Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of oil Wells performance ranking in high water cut stage

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Computational Geosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to quantify the performance ranking of oil wells in high water cut reservoir, a quantitative evaluation method of oil wells is established from two perspectives of numerical simulation and machine learning respectively. The backward flight time of oil wells control area is obtained by numerical simulation. The flow heterogeneity of oil wells is evaluated based on Lorentz coefficient, and the concept of potential index is proposed to characterize the oil wells potential and flow capacity. A large number of dynamic data of oilfield development is collected to establish time series model. The production history of oil wells is fitted by using VAR algorithm of machine learning, the impact of oil wells production on the whole reservoir development is evaluated through impulse response analysis and the production capacity is quantified by the cumulative influence coefficient. The scores obtained by the two methods are compared, and the comprehensive performance ranking of oil wells is determined by the entropy weight method. The evaluation method is applied to Gangxi Oilfield. The results show that the two evaluation methods are based on different assumptions, but the scoring trend of each well is basically the same. Due to the comprehensive consideration of the influence of numerical simulation and development dynamic data, the final evaluation score objectively reflects the development status of oil wells. The new method provides a theoretical basis for the effective development of high water cut reservoir.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tong, K.: Reservoir evaluation and fracture chracterization of the metamorphic buried hill reservoir in Bohai Bay basin. Pet Explor Dev. 39(1), 62–69 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jia, Y.: Geochemical characteristics and tectonic setting of the carboniferous-Permian volcanic rocks in Zhongguai area northwestern Junggar Basin. Chinese J Geol. 47(4), 993–1004 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wan, J.Y., Wang, S.B., Qiu-Feng, A.: Reservoir characteristics of Fuyang oil layer in Q3 and Q4 member in Daqing placanticline and area to its west. Pet Geol Oilfield Dev Daqing. 5(4), 14–17 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hou, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, D.: Numerical simulation of reservoir parameters’ synergetic time-variability on development rules. J Petroleum Explor Product Technol. 6(4), 641–652 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang, J.L., Dong, Z., Li, D.: A reservoir assessment of the Qingshankou sandstones (the upper cretaceous), Daqingzijing field, south Songliao Basin, Northeastern China. Pet Sci Technol. 32(3), 274–280 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Longxin, M., Ruifeng, W., Xianghong, W.: Development features and affecting factors of natural depletion of sandstone reservoirs in Sudan. Pet. Explor. Dev. 42(3), 379–383 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Guo, X., Song, H., Wu, K.: Pressure characteristics and performance of multi-stage fractured horizontal well in shale gas reservoirs with coupled flow and geomechanics. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 111, 159–167 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hu, J., Zhao, J., Li, Y.: Productivity model of horizontal Wells in a sour gas reservoir. Part. Sci. Technol. 172, 273–283 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., Hinton, G.: Deep learning. Nature. 521, 436–444 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chalmers, G.R.L., Bustin, R.M.: Geological evaluation of halfway-Diog-Montney hybrid 20 gas shale-tight gas reservoir, Northeastern British Columbia. Marine Pet Geol. 38, 53–72 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Freund, Y., Schapire, E.: A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an 10 application to boosting. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 55, 119–139 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Scornet, E., Biau, G., Vert, J.: Consistency of random forests. Ann. Stat. 30(4), 1716–1741 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shaheen, M., Shahbaz, M., Ur Rehman, Z., and Guergachi, A. Data mining applications in 4 hydrocarbon exploration. Artif. Intell. Rev. 35, 1–18 (2011)

  14. Shelley, B., Grieser, B., Johnson, B.J., Fielder, E.O., Heinze, J.R., Werline, J.R.: Data 6 analysis of Barnett shale completions. SPE J. 13(3), 366–374 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Smola, A.J., and Scholkopf, B.. A tutorial on support vector regression. Statistics and 12 Computing. 14, 199–222 (2004)

  16. Ke-Ran, Q., Zhi-Liang: Intelligent prediction and integral analysis of shale oil and gas sweet spots. Pet Sci. 41(4), 744–755 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nwachukwu, A., Jeong, H., Pyrcz, M.: Fast evaluation of well placements in heterogeneous reservoir models using machine learning. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 163, 463–475 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Anifowose, F.A., Labadin, J., Abdulraheem, A.: Ensemble machine learning: an untapped modeling paradigm for petroleum reservoir characterization. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 151, 480–487 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Martins, S.C., Goliatt, D.F.L., Egberto, P.: Machine learning approaches for petrographic classification of carbonate-siliciclastic rocks using well logs and textural information. J. Appl. Geophys. 155, 217–225 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ao, Y., Li, H., Zhu, Liping: The linear random forest algorithm and its advantages in machine learning assisted logging regression modeling. J Pet Sci Eng. 174, 776–789 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kadiyala, K.R., Karlsson, S.: Numerical methods for estimation and inference in Bayesian VAR-models. J. Appl. Econ. 12(2), 99–132 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cheng, Q.Y.: Structure entropy weight method to confirm the weight of evaluating index. Syst Eng-Theory Prac. 30(7), 1225–1228 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Liu, P., Zhang, X.: Research on the supplier selection of a supply chain based on entropy weight and improved ELECTRE-III method. Int. J. Prod. Res. 49(3), 637–646 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Alexander, G.J., Baptista, A.M.: Economic implications of using a mean-VAR model for portfolio selection: a comparison with mean-variance analysis. J Econ Dynam Cont. 26(7), 1159–1193 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hansen, H., Johansen, S.: Some tests for parameter constancy in cointegrated VAR-models. Econ J. 2(2), 306–333 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kilian, L., Murphy, D.P.: Why agnostic sign restrictions are not enough: understanding the dynamics of oil market VAR models. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 10(5), 1166–1188 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Canova, F., Ciccarelli, M.: Forecasting and turning point predictions in a Bayesian panel VAR model. J. Econ. 120(2), 327–359 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Giordano, R., Momiglianoa, S., Perotti, R.: The effects of fiscal policy in Italy: evidence from a VAR model. Eur. J. Polit. Econ. 23(3), 707–733 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dungey, M., Pagan, A.: A structural VAR model of the Australian economy. Econ Record. 76(235), 321–342 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hu, J., Lei, Z., Chen, Z.: Effect of Sulphur deposition on well performance in a sour gas reservoir. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 18(1), 234–241 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Contreras, J., Espinola, R., Nogales, F.J.: ARIMA models to predict next-day electricity prices. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 18(3), 1014–1020 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Conejo, A.J., Plazas, M.A., Espinola, R.: Day-ahead electricity price forecasting using the wavelet transform and ARIMA models. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 20(2), 1035–1042 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ömer, F., Durdu: A hybrid neural network and ARIMA model for water quality time series prediction. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 23(4), 586–594 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Davis, J.M., Roy, N.D., Mozley, P.S.: The effect of carbonate cementation on permeability heterogeneity in fluvial aquifers: an outcrop analog study. Sediment. Geol. 184(3–4), 267–280 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Jiang, S., Jiang, M.X., Cheng, Y.W.: Study on the reservoir heterogeneity in oilfield a. J Southwest Pet Univ. 63(24), 386–394 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bao, K., Lie, K.A., Moyner, O.: Fully implicit simulation of polymer flooding with MRST. Computational Geosciences. 21(5–6), 1–26 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Deng, H.W., Haynatzka, V., Spitze, K.: The determination of genetic covariances and prediction of evolutionary trajectories based on a genetic correlation matrix. Evolution. 53(5), 1592–1599 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nakamura K, Nakadai K, and Nakajima H.. Correlation matrix interpolation in sound source localization for a robot. International Conference on Acoustics. 2011

  39. Chen, L.J., Ho, Y.H., Hsieh, H.H.: ADF: An Anomaly Detection Framework for Large-Scale PM2.5 Sensing Systems. Internet Things J. 5(2), 559–570 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Revina, I.M., Emmanuel, W.R.S.: MDTP: a novel multi-directional triangles pattern for face expression recognition. Multimed Tools Appl. 78(18), 1–16 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R.: Multimodel Inference Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection. Sociol Methods Res. 33(33), 261–304 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Penny, W.D.: Comparing Dynamic Causal Models using AIC, BIC and Free Energy. Neuroimage. 59(1), 319–330 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Edwards, D., Abreu, G.C.D., Labouriau, R.: Selecting high-dimensional mixed graphical models using minimal AIC or BIC forests. BMC Bioinformatics. 11(1), 18–18 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Chakrabarti, A., Ghosh, J.K.: AIC, BIC and Recent Advances in Model Selection. Philos Stat. 7(4), 583–605 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the Fundamental Research Funds for the National Science and Technology Major Project (2017ZX05009001); the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51674279).The funders had no conflict of interest or any role in the study design, data collection, and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The authors also would like to acknowledge the technical support of PETREL and ECLIPSE in this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qi Guo.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guo, Q. Evaluation of oil Wells performance ranking in high water cut stage. Comput Geosci 25, 1821–1835 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-021-10071-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-021-10071-0

Keywords

Navigation