Updating GGR Study Using Tracer Test Data As a Part of Integrated Planning For Chemical Flood In Rantau Field
Rantau Field located in the central part of North Sumatra Basin, which is a faulted anticline structure that extends to the shape of a saddle (“Saddle”) in the middle and trending elongation N 650 W. The pattern of flower structures along with his pop-ups grow in Rantau Field that serves as a trap for hydrocarbons in this field. Trap cover (“closures”) from this Anticline has a width of approximately 3.5 km long and 11 km with a height of 400 m. cover Based on the pattern of these structures, Rantau Field is divided into five blocks and was named: Block-A (Block A and A2), Block-B, Block-C, Block-D, and Block-E in succession from the SE to NW. Start up a full scale waterflood commenced in early 2013, by injecting produced water as much as the average 11300 bwpd through 31 wells injector. While the average additional production from waterflood activity is nearly 987 bopd, which is produced through 28 monitor wells. The Planning of Rantau Chemical Flood Pilot project in an integrated project which involves various multi-discipline aspects of both sub-surface, surface and as well as support functions. Based on field screening conducted by GGRP team, it showed that the most prospective layer for the implementation of chemical flood was in Z-600. For the purpose of chemical flood planning, it needs to do some additional analysis to upgrade GGRP Data. One of the analyses was Tracer Test Survey. The tracer injection was performed in layer Z600, block C1 & C2 waterflood project. It was conducted in 6 water injection well; P–025, P–239, P–306, P–309, P–342, P–377, whereas the sampling and analysis was 6 production well; P–022, P–383, P–014, P–164, P–168, P–140. In some part of the structure, it shows that the chemical tracer pass through fault, which may prove that the fault was leaking fault. Some tracer analysis indicated chemical tracer has not been detected yet in any monitoring wells. It is probably caused of the chemical tracer has not achieved the breakthrough or there are some facies changes. The analysis also showed that the tracer was slower in breakthrough time compare to the dynamic model (reservoir simulation). Therefore, the team has decided to do some additional study to enrich data and upgrade the latest GGRP Study by specifically doing re-modeling using tracer test data analysis.
AAPG Datapages/Search and Discovery Article #90194 © 2014 International Conference & Exhibition, Istanbul, Turkey, September 14-17, 2014