10 vues

Transféré par Denis Gontarev

vcc vnbmn,m.,

- 00006169
- Defining Exploration
- SPE93146
- New Techniques Improve Reservoir Description While Reducing Risk
- EBO 3 Exercises
- 00087329
- 1__ResSimCh3
- 00000532
- 1-s2.0-S1110062116300344-main Vsh_shale volume
- Investigation of Cementation Factor in Iranian Carbonate Reservoirs
- Investigation of Recovery Mechanisms in Fractured Reservoirs
- 09 Static Model
- Updated Advanced Geo Modelling 3Day
- Chapter 6 Ptech
- reservoir drive mechanisms.pdf
- SPE-75213-MS
- Ikoku-Ch1-Eng-01-52-EstimReserv
- Reservoir Analysis Using Gas Chromatography
- 04 06 Dumesnil Halliburton En
- Closure of Natural Fractures SPE-153609-MS-P

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

Ajayi Temitope Ayokunle, Mohamed Hossni Hashem, The Petroleum Institute

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition held in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, 25–28

April 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents

of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect

any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written

consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may

not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract

Maximizing profit with minimal costs is a top priority in the oil and gas industry. With the dynamics of

today’s oil market, finding economically feasible tools to maximizing the production is vital. Multilateral

wells possess the potential of achieving such a goal. To date, different theoretical designs of multilateral

wells are proposed in literature. One of the most common designs studied is the fishbone configuration.

This configuration maximizes the reservoir contact and thus the productivity of the well. While the merits

of the application of multilateral wells are well documented, an understanding of the best operating

conditions for the use of multilateral wells is rare thus we answer cogent questions related to the

optimization of multilateral wells under different reservoir conditions and well design parameters.

To answer such questions, Design of Experiment (DOE) and Response Surface Methodology (RSM)

was utilized. Selected factors to be optimized are the number of laterals, length of horizontal sections of

laterals, correlation lengths for heterogeneity indication, reservoir thickness, and permeability anisotropy.

These factors were chosen based on literature search, perceptions and deliberations while the objective

function is the cumulative oil production. Several experiments were conducted using extensive three

dimensional fine scale numerical simulations and the Box Behnken response surface methodology was

used to derive the response surfaces. Single effects and interaction plots are made to show the interactions

between parameters and the effect of these parameters and interactions on the objective function.

Results show a high dependence of productivity on the horizontal section length and reservoir

thickness. This implies that candidate reservoirs for the application of fishbone multilateral wells should

possess larger thickness. However, where the reservoir is thin production can be improved using longer

horizontal sections. The outcome of this study indicates the importance of the horizontal section and

lateral lengths on a fishbone multilateral well productivity from the same reservoir.

This study provides a template for decision making in field development operations thereby reducing

uncertainties and maximizing gains.

Introduction

Production Optimization is important to the success of oil and gas activities. Decisions as to what kind

of well should be drilled are encountered frequently in the oil and gas business, these decisions are usually

carried out after production has commenced and the reservoir has been monitored. It is essential however

2 SPE-182764-MS

to understand factors that could affect reservoir and well performance even before the well is produced.

Heterogeneous reservoirs are a common occurrence in the industry, a perfectly homogenous reservoir is

impossible in real scenarios. This necessitated the need to carry out the study on heterogeneous reservoirs.

Different kinds of well configurations have been applied in the industry, there is no gainsaying that

horizontal and multilateral wells improve the productivity of candidate reservoirs. Multilaterals are also

known as multi-branched wells (Butler et al., 2015; Crouse, 1997). It is defined by several authors as a

well which has more than one horizontal of close to horizontal section drilled from a single mother-bore

which on the other hand can be vertical, horizontal or deviated mother-bore (Crouse, 1997).

This form of wells has several advantages over other forms of wells as they increase and maximize the

recovery over a shorter period of time (Butler et al., 2015; Crouse, 1997). They also have the advantage

of increased reservoir contact, faster production, less drilling sites and reduction of pressure losses through

the wellbore (Yildiz, 2005). However, this technology possess risk which causes operating companies to

refrain from utilizing it (Butler et al., 2015). Such risk could be as a result of the loss of the main bore,

loss of a lateral, loss of more than one lateral and the main bore (Butler et al., 2015). Butler et al. (2015)

detailed a comprehensive assessment of the risks associated with the deployment of multilateral wells. The

previous wells drilled as multilaterals showed a reliability and success rates of more than 90% (Butler et

al., 2015).

Multilaterals can have different and complicated designs which may result in difficulties analyzing

their production performance during different flow regimes (Aguilar et al., 2007; Shi et al., 2005). A

multi-branched well can be dual lateral, trilateral and quad lateral (Crouse, 1997). Different configurations

of multilateral wells exist and can be applied depending on the reservoir and properties of the reservoir.

Retnanto et al. (1996) classified these configurations into six main types; multi-branched wells, fork wells,

several laterals leading into one main horizontal hole, several laterals leading into one main vertical hole,

dual opposing laterals and stacked laterals as depicted below.

Fishbone Multilaterals are multilateral wells whose laterals (fishbones) are drilled from one single

horizontal mother wellbore. They are defined by Yu et al. (2012) as a well where several fishbones as

drainage passage are drilled from one horizontal section. They are similar to laterals leading into one main

horizontal hole but with each lateral emanating from different positions on the horizontal section as shown

SPE-182764-MS 3

The productivity equations for multilateral wells have been proven to vary from that of vertical and

horizontal wells therefore, several authors have discussed the productivity of multilateral wells with

different designs (El-Sayed and Amro, 1999; Salas et al., 1996). Salas et al. (1996) in their paper described

the different methods for predicting the productivity of multilateral wells via analytical solutions and

numerical simulations thereafter developing an analytical model for determining the inflow performance

of multilateral wells, their model was then applied in reservoirs containing faults and shales. Results of

this application showed that multilateral wells could be more effective than horizontal wells in the

waterflooding of faulted reservoirs. El-Sayed and Amro (1999) developed models to calculate the

productivity of planar and stacked multilaterals, they used the developed model to determine the

productivity of a hypothetical model. They realized that planar multilaterals are more effective compared

to stacked laterals for small drainage areas and thin formation reservoirs. Their results also proposed

certain conditions favorable to the performance of multilateral wells.

Chen et al. (2000) developed a deliverability model for multilateral wells by coupling the reservoir

inflow model with wellbore flow model for horizontal laterals before integrating the model into a

multilateral deliverability model whilst acounting for pressure drop along the laterals and mother bore.

Yildiz (2005) developed a mathematical model using analytical solutions to investigate the performance

of dual lateral and multilateral wells, the model developed was derived from the 3D diffusivity equation

for steady state flows into multilateral wells. Their model was verified with experimental data and with

Salas et al. (1996) model for different multilateral well configurations with excellent agreement. Li and

Zhang (2013) developed a semi-analytical model to predict the productivity of horizontal and fishbone

multilateral wells in a row well pattern using conformal transformations and mirror image theory. Their

results were verified with the electrolytic experimental methodology with a maximum error of about

12.5%. Experimental techniques have also been used by some researchers to determine and optimize the

productivity of different multilateral well configurations (Guoqing et al., 2004; Huang et al., 2006; Zhu

et al., 2011). These researchers basically use a series of electric field analogue experiments for their

investigations. Other attempts included mathematical studies on the productivity equation of multilaterals

(Chen et al., 2000; Yildiz, 2003, 2005).

The methodology used in this analysis is the Design of Experiment (DOE) and Response Surface

Methodology (RSM). Design of Experiment (DOE) is a statistical technique that has been applied in

several industries (Hibbert, 2012; Lazic, 2006). It is used specifically to gain an insight into the effect of

different factors on a particular response that exhibits uncertainties or variations(Box et al., 2005;

Montgomery et al., 2009). Response surface methodology (RSM) is an addendum to DOE used to

optimize processes based on the initial experiments conducted.

Different forms of DOEs can be performed depending on the need of the investigator, the Factorial

Design method is used for screening and determining the effect of each parameter on a particular response

and thereafter screening out all factors considered inappropriate to the experimenters goals, there are two

forms of the factorial design method, the full factorial method and the fractional factorial method, the full

factorial involves considering the effect of each parameter and all possible interactions of the parameter

space on the response, fractional factorial design methods however aims to reduce redundancies in

experimentation by removing those combinations of factors which have been proven to be redundant to

4 SPE-182764-MS

the experiment. Other DOE techniques are the D-optimal techniques, Plackett-Burman designs and the

Box-Behnken Designs. The Plackett-Burman design can also be used in reducing redundancies in

experiments, it has the advantage of requiring less amount of runs than the fractional or full factorial

designs and being more projective in its analysis. The Box-Behnken designs have the advantage of

requiring less simulations and being able to characterize more levels of each factor thus giving more room

for the parameter space required for simulations. The usual workflow for optimizations using design of

experiments involves screening, characterization and optimization as shown in Figure 3.

To analyze and optimize the effect of the different factors on the objective function, response surface

methods are usually used. This involves representing the factors and their interactions in a complex

mathematical model which can then be optimized. It reflects at first glance what parameters have the most

effect on the objective function and also what interactions of the parameter space have the most effect on

the response.

Petroleum engineering processes involve lots of uncertainties and therefore the method of design of

experiment has been used to assess the uncertainties present in many petroleum engineering processes

(Dejean and Blanc, 1999; Elvind et al., 1992; Itotoi et al., 2010; Ogunbanwo et al., 2012; Van Elk and

Guerrera, 2000). The ability to make predictions is also useful to the success of many operations in the

oil and gas industry, DOE provides an excellent means of making predictions and has thus been applied

in the petroleum engineering literature for predictive purposes(Chu, 1990; Vanegas Prada and Cunha,

2008).

Methodology

Reservoir models

This study uses a commercial reservoir simulators for its analysis. Different 3D reservoir models were

constructed using Petrel®. These reservoirs are conventional cartesian reservoirs extending over 10000 ft

and 15000 ft in the x and y directions respectively and have a uniform porosity of 25%. Permeability

values are obtained from a lognormal distribution function with a mean of 80mD and a standard deviation

of 75. Permeability is populated using Sequential Gaussian Simulation technique with varying correlation

lengths to indicate heterogeneity. A 50 ft *50 ft * 10 ft fine grid is produced to capture high resolution

depletion and production data. The models have varying thicknesses (50, 100, and 200), ranges (1000,

2000, and 4000) and permeability anisotropies (0.1, 0, and 1). Table 1 summarizes the test parameter

properties for the different reservoir models.

SPE-182764-MS 5

Property

1 50 1000 0.1

2 50 1000 0

3 50 1000 1

4 50 2000 0.1

5 50 2000 0

6 50 2000 1

7 50 4000 0.1

8 50 4000 0

9 50 4000 1

10 100 1000 0.1

11 100 1000 0

12 100 1000 1

13 100 2000 0.1

14 100 2000 0

15 100 2000 1

16 100 4000 0.1

17 100 4000 0

18 100 4000 1

19 200 1000 0.1

20 200 1000 0

21 200 1000 1

22 200 2000 0.1

23 200 2000 0

24 200 2000 1

25 200 4000 0.1

26 200 4000 0

27 200 4000 1

CMG Builder and IMEX Simulator are considered for the dynamic simulation using Black Oil model.

The reservoir is modeled above the bubble point to prevent gas evolution. The bubble point is set at 1500

psi and the reservoir has a zero flux and constant pressure boundary condition with an average initial

pressure of 5000 psi. Furthermore, rock compressibility and reservoir temperature was kept constant at

3*10-6 psi-1 and 200°F respectively.

38°API oil was used in this study. Relative permeability data was derived using the Brooks Corey

Model as shown below. Capillary pressure effect is ignored in all simulations.

6 SPE-182764-MS

Figure 4 —Relative permeability curves for the resevoir models (left water-oil, right oil-gas)

For the water-oil system connate water and residual oil saturations are 0.2 and 0.25 respectively. The

gas-oil system was defined for the software; however, the reservoir is above the bubble point pressure and

therefore the gas is not present. All saturation values are defined as shown in Table 2 and Corey exponents

are obtained from literature survey for carbonate reservoirs to construct the relative permeability curves

required for fluid mobility. Table 3 summarizes other common properties used for the simulations.

Property Value

Swcon 0.2

swcrit 0.2

soirw 0.25

sorw 0.25

soirg 0.25

sorg 0.25

sgcon 0.25

sgcrit 0.25

krocw 1

krwiro 0.3

krgcl 0.5

krogcg 1

ekrw 4

ekrow 2

ekrog 2

ekrg 4

SPE-182764-MS 7

Property Value

Porosity 0.25

Compressibility (Psi-1) 3.00E-06

Reference pressure (Psi) 14.7

Reservoir Temp (F) 200

Bubble point Pressure (Psi) 1500

Boundary Pressure (Psi) 5000

Gas gravity 0.75

Oil API 38

Water Salinity (ppm) 10000

Mean Permeability (md) 80

Well models

The multilateral wells are with a mother bore extending 2000 ft, 5000 ft or 8000 ft horizontally into

the reservoir and 2, 4 or 6 laterals. The location of each well is set at an equal distance from all the

boundaries of the reservoir for uniform comparison between the results. All the wells have a 4700 psi

bottom hole flowing pressure. The laterals are equally spaced from one another with each lateral facing

either the east or west direction. The cumulative production of these wells is obtained for 10 years to

evaluate their productivity.

To explore which parameters have greater impact on the productivity of multilateral wells, Design of

Experiment (DOE) and Response Surface Methodology (RSM) are utilized using Box-Behnken method

and 40 different simulation runs. The Box Behnken methodology was chosen due to the previously stated

reasons. Selected factors to be optimized are the number of laterals (N), length of horizontal sections (L),

correlation lengths for heterogeneity indication (R), reservoir thickness (h), and permeability anisotropy

(I). These factors are chosen based on literature search, perceptions and deliberations while the objective

function is the cumulative oil production. Model configurations used in each run are presented in Table

4.

8 SPE-182764-MS

Run # L h I Correlation length Number of laterals

1 -1 0 -1 0 0

2 0 0 1 0 -1

3 0 0 1 0 1

4 1 0 1 0 0

5 -1 0 1 0 0

6 1 0 0 0 1

7 1 0 0 0 -1

8 -1 0 0 0 -1

9 -1 0 0 0 1

10 0 0 -1 0 -1

11 0 0 -1 0 1

12 1 0 -1 0 0

13 0 0 0 1 1

14 1 0 0 1 0

15 -1 0 0 1 0

16 0 0 0 1 -1

17 0 0 1 1 0

18 0 0 -1 1 0

19 0 0 0 -1 -1

20 1 0 0 -1 0

21 -1 0 0 -1 0

22 0 0 0 -1 1

23 0 0 -1 -1 0

24 0 0 1 -1 0

25 0 1 0 0 -1

26 0 1 0 0 1

27 1 1 0 0 0

28 -1 1 0 0 0

29 0 1 -1 0 0

30 0 1 1 0 0

31 0 1 0 1 0

32 0 1 0 -1 0

33 0 -1 1 0 0

34 0 -1 -1 0 0

35 1 -1 0 0 0

36 0 -1 0 0 1

37 0 -1 0 0 -1

38 -1 -1 0 0 0

39 0 -1 0 1 0

40 0 -1 0 -1 0

The values -1, 0 and 1 are designated to each level of the property used as follows:

SPE-182764-MS 9

Property Value Designated Level

h 50 -1

100 0

200 1

L 2000 -1

5000 0

8000 1

I 0.1 -1

1 0

10 1

Range (R) 1000 -1

2000 0

4000 1

Number of laterals (N) 2 -1

4 0

6 1

Analysis of Results

Understanding the yearly production plots and how the parameters affect it for different scenarios allows

for a better decision making. It can be noticed that the daily production rate increases by increasing the

length of the horizontal section for a four-laterals well. This increase is significant over time. However,

increasing the length four times results in only double of the production rate over the years as shown in

Figure 5.

On the other hand, Figure 6 shows the difference between drilling two and six laterals from a 5000 ft

horizontal well in a 100 ft thick isotropic reservoir modeled with a correlation length (range) of 2000 ft.

It was found that the increase in the number of laterals for a given well in a given reservoir does not yield

10 SPE-182764-MS

promising results. This may be due to the short length of each lateral (200ft) and the resulting drainage

pattern which does not produce a greater drawdown around the well.

Moreover, wells in reservoirs with higher permeability anisotropy value produce at higher rates as

discussed in literature. In spite of this increase in recovery, the increment is not significant (Figure 7).

Furthermore, the resulting gain in production dimensions over the lifetime of the well. This effect is

expected as the vertical extent of the reservoir is considerably smaller than its horizontal extent.

Additionally, after a long period of production the vertical resources in the reservoir with higher vertical

permeability (higher permeability anisotropy) are exhausted at a higher rate, thus, the diminishing gain.

SPE-182764-MS 11

Reservoir thickness has the most profound effect on productivity. Thick reservoirs are expected to

produce higher quantities of oil due to larger drainage volume available for the well to extract from.

Furthermore, a reservoir with quadruple thickness of another one results in a five-time increase in the

productivity of the well (Figure 8).

Range or correlation length is not a physical parameter in a real reservoir. However, range controls how

reservoir properties are populated in a certain reservoir model. Lower range values represent homoge-

neous reservoir models with more continuous properties. It is important to understand the required level

of continuity based on real well logs and other property indicators available.

Figure 9 —the effect of range on permeability distribution (left Rⴝ4000, right Rⴝ1000)

Figure 10 shows the effect of correlation lengths on the productivity of the multilateral well. Even

though the change in production is not significant, it is important to know that this parameter is chosen

by the user and also affect the results of simulation. This means that production forecasts depend on the

methodology of populating the reservoir properties in the model.

12 SPE-182764-MS

Figure 10 —Effect of reservoir model correlation length on the daily production rate

A statistical software was used for the analysis of the simulation experimental results gotten from the

commercial simulator. The results obtained from the DOE show how the cumulative oil production is

affected by the factors and their respective level. Furthermore, the interaction between these factors is

investigated to see their effect on Np.

Main Effects Plots

Figure 11 shows the high dependency of Np on the thickness (B) of the reservoir for the multilateral. It

also indicates that well length (A) also has a positive effect on the productivity of the well. Both reservoir

thickness and well length have the highest impact on the productivity of the multilateral.

Moreover, reservoirs with higher anisotropy (C) values can positively influence the productivity but

has less impact than both the thickness of the reservoir and the length of the horizontal mother-bore.

Surprisingly, the correlation length (Range) (D) used in populating reservoir permeability values in the

model has a different effect trend on the productivity of the well. At its lowest and highest values (1000

and 4000 ft) the well will produce at higher rates. However, at its middle value (2000 ft) it has a reduced

SPE-182764-MS 13

impact on the productivity. This interesting finding shows the importance of accurately populating the

data which will affect the future production forecasts of the well. The Number of laterals (E) does not

produce a profound impact on the productivity. It should be noted that longer laterals may produce

different results, yet, there will be drilling challenges involved in drilling such wells.

Interaction Plot Results

Figure 12 shows the two-way interaction between the factors studied. Interactions which show parallel

trends at different factor levels mean that these factors do not have an interaction with each other in

affecting the production data. This can be seen in the interactions between anisotropy and well length

(C*A), number of laterals and well length (E*A), number of laterals and reservoir thickness (E*B),

anisotropy and range (C*D), number of laterals and range (E*D). All the factors do not have an interaction

with the number of laterals in affecting the well productivity (A, B, C, D*E).

The interaction between well length and reservoir thickness (A*B and B*A) shows that a combination

of these factors can lead to substantial increase in productivity. Furthermore, the interaction between the

reservoir thickness and the range used produces an interesting trend on the production. It is interesting to

find that thinner reservoir models with lower range values (1000 ft, i.e. More heterogeneous) have a

positive effect on the productivity of the well model. The interaction plot also shows that the opposite is

right for the thicker reservoirs models. This may be the case for the current permeability values used in

this study.

Contour Plots

Contour plots are shown in Figure 13 to further show the relationship between different parameters. These

are plots of two different factors while keeping the remaining factors at a median level in order to show

the effect of these combination of factors on the objective function. It can be seen from the plots that a

combination of thickness and lateral length, anisotropy and thickness, range and thickness provide the

highest oil production rate from candidate reservoirs whilst other paramters were held constant. These

14 SPE-182764-MS

indicates that the thickness of the reservoir provide the highest indication as to the suitability of reservoirs

for multilateral well drilling.

Optimization

A regression model was derived to show the relationships between the different factors using a single

mathematical equation thereby providing a basis for an optimization.

The equation provided above was therefore used for the optimization which aims at maximizing the

production of the reservoir given the various singular effects of the factors and the interaction effects of

combined factors.

SPE-182764-MS 15

Analysis of the optimization procedures showed that the maximum optimized attainable value for the

cumulative oil production from the combination of specified sensitivity parameters is 101585756 barrels.

This value would be gotten when all values are set at the maximum value of ⫹1 for each parameter. A

95% confidence interval for the optimization process was within a range of 88421769 to 114749743 while

the 95% prediction interval was within the range of 86581898 to 116589614 with a standard error of

6391717.

Summary and Conclusion

This paper has presented the results of simulation runs made for the purpose of optimizing the

performance of multilateral wells in heterogeneous reservoirs. The following conclusions can be deduced

from this study

1. An optimization technique is presented to determine the ideal operating conditions for the

application of multilateral wells in candidate reservoirs.

2. The productivity of multilateral wells shows a high dependence on the thickness of the reservoir

and the length of the main horizontal bore.

3. The number of laterals in the used multilateral well design does not have a significant effect on

the productivity of the well.

It is recommended to consider other types of multilateral wells in order to have a profound effect on

the production. Furthermore, it is also recommended to consider the length of each lateral in the

parameters affecting the productivity of the well. However, this will impose a bigger challenge during

drilling. Additionally, reservoir models should be studied in a greater detail or history matching and

production forecasts as presented by the effect of range used in populating the reservoir properties.

Nomenclature

N – Number of laterals

I – Anisotropy

H – Thickness

R – Range (Correlation length)

L – Length of Horizontal Section

Np – Cumulative Oil Production

swcon – Endpoint Saturation: Connate Water

swcrit – Endpoint Saturation: Critical Water

soirw – Endpoint Saturation: Irreducible Oil for Water-Oil Table

sorw – Endpoint Saturation: Residual Oil for Water-Oil Table

16 SPE-182764-MS

sorg – Endpoint Saturation: Residual Oil for Gas-Liquid Table

sgcon – Endpoint Saturation: Connate Gas

sgcrit – Endpoint Saturation: Critical Gas

krocw – Kro at Connate Water

krwiro – Krw at Irreducible Oil

krgcl – Krg at Connate Liquid

krogcg – Krog at Connate Gas

ekrw – Exponent for calculating krw from krwiro

ekrow – Exponent for calculating krow from krocw

ekrog – Exponent for calculating krog from krogcg

ekrg – Exponent for calculating krg from krgcl

API – American Petroleum Institute

References

Aguilar, C., Ozkan, E., Kazemi, H., Al-Kobaisi, M., Ramirez, B.A., 2007. Transient behavior of multilateral wells in

numerical models: a hybrid analytical-numerical approach, SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference.

Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Box, G.E., Hunter, J.S., Hunter, W.G., 2005. Statistics for experimenters: design, innovation, and discovery. AMC 10, 12.

Butler, B., Grossmann, A., Parlin, J., Sekhon, C., 2015. Overcoming the Perceived Risk of Multilateral Wells, SPE

Offshore Europe Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Chen, W., Zhu, D., Hill, A., 2000. A comprehensive model of multilateral well deliverability, International Oil and Gas

Conference and Exhibition in China. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Chu, C., 1990. Prediction of steamflood performance in heavy oil reservoirs using correlations developed by factorial

design method, SPE California Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Crouse, P.C., 1997. Application and Needs for Advanced Multilateral Technologies and Strategies. Website: www.netl-

.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/97/97ng/ng97—pdf/NG2-5.pdf, 24 –27.

Dejean, J., Blanc, G., 1999. Managing uncertainties on production predictions using integrated statistical methods, SPE

Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

El-Sayed, A.-A.H., Amro, M.M., 1999. Production performance of multilateral wells, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling

Technology Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Elvind, D., Asmund, H., Rolf, V., 1992. Maximum information at minimum cost: a North Sea field development study

with an experimental design. Journal of Petroleum Technology 44, 1,350 –351,356.

Guoqing, H., Xiangfang, L., Xiaodong, W., 2004. Experimen-tal research on multi-lateral wells by the electric field

ana-logue model. Petroleum Science 1, 66 –71.

Hibbert, D.B., 2012. Experimental design in chromatography: a tutorial review. Journal of Chromatography B 910, 2–13.

Huang, S., Cheng, L., Zhao, F., Li, C., 2006. Experimental research of flow mechanism of near wellbore area of fishbone

well. Oil Drill. Prod. Technol 28, 58 –60.

Itotoi, I.H., Ojeke, A., Nnamdi, D., Umurhohwo, J., Benjamin, O., AkaChidike, K., 2010. Managing Reservoir Uncertainty

in Gas Field Development Using Experimental Design, Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition.

Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Lazic, Z.R., 2006. Design of experiments in chemical engineering: a practical guide. John Wiley & Sons.

Li, C.-L., Zhang, S.-C., 2013. Modeling of fishbone multilateral well productivity in row well pattern. Petroleum Science

and Technology 31, 840 –848.

Montgomery, D.C., Runger, G.C., Hubele, N.F., 2009. Engineering statistics. John Wiley & Sons.

Ogunbanwo, O.O., Gerritsen, M.G., Kovscek, A.R., 2012. Uncertainty Analysis on In-Situ Combustion Simulations Using

Experimental Design, SPE Western Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Retnanto, A., Frick, T., Brand, C., Economides, M., 1996. Optimal configurations of multiple-lateral horizontal wells, SPE

Western Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Salas, J., Clifford, P., Jenkins, D., 1996. Multilateral well performance prediction, SPE Western Regional Meeting. Society

of Petroleum Engineers.

Shi, H., Holmes, J.A., Durlofsky, L.J., Aziz, K., Diaz, L., Alkaya, B., Oddie, G., 2005. Drift-flux modeling of two-phase

flow in wellbores. Spe Journal 10, 24 –33.

SPE-182764-MS 17

Van Elk, J.F., Guerrera, L., 2000. Improved uncertainty management in field development studies through the application

of the experimental design method to the multiple realisations approach, SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference

and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Vanegas Prada, J., Cunha, L., 2008. Prediction of SAGD performance using response surface correlations developed by

experimental design techniques. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology 47.

Yildiz, T., 2003. Multilateral Pressure-Transient Response. SPE Journal 8, 5–12.

Yildiz, T., 2005. Multilateral horizontal well productivity, SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference. Society of Petroleum

Engineers.

Yu, C., Shang, X., Chen, Z., Wu, S., Zhao, Y., Liu, Y., 2012. Application of Multilateral Wells in Burial-hill Migmatitic

Granite Formation, IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum

Engineers.

Zhu, M., Wu, X. D., Han, G. Q., Yuan, Y., 2011. Experiment Research of Electric Analogy for Multi-Lateral Wells

Considering Frictional Pressure Drop in Wellbore, Advanced Materials Research. Trans Tech Publ, pp. 698 –701.

- 00006169Transféré parVasundhara Singh
- Defining ExplorationTransféré parNorberto Escobar Morales
- SPE93146Transféré parMarielis Sifontes
- New Techniques Improve Reservoir Description While Reducing RiskTransféré parSanjeev Singh Negi
- EBO 3 ExercisesTransféré par13670319
- 00087329Transféré parmsmsoft90
- 1__ResSimCh3Transféré parweldsv1
- 00000532Transféré parBahman Matouri
- 1-s2.0-S1110062116300344-main Vsh_shale volumeTransféré parSky walking
- Investigation of Cementation Factor in Iranian Carbonate ReservoirsTransféré parcrown212
- Investigation of Recovery Mechanisms in Fractured ReservoirsTransféré parFabricetoussaint
- 09 Static ModelTransféré parali
- Updated Advanced Geo Modelling 3DayTransféré parMichelle Duncan
- Chapter 6 PtechTransféré parAzrin Kun
- reservoir drive mechanisms.pdfTransféré parWassef MB
- SPE-75213-MSTransféré parBinu Kaani
- Ikoku-Ch1-Eng-01-52-EstimReservTransféré parVictor Gomez
- Reservoir Analysis Using Gas ChromatographyTransféré pardeddeddedded
- 04 06 Dumesnil Halliburton EnTransféré parQingming Ma
- Closure of Natural Fractures SPE-153609-MS-PTransféré parFernando Arteaga Pinto
- xxxxTransféré parvastaguen
- HeavyOil WorksheetTransféré parhtes2014
- ResumeTransféré partotongs
- TorisTransféré parikan76
- 3. Aamir-PJHRTransféré parWaqar Ahmed
- Draft+Tight+Gas+Policy+2010Transféré parMir Saifullah Baloch
- OGX Management PresentationTransféré parogxriweb
- Lab 5 Reservoir Fluid StudiesTransféré parIrwan Januar
- Chinese Reserve DefinitionsTransféré parLed Ledereh
- petroleum_geology.pdfTransféré parNurullah Akmal

- Terrain Induced SluggingTransféré parmajesty9
- Terrain Induced SluggingTransféré parmajesty9
- 003,155Transféré parDenis Gontarev
- SPE-96587.pdfTransféré parMohamed Yousry
- Leksii Mulyavin SFTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- MME_book_MBA.pdfTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Topic 5- Material BalanceTransféré parRoshan Gill
- r2sl[1]Transféré parDenis Gontarev
- Enhanced DataTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- OIJ-2016-08-094-097-RUTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- From Material Balance to Reservoir SimulationTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Бизли Д. Python. Сборник РецептовTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- 5943 WellFlo SoftwareTransféré parjoresito
- Dual ESP Completion SystemTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- SPE-1100-0068-JPT Well Test Analysis in Gas Condensate ReserTransféré parMiguel Angel Gonzales
- Dynamic Process Simulation When Do We Really Need ItTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Pigging Slug TrickTransféré parLorena Dávila
- Aspen-HYSYS Simulation of Natural Gas Processing PlantTransféré parsorincarmen88
- SPE-0516-0079-JPTTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Terrain Induced SluggingTransféré parmajesty9
- Hysys Tips and Tricks User Variables to Calculate Erosional Velocity in Dynamic Simulation ModelsTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- MEK4450 FlowAssurance Pensum-2Transféré parhiyeon
- Lng Dynamic HysysTransféré parSrihari Kodimela
- 01.10.17Transféré parDenis Gontarev
- Exploratory Data Analysis in Business and Economics An Introduction Using SPSS_Stata_and_Excel_Cleff - copia.pdfTransféré parJose Gomez
- SPE-187601-MSTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Sullagaev a v Hysys Stabilizatsiya Nefti Rukovodstvo Pol ZovTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- User Manual en-USTransféré parDenis Gontarev
- Оценка пластовых свойствTransféré parDenis Gontarev

- OptimizationPPT-41Transféré parMichael G. Tadesse
- 180931875-Computational-Heat-Transfer-VOL1-Mathematical-Modelling-1995-pdf.pdfTransféré parزكرياء بنحيرت
- Vibration Damping of Hydraulic Turbine Unit —Transféré parpramods_8
- Applications of linear programming in oil industry.pdfTransféré parKhôi Nguyên
- CIRRELT-2008-Clustering-Based Heuristics for the Two-Echelon Vehicle Routing ProblemTransféré parJuan Sebastián Poveda Gulfo
- Improving ClgarciaTransféré parDouglas Viana
- 300617011-Case-Study-2-Chandpur.docxTransféré parTarun Imandi
- Chess Scientific CalculationTransféré parSenthilkumar
- 11D Introduction to RMEx_SG,LSTransféré parVarun Patel
- Extract BlueTransféré parPandu Setiawan
- [IJCT-V2I5P20] Authors : Abdallah Lakhouili , Hicham Medromi , El Hassan EssoufiTransféré parIjctJournals
- FSV Phase2 Overview ReportTransféré pard
- SALVO Project Innovations Descriptor v2Transféré parfoca88
- DETERMINATION OF MATERIAL MODEL PARAMETERS FOR DEEP DRAWING METAL FORMING ANALYSIS USING THE MATHEMATICA PROGRAMTransféré paryesullen
- Chapter 7b - Product BlendingTransféré parwong zhi cheng
- A Critical Look at CCPMTransféré parIsmael Sandoval
- 09_oabdulahhTransféré parmarcgleb
- ExxonMobil G-EMS Initiatives BOP Final Ex NotesTransféré parSrihari Kodimela
- REVIEW OF MITIGATION OF HARMONICS IN MULTILEVEL INVERTERS USING PSOTransféré parTJPRC Publications
- Report - The Optimal MSVS Fleet for First-Line ReplenishmentTransféré parcircles808
- KamleshTransféré parakshay vyas
- tablecurve2d_5_01_brochure.pdfTransféré parGhasem Bashiri
- dffitsTransféré parTangguh Wicaksono
- Robust design and operations of hydrocarbon biofuel supply chainintegrating with existing petroleum refineries considering unitcost objectiveTransféré parPedro Rafael Brito Brito
- SimulationPerformance_15.2_en_r1596.pdfTransféré parJennifer Charles
- Lmp and Nco Psat PaperTransféré parDivya Aseeja
- Relay 1Transféré parjimmydafe
- Advanced Thermodynamics for Engineers - D E WinterboneTransféré parAngel Haro
- 21 CDMA Optimization Process-38Transféré parlady_s
- Instrumental Variables: A study of implicit Behavioral Assumptions used in making program evaluationsTransféré parJavier Alfonso Lopez Chan