使用非结构化网格的复杂地质建模:质量保证方法和改进预测

S. Harris, Samita Santoshini, Stewart Smith, A. Levannier, O. H. Khan
{"title":"使用非结构化网格的复杂地质建模:质量保证方法和改进预测","authors":"S. Harris, Samita Santoshini, Stewart Smith, A. Levannier, O. H. Khan","doi":"10.2523/IPTC-19303-MS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The vast majority of grids for reservoir modeling and simulation workflows are based on pillar gridding or stairstep grid technologies. The grids are part of a feature-rich and well-established modeling workflow provided by many commercial software packages. Undesirable and significant simplifications to the gridding often arise when employing such approaches in structurally complex areas, and this will clearly lead to poor predictions from the downstream modeling.\n In the classical gridding and modeling workflow, the grid is built in geological space from input horizon and fault interpretations, and the property modeling occurs in an approximated ‘depositional’ space generated from the geological space grid cells. The unstructured grids that we consider here are based on a very different workflow: a volume-based structural model is first constructed from the fault/horizon input data; a flattening (‘depositional’) mapping deforms the mesh of the structural model under mechanical and geometric constraints; the property modeling occurs in this depositional space on a regular cuboidal grid; after ‘cutting’ this grid by the geological discontinuities, the inverse depositional mapping recovers the final unstructured grid in geological space. A critical part of the depositional transformation is the improved preservation of geodetic distances and the layer-orthogonality of the grid cells.\n The final grid is an accurate representation of the input structural model, and therefore the quality checking of the modeling workflow must be focused on the input data and structural model creation. We describe a variety of basic quality checking and structurally-focused tools that should be applied at this stage; these tools aim to ensure the accuracy of the depositional transformation, and consequently ensure both the quality of the generated grid and the consistent representation of the property models. A variety of quality assurance metrics applied to the depositional/geological grid geometries provide spatial measures of the ‘quality’ of the gridding and modeling workflow, and the ultimate validation of the structural quality of the input data.\n Two case studies will be used to demonstrate this novel workflow for creating high-quality unstructured grids in structurally complex areas. The improved quality is validated by monitoring downstream impacts on property prediction and reservoir simulation; these improved prediction scenarios are a more accurate basis for history matching approaches.","PeriodicalId":11267,"journal":{"name":"Day 3 Thu, March 28, 2019","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complex Geological Modeling Using Unstructured Grids: Quality Assurance Approaches and Improved Prediction\",\"authors\":\"S. Harris, Samita Santoshini, Stewart Smith, A. Levannier, O. H. Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.2523/IPTC-19303-MS\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The vast majority of grids for reservoir modeling and simulation workflows are based on pillar gridding or stairstep grid technologies. The grids are part of a feature-rich and well-established modeling workflow provided by many commercial software packages. Undesirable and significant simplifications to the gridding often arise when employing such approaches in structurally complex areas, and this will clearly lead to poor predictions from the downstream modeling.\\n In the classical gridding and modeling workflow, the grid is built in geological space from input horizon and fault interpretations, and the property modeling occurs in an approximated ‘depositional’ space generated from the geological space grid cells. The unstructured grids that we consider here are based on a very different workflow: a volume-based structural model is first constructed from the fault/horizon input data; a flattening (‘depositional’) mapping deforms the mesh of the structural model under mechanical and geometric constraints; the property modeling occurs in this depositional space on a regular cuboidal grid; after ‘cutting’ this grid by the geological discontinuities, the inverse depositional mapping recovers the final unstructured grid in geological space. A critical part of the depositional transformation is the improved preservation of geodetic distances and the layer-orthogonality of the grid cells.\\n The final grid is an accurate representation of the input structural model, and therefore the quality checking of the modeling workflow must be focused on the input data and structural model creation. We describe a variety of basic quality checking and structurally-focused tools that should be applied at this stage; these tools aim to ensure the accuracy of the depositional transformation, and consequently ensure both the quality of the generated grid and the consistent representation of the property models. A variety of quality assurance metrics applied to the depositional/geological grid geometries provide spatial measures of the ‘quality’ of the gridding and modeling workflow, and the ultimate validation of the structural quality of the input data.\\n Two case studies will be used to demonstrate this novel workflow for creating high-quality unstructured grids in structurally complex areas. The improved quality is validated by monitoring downstream impacts on property prediction and reservoir simulation; these improved prediction scenarios are a more accurate basis for history matching approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 3 Thu, March 28, 2019\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 3 Thu, March 28, 2019\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-19303-MS\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 3 Thu, March 28, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-19303-MS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

绝大多数用于油藏建模和仿真工作流程的网格都是基于柱网格或阶梯网格技术。网格是许多商业软件包提供的功能丰富且完善的建模工作流的一部分。当在结构复杂的区域采用这种方法时,往往会出现网格化的不良和重大简化,这显然会导致下游建模的不良预测。在传统的网格划分和建模工作流程中,根据输入的层位和断层解释在地质空间中建立网格,并在由地质空间网格单元生成的近似“沉积”空间中进行属性建模。我们在这里考虑的非结构化网格基于一个非常不同的工作流程:首先从断层/水平输入数据构建基于体的结构模型;在力学和几何约束下,平坦化(“沉积”)映射会使构造模型的网格变形;属性建模在该沉积空间中以正立方体网格形式进行;通过地质不连续面“切割”该网格后,逆沉积填图恢复地质空间中最终的非结构化网格。沉积变换的一个关键部分是改进了大地测量距离的保存和网格单元的层间正交性。最终的网格是输入结构模型的精确表示,因此建模工作流的质量检查必须集中在输入数据和结构模型创建上。我们描述了在这个阶段应该应用的各种基本质量检查和以结构为重点的工具;这些工具旨在确保沉积转换的准确性,从而确保生成网格的质量和属性模型的一致表示。应用于沉积/地质网格几何的各种质量保证指标为网格化和建模工作流的“质量”提供了空间度量,并最终验证了输入数据的结构质量。将使用两个案例研究来演示在结构复杂的区域创建高质量非结构化网格的新工作流程。通过监测下游对物性预测和储层模拟的影响,验证了改进后的质量;这些改进的预测场景为历史匹配方法提供了更准确的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Complex Geological Modeling Using Unstructured Grids: Quality Assurance Approaches and Improved Prediction
The vast majority of grids for reservoir modeling and simulation workflows are based on pillar gridding or stairstep grid technologies. The grids are part of a feature-rich and well-established modeling workflow provided by many commercial software packages. Undesirable and significant simplifications to the gridding often arise when employing such approaches in structurally complex areas, and this will clearly lead to poor predictions from the downstream modeling. In the classical gridding and modeling workflow, the grid is built in geological space from input horizon and fault interpretations, and the property modeling occurs in an approximated ‘depositional’ space generated from the geological space grid cells. The unstructured grids that we consider here are based on a very different workflow: a volume-based structural model is first constructed from the fault/horizon input data; a flattening (‘depositional’) mapping deforms the mesh of the structural model under mechanical and geometric constraints; the property modeling occurs in this depositional space on a regular cuboidal grid; after ‘cutting’ this grid by the geological discontinuities, the inverse depositional mapping recovers the final unstructured grid in geological space. A critical part of the depositional transformation is the improved preservation of geodetic distances and the layer-orthogonality of the grid cells. The final grid is an accurate representation of the input structural model, and therefore the quality checking of the modeling workflow must be focused on the input data and structural model creation. We describe a variety of basic quality checking and structurally-focused tools that should be applied at this stage; these tools aim to ensure the accuracy of the depositional transformation, and consequently ensure both the quality of the generated grid and the consistent representation of the property models. A variety of quality assurance metrics applied to the depositional/geological grid geometries provide spatial measures of the ‘quality’ of the gridding and modeling workflow, and the ultimate validation of the structural quality of the input data. Two case studies will be used to demonstrate this novel workflow for creating high-quality unstructured grids in structurally complex areas. The improved quality is validated by monitoring downstream impacts on property prediction and reservoir simulation; these improved prediction scenarios are a more accurate basis for history matching approaches.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
New Modified Plane of Weakness Method Enables Drilling Horizontal Wells Successfully in Ordos Basin, China A Practical Method to Match Trajectories of a Horizontal Well in Time Domain and in Depth in Ancient Buried Hill 3D Permeability Characterization Based on Pore Structure Analysis and Multi-Parameters Seismic Inversion and Its Application in H Oilfield Research and Application on Intensive Drilling Model of Large Platforms Disclose Hidden Hydrocarbon HC Reserves from Additional Zone of Interest AZIs Using dT LogR Method in Lunar Field, Gulf of Thailand
×
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