A methodology to reduce uncertainty constrained to observed data

SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 167-180

  Maschio, Célio ^a   Schiozer, Denis J ^a   Moura Filho, Marcos A B ^b   Becerra, Gustavo G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b PETROBRAS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FORECASTING; PETROLEUM RESERVOIRS; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS;

ATTRIBUTE LEVELS; ATTRIBUTE VALUES; CAMPOS BASIN; HISTORY MATCHING; OBSERVED DATA; RESERVOIR PARAMETERS; RESERVOIR SIMULATION MODEL;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

HYDROCARBON RESERVOIR; METHODOLOGY; MODELING; PREDICTION; RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; BRAZIL; CAMPOS BASIN; SOUTH AMERICA;

EID: 62749186248     PISSN: 10946470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2118/111030-pa     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Alvarado, M.G., McVay, D.A., and Lee, W.J. 2005. Quantification of uncertainty by combining forecasting with history matching. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 23 (3): 445-462. DOI:10.1081/ LFT-200031057.
2. Becerra, G.G. 2007. Uncertainty Mitigation Through the Integration with Production History Matching. MS Thesis, Petroleum Engineering Department, State University of Campinas, Brazil.
3. Bennett, F. and Graf, T. 2002. Use of Geostatistical Modeling and Automatic History Matching to Estimate Production Forecast Uncertainty - A Case Study. Paper SPE 74389 presented at the SPE International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition in Mexico, Villahermosa, Mexico, 10- 12 February. DOI: 10.2118/4389-MS.
4. Bissel, R.C., Dubrule, O., Lamy, P., Swaby, P., and Lépine, O. 1997. Combining Geostatistical Modeling With Gradient Information for History Matching: The Pilot Point Method. Paper SPE 38730 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 5-8 October. DOI: 10.2118/38730-MS.
5. Gu, Y. and Oliver, D.S. 2005. History Matching of the PUNQ-S3 Reservoir Model Using the Ensemble Kalman Filter. SPEJ 10 (2): 217-224. SPE-89942-PA. DOI: 10.2118/89942-PA.
6. Guérillot, D. and Pianelo, L. 2000. Simultaneous Matching of Production Data and Seismic Data for Reducing Uncertainty in Production Forecasts. Paper SPE 65131 presented at the SPE European Petroleum Conference, Paris, 24-25 October. DOI: 10.2118/65131-MS.
7. Jenni, S., Hu, L.Y., Basquet, R., de Marsily, G., and Bourbiaux, B. 2004. History Matching of Stochastic Models of Field-Scale Fractures: Methodology and Case Study. Paper SPE 90020 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 26-29 September. DOI: 10.2118/90020-MS.
8. Kashib, T. and Srinivasan, S. 2006. A probabilistic approach to integrating dynamic data in reservoir models. J. of Petroleum Science and Engineering 50 (3-4): 241-257. DOI:10.1016/ j.petrol.2005.11.002.
9. Landa, J.L. and Güyagüler, B. 2003. A Methodology for History Matching and the Assessment of Uncertainties Associated With Flow Prediction. Paper SPE 84465 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 5-9 October. DOI: 10.2118/84465-MS.
10. Lépine, O.J., Bissel, R.C., Aanonsen, S.I., Pallister, I.C., and Barker, J.W. 1999. Uncertainty Analysis in Predictive Reservoir Simulation Using Gradient Information. SPEJ 4 (3): 251-259. SPE-57594-PA. DOI: 10.2118/57594-PA.
11. Ligero, E.L., Maschio, C., and Schiozer, D.J. 2003. Quantifying the Impact of Grid Size, Upscaling, and Streamline Simulation in the Risk Analysis Applied to Petroleum Field. Paper SPE 79677 presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Houston, 3-5 February. DOI: 10.2118/ 7967-MS.
12. Moura Filho, M.A.B. 2005. Integration of Uncertainty Analysis and History Matching Process. MS Thesis, Petroleum Engineering Department, State University of Campinas, Brazil.
13. Omre, H. and Lødøen, O.P. 2004. Improved Production Forecasts and History Matching Using Approximate Fluid-Flow Simulators. SPEJ 9 (3): 339-351. SPE-74691-PA. DOI: 10.2118/74691-PA.
14. Queipo, N.V., Pintos, S,, Rincón, N., Contreras, N., and Colmenares, J. 2002. Surrogate modeling-based optimization for the integration of static and dynamic data into a reservoir description. J. of Petroleum Science and Engineering 35 (3-4): 167-181. DOI:10.1016/S0920-4105(02)00238-3.
15. Reis, L.C. 2006. Risk Analysis With History Matching Using Experimental Design or Artificial Neural Networks. Paper SPE 100255 presented at the SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, 12-15 June. DOI: 10.2118/100255-MS.
16. Rotondi, M., Nicotra, G., Godi, A., Contento, F.M., Blunt, M.J., and Christie, M.A. 2006. Hydrocarbon Production Forecast and Uncertainty Quantification: A Field Application. Paper SPE 102135 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 24-27 September. DOI: 10.2118/102135-MS.
17. Schiozer, D.J., Ligero, E.L., Suslick, S.B., Costa, A.P.A., and Santos, J.A.M. 2004. Use of representative models in the integration of risk analysis and production strategy definition. J. of Petroleum Science and Engineering 44(1-2): 131-141. DOI:10.1016/ j.petrol.2004.02.010.
18. Steagall, D.E. and Schiozer, D.J. 2001. Uncertainty Analysis in Reservoir Production Forecast during the Appraisal and Pilot Production Phases. Paper SPE 66399 presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Houston, 11-14 February. DOI: 10.2118/66399-MS.
19. Suzuki, S. and Caers, J. 2006. History Matching With an Uncertain Geological Scenario. Paper SPE 102154 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 24-27 September. DOI: 10.2118/102154-MS.
20. Varela, O.J., Torres-Verdin, C., and Lake, L.W. 2006. On the value of 3D seismic amplitude data to reduce uncertainty in the forecast of reservoir production. J. of Petroleum Science and Engineering 50 (3-4): 269-284. DOI:10.1016/j.petrol.2005/11.004.
21. Zabalza-Mezghani, I., Manceau, E., Feraille, M., and Jourdan, A. 2004. Uncertainty management: From geological scenarios to production scheme optimization. J. of Petroleum Science and Engineering 44 (1-2): 11-25. DOI:10.1016/j.petrol.2004.02.002.