1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. Petroleum Geostatistics 2019
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Summary

Stochastic reservoir modeling is an integral part of quantifying subsurface uncertainties. Classical geostatistical methods like Gaussian random function and multi-point geostatistics (MPS) are robust and cheap in computing time. However, these methods are based on mathematical/statistical concepts and therefore lack geological plausibility. Physical modeling with stratigraphic forward modeling (SFM), on the other hand, is capable of generating detailed 3D simulations of the geological realm. Conditioning SFM to e.g. well log data is expensive and not always successful. A hybrid approach of SFM with MPS can support the conditioning. This approach generates concept driven models that match the well data while also keeping geological continuity. Experiments were done on the mature 7th Tortonian oil reservoir in, Austria. Classical geostatistical approaches failed to generate enough dynamically diverse prior models to envelop the production data. First one geological process (SFM) model was generated and conditioned to well data. The result was then used as a training image (TI) for MPS. These results better match the wells while still preserving the geological information from SFM. All simulation models have been initialized and dynamically simulated. In comparison with the common geostatistical approach, they are dynamically more diverse while being more constrained by geological concepts.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
2019-09-02
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ballin, P., Journel, A. & Aziz, K., 1992. Prediction of Uncertainty in Reservoir Performance Forecast. JCPT, Volume 4.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Caumon, G. & Journel, A. G., 2004. Early Uncertainty Assessment: Application to a Hydrocarbon Reservoir Appraisal. Geostatistics Banff2004, Volume 14, pp. 551–557.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Chiotoroiu, M., Peisker, J., Clemens, T. & Thiele, M., 2016. Forecasting Incremental Oil Production of A Polymer Pilot Extension in the 8TH Tortonian Reservoir Including Quantitative Uncertainty Assessment.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. DeeSse® v2018.1.3, Ephesia Consult
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Mariethoz, G., Renard, P., Straubhaar, J., 2010. The Direct Sampling method to perform multiple-point geostatistical simulations. Water Resources Research - WATER RESOUR RES. 46. 10.1029/2008WR007621.
     https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007621 [Google Scholar]
  6. Peisker, J., Nejedlik, J.J., Chiotoroiu, M.M., Clemens, T. & Thiele, M., 2016. Covering Geological Uncertainty in Polymer Injection Projects Using Multidimensional Scaling. ViennaEAGE2016
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Popper, K., 1963. Conjectures and Refutations. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London/New York
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Scheidt, C. & Caers, J., 2009. Uncertainty quantification in reservoir performance using distances and kernel methods - application to a West-Africa deepwater turbidite reservoir. SPE Journal, 118740-PA
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Scheidt, C. & Caers, J., 2007. A workflow for Spatial Uncertainty Quantification using Distances and Kernels. SCRF report, Volume 20.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Streamsim Technologies, inc., Flux Pattern Map for connectivity quantification, US6,519,531
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Tetzlaff, D., Tveiten, J., Salomonsen, P, Christ, A. B., Athmer, W.G., BorgosH., Sonneland, L., Martinez, C., & Raggio, F., 2014. GEOLOGIC PROCESS MODELING.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D., 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, pp. 1124–1131.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Zhang, Y., Lewis, M., Pellon, M. & Coleman, P., 2007. A Preliminary Research on Modeling Cognitive Agents for Social Environments in Multi-Agent Systems. pp. 116–123.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 3DSL v2015.1217Reference Manual, Streamsim Technologies.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
Loading
Combining Stratigraphic Forward Modelling with Multiple-point Statistics - A Case Study from Seismic to Tracer Response
Conference Proceedings 2019, 1 (2019); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201902225
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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