1887
Volume 58, Issue 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A modified discrete element method is briefly introduced and used for modelling reservoir geomechanical response during fluid injection and depletion. The modified approach works as a continuum method until some local failure is initiated, after which it behaves like a discrete element method on a polygonal lattice. The method is advantageous for modelling fracture developments in rocks. It is applied here to synthetic models of two reservoirs taken from the North Sea (Gullfaks and Elgin‐Franklin). For Gullfaks, two cases of water injection were modelled, one with low horizontal effective stress and the other with low vertical effective stress. Vertical fractures are developed in the first case, whereas horizontal fractures are developed in the second case. This would not have been seen using traditional methods. Based on 4D seismics data for the Gullfaks field, one may envision that horizontal fractures could have been formed. The Elgin‐Franklin synthetic model is used to study various scenarios of changing stress field around the depleting reservoir. Based on 4D seismics data from this field, one may see changes that could be interpreted in terms of possible fault reactivation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00859.x
2010-01-19
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AddisM.A.1997. The stress‐depletion response of reservoirs. SPE 38720.
  2. AlassiH.T.2008. Modelling reservoir geomechanics using discrete element method: Application to reservoir monitoring . PhD thesis, NTNU, Norway .
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AlassiH.T., HoltR.M. and LandrøM.2008. Modelling reservoir geomechanical changes caused by fluid injection–A discrete element approach. 70th EAGE meeting, Rome , Italy , Expanded Abstracts, E032.
  4. AlassiH.T., LiL. and HoltR.M.2006. Discrete element modeling of stress and strain evolution within and outside a depleting reservoir. Pure and Applied Geophysics163, 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BarkvedO. and KristiansenT.G.2005. Seismic time‐lapse effects and stress changes: Example from a compacting reservoir. The Leading Edge24, 1244–1248.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CundallP.A. and StrackO.D.L.1979. A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Geotechnique29, 47–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DuffautK. and LandrøM.2007. Vp/Vs ratio versus differential stress and rock consolidation – A comparison between rock models and time‐lapse AVO data. Geophysics72, C81–C94.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. DusseaultM.B. and SimmonsJ.V.1982. Injection‐induced stress and fracture orientation changes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal19, 483–493.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. HatchellP. and BourneS.2005. Rocks under strain: Strain‐induced time‐lapse time shifts are observed for depleting reservoirs. The Leading Edge24, 1222–1225.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. HawkinsP.J., HoweS., HollingworthS., ConroyG., Ben‐BrahimL., TindleC. et al . 2007. Production‐induced stresses from time‐lapse time shifts: A geomechanics case study from Franklin and Elgin fields. The Leading Edge26, 655–662.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. HettemaM.H.H., SchutjensP.M.T.M., VerboomB.J.M. and GussinkloH.J.2000. Production‐induced compaction of a sandstone reservoir: The strong influence of stress path. SPE Reservoir Evaluation Engineering3, 342–347.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. HoltR.M., FlornesO., LiL. and FjærE.2004. Consequences of depletion‐induced stress changes on reservoir compaction and recovery. Proceedings of the Gulf Rocks’04, Ppr. 04–589. ARMA/NARMS.
  13. KenterC.J., BeukelA.V.D., HatchellP., MaronK. and MolenaarM.2004. Evaluation of reservoir characteristics from timeshifts in the overburden. Proceedings of the Gulf Rocks’04, Ppr. 04–627. ARMA/NARMS.
  14. KvamØ. and LandrøM.2005. Pore‐pressure detection sensitivities tested with time‐lapse seismic data. Geophysics70, O39–O50.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. LandrøM.2001. Discrimination between pressure and fluid saturation changes from time‐lapse seismic data. Geophysics66, 836–844.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. LandrøM., DigranesP. and StrønenL.K.2001. Mapping reservoir pressure and saturation changes using seismic methods‐possibilities and limitations. First Break19, 12.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. LandrøM. and StammeijerJ.2004. Quantitative estimation of compaction and velocity changes using 4D impedence and traveltime changes. Geophysics69, 949–957.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MaxwellS.C. and UrbancicT.2001. The role of passive microseismic monitoring in the instrumented oil field. The Leading Edge19, 636–639.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MuldersF.M.M.2003. Modelling of stress development and fault slip in and around a producing gas reservoir . PhD thesis, TU Delft, the Netherlands .
    [Google Scholar]
  20. PotyondyD.O. and CundallP.A.2004. A bonded particle model for rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences41, 1329–1364.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. RøsteT., LandrøM. and HatchellP.2007. Monitoring overburden layer changes and fault movements from time‐lapse seismic data on the Valhall Field. Geophysical Journal International170, 1100–1118.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. RudnickiJ.W.1999. Alteration of regional stress by reservoirs and other inhomogeneities: Stabilizing or destabilizing? In: Proceedings of the International Congress on Rock Mechanics (eds G.Vouille and P.Berest ), pp. 1629–1637. ISRM.
  23. SantarelliF., HavmøllerO. and NaumannM.2008. Geomechanical aspects of 15 years water injection on a field complex: An analysis of the past to plan the future. SPE112944.
  24. SegallP. and FitzgeraldS.D.1998. A note on induced stress changes in hydrocarbon and geothermal reservoirs. Tectonophysics289, 117–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. TeufelL.W., RhettD.W. and FarrellH.E.1991. Effect of reservoir depletion and pore pressure drawdown on in situ stress and deformation in the Ekofisk field. In: Rock Mechanics as a Multidisciplinary Science (ed. J.C.Roegiers ), pp. 63–72. A.A. Balkema.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00859.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00859.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Modelling; Monitoring; Time lapse

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error