This paper presents the successive modeling solutions used to estimate the performance under primary and secondary recovery of the Kharyaga field. Kharyaga object 2 is characterized by different zones of heterogeneities and reservoir type: while platform margin is fractured and karstified, no karstic features are identified in the platform interior, transition zones seems the most complex.
To decide on further development of the field two dynamic models of the field were developed:
Double porosity-double permeability
Single porosity-single permeability.
The paper discusses advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches to predict a behavior of such a complex field. Forecast is run on these two models and the results are compared. Based on that, the conclusions and recommendations are made when it is reasonable to use one or another model for forecast.