Discrepancy between (GIIP - Final GIIP) and Field production totals

[mbmfer]

Hi,

Looking at the summary vectors and PRT file at the end of the run I can see that the difference between initial and final GIIP in this run gives 563 BCF:

                                                 ===================================================
                                                  :                   Field Totals                  :
                                                  :      PAV  =            72 BARSA                 :
                                                  :      PORV =    1543981036   RM3                 :
                                                  : Pressure is weighted by hydrocarbon pore volume :
                                                  : Porv volumes are taken at reference conditions  :
                         :--------------- Oil    SM3 ---------------:-- Wat    SM3 --:--------------- Gas    SM3 ---------------:
                         :      Liquid        Vapour        Total   :      Total     :      Free        Dissolved       Total   :
:------------------------:------------------------------------------:----------------:------------------------------------------:
:Currently   in place    :        160648         17725        178373:   1454439910   :    5479774276             0    5479774276:
:------------------------:------------------------------------------:----------------:------------------------------------------:
:Originally  in place    :             0             0             0:   1456533322   :   21430039980             0   21430039980:
:========================:==========================================:================:==========================================:

However the field totals reported at the same time step show a total gas production of 569 BCF:

=================================================== CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION/INJECTION REPORT =========================================
:  WELL  :  LOCATION :  WELL  :CTRL:    OIL    :   WATER   :    GAS    :   Prod    :    OIL    :   WATER   :    GAS    :   INJ     :
:  NAME  :  (I,J,K)  :  TYPE  :MODE:    PROD   :   PROD    :    PROD   :  RES.VOL. :    INJ    :   INJ     :    INJ    :  RES.VOL. :
:        :           :        :    :    MSCM   :   MSCM    :    MMSCM  :   MRCM    :    MSCM   :   MSCM    :    MMSCM  :   MRCM    :
====================================================================================================================================

:   FIELD:           :        :    :      141.8:       92.7: 16133206.4:   116483.4:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0: 
:--------:-----------:--------:----:------------:----------:-----------:-----------:------------:----------:-----------:-----------: 

:    MANW:           :        :    :       84.7:       70.1:  9701099.8:    69742.4:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0: 
:--------:-----------:--------:----:------------:----------:-----------:-----------:------------:----------:-----------:-----------: 

:    MANE:           :        :    :       57.1:       22.6:  6432106.6:    46741.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0: 
:--------:-----------:--------:----:------------:----------:-----------:-----------:------------:----------:-----------:-----------: 

: MANEAST:           :        :    :      141.8:       92.7: 16133206.4:   116483.4:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0: 
:--------:-----------:--------:----:------------:----------:-----------:-----------:------------:----------:-----------:-----------: 

:    AN_E:           :    PROD:GRUP:       57.1:       22.6:  6432106.6:    46741.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0:        0.0: 
:--------:-----------:--------:----:------------:----------:-----------:-----------:------------:----------:-----------:-----------: 

Do you know how may I account for the 6 BCF difference between the 2 figures? The FGIP and FGPT vectors also show the same discrepancy.

[EdmundStephens]

Hi, maybe this helps. I have had similar small discrepancies over the years.

• Volume may be lost into connected aquifer if these are above the hydrocarbon contact
• If you have multiple PVT connected regions then flow between these regions may not exactly conserve mass because black oil simulators model pressure and saturation therefore not necessarily conserving mass
• When solvers fail in Eclipse and tNav, the solution can be stopped at the last iteration which may be completely erroneous

Good luck!