Production rate forecasting using pressure and saturation estimates near the wellbore

IF 4.6 0 ENERGY & FUELS
D. Voloskov , E. Gladchenko , D. Akhmetov , E. Illarionov , K. Pechko , A. Afanasev , M. Simonov , D. Orlov , D. Koroteev
{"title":"Production rate forecasting using pressure and saturation estimates near the wellbore","authors":"D. Voloskov ,&nbsp;E. Gladchenko ,&nbsp;D. Akhmetov ,&nbsp;E. Illarionov ,&nbsp;K. Pechko ,&nbsp;A. Afanasev ,&nbsp;M. Simonov ,&nbsp;D. Orlov ,&nbsp;D. Koroteev","doi":"10.1016/j.geoen.2025.213946","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Production flow rate forecasting is crucial for effective reservoir management decisions. Usually, this forecasting relies on either full-scale reservoir models, which demand significant computational resources, or highly simplified surrogate models like the Capacitance–Resistance Model (CRM). While CRM offers computational efficiency, it faces considerable challenges when applied to multilayer reservoirs or scenarios with varying fluid saturations. We present a novel method for flow rate forecasting, occupying an intermediate position between these two approaches. The model consists of several components: separate machine learning models are used to predict pressure and fluid saturation in each grid cell perforated by the well. The predicted pressure and saturation values are then used to estimate well production rates. This workflow preserves the physical interpretability: outputs of intermediate models represent primary dynamic variables and the weighting coefficients of the flow rate estimation model can be interpreted as connection factors of the grid blocks. At the same time, it overcomes some of the limitations of both full-scale reservoir model and CRM-like surrogate models. Unlike CRM, each well is considered as a collection of cells for better representation of structural heterogeneity. Additionally, by considering fluid saturation as a dynamic property, it can manage problems with varying fluid phase composition. The focus only on values near the wellbore facilitates rapid forecasting compared to full-scale modeling. We test the proposed approach using two reservoir models: a simplistic synthetic reservoir and a model of a real-world reservoir, and compare it with the results obtained using a commercial reservoir simulator and CRM. We observe a better accuracy against the CRM and a reasonable approximation of full-scale simulation results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100578,"journal":{"name":"Geoenergy Science and Engineering","volume":"253 ","pages":"Article 213946"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoenergy Science and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949891025003045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Production flow rate forecasting is crucial for effective reservoir management decisions. Usually, this forecasting relies on either full-scale reservoir models, which demand significant computational resources, or highly simplified surrogate models like the Capacitance–Resistance Model (CRM). While CRM offers computational efficiency, it faces considerable challenges when applied to multilayer reservoirs or scenarios with varying fluid saturations. We present a novel method for flow rate forecasting, occupying an intermediate position between these two approaches. The model consists of several components: separate machine learning models are used to predict pressure and fluid saturation in each grid cell perforated by the well. The predicted pressure and saturation values are then used to estimate well production rates. This workflow preserves the physical interpretability: outputs of intermediate models represent primary dynamic variables and the weighting coefficients of the flow rate estimation model can be interpreted as connection factors of the grid blocks. At the same time, it overcomes some of the limitations of both full-scale reservoir model and CRM-like surrogate models. Unlike CRM, each well is considered as a collection of cells for better representation of structural heterogeneity. Additionally, by considering fluid saturation as a dynamic property, it can manage problems with varying fluid phase composition. The focus only on values near the wellbore facilitates rapid forecasting compared to full-scale modeling. We test the proposed approach using two reservoir models: a simplistic synthetic reservoir and a model of a real-world reservoir, and compare it with the results obtained using a commercial reservoir simulator and CRM. We observe a better accuracy against the CRM and a reasonable approximation of full-scale simulation results.
利用井筒附近的压力和饱和度预测产量
生产流量预测对于有效的油藏管理决策至关重要。通常,这种预测要么依赖于需要大量计算资源的全尺寸油藏模型,要么依赖于高度简化的替代模型,如电容-电阻模型(CRM)。虽然CRM提供了计算效率,但当应用于多层油藏或不同流体饱和度的情况时,它面临着相当大的挑战。我们提出了一种新的流量预测方法,它介于这两种方法之间。该模型由几个部分组成:单独的机器学习模型用于预测井射孔的每个网格单元的压力和流体饱和度。然后使用预测的压力和饱和度值来估计井的产量。该工作流保留了物理可解释性:中间模型的输出表示主要动态变量,流量估计模型的加权系数可以解释为网格块的连接因子。同时,它克服了全尺寸油藏模型和类crm代理模型的一些局限性。与CRM不同,每口井都被视为细胞的集合,以便更好地表示结构的异质性。此外,通过将流体饱和度视为一种动态特性,它可以处理不同流体相组成的问题。与全尺寸建模相比,只关注井筒附近的数值有助于快速预测。我们使用两种油藏模型来测试所提出的方法:一个简单的合成油藏模型和一个真实油藏模型,并将其与使用商业油藏模拟器和CRM获得的结果进行比较。我们观察到对CRM有更好的精度和合理的近似全尺寸模拟结果。
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
CiteScore
1.00
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信