Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
both superposition and noise, which must be accounted for in 5. Check if the cumulative cross correlation is greater than a
analyzing the data. threshold value. If it is greater, then the set of injectors is
accepted, otherwise all injectors are rejected. As in step 2,
the choice of threshold is an arbitrary one. For our cases,
Procedure we used a threshold value of 0.5.
Superposition between several injectors has a significant effect 6. Repeat the step 1 to 5 for other producers in the field.
to the response of a producer. It can be constructive or The difficulties in the above procedure are to determine the
destructive. Figure 1 shows a typical five-spot pattern where cross correlation threshold values. There are two thresholds
one producer could be influenced by four injectors. In reality, applied, the first is the minimum cross correlation for the first
the producer can also be influenced by injectors that are injector [step 2], the second is the minimum cumulative cross
outside the pattern. The effect of multiple injectors on the correlation for the set of injectors [step 5]. Besides these
producer can be constructive or destructive, as shown in thresholds, we may need to use another one, the minimum
Figure 2. The basic assumption for this work is that if two increment in cumulative cross correlation to be considered
injectors are in good communication with a common producer, significant. If an injector is added and the increase in
it is expected that the cross correlation of the summation of the cumulative cross correlation is lower than this threshold, we
water injection rates to the liquid production rate is higher need to check on the trend of cumulative cross correlation
than the cross correlation of each single injector. from after this injector (X) is added to when the last injector
Unfortunately, it is practically impossible to distinguish (Y) is accepted in the set of supporting injectors. If the
whether a slight increase in cross correlation is due to increment in cumulative cross correlation when each injector
superposition effect or due to noise in field rate data. (from X to Y) is added is always lower than the minimum
However, if there is a significant jump in cross correlation increment threshold, then all injectors from X to Y are
value when rate from an injector is added, most probably it is insignificant, thus should be rejected. However, if one injector
caused by constructive interference in injection rates rather (Z), in between X and Y, is added and the cumulative cross
than caused by the noise. correlation increment is higher than the increment threshold,
The procedure utilized in this study is summarized below. then all injectors from X to Z are accepted. Injectors between
1. Select one producer from the field. Z to Y should be analyzed by using similar process. We will
2. Determine an injector that has the highest cross illustrate the process by using the data in Table 1. Consider
correlation value to the selected producer among all the Prod-1, when Inj-3 and Inj-4 were added, the cumulative cross
directly adjacent wells. For a five-spot pattern water correlation increments were lower than the minimum
flood, we select all the four injectors surrounding the increment (0.005 for this case) for both Inj-3 and Inj-4. Thus,
producer. The highest cross correlation value has to be both injectors were rejected. However, for Prod-2, when Inj-4
greater than a minimum threshold. The choice of a was added, the cumulative cross correlation increased more
threshold value is an arbitrary one; in our study, we than the minimum threshold. Thus, both Inj-3 and Inj-4 were
selected a value of 0.25. However, when other values are accepted.
selected, the results are not significantly different. If no Below, we will show the application of the procedure
adjacent injector has cross correlation higher than the explained above, first to a synthetic reservoir, and second to
threshold, the search proceeds to step 5, i.e., search the real field data from North Robertson Unit, Texas.
injectors outside the pattern.
3. After determining the injector with the highest cross
correlation, find an injector that causes highest significant Application to synthetic field
improvement in cross correlation. This is achieved by The field is a rectangular homogeneous reservoir, which is
adding the injection rates series from the the previous compartmentalized into several zones by sealing barriers.
injector [step 2] and a newly selected injector, and Figure 4 shows the map of the field. There are 12 5-spot
calculating cross correlation between the total injection patterns with 12 producers and 20 injectors. The water flood
rates series and liquid production rates series from the performance was simulated using ECLIPSE simulator. The
producer. The newly selected injector is changed, one at a water injection rates at all injectors were varied monthly, and
time, until we find an injector which provides the most the responses of producers were recorded as monthly liquid
improvement in cross correlation. The selected injectors production rates. The above procedure was applied to the
are restricted to certain pre-defined regions from a field. Table 2 shows the results of all producers in the field.
producer. An example is shown in Figure 3. This distance Note that cross correlation values are very high for all wells.
limit is utilized to restrict the search, as it is unlikely that Clearly, we actually did not need to utilize any threshold in
an injector too far away from a producer has a significant this case. The reason of these high values is that the synthetic
impact on a producer. reservoir has closed outside boundaries. The water injected
4. Repeat step 3 until there is no increase in cross correlation could not flow outside the reservoir boundaries. Real fields
when a new injector is added. almost never have perfect closed boundaries, consequently
some of the injected water travels outside the boundaries and
52224 RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT USING PRODUCTION DATA 3
can not be recovered. This will reduce the cross correlations of communication in section 329. Since the primary recovery
real fields. Figure 5 shows the mapping of all the from this section was good, this area is a prime candidate for
connectivities between injectors and producers in the synthetic infill wells. In 1996, six producers and two injectors were
field. It is shown that all connectivities occured within each drilled in the section. The cumulative production from each of
compartment, except for connectivities between Producer 204 the new producer is shown in the box. All the producers were
and Injector 107 and between Producer 208 and Injector 113. economically succesful. Figure 9 shows a plot of monthly
However, if we analyzed carefully, the increments in cross production versus time for section 329. As evident, the new
correlations are insignificant when the injectors were added. In wells have added new reserves to the section without robbing
both cases, by adding an injector, the correlation coefficient any production from old wells.
increased by less than 0.002. These two connections represent In contrast, the evaluation of section 5 shows strong
the smallest increase among all pairs. In Figure 5, we connectivities. Figure 10 shows that there are east-west
differentiated a weak connectivity as a dashed-line connecting connectivities trends in section 5, especially in middle part of
the injector with the producer. Here we defined a weak the section. This is consistent with the field observation about
injector as an injector that increased the cross correation lower the response of producers when injection rates at injectors
than 0.005. If we use this threshold to eliminate any injectors, were altered. Although section 5 was also good primary
the revised map is shown in Figure 6. If a minimum producer, it may not be a good candidate for infill wells.
increment threshold were applied, the weak injectors would be By applying the above procedure, we can obtain the idea
rejected, thus the connectivities dissappeared. For a real field about the trends in reservoir connectivities. This information,
data, it is necessary to apply this threshold since noise in data along with other available production data, such as flowing
can be deceiving. pressures, water cut, etc., and data from other sources (for
Since communications between injectors and producers are example geological data and logs), can be utilized to optimize
localized within each compartment, it is possible to infer the performance of water flood, such as determining the
possible barriers in the reservoir from the lack of connectivity, possible locations to drill infill wells, water allocations, etc. It
see Figures 5 and 6. We can see that the inferred barriers are can also be utilized for reservoir modeling purpose.
good approximations to the real barriers.
Conclusions
Application to real field data Based on this study, following conclusions can be drawn:
Observing that the procedure worked for synthetic case, we A new methodology for quantifying connectivity between
tested the procedure into real field data. As previously injectors and producers in a mature water flood is
mentioned, for field cases, the injected water can flow outside proposed.
the lease boundary, resulting in lower cross correlations The methodology identifies strong connectivities and
between injectors and producers. Furthermore, field data potential barriers in the field.
contains noise due to inaccuracy in measurements. Due to The method is validated by applying it to a synthetic as
these factors, the cross correlations are generally lower than well as to field data.
the synthetic case. For the synthetic case, the cumulative cross
correlation values are very high (greater than 0.9).
Considering these factors, we assumed that the meaningful References
cumulative cross correlation for the field data utilized here 1. Heffer, K.J., Fox, R.J., and McGill, C.A.: Novel Techniques
was 0.5, i.e., we accepted the set of injectors if their ShowLinks between Reservoir Flow Directionality, Earth
cumulative cross correlation was greater than this threshold. Stress, Fault Structure and Geomechanical Changes in Mature
For threshold of accepting the first adjacent well, we use 0.25. Waterfloods, paper SPE 30711 presented at the SPE ATCE,
We also did not accept weak connectivities, i.e., if the Dallas, TX, October 1995.
increments in cross correlations were lower than 0.005. 2. Refunjol, B.T., and Lake, L.W.: Reservoir Characterization
The field data were taken from North Robertson Unit Based on Tracer Response and Rank Analysis of Production and
Injection Rates, presented at the 4th International Reservoir
section 329 and Section 5 in Gaines County, Texas, see Characterization Technical Conference, Houston, TX, March 2-
Figure 7. Production in this field began in the early 1950s 4, 1997.
with 40 acres spacing. The water flood was initiated in 1987 3. Jansen, F.E.: Reservoir Description from Production Data,
on a converted 20 acres spacing. All producers were on Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tulsa, 1996.
artificial lift, where the wellbore pressure was considered 4. Panda, M.N., and Chopra, A.K.: An Integrated Approach to
fairly constant. This made the unit suitable for the above Estimate Well Interactions, paper SPE 39563 presented at the
procedure since changes in production rates at producers were SPE India OGCE, New Delhi, India, February 1998.
likely caused by changes in injection rates at injectors only,
not by changes in wellbore pressure.
Figure 8 shows the map of section 329. The connectivities
between injectors and producers illustrate lack of direct
4 SOERIAWINATA AND KELKAR 52224
Figure 3-Pre-defined search neighboorhood for Producer x. The Figure 4-Areal map of the synthetic reservoir, triangles represent
black triangles represent the injectors that are inside this Injectors, circles represent producers.
producer pre-defined region, while white triangles represent
injectors outside the neighboorhood.
Figure 5-Connectivities between Injectors and Producers in Figure 6-Connectivities between Injectors and Producers in
synthetic field, solid lines represent significant correlations, synthetic field if the weak correlations were eliminated.
dashed lines stand for weak correlations. The bold lines are the
reservoir barriers inferred from the lack of connectivity.
6 SOERIAWINATA AND KELKAR 52224
Section 329
Injector
3517 3518 3519 3520
Producer
Infill producer
3505 3506 3507 3508 3802
Infill injector
3207
3531
1404 2217 2218
Figure 7-The sketch map of North Robertson Unit, Gaines County, Figure 8-Section 329 of North Robertson Unit. There is lack of
Texas. connectivity between Injectors and Producers. The numbers
inside the boxes are the cumulative oil production for the infill
wells in Stock Tank Barrels.
25000
Producer
303 304 403 404
15000
10000 293
101 201 202
203
295
0
1006 1007 1008 1009
94/01 95/01 96/01 97/01 98/01
time (years)
Figure 9-Aggregate oil rate of NRU Section 329. The solid line Figure 10-Section 5 of North Robertson Unit. The bold lines are
represents total oil rate from all producers including the infill the possible barriers inferred from lack of connectivity.
wells, the dashed line represents total oil rate without the infill
wells.