The present techniques relate to computer implementation of tools for the interpretation of reservoir connectivity models. In particular, an embodiment of the present techniques relates to a mathematical graph structure (representation) of key elements controlling the connectivity of a reservoir.
This section is intended to introduce various aspects of the art, which may be associated with embodiments of the disclosed techniques. This discussion is believed to assist in providing a framework to facilitate a better understanding of particular aspects of the disclosed techniques. Accordingly, it should be understood that this section is to be read in this light, and not necessarily as admissions of prior art.
Three-dimensional (3D) model construction and visualization commonly employs data stored in a data volume organized as a structured grid or an unstructured grid. Data stored in a data volume may comprise a data model that corresponds to one or more physical properties about a corresponding region that may be of interest. Physical property model construction and data visualization have been widely accepted by numerous disciplines as a mechanism for analyzing, communicating, and comprehending complex 3D relationships. Examples of physical regions that can be subjected to 3D analysis include the earth's subsurface, facility designs, and the human body.
In the field of hydrocarbon exploration, analysis of a reservoir's connectivity facilitates characterizing the reservoir. Moreover, connectivity analysis may affect decisions made in all phases of hydrocarbon resource development of an asset's life cycle, such as exploration and production. Connectivity assessments can affect decisions such as determining optimal well locations in addition to the management reservoir decisions.
In one technique, a set of rules and processes allows geologists to identify compartments from reservoir geometry. Typically, compartment identification starts with structure maps. Structural features, stratigraphic features, and the limits of top seal or base seal define compartment boundaries. Even without knowledge of fluid contacts, depths, and pressure conditions, one can identify potential compartment boundaries from the maps based on a few simple rules of the structural and stratigraphic features. That is, one can evaluate the relevance of compartment boundaries defined by top-seal or base-seal. Traditional spill points on convex-upward closures and down-dip tips of faults or other structural or stratigraphic barriers are only relevant on top-of-reservoir maps. Break-over points, including those associated with concave-upward closures and up-dip tips of faults or other structural or stratigraphic barriers, are only relevant on base-of-reservoir maps. Even though the rules to identify compartments based on the structure maps are relatively simple, the process of identification typically relies on the geologists' manual identification of compartment boundaries and contact relations among boundaries based on the contour or cross section displays of structural surfaces.
Current processes for compartment identification rely on geologists' knowledge and step-by-step procedures to first identify compartment boundaries. The contacts from compartment boundaries may then be used to identify the spill-over or break-over points among compartments. The current methods may make handling the uncertainty of the structural and stratigraphic features difficult, if not impossible. Various examples of reservoir connectivity analysis techniques are discussed in the following paragraphs.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0027666 to Frankel discloses methods and systems for characterizing connectivity in reservoir models using paths of least resistance. An embodiment is stated to be related to computer modeling of the transmission of properties, such as the flow of fluids within subsurface geological reservoirs. Further, an embodiment is stated to include a method of evaluating the transmission of a property within a subsurface geologic reservoir using a graph-theory single source shortest path algorithm.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0154505 to Kim, et al. discloses a rapid method for reservoir connectivity analysis using a fast marching method. A model of a portion of the reservoir is stated to be divided into cells, where each cell is stated to have a volume and some attributes, and wherein a speed function is stated to be assigned to a portion of the cells. A reference cell is stated to be chosen. A connectivity between cells in the reservoir is stated to be determined by solving an Eikonal equation that describes the travel time propagation, said propagating front progressing outward from a reference cell until an ending condition is met, said Eikonal equation being solved by a fast marching method with propagation velocity as a function of spatial position being provided by the speed function. Regions of the reservoir are stated to be characterized by their connective quality to the reference cell using the connectivity.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,549,879 to Cullick, et al. discloses determining optimal well locations from a 3D reservoir model. Various constraints are stated to be satisfied. In the first stage, the wells are stated to be placed assuming that the wells can only be vertical. In the second stage, these vertical wells are stated to be examined for optimized horizontal and deviated completions. This solution is stated to be expedient, systematic, and provide a good first-pass set of well locations and configurations. The first stage solution is stated to formulate the well placement problem as a binary integer programming (BIP) problem which uses a “set-packing” approach that exploits the problem structure, strengthens the optimization formulation, and reduces the problem size. Commercial software packages are readily available for solving BIP problems. The second stage is stated to sequentially consider selected vertical completions to determine well trajectories that connect maximum reservoir pay values while honoring configuration constraints including completion spacing constraints, angular deviation constraints, and maximum length constraints. The parameter to be optimized in both stages is stated to be a tortuosity-adjusted reservoir quality. An algorithm is stated to be disclosed for calculating the tortuosity-adjusted quality values.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,069,149 to Goff, et al. discloses a process for interpreting faults from a fault-enhanced 3D seismic attribute volume. The method is stated to include the steps of extracting faults from a 3D seismic attribute cube, and then calculating a minimum path value for each voxel of the 3-D seismic attribute cube. A fault network skeleton is stated to be extracted from the 3D seismic attribute cube by utilizing the minimum path values which correspond to voxels within the 3D seismic attribute cube. The individual fault networks are stated to be labeled, and a vector description of the fault network skeleton is stated to be created. The fault network skeleton is stated to be subdivided into individual fault patches wherein the individual fault patches are the smallest, non-intersecting, non-bifurcating patches that lie on only one geologic fault. The individual fault patches are then stated to be correlated into a representation of geologic faults.
International Patent Application Publication No. WO2007/106244 to Li, et al. discloses a method for quantifying reservoir connectivity using fluid travel times. In the method, fluid travel time models are stated to be constructed from a reservoir model. Then, reservoir connectivity measures are stated to be calculated from the fluid travel time models and analyzed to determine a location for at least one well. Based on the analysis, one or more wells may be drilled and hydrocarbons produced.
L. M. Hirsch et al., “Graph Theory Applications to Continuity and Ranking in Geologic Models”, Computers & Geosciences, Volume 25, Number. 2, p. 127-139, states that most of the currently available analysis tools for geologic modeling cannot easily handle irregularities such as faults, onlap and truncations, or they are strongly limited in the dimensions of the models that are amenable to analysis. The article proposes an algorithmic graph theory for computationally efficient, continuity analysis. This method is stated to treat irregularities in the geologic model including unstructured grids of unequal cell sizes. Geologic models are stated to be transformed from a cell-based representation to a node- and connection-based representation, where both nodes and arcs (connections) can have associated properties. Quantities such as connected components, maximum flow, shortest paths, minimum-cost paths and many other connectivity measures are stated to be determined. These connectivity measures are stated to involve connections whose lengths or values are weighted by reservoir parameters such as porosity and permeability. Because graph algorithms are efficient, connectivity is stated to be rapidly evaluated for different wells that might become important during reservoir development. Graph theory algorithms are stated to be applied to rank the anticipated flow performance of different geologic model realizations, to aid in delineating contiguous regions of similar character for use in up-scaling, as well as to assess how well a scaled-up model preserves the continuity of the original detailed geologic model.
P. J. Vrolijk, et al., “Reservoir Connectivity Analysis—Defining Reservoir Connections and Plumbing”, SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Kingdom of Bahrain (2005), states that gas, oil, and water fluids in channelized or faulted reservoirs can create complex reservoir plumbing relationships. Variable hydrocarbon contacts can develop when some, but not all, fluids are in pressure communication. Reservoir Connectivity Analysis (RCA) is a series of analyses and approaches to integrate structural, stratigraphic, and fluid pressure and composition data into permissible but non-unique scenarios of fluid contacts and pressures. RCA provides the basis for fluid contact and pressure scenarios at all business stages, allowing the creation of fluid contact and segmentation scenarios earlier in an exploration or development setting, and the identification of by-passed pays or new exploration opportunities in a production setting. Combining conventional structural and fault juxtaposition spill concepts with a renewed appreciation of fluid breakover (contacts controlled by spill of pressure-driven, denser fluid, like water over a dam) and capillary leak (to define the ratio of gas and oil where capillary gas leak determines the gas-oil contact (GOC)), permissible but non-unique scenarios of the full fluid fill, displacement, or spill pathways of a hydrocarbon accumulation are defined, comprising single or multiple reservoir intervals.
Additional examples of known reservoir data analysis techniques can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 6,823,266 to Czernuszenko et al., “Reservoir Connectivity: Definitions, Strategies, and Applications” by M. Meurer et al., and PCT Application PCT/US2008/084327 to M. Meurer et al.
An exemplary embodiment of the present techniques comprises a method for reservoir connectivity analysis in a three-dimensional (3D) earth model where a subsurface region is identified. A baseline reservoir connectivity model is obtained from the subsurface region, and compartments and/or connections are determined from the baseline reservoir connectivity model using reservoir connectivity analysis. A set of 3D objects is created, representing the compartments and/or connections from the 3D earth model and a mathematical graph structure is created from the 3D objects. Reservoir connectivity scenarios are evaluated based on analysis of the mathematical graph structure and 3D objects.
Advantages of the present techniques may become apparent upon reviewing the following detailed description and drawings of non-limiting examples of embodiments in which:
In the following detailed description section, specific embodiments are described in connection with preferred embodiments. However, to the extent that the following description is specific to a particular embodiment or a particular use, this is intended to be for exemplary purposes only and simply provides a description of the exemplary embodiments. Accordingly, the present techniques are not limited to embodiments described herein, but rather, it includes all alternatives, modifications, and equivalents falling within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.
At the outset, and for ease of reference, certain terms used in this application and their meanings as used in this context are set forth. To the extent a term used herein is not defined below, it should be given the broadest definition persons in the pertinent art have given that term as reflected in at least one printed publication or issued patent.
The term “break-over” refers to a loss of a denser fluid driven by overpressure at a break or saddle in the base-seal.
The term “cell” refers to a collection of faces, or a collection of nodes that implicitly define faces, where the faces together form a closed volume. Additionally, the term “face” refers to an arbitrary collection of points that form a surface.
The terms “compartment” or “reservoir compartment” refer to a trap containing no identified barriers that would allow the contact between two fluids to reach equilibrium at more than one depth.
The term “computer component” refers to a computer-related entity, either hardware, firmware, software, a combination thereof, or software in execution. For example, a computer component can be, but is not limited to being, a process running on a processor, a processor, an object, an executable, a thread of execution, a program, or a computer. One or more computer components can reside within a process or thread of execution and a computer component can be localized on one computer or distributed between two or more computers.
The terms “non-transitory, computer-readable medium”, “tangible machine-readable medium” or the like refer to any tangible storage that participates in providing instructions to a processor for execution. Such a medium may take many forms, including but not limited to, non-volatile media, and volatile media. Non-volatile media includes, for example, NVRAM, or magnetic or optical disks. Volatile media includes dynamic memory, such as main memory. Computer-readable media may include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexible disk, hard disk, magnetic tape, or any other magnetic medium, magneto-optical medium, a CD-ROM, any other optical medium, a RAM, a PROM, and EPROM, a FLASH-EPROM, a solid state medium like a holographic memory, a memory card, or any other memory chip or cartridge, or any other physical medium from which a computer can read. When the computer-readable media is configured as a database, it is to be understood that the database may be any type of database, such as relational, hierarchical, object-oriented, and/or the like. Accordingly, exemplary embodiments of the present techniques may be considered to include a tangible storage medium or tangible distribution medium and art-recognized equivalents and successor media, in which the software implementations embodying the present techniques are stored.
The term “DCA” refers to dynamic reservoir connectivity analysis. In a DCA work flow, a reservoir connectivity model based on the geologic time scale and production time scale reservoir connectivity for the subsurface region is constructed, wherein the reservoir connectivity model includes a plurality of production scenarios each including reservoir compartments, connections, and connection properties for each scenario. Each of the production scenarios is tested and refined based on production data for the subsurface region.
The term “earth model” refers to a geometrical model of a portion of the earth that may also contain material properties. The model is shared in the sense that it integrates the work of several specialists involved in the model's development (non-limiting examples may include such disciplines as geologists, geophysicists, petrophysicists, well log analysts, drilling engineers and reservoir engineers) who interact with the model through one or more application programs.
The term “graph theory” refers to the study of graphs as mathematical structures used to model pairwise relations between objects from a certain collection. Graph theory has been used extensively in solving problems such as traffic simulation of transport networks, circuit analysis, flow analysis, reservoir simulation, etc.
The term “property” refers to data representative of a characteristic associated with different topological elements on a per element basis. Generally, a property could be any computing value type, including integer and floating point number types or the like. Moreover, a property may comprise vectors of value types. Properties may only be valid for a subset of a geometry object's elements. Properties may be used to color an object's geometry. The term “property” may also refer to characteristic or stored information related to an object. Application of the appropriate definition is intuitive to one skilled in the art of computer science.
The term “RCA” refers to reservoir connectivity analysis. In a RCA work flow, all stratigraphic and structural reservoir compartments are identified and the connections that trace the path of fluid displacement when a droplet of oil or gas is added to any individual reservoir compartment are described. A fundamental assumption of RCA is a steady-state fluid distribution appropriate to a pre-production fluid state.
The term “seal” refers to impermeable rocks that keep hydrocarbons in place and prevent them from escaping to the surface. An example of a seal would be a layer of the rock type shale.
The term “seismic data” refers to a multi-dimensional matrix or grid containing information about points in the subsurface structure of a field, where the information was obtained using seismic methods. Seismic data typically is represented using a structured grid. Seismic attributes or properties are cell or voxel based. Seismic data may be volume rendered with opacity or texture mapped on a surface.
The term “spill” refers to an escape of a more buoyant fluid at a break or cusp in the top-seal.
The term “structured grid” refers to a matrix of volume data points known as voxels. Structured grids are typically used with seismic data volumes or medical imaging.
The term “topological elements” refers to the building blocks of an object. Points, faces, or cells are the most common examples.
The term “unstructured grid” refers to a collection of cells with arbitrary geometries. Each cell can have the shape of a prism, hexahedron, or other more complex 3D geometries. When compared to structured grids, unstructured grids can better represent actual data since unstructured grids can contain finer cells in one area with sudden changes in value of a property, and coarser cells elsewhere where the value of the property changes more slowly. Finer cells may also be used in areas having more accurate measurements or data certainty, for example, in the vicinity of a well. The flexibility to define cell geometry allows the unstructured grid to represent physical properties better than structured grids. In addition, unstructured grid cells can also better resemble the actual geometries of subsurface layers because cell shape is not restricted to a cube and may be given any orientation. However, in an unstructured grid, cell geometries and locations are explicitly stored and, thus, an unstructured grid may require a substantial amount of memory. Unstructured grids may be employed in connection with reservoir simulation models. Note that the term unstructured grid relates to how data is defined and does imply that the data itself has no structure. For example, one could represent a seismic model as an unstructured grid with explicitly defined nodes and cells. The result would necessarily be more memory intensive and inefficient to process and visualize than the corresponding structured definition.
The terms “visualization engine” or “VE” refer to a computer component that is adapted to present a model and/or visualization of data that represents one or more physical objects.
The term “voxel” refers to the smallest data point in a 3D volumetric object. Each voxel has unique set of coordinates and contains one or more data values that represent the properties at that location. Each voxel represents a discrete sampling of a 3D space, similar to the manner in which pixels represent sampling of the 2D space. The location of a voxel can be calculated by knowing the grid origin, unit vectors and the indices of the voxel. As voxels are assumed to have similar geometries (such as cube-shaped), the details of the voxel geometries do not need to be stored and, thus, structured grids require relatively little memory. However, dense sampling may be needed to capture small features, therefore increasing computer memory usage requirements.
The term “well” refers to a surface location with a collection of wellbores. Wells may be visually rendered as a point or a glyph, along with a name.
The term “wellbore” refers to a constituent underground path of a well and associated collections of path dependent data. A wellbore may be visually rendered as a collection of connected line segments or curves. Wellbores may also be visually rendered cylindrically with a radius.
While for purposes of simplicity of explanation, the illustrated methodologies are shown and described as a series of blocks, it is to be appreciated that the methodologies are not limited by the order of the blocks, as some blocks can occur in different orders and/or concurrently with other blocks from that shown and described. Moreover, less than all the illustrated blocks may be required to implement an example methodology. Blocks may be combined or separated into multiple components. Furthermore, additional and/or alternative methodologies can employ additional, not illustrated blocks. While the figures illustrate various serially occurring actions, it is to be appreciated that various actions could occur concurrently, substantially in parallel, and/or at substantially different points in time.
An aspect provides a process for constructing, describing, and interrogating a permissible reservoir connectivity model and may be referred to as a “Graph/Geometrical Connectivity Model” (GGCM). The process may use geometrical algorithms or operations to construct geometrical representations of reservoir connectivity analysis (RCA) specific geological objects in a 3D earth environment and may utilize graph theory algorithms to derive a mathematic graph structure of a group of these objects. One aspect may apply to a permissible reservoir connectivity model based on a static geological time scale, and also to a dynamic production time scale fluid connection and distribution for a given subsurface region. An aspect may also provide a systematic construct which may be used to make current RCA and DCA work flows more suitable for a 3D earth environment.
Prior to finalizing a permissible GGCM, compartments in the reservoir of interest should be identified. Identification of reservoir compartments may be performed by analysis of reservoir geometry. To facilitate the explanation of the processes described herein, an explanation of compartment identification and connectivity analysis on a static geological time-scale is provided.
Generally, the work process of reservoir connectivity analysis (RCA) on a static time scale yields a logically permissible, but non-unique interpretation of compartments or connections in a petroleum region. This work process is generally accomplished by first identifying compartments based on geologic interpretation of seismic data, such as horizons, fault planes and stratigraphic framework. Then, fluid connections and exit points can be identified for each compartment based on the previous steps and fluid interpretation, such as petro-physical log interpretation, fluid temperature, fluid pressure, fluid composition, and capillary pressure. Next, fluid contacts can be identified. From the information above, a diagram showing compartments and connections can be constructed among compartments.
An assumption of the RCA process described above is a steady-state fluid distribution appropriate to a pre-production fluid state. Extension of RCA to a production-scale reservoir connectivity analysis may be known as “dynamic connectivity analysis” (DCA). To accomplish DCA, steady-state system fluid exits can be established using production data. Second, compartment exits and paths to system fluid exits can be established using production data. Third, interpreted elements can be identified that control fluid contacts, and associated uncertainties can be documented with interpreted elements. Fourth, fluid pressure evolution can be evaluated, and cumulative pre-well production data can be reconciled with fluid contacts and pressure evolution. Fifth, any changes in the chemistry of produced fluids can be reconciled. Finally, saturation and pressure changes can be interpreted based on 4D seismic data. 4D seismic data may refer to initially performing a seismic survey of a subsurface region, then performing one or more later seismic surveys of the same region while attempting to duplicate the acquisition parameters and conditions as closely as possible.
In the workflow described above, multiple production-time specific static diagrams, charts, and 2D maps or cross section views may be necessary to comprehend the (dynamic) relationships of fluid movement, a structurally complex reservoir, and production over time. Because of constraints of the available data and the complexity of the multi-phased model scenarios, coupled with the uncertainty of exact geometries of compartments and exact spill over or break over locations, it can be difficult for geologists and reservoir engineers to make consistent predictions without mathematical abstraction and assistance.
In one aspect, a method is provided for mathematical data abstraction into a systematic framework to facilitate decision making processes at every stage of reservoir connectivity analysis. The method can use a mathematical framework, known as graph theory, to provide data representation and algorithms. The use of graph-theoretic methods together with geometrical processing in a 3D earth environment may facilitate the analysis of multi-phase or time-variant connection networks and complex reservoir connectivity models. Further, it may also improve RCA/DCA model construction and quality by the incorporation of uncertainty regarding the exact location of compartments and fluid contact elevations.
In graph theory, a graph G(V,E) is a mathematic abstraction, represented as a collection of points (V: vertices) and lines (E: edges) connecting subsets of points. In a directed-graph representation, an edge can be represented by a directed arc. A path in a graph can be represented as a sub-graph of G having a series of vertices and edges.
In the field of geometrical constructions, geological objects represented as gridded-surfaces, polygons, points, or geo-body cells, can be identified and constructed using geometrical-based algorithms such as surface intersection algorithms and other topological analyses. An aspect of the disclosed techniques may also utilize geometrical processes, such as surface intersection and flow path constructions based on the 3D geological objects for the purposes of visualization and analysis of the dynamic fluid flows in a 3D earth environment. If regular and/or unstructured reservoir grids are used, cell-based algorithms such as geo-body detection can also be used. Three-dimensional geological objects such as compartments, spill/break-over locations, and flow paths may correspond to vertices, edges and combinations of those in the graph G(V,E).
A method of constructing a GGCM is described herein that utilizes a graph-theoretic framework and geometrical objects within a 3D environment for the purpose of construction, prediction and analyses of reservoir connectivity models. Graph-based algorithms and tools may be used to assist in identifying critical flow paths and topological relations among various compartments. Geometrical algorithms may be used to create and isolate key geometrical objects to interactively visualize geometric relationships between compartments and interpreted connection pathways in a 3D visual environment.
At block 106, a graph representation G(V,E) of the RCA/DCA model can be created. The graph representation may be referred to as a GGCM. The compartments identified at block 104 can be denoted by vertices with properties such as, for example, fluid contacts and compartment pressure information. The connections representing connecting paths of gas, oil, or water identified at block 104 can be denoted by edges with properties such as spill point depths, break-over locations, and fluid flow capacity.
At block 108, the analysis sessions occur. During the analysis sessions, various constructs from a graph G can be used to evaluate the reservoir connectivity options in the GGCM. Each construct is represented by a sub-graph of G.
Block 110 determines if the resulting GGCM is satisfactory. If the result is satisfactory, the method ends. If the result is not satisfactory, process flow continues to block 112. At block 112, alternate scenarios and interpretations may be tested by modifying the model. Modifying the model may entail splitting or merging compartments and their connection pathways based on the contact information, fluid properties or production data. The method then returns to block 104.
At block 204, the depths where the fluid spill over and break over from one compartment to another can be identified. The common contacts such as gas-oil (GOC), gas-water (GWC) or oil-water (OWC) may be extracted and recorded as 3D depth contour polygons on the top seal and base seal surfaces. At block 206, a set of 3D geometric objects can be created based on the identification processes described at block 204. Compartment-scale container surfaces are created to represent reservoir compartments, and flat planes/polygons are created to denote the different fluid contacts. Sets of points are created and used to represent the spill and break-over point locations. Each of these 3D geometric objects are created from the original top and base seal surfaces via the geometric operation of surface cutting and intersection.
According to certain aspects of the disclosed techniques, geometrical operations and algorithms may be used to determine the boundaries of compartments and may also be used to identify, for example, saddle locations on top or base seal surfaces which are potential spill or break-over points.
On the top seal map 302 depicted in
The bottom seal map 304 depicted in
The cross section 306 depicted in
Once the compartments are identified, the depths where the fluid spills and breaks-over from one compartment to another can be determined as discussed herein at block 204 of
Compartments A 402 and B 404 are identified and their geometries are represented as regions bounded by the top seal surface and the GOC planes. Fluid contact elevations, shown by dashed lines 412, may be determined from well data or from the analysis of gas and oil pressure gradients as shown on the right-hand side of the
As discussed herein, at block 206 of
After block 206 of
As discussed herein at block 106 of
An embodiment may utilize a graph abstraction and corresponding analytical algorithms to identify areas of interest like weakly and strongly connected pathways. At the same time, the methods described herein may be used to visually query the geometric components of the 3D earth model to further investigate the relationship of the underlying connectivity model.
As discussed at block 108 of
The example shown in
In any event, same process of evaluating reservoir connectivity in GGCM can be repeated until a satisfactory result is achieved. A satisfactory result may be a result that matches well with a cell-based flow simulation result, also known as history matching. As described herein at block 112, alternate scenarios and interpretations may be tested by modifying the model by splitting or merging compartments and their connection pathways based on the contact information, fluid properties and/or production data.
Aspects disclosed herein may be used to perform hydrocarbon management activities such as extracting hydrocarbons from a subsurface region or reservoir. Other hydrocarbon management activities may include hydrocarbon production, hydrocarbon exploration, identifying potential hydrocarbon resources, identifying well locations, determining well injection and/or extraction rates, acquiring, disposing of and/or abandoning hydrocarbon resources, reviewing prior hydrocarbon management decisions, and any other hydrocarbon-related acts or activities.
The computer system 1200 may also include computer components such as computer-readable media. Examples of computer-readable media include a random access memory (RAM) 1206, which may be SRAM, DRAM, SDRAM, or the like. The computer system 1200 may also include additional computer-readable media such as a read-only memory (ROM) 1208, which may be PROM, EPROM, EEPROM, or the like. RAM 1206 and ROM 1208 hold user and system data and programs, as is known in the art. The computer system 1200 may also include an input/output (I/O) adapter 1210, a communications adapter 1222, a user interface adapter 1224 a display driver 1216 and a display adapter 1218. In an exemplary embodiment of the present techniques, the display adapter 1218 may be adapted to provide a 3D representation of a 3D earth model. Moreover, an exemplary embodiment of the display adapter 1218 may comprise a visualization engine or VE that is adapted to provide a visualization of extracted data. The I/O adapter 1210, the user interface adapter 1224, and/or communications adapter 1222 may, in certain embodiments, enable a user to interact with computer system 1200 in order to input information.
The I/O adapter 1210 may connect a storage device(s) 1212, such as one or more of hard drive, compact disc (CD) drive, floppy disk drive, tape drive, etc. to computer system 1200. The storage device(s) may be used when RAM 1206 is insufficient for the memory requirements associated with storing data for operations of embodiments of the present techniques. The data storage of the computer system 1200 may be used for storing information and/or other data used or generated as disclosed herein. User interface adapter 1224 couples user input devices, such as a keyboard 1228, a pointing device 1226 and/or output devices to the computer system 1200. The display adapter 1218 is driven by the CPU 1202 to control the display on a display device 1220 to, for example, display information or a representation pertaining to a portion of a subsurface region under analysis, such as displaying a visualization of data extracted by defining a region of interest in terms of 3D objects, according to certain aspects and methodologies disclosed herein.
The architecture of system 1200 may be varied as desired. For example, any suitable processor-based device may be used, including without limitation personal computers, laptop computers, computer workstations, and multi-processor servers. Moreover, disclosed aspects and methodologies may be implemented on application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) or very large scale integrated (VLSI) circuits. In fact, persons of ordinary skill in the art may use any number of suitable structures capable of executing logical operations according to the embodiments.
Input data to the computer system 1200 may include geologic and geophysical data volumes/models such as seismic volumes, geological models and reservoir models. Input data may additionally include engineering data, such as drilled well paths and/or planned well paths. Computational implementations according to exemplary embodiments of the present techniques may include connections and/or access to computational implementations of processes to model and investigate the engineering and reservoir model properties and path creation method. Relevant connections may include facilities to perform geological model analysis, reservoir simulation, engineering analysis or the like.
The present techniques may be susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, and the exemplary embodiments discussed above have been shown only by way of example. However, the present techniques are not intended to be limited to the particular embodiments disclosed herein. Indeed, the present techniques include all alternatives, modifications, and equivalents falling within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.
This application is the National Stage entry under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT/US2011/058977 that published as WO 2012/115689 and was filed on 2 Nov. 2011, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/444,921, filed on 21 Feb. 2011 entitled RESERVOIR CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS IN A 3D MODEL, the entireties of which are incorporated by reference herein.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2011/058977 | 11/2/2011 | WO | 00 | 6/26/2013 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2012/115689 | 8/30/2012 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5468088 | Shoemaker et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5708764 | Borrel et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5992519 | Ramakrishman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6035255 | Murphy et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044328 | Murphy et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6070125 | Murphy et al. | May 2000 | A |
6219061 | Lauer et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6236994 | Swartz et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6353677 | Pfister et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6373489 | Lu et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6490528 | Cheng et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6516274 | Cheng et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6519568 | Harvey et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6549879 | Cullick et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6643656 | Peterson | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6757613 | Chapman et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6765570 | Cheung et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6766254 | Bradford et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6772066 | Cook | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6823266 | Czemuszenko et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6823732 | Corghi | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6826483 | Anderson et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6829570 | Thambynayagam et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6912467 | Schuette | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6912468 | Marin et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6980939 | Dhir et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6980940 | Gurpinar et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6993434 | Cheng et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7003439 | Aldred et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7027925 | Terentyev et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031842 | Musat et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7050953 | Chiang et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7069149 | Goff et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7079953 | Thorne et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7096172 | Colvin et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7098908 | Acosta et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7136064 | Zuiderveld | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7181380 | Dusterhoft et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7203342 | Pedersen | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7248258 | Acosta et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7280932 | Zoraster et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7281213 | Callegari | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7283941 | Horowitz et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7298376 | Chuter | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7314588 | Blankenship | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7330791 | Kim et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7337067 | Sanstrom | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7362329 | Zuiderveld | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7363866 | Gnedenko et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7366616 | Bennett et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7395252 | Anderson et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7409438 | McConnell et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7412363 | Callegari | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7437358 | Arrouye et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7451066 | Edwards et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7458062 | Coulthard et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7460957 | Prange et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7478024 | Gurpinar et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7512543 | Raghuraman et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7519976 | Blevins | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7539625 | Klumpen et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7548873 | Veeningen et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7565243 | Kim et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7576740 | Dicken | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7584086 | Frankel | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7596481 | Zamora et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7603264 | Zamora et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7606666 | Repin et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7616213 | Chuter | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7620534 | Pita et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7627430 | Hawtin | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7630914 | Veeningen et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7652779 | Wu et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7657407 | Logan | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7657414 | Zamora et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7668700 | Erignac et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7684929 | Prange et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7711550 | Feinberg et al. | May 2010 | B1 |
7716028 | Montaron et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7725302 | Ayan et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7739089 | Gurpinar et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7743006 | Woronow et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7796468 | Kellogg | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7814989 | Nikolakis-Mouchas | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7876705 | Gurpinar et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7886285 | Asselin et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7913190 | Grimaud et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7925483 | Xia et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7925695 | McConnell et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7953585 | Guipinar et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7953587 | Bratton et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7970545 | Sanstrom | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7986319 | Dommisse et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7991600 | Callegari | Aug 2011 | B2 |
7995057 | Chuter | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8005658 | Tilke et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8044602 | Smith | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8055026 | Pedersen | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8064684 | Ratti et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8073664 | Schottle et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8094515 | Miller et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8103493 | Sagert et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8145464 | Arnegaard et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8155942 | Sarma et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8199166 | Repin et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8204728 | Schottle et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8249844 | Dale et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8259126 | Chuter | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8280635 | Ella et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8296720 | Coulthard et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8301426 | Abasov et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8325179 | Murray et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8346695 | Pepper et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8364404 | Legendre et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8381815 | Karanikas et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8392163 | Liu | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8427904 | Miller et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8560476 | Anderson et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8578000 | Van Wie et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8638328 | Lin | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8727017 | Hilliard et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8731872 | Czernuszenko et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8731873 | Walker et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8731875 | Hilliard et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8736600 | Lin et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8751208 | Brouwer | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8797319 | Lin | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8803878 | Andersen et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8812334 | Givens et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8849639 | Brown et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8849640 | Holl et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8868540 | Ture et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8931580 | Cheng et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
9123161 | Adair et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
20020049575 | Jalali et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020177955 | Jalali et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20040012670 | Zhang | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20050119959 | Eder | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050120242 | Mayer et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050171700 | Dean | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060224423 | Sun et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060235666 | Assa | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060247903 | Schottle | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060265508 | Angel et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070027666 | Frankel | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070088707 | Durgin et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070185696 | Moran et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070199721 | Givens et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070266082 | McConnell et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070294034 | Bratton et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080088621 | Grimaud et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080154505 | Kim et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080165185 | Smith et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080306803 | Vaal et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090027380 | Rajan et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090027385 | Smith | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090037114 | Peng et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090125362 | Reid et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090132170 | Krueger et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090157367 | Meyer et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090182541 | Crick et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090222742 | Pelton et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090229819 | Repin et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090240564 | Boerries et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090295792 | Liu et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090299709 | Liu | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090319243 | Suarez-Rivera et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100057418 | Li et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100191516 | Benish et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100206559 | Sequeira, Jr. et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100214870 | Pepper et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100225642 | Murray et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100235154 | Meurer | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100283788 | Rothnemer et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110002194 | Imhof | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110029293 | Petty et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110044532 | Ho11 et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110054857 | Moguchaya | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110063292 | Holl | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110074766 | Page et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110099547 | Banga | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110107246 | Vik | May 2011 | A1 |
20110112802 | Wilson et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110115787 | Kadlee | May 2011 | A1 |
20110126192 | Frost et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110153300 | Ho11 et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110161133 | Staveley et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20120137281 | Kleiner et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120150449 | Dobin | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120166166 | Czernuszenko | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130112407 | Cheng et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130140037 | Sequeira, Jr. et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130179136 | Tiwari | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130198669 | Gao | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130317798 | Cheng et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130338984 | Braaksma et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20130338987 | Cheng | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140278117 | Dobin et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140365192 | Cheng et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150049084 | Cheng et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150094994 | Sequeira, Jr. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20160003008 | Uribe et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160011332 | AlQahtani | Jan 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1230566 | Feb 2002 | EP |
1036341 | Feb 2016 | EP |
WO 2000014574 | Mar 2000 | WO |
2007106244 | Sep 2007 | WO |
2009094064 | Jul 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
La Pointe, P. R., & Wallmann, P. C. (Jan. 1, 1996). Three-dimensional Flow Analysis In Complex Fracture Networks Through Graph Theory-based Search Algorithms. American Rock Mechanics Association. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for corresponding PCT Application No. PCT/US2011/058977, 13 pgs. |
L.M. Hirsch et al., “Graph Theory Applications to Continuity and Ranking in Geologic Models”, Computers & Geosciences vol. 25 (1999), 127-139. |
P. Vrolijk et al., “Reservoir Connectivity Analysis—Defining Reservoir Connections and Plumbing”, SPE 93577 (2005) 23 pgs. |
M. Ellen Meurer et al., “Reservoir Connectivity: Definitions, Strategies, and Applications”, AAPG Search and Discovery Article 90077, 1 pg. |
Larry T. Sumpter et al., “Interpreting Static and Dynamic Connectivity Across Potential Structural and Stratigraphic Boundaries: A Case Study in a Mature Oil Field”, AAGP Search and Discovery Article 90078 presented at 2008 AAPG Annual Convention. |
Bharat, K, et al. (2001), “Who Links To Whom: Mining Linkage Between Web sites”, Proceedings of the 2001 IEE Int'l Conf. on Data Mining, pp. 51-58. |
Cabral, B., et al (1995), “Accelerated Volume Rendering and Tomographic Reconstruction Using Texture Mapping Hardware”, IEEE in Symposium on Volume Visualization, pp. 91-98, 131. |
Crawfis, R., et al. (1992), “Direct Volume Visualization of Three-Dimensional Vector Fields”, Proceedings of the 1992 Workshop on Volume Visualization, pp. 55-60. |
Dhillon, S. (2008), “Managing License Incompatibilities Distributing Eclipse Application Stacks”, Thesis, pp. 1-116. |
Drebin, R., et al. (1988), “Volume Rendering”, Computer Graphics, the Proceedings of 1988 SIGGRAPH Conference, vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 65-74. |
Lorensen, W., et al., (1987), “Marching Cubes: A High-Resolution 3D Surface Construction Algorithm”, Computer Graphics, The Proceeding of 1987 SIGGRAPH Conference, vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 163-169. |
McCann, P., et al. (2003), “Horizontal Well Path Planning and Correction Using Optimization Techniques,” J. of Energy Resources Tech. 123, pp. 187-193. |
Mugerin. C., et al. (2002), “Well Design Optimization: Implementation in GOCAD,” 22nd Gocade Meeting, Jun. 2002 pp. 1-14. |
Rainaud, J.F., et al. (2004), “WOG—Well Optimization by Geosteering: A Pilot Software For Cooperative Modeling On Internet,” Oil & Gas Science & Tech. 59(4), pp. 427-445. |
Reed, P., et al. (2003) “Simplifying Multiobjective Optimization Using Genetic Algorithms,” Proceedings of World Water and Environmental Resources Congress, 10 pgs. |
Udoh, E., et al. (2003), “Applications of Strategic Optimization Techniques To Development and Management of Oil and Gas Resources”, 27th SPE Meeting, 16 pgs. |
Yuen, B.B.W., et al. (2011) “Optimizing Development Well Placements Within Geological Uncertainty Utilizing Sector Models” SPE 148017. Paper prepared for presentation at the SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, Oct. 9-11, 2011. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130338984 A1 | Dec 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61444921 | Feb 2011 | US |