[Opm] CORRECTION: PRT Files

[bobmerrill at mersep.com]

Dear Alf:

I made a mistake in my previous note - the calculated water volume (53K)
is correct - but the combined volume (Bo x Oil+Bw * Water ~ 267k RB) is
still much larger than the reported pore volume (42475 RB).

Note, that the FIPNUM for region 1 (the only region) is correct, for both
pressure and fluids in place.  Just the FIELD numbers look odd.

Regards,

Bob Merrill


On Fri, December 16, 2016 9:06 pm, bobmerrill at mersep.com wrote:
> Dear Alf:
>
>
> Thank you for your quick response.  I am using the 2016.10 release
> (November).  I would need to relearn many skills to compile, link and load
>  a project of this size from source.
>
> I enclose the two DATA files which produced the anomalous PAV.  I have
> sent partial PRT files (I didn't want to send a zip - two many viruses).
>
> In addition to the misleading PAV, I also believe that the reported PORV
> is wrong.  The value reported as PORV doesn't agree with my hand
> calculation for the case BUCKLEY_LEVERETT.DATA.  The Oil In Place number
> is similar to my hand calculation (the difference may be due to
> interpolation of oil formation volume factor).  However, the water volume
>  reported is completely wrong (it agrees with neither my hand
> calculations nor the reported PORV).  The GOR appears to be correct.
>
> I believe that this may be a reporting issue.  A comparison of Eclipse
> and Flow results for simplified Buckley Leverett (1D) flow are very
> similar, and the map saturations are also similar (+/- 1.5pu; see enclosed
>  comparison in the PNG).  There does seem to be an issue with Flow's
> initial timestep (the rate is too big), but that is easily fixed by
> choosing a small first dt (0.01 days, in this case).
>
> Let me know if I can provide any assistence with your efforts on Flow.
>
>
> Are you in Stavanger?  I worked with Kurt Meisingset at Statoil (probably
>  long retired) on a joint industry PVT project almost 20 years ago.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Bob Merrill
> India
>
>
> (please note: I can only receive/send files < 1.5MB on this account)
>
>
>
> On Fri, December 16, 2016 3:02 am, Alf Birger Rustad wrote:
>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>>
>>
>> Your understanding is correct. We did debug the PAV calculations right
>> before the release, so there might still be some rough edges. Can you
>> please share what version of flow you are using, is it the 2016.10
>> release or fresh from git? Can you also share what SPE1 deck you are
>> using. Is it from opm-data, and if so, is it case 1 or 2.
>>
>> Thanks for testing and reporting!
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alf
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Opm [opm-bounces at opm-project.org] on behalf of
>> bobmerrill at mersep.com [bobmerrill at mersep.com]
>> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 2:59 AM
>> To: opm at opm-project.org
>> Subject: [Opm] PRT Files
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear OPM List:
>>
>>
>>
>> I am a new user to Flow; I am just beginning to experiment with the
>> keywords to see which work and which don't.
>>
>> I am not a skilled programmer (no C; some (old) Fortran; reasonable
>> Perl
>> and VBA).
>>
>> I am a fairly experienced reservoir engineer.  And I'm confused about
>> the output in the PRT files.  A report is printed which is called "Field
>>  Totals".  It lists a quantity called "PAV" which I assume to be the
>> average HCPV weighted pressure.  But is lists a value around 334 (in
>> both SPE1 and in a case I built from scratch).  I'm pretty sure that the
>>  reservoir pressure is NOT 334; I have BHP constrants of 4800
>> (producer) and
>> 5100 (injector).
>>
>>
>>
>> So what is it?  If it's not what it says, are the volumes in place
>> correct?
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Merrill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opm mailing list
>> Opm at opm-project.org
>> http://opm-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
>> intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of
>> the information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are
>> not the addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail
>> and delete this message. Thank you
>>
>>
>