SPE 68233

Prediction of Oil PVT Properties Using Neural Networks

E.A. Osman, SPE, O.A. Abdel-Wahhab, and M.A. Al-Marhoun, SPE, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals,
Saudi Arabia
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2001 SPE Middle East Oil Show held in
Bahrain, 1720 March 2001.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Reservoir fluid properties are very important in reservoir
engineering computations such as material balance
calculations, well test analysis, reserve estimates, and
numerical reservoir simulations. Ideally, these properties
should be obtained from actual measurements. Quite often,
however, these measurements are either not available, or very
costly to obtain. In such cases, empirically derived
correlations are used to predict the needed properties. All
computations, therefore, will depend on the accuracy of the
correlations used for predicting the fluid properties.
This study presents Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
model for predicting the formation volume factor at the bubble
point pressure. The model is developed using 803 published
data from the Middle East, Malaysia, Colombia, and Gulf of
Mexico fields. One-half of the data was used to train the ANN
models, one quarter to cross-validate the relationships
established during the training process and the remaining one
quarter to test the models to evaluate their accuracy and trend
stability. The results show that the developed model provides
better predictions and higher accuracy than the published
empirical correlations. The present model provides predictions
of the formation volume factor at the bubble point pressure
with an absolute average percent error of 1.789%, a standard
deviation of 2.2053% and correlation coefficient of 0.988.
Trend tests were performed to check the behavior of the
predicted values of Bob for any change in reservoir
temperature, Gas Oil Ratio (GOR), gas gravity and oil gravity.
The trends were found to obey the physical laws.

Introduction
Reservoir fluid properties are very important in petroleum
engineering computations, such as material balance
calculations, well test analysis, reserve estimates, inflow
performance calculations and numerical reservoir simulations.
Ideally, these properties are determined from laboratory
studies on samples collected from the bottom of the wellbore
or at the surface. Such experimental data are, however, not
always available or very costly to obtain. Then, the solution is
to use the empirically derived correlations to predict PVT
properties.
There are many empirical correlations for
predicting PVT properties, most of them were developed using
linear or non-linear multiple regression or graphical
techniques.
Each correlation was developed for a certain
range of reservoir fluid characteristics and geographical area
with similar fluid compositions and API gravity. Thus, the
accuracy of such correlations is critical and it is not often
known in advance.
Among those PVT properties is the bubble point Oil
Formation Volume Factor (Bob), which is defined as the
volume of reservoir oil that would be occupied by one stock
tank barrel oil plus any dissolved gas at the bubble point
pressure and reservoir temperature. Precise prediction of Bob
is very important in reservoir and production computations.
The objective of this study is to develop a new predictive
model for Bob based on Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
using worldwide experimental PVT data.
A new algorithm for training feed forward neural networks
was used. That algorithm was found to be faster and more
stable than other schemes reported in the literature. Database
of 803 published data from the Middle East, Malaysia, and
Gulf of Mexico fields was used to develop the present model.
Of the 803 data points, 402 were used to train the ANN
models, 201 to cross-validate the relationships established
during the training process and the remaining 200 to test the
model to evaluate its accuracy and trend stability. Using the
same 200 data points, several empirical correlations were used
to predict Bob. The results show that the present model
outperforms all the existing models in terms of absolute
average percent error, standard deviation, and correlation
coefficient.

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

Empirical Models and Evaluation Studies

For the last 60 years engineers realized the importance of
developing and using empirical correlations for PVT
properties. Studies carried out in this field resulted in the
development of new correlations. Standing 1,3 presented
correlations for bubble point pressure and for oil formation
volume factor. Standings correlations were based on
laboratory experiments carried out on 105 samples from 22
different crude oils in California. Katz2 presented five
methods for predicting the reservoir oil shrinkage. Vazquez
and Beggs4 presented correlations for oil formation volume
factor. They divided oil mixtures into two groups, above and
below thirty degrees API gravity. More than 6000 data points
from 600 laboratory measurements were used in developing
the correlations. Glaso5 developed correlation for formation
volume factor using 45 oil samples from North Sea
hydrocarbon mixtures. Al-Marhoun6 published correlations
for estimating bubble point pressure and oil formation volume
factor for the Middle East oils. He used 160 data sets from 69
Middle Eastern reservoirs to develop the correlation. AbdulMajeed and Salman7 published an oil formation volume factor
correlation based on 420 data sets. Their model is similar to
that of Al-Marhoun6 oil formation volume factor correlation
with new calculated coefficients.
Labedi8 presented correlations for oil formation volume
factor for African crude oils. He used 97 data sets from Libya,
28 sets from Nigeria, and 4 sets from Angola to develop his
correlations. Dokla and Osman9 published set of correlations
for estimating bubble point pressure and oil formation volume
factor for UAE crudes. They used 51 data sets to calculate new
coefficients for Al-Marhoun6 Middle East models. Al-Yousef
and Al-Marhoun10 pointed out that the Dokla and Osman9,11
bubble point pressure correlation was found to contradict the
physical laws. In 1992, Al-Marhoun12 published a second
correlation for oil formation volume factor. The correlation
was developed with 11,728 experimentally obtained formation
volume factors at, above, and below bubble point pressure.
The data set represents samples from more than 700 reservoirs
from all over the world, mostly from Middle East and North
America.
Macary and El-Batanoney13 presented correlations for
bubble point pressure and oil formation volume factor. They
used 90 data sets from 30 independent reservoirs in the Gulf of
Suez to develop the correlations. The new correlations were
tested against other Egyptian data of Saleh et al.14, and showed
improvement over published correlations. Omar and Todd15
presented oil formation volume factor correlation, based on
Standing1 model. Their correlation was based on 93 data sets
from Malaysian oil reservoirs.
In 1993, Petrosky and
Farshad16 developed new correlations for Gulf of Mexico
crude oils. Standing1 correlations for bubble point pressure,
solution gas oil ratio, and oil formation volume factor were
taken as a basis for developing their new correlation
coefficients. Ninety data sets from Gulf of Mexico were used
in developing these correlations.

SPE 68233

Kartoatmodjo and Schmidt17 used a global data bank to

develop new correlations for all PVT properties. Data from
740 different crude oil samples gathered from all over the
world provided 5392 data sets for the correlation development.
Al-Mehaideb18 published a new set of correlations for UAE
crudes using 62 data sets from UAE reservoirs. These
correlations were developed for bubble point pressure and oil
formation volume factor. The bubble point pressure
correlation like Omar and Todd15 uses the oil formation
volume factor as input in addition to oil gravity, gas gravity,
solution gas oil ratio, and reservoir temperature.
Saleh et al.14 evaluated the empirical correlations for
Egyptian oils. They reported that Standing1 correlation was the
best for oil formation volume factor. Sutton and Farshad19, 20
published an evaluation for Gulf of Mexico crude oils. They
used 285 data sets for gas-saturated oil and 134 data sets for
undersaturated oil representing 31 different crude oils and
natural gas systems. The results show that Glaso5 correlation
for oil formation volume factor perform the best for most of
the data of the study. Later, Petrosky and Farshad16 published
a new correlation based on Gulf of Mexico crudes. They
reported that the best performing published correlation for oil
formation volume is Al-Marhoun6 correlation. McCain21
published an evaluation of all reservoir properties correlations
based on a large global database. He recommended Standing1
correlations for formation volume factor at and below bubble
point pressure.
Ghetto et al.22 performed a comprehensive study on PVT
properties correlation based on 195 global data sets collected
from the Mediterranean Basin, Africa, Middle East, and the
North Sea reservoirs. They recommended Vazquez and Beggs4
correlation for the oil formation volume factor. Elsharkawy et
al.23 evaluated PVT correlations for Kuwaiti crude oils using
44 samples. Standing1 correlation gave the best results for
bubble point pressure while Al-Marhoun6 oil formation
volume factor correlation performed satisfactory. Mahmood
and Al-Marhoun24 presented an evaluation of PVT correlations
for Pakistani crude oils. They used 166 data sets from 22
different crude samples for the evaluation. Al-Marhoun12 oil
formation volume factor correlation gave the best results. The
bubble point pressure errors reported in this study, for all
correlations, are among the highest reported in the literature.
Hanafy et al.25 published a study to evaluate the most accurate
correlation to apply to Egyptian crude oils. For formation
volume factor Macary and El-Batanoney13 correlation showed
an average absolute error of 4.9% while Dokla and Osman9
showed 3.9%. The study strongly supports the approach of
developing a local correlation versus a global correlation.
Al-Fattah and Al-Marhoun26 published an evaluation of all
available oil formation volume factor correlations. They used
674 data sets from published literature. They found that AlMarhoun12 correlation has the least error for global data set.
Also, they performed trend tests to evaluate the models
physical behavior.
Finally, Al-Shammasi27 evaluated the
published correlations and neural network models for bubble
point pressure and oil formation volume factor for accuracy

SPE 68233

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

and flexibility to represent hydrocarbon mixtures from

different geographical locations worldwide. He presented a
new correlation for bubble point pressure based on global data
of 1661 published and 48 unpublished data sets. Also, he
presented neural network models and compared their
performance to numerical correlations. He concluded that
statistical and trend performance analysis showed that some of
the correlations violate the physical behavior of hydrocarbon
fluid properties. Published neural network models miss major
model parameters to be reproduced.
Neural Network Models
Artificial neural networks are parallel-distributed information
processing models that can recognize highly complex patterns
within available data. In recent years, neural network have
gained popularity in petroleum applications. Many authors
discussed the applications of neural network in petroleum
engineering28-32. Few studies were carried out to model PVT
properties using neural networks. In 1996, Gharbi and
Elsharkawy33 published neural network models for estimating
bubble point pressure and oil formation volume factor for
Middle East crude oils. They used two hidden layers neural
networks to model each property separately. The bubble point
pressure model had eight neurons in the first layer and four
neurons in the second. The formation volume factor model had
six neurons in both layers. Both models were trained using
498 data sets collected from the literature and unpublished
sources. The models were tested by other 22 data points from
the Middle East. The results showed improvement over the
conventional correlation methods with reduction in the
average error for the bubble point pressure oil formation
volume factor.
Gharbi and Elsharkawy34 presented another neural network
model for estimating bubble point pressure and oil formation
volume factor for universal use. They used three-layer neural
network model to predict the two properties. They developed
the model using 5200 data sets collected from all over the
world representing 350 different crude oils. Another set of
data consisting of 234 data sets was used for verifying the
results of the model. The reported results for the universal
model showed less improvement than the Middle East neural
model over the conventional correlations. The bubble point
pressure average error was lower than that of the conventional
correlations for both training and test data. The oil formation
volume factor on the other hand was better than conventional
correlations in terms of correlation coefficient. The average
error for the neural network model is similar to conventional
correlations for training data and higher for test data than the
best performing conventional correlation.
Elsharkawy35 presented a new technique to model the
behavior of crude oil and natural gas systems using a radial
basis function neural network model (RBFNM). The model
can predict oil formation volume factor, solution gas-oil ratio,
oil viscosity, saturated oil density, undersaturated oil
compressibility, and evolved gas gravity. He used differential
PVT data of ninety samples for training and another ten novel

samples for testing the model. Input data to the RBFNM were
reservoir pressure, temperature, stock tank oil gravity, and
separator gas gravity. Accuracy of the model in predicting the
solution gas oil ratio, oil formation volume factor, oil
viscosity, oil density, undersaturated oil compressibility and
evolved gas gravity was compared for training and testing
samples to all published correlations. The comparison shows
that the proposed model is much more accurate than these
correlations in predicting the properties of the oils. The
behavior of the model in capturing the physical trend of the
PVT data was also checked against experimentally measured
PVT properties of the test samples. He concluded that
although, the model was developed for specific crude oil and
gas system, the idea of using neural network to model
behavior of reservoir fluid can be extended to other crude oil
and gas systems as a substitute to PVT correlations that were
developed by conventional regression techniques.
Finally, Varotsis et al.36 presented a novel approach for
predicting the complete PVT behavior of reservoir oils and gas
condensates using Artificial Neural Network (ANN). The
method uses key measurements that can be performed rapidly
either in the lab or at the well site as input to an ANN. The
ANN was trained by a PVT studies database of over 650
reservoir fluids originating from all parts of the world. Tests of
the trained ANN architecture utilizing a validation set of PVT
studies indicate that, for all fluid types, most PVT property
estimates can be obtained with a very low mean relative error
of 0.5-2.5%, with no data set having a relative error in excess
of 5%. This level of error is considered better than that
provided by tuned Equation of State (EOS) models, which are
currently in common use for the estimation of reservoir fluid
properties. In addition to improved accuracy, the proposed
ANN architecture avoids the ambiguity and numerical
difficulties inherent to EOS models and provides for
continuous improvements by the enrichment of the ANN
training database with additional data.
Data Acquisition and Analysis
Data used for this work are collected from published sources.
After dropping the repeated data sets, we ended up with 803
data sets as follows: Katz2 (53), Vazquez and Beggs4 (254),
Glaso5 (41), Ghetto et al.22 (173), Omar and Todd15 (93),
Gharbi and Elsharkawy33 (22), and Farshad et al.37 (146).
Each data set contains reservoir temperature, oil gravity, total
solution gas oil ratio, and average gas gravity, bubble point
pressure and oil formation volume factor at the bubble point
pressure. The repeated data sets were reported by other
investigators26,27. Of the 803 data points, 403 were used to
train the ANN models, the remaining 200 to cross-validate the
relationships established during the training process and 200 to
test the model to evaluate its accuracy and trend stability. A
statistical description of training and test data are given in
Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

Neural Networks
An artificial neural network is a computer model that attempts
to mimic simple biological learning processes and simulate
specific functions of human nervous system. It is an adaptive,
parallel information processing system, which is able to
develop associations, transformations or mappings between
objects or data. It is also the most popular intelligent
technique for pattern recognition to date. The basic elements
of a neural network are the neurons and their connection
strengths (weights). Given a topology of the network structure
expressing how the neurons (the processing elements) are
connected, a learning algorithm takes an initial model with
some prior connection weights (usually random numbers)
and produces a final model by numerical iterations. Hence
learning implies the derivation of the posterior connection
weights when a performance criterion is matched (e.g. the
mean square error is below a certain tolerance value).
Learning can be performed by supervised or unsupervised
algorithm. The former requires a set of known input-output
data patterns (or training patterns), while the latter requires
only the input patterns. This is commonly known as the feed
forward model, in which no lateral or backward connections
are used38.
Advantages of Artificial Neural Networks
Several advantages can be attributed to ANNs rendering them
suitable to applications such as considered here. Firstly, an
ANN learns the behavior of a database population by selftuning its parameters in such a way that the trained ANN
matches the employed data accurately. Secondly, if the data
used are sufficiently descriptive39, the ANN provides a rapid
and confident prediction as soon as a new case, which has not
been seen by the model during the training phase, is applied.
Possibly, the most important aspect of ANNs is their ability to
discover patterns in data that are so obscure as to be
imperceptible to normal observation and standard statistical
methods. This is particularly the case for data exhibiting
significantly unpredictable nonlinearities40.
Traditional
correlations are based on simple models which often have to
be stretched by adding terms and constants in order for them
to become flexible enough to fit experimental data, whereas
neural networks are marvelously self-adaptable. Using a
sufficiently large database for training, ANNs allow property
values to be accurately predicted over a very wide range of
input data36.
An ANN model can accept substantially more information
as input to the model, thereby, improving significantly the
accuracy of the predictions and reducing the ambiguity of the
requested relationship. Moreover, ANNs are fast-responding
systems. Once the model has been educated predictions
about unknown fluids are obtained with direct and rapid
calculations without the need for tuning or iterative
computations. Furthermore, an outstanding attribute of the
ANNs is their capability of becoming increasingly expert by
retraining them using larger databases. Continuous enrichment
of the ANN knowledge eventually leads to a predictive
model exhibiting accuracy comparable to the PVT data itself36.

SPE 68233

Neural Network Architecture

In this study, a backpropagation network (BPN) is used. A
backpropagation network is multi-layered and information
flows from the input to the output through at least one
hidden/middle layer. Each layer contains neurons that are
connected to all neurons in the neighboring layers. The
connections have numerical values (weights) associated with
them. During the training phase, the weights are adjusted
according to the generalized delta rule. Training is completed
when the network is able to predict the given output. A new
algorithm was used to train the three-layer network41. The
first layer consists of four neurons representing the input
values of reservoir temperature, solution gas oil ratio, gas
specific gravity and API oil gravity. The second (hidden)
layer consists of 5 neurons, and the third layer contains one
neuron representing the output values of the bubble-point
formation volume factor Bob. A simplified schematic of the
used neural network is illustrated in Fig. 1. Details of the
learning algorithm are given in Appendix A.
The data were divided into two groups: training group (603
data sets) and testing group (200 data sets). The training
group is split into two groups: the first (402 data sets) was
used to train the network; the second set was used to test the
error during the training, this was called cross validation. It
gives the ability to monitor the generalization performance of
the network and prevent the network to over fit the training
data38. In a BPN, the input activity is transmitted forward
while the error is propagated backwards. The neurons in the
BPN use a transfer function that is sigmoid or S shaped. A key
feature of the sigmoid function is that it has a minimum value
of 0 and a maximum value of 1 and is differentiable
everywhere with a positive slope. The derivative of the
transfer function is required to calculate the error that is
backpropagated and the derivative of the sigmoid function is
easy to calculate.
In designing the neural network, many important
parameters that will control its overall performance such as the
leaning constant and the number of middle layer neurons. The
learning constant must be kept sufficiently low enough to
ensure good training with minimum oscillations without
compromising on the speed of the training procedure. The
exponential decline method of varying the learning constant is
an efficient process to obtain a well-trained network. The
exercises involving the middle layer neurons have shown that
for case studies involving little or no noise, using the least
possible number (usually 1 or 2) of middle layer neurons result
in a well trained network.
Over-training a network must be avoided and it is
important to frequently monitor the error as training
progresses. It has been shown that over training a network
causes the network to memorize results rather than generalize.
Then, the resulted model can perfectly predict the data similar
to training data, but it will perform badly if new cases
submitted to the network. The cross-validation method used
in this study utilized as a checking mechanism in the training
algorithm to prevent over-training.

SPE 68233

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

Statistical Error Analysis:

To compare the performance and accuracy of the new model
to other empirical correlations, statistical error analysis is
performed. The statistical parameters used for comparison
are: average percent relative error, average absolute percent
relative error, minimum and maximum absolute percent error,
root mean square and the correlation coefficient. Equations
for those parameters are given below:
1. Average Percent Relative Error:
It is the measure of the relative deviation from the
experimental data, defined by:

Er =
Where

1 N
Ei
n i =1

(1)

Ei is the relative deviation of an estimated value from

an experimental value

(Bob )exp (Bob )est

Ei =
100 i = 1, 2, n (2)
(Bob )exp

2. Average Absolute Percent Relative Error:

It measures the relative absolute deviation from the
experimental values, defined by:

Ea =

1 n
Ei
n i =1

(3)

3. Minimum and Maximum Absolute Percent Relative

Error:
To define the range of error for each correlation, the
calculated absolute percent relative error values are scanned to
determine the minimum and maximum values. They are
defined by:
n

E min = min Ei

(4)

i =1
n

E max = max Ei

(5)

i =1

4. Root Mean Square Error:

Measures the data dispersion around zero deviation, defined
by:

1 n 2
RMS = Ei
n i =1

(6)

5. The Correlation coefficient:

It represents the degree of success in reducing the standard
deviation by regression analysis, defined by:

n
n
_

2
r = 1 (Bob )exp (Bob )est i / (Bob )exp Bob

i =1
i =1

(7)
Where
_

B ob =

1 n
(Bob )exp
n i =1

(8)

Results and Discussion

After training the neural networks, the model becomes ready
for testing and evaluation. To perform this, the last data group
(200 data sets), which was not seen by the neural network
during training, was used. To compare the performance and
accuracy of the new model to other empirical correlations, five
correlations were selected. Those are: Standing (1947)1,
Vazquez and Beggs (1980)4, Glaso (1980)5, Al-Marhoun
(1988)6, Al-Marhoun (1992)12. Equations describing those
models are found in Appendix B. The statistical results of the
comparison are given in Table 3.
The Artificial Neural
Network Model outperforms all the empirical correlations.
The proposed model showed high accuracy in predicting the
Bob values, and achieved the lowest absolute percent relative
error, lowest minimum error, lowest maximum error, lowest
root mean square error, and the highest correlation coefficient
among other correlations.
The absolute percent relative error is an important
indicator of the accuracy of the models. Figure 2 shows a
comparison of the absolute percent relative error for all
correlations. Its value for ANN was 1.7886%, while other
correlations indicates higher error values of 2.2053% for AlMarhoun (1992), 2.334 for Al-Marhoun (1988), 2.7238% for
Standing1, 2.9755% for Vazquez and Beggs4, and 3.3743 for
Glaso5 Correlation. Figure 3 shows a comparison of the
correlation coefficient for all correlations. ANN achieves the
highest correlation coefficient of 98.78%, while other values
range between 97.15% for Glaso5, and 98.42% for Vazquez
and Beggs4 correlation. It should be noted that the ANN
model outperforms other empirical correlations despite the
fact that the ANN model did not see the testing data during
training. On the other hand, some of these data sets were
already used in developing the other empirical correlations.
The higher accuracy of the predicted results indicates that the
neural network was successfully trained. Also, these results
demonstrated the efficiency of the training algorithm.
Figures 4-9 illustrate scatter diagrams of the predicted
versus experimental Bob values. These cross plots indicates
the degree of agreement between the experimental and the
predicted values. If the agreement is perfect, then all points
should lie on the 45 degrees line on the plot. Compared to
other cross plots, Fig. 9 shows the most tight cloud of points
around the 45 degrees line indicating the excellent agreement
between the experimental and the calculated data values. The
most scattered points were found in Fig. 4, representing
Standing1 Correlation, and Fig. 6, which represent Glaso5

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

correlation, indicating their poor performance for this set of

data. Again, this indicates the superior performance of the
ANN model compared to other empirical correlations.
Trend Analysis
The above discussion shows that the developed model
outperforms other empirical correlations in predicting Bob
values. Now, the model must be tested to see whether it is
physically correct or not, and to make sure that the model is
stable. In order to perform these tests, trend tests must be
conducted.
The model was tested using hypothetical
intermediate data points, and the dependence of Bob on
solution gas oil ratio (Rs), reservoir temperature (T), oil gravity
(o) and gas relative density (g) was studied. To study the
effect of solution gas oil ratio Rs on Bob, Rs was varied between
20 and 4000 SCF/STB, while fixed values of other parameters
were used ( T = 200F, g = 0.9, o = 0.85 (API=34.95) ). Fig.
10 illustrates the performance of the ANN model and other
empirical correlations. The graph demonstrates that Bob is an
increasing function of Rs, and the results of the ANN model
are stable. To study the effect of reservoir temperature T on
Bob, temperature was varied between 80 and 400F, while
fixed values of other parameters were used (Rs = 500
SCF/STB, g = 0.9, o = 0.85 (API=34.95)). Fig. 11 illustrates
the performance of the ANN model and other empirical
correlations. The graph demonstrates that Bob is an increasing
function of T, and that the results of the ANN model are
stable.
To study the effect of oil gravity o on Bob, o was varied
between 20 and 56 API, while fixed values of other
parameters were used (T = 200F, g = 0.9, Rs = 500
SCF/STB). Fig. 12 illustrates the performance of the ANN
model and other empirical correlations. Again, the plot
indicates that Bob is an increasing function of API oil gravity
(decreasing function of oil relative density), and the results of
the ANN model are stable. The break in Vazquez and Beggs4
correlation curve occurs at API = 30, which is the criterion
defined by the authors to apply either equation to predict Bob4.
Finally, the effect of gas relative density (g) on Bob was
studied. g was varied between 0.5 and 1.5, while fixed values
of other parameters were used (Rs = 500 SCF/STB, T = 200F,
o = 0.85 (API=34.95) ). Fig. 13 illustrates the performance of
the ANN model and other empirical correlations. The plot
demonstrates that except for Al-Marhoun 19926 correlation,
Bob is an increasing function of g. Also, the results of the
ANN model are stable but the function increased slower than
the correlations of Standing1, Vazquez and Beggs4, and AlMarhoun 19886.

2. Of the 803 data sets, 403 were used to train the ANN
model, 200 to cross-validate the relationships established
during the training process and the remaining 200 to test the
model to evaluate its accuracy.
3. A new algorithm was used to train a feedforward threelayer network. The first layer consists of four neurons
representing the input values of reservoir temperature, solution
gas oil ratio, gas specific gravity and API oil gravity. The
second (hidden) layer consists of 5 neurons, and the third layer
contains one neuron representing the output values of the
bubble-point formation volume factor Bob.
4. The results show that the developed model provides
better predictions and higher accuracy than the published
empirical correlations. The present model provides predictions
of the formation volume factor at the bubble point pressure
with an absolute average percent error of 1.789%, and
correlation coefficient of 0.988.
5. Trend analysis was performed to check the behavior of
the predicted values of Bob for any change in reservoir
temperature, solution gas oil ratio (Rs), gas gravity and oil
gravity. The model was found to be physically correct. The
stability of the model indicated that the neural network model
does not over fit the data, which implies that it was
successfully trained.
6. Incorporating additional data sets during training and
cross-validation stages can further refine the new model to
cover a wider range of input variables.
Nomenclature
=
Bob
Rs
=
T
=
o
=
g
=
Er
=
Ei
=
Ea
=
Emax
=
=
Emin
RMS
=
r
=

OFVF at the bubble- point pressure, RB/STB

on solution gas oil ratio, SCF/STB
reservoir temperature, degrees Fahrenheit
oil relative density (water=1.0)
gas relative density (air=1.0)
average percent relative error
percent relative error
average absolute percent relative error
Maximum absolute percent relative error
Minimum absolute percent relative error
root mean square error
correlation coefficient

Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank King Fahd University of Petroleum
and Minerals for the facilities utilized to perform the present
work and for their support.
References
1.

Conclusions
1. A new model was developed to predict the oil formation
volume factor at the bubble-point pressure. The model was
based on artificial neural networks, and developed using 803
published data sets from the Middle East, Malaysia, Colombia,
and Gulf of Mexico fields.

SPE 68233

2.
3.

Standing
M.B.:
A
Pressure-Volume-Temperature
Correlation for Mixtures of California Oils and Gases,
Drill&Prod. Pract., API (1947), pp 275-87.
Katz, D. L.: Prediction of Shrinkage of Crude Oils,
Drill&Prod. Pract., API (1942), pp 137-147.
Standing, M. B.: Volumetric and Phase Behavior of Oil
Field Hydrocarbon System. Millet Print Inc., Dallas, TX
(1977) 124.

SPE 68233

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

14.

15.

16.

17.
18.

19.
20.

21.
22.

23.

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

Vazuquez, M. and Beggs, H.D.: Correlation for Fluid

Physical Property Prediction, JPT (June 1980) 968.
Glaso, O.: Generalized Pressure-Volume Temperature
Correlations, JPT (May 1980), 785.
Al-Marhoun, M.A.: PVT Correlations for Middle East
Crude Oils, JPT (May 1988) 650.
Abdul-Majeed, G.H.A. and Salman, N.H.: An Empirical
Correlation for FVF Prediction, JCPT, (July-August 1988)
118.
Labedi, R.: Use of Production Data to Estimate Volume
Factor Density and Compressibility of Reservoir Fluids. J.
Pet. Sci. & Eng., 4(1990) 357.
Dokla, M. and Osman, M.: Correlation of PVT Properties
for UAE Crudes, SPEFE (March 1992) 41.
Al-Yousef H. Y., Al-Marhoun, M. A.: Discussion of
Correlation of PVT Properties for UAE Crudes, SPEFE
(March 1993) 80.
Dokla, M. and Osman, M.: Authors Reply to Discussion
of Correlation of PVT Properties for UAE Crudes, SPEFE
(March 1993) 82.
Al-Marhoun, M. A.: New Correlation for formation
Volume Factor of oil and gas Mixtures, JCPT (March
1992) 22.
Macary, S. M. & El-Batanoney, M. H.: Derivation of PVT
Correlations for the Gulf of Suez Crude Oils, Paper
presented at the EGPC 11th Petroleum Exploration &
Production Conference, Cairo, Egypt (1992).
Saleh, A. M., Maggoub, I. S. and Asaad, Y.: Evaluation of
Empirically Derived PVT Properties for Egyptian Oils,
paper SPE 15721 , presented at the 1987 Middle East Oil
Show & Conference, Bahrain, March 7-10.
Omar, M.I. and Todd, A.C.: Development of New
Modified Black oil Correlation for Malaysian Crudes,
paper SPE 25338 presented at the 1993 SPE Asia Pacific
Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Singapore, Feb. 8-10.
Petrosky, J. and Farshad, F.: Pressure Volume
Temperature Correlation for the Gulf of Mexico. paper
SPE 26644 presented at the 1993 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, Oct 3-6.
Kartoatmodjo, T. and Schmidt, Z.: Large data bank
improves crude physical property correlations, Oil and
Gas Journal (July 4, 1994) 51.
Almehaideb, R.A.: Improved PVT Correlations For UAE
Crude Oils, paper SPE 37691 presented at the 1997 SPE
Middle East Oil Show and Conference, Bahrain, March 15
18.
Sutton, R. P. and Farshad, F.: Evaluation of Empirically
Derived PVT Properties for Gulf of Mexico Crude Oils
SPRE (Feb. 1990) 79.
Sutton, Roberts P. and Farshad, F.: Supplement to SPE
1372, Evaluation of Empirically Derived PVT Properties
for Gulf of Mexico Crude Oils SPE 20277, Available from
SPE book Order Dep., Richardson, TX.
McCain, W. D.: Reservoir fluid property correlationsState of the Art, SPERE, (May 1991) 266.
Ghetto, G. De, Paone, F. and Villa, M.: Reliability
Analysis on PVT correlation, paper SPE 28904 presented
at the 1994 SPE European Petroleum Conference, London,
UK, October 25-27.
Elsharkawy, A. M. Elgibaly, A. and Alikhan, A. A.:
Assessment of the PVT Correlations for Predicting the
Properties of the Kuwaiti Crude Oils, paper presented at

24.
25.

26.
27.

28.

29.

30.

31.
32.
33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.
39.

the 6th Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition &

Conference, Oct. 16-19, 1994.
Mahmood, M. M. and Al-Marhoun, M. A.: Evaluation of
empirically derived PVT properties for Pakistani crude
oils, J. Pet. Sci. & Engg. 16 (1996) 275.
Hanafy, H.H., Macary, S.A., Elnady, Y. M., Bayomi, A.A.
and El-Batanoney, M.H.: Empirical PVT Correlation
Applied to Egyptian Crude Oils Exemplify Significance of
Using Regional Correlations, paper SPE 37295 presented
at the SPE Oilfield Chemistry International Symposium,
Houston, Feb. 1821, 1997.
Al-Fattah, S. M. and Al-Marhoun, M. A.: Evaluation of
empirical correlation for bubble point oil formation volume
factor, J. Pet. Sci. & Engg. 11(1994) 341.
Al-Shammasi, A.A.,: Bubble Point Pressure and Oil
Formation Volume Factor Correlations, paper SPE 53185
presented at the 1997 SPE Middle East Oil Show and
Conference, Bahrain, March 1518.
Kumoluyi, A.O. and Daltaban, T.S.: High-Order Neural
Networks in Petroleum Engineering, paper SPE 27905
presented at the 1994 SPE Western Regional Meeting,
Longbeach, California, USA, March 23-25.
Ali, J. K.: Neural Networks: A New Tool for the
Petroleum Industry, paper SPE 27561 presented at the
1994 European Petroleum Computer Conference,
Aberdeen, U.K., March 15-17.
Mohaghegh, S. and Ameri, S.,:" A Artificial Neural
Network As A Valuable Tool For Petroleum Engineers,"
SPE 29220, unsolicited paper for Society of Petroleum
Engineers, 1994.
Mohaghegh, S.:" Neural Networks: What it Can do for
Petroleum Engineers," JPT, (Jan. 1995) 42.
Mohaghegh, S.:" Virtual Intelligence Applications in
Petroleum Engineering: Part 1 - Artificial Neural
Networks, JPT (September 2000).
Gharbi, R.B. and Elsharkawy, A.M.: Neural-Network
Model for Estimating the PVT Properties of Middle East
Crude Oils, paper SPE 37695 presented at the 1997 SPE
Middle East Oil Show and Conference, Bahrain, March 15
18.
Gharbi, R.B. and Elsharkawy, A.M.: Universal NeuralNetwork Model for Estimating the PVT Properties of
Crude Oils, paper SPE 38099 presented at the 1997 SPE
Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, April 14-16.
Elsharkawy, A.M.: Modeling the Properties of Crude Oil
and Gas Systems Using RBF Network, paper SPE 49961
presented at the 1998 SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas
Conference, Perth, Australia, October 12-14.
Varotsis N., Gaganis V., Nighswander J., and Guieze P.,:
A Novel Non-Iterative Method for the Prediction of the
PVT Behavior of Reservoir Fluids, paper SPE 56745
presented at the 1999 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, October 36.
Farshad, F.F, Leblance, J.L, Garber, J.D. and Osorio, J.G.:
Empirical Correlation for Colombian Crude Oils, paper
SEP 24538, Unsolicited (1992), Available from SPE book
Order Dep., Richardson, TX.
Bishop, C.: Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition,
Oxford University Press, NY (1995).
Fauset, L.: Fundamentals of Neural Networks, Prentice
Hall, NJ, USA, 1996.

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

40. Hornik, K., Multilayer Feedforward Networks are

Universal Approximators, Neural Networks, (1989), Vol.
2, 359.
41. Abdel-Wahhab, O. and Sid-Ahmed, M.A.: A New Scheme
for Training Feedforward Neural Networks, Pattern
Recognition, (Feb. 1998) 15.

Appendix A: Training Algorithm Used in the Present

Study:
In Abdel-Wahhab and Sid-Ahmed41, a new algorithm for
training feed-forward neural networks was developed. This
algorithm is shown to be faster and more stable than other
schemes presented in the literature. The algorithm is
summarized below. Figure 10 in the original paper is used for
notations.
1. Initialization:

Randomize all weights in the network.

For layers j = 1 through L, initialize the mjmj matrices Sj

by small non-zero random number. Where mj is the length
of the vectors xj-1.

(A-5)

Calculate:

S j +1 =

S j - ( jk j ) (x j S j )T

(A-6)

bj

j =

1+

(A-7)

5. Back-propagate error signals:

Calculate error signals, for every node k.

eLk = f ( y Lk ) (ok - x Lk ) for the output layer, L. (A-8)

for

the

hidden

the network.
For each layer j, and for every node k, calculate the

summation output

layers from L-1 to 1

y jk = ( x j 1,i . w jki )

For every node, k, in the output layer, calculate the

desired summation output by using the inverse function

dk =

(A-1)

i =0

(A-9)

6. Find the desired summation output:

1 1 + ok
ln
a 1 ok

(A-10)

6. Update the weights::

the function output

For every node, k,

[1 exp( a . y )]
)=
[1 + exp( a . y )]

jk

(A-2)

jk

(A-11)

For each hidden layer j = 1 through L - 1, weight vectors

are updated by

2a .exp( a . y jk )
1 + exp( a . y jk )

The weight vectors in the output layer L are updated by

wLk = wLk + kL (dk - yLk)

and the derivative of f( yjk)

f ' ( y jk ) =

and the unweighted Kalman gain is given by

e jk = f ' ( y jk ) ( e j +1,i w j +1,i ,k )

Randomly select an input/output pair (x0, o) to present to

f ( y jk

(A-4)

4. Update the inverse matrix:

Equate the node offsets xj-1,0 of every node to some non-

2. Choose a training pattern:

S j )T ( x j S j ) + b j

kj = Sj (xj Sj)

zero constant for layers j = 1 through L.

((x

where

j =

SPE 68233

wjk = wjk + kj ejk j.

(A-3)

(A-12)

8. Stopping criteria:

Here, N is the number of inputs to a node, and the constant a is

the sigmoid slope.

convergence test, or

3. Invoke the unweighted gain equations:

Run the algorithm for a fixed number of iterations, or

Split the data into 2 sets: one set to train the network and

For each layer j from 1 through L, the predicted residual

variance inverse is given by

Use the mean-square error of the network output as a

the other set to test the error. This method is called cross

SPE 68233

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

validation. It gives the ability to monitor the generalization

performance of the network and prevent the network to over

G = Rs ( g / o ) 4 + a5T
a

fit the training data.

a1 = 6.5811

a2 = 2.91329

Appendix B: Empirical PVT Correlations Used for

Comparison:

a3 = 0.27683

a 4 = 0.526

1. Standing (1947):

Bob = a1 + a2 Rs ( g / o ) 3 + a4T
a

4. Al-Marhoun (1988):

a5

(B-1)

Where

a1 = 0.975

a2 = 12 10 5

a4 = 1.25

a5 = 1.2

Bob = 1 + c1 R s + c 2 (T 60)(API / g ) +

c 3 R s (T 60 )(API / g )

(B-2)

c2 = 2.75110 5

c3 = 1.337 10
3. Glaso (1980):

b2 = 0.862963 10 3

b3 = 0.182594 10 2

b4 = 0.318099 10 5

b5 = 0.74239

b6 = 0.323294

5. Al-Marhoun (1992):

Bob = 1 + a1 R s + a 2 R s ( g / o ) + a 3 R s (T 60 )(1 o )

+ a 4 (T 60 )

and for API >30

b1 = 0.945810

b7 = 1.20204

c3 = 1.811 10 8

c1 = 4.670 10

c2 = 1.110

(B-5)

Where

Bob = 1 + anti log a1 + a2 (log G ) + a3 (log G )

a1 = 0.177342 10 3

a 2 = 0.220163 10 3

a 4 = 4.292580 10 6

a 4 = 0.528707 10 3

(B-3)
Where
TABLE 1: STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INPUT DATA USED FOR TRAINING (603 POINTS)

Property
Oil FVF At Pb
Bubblepoint Pressure
Temperature, F
Gas-Oil Ratio
Gas Relative Density
Oil Relative Density
Bp Oil Relative Density
API Oil Gravity

(B-4)

M = Rsb5 gb6 ob7

Where for API 30

Bob = b1 + b2 (T 60 ) + b3 M + b4 M 2
Where

a3 = 0.5

2. Vazquez and Beggs (1980):

c1 = 4.677 10 4

a5 = 0.968

Min
1.028
107.33
58
8.61
0.511
0.725
0.432
11

Max
3.562
7127
341.6
3617.27
1.789
0.993
0.992
63.7

Average
1.342
2015.958
183.333
549.192
0.89
0.854
0.732
34.593

St. Dev
0.284
1284.455
52.228
495.508
0.184
0.046
0.098
8.765

Skewness
2.116
0.996
0.222
1.969
1.019
0.544
-0.191
-0.276

Kurtosis
8.001
1.052
-0.523
6.251
1.16
-0.045
-0.528
-0.211

10

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

SPE 68233

TABLE 2: STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INPUT DATA USED FOR TESTING (200 POINTS)

Property
Oil FVF At Pb
Bubblepoint Pressure
Temperature, F
Gas-Oil Ratio
Gas Relative Density
Oil Relative Density
Bp Oil Relative Density
API Oil Gravity

Min

Max

Average

St. Dev

Skewness

Kurtosis

1.038
148
60
12
0.525
0.741
0.48
11.4

2.478
7127
341.6
2191.33
1.789
0.99
0.991
59.5

1.338
1964.05
184.302
533.75
0.9
0.854
0.732
34.757

0.262
1312.422
55.815
447.483
0.198
0.047
0.101
8.996

1.425
1.128
0.322
1.233
1.042
0.475
-0.129
-0.225

2.302
1.528
-0.46
1.366
1.286
-0.284
-0.572
-0.386

TABLE 3: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS FOR DIFFERENT EMPIRICAL

CORRELATIONS
Correlation
Standing (1947)
Vazquez & Beggs (1980)
Glaso (1980)
Al-Marhoun (1988)
Al-Marhoun (1992)
ANN

Er

EA

Emin

Emax

Erms

-0.1696
2.3083
1.8186
0.3395
-0.1152
0.3024

2.7238
2.9755
3.3743
2.3334
2.2053
1.7886

0.0081
0.0136
0.0030
0.0112
0.0033
0.0076

20.1795
15.5368
17.7763
13.2590
13.1794
11.7751

4.2025
4.0417
4.5663
3.3810
3.4162
2.7193

0.9742
0.9842
0.9715
0.9811
0.9806
0.9878

HIDDEN LAYER

INPUT

OUTPUT

Fig.1- Schematic of an artificial neural network with one-hidden layer.

SPE 68233

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

11

4.0
3.5
3.0

AAPRE

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Standing (1947)

Vazquez and
Beggs (1980)

Glaso 1980

Al-Marhoun
(1988)

Al-Marhoun
(1992)

Artificial Neural
Networks

Fig. 2- Comparison of average absolute percent error for different correlations.

0.990

Correlation coefficient

0.985
0.980
0.975
0.970
0.965
0.960
0.955
0.950
Standing 1947

Vazquez and
Beggs 1980

Glaso 1980

Al-Marhoun
1988

Al-Marhoun
1992

Fig. 3- Comparison of correlation coefficient for different correlations.

Artificial
Neural
Networks

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

3.00

3.00

2.50

2.50
Predicted Bob

Predicted Bob

12

2.00
1.50
1.00

2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50

0.50

0.00

0.00
0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0.00

3.00

0.50

Measured Bob

2.50

2.50
Predicted Bob

Predicted Bob

3.00

2.00
1.50
1.00

2.00

2.50

3.00

2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50

0.50

0.00

0.00
0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0.00

3.00

0.50

3.00

2.50

2.50
Predicted Bob

3.00

2.00
1.50
1.00

3.00

1.00

0.00

0.00
2.00

2.50

1.50

0.50

1.50

2.00

2.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

Fig. 7- Cross Plot of Al-Marhoun (1988) Correlation.

Fig. 6- Cross Plot of Glaso Correlation.

0.50

1.00

Measured Bob

Measured Bob

0.00

1.50

Fig. 5-Cross Plot of Vazquez & Beggs Correlation.

3.00

0.00

1.00

Measured Bob

Fig. 4- CrossPlot of Standing Correlation.

Predicted Bob

SPE 68233

2.50

3.00

Measured Bob
Fig 8- Cross Plot of Al-Marhoun (1992) Correlation.

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

Measured Bob
Fig. 9- Cross Plot of Artificial Neural Networks Model.

SPE 68233

PREDICTION OF OIL PVT PROPERTIES USING NEURAL NETWORKS

13

4.0
Standing
Vazquez&Beggs
Glaso
Al-Marhoun 88
Al-Marhoun 92
ANN

3.5

Predicted Bob

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Solution Gas Oil Ratio, SCF/STB

Fig. 10-Trend Analysis - Effect of Solution Gas Oil Ratio on Bob.

1.50
Standing
Vazquez & Beggs

1.45

Glaso
Al-Marhoun 88
Al-Marhoun 92

Predicted Bob

1.40

ANN

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.20
0

100

200

300

400

Reservoir Temperature, Degrees F

Fig. 11- Trend Analysis -Effect of Reservoir Temperature on Bob.

500

14

EL-SAYED A. OSMAN, OSAMA A. ABDEL-WAHHAB AND MOHAMMED AL-MARHOUN

SPE 68233

1.40
Standing
Vazquez & Beggs
Glaso
Al-Marhoum 88
Al-Marhoun 92
ANN

Predicted Bob

1.35

1.30

1.25
10

20

30

40

50

60

Oil API Gravity

Fig. 12- Trend Analysis, Effect of Oil Gravity on Bob.

1.44
Standing
Vazquez&Beggs
Glaso
Al-Marhoun 88
Al-Marhoun 92
ANN

1.40

Predicted Bob

1.36

1.32

1.28

1.24

1.20
0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

Gas Relative Density

Fig. 13- Trend Analysis, Effect of Gas Relative Density on Bob.

1.4

1.6