Importance of Multiple-Contact and Swelling Tests for Huff-n-Puff Simulations: A Montney Shale Example
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Accurate assessment of Huff-n-Puff (HnP) performance using compositional reservoir simulation requires a representative fluid model tuned to several PVT measurements.In unconventional reservoir applications, fluid models are typically constructed using laboratory depletion tests (e.g. CCE and CVD) only. In this work, multiple depletion and gas injection tests (e.g. swelling, shrinkage, and multiple-contact tests) are integrated to construct a common Equation of State (EOS) that is used to evaluate HnP performance for a Montney light oil example. Several sets of depletion and gas injection PVT data were available for this study.However,the injection tests were conducted using oil samples taken at different production times. Further, different hydrocarbon injection gases were used to perform the experiments. Building a common EOS for this range of measurements, which were conducted on multiple samples, is not a straightforward task. Therefore, a workflow, and several computer programs, are developed to simulate all the PVT tests simultaneously and to conduct the regression process. The resulting EOS is then used to construct a representative compositional simulation model. The model is calibrated through history-matching and employed to design an optimal HnP process for the studied Montney well. The results are then compared with a case where no injection tests were used to develop the fluid model. The results indicate that it is particularly challenging for the regression process to maintain a balance between the quality of the match for the depletion and the injection tests.This process required some unique global optimization methods to build a reliable EOS that matched all the measured data. For this study, the importance of the injection PVT tests is mainly reflected in tuning the interfacial tension, and secondarily the viscosity and phase density values. However, in this case study, it appears that the importance of the injection tests for tuning the EOS is marginal. In other words, depletion tests were sufficient to calibrate an EOS that resulted in an acceptable match to many measured data points obtained from multi-contact and swelling tests. This finding is mainly related to the fact that all the injected gases are hydrocarbon gases with a composition consistent with the solution gas in the oil samples. Therefore, the PVT model could also be used for injection simulations, even though the EOS was calibrated to the depletion tests only. However, it is expected that this is not the case for other non-hydrocarbon gas injection tests (e.g. using CO2 or N2) where the depletion tests cannot easily constrain the properties of the injectants during the depletion process. The constructed PVT models are used as input to dual-porosity dual-permeability (DP-DK) models, which are calibrated using multi-phase production data. The results further indicate that the two EOSs could predict an optimal HnP process with a minimal recovery difference. A new fluid modelling workflow is introduced for the first time to evaluate the importance of various gas injection PVT experiments on HnP performance prediction. This new method is tested against a field example with several measurements from a multi-fractured horizontal well (MFHW) in the Montney Formation in Canada.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».