2023-24

HERIOT-WATT UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF GEOENERGY ENGINEERING

ECLIPSE TUTORIAL NO. 3

(Model construction, history matching and prediction)

This exercise is divided into three parts:

A – Identifying initial input parameters (OOIP and Ø) from early production data and
material balance.
B – Adjust history matching parameters to give correct water production rate.
C – Predict optimum development strategy for remainder of field life.

A – Use of Material Balance to calculate IOIP and system porosity.

“Extract” the tut3.zip file (and the include-files subfolder) into your workspace.
Only "drag and drop" from the zip file if you see the “include-files” folder and not
its contents. This folder must be a sub-folder with its contents in place.

The HAROLD-HISTORY.DATA file contains a model of an undersaturated oil

reservoir with a small aquifer that started producing oil from a single well on 9 th
August 2020. The porosity is not known, but is thought to be somewhere in the
range 23% to 33%. Your first task is to use the Material Balance equation to
calculate the original stock tank oil in place (STOOIP), and from that estimate a
single porosity value to use in the model. The bulk volume of the reservoir above
the oil water contact is known to be approximately 37,279,000 rb, and the Net-to-
Gross ratio has been estimated at 0.92.

The fact that during the initial stages of production the reservoir remains above
the bubble point pressure (3100 psia) and that there is negligible influx of water
initially, allows you to use the following equation to calculate the STOOIP:

1
where the quantity (Np/N) is the Recovery Factor (RF) as a fraction of the OOIP
(i.e. N), the pressure increase (which will be negative) is given by . The
other quantities have their usual meanings – formation volume factors,
compressibilities and saturations. These may be taken from the input data file.
Assume Swi = 0.28 (which includes the water leg) and in calculating B o and Boi,
bear in mind that the gas-oil ratio initially is 0.35 Mscf/stb. You may use the
spreadsheet CM2Ex1_RECIP.xls to assist with this calculation. Note that Eclipse
interpolates 1/Bo linearly so we do the same here.

Use the table below which contains measured static pressures (an estimate of field
average pressure) and cumulative production for the initial period of production in
this reservoir, before there is any water injection and before water breakthrough.
Calculate the STOIIP for each date after the 9th of August 2020.

You should find that the STOIIP varies for each date. Discuss possible reasons.
Estimate a value of STOIIP from these numbers and explain your method.

Date Measured Static Cumulative oil production

BHP
(psia) (stb)
9 August 2020 5102 0
1 September 2020 5079 17310
1 October 2020 5030 44595
1 November 2020 4970 73498
1 December 2020 4911 101619
1 January 2021 4861 134353
1 February 2021 4812 166067
1 March 2021 4761 189986
1 April 2021 4707 225899
1 May 2021 4642 254717
Once you have calculated STOOIP, use the relationship

STOOIP = N = (bulk volume / Bo(init)) x Ø x NTG x Soil to calculate Ø.

What value of Ø do you get?

In Figure 1, show a screen capture of the spreadsheet indicating your inputs and
the final calculations of N and Ø. Enter this value for Ø as being uniform
throughout the field and run the model. In Figure 2, plot the Field Average
Pressure (FPR) from the model and the static BHP data from the table above
against time (you will need to extract FPR from the .RSM file from your run and
make the plot in Excel). In all pressure plots, make sure you select appropriate
limits on the y-axis to see pressure! Also make historic data stand out on all plots
using large symbols or equivalent. On Figure 3 plot WBHP and WBHPH against
time and in Figure 4 plot FOPR and FOPRH against time, to compare the
calculated (eg FOPR) and historically observed (eg FOPRH) values.).

2
  Do you have a good match when comparing FPR versus “static BHP” in
the above table. You must explain your answer.
 Discuss the match of BHP versus BHPH in terms of how it differs from
the match of FPR versus static BHP.
 Discuss the match of FOPR versus FOPRH. Is it a good match and can
you explain it?
 Can you improve the match to the data predicted so far and if so what
would you change in the model?
 Suppose you have got a good match. Would you expect the forecast to be
accurate?

B – Adjust history matching parameters to give correct water production rate.

We now consider the water injection phase having attempted the pressure match.

Additional data from 1 May 2021 to 1 Sep 2023 may be added by inserting the
following immediately before the END keyword:

-- History match after start of water injection on 01/05/21 up to 01/09/23

INCLUDE
'include-files\SCHED-HIST-TO-1-Sep-2023.INC' /

(Remember that you cannot alter historical observed data and do not delete the
existing INCLUDE statement!)

Run this model, and in Figure 5 plot calculated and historical water production
rates. In Figure 6 plot the calculated and historical BHP values at the injector and
producer wells. Make sure you select appropriate limits on the y-axis to see
pressure!

Regardless of the match quality Part A, consider the situation where the history
match of the static BHP versus average pressure is very good for the depletion
phase. Discuss whether or not you would expect a good match of the same data
over the waterflood period?

It turns out that layer 2 of the simulation grid was assigned an incorrect absolute
permeability during the original model construction but all other well
measurements were correctly assigned. Vary this parameter until you get a match
on water production rate and BHP pressures.

What value do you think gives the best match?

Plot calculated and historical water flow rates (on Figure 7) and BHPs (on Figure
8) for both wells for ALL of the various simulations you’ve run. Note: You
MUST make the figures easily readable so select an appropriate scale for the axes
to show them off!

3
  Based on the way that the quality of the match changed when you altered
permeability, explain your final choice.
 Can you improve the match further? If so, give two examples of what you
would change and explain your choice.
 What properties would you not consider changing and why?

C – Predict optimum development strategy for remainder of field life.

In this part you will use your best history matched model from part B to help plan
the future development of the field.

You have a budget to drill two new wells which can come on stream as of
01/09/23. These wells may be sidetracked from existing wells or they may be
new wells; they may be horizontal or vertical production wells, or water injection
wells. Additionally, you may close existing completions when wells hit economic
limits (use GECON keyword which should be placed after the included file
“HIST-TO-1-Sep-2023.INC”). Immiscible gas may also be injected instead of
water at no extra cost.

Horizontal wells are defined by multiple entries in the COMPDAT keyword for
the same well, keeping Ztop and Zbot the same, and setting the 13 th item in the
keyword to be X or Y, depending on the orientation (default is Z), eg

COMPDAT
-- well X Y Ztop Zbot Status well ID orientation
D10 9 10 2 2 OPEN 1* 1* 0.500 3* X/
D10 8 10 2 2 OPEN 1* 1* 0.500 3* X/
D10 7 10 2 2 OPEN 1* 1* 0.500 3* X/
D10 7 11 2 2 OPEN 1* 1* 0.500 3* Y/
/
Alternatively, a polymer flood may be attempted, instead of drilling one new well
(i.e. a total of three wells only may be simulated but you can inject polymer into
all injectors). Properties of the polymer used in TUT2 should be used here. You
may also deplete the field by stopping injection altogether. This model is three-
phase, and if the pressure drops below the bubble point then free gas will be
evolved.

The aim of this part of the exercise is to investigate a range of scenarios and
sensitivities by simulation which should include trying different combinations of
wells as well as water-flood, polymer-flood and gas flood within the economic
constraints. You are trying to find those that maximise recovery. Also you are
trying to understand WHY they maximise recovery.

The field economic constrains are that you must maintain production of oil to be
at least 400 stb/d, and the water cut may not exceed 98%. Use the GECON
keyword to automatically detect when the economic constraints have been
reached. Simulate monthly time steps. With GECON you can set the number of
steps to be large as the simulation stops automatically. However, you should make
sure this is why the simulation stops.

You may produce at no more than 3300 BBL/day per well and inject water at no
more than 3500 BBL/day per well. All injectors must keep pressure below 5200

4
 PSI while producer pressures stay above 2300 PSI. You MUST set up
WCONPROD and WCONINJ keywords to apply this for the forecast period. Gas
injection is also limited to a maximum of 2000 Mscf/DAY per well.

Compare the results of 10 to 20 simulations. You will consider several scenarios

(you may also investigate sensitivities within scenarios).
In the report indicate which is your best strategy, and why it works well – i.e
describe why the displacement process is more efficient in the optimum
model.
Compare your optimum model to a “do nothing” base case where the
original wells continue flowing as they are at the end of the history period.
You should also discuss the best cases of two alternative scenarios (e.g.
polymer versus gas injection versus inclusion of new wells).
Plot the recovery or recovery factor vs time (ON ONE GRAPH) as a
comparison for ALL of the sensitivity calculations. Do the same for the water
cut vs time (ON ANOTHER GRAPH). A separate graph for each model is
not very useful.
Generate appropriate plots of saturation (or differences in saturation) to use
as evidence for your explanations.
Also provide a table listing your sensitivity calculations (name of file*,
parameter varied and results (eg final FOPT, etc.). The emphasis here should
not be on squeezing the last drop of oil out, but on understanding why one
technique is more effective than another.

Remember that running a simulation is far cheaper than actually drilling a well
and all numerical experiments are valid! You can learn (and demonstrate
learning) as much from the ones that show poor recovery as from the ones that
show good recovery.

* It is important that you develop the habit of keeping files well organised, using
folders, sensible file names and a descriptor at the top of each file which indicates
what the current sensitivity entails.

Note: the report that you submit MUST be your own. You are allowed and
encouraged to discuss your work with other students but you must not share
models and your explanations must be written in your own words. Submitted
reports will be checked using Turnitin to assess for plagiarism. It is a serious
offence to share or copy work. Please refer to the student handbook for
further information about plagiarism.

Karl Stephen and Eric Mackay Jan 2024