Soran university

Faculty of engineering
Petroleum engineering department
4th stage

Field Development
Finding standard oil initial in place (STOIIP)

Prepared by:
Anas Abdulrazak
Rawa Sarbaz
Muhamad Omer

Supervised by:
Dr. Jagar A. Ali

14th Feb, 2024

Table of Contents
Exercise ....................................................................................................................................... i

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

2. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 . Finding contour map areas ........................................................................................ 3

2.2. Finding the STOIIP ......................................................................................................... 6

2.2.1. Deterministic Method ............................................................................................... 6

2.2.2. Stochastic methods ................................................................................................... 8

2.3. Data compare................................................................................................................. 10

4. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 12

5. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 14

6. References ............................................................................................................................ 15

List of figures
Figure 1. reservoir estimation methods ...................................................................................... 2

Figure 2. Conceptual scheme for oil and gas resources and reserves. ....................................... 2

Figure 3. relationship between area and thickness of the reservoir considering proved,

probable and possible estimation ............................................................................................... 6

Figure 4. Frequency view of STOIIP ......................................................................................... 9

Figure 5. cumulative frequency view of STOIIP considering the probabilities ........................ 9

Figure 6. cumulative frequency view of reserve considering the probabilities ....................... 10

Figure 7. Deterministic and Stochastic reserve estimate ......................................................... 11

Figure 8. Percentage Change in STOIIP vs Range of input data ............................................. 11

List of tables
Table 1. contour map regions due to different elevation ........................................................... 3

Table 2. petrophysics property of rock ...................................................................................... 5

Table 3 reservoir Petro-physical properties ............................................................................... 7

Table 4. recording area versus Hight considering the estimations (p90, p50 and p10) ............. 7

Table 5. using deterministic method based on the estimations .................................................. 8

Table 6. determining STOIIP and Reserve in each probability ................................................. 8

Table 7. comparation data between deterministic and probabilistic ........................................ 10

Exercise
Calculate the initial oil in place (using deterministic and probabilistic methods) for the below
contour map based on the data of the given field. Report your result and interpretation along
with the steps by a report. Discuss any uncertainties for the calculated reserve.

i
1. Introduction
Reserves estimation is one of the most essential tasks in the petroleum industry. It is the process
by which the economically recoverable hydrocarbons in a field, area, or region are evaluated
quantitatively (Demirmen, 2007). As a result, reserve estimation challenge is a function of time
and available data, Reserve estimation can be divided into five types: analogy, volumetric,
decline curve analysis, material balance and reservoir simulation (figure.1), each of them
differs from another to the kind of data required. The choice of the suitable and appropriate
method relies on reservoir maturity, heterogeneity in the reservoir and data acquisition required
(Mohammad Najeeb, 2020). In this study case two types of reserve estimation used, volumetric
approach in mathematic formula (deterministic side) and Monte Carlo Simulation technique
(probabilistic side). The method of estimation is called deterministic if a single best estimate
of reserves is made based on known geological, engineering, and economic data. The method
of estimation is called probabilistic when the known geological, engineering, and economic
data are used to generate a range of estimates and their associated probabilities (). Depending
on the degree of uncertainty, three main classes of reserves are recognized: proved, probable,
and possible (figure.2), the last-named two collectively called unproved. Identifying reserves
as proved, unproved probable, and unproved possible has been the most frequent classification
method and gives an indication of the probability of recovery. Because of potential differences
in uncertainty, caution should be exercised when aggregating reserves of different
classifications. The estimations have a high degree of dependence on probability. When
probabilistic methods of estimation are used, the probabilities descend from 90% for proved
reserves, 50% for unproved probable and 10% for unproved possible. Proved reserves are those
quantities that have reasonable certainty of being recovered, indicating a high degree of
confidence. Proved reserves may be developed or undeveloped. Probable reserves are more
likely than not to be recoverable, while possible reserves are less likely to be recoverable than
probable reserves. Geological and engineering data form the basis of determination. Proved
reserves assume recoverability under current economic conditions, operating methods, and
government regulations. For unproved reserves, recoverability may be tied to future economic
conditions and technology (Demirmen, 2007). If deterministic methods are used, the term
‘reasonable certainty’ is intended to express a high degree of confidence that the quantities will
be recovered. If probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 90% probability that
the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the estimate.

1|Page
Therefore, a comparison of deterministic and probabilistic methods can provide quality
assurance for estimating hydrocarbon reserves. Proved reserves would then be calculated both
deterministically and probabilistically and the two values compared. Probabilistic methods use
stochastic parameters such as a Monte Carlo simulation. On the other hand, deterministic
calculations are made with discrete values. If the deterministic value and the probabilistic value
agree, then confidence in the reserve calculation is increased. If the two values are very
different, the assumptions need to be reexamined (Vilanova, 2016).

Figure 1. reservoir estimation methods

Figure 2. Conceptual scheme for oil and gas resources and reserves .

2|Page
 2. Methodology
2.1 . Finding contour map areas
At the outset, manual methodologies utilizing hand-drawn counter maps are utilized. Analysts
can quantify the area at various depth levels by delineating squares on the counter map and
subsequently counting and aggregating the squares that encompass the zone of interest, as
exemplified in the accompanying figures.

Table 1. contour map regions due to different elevation

3|Page
4|Page
Table 2. petrophysics property of rock

Square
8700 8600 8500 8400 8300 8200 8100
(contour)
Total 18.09 13.04 8.84 6.72 5.13 3.54 1.91

Area (km^2) 18.09 13.04 8.84 6.72 5.13 3.54 1.91

Area (ac) 4470.04 3222.18 2184.36 1660.51 1267.62 874.73 471.96

Ht above OWC 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Inc vol (ac-ft) 384611 270327 192244 146407 107118 67335 23598

5|Page
 2.2. Finding the STOIIP
In the context of a Field Development Plan (FDP), the assessment of Stock Tank Oil Initially
in Place (STOIIP) involves both deterministic and stochastic approaches. These methodologies
play crucial roles in estimating and planning for the development of hydrocarbon reservoirs.

7758 ∗ 𝑁/𝐺 ∗ 𝐺𝑅𝑉 ∗ 𝑃𝑂𝑅 ∗ (1 − 𝑆𝑊)

𝑆𝑇𝑂𝐼𝐼𝑃 =
𝐵𝑂

where:

Grv: is gross rock volume.

N/g: is net to gross.

Sw: is water saturation.

Bo :is oil formation factor.

2.2.1. Deterministic Method

By employing the given petrophysical data, the STOIIP can be derived. Begin by plotting a
graph illustrating the relationship between the Height above Water Oil Contact and the
reservoir area to identify the proven reserves (P90), probable reserves (P50), and possible
reserves (P10).

800

700

600
Height Above OWC (ft)

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Area (ac)

Figure 3. relationship between area and thickness of the reservoir considering proved, probable and possible estimation

6|Page
Table 3 reservoir Petro-physical properties

 GRV = H * Area
 For P90 h = 170 ft and area = 2577 acre
 GRV = 170 * 2577.99 = 438258.3
 For P50 h = 320 ft area = 3077.99 acre
 GRV= 984956.8-acre ft
 For P10 h = 420 ft area = 4077.99 acre
 GRV = 1712755.8 Acre ft

Table 4. recording area versus Hight considering the estimations (p90, p50 and p10)

P90 P50 P10

x (area) y (height) x (area) y (height) x (area) y (height) x (area) y (height)
4470.40 0 2212.85 0.00 2999.64 0.00 3330.45 0.00
3222.18 100 1594.98 49.50 2162.08 67.10 2400.52 74.50
2184.36 200 1081.26 99.00 1465.71 134.20 1627.35 149.00
1660.51 300 821.95 148.50 1114.20 201.30 1237.08 223.50
1267.62 400 627.47 198.00 850.57 268.40 944.38 298.00
874.73 500 432.99 247.50 586.94 335.50 651.67 372.50
471.96 600 233.62 297.00 316.69 402.60 351.61 447.00
0.00 700 0.00 346.50 0.00 469.70 0.00 521.50

7|Page
Table 5. using deterministic method based on the estimations

P90 P50 P10

GRV (bbl) 4576.28 GRV (bbl) 6203.40 GRV (bbl) 6887.53

Porosity Porosity Porosity

0.20 0.21 0.22
(frac.) (frac.) (frac.)

SW Sw Sw
0.40 0.37 0.25
(frac.) (frac.) (frac.)

NTG 0.52 NTG 0.54 NTG 0.71

Bo
1.4
(rb/stb)

RF (fract.) 0.5

Table 6. determining STOIIP and Reserve in each probability

STOIIP
P90 203.971114 P50 316.559247 P10 576.3383
(MMBLS)

Reserve
P90 101.985557 P50 158.279623 P10 288.1691
(MMBLS)

2.2.2. Stochastic methods

The stochastic approach involves running multiple simulations with a range of possible values
for these parameters to generate a probability distribution of STOIIP.

• Utilized the Monte Carlo method for the determination of Stock Tank Oil Initially In
Place (STOIIP). This method involves the utilization of diverse porosity, water
saturation (SW), gross rock volume (GRV), and net-to-gross ratio (N/G) values to
calculate the P90, P50, and P10 percentiles. The computation is executed through an
Excel file, integrating the petrophysical characteristics of wells. This methodology
facilitates a thorough evaluation of reservoir uncertainty, encompassing a spectrum of
input parameters.

8|Page
Figure 4. Frequency view of STOIIP

Figure 5. cumulative frequency view of STOIIP considering the probabilities

9|Page
Figure 6. cumulative frequency view of reserve considering the probabilities

2.3. Data compare

Table 7. comparation data between deterministic and probabilistic

Prob. STOIIP Recoverable

P90 204 102
Deterministic P50 360 158
P10 577 288
P90 296 147
Stochastic P50 352 178
P10 417 209

10 | P a g e
 Deterministic and Stochastic
Reserve Estimate
700
577
600
500 417
400 360 352
288 296
300
204 209
158 178
200 147
102
100
0
P90 P50 P10 P90 P50 P10
Deterministic Stochastic
STOIIP Recoverable

Figure 7. Deterministic and Stochastic reserve estimate

Percentage Change in STOIIP vs

Range of input data
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
GRV NTG Phi Sw
-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

Low High

Figure 8. Percentage Change in STOIIP vs Range of input data

11 | P a g e
4. Discussion
Figure-3 shows how the surface area of a reservoir increases as its height increases. The red
line, light blue line, and yellow line represent the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of the possible
surface areas for a given height, which can be used to estimate the gross reservoir volume at
different confidence levels.

• The surface area of a reservoir is directly related to its height, with an increasing height
resulting in a decrease in surface area.
• The percentage lines represent different percentages of possible surface areas for a
given height, with red representing a conservative estimate, blue representing the
median, and yellow representing an optimistic estimate with a 90% chance of being
higher than the actual value.

Table-5 shows a range of possible STOIIP values across the percentiles. This reflects the
inherent uncertainty in reservoir properties and the estimation process. The P10 value
represents a conservative estimate, while P90 is an optimistic one, with P50 being the most
likely outcome. While deterministic methods offer advantages like simplicity and
reproducibility, they may not capture all the complexities of a reservoir. Real-world factors
like geological variations and data quality can introduce uncertainties not reflected in
deterministic outputs. Consider incorporating probabilistic methods alongside deterministic
approaches for a more comprehensive understanding of STOIIP uncertainty. shows the
relationship between STOIIP and cumulative probability through P10, P50, and P90 values.

• P10: There's a 10% chance STOIIP will be lower, a conservative estimate.

• P50: The median value, with a 50% chance of being higher or lower.
• P90: There's a 90% chance STOIIP will be lower, an optimistic estimate.

Similar P10, P50, P90 values for different scenarios (e.g., reservoir sections, sensitivity
analysis).

12 | P a g e
 • Figure-5 compares two methods for estimating reserves: deterministic and stochastic.
Deterministic methods provide a single estimate, while stochastic methods account for
uncertainty with a range of estimates, The vertical axis shows the number of reserves,
while the horizontal axis shows the probability of achieving that amount. The P10, P50,
and P90 values represent the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of the possible reserve
estimates.

Moreover, as illustrated in figure-7 The deterministic estimate is 577 million units, while the
stochastic estimate ranges from 102 million to 700 million units. The P50 value, which is more
likely to be accurate, is 417 million units, lower than the deterministic estimate due to the
consideration of uncertainty.

• Oil reservoir development strategy aiming for high recovery, stable production, and
cost-effectiveness. It achieves a 50% recovery factor, significantly higher than natural
depletion, through a well layout with efficient sweep and avoids complexities of other
methods, making it stable and cost-effective.

13 | P a g e
5. Conclusion
Accurately estimating the initial hydrocarbon volume within a reservoir is essential for
informed decision-making, but inherent uncertainties complicate this task. Two distinct
approaches provide valuable insights:

1. Volumetric Techniques: Offering a swift and efficient estimation, these methods serve as a
valuable starting point for preliminary assessments and early decision-making. Their
simplicity makes them readily applicable, but it's crucial to acknowledge their potential for
oversimplification by neglecting geological and data-related uncertainties.

2. Probabilistic Techniques: Acknowledging the inherent variability and uncertainty associated

with reservoir characterization, these methods provide a more nuanced understanding. By
generating a range of potential outcomes, they empower engineers to effectively assess risks
and make well-informed decisions that account for potential variations. This approach can be
likened to a detailed map highlighting diverse possibilities within the terrain.

In summary, this report investigated the inherent uncertainty associated with estimating the
initial oil-in-place (STOIIP) within a reservoir. While deterministic methods offer a single
value, they neglect crucial factors like geological variability and data limitations. This analysis
highlights the value of employing stochastic methods, represented by the red, blue, and yellow
lines in the graph. These methods generate ranges of possible STOIIP values (P10, P50, P90)
based on different confidence levels, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the
uncertainty involved.

Key takeaways:

• Deterministic methods, while simple, are insufficient for capturing real-world

complexities.
• Stochastic methods offer a range of possible STOIIP values at different confidence
levels (P10, P50, P90) for informed decision-making.
• Combining deterministic and stochastic approaches provides a more comprehensive
picture of STOIIP uncertainty.

14 | P a g e
6. References
1. Demirmen, F., 2007. Reserves Estimation: The Challenge for the Industry. JPT.
2. Mohammad Najeeb, F. S. K. G. N. S., 2020. Using Different Methods to Predict Oil in Place
in Mishrif Formation / Amara Oil Field. 30 March.
3. Vilanova, j., 2016. A Comparison of Deterministic and Probabilistic Methods to Improve
Reserves Estimates. linkedin.

15 | P a g e