TGL Reservoir Engineering Eng

8/12/2019 TGL Reservoir Engineering Eng

1/15

EPT

delivering breakthrough solut ions

TGL GroupT

Group

Reservoir

Engineering

May 2010


2/15

2TGroup

Petrophsical

evaluation (PP)

Structure (PS)

Static Model

Data

Integration

Production Data

Pressure Data

1000

1010

1020

1030

1040

1050

1060

1070

1080

1090

1100

4 0 00 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 9 0 00 1 0 0 00 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 3 00 0 1 4 0 0 0

F o rm t i o n r u r (K )

TVDSS

(m)

J -

J -

J -

J -

J -3

J -

J -7

J -

J -

C fr m l

Sep-90

July-97

Nov-96

Rja-1:Jan-88

Rja-4:Nov-90

Originalwater lin

Points legend:

Thepoints linedwithred:UG-1

Thepoints linedwithredandshadowed:UG-2

Thepoints linedwithblue:UG-3

OWC =1051.9 m

igure.

Completions

Available Data

Output

-

.7

.

.

.7.

.

.

.

.

.

.7

.

.

7.......7.

.7.......7.

.

RE Dynamic model

Input

PT: Well designWE

Surface engineering

One mapable

seismic horizon

Faults

x-trap analysis

QCed raw logs

calculated logs facies analysis

OWCs

Core

8 00 0 8 40 0 8 80 0 9 200 96 00 10 00 0 1 04 00 1 08 00 1 12 00 1 16 00 1 20 00 1 240 0

8 00 0 8 40 0 8 80 0 9 200 96 00 10 00 0 1 04 00 1 08 00 1 12 00 1 16 00 1 20 00 1 240 0

-2000

-1800

-1600

-1400

-1200

-2000

-1800

-1600

-1400

-12

00

TidalChannelSandShaleDiamectiteGLSand

FluvialSandGFSandSheetFloodSandGDSand

SandyDiamectiteMuddyDiamectiteGLMudALS-10H1

ALS-9H1ALS-8H1ALS-7H1ALS-6H1

ALS-5H1ALS-4H1ALS-3H1ALS-2H1

ALS-1H1

W-E F acies X-Section

Structural modelling

Stratigraphic framework

Facies modellingProperty modelling

Uncertainty management

Volumetrics

SWS

Dip meter data

AnaloguesExternal studies

Reservoir Engineering Workflow


3/15

3TGroup

cores

logs

w

elldata

sedimentologypetrographyRCALSCAL

porosityoil saturationreservoir delineation

depositional units

reservoir quality distribution

geological trendscomputer mapping &

modelling

reservoir simulator

Reservoir characterization

geological modelling

seismicstructure topsvolumesFaultsmaps

Data Base,Paradigm

Software


4/15

4TGroup

reserves

$/bbl

Modelling

Geological model

(static)

Reservoir Simulation

model (dynamic)

production

forecast

recompletions

new wells

optimisedwater flood

core analysis

log interpretation

structural modelling

property modelling

3D seismic

log correlation

reservoir subdivision

flow modelling

production history

SCAL

Fluid properties

Pressure data

Well test analysis

Petrel modules Eclipse


5/15

5TGroup

declineanalysis

$/bbl

PPT Tools

Production optimization

Production Analyst

Block analysis

production

forecast

materialbalance

reporting

optimised

water flood

flow modelling

production history

Productionhistory,

Fluid properties

Pressure history

Well test analysis

OFM, Topaze MBal


6/15

6TGroup

Candidate selection process

Capture and

characterize

opportunities

Capture and

characterize

opportunities

Study, screen

and filter out

unfeasible

opportunities

Plan and work

out executable

options

Approve

opportunities

for realization

Needed:

Tools

Standards

Planning

Work process

Identify promising areas

Pool of candidates

Data gathering

Initial block/well review

Initial candidate list

Mechanical assessment

Macro screening

from the candidates

pool (ranking tools)

Surveillance plan

(Pr & inclination)

Micro screening

(BA, MBAL,

FrontSim, Geol. &

dynamic modeling))

Final candidate list

proposal

Approve final

candidate list

Agreed program

signed off

Performance

review

Lessons learned

Surveillance execution

(feed micro screening)

Well approval

Execution program

Execution

Training

End of well report

Client reps.

Execute ST,

completion

Client reps. & TGL

Execution planning

Drilling

Completion

Optimization

Stimulation

TGL Group ClientTGL Group


7/15

7TGroup

Field life performance

Field performance analysis no water injection (depletion decline)

Water fill-up period (catching up on reservoir pressure and compensation)

Waterflood analysis in mature fields (after water break through) Buckley-Leverett, Welge

Waterflood life

Oilp

roductionrate

Injectionstart

Depletion Initial

fill-up

Secondary oil

Primary oil

5% 5-10% 15-30%0-10%

Production decline

period

Production

incline period

Water

Total fluid

% Recovery


8/15

8TGroup

Field life phases/Ranking

1. Depletion decline phase (no water injection)

Arps

Fetkovich

Material balance

2. Fill-up phase (no water break through)

WF design (Craig, Buckley-Leverett-Welge,

Dykstra-Parson)

Composite performance plots

Compensation

French decline

Monitor reservoir pressure

3. Waterflood phase (water break through, production

history)

Composite performance plots

Compensation

WF decline curve (log(WOR) vs. cum. oil)

Conformance plots

Recoverable reserves

Current oil rate per block/well

Recoverable oil per well

Recovery dynamic percentage - Current

Production/ Remaining Reserves

Compensation

Reservoir pressure

Well count (P/I ratio)

Water cut

Mechanical/Well Integrity

Field life phases Ranking criteria


9/15

9TGroup Goals of toolkit & process

Goal Process Tool

Reservoir energy assessment Material balance

MBAL

Excel Mat. balance

OFM Mat. balance

OOIP and recoverable

reserves assessment Decline curve analysis

OFM

Excel

Production & injection history Composite plotsOFM

Excel

Volumetric and displacement

sweep efficencyConformance plots

OFM

Excel

Theoretical and actualreservoir behavior comparison

Welge and kro/krw based on WOR OFMExcel

Forecast of WF optimization

effects

Log WOR vs. cumulative oil, decline

analysis

OFM

Excel


10/15

10TGroup

Waterflood management process

Deliverables:

- Conversions

- Fix P/I- New drilling

Completion data

Petrophysical

data

Production ,

Injection data

Well testing,

pressure survey

Geological

data, reserves

PVT data, Cap

press, rel. perms

Collect/Assess

input data

Rank reservoirs/

Fields

Database

Criteria:

Recoverable Reserves

by Field

Recoverable Reserves

by Reservoir

Recoverable

reserves

evaluation

Block division/

analysis/ranking

Deliverables:- Candidate blocks/

wells

- Incremental

Production

Cum copmens. By

block

>100%

Curr. reservoir

pressure

100%

Fix injection

Not first priority

Conformanceplots

WOR vs Np

Compensation

Areal sweep

efficiency

Displacement

sweep efficiency

(Net waterinjected/MOPV

Fractional flow

analysis

WF decline curveanalysis

Oil rate vs. cum

oil

WOR vs MOPV

Deliverables:

- Candidate blocks/wells

- Changing WF patterns- Improve sweep (gel

bright water)

Deliverables:


- Infill/New drilling areas- Incremental Production

Water in the

ground

I/P ratio

Water break

through

Process after water break through

NO

YES

Deliverables:

- Candidate blocks/wells- Incremental Production

1. Arps

2. Fetkovich curvematch

3. Material balance

Criteria:

WC >50%

HCPVI>25%Stable well count

Stable production/

injection

Depletion decline

Deliverables:


- Incremental Production

1. Craig

2. Buckley-Leverett-Welge

3. Dykstra-Parson4. Composite

performance plots4. Compensation

Water fill-up Mature WF phase

Criteria:Recoverable reservesCurrent oil rate per block/well

Compensation

Reservoir pressure

Well count (P/I ratio)

Applicable Compositeperformance plots,

petrophysics, geology

Plots of Liquid/oil rate

vs. time

Semilog plot GOR,WOR vs. time

Plot of Cumulative oil/water vs. time

Plot of injection water

vs. time

Effectcalculation

Acceleration/Improve

compensation

Log WOR vs.cum oil

RFimprovement/

more producers

Change sweep

efficiency

Deliverables:

- Oil incremental

- Economical effect- Financial

memorandum

11


11/15

11TGroup

0

1

2

3

4

5

2010201220142016201820202022202420262028203020322034203620382040

Yearlyoilproduction(millionm

3)

Vertical lines represent P10 & P90 forecasts

Uncertainty analysis

Identify parameters with uncertainties

eological model Hydrodynamic model

Analysis of reservoir data

Uncertainty analysis of prognoses

Compare parameter impactsModel prognoses

0

5

10

15

20

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50

Oil production (k tonne)

Probability

010

203040

506070

8090

100

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40

Initialwatersaturation

porosity %

Intial water saturation trend

Type Parameters Principal

Impact Comment Low Median High

Horizontal perm multiplier Rates poro-perm trends 0.80 1.00 1.20Vertical / hz l p erm ratio Recovery analogue marine reservoirs 0.030 0.065 0.150

Pore compressibility (kPa 10-6

) Recovery analogue 3.2 4.0 4.8

OWC (m) OIIP well test data 855 861 865

oil viscosity (c P) Rates oil samples 140 217 280

Residual oil saturation Recovery SCAL 0.24 0.28 0.32

skin Rate horizontal PTA's 0 0 3

effective producting length (m) Rate horizontal PTA's 300 600 1000

effective productive time Rate Estimates from analogue 0.70 0.90 0.95

Well

Geological

Dynamic

Select best plan from

probabilistic prognoses

12


12/15

12TGroup

Value of water injected

Log WOR vs. cum oil can be used to forecast value of oil recovery acceleration

Increased volume of water will increase volume of oil based on mass balance principle

Field oil and liquid rates

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

18-Feb-82 11-Aug-87 31-Jan-93 24-Jul-98 14-Jan-04 6-Jul-09 27-Dec-14 18-Jun-20 9-Dec-25

Oilandliquid

srates

Oil rate (T/d)

Liquids rate (m3/d)

Forward oil rate (T/d)

Forward liquids rate (m3/d)

Increased Tot liq (m3/d)

Increase oil rate (T/d)

13


13/15

13TGroup

Benefits calculation

WF Analyses

finished

Injection

Efectivness

Improve

production

efficiency

Fill-up

phase

Depletion Fill-up Waterflooding

Injectors Producers

Yes No

Neighborhood

characteristics

Fetkovich

Darcy

Fetkovich

Hyperbolicdecline

WOR vs.

cum oil

Fetkovich

Hyperbolicdecline

Non matureflooding

Matureflooding

Log WOR

vs. cum oil

Injectors /

producer

Water break

through

14


14/15

14TGroup

Recommended practices for different levels for WFoptimization

Chart/plot Reservoir Block Pattern Well

Composite reservoir perfromanceplots (current and cumulativeproduction/injection, GOR, WC, WOR,pressure vs. time) X X X

ABC plot X X

Production heterogeneity index X X

Cumulative compensation vs. time X X X

Oil rate vs. cumulative oil X X X

WC vs. cum oil X X X

Liquid rate vs. cumulative liquid X X

Log WOR vs. cum oil X X X X

RF vs. MOPV X X X

RF vs. HCPVI X X X

RF vs. PVI X X X

PVI vs. time X X X

WC vs. PVI X X X

Cum. Water injected vs. cum. Totalfluid X X X

Volumetric sweep efficiency X X X

Hall plot X X

WF optimization process

RFbreakthrough

Field oil and liquid rates

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

18-Feb-82 11-Aug-87 31-Jan-93 24-Jul-98 14-Jan-04 6-Jul-09 27-Dec-14 18-Jun-20 9-Dec-25

Oilandliquidsrates

Oil rate (T/d)

Liquids rate (m3/d)

Forward oil rate (T/d)

Forward liquids rate (m3/d)

Increased Tot liq (m3/d)

Increase oil rate (T/d)

Material balance

Value of injection

Conformance plots

Welge technique

Decline analysisCompensation

Recommendations

1 1 144 (2388) ;60

3/ (10 3 10)

2 1 149

3 1 152 ,

4 1 155 ,

5 1 165 ,

6 1 171

7 1 176 , ,

8 1 145 .

9 1 153

10 1 170 .

11 1 167

.

2413 .

. (2396)

12 1 178 . ( 2396)

13 1 180 (2374,5-2381,5 )

14 1 182,155 - (- 182, 155)

15 1 (13,14)

(1,6,11 )

16 1 (.

144,171,176,149,187,155)

15


15/15

15TGroup

01

02

03

0405

06

0708

09 10

1112

13

1415

16 17

1819

20

2122

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33 34

35

36

37

1300

1269

725

721

717

344

-40

496182

165

463486

301

-22

536

296506

424

254

2535

-107185

-49

365

30

580

341

155

504

-9

-37

849

310 660

906

369

470

011300- -.

01

02

03

0405

06

0708

09 10

1112

13

1415

16 17

1819

20

2122

23

24

2526

27

28

29

30

31

32

33 34

35

36

37

1300

1269

725

721

717

344

-40

496182

165

463486

301

-22

536

296506

424

254

2535

-107185

-49

365

30

580

341

155

504

-9

-37

849

310 660

906

369

470

011300- -.

Recommendations

1 1 144 (2388) ; 60

3/ (10 3 10 )

2 1 149

3 1 152 ,

4 1 155 ,

5 1 165 ,

6 1 171

7 1 176 , ,

8 1 145 .

9 1 153

10 1 170 .

11 1 167

.

2413 .

. ( 2396)

12 1 178 . ( 2396)

13 1 180 ( 2374,5-2381,5 )

14 1 182, 155 - (- 182, 155 )

15 1 (13,14 )

(1, 6, 11 )

16 1 (.144, 171, 176, 149, 187, 155)

Water injection redistribution Blocks ranking

Specific recommendation on well by well basis

14891490

1491

1492

1494

1496

1497

232

233

234

317

318

319

321

322

325

327

329

330

331

332

341

363

364

433

443

444

445

446

447

448

450

451

452

453

454

495

497

511

527528

529

530

531

Perspective areas identification

TGL Reservoir Engineering Eng

Documents

Transcript of TGL Reservoir Engineering Eng