Qc of static model...please helpe

[bayan]

I'm appreciated and greatfull for any help regarding how make QC on the static model ....any materials or explanations related that subject will be appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Best regards

[petengr]

Hello,
some tips:
- Check the IOIP before and after the upscaling of the model. Error% between the two figures should be, I would say, not more than 10%.
- Check the IOIP from dynamic is also in agreement with the figure from static model.
- In the history matching stage, the model should produce good match to the production measured data, at least to the total production of the reservoir you have modelled.

Hope those tips can help.

Also check out this link:

[link Point to another website Only the registered members can access]
Regards

[bayan]

Thank you so much that is great useful

[vinomarky]

At a high level, you need to keep in mind that the whole purpose of the exercise is to get a model that reflect as near as is practical/useful to reality. With this in mind, the first step would be to ensure both you as well as your geoscience colleagues share a common understanding of what the system is, and how it is/should be plumbed togeather. Fluvial? Deltaic? Fractured? Laminated? Continuous? etc. Don’t get bogged down into electofacie type discussions, rather understand at a crayon drawing/cartoon type level what it is you are all trying to represent (when at all possible look at the physical core).

Once this is understood, then the QC required will reflect what sort of system you are trying to represent. Make maps, or review facie connections etc to ensure that the connectivity and heterogeneities are preserved as much as is reasonable. Ensure unsupported property 'bullseyes' around wells or consistently away from wells (that often indicate poor statistical property populations) are challenged. Look at histograms of properties vs the analogous well log histograms, perform sector simulations with various degrees of granularity to test effect of upscaling etc.... In short do what you think needs to be done to ensure the DYNAMIC characteristics of the model (in addition to the in place volumes) have been properly represented to a level that will result in the questions you need answered, being answered (ie high level questions may only need a very coarse, glorified material balance model, while EOR type studies may need to be very detailed)

[bayan]

Thank you so much

[farujoy]

One of the more common issues in the QC of static model is the population of values for important properties like porosity, ntg, most of the times the population of these properties taking the input from the known wells fails just near to the wells itself, this issue gives some times poor values for wells that is supposed have high production, several times it is required review the logs in order to validate the population in the model

[temr]

THe model QC can be divied in two major part
the first part is the input data in order to run that you need to be an expert in following areas
1. Core data analysis
2. Well log interpretation
3. Seismic
4. Geology
5. Deposition model
6. Well test analysis ( like pressure data etc)
The second part is technical one how all this data used to create the grid and properties using standard tool like petrel
For the first part no one will help you except you
For the second part - there are standard for geological model in post soviet union countries you can look them in the web if you are Russian speaking. If you are from other part of the world i so far did not heard about standards like this and will agree with that since QCing the model is more for the input data you used rather than how you distribute your porosity since porosity distribution is the function of your conceptual knowlege of the field
So at the end i will advise you to become experts in the areas i listed above