Integrated Modeling of Geological Heterogeneity and Fluid Displacement: Smørbukk Gas-Condensate Field, Offshore Mid-Norway

Brandsæter, Inge; Ringrose, Philip; Townsend, C.; Omdal, Stuart

doi:10.2118/66391-ms

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A detailed study of the fault pattern of the field is given in ref. 7. A steady-state scale-up method was applied to derive full field permeability (ref.…”

Section: Smørbukk Field (Refs 7 and 8)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Smørbukk field: Impact of Small Scale Heterogeneity on Gas Cycling Performance

Thibeau

2002

Proceedings of SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractThis paper is aiming at quantifying the interaction of small scale, permeability heterogeneity and flow performance. The work is applied to the Smørbukk gas-condensate producing field, and more specifically to its Tilje 1.1.1 formation, where injected gas is expected to expand first.The key assumption consists in modeling small scale heterogeneity as vertical perturbations to the current petrophysical maps. Two types of data sources are used to generate these perturbations: permeability logs and minipermeameter data. Vertically refined full field flow models are built to incorporate explicitly these perturbations. The impact on the flow performance was evaluated in term of front developments in the reservoir; GOR evolutions at the wells and final recoveries. Finally, an upscaling procedure is proposed to take into account the bypass of the gas cap gas by the injected gas. Analytical estimates are provided to better understand the phenomena.

show abstract

“…A detailed study of the fault pattern of the field is given in ref. 7. A steady-state scale-up method was applied to derive full field permeability (ref.…”

Section: Smørbukk Field (Refs 7 and 8)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Smørbukk field: Impact of Small Scale Heterogeneity on Gas Cycling Performance

Thibeau

2002

Proceedings of SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Panda et al 1 and Lee et al 2 , among others, have specifically investigated the scale reconciliation aspect of reservoir modeling. The literature is replete with integrated studies that try to reconcile data in varying degrees [3][4][5] . The success of this effort has been varied and is strongly dependent on the amount and quality of data as well as the complexity of the field.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Relevant to Flow? A Comprehensive Study Using a Shallow Marine Reservoir

Castellini¹,

Chawathe²,

Larue³

et al. 2003

Proceedings of SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractThese days "estimating uncertainty" is the mantra. As we do this, we ask ourselves which is better: an array of geologically simple rapidly history-matched models, or a single geologically comprehensive, carefully history-matched model. After all, uncertainty, which is normally characterized by a range of forecasts from techniques such as Experimental Design, is difficult to quantify using just one model however comprehensive it may be. Yet if forecasts are obtained from a series of simple models, how good are they? Choosing one over the other also has significant implications in the time required for modeling, and also reservoir management.Specific questions, that directly affect the cost of modeling, come to mind. These are: What is the optimal level of geological detail, especially if the uncertainty management plan includes history-matching and simulating a series of models? Can the oil trapped behind the flood front be estimated by a series of simple lateral (shales) barriers/baffles or do we always need an extensive sequence stratigraphy framework? A detailed model may not be as amenable to uncertainty estimation by the virtue of its size. Is field-scale history matching adequate or is well-by-well history matching a must? Perhaps the brute force approach of probabilistic forward modeling provides the panacea. After all the proof-ofthe-pudding lies only in the model's ability to accurately predict field performance. Finally, we also ask -should the modeling strategy, i.e., comprehensive vs. simple, be dependent on the response variable of interest, e.g. ultimate recovery factor vs. infill drill locations. As such, if ultimate recovery is the objective, a simple model may suffice. To answer questions like these, we re-visit current reservoir modeling paradigms.As a datum, we use a comprehensively modeled waterflood from Western Africa. This reservoir was modeled using extensive sequence stratigraphic techniques. The model was scaled-up from about 14 million cells to about 280,000 cells using a flow-based scale-up algorithm, carefully preserving all the mappable mudstones above flooding surfaces. History-matching for a 30-year period was systematically conducted with a team of field engineers and simulation specialists. The whole process took about a year to complete. Against this datum, we compare a series of rapidly built geological models that still honor all the data and the overall depositional architecture, and yet are significantly different from the datum geological model by the virtue of the modeling strategies implemented. The different modeling strategies vary in complexity from changes in variogram lengths and direction to simple tank models with stochastic sandstones and mudstones conditioned by well data. Various geostatistical algorithms were also investigated for facies modeling and petrophysical properties population within facies.The new models were history-matched using the conventional manual method and two separate assisted-history match...

show abstract

“…The Smørbukk field is located in the Norwegian Sea, within the Åsgard development 1,2 . Smørbukk contains layers of sand bodies with good horizontal communication.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%