Sample Size Effects on Petrophysical Characterization and Fluid-to-Pore Accessibility of Natural Rocks

Laboratory-scale analysis of natural rocks provides petrophysical properties such as density, porosity, pore diameter/pore-throat diameter distribution, and fluid accessibility, in addition to the size and shape of framework grains and their contact relationship with the rock matrix. Different types of laboratory approaches for petrophysical characterization involve the use of a range of sample sizes. While the sample sizes selected should aim to be representative of the rock body, there are inherent limitations imposed by the analytical principles and holding capacities of the different experimental apparatuses, with many instruments only able to accept samples at the μm–mm scale. Therefore, a total of nine (three limestones, three shales, two sandstones, and one dolomite) samples were collected from Texas to fill the knowledge gap of the sample size effect on the resultant petrophysical characteristics. The sample sizes ranged from 3 cm cubes to <75 μm particles. Using a combination of petrographic microscopy, helium expansion pycnometry, water immersion porosimetry, mercury intrusion porosimetry, and (ultra-) small-angle X-ray scattering, the impact of sample size on the petrophysical properties of these samples was systematically investigated here. The results suggest that the sample size effect is influenced by both pore structure changes during crushing and sample size-dependent fluid-to-pore connectivity.

[1]  J. Ilavsky,et al.  Micro- to Nano-Scale Areal Heterogeneity in Pore Structure and Mineral Compositions of a Sub-Decimeter-Sized Eagle Ford Shale , 2022, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[2]  E. Neubauer,et al.  Sorption of Nanomaterials to Sandstone Rock , 2022, Nanomaterials.

[3]  J. Ilavsky,et al.  Spatial heterogeneity analyses of pore structure and mineral composition of Barnett Shale using X-ray scattering techniques , 2021, Marine and Petroleum Geology.

[4]  Wen Zhou,et al.  Porosity measurement of granular rock samples by modified bulk density analyses with particle envelopment , 2021 .

[5]  Q. Hu,et al.  Microfracture-pore structure characterization and water-rock interaction in three lithofacies of the Lower Eagle Ford Formation , 2021 .

[6]  Tongwei Zhang,et al.  Effect of Shale Sample Particle Size on Pore Structure Obtained from High Pressure Mercury Intrusion Porosimetry , 2021, Geofluids.

[7]  Kouqi Liu,et al.  Experimental Study on the Pore Shape Damage of Shale Samples during the Crushing Process , 2021 .

[8]  T. Blach,et al.  Effect of Particle Size on Pore Characteristics of Organic-Rich Shales: Investigations from Small-Angle Neutron Scattering (SANS) and Fluid Intrusion Techniques , 2020, Energies.

[9]  M. Fernø,et al.  Pore- and Core-Scale Insights of Nanoparticle-Stabilized Foam for CO2-Enhanced Oil Recovery , 2020, Nanomaterials.

[10]  L. Anovitz,et al.  Quantifying Fluid‐Wettable Effective Pore Space in the Utica and Bakken Oil Shale Formations , 2020, Geophysical Research Letters.

[11]  B. Krooss,et al.  Experimental Investigation of the Dependence of Accessible Porosity and Methane Sorption Capacity of Carbonaceous Shales on Particle Size , 2020 .

[12]  Haijiao Fu,et al.  Multiscale connectivity characterization of marine shales in southern China by fluid intrusion, small-angle neutron scattering (SANS), and FIB-SEM , 2020 .

[13]  H. El-Sobky,et al.  Complementary neutron scattering, mercury intrusion and SEM imaging approaches to micro- and nano-pore structure characterization of tight rocks: A case study of the Bakken shale , 2019, International Journal of Coal Geology.

[14]  D. Elsworth,et al.  Controls of CO2–N2 gas flood ratios on enhanced shale gas recovery and ultimate CO2 sequestration , 2019, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.

[15]  H. Dehghanpour,et al.  Imbibition Oil Recovery from the Montney Core Plugs: The Interplay of Wettability, Osmotic Potential and Microemulsion Effects , 2019, Day 2 Wed, April 24, 2019.

[16]  L. Levine,et al.  Development of combined microstructure and structure characterization facility for in situ and operando studies at the Advanced Photon Source. , 2018, Journal of applied crystallography.

[17]  G. Ye,et al.  Relationship between the Size of the Samples and the Interpretation of the Mercury Intrusion Results of an Artificial Sandstone , 2018, Materials.

[18]  D. Davudov,et al.  Scale-Dependent Pore and Hydraulic Connectivity of Shale Matrix , 2017 .

[19]  Tongwei Zhang,et al.  Application of mercury injection capillary pressure to mudrocks: Conformance and compression corrections , 2017 .

[20]  J. Pashin,et al.  The influence of particle size, microfractures, and pressure decay on measuring the permeability of crushed shale samples , 2017 .

[21]  Q. Fisher,et al.  Laboratory characterization of the porosity and permeability of gas shales using the crushed shale method: Insights from experiments and numerical modelling , 2017 .

[22]  Henry M. Loope,et al.  Significance of analytical particle size in low-pressure N 2 and CO 2 adsorption of coal and shale , 2017 .

[23]  Hai-hua Zhu,et al.  Influence of particle size on gas-adsorption experiments of shales: An example from a Longmaxi Shale sample from the Sichuan Basin, China , 2016 .

[24]  Carlos Torres-Verdín,et al.  Assessing the utility of FIB-SEM images for shale digital rock physics , 2016 .

[25]  S. Peng,et al.  Permeability measurements in mudrocks using gas-expansion methods on plug and crushed-rock samples , 2016 .

[26]  R. Ewing,et al.  Low nanopore connectivity limits gas production in Barnett formation , 2015 .

[27]  D. Elsworth,et al.  Estimation and modeling of coal pore accessibility using small angle neutron scattering , 2015 .

[28]  J. Klaja,et al.  Helium porosity measurements for rocks from unconventional reservoirs performed on crushed samples , 2015 .

[29]  R. G. van de Ketterij,et al.  Effect of high hyperbaric pressure on rock cutting process , 2015 .

[30]  A. Schimmelmann,et al.  The effect of analytical particle size on gas adsorption porosimetry of shale , 2015 .

[31]  J. W. Cole,et al.  Physical property relationships of the Rotokawa Andesite, a significant geothermal reservoir rock in the Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand , 2014, Geothermal Energy.

[32]  Mark D. Zoback,et al.  Experimental investigation of matrix permeability of gas shales , 2014 .

[33]  Q. Lan,et al.  Spontaneous Imbibition of Brine and Oil in Gas Shales: Effect of Water Adsorption and Resulting Microfractures , 2013 .

[34]  Robert P. Ewing,et al.  Low pore connectivity in natural rock. , 2012, Journal of contaminant hydrology.

[35]  Maria Mastalerz,et al.  Characterization of tight gas reservoir pore structure using USANS/SANS and gas adsorption analysis , 2012 .

[36]  Pete R. Jemian,et al.  Irena: tool suite for modeling and analysis of small‐angle scattering , 2009 .

[37]  R. Sigal.  A methodology for blank and conformance corrections for high pressure mercury porosimetry , 2009 .

[38]  H. Giesche,et al.  Mercury Porosimetry: A General (Practical) Overview , 2006 .

[39]  J. Wan,et al.  Surface‐zone flow along unsaturated rock fractures , 2001 .

[40]  D. L. Luffel,et al.  New Core Analysis Methods for Measuring Reservoir Rock Properties of Devonian Shale , 1992 .

[41]  E. W. Washburn.  Note on a Method of Determining the Distribution of Pore Sizes in a Porous Material. , 1921, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  Jianhua Zhao,et al.  Mineral-controlled nm-μm-scale pore structure of saline lacustrine shale in Qianjiang Depression, Jianghan Basin, China , 2019, Marine and Petroleum Geology.

[43]  M. Lutyński,et al.  Characteristics of carbon dioxide sorption in coal and gas shale – The effect of particle size , 2016 .

[44]  Ebrahim Fathi,et al.  Shale Permeability Measurements on Plugs and Crushed Samples , 2012 .

[45]  K. Vaughn,et al.  Improved Petrophysical Core Measurements on Tight Shale Reservoirs Using Retort and Crushed Samples , 2011 .

[46]  K. Newsham,et al.  Sample Size Effects on the Application of Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure for Determining the Storage Capacity of Tight Gas and Oil Shales , 2011 .

[47]  Paul A. Webb,et al.  Volume and Density Determinations for Particle Technologists , 2001 .

[48]  C. W. Hopkins,et al.  Matrix Permeability Measurement of Gas Productive Shales , 1993 .