BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH PRODID:-//Tendenci - The Open Source AMS for Associations//Tendenci Codeba se MIMEDIR//EN BEGIN:VEVENT DESCRIPTION:--- This iCal file does *NOT* confirm registration.\r\nEvent d etails subject to change. ---\r\nhttps://www.spegcs.org/events/3405/\r\n\r \nEvent Title: Reservoir: Comparison of Numerical vs Analytical Models for EUR Calculation and Optimization in Unconventional Reservoirs \r\nStart D ate / Time: Mar 21, 2017 11:30 AM US/Central\r\nLocation: Sullivan's Steak house\r\nSpeaker: Dr. Jim Erdle\r\nGoogle\r\nhttp://maps.google.com/maps?q =4608+Westheimer+Rd,Houston,Texas,77027\r\n\r\nForecast\nhttp://www.weathe r.com/weather/monthly/77027\r\n\r\n&ldquo\;Comparison of Numerical vs Anal ytical Models for EUR Calculation \r\nand Optimization in Unconventional R eservoirs&rdquo\;\r\nAnalytical models available in Rate-Transient-Analysi s (RTA) packages are widely used as fast tools for history matching and fo recast in unconventional resources. In addition, recently, there has bee n an increasing interest in numerical simulation of unconventional reservo irs. In this study, we use both methods to history match fractured unconve ntional wells, followed by forecast calculations. This study aims to revea l large differences in Estimated Ultimate Recovery (EUR), predicted by ana lytical models and numerical simulation in unconventional reservoirs.\r\nF irst, we consider a single-phase shale oil reservoir as a base case for th is study. The base case also satisfies other assumptions inherent in ana lytical models such as homogenous reservoir properties and fully-penetrati ng planar fractures with constant half-length and conductivity. We then im pose different real-world deviations from RTA assumptions and investigate reliability of EUR predictions made by both approaches.\r\nExample results show that, in the presence of real-world deviations from RTA assumptions, analytical models can still match the historical production data\; howeve r, key reservoir and fracture parameters need to be modified drastically t o compensate lack of sufficient physics in analytical models. For the case s presented in this study, analytical models under-predicts EURs by 10-20% although history match of two-year production looks good. For all cases, we also apply an efficient simulation workflow for probabilistic forecasti ng of brown fields. This workflow provides multiple history-matched models that are constrained by historical production data. The probabilistic for ecast provides P90 (conservative), P50 (most likely), and P10 (optimistic) values for EUR. In all examples, range of P90 to P10 values includes the reference EUR and the P50 values are within 7% error of the reference EUR. --- This iCal file does *NOT* confirm registration.Event details subje ct to change. ---\r\n\r\n--- By Tendenci - The Open Source AMS for Associa tions ---\r\n UID:uid3405@spegcs.org SUMMARY:Reservoir: Comparison of Numerical vs Analytical Models for EUR Calculation and Optimization in Unconventional Reservoirs DTSTART:20170321T163000Z DTEND:20170321T180000Z CLASS:PUBLIC PRIORITY:5 DTSTAMP:20240329T080324Z TRANSP:OPAQUE SEQUENCE:0 LOCATION:Sullivan's Steakhouse X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html: