Analysis of Petrophysical Characteristics and Water Movability of Tight Sandstone Using Low-Field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

  • Chaozheng Li
  • Guangdi LiuEmail author
  • Zhe Cao
  • Wei Yuan
  • Peng Wang
  • Yuan You
Original Paper


Low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) coupled with gas–water centrifugation (GWC) was performed to investigate petrophysical characteristics and water movability of the Chang 7 tight sandstone. Microscopic observation, mineral composition analysis and grain size analysis were applied to determine lithology and pore characteristics. Then, the controls of petrophysical properties and geological factors on the water movability were discussed. The results indicate that the T2 distribution of the Chang 7 tight sandstone can be divided into three groups according to the shape, range and amplitude of T2 spectrum. The removable water volume increases with the centrifugal force, but its gradient presents a remarkable difference among the different reservoir types. The final removable water volume (Φmov) at centrifuge force of 400 psi (average value of 5.28%) is approximately half of the total pore volume (porosity). The T2 geometric mean (T2gm), fractal dimension (Df) and NMR permeability calculated from NMR data can be used to characterize the pore structure and petrophysical properties of tight sandstone. The reservoir quality index can also be estimated based on the NMR permeability models. Removable water volume under the different centrifugation conditions is positively related to porosity, permeability and T2gm and negatively related to Df. Furthermore, removable water volume under different centrifugation conditions is positively related to detrital mineral (quartz + feldspar) content and grain size but negatively related to clay content.


Tight sandstone Petrophysical properties Fractal dimension Water movability Nuclear magnetic resonance 



This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China Project “Effectiveness of micro-nano pore-throat system to oil charging in tight sandstone and its control on oil accumulation” (No. 41472114).


  1. Aliakbardoust, E., & Rahimpour-Bonab, H. (2013). Effects of pore geometry and rock properties on water saturation of a carbonate reservoir. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 112, 296–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Mahrooqi, S. H., Grattoni, C. A., Moss, A. K., & Jing, X. D. (2003). An investigation of the effect of wettability on NMR characteristics of sandstone rock and fluid systems. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 39, 389–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Rbeawi, S., & Kadhim, F. (2017). The impact of hydraulic flow unit & reservoir quality index on pressure profile and productivity index in multi-segments reservoirs. Petroleum, 3(4), 414–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amaefule, J. O., Altunbay, M., Kersey, D. G., & Keelan, D. K. (1993). Enhanced reservoir description: Using core and log data to identify hydraulic (Flow) units and predict permeability in uncored intervals/wells. In SPE Annual technical conference and exhibition, 3–6 October, Houston, Texas, USA.
  5. An, S., Yao, J., Yang, Y., Zhang, L., Zhao, J., & Gao, Y. (2016). Influence of pore structure parameters on flow characteristics based on a digital rock and the pore network model. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 31, 156–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson, W. G. (1986). Wettability literature survey part 1: Rock/oil/brine interactions and the effects of core handling on wettability. National Municipal Review, 38(10), 1125–1144.Google Scholar
  7. Arns, C. H., Sheppard, A., Sok, R. M., & Knackstedt, M. A. (2005). NMR petrophysical predictions on digitized core images. In: SPWLA 46th annual logging symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, June 26–29.
  8. Bjørlykke, K. (2014). Relationships between depositional environments, burial history and rock properties. Some principal aspects of diagenetic process in sedimentary basins. Sedimentary Geology, 301(3), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blunt, M. J., Bijeljic, B., Dong, H., Gharbi, O., Iglauer, S., Mostaghimi, P., et al. (2013). Pore-scale imaging and modelling. Advances in Water Resources, 51, 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, R. J. S., & Gamson, B. W. (1960). Nuclear magnetism logging. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 219(8), 199–207.Google Scholar
  11. Bustin, R. M., Bustin, A. M. M., Cui, A., Ross, D., & Pathi, V. M. (2008). Impact of shale properties on pore structure and storage characteristics. In: SPE Paper 119892 presented at the society of petroleum engineers shale gas production conference in Fort Worth, Texas, November 16–18, 2008.
  12. Butcher, A., & Lemmens, H. (2001). Advanced SEM technology clarifies nanoscale properties of gas accumulations in shales. American Oil & Gas Reporter, 54, 118–124.
  13. Cai, Y., Liu, D., Pan, Z., Yao, Y., Li, J., & Qiu, Y. (2013). Petrophysical characterization of Chinese coal cores with heat treatment by nuclear magnetic resonance. Fuel, 108(11), 292–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cao, Z., Liu, G., Zhan, H., Gao, J., Zhang, J., Li, C., et al. (2017). Geological roles of the siltstones in tight oil play. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 83, 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cao, Z., Liu, G., Zhan, H., Li, C., You, Y., Yang, C., et al. (2016). Pore structure characterization of Chang-7 tight sandstone using MICP combined with N 2 GA techniques and its geological control factors. Scientific Reports, 6, 36919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chao, C., Xu, G., & Fan, X. (2019). Effect of surface tension, viscosity, pore geometry and pore contact angle on effective pore throat. Chemical Engineering Science, 197, 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen, S., Arro, R., Minetto, C., Georgi, D., & Liu, C. (1998). Methods for computing SWI and BVI From NMR logs. Presented at the SPWLA annual logging symposium, Keystone, Colorado, USA, 26–29 May.
  18. Clarkson, C. R., Freeman, M., He, L., Agamalian, M., Melnichenko, Y. B., Mastalerz, M., et al. (2012). Characterization of tight gas reservoir pore structure using USANS/SANS and gas adsorption analysis. Fuel, 95, 371–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clarkson, C. R., Jensen, J. L., & Blasingame, T. A. (2011). Reservoir engineering for unconventional gas reservoirs: what do we have to consider. In Paper SPE145080 presented at SPE North American unconventional gas conference and exhibition held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 14–6.
  20. Clarkson, C. R., Solano, N., Bustin, R. M., Bustin, A. M. M., Chalmers, G. R. L., He, L., et al. (2013). Pore structure characterization of North American shale gas reservoirs using USANS/SANS, gas adsorption, and mercury intrusion. Fuel, 103, 606–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Coates, G. R., Gardner, J. S., & Miller, D. L. (1994). Applying pulse-echo NMR to shaly sand formation evaluation. In SPWLA 35th annual logging symposium, 19–22 June, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
  22. Coates, G. R., Marschall, D., Mardon, D., & Galford, J. (1997). A new characterization of bulk-volume irreducible using magnetic resonance. Log Analyst, 39(1), 51–63.Google Scholar
  23. Coates, G., Xiao, L., & Prammer, M. (1999). NMR logging principles and applications. Houston: Halliburton Energy Services.Google Scholar
  24. Cohen, M. H., & Mendelson, K. S. (1982). Nuclear magnetic relaxation and the internal geometry of sedimentary rocks. Journal of Applied Physics, 53(2), 1127–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Daigle, H., & Dugan, B. (2009). Extending NMR data for permeability estimation in fine-grained sediments. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 26(8), 1419–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dastidar, R., Sondergeld, C. H., & Rai, C. S. (2006). NMR desaturation and surface relaxivity measurements on clastics rocks. In SPE-99629-MS presented at SPE Europe/EAGE annual conference and exhibition, Vienna, Austria, June 12–15, 2006.
  27. Didar, B. R., & Akkutlu, I. Y. (2013). Pore-size dependence of fluid phase behavior and the impact on shale gas reserves. In SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional resources technology conference, 12–14 August, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  28. Dillinger, A., & Esteban, L. (2014). Experimental evaluation of reservoir quality in Mesozoic formations of the Perth Basin (Western Australia) by using a laboratory low field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 57(2), 455–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dou, H., & Yang, Y. (2012). Further understanding on fluid flow through multi-porous media in low-permeability reservoirs. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 39(5), 674–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Eichhubl, P., D’Onfro, P. S., Aydin, A., Waters, J., & McCarty, D. K. (2005). Structure, petrophysics, and diagenesis of shale entrained along a normal fault at black diamond mines, California-implications for fault seal. AAPG Bulletin, 89(9), 1113–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Feng, S., Niu, X., Liu, F., Yang, X., Liu, X., & You, Y. (2013). Characteristics of Chang7 tight oil reservoir space in Ordos basin and its significance. Zhongnan Daxue Xuebao, 44(11), 4574–4580.Google Scholar
  32. Firouzi, M., Alnoaimi, K., Kovscek, A., Kovscek, A., & Wilcox, J. (2014). Klinkenberg effect on predicting and measuring helium permeability in gas shales. International Journal of Coal Geology, 123, 62–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Folk, R. L., & Ward, W. C. (1957). Brazos River bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 27, 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Fu, J., Luo, A., Zhang, N., Zhang, N., Deng, X., Lv, J., et al. (2014). Determine lower limits of physical properties of effective reservoirs in Chang 7 oil formation in Ordos Basin. China Petroleum Exploration, 19(6), 82–88.Google Scholar
  35. Gao, H., & Li, H. (2015). Determination of movable fluid percentage and movable fluid porosity in ultra-low permeability sandstone using nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) technique. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 133, 258–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Han, W., Gao, C., & Han, X. (2015). Application of NMR and micrometer and nanometer CT technology in research of tight reservoir: Taking Chang 7 Member in Ordos Basin as an example. Fault-Block Oil and Gas Field, 25(1), 62–66.Google Scholar
  37. Hinai, A. A., Rezaee, R., Esteban, L., & Labani, M. (2014). Comparisons of pore size distribution: A case from the Western Australian gas shale formations. Journal of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources, 8, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hodgkins, M. A., & Howards, J. J. (1999). Application of NMR logging to reservoir characterization of low-resistivity sands in the Gulf of Mexico. AAPG Bulletin, 83(1), 114–127.Google Scholar
  39. Jia, C., Zou, C., Li, J., Li, D., & Zheng, M. (2012). Assessment criteria, main types, basic features and resource prospects of the tight oil in China. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 33(3), 343–350.Google Scholar
  40. Jin, G., Xie, R., Liu, M., Guo, J., & Gao, L. (2019). A new method for permeability estimation using integral transforms based on NMR echo data in tight sandstone. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 180, 424–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kate, J. M., & Gokhale, C. S. (2006). A simple method to estimate complete pore size distribution of rocks. Engineering Geology, 84(1), 48–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kenyon, W. E. (1997). Petrophysical principles of applications of NMR logging. Log Analyst, 38(2), 21–40.Google Scholar
  43. Kenyon, W. E., Day, P. I., Straley, C., & Willemsen, J. F. (1988). A three-part study of NMR longitudinal relaxation properties of water-saturated sandstones. SPE Formation Evaluation, 3, 622–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kleinberg, R. L. (1996). Utility of NMR T2, distributions, connection with capillary pressure, clay effect, and determination of the surface relaxivity parameter ρ2. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 14(7–8), 761–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Klinge, M., Lehmkuhl, F., Schulte, P., Hülle, D., & Nottebaum, V. (2017). Implications of (reworked) aeolian sediments and paleosols for Holocene environmental change in Western Mongolia. Geomorphology, 292, 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kou, R., Alafnan, S. F. K., & Akkutlu, I. Y. (2016). Coupling of Darcy’s equation with molecular transport and its application to upscaling Kerogen permeability. In SPE EUROPEC Featured at EAGE conference and exhibition.Google Scholar
  47. Krohn, C. E. (1988). Fractal measurements of sandstones, shales, and carbonates. Journal of Geophysical Research, 93(B4), 3297–3305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lai, J., & Wang, G. (2015). Fractal analysis of tight gas sandstones using high-pressure mercury intrusion techniques. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 24, 185–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lai, J., Wang, G., Ran, Y., Zhou, Z., & Cui, Y. (2016). Impact of diagenesis on the reservoir quality of tight oil sandstones: The case of Upper Triassic Yanchang Formation Chang 7 oil layers in Ordos Basin, China. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 145, 54–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lala, A. M. S., & El-Sayed, E. M. (2015). Calculating absolute permeability using nuclear magnetic resonance models. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 8(10), 7955–7960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Li, C. Z., Liu, G. D., Cao, Z., Niu, Z. C., Niu, X. B., & Wang, P. (2016). The study of Chang 7 tight sandstone micro pore characteristics in Longdong area. Ordos Basin. Natural Gas Geoscience, 27(7), 1235–1247.Google Scholar
  52. Li, S., Tang, D., Xu, H., Pan, Z., Huang, W., & Zhu, X. (2015). Comparative analysis on water movability in pores of different reservoir rocks by nuclear magnetic resonance. Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 33(5), 689–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Li, P., Zheng, M., Bi, H., Wu, S., & Wang, X. (2017). Pore throat structure and fractal characteristics of tight oil sandstone: A case study in the Ordos Basin, China. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 149, 665–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Liao, J., Zhu, X., Deng, X., Sun, B., & Hui, X. (2013). Sedimentary characteristics and model of gravity flow in Triassic Yanchang Formation of Longdong Area in Ordos Basin. Earth Science Frontiers, 20(2), 29–39.Google Scholar
  55. Liu, X., Xiong, J., & Liang, L. (2015). Investigation of pore structure and fractal characteristics of organic-rich Yanchang formation shale in central China by nitrogen adsorption/desorption analysis. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 22(7), 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mandelbrot, B. B., Passoja, D. E., & Paullay, A. J. (1984). Fractal character of fracture surfaces of metals. Nature, 308, 721–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mao, Z., Xiao, L., Wang, Z., Jin, Y., Liu, X., & Xie, B. (2013). Estimation of permeability by integrating nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) logs with mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) data in tight gas sands. Applied Magnetic Resonance, 44(4), 449–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mason, G., Fischer, H., Morrow, N. R., & Ruth, D. W. (2010). Correlation for the effect of fluid viscosities on counter-current spontaneous imbibition. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 72, 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Morad, S., Al-Ramadan, K., Ketzer, J. M., & De Ros, L. F. (2010). The impact of diagenesis on the heterogeneity of sandstone reservoirs: A review of the role of depositional facies and sequence stratigraphy. AAPG Bulletin, 94(8), 1267–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Nelson, P. H. (2009). Pore-throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and shales. AAPG Bulletin, 93, 329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Padhy, G. S., Lemaire, C., Amirtharaj, E. S., & Ioannidis, M. A. (2007). Pore size distribution in multiscale porous media as revealed by DDIF–NMR, mercury porosimetry and statistical image analysis. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 300, 222–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pittman, E. D. (1992). Relationship of porosity and permeability to various parameters derived from Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure curves for sandstones. AAPG Bulletin, 76(2), 191–198.Google Scholar
  63. Rezaee, R., Saeedi, A., & Clennell, B. (2012). Tight gas sands permeability estimation from mercury injection capillary pressure and nuclear magnetic resonance data. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 88–89(2), 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rootare, H. M., & Prenzlow, C. F. (1967). Surface area from mercury porosimetry measurements. Journal of Physical Chemistry, 71, 2733–2735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rosenbrand, E., Fabricius, I. L., Fisher, Q., & Grattoni, C. (2015). Permeability in Rotliegend gas sandstones to gas and brine as predicted from NMR, mercury injection and image analysis. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 64(6), 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Scherer, M. (1987). Parameters influencing porosity in sandstones: A model for sandstone porosity prediction. AAPG Bulletin, 71, 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schmitt, M., Fernandes, C. P., Wolf, F. G., Neto, J. A. B. D. C., Rahner, C. P., & Santos, V. S. S. D. (2015). Characterization of Brazilian tight gas sandstones relating permeability and angstrom-to micron-scale pore structures. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 27, 785–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sun, W., Zuo, Y., Wu, Z., Liu, H., Xi, S., Shui, Y., et al. (2019). Fractal analysis of pores and the pore structure of the Lower Cambrian Niutitang shale in northern Guizhou province: Investigations using NMR, SEM and image analyses. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 99, 416–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Surdam, R. C., Crossey, L. J., Hagen, E. S., & Heasler, H. P. (1989). Organic-inorganic and sandstone diagenesis. AAPG Bulletin, 73(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  70. SY/T 6490-2014. (2014). Standards of the petroleum and natural gas industry of the People’s Republic of China. Specification for measurement of rock NMR parameter in laboratory (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  71. Taktak, F., Rigane, A., Boufares, T., Kharbachi, S., & Bouaziz, S. (2011). Modelling approaches for the estimation of irreducible water saturation and heterogeneities of the commercial Ashtart reservoir from the Gulf of Gabès, Tunisia. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 78(2), 376–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Timur, A. (1968). An investigation of permeability, porosity, & residual water saturation relationships for sandstone reservoirs. The Log Analyst, 9(4), 8–17.Google Scholar
  73. Timur, A. (1969). Pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance studies of porosity, movable fluid, and permeability of sandstones. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 21, 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Timur, A. (1972). Nuclear magnetic resonance study of carbonate rocks. Log Analyst, 13(5), 3–11.Google Scholar
  75. Wang, Z., Pan, M., Shi, Y., Liu, L., Xiong, F., & Qin, Z. (2018). Fractal analysis of Donghetang Sandstones using NMR measurements. Energy & Fuels, 32(3), 2973–2982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wang, C., Wang, Q., Chen, G., He, L., Xu, Y., Chen, L., et al. (2017). Petrographic and geochemical characteristics of the lacustrine black shales from the Upper Triassic Yanchang Formation of the Ordos Basin, China: Implications for the organic matter accumulation. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 86, 52–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wardlaw, N. C., & Mckellar, M. (1981). Mercury porosimetry and the interpretation of pore geometry in sedimentary rocks and artificial models. Powder Technology, 29(1), 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Westphal, H., Surholt, I., Kiesl, C., Thern, H. F., & Kruspe, T. (2005). NMR measurements in carbonate rocks: Problems and an approach to a solution. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 162(3), 549–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wu, H., Zhang, C., Ji, Y., Liu, R., Wu, H., Zhang, Y., et al. (2018). An improved method of characterizing the pore structure in tight oil reservoirs: Integrated NMR and constant-rate-controlled porosimetry data. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 166, 778–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Xiao, L., Xie, R., & Liao, G. (2012). NMR logging principles and applications of complex hydrocarbon reservoirs in China. Beijing: Science Press.Google Scholar
  81. Xie, D., Guo, Y., & Zhao, D. (2014). Fractal characteristics of adsorption pore of shale based on low temperature nitrogen experiment. Journal of China Coal Society, 39(12), 2466–2472.Google Scholar
  82. Xu, H., Tang, D., Zhao, J., & Li, S. (2015). A precise measurement method for shale porosity with low-field nuclear magnetic resonance: A case study of the Carboniferous–Permian strata in the Linxing area, eastern Ordos Basin, China. Fuel, 143, 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Yan, W., Sun, J., Cheng, Z., Li, J., Sun, Y., Shao, W., et al. (2017). Petrophysical characterization of tight oil formations using 1D and 2D NMR. Fuel, 206, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Yang, J. (2002). Tectonic evolution and oil–gas reservoirs distribution in Ordos Basin. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press.Google Scholar
  85. Yang, H., & Deng, X. (2013). Deposition of Yanchang Formation deep-water sandstone under the control of tectonic events in the Ordos Basin. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 40(5), 549–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yang, H., Dou, W., Liu, X., & Zhang, C. (2010). Analysis on sedimentary facies of Member 7 in Yanchang Formation of Triassic in Ordos Basin. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 28(2), 254–263.Google Scholar
  87. Yang, R., Fan, A., Han, Z., & van Loon, A. (2017a). Lithofacies and origin of the Late Triassic muddy gravity-flow deposits in the Ordos Basin, central China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 85, 194–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Yang, C., Zhang, J., Wang, X., Tang, X., Chen, Y., Jiang, L., et al. (2017b). Nanoscale pore structure and fractal characteristics of a marine-continental transitional shale: A case study from the lower Permian Shanxi Shale in the southeastern Ordos Basin, China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 88, 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Yang, H., Zhong, D., Yao, J., Liu, X., Ma, S., & Fan, L. (2013). Pore genetic types and their controlling factors in sandstone reservoir of Yanchang formation in Longdong area, Ordos basin. Earth Science Frontiers, 20(2), 69–76.Google Scholar
  90. Yao, Y., & Liu, D. (2012). Comparison of low-field NMR and mercury intrusion porosimetry in characterizing pore size distributions of coals. Fuel, 95(1), 152–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Yao, Y., Liu, D., Che, Y., Tang, D., Tang, S., & Huang, W. (2009). Non-destructive characterization of coal samples from China using microfocus X-ray computed tomography. International Journal of Coal Geology, 80, 113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Yao, Y., Liu, D., Che, Y., Tang, D., Tang, S., & Huang, W. (2010). Petrophysical characterization of coals by low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Fuel, 89(7), 1371–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Yu, J., Ma, J., Lu, J., Cao, Y., Feng, S., & Li, W. (2015). Application of mercury injection and rate-controlled mercury penetration in quantitative characterization of microscopic pore structure of tight reservoirs: A case study of the Chang7 reservoir in Huachi-Heshui area, the Ordos Basin. Petroleum Geology and Experiment, 37(6), 789–795.Google Scholar
  94. Zhang, C., Chen, Z., Zhang, Z., Li, J., Ling, S., & Sun, B. (2007). Fractal characteristics of reservoir rock pore structure based on NMR T2 distribution. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 29(4), 80–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Zhang, Z., & Weller, A. (2014). Fractal dimension of pore-space geometry of an Eocene sandstone formation. Geophysics, 79(6), 377–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Zhao, H., Ning, Z., Wang, Q., Zhang, R., Zhao, T., Niu, T., et al. (2015). Petrophysical characterization of tight oil reservoirs using pressure-controlled porosimetry combined with rate-controlled porosimetry. Fuel, 154, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Zhao, H., Ning, Z., Zhao, T., Zhang, R., & Wang, Q. (2016). Effects of mineralogy on petrophysical properties and permeability estimation of the Upper Triassic Yanchang tight oil sandstones in Ordos Basin, Northern China. Fuel, 186, 328–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Zhou, L., & Kang, Z. (2016). Fractal characterization of pores in shales using NMR: A case study from the Lower Cambrian Niutitang Formation in the Middle Yangtze Platform, Southwest China. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 35, 860–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Zhou, S., Liu, D., Cai, Y., & Yao, Y. (2016). Fractal characterization of pore-fracture in low-rank coals using a low-field NMR relaxation method. Fuel, 181, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Zhu, F., Hu, W., Cao, J., Sun, F., Liu, Y., & Sun, Z. (2018). Micro/nanoscale pore structure and fractal characteristics of tight gas sandstone: A case study from the Yuanba area, northeast Sichuan Basin, China. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 98, 116–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Zhu, H., Zhong, D., Yao, J., Niu, X., Liang, X., & Zhao, Y. (2014). Microscopic characteristics and formation mechanism of Upper Triassic Chang 7 tight oil reservoir in the southwest Ordos basin. Journal of China University of Mining and Technology, 43(5), 853–863.Google Scholar
  102. Zou, C., Yang, Z., Tao, S., Wei, L., Wu, S., Hou, L., et al. (2012). Nano-hydrocarbon and the accumulation in coexisting source and reservoir. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 39(1), 15–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Mathematical Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaozheng Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Guangdi Liu
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Zhe Cao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wei Yuan
    • 3
  • Peng Wang
    • 4
  • Yuan You
    • 4
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and ProspectingChina University of PetroleumBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.College of GeosciencesChina University of PetroleumBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Northeast Petroleum UniversityDaqingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.PetroChina Changqing Oilfield CompanyXi’anPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations