Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Artificial Neural Network Modeling and Forecasting of Oil Reservoir Performance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Applications of Data Management and Analysis

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Social Networks ((LNSN))

Abstract

A detailed uncertainty analysis on numerical flow simulation models preserving a robust and reliable model for an oil and gas reservoir is often deterministic, cumbersome, and expensive (manpower and time-consuming). Presence of a high-dimensional data space consisting of a large number of operational and geological parameters impedes practical decision-making and future performance prediction for oil and gas recovery processes. Thus, the rise of uncertainty-based reservoir development scenarios has provoked reservoir engineers to look for alternative modeling techniques that are capable of being reevaluated numerous times to examine the impact of specific variables or probing a range of scenarios on production profiles. This study reviews simulation data-driven proxy models that can be used instead of an actual reservoir simulator by using data interpolation in a high-dimensional parameter space.

The current study integrates a systematic data analysis and numerical flow simulations to create a comprehensive data set for different recovery processes, which entails different characteristics labeling reservoir heterogeneities and other pertinent operational constraints. This representative data set is then utilized as the building blocks for a cognitive data-driven proxy modeling workflow. Artificial and computational intelligence techniques are used to cognitively train a data-driven proxy model. The trained proxy will be subsequently employed to predict the production performance for the underlying process in presence of new reservoir development scenarios. The predictability of the designed cognitive proxy model is evaluated via comparing the results from proxy with those from a commercial simulator. Particularly, we compare the performance of two types of interpolation models: the radial basis function neural network (RBF NN) and the multilayer Levenberg-Marquardt neural network (ML LM NN). Results of studies of nine different cases of SAGD, black oil, and unconventional reservoirs will be presented to illustrate the current approach.

The presented results and performance characteristics associated with data-driven proxy models which can be reevaluated much faster than explicit models for the underlying process highlight the great potential of this modeling approach to be integrated directly into most existing reservoir management routines. This paper provides a viable tool to overcome challenges related to dynamic assessment of uncertainties during history matching of recovery processes and signifies the ability of cognitive proxy modeling in future performance prediction of oil and gas recovery processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

ACI:

Artificial and computational intelligence

ANN:

Artificial neural network

BO:

Black oil

GlobalHmError:

Global history matching error (%)

HL:

Hidden layer

HM:

History matching

LHD:

Latin hypercube design

LM:

Levenberg-Marquardt

ML:

Multilayer

NN:

Neural network

NPV:

Net present value

OF:

Objective function

OL:

Output layer

RBF:

Radial basis function

SL:

Single layer

SAGD:

Steam-assisted gravity drainage

UA:

Uncertainty analysis

References

  1. Kjaerulff, U. B., & Madsen, A. L. (2008). Bayesian networks and influence diagrams. Springer Science Business Media, 200, 114.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mehrotra, K., Mohan, C. K., & Ranka, S. (1997). Elements of artificial neural networks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Poulton, M. M. (Ed.). (2001). Computational neural networks for geophysical data processing (Vol. 30). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Suh, S. (2012). Practical applications of data mining. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, Z. (2002). Characteristic mixed discontinuous finite element methods for advection-dominated diffusion problems. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 191, 2509–2538.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen, Z., Ewing, R. E., Kuznetsov, Y., Lazarov, R., & Maliassov, S. (1994). Multilevel preconditioners for mixed methods for second order elliptic problems. Numerical Linear Algebra and Applications, 3, 427–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, Z., Huan, G., & Ma, Y. (2006). Computational methods for multiphase flows in porous media. Computational science and engineering series (Vol. 2). Philadelphia, PA: SIAM.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Purewal, S. (2005). Production forecasting in the oil and gas industry—Current methods and future trends. Business Briefing: Exploration & Production: The Oil & Gas Review (2), p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bravo, C. E. et al. (2012). State-of-the-art application of artificial intelligence and trends in the E&P industry: A technology survey. In SPE Intelligent Energy International. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mohaghegh, S. (2000). Virtual-intelligence applications in petroleum engineering: Part I-artificial neural networks. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 52, 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Saputelli, L., Malki, H., Canelon, J., & Nikolaou, M. (2002). A critical overview of artificial neural network applications in the context of continuous oil field optimization. In SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Aminian, K., Ameri, S., Oyerokun, A., & Thomas, B. (2003). Prediction of flow units and permeability using artificial neural networks. In SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section Joint Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chaki, S., Verma, A. K., Routray, A., Mohanty, W. K., & Jenamani, M. (2014). Well tops guided prediction of reservoir properties using modular neural network concept: A case study from western onshore, India. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 123, 155–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang, H., Meddaugh, W. S., & Toomey, N. (2011). Using an artificial-neural-network method to predict carbonate well log facies successfully. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 14, 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Awoleke, O., & Lane, R. (2011). Analysis of data from the Barnett shale using conventional statistical and virtual intelligence techniques. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 14, 544–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lechner, J. P., Zangl, G. (2005) Treating uncertainties in reservoir performance prediction with neural networks. In SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zangl, G., Graf, T., & Al-Kinani, A. (2006). A proxy modeling in production optimization. In SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Artun, E., Ertekin, T., Watson, R., & Miller, B. (2012). Designing cyclic pressure pulsing in naturally fractured reservoirs using an inverse looking recurrent neural network. Computers & Geosciences, 38, 68–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ayala, H. L. F., & Ertekin, T. (2007). Neuro-simulation analysis of pressure maintenance operations in gas condensate reservoirs. Journal of Petroleum Science & Engineering, 58, 207–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Costa, L. A. N., Maschio, C., & Schiozer, D. J. (2014). Application of artificial neural networks in a history matching process. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 123, 30–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Maschio, C., & Schiozer, D. J. (2014). Bayesian history matching using artificial neural network and Markov chain Monte Carlo. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 123, 62–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Amirian, E., & Chen, Z. (2015). Practical application of data-driven modeling approach during waterflooding operations in heterogeneous reservoirs. Paper presented at the SPE Western Regional Meeting-Garden Grove. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Amirian, E., Leung, J. Y., Zanon, S., & Dzurman, P. (2013) Data-driven modeling approach for recovery performance prediction in SAGD operations. In SPE Heavy Oil Conference-Canada, Calgary, AB, Canada. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Amirian, E., Leung, J. Y., Zanon, S., & Dzurman, P. (2015). Integrated cluster analysis and artificial neural network modeling for steam-assisted gravity drainage performance prediction in heterogeneous reservoirs. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, 723–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fedutenko, E., Yang, C., Card, C., & Nghiem L. X. (2012) Forecasting SAGD process under geological uncertainties using data-driven proxy model. In SPE Heavy Oil Conference Canada. . Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fedutenko, E., Yang, C., Card, C., & Nghiem, L. X. (2014). Time-dependent neural network based proxy modeling of SAGD process. In SPE Heavy Oil Conference-Canada. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Popa, A. S., & Cassidy, S. D. (2012). Artificial intelligence for heavy oil assets: The evolution of solutions and organization capability. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Parada, C. H., & Ertekin, T. (2012). A new screening tool for improved oil recovery methods using artificial neural networks. In SPE Western Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zerafat, M. M., Ayatollahi, S., Mehranbod, N., & Barzegari, D. (2011). Bayesian network analysis as a tool for efficient EOR screening. In SPE Enhanced Oil Recovery Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Holdaway, K. R. (2012). Oilfield data mining workflows for robust reservoir characterization: Part 2, SPE Intelligent Energy International. Long Beach, CA: Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Mohammadpoor, M., Firouz, Q., Reza, A., & Torabi, F. (2012). Implementing simulation and artificial intelligence tools to optimize the performance of the CO2 sequestration in coalbed methane reservoirs. In Carbon Management Technology Conference, Orlando, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  32. McKay, M. D., Beckman, R. J., & Conover, W. J. (1979). Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21, 239–245.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Myers, R. H., & Montgomery, D. C. (2002). Response surface methodology. Process and product optimization using designed experiments. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Killough, J. E. (1995, January). Ninth SPE comparative solution project: A reexamination of black-oil simulation. In SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Computer Modeling Group Ltd. for permission to publish this paper. This research is supported by the NSERC/AIEES/Foundation CMG and AITF (iCORE) Chairs.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Ehsan Amirian & Zhangxin Chen

  2. Computer Modelling Group Ltd., Calgary, AB, Canada

    Eugene Fedutenko, Chaodong Yang & Long Nghiem

Authors
  1. Ehsan Amirian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eugene Fedutenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chaodong Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhangxin Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Long Nghiem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ehsan Amirian .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Mohammad Moshirpour

  2. Department Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Behrouz H. Far

  3. Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Reda Alhajj

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Amirian, E., Fedutenko, E., Yang, C., Chen, Z., Nghiem, L. (2018). Artificial Neural Network Modeling and Forecasting of Oil Reservoir Performance. In: Moshirpour, M., Far, B., Alhajj, R. (eds) Applications of Data Management and Analysis . Lecture Notes in Social Networks. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95810-1_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation