Tight rock wettability and its relationship to other petrophysical properties: A Montney case study
- 131 Downloads
Understanding and modelling the wettability of tight rocks is essential for designing fracturing and treatment fluids. In this paper, we measure and analyze spontaneous imbibition of water and oil into five twin core plugs drilled from the cores of a well drilled in the Montney Formation, an unconventional oil and gas play in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. We characterize the samples by measuring the mineralogy using XRD (x-ray diffraction), total organic carbon content, porosity, and permeability. Interestingly, the equilibrated water uptake of the five samples is similar, while, their oil uptake increases by increasing the core porosity and permeability. We define two wetta-bility indices for the oil phase based on the slope and equilibrium values of water and oil imbibition curves. Both indices increase by increasing porosity and permeability, with the slope affinity index showing a stronger correlation. This observation suggests that part of the pore network has a stronger affinity to oil than to water. We also observe that the two indices decrease by increasing neutron porosity and gamma ray parameters measured by wireline logging tools. The samples with higher gamma ray and neutron porosity are expected to have greater clay content, and thus less effective porosity and permeability.
Key Wordsspontaneous imbibition wettability petrophysics gamma ray log
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
We thank Encana Corporation for providing the rock samples and petrophysical data, and NSERC (Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada) for supporting this work. The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12583-017-0725-9.
- Aloulou Fawzi, M. F., Meg Coleman, 2014. Tight Oil Production Pushes U.S. Crude Supply to over 10% of World Total.Google Scholar
- Amott, E., 1959. Observations Relating to the Wettability of Porous Media. AIME (216): 156–162Google Scholar
- Borysenko, A., Clennell, B., Sedev, R., et al., 2009. Experimental Investigations of the Wettability of Clays and Shales. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 114(B7). doi: 10.1029/2008jb005928Google Scholar
- Brown, R. J. S., Fatt, I., 1956. Measurements of Fractional Wettability of Oil Fields' Rocks by the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation Method. In: Fall Meeting of the Petroleum Branch of AIME. doi: 10.2118/743-gGoogle Scholar
- Habibi, A., Binazadeh, M., Dehghanpour, H., et al., 2015. Advances in Understanding Wettability of Tight Oil Formations. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. 19. doi: 10.2118/175157-msGoogle Scholar
- Handy, L., 1960. Determination of effective Capillary Pressures for Porous Media from Imbibition Data. Trans. AIME, 219: 75–80.Google Scholar
- Herron, M. M., 1988. Geochemical Classification of Terrigenous Sands and Shales from Core or Log Data. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 58(5). doi: 10.1306/212f8e77-2b24-11d7-8648000102c1865dGoogle Scholar
- Kai, O., Shidong, 2013. Overview of Nanofluid for EOR and Its Effect on Wettability. NTNU Google Scholar
- Kendall, D. R., 1999. Sedimentology and Stratigraphy of the Lower Triassic Montney Formation, Peace River Basin, Subsurface of Northwestern Alberta. University of CalgaryGoogle Scholar
- Law, B. E., Spencer, C. W., 1993. Gas in Tight Reservoirs——An Emerging Major Source of Energy. United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper, 1570Google Scholar
- Morrow, N., Ma, S., Zhou, X., et al., 1994. Characterization of Wettability from Spontaneous Imbibition Measurements. Annual Technical Meeting Google Scholar
- Nelson, P. H., 2009. Pore-Throat Sizes in Sandstones, Tight Sandstones, and Shales. 93: 329–340. doi: 10.1306/10240808059Google Scholar
- Odusina, E. O., Sondergeld, C. H., Rai, C. S., 2011. NMR Study of Shale Wettability. Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference. doi: 10.2118/147371-msGoogle Scholar
- Peters, K., 1986. Guidelines for Evaluating Petroleum Source Rock Using Programmed Pyrolysis. AAPG Bulletin, 70(3): 318–329. doi: 10.1306/94885688-1704-11d7-8645000102c1865dGoogle Scholar