Computational Geosciences

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 1059–1082 | Cite as

Effect of mobility and convection-dominated flow on evaluation of reservoir dynamic performance by fast marching method

  • Abdulaziz Al-QasimEmail author
  • Mohan Kelkar
Original Paper


The determination of optimum well locations and number of wells needed during green field development always comes with unprecedented challenges because of the geological uncertainty, and the non-linear relationship between the input and output variables associated with real reservoirs. These variables are key sources affecting the viability and validity of the results. Reservoir simulation is one of the least uncertain and most reliable prediction tools for dynamic performance of any reservoir. As field development progresses, more information becomes available, enabling us to continually update and, if needed, correct the reservoir description. The simulator can then be used to perform a variety of exercises or scenarios, with the goal of optimizing field development and operation strategies. Optimizing well numbers or locations under such geological uncertainty is achieved by using a reservoir simulator under several geological realizations, and these require multiple reservoir simulations to estimate the field performance for a given well configuration at a given location. Using reservoir simulation becomes impractical when dealing with real field cases incorporating multi-million cells because of the associated CPU demand constraints (Bouzarkouna et al. 2011). For instance, to determine the optimum well locations in a giant field that will result in the most efficient production rate scenario, one requires a large number of simulation runs for different realizations and well configurations. A large amount of runs is technically difficult to achieve even if we have access to super computers. The fast marching method (FMM), which is based on a solution of Eikonal equation, can be used to find the optimum well locations in a green oil field by tracking the pressure distribution in the reservoir. The FMM will enable us to calculate the radius of investigation or pressure front as a function of time without running any simulation and with a high degree of accuracy under primary depletion conditions. The main purpose of this paper is to study the effect of mobility on FMM and extend the investigation of its validity to include two-phase flow and convection-dominated flow and evaluate the ability of the methodology to predict the dynamic performance of the reservoir during pseudo-steady-state flow regime.


Mobility Reservoir Dynamic Fast marching method 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


Funding Information

The authors would like to thank Saudi Aramco for supporting and funding this research at the University of Tulsa and many others for their contributions toward the project.


  1. 1.
    Bouzarkouna, Z., Auger, A., Ding, D.Y.: Local-meta-model CMA-ES for partially separable functions. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO) (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Esmaiel, T.E.: Applications of experimental design in reservoir management of smart wells. SPE 94838 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spokes, J.J., Ovuede, M.A., Ginger, E.P., Narahara, G.M., Haga, O., Gontijo, J.: Application of experimental design in selecting a development plan for the Agbami field. Offshore Technology Conference. OTC 16994 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Uvieghara, T., Lawal, K.A., Effiom, O.: Application of experimental design for improved reservoir-characterization by pressure-transient analysis. SPE 167566 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Novakovic, D., Roth, J.: Uncertainty analysis in a mature field: Dibi Field case study (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dogru, S.: Selection of optimal platform locations. SPE 10754 (1987)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beckner, B.L., Song, X.: Field development planning using simulated annealing - optimal economic well scheduling and placement. Society of Petroleum Engineers (1995).
  8. 8.
    Norrena K.P., Deutsch C.V.: Automatic determination of well placement subject to geostatistical and economic constraints. In: Proceedings of the 2002 SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium and International Horizontal Well Technology Conference. Calgary, Canada, SPE 78996 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seifert, G., Porezag, D., Frauenheim, T.: Calculations of molecules, clusters, and solids with a simplified LCAO-DFT-LDA scheme. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 58, 185 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bittencourt, A.C., Horne, R.N.: Reservoir development and design optimization. Paper SPE 38895 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, TX, October 5-8 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guyaguler, B., Horne, R.N., Rogers, L., Rosenzweig, J.J.: Optimization of well placement in a Gulf of Mexico Waterflooding project. Presented in the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, SPE 63221 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yeten, B., Durlofsky, L.J., Aziz, K.: Optimization of non-conventional well type, location and trajectory. SPE J. 8, 200–210 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Handels, M., Zandvliet, M., Brouwer, R., Jansen, J.D.: Adjoint-based well- placement optimization under production constraints. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2007).
  14. 14.
    Sarma, P., Chen, W.H.: Applications of optimal control theory for efficient production optimisation of realistic reservoirs. International Petroleum Technology Conference (2008).
  15. 15.
    Forouzanfar, F., Li, G., Reynolds, A.C.: A two-stage well placement optimization method based on adjoint gradient. The Presented in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, SPE 135304 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Badru, O., Kabir, C.S.: Well placement optimization in field development. SPE 84191 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ozdogan, U., Horne, R.N.: Optimization of well placement under time-dependent uncertainty. SPE 90091 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Santana, R.: Production Optimization by Solving the Well Location Problem. Presented in the Offshore Technology Conference OTC 22954, Houston, TX (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Douglas, J. Jr, Pereira, F., Yeh, L.M.: A parallelizable method for two-phase flows in naturally-fractured reservoirs. Comput. Geosci. 1, 333–368 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang, Y., Kovscek, A.R.: Streamline approach for history matching production data. SPE 58350 (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thiele, M.R., Batycky, R.P.: Streamline simulation: a technology update. J. Petrol. Tech. 53(5), 26–27 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sharifi, M., Kelkar, M., Bahar, A., Slettebo, T.: Dynamic ranking of multiple realizations by use of the fast-marching method. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2014).
  23. 23.
    Yin, J., Xie, J., Datta-Gupta, A., Hill, A.D.: Improved characterization and performance assessment of shale gas wells by integrating stimulated reservoir volume and production data. SPE 148969 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Datta-Gupta, A., Xie, J., Gupta, N.: Radius of investigation and its generalization to unconventional reservoirs. J. Petrol. Tech. 63(7), 52–55 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xie, J., Gupta, N., King, M.J.: Depth of investigation and depletion behavior in unconventional reservoirs using fast marching methods. Presented in SPE europec/EAGE Annual Conference. copenhagen, Denmark, SPE 154532 (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang, Y., Yang, C., King, M.J., Datta-Gupta, A.: Fast-marching methods for complex grids and anisotropic permeabilities: application to unconventional reservoirs. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2013).

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saudi AramcoDhahranSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.University of TulsaTulsaUSA

Personalised recommendations