Suscripción a Biblioteca: Guest
Portal Digitalde Biblioteca Digital eLibros Revistas Referencias y Libros de Ponencias Colecciones
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification
Factor de Impacto: 3.259 Factor de Impacto de 5 años: 2.547 SJR: 0.417 SNIP: 0.8 CiteScore™: 1.52

ISSN Imprimir: 2152-5080
ISSN En Línea: 2152-5099

Acceso abierto

International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification

DOI: 10.1615/Int.J.UncertaintyQuantification.2018019782
pages 23-41

COMPARISON OF RISK ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES IN A GEOSTATISTICAL CONTEXT: MONTE CARLO WITH JOINT PROXY MODELS AND DISCRETIZED LATIN HYPERCUBE

Susana Santos
University of Campinas
Ana Teresa F. S. Gaspar
Department of Energy, School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Campinas, Brazil
Denis J. Schiozer
Department of Energy, School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Campinas, Brazil

SINOPSIS

During the development of petroleum fields, uncertainty quantification is essential to base decisions. Several methods are presented in the literature, but its choice must agree with the complexity of the case study to ensure reliable results at minimum computational costs. In this study, we compared two risk analysis methodologies applied to a complex reservoir model comprising a large set of geostatistical realizations: (1) a generation of scenarios using the discretized Latin hypercube sampling technique combined with geostatistical realizations (DLHG) and (2) a generation of scenarios using the Monte Carlo sampling technique combined with joint proxy models, entitled the joint modeling method (JMM). For a reference response, we assessed risk using the pure Monte Carlo sampling combined with flow simulation using a very high sampling number. We compared the methodologies, looking at the (1) accuracy of the results, (2) computational cost, (3) difficulty in the application, and (4) limitations of the methods. Our results showed that both methods are reliable but revealed limitations in the JMM. Due to the way the JMM captures the effect of a geostatistical uncertainty, the number of required flow simulation runs increased exponentially and became unfeasible to consider more than 10 realizations. The DLHG method showed advantages in such a context, namely, because it generated precise results from less than half of the flow simulation runs, the risk curves were computed directly from the flow simulation results (i.e., a proxy model was not needed), and incorporated hundreds of geostatistical realizations. In addition, this method is fast, straightforward, and easy to implement.


Articles with similar content:

FRAMEWORK FOR CONVERGENCE AND VALIDATION OF STOCHASTIC UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION AND RELATIONSHIP TO DETERMINISTIC VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.3, 2013, issue 5
Frederick Stern, Matteo Diez, Wei He, S. Maysam Mousaviraad
DATA ASSIMILATION FOR NAVIER-STOKES USING THE LEAST-SQUARES FINITE-ELEMENT METHOD
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.8, 2018, issue 5
Richard P. Dwight, Alexander Schwarz
BAYESIAN MULTISCALE FINITE ELEMENT METHODS. MODELING MISSING SUBGRID INFORMATION PROBABILISTICALLY
International Journal for Multiscale Computational Engineering, Vol.15, 2017, issue 2
Wing Tat Leung, B. Mallick, Yalchin Efendiev, N. Guha, V. H. Hoang, S. W. Cheung
VPS: VORONOI PIECEWISE SURROGATE MODELS FOR HIGH-DIMENSIONAL DATA FITTING
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.7, 2017, issue 1
Marta D'Elia, Mohamed S. Ebeida, Ahmad Rushdi, Eric T. Phipps, Laura P. Swiler
REFINED LATINIZED STRATIFIED SAMPLING: A ROBUST SEQUENTIAL SAMPLE SIZE EXTENSION METHODOLOGY FOR HIGH-DIMENSIONAL LATIN HYPERCUBE AND STRATIFIED DESIGNS
International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, Vol.6, 2016, issue 1
Michael D. Shields