Arabian Journal of Geosciences

, 12:576 | Cite as

An experimental study on stress sensitivity of tight sandstone gas reservoirs during nitrogen drilling

  • Meng Yingfeng
  • Luo ChengboEmail author
  • Li Gao
  • Liu Houbin
Original Paper


The “Fizz Phenomenon,” observed by real-time monitoring and reservoir evaluation technology while nitrogen drilling, is ubiquitous in tight sandstone gas reservoirs. Experiments are used to simulate stress sensitivity when encountering tight gas reservoirs in the Xujiahe formation of the central and western Sichuan Basin. The original reservoir effective stress is assumed to be the effective confining pressure reflecting the real severity of damage to the formation permeability. Results show that 1) the permeability of samples reduces with confining pressure increasing and pore pressure reducing. 2) The denser the rock, the stronger stress sensitivity is, which can explain the mechanism of low permeability reservoir sensitivity differences by using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), casting thin sections, and constant-speed mercury injection experiment. What’s more, throat size and shape and plastic mineral content and type contribute to the differences of permeability sensitivity. 3) Mineral content and type of plastic are the major factors affecting the sensitivity of permeability differences. The stress sensitivity of tight reservoir permeability rock becomes strong with the increase of plastic mineral content.


Tight sandstone Pore and throat structure Plastic mineral Stress sensitivity 


  1. Al-Wardy W, Zimmerman RW (2004) Effective stress law for the permeability of clay-rich sandstones. J Geophys Res 109:B04203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chin LY, Raghavan R, Thomas LK (1998) Fully coupled analysis of well responses in stress-sensitive reservoirs. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition SPE-48967-MSGoogle Scholar
  3. Dobrynin VM (1962) Effect of overburden pressure on some properties of sandstones. Soc Pet Eng J 2(4):360–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Farquhar RA, Smart BGD, Todd AC, Tompkins DE, Tweedie AJ (1993) Stress sensitivity of low-permeability sandstones from the Rotliegendes sandstone. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-26501-MSGoogle Scholar
  5. Fatt I, Davis DH (1952) Reduction in permeability with overburden pressure. Soc Pet Eng 4(12):329–329Google Scholar
  6. Fjaer E, Holt RM, Horsrud P, Raaen AM, Risnes R (2008) Petroleum related rock mechanics. Edition, Second. isbn:978-0-444-50260-5Google Scholar
  7. Gangi AF (1978) Variation of whole and fractured porous rock permeability with confining pressure. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15(5):249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guo X, Wu Y (2007) Influence of start-up gradient and stress sensitivity on productivity of low-permeability gas reservoirs. Oil Gas Geol 28(4):539–543Google Scholar
  9. He GS, Tang H (2011) Petrophysics. Published by Petroleum Industry Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  10. He SL, Jiao CY, Wang JG, Luo FP, Zou L (2011) Discussion on the differences between constant-speed mercury injection and conventional mercury injection techniques. Fault-Block Oil Gas Field 18(2):235–237Google Scholar
  11. Jennings JB, Carroll HB, Raible CJ (1981) The relationship of permeability to confining pressure in low permeability rock. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-9870-MSGoogle Scholar
  12. Jiang YF, Zhang LH, Liu QG, Wang XM (2011) Productivity analysis of horizontal wells in low-permeability gas reservoirs considering stress sensitivity. Nat Gas Ind 31(10):54–56Google Scholar
  13. Jin M, Somerville J, Smart BGD (2000) Coupled reservoir simulation applied to the management of production induced stress-sensitivity. In: International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China SPE-64790-MSGoogle Scholar
  14. Jones FO (1975) A laboratory study of the effects of confining pressure on fracture flow and storage capacity in carbonate rocks. Soc Pet Eng 27(1):21–27Google Scholar
  15. Jones FO, Owens WW (1980) A laboratory study of low-permeability gas sands. J Pet Technol 32(9):1631–1640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kang YL, Zhang H, Chen YJ, Li QG, You LJ, Cheng QJ (2006) Comprehensive research of tight sandstones gas reservoirs stress sensitivity in DaNiuDi gas field. Nat Gas Geosci 17(3):335–344Google Scholar
  17. Lei Q, Xiong W, Yuang JR, Cui YQ, Wu YS (2007) Analysis of stress sensitivity and its influence on oil production from tight reservoirs. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-111148-MSGoogle Scholar
  18. Lei G, Dong PC, Wu ZS, Mo S, Gai S, Zhao CH, Liu ZK (2015) A fractal model for the stress-dependent permeability and relative permeability in tight sandstones. J Can Pet Technol 54(1):36–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li CL (2011) Fundamentals of reservoir engineering. Published by Petroleum Industry Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu RJ, Liu HQ, Zhang HL, Tao Y, Li M (2011) Study of stress sensitivity and its influence on oil development in low permeability reservoir. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 30(1):2699–2701Google Scholar
  21. Ostensen RW (1986) The effect of stress-dependent permeability on gas production and well testing. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-11220-PAGoogle Scholar
  22. Rosalind AA (2008) Impact of stress sensitive permeability on production data analysis. In: SPE Unconventional Reservoirs Conference SPE-114166-MSGoogle Scholar
  23. Ruan M, Wang LG (2002) Low-permeability oilfield development and pressure-sensitive effect. Acta Pet Sin 23(3):73–76Google Scholar
  24. Sheng YS, Hu QX, Gao H, Shi YM, Dang YC, Shao F, Du SH (2016) Evaluation on stress sensibility of low reservoir in situ conditions. Acta Sci Nat Univ Pekin 52(6):1025–1033Google Scholar
  25. Terzaghi K (1923) Die berechnung der durchlaessigkeitsziffer des tones aus dem verlauf hydrodynamischen spannungserscheinungen. Sitzungber Aka Wiss Wien 132:125–138Google Scholar
  26. Tian L, Xiao C, Gu DH (2014) A shale gas reservoir productivity model considering stress sensitivity and non-Darcy flow. Nat Gas Ind 34(12):70–75Google Scholar
  27. Tiller FM (1953) The role of porosity in filtration. Numerical methods for constant rate and constant pressure filtration based on Kozeny’s law. Chem Eng Prog 49(9):467–479Google Scholar
  28. Wang RF, Shen PP, Song ZQ, Yang H (2009) Characteristic of micro-pore throat inultra-low permeability sandstone reservoir. Acta Pet Sin 30(4):560–563Google Scholar
  29. Worthington PF (2004) The effect of scale on the petrophysical estimation of intergranular permeability. Petrophysics 45(1):59–72Google Scholar
  30. Xiang ZP, Xie F, Zhang J, Wei XF (2009) The influence of stress sensitivity of abnormal high pressure and low permeability gas reservoir on the deliverability of a gas well. Nat Gas Ind 29(6):83–85Google Scholar
  31. Xiao XJ, Bi YP, Wang XP, Gao J, Chang ZQ, Zhang JY (2014) A new trinomial deliverability equation with consideration of stress sensitivity. Nat Gas Geosci 25(5):767–770Google Scholar
  32. Xie W, Zhang C, Sun W, Tong MB (2011) Application of ASPE technology in pore structure study of Chang 2 reservoir. Fault-Block Oil Gas Field 18(5):549–551Google Scholar
  33. Xu HJ, Fan MG, Kang Z, Chang ZQ, Zhang SJ (2008) A productivity prediction equation considering rock permeability stress-sensitivity in low-permeability gas reservoirs. Nat Gas Geosci 19(1):145–147Google Scholar
  34. Yang ZM, Jiang HQ, Li ST, Zhu GY (2007) Characteristic parameters of microscopic pore structures of low permeability gas reservoirs-by using Sulige and Dina low permeability gas reservoirs for example. J Oil Gas Technol 29(6):108–110Google Scholar
  35. Yang B, Jiang HQ, Chen MF, Ning B, Fang Y (2008) Diliverability equation for stress-sensitive gas reservoir. J Southwest Pet Univ 30(5):158–161Google Scholar
  36. Yu JB, Guo DJ, Wang XQ (2006) Study of microscopic behaviors of low permeability reservoir through constant velocity mercury injection technique. J Daqing Pet Inst 30(2):22–25Google Scholar
  37. Zarool HBTA, Mehmet A, Duncan B (1995) Stress sensitivity in the Dulang field-how it is related to productivity. In: SPE European Formation Damage Conference SPE-30092-MSGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhou KM, Yang X, Fang JR (2010) Evaluation method for stress sensitivity of low-permeability sandstone gas reservoirs in Xujia river block. Oil Drill Prod Technol 28(4):33–35Google Scholar
  39. Zhu SY (2013) Experiment research of tight sandstone gas reservoir stress sensitivity based on the capillary bundle mode. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-167638-STUGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meng Yingfeng
    • 1
  • Luo Chengbo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Li Gao
    • 1
  • Liu Houbin
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and ExploitationSouthwest Petroleum UniversityCheng duChina

Personalised recommendations