Advertisement

Testing Bulk Properties of Powder-Based 3D-Printed Reservoir Rock Proxies

  • Franciszek J. Hasiuk
Article
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

3D printing with powders offers the most analogous method to the natural way in which clastic reservoir rocks are formed, resulting in pore network textures and morphologies similar to natural rocks. To characterize pore networks and their transport properties in rock proxies 3D-printed from powdered materials, solid proxy reservoir rocks were 3D-printed in aluminum, steel, ceramic, and gypsum powders. These proxies were analyzed using traditional destructive and nondestructive reservoir characterization methods. While CT and helium porosimetry helped identify connected porosity, mercury porosimetry provided information on the pore-throat size distribution. X-ray fluorescence was used to identify elemental composition of each material. Thin-section petrography provided further information on proxy pore network microstructure. Despite designing a solid digital model, 3D printers using powder materials can impart significant porosity as a byproduct of the printing process that can be used for repeatable flow and geomechanical experiments in proxies. Ceramic and aluminum proxies showed the lowest porosity. Gypsum proxies had the highest porosity (36%) and range of porosities (5–36%). Metal proxies (aluminum and steel) showed low porosity and minimal mercury intrusion. Proxies were printed in two sizes (8 mm × 15 mm and 25 mm × 25 mm). Larger proxies were lower in porosity except in the case of gypsum because of post-processing artifacts. Ceramic and gypsum proxies showed significant compressibility at high mercury intrusion pressures. Proxies printed in silica sand were the most analogous to natural reservoir rocks despite their high porosity (36–51%) and pore-throat size mode (70 μm).

Keywords

3D printing Porosity Permeability Powder 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Sergey Ishutov for executing some of the analytical work for this project as well as thoughtful discussions on interpreting the data. I would like to thank Drs. Rick Chalaturnyk and Bauyrzhan Primkulov (University of Alberta) for 3D printing the silica proxies analyzed in this study. I would like to thank Dr. Michelle Barger, Iowa Department of Transportation, for facilitating the HHXRF analysis. This study was funded in part by Aramco (Grant No. A-0139-2015) Services Company, 16300 Park Row Dr., Houston, TX 77084.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

None.

Supplementary material

11242_2018_1221_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (24 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 24 kb)

References

  1. Bhattacharjee, N., Urrios, A., Kang, S., Folch, A.: The upcoming 3D-printing revolution in microfluidics. Lab Chip 16(10), 1720–1742 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1039/C6LC00163G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fereshtenejad, S., Song, J.J.: Fundamental study on applicability of powder-based 3D printer for physical modeling in rock mechanics. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 49, 1–10 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-015-0904-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gerami, A., Alzahid, Y., Mostaghimi, P., Kashaninejad, N., Kazemifar, F., Amirian, T., Mosavat, N., Warkiani, M.E., Armstrong, R.T.: Microfluidics for porous systems: fabrication, microscopy and applications. Transp. Porous Media 1–28 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-018-1202-3
  4. Ishutov, S., Fullmer, S.M., Buono, A.S., Hasiuk, F.J., Harding, C., Gray, J.: Resurrection of a reservoir sandstone from tomographic data using 3-D printing. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 101, 1425–1443 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1306/11111616038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ishutov, S., Jobe, T.D., Zhang, S., Gonzalez, M.A., Agar, S.M., Hasiuk, F., Watson, F., Geiger, S., Mackay, E., Chalaturnyk, R.: 3D printing for geoscience: fundamental research, education, and applications for the petroleum industry. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 102, 1–26 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1306/0329171621117056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Karadimitriou, N.K., Hassanizadeh, S.M.: A review of micromodels and their use in two-phase flow studies. Vadose Zone J (2012).  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2011.0072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kong, L., Ostadhassan, M., Li, C., Tamimi, N.: Can 3-D printed gypsum samples replicate natural rocks? An experimental study. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1520-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lucia, F.J.: Carbonate Reservoir Characterization: An Integrated Approach, vol. 7. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  9. Osinga, S., Zambrano-Narvaez, G., Chalaturnyk, R.J.: Study of geomechanical properties of 3D-printed sandstone analogue. In: ARMA Conference, Paper 2015-547 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. Pilliar, R.M., Filiaggi, M.J., Wells, J.D., Grynpas, M.D., Kandel, R.A.: Porous calcium polyphosphate scaffolds for bone substitute applications—in vitro characterization. Biomaterials 22, 963–972 (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00261-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Primkulov, B., Chalaturnyk, J., Chalaturnyk, R., Zambrano Narvaez, G.: 3D Printed sandstone strength: curing of furfuryl alcohol resin-based sandstones. 3D Print. Addit. Manuf. 4(3), 149–156 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2017.0032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Scholle, P.A., Ulmer-Scholle, D.S.: A color guide to the petrography of carbonate rocks: grains, textures, porosity, diagenesis. AAPG Mem. 77, 333 (2003) Google Scholar
  13. Schröder-Turk, G.E., Mickel, W., Schröter, M., Delaney, G.W., Saadatfar, M., Senden, T.J., Mecke, K., Aste, T.: Disordered spherical bead packs are anisotropic. Europhys. Lett. 90, 34001 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/90/34001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Seitz, H., Rieder, W., Irsen, S., Leukers, B., Tille, C.: Three‐dimensional printing of porous ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B: Appl. Biomater. 74(2), 782−788 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shi, J.Q., Durucan, S.: Exponential growth in San Juan Basin Fruitland coalbed permeability with reservoir drawdown: model match and new insights. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 13(06), 914–925 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.2118/123206-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Song, W., de Haas, T.W., Fadaei, H., Sinton, D.: Chip-off-the-old-rock: the study of reservoir-relevant geological processes with real-rock micromodels. Lab Chip 14, 4382–4390 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1039/c4lc00608a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Song, L., Jiang, Q., Shi, Y.E., Feng, X.T., Li, Y., Su, F., Liu, C.: Feasibility investigation of 3D printing technology for geotechnical physical models: study of tunnels. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 9, 1–21 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1504-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tiab, D., Donaldson, E.C.: Petrophysics: Theory and Practice of Measuring Reservoir Rock and Fluid Transport Properties. pp. 106–109. Gulf Professional Publishing (2015) Google Scholar
  19. Zhou, T., Zhu, J.B.: Identification of a suitable 3D printing material for mimicking brittle and hard rocks and its brittleness enhancements. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-017-1335-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Energy Research SectionKansas Geological SurveyLawrenceUSA
  2. 2.Department of Geological and Atmospheric SciencesIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations