Comparison of methods to calculate relative permeability from capillary pressure in consolidated water‐wet porous media

[1] The Brooks and Corey relative permeability model has been accepted widely as a way to calculate relative permeability using capillary pressure data. However, the Purcell model was found to be the best fit to the experimental data of the wetting-phase relative permeability in the cases studied here, as long as the measured capillary pressure curve had the same residual saturation as the relative permeability curve. The differences between the experimental data of relative permeability and the data calculated using the Purcell relative permeability model for the wetting phase were almost negligible. A physical model was developed to explain the insignificance of the effect of tortuosity on the calculation of the wetting-phase relative permeability. For the nonwetting-phase, the relative permeabilities calculated using the models were very close to the experimental values in drainage except for the Purcell model. However, in the case of imbibition, the relative permeabilities calculated using the models were different from the experimental data. This study showed that relative permeability could be calculated satisfactorily by choosing a suitable model, especially in drainage processes. In the reverse procedure, capillary pressure could also be computed once relative permeability data are available.