MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2767564322 · doi:10.2118/188313-ms

Reduced-Physics Modeling and Optimization of Mature Waterfloods

2017· article· en· W2767564322 sur OpenAlex
Fayadhoi Ibrahima, Agustin Maqui, Ana Suarez Negreira, Chao Liang, Feyisayo Olalotiti, Ouassim Khebzegga, Sébastien Matringe, Xiang Zhai

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Établissements canadiensImpact
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWorkflowReservoir simulationComputer scienceReservoir engineeringContext (archaeology)Petroleum engineeringReservoir modelingAquiferOil fieldEnhanced oil recoveryField (mathematics)Permeability (electromagnetism)Industrial engineeringGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringPetroleumGroundwaterMathematics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Mature waterfloods often present significant Reservoir Management challenges. After an initial boost in oil production, water cuts tend to increase and flood performance starts to decline. Complex reservoirs that have been producing for decades through hundreds or thousands of wells are notoriously challenging to model. Creating and history-matching a simulation model usually take several months for subsurface teams, and operational teams can rarely rely on these models to make reservoir management decisions. In this paper, a novel methodology is presented that is being used in practice on large waterfloods or strong aquifer-supported reservoirs, to support operational decisions in near real-time. The proposed technology relies on a reduced-physics, data-driven reservoir model to quickly build and match a reservoir model that can be used to optimize waterfloods. The first stage of the workflow involves collecting and validating the field data, including rock and fluid properties, production, injection and pressure data as well as well information, such as trajectories and historical perforations. The reservoir behavior is then modeled following an approach similar to that of Thiele and Batycky (2006) in the context of streamline simulation. The model represents the reservoir as a network of inter-well connections described by their strengths and efficiencies. Contrary to traditional streamline-based method, the strength of connection is rather determined through the solution of a numerical tracer test, which generalizes the method to unstructured or locally refined grids as well as dual permeability systems, and allows the method to account for mild compressibility effects. An empirical fractional flow model is then used to calculate the connection efficiencies. Once the model is complete and calibrated, a cutting-edge optimization algorithm is used to optimize the production-injection strategy based on this network of subsurface connections. Recommendations for adjustments in the production-injection strategies are proposed and model uncertainties are computed through a novel algorithm to compute the associated risks. A new finite-volume based time-of-flight computation algorithm is developed based on the numerical tracer solution, which, combined with the empirical fractional flow model, can give a data-driven production mapping algorithm. The proposed methodology was successfully applied to many reservoirs across the world, including several giant middle-east carbonates with hundreds of wells and decades of history. The approach consistenly identified an optimized strategy that could deliver several percentage points of incremental oil along with a reduction in water production. The methodology proposed is fast enough to build and match a new model in a few days; and updating an existing model takes less than an hour as new data comes available, avoiding expensive numerical simulations and helping engineers optimize daily production-injection strategy of reservoirs.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,519
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,212

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,278
Écart entre enseignants0,252 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle