8 1 Anbe Exercise Compatibility Mode

Reservoir Simulation
----------
Alwyn Field History Matching
Etienne MOREAU
© IFP
Outline
Reservoir Model Pressure match

Grid Properties Field Pressure
Rock & fluids properties RFT Pressures
Original fluids in place
Saturation Match
Recurrent Data Field Water-
Water-Cut
Wells Properties
RFT Data
Production Data
Well Performance Match
Data to match
Production forecast
Run 0 Analysis Inflow & outflow calculations
Field Pressure & Water-

Water-Cut Well controls
Drive Mechanisms Do Nothing Case
Matching Parameters Field Optimisation
© IFP
Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

2
Introduction
Course Overview
© IFP

3
Course Overview
Knowledge Objectives
To look at main issues related to reservoir simulation
To review main data related to reservoir simulation
To see how to realize a history match
To see how to set up a production forecast
Know how Objectives

To work more efficiently with Eclipse
Presentations
Theory & practice
Participants Work to Do
To run requested simulations
To complete requested tables
© IFP

4
Reservoir Model
Grid Properties
© IFP

5
Horizontal Grid
© IFP
6 Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

© IFP
3D Grid: Geometry & Number of cells

7
Grid Properties: Work to Do
Field geometry
Give the number of cells & the average cell dimensions
Visualize the 3D grid
Grid optimisation
Give the pinch out criteria & the number of pinch outs generated
Give the pore volume cut-
cut-off & the number of cells set as inactive
Give the number of active cells
Give the number of non neighbour connections
Faults
Give the number & the geometry of faults
Numerical Performance
Plot CPU time and time step length vs. date
© IFP

8
Reservoir Model
Rock & Fluids Properties

© IFP

9
Rock properties: Work to Do
Identify for each layer

Average porosity & permeability,
Porosity & permeability ranges,
Anisotropy ratio.
Complete the corresponding table
Identify the best layer in Tarbert and Ness formations

Create a picture showing permeability and transmissivity distributions in these
two layers.
Give your comments

© IFP

10
Rock Properties: Work to Do
NTG (fraction) Porosity (fraction) Permeability (mD)

Layer
Maxi. Mean Mini. Maxi. Mean Mini. Maxi. Mean Mini.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
© IFP

11
Saturation Functions: Work to Do
Give the number of rock-

rock-types
Give for each rock type the following figures

Irreducible water : Swc ; Kro max & Pcwo max
Oil displaced by water : Sorw ; Krw max & Pcwo
Oil displaced by gas : Sorg & Krg max & Pcgo max
Using ECLIPSE Office

Draw the curves corresponding to each rock type.
Create a picture showing the distribution of rock types in Tarbert and Ness.
Give your comments

© IFP

12
Saturation Functions: Work to Do
Irreducible water Oil displaced by water Oil displaced by gas
Rock Kro Pcwo Krw Krg Pcgo

Swc Sorw Pcwo Sorg
type max max max max max
fraction fraction bars fraction fraction bars fraction fraction bars
2
© IFP

13
Fluids Properties: Work to Do
Stock tank properties

Identify for each phase
Stock density
Stock viscosity
Give your comments
Reservoir fluid properties

Give the number of PVT region
Plot each oil and gas PVT table (using ECLIPSE Office)
Give for the first oil PVT table
Highest solution gas ratio
Corresponding saturation pressure, saturated Bo and viscosity
Corresponding under saturated Bo and viscosity vs. pressure.
Give your comments
© IFP

14
Reservoir Model
Regions
© IFP

15
Regions: Work to Do
Identify keywords used to define

equilibration regions, saturation regions, PVT regions and fluid in place regions
Using ECLIPSE office create pictures showing distributions of these

regions
© IFP

16
Original Fluids In Place: Work to Do
Equilibration regions
Give the number & geometry of regions
Give the equilibration parameters for each region
Oil properties vs. depth

Give the following information for equilibration region 1
Oil volume factor, viscosity and solution gas ratio at datum depth
Calculate the following information for equilibration region 1
Oil pressure, volume factor, viscosity and solution gas ratio vs. depth
Original fluids in place

Give the number of regions retained for fluid in place calculations
Give the following results for each region
Total pore volume
Oil, gas and water volumes in reservoir conditions
Oil, gas and water volumes in stock conditions
© IFP

17
Oil Properties versus Depth: Work to Do
Depth Pr Pb FVF Rs Viscosity Density

(m TVD) (bars) (bars) (vol/vol) (vol/vol) (cp) (kg/m3)
3100
3120
3140
3160
3180
3200
3220
3240
© IFP

18
Original Volumes In Place: Work to Do
Three regions have been retained

FIP Region 1 2 3
Reservoir
Panel
Original volumes in place are
Pore
Oil Volume Gas Volume Water Volume
Volume
Region
106 r m3 106 r m3 106 s m3 109 r m3 109 s m3 106 r m3 106 s m3
Field
© IFP

19
Recurrent Data
Wells’ Properties
© IFP

20
Wells’ Drilled Formations
Well Date Tarbert Ness 2 Ness 1 LB
N01 12/03/87 X X X X
N02 27/03/87 X X X
N03 09/05/87 X X
N09 02/10/87 X X X
N10 20/11/87 X X X
N11 08/11/87 X X X
N14 30/01/88 X X X
N18 10/04/88 X X X
N26 28/01/89 X X
© IFP

21
Wells’ Properties: Work to Do
Wells’ Identification
Give for each well the following information
I,J coordinates at well head
Wells’ Trajectories
I,J coordinates, reservoir depth & Initial pressure at reservoir entry
WOC location along well trajectory
Wells’ Initial Data

Perforated layers, initial flow rate, initial flowing pressure & initial PI
Compare numerical & natural PI
© IFP

22
Well Head Well Entry into Reservoir

Well WOC Vert.
Name Depth
I J I J Depth Pressure
N01
N02
N03
N09
N10
N11
N14
N18
N26
S09
© IFP

23
Start Up Initial flow Initial Initial

Well Perforations Status
Date rate Flowing PI
N01
N02
N03
N09
N10
N11
N14
N18
N26
S09
© IFP

24
Recurrent Data
RFT Data
© IFP

25
RFT Data: Work to Do
Field behaviour:
Plot all simulated data on the same graph.
What can you conclude about interferences between Ness and Tarbert
Wells’ behaviour:
Plot Dynamic & simulated data for each single well
Record reservoir pressure at top Ness and bottom Tarbert
Produce a comparison table between history & simulation

At top Ness and bottom Tarbert
What can you conclude

About interferences between wells
About connection between Ness and Tarbert
© IFP

26
RFT Data: Work to Do
Top Tarbert Bottom Tarbert Top Ness

Well
History Simul. History Simul. History Simul.
N02
N03
N10
N11
N18
N26
FIELD
© IFP

27
Recurrent Data
Production Data
© IFP

28
Production Data: Work to Do
Field behaviour :
Plot for the whole field the following information
Oil flow rate, water cut & Gas oil ratio
Reservoir voidage & injection
Average Reservoir pressure
Wells’ behaviour:
Plot for each well the following information
Oil flow rate, water cut & Gas oil ratio
Reservoir pressure & bottom hole flowing pressure
Give your comments

© IFP

29
Recurrent Data
Data to Match
© IFP

30
Data to Match: Work to Do
Objective are
To investigate field compartmentalisation & to identify connected volume to
wells producing or injecting in Tarbert formation
To investigate water oil displacement efficiency and to coorectly reproduce oil
and water production at field scale
Data to Match Selection

Select the data to match in the “Data to match” table
Identify the corresponding historical values

after one year and at final date
Give your comments

© IFP

31
Cum Cum Cum Curent Current

Well WBT FPR
Oil Water Gas Wat. Cut GOR
N2
N3
N10
N11
N18
N26
Field
Pressure
Saturation
© IFP

32
RFT RFT Well Flowing

Well PLT K.H. Skin
Tarbert Ness PI Pressure
N2
N3
N10
N11
N18
N26
Field
Pressure
Saturation
© IFP

33
Run 0 Analysis
Field Pressure & Liquid Productions

© IFP

34
Field Pressure & Liquid Productions: Work to Do
Average Reservoir pressure

Build a graph showing following data
Tarbert: Simulated and historical data
Ness 2, Ness1 and Lower Brent: Simulated data
What can be said about communication between Ness and Tarbert?
RFT Pressure for well N14

Build a graph showing simulated and historical data
What can be said about communication between Ness and Tarbert?
Liquid productions
Build a graph showing following data
Oil: Simulated and historical data
Water: Simulated and historical data
Build a graph showing simulated and historical data
What can be said about liquid productions?
© IFP

35
Run 0 Analysis
Drive Mechanisms
© IFP

36
Drive Mechanisms: Oil Expansion above Pb
PV
compaction Vp c p ∆P
Wi [B w − B w,i ] + Winj
N p Bo Water
Expansion
+
+ Injection
Produced Volume
Wp B w
Ni [Bo − Bo,i ]
Oil
expansion
N p Bo + Wp B w = N i [Bo − Bo,i ] + Wi [Bo − Bo,i ] + WinjB w + Vp c p ∆P

© IFP

37
Drive Mechanisms: ECLIPSE Keywords
Keyword Information
FOPT Cumulative Oil Production

FGPT Cumulative Gas Production
FWPT Cumulative Water Production
FWIT Cumulative Water Injection
FORMR Stock tank oil produced by rock compaction

FORME Stock tank oil produced by oil expansion
FORMS Stock tank oil produced by solution gas expansion
FORMW Stock tank oil produced by water expansion
FRPV Pore volume at reservoir conditions

FOPV Pore volume containing oil
FGPV Pore volume containing gas
© IFP

38
Drive Mechanisms: Work to Do
Oil Production Analysis

Build a graph showing
Oil produced by water drive, oil expansion & rock compaction
Identify the main drive mechanism at late times
Energy Diagram
Build a graph showing
Oil percentage produced by water drive, oil expansion & rock compaction
Identify the main drive mechanism
At early, middle and late times
Water Injection Analysis

Build a graph showing water injection rates in Tarbert and Ness
Identify the injection split between Tarbert & Ness
© IFP

39
Drive Mechanisms: Work to Do
Reservoir Voidage
Build a graph showing injection & reservoir voidage in Ness
Identify voidage replacement
Summary Analysis
Indicate what periods should be looked at individually
Identify for each period
Main discrepancies between simulation results and field behaviour.
© IFP

40
Ness Tarbert Communication
Complete the following table
What can be said about

Communication between Ness & Tarbert
Horizontal permeability in Ness
© IFP

41
Run 0 Analysis
Matching Parameters
© IFP

42
Pre Selection Review
Can be Uncertain Can be Uncertain

influent Parameter influent Parameter
Faults Tarbert Properties
Faults Vertical throw Reservoir NTG
Fauts Transmissivity Reservoir Porosity
Flodding Surfaces Horizontal Permeability
Tarbert N2 Connection Kv / Kh anisotropy ratio
N2 N1 Connection Ness Properties

N1 LB Con nection Reservoir NTG
General Reservoir Data Reservoir Porosity
Reservoir Thickness Horizontal Permeability
Reservoir Dip Kv / Kh anisotropy ratio
Pore Compressibility Lower Brent Properties
Hydraulic Diffusivity Horizontal permeability

© IFP

43

Aquifer Properties Oil Properties
Aquifer Location Oil Compr. above Pb
Aquifer Size Oil Compr. below Pb
Aquifer Porosity Initial Rs
Aquifer Thickness Stock Oil Density
Aquifer Compressibility Stock Oil Viscosity

Aquifer Hor. Perm. Oil FVF above Pb
Aquifer Vert. Perm. Oil FVF below Pb
Water Properties Gas Properties
Water Compressibility Gas Compressibility
Water Density Gas Density
Water Vicosity Gas Vicosity

© IFP

44

W/O Flow G/O Flow (cont'd)
W/O Capillary Pressure Maxi Oil Rel Perm.
Connate Wat. Sat. Maxi Gas Rel Perm.
Residual Oil Sat. Gas Rel Perm Shape
Maxi Oil Rel Perm. Oil Rel Perm Shape
Maxi Water Rel Perm. Wells Properties

Water Rel Perm Shape Well pattern
Oil Rel Perm Shape Perfs location
G/O Flow Well Cell Size
G/O Capillary Pressure Connection factors
Critical Gas Sat. Skin factor
Residual Oil Sat. Well Rel. Perm

© IFP

45
Look at the previous tables

Indicate for each parameter
What is the expected level of uncertainty
What is the expected influence it can have on field dynamic behaviour at
early, middle and late times
Look at the energy diagram, water injection and voidage graphs

Indicate which parameters can be selected
For field pressure and water cut match at early, middle and late times
For RFT pressure match
Matching Parameters First Selection

Identify the two parameters that must be explored in priority to improve field
pressure match.
© IFP

46
Pressure Match
Field Average Pressure

© IFP

47
Field Pressure Match: Work to Do
First Screening
Identify the two parameters that must be explored in priority
Identify the cases that should be run to explore how the two selected
parameters impact field pressure match.
Trial & Error Process

Simulate the correspondent cases
Explain why it is necessary to launch mono & multi parameters sensitivity tests.
Explain why it is not possible to obtain a match both at early and late times.
Best Case Identification

Do you think it is better to obtain a match at early or late times
Give the two values that correspond to your best match
© IFP

48
Field Pressure Match: Work to Do
Second Screening
Identify three new parameters that must be explored to improve field pressure
match at early times.
Trial & Error Process

Investigate how field pressure vary when these parameters are changed
Best Case Identification

Give the five values that correspond to your best match
© IFP

49
Pressure Match
RFT Pressure
© IFP

50
RFT Pressure Match: Work to Do
Selection of matching parameters

Explain why RFT pressure is impacted by interference between wells
Explain interference is impacted by horizontal permeability in Tarbert.
Explain why interference with and injector produces opposite effect to
interference with a producer.
Launch sensitivity runs

Multiply and divide by 2 horizontal permeability in Tarbert
© IFP

51
RFT Pressure Match: Work to Do
Identify the best permeability to match RFT data without destroying field
pressure match
© IFP

52
Saturation Match
Field Water Cut

© IFP

53
End point scaling : Two points scaling
Principle
Main data
Unscaled Kr Scaled Kr
SW KRW KRO PC SW KRW KRO PC
Connate Water Sat. Swirr 0 Kromax Pc max SWL 0 KRO PCW
Critical Water Sat. Swcr 0 Kror * SWCR 0 KROR *
Maximum Water Sat. Swmax Krwmax 0 0 SWU KRW 0 0

© IFP

54
End point scaling : Three points scaling
Principle
Main data
Unscaled Kr Scaled Kr
SW KRW KRO PC SW KRW KRO PC
Connate Water Sat. Swirr 0 Kromax Pc max SWL 0 KRO PCW
Critical Water Sat. Swcr 0 Kror * SWCR 0 KROR *
Residual oil Sat. 1-Sorw Krwr 0 * SOWCR KRWR 0 *
Maximum Water Sat. Swmax Krwmax 0 0 SWU KRW 0 0

© IFP

55
Well Performance Match
Well Performance
© IFP

56
© IFP
Well performance History match: Well N2 (Run 0)

57
Well performance: Pressure drawdown
Pressure at drainage radius ? Average WBP9 pressure
Bottom hole flowing pressure Well cell pressure
AREA REPRESENTED BY THE NUMERICAL PI

DRAINAGE AREA
© IFP

58
Well performance: Pressure drawdown
COMPARAISON BETWEEN WELL CELL PRESSURE & BHP
P P
Q
t Ln r
PRESSURE & FLOW RATE HISTORY INSTANTANEOUS PRESSURE PROFILE
© IFP

59
Well performance: ECLIPSE Keywords
Reservoir pressure
WBP : Well cell pressure
WBP9 : Average reservoir pressure in the surrounding cells
Well pressure
WBHP : Well bottom hole pressure
© IFP

60
Well performance: Pressure history matching
INFLUENCE OF THE WELL FLOW RATE
P P
Q Q
t t
ERRONEOUS PRESSURE MATCH GOOD PRESSURE MATCH

© IFP

61
Well performance: Work to Do
Run 0
Well data
Keep a zero skin on all wells.
Results Analysis
Give the maximum oil production rate & the corresponding draw down.
Calculate the target PI per well to have a 30 bars drawdown.
Run 1
Well data
Use a WPI multiplyer to get correct draw downs at end of history.
Results Analysis:
Give the maximum oil production rate & check the draw down.
Calculate the corresponding PI.
Compare numerical indexes and calculated skins with field data.
Give your comments

© IFP

62
Production forecast: Introduction
Good Production forecasts will depend on

Good history match
Good integration of well performance and production constraints
Well performance
Inflow curves
Productivity index or complete curve
Outflow curves
VFP tables
Production constraints
Constraints related to flow
Maximum water-
water-cut or maximum GOR per well
Maximum water production or gas production for a group of wells
Constraints related to pressure
Minimum bottom hole flowing pressure
Minimum well head pressure
© IFP

63
Production Forecast
Base Case
© IFP

64
Production Forecast: Well Controls
Main controls
Imposed Flow rate
Oil, Water, Gas, Liquid, Reservoir voidage
Imposed pressure
Tubing Head Flowing pressure
Bottom hole flowing pressure
Secondary controls
Flow rates
Economic limits
Rates upper limit per phase
Maximum ratios (Wcut, GOR, WGR)
Pressures
BHP and THP limit (lower for a producer, upper for an injector)
Maximum drawdown
VFP tables are used to relate bottom hole to well head pressures
© IFP

65
Production Forecast: Eclipse keywords
Well controls
WCONPROD : Control data for production wells
WECON : Economic limit data for production wells
WEFAC : Well efficiency factors (for downtime)
WELDRAW : Maximum drawdown per producer
WCONINJE : Control data for injection wells
WECONINJ : Economic limit data for injection wells
Group control
GCONINJE : Injection rate control at the field level
Dimensions in RUNSPEC
VFPPDIMS : Production wells VFP table dimensions
VFPIDIMS : Injection wells VFP table dimensions
© IFP

66
Production Forecast: Work to Do
Complete the ECLIPSE data file so as

To integrate production constraints at the end of the history
First Case assumptions

Producers
Minimum bottom hole pressure = 360 bars
Maximum water cut = 93%
Production uptime = 90%
Injectors
Maximum bottom hole pressure = 400 bars
Injection uptime = 85%
First case simulations

Explain why prod. guidelines are incompatible with the production history.
© IFP

67
Base Case assumptions

Producers
Minimum bottom hole pressure = 300 bars
Maximum drawdown = 40 bars
Maximum water cut = 93%
Production uptime = 90%
Injectors
Maximum bottom hole pressure = 460 bars
Maximum drawdown = 70 bars
Injection uptime = 85%
Base case simulations (until 1/1/2000)

Field behaviour
Plot oil, gas, water production & injection rates vs time
Wells’ behaviour
Give cumulative oil, gas & water production per well on 1/1/1995 and 1/1/2000
© IFP

68
Production Forecast
Field Optimisation
© IFP

69
Alternate Case assumptions

Producers
Minimum bottom hole pressure = 260 or 300 bars
Maximum water cut = 93% or 96%
Production uptime = 90% or 95%
Injectors
Full voidage replacement
Maximum bottom hole pressure = 460 or 500 bars
Injection uptime = 85% or 90%
Alternate case simulations (until 1/1/2000)

Simulate all the different possibilities
Look at the field behaviour
Give cumulative oil, gas & water production on 1/1/1995 and 1/1/2000
Give the best action to improve oil recovery
© IFP

70

8 1 Anbe Exercise Compatibility Mode

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

8 1 Anbe Exercise Compatibility Mode

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reservoir Simulation

Reservoir Model Pressure match

Field Pressure & Water-

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Know how Objectives

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

6 Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Grid Properties: Work to Do

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Rock & Fluids Properties

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Rock properties: Work to Do

Identify for each layer

Complete the corresponding table

Identify the best layer in Tarbert and Ness formations

Give your comments

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

NTG (fraction) Porosity (fraction) Permeability (mD)

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Saturation Functions: Work to Do

Give the number of rock-

Give for each rock type the following figures

Using ECLIPSE Office

Give your comments

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Irreducible water Oil displaced by water Oil displaced by gas

Rock Kro Pcwo Krw Krg Pcgo

fraction fraction bars fraction fraction bars fraction fraction bars

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Fluids Properties: Work to Do

Stock tank properties

Reservoir fluid properties

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Identify keywords used to define

Using ECLIPSE office create pictures showing distributions of these

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Oil properties vs. depth

Original fluids in place

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Oil Properties versus Depth: Work to Do

Depth Pr Pb FVF Rs Viscosity Density

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Three regions have been retained

Original volumes in place are

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Well Date Tarbert Ness 2 Ness 1 LB

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Wells’ Properties: Work to Do

Wells’ Initial Data

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Well Head Well Entry into Reservoir

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Wells’ Properties: Work to Do

Start Up Initial flow Initial Initial

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

Reservoir Simulation ALWYN Field History Matching - E.M.

RFT Data: Work to Do

Produce a comparison table between history & simulation