基于交替条件期望变换的凝析气藏露点压力预测模型

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2020.04.017

Abstract

Abstract:

The efficient development of condensate gas reservoirs requires accurate fluid phase properties data, among which accurate prediction of dew point pressure is an important issue in the development of condensate gas reservoirs. In order to solve the problem of low accuracy of traditional prediction methods for dew point pressure of condensate gas reservoirs, based on optimization theory and applied statistical analysis, and by fitting measured data, a non-parametric regression model determined by alternating conditional expectation transformation（ACE） is proposed, and an explicit correlation of dew point pressure with statistical significance is obtained. Based on Pearson correlation analysis, the independent variables of the model are gas reservoir temperature, mole fraction of （C₁, C₂-C₆, C₇₊）, and molecular weight and relative density of C₇₊. The potential function relation between independent and dependent variables is analyzed by 27 sets of experimental data for published dew point pressure, and 9 groups of measured dew point pressure data of TLM oilfields are predicted. The results show that the model has high precision and good generalization ability. The average absolute relative deviation（AARD） of model regression is 2.16 %, and the predicted AARD is only 4.8 %. The maximum absolute relative deviation（ARD） is 9.21 % and the minimum is 0.34 %. This study provides a reference method for dew point pressure prediction of condensate gas reservoirs.

Key words: alternating conditional expectation, condensate gas reservoir, dew point pressure, prediction, model

CLC Number:

TE319

SUN Bowen,GUO Ping,WU Yiming,WANG Zhouhua,ZHOU Daiyu,LIU Zhiliang. Dew point pressure prediction model of condensate gas reservoir based on alternating conditional expectation transform[J].Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2020, 10(4): 107-112.

Figures/Tables 7

Table 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Table 2

Equation coefficients of ACE Model"

n	x	$β n 6$	$β n 5$	$β n 4$	$β n 3$	$β n 2$	$β n 1$	$β n 0$
1	T				2.60×10^-5	-3.09×10^-2	12.2	1.60×10³
2	C₁				-5.88×10^-5	1.47×10^-2	-1.13	26.5
3	C₂-C₆	-3.30×10^-7	2.61×10^-5	-8.00×10^-4	1.16×10^-2	-7.51×10^-2	1.08×10^-1	4.03×10^-1
4	C₇₊			8.93×10^-4	-2.00×10^-2	1.33×10^-1	-6.61×10^-3	-9.93×10^-1
5	MC₇₊			-5.91×10^-8	4.21×10^-5	-1.11×10^-2	1.31	-59.6
6	ΓC₇₊			-1.17×10⁵	3.76×10⁵	-4.54×10⁵	2.43×10⁵	-4.88×10⁴

Table 2

Fig. 4

Table 3

References 16

[1]	崔书姮, 汤勇, 赵曜 , 等. 高温高压凝析气藏石蜡沉积条件预测研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2017,7(3):55-58.
	CUI S H, TANG Y, ZHAO Y , et al. Study on prediction of wax deposition conditions in high temperature and high pressure condensate gas reservoir[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2017,7(3):55-58.
[2]	李建奇, 杨志伦, 张春雨 , 等. 反凝析作用对苏里格气田上古生界气藏开发的影响[J]. 天然气工业, 2015,35(4):45-51.
	LI J Q, YANG Z L, ZHANG C Y , et al. Impacts of retrograde condensation on the development of Upper Paleozoic gas reservoirs in the Sulige Gasfield, Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2015,35(4):45-51.
[3]	彭松 . 致密砂岩凝析气藏反凝析伤害机理及合理开发方式研究[D]. 成都:西南石油大学, 2015.
	PENG S . Research on mechanism of condensate damage and reasonable development method in tight sand gas-condensate reservoirs[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Petroleum University, 2015.
[4]	中国石油勘探开发研究院. 油气藏流体物性分析方法: GB/T 26981-2011[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2012.
	Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development. Test method for reservoir fluid physical properties: GB/T 26981-2011[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2012.
[5]	VALIOLLAHI S, KAVIANPOUR B, RAEISSI S , et al. A new Peng-Robinson modification to enhance dew point estimations of natural gases[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2016,34:1137-1147.
[6]	HAJI-SAVAMERI M, MENAD N A, NOROUZI-APOURVARI S , et al. Modeling dew point pressure of gas condensate reservoirs: Comparison of hybrid soft computing approaches, correlations, and thermodynamic models[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2020,184:1-18.
[7]	ZHONG ZHI, LIU SIYAN, KAZEMI M , et al. Dew point pressure prediction based on mixed-kernels-function support vector machine in gas-condensate reservoir[J]. Fuel, 2018,232:600-609.
[8]	张可, 李实, 廉黎明 , 等. 交替条件期望变换确定油气最小混相压力新方法[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2012,2(1):23-28.
	ZHANG K, LI S, LIAN L M , et al. The new method to determine the minimum miscibility pressure of oil and gas by using alternating conditional expectation transform[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2012,2(1):23-28.
[9]	江安, 雷少飞 . 基于交换条件数学期望的CO₂最小混相压力预测模型[J]. 中国科技论文, 2016,11(17):2029-2034.
	JIANG A, LEI S F . The use of alternating conditional expectation to predict CO₂ minimum miscibility pressure[J]. China Sciencepaper, 2016,11(17):2029-2034.
[10]	FENG Q H, ZHANG J Y, ZHANG X M , et al. The use of alternating conditional expectation to predict methane sorption capacity on coal[J]. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2014,121:137-147.
[11]	陶德硕, 侯健, 魏翠华 . 基于交替条件期望的油藏井间连通性定量表征[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2014,14(31):55-60.
	TAO D S, HOU J, WEI C H . Quantitative characterization of dynamic connectivity of reservoir well based on alternating conditional expectation[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2014,14(31):55-60.
[12]	FENG Q H, ZHANG J Y, ZHANG X M , et al. Proximate analysis based prediction of gross calorific value of coals: A comparison of support vector machine, alternating conditional expectation and artificial neural network[J]. Fuel Processing Technology, 2015,129:120-129.
[13]	蒙园, 张建华, 龙日尚 . 基于交替条件期望的短期负荷概率密度预测[J]. 华北电力大学学报(自然科学版), 2018,45(1):58-65.
	MENG Y, ZHANG J H, LONG R S . Short-term load probability density forecasting based on alternating conditional expectation. Journal of North China Electric Power University(Natural Science Edition), 2018,45(1):58-65.
[14]	孙志道, 胡永乐, 李云娟 , 等. 凝析气藏早期开发气藏工程研究[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2003.
	SUN Z D, HU Y L, LI Y J , et al. Gas reservoir engineering study of prophase condensate reservoir development[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2003.
[15]	杨帆, 冯翔, 阮羚 , 等. 基于皮尔逊相关系数法的水树枝与超低频介损的相关性研究[J]. 高压电器, 2014,50(6):21-25.
	YANG F, FENG X, RUAN L , et al. Correlation study of water tree and VLF tanδ based on pearson correlation coefficient[J]. High Voltage Apparatus, 2014,50(6):21-25.
[16]	陈丽群, 刘敏, 张建业 , 等. 新露点压力预测模型的建立与对比分析[C]// 2017年全国天然气学术年会论文集.杭州:中国石油学会天然气专业委员会, 2017: 912-921.
	CHEN L Q, LIU M, ZHANG J Y , et al. Establishment and comparison of new dew point pressure prediction model[C]// 2017 National Natural Gas Academic Annual Conference. Gas Committee of CPS, Hangzhou, 2017: 912-921.

T/K	x（C₁）/%	x（C₂-C₆）/%	x（C₇₊）/%	M（C₇₊）	Γ（C₇₊）	露点压力/MPa		ARD	AARD
T/K	x（C₁）/%	x（C₂-C₆）/%	x（C₇₊）/%	M（C₇₊）	Γ（C₇₊）	实验值	预测值	ARD	AARD
377.55	74.95	11.68	2.41	134	0.775	37.93	39.07	3.01 %	2.16 %
410.15	71.87	18.82	7.42	152	0.790	36.85	39.03	5.93 %
405.65	94.75	1.14	0.21	174	0.821	43.99	43.78	0.47 %
396.95	86.86	4.08	0.56	124	0.759	39.51	37.90	4.08 %
410.75	95.57	0.77	0.30	205	0.847	46.95	47.34	0.83 %
419.05	70.39	9.15	10.93	144	0.788	38.75	39.07	0.84 %
423.77	77.34	9.04	11.11	153	0.799	41.64	41.63	0.03 %
379.85	79.64	8.09	5.91	142	0.782	43.9	44.88	2.23 %
377.55	88.2	8.32	1.49	172	0.805	43.41	45.45	4.69 %
378.45	84.96	6.50	3.38	143	0.787	44.33	44.24	0.20 %
376.15	65.59	15.14	6.42	138	0.762	42.14	42.37	0.55 %
384.85	84.26	3.59	1.26	145	0.805	40.87	40.97	0.23 %
377.15	74.09	13.40	5.60	154	0.804	43.33	43.34	0.03 %
375.15	81.99	7.45	3.84	152	0.802	45.28	44.13	2.54 %
410.15	70.38	14.93	9.84	189	0.827	44.13	43.46	1.53 %
390.15	74.56	7.81	2.67	131	0.772	35.77	37.31	4.31 %
418.15	63.70	21.52	10.10	147	0.792	38.19	37.33	2.24 %
376.95	82.67	7.72	4.62	139	0.782	46.28	44.64	3.55 %
389.15	74.95	15.54	6.98	197	0.823	50.47	48.45	4.01 %
392.15	71.6	9.76	3.95	143	0.783	40.77	38.68	5.13 %
387.05	86.33	4.31	1.01	136	0.804	39.83	39.61	0.55 %
412.05	75.10	14.01	6.25	228	0.844	47.67	48.29	1.29 %
376.95	84.32	6.38	3.65	159	0.795	45.57	45.99	0.92 %
378.15	72.94	8.67	2.91	124	0.759	36.93	37.74	2.19 %
389.95	85.43	3.91	1.08	136	0.777	39.34	40.70	3.46 %
378.15	86.62	8.86	2.39	144	0.783	45.08	43.63	3.21 %
399.85	94.22	1.17	1.07	166	0.801	44.69	44.62	0.15 %

T/K	x（C₁）/%	x（C₂-C₆）/%	x（C₇₊）/%	M（C₇₊）	Γ（C₇₊）	露点压力/MPa		ARD	AARD
T/K	x（C₁）/%	x（C₂-C₆）/%	x（C₇₊）/%	M（C₇₊）	Γ（C₇₊）	实验值	预测值	ARD	AARD
397.15	96.55	2.09	0.17	150.15	0.79	47.67	43.75	8.23 %	4.80 %
402.40	95.80	2.83	0.42	150.97	0.79	45.28	42.51	6.11 %
407.25	87.48	10.01	1.17	133.96	0.77	40.87	37.11	9.21 %
405.55	87.94	9.46	1.17	137.16	0.77	40.77	38.02	6.74 %
400.15	87.85	9.71	1.06	153.38	0.79	39.83	39.70	0.34 %
401.95	87.77	9.54	1.28	150.54	0.79	37.93	39.18	3.30 %
407.02	88.59	8.96	0.60	123.54	0.76	36.85	35.44	3.83 %
408.20	88.21	9.27	0.99	132.82	0.77	35.77	36.89	3.14 %
409.25	87.97	9.61	1.15	140.25	0.78	38.19	37.30	2.34 %

Dew point pressure prediction model of condensate gas reservoir based on alternating conditional expectation transform

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 16

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	GAO Xiaorong, LI Hongyan, REN Xiaoqing, SUN Caixia, LU Xingchen, LIU Lin, LYU Qiangqiang, XU Yong, DONG Wenbin, WANG Zemu, WANG Rongkang, MIAO Ruican. Effect of rock-soil stratification on the heat transfer performance of U-shaped butted well in medium-deep layers [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 703-712.
[2]	CONG Shufei, ZHOU Hong, ZHAO Yan, JIN Hailong, LIU Peng, WU Rongbi, CHEN Yuanchun. 3D geological modeling technology of medium-deep geothermal field in Shenshui 501 geothermal field in Damintun Sag [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 741-748.
[3]	XU Yandong, TAO Shan, HE Hui, WAN Xiaoyong, ZOU Ning, YUAN Hongfei. Well test model of vertical double-hole channeling considering gravity [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 827-833.
[4]	ZHENG Gongying, LYU Qibiao, YANG Yongjian, XU Shoucheng. Prestack seismic prediction of sandstone reservoirs in the fifth member of Xujiahe Formation in Dongfengchang area of Ziyang [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 569-580.
[5]	LI Mengqiao, YE Tairan, DING Weinan, LIU Xingyan. Fine characterization technique of concealed channel and its application in the Jurassic Formation of western Sichuan Depression [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 591-599.
[6]	QIAN Yugui. Application of machine deep learning technology in tight sandstones reservoir prediction: A case study of Xujiahe Formation in Xinchang, western Sichuan Depression [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 600-607.
[7]	ZHAO Di, MA Sen, CAO Yanhui. Seismic rock physics analysis and prediction model establishment of Shaximiao Formation in Zhongjiang Gas Field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 608-613.
[8]	XIA Haibang, HAN Kening, SONG Wenhui, WANG Wei, YAO Jun. Pore scale fracturing fluid occurrence mechanisms in multi-scale matrix-fracture system of shale gas reservoir [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 627-635.
[9]	HAN Kening, WANG Wei, FAN Dongyan, YAO Jun, LUO Fei, YANG Can. Production forecasting for normal pressure shale gas wells based on coupling of production decline method and LSTM model [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 647-656.
[10]	LUO Hongwen, ZHANG Qin, LI Haitao, XIANG Yuxing, LI Ying, PANG Wei, LIU Chang, YU Hao, WANG Yaning. Influence law of temperature profile for horizontal wells in tight oil reservoirs [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 676-685.
[11]	HU Zhijian, LI Shuxin, WANG Jianjun, ZHOU Hong, ZHAO Yulong, ZHANG Liehui. Productivity evaluation of multi-stage fracturing horizontal wells in shale gas reservoir with complex artificial fracture occurrence [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 459-466.
[12]	LIU Honglin,ZHOU Shangwen,LI Xiaobo. Application of PCA plus OPLS method in rapid reserve production rate prediction of shale gas wells [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 474-483.
[13]	QIU Xiaoxue,ZHONG Guanghai,LI Xiansheng,CHEN Meng,LING Weitong. CFD simulation of flow characteristics of shale gas horizontal wells with different inclination [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 340-347.
[14]	YANG Zuoya,WU Xiaomin. Numerical simulation study on multi-layer combined exploitation of natural gas hydrate reservoirs [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 393-402.
[15]	ZHANG Ying,QU Lili,ZHU Lu,ZHANG Yan,HAN Siyang,ZENG Cheng. Application of SVM algorithm in fluid prediction of volcanic reservoirs in Nanpu Sag, Bohai Bay Basin [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(2): 181-189.