History Matching and Optimal Design of Chemically Enhanced Oil Recovery Using Multi-Objective Optimization
- Zheng Zhang (Texas A&M University) | Hye Young Jung (Texas A&M University) | Akhil Datta-Gupta (Texas A&M University) | Mojdeh Delshad (The University of Texas at Austin)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Simulation Conference, 10-11 April, Galveston, Texas, USA
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2019. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.3.6 Chemical Flooding Methods (e.g., Polymer, Solvent, Nitrogen, Immiscible CO2, Surfactant, Vapex), 1.8 Formation Damage, 1.6.9 Coring, Fishing, 5.4 Improved and Enhanced Recovery, 7 Management and Information, 5.5.8 History Matching, 7.6 Information Management and Systems, 5.5 Reservoir Simulation, 1.8 Formation Damage, 4.3.4 Scale, 7.6.6 Artificial Intelligence, 5.2.1 Phase Behavior and PVT Measurements, 5.2 Fluid Characterization, 5.4 Improved and Enhanced Recovery, 5 Reservoir Desciption & Dynamics, 1.6 Drilling Operations
- Optimization, History Matching Quality Index, History Matching, Enhanced oil recovery
- 3 in the last 30 days
- 182 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 9.50|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 28.00|
Chemical enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods have received increased attention in recent years since they have the ability to recover the capillary trapped oil. Successful chemical flooding application requires accurate numerical models and reliable forecast across multiple scales: core scale, pilot scale, and field scale. History matching and optimization are two key steps to achieve this goal.
For history matching chemical floods, we propose a general workflow for multi-stage model calibration using an Evolutionary Algorithm. A comprehensive chemical flooding simulator is used to model important physical mechanisms including phase behavior, cation exchange, chemical and polymer adsorption and capillary desaturation. First, we identify dominant reservoir and process parameters based on a sensitivity analysis. The history matching is then carried out in a stage-wise manner whereby the most dominant parameters are calibrated first and additional parameters are incorporated sequentially until a satisfactory data misfit is achieved. Next, a diverse subset of history matched models is selected for optimization using a Pareto-based multi-objective optimization approach. Based on the concept of dominance, Pareto optimal solutions are generated representing the trade-off between increasing oil recovery while improving the efficiency of chemical usage. These solutions are searched using a Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II). Finally we implement a History Matching Quality Index (HMQI) with Moving Linear Regression Analysis to evaluate simulation results from history matching process. The HMQI provides normalized values for all objective functions having different magnitude and leads to a more consistent and robust approach to evaluate the updated models through model calibration.
|File Size||2 MB||Number of Pages||22|
Cheng, H., Dehghani, K., and Billiter, T.C. 2008. A Structured Approach for Probabilistic-Assisted History Matching Using Evolutionary Algorithms: Tengiz Field Applications. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/116212-ms
Darman, N., Bui, T., Moreno, J.C., 2010. Eliminating Subjectivity in History Match Evaluation Through Systematic Data Mining and Application of History Match Quality Index, Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/132072-ms
King, M.J., Park, H.-Y., and Datta-Gupta, A. 2013. Handling Conflicting Multiple Objectives Using Pareto-Based Evolutionary Algorithm for History Matching of Reservoir Performance. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/163623-ms.
Ouenes, A. and Bhagavan, S. 1994. Application of Simulated Annealing and Other Global Optimization Methods to Reservoir Description: Myths and Realities. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/28415-ms.
Pan, Y. and Horne, R.N. 1998. Improved Methods for Multivariate Optimization of Field Development Scheduling and Well Placement Design. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/49055-ms.
Sambridge, M., Mosegaard, K. 2002. Monto Carlo Methods in Geophysical Inverse Problems. Reviews of Geophysics 40 ((3)): 1009. DOI: 10.1029/2000rg000089
Schulze-Riegert, R.W., Krosche, M., Fahimuddin, A.. 2007. Multi-Objective Optimization with Application to Model Validation and Uncertainty Quantification. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/105313-ms.
White, C.D. and Royer, S.A. 2003. Experimental Design as a Framework for Reservoir Studies. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/79676-ms.
Williams, M.A., Keating, J.F., and Barghouty, M.F. 1998. The Stratigraphic Method: A Structured Approach to History Matching Complex Simulation Models. DOI: 10.2118/38014-pa
Yeten, B., Castellini, A., Guyaguler, B.. 2005. A Comparison Study on Experimental Design and Response Surface Methodologies. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/93347-ms.
Yeten, B., Durlofsky, L.J., and Aziz, K. 2002. Optimization of Nonconventional Well Type, Location and Trajectory. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/77565-ms.
Yin, J., Park, H., Datta-Gupta, A.. 2010. A Hierarchical Streamline-Assisted History Matching Approach with Global and Local Parameter Updates. Society of Petroleum Engineers. DOI: 10.2118/132642-ms.