Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Modelling Drainage of Wells and frac Shadows in Conventional and Tight Oil Reservoirs
Case Studies Using VSM (Volumetric Sweep Mapping) Simulator
Rocky Mottahedeh, P.Geol, P.Eng. UOGC & SMART4D
Contributors & Co-Writers: Senior Geologist Jessica Metez, P.Geol. Canamax Energy Ltd.
Jeremy Krukowski, P.Eng. President & COO Canamax Energy Ltd.
Dina Hayter Heavy Oil Play Montney Grimshaw Tight Oil
Technical
Luncheon
Calgary, Feb 20th 2019
Canadian
Well Logging
Society
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Background on United & SMART4D
• United was established in 1991
• Geosteering & Geomodelling since 1998, with over a 1000 horizontals experience built into the software. SMART4D has been built in Calgary by United
• Experience with all resource types integrated
• SMART4D released as a Geosteering Product 2015
• Integrated Reservoir Studies, Geo-modelling &Post Drill reviews; VSM (Volumetric Sweep Mapping) Simulation for modelling drainage of wells and fracs
Extensive worldwide
experience
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
What's SMART4D and What does United do?
• SMART4D is a 3D geo-modelling, Geosteering & visualization software from United similar to Petrel. It is lighter and more nimble than most geo-models out there. As a Geosteering software it provides a forward vision by proactively catching deviations early. It provides a technical advantage as clients put it.
• Automated 3D kriging allows all geoscience professionals to work with immersive 3D models. Much lower annual cost than comparable 3D models, user-friendly, cloud-based or on networks
• Rapid initialization with templates to load small or very large model areas data sets from tabular and .las files. Builds multiple structures, isopachs and models properties (Gamma, Porosity, resistivity, YM, etc.) within 5 minutes.
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
What's SMART4D?
• Load structures from pre-gridded data or seismic sources. Do petrophysics, digitize logs and maps, geo-ref images, plan wells, Calculate In Place Volumes of Oil & Gas, HCPV, Pay maps from multiple 3D properties, upscale/downscale to VSM
• Connect to rig data through WITSML, report to web and Real-time Panels & 3D interpretations on the fly
• Use the client geomodel framework from the Cloud, United delivers Reservoir Studies services for development/infill potential.
• Planning and modelling of drainage of wells and frac shadows using United’s VSM volumetric simulator at much lower costs than flow simulation studies. VSM brings in core, production, Displacement Efficiencies and EURs to assess the unswept regions of conventional and tight reservoirs, allowing for better planning of well pads, spacing and reduction of risk on capital.
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
VSM Simulator Conventional Oil Process
• Very high resolution HCPV model (5-15 million cells)
• EURs and production history
• Completions data
• Displacement Efficiency (DE)
• Initial estimated profile of drainage
• Watch for pressure or production interference
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
VSM Simulator Conventional Oil Process
Vertical well drainage
The process removes volume from HCPV model until it gets a match (20 iterations).
0
1
00
%
Rec
ove
ry
HCPV
Computer takes a cone shaped model and distributes it along a horizontal well, frac wings are ellipsoids and controlled by the geoscience and engineer knowing the stress directions.
Horizontal well drainage
HCPV
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
VSM Simulator Results
High Resolution Remaining HCPV 3D View
Heavy Oil or Conventional Oil Example Tight Oil Play Example with Fracs
Vertical well Drainage
Horizontal well drainage
Remaining HCPV 2D View
High Resolution Remaining HCPV 3D View
Remaining HCPV 2D View
ℎ
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Dina Sands Hayter Heavy Oil Field VSM for Reducing Risk on Infills Iteratively Matching EURs to Movable HCPV in 3D
• 12m pay at 800m TVD • 16º API oil, Pi 5.6 Mpa • OOIP 69 MMSTB • Bottom water drive • 25m well spacing • Incremental Recovery
6.2 MMSTB 17% to 26% • 95/95 successful infills
Early Application of VSM
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
VSM Process has Evolved: Frac Shadows in Tight Reservoirs
Dozens of integrated reservoir studies and hundreds of infills drilled on its results in Heavy Oil, conventional plays, waterfloods and then to Tight Plays
Tight Plays
Waterfloods Heavy Oil
Microseismic Visualization
Horizontal Well Panel
3D Visualization
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Learnings from Completions Histories in a Complex Play Bakken Example
Larger fracs footprints in a poor HCPV area
Non frac’d wells
Vertical well’s drainage Different sized fracs in the same well
Failed fracs at toe of well
Could have improve results by larger fracs in better HCPV Frac Shadowing
High
High Resolution HCPV*h Map
Medium
Low
Residual Oil after VSM
Overlapping frac shadows
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
CanaMax Grimshaw Montney Oil Case Study
Purpose and Methodology: Understanding Well Spacing, Frac Shadows, Optimizations and Infill Potential
Thank you to co-contributors at CanaMax
Senior Geologist Jessica Metez, P.Geol. Jeremy Krukowski, P.Eng. President & COO
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Reservoir Properties in Montney play in Grimshaw Reservoir Parameters Value
Initial Pressure, KPa
7300
Current Average Reservoir Pressure, KPa
>90% of Pi
Porosity, % 14
Water Saturation 40%
Oil Column ~8m
FVF
1.05
OOIP in Model Area: 66 MMSTB
Recovery to date, with current development and expected RF:
2%, 6% 12%
83-23W5
150 MSTB
EUR Average 135 MSTB New Wells 175 MSTB
Wells
Grimshaw
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
CanaMax Grimshaw Montney Oil Case Study
• CanaMax’s utilized United’s cloud hosted software SMART4D to build 3D model and geosteer wells
• United further characterized the reservoir and modelled well and frac drainages
• Grimshaw Triassic Pool is on the subcrop edge of Montney Formation in embayment graben complexes
• Siliclastic shoreface deposits (coarsening upward)
• Canamax Engineering team provided the reservoir data production, fracs
and EURs
• OOIP was calculated and potential infills evaluated
Units B & C
Montney B
Montney Montney A
Montney C
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Horizontal Panel Showing HCPV in the Montney B&C
HCPV at >9%, <65% SW 66MSTB Sept 2018 EUR 129 MSTB
16-30-83-23W5
Dynamic Profile shows most of the HCPV is concentrated in the B in this well
Entry from shale plug into the reservoir
-212 SL
A
A
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Montney B&C Isopach in Grimshaw
Contour values in meters
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Montney B&C Net Pay in Grimshaw
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Mapped Initial Pressure Map Grimshaw Montney
Cum oil to Sept. 2018 in MSTB
Date of Initial Pressure
Overall pressure in the modelled area is still near original, 7.3 MPa.
There are 2 injectors in the field
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Montney B&C Defined Downscaled Area for HCPV Model
600x500x30 = 9,000,000 cells
Voxel sizes are X: 8.6m Y: 8.8m Z: 0.5m
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Montney Grimshaw 3D view of Remaining HCPV map after VSM run
A A’
North
A
A’
After VSM simulation is completed on the Original HCPV, the system also outputs
the remaining summation of HCPV to a single map
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
• VSM runs consider the contributions of each wellbore and frac
• There are up to 20 iterations of solutions until the process comes up to a matching stimulated
Reservoir volume to the EUR value or production to date within 5% precision
• Cutoff used are 9% on Porosity and 65% on SW, no gamma cutoff was implemented
• The Displacement Efficiency (DE) used was 0.35
• There were about 2000 frac intervals in this model
• Use of external interference data from production decline or pressure interference for matches
Sept. 6th 2018
VSM Simulation Process at EURs
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
VSM runs with Drainage Footprints at Cum Oil Sept 2018 and at EURs
• Cum Oils to date posted at toe of horizontals • Drainage shapes indicate matched VSM at Sept 2018
Cum to Sept 2018 1.194 MMSTB / 66.6 MMSTB OOIP =1.8 % produced
Based on EUR’s of 4.043 MMSTB / 66.6 MMSTB OOIP =6.1% recovery
• EURs posted at toe of horizontals • Drainage shapes indicate matched VSM at EURs
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
35% Displacement Efficiency (DE) and VSM Parameters
14
-28
Pro
po
sed
HZ
1
Pro
po
sed
HZ
2
16
-29
13
-28
-83
-23
W5
Inje
cto
r
EURs MSTB
Base Case and expected footprint of drainage
Sub-project area
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Sensitivity Testing of Displacement Efficiency and VSM Parameters
14
-28
Pro
po
sed
HZ
1
Pro
po
sed
HZ
2
16
-29
13
-28
-83
-23
W5
Inje
cto
r
14
-28
Pro
po
sed
HZ
1
Pro
po
sed
HZ
2
16
-29
13
-28
-83
-23
W5
Inje
cto
r
DE=15% DE=5%
Potential Issue with frac shadow touching the injector drainage space (Solution is not to frac the last few planned stages).
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
3D views of Waterflood area around 13-28 injector at the Heel The filtered view shows remaining HCPV after VSM
Learning from the model: Proposed HZ2 completion should avoid the last 3-4 frac stages at the heel.
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
Learnings from the study VSM results
• This reservoir is in early stages of development with less than 2% produced with 6% recovery with the current well configurations from an OOIP of 66 MMSTB.
• Remaining oil infill opportunities between current wells and new areas can be a basis for the next development plans and fracs to improve production and recovery from this reservoir.
• VSM is helpful in reducing risk on capital for future drilling and field optimization
Copyright United Oil & Gas Consulting Ltd. 2019
PROFESSIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Interpretations of logs, whether made directly from original logs or by electronic data processing from actual or digitized data, or from electronically transmitted data or otherwise, or any recommendation based upon such interpretations, are opinions based on inferences from physical or other measurements, empirical factors, and assumptions. Such inferences are not infallible and different opinions may exist. Accordingly we do not warrant the accuracy or correctness of any such interpretation or recommendation. Under no circumstances should any such interpretation or recommendation be relied upon as the sole basis for any drilling, production, completion, or financial decision. We do not guarantee results. We make no warranties, express or implied. Under no circumstances shall we be liable for consequential damages.