Advertisement

Reservoir rock permeability prediction using SVR based on radial basis function kernel

  • Majid BagheriEmail author
  • Hadi Rezaei
Original Article
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

Permeability is one of the most important parameters of the rock reservoir. This parameter represents the ability of fluid pass through the porous medium without changing the structure of the rock which plays a main role in the production rate of a hydrocarbon reservoir. Permeability could be obtained through laboratory using core plugs, although the measurements is highly accurate, but these analyses are costly, time-consuming, and also the core data are not available for all wells. Therefore, permeability is usually predicted using well logs by regression techniques. In this study, support vector regression (SVR) based on radial basis function is developed to estimate permeability in South Pars gas field of Iran. For this purpose, first four electrofacies were identified using a method called multi-resolution graph-based clustering (MRGC), and thereafter the method applied for each facies. To evaluate the prediction model, the correlation coefficient between the real permeability (determined from core plugs) and the estimated was calculated for each electrofacies. The values for the four electrofacies designated obtained 88.2, 78.51, 84.73, and 77.54 percent, respectively. The high amount of obtained correlations for each electrofacies demonstrates the power of the regression model for a reliable permeability prediction of the reservoir.

Keywords

Permeability Electrofacies Support vector regression Radial basis function Well log Core data 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Many thanks go to Institute of geophysics university of Tehran for supporting this research and also Mr. Mohammad Reza Ebadi for helping us to provide the appropriate data.

References

  1. Akande KO, Owolabi TO, Twaha S, Olatunji SO (2014) Performance comparison of SVM and ANN in predicting compressive strength of concrete. IOSR-JCE 16(5):88–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akande KO, Owolabi TO, Olatunji SO (2015) Investigating the effect of correlation-based feature selection on the performance of support vector machines in reservoir characterization. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 22:515–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagheri M, Riahi MA (2015) Seismic facies analysis from well logs based on supervised classification scheme with different machine learning techniques. Arab J Geosci 8:7153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagheri M, Riahi MA (2017) Modeling the facies of reservoir using seismic data with missing attributes by dissimilarity-based classification. J Earth Sci 28:703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagheri M, Riahi MA, Hashemi H (2013) Reservoir lithofacies analysis using 3D seismic in dissimilarity space. J Geophys Eng 10(3):9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fletcher R (1989) Practical methods of optimization. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Khan Mohammadi M, Sherkati SH (2010) Fracturing analysis in south pars gas field. Explor Prod Mon 77:43–49Google Scholar
  8. Khoshbakht F, Mohammadnia M (2012) Assessment of clustering methods for predicting permeability in a heterogeneous carbonate-reservoir. J Pet Sci Technol 2(2):50–57Google Scholar
  9. Lee SH, Dutta-Gupta A (1999) Electrofacies characterization and permeability predictions in carbonate reservoirs: role of multivariate analysis and nonparametric regression. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Houston, Texas (SPE 56658)Google Scholar
  10. Mohaghegh S, Arefi R, Ameri S (1996) Virtual measurement of heterogeneous formation permeability using geophysical well log responses. Log Analyst (Society of Professional Well Log Analysts) 37:32–39Google Scholar
  11. Nashawi IS, Malallah A (2009) Improved electrofacies characterization and permeability predictions in sandstone reservoirs using a data mining and expert system approach. Petrophysics 50(03)Google Scholar
  12. Olatunji SO, Selamat A, Azeez ARA (2015) Modeling permeability and PVT properties of oil and gas reservoir using hybrid model based on type-2 fuzzy logic systems. Neurocomputing, V 157:125–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rahimpour-Bonab B, Rahimpour-Bonab H (2009) Effects of depositional and diagenetic characteristics on carbonate reservoir quality: a case study from the South Pars gas field in the Persian Gulf. Pet Geosci 15:325–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schölkopf B, Smola AJ (2002) Learning with Kernels. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Taoreed O, Gondal OwolabiMohammed A (2018) Development of hybrid extreme learning machine based chemo-metrics for precise quantitative analysis of LIBS spectra using internal reference pre-processing method. Analytica Chimica Acta, V 1030:33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vapnik VS, Golowich Smola A (1997) Support vector method for function approximation, regression estimation, and signal processing, neural information processing systems, vol 9. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Worden RH, Armitage PJ, Butcher AR, Churchill JM, Csoma AE, Hollis C, Lander RH, Omma JE (2018) Petroleum reservoir quality prediction: overview and contrasting approaches from sandstone and carbonate communities. Geol Soc Spec Pub 435(1):1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ye SJ, Rabiller P (2000) A new tool for electrofacies analysis: multi-resolution graph-based clustering: SPWLA 41st Annual Logging Symposium, Dallas, Texas, USAGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhu L, Zhang C, Wei Y, Chao-MO Zhang (2016) Permeability prediction of the tight sandstone reservoirs using hybrid intelligent algorithm and nuclear magnetic resonance logging data. Arab J Sci Eng 42:25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-016-2365-2 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeophysicsUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations