janine wiedel (2015) jian wang (2015)
Post on 25-Nov-2021
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Reservoir Performance Evaluation by Cost Effective
Digital Petrophysics Workflows
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016 Luxembourg
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
Digital Rock Analysis promises faster and cheaper RCAL/SCAL
campaigns
Expensive (Hardware and Software) and as a service only
provided by a very small group of specialists.
Only a few Laboratory tests are actually faster than their
conventional equivalent (if you have a leading edge HPC hardware
with MPI/OpenCL codes).
3D models from imaging protocols can be obtained from almost any rock
sample
WHY? SO?WHAT
?
Can we deliver useful reservoir performance information to BBUU
operations using a tabletop micro_CT, available commercial easy to use
software by workflows spanning less than one day per sample?
IMAGING
DIGITAL
PETROPHYSICS
WORKFLOW
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
• Pilot test on analog sample for protocol accuracy test
• Full deployment on selected prospective intervals
PROCESSING
CHARACTERIZI
NGSkyscan 1272. 90kV, 3um resolution, 10hrs scan. Averaging
Priority
ZA
ZA
Comptom
ricPhotoelect
4
Correlation Length. Is it
representative?
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
Denoising and Segmentation
• Averaging (Scanning)
• Soft Gaussian
• Adaptative (long search
areas)
• Depeckling white dots
IMAGING
PROCESSING
CHARACTERIZI
NG
DIGITAL
PETROPHYSICS
WORKFLOW
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
MORPHOMETRY NUMERICAL SIMULATION• Porosity
• Pore Size Distribution
• Connectivity
• Fractal Dimension
• Structure Separation
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
RESULTSPorosity from Image Analysis: 21,76%
±1,2%
Permeability (kair) from Morphometric Models: 510mD-
722mD
Permeability Tensor from Numerical Simulation
Close “Sibling
Sample”
ɸ=20,7%
K=644,01mD
WHY? SO?WHAT
?
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
The same protocol was
applied to 10 samples from
different wells but the same
field REV Analysis was conducted
during each test
Close data gave reasonable
agreement (not sibling)
ID Total ɸ ɸ Closest Data Est. κ (mD) FEA κ (mD) κ Closest Data (mD)
1 12,33 15,1 [17,21<κ<28,07] 2,756 29,835
2 31,42 30,3 [174,05<κ<308,80] 2645 455,6
3 18,26 20,6 [45,22<κ<107,8] 6,315 6,325
4 20,53 20,6 [38,28<κ<91,26] 17,14 6,325
5 20,88 26,6 [87,86<κ<152,31] 135,6 79,813
6 24,76 24,3 [79,06<κ<140,25] 586,8 150,631
7 24,05 22,8 [77,99<κ<140,12] 521,3 64,02
8 23,98 21,4 [159,85<κ<245,05] 484 61,401
9 21,33 20,7 [37,80<κ<61,66] 29,82 797,86
10 5,63 18,7 [9,52<κ<30,94] 0,462 1,362
3D Morphometry gave
outstanding RQI typing
Bruker Micro_CT user meeting 2016
CONCLUSIO
NS
The protocol was successfully implemented and useful reservoir behavior
information was delivered to our BBUU. So, it worked.However, apparently it can be further improved at the acquisition stage (1275?)
10mi
n
1hr 10hr
s
κ = 385mD κ = 475mD κ = 430mD
top related