History Match of the UTF Phase A Project with Coupled Reservoir Geomechanical Simulation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Field operation of the UTF Phase A SAGD project started in November 1987 and the whole production period terminated in October 1990. The success of this practical SAGD project has been used as a guide for a great number of field SAGD applications today. In order to understand the realistic interactions between fluid flow and geomechanical behavior of the reservoir during the SAGD operation, the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulation methodology was applied to history match the measured performance of the pilot. Reservoir and geomechanical responses as a result of the SAGD operation were available from an extensive instrumentation program designed for this project. Coupled simulation predictions of reservoir pressure, reservoir temperature, horizontal displacement, vertical strain, and volumetric strain were all compared with the data obtained from the field survey. These comparisons show that the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulation methodology has the potential to capture both reservoir and geomechanical physics appropriately while history matching the performance of a SAGD project. In particular, the steam chamber propagation modes both in the field and in the simulation were also discussed relative to the history of the Phase A pilot. Introduction The methodology of the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulations has been developed and tested successfully (Li, et al., 2003). However, the methodology needs to be verified based on a practical field application of the SAGD process. Fortunately, the UTF Phase A project provided a variety of data measured in the field over the period of the SAGD operation, which can be used for the history match of the SAGD process to verify this methodology. The available data include bottom hole pressures of each injector and producer, reservoir pressure, temperature, vertical strain, vertical displacement of the reservoir top, horizontal displacement, horizontal strain, and volumetric strain inside the reservoir during the SAGD operation. The objective of this paper is to establish the oil sands reservoir model and geomechanical model based on the available and assumed reservoir properties. Thereafter, conduct the coupled reservoir geomechanical simulation and compare the simulation performance with that obtained from the field. Finally, sensitivity studies were conducted to examine the relative influence of reservoir parameters on the SAGD predictions. PROJECT AND RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION The Alberta Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority (AOSTRA) initiated a feasibility study on the construction of an Underground Test Facility (UTF) in 1982, which were based on two discrete but complementary technologies:the Shaft and Tunnel Access Concept (SATAC) andhorizontal well technology for in situ recovery of oil sands reservoir. A detailed design of the UTF was completed in January 1982 and construction began in June 1984. The SAGD process was selected for initial piloting at UTF in 1985. Field operation of the Phase A SAGD project started in November 1987 and the whole production period terminated in October 1990. The AOSTRA Underground Test Facility (UTF) is located 60 km northwest of Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada, within the area of Township 93 and Range 12. It is about 20 km west of the Syncrude Canada surface mining operation area.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».