individual project

17
AUTOMATED DEVELOPMENT OPTIMIZATION OF FULMAR FIELD By: Vishnu Prasanna Raj Supervised by: Mike Christie 1

Upload: vishnu-p-raj

Post on 18-Aug-2015

12 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Individual Project

AUTOMATED DEVELOPMENT OPTIMIZATION OF FULMAR FIELD

By: Vishnu Prasanna Raj

Supervised by: Mike Christie

1

Page 2: Individual Project

OUTLINE

ObjectivesIntroductionMethodologyResultsConclusionFurther Suggestions

2

Page 3: Individual Project

OBJECTIVES

1. To do Automated development optimization of Fulmar field using Raven Software.

2. Comparison of the Automated and Manually done field development optimization.

3. Comparison of the Single Objective Optimization(SOO) technique and Multi Objective Optimization(MOO) technique.

3

Page 4: Individual Project

INTRODUCTION

Conventional Approach Unconventional Approach

Single Objective Optimization (SOO) Multi Objective Optimization (MOO)

Data summary(Fulmar Field) Three way dip anticline structure STOIIP of 907MMSTB Two OWC (Major Fault)

4

Page 5: Individual Project

METHODOLOGY

Optimization Parameters

5

Page 6: Individual Project

METHODOLOGY

1. Optimization of Number of wells

6

Page 7: Individual Project

METHODOLOGY

2. Optimization of Well Locations

7

Page 8: Individual Project

METHODOLOGY

3. Optimization of Recovery Method Water Flooding Polymer Flooding

4. Optimization of Flow Rates Production Rates Injection Rates

5. Optimization of Perforation Interval Production wells Injection wells

8

Page 9: Individual Project

RESULTS

1. Total Development Optimization SOO • MOO

Best Score for SOO • Best Score for MOO

FOPT = 647 MMSTB FOPT = 654 MMSTB

FWCT = 65%

9

Page 10: Individual Project

RESULTS

1. Total Development Optimization Number Of Production wells • Type of Production wells

10

Page 11: Individual Project

RESULTS

1. Total Development Optimization Number Of Injectors • Recovery Methods

11

Page 12: Individual Project

RESULTS

12

2. Comparison with Manual Optimization MOO SOO

Page 13: Individual Project

RESULTS

13

3. Comparison of SOO & MOO

Page 14: Individual Project

CONCLUSION

Automated optimization Improves Recovery Saves time MOO technique faster convergence

Raven All the parameters were optimized in a single

simulation

14

Page 15: Individual Project

FURTHER SUGGESTIONS

Calculation of NPV

More Recovery Methods Gas Flooding & Low Salinity water Injection

15

Page 16: Individual Project

Thank You

16

Page 17: Individual Project

BACKUP SLIDESCOMPDAT

-- well P Y Ztop Zbot Status well ID orientation

P1 $i1 $j1 1 $z1 {($a < 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} 7* /

P1 {$i1+1*($x1-$y1)} {$j1+1*(1-($x1+$y1))} $za1 $za1 {($a > 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} 7* /

P1 {$i1+2*($x1-$y1)} {$j1+2*(1-($x1+$y1))} $za1 $za1 {($a > 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} 7* /

P1 {$i1+3*($x1-$y1)} {$j1+3*(1-($x1+$y1))} $za1 $za1 {($a > 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} 7*/

I1 $I1 $J1 1 $Z1 OPEN 7* / /

WCONPROD

P1 {($b < 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} LRAT 3* $Pr1 1* 5000 / /

WCONINJ

I1 WAT {($c < 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} RATE $Ir1 3* 10000 /

I1P WAT {($d < 0.5)?"OPEN":"SHUT"} RATE $Ir1 3* 10000 / /

WPOLYMER

-- well name concentration

I1P 1.0 / /