The occurrence of discontinuities such as faults, fractures or fracture corridors in the porous rock matrix usually has a strong impact on fluid flow and needs to be addressed carefully during the life cycle of the reservoirs.
The major difficulty in characterizing the hydraulic properties of such systems frequently relates with our ability to integrate all the information in a meaningful way in order to derive the key factors constraining the development, intensity and role of the main fracture type in a given reservoir[1].
When the faults/fracture corridors act as baffles or barriers they may delineate compartments and blocks with differential drainage rates and variations in pore pressure. Where flow takes place in both the matrix and along/across the discontinuities, the flow paths can become very complex and the way the two systems interplay may even change with time or with injected/produced fluids.
Likewise, the occurrence of faults identified from seismic or fractures brings some extra complexity to the strategies used for reservoir simulation. Issues like how to characterize the faults at different scales and to perform fault ranking and upscaling may have a strong impact on the way simulation results will match actual reservoir dynamics.
Introduction
This paper illustrates the role faults and fracture corridors play in two heterogeneous carbonate fields located onshore Abu Dhabi and their impact on different aspects of reservoir development highlighting some of the solutions to manage such situations. The focus is made on the impact of faults and/or fracture corridors; for they represent the main structural heterogeneities within Abu Dhabi onshore reservoirs[2] (diffuse fracturing is rarely observed).
Reservoirs in Field 1 and Field 2 are different in age. Furthermore, the main structural heterogeneity is different. Yet, in both case, specific studies were conducted, aiming at reducing the uncertainties linked to the main type of fractures (i.e. fault zone within Field 1, fractured corridors and/or sub seismic faults within Field 2).
As a result, the specific studies allowed;
- Characterizing the damaged zone for the main fault system of Field 1, both in term of geometry (thickness, location, and associated fracturing) and dynamic behavior (the fault segments are probably barrier to oil, but locally allow gas to migrate). Consequently, some well trajectories were re-designed.
- Achieving excellent history-matched models by using different strategies depending upon the characteristics at each well (the well performance is dominated by matrix or fracture) for Field 2. Consequently, the history-matched models will be used to quantify the uncertainties in the future development options.