Abstract
Coal permeability is an important parameter in coalbed methane (CBM) exploration and greenhouse gas storage. A reasonable theoretical permeability model is helpful for analysing the influential factors of gas flowing in a coalbed. As an unconventional reservoir, the unique feature of a coal structure deformation determines the state of gas seepage. The matrix block and fracture change at the same time due to changes in the effective stress and adsorption; the porosity and permeability also change. Thus, the matrix block deformation must be ignored in the theoretical model. Based on the cubic model, we analysed the characteristics of matrix block deformation and fracture deformation. The new models were developed with the change in matrix block width a. We compared the new models with other models, such as the Palmer–Manson (P–M) model and the Shi–Durucan (S–D) model, and used a constant confining stress. By matching the experimental data, our model matches quite well and accurately predicts the evolution of permeability. The sorption-induced strain coefficient f differs between the strongly adsorbing gases and weakly adsorbing gases because the matrix block deformation is more sensitive for the weakly adsorbing gases and the coefficient f is larger. The cubic relationship between porosity and permeability overlooks the importance of the matrix block deformation. In our model, the matrix block deformation suppresses the permeability ratio growth. With a constant confining stress, the weight of the matrix block deformation for the strongly adsorbing gases is larger than that for weakly adsorbing gases. The weight values increase as the pore pressure increases. It can be concluded that the matrix block deformation is an important phenomenon for researching coal permeability and can be crucial for the prediction of CBM production due to the change in permeability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Biot MA (1941) General theory of three-dimensional consolidation. J Appl Phys 12(2):155–164
Cammarata G, Fidelibus C, Cravero M, Barla G (2007) The hydro-mechanically coupled response of rock fractures. Rock Mech Rock Eng 40(1):41–61
Chen Z, Liu J, Pan Z, Connell LD, Elsworth D (2012) Influence of the effective stress coefficient and sorption-induced strain on the evolution of coal permeability: model development and analysis. Int J Greenh Gas Con 8(5):101–110
Detournay BE, Cheng AHD (2012) Fundamentals of poroelasticity. Comprehensive rock engineering: principles, practice and projects
Flores RM (1998) Coalbed methane: from hazard to resource. Int J Coal Geol 35(97):3–26
Gates JI, Lietz WT (1950) Relative permeabilities of California cores by the capillary-pressure method. Drilling and Production Practice. American Petroleum Institute, USA
Gray I (1987) Reservoir engineering in coal seams: Part 1-The physical process of gas storage and movement in coal seams. SPE Reserv Eng 2(1):28–34
Guo P, Cheng Y, Jin K, Li W, Tu Q, Liu H (2014) Impact of effective stress and matrix deformation on the coal fracture permeability. Transport Porous Med 103(1):99–115
Haenel MW (1992) Recent progress in coal structure research. Fuel 71(11):1211–1223
Harpalani S, Chen G (1997) Influence of gas production induced volumetric strain on permeability of coal. Geotech Geol Eng 15(4):303–325
Hol S, Spiers CJ (2012) Competition between adsorption-induced swelling and elastic compression of coal at CO2 pressures up to 100 MPa. J Mech Phys Solids 60(11):1862–1882
Ji H, Li Z, Yang Y, Hu S, Peng Y (2015) Effects of organic micromolecules in coal on its pore structure and gas diffusion characteristics. Transport Porous Med 107(2):419–433
Koenig R (1989) Hydrologic characterization of coal seams for optimal dewatering and methane drainage. Q Rev Methane Coal Seams Technol 7:30–31
Law BE, Rice DD (1993) Hydrocarbons from coal. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, USA
Lin W, Kovscek AR (2014) Gas sorption and the consequent volumetric and permeability change of coal I: experimental. Transp Porous Med 105(2):371–389
Liu HH, Rutqvist J (2009) A new coal-permeability model: internal swelling stress and fracture-matrix interaction. Transp Porous Med 82(1):157–171
Liu J, Chen Z, Elsworth D, Miao X, Mao X (2010) Linking gas-sorption induced changes in coal permeability to directional strains through a modulus reduction ratio. Int J Coal Geol 83(1):21–30
Liu Q, Cheng Y, Zhou H, Guo P, An F, Chen H (2015) A mathematical model of coupled gas flow and coal deformation with gas diffusion and klinkenberg effects. Rock Mech Rock Eng 48(3):1163–1180
Maghous S, Dormieux L, Kondo D, Shao J (2013) Micromechanics approach to poroelastic behavior of a jointed rock. Int J Numer Anal Met 37(2):111–129
McKee C, Bumb A, Koenig R (1988) Stress-dependent permeability and porosity of coal and other geologic formations. SPE Form Eval 3(01):81–91
Palmer I, Mansoori J (1996) How permeability depends on stress and pore pressure in coalbeds: a new model. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers
Pan Z, Connell LD (2007) A theoretical model for gas adsorption-induced coal swelling. Int J Coal Geol 69(4):243–252
Pan Z, Connell LD (2011) Modelling of anisotropic coal swelling and its impact on permeability behaviour for primary and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Int J Coal Geol 85(3):257–267
Pini R, Ottiger S, Burlini L, Storti G, Mazzotti M (2009) Role of adsorption and swelling on the dynamics of gas injection in coal. J Geophys Res 114(B4):2415–2440
Puri R, Seidle J (1992) Measurement of stress-dependent permeability in coal and its influence on coalbed methane production. In Situ 16(3):183–202 (United States)
Robertson EP (2005a) Measurement and modeling of sorption-induced strain and permeability changes in coal. Department of Energy, USA
Robertson EP (2005b) Modeling permeability in coal using sorption-induced strain data. SPE annual technical conference and exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers
Robertson EP, Christiansen RL (2005) Measuring and modeling sorption-induced coal strain. 4th Annual DOE/NETL Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration, Alexandria, Virginia, pp 2–5
Robertson EP, Christiansen RL (2006) A permeability model for coal and other fractured, sorptive-elastic media. Society of petroleum engineers eastern regional meeting, Canton, OH, 10, 13 Oct 2006, pp 314–324
Robertson EP, Christiansen RL (2007) Modeling laboratory permeability in coal using sorption-induced strain data. Spe Reserv Eval Eng 10(03):260–269
Robertson EP, Christiansen RL (2008) A permeability model for coal and other fractured, sorptive-elastic media. Spe Journal 13(03):314–324
Ross HE, Hagin P, Zoback MD (2009) CO2 storage and enhanced coalbed methane recovery: reservoir characterization and fluid flow simulations of the Big George coal, Powder River Basin, Wyoming, USA. Int J Greenh Gas Control 3(6):773–786
Saghafi A, Faiz M, Roberts D (2007) CO2 storage and gas diffusivity properties of coals from Sydney Basin, Australia. Int J Coal Geol 70(1):240–254
Scherer GW (1986) Dilatation of porous glass. J Am Ceram Soc 69(6):473–480
Seidle J, Huitt LG (1995) Experimental measurement of coal matrix shrinkage due to gas desorption and implications for cleat permeability increases, International meeting on petroleum Engineering. Soc pet Engg, Beijing, China
Seidle J, Jeansonne M, Erickson D (1992) Application of matchstick geometry to stress dependent permeability in coals. Paper SPE 24361:18–21
Shi JQ, Durucan S (2004) Drawdown induced changes in permeability of coalbeds: a new interpretation of the reservoir response to primary recovery. Transport Porous Med 56(1):1–16
Somerton WH, Söylemezoḡlu I, Dudley R (1975) Effect of stress on permeability of coal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 12(5):129–145
Walsh J (1981) Effect of pore pressure and confining pressure on fracture permeability. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 18(5):429–435
Wang G, Ren T, Wang K, Zhou A (2014) Improved apparent permeability models of gas flow in coal with Klinkenberg effect. Fuel 128(14):53–61
Warren JE, Root PJ (1963) The Behavior of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Soc Petrol Eng J 3(3):245–255
White CM, Smith DH, Jones KL, Goodman AL, Jikich SA, LaCount RB, DuBose SB, Ozdemir E, Morsi BI, Schroeder KT (2005) Sequestration of carbon dioxide in coal with enhanced coalbed methane recovery a review. Energ Fuel 19(3):659–724
Yang Y, Li Z, Tang Y, Liu Z, Ji H (2014) Fine coal covering for preventing spontaneous combustion of coal pile. Nat Hazards 74(2):603–622
Yang Y, Li Z, Tang Y, Gu F, Ji H, Zhen L (2015) Effects of low molecular weight compounds in coal on the characteristics of its spontaneous combustion. Can J Chem Eng 93(4):648–657
Zhang H, Liu J, Elsworth D (2008) How sorption-induced matrix deformation affects gas flow in coal seams: a new FE model. Int J Rock Mech Min 45(8):1226–1236
Zhou Y, Li Z, Yang Y, Wang M, Gu F, Ji H (2015) Effect of adsorption-induced matrix deformation on coalbed methane transport analyzed using fractal theory. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 26:840–846
Acknowledgments
This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51304189), the Program for Innovative Research Team in University of Ministry of Education of China (IRT13098), and A Project Funded by the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, Y., Li, Z., Yang, Y. et al. Improved Porosity and Permeability Models with Coal Matrix Block Deformation Effect. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49, 3687–3697 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-016-1005-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-016-1005-1