Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional … · 2019. 5. 20. · the current...

$: Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional … · 2019. 5. 20. · the current well configurations from an OOIP of 66 MMSTB. • Remaining oil infill opportunities$
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019

Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional and Tight Oil Reservoirs

Case Studies Using VSM (Volumetric Sweep Mapping) Simulator

Rocky Mottahedeh, P.Geol, P.Eng. UOGC & SMART4D

Contributors & Co-Writers: Senior Geologist Jessica Metez, P.Geol. Canamax Energy Ltd.

Jeremy Krukowski, P.Eng. President & COO Canamax Energy Ltd.

Dina Hayter Heavy Oil Play Montney Grimshaw Tight Oil

Technical

Luncheon

Calgary, Feb 20th 2019

Canadian

Well Logging

Society


Background on United & SMART4D

• United was established in 1991

• Geosteering & Geomodelling since 1998, with over a 1000 horizontals experience built into the software. SMART4D has been built in Calgary by United

• Experience with all resource types integrated

• SMART4D released as a Geosteering Product 2015

• Integrated Reservoir Studies, Geo-modelling &Post Drill reviews; VSM (Volumetric Sweep Mapping) Simulation for modelling drainage of wells and fracs

Extensive worldwide

experience


What's SMART4D and What does United do?

• SMART4D is a 3D geo-modelling, Geosteering & visualization software from United similar to Petrel. It is lighter and more nimble than most geo-models out there. As a Geosteering software it provides a forward vision by proactively catching deviations early. It provides a technical advantage as clients put it.

• Automated 3D kriging allows all geoscience professionals to work with immersive 3D models. Much lower annual cost than comparable 3D models, user-friendly, cloud-based or on networks

• Rapid initialization with templates to load small or very large model areas data sets from tabular and .las files. Builds multiple structures, isopachs and models properties (Gamma, Porosity, resistivity, YM, etc.) within 5 minutes.


What's SMART4D?

• Load structures from pre-gridded data or seismic sources. Do petrophysics, digitize logs and maps, geo-ref images, plan wells, Calculate In Place Volumes of Oil & Gas, HCPV, Pay maps from multiple 3D properties, upscale/downscale to VSM

• Connect to rig data through WITSML, report to web and Real-time Panels & 3D interpretations on the fly

• Use the client geomodel framework from the Cloud, United delivers Reservoir Studies services for development/infill potential.

• Planning and modelling of drainage of wells and frac shadows using United’s VSM volumetric simulator at much lower costs than flow simulation studies. VSM brings in core, production, Displacement Efficiencies and EURs to assess the unswept regions of conventional and tight reservoirs, allowing for better planning of well pads, spacing and reduction of risk on capital.


VSM Simulator Conventional Oil Process

• Very high resolution HCPV model (5-15 million cells)

• EURs and production history

• Completions data

• Displacement Efficiency (DE)

• Initial estimated profile of drainage

• Watch for pressure or production interference


VSM Simulator Conventional Oil Process

Vertical well drainage

The process removes volume from HCPV model until it gets a match (20 iterations).

0

1

00

%

Rec

ove

ry

HCPV

Computer takes a cone shaped model and distributes it along a horizontal well, frac wings are ellipsoids and controlled by the geoscience and engineer knowing the stress directions.

Horizontal well drainage

HCPV


VSM Simulator Results

High Resolution Remaining HCPV 3D View

Heavy Oil or Conventional Oil Example Tight Oil Play Example with Fracs

Vertical well Drainage

Horizontal well drainage

Remaining HCPV 2D View

High Resolution Remaining HCPV 3D View

Remaining HCPV 2D View

ℎ


Dina Sands Hayter Heavy Oil Field VSM for Reducing Risk on Infills Iteratively Matching EURs to Movable HCPV in 3D

• 12m pay at 800m TVD • 16º API oil, Pi 5.6 Mpa • OOIP 69 MMSTB • Bottom water drive • 25m well spacing • Incremental Recovery

6.2 MMSTB 17% to 26% • 95/95 successful infills

Early Application of VSM


VSM Process has Evolved: Frac Shadows in Tight Reservoirs

Dozens of integrated reservoir studies and hundreds of infills drilled on its results in Heavy Oil, conventional plays, waterfloods and then to Tight Plays

Tight Plays

Waterfloods Heavy Oil

Microseismic Visualization

Horizontal Well Panel

3D Visualization


Learnings from Completions Histories in a Complex Play Bakken Example

Larger fracs footprints in a poor HCPV area

Non frac’d wells

Vertical well’s drainage Different sized fracs in the same well

Failed fracs at toe of well

Could have improve results by larger fracs in better HCPV Frac Shadowing

High

High Resolution HCPV*h Map

Medium

Low

Residual Oil after VSM

Overlapping frac shadows


CanaMax Grimshaw Montney Oil Case Study

Purpose and Methodology: Understanding Well Spacing, Frac Shadows, Optimizations and Infill Potential

Thank you to co-contributors at CanaMax

Senior Geologist Jessica Metez, P.Geol. Jeremy Krukowski, P.Eng. President & COO


Reservoir Properties in Montney play in Grimshaw Reservoir Parameters Value

Initial Pressure, KPa

7300

Current Average Reservoir Pressure, KPa

>90% of Pi

Porosity, % 14

Water Saturation 40%

Oil Column ~8m

FVF

1.05

OOIP in Model Area: 66 MMSTB

Recovery to date, with current development and expected RF:

2%, 6% 12%

83-23W5

150 MSTB

EUR Average 135 MSTB New Wells 175 MSTB

Wells

Grimshaw


CanaMax Grimshaw Montney Oil Case Study

• CanaMax’s utilized United’s cloud hosted software SMART4D to build 3D model and geosteer wells

• United further characterized the reservoir and modelled well and frac drainages

• Grimshaw Triassic Pool is on the subcrop edge of Montney Formation in embayment graben complexes

• Siliclastic shoreface deposits (coarsening upward)

• Canamax Engineering team provided the reservoir data production, fracs

and EURs

• OOIP was calculated and potential infills evaluated

Units B & C

Montney B

Montney Montney A

Montney C


Horizontal Panel Showing HCPV in the Montney B&C

HCPV at >9%, <65% SW 66MSTB Sept 2018 EUR 129 MSTB

16-30-83-23W5

Dynamic Profile shows most of the HCPV is concentrated in the B in this well

Entry from shale plug into the reservoir

-212 SL

A

A


Montney B&C Isopach in Grimshaw

Contour values in meters


Montney B&C Net Pay in Grimshaw


Mapped Initial Pressure Map Grimshaw Montney

Cum oil to Sept. 2018 in MSTB

Date of Initial Pressure

Overall pressure in the modelled area is still near original, 7.3 MPa.

There are 2 injectors in the field


Montney B&C Defined Downscaled Area for HCPV Model

600x500x30 = 9,000,000 cells

Voxel sizes are X: 8.6m Y: 8.8m Z: 0.5m


Montney Grimshaw 3D view of Remaining HCPV map after VSM run

A A’

North

A

A’

After VSM simulation is completed on the Original HCPV, the system also outputs

the remaining summation of HCPV to a single map


• VSM runs consider the contributions of each wellbore and frac

• There are up to 20 iterations of solutions until the process comes up to a matching stimulated

Reservoir volume to the EUR value or production to date within 5% precision

• Cutoff used are 9% on Porosity and 65% on SW, no gamma cutoff was implemented

• The Displacement Efficiency (DE) used was 0.35

• There were about 2000 frac intervals in this model

• Use of external interference data from production decline or pressure interference for matches

Sept. 6th 2018

VSM Simulation Process at EURs


VSM runs with Drainage Footprints at Cum Oil Sept 2018 and at EURs

• Cum Oils to date posted at toe of horizontals • Drainage shapes indicate matched VSM at Sept 2018

Cum to Sept 2018 1.194 MMSTB / 66.6 MMSTB OOIP =1.8 % produced

Based on EUR’s of 4.043 MMSTB / 66.6 MMSTB OOIP =6.1% recovery

• EURs posted at toe of horizontals • Drainage shapes indicate matched VSM at EURs


35% Displacement Efficiency (DE) and VSM Parameters

14

-28

Pro

po

sed

HZ

1

Pro

po

sed

HZ

2

16

-29

13

-28

-83

-23

W5

Inje

cto

r

EURs MSTB

Base Case and expected footprint of drainage

Sub-project area


Sensitivity Testing of Displacement Efficiency and VSM Parameters

14

-28

Pro

po

sed

HZ

1

Pro

po

sed

HZ

2

16

-29

13

-28

-83

-23

W5

Inje

cto

r

14

-28

Pro

po

sed

HZ

1

Pro

po

sed

HZ

2

16

-29

13

-28

-83

-23

W5

Inje

cto

r

DE=15% DE=5%

Potential Issue with frac shadow touching the injector drainage space (Solution is not to frac the last few planned stages).


3D views of Waterflood area around 13-28 injector at the Heel The filtered view shows remaining HCPV after VSM

Learning from the model: Proposed HZ2 completion should avoid the last 3-4 frac stages at the heel.


Learnings from the study VSM results

• This reservoir is in early stages of development with less than 2% produced with 6% recovery with the current well configurations from an OOIP of 66 MMSTB.

• Remaining oil infill opportunities between current wells and new areas can be a basis for the next development plans and fracs to improve production and recovery from this reservoir.

• VSM is helpful in reducing risk on capital for future drilling and field optimization


PROFESSIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Interpretations of logs, whether made directly from original logs or by electronic data processing from actual or digitized data, or from electronically transmitted data or otherwise, or any recommendation based upon such interpretations, are opinions based on inferences from physical or other measurements, empirical factors, and assumptions. Such inferences are not infallible and different opinions may exist. Accordingly we do not warrant the accuracy or correctness of any such interpretation or recommendation. Under no circumstances should any such interpretation or recommendation be relied upon as the sole basis for any drilling, production, completion, or financial decision. We do not guarantee results. We make no warranties, express or implied. Under no circumstances shall we be liable for consequential damages.

Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional … · 2019. 5. 20. · the current...

Documents

Transcript of Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional … · 2019. 5. 20. · the current...