The article is devoted to the comparison of the capabilities of two analytical models describing the operation of oil fields, namely CRM and stochastic-analytical model (SAM). These tools for controlling and regulating the technological mode of withdrawal and injection neutralize the disadvantages expressed in the uncertainty of the adaptation of hydrodynamic models (HDM) and the distribution of reservoir properties (PRP) in the zones between wells, and also act as "assistants" in setting up the hydrodynamic model, conducting analysis and monitoring RPM systems. The inverse problem of underground hydromechanics is solved in the form of CAM (“autohydro-self-monitoring”), while CRM is represented by an equation based on material balance.
Materials and methods
Analytical solution of the problems of analysis and optimization of the waterflooding system, the ability to assess the filtration properties of the reservoir in the vicinity of wells and between pairs of wells of candidates for geological and technical measures.
Hydrodynamic modeling, stochastic-analytical models, analytical models, reservoir pressure maintenance system