Advertisement

Mathematical Geology

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 1–21 | Cite as

Conditional Simulation of Complex Geological Structures Using Multiple-Point Statistics

  • Sebastien Strebelle
Article

Abstract

In many earth sciences applications, the geological objects or structures to be reproduced are curvilinear, e.g., sand channels in a clastic reservoir. Their modeling requires multiple-point statistics involving jointly three or more points at a time, much beyond the traditional two-point variogram statistics. Actual data from the field being modeled, particularly if it is subsurface, are rarely enough to allow inference of such multiple-point statistics. The approach proposed in this paper consists of borrowing the required multiple-point statistics from training images depicting the expected patterns of geological heterogeneities. Several training images can be used, reflecting different scales of variability and styles of heterogeneities. The multiple-point statistics inferred from these training image(s) are exported to the geostatistical numerical model where they are anchored to the actual data, both hard and soft, in a sequential simulation mode. The algorithm and code developed are tested for the simulation of a fluvial hydrocarbon reservoir with meandering channels. The methodology proposed appears to be simple (multiple-point statistics are scanned directly from training images), general (any type of random geometry can be considered), and fast enough to handle large 3D simulation grids.

geostatistics stochastic simulation training image random geometry 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bridge, J. S., and Leeder, M. R., 1979, A simulation model of alluvial stratigraphy: Sedimentology, v. 26, p. 617–644.Google Scholar
  2. Caers, J., and Journel, A. G., 1998, Geostatistical quantification of geological information for a fluvialtype North-Sea reservoir: SPE paper no. 56655.Google Scholar
  3. Caers, J., Srinivasan, S., and Journel, A. G., 1999, Stochastic reservoir simulation using neural networks trained on outcrop data: SPE paper no. 49026.Google Scholar
  4. Deutsch, C. V., 1992, Annealing techniques applied to reservoir modeling and the integration of geological and engineering (well test) data: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 306 p.Google Scholar
  5. Deutsch, C. V., and Journel, A. G., 1998, GSLIB: Geostatistical software library and user's guide, 2nd ed.: Oxford University Press, New York, 368 p.Google Scholar
  6. Deutsch, C. V., and Wang, L., 1996, Hierarchical object-based stochastic modeling of fluvial reservoirs: Math. Geol., v. 28, no. 7, p. 857–880.Google Scholar
  7. Farmer, C. L., 1988, The generation of stochastic fields of reservoir parameters with specified geostatistical distributions, in Edwards, S., and King, P. R., eds., Mathematics in oil production: Clarendon Press, Oxford, p. 235–252.Google Scholar
  8. Gómez-Hernández, J. J., 1991, A stochastic approach to the simulation of block conductivity fields conditioned upon data measured at a smaller scale: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 351 p.Google Scholar
  9. Goovaerts, P., 1997, Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation: Oxford University Press, New York, 483 p.Google Scholar
  10. Guardiano, F., and Srivastava, R. M., 1993, Multivariate geostatistics: Beyond bivariate moments, in Soares, A., ed., Geostatistics-Troia, Vol. 1: Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, p. 133–144.Google Scholar
  11. Haldorsen, H. H., and Damsleth, E., 1990, Stochastic modeling: J. Pet. Technol., v. 42, April, p. 404–412.Google Scholar
  12. Journel, A. G., 1993, Geostatistics: Roadblocks and challenges, in Soares, A., ed., Geostatistics-Troia, Vol. 1: Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, p. 213–224.Google Scholar
  13. Journel, A. G., 1997, Deterministic geostatistics: A new visit, in Baffi, E., and Shofield, N., eds., Geostatistics Wollongong, Vol. 1: Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, p. 174–187.Google Scholar
  14. Journel, A. G., and Alabert, F. G., 1989, Non-Gaussian data expansion in the Earth Sciences: Terra Nova, v. 1, p. 123–134.Google Scholar
  15. Omre, H., 1991, Stochastic models for reservoir characterization, in Kleppe, J., and Skjaeveland, S. M., eds., Recent advances in improved oil recovery methods for North Sea sandstone reservoirs: Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, Stavanger, 14 p.Google Scholar
  16. Roberts, E. S., 1998, Programming abstractions in C: A second course in computer science: Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 819 p.Google Scholar
  17. Srivastava, M., 1992, Iterative methods for spatial simulation: Stanford Center for Reservoir Forecasting, Rep. No. 5, 24 p.Google Scholar
  18. Srivastava, M., 1995, An overviewof stochastic methods for reservoir characterization, in Yarus, J., and Chambers, R., eds., Stochastic modeling and geostatistics: Principles, methods, and case studies, Vol. 3: AAPG Computer Applications in Geology, Tulsa, p. 3–16.Google Scholar
  19. Strebelle, S., 2000, Sequential simulation drawing structures from training images: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 200 p.Google Scholar
  20. Tjelmeland, H., 1996, Stochastic models in reservoir characterization and Markov random fields for compact objects: Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
  21. Tran, T. T., 1994, Improving variogram reproduction on dense simulation grids: Comput. Geosci., v. 20, no. 7, p. 1161–1168.Google Scholar
  22. Xu, W., 1996, Conditional curvilinear stochastic simulation using pixel-based algorithms: Math. Geol., v. 28, no. 7, p. 937–949.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Mathematical Geology 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastien Strebelle
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Geological and Environmental SciencesStanford UniversityStanford

Personalised recommendations