Advertisement

A slip-flow model for multi-component shale gas transport in organic nanopores

  • Fengrui SunEmail author
  • Yuedong YaoEmail author
  • Guozhen LiEmail author
  • Xiangfang Li
ICCESEN 2017
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Geo-Resources-Earth-Environmental Sciences

Abstract

With the rapid development of shale gas resources, the accurate simulation of shale gas development process is becoming more and more important. Shale gas transport through nanopores of shale formation is the basic of shale gas development simulation. At present, the effect of impurities on methane transport through nanopores is neglected. In this paper, a novel model is presented for simulating multi-component shale gas transport through nanopores of shale formation. The effects of multi-component, slippage flow, and Knudsen diffusion are considered in the model. Results show that when the shale gas in nanopores is very thin, the Knudsen diffusion plays the dominant role over wide range of nanopore radius. While the effect of multi-component on Knudsen number and contribution degree can be neglected, both of the slippage flow rate and the Knudsen diffusion rate increase with increasing of CO2 content. Under medium pressure condition, there exists two turning points where the slippage flow and Knudsen diffusion take turns in charge of the shale gas transmission. Under high pressure condition, the slippage flow is the dominant factor over wide range of nanopore sizes. While the conductivities increase with decreasing methane content, the effect of multi-component on contribution degrees of slippage and Knudsen diffusion can be neglected.

Keywords

Shale gas Nanopores Slippage flow Knudsen diffusion Multi-component effect Analytic model 

References

  1. Anderson JM, Moorman MW, Brown JR et al (2014) Isothermal mass flow measurements in microfabricated rectangular channels over a very wide Knudsen range. J Micromech Microeng 24:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beskok A, Karniadakis GE (1999) A model for flows in channels, pipes, and ducts at micro and nano scales. Microscale Therm Eng 3:43–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Choi JG, Do DD, Do HD (2001) Surface diffusion of adsorbed molecules in porous media: monolayer, multilayer, and capillary condensation regimes. Ind Eng Chem Res 40:4005–4031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Civan F, Devegowda D, Sigal R (2013) Critical evaluation and improvement of methods for determination of matrix permeability of shale. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 30 September–2 October, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. SPE 166473-MSGoogle Scholar
  5. Curtis ME, Sondergeld CH, Ambrose RJ (2012) Microstructural investigation of gas shales in two and three dimensions using nanometer-scale resolution imaging. AAPG Bull 96:665–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Darabi H, Ettehad A, Javadpour F (2012) Gas flow in ultra-tight shale strata. J Fluid Mech 710:641–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feng D, Li XF, Wang XZ, Li J, Zhang T, Sun Z, He MX, Liu Q, Qin JZ, Han S, Hu JC (2018) Anomalous capillary rise under nanoconfinement: a view of molecular kinetic theory. Langmuir 34(26):7714–7725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fengrui S, Yuedong Y, Xiangfang L, Guozhen L, Zhili C, Yucui C, Meng C, Song H, Chaohui LV, Dong F, Zheng S (2018a) Effect of flowing seawater on supercritical CO2 - superheated water mixture flow in an offshore oil well considering the distribution of heat generated by the work of friction. J Pet Sci Eng 162:460–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fengrui S, Yuedong Y, Li G, Li X (2018b) Numerical simulation of supercritical-water flow in concentric-dual-tubing wells. SPE J 23(6):2188–2201. SPE-191363-PA.  https://doi.org/10.2118/191363-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fengrui S, Yuedong Y, Guozhen L, Xiangfang L, Chengang L, Zhili C (2018c) A model for predicting thermophysical properties of water at supercritical state in offshore CDTW. Measurement 124:241–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fengrui S, Yuedong Y, Guozhen L (2018d) Comments on: the flow and heat transfer characteristics of compressed air in high-pressure air injection wells [Arabian Journal of Geosciences (2018) 11: 519]. Arab J Geosci 11(20):631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fengrui S, Yuedong Y, Guozhen L (2019) Comments on Heat and mass transfer characteristics of steam in a horizontal wellbore with multi-point injection technique considering wellbore stock liquid [International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 127 (2018) 949–958]. Int J Heat Mass Transf 132:1319–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gao XC, Diniz da Costa JC, Bhatia SK (2014) Adsorption and transport of gases in a supported microporous silica membrane. J Membr Sci 460:46–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guo S, Peng Y (2019) Determination method of shale gas content: a case study in the Ordos Basin, China. J Pet Sci Eng 173:95–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huo P, Zhang D, Yang Z et al (2017) CO2 geological sequestration: displacement behavior of shale gas methane by carbon dioxide injection. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 66:48–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Javadpour F (2009) Nanopores and apparent permeability of gas flow in mudrocks (shales and siltstone). SPE J Can Pet Technol 48:16–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Karniadakis GE, Beskok A, Aluru N (2005) Microflows and nanoflows: fundamentals and simulation. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Keliu W, Xiangfang L, Zhangxing C, Junjian L, Yuan H, Liangliang J (2015) Gas transport behavior through micro fractures of shale and tight gas reservoirs. J Theor Appl Mech 47(6):955–964Google Scholar
  19. Klinkenberg LJ (1941) The permeability of porous media to liquids and gases. Drilling and production practice, 1 January, New York. pp 200–213Google Scholar
  20. Liu J, Yao Y, Liu D, Elsworth D (June 2017) Experimental evaluation of CO2 enhanced recovery of adsorbed-gas from shale. Int J Coal Geol 179(15):211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loucks RG, Reed RM, Ruppel SC, Jarvie DM (2009) Morphology, genesis, and distribution of nanometer-scale pores in siliceous mudstones of the Mississippian Barnett shale. J Sediment Res 79:848–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ma JS, Sanchez JP, Wu KJ et al (2014) A pore network model for simulating non-ideal gas flow in micro- and nano-porous materials. Fuel 116:498–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mason EA, Malinauskas AP, Evans RB III (1967) Flow and diffusion of gases in porous media. J Chem Phys 46:3199–3216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sondergeld CH, Ambrose RJ, et al (2010) Micro-structural studies of gas shales. SPE 131771Google Scholar
  25. Song W, Yao J, Ma J, et al (2017) Assessing relative contributions of transport mechanisms and real gas properties to gas flow in nanoscale organic pores in shales by pore network modelling. Int J Heat Mass Transf 113:524–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Yu P, Ding G, Zou M (2017a) The flow and heat transfer characteristics of superheated steam in offshore wells and analysis of superheated steam performance. Comput Chem Eng 100:80–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sun F, Yao Y, Chen M, Li X, Zhao L, Meng Y, Sun Z, Zhang T, Feng D (2017b) Performance analysis of superheated steam injection for heavy oil recovery and modeling of wellbore heat efficiency. Energy 125:795–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Yu P, Zhao L, Zhang Y (2017c) A numerical approach for obtaining type curves of superheated multi-component thermal fluid flow in concentric dual-tubing wells. Int J Heat Mass Transf 111:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Zhao L (2017d) Type curve analysis of superheated steam flow in offshore horizontal wells. Int J Heat Mass Transf 113:850–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Zhao L, Ding G, Zhang X (2017e) The mass and heat transfer characteristics of superheated steam coupled with non-condensing gases in perforated horizontal wellbores. J Pet Sci Eng 156:460–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Tian J, Zhu G, Chen Z (2017f) The flow and heat transfer characteristics of superheated steam in concentric dual-tubing wells. Int J Heat Mass Transf 115:1099–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li H, Chen G, Sun Z (2017g) A numerical study on the non-isothermal flow characteristics of superheated steam in ground pipelines and vertical wellbores. J Pet Sci Eng 159:68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X (2018a) The heat and mass transfer characteristics of superheated steam coupled with non-condensing gases in horizontal wells with multi-point injection technique. Energy 143:995–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li G, Miao Y, Han S, Chen Z (2018b) Flow simulation of the mixture system of supercritical CO2 & superheated steam in toe-point injection horizontal wellbores. J Pet Sci Eng 163:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li G, Sun Z (2018c) A numerical model for predicting distributions of pressure and temperature of superheated steam in multi-point injection horizontal wells. Int J Heat Mass Transf 121:282–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li G, Huang L, Liu H, Chen Z, Liu Q, Liu W, Cao M, Han S (2018d) Exploitation of heavy oil by supercritical CO2: effect analysis of supercritical CO2 on H2O at superheated state in integral joint tubing and annuli. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology 8(3):557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li G, Liu Q, Han S, Zhou Y (2018e) Effect of friction work on key parameters of steam at different state in toe-point injection horizontal wellbores. J Pet Sci Eng 164:655–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sun F, Yao Y, Li X, Li G, Han S, Liu Q, Liu W (2018f) Type curve analysis of multi-phase flow of multi-component thermal fluid in toe-point injection horizontal wells considering phase change. J Pet Sci Eng 165:557–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X, Chen M, Chen G, Zhang T (2018g) Analysis of superheated steam performance in offshore concentric dual-tubing wells. J Pet Sci Eng 166:984–999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X, Zhang T, Lu C, Liu W (2018h) An improved two-phase model for saturated steam flow in multi-point injection horizontal wells under steady-state injection condition. J Pet Sci Eng 167:844–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X (2018i) Geothermal energy extraction in CO2 rich basin using abandoned horizontal wells. Energy 158:760–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X, Li Q, Yang J, Wu J (2018j) A coupled model for CO2 & superheated steam flow in full-length concentric dual-tube horizontal wells to predict the thermophysical properties of CO2 & superheated steam mixture considering condensation. J Pet Sci Eng 170:151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X (2018k) Performance of geothermal energy extraction in a horizontal well by using CO2 as the working fluid. Energy Convers Manag 171:1529–1539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X (2018l) Geothermal energy development by circulating CO2 in a U-shaped closed loop geothermal system. Energy Convers Manag 174:971–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Li X (2019a) Transport zones of oil confined in lipophilic nanopores: a technical note. Arab J Geosci.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-019-4321-4
  46. Sun F, Yao Y, Li G, Zhang S, Xu Z, Shi Y, Li X (2019b) A slip-flow model for oil transport in organic nanopores. J Pet Sci Eng 172:139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tinni A, Fathi E, Agarwal R et al (2012) Shale permeability measurements on plugs and crushed samples. In: SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, 30 October–1 November, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. SPE 162235-MS.Google Scholar
  48. Wang S, Shi J, Wang K, et al (2018) Apparent permeability model for gas transport in shale reservoirs with nano-scale porous media[J]. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 55:508–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wu KL, Li XF, Wang CC et al (2014) Apparent permeability for gas flow in shale reservoirs coupling effects of gas diffusion and desorption. In: Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTEC) held in Denver, Colorado, USA, 25–27 August 2014Google Scholar
  50. Wu KL, Li XF, Chen ZX (2015) Real gas transport through nanopores of shale gas reservoirs. Sci Sin Tech 45:68–78.  https://doi.org/10.1360/N092015-00076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wu KL, Li XF, Chen ZX et al (2016) Real gas transport mechanism and mathematical model through complex nanopores and microfractures in shale gas reservoirs. Sci Sin Tech 46:851–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Xiong XY, Devegowda D, Michel GG et al (2012) A fully-coupled free and adsorptive phase transport model for shale gas reservoirs including non-darcy flow effects. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 8–10 October. San Antonio, Texas, USA. SPE 159758-MSGoogle Scholar
  53. Yu H, Li Q, Sun F (2019) Numerical simulation of CO2 circulating in a retrofitted geothermal well. J Pet Sci Eng 172:217–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and ProspectingChina University of Petroleum – BeijingBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.College of Petroleum EngineeringChina University of Petroleum – BeijingBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.China University of Petroleum – BeijingBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations