Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching
Reservoir parameters are estimated by adjusting simulation models to match field or laboratory data. Multivariate optimization techniques with physically realistic constraints on the parameters are used in order to obtain these estimates. Two examples are presented. The first example is the analysis...
Guardado en:
Publicado: |
1994
|
---|---|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://bibliotecadigital.exactas.uba.ar/collection/paper/document/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli |
Aporte de: |
id |
paper:paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
paper:paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli2023-06-08T15:50:07Z Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching Permeability Porosity Reservoirs-Oil Algorithms Approximation theory Capillary flow Computational methods Constraint theory Mathematical models Mechanical permeability Optimization Parameter estimation Porosity Automatic algorithms Automatic history matching Coreflood experiment Davidon Fletcher Powell (DFP) Drawdown test Fletcher Reeves (FR) Levenberg Marquardt (LM) Minimization Multivariate optimization Quasi Newton approximation for the least squares problem (QNA) Petroleum reservoir evaluation drawdown test history matching multivariate statistics optimization reservoir parameters Reservoir parameters are estimated by adjusting simulation models to match field or laboratory data. Multivariate optimization techniques with physically realistic constraints on the parameters are used in order to obtain these estimates. Two examples are presented. The first example is the analysis of a drawndown test. Permeability and porosity are determined by minimizing an objective function which is the sum of the squares of the differences between theoretical and measured pressure-time distributions at the well. The minimization is performed by applying four different optimization techniques: Davidon-Fletcher-Powell (DFP), Fletcher-Reeves (FR), Quasi-Newton Approximation for the Least-Squares Problem (QNA) and Levenberg-Marquardt (LM). The second example is the simultaneous determination of capillary pressure and relative permeability curves of oil/water systems. It is based on the analysis of transient output data measured from a linear coreflood experiment. QNA and LM are used to match results from a numerical simulator to laboratory coreflood data. The special methods for the least-squares problem (LM, QNA) behave better than the two others (DFP, FR). LM and QNA arrive to the optimal point more frequently than DFP and FR. LM takes less computing time than QNA but is more affected by rounding errors. Therefore, QNA shows the best behavior when finding the optimum. The automatic algorithms are of particular use whenever the equations which govern the flow are too complex to be solved by the traditional analytical-graphical methods. © 1994. 1994 https://bibliotecadigital.exactas.uba.ar/collection/paper/document/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli |
institution |
Universidad de Buenos Aires |
institution_str |
I-28 |
repository_str |
R-134 |
collection |
Biblioteca Digital - Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales (UBA) |
topic |
Permeability Porosity Reservoirs-Oil Algorithms Approximation theory Capillary flow Computational methods Constraint theory Mathematical models Mechanical permeability Optimization Parameter estimation Porosity Automatic algorithms Automatic history matching Coreflood experiment Davidon Fletcher Powell (DFP) Drawdown test Fletcher Reeves (FR) Levenberg Marquardt (LM) Minimization Multivariate optimization Quasi Newton approximation for the least squares problem (QNA) Petroleum reservoir evaluation drawdown test history matching multivariate statistics optimization reservoir parameters |
spellingShingle |
Permeability Porosity Reservoirs-Oil Algorithms Approximation theory Capillary flow Computational methods Constraint theory Mathematical models Mechanical permeability Optimization Parameter estimation Porosity Automatic algorithms Automatic history matching Coreflood experiment Davidon Fletcher Powell (DFP) Drawdown test Fletcher Reeves (FR) Levenberg Marquardt (LM) Minimization Multivariate optimization Quasi Newton approximation for the least squares problem (QNA) Petroleum reservoir evaluation drawdown test history matching multivariate statistics optimization reservoir parameters Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
topic_facet |
Permeability Porosity Reservoirs-Oil Algorithms Approximation theory Capillary flow Computational methods Constraint theory Mathematical models Mechanical permeability Optimization Parameter estimation Porosity Automatic algorithms Automatic history matching Coreflood experiment Davidon Fletcher Powell (DFP) Drawdown test Fletcher Reeves (FR) Levenberg Marquardt (LM) Minimization Multivariate optimization Quasi Newton approximation for the least squares problem (QNA) Petroleum reservoir evaluation drawdown test history matching multivariate statistics optimization reservoir parameters |
description |
Reservoir parameters are estimated by adjusting simulation models to match field or laboratory data. Multivariate optimization techniques with physically realistic constraints on the parameters are used in order to obtain these estimates. Two examples are presented. The first example is the analysis of a drawndown test. Permeability and porosity are determined by minimizing an objective function which is the sum of the squares of the differences between theoretical and measured pressure-time distributions at the well. The minimization is performed by applying four different optimization techniques: Davidon-Fletcher-Powell (DFP), Fletcher-Reeves (FR), Quasi-Newton Approximation for the Least-Squares Problem (QNA) and Levenberg-Marquardt (LM). The second example is the simultaneous determination of capillary pressure and relative permeability curves of oil/water systems. It is based on the analysis of transient output data measured from a linear coreflood experiment. QNA and LM are used to match results from a numerical simulator to laboratory coreflood data. The special methods for the least-squares problem (LM, QNA) behave better than the two others (DFP, FR). LM and QNA arrive to the optimal point more frequently than DFP and FR. LM takes less computing time than QNA but is more affected by rounding errors. Therefore, QNA shows the best behavior when finding the optimum. The automatic algorithms are of particular use whenever the equations which govern the flow are too complex to be solved by the traditional analytical-graphical methods. © 1994. |
title |
Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
title_short |
Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
title_full |
Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
title_sort |
comparison of optimization techniques for automatic history matching |
publishDate |
1994 |
url |
https://bibliotecadigital.exactas.uba.ar/collection/paper/document/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_09204105_v12_n1_p25_Savioli |
_version_ |
1768545515837849600 |