Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 23

Geological Modeling

Uncertainty Analysis
Serdar Kaya,
Please contact for any suggestion, comments or contribution serdar@grenergyllc.com

Uncertainty can be defined as degree of


inaccuracy in a measurement or prediction
at a level of reasonable precision

Uncertainties are present in all data and more


imposed during the data process!
Seismic Data
Seismic Interpretation
Time to Depth Conversion
Well Markers
Reservoir Thickness
Compartments
Fluid contacts
Fluid Characteristics
Facies Model

Water Saturation
Fault Transmissibility
Fault Displacement
Fractures
Permeability
Porosity
NTG

Develop an Approach
Gather Information
Collect uncertainty information on data and data
processing

Decide approach to use


Stochastic Multiple Realization
Deterministic Scenario Base

Perform Analysis
Statistical
Quantitative

Quantification of Uncertainty
Accuracy : Systematic shifts due to environmental correction or
measurement tools/techniques
Difference between Core porosity and Phie

Variation in Modeling steps


Difference between well log porosity and scaled-up porosity
Difference between scaled-up porosity and modeled porosity
Difference between realizations on seed number
Difference between variogram range

Precision:

Structural Uncertainty High and Low Case


High case Top Structure
Low Case Top Structure

Well
Marker

Base Case

Uncertainty Analysis
Uncertainty in Top Structure

240 feet
FWL

40 feet

Structural uncertainty doesnt affect the volumetric

Porosity Measurement Statistic


Core Porosity

Log Porosity

Statistics for Core Porosity


Name

Type

Min

Max

Delta

Mean

Std

Var

Sum

Scaled-up

Cont.

2.35

27.24

24.89

227

18.08

5.292

28.003

4104.0497

Well logs

Cont.

2.35

28.62

26.26

592

18.855

5.157

26.59

11162.171

Statistics for Log Porosity


Scaled-up

Cont.

0.68

29.91

29.23

441

17.8

6.37

40.57

7850.9

Well logs

Cont.

30.72

30.72

2706

18.41

6.39

40.84

49812.24

Uncertainty on Stochastic Modeling


Statistics of Porosity Realizations in Oil Pool
Min

Max

Mean

Realization #1

2.06

28.79

14.54

Realization #2

1.23

29.07

14.6

Realization #3

0.83

27.48

14.63

Realization #4

1.16

27.61

14.33

Realization #5

0.74

27.54

14.42

Realization #6

1.2

28.3

14.52

Realization #7

1.33

27.38

14.46

Realization #8

0.69

27.65

14.99

Realization #9

1.13

28.13

14.5

R8 has highest mean 14.99


R4 has minimum mean 14.33
Difference is 0.66

Porosity Measurement Comparison


Phie

Porosity Statistics
Phie
Min
2.79
Max
29.34
Delta
26.54
Number of
Defined Values
296
Mean
18.36
Std. dev.
6.44
Variance
41.54
Sum
5434.2

Cpor

Cpor
9.212
28.616
19.404
92
20.41
4.1544
17.259
1877.7

Difference in mean
is 2.05 PU

Porosity Modeling
Result of Various Modeling Approach

Bulk shift for uncertainty in porosity


-/+ 2.05 PU

Bulk shift for uncertainty is applied on the best history match


performing porosity realization

Porosity Model Uncertainty


Uncertainty Embedded Workflow
Log Porosity (316 wells)
(reconciled to OB corrected core porosity)

Scenario Based
Uncertainty

Scale-up porosity to 3D Model

SGS with Collocated


Co-Krigging to Porosity
Map

Krigging versus SGS

Porosity Model by Krigging

Porosity Model by SGS

Krigging Model
as 2D Trend

Krigging Model
without trend

Krigging Model
with modified
trend

SGS with Data


Range Variogram

SGS with 5
Km range

SGS with
30 Km range

Krigging with Data


Range Variogram

Krigging with 5
km Variogram

Krigging with 30
km Variogram

Trend
Correlation
coefficient

Variogram

Seed number

Parametric Dependencies
Conditional Modeling and
Permeability Uncertainty

Perm Modeling
Uncertainty

Perm = a * Porosity b

Permeability

Estimate

data point
Porosity
Uncertainty

Input variable

Porosity

Poro Perm relationship


Standard Variation
bounds

Number of Cases to Define Distribution


8

10 Runs

1 Case

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.85

0.9

0.95

10 Cases

3
2.5
2
1.5

0.5

1
0.9

0.95

500

30
20

1200

5000 Runs

10000 Runs

10000 Cases

400
300
200

0
1.05 0.85

1.05

1000

5000 Cases

800
600
400
200

0.9

0.95

Millions

Emission

0.95
Emission

100

10

0.95

0.9

Millions

Frequency

500 Case
Frequency

Frequency

1.05

0
0.85

Millions

600

500 Runs

0.9

Emission

40

0
0.85

Emission

50

0
1.05 0.85

50 Cases

Millions

60

50 Runs

3.5

Frequency

Frequency

4.5

1 Runs

Frequency

1.2

1.05

0
0.85

0.9

0.95

Emission

1.05
Millions

Millions

Emission

Fluid
Characteristics

Structure

HC Pool Area

FWL

STOOIP

Reservoir
Connectivity

Data:

Injectivity

Reduce your
uncertainty by
consciously
developing
data gathering
program

Productivity

Uncertainty:

Production Test/
PBU/PFO
Long Term Test
(Prod/Inj)
Interference Test
Production Logging
Tracer test
Formation Pressure
PVT data
3D Seismic
Well Coverage
Core data (whole
core analysis)
Log data
15

Model Upscaling Lost Precision in Processing


Upscaled 13 and 23 Layers vs. Geomodel (47 Layers)

13 Layers
23 Layers

47 Layers

16

Permeability Model
Cloud Definition for Uncertainty Multiple Realizations

Density of the points


Extended limits

Upper Reservoir (R1) Porous 1.2 Sub-zone

Extended Cloud Case


Permeability

Reduced Cloud Case


Permeability

Extended Cloud Case


Permeability

Reduced Cloud Case


Permeability

Volumetric Uncertainty Analysis


Tornado Chart
Structure

Porosity
Water
Contact
Water
Saturation

STOIIP (MMSTB)

Porosity Modeling
Uncertainty parameters
Final porosity model is obtained by history match process
Uncertainty cases are generated on various parameters:
Modeling algorithm: SGS versus Krigging
Trend
Variogram
Seed number
Bulk shift due to core porosity log porosity difference

Permeability Modeling
Uncertainty Embedded in Permeability Modeling Workflow
Permeability (10 wells)
(Distribution on Phie-K Cross Plot per sub-zone)
Scale-up permeability to 3D Model

Scenario Based
Uncertainty

Cloud Transformation

Cloud definition

GRFS with 2D
Porosity Map
Trend

GRFS without any Trend

GRFS with Porosity


Model Trend

Data range Variogram

5 and 30 Km range
variogram

Trend

Variogram

Seed number

Permeability Modeling
Uncertainty Parameters
Final permeability model will be decided after history match
Uncertainty cases are generated on various parameters
Modeling algorithm: SGS with various trends
Cloud definition
Variogram
Seed number
Bulk shift due to uncertainty in measurements

Conclusion
Uncertainty analysis starts with data processing and review
Along the modeling work, analysis can be incorporated into
workflow
Uncertainty parameters can be evaluated by stochastic or
deterministic methods
Conscious data planning can reduce uncertainty

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi