1887
1st Australasian Exploration Geoscience Conference – Exploration Innovation Integration
  • ISSN: 2202-0586
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

The heterogeneous distribution of reservoir properties is one of the most important uncertainties in static and dynamic reservoir modelling. Petrophysical properties are usually interpolated within reservoir models from sparse well-log data, which can lead to highly uncertain estimates at inter-well locations that directly affect the reliability of fluid-flow model predictions of reservoir behavior. To address this issue, we build an ensemble of equiprobable models that combine different geostatistical realizations of reservoir properties to span the range of potential outcomes. While this process captures the impact of reservoir property distributions on the model response, a major challenge is classifying the subset of models in the ensemble best representing reservoir fluid-flow behavior. Thus, we introduce a methodology combining 4D seismic amplitude attributes and reservoir production data to classify fluid-flow models. This classification is based on applying thresholds for independent seismic and production objective functions. We test our methodology on the benchmark case UNISIM-I developed from observations from the Namorado Field, Campos Basin, Brazil. By comparing injection and production rates in relation to 4D seismic amplitude trends, we identify nine models out of an ensemble of 100 that judged optimal via the required seismic and production objective function thresholds and obtain an improved quantitative evaluation of the impact of reservoir production on the 4D seismic signal. Ultimately, combining seismic and production data offers interpretation scenarios that automatically identify realistic fluid-flow models that can assist the update of permeability and porosity distributions within the reservoir.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_2B
2018-12-01
2026-01-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Avansi, G.D., Maschio, C. & Schiozer, D., 2016. Simultaneous History-Matching Approach by Use of Reservoir-Characterization and Reservoir-Simulation Studies - SPE-179740-PA. SPE Reservoir Evalution & Engineering, Preprint(Preprint).
  2. Avansi, G.D. & Schiozer, D.J., 2015. A New Approach to History Matching Using Reservoir Characterization and Reservoir
  3. Simulation Integrated Studies. In Offshore Technology Conference. Houston, Tx. U.S.A.: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
  4. Avansi, G.D. & Schiozer, D.J., 2015. UNISIM-I: Synthetic Model for Reservoir Development and Management Applications. International Journal of Modeling and Simulation for the Petroleum Industry, 9(1), pp.21-30.
  5. Aziz, K. and Settari, A., 1979. Petroleum reservoir simulation, Chapman & Hall.
  6. Barkved, O.I., 2012. Seismic Surveillance for Reservoir Delivery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: EAGE publications. Doyen, P., 2007. Seismic Reservoir Characterization : An Earth Modelling Perspective, EAGE Publications. Fanchi, J.R., 2006. Principles of Applied Reservoir Simulation, Elsevier.
  7. Gosselin, O. et al., 2003. History matching Using Time-lapse Seismic (HUTS). In SPE Annual and Technical Conference. Denver, U.S.A., pp. 1-15.
  8. Kjelstadli, R.M. et al., 2005. Quantitative History Match of 4D Seismic Response and Production Data in the Valhall Field.
  9. Lumley, D.E., 1995. Seismic Time-Lapse Monitoring of Subsurface fluid flow. PHD Thesis, Stanford University.
  10. Lumley, D.E. & Behrens, R.A., 1998. Practical Issues of 4D Seismic Reservoir Monitoring : What an Engineer Needs to Know. SPE Reservoir Evalution & Engineering, 1(6), pp.528-538. Mesquita, F.B., Davolio, A. & Schiozer, D., 2015. A Systematic Approach to Uncertainty Reduction with a Probabilistic and Multi-Objective History Matching - SPE 174359. In Europec. Madrid, Spain.
  11. Oliver, D.., Reynolds, A.. & Liu, N.., 2008. Inverse Theory for Petroleum Reservoir Characterization and History Matching, Cambridge University Press.
  12. Oliver, D.S. & Chen, Y., 2011. Recent progress on reservoir history matching : a review. Computers & Geosciences, (15), pp.185-221.
  13. Schiozer, D.J., Avansi, G.D. & de Souza dos Santos, A.A., 2016. Risk quantification combining geostatistical realizations and discretized Latin Hypercube. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40430-016-0576-9.
  14. Tillier, E., Da Veiga, S. & Derfoul, R., 2012. Appropriate formulation of the objective function for the history matching of seismic attributes. Computers & Geosciences, 51, pp.64-73. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0098300412002762 [Accessed September 1, 2014].
  15. Ullmann, D. et al., 2011. SPE 143048 Incorporation of 4D Seismic in the Re-construction and History Matching of Marlim Sul Deep Water Field Flow Simulation Model. In SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition. Vienna.
/content/journals/10.1071/ASEG2018abW10_2B
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): eismic; fluid-flow model classification; reservoir property uncertainties
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error