Uncertainty Assessment of Production Performance for a Heavy Oil Offshore Field by using the Experimental Design Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Development of heavy oil fields presents increasing complexity directly associated to the high levels of uncertainty in the fluid and reservoir characterization. Particularly in offshore scenarios, where the difficulties for well testing, fluid and core sampling demand much more efforts and limit the availability of information. Thus, when considering the development of an offshore heavy oil field, a probabilistic analysis, instead of a deterministic one, is the natural way to evaluate reservoir production performance and project feasibility. This work considers the application of experimental design techniques to the problem of uncertainty quantification and risk analysis for heavy oil offshore projects. Initially, the parameters that have a large impact on the cumulative oil production response are specified. Then, based on the given uncertainty distribution of these parameters and on the application of an experimental design technique the assessment of uncertainty on the cumulative oil production is achieved. The computational effort when estimating production uncertainty is reduced by considering a response surface methodology, approximating the simulator by a simple regression model that fits the simulator outputs. The methodology proposed in this work was applied to a synthetic case, representative of an actual heavy oil offshore field scenario, which considered as uncertain parameters porosity, absolute permeabilities, area of the accumulation and well productivity index. Introduction Reservoir engineering requires managing sources of uncertainty on the physical reservoir description parameters due to three main causes: the model, because it is an imperfect representation of reality; geologic parameters, because of a limited sampling in space and/or time, and measurement errors in the experiments performed to determine inputs. With rapid changes in political and economic conditions, it seems that smaller fields with complex geology, reduced economic margin and less robust projects (EOR, infill drilling, thermal recovery, heavy oil offshore fields), are typical petroleum engineering issues in many hydrocarbon producing regions of the world. For this reason, oil companies need a systematic method for quantifying the composite technical uncertainties (in production rates and reserves) and its associated economic risks (NPV and other economic indicators) connected with field developments and incremental projects. In the evaluation and planning of a reservoir development the common approach is first to build the expected geological model, using the most representative set of dynamic parameters, and then determine the best set of well locations given the geological model. The platform, in the case of an offshore field, and production facilities are optimized (with respect to NPV) for this model. This combination of geological model, dynamic parameters and technical design constitutes the base (or reference) case. A reservoir simulation is then performed, giving the base case production profile and recovery factor. This production profile is finally combined with a fixed scenario for the future oil and/or gas prices and investment interests to obtain the economic indicators (NPV, PI, IRR) for the project. To study the influence of the various parameters that enter the process on the final results, a sensitivity study is usually performed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".