SPE-196630-MS

Giant Field Development Optimisation with the Consideration of Regional

Voidage Replacement Ratio

Najoud Hassan BaniHammad, ADNOC Offshore; Rachit Kedia, Halliburton; Jawaher AlSabeai, ADNOC Offshore

Copyright 2019, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 17 - 19 September
2019.

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
Net present value (NPV) and voidage replacement ratio (VRR) are the key drivers to define an optimal
reservoir development strategy that maximizes returns while maintaining reservoir health. In the subsurface
context, maximizing NPV consists of optimizing the well locations. Voidage replacement ratio (VRR),
which is defined as the ratio between the volume of injected fluid and the volume of produced fluid, measures
the rate of change in reservoir energy. Conventionally, operators try to maintain a VRR close to one during
the whole field life. Typically a single value of VRR is used as a metric to represent the whole reservoir.
However, this approach does not capture the lateral variation in pressure seen in giant fields.
This paper focuses on a more suitable method for determining the VRR for each user-defined pressure
region using reservoir simulation. This method is used to plan the location of future wells during the long
term development plan and maximize NPV and recovery. Two scenarios of well location will be examined.
The first scenario consists of optimizing well location using a single VRR metric for the whole field. The
second scenario uses the VRR from each pressure region to decide on the optimum number of wells per
region.
This latter approach is shown to give better results in planning well location for future field development
and is consistent with the reservoir pressure distribution across the field.

Introduction
Voidage replacement, in general, can be defined as injection adjusted to balance the field production, and
forms a major part of the secondary recovery phase of a field development plan. It is vital for not only for
reservoir pressure maintenance, but also for a more optimum subsurface hydrocarbon recovery. Although
simple in definition, voidage replacement can be a complicated reservoir management process due to
several uncertainties and a typical lack of all required measurement data owing to technical or economical
restrictions (Temizel, 2016). Fig. 1 shows the different reservoir recovery phases.
2 SPE-196630-MS

Figure 1—Reservoir Recovery Phases (Realist, 2019).

Voidage Replacement Ratio (VRR) can be defined as the ratio between the total fluid injection in reservoir
barrels and the total fluid production in reservoir barrels. VRR is used as a key indicator to achieve the
required reservoir pressure, particularly when the wells are not equipped with bottom-hole pressure gauges
(Buell, 2018). Eq. 1 and 2 show the general calculation of VRR:

(1)

(2)

Where:
VRR = Voidage Replacement Ratio (Dimensionless)
Qoprod = Oil Production Volume (STB)
Qgprod = Gas Production Volume (STB)
Qwprod = Water Production Volume (STB)
Qwinj = Water Injection Volume (STB)
Qginj = Gas Injection Volume (STB) Bo = Oil Formation Volume Factor (Dimensionless)
Bg = Gas Formation Volume Factor (Dimensionless)
Bw = Water Formation Volume Factor (Dimensionless)
GOR = Gas-Oil Ratio (SCF/STB or MSCF/STB)
Rs = Solution Gas-Oil Ratio (SCF/STB or MSCF/STB)
Instantaneous VRR can be calculated at any time during the field life using the production and injection
volumes and the GOR during that specific period of time. The average field or regional VRR can be
calculated on a cumulative basis with cumulative production and injection volumes and an average GOR
value (Temizel, 2016).
If the instantaneous VRR for a given period of time is equal to or greater than 1.0, the reservoir pressure is
being maintained or increased for that time period; a ratio less than 1.0 means the reservoir pressure declines.
When computing the reservoir voidage, it should not be assumed that the free gas term is negligible without
making appropriate calculations (Fekete, 2019). As long as the cumulative VRR is equal to or greater than
SPE-196630-MS 3

1.0, after taking into account injection losses, reservoir pressure since the start of water injection will be
maintained or increased. When the cumulative VRR calculated since the start of production reaches 1.0,
reservoir pressure will have increased to near original reservoir pressure (Pi) (Fekete, 2019).
Fig. 2 shows the instantaneous and cumulative VRR plots for a sample model dataset.

Figure 2—Instantaneous VRR and Cumulative VRR for a Sample Model Dataset (Fekete, 2019).

The calculation of VRR, in general, is not a very straightforward process, especially in reservoirs that
have large compositional gradients, as these introduce large uncertainties in the values of the formation
volume factors (FVF). The FVF values are further made uncertain by reservoir compartmentalization and a
reduction in the reservoir pressure, thus creating area-wise and time-wise changes. The composition of the
injected gas can also play a vital role in the FVF estimations due to injected gas solubility in the reservoir
hydrocarbons (Temizel, 2016).
The NPV is one of the key tools used to look at the economic feasibility of oil and gas projects. NPV is
the sum of the net cash flows over a specific period of time (monthly or yearly) after discounting. Several
factors such as the oil price, disposal and injection costs, retail price indices, inflation and well costs are
used as the commercial data inputs for a useful NPV evaluation.

Field Description
The giant field under consideration, located offshore Abu Dhabi, was discovered in 1963. This giant
carbonate field is located in the central part of the Arabian Gulf, northwest (NW) of Abu Dhabi, and covers
an area of approximately 40 km by 25 km. The field has been in production for more than 50 years through
primary depletion, followed by water and gas injection as secondary recovery phases. The field injection
was initiated first through dump flood water injection, followed by peripheral sea water injection. As a
part of the further development plans, crestal gas injection was supplemented with the water injection.
Future development plans include water injection roll-up, in-fill drilling, followed by EOR through pattern
balancing. The field has 300+ wells along with an extensive surface pipeline network with more than 100
wellhead towers and 500+ kilometers of surface pipelines (El Faidouzi, 2018).
4 SPE-196630-MS

The field is divided into three independent producing zones based on the sequence boundaries and
the depositional systems, covering more than 1000 feet of Lower Cretaceous shallow-marine carbonate
sequence. The three zones produce light 40° API oil, and the oil column is covered by the primary and
secondary gas caps. The field has large compositional and pressure gradients across the three producing
zones. Furthermore, several impurities such as CO2 and H2S are found in the in-situ oil.
For this study, both black-oil and compositional simulation models were used. The black-oil model had
a total of 28 layers with approximately 1.5 million total grid-cells and 1.2 million active grid-cells, several
pressure region definitions, and approximately 300+ producers and injectors. The compositional model,
with the same grid as the black oil model, had a total of 9 components with the Peng-Robinson Equation
of State (EOS) and volume shift factors.

Problem Description
The calculation of an average field VRR was not very representative due to the compositional and pressure
gradients in the reservoir. For the purpose of this study, a new segmentation strategy was implemented in
the reservoir studies, wherein, the reservoir was divided into several areal and vertical pressure regions to
allow for a more accurate estimation of the VRR. Increasing the accuracy of the estimation of the VRR,
leads to a better result when planning future wells for the field to maximize the reservoir recovery. Fig. 3
and Fig. 4 show the areal reservoir segmentation and the lateral reservoir segmentation, respectively, into
multiple pressure regions.

Figure 3—Areal Reservoir Segmentation.

SPE-196630-MS 5

Figure 4—Lateral Reservoir Segmentation.

Methodology
A next-generation reservoir simulator was utilized for running several simulation sensitivities. The first
step involved the implementation of a number of pressure maintenance and voidage replacement injection
targets for the pressure regions. The simulator calculated the regional injection rate by taking the mass in
place, average pressure, average temperature, and the change in mass between the simulated time-steps
into consideration. If the pressure was below the specified pressure, it over-injected, and if the pressure
was above the specified pressure, it reduced the injection in order to satisfy the target pressure value. All
targets were solved simultaneously along with well level constraints such as tubing head pressure (THP),
bottom hole pressure (BHP), maximum surface water injection capacity, and the maximum well injection
rate (Landmark, Halliburton, 2018).
The next step was to generate the inter-region flux reports for the pressure regions in the reservoir. The
inter-region flux reports provided the cumulative oil, water, and gas net influx between the regions which
were essential for a more realistic and accurate estimation of the VRR, especially for the pressure regions
which did not have any active water or gas injectors.
For compositional models:
For each component, the net component molar influx was determined by computing the following:

• Net component molar influx = moles in region at current time - moles in region initially + moles
produced from region - moles injected into region
This caused the following molar conservation equation to be true for each component:
• (change in moles in region from time 0) = moles injected into region + moles flowing into region
(net influx) - moles produced from region
For black oil models, mass was used instead of moles:

• All hydrocarbon components with positive net molar influx were combined and flashed. All
hydrocarbon components with negative net molar influx were combined and flashed separately.
The resulting oil and gas volumes were summed to obtain the net influx of oil and gas. Water was
treated separately.
All variations in the flash conditions and compositions for different regions were taken into consideration
and the following standard equation (Eq. 3) was used for the calculation of VRR for all pressure regions:
6 SPE-196630-MS

(3)
Where:
Water Influx = Output from simulation (converted to reservoir condition * 1.034) (MRB)
Gas Influx = Output from simulation (converted to reservoir condition * 0.8) (MRB)
Water Production = Output from simulation as reservoir condition (MRB)
Gas Production = Output from simulation as reservoir condition (MRB)
Oil Production = Output from simulation as reservoir condition (MRB)
The water and gas influx were converted to RB using the field average Bg and Bw. A comparison
was done between the VRRs calculated from the actual field-observed data and the simulated data for
the purpose of validation. There were differences between the calculated VRR values, especially in cases
where there are no active injectors in a specific pressure region. In such cases, the VRR calculated from the
simulated data carried a higher accuracy, as the total influx and efflux from that pressure region was taken
into consideration. The actual field data only considered the data from the wells (i.e., the total production
and the injection) disregarding the inter-region movement of the fluids.

Results
Initial Validation
The initial validation required the comparison of the VRRs calculated from the simulation results and the
VRRs calculated from the actual field observations. Fig. 5 shows the congruence between the two calculated
VRRs, thereby validating the method of calculating the VRR from the simulated data. Both the subject
regions had active water and gas injectors.

Figure 5—Comparison of Actual and Simulated VRRs for Reg. 1 and Reg. 2.

However, there were differences observed between the simulated and actual VRRs, as seen is Fig. 6,
especially in regions without any active water or gas injectors. The difference was attributed to the reason
that the inter-regional movement of the fluids, in terms of influx and efflux, was not taken into consideration
when calculating the VRR from the actual field observations. In the two example regions, the field-observed
VRR was either more optimistic or pessimistic as compared to the simulated VRR. For example in Region
3, during the period from 2020 to 2022, more wells were shut-in from the neighboring regions, which in
turn affected the pressure behavior from surrounding water injectors. At the same time, new oil producers
started to flow 2022 onward in the same segment.
SPE-196630-MS 7

Figure 6—Comparison of Actual and Simulated VRRs for Reg. 3 and Reg. 4.

Optimisation Process
In this section, we considered two main methods for well placement and the total number of new infill
wells to be drilled as a part of the future field development strategy. The first method was based on the
lateral regional VRR and the second method was based on the areal regional VRR. A number of different
simulation sensitivities for different regions were conducted for the following objectives:

• Total number of new in-fill producers and injectors

• Areal and lateral distribution of these wells

• Activation and deactivation of these wells in agreement with the overall field development strategy

Base Case: Optimisation based on Lateral Regional VRR

In this section, the lateral VRR in conjunction with the lateral pressure distribution was used as a guide to
well placement. The well distribution on this basis resulted in inefficient water injection as a high number
of wells ended up being located in low quality (low permeability and high pressure) areas. Fig. 7 (red line)
illustrates the Base Case VRR where it can be seen that the VRR for one of the pressure regions is initially
high, but then decreases over time due to an increase in production and a decrease in the pressure support.

Figure 7—Optimisation Sensitivities.

8 SPE-196630-MS

Case 1 to 3: Optimisation based on Areal Regional VRR

In this section, a new set of sensitivities based on the areal regional definitions were conducted. The areal
regional VRR provided better understanding of the reservoir performance as well as the efficiency of
injection support for each focused area. A few of these sensitivities are listed below:

• In Case 1, there was a decrease in the oil production if water injection support remained the same

• Case 2 focused on a slight decrease in the water injection with a minor increase in production

• Case 3 was the best case scenario with an optimum number of producers that were efficiently
supported by water injectors, coupled with the optimized activation and deactivation of these wells.
Table 1 shows the summary of cases:

Table 1—Summary of cases.

Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Original plan based on Lateral VRR Less OP only Less WI and minor increase in OP Optimum Number of OP and WI

Even though the total regional production did not change between the Base Case and Case 3, the regional
pressure maintenance was observed to be more stable and regional pressure values were optimum for better
future reservoir recovery.
Fig. 8 shows another example of Region 5, where a high VRR was observed, especially after 2030. In
this region, drilling of new oil producers is not planned, and the old and current oil producers are supported
by a high number of historical water injectors. With time, the oil producers are expected to shut-in due
to operational reasons and well level constraints, resulting in a low number of active oil producers in this
region, which in turn increases the VRR. This plot provides a better understanding of the pressure support
in this region and the need for adding additional oil producers in this area. Case 3 shows the additional oil
producers at the beginning of 2030, which leads to an improved recovery. Moreover, with the additional oil
cumulative, the pressure decrease remains within manageable limits.

Figure 8—Optimisation for Reg. 5.

Conclusions
This study focused on the calculation of regional VRRs as a part of the future field development strategy.
A comparison between the VRRs based on areal and lateral regional definitions was conducted for a better
understanding of the reservoir performance and injection support efficiency for different focus areas. It was
SPE-196630-MS 9

found that a region-based VRR calculation approach is better than a field-based approach, especially in
reservoirs with large compositional and pressure gradients. It is also found that the areal regional VRRs
are more representative when planning the in-fill well locations, total number of in-fill wells to be drilled,
and the overall opening and shutting of these wells in accordance with the field development plan. The
approach using areal VRRs leads to better injection efficiency and a more optimized overall reservoir
pressure maintenance.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank ADNOC Offshore for allowing the publication of this paper and Halliburton
for their support.

References
Buell, S. (2018, December 31). Waterflood Design and Operational Best Practices. Waterflood Design and Operational
Best Practices. Society of Petroleum Engineers. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/SPEupdates/waterflood-
design-and-operational-best-practices
El Faidouzi, M. M.-K. (2018, November 12). Integrated Asset Modeling Assists Brownfield Rejuvenation. Society of
Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/192893-MS
Fekete. (2019, July 13). Surveillance Analysis Theory. Retrieved from http://fekete.com/SAN/TheoryAndEquations/
HarmonyTheoryEquations/Content/HTML_Files/Reference_Material/Analysis_Method_Theory/
Surveillance_Theory.htm
Landmark, Halliburton. (2018, September). Nexus® Technical Reference Guide. Nexus® Technical Reference Guide.
Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Realist, M. (2019, July 18). Crude Oil Extraction Process. Retrieved from Market Realist: https://
marketrealist.com/2015/01/important-know-crude-oil-extraction-process/
Temizel, C. K. (2016, December 6). Production Optimisation through Voidage Replacement using Triggers for Production
Rate. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/184131-MS