Methods for Probabilistic Uncertainty Quantification with Reliable Subsurface Assessment and Robust Decision-Making

Shusei Tanaka, K. Dehghani, Wang Zhenzhen
{"title":"Methods for Probabilistic Uncertainty Quantification with Reliable Subsurface Assessment and Robust Decision-Making","authors":"Shusei Tanaka, K. Dehghani, Wang Zhenzhen","doi":"10.2118/195837-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Reliability of subsurface assessment for different field development scenarios depends on how effective the uncertainty in production forecast is quantified. Currently there is a body of work in the literature on different methods to quantify the uncertainty in production forecast. The objective of this paper is to revisit and compare these probabilistic uncertainty quantification techniques through their applications to assisted history matching of a deep-water offshore waterflood field. The paper will address the benefits, limitations, and the best criteria for applicability of each technique.\n Three probabilistic history matching techniques commonly practiced in the industry are discussed. These are Design-of-Experiment (DoE) with rejection sampling from proxy, Ensemble Smoother (ES) and Genetic Algorithm (GA). The model used for this study is an offshore waterflood field in Gulf-of-Mexico. Posterior distributions of global subsurface uncertainties (e.g. regional pore volume and oil-water contact) were estimated using each technique conditioned to the injection and production data.\n The three probabilistic history matching techniques were applied to a deep-water field with 13 years of production history. The first 8 years of production data was used for the history matching and estimate of the posterior distribution of uncertainty in geologic parameters. While the convergence behavior and shape of the posterior distributions were different, consistent posterior means were obtained from Bayesian workflows such as DoE or ES. In contrast, the application of GA showed differences in posterior distribution of geological uncertainty parameters, especially those that had small sensitivity to the production data. We then conducted production forecast by including infill wells and evaluated the production performance using sample means of posterior geologic uncertainty parameters. The robustness of the solution was examined by performing history matching multiple times using different initial sample points (e.g. random seed). This confirmed that heuristic optimization techniques such as GA were unstable since parameter setup for the optimizer had a large impact on uncertainty characterization and production performance.\n This study shows the guideline to obtain the stable solution from the history matching techniques used for different conditions such as number of simulation model realizations and uncertainty parameters, and number of datapoints (e.g. maturity of the reservoir development). These guidelines will greatly help the decision-making process in selection of best development options.","PeriodicalId":10909,"journal":{"name":"Day 2 Tue, October 01, 2019","volume":"215 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 2 Tue, October 01, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/195837-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Reliability of subsurface assessment for different field development scenarios depends on how effective the uncertainty in production forecast is quantified. Currently there is a body of work in the literature on different methods to quantify the uncertainty in production forecast. The objective of this paper is to revisit and compare these probabilistic uncertainty quantification techniques through their applications to assisted history matching of a deep-water offshore waterflood field. The paper will address the benefits, limitations, and the best criteria for applicability of each technique. Three probabilistic history matching techniques commonly practiced in the industry are discussed. These are Design-of-Experiment (DoE) with rejection sampling from proxy, Ensemble Smoother (ES) and Genetic Algorithm (GA). The model used for this study is an offshore waterflood field in Gulf-of-Mexico. Posterior distributions of global subsurface uncertainties (e.g. regional pore volume and oil-water contact) were estimated using each technique conditioned to the injection and production data. The three probabilistic history matching techniques were applied to a deep-water field with 13 years of production history. The first 8 years of production data was used for the history matching and estimate of the posterior distribution of uncertainty in geologic parameters. While the convergence behavior and shape of the posterior distributions were different, consistent posterior means were obtained from Bayesian workflows such as DoE or ES. In contrast, the application of GA showed differences in posterior distribution of geological uncertainty parameters, especially those that had small sensitivity to the production data. We then conducted production forecast by including infill wells and evaluated the production performance using sample means of posterior geologic uncertainty parameters. The robustness of the solution was examined by performing history matching multiple times using different initial sample points (e.g. random seed). This confirmed that heuristic optimization techniques such as GA were unstable since parameter setup for the optimizer had a large impact on uncertainty characterization and production performance. This study shows the guideline to obtain the stable solution from the history matching techniques used for different conditions such as number of simulation model realizations and uncertainty parameters, and number of datapoints (e.g. maturity of the reservoir development). These guidelines will greatly help the decision-making process in selection of best development options.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
具有可靠地下评估和稳健决策的概率不确定性量化方法
对于不同的油田开发方案,地下评估的可靠性取决于产量预测的不确定性量化的有效性。目前,文献中有大量关于量化生产预测不确定性的不同方法的研究。本文的目的是通过这些概率不确定性量化技术在深海海上注水油田辅助历史拟合中的应用,对它们进行回顾和比较。本文将讨论每种技术的优点、局限性和适用性的最佳标准。讨论了工业上常用的三种概率历史匹配技术。这些是实验设计(DoE)与拒绝抽样代理,集成平滑(ES)和遗传算法(GA)。本研究使用的模型是墨西哥湾的一个海上注水油田。全球地下不确定性的后验分布(例如,区域孔隙体积和油水接触)根据注入和生产数据进行了估计。将三种概率历史匹配技术应用于具有13年生产历史的深水油田。利用前8年的生产数据进行历史拟合,估计地质参数不确定性的后验分布。虽然后验分布的收敛行为和形状不同,但从DoE或ES等贝叶斯工作流中获得一致的后验均值。相比之下,遗传算法在地质不确定性参数的后验分布上存在差异,特别是对生产数据敏感性较小的地质不确定性参数。利用后验地质不确定性参数的样本均值对油田生产动态进行了评价。通过使用不同的初始样本点(例如随机种子)多次执行历史匹配来检查解决方案的鲁棒性。这证实了启发式优化技术(如遗传算法)是不稳定的,因为优化器的参数设置对不确定性表征和生产性能有很大影响。研究表明,在不同条件下,如模拟模型实现数量、不确定性参数、数据点数量(如油藏开发成熟度)等,采用历史拟合技术获得稳定解的指导方针。这些准则将大大有助于选择最佳发展备选办法的决策过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Verification of Autonomous Inflow Control Valve Flow Performance Within Heavy Oil-SAGD Thermal Flow Loop Reactive vs Proactive Intelligent Well Injection Evaluation for EOR in a Stratified GOM Deepwater Wilcox Reservoir using Integrated Simulation-Surface Network Modeling A Novel Workflow for Oil Production Forecasting using Ensemble-Based Decline Curve Analysis An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Predict the Water Saturation in Carbonate Reservoir Rocks Characterization of Organic Pores within High-Maturation Shale Gas Reservoirs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1