Segmentation of multi-coal seam pore structure in single well profile and its sedimentary control: a case study of Well Y1 in Panguan syncline, western Guizhou, China

  • Zhengguang Zhang
  • Yong Qin
  • Zhaobiao YangEmail author
  • Junlong Zhao
  • Tongsheng Yi
Original Paper


The pore structure of coal reservoirs is crucial for the occurrence and production of coalbed methane (CBM). Taking as an example the upper Permian coal-bearing strata profile of Well Y1 in Panguan syncline of western Guizhou, mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) and low-temperature N2 adsorption/desorption (LT-N2GA) experiments were carried out on samples from six main coal seams. Hysteresis coefficients of MIP and LT-N2GA were proposed. Fractal dimension of pore structure of each coal seam was calculated. The segmentation of pore structure of multi-coal seams was found. We found the total pore volume (TPV) and specific surface area (SSA) of coal were increased and then decreased as the increase of coal seam buried depth, which is characterized by two-segment distribution. The upper segment included the 7#, 10#, and 12# coal seams, whereas the lower segment contained the 18#, 19#, and 24# coal seams. The TPV, SSA, and MIP hysteresis coefficients and fractal dimension of seepage pore of the upper segment coal seams are larger than those of lower segment coal seams on the whole, while the LT-N2GA hysteresis coefficient, fractal dimension of adsorption pore, and fractal dimension of high-pressure stage of the upper segment are smaller than those of the lower segment. The coal seams in upper segment have more open pores, while the coal seams in the lower segment have more fine neck bottle pores or ink bottle pores. Taken together, these data demonstrated that the coal seams in the upper segment have higher adsorption and seepage capacity, and are more favorable for CBM development. The fundamental reason for the two-segment variation of TPV and SSA of six main coal seams is the symmetry of sedimentary facies in coal-bearing strata; moreover, the ash yield controls the TPV and SSA of coal seams, and the ratio of vitrinite to inertinite (V/I) controls the development of pores.


Multiple coal seams Pore structure Pore volume Specific surface area Hysteresis coefficient Fractal characteristics 


Funding information

This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41772155,41802181), the key project of the National Science and Technology (2016ZX05044-002), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China (No. 2015XKZD07).


  1. Barrett EP, Joyner LG, Halenda PP (1951) The determination of pore volume and area distribution in porous substances: computations from nitrogen isotherms. J Am Chem Soc 73:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brunauer SB, Emmett PH, Teller E (1938) Adsorption of gases in multi-molecular layers. J Am Chem Soc 60:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cai YD, Liu DM, Yao YB, Li JQ, Liu JL (2011) Fractal characteristics of coal pores based on classic geometry and thermodynamics models. Acta Geologica Sinica - English Ed 85:1150–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen SD, Tang DZ, Tao S, Xu H, Zhao JL, Fu HJ, Ren PF (2018a) In-situ stress, stress-dependent permeability, pore pressure and gas-bearing system in multiple coal seams in the Panguan area, western Guizhou, China. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 49:110–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen SD, Tao S, Tang DZ, Xu H, Li S, Zhao JL, Jiang Q, Yang HX (2017) Pore structure characterization of different rank coals using N2 and CO2 adsorption and its effect on CH4 adsorption capacity: a case in Panguan syncline, western Guizhou, China. Energy Fuel 31:6034–6044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen YL, Qin Y, Wei CT, Huang LL, Shi QM, Wu CF, Zhang XY (2018b) Porosity changes in progressively pulverized anthracite subsamples: implications for the study of closed pore distribution in coals. Fuel 225:612–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clarkson CR, Bustin RM (1996) Variation in micropore capacity and size distribution with composition in bituminous coal of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin: implications for coalbed methane potential. Fuel 75:1483–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clarkson CR, Bustin RM (1999) The effect of pore structure and gas pressure upon the transport properties of coal: a laboratory and modeling study. 1. Isotherms and pore volume distributions. Fuel 78:1333–1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diessel CFK (1982) An appraisal of coal facies based on macerals characteristics. Aust Coal Geol 4:474–483Google Scholar
  10. Duan XQ, Qu JW, Wang ZN (2009) Pore structure of macerals from a low rank bituminous. J China Univ Min Technol 38:224–228 (In Chinese with an English abstract)Google Scholar
  11. Friesen WI, Mikula RJ (1987) Fractal dimensions of coal particles. J Colloid Interface Sci 120:263–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fu HJ, Tang DZ, Xu T, Xu H, Tao S, Li S, Yin ZY, Chen BL, Zhang C, Wang LL (2017) Characteristics of pore structure and fractal dimension of low-rank coal: a case study of Lower Jurassic Xishanyao coal in the southern Junggar Basin, NW China. Fuel 193:2542–2564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gan H, Nandi SP, Walker PL (1972) Nature of porosity in American coals. Fuel 51:272–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gao D, Qin Y, Yi TS (2009) CBM geology and exploring-developing stratagem in Guizhou Province, China. Procedia Earth and Planet Sci 1:882–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gmur D, Kwiecińska BK (2002) Facies analysis of coal seams from the Cracow Sandstone Series of the Upper Silesia Coal Basin, Poland. Int J Coal Geol 52:29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hodot BB (1966) Outburst of coal and coalbed gas. China Industry Press, Beijing (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  17. Jaroniec M, Kruk M, Olivier J (1997) Fractal analysis of composite adsorption isotherms obtained by using density functional theory data for argon in slitlike pores. Langmuir 13:3719–3722Google Scholar
  18. Ju W, Yang ZB, Qin Y, Yi TS, Zhang ZG (2018) Characteristics of in-situ stress state and prediction of the permeability in the Upper Permian coalbed methane reservoir, western Guizhou region, SW China. J Pet Sci Eng 165:199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li M, Jiang B, Lin S, Lin SF, Wang JL, Ji MJ, Qu ZH (2011) Tectonically deformed coal types and pore structures in Puhe and Shanchahe coal mines in western Guizhou. Min Sci Technol 21:353–357Google Scholar
  20. Li S, Tang DZ, Xu H, Yang Z (2012) The pore-fracture system properties of coalbed methane reservoirs in the Panguan syncline, Guizhou, China. Geosci Front 3:853–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lu J, Shao LY, Wang ZG, Li YH, Wang S (2014) Organic carbon isotope composition and paleoclimatic evolution of Jurassic coal seam in the northern Qaidam basin. J China Univ Min Technol 43:612–618 (In Chinese with an English abstract)Google Scholar
  22. Lv ZF, Zhang XM, Zhong LW, Zhang SA, Zhu ZY, Li J (1991) The pore features of lump coal and its influence factors. J China Univ Min Technol 20:48–57 (In Chinese with an English abstract)Google Scholar
  23. Mahnke M, Mögel HJ (2003) Fractal analysis of physical adsorption on material surfaces. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 216:215–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mandelbrot BB (1975) Les objets fractals: forme, hazard et dimension. Flammarion, ParisGoogle Scholar
  25. Mastalerz M, Drobniak A, Rupp J (2008) Meso- and micropore characteristics of coal lithotypes: implications for CO2 adsorption. Energy Fuel 22:4049–4061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Neimark AV (1990) Determination of surface fractal dimension from the results of an adsorption experiment. J Chem Phys 64:1398–1403Google Scholar
  27. Nie BS, Liu XF, Yang LL, Meng JQ, Li XC (2015) Pore structure characterization of different rank coals using gas adsorption and scanning electron microscopy. Fuel 158:908–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nishioka M (1992) The associated molecular nature of bituminous coal. Fuel 71:941–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Okolo G, Everson R, Neomagus H, Roberts M, Sakurovs R (2015) Comparing the porosity and surface areas of coal as measured by gas adsorption, mercury intrusion and SAXS techniques. Fuel 141:293–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pfeifer P, Colem W (1990) Fractals in surface science: scattering and thermodynamics of adsorbed films. New J Chem 14:221–232Google Scholar
  31. Schmitt M, Fernandes CP, Neto DC, Wolf FG, Santos VS (2013) Characterization of pore systems in seal rocks using nitrogen gas adsorption combined with mercury injection capillary pressure techniques. Mar Pet Geol 39:138–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shi JQ, Durucan S (2005) Gas storage and flow in coalbed reservoirs: implementation of a bidisperse pore model for gas diffusion in coal matrix. SPE Reserv Eval Eng 8:3823–3832Google Scholar
  33. Sing KSW (1985) Reporting physisorption data for gas/solid systems-with special reference to the determination of surface area and porosity. Pure Appl Chem 57:603–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Song Y, Jiang B, Li FL, Liu JG (2017) Structure and fractal characteristic of micro- and meso-pores in low, middle-rank tectonic deformed coals by CO2 and N2 adsorption. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 253:191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Swanson SM, Mastalerz MD, Engle MA, Valentine BJ, Warwick PD, Hackley PC, Belkin HE (2015) Pore characteristics of Wilcox Group Coal, U.S. Gulf Coast Region: implications for the occurrence of coalbed gas. Int J Coal Geol 139:80–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. SY/T 5346-2005, 2005, Chinese oil and gas industry standard. Rock capillary pressure measurement (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  37. SY/T 6154-1995, 1995, Chinese oil and gas industry standard. Determination of specific surface and pore size distribution of rock by static nitrogen adsorption capacity method (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  38. Tao S, Chen SD, Tang DZ, Zhao X, Xu H, Li S (2018a) Material composition, pore structure and adsorption capacity of low-rank coals around the first coalification jump: a case of eastern Junggar Basin, China. Fuel 211:804–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tao S, Pan ZJ, Tang SL, Chen SD (2019) Current status and geological conditions for the applicability of CBM drilling technologies in China: a review. Int J Coal Geol 202:95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tao S, Zhao X, Tang DZ, Deng CM, Meng Q, Cui Y (2018b) A model for characterizing the continuous distribution of gas storing space in low-rank coals. Fuel 283:552–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Teichmüller M (1989) The genesis of coal from the viewpoint of coal petrology. Int J Coal Geol 12:1–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Teng J, Mastalerz M, Hampton LB (2017) Maceral controls on porosity characteristics of lithotypes of Pennsylvanian high volatile bituminous coal: example from the Illinois Basin. Int J Coal Geol 172:80–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang BY, Qin Y, Shen J, Zhang QS, Wang G (2018) Pore structure characteristics of low- and medium-rank coals and their differential adsorption and desorption effects. J Pet Sci Eng 165:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wardlaw NC, Mckellar M (1981) Mercury porosimetry and the interpretation of pore geometry in sedimentary rocks and artificial models. Powder Technol 29:127–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Xu BB, He MD (2003) Guizhou coalfield geology. China University of Mining and Technology press, Xuzhou (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  46. Yan JP, He X, Geng B, Hu QH, Feng CZ, Kou XP, Li XW, State K (2017) Nuclear magnetic resonance T2 spectrum: multifractal characteristics and pore structure evaluation. Appl Geophys 14:205–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yang JY (2008) The 6# coal of Heidaigou from Junger Coalfield in inner Mongolia: the action of trace elements separation in the coal facies. J Fuel Chem Technol 36:646–652 (In Chinese with an English abstract)Google Scholar
  48. Yang ZB, Zhang ZG, Qin Y, Wu CC, Yi TS, Li YY, Tang J, Chen J (2018) Optimization methods of production layer combination for coalbed methane development in multi-coal seams. Pet Explor Dev 45:312–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yao YB, Liu DM, Che Y, Tang DZ, Tang SH, Huang WH (2010) Petrophysical characterization of coals by low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Fuel 89:1371–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhang BQ, Li SF (1995) Determination of the surface fractal dimension for porous media by mercury porosimetry. Ind Eng Chem Res 34:1383–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang SH, Tang SH, Tang DZ, Pan ZJ, Yang F (2010) The characteristics of coal reservoir pores and coal facies in Liulin district, Hedong coal field of China. Int J Coal Geol 81:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang SH, Tang SH, Tang DZ, Yan ZF, Zhang B, Zhang JZ (2009) Fractal characteristics of coal reservoir seepage pore, east margin of Ordos basin. J China Univ Min Technol 38:713–718 (In Chinese with an English abstract)Google Scholar
  53. Zhao JL, Xu H, Tang DZ, Mathews JP, Li S, Tao S (2016a) A comparative evaluation of coal specific surface area by CO2, and N2, adsorption and its influence on CH4, adsorption capacity at different pore sizes. Fuel 183:420–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhao JL, Xu H, Tang DZ, Mathews JP, Li S, Tao S (2016b) Coal seam porosity and fracture heterogeneity of macrolithotypes in the Hancheng Block, eastern margin, Ordos Basin, China. Int J Coal Geol 159:18–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhengguang Zhang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yong Qin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Zhaobiao Yang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Junlong Zhao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tongsheng Yi
    • 3
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Coalbed Methane Resources and Reservoir Formation Process, Ministry of EducationChina University of Mining and TechnologyXuzhouChina
  2. 2.School of Resources and GeosciencesChina University of Mining and TechnologyXuzhouChina
  3. 3.Guizhou Research Center of Shale Gas and Coalbed Methane Engineering TechnologyGuiyangChina

Personalised recommendations