Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Nama: Muhamad Rizki Asy’ari

NIM: 17/419611/PTK/11721

SUMMARY
INTEGRATED MODELING FOR RESERVOIR OPTIMIZATION (IN DEVELOPMENT SCALE)
Lecturer: Dr. Ferian Anggara

In a full-field development of unconventional reservoir, the addition of sufficient quantity


and quality of data spend a lot of money due to low oil price. The effective investigation of
existing information to improve shale oil/gas development can be performed by conducting
reservoir modeling as an alternative. The modeling efforts could handle the complex situations
and potentially development efficiency. A new concept, called “top-down big-picture” is applied
in order to approach the successful field development (Liang et al., 2016).
According to Liang et al. (2017), top-down big-picture concept is sequential investigations
from big to small pictures, started from basin and regional geology, geophysics & rock mechanics,
to sweet spot corridor, and development sequence such as well landing, spacing, and
completions. This concept consists of three important workflows for full-field development, the
3D Earth model, multipad model, and well model. An example from the Wolfcamp Field, Midland
Basin, West Texas, apply this workflow to conduct the modeling from approximately 1.100
vertical wells. Several principle steps to develop an earth model are: 1. data compilation, QC, and
management; 2. 3D structural and stratigraphic framework; 4. reservoir description; 4. 3D
facies/rock-type, petrophysical and geomechanical models. After the model was built and
petrophysical and geomechanical heterogeneities were captured, the model was ready to be
downsized to a multiped model for landing, staggering, and spacing study to capture multiwell
and multiped interactions. Further, modeling is focused on a smaller-scale pad or well model for
spacing, completions design, and investigation mechanism.
The main reservoir unit of Wolfcamp field is WFMP B interval of Wolfberry Formation
based on petrophysical and geomechanical analysis from well log. It consists of basinal shale and
siltstone with detrital slope carbonates. The net thickness is about 50 – 200 ft with mineralogical
composition as follows: 45% quartz, 20% clay, 20% calcite, 10% kerogen, and 5% other minerals.
TOC is 2-8 %. The average porosity is 6 – 12 %. The true vertical depth of reservoir is around 7.000
– 10.000 ft with 0.47 – 0.52 psi/ft of pressure gradient. The oil from this interval has API gravity
about 40° - 43°. From this analysis, a 3D facies/rock-type model is built by utilizing variogram. The
lithology is divided into three main type, such as shale, mix lithology, and limestone. The shale is
dominant in the upper part of the formation interval with widespread distribution to all direction.
Then the petrophysical model is generated to determine zones for suitable well placement and
stimulation by identifying clay content as well as porosity, Sw, and permeability distributions. The
clay content distribution is higher in W-E direction. The Sw model developed from J-function
shows that the value is quite scattered. However, generally the low value is trending to the W-E
direction. Further, the geomechanical model is computed to provide the stress orientation and
distribution based on FMI interpretation and geomechanical prorties from well log analysis. This
model resulted in minimum horizontal stress (Shmin) distribution. The Shmin value is greater n
NW-SE trend and slightly lower in W-E trends. Based on those models, the well placement is
located in the center-south of the fields. The horizontal well is planned in the top interval of the
reservoar due to higher shale content with relative W-E trend due to clay content, Sw, and Shmin
value trend. The well is relatively parallel with the Shmin in order to generate good perpendicular
fractures.
After constructing the earth model, the hydraulic model is simulated from one horizontal
well to capture the fracturing result. The result shows the fracture is perpencular with the
horizontal well and exhibit the variation permeability value and fracture pattern due to the
reservoir heterogeneity. The permeability become higher around the fractures. The simulation
after 1 year and 10 years of production show the pressure depletion occur around the fracture
network. The different completion designs show that the pump volume, number of clusters, and
cluster-spacing affect the size and complexity of the fracture network. From those design, the
cumulative production simulation gives a relatively narrower spread from kriging, spline, and
linear proxies.
This model then applied to support the field-development decision. For ecample, the well
spacing and development sequence is demonstrated. At the first time the three horizontal wells
are placed by certain distance in a sweetpot zone determined based on the earth model. After 1
years of production, the three-well production is decreasing. Then, the optimization is conducted
by modeling the child wells placed in between two parent wells based on the pressure model
whose area has no significant change . This child well will maintain the reservoir production with
no significant depletion from first year to the next couples of years of production.
As a conclusion, the top-down big-picture concept is suitable for full-scale field
development optimization because its good integration from big to small scales aspects.
However, a lot of data information is needed to get a better result and frequently update to
optimizing the development of the field.

References:
Liang, B., Khan, S., and Puspita, S.D., 2017, An Integrated Modeling Wrokflow with Hydraulic Fracturing, Reservoir
Simulation, and Uncertainty Analysis for Unconventional-Reservoir Development, Unconventional Resources
Technology Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineering, Texas.

Liang, B., Khan, S., Puspita, D.P., et al., 2016, Improving Unconventional Reservoir Factory-Moel Development by an
Integrated Workflow with Earth Model, Hydraulic Fracturing, Reservoir Simulation, and Uncertainty Analysis,
Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineering, Texas.

You might also like