Smart Well ICV Optimization via Simulation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for optimizing oil recovery and reducing water production in smart wells often rely on either reactive or proactive approaches, with the reactive approach sometimes leading to undesirable results like delayed water or gas influx, which can bypass oil reserves and result in inefficient production.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of integrated reactive/proactive optimization methods that calculate optimal downhole valve settings by comparing static and dynamic data, adjusting parameters to minimize misfit, and using simulation models to maximize oil recovery while reducing water production, through a combination of surface and downhole models and 3D grid simulation.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If a reactive approach is used to adjust ICV settings based on current well performance, then daily production can be increased, but water or gas breakthrough may be delayed which can bypass oil reserves
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary actions by using simulation models to predict future well performance and water/gas breakthrough timing before it actually occurs. This allows operators to adjust ICV settings proactively to prevent bypassing oil reserves while still maintaining high production rates, thus resolving the contradiction between immediate productivity gains and long-term oil recovery reliability
2Reliability
If a proactive approach is used to adjust ICV settings based on forecasted results, then oil recovery can be optimized, but the approach is difficult to justify without clear evidence of effectiveness
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements feedback by continuously comparing simulated predictions with actual well performance data. This creates a closed-loop system where the simulation model is validated and refined against real-world results, providing clear evidence of effectiveness that justifies the proactive approach while reducing the perceived complexity through automated validation
Solution Approach 2:
The system creates a virtual copy of the well through simulation modeling that replicates physical well behavior. This digital twin allows operators to test and validate proactive ICV settings in the virtual environment before applying them to the actual well, providing evidence of effectiveness without risking actual production and simplifying the justification process
3Productivity
If ICV settings are adjusted to maximize current oil production, then daily output increases, but water production also increases reducing overall efficiency
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies dynamics by enabling real-time adjustment of ICV settings based on changing well conditions and simulation predictions. This allows the system to dynamically optimize the balance between oil production and water production, adjusting valve positions to maintain high oil rates while minimizing water influx, thus resolving the contradiction between maximizing oil productivity and reducing water loss
Data Source
AI summary
A method and non-transitory program carrier device tangibly carrying computer executable instructions for adjusting downhole valve settings in order to optimize oil recovery and reduce water production from a well. The method and non-transitory program carrier device are particularly advantageous in wells with intelligent completions that are often referred to as smart wells. In the oil and gas industry, an Internal Control Valve (ICV) is an important tool for both reactive and proactive approaches to adjust ICV settings to improve oil recovery.