Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Shale & Tight Reservoir Simulation
Jim Erdle - VP/USA & LA
OCTOBER 2012
AGENDA
How CMG’s simulators are being used o Shale/Tight reservoir modelling features
o Shale/Tight reservoir modelling workflows
How other simulators are being used
Shale Operators using CMG’s simulators
SPE References
CMG’S PRODUCTS IMEX – Black Oil reservoir simulator
GEM – EOS-compositional reservoir simulator
STARS – Thermal/Reactive-Transport reservoir simulator
GEOMECH – Geomechanics simulator (GEM & STARS)
BUILDER – Model creation/editing GUI
RESULTS – Simulator output display GUI
WINPROP – PVT modelling
CMOST – SA, UA, Aided History-Matching & Optimization
MODELLING FEATURES PVT
o Black Oil treatment (IMEX) primary production of dry gas, wet gas, black oil, volatile oil and gas
condensate reservoir fluids
o Multi-component EOS Treatment (GEM) Adds ability to model Multi-Component fluids including non-HC
gases (e.g. CO2, H2S, acid gas, Flue Gas & N2) for EOR
MODELLING FEATURES
Single vs Dual Porosity o Single Porosity if no open
natural fractures
o Dual Permeability if open
natural fractures
MODELLING FEATURES Adsorped Components
o Single gas component (new in IMEX for 2012)
o Multiple gas or oil components (GEM)
MODELLING FEATURES
Diffusion o Multi-component molecular diffusion (GEM)
Competitive with darcy flow in some very low matrix perm
situations
Injection of solvents to aid liquid recovery (e.g. CO2,
propane, etc.)
Sequestration of CO2, acid gas, etc.
MODELLING FEATURES Relative Perm & Capillary Pressure
o Independent curves for matrix, natural fractures &
propped fractures Usually straight line for natural & propped fracs
Matrix can be oil-wet or water-wet (which is it?)
Can include hysteresis if modelling solvent injection
Can also include wettability alteration via relative
permeability interpolation (new in GEM for 2012)
MODELLING FEATURES Compaction/Dilation
o Pressure-dependent Compaction/Dilation tables for
modelling degradation of permeability & porosity In propped fractures, natural fractures & matrix, including
hysteresis for modelling shut-in periods
o Effective Stress-dependent Compaction/Dilation tables
when using GEOMECH (GEM) Barton-Bandis approach for modelling of natural fracture perm vs
Effective Stress
MODELLING FEATURES Compaction/Dilation
Unpropped Fracture
Compaction Table
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Pressure (psi)
Co
nd
uc
tiv
ity
Mu
ltip
lie
r
Propped Fracture
Compaction Table
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Pressure (psi)
Co
nd
uc
tiv
ity
Mu
ltip
lie
r
MODELLING FEATURES
Initial Fluid Saturations o Non-equilibrium initialization of fluids for
modelling presence and flowback of frac fluids in
propped & natural fractures
MODELLING FEATURES Explicit Gridding of Propped Fractures
o LS-LR-DK (TARTAN) grids to model propped fracs
o Single Plane or Complex geometry
o Non-Darcy flow in propped fracs
MODELLING FEATURES Explicit Gridding of Propped Fractures
Single Plane geometry Complex geometry
MODELLING FEATURES Explicit Gridding of Propped Fractures
o Automatic generation of TARTAN grids (BUILDER)
o SRV delineation (BUILDER) Import & Filtering of Micro Seismic data
Interactive selection on simulation grid display
o TARTAN grids can be applied to any parent grid geometry
Cartesian & Corner Point Grids
MODELLING FEATURES Explicit Gridding of Propped Fractures
Hydraulic Fracture Wizard Microseismic Wizard
MODELLING FEATURES Time-dependent Propped Fractures
o TARTAN grids can be added when wells are fracked Don’t have to put all grids in place at beginning of run!
Efficient way to model re-fracs & multi-well models
o Compaction/Dilation Tables (with Hysteresis) can be
time-dependent (coming in Dec 2012)
MODELLING WORKFLOW
2. Build single well
base models
5. Build multi-well
models
3. Perform SA & AHM
on single well
models
4. Forecast EUR for
single well models
6. Perform OPT of
multi-well models
1. Choose CMG simulator
with required physics
Base Case Results Initial model with assumed values does
not match historical production data o Too much gas produced o Not enough water produced
Sensitivity Analysis using CMOST
Reservoir parameter uncertainty
o Fracture Permeability
o Fracture Width
o Pressure Dependent Permeability of Fracture (CROCKTAB)
o Langmuir Adsorption parameters
o Diffusivity
o Initial Water Saturation in Fractures (to model water from the
HF fluid)
Sensitivity Analysis using CMOST
History Match Error Reduction Objective Function Error Reduced from 55% to 1.4%
21
History Match – Final Results
History Match – Final Results History match error reduction
o Overall HM error reduced from 55% to 1.4%
o Final Gas Rate Match error = 0.70%
o Final Water Rate Match error = 2.13%
Total Calendar Time to complete HM
o Engineering Time = 10 hours
o Computing Time = 15 hours (8 concurrent 2-way parallel jobs)
o Total calendar time = 25 hours
ANOTHER APPROACH TO GRIDDING
Representation of Single-Plane Propped Fractures o Some are using Logarithmically Refined grids over entire model in
both X & Y directions (LS-GR-DK grids) to model single-plane fracs
Mangum
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500
-900
-800
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0100
-800
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0100
200
0.00 180.00 360.00 feet
0.00 55.00 110.00 meters
File: ECLIPSE_Global Grid Refinement.datUser: kpatelDate: 7/27/12
Scale: 1:2374Y/X: 1.00:1Axis Units: ft
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Porosity 2011-07-24 K layer: 1
Mangum
-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500
-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500
-90
0-8
00
-70
0-6
00
-50
0-4
00
-30
0-2
00
-10
00
10
02
00
-90
0-8
00
-70
0-6
00
-50
0-4
00
-30
0-2
00
-10
00
20
0
0.00 195.00 390.00 feet
0.00 60.00 120.00 meters
File: CMG_Local Grid Refinement.datUser: kpatelDate: 7/27/12
Scale: 1:2480Y/X: 1.00:1Axis Units: ft
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Porosity 2011-07-24 K layer: 1
Global Logarithmic Grids CMG’s TARTAN Grids
ANOTHER APPROACH TO GRIDDING
TARTAN grids = Same Results in 1/10 the time!
ANOTHER APPROACH TO GRIDDING
TARTAN grids = Same Results in 1/10 the time!
ANOTHER APPROACH TO GRIDDING
TARTAN grids = Same Results in 1/10 the time!
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Pre
ssu
re
Time
Mangum
400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
0.00 75.00 150.00 feet
0.00 25.00 50.00 meters
File: cmg_local grid refinement.irfUser: kpatelDate: 7/27/12
Scale: 1:1148Y/X: 1.00:1Axis Units: ft
791
1,193
1,596
1,998
2,401
2,803
3,205
3,608
4,010
4,413
4,815
Pressure (psi) 2039-11-24 K layer: 1
Pressure 40 ft from propped frac is the same!
USING CMG FOR SHALE/TIGHT RESERVOIRS • Anadarko
• Apache
• BG Group
• BHP Billiton
• BP
• Chesapeake
• Chevron
• Devon
• Encana
• EOG
• ExxonMobil
• Marathon
• Matador
• Noble Energy
• Reliance
• Rosetta Resources
• Samson
• Shell
• Statoil
• Talisman
• Total
• Venoco
• Vitruvian
• XTO
SPE REFERENCES CSUG/SPE 148710-PP “Shale Gas Modeling Workflow:
From Microseismic to Simulation – A Horn River Case
Study” o Joint paper with CMG and NEXEN
IPTC-14940 “Evaluation in Data Rich Fayatteville Shale
Gas Plays – Integrating Physics-based Reservoir
Simulations with Data Driven Approaches for
Uncertainty Reduction” o by Yitian Xiao et al (ExxonMobil) presented at 2012 IPTC Bangkok
SPE REFERENCES SPE 147596 “Shale Oil Production Performance from
a Stimulated Reservoir Volume” o by A.S. Chaudhary, C. Economides & R. Wattenbarger (TAMU)
presented at 2011 ATCE - Denver
SPE 146975 “Heat Transfer Applications for the
Stimulated Reservoir Volume” o by S. Thoram & C. Economides (TAMU) presented at 2011 ATCE -
Denver
SPE REFERENCES
SPE 132093 “Accurate Simulation of Non-Darcy Flow
in Stimulated Fractured Shale Gas Reservoirs” o by B. Rubin (CMG) presented at 2010 WRM – Anahiem
Thank you!
Any Questions?
