Lessons Learned from Production History Matching in Single Cell Numerical Models in an Integrated Asset Model
- C. Noguera (Universidad de Oriente)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Energy Resources Conference, 9-11 June, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2014. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.1.7 Seismic Processing and Interpretation, 4.1.5 Processing Equipment, 2.4.3 Sand/Solids Control, 2.4.5 Gravel pack design & evaluation, 4.1.2 Separation and Treating, 4.2 Pipelines, Flowlines and Risers, 5.5.8 History Matching, 5.6.8 Well Performance Monitoring, Inflow Performance, 4.6 Natural Gas, 7.1.7 Intergated Asset Management, 5.3.2 Multiphase Flow, 5.2.1 Phase Behavior and PVT Measurements, 5.5 Reservoir Simulation, 5.6.4 Drillstem/Well Testing, 7.1.8 Asset Integrity
- Single Cell Numerical Model, History Matching, Integrated Asset Model, Lessons Learned
- 0 in the last 30 days
- 187 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 9.50|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 28.00|
Integrated Asset Modeling (IAM) approach1 is defined as simultaneously modeling the flow through the reservoir up the wellbore and through a surface network. Reservoir simulation history matching is one of the most complex and time consuming process, however, it ensures that the model developed is useful for forecasting and management decisions. By nature, an Integrated Asset Modeling model can be made up of hundreds of nodes, making it complex and difficult to manage if a proper methodology is not implemented to allow an effective history matching, especially when developing all the components of the IAM model.
The purpose of this paper is to share lessons learned from a methodology that allows the development of reservoir models via material balance, proper matching of wellbore models and wellbore tests; calibration of the surface network and ultimately, history matching of an Integrated Asset Model, following rigorous quality assurance and quality check procedures. Issues addressed include: characterization of the reservoir-wellbore system, knowledge of main drive mechanisms, aquifer uncertainty, tubing flow assessment.
The methodology enabled production history matching of 15 producing gas wells; ensuring that the IAM model developed is therefore a reliable forecasting tool. In addition, Simulation run time reduction was achieved by switching from a rate dependent constrained system to a pressure drop dependant system.
Production history matching should precede any numerical simulation study, as it provides useful knowledge of the properties and characteristics of the reservoir-wellbore-surface network, leaving little room for adjustments, which constitutes an excellent starting point for numerical models; hence an IAM approach represents basis for the construction and quality check of more rigorous multi cells numerical reservoir simulation models.
|File Size||6 MB||Number of Pages||14|