MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073229377 · doi:10.2118/2007-061

Real Time Optimization of a Water Flood Reservoir

2007· article· en· W2073229377 on OpenAlexafffund
J.W. Vanegas P., L.B. Cunha, N. Aqeel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsFlood mythComputer sciencePetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementGeologyGeotechnical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to the rising rate of demand for hydrocarbon fuels as well as descending trends in reserve discovery it is of increasing necessity to produce oil and gas fields more efficiently and economically. In this scenario, the use of secondary recovery processes, i.e. waterflooding, is becoming more and more imperative. Also the use of smart wells, which are equipped with data acquisition, monitoring and controlling instruments, is also being proposed as efficient means of maximizing ultimate recovery. In this work a methodology to optimize petroleum production or net present value (NPV) from a waterflood reservoir by controlling operational parameters of the production and injection wells with the use of smart well technology is developed. The optimization procedure involves maximizing the objective function expressed in terms of cumulative oil produced or NPV from a waterflood reservoir by adjusting a set of operational parameters expressed as the production wells flow rates and injector wells bottomhole pressure. The production and injector wells in this reservoir are smart wells whose downhole chokes are automatically adjusted to meet certain optimal requirements. Production strategies can be derived from numerical optimization analyses, the solutions for which are most frequently based on optimal control theory. The approach used in this work considers a simpler alternative to the optimal control approach: a moving-horizon formulation coupled to a heuristic algorithm. This work also provides a validation of the optimization methodology proposed through two heterogeneous and one homogeneous reservoir models with five-spot pattern waterflood schemes. The results of the optimization methodology proposed in this work show an increase in cumulative production and in NPV with respect to the base case. Introduction The increasing availability of intelligent and smart wells as well as integrated technologies permit practical acquisition of production information from every well and dissemination for use by everyone within an organization and allow overall field optimization of operations in real time to happen. Instrumented wells with real-time downhole measurements and remotely activated valves, public wireless communications, database and interface tools provide key and powerful developments for reservoir management and production optimization to gas and oil producers. The concept of real-time optimization (RTO) is not new and has been practiced in some areas of Petroleum engineering like drilling or production operations for quite same time but due to new technologies related to data measurement and processing the extent to which RTO is now feasible has increased tremendously. A well-established definition for RTO is that "it is a process of measure-calculate-control cycle at a frequency, which maintains the system's optimal operating conditions within the time-constant constraints of the system". Based on this definition it is possible to conclude that the concept of realtime optimization requires the use of measurements of a process at a certain frequency to enable decision-making at the same frequency. This whole procedure would ideally be performed continuously, by collecting all available data in real time and also continuously solving all-encompassing optimization problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207