Course Outline

Reservoir Simulation
Semester long or 40 hours condensed course

Instructor: Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
President & Senior Reservoir Advisor
Greatland Solutions, LLC
PO Box 3645 Greenwood Village, CO 80155-3645 USA
Phone: (720) 261-7616 FAX: (720) 746-6325
E-mail: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Course Goals
Reservoir Simulation is designed to introduce students to the fundamental concepts and
principles of reservoir simulation; to recognize strengths and limitations of reservoir simulation; to
make intelligent decisions on whether to simulate or not to simulate, and to solve practical
problems using state-of-the-art reservoir simulators.

Course Description
Reservoir Simulation covers the theory and use of reservoir simulation in petroleum reservoir
and production engineering. Course topics include the need for reservoir simulation, mathematical
description of the reservoir, discretization techniques, and numerical solutions to single-phase and
multiphase flow equations, concepts of transmissibility, model initialization, history matching and
prediction. Practical aspects of reservoir simulation are emphasized and demonstrated through
hands-on exercises and class project(s).

Prerequisites: knowledge of calculus and basic applied math or permission of Instructor

Required Materials
Course notes, technical papers, and references to be assigned in class. Some of the resources
may be available online from the Internet. The course notes may be supplemented with the
following SPE Textbook:

Reservoir Simulation Course Outline & Syllabus Page 1 of 3

Prof. David Ogbe, Ph.D., PE.
 Ertekin, T, J.H. Abou-Kassem and G. King (EAK, 2001): Basic Applied Reservoir Simulation, SPE
Textbook Series, Volume 7, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, Texas. 2001.

Recommended Reading
Mattax, Calvin C. and Robert L. Dalton (MAD, 1990): Reservoir Simulation, Monograph Volume
13, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, Texas. 1990.

Aziz, K and A. Settari (KAS, 1979): Petroleum Reservoir Simulation, Elsevier Applied Science
Publishers. 1979.
Fanchi, J.R. (JRF, 1997): Principles of Applied Reservoir Simulation, Gulf Publishing Co., Houston,
Texas. 1997.
Thomas, G.W (GWT, 1982): Principles of Hydrocarbon Reservoir Simulation, International
Human Resources Development Corp. (IHRDC). Boston. 1982.

Course Topics
1. Introduction, Definition and Purpose of Course
What is simulation? Why simulate? Types of models? Benefits
Simulation versus conventional reservoir engineering analysis
Organizing a simulation study
2. Modeling Concepts
Equation formulation for single, multiphase and compositional models
Discretization techniques & Finite difference schemes: explicit and implicit
Grid blocks and time steps
Transmissibility
Data requirements for initialization, history matching, and prediction runs
3. Reservoir Simulation Model Design
Problem definition
Selection of mathematical model and grids
Data organization
Initialization and equilibration. How to establish initial pressures and saturation
distributions.
4. Numerical Solution Methods
Direct solution methods
Iterative solvers
Selection of solution methods
5. History Matching
Objectives, strategy and planning history matching (HM)
Special considerations and adjustments for successful HM
Automatic HM techniques: an Overview
6. Reservoir Performance Predictions

Reservoir Simulation Course Outline & Syllabus Page 2 of 3

Prof. David Ogbe, Ph.D., PE.
7. Well Management Concepts
8. Practical Reservoir Simulation and Class Project
Organization of reservoir simulation project
Study objectives
Data collection and quality control
Model construction
History matching
Performance prediction
Project analysis, report and documentation
9. Use of Simulator for Solving Class Problems
Overview of Black Oil simulators (e.g. ECLIPSE , IMEX, BOAST, etc)
Data preparation and post processing
Analysis of Results
10. Beyond Black-Oil Models: Overview of the Simulation of Special Processes
Compositional processes
Miscible displacement, chemical and polymer flooding
Thermal processes—Steam stimulation. Steam drive, In-Situ combustion
Simulation of Lab experiments and well tests

Class project(s) will be done using a state-of-the-art reservoir simulator

(e.g. IMEX by Computer Modelling Group or Eclipse by Schlumberger)

Reservoir Simulation Course Outline & Syllabus Page 3 of 3

Prof. David Ogbe, Ph.D., PE.
Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation Reservoir Simulation

Section I: Introduction
Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Course Outline Introduction

Introduction and course objectives
Overview and Course objectives

Modeling Concepts and Fluid flow Equations
Reservoir simulation Fundamentals

Reservoir Simulation Model Design ♦ What is reservoir simulation?

Numerical Solution Methods ♦ Why simulate?

History Matching ♦ Uses of simulation Tools

Performance Prediction ♦ How does a simulator compare with conventional

Well Management Models reservoir engineering methods?

Case Studies ♦ Classification of simulators

Beyond Black Oil models and Advanced Topics ♦ Performing a reservoir simulation study

♦ What are the strengths and limitations of reservoir

simulators?

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Overview of the Course Course Objectives

This course covers the fundamental concepts of
Understand fundamental concepts of reservoir simulation
reservoir simulation.
Identify problems associated with reservoir simulation process

Introduces petroleum engineers and geoscientists
Make intelligent decisions on when and where to apply
to both the fundamental theory and practice of reservoir simulators to support reservoir management. Need
reservoir simulation to aid reservoir performance to know whether to simulate or not to simulate
prediction and reservoir management.
If yes, what kind of simulation study (quantitative or
qualitative) to perform

We emphasize a hands-on practice using state-of-

If no, why and what other “simpler” model to use in solving
the-art numerical simulators to study reservoir the problem.
problems.

3/7/2010 3/7/2010

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Course Objectives, continued Definitions and Concepts

Prepare input data and use commercial simulator(s) to solve

What is Simulation?
simple but practical problems

Recognize the limitations of reservoir models and understand Webster dictionary defines “To simulate is to assume
the challenges of using reservoir modeling tools. appearance of; without reality”

Petroleum reservoir simulation is the planning, construction and
operation of a model whose behavior approximates the behavior
of the actual (real) reservoir

Petroleum reservoir simulation is an approach whereby
mathematical equations (i.e., a model) or computable procedure
are employed to infer (gain insights into) the behavior of the real
(physical) reservoir.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Simulation Limitations of physical models

Physical models can be conveniently used to
Simulation = model building study problems on a small scale (local level).
It is difficult to produce a representative sand
pack for a large reservoir

A unique model must be built each time to
Physical
Mathematical simulate specific reservoir problem
models
models

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Why Simulate? Why Simulate (cont’d) ?

Absence of the real thing. Full information about the
Process may be hazardous.
reservoir is not available at this time. Early in the life of

For example, we would not want to actually dump
the reservoir, we make qualitative studies to evaluate and
compare available alternatives for developing the
waste water into a reservoir in order to test the
reservoir. injectivity of the formation.

Real reservoir can be produced once. Mistakes made
We would not explode nuclear weapons to test
during reservoir production cannot be corrected. But with their effect on human populations
a reservoir simulator, we have many chances to evaluate
Cost
several production scenarios in order to select the
“optimum” production scheme.
Scale of the problem

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Uses of Reservoir Simulation

Abuses of Reservoir Simulation
Tools

Identify reservoir flow behavior
Failure to recognize the simulator as an engineering

Describe complex reservoir flow processes in tool. Failure to consider other simpler engineering
order to understand flow mechanisms models

Use of the inappropriate model. Tendency to use

Design techniques to improve oil and gas
complex models with insufficient data. Poor quality
recovery data.

Forecast future performance
Lack of understanding of reservoir physics. Over
reliance on numerical results.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Case 1: Reservoir simulation can be

Role of Reservoir Engineer used to answer these questions

What is the oil or gas in place?
Production? Injection?

How much oil or gas will be recovered? Production?

Why is the recovery so low?

Reservoir A Aquifer Reservoir B

How do I maintain reservoir pressure?

Where, when and how many wells should be
drilled?
Injection Production

What is the cost of field development?
♦What fluids? ♦New locations?
♦At what rate? ♦Rate?
♦Where? ♦Economics?
♦What pressures? ♦Production by Well? By group? By reservoir?

Source: Koza and Rasor, 1982

Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Simulation for evaluating field Case II: Reservoir simulation can be used to
answer these questions
development plans
Injection

Production ♦ What fluid to inject?

♦ Rate?
♦ Which layers?
♦ Gas Processing plant?
♦ Sequence of field
development?
♦ Economics?

Gas Reservoir
(Stratified)

Gas-Water Contact Source: Koza and Rasor, 1982

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

Major steps in Development & Usage of Simulators

Reservoir Simulation 1. Development of Simulator
Source: Ertekin et al, 2001 (adapted from

Simulation Tasks
Odeh, 1982)

Develop Use Simulators

Source: Mattax and Dalton, 1990

Simulators to conduct 2. Conducting Simulation Study

studies

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19 Reservoir Simulation Slide 20

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Definitions
Data Requirements for simulation study
Property Sources
Permeability Pressure transient testing, Core analyses.
Correlations, Well performance

Porosity, Rock compressibility Core analyses. Well logs

Relative permeability and capillary Laboratory core flow tests
pressure

Saturations Well logs. Core analyses, Pressure cores,

Single-well tracer tests
Source: Odeh, Siam Review, 1982

Fluid property (PVT) data Laboratory analyses of reservoir fluid

samples

Faults, boundaries, fluid contacts Seismic, Pressure transient testing

Aquifers Seismic. Material balance calculations,
Regional exploration studies

Fracture spacing, orientation, connectivity Core analyses. Well logs, Seismic, Pressure
transient tests, Interference testing.
Wellbore performance

Rate and pressure data, completion and Field performance history

workover data

Reservoir Simulation Slide 21 Reservoir Simulation Slide 22

Sources of Data
Rock and Fluid Properties required for Simulation

Well logs

Core data

Pressure transient tests

Geological Descriptions

regional geological data, lithofacies

Seismic Surveys (faults, φ )

Production data

Source: Mattax and Dalton, 1990

Reservoir Simulation Slide 23 Reservoir Simulation Slide 24

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Conventional reservoir engineering tools

Generalized Darcy flow Equation

• Material balance equation
• Fractional flow formula
How does simulation compare with • Frontal advance equation
• Waterflood prediction techniques
conventional petroleum reservoir
• Stiles, Dykstra parsons, etc
engineering tools? • Decline curve analysis
• Empirical methods

Reservoir Simulation Slide 25 Reservoir Simulation Slide 26

Assumptions Decline Curve Analysis

Petroleum reservoir is a single unit
• Pressure and saturation values are calculated
as an average throughout the system
• Homogeneous rock and fluid properties
• Any change in the system is instantaneous
and uniform throughout the reservoir

Reservoir Simulation Slide 27 Reservoir Simulation Slide 28

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Material Balance Equations Uses of material balance

Zero dimensional model
Predict initial oil or gas in place

Basis
calculate oil and gas production under given
drive mechanism
or
calculate the amount of water influx under
[ Expansion] + [Influx] = [Production]
given drive mechanism

determine the reservoir drive mechanisms
[Volume entering] - [Volume Leaving]
= [Net change in volume]

Reservoir Simulation Slide 29 Reservoir Simulation Slide 30

Material Balance Method Material Balance Method

Advantages

Limitations

Computationally simple model

Allows no spatial variation of reservoir and

Provides good estimates of reserves when
fluid properties
production data is available

Reservoir geometry is not considered. Treats
reservoir like a point

Locations of wells not included

Does not consider the dynamics of fluid
movement, e.g., the movement of the oil-water
contact

Reservoir Simulation Slide 31 Reservoir Simulation Slide 32

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation Assumptions of simulation

Basis
Treats reservoir as a collection of individual

Conservation of mass, energy or blocks, each has its own set of properties and
momentum in a collection of blocks can behave differently
[ Rate of fluid in] - [ Rate of fluid out]
Blocks are interdependent because of fluid
= [Rate of change within system] continuity

Rate or transport equation, e.g.,
Does not have same limiting assumptions as
Darcy’s Law conventional reservoir engineering

Equation of state

Reservoir Simulation Slide 33 Reservoir Simulation Slide 34

Engineering Methods Vs. Reservoir Simulation Classification of Reservoir Simulators

Reservoir simulators can be classified using:

1. Type of reservoir or fluid to be simulated

Gas reservoir simulator

Black-Oil simulator

Condensate

Volatile oil

Naturally fractured , Dual porosity model

Compositional Simulator

Reservoir Simulation Slide 35 Reservoir Simulation Slide 36

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Classification of Reservoir Simulators (2) Classification of Reservoir Simulators (3)

Reservoir simulators can be classified using: Reservoir simulators can be classified using:
2. Process to be simulated 3. Geometry or dimensions

Miscible flooding
Cartesian (X-Y-Z or X-Z, 1-D, Areal 2-D, 3-D )

Chemical flooding

Radial, r-θ-Z, r-Z, r-θ, 1-D, 2-D, 3-D

Water flooding 4. Phases

Polymer flooding
Single phase, e.g., water or gas

Thermal, steam flooding, in-situ combustion
Two phase flow, oil-water, gas-water, gas-oil

Three phase flow, oil-water-gas

Reservoir Simulation Slide 37 Reservoir Simulation Slide 38

Classification of Reservoir Simulators by

Dimension Classification of Reservoir Simulators (4)

Reservoir simulators can be classified using:

5. Special purpose/ Function

Phase behavior model
Source: Odeh, Siam Review, July, 1982

Geomechanics coupled with fluid flow model

Asphaltene deposition

Reservoir Simulation Slide 39 Reservoir Simulation Slide 40

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Types of Grids used in Reservoir Types of Grids used in Reservoir

Simulation (1) Simulation (2)

Source: SSI, 1982

Source: SSI, 1982

Reservoir Simulation Slide 41 Reservoir Simulation Slide 42

Types of Grids used in Reservoir Types of Grids used in Reservoir

Simulation (3) Simulation (4)
Source: SSI, 1982

Source: SSI, 1982

Reservoir Simulation Slide 43 Reservoir Simulation Slide 44

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Types of Grids used in Reservoir Types of Grids used in Reservoir

Simulation (5) Simulation (6)

Source: SSI, 1982

Source: SSI, 1982

Reservoir Simulation Slide 45 Reservoir Simulation Slide 46

Hydrocarbon Recovery Methods studied by

Simulation
Black Oil Model
• Simple phase behavior not interested in
component mass transfer
• Temperature variation may not be important
• Oil may not vaporize into gas
• Gas can be dissolved or be liberated from oil
• Gas can be dissolved or be liberated from
Source: Ertekin et al, 2001

water
• Can handle primary production, water
injection, or dry gas injection, miscible gas
injection

Reservoir Simulation Slide 47 Reservoir Simulation Slide 48

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Compositional Model Thermal Model

• Complicated phase behavior
• Simple or moderately complicated phase
• Temperature variation may not be important
behavior
• Track mass transfer of components between
• Temperature variation is important
oil and gas
• Need to account for mass and energy

Use to simulate gas condensate reservoirs,
balance
gas cycling with stripping, CO2 or rich gas
injection • Use to simulate steam injection, in-situ
combustion, steam injection with additives,
steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 49 Reservoir Simulation Slide 50

Sources of Information
These notes are taken from several sources, primarily:

Mattax and Dalton (1990): Reservoir Simulation, SPE Monograph Vol. 13, Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Richardson, Texas

CMG (1991): “Introduction to Reservoir Simulation,” Unpublished course notes, Computer Modeling Group,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Kazemi, H (1996): “Future of reservoir Simulation, “ SPE Computer Applications, October 1996, pp120-121

Koza, W.P., and R.W. Rasor (1982): Reservoir Simulation School--Advanced Computer Applications,
Unpublished Course Notes , Gulf Oil Exploration and Production company, Houston, Texas

Odeh, A.S. “Modeling Hydrocarbon Reservoirs,”

Crichlow, H.B. (1977): Modern Reservoir Engineering—A Simulation Approach, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey

SPE publications

SSI (1981): Reservoir Simulation Course Notes, Scientific Software Intercomp, Denver, Colorado

Ertekin, T, J.H. Abou-Kassem and G.R. King (2001): Basic Applied Reservoir Simulation, SPE,
Richardson, Texas

Reservoir Simulation Slide 51

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

 Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation

Section II: Organizing a Simulation

Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Study
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Performing reservoir simulation study Performing reservoir simulation study (2)

Phase 1 -- pre initialization tasks
Phase 2 --Model Initialization

define objectives and constraints
Phase 3--History Matching--calibrate the

data gathering and validation model

review of initial plan with sponsor
Phase 4--Prediction Runs

revise project plan

Phase 5--Editing and analysis

prepare final study plan and schedule

Phase 6--Report Preparation

geologic and engineering work

estimation of original fluid volumes

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Reservoir Simulation I
 Course Notes

Phase I: Pre-Initialization Tasks Phase I: Pre-Initialization Tasks (2)

1. Problem Definition 2. Data gathering

Define study objectives
Quantity of data available

Identify constraints
Quality of data available

Scope of potential ways to solve the problem

Resource Inventory

Human resources

Computational resources

Time and schedule of project

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Phase I: Pre-Initialization Tasks (3) Data gathering

2. Data gathering

Is additional data required to get job done?
Sources of data

If the answer is yes, then we recommend data
Company Data base ( In house)
acquisition and now we need to know:
 What is needed?

State and Federal agencies
 Who and how to get it?
Universities and outside databases
 Sources of data
Consultants and service companies
 Schedule

Literature
 Cost
 Establish data quality control measures

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Reservoir Simulation I
 Course Notes

Phase I: Pre-Initialization Tasks (3) Phase I Pre-initialization Tasks (4)

3. Selection of Approach to Solve Problem 5. Revise project plan

Type of model to use? 6. Prepare final study plan and schedule

Black Oil
7. Reservoir description and model design

Compositional
− Grid system to be used
4. Review initial project plan with sponsor(s)
− Geologic descriptions

do not hesitate to talk about cost

expected results − PVT, rock and fluid properties

time

approach

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Phase I Pre-initialization Tasks (5) Phase II: Initialization of the Model

8. Estimate of fluids in place (may be included
Define initial reservoir conditions, e.g.,
in Phase II—Model Initialization) saturation distributions, pressure and
9. Model development or revision of model and composition at time zero
computer programming --may not be needed
Perform material balance checks
these days because of commercially
Establish equilibrium conditions
available modern simulation tools
How are the fluids distributed in the model?

Segregated fluids

Dispersed fluids

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Reservoir Simulation I
 Course Notes

Phase III: History Matching History Matching Example

History matching is a process where certain variables
(usually indeterminate variables) are adjusted to get Example of Pressure History Match

an agreement between the observed and calculated 2200

Observed

parameters 2000
First Pass
Final Match

Average Reservoir Pressure (psia)

In some cases, e.g., drilling new horizontal wells or in 1800

the study of water coning, we may not have prior 1600

Final match

observed data to perform history matching 1400

First Pass

1200

1000

800
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Parameters to Match in History Matching Phase IV: Prediction Runs

Rate-Time Parameters
This task is linked with problem objectives

Oil and gas flow rates and you should have a prior idea of what you
are looking for. Also, prediction runs might

Gas-oil ratio (GOR)
support history matching if you have

Water-oil ratio (WOR)
production history available. Even if we have

Pressure at well level little or no data to conduct a history match,

Pressure at field level the prediction runs can still give some

Production or injection rates by well or by estimates
group of wells

Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Reservoir Simulation I
 Course Notes

Phase IV: Prediction Runs (2) To organize simulation study

We need to address:
• Well management issues Phase V: Editing and Analysis
• GOR, WOR, water cut limits
Requires critical analysis of simulation study
• Quality of history matching against project objectives
− Might even sometime force you to go back
to Phase I.
− Cost-benefit analysis
− Revision of project plan and objectives

Phase VI: Report Writing/Documentation

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

Simulation Selection

System

Gas Black-oil Miscible Condensate

Dimensionality

0-D 1-D 2-D 3-D

Geometry

x x-y x-z r-z θ

r-θ x-y-z θ-z
r-θ

Phases

1-Phase 2-Phase 3-Phase N-component

Increasing complexity

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Reservoir Simulation I
Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation
Section III: Flow Equations, Structure
Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE of the Simulator and data requirements
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Simulator and reservoir analogy Black-oil simulator

Special case of the compositional model

Define

One component in the water phase
Input Reservoir Output
All of the gas is one component
Response

Two components in the oil phase
Dissolved gas

Residual or black oil left after gas evolution

Input data Simulator Output
We have 3 component model (oil,water,gas)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Black-oil simulator Deriving Fluid Flow Equations

Assume
Conservation of Mass

Equation of State

No phase transfer between water and gas

Transport or rate equation

No phase transfer between oil and water

Oil does not vaporize into the gas phase
Conservation or Continuity Equation
∂
−∇ • ( ρ u ) = ( ρφ ) + q%
∂t
Rate or Transport Equation (e.g. Darcy's Law)
k
u=- ( ∇p − γ∇D )
µ
ρg
where γ =
gc

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Summary of Multiphase flow

Multiphase Flow Equation 2
Equations

Oil equation  kk  q% ∂  φS 
Six Unknowns:
∇  ro ( ∇Po − γ o∇D)  − o =  o 
 µo Bo  ρos ∂t  Bo 

Phase pressures: Pw, Po, Pg,

Water Equation
Phase Saturations: Sw, So, Sg

 kk  q% ∂  φS 
∇  rw ( ∇Pw − γ w∇D)  − w =  w 
 µw Bw  ρws ∂t  Bw 
With the three mass-

Gas equation (No gas
conservation equations, we
need three Auxilliary Equations
dissolved in water)  kk rg
∇

( ∇Pg − γ g∇D ) + RµsokkB ro (∇Po − γ o∇D ) So + S g + S w = 1
 µ g Bg o o  to have six equations.
 q%g Rso q%o  ∂  Rso So φ S g 
−
ρ
+

= 

 gs Bo ρos  ∂t  Bo
+
Bg 

Pcow = Po − Pw

Auxiliary Eqns:
Pcog = Pg − Po

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Typical Input data file Simulator Structure

1. Read input data file 2. Initialization and determination of fluids in

Model size place

Geometry (radial, spherical, cylindrical, etc…)
Initialize model to a gravity capillary

Grid data (size) equilibrium

Rock data
Calculate original fluid volumes

Fluid data
3. Recurrent data

Solution techniques

Initialization data
well completions

Recurrent data
well controls

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Sources of error in simulation Grids and Time Steps

Physical description of the reservoir

Why use grids?

Approximations and assumptions used to derive
equations
Finite difference (or finite element)

Truncation error (discretization error) formulations to the fluid flow equations

Error due to transforming PDE into an algebraic require spatial discretization of reservoir
equations model into a pattern of grid blocks and

Once we have discretized the equation, we may have division of the total simulation time into
some errors of linearization
smaller time steps

Round off errors

We need ∆x, ∆y, ∆z, ∆t

Programming error (software)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Types of Grids Types of Grids (2)

Classify grids: Classify grids:

Regular grid (Cartesian or rectilinear)
Block-centered grid

Irregular grid (cylindrical, curvilinear). Used
Point-centered grid
when boundary of reservoir has to be
Corner-point geometry
reproduced exactly to study boundary effects
PEBi grid: Perpendicular Bisector

Uniform grid

Non-uniform grid

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Types of Grids (3) Types of Grids (4)

Dimensionality/Geometry

1-D, 2-D, 3-D

Cartesian, radial, spherical

Non-orthogonal
PEBI grid  perpendicular
bisection grid
Ref: Heinemann et al, SPE 12255, 1983 Ref: Heinemann et al, SPE 12255, 1983
Reservoir Sim. Symp. San Francisco Reservoir Sim. Symp. San Francisco

After Bogdan Balan, Schlumberger, Abingdon, UK

Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Types of Grids (5) Block Centered Grids

Divide model domain into n grid blocks
(cells)

Affix ‘grid points’ (nodes) at center of each
block

No points are located on the boundary. X=0 X=L

Problem when we want to represent the

boundary

‘more’ common in reservoir simulation

more representative of ‘flux specified’ X=0 X=L

boundary conditions (Neumann B.C.)

‘less’ accurate compared to point-centered
After Bogdan Balan, Schlumberger, Abingdon, UK grid
After Adamson et al, Oilfield Review,
Schlumberger , Summer 1996
X=0 X=L

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

Point-centered grid or mesh-centered

Criteria for selecting grid systems
or lattice grid

place the first and last points at X=0 and 1. Describe the geometry, geology, and physical properties of the
X=L reservoir

affix ‘grid points’ (nodes) at desired 2. Model reservoir fluid mechanics properly
locations in the domain of the model X=0 X=L
3. Identify saturations or compositions, pressures at the specified

distribute the blocks midway between the locations and times required in the study
points
4. Describe the dynamics of pressure and saturation distributions

points can be located on the boundaries
to meet study objectives

more representative of ‘pressure specified’ X=0 X=L

boundary conditions (Dirichlet B.C.) 5. Compatible with the mathematics used in solving the simulator

‘more’ accurate compared to block-
equations so that the Solution to the fluid flow equations are
centered grid because simulation equations accurate and stable
approximate ‘pressure distribution’ at the X=0 X=L

nodes

X=0 X=L

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19 Reservoir Simulation Slide 20

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Determining max. no of grid blocks

Pertinent Definitions
and time step size for simulation
Constraints on gridding Criteria

Numerical dispersion #5 Stable Algorithm: A numerical algorithm is stable if the

Geologic features #1 error obtained at some initial time step does not grow
larger at a later time step

Well locations #1, #3, #4
Numerical Dispersion: Smearing of displacement flood

Lease boundaries #1, #3
front as a result of using finite difference

Maximum saturation changes #4 approximations to represent partial differential

Computer resource availability #1 thru #5 equations

Reservoir Simulation Slide 21 Reservoir Simulation Slide 22

Example Illustrating Numerical

Numerical Dispersion
Dispersion

Numerical Dispersion: Smearing of displacement flood

front as a result of using finite difference
approximations to represent partial differential
equations

Need to truncate Taylor series approximation to simplify our

calculations (e.g., singe phase flow)

Truncation leads to error in discretization and residual from
linearized equations  will translate into mathematical smearing
of the flood front After Fanchi, Principles of Applied Reservoir
Simulation, 3rd Edition, Gulf Publishing

Reservoir Simulation Slide 23 Reservoir Simulation Slide 24

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation
Section IV: Review of Mathematical
Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Concepts and Derivation of Flow Equations
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com Adapted from Slides by Dr. Chuck Kossack, Schlumberger, 2006

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Review of Mathematics – 1 Review of Mathematics - 2

Differential operators example 1:
let P = 5 x that is pressure increases

In 3 dimensions
r velocity
r r is ra vector
u = uxi + uyj + uzk as 5 times the x − coordinate

If P is a scalar function, then ∇P (gradient of ∂P r ∂P r ∂P r

∇P = i + j+ k
P) is a vector ∂x ∂y ∂z
∂P r ∂P r ∂P r ∂P r ∂ r r
∇P = i + j + k ∇P = i = (5 x )i = 5 i
∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x ∂x
r
the gradient of pressure in the x (or i ) direction is 5

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Review of Mathematics - 3 Review of Mathematics – 4

example 2:
If u is a vector, then ∇· u (divergence of u) is
let P = 5 x + 3 y + 1z that is pressure increases a scalar
as 5 times the x cooridi nate, 3 times the y coord.. ..
r ∂ux ∂uy ∂uz
∂P r ∂P r ∂P r ∇ ⋅u = + +
∇P =
∂x
i +
∂y
j+
∂z
k
∂x ∂y ∂z
∂P r ∂P r ∂P r ∂
(5 x )i + ∂ (3 y ) j + ∂ (1z )k = 5i + 3 j + k
r r r r r r
∇P = i + j+ k =
∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z
r
the gradie nt of pres sure in t he x (or i ) directio n is 5
r
the gradie nt of pres sure in t he y (or j ) directio n is 3
r
the gradie nt of pres sure in t he z (or k ) directio n is 1

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Review of Mathematics - 5 Review of Mathematics – 6

example :
Special case: If P and f are scalars, then the
r r r r divergence of f times the gradient of P is a
velocity u = 5 x i + 3 yj + 1z k
scalar
thus, u x = 5 x , u y = 3 y, uz = z
r ∂u x ∂u y ∂u z ∂  ∂P  ∂  ∂P  ∂  ∂P 
∇ ⋅u = + + ∇ ⋅ ( f∇ P )=  f  +  f  +  f 
∂x  ∂x  ∂y  ∂y  ∂z  ∂z 
∂x ∂y ∂z
∂
= (5 x ) + ∂ (3 y ) + ∂ (z )
∂x ∂y ∂z
r
= 5 + 3 +1 = 9 t he divergence of u is 9

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Review of Mathematics – 7
∂  k x ∂Φ  ∂  k y ∂Φ 
V  φS o   φS  
 +   a a n +1 n
∂x  µβ ∂x  ∂y  µβ ∂y 

For the special case where f = 1, we get the PDE ∂f F(x + 2 ) - F(x - 2 )
∆[To ∆Φ o ] =   -  o  
∆t  Bo 
F= ;
∂  k z ∂Φ  ∂ (φ/β ) ∂x a a  Bo  
+  =
∂z  µβ ∂z  ∂t
(x + ) - (x - )
2 2  
Laplacian of P
Finite difference

∂ ∂ ∂
2 2 2 equation
P P P
∇
2
P = + +
∂ ∂
2 2 2
x ∂ y z Derive Linearise Discretise Solve the
the the Linear
Equations
Equations Equations Equations

Note for incompressible flow, single phase,

a11x1 + a12x 2 + .......... + a1n x n - b1 = 0
no wells (sources or sinks) (AB) k +1 = (AB)k + A k +1∂B + Bk ∂A
a 21x1 + a 22x 2 + .......... + a 2n x n - b 2 = 0
.

∇ Φ = P − ρgz
2
Φ = 0 where
.
.
a n1x1 + a n2 x 2 + .......... + a nn x n - b n = 0

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Simulation – The key is to determine the

inter block flow – given the cell properties
The Continuity
Producer
Equation inter block flow q= A k kr ∆P
∆x µ

Constitutive The Equation

The
Equations of Flow
Equation Cell Properties:
of State Structure - Depth, Thickness, ∆X, ∆Y
Properties - Permeability, Porosity

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Conservation of Mass, Single Conservation of Mass, Single

Phase Phase
Control Volume
Mass of fluid in Control Volume
Cross-sectional Area = A

= m = ρ • φ • A ∆x = ρ • φ • ∆V
Flow x
Mx = Mass flux in or out of CV= mass
flow/area/time
∆x
Units: (kgm/ m2 · sec)

Volume of Control Volume (CV) = A * ∆x (m3)
∆t = time interval

Rock porosity in Control Volume = φ (t)

Fluid density (mass/volume) = ρ (x,t)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Mass Balance Equation Mass Balance Equation

Over the time interval ∆t the Material Balance Fluid compressibility is represented by ρ = ρ(P)
ρ(
Equation is

IN - OUT = ACCUMULATION ± injection/production Rock compressibility is represented by φ = φ(P)
φ
Inj/Prod = Q • Α∆x
Α∆ • ∆t

IN = Mxx • Α • ∆t

OUT = Mxx+∆∆ x • Α • ∆t
Thus: IN - OUT = ACC ± Inj/Prod becomes

Accumulation = mass in placet+∆∆ t - mass in placet

ρφ • A • ∆x]t+∆∆ t - [ρφ
= [ρφ ρφ • A • ∆x]t
[Mx x - Mx x+∆∆ x ] • A ∆t = [ρφ
ρφ • A • ∆x]t+∆∆ t - [ρφ
ρφ • A • ∆x]t

Mass accumulation is due to compressibility as the pressure
changes.
± Q • Α∆x
Α∆ • ∆t (EQU 1)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Mass Balance Equation Mass Balance Equation

Divide EQU 1 by: Α∆x

Α∆ • ∆t we get
The result is
∂Mx ∂
Mx x - Mx x+∆∆ x = ρφ t+∆∆ t - ρφ t − = ( φρ ) + Q EQU 3
+Q EQU 2 ∂x ∂t
∆x ∆t

We get partial derivatives because

Take Limit as ∆x 0
Mx = f(x,t) and φρ = f(x,t)
Take Limit as ∆t 0

As per Calculus

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

Momentum Balance

Next we need a relationship between velocity and
pressure

In porous media we use Darcy’s Law (see next slide)

ux = Darcy Velocity in the x-direction

Mass Flux = Mx = ρux (EQU 4)

(Units: kgm/m3 • m/sec = kgm/ m2 • sec)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19 Reservoir Simulation Slide 20

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Permeability Units

In Russia, for example, permeability is give in
units of Meters2 or cm2

1 Darcy = 1,000 mD = 0.9869x10-8 cm2

Reservoir Simulation Slide 21 Reservoir Simulation Slide 22

Permeability Tensor Darcy’s Law – Single Phase Flow

Y kv
k
1-D Horizontal Flow

k ∂P
Permeability is second rank symmetric
u x = − ⋅ EQU 5
µ ∂x
tensor
k xx k xy k xz 
 
[k] = k yx k yy k yz 
3-D - 1 Phase Flow with Gravity
U Angle 
k k k

 zx zy zz 
P1
where kxy = kyx, kxz = kzx and kyz = kzy. r
P2 r k  g 
u = − ∇P + ρ ⋅  EQU 6
x µ  gc

where gc is a conversion constant, note z is positive
1 Cos2α Cos2 β Cos2γ down
= + +
k kx ky kz

Reservoir Simulation Slide 23 Reservoir Simulation Slide 24

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Darcy’s Law Darcy’s Equation and Flow in

Porous Media
Generalized Darcy’s Law

We know that k dΦ k xy dΦ k xz dΦ Simplification
Vx = - xx - -
µ dx µ dy µ dz
r
g g k yx dΦ k yy dΦ k yz dΦ If the principal axes of
ρ = ρ ∇z = γ∇z
Vy = - - -
µ dx µ dy µ dz
EQU 7 permeability coincides with
gc gc k dΦ k zy dΦ k zz dΦ
Vz = - zx - -
µ dx µ dy µ dz
the axes of the co-ordinates
system, the cross terms
or disappear.

Thus Darcy‘s Law in 3-D vector form:  Vx   k xx k xy k xz  J x  k xx 0 0 
    
 Vy  =  k yx k yy k yz  J y   
V  k   0 k yy 0
u = − ( ∇ P − γ∇ z )
r k  z   zx k zy k zz  z 
J
 
0 0 k zz 
µ
EQU 8
- 1∂ φ
J = , l = x, y, z
where µ∂l
Reservoir Simulation Slide 25 Reservoir Simulation Slide 26

Combining Darcy’s Law with Combining Darcy’s Law with

Material Balance Material Balance

We substitute ux for Mx in EQU 3 and get the
We substitute for ux (from EQU 8) for the 3-D
following with Gravity

∂ ( ρux ) ∂
− = ( ρφ ) + Q  ρk  ∂
EQU 9

∂x ∂t ∇ ⋅  ( ∇P − γ∇z )  = ( ρφ ) + Q
µ  ∂t

In 3 dimensions EQU 11

∂
− ∇ • (ρu ) =
r
∂t
(φ ρ ) + Q EQU 10

Reservoir Simulation Slide 27 Reservoir Simulation Slide 28

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Simulator Flow Equation Multiphase Simulation Equation

Now if we divide EQU 11 by ρSTC and define
Volatile oil: gas dissolved in oil - Rs,
the formation volume factor B = VRC/VSTC we

no oil vaporized in gas
get the following:
∂ φ 
[
∇ ⋅ λ (∇ P − γ∇ z ) = ] ∂ t  B 
+q Stock Tank Oil: oil
component
Reservoir Oil: oil components +
dissolved gas (Rs)
EQU 12 Stock Tank Gas: gas Reservoir Gas: gas component
component
Reservoir Water: water
k  Q

Where λ = and q = 
Stock Tank Water: water component
µB  ρ component

Reservoir Simulation Slide 29 Reservoir Simulation Slide 30

Oil Formation Volume Factor / Rs Water and Gas FVF

[Vo + Vdg ]RC [Vw] RC
Bo =
Bo Bw = B
[Vw] STC
w

[Vo] STC
P P

[Vg ]RC
[Vdg ]STC Rs
Bg =
Bg
Rs =
[Vo] STC [Vg ]STC
P P

Reservoir Simulation Slide 31 Reservoir Simulation Slide 32

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Black Oil Equation-of-State

(Generalized)
ρo,sc + Rsρg,sc
Oil: ρo =
Bo
ρw,sc
Water: ρw =
Bw
ρg,sc + Rv ρo,sc
Gas: ρg =
Bg
Reservoir Simulation Slide 33 Reservoir Simulation Slide 34

Simulation Equations – Multi- Simulation Equations – Multi-

Phase Flow Phase Flow

For multi-phase flow of phase i
Three phase (o-w-g) flow equations

1. Continuity Equation
volatile oil: gas dissolved in oil - Rs,

no oil dissolved in gas
∂
− ( ρ i u i )= ∂ (φ S i ρ i ) + Q i
Water component:
∂x ∂t

2. Fluid Flow Equation ui = velocity of phase
[
∇ ⋅ λ w (∇ P w − γ w ∇ z ) = ]
i
∂  Sw 
( ∇P − γ ∇z )  φ B w  + q w
kk ri g
ui = − whereγ i = ρ i
µi
i i
gc ∂t
Reservoir Simulation Slide 35 Reservoir Simulation Slide 36

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Simulation Equations – Multi- Simulation Equations – Multi-

Phase Flow Phase Flow

Oil component:
Gas component:

[ ] [ ]
(1)

∇ ⋅ λ o ( ∇ P o − γ o∇ z ) = ∇⋅ Rsλo( ∇Po − γo∇z) + λg( ∇Pg − γg∇z)

(2) (3) (4)

(6)

∂ ∂   So Sg  
(5)

 So  (7) (8)

∂t φ B o  + q o = φ Rs +   + Rsqo + qg

∂t   Bo Bg  

Reservoir Simulation Slide 37 Reservoir Simulation Slide 38

Simulation Equations – Multi- Simulation Equations – Multi-

Phase Flow Phase Flow

where phase transmissibility, phase i
We have 3 component balances and six
dependent variables which are the unknowns:
k ⋅ kri
λi =
Po So Pw Sw Pg Sg

µi ⋅ Bi
Need 3 additional relationships:

So + Sw + Sg = 1

Pcow = Po - Pw = f(Sw)

Pcog = Pg - Po = f(Sg)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 39 Reservoir Simulation Slide 40

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Unknowns Dependence on Phases

Polymer Flooding
Present
There are 3 cases:
Assumptions

IF Sg > 0 and So > 0 this means saturated oil and gas

Isothermal
therefore Rs = R (Pg). Therefore we solve for Po, Sw, Sg.
Two Phase flow

No molecular diffusion of polymer
IF Sg = 0 this means that Rv = R (Pg) is not a required
and we solve for Po, Sw, and Rs. Rs vary from 0 to saturated.
Polymer is either dissolved or adsorbed on
the rock surface
IF So = 0 this means that Rs = R (Po) is not a required
and we solve for Po, Sw, and Rv. Rv vary from 0 to saturated.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 41 Reservoir Simulation Slide 42

Polymer flow Equations

 kk  q% ∂  φS 

Oil equation ∇  ro ( ∇Po − γ o∇D)  − o =  o 
 µo Bo  ρos ∂t  Bo 

Water Equation  kk  q% ∂  φS 
∇  rw ( ∇Pw − γ w∇D) − w =  w 
 µw Bw  ρws ∂t  Bw 

Polymer  Ckkrw  CBwq

ˆ % ∂
∇ (∇Pw − γ w∇D ) − w
= (φ ( S w + w ) )
 µw  ρ ws ∂t
C=polymer concentration (LB/RB water phase)
Cˆ =Polymer concentration in source/sink
w= adsorption, mass of polymer adsorbed on
rock surface per unit bulk volume

Reservoir Simulation Slide 43 Reservoir Simulation Slide 44

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation Slide 45 Reservoir Simulation Slide 46

Reservoir Simulation Slide 47

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E.

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation

Section V: Discretization and Linearization

Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA Adapted from Slides by Dr. Chuck Kossack, Schlumberger, 2006

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Discretization
∂  k x ∂Φ  ∂  k y ∂Φ 
V  φS o   φS  
 +   a a n +1 n
∂x  µβ ∂x  ∂y  µβ ∂y 
PDE ∂f F(x + 2 ) - F(x - 2 )
∆[To ∆Φ o ] =   -  o  
Converts continuous PDE into difference form
∆t  Bo 
F= ;
∂  k ∂Φ  ∂ (φ/β ) ∂x a a  Bo  
+  z = (x + ) - (x - )  
∂z  µβ ∂z  ∂t 2 2
Replaces original problem with other problem, which
Finite difference can be solved easily
equation

The reservoir domain is presented by spatially
distributed, interconnected discrete elements (grid
Linearise Discretise Solve the blocks)
Derive
the the Linear
Equations
Temporal (time) domain is also discretized
Equations Equations Equations

The reservoir parameters are calculated over these
constitutive elements at discrete time steps
a11x1 + a12x 2 + .......... + a1n x n - b1 = 0
(AB) k +1 = (AB)k + A k +1∂B + Bk ∂A
a 21x1 + a 22x 2 + .......... + a 2n x n - b 2 = 0
.
.
.
a n1x1 + a n2 x 2 + .......... + a nn x n - b n = 0

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Finite Difference Approximations

Finite Differences
to First Derivatives
∂ ∂
∂x
an d
∂t forward difference ∂ f = f ( x + ∆ x ) − f ( x )
Replace
∂x ∆x

f (x + ∆x) − f (x − ∆x)
with point values at specific points in space and time.
central difference ∂f
An ``Engineering'' Approximation: Taylor Series: =
∂x 2∆x

∆x ∂f( x o ) ∆ x2 ∂2 f( x o ) Error terms:

f ( x o + ∆x) = f ( x o ) + + ∆x ∂ 2 f ∆x2 ∂ 3 f
1! ∂x 2! ∂ x2 − − − .....
forward error 2! ∂x 2 3! ∂ x 3
∆ x 3 ∂3 f( x o )
+ + ... ∆ x 2 ∂ 3 f
3! ∂ x3 central error − − .....
3! ∂x 3

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Approximation to Second Order

Second Derivative
Derivatives
k ro
let M o = Then the second derivative
∂  ∂f  µ o Bo
viscous term becomes
 =?
∂x  ∂x  Let
Let
x+a
x-a
be forward direction
be backward direction ∂  ∂p 
 kxM o o  ≈
Let x+a/2 be forward direction in half a ∂x  ∂x 
Let x-a/2 be backward direction in half a
(k x M o )i+1/ 2, j [( po )i +1, j − ( po )i, j ] (k x M o )i−1/ 2, j [( po )i , j − ( po )i −1, j ]
−
a a xi +1 − xi xi − xi −1
F(x + ) - F(x - )
2 2 = f(x + a) - 2f(x) + f(x - a) xi +1/ 2 − xi −1/ 2
a a a2
(x + ) - (x - )
2 2

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Transmissibility Transmissibility

Flow from one grid block is controlled by
Transmissibility has 2 components

The pressure difference (pressure gradient)
Fixed component function of geometry
between grid blocks
Variable component function of flowing phase

And the transmissibility (ease of fluid flow) at saturation in the UPSTREAM Grid Block
the boundary between the grid blocks.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Fixed Component of Fixed Component of

Transmissibility Transmissibility
flow
Without dip in the reservoir

Dxi −1 ⋅ Dyi ⋅ Dzi ⋅ NTGi + Dxi ⋅ Dyi −1 ⋅ Dzi −1 ⋅ NTGi −1

i-1 i A=
Dxi + Dxi −1
TRANXi is transmissibility at this boundary
Dxi and Dxi-1 = the length of grid blocks Const ⋅ A
Dyi, Dyi-1, Dzi, Dzi-1 thickness, height of grid blocks TRANX i =
1  Dxi Dxi −1 
+
2  PERMX i PERMX i −1 
PERMXi and PERMXI-1 = x-permeability of each block
A = Interface area between cell i an i-1
NTGi and NTGi-1 = Net To Gross in each block

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Weighting of Variable Component

Influence of Mobility Weighting
of Transmissibility
Flow

For the value

at grid block i

Downstream: use i and i - 1

Mid-point: use i + 1 and i - 1

Single point upstream: use i + 1 and i

Two point upstream use i + 2 and i +1 and
extrapolate saturation to i + 1/2 boundary

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Finite Difference Simulation Equation Water Equation, X Dimension

Oil-Water System Only
 k x ∆ y ∆ z k rw 
Oil Equation, X Dimension Only  µ B ∆  [ P oi-1 - P oi - Pcowi -1 + Pcowi + γw ( z i -1 - z i )] -
  n +1 n +1

 k x ∆ y ∆ z k ro   w w x  i -1/2

 µ B ∆x 
 [ P n +1 o i - 1 - P n +1 o i + γ o ( z i - 1 - z i ) ]  k x ∆ y ∆ z k rw 
 o o  i -1/2 
 µ B ∆ 
 [ P n+1 oi - P n+1oi+1 + Pcowi - Pcowi+1 + γw ( zi - zi+1 ) ]
 w w x  i+1/2

 k ∆ y ∆ z k ro 
-  x 
 [ P n +1 o i - P n +1 o i +1 + γ o ( z i - z i - 1 ) ]
 µ o B o ∆ x  i+ 1/2  φ   S no+1 - S no  This is unknown since it
- q ws δ i = ( ∆ x ∆ y ∆ z ) i    
 B w i  ∆t i is at the new time level
 φ   S on+1 + S no 
- q os δ i = ( ∆ x ∆ y ∆ z ) i    
 Bo  i  ∆t i  (1 - S oi )
(1 − φ )Cf  Poi - Poi 
n+1 n
- ( ∆ x ∆ y ∆ z )i 
 B wi  ∆t 
  S   d (1/ B o )    p - p  n +1 n

+ ( ∆ x ∆ y ∆ z ) i   o  (1 − φ )C f + ( φ S o ) i   
  


o o

  B o  i  dp i  ∆t i  d (1/ B w )i   Pon+1 - Pon Pcown+1 - Pcown  

+ φ i (1 - S oi )   
 -  
NOTE: n = current time level, n+1 = new  dp   ∆t ∆t i 
(unknown) time level
NOTE: n = current time level, n+1 = new (unknown) time level
NOTE: 1 Equation, 2 Unknowns, Pon+1, Son+1
Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Linearization and Solution Process

There are 2 types of linearization that we
must understand

We will discuss both of these
Linearization and Solution Process

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

Linearization (1) in the PDE Linearization (1) in the PDE

 ∂S 
To Linearize: Expand the time derivatives

in the PDE we have  o  which becomes
 ∂t   ∂ S o   dS o   ∂ Pc 
  =    
 ∂ t   dP c  ∂ t 
n +1
 So − So n
  in the finite difference equation
 ∆t 
 i  dS 
Where  o  is considered to be a unique function of S o (of Pc ).
We would like to replace this unknown derivative with known quantities,  dPc 
that is, at the nth time level
Now P C is evaluated explicitly , thus
We use the chain rule and the fact that capillary pressure varies slower
n
∂S n +1
  ∂ Pc 
n
than viscous pressure and is evaluated at the OLD time level (n).  dS
o
=  o
   (EQ 56)
∂t  dP c   ∂t 

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19 Reservoir Simulation Slide 20

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Linearization (1) in the PDE Linearization Part 2

When we replace the term evaluated at the
We now have an equation with one unknown
n+1 time level with the product of 2 terms BUT ------
evaluated at the nth time level we have
We find that several of the coefficients in front
linearized the PDE of the unknown pressures are functions of the
pressure at the new time level (depending on

The only remaining unknown is the pressure the level of implicitness in the solution
at the new time level that is, Pn+1 procedure)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 21 Reservoir Simulation Slide 22

Linearization Part 2 Linear and Non-Linear

Thus, to solve this equation with non-linear Ax + By = D this is linear
coefficients we must “linearize” again. where x and y the unknowns
and A and B are constants

A( x, y ) x + B( x, y ) y = D this is non - linear

since A and B are functions of the unknown solutions x and y

Reservoir Simulation Slide 23 Reservoir Simulation Slide 24

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Convergence of the Non-Linear

Linearize (2) the Equation
Iterations
Let l be the iteration counter
If this solution process converges
(x − x ) → 0 and
We know the solution at l, we are looking
l +1 l
for the solution at the next non - linear iteration l + 1
( y − y ) → 0 and
l +1 l

We linearize the equation by evaluating the [A ( x , y ) = A ( x

l +1 l +1 l
, yl) ]
coefficents A(x, y) and B(x, y)
at the l iteration level where x and y are known.
[B ( x , y ) = B ( x
l +1 l +1 l
,y l
)]

The coefficients do not change any more, so the
solution to the linearized equation is the correct
[A( x , y )] x
l l l l +1
[
+ B( x , y ) y
l l
]
l l +1
=D solution to the non-linear equation.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 25 Reservoir Simulation Slide 26

Reservoir Simulation Matrix Inversion

Have system of Non-Linear Finite Difference
Matrix Inversion - to solve the simulator
Equations to solve at each grid block equations efficiently
a11x1 + a12x 2 + ..........+ a1n x n - b1 = 0 a11 a12 . a1n   x1  b1 

Unknowns P, Sw, Sg a 21x1 + a 22 x 2 + ..........+ a 2n x n - b 2 = 0
a a 22 . a 2n  x  b 
.  21   2  2

To solve the non-linear system: . A = . ; x = . ; b = . 
.      

Linearize equations a n1x1 + a n2 x 2 + ..........+ a nn x n - b n = 0 .  .  . 

Solve the linear system for P or P, Sw,Sg a n1 a n2 . a nn   x n  b n 

Converge the non-linear system with Newton Iterations

Simultaneous Linear Equations Corresponding

Matrix Equation

Reservoir Simulation Slide 27 Reservoir Simulation Slide 28

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Iteration Process in Reservoir

Linear Problem
Simulation

AP = d
a b c d   P1   d1 
e f g h   P2  d 2  Example of linear
i j k l   P3  =  d 3  and non-linear
 
m n o p   P4  d 4  iteration process:
4 non-linear
iterations Usually a non-linear iteration requires
20 to 30 linears to converge pressure
and saturations
Reservoir Simulation Slide 29 Reservoir Simulation Slide 30

Solution to the Non-Linear

Linearization
Problem

Newton-Raphson Technique: Y
Have choices:

It is primarily a root finding technique

can solve unknowns one at a time using
parameters (k, kr, Pc, µ, ρ) at current (n, old)
Y
time --- called explicit
X

Root x4 x3 x2 x1
can solve all unknowns simultaneously using

X

x3 x1 Root x0
Newton-Raphson convergence course parameters at new (n+1, new) time --- called
x2
implicit or fully implicit
f(x k )
∂f(x k )
x k +1 = x k -
Divergent Newton-Raphson iteration process
∂x

Reservoir Simulation Slide 31 Reservoir Simulation Slide 32

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Solution to the Non-Linear Solution to the Non-Linear

Problem Problem

Explicit - has severe stability constraints
Fully Implicit is expensive

for example throughput for a grid block can not
unconditionally stable
exceed 5 to 10% of the pore volume
no limit to time step - except for time

time step lengths might be minutes or even truncation error
seconds
must solve for all unknowns P, Sw, Sg, in all
grid blocks simultaneously with an iterative
routine since problem is very non-linear

Reservoir Simulation Slide 33 Reservoir Simulation Slide 34

Solution to the Non-Linear

IMPES – FULLY IMPLICIT
Problem

Black Oil Simulators we have a choice of
Equations written in Residual form: IMPES
solution techniques M − Mt
R = t + dt + F ( Pt + dt , S t ) + Q ( Pt + dt , S t )

IMPES - implicit pressure - explicit saturations dt

Fully Implicit where
dM is the mass, per unit surface density, accumulated

Lets compare IMPES and Fully Implicit during the current time step, dt
methods F is the net flow rate into neighborin g grid blocks
Q is the net flowrate into wells during the timestep
R is the residual in each cell and each fluid

Reservoir Simulation Slide 35 Reservoir Simulation Slide 36

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

IMPES – FULLY IMPLICIT IMPES – FULLY IMPLICIT

IMPES residual – similar to fully implicit
To solve IMPES equations correctly:

residual except:
Necessary to iterate until all residuals have

All flow and well terms – computed using been reduced to a small value
saturations (or Rs, Rv) AT THE BEGINNING
OF EACH TIMESTEP
IMPES – linear equations from Newton’s
method – much easier to solve – because

IMPES: mass terms Mt+dt – evaluated using derivative of the flows with respect to
both pressure and saturations at the end of saturations are zero.
the timestep

Reservoir Simulation Slide 37 Reservoir Simulation Slide 38

IMPES – FULLY IMPLICIT IMPES and Implicit in Black Oil

 P1   P1 

IMPES: linear equations are solved 
 P2 
 
 Sw1 

   
sequentially  P3   Sg 1 
   
 P4   P2 

First for pressure Vector of   Vector of  
 P5   Sw2 

Subsequently for saturation Unknowns for   Unknowns for  
 P6   Sg 2 
IMPES Solution   Full Implicit  
 P7  Solution  P3 
   
Black Oil and  P8   Sw3 

FULLY IMPLICIT – linear equation are solved 
 P9 
 
 Sg 3 

Compositional    
simultaneously  P10   P4 
   
 •   • 
   
 •   • 
 •   • 
P   P 
 nb − 2   nb 
 Pnb−1   Swnb 
   
 Pnb   Sg nb 
Reservoir Simulation Slide 39 Reservoir Simulation Slide 40

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Black Oil Simulation Selection of Time Step

Computational Cost Partitioning
Pie 1
Why needed?
– To control numerical dispersion from time
The Rest truncation.
– Accurate calculation of fluid mobilities - important
especially for explicit systems
– To avoid dramatic changes in pressure and
saturation due to uncontrollably large time steps
Inversion

Reservoir Simulation Slide 41 Reservoir Simulation Slide 42

Time Stepping

In numerical simulators

Can specify maximum time step

Can specify minimum time step

Can specify reporting steps

change a well rate

workover a well, add wells

report results

DO NOT specify the exact time step (unless at

max or min) - exact time step controlled by
commuter program

Reservoir Simulation Slide 43

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

 Reservoir Simulation

Section VI: Solving the Equations

Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Block Ordering Grid Orientation

Diagonal grid-- oriented diagonal

Parallel grid-- oriented parallel to
to a line of injector-producer pair
Adapted from Abou-Kassem, J.H.,S.M. a line of injector-producer pair
Farouq Ali and M.R. Islam: Petroleum
Reservoir Simulation: A Basic Approach,
Gulf Publishing Company, 2006

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

 Grid Orientation Numerical Dispersion
Effect of Cell Size on numerical dispersion
(ref: Koza, 1982)

3-Cell Model

6-Cell Model

Reducing numerical dispersion by

Reduce Grid Orientation by using nine-point Formulation
increasing no of grid cells
Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

IMPES vs. Simultaneous Solution Simultaneous Solution

IMPES Formulation Simultaneous Solution Formulation

IMplicit Pressure Explicit Saturation

(ref: Koza, 1982)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Course Notes

Well Management Tasks

Sets well rates or pressures
Reservoir Simulation
Implements operating
policies

Satisfies operating
constraints at the levels of

Producing interval

Well group of wells
Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Reservoir
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska

Field
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Well controls Classification of Simulator Wells

Shut in, work over, recomplete or redrill wells as per specified

criteria—GOR and WOR limits, minimum oil rate

Wellbore and flow line hydraulics

Initiate artificial lift—gas lift, pumps

Control water or gas injection rates to maintain a specified
average reservoir pressure

Return produced water to specified locations in the reservoirs

Optimize level & distribution of well rates tom match field
production-facility capacities

Availability of gas for gas lift

Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13 Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Typical Controls Common Physical Well controls

Well productivity

Wellbore and flowline hydraulics

Facility capacity

Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13 Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13
Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Well productivity Wellbore Hydraulics

Factors affecting well productivity

Reservoir rock & fluid properties
Bottomhole pressure (BHP)

Fluid saturations
Wellhead pressure

Well completions
Measured and vertical depth

Permeability

Relative permeability

Gas/liquid ratio (GLR)

Perforation quantity and quality
WOR

Well drainage volume
Tubing size

Well stimulation or damage

Lift mechanisms-natural flow, gas lift or subsurface

Turbulent flow near wellbore (e.g. gas wells)
pump

Source: Mattax & Dalton, SPE Monograph vol. 13

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Surface system hydraulics External Production constraints

Choke size Imposed by

Flowline size and configuration
Regulatory agencies

Separator backpressure
Operator

Number of flowing phases
Market forces

Risks-political

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Surface facility capacity Statutory controls

Liquid-handling capacity of separators
Conservation

Gas-handling-capacity of separators
Market demand

Injection and gas lift compressor capacity
Political purposes

Pump capacity

Examples

Oil-production allowables

Water-disposal capacity

GOR limits on wells, lease or reservoir basis

Gas- and water-injection credits

Reservoir pressure levels

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Operating Guidelines

Limits on rates, pressures or fluid ratios

Minimize sand production, coning, water
underrun, gas overrun

Maximize recovery by controlling net voidage
and reservoir pressure

Maximize economic factors

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation

Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Section VIII: History Matching
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

History Matching (HM)

History matching is used to calibrate the model
so that we can evaluate alternative Observed
production schemes. data

Injection plan

Drill new well.

Where to drill?

Type of well to drill?

Recovery rates

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Procedure for Organizing Reservoir

Purpose of History Match
Simulation Study (revisited)

Understand current production mechanism
Phase I: Problem Definition, Data collection

Understand fluid distribution and movement and Model Initialization

Infer reservoir description
Phase II: History Matching (HM)

Update fluids in place and reserves
Phase III: Prediction Runs

Identify and diagnose reservoir and well
Phase IV: Report and recommendations
problems
Phase V: Update the study periodically

Provide basis for additional data collection

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Where HM fits in Reservoir

Data to Match
Simulation Study

Phase I: Problem definition, data collection and Initialization

Pressure Vs. time
 Definition of problem
 Collection of data
flowing well pressure
 Data preparation for model input
shut-in well pressure
 Initial data quality and consistency check

volumetric average reservoir pressure
 Initialization of model

Phase II: Perform History Match (HM)
Production rate Vs. time
 Define history match objectives
water influx
 Identify parameters to be changed to cause
agreement between observed and calculated data
WOR or GOR at various wells
from the model
 Follow Systematic approach to history matching

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

What parameters to change What parameters to change (2)

Transmissibility
Location of oil-water, gas-oil, gas-water

kh, kv contacts

Decreasing order of preference

Decreasing order of preference

kro, krw, krg
Porosity

shape of curves affect wettability
compressibility of rock and individual fluid

endpoints affect fluid distribution, e.g. compressibility
residual saturation
PVT Data-- Rs, Bg, Bo, µo, µg

Productivity (PI) or Injectivity (WI) index

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

What Output results to examine Action Steps for HM

Pressure distribution at various times 1. Collect data on performance history

Saturation distribution at various times 2. Evaluate data quality

GOR or WOR Vs. time 3. Define specific objectives of HM

Well pressure Vs. time 4. Develop preliminary model based on the quantity

Water Influx and quality of available data

Average pressures 5. Simulate history with preliminary model and analyze

In a section of the reservoir
results

Whole reservoir 6. Is the model satisfactory?

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Action Steps for HM (2) History Matching Methods

6. Is the model satisfactory?

Trial-and-error Manual
7. If not make adjustments to model. Review model

Rough analytical estimates
and revisions with geologic, drilling, production and History Match

Simpler models to guide changes
facility personnel to confirm the realism of proposed
changes
8. Re run the simulations to improve the match
9. Analyze the results
Regression analysis Automatic
10. Repeat steps 6-9 until we obtain a satisfactory
System control theory
History Match
match
Optimal control theory

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13 Reservoir Simulation Slide 14

Guidelines for Reservoir Simulation

Study

PVT data should be consistent with the system being
Observed
data
modeled. PVT data should cover all the ranges of
pressure and temperatures to be studied.

The input relative permeability curves should follow
the classic guidelines—correct endpoints and shapes

Capillary pressure should be adjusted to facilitate
initialization of the model to proper equilibrium states

Reservoir Simulation Slide 15 Reservoir Simulation Slide 16

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Guidelines for Reservoir Simulation Guidelines for Reservoir Simulation

Study (2) Study (3)

Residual saturations should be based on laboratory
data when possible
Inconsistencies in pressure and saturations must be
corrected

Gridding should honor the model limitations and
 Negative values are unacceptable
physics governing flow  Oil saturations cannot be drop below residual values

Adjacent grids should not vary drastically in size  Pressure should not go outside range of PVT data

During history match runs, we need to check  Anomalies should be explainable
the input data, material balance errors
Oscillations in water-oil ratio (WOR) and gas-oil ratio
(GOR ) indicate too large a time step

GOR and WOR may be influenced by rate averaging

Reservoir Simulation Slide 17 Reservoir Simulation Slide 18

History Matching (HM) Guidelines History Match (HM) Guidelines (2)

Do HM with a well defined set of objectives and an
Set guidelines for what is acceptable match
outlined , logical approach ± 10% in pressure?


Initially select as many History matching parameters ± 5% in Cumulative production rates?



as possible
Proceed with the history match process systematically

 Convert rates to reservoir voidage rates

Prepare performance plots and well history database
 Input voidage rates vs. time, and match the the

Skin factor
calculated pressure to the observed pressure by

Well Completion records adjusting:

Stimulation/workover records • Permeability • Aquifer size

Gas and water shut-off • Gascap size • Volume of oil l in place

Once pressures are matched, attempt to match oil, gas, water
rates by adjusting relative perms, and transmissibilities.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 19 Reservoir Simulation Slide 20

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Systematic Approach to History Systematic Approach to History

Matching Matching (2)

Establish range of uncertainty in data
Step I: Initialization
 What is determinate and indeterminate?
• Step II: Pressure Match
 What is the impact of changes in parameter on the

response? • Step III: Saturation match

 How will change in k ro vs. krg affect GOR?
• Step IV: PI match
• Variables to Observe
• Step V: Final history matching runs
 Pressure distribution

 Saturation distribution

 Pressure levels

 Bottom hole pressures

 Productivity index, PI

Reservoir Simulation Slide 21 Reservoir Simulation Slide 22

Overview of History Matching Overview of History Matching

Data uncertainties
Reservoir formation parameters are usually

Injection data can be less accurate than production data measured at the point of observation - wells.
due to measurement errors, fluid losses into other
These are porosity, permeability, relative
intervals due to leaks in the casing or flow behind the pipe.

Well test data are usually reliable when build up records
permeability, capillary pressure etc.
are taken.
Inferred parameters between wells are

Pressures measured during flow tests are usually less usually associated with high degree of
reliable than those obtained during shut in.
uncertainty.

Reservoir Simulation Slide 23 Reservoir Simulation Slide 24

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Overview of History Matching History Matching

Having set of parameters that match the reservoir History matching is normally carried out in these
performance available does not guarantee accurate stages:
future performance predictions.

The duty of reservoir management is to direct efforts in - Define which data is determinate and which is indeterminate
simulation studies to quantify uncertainty in the future - Define the data to be compared and the tolerances
performance predictions. - Determine the solution technique
- Match the pressures (field or reservoir pressure)
- Match the GOR/water-cut, etc.
- Match the FBHP

Reservoir Simulation Slide 25 Reservoir Simulation Slide 26

History Matching History Matching

Important to know which variables may have Before starting to history match: define the
a significant effect on the history match and data to be matched and the tolerances.
which may not.
Final Match tolerances depend on:
Thus, at the beginning of the history
matching process a sensitivity analysis of the - The study objectives
key parameters is suggested. - The data quality
- The model coarseness
- Time and money available

Reservoir Simulation Slide 27 Reservoir Simulation Slide 28

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

History Matching History Matching

There are no “hard and fast” rules for history matching. However, Pressure match
the following may be of some help:

- Keep it simple (KISS) - Run the model under reservoir voidage

- Keep it physical control
- Use common sense - Examine the overall pressure levels, adjust the
- Don’t panic! pore volume/aquifer properties to match
- Run model under voidage control until pressures matched, overall pressure
then switch to principal product rate
- Proper use of pseudos is more consistent than rock curves
- Match the well pressures, modify local
- Correct the problem, not the symptom PVs/aquifers to match overall pressures;
- The most difficult problems may require a rethink of the modify local transmissibility to match
base data pressure gradient
Reservoir Simulation Slide 29 Reservoir Simulation Slide 30

History Matching History Matching

Saturation match
- Normally attempted once pressures matched Well PI match
- Most important parameters are rel. perm. curves and
permeabilities - Not usually matched until pressures and saturations are
- Try to explain the reasons for the deviations and act matched, unless BHP affects production rates
accordingly - Must be matched before using model in prediction mode
- Changes to rel. perm. tables should affect the model globally - Match FBHP data by modifying KH, skin or PI directly
- Changes to permeabilities should have some physical
justification
- Consider the use of well pseudos
- Assumed layer KH allocations may be incorrect
(check Production logs, PLTs, etc.)

Reservoir Simulation Slide 31 Reservoir Simulation Slide 32

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

History Matching History Matching Adjustments

Automatic history matching does not exist. New Eclipse
SimOpt program is a history matching aid. Try to minimize an Simulation field pressure too high
objective function over the time period of the history:
n
Q = ∑ Ri2 Possible Changes

where i =1
Pore Volume?
Ri = Wi ( X mod el − X observed )i Aquifer?

with X = calculated/model data Oil Initially in Place

Xo = actual/observed data (Contacts, So)
Wi = weighting factor
Energy?
Gas cap size
Reservoir Simulation Slide 33 Reservoir Simulation Slide 34

History Matching Adjustments History Matching Adjustments

Break Through: OK, After BT WC too high Water BT too early, After BT slope - OK

Possible Changes
Possible Changes
Effective end point Krw ?
Krw / Kro ratio decrease?
Horiz. Permeability of well to aquifer layer?
Aquifer size?
Shale or barrier between wells and water?
Vertical permeability between wells and
water?
Numerical dispersion / grid effect?

Reservoir Simulation Slide 35 Reservoir Simulation Slide 36

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

History Matching Adjustments History Matching Adjustments

Gas BT OK, After BT simulation slope in

Gas BT simulation very late, After BT error
slope OK

Possible Changes
Possible Changes

Krg / Kro ratio increase?

Effective Krg end point?
Supply of gas?
Shale or barrier effecting coning?
Vertical permeability between wells and
gas?
Numerical dispersion / grid effect?

Reservoir Simulation Slide 37 Reservoir Simulation Slide 38

Predictions Prediction, continued

Most simulation models are used to produce production forecasts. - Check that the transition from “history” to “prediction”
Exact details of prediction cases depend on particular field and is smooth
study objectives, so difficult to generalize. - Monitor carefully “automatic” workovers
- Take care when using the model to plan infill drilling
- During predictions, well rates usually controlled primarily -Simulation model recoveries are usually optimistic
by FTHP/FBHP -Predicted results should be related to study objectives
- Most simulators can model a wide variety of operating
constraints

Reservoir Simulation Slide 39 Reservoir Simulation Slide 40

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

History Matching Restart Runs

Field History Period Prediction Period

production
rate

Base Run Restart Run

Present day Time

Reservoir Simulation Slide 41

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Reservoir Simulation Introduction to Reservoir

Simulation using IMEX
Professor David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE
Professor Emeritus, University of Alaska
Senior Reservoir Engineering Advisor
Greatland Solutions, Greenwood Village, CO 80155, USA

Email: davido@greatlandsolutions.com

Reservoir Simulation Slide 2

Outline IMEX Features

Phases

Introduction
Single phase (oil, gas, water)

IMEX Features
Two Phase flow (oil/water, oil/gas, gas/water)

Data Files
Three Phase flow (oil/gas/water)

Preparation of Input Data
Geometry

Running the Program
1-D, 2-D, 3-D Cartesian or Radial

Post Processing
Variable depth/variable thickness

Block-centered

Corner-Point

local grid refinement

Prof David Ogbe, Feb 2003

Reservoir Simulation Slide 3 Reservoir Simulation Slide 4

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

IMEX 100 Features, 2 IMEX Features, 3

Solution Options
Variable bubble-point

IMPES (Implicit Pressure Explicit Saturation)
API tracking for modeling reservoir with

Fully Implicit compositional gradients

Adaptive Implicit
Temperature model to account for non-

Dual Porosity/Permeability isothermal conditions

PVT and Rock Data
Pseudo-Miscible Options

3-Component model

Todd-Longstaff mixing

Reservoir Simulation Slide 5 Reservoir Simulation Slide 6

Additional Programs Other Supporting Programs

IMEX also provides options to do:
Grid Builder to generate flow simulation properties

Polymer Flood and grid systems

Surface Networks
WinProp is an equation of state (EoS) Package

Local Grid Refinement

Results for Post-processing

Faulted Reservoir Modeling

Gas Lift Optimization

Parallel Options

Subsidence

Reservoir Simulation Slide 7 Reservoir Simulation Slide 8

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

Additional Programs Data Files

GEM compositional simulator
Input data file (myimex.dat)

STARS is a Compositional Process-thermal
Output data file (myimex.out)
simulator
Restart data files

Index-results-file

Main-results-file

Reservoir Simulation Slide 9 Reservoir Simulation Slide 10

Sections in Input Data File

Input/Output Control

Reservoir description

Component Properties

Rock-Fluid Data
Example Data File

Initial Conditions

Numerical Methods Control

Well and Recurrent Data

Reservoir Simulation Slide 11 Reservoir Simulation Slide 12

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

Course Notes

IMEX DEMO

Data Files

Preparation of Input Data

Running the Program

Post Processing

Reservoir Simulation Slide 13

Reservoir Simulation I Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE

 Stone’s Models for Calculating Three-phase Relative Permeability
The following notes were taken from Aziz and Settari (1979).

Stone Model I (1970)

Define:
Som = residual oil saturation when oil is displaced simultaneously by oil and gas.
Koederitz et al (1989) defined Som as weighted average of Sorg and Sorw. That is,

Som = ω Sorw + (1 − ω ) Sorg where the weighting factor is

Sg
ω = 1−
1 − S wc − Sorg
Sorw = residual oil saturation from oil-water system
Sorg = residual oil saturation from oil-gas system

Normalized saturations:

So − Som
So* = for So ≥ Som (1)
1 − S wc − Som

S w − S wc
S w* = for Sw ≥ Swc (2)
1 − S wc − Som

Sg
S g* = (3)
1 − S wc − Som
Using these normalized saturations, the three-phase elative permeability to oil is
calculated.

kro = So* β w β g (4)

The terms βw and βg are defined as.

krow ( S w )
βw = (5)
1 − S w*

krog ( S g )
βg = (6)
1 − S g*
The definitions given in Equations (5) and (6) reduce the three-phase relative
permeability calculated from Equation (4) to that of two-phase for the extreme cases of
S g = S g* = 0 and S w = S wc .

Reservoir Simulation Notes Relative Permeability Page 1

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E. Rev. 04-01-03
Stone II Model (1973)

In 1973 Stone derived a second model from channel-flow considerations. This model
does not require specifying Som. The three-phase oil relative permeability is given by:

kro = (krow + krw )(krog + krg ) − (krw + krg ) (7)

Note that Equation (7) may give negative oil relative permeability values when very low
(or zero) values would be expected. We consider these negative kro values as zero or
immobile oil.

Modified Stone Models

The modified Stone’s models are derived by assuming that the oil-gas data are measured
in the presence of irreducible water. Thus, an oil-water system at Swc is identical
physically to a gas-oil system at Sg = 0 in that both systems have Sw = Swc and
So = 1- Swc.

We denote:

krow ( S wc ) = krog ( S L = 1) = krocw (8)

where SL = 1 – Sg = So + Swc for the oil-gas data.

Modified Stone I
kro = krocw So* β w β g (9)
where
k (S )
β w = row w * (10)
krocw (1 − S w )

krog ( S L )
βg = (11)
krocw (1 − S g* )

Modified Stone II

 k krog 
kro = krocw ( row + krw )( + krg ) − (krw + krg )  (12)
 krocw krocw 

References
1. Aziz, K. and A. Settari (1979): Petroleum Reservoir Simulation, Elsevier Applied
Science Publishers, 1979. pp 32-36
2. Koederitz, L.F., A.H. Harvey and M. Honarpour (1989): Introduction to
Petroleum Reservoir Analysis, Gulf Publishing Company, p. 86.

Reservoir Simulation Notes Relative Permeability Page 2

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., P.E. Rev. 04-01-03
 Advanced Reservoir Engineering
Appendix A Review of Petrophysical
Section 9: Rock Fluid Properties Properties

Reservoir Engineering Slide 1 Reservoir Engineering Slide 2

Rock Properties Coring

• Sources of data • Replace conventional drilling bit with

Cores coring bit and core barrel

In-situ (downhole) measurements with logging
Coring Methods
devices • Conventional core samples
• Open-hole logs • Sidewall core samples
• Cased hole logs

Drill cuttings provide useful data in certain
instances

Reservoir Engineering Slide 3 Reservoir Engineering Slide 4

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Coring Routine Core Analysis

Conventional cores in consolidated formations
Also called PKS (Porosity, Permeability,
• 1 to 4-inch diameter Saturation)
• Up to 20 feet long
Measurement of basic rock properties
• Good source of rock properties • Porosity

Sidewall cores in unconsolidated formations • Permeability
• Core size, shape and packing of grains affected • Saturation
• Inaccuracy in measurements

Reservoir Engineering Slide 5 Reservoir Engineering Slide 6

Special Core Analysis Well Logs

Measurement of rock properties
In-situ measurement of rock properties
• Capillary Pressure • Porosity
• Relative Permeability • Net pay intervals
• Mineral Content • Water saturation
• Electrical properties , e.g., Formation Resistivity • Permeability estimates
• Rock compressibility • Lithological properties
• Acoustic velocity

Reservoir Engineering Slide 7 Reservoir Engineering Slide 8

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Why Routine Core Analysis? Why Special Core Analysis (SCA)?

Routine Core Analysis
Complements data from routine core analysis
• Reservoir storage capacity
SCA also provides
• Static distribution of fluids in the reservoir • Static distribution of fluids
• Flow capacity • Dynamic flow performance
• Identify rock types

Improves input data for reservoir description
and modeling

Reservoir Engineering Slide 9 Reservoir Engineering Slide 10

Improved Reservoir Description Geologic Factors that Affect

Methodology Reservoirs

Goal: obtain a quality description of the
Reservoir Type
reservoir by integration of available data from • Depositional environment
various sources • Origin and transportation of sediments
• Distance from source of sediments

SCA is an important component

Reservoir Structure

Improved methodology works, regardless of • Depositional environment
• Geology • Diagenetic history
• Hydrocarbon type (compaction,precipitation,cementation,solution,
• Maturity recrystallization)
• Tectonic structural history
• Location

Reservoir Engineering Slide 11 Reservoir Engineering Slide 12

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 How Depositional Processes
How Diagenetic Processes
Influence Reservoir Rock Quality
Influence Reservoir Rock Quality

Texture
Compaction
• Grain size
Cementation
• Grain shape
Solution
• Grain packing

Fracturing
• Grain roundness
• Sorting

Mineral Composition

Reservoir Engineering Slide 13 Reservoir Engineering Slide 14

Porosity Porosity

Measure of space
Total Porosity (absolute porosity)
available in the reservoir
for storage of fluids Total Pore Space Bulk Volume − Grain Volume
Pore
Space
Grain
φ= =

Ratio of volume of pore Bulk Volume Bulk Volume
space to the bulk volume
of the rock
Effective Porosity: ratio of volume of
Void Space
φ = --------------- interconnected pore space to the bulk volume
Pore Volume
of the rock
Interconnected Pore Volume
φe =
Bulk Volume

Reservoir Engineering Slide 15 Reservoir Engineering Slide 16

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Porosity Classification Porosity Classification (2)

Using mode of Origin
Microporosity
• Primary Porosity (or original Porosity) • Small pores (less than 1 micron diameter)
associated with clay minerals, especially
• Secondary Porosity (or induced Porosity) authegenic minerals
• Extensive microporosity can cause high irreducible
water saturation

Dissolution Porosity
• Framework grains and/or cements are partially to
completely dissolved

Fractured Porosity
• Formed as function of stress fields acting on the
rock, causing it to break and separate

Reservoir Engineering Slide 17 Reservoir Engineering Slide 18

Primary Porosity Secondary Porosity

Developed during the depositional process
Formed after deposition

Intergranular sandstones
Fractures developed in shales and

Intercrystalline, oolitic carbonates carbonates

More uniform than secondary porosity
Vugs and solution cavities in limestones
Example: and dolomite
In moderately round, well sorted sandstones,

φ = 20 to 30%

Reservoir Engineering Slide 19 Reservoir Engineering Slide 20

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 How to recognize secondary
Porosity Examples
porosity
Pore Pore Grain
Grain

Pores are elongated Space Space

Presence of oversized pores

Remnants of less stable framework grains or
cements in the reservoir

Occurrence of “ghost” outlines of framework
grains

Inter-Connected Porosity Isolated Porosity

Reservoir Engineering Slide 21 Reservoir Engineering Slide 22

Primary Porosity Examples Secondary Porosity Examples

Fenestral (Shrinkage) Solution (leaching of Fractures

Solution)
Intercrystalline (Between
crystals) Mold
Intragranular Porosity Intergranular Porosity Vuggy
(Limestone) (Sandstone)
(Adapted from “Reservoir Engineering Basics” Schlumberger ProCADE ASM Module 1) (Adapted from “Reservoir Engineering Basics” Schlumberger ProCADE ASM Module 1)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 23 Reservoir Engineering Slide 24

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Determining Porosity from Well
How to Determine Porosity
Logs

Cores
Sonic log
• Boyles Law Porosimeter
• Saturation methods ∆t = ∆tma (1 − φ ) + ∆t f (φ ) Rock Type Sonic Travel Time
(microsec/ft)
where

Well Logs Quartz 55
∆t = Sonic travel time log response (Sandstone)
• Density ∆tma = Sonic travel time for matrix
Limestone 47
• Sonic mineral grains
∆t f = Sonic travel time for fluid Dolomite 43
• Neutron
in the pore space
φ =Porosity, fraction

Reservoir Engineering Slide 25 Reservoir Engineering Slide 26

Determining Porosity from Well

Factors that affect porosity
Logs Relationship between texture

Particle shape and pore space

Density log

ρb = ρma (1 − φ ) + ρ f (φ )

Packing
Rock Type Density
(gm/cc)
Particle sizes
where
Quartz 2.65
Cementing
ρ = Bulk density log response (Sandstone) materials
ρ ma = Density of matrix mineral grains Limestone 2.71
ρ f = Density of fluid in the pore space
Overburden stress
Dolomite 2.87
φ = Porosity, fraction

Vugs and fractures

Reservoir Engineering Slide 27 Reservoir Engineering Slide 28

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Porosity of Uniformly Packed
How Packing affects Porosity
Spheres
UNIT CELL

Bulk Volume = (2r )3 = 8r 3

4 π r3
Matrix volume =
3
Pore Volume
Porosity =
Bulk Volume
Bulk Volume − Matrix Volume
Porosity = 48% for Porosity = 26% for =
Porosity = 14% for Porosity = 48% for Bulk Volume
Cubic packing of Rhombohedral packingCubic packing with
Cubic packing of
of Spherical Grains 8 r3 − 4 / 3 π r3 π
Spherical Grains mixed grains Spherical Grains = =1− = 47.6%
8 r3 2 ( 3)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 29 Reservoir Engineering Slide 30

Example 1: Use of Porosity Permeability

• Given: The areal extent of a gas reservoir is
640 acres.
Measures the ability of the rock to transmit
fluids through it

Net sand thickness = 20 ft

Regulates the rate at which fluids may be

Effective Porosity = 18% displaced or produced from the porous medium
• Find the bulk (Vb) and pore volumes (Vp) of
Mathematically, Darcy’s law provides
the reservoir?
qµ L
• Solution: Bulk volume, V = 43560 Ah ft 3 Permeability, k =
b
A∆p
= 43560(640)(20) = 5.58 ×108 ft 3
Pore volume, V p = Vbφ = 43560 Ahφ ft 3
= 5.58 ×108 (0.18) = 1.00 ×108 ft 3

Reservoir Engineering Slide 31 Reservoir Engineering Slide 32

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Permeability
∆p atm
Definition How to Determine Permeability
=1
L cm
q = 1 cm3/s
A A = 1 cm 2

Core data
L µ = 1 cp • Steady state
• Unsteady state
qµ L
Permeability, k = = 1 Darcy
Well Log data and RFT
A∆p
k = permeability ( Darcy )
Well tests
q = flow rate, cm3 / s
Production data
µ = vis cos ity of fluid , centipoise (cp )

Correlations
A = cross sec tional area (cm 2 )
∆p  atm 
= pressure gradient  
L  cm 

Reservoir Engineering Slide 33 Reservoir Engineering Slide 34

Estimating Permeability from Estimating Permeability from

Correlations Correlations (2)

Carman-Kozeny
Coates/Timur

φe3  1   φ − BFV 
2

k= 2   k = 10000φ 4  
(1 − φe )  Fsτ 2 S gv3   BFV 
where
k = permeability ( µ m 2 ) where k=permeability, md
Fs = shape factor (2 for circular cylinders ) φ=porosity, fraction
τ = Tortuosity
BFV = Boundwater volume obtained from
φe = Effective porosity ( fraction) CMR* (Combinable Magnetic Resonance) log
S gv = surface area per unit grain ( µ m-1 )

Reservoir Engineering Slide 35 Reservoir Engineering Slide 36

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Estimating Permeability for Flow through Estimating Permeability for flow through
Fractures Solution Channels

Linear Flow through Fractures
Flow through Solution Channels
p1 p2 p2
p1

k f = 8.444 ×106 (1 − S wcf ) φ f w2f q kc = 12.6 ×106 (1 − Siwc ) φc rc2 rc

h q Channel h
= 8.444 ×106 w2f (if S wcf = 0 and φ f = 1) = 12.6 ×106 rc2 (if Siwc = 0 and φc = 1)
wf
w w
where kf = fracture permeability, Darcy where kc= solution channel permeability, Darcy L

φf = fracture porosity, fraction φc = solution channel porosity, fraction

Swcf = connate water saturation in the fracture Siwc = irreducible water saturation in the channel
w f= fracture width, cm rc= radius of tubular channel, cm
(After Tiab and Donaldson, 2004) (After Tiab and Donaldson, 2004)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 37 Reservoir Engineering Slide 38

Lab Methods for Measuring Using Whole-Core to Measure

Permeability Permeability

Steady-state
Cut selected pieces from the full or whole

Unsteady-state core
• core sizes 2 1/2 to 5 1/2 inches in diameter

• several inches to several feet long

Most applicable technique for very

heterogeneous formations

Additional expense limits the practical number
of tests conducted

Reservoir Engineering Slide 39 Reservoir Engineering Slide 40

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Measuring Permeability using Perm Sample Selection I IIa
Unacceptable
IIb

Plugs kH
~1 ft ?

Most commonly applied method to measure Or
permeabilty kH
Full-
Diameter
 Goal: Select a Suitable

Cut small cylindrical core samples representative sample kV kV

• 3/4 inch to 1-1/2 inch diameter  Depends on Lithology III IV V

• 1 to a few inches long kV

Full

Method may not apply to heterogeneous Diameter
kH Matrix
Only
`4” - 9”
formations
Fracture
k and φ?

Whole Core
Analysis
(2-3 ft)
Reservoir Engineering Slide 41 Reservoir Engineering Slide 42

Laboratory Determination of Laboratory Determination of

Absolute Permeability-Liquid Flow Absolute Permeability-Gas Flow

Viscous Turbulent Viscous Turbulent

flow flow flow flow
q qscpsc
A A

k k
Slope = µ Slope = µ

0 0
0 (p1 - p2) 0 (p12 - p22)
L 2L

Reservoir Engineering Slide 43 Reservoir Engineering Slide 44

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 How Fluid-Rock Interactions Affect
Measuring Air Permeability
Lab Measurements of Permeability

Fresh water may cause clay swelling, Rubber cork
reducing permeability

Tests may cause fines migration, plugging
To air
pore throats and reducing permeability metering Air
Core
device

Run tests using reservoir or synthetic
reservoir fluids p2
p1

Water
manometer
Hg manometer

Reservoir Engineering Slide 45 Reservoir Engineering Slide 46

Klinkenberg Effect How to Correct Permeability for Klinkenberg Effect

Gas slippage—finite
velocity and movement
Measure permeability at
of gas molecules at the several mean pressures, p
wall of conduit; unlike
Extrapolate line to high
( )
liquids with zero velocity pressures
at the wall 1 →0
kgas

p Slope = bk∞

Slippage increases with
• Decreasing gas pressure
Read equivalent liquid
• Decreasing gas molecular permeability at intercept
weight k∞ Equivalent Liquid

Equivalent liquid permeability Permeability
• Increasing gas
temperature
= true absolute permeability
1
• Decreasing conduit size,  b Reciprocal of mean p
k g = k∞ 1 +  pressure,
i.e., with decreasing  p
permeability
p = ( p1 + p2 ) 2

Reservoir Engineering Slide 47 Reservoir Engineering Slide 48

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 How Permeability Affects Magnitude of Effect of gas pressure on
Klinkenberg Effect measured permeability
y Temperature 25°C ne
rmeabilit tha
High Pe Me

Permeability, md
Air Permeability

n e
Etha

te ne
dia y Propa
rme it
Inte eabil
m
Per

Low Permeability

1/pm (1/Atmospheres) 1/pm

(Adapted from Cole, F.W., 1969, Reservoir Engineering Manual) (Adapted from Calhoun, J, Jr. 1976, Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Univ.
Oklahoma, Press)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 49 Reservoir Engineering Slide 50

Factors that affect Permeability Permeability Anisotropy

Shape and size of sand grains
Permeability often varies with direction

Sorting
Permeability perpendicular to bedding plane may be
reduced by silts/shale laminations in sands or

Cementation stylolites in carbonates

Fracturing and solution
Factors controlling Anisotropy

Lithology or rock type • Depositional environments
– Grain orientation
– Laminated features
– Bioturbation
• Digenesis, solution and dissolution
• Fracturing

Reservoir Engineering Slide 51 Reservoir Engineering Slide 52

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Why Average Permeability What Average Permeability to use

Reservoir contains distinct layers, blocks,
Geometric Average is used when permeability
rings of varying permeability varies randomly

Need to describe small-scale heterogeneities
Arithmetic average for flow parallel to bed
obtained from core data boundaries

Use average permeability to represent flow
Harmonic average for flow perpendicular bed
characteristics of entire reservoir or individual boundaries
layers, Scale-up

Reservoir Engineering Slide 53 Reservoir Engineering Slide 54

Geometric Average Permeability Arithmetic Average Permeability

Permeability varies randomly
Flow parallel to bed boundaries
 
 ∑ ( h j ln(k j ) ) 
n n

j =1 ( k h + k h + k h K + k n hn )
∑k h
j =1
j j

k = exp   k= 11 2 2 3 3 =
 h
 h1 + h2 + h3 K + hn n

 ∑ h j  ∑h j
 j =1  p1 p2
j =1

q1 k1 h1

If thickness (hj) of all core samples are the q2 k2 h2
same q3 k3 h3
k = n k1k 2 k3 K k n q4 k4 h4 Schematic of horizontal
Bed flow
∆x
Boundary in a stratified reservoir

Reservoir Engineering Slide 55 Reservoir Engineering Slide 56

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Harmonic Average Permeability
Harmonic Average Permeability
Radial Flow

Flow perpendicular to bed boundaries
Flow perpendicular to bed boundaries
∆p 5

Linear flow in series • ∆p 4
∆p 3
∆p1 ∆p2 ∆p3 ∆p4 re ∆p 2
• n
ln
rw ∆p 1
k =
∑L j rj
k= j =1 ln q
q n rj −1 rw
Lj
∑
n

∑
j =1 kj
k1 k2 k3 k4 h
j =1 kj k1 k2 k3 k4 k5 h
w
L1 L2 L3 L4 r1 r2 r3 r4 re

Center
of the
well

Reservoir Engineering Slide 57 Reservoir Engineering Slide 58

Porosity-Permeability Relationship Porosity-Permeability Relationship

(b) Reservoir A
Permeability-Porosity Relationship
Permeability-Porosity Relationship
100000.00
Permeability, kair md

Permeability, kair md

100000.00 10000.00
10000.00 1000.00
1000.00 100.00
Reservoir A
100.00 10.00
All Data Points
10.00 1.00
1.00 0.10
0.10 0.01
0.01 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Porosity, φ %
Porosity, φ %
(C) Reservoir B
Permeability-Porosity Relationship

(a) All data points

Permeability, kair md

1000.00

100.00

• Any comments on these 10.00 Reservoir B

1.00

results? 0.10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

(After Core Lab, 1990; Tiab and Donaldson, Porosity, φ %

1996; 2004)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 59 Reservoir Engineering Slide 60

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Formation Compressibility Formation Compressibility

Subsurface reservoirs subject to overburden
Overburden pressure ~ 1 psi /ft
pressure caused by weight of overlying c f = cr + c p
formation c f = formation compressibility (psi-1 )

Overburden pressure varies with cr = rock grain compressibility (psi -1 )
• Depth c p = pore volume compressibility (psi-1 )
• Nature of the structure
• Degree of consolidation of formation
Note cr much less than cp in petroleum
• Geologic age and history of the rocks reservoirs c ≈ c
f p

 1   ∂V   1   ∂φ 
cf = −   =   
 V   ∂p   φ   ∂p 

Reservoir Engineering Slide 61 Reservoir Engineering Slide 62

Estimating Formation
Newman Correlation for Estimating cf
Compressibility a
cf =
(1 + bcφ )

Hall Correlation
a, b, c = correlation coefficients
c f = 1.782 ×10−6 φ −0.438
−1
c f = formation compressibility, psi Rock Type Correlation coefficients

Example: φ = porosity, ( fraction)
Consolidated a = 97.32 ×10-6

Estimate formation compressibility for a Sandstones b = 0.699993
sandstone reservoir having an average c = 79.8181
porosity of 15% a = 0.8535
c f = 1.782 × 10−6 φ −0.438

Solution: Limestones b = 1.075
−6 −0.438 −6 −1
c f = 1.782 × 10 (0.15) = 4.09 × 10 psi c = 2.202 ×106

Reservoir Engineering Slide 63 Reservoir Engineering Slide 64

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Range of Compressibilities Compressibility
 1   ∂V   1   ∂ρ 
cl = −    l  =    l 
 Vl   ∂p   ρl   ∂p 
Effect of Confining Pressure on Porosity
l = gas, oil , water ρ = fluid density
50 Sandstones

Porosity, (%)
Rock/Fluid Type Compressibility ×10-6 (psi-1) 40 Shales
30
Formation rock 3 -10 20
10
Water 2-4 0
0 1000 2000 3000
Undersaturated Oil 5 - 100
Net Confining Pressure (psi)
Gas at 1000 psi 900 - 1300
Gas at 5000 psi 50 - 200

Reservoir Engineering Slide 65 Reservoir Engineering Slide 66

Fluid Saturation Connate Water Saturation

Saturation of any fluid (oil, gas, water) is the
Connate water is seawater trapped in porous
fraction of the pore space occupied by the fluid spaces of sediments during deposition and
Vo Volume balance, Vo + Vg + Vw = Vp
lithification, long before oil migration into
Oil , So =
Vp So + S g + Sw = 1 reservoir rock
Vg So , S g , Sw = oil/gas/water saturation (fraction)
Amount of connate water saturation, Swi varies
Gas, S g =
Vp
Vg = pore volume occupied by free gas (ft 3 or bbl) with depth
Vw
Water , S w = Vo = pore volume occupied by oil (ft 3 or bbl)
• 100% below the oil zone
Vp
Vw = pore volume occupied by water (ft 3 or bbl)
• 0% at heights above the free water level
• Nearly constant = irreducible water saturation
above the transition zone

Reservoir Engineering Slide 67 Reservoir Engineering Slide 68

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Connate Water Saturation and
Water Saturation Profile
Transition Zone

Magnitude of Swi and height of the transition
zone depends
100% Oil

• Pore size
Oil Pay Zone
• Rock Texture
Height Above

High values of Swi indicate small pore sizes

FWL
Oil + Water

Transition

Transition Zone represents a zone of varying
Zone water saturation
100% Water Water-oil • Wells completed within this zone will produce both
Saturation Contact
100% Free Water Level hydrocarbons and water
Water 0 (FWL)
Swi 100%
Water
• Wells completed above this zone but within the
Saturation zone of irreducible water saturation will produce
only hydrocarbons
Reservoir Engineering Slide 69 Reservoir Engineering Slide 70

Data Averaging Example 2: Data Averaging

n

Porosity
∑φ h • Given: The core data Depth Interval, MD Porosity Kair,
j j meters % md
• Thickness weighted j =1
listed here. Assume kv=
φ = n kh within the interval
3697.40 - 3697.55
3697.73 - 3697.85
3.90
4.20
0.33
0.29

∑h
3698.03 - 3698.19 3.40 0.12
j • Find: 3698.27 - 3698.35 6.80 0.78
3698.44 - 3698.58 4.40 0.42
j =1

Average porosity 3698.66 - 3698.82 5.40 0.56
3698.97 - 3699.10 7.30 1.29

Saturation n

Average horizontal
∑φ h S
3699.57 - 3699.70 3.90 1.41
3699.87- 3699.95 6.40 3.20
• Pore Volume Weighted j j j permeability, kh 3700.21 - 3700.33 6.90 2.89
j =1
S= n
Average vertical 3700.48 - 3700.64
3701.06 - 3701.22
3.10
8.90
7.21
18.26

∑φ h
j =1
j j permeability, kv 3701.30 - 3701.40
3701.49 - 3701.60
9.20
5.30
14.76
0.65
3701.83 - 3701.97 2.70 0.02
3702.05 - 3702.14 4.90 3.50

Reservoir Engineering Slide 71 Reservoir Engineering Slide 72

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Capillary Pressure Uses of Capillary Pressure

Capillary pressure, pc, is the difference in
Determine fluid distribution in the reservoir
pressure across the curved liquid interface • Identify pay and non-pay zones
between two immiscible fluids • Determine initial water saturation in the reservoir

Curvature of the interface is due to
Determine residual oil saturation for water
preferential wetting of the capillary walls flooding applications

Mathematically,
Calculate pore size distribution index
pc = pnw − pw
Identify rock types
pc = capillary pressure, psi

Calculate relative permeability
pnw = pressure of non-wetting phase, psi
pw = pressure of wetting phase, psi

Aid in formation evaluation and flow unit
identification
Reservoir Engineering Slide 73 Reservoir Engineering Slide 74

Understanding Capillary pressure Wettability σ

r

Cohesive forces— o o o
Measures the ability of
attraction of molecules o + + o a fluid to coat the solid θ
o + + + o θ
between like substances + + (rock) surface
• Accounts for surface Surface Free Energy
energy (interfacial
Contact angle is
tension) between two σ formed when two Capillary rise of Wetting
immiscible fluids immiscible fluids Liquid

Adhesive forces— contact a solid surface
r
attraction of molecules Non-wetting θ Wetting
Wetting phase-fluid
between unlike preferentially wets the
Solid (Rock)
substances solid θ
• attraction of a fluid (i.e., σ
water) to the rock Schematic Showing
Non-wetting phase-
Static Wetting for Liquid-Liquid System
fluid has little or no Capillary depression of Non-Wetting
substrate (contact angle)
Liquid
(After Core Lab, 1990) affinity for the solid (Adapted from Core Lab, 1990)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 75 Reservoir Engineering Slide 76

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Wettability: Water-Wet oil Wettability: Neutrally-Wet oil
(a) Water-wet (a) Water-wet
θ system θ system
Water 0 < θ < 70° Water 0 < θ < 70°

(a) Water-wet system Solid

(b) neutrally-wet Solid
• Water wets the walls system
of the capillary
oil • Two fluids wet the oil
• Non-wetting phase (b) neutrally-wet walls of the capillary (b) neutrally-wet
(oil) rests on a thin system system
Water
θ 70 < θ < to the same extent Water
θ 70 < θ <
film of the wetting fluid
• Pnw > Pw Solid
110° • Pnw = Pw and Pc = 0 Solid
110°

• interface is curved • interface is straight

concave with respect oil across oil
to the denser phase (c) Oil-wet system (c) Oil-wet system
Water
• Contact angle (~ 90°) Water
110 < θ < 110 < θ <
• Contact angle < 70° θ θ
180° 180°
Solid Solid

Reservoir Engineering Slide 77 Reservoir Engineering Slide 78

Wettability: Oil-Wet Systems oil Contact Angle Criteria for Wettability

(a) Water-wet
system
θ
Water 0 < θ < 70°

Using contact angle θ of
oil

(c) oil-wet system Solid water surrounded by oil
θ < 90°
• Oil wets the walls of • Water-wet if θ < 90°
the capillary oil • Intermediate or Neutrally- Water
(b) neutrally-wet wet
• Pnw > Pw system Water-Wet
Water if θ = 90°
• interface is curved θ 70 < θ <
110° • Oil-wet if θ > 90°
convex with respect Solid
to the denser phase
In practice, Intermediate wet oil
oil
if 70°< θ < 110° θ > 90°
• Contact angle oil
θ = 90°
(c) Oil-wet system
110 < θ < 180° Water
Water
110 < θ <
θ Water
180°
Solid Oil-Wet
Neutral or Intermediate

Reservoir Engineering Slide 79 Reservoir Engineering Slide 80

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Three Components for Calculating Capillary
Capillary Pressure Concept
Pressure

Interfacial Tension (σ) A B
• Fluid factor
ρw

Contact angle (θ) ρo
• Rock/fluid factor ρo

Depth

Capillary radius (r) 3
Pc = 0
• Rock factor 2

Plateau Equation 1
ρw
combines 3 components
Pressure
2σ cos θ Capillary rise of Wetting Liquid
pc =
r

Reservoir Engineering Slide 81 Reservoir Engineering Slide 82

Fluid Distribution in Petroleum Reservoirs Relation between capillary pressure

and height
Capillary pressure difference
between
144 × pc
h=
gas and oil phases in core ‘B’ Gas & Water
ρo-ρ
Pc = h2g (ρ ρg)

( ρ w − ρo )
Gas density = ρg

‘B’
Oil, Gas & Water h2

Free Oil Level

‘A’
Oil & Water

Oil density = ρo
h1 • pc = Capillary pressure, psi
Free Water Level
Water
• ρw = Density of water, lb/ft3
Water density = ρw

Capillary pressure difference

• ρo = Density of oil, lb/ft3
between
oil and water phases in core ‘A’
• h = Height of water-oil transition zone ft
Pc = h1g (ρw-ρo)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 83 Reservoir Engineering Slide 84

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Calculating Oil/Water Capillary
Calculating Capillary Pressure
Pressure
σaw

The adhesion tension
between the air and
water
For Oil/Water System, the equation for

The radius of the tube
capillary pressure is
Air

2 σ ow cos θ

The density difference ∆h
between fluids
Pc =

Air/Water System Water r
2 σ aw cos θ
∆h = Capillary Tube Model for
r g ∆ρ aw Air/Water System

Reservoir Engineering Slide 85 Reservoir Engineering Slide 86

Converting Lab Capillary Pressure

Conversion to Reservoir Conditions
Data to Reservoir Conditions

Setting rLab = rRes and combining equations

Lab Conditions
yields capillary pressure at reservoir conditions
2 σ Lab cos θ Lab
Pc , Lab = σ Re s cos θ Re s
rLab pc ,Re s = pc , Lab

Reservoir Conditions σ Lab cos θ Lab

2 σ Re s cos θ Re s
Pc ,Re s =
rRe s

Reservoir Engineering Slide 87 Reservoir Engineering Slide 88

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Typical values for σ and θ Typical Capillary Pressure Curves
Conditions System Contact Cosθ Interfacial σCosθ
angle, θ Tension, σ
(mN/m) (mN/m)

Capillary Pressure, Pc
Air/brine 0 1.0 72 72
Drainage (1)
Kerosene/brine 30 0.866 48 42 Imbibition (2)

Laboratory Mercury/air 140 0.765 480 367

Pd
Air/Kerosene 0 1.0 24 24
Oil/brine 30 0.866 30 26
Reservoir Gas/brine 0 1.0 50* 50 Si Sm
* Pressure and temperature dependent. Reasonable value to 5000ft depth.
Note mN=10-3N 0 0.5 1.0
(Adapted from Core Lab, 1982) Sw

Reservoir Engineering Slide 89 Reservoir Engineering Slide 90

Drainage Process Imbibition Process

Fluid flow process in which saturation of the

Fluid flow process in which the saturation
non-wetting phase increases and the wetting
of the wetting phase increases and the
phase saturation decreases
nonwetting phase saturation decreases

Mobility of nonwetting fluid phase increases

Mobility of wetting phase increases as
as nonwetting phase saturation increases
wetting phase saturation increases

Example:

Example:
• Gas injection an oil- or water-wet reservoir
• Waterflooding an oil reservoir having
preferentially water-wet rock

Reservoir Engineering Slide 91 Reservoir Engineering Slide 92

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Reservoir Properties Affecting How Permeability Affects
Capillary Pressure
Capillary Pressure 20

Decreasing
Permeability

Variations in permeability 16

Capillary Pressure

Pore size distribution
12

Saturation history
C

Wettability--Contact angle A B
8

Interfacial tension

Density difference between fluids 4

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Water Saturation

Reservoir Engineering Slide 93 Reservoir Engineering Slide 94

Effect of Grain Size Distribution How Saturation History Affects

Capillary Pressure
Capillary pressure, psia
Capillary pressure, psia

Poorly sorted
Well-sorted

Drainage

Imbibition

Water saturation, %
Water saturation, %

Reservoir Engineering Slide 95 Reservoir Engineering Slide 96

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 How Interfacial Tension Affects
Effect of Wettability--Contact Angle
Capillary Pressure

Height Above Free Water Level

20

16
Capillary Pressure

Decreasing θR
12
High Tension

8
θR = 0°°
θR = 30°° Low Tension
θR = 60°°
4
θR = 80°° 0 1.0
Water Saturation
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Water Saturation

Reservoir Engineering Slide 97 Reservoir Engineering Slide 98

Methods for Measuring Capillary

Effect of Fluid Density Difference
Pressure
Height Above Free Water Level

Small Density Difference
Porous disk method

Mercury injection

Centrifuge method

Large
Density
Difference
0 1.0
Water Saturation

Reservoir Engineering Slide 99 Reservoir Engineering Slide 100

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Measuring Capillary Pressure Using Example Capillary Pressure Data From
Porous Disk Method the
Nitrogen
Porous Disk Method
pressure
Saran tube
Crude oil Scale of

Capillary pressure, psia

Neoprene Stopper squared
paper
Measured
Nickel- data points
Core plated Seal of
spring red oil
Kleenex
paper
Ultra-fine Minimum
fritted Displacement
glass disk Interstitial
Brine pressure
Saturation

0 100
(Adapted from Tiab and Donaldson, 2004) Wetting phase saturation, %

Reservoir Engineering Slide 101 Reservoir Engineering Slide 102

Measuring Capillary Pressure Using

Mercury Injection Method
Mercury Injection Method
0-200 psi pressure gauge

Advantages
0-2,000 psi pressure
gauge • Method is simple to conduct
Regulating valve • Results obtained quickly
To
Lucite window atmosphere • Method is reasonably accurate, especially for
Cylinder
strongly water-wet cores
U-tube monometer
Disadvantages
Lucite window
• Core sample cannot be used for any other test
• Mercury vapor is toxic--hazardous testing
material

(Adapted from Tiab and Donaldson, 2004)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 103 Reservoir Engineering Slide 104

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Centrifuge Method for Measuring
Capillary Pressure Leverett J-Function for Normalizing
Centrifuge Arm Capillary Pressure Data
Teflo
Fluid saturation-capillary pressure
n relationships are affected by permeability
Cap

Graduated Glass
Trunion Ring
A universal capillary pressure curve is
Tube
Core
impossible to generate because of the
variation of properties affecting capillary
Centrifuge pressures in reservoir
Shield

The Leverett J-function is used to convert all
Core and Core Holder in a centrifuge for measuring oil- capillary pressure data to a universal curve
displacing-water Pc
(Adapted from Tiab and Donaldson, 2004)

Reservoir Engineering Slide 105 Reservoir Engineering Slide 106

Typical Behavior of J-Function vs.

Leverett J-Function Saturation
Capillary Pressure J-Function

The Leverett J-Function accounts for changes
1.0
in permeability, porosity, and wettability of the 0.9
reservoir 0.8
Capillary J-Function

0.22 pc k
J (Sw ) =
0.7

σ cos θ φ 0.6
0.5
where
pc = capillary pressure, psi 0.4
0.3
σ = interfacial tension, dynes/cm 0.2
k = permeability, md 0.1

φ = porosity, fraction 0.0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
θ = contact angle, degree Water Saturation, Sw

Reservoir Engineering Slide 107 Reservoir Engineering Slide 108

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 Use of Leverett J-Function Example 3: Conversion to Reservoir Conditions
• The laboratory capillary pressure data
obtained using mercury injection S (Hg) Pc(Hg-air)

Average capillary pressure data for a given method for a core sample are listed in psi
rock type from a given reservoir the attached Table. Convert the data to
reservoir conditions for a formation 0.70 1500
containing oil and water.

Normalize capillary pressure data from 0.60 950
different reservoirs having same lithologies • Calculate reservoir capillary pressure
data for oil saturations of 70, 60, 50, 40, 0.50 675
30, 20, and 15 percent. k=25md φ = 0.40 480

Identify rock types 12%
• If J-functions show scatter in a given set of data, 0.30 342
• Laboratory Data: σHg = 480 dynes/cm,
then we are dealing with different rock types θHg = 140° 0.20 243
• Reservoir Data: σow = 30 dynes/cm, θow 0.15 205
= 30°
Note: The reservoir data above are representative values based upon industry
literature
Reservoir Engineering Slide 109 Reservoir Engineering Slide 110

Example 4: Converting Capillary

Pressure Data Example 5: Calculation of J-function
(pc)Air-Hg to (pc)Air-Brine Calculate J(Sw) using the following pc vs Sw data
The laboratory capillary pressure data
obtained using mercury injection method
S (Hg) Pc(Air-Hg) psi k = 25 md Sw Pc(Air-Brine)
for a core sample are listed in the 0.70 1500 φ = 0.12 (Brine) psi
attached Table. Convert the air-mercury 392
σ cos θ = 72 0.25
data to equivalent conditions for an air- 0.60 950
brine system. 0.30 294
0.50 675
0.40 186
Laboratory Data: 0.40 480
σa-Hg = 480 dynes/cm, θa-Hg = 140° 0.50 132
σa-w = 70 dynes/cm, θa-w = 0° 0.30 342 0.60 94
0.20 243 0.70 67

0.15 205 0.80 48

0.85 40

Reservoir Engineering Slide 111 Reservoir Engineering Slide 112

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page
 References

Koederitz, L.F., A.H. Harvey and M. Honarpour (1989): Introduction to Petroleum Reservoir
Analysis, Gulf Publishing CO., Houston, Texas

Ahmed, T (2000): Reservoir Engineering Handbook, Gulf Publishing CO., Houston, Texas

Ertekin, T, J.H. Abou-Kassem, and G.R. King (2001): Basic Applied Reservoir Simulation,
Society of Petroleum Engineer, Richardson, Texas

Castelijns,C, R. Badry, E. Decoster and C. Hyde (1999) “Combining NMR and Formation
Tester Data for Optimum Hydrocarbon Typing, Permeability and Producibility Estimation,”
SPWLA

Schlumberger (2001): Oilfield Review Electronic Archive 1992-2000

Timmerman, E.H. (1982): Practical Reservoir Engineering, Vol. 1, PennWell Publishing Co.,
Tulsa, Oklahoma

Core Lab (1982): A Course in Special Core Analysis, Course Notes

Core Lab (1990); Amaefule, J.O., D.K. Keelan, D.G. Kersey and D.M. Marschall (1990):
Applications of Core Data in Integrated Reservoir Description and Exploitation, Core
Laboratories,

Amyx, J.W., Bass, D.M., and Whiting, R.L.: Petroleum Reservoir Engineering, McGrow-Hill
Book Company New York, 1960

Tiab, D. and Donaldson, E.C.: Petrophysics, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, TX. 1996

Tiab, D. and Donaldson, E.C.: Petrophysics, 2nd Edition, Elsevier Gulf Publishing Company,
Boston, MA. 2004

Reservoir Engineering Slide 113

Advanced Reservoir Engineering

Prof. David O. Ogbe, Ph.D., PE Page