1 (from www.halliburton.com) Optimization of Advanced Well Type and Performance Louis J. Durlofsky Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Genetic Algorithms (Evolutionary Computing) Genetic Algorithms are used to try to “evolve” the solution to a problem Generate prototype solutions called.
Advertisements

Using Parallel Genetic Algorithm in a Predictive Job Scheduling
Institute of Intelligent Power Electronics – IPE Page1 Introduction to Basics of Genetic Algorithms Docent Xiao-Zhi Gao Department of Electrical Engineering.
A Workflow Approach to Designed Reservoir Study Presented by Zhou Lei Center for Computation and Technology Louisiana State University June 25, 2007.
Non-Linear Problems General approach. Non-linear Optimization Many objective functions, tend to be non-linear. Design problems for which the objective.
Petroleum Reservoir Management Based on Approximate Dynamic Programming Zheng Wen, Benjamin Van Roy, Louis Durlofsky and Khalid Aziz Smart Field Consortium,
Iterative Improvement Algorithms
Genetic Algorithm for Variable Selection
Iterative Improvement Algorithms For some problems, path to solution is irrelevant: just want solution Start with initial state, and change it iteratively.
D Nagesh Kumar, IIScOptimization Methods: M1L4 1 Introduction and Basic Concepts Classical and Advanced Techniques for Optimization.
Genetic Algorithm What is a genetic algorithm? “Genetic Algorithms are defined as global optimization procedures that use an analogy of genetic evolution.
On the Application of Artificial Intelligence Techniques to the Quality Improvement of Industrial Processes P. Georgilakis N. Hatziargyriou Schneider ElectricNational.
Classification: Internal Status: Draft Using the EnKF for combined state and parameter estimation Geir Evensen.
Coordinative Behavior in Evolutionary Multi-agent System by Genetic Algorithm Chuan-Kang Ting – Page: 1 International Graduate School of Dynamic Intelligent.
Control Optimization of Oil Production under Geological Uncertainty
Efficient Model Selection for Support Vector Machines
An Approach of Artificial Intelligence Application for Laboratory Tests Evaluation Ş.l.univ.dr.ing. Corina SĂVULESCU University of Piteşti.
Genetic Algorithms CS121 Spring 2009 Richard Frankel Stanford University 1.
Part 5 Parameter Identification (Model Calibration/Updating)
Cristian Urs and Ben Riveira. Introduction The article we chose focuses on improving the performance of Genetic Algorithms by: Use of predictive models.
Evolution Strategies Evolutionary Programming Genetic Programming Michael J. Watts
IPE 2003 Tuscaloosa, Alabama1 An Inverse BEM/GA Approach to Determining Heat Transfer Coefficient Distributions Within Film Cooling Holes/Slots Mahmood.
Optimization in Engineering Design Georgia Institute of Technology Systems Realization Laboratory Mixed Integer Problems Most optimization algorithms deal.
Zorica Stanimirović Faculty of Mathematics, University of Belgrade
Genetic Algorithms Michael J. Watts
An Iterative Heuristic for State Justification in Sequential Automatic Test Pattern Generation Aiman H. El-MalehSadiq M. SaitSyed Z. Shazli Department.
Genetic Algorithms Genetic algorithms imitate a natural optimization process: natural selection in evolution. Developed by John Holland at the University.
(Particle Swarm Optimisation)
An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms Lecture 2 November, 2010 Ivan Garibay
Remarks: 1.When Newton’s method is implemented has second order information while Gauss-Newton use only first order information. 2.The only differences.
Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm
Genetic Algorithms Introduction Advanced. Simple Genetic Algorithms: Introduction What is it? In a Nutshell References The Pseudo Code Illustrations Applications.
Derivative Free Optimization G.Anuradha. Contents Genetic Algorithm Simulated Annealing Random search method Downhill simplex method.
1 Part IV: Blade Geometry Optimization Philippe Giguère Graduate Research Assistant Steady-State Aerodynamics Codes for HAWTs Selig, Tangler, and Giguère.
2005MEE Software Engineering Lecture 11 – Optimisation Techniques.
Learning by Simulating Evolution Artificial Intelligence CSMC February 21, 2002.
Stochastic inverse modeling under realistic prior model constraints with multiple-point geostatistics Jef Caers Petroleum Engineering Department Stanford.
Céline Scheidt and Jef Caers SCRF Affiliate Meeting– April 30, 2009.
Genetic Algorithms Genetic algorithms provide an approach to learning that is based loosely on simulated evolution. Hypotheses are often described by bit.
Optimization by Model Fitting Chapter 9 Luke, Essentials of Metaheuristics, 2011 Byung-Hyun Ha R1.
Monte-Carlo based Expertise A powerful Tool for System Evaluation & Optimization  Introduction  Features  System Performance.
Innovative and Unconventional Approach Toward Analytical Cadastre – based on Genetic Algorithms Anna Shnaidman Mapping and Geo-Information Engineering.
D Nagesh Kumar, IIScOptimization Methods: M8L5 1 Advanced Topics in Optimization Evolutionary Algorithms for Optimization and Search.
Hyucksoo Park, Céline Scheidt and Jef Caers Stanford University Scenario Uncertainty from Production Data: Methodology and Case Study.
1 Autonomic Computer Systems Evolutionary Computation Pascal Paysan.
Genetic algorithms: A Stochastic Approach for Improving the Current Cadastre Accuracies Anna Shnaidman Uri Shoshani Yerach Doytsher Mapping and Geo-Information.
Retrospective Production Optimization Under Uncertainty Using Kernel Clustering Mehrdad Gharib Shirangi and Tapan Mukerji Department of Energy Resources.
An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms Lecture 2 November, 2010 Ivan Garibay
Artificial Intelligence By Mr. Ejaz CIIT Sahiwal Evolutionary Computation.
Hybrid Bayesian Linearized Acoustic Inversion Methodology PhD in Petroleum Engineering Fernando Bordignon Introduction Seismic inversion.
Genetic Algorithms. Solution Search in Problem Space.
Genetic Algorithms An Evolutionary Approach to Problem Solving.
Genetic Algorithm(GA)
Genetic Algorithm. Outline Motivation Genetic algorithms An illustrative example Hypothesis space search.
SEISMIC ATTRIBUTES FOR RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION
Geostatistical History Matching Methodology using Block-DSS for Multi-Scale Consistent Models PHD PROGRAM IN PETROLUM ENGINEERING CATARINA MARQUES
Measurement and Control of Reservoir Flow
Michigan Technological University
Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting
Introduction to Genetic Algorithm (GA)
A strategy for managing uncertainty
IMPACT OF ADVANCED COMPLETIONS ON RESERVOIR AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE
Prof. Marie desJardins September 20, 2010
Jincong He, Louis Durlofsky, Pallav Sarma (Chevron ETC)
Assessing uncertainties on production forecasting based on production Profile reconstruction from a few Dynamic simulations Gaétan Bardy – PhD Student.
Brent Lowry & Jef Caers Stanford University, USA
Aiman H. El-Maleh Sadiq M. Sait Syed Z. Shazli
Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting
EE368 Soft Computing Genetic Algorithms.
Energy Resources Engineering Department Stanford University, CA, USA
Presentation transcript:

1 (from Optimization of Advanced Well Type and Performance Louis J. Durlofsky Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University ChevronTexaco ETC, San Ramon, CA

2 B. Yeten, I. Aitokhuehi, V. Artus K. Aziz, P. Sarma Acknowledgments

3 TAML, 1999 Multilateral Well Types

4 Optimization of NCW Type and Placement Applying a Genetic Algorithm that optimizes via analogy to Darwinian natural selection GA approach combines “survival of the fittest” with stochastic information exchange Algorithm includes populations with generations that reproduce with crossover and mutation General level of fitness as well as most fit individual tend to increase as algorithm proceeds

I1 J1 K1 l xy  h z Jn l xy  h z heeltoe main trunk heel toe lateral multilateral well Representation allows well type to evolve (Jn  0 generates a lateral) Encoding of Unknowns for GA

6 UnknownsObjective Function Objective function can be any simulation output (NPV, cumulative oil) Nonconventional Well Optimization

7 Flowchart for Single Geological Model Objective function f (or fitness): NPV, cumulative oil

8 Single Well Optimization Example Objective: optimum well and production rate that maximizes NPV, subject to GOR, WOR constraints (from Yeten et al., 2003) Optimum well (quad-lateral)

9 Evolution of Well Types (from Yeten et al., 2003)

10 ? Nonconventional Well Optimization with Geological Uncertainty

11 Optimization over Multiple Realizations Find well that maximizes F = + r   is average fitness of well over N realizations, r is risk attitude,   is variance in f over realizations) Evaluate each individual (well) for each realization (well i, realization j) i

12 Realization # NPV ($) Risk Neutral (r =0) Optimization (Primary Production, Maximize NPV)

13 Realization # NPV ($) Risk Averse (r = -0.5) Optimization (Primary Production, Maximize NPV)

14 Risk averse attitude (r = -0.5) well cost = $ 1,058,704 expected NPV = $ 3,401,210 std = $ 404,920 Risk neutral attitude (r = 0) well cost = $ 759,158 expected NPV = $ 3,506,390 std = $ 935,720 Realization # NPV ($) Comparison of Optimization Results

15 attribute 1 attribute 2 attribute 1 attribute 2 Proxy - Unsupervised Cluster Analysis fitness cluster # Attributes can be combined into principal components

16 Proxy Estimate for a Single Realization (Primary Production, Monobore Wells) estimated fitness actual fitness r = 0.93

17 Estimated Mean for All Realization (Primary Production, Monobore Wells) estimated mean fitness actual mean fitness r = 0.97

18

19 Reactive control: adjust downhole settings to react to problems (e.g., water or gas production) as they occur Defensive control: optimize downhole settings to avoid or minimize problems. This requires: –Accurate reservoir description (HM models) –Optimization procedure Optimize using gradients computed numerically or via adjoint procedure Smart Well Control: “Reactive” versus “Defensive”

20 Numerical Gradients Define cost function J (NPV, cumulative oil) Numerically compute  J/  u x - dynamical states, u - controls Apply conjugate gradient technique to drive  J/  u to 0

21 Adjoint Procedure - Lagrange multipliers, x - dynamical states, u - controls, g - reservoir simulation equations Optimality requires first variation of J A = 0 (  J A = 0): optimality criteriaadjoint equations Define augmented cost function J A

22 Adjoint versus Numerical Gradient Approaches for Optimization Numerical Gradients Advantages Easily implemented No simulator source code required Main Drawback CPU requirements Adjoint Gradients Advantages Much faster for large number of wells & updates Can also be used for HM Main Drawback Adjoint simulator required Adjoint and numerical gradient procedures developed; implementation of smart well model into GPRS underway

23 Smart Well Model Numerical gradient approach (Yeten et al., 2002) allows use of existing (commercial) simulator Applying ECLIPSE multi-segment wells option

24 Sequential restarts applied to determine optimal settings Optimization Methodology - Fixed Geology

25 Impact of Smart Well Control - Example Channelized reservoir, 4 controlled branches Production at fixed liquid rate with GOR and WOR constraints (three-phase system)

26 Effect of Valve Control on Oil Production Oil rate - uncontrolled caseOil rate - controlled case Downhole control provides an increase in cumulative oil production of 47% (from Yeten et al., 2002)

27 Optimized Valve Settings

28 Optimization with History Matching Actual geology is unknown (one model selected randomly represents “actual” reservoir and provides “production” data) Update reservoir models based on synthetic history Optimize using current (history-matched) model

29 History Matching Procedure Facies-based probability perturbation algorithms (Caers, 2003) Multiple-point geostatistics (training images) Performs two levels of nonlinear optimization (facies and k-  ) History matching based on well pressure, cumulative oil and water cut (for each branch) Initial models from same training image as “actual” models

30 History Matching Objective Functions Two levels of optimization –Single parameter facies optimization –Multivariate permeability-porosity optimization

31 Channelized Model I Unconditioned 2 facies model, 20 x 20 x 6 grid Quad-lateral well with a valve on each branch –Constant total fluid rate (10 MSTB/D initial liquid rate) –Shut-in well if water cut > 80% OWG flow, M < 1; 4 optimization and HM steps

32 Optimization on Known Geology Valves provide ~40% gain in cumulative oil over no-valve base case

33 Dimensionless Increase in N p Dimensionless cumulative oil difference,  N  N = 0 (no valves result)  N = 1 (known geology result)

34 Illustration of Incremental Recovery  N =0  N =1  N =0.5 HM with valves

35 Optimization with History Matching Optimization with history matching gives  N =0.94 Repeating for different initial models:  N =0.90  0.18

36 Channelized Model II Unconditioned 2 facies model, 20 x 20 x 6 grid Different training image than Channelized Model I, same well and other system parameters

37 Optimization with History Matching - CM II  N =0.41 Repeating for different initial models:  N =0.44  0.27 Inaccuracy may be due to nonuniqueness of HM

38 Optimization over Multiple HM Models Use of multiple history-matched models provides significant gains Number of HM Models  N (  )  

39 Effect of Conditioning (on Facies) Partial redundancy of conditioning and production data reduces impact of conditioning in some cases For CM II, use of 3 conditioned and history matched models gives  N = 0.83  0.10 (~same as w/o cond) Single HM Model

40 Summary Presented genetic algorithm for optimization of nonconventional well type and placement Applied GA under geological uncertainty Developed combined valve optimization – history matching procedure for real-time smart well control Demonstrated that optimization over multiple history-matched models beneficial in some cases

41 Research Directions Developing efficient proxies for optimization of well type and placement under geological uncertainty Implementing adjoint approach (optimal control theory) and multisegment well model into GPRS for determination of valve settings Plan to incorporate additional data (4D seismic) and accelerate history matching procedure