Structural geology reduces uncertainty using constrained model building techniques, ensuring physically consistent geological models.

Through enhanced feedback workflows between MOVE and Reveal, both structural and simulation models can benefit from continually validating and updating our understanding of the geology.

Fig 1: Quantitative fault geometry prediction based on deformed hanging wall shape, iterating on shear angle to achieve an optimum result

Uncertainty in fault sealing behaviour (fault transmissibility) plays an important role in flow dynamics and compartmentalisation within a reservoir. The Fault Analysis functionality in MOVE allows examination of whether there is a potential for fluid transmission across a fault. This data is then utilised directly by Reveal to aid history matching, updating the geological interpretation without the need for re-gridding.

Fig 2: Transition of Fault seal analysis data in MOVE to NNCs in Reveal. Properties related to the sealing behaviour of faults can be easily imported into existing Reveal models, without the need for re-gridding.

Dynamic simulations benefit from easily updated and imported geological models, to provide fit for purpose grids to suit any required objective.

Typical examples include:

•          Small scale regional studies (Sector models)
•          Overburden description for reservoir integrity analysis
•          Varying degrees of grid refinement

Generating new realisations using the integration between MOVE-Reveal will ensure dynamic simulation models remain consistent, as our understanding of the geology changes.

Fig 3: Generation of different reservoir realisations for various objectives, ensuring geological consistency throughout.

Standard matching techniques remain valid only when their assumptions remain valid. History matching can be enhanced by Reveal through its robust physics models, and capturing the dynamic interactions of multiple physical effects (e.g. thermal injectivity decline and fracture propagation).

Fig 4: Multi-layer water injection thermal fractures controlled by upper layer injection ICVs. Modelling the physical process of fracture propagation ensures the correct physics is captured, models are accurately history matched, and continue to be predictive.

Maintaining consistency with integrated models (PVT, well modelling, geological models, etc.) ensures value is added to any objectives requiring simulation modelling.

Through OpenServer and Resolve, many of the manual tasks surrounding grid generation and model maintenance can be automated through Visual Workflows. This allows domain specific expertise to be captured and distributed, whilst also allowing for multidisciplinary workflows which seamlessly integrate geological and engineering expertise.

Fig 5: Example of a Visual Workflow in Resolve which combines Fault seal analysis in MOVE and subsequent import of fault properties and simulation in Reveal, to reduce the uncertainty in fault properties in matching measured drainage region pressures from well tests.

DOF has a proven framework for real-time data and model management. This ensures access to up-to-date models and quality-controlled data, as well as providing “off the shelf” and bespoke workflows for automation. DOF is an essential component to ensure matching of reservoir models with real-time data, and maintaining geologically consistent static and dynamic models.

Fig 6: Timeline of the extensive functionalities available in IPM and DOF. Integrating geological modelling and reservoir simulation within a DOF environment will provide up-to-date, history matched models with real-time data.