether injection is water, CO2, or steam. Over time, the producing wells respond as a result of the fluid injected
into their corresponding injection wells. The most common examples of using patterns in field operations are waterflooding
and steamflooding. In waterflood operations, water is injected to carry oil through the rock pore space and produce the
combined oil and water from production wells. In steamflooded fields, steam is injected to the center of a group of producer
wells that produce the heated, less viscous oil from the perimeter wells.
Fig. 1 (Craig 1971) illustrates several common flooding patterns. Models of displacement performances refer in most
cases to an ideal five-spot pattern. A typical five-spot pattern consists of four injectors in a square around one producer. A
peripheral flood can yield maximum oil recovery with a minimum of produced water. The water production in peripheral
floods can be delayed by shutting in wells that suffer water breakthrough until only the last row of the producers remains.
Data from each pattern consists of wells with allocation factors for assigning a percentage of production to corresponding
injectors or group of injectors, or vice versa: assigning a percentage of injected volume to a corresponding producer or a
group of producing wells. In the former case, a fraction of the produced fluids is assigned to the pattern which is defined as
pattern oil production:
Qoi = ∑Fj
Aij q oj , .................................................................................................................................................. Eq. (1)
2 SPE 153802

where Qoi is the oil production rate of pattern i, qoj is the oil production rate of well j, and FAij is allocation factor of well j in
pattern i. The water production rate and hence the liquid production rate of the pattern are defined in the same way. Separate
allocation factors are used for oil, gas, and water phases. These values are then used to calculate an important variable in the
waterflood, which is voidage replacement ratio (VRR):
(Qinj ) i
RVRi = , ..................................................................................................................................................... Eq. (2)
Q Li
where RVRi is voidage replacement ratio of pattern i, (Qinj)i is water injection rate of pattern i, and QLi is liquid production rate
of pattern i.
Monitoring and optimization of waterflood performance requires use of factors to allocate production and injection
among patterns. Various methods can be used to determine the allocation factors. Tracer tests in injection wells can be used
in estimating allocations, but the tests are expensive and have qualitative results. In practice, little or no data of this type may
be available in a mature field, which makes evaluation of flood performance difficult. The simplest method is to use the
pattern geometry to determine the pattern allocation factors. The percentage of volume produced from each producer is
assigned as a fraction of the total area exposed from a circle (i.e., angle open to flow). For example, in a typical five-spot
pattern (Fig. 2), one-fourth of the circle centered on production well is exposed to highlighted pattern; hence, an allocation
factor of 0.25 is assumed for that production well in that pattern. Similarly, its allocation factor is 0.25 in all four
corresponding patterns. Although geometric allocation factors are very simple to calculate, they are not very accurate because
of the simplified assumptions that are made. The most important assumptions are listed:
• Homogeneous reservoir.
• Isotropic reservoir.
• The production well is the same distance from all injectors of the corresponding patterns (symmetry).
• All injectors of the corresponding patterns use the same injection rate.
• There are no effects from other injectors in nonadjacent patterns.
The first, second, and last assumptions are common in the oil industry, despite the heterogeneities in reservoir properties,
such as permeability and porosity, and the discontinuities, such as faults. However, the patterns are not exactly symmetric,
which means the production well is a different distance from each injection well of the four corresponding patterns. The case
is even worse in the assumption about the injection rates, because injectors typically use completely different injection rates
and allocation factors need to be adjusted accordingly. For example, assume that the water injection rates of the four injection
wells are completely different, with relative values of 1, 1, 1, and 3 for injectors 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. If the reservoir is
assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic, the Buckley-Leverett theorem predicts the oil recovery as
( S w ) avg − S wi
ER = , ............................................................................................................................................ Eq. (3)
1 − S wi
where ER is the oil recovery, (Sw)avg is average water saturation, and Swi is initial water saturation. So before the breakthrough
we have
Qi
E R1 = , ...................................................................................................................................................... Eq. (4)
1 − S wi
where ER1 is oil recovery before breakthrough, and Qi is the injected pore volume and calculated as
q injt
Qi = ,............................................................................................................................................................. Eq. (5)
ALφ
where qinj is the water injection rate, t is time, A is reservoir area, L is reservoir length, and φ is porosity. This equation shows
that at small times after injection (t < tBT), Qi for Injector 4 is three times that of the other injectors; hence, the oil recovery of
Pattern 4 is three times that of the other patterns. In other words, one-half the oil volume produced is coming from Pattern 4.
This result implies the allocation factor of the production well in Pattern 4 should be 0.50, and it is 0.167 in Patterns 1 to 3.
The waterflood analysis would be completely different and would lead to different decisions when just the allocation factors
of 0.25 based on pattern geometry are used.
Another problem arises because the injection rate of injectors is not constant over time, so allocation factors must be
adjusted to match the field performance. The allocation factors are also subject to change as a result of adding a new producer
to the current pattern or developing a completely new pattern next to the existing one. In any of these cases it will be too
difficult to recalculate the history of pattern performance if the allocation factors are fixed manually.
To address these problems different methods can be used to allocate fluids. Chapman and Thompson (1989) use a
material-balance method to aid in correcting the allocation factors. The method described in this paper handles fluid
allocations by study of each pattern and uses the diffusivity equation to help calculate the allocation factors. Typical steady-
state applications involve the use of measured pressures and production data to estimate the reservoir properties. In this
SPE 153802 3

waterflood monitoring method, the diffusivity equations are used to calculate what the pressure should be, given the known
injection rates. The calculated pressures are then normalized to estimate the allocation factors.

Calculation of Allocation Factors

The new method for calculation of allocation factors includes the effect of the distance between the producer and injector in a
corresponding pattern, the injection rate of injection wells in adjacent patterns, and the future development of waterflood
patterns. To address this problem, we assume that “the amount of oil produced from a specific production well under the
effect of several injection wells is proportional to the pressure increase caused by those injection wells in the location of
production well, as radial diffusivity equation predicts.”
Basic radial diffusivity equation for liquid flow (Mian 1992) is
1 ∂ ⎛ ∂p ⎞ φ cμ ∂p
⎜r ⎟ = ,......................................................................................................................................... Eq. (6)
r ∂r ⎝ ∂r ⎠ k ∂t

where φ is porosity; c is the compressibility; μ is the fluid viscosity, which is assumed to be constant; and k is permeability,
which is assumed to be independent of radial distance, r. The density of the fluid is also assumed to be constant.
The steady-state solution of diffusivity equation uses ∂p ∂t = 0 and Darcy’s law for radial flow to conclude

qμ ⎛ r ⎞
p − pw = ln⎜ ⎟ . ......................................................................................................................................... Eq. (7)
2πkh ⎜⎝ rw ⎟
⎠
If we assume the bottomhole pressures of the injection wells connected to a production well are equal, according to the
superposition theorem the sum of these pressure increases makes up the pressure increase in the location of the production
well, which increases the production. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that each injection well contributes to production
proportional to its corresponding Δp. For a specific production well, which is under direct influence of n different injection
wells, we can calculate this expression
q i μ ⎛ ri ⎞
Δp i = ln⎜ ⎟, i = 1, ..., n , ...................................................................................................................... Eq. (8)
2πkh ⎜⎝ rwi ⎟
⎠
where Δpi is pressure increase caused by the ith injection well in the location of production well, qi is the injection rate of the
ith injection well, ri is the distance between the production well and the ith injection well, and rw,i is the wellbore radius of the
ith injection well. Based on the following assumptions (homogeneous and isotropic rock around that specific production well,
constant fluid viscosity, and constant payzone thickness), a simplified parameter can be used as
⎛ r ⎞
C i = q i ln⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟, i = 1, ..., n , ............................................................................................................................. Eq. (9)
⎝ rwi ⎠
to define allocation factors of the production well in n different patterns as
Ci
F Ai = n
, i = 1, ..., n . ............................................................................................................................. Eq. (10)
∑C
i =1
i

Algorithm. The computer algorithm for the method just discussed can be implemented with every programming language. A
database language (SQL) was used to implement the algorithm in this project.

i. Define k = 1.
ii. Consider kth production well (WPk).
iii. Find injection wells of patterns that WPk is a member of those patterns (call these injection wells: WIi, i = 1, …, m).
iv. For all values of i = 1 to m, calculate this parameter:
⎛r ⎞
C ki = q i ln⎜⎜ ki ⎟ ........................................................................................................................................... Eq. (11)
⎟
⎝ rwi ⎠
v. Define
4 SPE 153802

C ki
F Aki = m
. ............................................................................................................................................. Eq. (12)
∑C
i =1
ki

vi. Assign allocation factor FAki to production well WPk in pattern i.

vii. k = k + 1.
viii. Repeat the algorithm, until k > n (n is number of production wells).

Implementation. Since studying the capabilities of commercial applications for implementing this enhanced workflow was a
part of this project, we attempted to implement this algorithm directly under the waterflood monitoring application
environment.
Most commercial applications are equipped with “user functions,” which are user-defined macros that can include
calculated variables, system functions, and other user functions. Programming skills similar to BASIC and C languages can
be used to create a user function. User functions, like system functions, enable us to perform more advanced operations
within the application or retrieve information from the system and return results.
Another method of implementing this workflow is from out of waterflood monitoring application environment. With this
method, the results can be read by the application as an input pattern table. In this work, the SQL was chosen for the data
retrieval and processing and OFM* well and reservoir analysis software was used as the application for waterflood
monitoring.
The queries used to create the pattern table in the format compatible with OFM software are given in Appendix A. Here
we explain the logic behind the code, which makes it more apparent where and how one should make changes to adopt it for
a specific project.

Data Tables in Database. These four tables provide the required data for the queries to calculate allocation factors:
• HEADER: This table contains general data about the wells, such as well name and position (x,y).
• CASING: This table contains the casing data of each well. The wellbore diameter of injectors is retrieved from this
table.
• MON_INJ: This table contains the monthly injection data of injectors.
• PATTERN: This table contains the definition of patterns. Producer-injector association is defined in this table.

“coeffs” View. This query reads the data from different tables to calculate coefficients Cki in Eq. 11. For each of the
producers in the PATTERN table and on each date that has injection data available, the distance between producer and
corresponding injector (rki) and then Cki are calculated.
m
“coeffs_sum” View. This query calculates the summation ∑C
i =1
ki for each of the production wells (WPk).

“prod_pattern” View. This query calculates allocation factors in Eq. 12 for each production well. The created view
contains the following columns:
• PatternSet, PatternName, UWI, Injector, Date, Factor, Loss
Note that DATE is a keyword in Oracle® software and must be put inside double quotes to be used as a column name
(“DATE”, not DATE).

“ofm_pattern” View. The PATTERN table, which is read by OFM software, should contain the injector of the pattern as
a well with allocation factor of 1. The prod_pattern view contains only the production wells in patterns (of course each field
contains a pattern number, a production well of that pattern, and corresponding injector of that pattern). This query uses
UNION to append the injectors to this table as separate fields. The order of the columns is also set to match their order in the
OFM software pattern table format.

Waterflood Monitoring. The new allocation factors for new production and injection data are automatically appended to the
PATTERN table (“ofm_pattern” view) created in the database each time the database is called, so it always contains the most
up-to-date allocation factors based on the last available production and injection data in the database and all the allocation
factors for previous months.
If the application reads this table directly from the database, the whole process is automated and each time the project is
opened in the application the program has access to the different allocation factors for different dates based on production and
injection data of each month.

*
Mark of Schlumberger
SPE 153802 5

Application of Method
The Sabiriyah and Raudhatain fields are located in northern Kuwait. The Mauddud reservoir is a thick Cretaceous limestone
comprising moderate permeability (10 to 100 md) layers with high permeability zones within them. There is no significant
mobile aquifer in this field, and waterflooding operations started in 2000 (Ibrahim et al. 2007).
Because of the large scale of the reservoir and plans to maximize ultimate recovery, waterflood performance monitoring
is necessary and has been implemented. Analysis of the patterns will help in waterflood optimization through changing rates,
workovers, infill drilling, and other remedial treatments. It is also important when selecting areas to expand the waterflood
system.
To enhance this workflow performance, the new method of calculating allocation factors was considered. The enhanced
workflow was implemented in the OFM software. This well and reservoir analysis software provides an interface that enables
the user to visualize and analyze production and reservoir data within the PC environment. It also gives the ability to execute
a query or SQL statement on the database.
Initial analysis of waterflood can begin with analysis of the reservoir as a whole or by the individual patterns. Graphs,
reports, and grid maps can assist in this process. To use these features, a set of calculated variables is defined to give access
to required values that should be calculated from raw data.

Calculated Variables. Some of the most useful calculated variables in waterflood analysis are given in Table 1; these are
recommended for any waterflood review.

Well Monitoring. Well symbols and headers enable us to modify basemap attributes such that the map can be used as a well
monitoring tool. Well symbols are referenced from the default symbol file. However, the well symbols can be customized.
Also, map headers can be used to show the required data on the map. With a little bit of coding in the headers dialog box,
we can show any information we want on the selected well. For example, we used system functions in our sample project to
show the last available data about the selected well, whether it is a production well (last monthly oil production and watercut
are shown with the corresponding date) or an injection well (last water injection is shown with corresponding date). Fig. 3
and Fig. 4 show the well monitoring map for a production well and an injection well, respectively.

Reports. The application should also provide a report module to be primarily used for retrieving date-dependent data. The
report module provides an interface for SQL-like statements. Users can design and customize the output to present their data.
All production- and injection-related variables can be reported. A sample report by the application can report VRR and
cumulative VRR of any pattern, as well as other variables such as monthly liquid production and water injection rate and
corresponding cumulative variables.

Maps. The bubble map provides a tool to visually present data on a geographical map. The bubbles (which come in many
different shapes; i.e., circle, square, triangle, pie) are displayed at the entities’ locations (i.e., wells, patterns, and field).
Different variables can be mapped for individual wells, a group of wells, patterns, or a whole field. Fig. 5, Fig. 6, and Fig. 7
show different map views for watercut of waterflood patterns in the sample field.
By defining the suitable calculated variables, different maps can be developed. We can also do some calculations in the
database, create new variables in tables, and use them to study features of special interest for waterflood monitoring. As an
example, a query can be used to calculate the production gain (or loss) between every two consecutive months that contain
production information. The resulting table is linked to the project in the application and a bubble map is produced to
represent gain or loss of production in that specific month (if both that month and the previous month contain production
data). Fig. 8 shows this map for the sample field.

Added Value of Using Dynamic Allocation Factors

We considered the effect of using the dynamic method of calculation of allocation factors on decisions during waterflood
surveillance in the sample field. Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show the pattern VRR map with pattern monthly injection rate, VVR, and
watercut values overlaid on the map for the same month. In Fig. 9 the static allocation factors, which are constants calculated
based only on geometry, have been used. Fig. 10 shows the same results when dynamic allocation factors calculated with
new method have been used. We can see that in two adjacent patterns, the behavior has dramatically changed. Using static
AFs, the VRR has been more than 1 and less than 1 in Patterns 11 and 12, respectively. In contrast, use of dynamic AFs
shows the opposite behavior of these two patterns at the same month.
Fig. 11 shows changes in VRR with time for both methods of static and dynamic calculation of AFs. As shown, the VRR
was reported to have stabilized near 2 in mid 2007 based on static AFs. As a result, the operator decided to decrease the water
injection rate to reduce the VRR, which in turn would lead to a decrease in pattern oil production. Plotting the VRR map
based on dynamic calculation of AFs shows the VRR has been near 1, and there has been no necessity to decrease the
injection rate. This means the pattern production could have been maintained without damaging the reservoir.
The decisions in waterflood projects are highly dependent on VRR values (which are calculated using allocation factors),
so it is important to calculate pattern allocation factors using a precise and realistic approach.
6 SPE 153802

Conclusions
The static method of allocating fluids uses geometry to calculate allocation factors and ignores some important petrophysical
and operational parameters; thus, it is not reliable. Different methods can be used to define allocation factors in a new way
that is more accurate and realistic. The Buckley-Leverett theorem is one of these. The dynamic method described in this
paper includes those parameters and enables us to achieve more realistic results with no extra cost and effort for heavy
simulation procedures.
Using dynamic allocation factors leads to more realistic waterflood monitoring and more efficient decision making, which
can be economically decisive. The dynamic calculation of allocation factors can be included in commercial applications as a
new method in addition to the static method.

Nomenclature
μ = Viscosity
φ = Porosity
A = Cross sectional area of reservoir
c = Compressibility
ER = Oil recovery factor
FA = Allocation factor
h = Thickness
k = Permeability
L = Length of reservoir
p = Pressure
pw = Bottomhole pressure
q = Flow rate
qi = Water injection rate of well
qo = Oil production rate of well
Qi = Pore volumes of injected fluid
Qinj = Water injection rate of pattern
QL = Liquid production rate of pattern
Qo = Oil production rate of pattern
r = Radial distance
rw = Wellbore radius
RVR = Voidage replacement ratio
(Sw)avg = Average water saturation
Swi = Initial water saturation
t = Time

Acknowledgment
The authors thank Schlumberger and Kuwait Oil Company for permission to publish this paper.

References
1 Chapman, L.R., and Thompson, R.R. 1989. Waterflood Surveillance in the Kuparuk River Unit with Computerized Pattern Analysis.
J. Pet Tech 41 (3): 277–282. SPE-17429-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/17429-PA.
2 Craig, F.F. Jr. 1971. The Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Waterflooding, Vol. 1. New York, New York: Monograph Series, SPE.
3 Ibrahim, M.N., Clark, R.A. Jr., and Al-Matar, B.S. 2007. Streamline Simulation for Reservoir Management of a Super Giant:
Sabiriyah Field (North Kuwait) Case Study. Paper SPE 105069 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference,
Bahrain, Kingdom of Bahrain, 11–14 March. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/105069-MS.
4 Mian, M.A. 1992. Petroleum Engineering Handbook for the Practicing Engineer, vol. 1. Tulsa, Oklahoma: PennWell Books.
5 OilField Manager 2005: Fundamentals, Training and Exercise Guide, version 2005.2. 2006. Houston, Texas, Schlumberger.
6 OilField Manager Help Manual. 2005. Houston, Texas, Schlumberger.
SPE 153802 7

Table 1—Most useful calculated variables in waterflood analysis

Calculated Variable Description

Oil.Monthly Monthly oil production
Oil.Cum Cumulative oil production
Oil.AvgRate Oil average production rate (bbl per calendar day)
Oil.WellCount Number of wells producing oil
Oil.ActRate Oil actual production rate (bbl per production day)
Liq.Monthly Monthly liquid (oil and water) production
Liq.MonthlyRV Monthly liquid production (reservoir volume)
Liq.Cum Cumulative liquid production
Liq.CumRV Cumulative liquid production (reservoir volume)
Liq.AvgRate Liquid average production rate (bbl per calendar day)
Liq.ActRate Liquid actual production rate (bbl per calendar day)
Liq.AvgWellRate Liquid average production rate per well
Ratio.GOR Gas/oil ratio
Ratio.GasLiq Gas/liquid ratio
Ratio.GORCum Cumulative gas/oil ratio
Date.FstPrd Date of first production
Date.FstInj Date of first injection
Date.LstPrd Date of last production
Date.LstInj Date of last injection
Date.ClosedDays Number of nonproduction days
Winj.Cum Cumulative water injection
Ratio.VRR Voidage replacement ratio (VRR)
Ratio.VRRCum Cumulative VRR
Status.OpenShut Well status (open/shut in)

1 2

3 4

Fig. 1—Common flooding patterns (Craig 1971) Fig. 2—A sample five-spot pattern
8 SPE 153802

Fig. 3—Well monitoring map for a sample production well Fig. 4—Well monitoring map for a sample injection well

Fig. 5—Bubble map of pattern watercut. Fig. 6—Contour map of pattern watercut.
SPE 153802 9

Fig. 7—Pie chart of pattern watercut versus oilcut. Fig. 8—Bubble map of pattern oil production gain.

Fig. 9—Pattern VRR (number in the center) using static Fig. 10—Pattern VRR (number in the center) using dynamic
allocation factors. allocation factors.
10 SPE 153802

Static AF
StaticAF
Dynamic AF
Dynamic
Injection Rate AF

Production Rate

Fig. 11—Plot of VRR vs. time for both static and dynamic allocation factors. Trends of water injection and oil production rates are
also shown. All data are from Pattern 3 in the sample database.

Appendix A: SQL Queries

The queries used to create the pattern table in the OFM software compatible format are given here.

Query to calculate coefficients C ki in Eq. 11

CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW coeffs AS
SELECT DISTINCT
a.uwi,
a.pattern_no,
a.injector,
d.idate,
sqrt(power(b.x-c.x,2)+power(b.y-c.y,2)) distance,
d.water,
e.r_well,
d.water*ln( sqrt(power(b.x-c.x,2)+power(b.y-c.y,2))/(e.r_well*0.0254) ) c_ik
FROM
pattern a,
header b,
header c,
mon_inj d,
(
SELECT csg.uwi, min(csg.inner_diameter) r_well
FROM casing csg
GROUP BY csg.uwi
)e
WHERE
a.uwi = b.uwi
AND a.injector = c.uwi
AND a.injector = d.uwi
AND e.uwi = a.injector;

m
Query to calculate ∑C
i =1
ki in the denominator of Eq. 12

CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW coeffs_sum AS

SELECT
SPE 153802 11

uwi,
idate,
sum(c_ik) c_sum
FROM
coeffs
GROUP BY
uwi, idate;

Query to calculate allocation factors AFki in Eq. 12

CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW prod_pattern AS
SELECT
'P-1' patternset,
a.pattern_no patternname,
a.uwi,
a.injector,
a.idate "DATE",
round((a.c_ik/b.c_sum),4) factor,
0 loss
FROM
coeffs a,
coeffs_sum b
WHERE
b.uwi = a.uwi
AND a.idate = b.idate
AND b.c_sum > 0;

Query to create the pattern table in the OFM software compatible format
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW ofm_pattern AS
SELECT
patternset,
patternname,
“DATE”,
uwi,
factor,
loss
FROM
prod_pattern
UNION
SELECT DISTINCT
patternset,
patternname,
"DATE",
injector,
1 factor,
0 loss
FROM
prod_pattern;