See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263611730

Integrated use of Petrel© and Modflow in the modeling of water injection and
effects on a Quaternary aquifer / Usage intégré de Petrel© et Modflow dans la
modélisation de l'injecti...

Conference Paper · August 2011

CITATIONS READS
0 1,133

3 authors, including:

Sarah Alloisio
Fresh Water Solutions Ltd.
2 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sarah Alloisio on 03 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Integrated use of Petrel© and Modflow in the modeling of
water injection and effects on a Quaternary aquifer /
Usage intégré de Petrel© et Modflow dans la modélisation de
l’injection d’eau et effets dans un aquifère Quaternaire
Sarah Alloisio1, Clayton Phair2, Cathy Safadi3
1
Schlumberger Water Services, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
2
Schlumberger Water Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
3
Knight Pièsold, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

ABSTRACT
The flow path and travel time of production water from Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD, an oil sand recovery
method) were estimated from an injection well located in a sand unit adjacent to a freshwater Quaternary aquifer. The
modeling approach was based on the integrated use of Petrel©, a 3D geo-modeling software package, to define the
hydrogeological units in the injection area using data from shallow seismic interpretation and down-hole geophysical
surveys, and of Modflow (USGS, 1988-2005), a groundwater flow simulation program. These estimates allowed the
feasibility and environmental compliance of the SAGD project under study to be assessed.

RÉSUMÉ
La direction d'écoulement et le temps de déplacement de l'eau produite par l’extraction des sables bitumineux ont été
estimés à partir d'un puits d’injection situé dans un sable jusqu’à une couche aquifère quaternaire adjacente. L'approche
de modélisation a été basée sur l'utilisation intégrée de Petrel©, un logiciel de géo-modélisation 3D, pour définir les
unités hydrogéologiques dans le secteur d'injection utilisant des données d'interprétation séismique superficielle et des
prospections géophysiques de puits, et de Modflow (USGS, 1988-2005), un programme employé pour la simulation
d'écoulement d'eaux souterraines. Ces évaluations ont permis d’étudier la praticabilité et la conformité environnementale
du projet d’extraction des sables bitumineux.

1 INTRODUCTION 2) Where will the production water go in the post

Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) is currently
recognized as the most effective method to recover deep
oil sands. The SAGD process consists of injecting steam
into the reservoir to lower the viscosity of the bitumen, and
pumping the bitumen to surface. During pumping, hot
bitumen is recovered with production water, which
consists of condensed steam and formation water.
Production water is typically disposed of by re-injection
into the subsurface.
A key element of a successful SAGD operation and a
typical regulatory requirement for production water
disposal is the ability to ensure that the re-injected
production water will not adversely affect the quality of the
adjacent fresh groundwater.
This paper describes a modeling study that was
conducted to estimate the flow path and travel time of
production water re-injected in a low-bitumen sand unit
(Water Sand) in contact with a freshwater Quaternary
aquifer located in Western Canada.
The study is related to a steam injection test program
that is estimated to generate approximately 300 m3/day of
production water for a period of 6 months. The specific
questions addressed in the modeling study were:
1) Where will the production water go during injection
assuming an injection rate of 300 m3/day for 6
months?
injection period after 1, 3 and 10 years?
2 SITE BACKGROUND
2.1 Physiography, topography and drainage
The project area is located in Western Canada, within the
Second Praire level of the interior Plains physiographic
region, which runs in NW-SE direction and is adjacent to
the High Level to the SW and to the Canadian Shield to
the NE.
Topography is overall flat with mildly sloping hills and
is marked by an esker running approximately in a W-E
direction and several kilometres in length.
The area straddles across two watersheds with a water
flow divide running in NE-SW direction, and has a
complex drainage pattern.
2.2 Climate
The site is located within the Humid Microthermal
climate region and is Subarctic according to the Köppen
Climate classification, with long cold winters, cool short
summers, and precipitation all year round (NRCan, 2007).
Temperatures range from -20°C in January to +15°C in
July and annual averages are within -1°C and +2°C.
Annual precipitation recorded from the stations
located in the area range from 400 to 450 mm, decreasing
to the north. Snow stays on the ground from late October
to early April.
The area is at the southern boundary of the permafrost
region, with ground ice estimated to cover 0-10% of the
land and to be less than 10% by volume in the top 10-20
m of ground (NRCan, 1995).
2.3 Geology and hydrostratigraphic units
The geology in the study area includes north-eastern
extensions of several units from the Western Canadian
Sedimentary basin (WCSB), but is also influenced by the
close proximity of the Canadian Shield (ARC, 1970; Blake,
1956).
The regional hydrostratigraphy comprises the following
(from the base up order) (Bachu et al, 1993):
1. Precambrian basement;
2. Devonian carbonates and shales;
3. Cretaceous clastic marine or fluvial sediments; and
4. Unconsolidated Quaternary sediments.
The Early Precambrian rocks located in the area are
mainly unmetamorphosed granites and felsic gneisses,
medium- to coarse-grained and foliated (Scott and
Slimmon, 1986). These rocks are considered to form an
aquiclude as groundwater flow through this unit is
insignificant relative to the amount of groundwater flow
that occurs in overlying sediments (Ozoray et al., 1980).
The Devonian strata comprise three formations, which
consist of basal sandstones and breccias with local
evaporites, of dolomitic mudstone and argillaceous
dolomite, and a fossiliferous dolomite deposited in a
shallow marine environment, respectively. These strata
are considered to form aquifers, due to the typical high
hydraulic conductivity and porosity of sandstones and
breccias and to the likely presence of significant fracture
systems within the dolomites. Field values of hydraulic
conductivity of ranging from 10-9 to 10-6 m/s (AMEC, 2008)
have been recorded in these strata, indicating that they
comprise both aquifers and aquitards.
The Cretaceous sediments, which comprise the
formation hosting the bitumen, consist of argillaceous and
carbonaceous quartzose sands and poorly consolidated
sandstones of fluvial, deltaic and marine origin (Scott and
Slimmon, 1986). Depending on the presence of bitumen, it
is possible to distinguish between Oil (bitumen-rich)
Sands, Lean Oil Sands and Water Sands. The Oil Sands
generally act as an aquitard, the Water Sands are
considered as an aquifer and the Lean Oil Sands may act
as an aquitard or aquifer based on their thickness and
lateral extent, which is variable within the study area. The
regional Quaternary sediments are largely comprised of
glacial till of substantial thickness (more than 200 m in
places), which is composed mostly of sand (90%) with silt,
gravel and boulders (Bayrock and Reimchen, 1974). The
sands and gravels located at the base of the Quaternary
deposits, where the underlying Cretaceous formation has
been eroded away, have been interpreted as paleo-
erosion channels in this study. The Quaternary sediments
form the major aquifer in the study area.
A schematic cross-section of the main
hydrostratigraphic units located in the study area is shown
on Figure 1.
Devonian
Figure 1. Schematic geology cross-section of study area
3 PILOT INJECTION TEST
The location of the injection well considered in this
study was selected based on the results of a seismic
survey which indicated the presence of a Water Sand unit
from 180 to 210 m below ground level (bgl). A pilot
injection test was carried out to establish the feasibility of
injecting production water at the proposed location.
The injection well was drilled to a depth of
approximately 220 m bgl and a 5-m thick screen was
perforated between 202 and 207 m bgl. An injection test
lasting approximately 3 hours was conducted by
discharging the water that had been previously purged
from the well.
The test results indicated that the Water Sand unit was
able to take injected fluids at rates up to about 1000
m3/day for short periods (10 to 20 minutes) without the
development of back pressure
4 MODEL DEVELOPMENT
4.1 Petrel model
Petrel is a software package widely used in oil
reservoir characterization and modeling, which allows a
3D static model of an oil reservoir to be built. In this study,
Petrel was employed in an unconventional fashion as it
was used to construct a 3D hydrogeological model of the
study area.
The model was built by uploading in Petrel all available
borehole and wireline data, including the following:
• revisions to geologic well top elevations
• wireline well logs
• shallow seismic interpretation
• DEM surface data.
The resulting static model allowed the visualization of
contact surfaces and isopachs for the main
hydrogeological units in the area. Figure 2 shows as an
example one of these surfaces, which represents the
Devonian – Precambrian contact.

Figure 2. Petrel surface of Devonian – Precambrian
contact
By allowing the integration of different types of
borehole and geophysical data, the Petrel model aided
with the three-dimensional understanding of the
hydrogeological setting of the study area. Specifically, the
model allowed the identification of the contacts Water
Sand – Quaternary sediments that are closest to the
injection point.
4.2 Modflow model
The Petrel hydrogeological model was created also to
aid in the construction of a numerical groundwater flow
model. The numerical model was built using the industry
standard finite difference code MODFLOW-2000
(Harbaugh et al., 2000), which calculates hydraulic head
and groundwater flow distributions in response to
specified inflows (e.g., recharge, injection) and outflows
(e.g., springflow, abstraction). The particle tracking
package MODPATH v.3 (Pollock, 1994) was used to
compute three-dimensional flow-paths based on the
hydraulic head distribution calculated using MODFLOW.
4.2.1 Model grid and layering
The area represented in the flow model is a 8 km by 8
km square with centre in the location of the proposed
injection well. A uniform finite difference grid consisting of
square grid cells of 50 m by 50 m was overlain on the
modelled area. The numerical groundwater model was
constructed using seven layers. These layers were
defined using a simplified conceptual model of the
geology in the study area (Figure 3). The layering system
provided a method to incorporate the key geological
features and potential flow interaction between the
formations. Surface topography was assigned to the top of
layer 1 using a 1:50,000 DEM (GeoBase). The bottoms of
the layers were defined as follows:
Layer 1: Elevation of contact between Quaternary and
Cretaceous
Layer 2: Elevation of top upper Water Sand unit (upper
contact with Cretaceous)
Layer 3: Elevation of contact between Quaternary valleys
and Devonian
Layer 4: Elevation of bottom of upper Water Sand unit
Layer 5: Elevation of contact between Cretaceous and
Devonian (also elevation of contact between the lower
Water Sand unit and Devonian)
Layer 6: Elevation of contact between Devonian and
Precambrian basement
Layer 7: Defined as 0 m asl.
The thickness of layer 1 varied, depending on the
surface topography, from about 160 to 210 m. Layers 2 to
5 were approximately 10 m, layer 6 was 30 m thick and
layer 7 was 300 m thick. The geology assigned to each of
the layers was based on the interpreted geology for the
elevation at the middle of a respective layer. The extent of
the Oil Sands in layer 2 was slightly modified since the
approximate method used to assign the geology in this
layer did not characterize the Oil Sands sufficiently.
Figure 3. Simplified stratigraphy (schematic – not to scale)
The maps representing the interpreted distribution of
the Quaternary sediments, Cretaceous deposits (Oil
sands, Lean Oil Sands and Water Sands), Devonian
strata and Precambrian basement were produced in
Petrel and exported to Modflow as grids with the same
resolution and extent as the model grid. Figure 4 shows
the distribution of the main hydrogeological units in Layer
4 of the model, where most of the injection takes place.
4.2.2 Boundary conditions
Boundary conditions are used to specify groundwater
sources and sinks in the model domain (Anderson and
Woessner, 1992). Boundary conditions assigned to the
model were constant heads, drains and meteoric
recharge.
Constant head values were assigned along the west
groundwater contours estimated from groundwater levels
recorded in eight piezometers screened in the Quaternary
within or in close proximity to the modelled area.
Groundwater discharge areas can be simulated in
Modflow using the DRAIN package, by setting the
assigned drain level equal or close to the topography, and
a conductance value assigned through calibration. The
drain boundary condition was used to simulate the
streams and wetland located in the south-east portion of
the modelled area.
area (source: confidential), was assigned to the Water
Sands unit. Since the voids of the Oils Sands are filled
with bitumen, a lower effective porosity of 0.01 was
assigned to this unit (source: confidential). Site data was
not available to characterize the effective porosity of the
Quaternary deposit and therefore a value of 0.15 was
used, which is within the range for sand. Effective
porosity values of 0.02 and 0.01 were assigned to the
Devonian and Precambrian, which were also based on
typical values for these materials (Domenico and
Schwartz, 1998).
The hydraulic conductivity, porosity and storage values
applied over the modelled area for each of the seven
model layers are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Hydraulic Parameters

Hydraulic
Unit Conductivity Ss (1/m) Sy Porosity
(m/s)
-5 -3
Quaternary 3 x 10 1 x 10 0.15 0.15
-10 -6
Oil Sands 1 x 10 1 x 10 0.01 0.01
-5 -4
Water Sands 5 x 10 5 x 10 0.3 0.3
-7 -4
Devonian 1 x 10 5 x 10 0.02 0.02
-10 -6
Precambrian 1 x 10 1 x 10 0.01 0.01

5 MODEL SIMULATIONS
Figure 4. Distribution of hydrogeological units in Layer 4 of
the model 5.1 Steady-state flow model

Meteoric recharge with a uniform and constant rate of
0.25 mm / day, which is approximately 20% of the mean
annual precipitation recorded in the study area, was
assigned throughout the model domain as a result of the
steady-state calibration.
4.2.3 Hydraulic properties
The aquifer properties assigned to the model were
hydraulic conductivity, storage and porosity.
Hydraulic conductivity values for the hydrogeologic
units were based on site specific data, including six
hydraulic tests carried out in the Quaternary sediments,
several tests conducted in the Oil and Water Sands, and
literature describing the general properties of these
deposits on a regional scale (Bachu et al. 1993, AMEC,
2008).
Specific storage and specific yield values were
specified based on typical values for each of the deposits
(Bachu et al. 1993, AMEC, 2008).
The effective porosity of the Water Sands unit is a
particularly important parameter for this study, as it
controls the volume of space occupied by the injected
water, and therefore the radial extent of its plume.
The total porosity was assumed to be equal to the
effective porosity and a value of 0.3, which is based on
porosity measurements in samples collected in the study
A steady-state model was developed initially to
simulate the natural groundwater gradient. The averaged
monthly measured water levels through the hydrologic
year at two piezometers installed in the Quaternary, one
piezometer screened in the Water Sands and one in the
Devonian were used for comparison with the modelled
heads simulated using the steady state model. The
recharge and hydraulic conductivity values were varied
until an approximate match was obtained between the
modelled and computed heads. The parameters from the
steady-state model were then used in the transient model
developed to simulate injection.
Based on the predicted hydraulic head distribution
from the steady state model, the assigned hydraulic
conductivity of the Water Sand of 5 x 10-5 m/s and a
porosity of 0.3, the groundwater velocity under a natural
gradient within the Water Sands was calculated as about
4 m/yr using Equation 1 (Freeze and Cherry, 1979):
 dh 
K 
v=  
dl
n
[1]
where K is hydraulic conductivity (L/T)
dh is the change in hydraulic head over a specified
length (L)
 dl is the specified length over which dh is calculated
(L)
n is effective porosity

5.2 Transient flow model

A transient model was developed based on the steady

state model. It was assumed that the pilot well would be
screened along the entire thickness of the Water Sand
unit at the injection location, which is approximately 30 m.
Accordingly, injection was simulated by a well
boundary condition assigned within Layers 3, 4 and 5 at
the location of the Injection Well, where Water Sand is
present. The injection rate to each layer was allocated
based on the relative transmissivity of each layer. The
injection rate assigned to layer 3, 4 and 5 were 84, 120
and 96 m3/d, respectively, for a total injection rate equal to
300 m3/d. The transient simulation was run for 10 years
which included 180 days (0.5 years) of injecting and a
total of 9.5 years of recovery after injection.

5.2 Particle Tracking

“Particles” of water were added at 3 elevations at the

Injection Well location in layers 3, 4 and 5. The path of
these particles was computed at regular intervals up to 10
years (end of transient model simulation). The particles
indicated flow away from the Injection Well during injection
to a distance of about 35 m. After injection was terminated
at 6 months, the flow of the particles was influenced by the
natural groundwater gradient and moved toward the
south. At the end of 10 years the maximum distance of the
particle path was about 80 m.
The particle path-lines and extent of the particles with
time are shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively.
Particle track modeling showed that the total distance
travelled during injection is significantly less then the
closest contact between the Quaternary sediments and
Water Sands, which is located at 350 m from the injection
well.
Figure 6. Simulated isochrones of injection plume
6 CONCLUSION
The use of Petrel to develop a static hydrostratigraphic
model allowed a detailed interpretation of the
hydrogeology in the modelled area. Specifically, it allowed
the identification of (1) the contact between the
Cretaceous and Devonian deposits and the Quaternary
sands and gravels that fill the eroded channels through
these units to the Precambrian bedrock, (2) the
distribution of Oil Sands and Water Sands at the injection
site, and (3) the closest contact between the Quaternary
deposits and the Water Sands in the injection area.
To provide a basis for comparison between the actual
flow of the injected water at the Injection Well and the
simulated response by the numerical groundwater flow
model, in-situ monitoring within the Water Sand unit
should be implemented as part of the injection operations,
at specified radii from the injection point. The parameters
to be measured should include bottom hole pressure and
selected physico-chemical parameters indicating the
presence of injected fluids. If the chemistry of the
produced water that is re-injected is similar in chemical
signature to the formation water in the water sands, it may
be difficult to detect the presence of injected fluids by
comparing standard cations and anions or TDS in the
injected fluid and the formation waters. The use of specific
tracers that are acceptable to regulators may therefore be
considered.

ACKOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge the

Figure 5. Particle Path-lines 10 years after start of
contribution of Rod Smith (Smith Water Management) for
injection along model N-S cross-section
 the technical input and review to the modeling study, Ken
Campbell (MiSwaco) for his project management role, and
Shane O’Neill (SWS Canada) for the review of this paper.

REFERENCES

Alberta Research Council (ARC). 1970. Bedrock Geology

of Northern Alberta, Map 1:500,000.
AMEC, 2008. Environmental Baseline Report (Location
confidential).
Anderson, M.P., Woessner, W.W. 1992. Applied
Groundwater Modeling: Simulation of Flow and
Advective Transport. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Bachu, S., J.R. Underschultz, B. Hitchon, and D. Cotteril.
1993. Regional-Scale Subsurface Hydrogeology in
Northeast Alberta, Alberta Geological Survey, Alberta
Research Council Bulletin No. 61.
Bayrock, L.A, Reimchen, T.H.F.. 1974. Map 148 –
Surficial Geology of the Waterways Area (NTS 74D).
Blake, D.A.W. 1956. Geological notes on the region south
of Lake Athabasca and Black Lake Saskatchewan and
Alberta. Department of Mines and Technical Surveys,
Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 53-33.
Domenico P. A., and F. W.Schwartz. 1998. Physical and
Chemical Hydrogeology (2nd edition). John Wiley and
Sons, New York, NY.
Freeze, R.A., Cherry, J.A. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice
Hall.
Harbaugh, A.W., Banta, E.R., Hill, M.C., and McDonald,
M.G. 2000. MODFLOW-2000, the U.S. Geological
Survey modular ground-water model — User guide to
modularization concepts and the Ground-Water Flow
Process. Open-File Report 00-92. U.S. Geological
Survey.
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 2007. Atlas of
Canada, 3rd Edition, 1957. online map.
http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/archives/3rd
edition/environment/climate/030
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 1995. Permafrost.
National Atlas of Canada, 5th edition, Map.
Ozoray G., D. Hackbarth, A.T. Lytviak. 1980.
Hydrogeology of the Bitumount-Namur Lake Area,
Alberta. Alberta Research Council. Earth Sciences
Report 78-6.
Pollock, D.W. 1994 User's Guide for
MODPATH/MODPATH-PLOT, Version 3: A particle
tracking post-processing package for MODFLOW, the
U.S. Geological Survey finite-difference ground-water
flow model. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
94-464.
Scott, B.P., W.L. Slimmon. 1986. Compilation Bedrock
Geology, Lloyd Lake, NTS Area 74F. Saskatchewan
Energy and Mines, Report 231
(1:250 000 scale map).

View publication stats