Professional Documents
Culture Documents
th
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The recent years have seen the emergence of detailed field
data acquisition and efficient modelling tools to characterize
reservoirs and model their complex internal structure in a
realistic way. This progress led to the detection of multi-scale
fractures in most reservoirs, and enabled to interpret
unexpected field production features such as early
breakthroughs. Therefore, the availability of a workflow and
an integrated modelling methodology becomes more and
more crucial to take into account the geological information
about fractures/faults into the reservoir dynamic simulation
process for optimizing field productivity and reserves. This
paper reviews and illustrates the overall methodology and the
specifically-involved procedures and tools we have gradually
built from the experience acquired in various fractured field
case studies.
The main steps of this multidisciplinary approach include
(a) the detection, geological analysis and modeling of multiscale natural fracture network from seismic and well data, (b)
its validation and calibration from dynamic field information
such as well tests, (c) the choice of an equivalent simulation
model applicable at reservoir scale, and its construction
thanks to innovative flow up-scaling procedures applied to
the realistic model provided by the geologist, (d) the
implementation of predictive and numerically-efficient
algorithms to represent the physics of flow transfers occurring
both at local and large scale during multiphase field
production.
Thanks to this consistent workflow, field simulation
models remain interpretable in geological terms, which is
helpful for subsequent model updating. Thus, specialists in
geosciences and reservoir engineers can cooperate in a very
effective way to improve the management of fractured
reservoirs.
Introduction
The presence of fractures and faults in petroleum reservoirs
has always been an issue for the assessment of field
productivity and reserves. The internal structure and flow
behaviour of fractured reservoirs1,2,3 has been fairly well
understood for a long time however, until recently, no
consistent methodology and software enabled to integrate
field information about natural fracturing for field production
purposes. The recent development of new field data
acquisition techniques, such as borehole imaging and 3D
seismic, was an incentive for such integration. The
unexpected production behaviour of many fields4 arising from
an insufficient consideration of fracture effects on flow
emphasized the need for better characterizing the distribution
of fractures at various scales and transferring the meaningful
part of this information to field simulation models.
Taking into account the availability of fracture-related
information and flow simulation issues, we developed an
integrated methodology involving the following steps (Fig.
1):
- constrained modelling of the geological fracture network
based on the analysis, interpolation and extrapolation of
fracture information acquired in wells and seismic surveys,
sometime completed by outcrop analogue data;
- characterizating the hydrodynamic properties of this natural
network from flow-related data;
- choosing a flow simulation model suited to the role played
by fractures and faults at various scales and involving
upscaled parameters derived from the flow-calibrated
geological fracture model;
- simulating reservoir flow behaviour on the basis of a
physical assessment of multiphase flow mechanisms
prevailing in transfers within and between media.
Using terminology found in the literature,5 the first two
steps of this methodology combine a forward approach
mainly based on geosciences and an inverse approach based
on reservoir engineering. The flow upscaling procedures
involved in the last two steps ensure consistency between the
flow-calibrated geological model and the single-medium,
multi-medium and/or explicit modelling approach(es) chosen
for field simulation. The four steps of this integrated
approach are presented, discussed and illustrated hereafter.
Building a geological model of faults and fractures.
The methodology is extensively described by Cacas et al.6 and
is briefly summarized hereafter (Fig. 2).
2
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
k xy kyy 0
0 0 kzz
q =
k
(p pf)
m
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
fp=
XYZ
lxlylz
i =1
i
p
2 Ai
ip
li
with X,Y,Z the cell dimensions, li (lx, ly, lz) the lateral
dimensions of the equivalent parallelepiped matrix block, Ai
the cross-section area of each of the 6 matrix block lateral
faces i (i= x-, x+, y- y+, z-, z+) and ip a specific phase
mobility function.
No shape factor input is required using this formulation
since it is implicitly defined from matrix block dimensions.
i represents the potential difference, in phase p across
p
cp
8
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.
6.
7.
Conclusions
The recent development of integrated and flexible modelling
methods and software enabled us to adopt a really-integrated
workflow to model naturally-fractured reservoirs. This
workflow starts with the geological analysis of fractures and
ends with the reservoir simulation of multiphase production
profiles:
- fracture models representative of the actual geology can
be built through the integration of information of various
origins - seismic, wells, outcrop -, of various nature structural, sedimentological - and through the application
of genetic concepts and constraints based on geology and
geomechanics;
- the capability to simulate flows within Discrete Fracture
Networks for hydraulic characterization and effectiveflow-property determination was a major breakthrough
which enabled the effective integration of geoscientists
and reservoir engineers disciplines;
- fractured/faulted reservoirs are complex media
characterized by different flow-property contrasts at
various scales. Flows cannot be simulated with the same
accuracy at any scale. Therefore, various possible flow
simulation methods based on single-porosity, dualporosity or explicit models have to be considered with
possible coupling;
- finally, the complexity of multiphase flow transfers in
fractured media leads us to recommend the use of flexible
simulation options which keep track of the physical
mechanisms prevailing at each scale.
Development of those modelling methods and tools is
going on, driven by various field case studies, to further
constrain geological fracture models, to extend the
capabilities of DFN simulation whatever the fracture density
and connectivity, and to increase the predictability of multimedium simulation of complex recovery processes.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
38907 presented at the SPE Ann. Tech. Conf. and Exh., San
Antonio, Tx, Oct. 5-8.
Sarda, S., Bourbiaux, B., Cacas, M.C., and Sabathier, J.C.
1997. "An Innovative Procedure to Compute Equivalent Block
Size in a Dual-Porosity Model," paper presented at the 9th
European Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, The Hague, The
Netherlands, Oct. 20-22.
Sarda, S., Bourbiaux, B., and Cacas, M.C. 1999. "Correlations
Between Natural Fracture Attributes and Equivalent DualPorosity Model Parameters," paper presented at the 10th
European Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Brighton, UK,
Aug. 18-20.
Van Lingen, P., Daniel, J.M., Cosentino, L. and Sengul, M.
2001. "Single Medium Simulation of Reservoirs with
Conductive Faults and Fractures," SPE paper 68165 presented
at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, March 17-20.
Warren, J.E. and Root, P.J. 1963. "The Behavior of Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs," SPE Journal, Sept., 245-255.
Thomas, L.K., Dixon, T.N., and Pierson, R.G. 1983. "Fractured
Reservoir Simulation," SPE Journal, Feb., 42-54.
Rossen, R.H. and Shen, E.I. 1987. "Simulation of Gas/Oil
Drainage and Water/Oil Imbibition in Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs," paper SPE 16982 presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas, Tx, Sept.
27-30.
Gurpinar, O. and Kossack, C.A. 2000. "Realistic Numerical
Models for Fractured Reservoirs," paper SPE 59041 presented
at the Int. Pet. Conf. & Exh. in Mexico held in Villahermosa,
Feb. 1-3.
Sadi, A.M. 1983. "Simulation of Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs," paper SPE 12270 presented at the 7th SPE
Symposium on Reservoir Simulation held in San Francisco,
CA, Nov. 15-18.
Gilman, J.R. 1986. "An Efficient Finite-Difference Method for
Simulating Phase Segregation in the Matrix Blocks in DoublePorosity Reservoirs," SPE Reservoir Engineering, July, 403413.
Pruess, K. and Narasimhan, T.N. 1985. "A Practical Method
for Modelling Fluid and Heat Flow in Fractured Porous
Media," SPE Journal, Feb., 14-26.
Coats, K.H. 1989. "Implicit Compositional Simulation of
Single-Porosity and Dual-Porosity Reservoirs," paper SPE
18427 presented at the SPE Symposium on Reservoir
Simulation held in Houston, Tx, Feb. 6-8.
Kazemi, H., Gilman, J.R. and Elsharkawy, A.M. 1992.
"Analytical and Numerical Solution of Oil Recovery From
Fractured Reservoirs With Empirical Transfer Functions," SPE
Reservoir Engineering, May, 219-227.
Quandalle, Ph., and Sabathier, J.C. 1987. "Typical Features of
a New Multipurpose Reservoir Simulator," paper SPE 16007
presented at the 9th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation
held in San Antonio, Tx, Feb. 1-4.
Sabathier, J.C., Bourbiaux, B., Cacas, M.C., and Sarda, S.
1998. "A New Approach of Fractured Reservoirs," paper SPE
39825 presented at the SPE Int. Pet. Conf. & Exh.,
Villahermosa, Mexico, March 3-5.
Da Silva, F.V. and Belery, P. 1989. "Molecular Diffusion in
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs: A Decisive Recovery
Mechanism", paper SPE 19672 presented at the Ann. Tech.
Conf. & Exh., San Antonio, TX, Oct. 8-11.
Manceau, E., Delamaide, E., Sabathier, J.C., Jullian, S.,
Kalaydjian, F., Ladron De Guevara, J.E., Sanchez Bujanos,
10
SPE 78489
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Seismic data
Field-scale (sub)-seismic
fault network
Well data
Flow simulation on
DFN models
Integration
Analysis
Modelling
Hydraulic
characterization
Kf
Up-scaling
Equivalent
flow parameters
Lithology (geocellular
facies model)
Local-scale
DFN models
SPE 78489
11
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fault map
Seismic
- orientation map
- length distribution
- fractal dimension
Coherency
Attributes
Structure
(markers
depth/folding)
Curvature
analysis
direction
Fault
probability
map
intensity
Density
correction map
Wells
(cores,
image logs)
Facies
geocellular
model
Fracture
sets
(and facies)
Statistics of
orientations
Orientation
maps
Spacing
Fracture
density maps
(per set
per facies)
Lithology
bed thickness
porosity
FIELD-SCALE
sub-seismic
fault map
Fracture lengths
Outcrop analogues
Fig. 2 Geological modelling of multi-scale fractures (faults and joints): overall approach
Genetic
rules
- abutting rules
- minimum spacing
("exclusion volume")
- bed crossing
probabilities
LOCAL-SCALE DFNs
12
SPE 78489
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Matrix block
Fracture cell
Fracture nodes
XY
Fig. 4 Discretization of a Discrete Fracture Network and assignment of matrix blocks to fracture nodes.
well
Fig. 5 Simulation of well tests for fracture hydraulic characterization purposes: the Discrete Fracture Network.
SPE 78489
13
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 6 Simulation of well tests for fracture hydraulic characterization purposes: visualization of the flow tubes (high-flow-rate tubes
in bright colour) during the initial phase of drawdown by a horizontal well (fracture flow regime) - note the flow anisotropy.
Fig. 7 Simulation of well tests for fracture hydraulic characterization purposes: visualization of the flow tubes (high-flow-rate tubes
in bright colour) during the late phase of drawdown by a horizontal well (pseudo-steady state flow regime).
14
SPE 78489
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Small-scale
disconnected
(1a)
Small-scale
connected
(1b, 1c)
200 m
200 m
Medium-to-large scale
connected
(2a,2b)
200 m
te < t
1 model
Field-scale
conductive faults
(3)
200 m
te > t
Little impact
of matrix
capillary
continuity
Anisotropic
Large-scale
sparsely distributed
(2c)
2 km
1 model
(with averaged
M-F properties)
2 model
2 -2K model
2 -2K model
Diffusive (isotropic)
driving mechanisms
Directional driving
mechanisms
- pressure diffusivity
- Gravity
- capillarity
- Fracture viscous
flow effects
- molecular diffusion
- heat conduction
Fig. 9 Different types of physical mechanisms involved in matrix-fracture transfers