Prediction of the Productivity Ratio of Perforated Wells Using Least Squares Support Vector Machine with Particle Swarm Optimization
Source abstract
Abstract
The productivity ratio is a vital metric for assessing the efficiency of perforated completions. Accurate and rapid prediction of this ratio is essential for optimizing the perforation design. In this study, we propose a novel approach that combines three-dimensional finite element numerical simulation and machine learning techniques to predict the productivity ratio of perforated wells. Initially, we obtain the productivity ratio of perforated wells under various perforation parameters using three-dimensional finite element numerical simulation. This generates a sample set for machine learning. Subsequently, we employ the least squares support vector machine (LSSVM) algorithm to establish a prediction model for the productivity ratio of perforated wells. To optimize the parameters of the LSSVM algorithm, we utilize the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm. We compare our proposed PSO-LSSVM model with that established based on other parameter optimization methods and machine learning algorithms, such as Grid search-LSSVM, PSO-ANN, and PSO-RF. Our results demonstrate that the PSO-LSSVM model exhibits rapid convergence, high prediction accuracy, and strong generalization ability in predicting the productivity ratio of perforated wells. This research provides a valuable reference and guidance for optimizing perforation design. Additionally, it offers new insights into predicting the productivity of complex completions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Reservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods · Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis · Drilling and Well Engineering
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Pipeline and Civil Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Lin, J. (2022, January 16–18). Numerical Simulation Investigation of Perforation Parameter Optimization Design Based on Orthogonal Experimental Method. Proceedings of the International Field Exploration and Development Conference, Xi’an, China. Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering.
2. Calculation of Perforated Vertical and Horizontal Well Productivity in Low-Permeability Reservoirs10.2118/198904-PA ↗
3. A new and simple model for the prediction of horizontal well productivity in gas condensate reservoirs10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.022 ↗
4. Grove, B., Harvey, J., and Martin, A. (2016, January 24–26). Perforating System Performance at Downhole Conditions: Recent Advances in Modeling and Prediction. Proceedings of the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, USA.10.2118/178979-MS ↗
5. Design for Reliability: Experimental and Numerical Simulation of Cased and Perforated Completions with Standalone Screen10.2118/201315-PA ↗
6. Allison, S., Löhken, J., Nelis, L., Djayapertapa, L., Byrne, M., Watson, K., and Clarke, A. (2015, January 3–5). Understanding Perforation Geometry Influence on Flow Performance Using CFD. Proceedings of the SPE European Formation Damage Conference and Exhibition, Budapest, Hungary.10.2118/174194-MS ↗
7. A new assessment of perforation skin factor for vertical perforated wells in near-wellbore region10.1007/s13202-021-01326-8 ↗
8. Yildiz, T., and Ozer, D. (1998, January 1–4). Experimental Study on the Productivity of Complex Well Configurations. Proceedings of the SPE International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, Calgary, AB, Canada.10.2118/50433-MS ↗
9. Semianalytical Productivity Models for Perforated Completions
10. Assessment of Total Skin Factor in Perforated Wells10.2118/82249-PA ↗
11. An Advanced Method for Predicting the Productivity Ratio of a Perforated Well10.2118/8804-PA ↗
12. Quantifying the skin factor for estimating the completion efficiency of perforation tunnels in petroleum wells10.1016/j.petrol.2006.11.012 ↗
13. Comparison of Skin Factors for Perforated Completions Calculated with Computational-Fluid-Dynamics Software and the Karakas-Tariq Semianalytical Model10.2118/143663-PA ↗
14. Quantifying the partial penetration skin factor for evaluating the completion efficiency of vertical oil wells
15. Numerical simulation of skin factors for perforated wells with crushed zone and drilling-fluid damage in tight gas reservoirs10.1016/j.jngse.2021.103907 ↗
16. Tang, Y., Ozkan, E., Kelkar, M., and Yildiz, T. (October, January 30). Fast and Accurate Correlations to Compute the Perforation Pseudoskin and Productivity of Horizontal Wells. Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, USA.
17. Research on Productivity Prediction Model of Three-Dimensional Directional Wells in Different Reservoirs10.1061/JLEED9.EYENG-4839 ↗
18. Application of supervised machine learning paradigms in the prediction of petroleum reservoir properties: Comparative analysis of ANN and SVM models10.1016/j.petrol.2020.108182 ↗
19. Ensemble machine learning: An untapped modeling paradigm for petroleum reservoir characterization10.1016/j.petrol.2017.01.024 ↗
20. Integrating deep learning and logging data analytics for lithofacies classification and 3D modeling of tight sandstone reservoirs10.1016/j.gsf.2021.101311 ↗
21. Performance evaluation of boosting machine learning algorithms for lithofacies classification in heterogeneous carbonate reservoirs10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2022.105886 ↗
22. Onwuchekwa, C. (2018, January 6–8). Application of machine learning ideas to reservoir fluid properties estimation. Proceedings of the SPE Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition, Lagos, Nigeria.10.2118/193461-MS ↗
23. Hadavimoghaddam, F., Ostadhassan, M., Heidaryan, E., Sadri, M.A., Chapanova, I., Popov, E., Cheremisin, A., and Rafieepour, S. (2021). Prediction of dead oil viscosity: Machine learning vs. classical correlations. Energies, 14.10.3390/en14040930 ↗
24. A reinforcement learning approach for waterflooding optimization in petroleum reservoirs10.1016/j.engappai.2018.09.019 ↗
25. Training effective deep reinforcement learning agents for real-time life-cycle production optimization10.1016/j.petrol.2021.109766 ↗
26. Digital twin for oil pipeline risk estimation using prognostic and machine learning techniques
27. Ambade, A., Karnik, S., Songchitruksa, P., Sinha, R.R., and Gupta, S. (2021, January 18–19). Electrical Submersible Pump Prognostics and Health Monitoring Using Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing. Proceedings of the SPE Middle East Intelligent Oil and Gas Symposium, SPE, Virtual.10.2118/208649-MS ↗
28. Kumar, A. (May, January 30). Artificial neural network as a tool for reservoir characterization and its application in the petroleum engineering. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC, Houston, TX, USA.
29. Evolving artificial neural network and imperialist competitive algorithm for prediction oil flow rate of the reservoir10.1016/j.asoc.2012.10.009 ↗
30. Amirian, E., Fedutenko, E., Yang, C., Chen, Z., and Nghiem, L. (2018). Applications of Data Management and Analysis: Case Studies in Social Networks and Beyond, Springer.
31. Application of mixed kernels function (MKF) based support vector regression model (SVR) for CO2–Reservoir oil minimum miscibility pressure prediction10.1016/j.fuel.2016.07.030 ↗
32. A hybrid particle swarm optimization and support vector regression model for modelling permeability prediction of hydrocarbon reservoir10.1016/j.petrol.2016.11.033 ↗
33. Porosity prediction using Fuzzy SVR and FCM SVR from well logs of an oil field in south of Iran10.1007/s11600-022-00944-y ↗
34. Comparison of machine learning methods for estimating permeability and porosity of oil reservoirs via petro-physical logs10.1016/j.petlm.2018.06.002 ↗
35. Artificial neural network, support vector machine, decision tree, random forest, and committee machine intelligent system help to improve performance prediction of low salinity water injection in carbonate oil reservoirs10.1016/j.petrol.2022.111046 ↗
36. TOC prediction using a gradient boosting decision tree method: A case study of shale reservoirs in Qinshui Basin
37. Analysis of factors of productivity of tight conglomerate reservoirs based on random forest algorithm10.1021/acsomega.2c02546 ↗
38. Anomaly Detection Using Explainable Random Forest for the Prediction of Undesirable Events in Oil Wells
39. Applied random forest for parameter sensitivity of low salinity water Injection (LSWI) implementation on carbonate reservoir10.1016/j.aej.2021.06.096 ↗
40. Model selection for the LS-SVM. Application to handwriting recognition10.1016/j.patcog.2008.10.023 ↗
41. Principles of risk minimization for learning theory
42. Kennedy, J., and Eberhart, R. (December, January 27). Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of the ICNN’95-International Conference on Neural Networks, Perth, WA, Australia.