Transport in Porous Media

, Volume 111, Issue 1, pp 123–141 | Cite as

Multi-Physics Pore-Network Modeling of Two-Phase Shale Matrix Flows

  • Xinwo Huang
  • Karl W. Bandilla
  • Michael A. Celia


We construct a three-dimensional pore-network model with mixed wettability to study the two-phase flow mechanisms in dry gas producing shales. Previous pore-scale modeling studies on shale have been focused on single-phase gas flow through the nano-pores. However, at most field sites, the majority of the injected fracking fluid does not return to the surface during the flow-back period. It is believed that a large portion of the fracking fluid imbibes into the shale matrix during the fracking process, and thus two-phase flow occurs. In addition, while the inorganic shale matrix is generally water-wet, the organic material embedded within the matrix is hydrophobic. As such, the system displays spatial heterogeneity of wettability. Other important physics are also coupled in the model. Pressure-dependent gas sorption effects are included in the organic pores, with pore size reduction accounted for in those pores. Compressibility and slip flow effects of the gas phase are included throughout the pore-network, with the latter underscoring the fact that the sizes of the nano-pores are comparable to the mean free path of the methane molecule. The coupled effects of these various physical processes are studied to determine the importance of each effect. Continuum-scale properties are computed, including relative permeability curves, as a function of fraction and structure of organic regions and type and magnitude of boundary conditions.


Pore-network model Shale gas Mixed wettability  Sorption Multi-physics 


  1. Aghaei, A., Piri, M.: Direct pore-to-core up-scaling of displacement processes: dynamic pore network modeling and experimentation. J. Hydrol. 522, 488–509 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambrose, R., Hartman, R., Diaz-Campos, M., Akkutlu, I.Y., Sondergeld, C.: New pore-scale considerations for shale gas in place calculations. SPE-131772. In: Proceedings of SPE Unconventional Gas Conference (2010)Google Scholar
  3. Andrew, M., Bijeljic, B., Blunt, M.J.: Pore-scale imaging of geological carbon dioxide storage under in situ conditions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40(15), 3915–3918 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrew, M., Bijeljic, B., Blunt, M.J.: Pore-by-pore capillary pressure measurements using X-ray microtomography at reservoir conditions: Curvature, snap-off, and remobilization of residual \(\text{ CO }_{2}\). Water Resour. Res. 50(11), 8760–8774 (2014a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrew, M., Bijeljic, B., Blunt, M.J.: Pore-scale imaging of trapped supercritical carbon dioxide in sandstones and carbonates. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 22, 1–14 (2014b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrew, M., Bijeljic, B., Blunt, M.J.: Pore-scale contact angle measurements at reservoir conditions using X-ray microtomography. Adv. Water Resour. 68, 24–31 (2014c)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Armstrong, R.T., Georgiadis, A., Ott, H., Klemin, D., Berg, S.: Critical capillary number: desaturation studied with fast X-ray computed microtomography. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41(1), 55–60 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beal, C.: The viscosity of air water natural gas crude oil and its associated gases at oil field temperatures and pressures. Trans. AIME 165(1), 94–115 (1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bennion, D.B., Bachu, S.: Permeability and relative permeability measurements at reservoir conditions for \(\text{ CO }_{2}\)-water systems in ultra low permeability confining caprocks. SPE-106995. In: Proceedings on SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition (2007)Google Scholar
  10. Berg, S., Ott, H., Klapp, S.A., Schwing, A., Neiteler, R., Brussee, N., Makurat, A., Leu, L., Enzmann, F., Schwarz, J., Kersten, M., Irvine, S., Stampanoni, M.: Real-time 3D imaging of Haines jumps in porous media flow. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110(10), 3755–3759 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bird, G.A.: Molecular Gas Dynamics and the Direct Simulation of Gas Flows. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)Google Scholar
  12. Blunt, M.J.: Flow in porous media–pore-network models and multiphase flow. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 6(3), 197–207 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blunt, M.J., Jackson, M.D., Piri, M., Valvatne, P.H.: Detailed physics, predictive capabilities and macroscopic consequences for pore-network models of multiphase flow. Adv. Water Resour. 25(8), 1069–1089 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bohacs, K., Passey, Q., Rudnicki, M., Esch, W., Lazar, O.: The spectrum of fine-grained reservoirs from ‘shale gas’ to ‘shale oil’/tight liquids: essential attributes, key controls, practical characterization. IPTC-16676. In: Proceedings on 6th International Petroleum Technology Conference (2013)Google Scholar
  15. Celia, M.A., Reeves, P.C., Ferrand, L.A.: Recent advances in pore scale models for multiphase flow in porous media. Rev. Geophys. 33, 1049–1057 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chalmers, G.R., Bustin, R.M., Power, I.M.: Characterization of gas shale pore systems by porosimetry, pycnometry, surface area, and field emission scanning electron microscopy/transmission electron microscopy image analyses: examples from the Barnett, Woodford, Haynesville, Marcellus, and Doig units. AAPG Bull. 96(6), 1099–1119 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Clarkson, C.R., Solano, N., Bustin, R.M., Bustin, A.M.M., Chalmers, G.R.L., He, L., Melnichenko, Y.B., Radliński, A.P., Blach, T.P.: Pore structure characterization of North American shale gas reservoirs using USANS/SANS, gas adsorption, and mercury intrusion. Fuel 103, 606–616 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Darabi, H., Ettehad, A., Javadpour, F., Sepehrnoori, K.: Gas flow in ultra-tight shale strata. J. Fluid Mech. 710, 641–658 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dong, H., Blunt, M.J.: Pore-network extraction from micro-computerized-tomography images. Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlinear Soft Matter Phys. 80(3), 036307 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fatt, I.: The network model of porous media. I. Capillary pressure characteristics. Trans. AIME 207, 144–159 (1956a)Google Scholar
  21. Fatt, I.: The network model of porous media. II. Dynamic properties of a single size tube network. Trans. AIME 207, 160–163 (1956b)Google Scholar
  22. Fatt, I.: The network model of porous media. III. Dynamic properties of networks with tube radius distribution. Trans. AIME 207, 164–181 (1956c)Google Scholar
  23. Freeman, C.A., Moridis, G.J., Blasingame, T.A.: A numerical study of microscale flow behavior in tight gas and shale gas reservoir systems. Transp. Porous Media 90, 253–268 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gharbi, O., Blunt, M.J.: The impact of wettability and connectivity on relative permeability in carbonates: a pore network modeling analysis. Water Resour. Res. 48(12), W12513 (2012)Google Scholar
  25. Herring, A.L., Andersson, L., Newell, D.L., Carey, J.W., Wildenschild, D.: Pore-scale observations of supercritical \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) drainage in Bentheimer sandstone by synchrotron X-ray imaging. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 25, 93–101 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hough, E.W., Rzasa, M.J., Wood, B.B.: Interfacial tensions at reservoir pressures and temperatures; apparatus and the water-methane system. J. Petrol. Technol. 3(2), 57–60 (1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. International Energy Agency (IEA).: Golden Rules for a Golden Age of Gas, World Energy Outlook Special Report on Unconventional Gas. (2012)
  28. Javadpour, F., Fisher, D., Unsworth, M.: Nano-scale gas flow in shale sediments. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 46(10), 55–61 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Javadpour, F.: Nanopores and apparent permeability of gas flow in mudrocks (shales and siltstone). J. Can. Pet. Technol. 48, 16–21 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Joekar-Niasar, V.: The immiscibles: Capillarity effects in porous media-pore-network modelling. Geol. Ultraiectina. 318, 148–162 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. Joekar-Niasar, V., Hassanizadeh, S.M.: Analysis of fundamentals of two-phase flow in porous media using dynamic pore-network models: a review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(18), 1895–1976 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klinkenberg, L.J.: The permeability of porous media to liquid and gases. In: API Drilling and Production Practice, pp. 200–213 (1941)Google Scholar
  33. Langmuir, I.: The adsorption of gases on plane surfaces of glass, mica and platinum. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 40(9), 1361–1403 (1918)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Loucks, R.G., Reed, R.M., Ruppel, S.C., Jarvie, D.M.: Morphology, genesis, and distribution of nanometer- scale pores in siliceous mudstones of the Mississippian Barnett Shale. J. Sediment. Res. 79, 848–861 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Loucks, R., Reed, R., Ruppel, S.C., Hammes, U.: Spectrum of pore types and networks in mudrocks and a descriptive classification for matrix-related mudrock pores. AAPG Bull. 6, 1071–1098 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ma, J., Sanchez, J.P., Wu, K., Couples, G.D., Jiang, Z.: A pore network model for simulating non-ideal gas flow in micro- and nano-porous materials. Fuel 116, 498–508 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mastalerz, M., Schimmelmann, A., Drobniak, A., Chen, Y.: Porosity of Devonian and Mississippian New Albany Shale across a maturation gradient: Insights from organic petrology, gas adsorption, and mercury intrusion. AAPG Bull. 97(10), 1621–1643 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mehmani, A., Prodanović, M., Javadpour, F.: Multiscale, multiphysics network modeling of shale matrix gas flows. Transp. Porous Media 99(2), 377–390 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mehmani, A., Prodanović, M.: The effect of microporosity on transport properties in porous media. Adv. Water Resour. 63, 104–119 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Prud’Homme, R.K., Chapman, T.W., Bowen, J.R.: Laminar compressible flow in a tube. Appl. Sci. Res. 43(1), 67–74 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rexer, T.F., Mathia, E.J., Aplin, A.C., Thomas, K.M.: High-pressure methane adsorption and characterization of pores in Posidonia shales and isolated kerogens. Energ. Fuel. 28(5), 2886–2901 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sakhaee-Pour, A., Bryant, S.: Gas permeability of shale. SPE Reserv. Eval. Eng. 15(4), 401–409 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schettler, P.D., Parmely, C.R.: Contributions to total storage capacity in Devonian shales. SPE-23422. In: Proceedings on SPE Eastern Regional Meeting (1991)Google Scholar
  44. Soeder, D.J.: Porosity and permeability of eastern Devonian gas shale. SPE Form. Eval. 3(1), 116–124 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Valvatne, P.H., Blunt, M.J.: Predictive pore-scale modeling of two-phase flow in mixed wet media. Water Resour. Res. 40(7), W07406 (2004)Google Scholar
  46. Vidic, R.D., Brantley, S.L., Vandenbossche, J.M., Yoxtheimer, D., Abad, J.D.: Impact of shale gas development on regional water quality. Science 340(6134), 1235009 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wu, Y.S., Pruess, K., Persoff, P.: Gas flow in porous media with Klinkenberg effects. Transp. Porous Media 32(1), 117–137 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhou, D., Blunt, M., Orr Jr, F.M.: Hydrocarbon drainage along corners of noncircular capillaries. J. Colloid Interf. Sci. 187(1), 11–21 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xinwo Huang
    • 1
  • Karl W. Bandilla
    • 1
  • Michael A. Celia
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations