Reservoir Modeling with GSLIB

Case Studies / Modeling Tips

Sequential Approach to Reservoir Modeling
Question / Answer Time
A Small Example
Glimpses of Case Studies

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Reservoir Modeling
Establish Stratigraphic Layering / Coordinates

Cell-based Lithofacies Object-Based Lithofacies

Modeling Modeling
Repeat for Multiple Realizations

Porosity Modeling
Model Uses
1. Volumetric / Mapping
2. Assess Connectivity
3. Scale-Up for Flow Simulation
4. Place Wells / Process Design
Permeability Modeling

Main geostatistical modeling flow chart: the structure and stratigraphy of each reservoir
layer must be established, the lithofacies modeled within each layer, and then porosity and
permeability modeled within each lithofacies.

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Introductory Example
Existing Vertical Well
Top of Reservoir

Fashioned after a real problem and the geological data is based on outcrop observations
A horizontal well is to be drilled from a vertical well to produce from a relatively thin oil
column.
The goal is to construct a numerical model of porosity and permeability to predict the
performance of horizontal well including (1) oil production, (2) gas coning, and (3)
water coning.

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Introductory Example -
Petrophysical Data
Lithofacies 1
10,000 Lithofacies 2
Lithofacies 3
Permeability, md

Code Lithofacies Average Coefficient K v :K h

Perm. of variation ratio
0 Coal and Shale 1 md 0.00 0.1
1 Incised Valley Fill Sandstone 1500 md 1.00 1.0
2 Channel Fill Sandstone 500 md 1.50 0.1
3 Lower Shoreface Sandstone 1000 md 0.75 0.8

10
0 0.4
Porosity

Permeability characteristics of each lithofacies: the coefficient of variation is the

average permeability divided by the standard deviation, Kv is the vertical permeability,
and Kh is the horizontal permeability.

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Flow Simulation

Gridding for flow simulation. For numerical efficiency, the vertical gridding is
aligned with the gas-oil fluid contact and the oil-water fluid contact. The black
dots illustrate the location of the proposed horizontal well completions.
Representative three-phase fluid properties and rock properties such as
compressibility have been considered. It would be possible to consider these
properties as unknown and build that uncertainty into modeling; however, in this
introductory example they have been fixed with no uncertainty.

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Simple Geologic Models
Layercake Model Gaussian Simulation Model

Smooth Model

Three simple assignments of rock properties (a) a layercake or horizontal

projection model, (b) a smooth inverse distance model, and (c) a simple Gaussian
simulation.
Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada
 Simple Geologic Models:
Flow Results
1000
Oil Production Ratio (m3/day)

1.0
1600

Gas Oil Ratio

Water Cut

0 3000 0 3000 0 3000

Time (days) Time (days) Time (days)

Flow results: layercake model - solid line; smooth model - long dashes; simple
geostats model -- short dashes.

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Better Geologic Model
(a) Geostatistical Model (b) Geostatistical Model - Flow Grid

The first geostatistical realization shown on the geological grid and the flow
simulation grid

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Multiple Realizations

01 06 11 16

02 07 12 17

03 08 13 18

04 09 14 19

05 10 15 20

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Geologic Models - Flow Results
10,000 1.0 2000

Gas Oil Ratio

Oil Production

Water Cut
m3/day

0 3000 0 0 3000
3000
Time, days Time, days Time, days

Flow results from 20 geostatistical realizations (solid gray lines) with simple
model results superimposed

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Uncertainty
Cumulative Oil Production at 1000 Days Time of Water Break Through

layercake first sgsim

first sgsim smooth
smooth
layercake

Frequency
Frequency

200 800 0 1600

Cumulative Oil Production, x 10^3 m^3 Water Break Through, days

The cumulative oil production after 1000 days and the time to water breakthrough.
Note the axis on the two plots. There is a significant difference between the
simple models and the results of geostatistical modeling (the histograms).

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Major Arabian Carbonate
Reservoir
GOSP 2 & 7 Area study commissioned by Zone Porosity % Layer
Saudi Aramco
SPE29869 paper Integrated Reservoir
Modeling of a Major Arabian Carbonate 3A
Reservoir by J.P. Benkendorfer, C.V. Deutsch,
P.D. LaCroix, L.H. Landis, Y.A. Al-Askar,
A.A. Al-AbdulKarim, and J. Cole
Oil production from wells on a one-kilometer 3B
spacing with flank water injection. There has
been significant production and injection
during the last 20 years 3A
This has had rapid and erratic water movement
uncharacteristic of the rest of the field a
reason for building a new geological and flow 3B
simulation models

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Modeling Process
Matrix Large-Scale
Lithology Porosity
Permeability Permeability

Standard GSLIB software (because it was for Saudi Aramco)

Novel aspect was modeling permeability as the sum of a matrix permeability
and a large-scale permeability
fractures
vuggy and leached zones
bias due to core recovery
Typical modeling procedure that could be applied to other carbonates and to
clastic reservoirs

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Indicator Simulation of
Lithology
Vertical Indicator Variogram: Layer 8 Horizontal Indicator Variogram: Layer 8
120 degrees
0.25 0.25
30 degrees

0 0.8 0 100
Distance Distance
Limestone N

Dolomite

1 km

Presence / absence of limestone / dolomite was modeled with indicator simulation

(SISIM) on a by-layer basis

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Gaussian Simulation of

Porosity
Variogram model for porosity in limestone:
Vertical Porosity Variogram Horizontal Porosity Variogram
Layer 8 (Limestone) Layer 8 (Limestone)

1.0 110 degrees

0.8
Variogram

Variogram
20 degrees

0 0
0 0.8 0 10,000
Distance (m) Distance (m)
Variogram model for porosity in dolomite:
Vertical Porosity Variogram Horizontal Porosity Variogram
Layer 8 (Limestone) Layer 8 (Limestone)
110 degrees
0.8 Variogram 1.0
Variogram

20 degrees

0 0
0 0.8 0 10,000
Distance (m) Distance (m)

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Gaussian Simulation of
Porosity

Porosity models for limestone and dolomite were built on a by-layer basis with
SGSIM and then put together according to the layer and lithology template

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Indicator Simulation of
Matrix Permeability
Group 1 - Limestone Vertical Matrix k Variogram Layer 5 (Limestone)
2.0
Means: Correlation: Linear Transform:
Porosity = 21.57 Pearson = 0.73 Slope = 0.129

Variogram
Permeability = 295.7 Spearman = 0.70 Intercept = -1.224
10,000
Permeability (md)

0
0 1.0
Stratigraphic Distance (m)
Horizontall Matrix k Variogram Layer 5 (Limestone)
2.0 20 degrees
110 degrees

0.01 Variogram
0
40
Porosity (%) 0
0 12000
Stratigraphic Distance (m)
Numbers above x-axis are porosity class percentages
Numbers at corners are porosity/permeability class percentages

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Gaussian Simulation of
Large-Scale Permeability
Vertical Large Scale Variogram Layer 5 Horizontal Large Scale Variogram Layer 5
2.0 2.0
isotropic

Variogram
Variogram

0 0
0 1.0 0 12000
Stratigraphic Distance Stratigraphic Distance

Matrix permeability at each well location yields a Khmatrix

Well test-derived permeability at each well location yields a Khtotal
Subtraction yields a Khlarge
Vertical distribution of Khlarge scale on a foot-by-foot basis is done by
considering multiple CFM data

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Gaussian Simulation of
Large-Scale Permeability

Large-scale permeability models were built on a by-layer basis with SGSIM

Matrix permeability and large-scale permeability models were added together
to yield a geological model of permeability
A calibrated power average was considered to scale the geological model to
the resolution for flow simulation

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Flow Simulation: First
History Match
3400
Datum Pressure (psi)

1600
100
Water Cut (%)

0
1975 1980 1985 1990 1994
1940 1995
Year

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada

 Flow Simulation: Fourth
History Match
3400
Datum Pressure (psi)

1600

100
Water Cut (%)

0
1975 1980 1985 1990 1994
1940 1995
Year

Centre for Computational Geostatistics - University of Alberta - Edmonton, Alberta - Canada