IMPROVING DUAL POROSITY SIMULATION OF WATERFLOOD PERFORMANCE IN THE NATURALLY FRACTURED SPRABERRY TREND AREA By Tanvir Chowdhury Texas A&M University Pioneer Natural Resources
Dec 19, 2015
IMPROVING DUAL POROSITY SIMULATION OF WATERFLOOD
PERFORMANCE IN THE NATURALLY FRACTURED SPRABERRY TREND
AREA
By Tanvir ChowdhuryTexas A&M University
Pioneer Natural Resources
• It is a very large field in areal extent (400,000 acres)
• A NFR with extensive vertical fractures
• Poor ultimate recoveryGlasscock Co
Reagan CoUpton Co
Midland Co
Martin Co Borden Co
Pioneer Natural Resources’ Pioneer Natural Resources’ Spraberry Unit PositionSpraberry Unit Position
Spraberry Trend AreaSpraberry Trend Area
Spraberry Trend Area
• Investigated the waterflood performance of an old (Humble Pilot) and a new (O’Daniel Pilot) Waterflood.
Find methods to extend and apply the results found from the Humble and O’Daniel Pilot simulations to all over the Spraberry Trend area
Presentation OutlineStep 1 Step 2
Applied
Simulation of tracer response from the
present waterflood pilot
Step 3
Field Simulation involving multiple wells
Confirmed
Previous StudiesPVT Study
Log Analysis Imbibition Study(Pc & Kr)
Pressure Transient AnalysisProduction Data Analysis
Core AnalysisOutcrop Study
Simulation of an old waterflood pilot (Humble
Pilot)
Permeability anisotropy and fracture orientation
Obtained
22
Only two wells were included in the basic model, one is injector (SHB-10) and the other is producer (SHB-8) as shown in Humble Pilot map.
The production well was located in the same line with injection well (in the on-trend direction, along the primary fracture orientation).
The response of oil production rate in the SHB-8 well was only affected by water injection from the SHB-10 well.
Assumptions For Simulation
16
15
SHACKELFORD
HUMBLE
MAGNOLIA
“A”
10
9
15
8
17
16
20
21
TIPPET
TIPPET
TIPPET TIPPET
HUTT
UNION
HUMBLE “B”
SHACKELFORD
HUMBLE “B”SHACKELFORD
SHACKELFORDHUMBLE “B”
HUMBLE “B”
1 2
3
2
6
3
1
23
4
1
2
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
48
412
13
1
2
3
4
3
11
8
24
6107
5
1
9
Spraberry FractureSystem Schematic
Average fracture spacing3.17 ft (N42E)
Average fracture spacing1.62 and 3.8 ft (N32E and N80E)
Pay zone, 5USiltstone,
Vshl<15%,f>7%
Pay zone,1USiltstone,
Vshl<15%,f>7%
Non-pay zone,2U,3U, and 4U
Siltstone+Dolomite,
Vshl<15%, f <7%
Sand layer1U (10 ft)
Sand layer5U (15 ft)
Shale layer(140 ft)
Reservoir Properties
Oil-water Relative Permeability
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1Sw
Kr
Krw (farcture)Kro (fracture)Krw (matrix)Kro (matrix)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Water Saturation (PV)
Cap
illa
ry P
ress
ure
(psi
g)
Comparison Between Observed and Simulated Results
Water cut vs. time BHP vs. time
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400Time (Days)
Wat
er I
nje
ctio
n R
ate
(ST
BW
/D)
Simulation ResultObserved Data
Water Injection Begins
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (Days)
Wat
er C
ut
(Fra
ctio
n)
Simulation Result
Observed Data
Water Injection Begins
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (Days)
BH
P (
Psi
a)
Simulation Result
Observed Data
Water Injectio
n Begins
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (Days)
Pro
du
ctio
n R
ate
(ST
B/D
)
Simulation Result
Observed Data
Water Injectio
n Begins
N
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
O‘Brian
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
Brunson
Boone
O‘Brian
Powell
Floyd
35
33
B-1
D-1
C-1
5
7
12
913
10 63
9
812
7
A-1
B-1
1
A-5
Boon
e E-1 A-6
A-3A-7
32
12
8W
346
1
24
31
36
26
D-1
19
1330
G-1
C-2E-1
Boon
e A-1
D-1
A-1F-1
C-1
C-11
D-1
32
47
25
29
37
46C-1
28
4538
39
40
48 14
4143
4950
44
42
Production Well
Production Well Monitored During Tracer Test
Water Injector
CO2 Injector
Logging Observation Well
N
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
O‘Brian
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
Brunson
Boone
O‘Brian
Powell
Floyd
35
33
B-1
D-1
C-1
5
7
12
913
10 63
9
812
7
A-1
B-1
1
A-5
Boon
e E-1 A-6
A-3A-7
32
12
8W
34
6
1
24
31
36
26
D-1
19
13
30
G-1
C-2
E-1
Boone
A-1
D-1
A-1F-1
C-1
C-11
D-1
32
47
25
29
37
46C-1
28
4538
39
40
48 14
41
43
4950
44
42
Production Well
Production Well Monitored During Tracer Test
Water Injector
CO2 Injector
Logging Observation Well
RESPONSE OF SURROUNDING WELLS ON TRACER INJECTIONAT E.T O'DANIEL PILOT AREA
0.0
20,000.0
40,000.0
60,000.0
80,000.0
100,000.0
120,000.0
140,000.0
160,000.0
180,000.0
200,000.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
TIME (DAYS)
TR
AC
ER
CO
NC
EN
TR
AT
ION
(P
PT
)
WIW #47-Brunson D-1 WIW #46-Brunson D-1
WIW #45- Pilot Well #38 WIW #48-O'Daniel A-1
Time
Co
nce
ntr
ati
on
Co
nce
ntr
ati
on
Time
a) Typical Response b) Shape of The Actual Response From WIW#47 to O’Daniel D-1
47O'Daniel
Brunson
D-1
Model
1. Dual porosity with tracer option using Eclipse
2. Grid block is 100 x 100
3. Number of wells 2, one injector (E.T. O’Daniel #47) and one producer (Brunson “D” 1).
4. Rock and fluid properties from Humble Simulation model.
5. Tracer injection concentration is 158.9 ppm for 11.67 hrs.
O'Daniel O'Daniel
Brunson
D-1
47
25
29
37
46
45
3839
40
4814A-1
O'Daniel
35
33
3212
8W34
24
31
36
D-113
30
29
C-128
14
Production Well
Water Injector
History Match Result (W#47-Br.D-1): Kx/Ky= 84/15000Orientation 43 Deg.
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Time (Days)
Co
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
pp
t)
Simulation Result Observed Data
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
O‘Brian
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
Brunson
Boone
O‘Brian
Powell
Floyd
35
33
B-1
D-1
C-1
5
7
12
913
10 63
9
812
7
A-1
B-1
1
A-5
Boon
e E-1 A-6
A-3A-7
32
12
8W
346
1
24
31
36
26
D-1
19
1330
G-1
C-2E-1
Boon
e A-1
D-1
A-1F-1
C-1
C-11
D-1
32
47
25
29
37
46C-1
28
4538
39
40
48 14
4143
4950
44
42
Fracture Orientation Obtained From The Tracer Test
Model
1. Dual porosity with tracer option using CMG simulator
2. Grid block is 130 x 130 with 3 x 2 layers
3. The 8,383-acre area of the model contains 15 injectors and 44 producers
4. Rock and fluid properties were obtained from The Humble Simulation model.
O’Daniel Unit Simulation
Structural Map For The O’Daniel Unit Simulation
Model
1. The Structural map was scanned and digitized.
2. The digitized map is then uploaded to the CMG Gridbuilder to build the geological model
Building The Model
Spraberry FractureSystem Schematic
Average fracture spacing3.17 ft (N42E)
Average fracture spacing1.62 and 3.8 ft (N32E and N80E)
Pay zone, 5USiltstone,
Vshl<15%,f>7%
Pay zone,1USiltstone,
Vshl<15%,f>7%
Non-pay zone,2U,3U, and 4U
Siltstone+Dolomite,
Vshl<15%, f <7%
Sand layer1U (10 ft)
Sand layer5U (15 ft)
Shale layer(140 ft)
The Simulation Model
Results Obtained From Previous Studies
1. There are 3 layers in the model.
2. Only the first and the third layers contribute to the production and the middle layer is a non-producing shale layer.
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
O‘Brian
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
Brunson
Boone
O‘Brian
Powell
Floyd
35
33
B-1
A-1
Boone
E-1 A-6
A-3A-7
32
12
8W
34
24
31
36
26
19
13
G-1
C-2
E-1
Boone
A-1
D-1
F-1
C-1
47W
29
37W
46WC-1
28
45W38
39
40
48W 14W
10W
5W
16
21
2
7W
22
20W
1
27
23
3
4W9W
11W
McClintic
McClintic
E-1
E-42 E-32
8
McClintic
Brown
E.T. O’Daniel Unit
25W
30
D-1
Production Well
Water Injector
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
O‘Brian
O'Daniel
O'Daniel
Brunson
Boone
O‘Brian
Powell
Floyd
35
33
B-1
A-1
Boon
e E-1 A-6
A-3A-7
32
12
8W
34
24
31
36
26
D-1
19
13
30
G-1
C-2E-1
Boone
A-1
D-1
F-1
C-1
47W
25W
29
37W
46WC-1
28
45W 39
40
48W 14W
10W
5W
16
21
2
7W
22
20W
1
27
23
3
4W9W
11W
McClintic
McClintic
E-1
E-42 E-32
8
McClintic
Brown
E.T. O’Daniel Unit
38
Production Well
Water Injector
Summary (Humble Pilot)
The fracture permeability values in the on-trend and off-trend directions of 15000 and 100 md, respectively, indicate that reservoir permeability is highly anisotropic.
The results obtained from this study support the previous analyses as follows:
The on-trend and off-trend permeability in the O’Daniel Unit are close to the value obtained from the Humble Pilot simulation.
The orientation of the fracture trend as determined by the tracer test agrees with the orientation obtained from historical production data, interference testing and horizontal core analysis.
Summary (Tracer Test)
For field simulation history matching, it is necessary to introduce existing fractures where there is not enough water production from off-set injectors.
It is possible to match most of the wells by using the permeability anisotropy (Kx/Ky) and fracture orientation obtained from the tracer simulation in the O’Daniel field model
Summary (O’Daniel Field Simulation)