Accounting for Serial Autocorrelation in Decline Curve Analysis of Marcellus Shale Gas Wells

E. Morgan
{"title":"Accounting for Serial Autocorrelation in Decline Curve Analysis of Marcellus Shale Gas Wells","authors":"E. Morgan","doi":"10.2118/191788-18ERM-MS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Current decline models fail to capture all of the behavior in shale gas production histories. That is, upon fitting one of these models, one often sees significant and sustained deviation of the flow rate data points from the decline trend. One way to measure this \"lost signal\" is to look at the autocorrelation in the residuals about the fitted decline model. Indeed, with many shale gas wells we see significant amounts of autocorrelation, especially when comparing the flow rate at one time to the next (lag one). Theoretically, this serially autocorrelated error can impact decline curve analysis in two ways: 1) inefficient estimation of decline curve parameters, and 2) lost signal in the data. Borrowing from time series statistics, there are two conventional ways of dealing with these potential problems: 1) estimate the decline curve parameters with generalized least squares or generalized nonlinear least squares, and 2) fitting an ARMA model to the residuals and adding it to the fitted decline curve.\n This paper investigates the practical implications of these two procedures by exercising them over decline curves fit to 8,527 Marcellus shale gas wells (all wells from that play with viable data for the analysis). The study explores the effect that generalized regression methods and ARMA-modeled residuals have on six different decline curves, and performance is measured in terms of sum of squared residuals (a metric for goodness-of-fit, calculated on the training data (first 24 months of each record)) and mean absolute percent error (a standard metric for forecasting accuracy, calculated on the testing data (all production rates after 24 months)).\n We find that inclusion of the ARMA-modeled residuals largely improves the goodness-of-fit for any decline curve, and improves the forecasting accuracy for the Hyperbolic decline curve and Duong's model. The use of generalized least squares or generalized nonlinear least squares has little benefit in fitting the decline curves, except for the Logistic Growth model, where it improves both fit and forecasting accuracy.","PeriodicalId":298489,"journal":{"name":"Day 4 Wed, October 10, 2018","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 4 Wed, October 10, 2018","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/191788-18ERM-MS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Current decline models fail to capture all of the behavior in shale gas production histories. That is, upon fitting one of these models, one often sees significant and sustained deviation of the flow rate data points from the decline trend. One way to measure this "lost signal" is to look at the autocorrelation in the residuals about the fitted decline model. Indeed, with many shale gas wells we see significant amounts of autocorrelation, especially when comparing the flow rate at one time to the next (lag one). Theoretically, this serially autocorrelated error can impact decline curve analysis in two ways: 1) inefficient estimation of decline curve parameters, and 2) lost signal in the data. Borrowing from time series statistics, there are two conventional ways of dealing with these potential problems: 1) estimate the decline curve parameters with generalized least squares or generalized nonlinear least squares, and 2) fitting an ARMA model to the residuals and adding it to the fitted decline curve. This paper investigates the practical implications of these two procedures by exercising them over decline curves fit to 8,527 Marcellus shale gas wells (all wells from that play with viable data for the analysis). The study explores the effect that generalized regression methods and ARMA-modeled residuals have on six different decline curves, and performance is measured in terms of sum of squared residuals (a metric for goodness-of-fit, calculated on the training data (first 24 months of each record)) and mean absolute percent error (a standard metric for forecasting accuracy, calculated on the testing data (all production rates after 24 months)). We find that inclusion of the ARMA-modeled residuals largely improves the goodness-of-fit for any decline curve, and improves the forecasting accuracy for the Hyperbolic decline curve and Duong's model. The use of generalized least squares or generalized nonlinear least squares has little benefit in fitting the decline curves, except for the Logistic Growth model, where it improves both fit and forecasting accuracy.
马塞勒斯页岩气井递减曲线分析中的序列自相关计算
目前的递减模型无法捕捉页岩气生产历史中的所有行为。也就是说,在拟合其中一个模型时,人们经常会看到流量数据点与下降趋势之间存在显著且持续的偏差。测量这种“丢失的信号”的一种方法是观察拟合下降模型残差中的自相关。事实上,在许多页岩气井中,我们可以看到大量的自相关性,特别是在比较一次与下一次的流量(滞后)时。从理论上讲,这种序列自相关误差会从两个方面影响衰落曲线分析:1)衰落曲线参数估计效率低下;2)数据中丢失信号。根据时间序列统计,处理这些潜在问题的常规方法有两种:1)用广义最小二乘或广义非线性最小二乘估计下降曲线参数;2)对残差进行ARMA模型拟合,并将其加入拟合的下降曲线中。本文通过对8,527口Marcellus页岩气井进行递减曲线拟合,研究了这两种方法的实际意义(该区块的所有井都具有可用数据进行分析)。该研究探讨了广义回归方法和arma模型残差对六条不同下降曲线的影响,并根据残差平方和(根据训练数据(每个记录的前24个月)计算的拟合优度指标)和平均绝对误差(根据测试数据(24个月后的所有生产率)计算的预测准确性标准指标)来衡量性能。我们发现,arma模型残差的加入大大提高了任何下降曲线的拟合优度,并提高了双曲下降曲线和Duong模型的预测精度。使用广义最小二乘或广义非线性最小二乘在拟合下降曲线方面几乎没有什么好处,除了Logistic增长模型,它可以提高拟合和预测精度。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信