Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Matei ene
Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics
Motivation
2 / 47
Petroleum Reservoir
3 / 47
Water flooding
4 / 47
2D Channelized Reservoirs
Rock type Permeability Porosity
Channel sand
Background shale
100 mD
0.1 mD
20%
5%
Y-channel reservoir
5 / 47
Reservoir State
=
= 1, , = 1, ,
0, = 1,
,0,1-
History Matching
a.k.a. Data Assimilation
are poorly known a priori Let represent the prior information More information becomes available during production
7 / 47
Forecast model
(+) = ()
Observations
= +
Update
= + = +
8 / 47
Multi-point Geostatistics
Strebelle, 2002
9 / 47
EnKF Workflow
10 / 47
= , where =1 : , = 1 linear, but not convex, combination ,0,1-, but may break outside of ,0,1 We use to compute and Negative permeabilities? Porosities > 1?
11 / 47
(1) Truncation
12 / 47
13 / 47
Parameterized EnKF
14 / 47
Research topic 1
Propose a parameterization that preserves the structure of channelized reservoirs over sequential assimilation steps.
15 / 47
Coordinates are all monomials of the state variables up to degree Mapping Example: for = 2 grid cells and degree = 2 = 1 2
= 1
1 2
2 2
1 2
2 1
image vector
16 / 47
17 / 47
The dimension of :
=1
, = , ()
=
=1
18 / 47
19 / 47
Kernel PCA
Schlkopf, 1998 Let 1 , , be a set of reservoir realizations The PC are the eigenvectors of their covariance matrix: = PCA on (1 ), , ( ) Keep the most significant of the
20 / 47
() =
() =
() =1 (1) 1 =1
=1 (1) =1
= 1,2,
Local optima!
21 / 47
Analytical Solution
() =
=1
where = ,0 0 1 0 0-
Iterative
23 / 47
Iterative
24 / 47
Iterative
25 / 47
Iterative
26 / 47
Iterative
27 / 47
KPCA-EnKF
= 1
= 3
28 / 47
= 5
Ensemble Collapse!
= 1
= 3
29 / 47
= 5
Subspace EnKF
Sarma and Chen, 2013 Partition the ensemble into groups Define a different parameterization for each group Assumption: the EnKF update is equivalent to the steepest descent equation
= + =
30 / 47
31 / 47
Results (1)
= 1
= 3
32 / 47
= 5
Results (2)
= 1
= 3
33 / 47
= 5
Ribbon Reservoir
Sat after 1 year Sat after 5 years
34 / 47
Ensemble Mean
EnKF
KPCA-EnS, d=3
35 / 47
5-Subspace EnKF
Ensemble Variability
EnKF
KPCA-EnS, d=3
36 / 47
5-Subspace EnKF
Research topic 2
Study the effect of the number of subspaces when using the Subspace EnKF for history matching channelized reservoirs.
37 / 47
Experiment Setup
Sources of information
Ensemble: 100 members Training set: 5 1500 samples
38 / 47
Ensemble Variability
2 subspaces
10 subspaces
39 / 47
50 subspaces
Research topic 3
Develop a strategy to form the subspaces which takes into account the prior information about the reservoir.
40 / 47
Generally applicable to any type of reservoir It can create specialized subspaces We used a separate set of 1400 samples to train a KPCA order 3 parameterization, Applied it to the training set, = ( ) And performed K-means clustering on the , in order to partition the 7500 training samples for *2,10,50+ subspaces
41 / 47
Ensemble Variability
2 subspaces
10 subspaces
42 / 47
50 subspaces
Ensemble Means
2 subspaces
10 subspaces
43 / 47
50 subspaces
Contributions
Proposed a new approach to update binary variables Studied adaptation methods for the update of bounded variables Developed an analytical method to compute polynomial KPCA preimages Paired the KPCA parameterization with the Iterative EnS and Subspace EnKF to avoid collapse Proposed training set clustering to adapt the parameterizations to the prior information
44 / 47
Recommendations
The analytical solution is generally preferable over approximate preimage schemes Normalization + logit transform is generally preferable to truncaton when updating bounded variables When using the Subspace EnKF, the number of subspaces needs to be balanced with the training set size. Training set clustering seems to increase posterior variability, especially when a large number of subspaces is used.
One assimilation method is not generally better than the others; the results need to be discussed with an expert
45 / 47
Future research
What is the effect of polynomial KPCA when used to update continuous variables?
Can we extend the facies variables to cases with more than 2 types of rock? (see Sebacher et al, 2013)
What is the benefit when using polynomial chaos expansions together with KPCA? (see Ma and Zabaras, 2011).
Is the Kalman update equivalent with the steepest descent equation? (see Sarma and Chen, 2013).
Is it possible to adapt higher degree KPCA to the Subspace EnKF framework? (see Sarma and Chen, 2013). How do the presented assimilation methods scale to realistic 3D cases?
46 / 47
Keywords
Water flooding Channelized reservoir State vector, facies History matching Ensemble Kalman Filter Multi-point geostatistics Adaptation methods
47 / 47
Parameterization
Feature space
Polynomial KPCA Preimage problem Ensemble collapse Subspace EnKF Training set clustering
Cheat Slides
48 / 47
Rock Properties
Porosity (%)
Permeability (mD)
flow effort pore connectivity
49 / 47
50 / 47
51 / 47
Data Flow
52 / 47
Normalization
= + 1
53 / 47
transform
: 0,1
1 1+
54 / 47
Y-channel Setup
55 / 47
Ribbon Setup
56 / 47
2 subspaces
10 subspaces
57 / 47
50 subspaces
Prior
58 / 47
2 subspaces
10 subspaces
59 / 47
50 subspaces
60 / 47