luff exploration company mark sippel, consulting engineer

Intelligent Computing SystemIntelligent Computing Systemfor Reservoir Analysisfor Reservoir Analysisand Risk Assessmentand Risk Assessment

of Red River Formationof Red River FormationAmor Field, Bowman County, NDAmor Field, Bowman County, ND

DE-FC22-00BC15123DE-FC22-00BC15123

Luff Exploration CompanyLuff Exploration Company

Mark Sippel, Consulting EngineerMark Sippel, Consulting Engineer

Statement of ProblemsStatement of Problems

• Integrating Seismic, Geologic and Engineering Data• Transforming Seismic Attributes to Reservoir

Attributes in Seismic Thin Beds• Predicting Reservoir Limits on Small Structural

Features with Limited Well Control• Identifying Tilted Oil-Water Contacts

Location of Amor Field Demonstration SiteLocation of Amor Field Demonstration Site

Intelligent Computing SystemTool Kit

• ICS is a Collection of Software Tools and Utilities• Designed for Primary Use with 3D Seismic But Can

Be Used in Areas of High-Density 2D Seismic Grids (1/2 mile spacing)

• It May Be Used without Seismic in Fields with Large Number of Wells (>30) for Reservoir Characterization

• Luff is Using the ICS Tool Kit for Predicting Reservoir Limits and Reservoir Attributes in 6-ft Dolomite Beds in the Red River Fm.

• Transformed Seismic-Reservoir Attributes are Used in Simulation Studies and Parameters for Waterflood Unitization

Intelligent Computing System MenuIntelligent Computing System Menu

ICS Strategy for Reservoir CharacterizationICS Strategy for Reservoir CharacterizationLevel 1Level 1

ForwardSeismicModeling

RegionalDepositional

Setting

RegionalStructural

Setting

GeologicalData

EngineeringData

Seismic Data

WellGeologic-Reservoir

Data

TransformedSeismic-Reservoir

Attributes

WellProduction

Data

TransformedSeismic-Production

Attributes

Level 2Level 2 Level 3Level 3 Level 4Level 4

ICS TransformationICS Transformationto Production Attributesto Production Attributes

DepositionalAttributes

StructuralAttributes

Growth-ThinningAttributes

Rock-QualityAttributes

EntrapmentAttributes

Well ProductionTraining

TransformedProductionAttributes

TransformedTransformedSeismic AttributesSeismic Attributes

Type Log forRed River Formation

0 100 200

Gam ma

-800

-700

-600

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

Rel

ativ

e D

epth

(fe

et)

-100102030

Porosity %

Stony Mountain Shale

Winnipeg Shale

Winnipeg Sandstone

A Zone Porosity Member

B Zone Porosity Member

C Zone Porosity Member

D Zone Porosity Member

Upper Red River

Lower Red River

Red River Formation

Paleozoic Ordovician

The Upper Red RiverConsists of Four Episodesin Shallow Shelf CarbonateSetting

Main Reservoirs are:Red River B ZoneRed River D Zone

Amor Field mostly B Zone6 - 8 ft Thick

Red River B Zone Type LogRed River B Zone Type Log

TopRed River

B Zone

Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Porosity

0 100 30% 0%

ForwardSeismic Modeling

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

Normal ReversePolarityTimeSeconds

P1P2

T1

T2

Duperow

Interlake

Red RiverBaseD zoneWinnipeg

MissionCanyon

Upper Red RiverReservoirs Are“Seismic Thin Beds”

Reservoir InformationContained in TwoPeak-Trough Pairs

Each EventConsistently Labeledin Every Seismic Survey

Understanding Seismic Attributesfrom Synthetic Seismograms

0.0

1.0

Tim

e -

Se

con

ds

Interlake

Red River

Winnipeg

P1

T1

P2

Low Porosity High Porosity

T2

Weak AmplitudeResponse

Strong AmplitudeReponse

Training for Seismic Transforms Comes fromTraining for Seismic Transforms Comes fromMultiple 3D Seismic SurveysMultiple 3D Seismic Surveys

10

15161718

19 20 21 22

272829

3

30

31 32 33 34

456

7 8 9

1

10 11 12

131415161718

19

2

20 21 22 23 24

2526272829

3

30

31 32 33 34 35 36

456

7 8 9

1

10 11 12

131415161718

19

2

20 21 22 23 24

2526272829

3

30

31 32 33 34 35 36

456

7 8 9

1

12

13

2

24

25

36

161718

19 20 21 22

27282930

31 32 33 34

456

7 8 9

1

10 11 12

131415161718

19

2

20 21 22 23 24

2526272829

3

30

31 32 33 34 35 36

456

7 8 9

1

10 11 12

131415161718

19

2

20 21 22 23 24

2526272829

3

30

31 32 33 34 35 36

456

7 8 9

1

11 12

1314

2

23 24

2526

36

31 32 33

31 32 33 34 35 36

31 32 33 34 35 36

35 36

1

10 11 12

141516

234

9

1

10 11 12

23456

7 8 9

1

10 11 12

23456

7 8 9

21 22 23 24

25262728

33 34 35 36

19 20 21 22 23 24

252627282930

31 32 33 34 35 36

19 20 21 22 23 24

252627282930

31 32 33 34 35 36

129N 101W129N 102W

129N 103W

130N 101W130N 102W130N 103W

23N 4E23N 5E

23N 6E

1200000 1210000 1220000 1230000 1240000 1250000 1260000 1270000 1280000 129000090000

100000

110000

120000

130000

140000

150000

160000

170000

180000

Amor FieldAmor Field

Amor Field, Red River Depth MapAmor Field, Red River Depth Map

56

7 8

1

12

2930

3132

25

36

1206000 1208000 1210000 1212000 1214000 1216000 1218000 1220000140000

142000

144000

146000

148000

150000

152000

154000

156000

158000

-6390

-6370

-6350

-6330

-6310

-6290

-6270

-6250

-6230

-6210

-6190

-6170

FeetFeet

Seismic Data TransformedSeismic Data Transformedto Depth Structureto Depth Structure

Does Not AdquatelyDoes Not AdquatelyDefine Reservoir LimitsDefine Reservoir Limits

Average TVDis 9300 feet

56

7 8

1

12

2930

3132

25

36

1206000 1208000 1210000 1212000 1214000 1216000 1218000 1220000140000

142000

144000

146000

148000

150000

152000

154000

156000

158000

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Average Oil CutFirst 24 Months

Seismic AttributesSeismic AttributesTransformedTransformed

to Oil Cutto Oil Cut

The Oil-Cut Mapis Tilted withRespect toPresent-DayStructure

56

7 8

1

12

2930

3132

25

36

1206000 1208000 1210000 1212000 1214000 1216000 1218000 1220000140000

142000

144000

146000

148000

150000

152000

154000

156000

158000

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.0 100 bopd

50 bopd

20 bopd

10 bopd

Average Oil RateFirst 24 Months

Seismic AttributesSeismic AttributesTransformed toTransformed to

Oil RateOil Rate

Predicted D Zone kh/uB (md-ft/cp)Predicted D Zone kh/uB (md-ft/cp)

56

7 8

1

12

2930

3132

25

36

1206000 1208000 1210000 1212000 1214000 1216000 1218000 1220000140000

142000

144000

146000

148000

150000

152000

154000

156000

158000

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

Log of kh/uBLog of kh/uBDrill-Stem TestsDrill-Stem Tests

Seismic AttributeSeismic AttributeTransform kh/uBTransform kh/uBUseful forUseful forReservoir SimulationReservoir Simulation

Predicted D Zone Porosity-Feet (phi-h)Predicted D Zone Porosity-Feet (phi-h)

56

7 8

1

12

2930

3132

25

36

1206000 1208000 1210000 1212000 1214000 1216000 1218000 1220000140000

142000

144000

146000

148000

150000

152000

154000

156000

158000

-0.50.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.56.06.57.0

Seismic AttributeSeismic AttributeTransform phi-hTransform phi-hUseful forUseful forReservoir SimulationReservoir Simulation

Porosity- feetPorosity- feet

B Zone Reservoir Attributes fromB Zone Reservoir Attributes fromDepositional Setting (280 Wells)Depositional Setting (280 Wells)

8 0 8 2 8 4 8 6 8 8 9 0 9 2R e d R i v e r - A + B C y c l e T h i c k n e s s ( f e e t )

0 . 0 0

0 . 2 0

0 . 4 0

0 . 6 0

0 . 8 0

1 . 0 0

1 . 2 0

1 . 4 0

1 . 6 0

1 . 8 0

2 . 0 0B

Zon

e G

ross

phi

-h

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

B z

one

DS

T k

h/uB

(m

d-ft/

cp)

B Zone P ropertiesphi-hkh/uB

Predicting B Zone Deposition SettingPredicting B Zone Deposition Setting

4 2 4 4 4 6 4 8 5 0 5 2 5 4 5 6B C y c l e T h i c k n e s s f r o m S e i s m i c A t t r i b u t e s ( f e e t )

4 2

4 4

4 6

4 8

5 0

5 2

5 4

5 6B

Cyc

le T

hick

ness

Log

s (f

eet)

Seismic Transform toSeismic Transform toB Zone Depositional Setting ThicknessB Zone Depositional Setting Thickness

PredictedA + BCycle

Thickness(feet)

Entrapment PressureEntrapment PressureAmor Field, Red River B ZoneAmor Field, Red River B Zone

Pressure(psi)

Amor Field, Red River B Zone Oil CutAmor Field, Red River B Zone Oil Cut

PredictedOil Cut

at InitialConditions

PlannedInjection Well A

ProductionLaterals

Initial Production fromInitial Production fromHorizontal Demonstation Well AHorizontal Demonstation Well A

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Tim e (days)

0

40

80

120

160

200

Cu

mul

ativ

e O

il R

ate

(bop

d)

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er C

ut (

frac

tion)

LegendO il R ateW ater C ut

Composite Production fromComposite Production from3 Horizontal Completions3 Horizontal Completions

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Tim e (days)

0

100

200

300

400

500

50

150

250

350

450

Oil

Rat

e (b

opd)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

Wat

er C

ut (

frac

tion)


Composite Production with ProjectionsAmor South Red River Unit

Amor South - Red River Unit

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

Jan-

79

Jan-

80

Jan-

81

Jan-

82

Jan-

83

Jan-

84

Jan-

85

Jan-

86

Jan-

87

Jan-

88

Jan-

89

Jan-

90

Jan-

91

Jan-

92

Jan-

93

Jan-

94

Jan-

95

Jan-

96

Jan-

97

Jan-

98

Jan-

99

Jan-

00

Jan-

01

Jan-

02

Jan-

03

Jan-

04

Jan-

05

Jan-

06

Jan-

07

Jan-

08

Jan-

09

Jan-

10

Jan-

11

Jan-

12

Jan-

13

Jan-

14

Jan-

15

Jan-

16

Jan-

17

Jan-

18

Jan-

19

Jan-

20

Historical Prod.(5 w ells) PDP Proj. (5 w ells) Alt WF Proj. - 90% Alt. WF Proj. - 100%

Oil

Rat

e B

arr

els

per

Mo

nth

ICS Example with 2D SeismicICS Example with 2D Seismic

161718

19 20 21

282930

311186000 1188000 1190000 1192000 1194000 1196000 1198000 1200000 1202000 1204000

76000

78000

80000

82000

84000

86000

88000

90000

92000

94000

0.19

0.14

0.63

0.32 0.75

0.160.60

0.71

0.49

0.32

0.19

0.32

0.100.150.200.250.300.350.400.450.500.550.600.650.700.750.80

Average Oil CutFirst 24 Months

ConclusionsConclusions• Intelligent Computing System Successfully Used to

Characterize Seismic Thin Beds in Red River Fm.• Training from Normalized Seismic Data at Multiple 3D

Surveys Increases Control Population• Seismic and Regional Well Data Analyzed with ICS• Reservoir and Productive Limits Predicted with ICS• Horizontal Completions Targeted from ICS

Interpretations• Incremental Primary plus Secondary for Amor Field is

Projected at 1,100,000 bbl• Five Similar Projects Are Planned for 2003 and 2004

Conclusions cont.Conclusions cont.• Keys to Successful Re-development

– 3D Seismic– Reservoir Characterization Based on ICS– Understanding Depositional Setting and

Relationship with Reservoir Development– Better Computer Simulation Models from Seismic-

Resevoir Attribute Transformations– Targeted Horizontal Drilling

• Luff is Re-Developing All Operated Fields that Were Discovered in the 1970’s and 1980’s

• Many Plugged or Uneconmic Producers Re-entered and Drilled Horizontally, Resulting in 200-250 bopd

Horizontal Re-Entry Example 1Horizontal Re-Entry Example 1

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240D ays

0

50

100

150

200

250

Cu

mul

ativ

e O

il R

ate

(bop

d)

0

0 .2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er-C

ut



0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240D ays

0

50

100

150

200

250

Cu

mul

ativ

e O

il R

ate

(bop

d)

0

0 .2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er-C

ut



0 10 20 30 40 50 60D ays

0

50

100

150

200

250

Cum

ulat

ive

Oil

Rat

e (b

opd)

0

0 .2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er-C

ut



0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360D ays

0

50

100

150

200

250

Cum

ulat

ive

Oil

Rat

e (b

opd)

0

0 .2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er-C

ut



0 5 10 15 20 25 30D ays

0

50

100

150

200

250

Cum

ulat

ive

Oil

Rat

e (b

opd)

0 .0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Cum

ulat

ive

Wat

er-C

ut


Software AvailabilitySoftware Availability

• Visit the Project Website at http://www.luffdoeproject.com

• Download ICS Files and Project Reports• Alternatively, Request a CD-ROM by Mail

luff exploration company mark sippel, consulting engineer

Documents