Pore Structures

  • Mehdi Ostadhassan
  • Kouqi Liu
  • Chunxiao Li
  • Seyedalireza Khatibi
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Petroleum Geoscience & Engineering book series (BRIEFSPGE)


Pore structures play a very critical role in the petroleum industry, which controls the capacity of oil and gas storage in the reservoir (Anovitz and Cole in Rev Miner Geochem 80(1):61–164, 2015). Pore with different properties such as pore size and pore shape can impact the physical, mechanical and chemical properties of the rocks including strength, elastic modulus, permeability, and conductivity (Boadu in J Appl Geophys 44(2–3):103–113, 2000; Sanyal et al. in Chem Eng Sci 61(2):307–315, 2006; Wang et al. in J Appl Geophys 86:70–81, 2012). Therefore, characterization and quantification of the pore structures appear to be crucial for reservoir development. The boom of the unconventional resources in the recent decade brought the attention of the many researchers’ attention. Shale oil formation is one of the typical unconventional reservoirs and the understanding of these kinds of formation is still limited. In comparison to the conventional reservoirs such as sandstone or limestone, the pore structures in shale reservoirs are more complex due to the abundance of the nano-pores. In this chapter, various kinds of methods are introduced and applied to analyze the micro structures of the shale oil formation.


  1. Allain C, Cloitre M (1991) Characterizing the lacunarity of random and deterministic fractal sets. Phys Rev Ann 44:3552–3558MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Amankwah KAG, Schwarz JA (1995) A modified approach for estimating pseudo-vapor pressures in the application of the Dubinin-Astakhov equation. Carbon 33:1313–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anovitz LM, Cole DR (2015) Characterization and analysis of porosity and pore structures. Rev Miner Geochem 80(1):61–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avnir D, Jaroniec M (1989) An isotherm equation for adsorption on fractal surfaces of heterogeneous porous materials. Langmuir 5(6):1431–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Backes AR (2013) A new approach to estimate lacunarity of texture images. Pattern Recognit Lett 34(13):1455–1461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Binnig G, Quate CF, Gerber C (1986) Atomic force microscopy. Phys Rev Lett 56(9):930–933Google Scholar
  7. Boadu FK (2000) Predicting the transport properties of fractured rocks from seismic information: numerical experiments. J Appl Geophys 44(2–3):103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogner A, Jouneau PH, Thollet G, Basset D, Gauthier C (2007) A history of scanning electron microscopy developments: towards “wet-STEM” imaging. Micron 38(4):390–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruening FA, Cohen AD (2005) Measuring surface properties and oxidation of coal macerals using the atomic force microscope. Int J Coal Geol 63:195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cai Y, Liu D, Yao Y et al (2011) Fractal characteristics of coal pores based on classic geometry and thermodynamics models. Acta Geol Sin (English) 85(5):1150–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cao TT, Song ZG, Wang SB et al (2015) A comparative study of the specific surface area and pore structure of different shales and their kerogens. Sci China Earth Sci 58(4):510–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cao Z, Liu G, Zhan H et al (2016) Pore structure characterization of Chang-7 tight sandstone using MICP combined with N2GA techniques and its geological control factors. Sci Rep-UK 6:36919 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chhabra A, Jensen RV (1989) Direction of determination of the f(a) singularity spectrum. Phys Rev Lett 62(12):1327–1330MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Costa EVL, Nogueira RA (2015) Fractal, multifractal and lacunarity analysis applied in retinal regions of diabetic patients with and without nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. Fractal Geom Nonlinear Anal Med Biol 1(3):112–119Google Scholar
  15. Cox EP (1927) A method of assigning numerical and percentage values to the degree of roundness of sand grains. J Paleontol 1(3):179–183Google Scholar
  16. Do DD, Do HD (2003) Pore characterization of carbonaceous materials by DFT and GCMC simulations: a review. Adsorpt Sci Technol 21(5):389–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fan L, Ziegler T (1992) Nonlocal density functional theory as a practical tool in calculations on transition states and activation energies. Applications to elementary reaction steps in organic chemistry. J Am Chem Soc 114:10890–10897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feder J (1988) Fractals. Plenum Press, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldstein JI, Newbury DE, Echlin P (1981) Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis. A text for biologists, material scientists, and geologists, Plenum Press, New York, 673 pGoogle Scholar
  20. Groen JC, Peffer LAA, Pérez-Ramı́rez J (2003) Pore size determination in modified micro-and mesoporous materials. Pitfalls and limitations in gas adsorption data analysis. Micropor Mesopor Mat 60(1):1–17Google Scholar
  21. Halsey TC, Hensen MH, Kadanoff LP et al (1986) Fractal measures and their singularities: the characterization of strange sets. Phys Rev A 33(2):1141–1151MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Hirono T, Lin W, Nakashima S (2006) Pore space visualization of rocks using an atomic force microscope. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43:317–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Houben ME, Desbois G, Urai JL (2014) A comparative study of representative 2D microstructures in Shale and Sandy facies of Opalinus Clay (Mont Terri, Switzerland) inferred from BIB-SEM and MIP methods. Mar Pet Geol 49:143–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hu MG, Wang JF, Ge Y (2009) Super-resolution reconstruction of remote sensing images using multifractal analysis. Sensors 9(11):8669–8683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Javadpour F (2009) CO2 injection in geological formations: determining macroscale coefficients from pore scale processes. Transp Porous Med 79:87–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Javadpour F, Farshi MM, Amrein M (2012) Atomic force microscopy: a new tool for gas-shale characterization. J Can Pet Technol 51(04):236–243Google Scholar
  27. Joos J, Carraro T, Weber A, Ivers-Tiffée E (2011) Reconstruction of porous electrodes by FIB/SEM for detailed microstructure modeling. J Power Sour 196(17):7302–7307Google Scholar
  28. Khalili NR, Pan M, Sandi G (2000) Determination of fractal dimensions of solid carbons from gas and liquid phase adsorption isotherms. Carbon 38(4):573–588Google Scholar
  29. Kuila U, Prasad M (2013) Specific surface area and pore-size distribution in clays and shales. Geophys Prospect 61(2):341–362Google Scholar
  30. Labani MM, Rezaee R, Saeedi A et al (2013) Evaluation of pore size spectrum of gas shale reservoirs using low pressure nitrogen adsorption, gas expansion and mercury porosimetry: a case study from the Perth and Canning Basins, Western Australia. J Petrol Sci Eng 112:7–16Google Scholar
  31. Li L, Chang L, Le S, Huang D (2012) Multifractal analysis and lacunarity analysis: A promising method for the automated assessment of muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) epidermis netting. Comput Electron Agric 88:72–84Google Scholar
  32. Liu K, Ostadhassan M (2017a) Quantification of the microstructures of Bakken shale reservoirs using multi-fractal and lacunarity analysis. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 39:62–71Google Scholar
  33. Liu K, Ostadhassan M (2017b) Microstructural and geomechanical analysis of Bakken shale at nanoscale. J Pet Sci Eng 153:133–144Google Scholar
  34. Liu K, Ostadhassan M (2017c) Multi-scale fractal analysis of pores in shale rocks. J Appl Geophys 140:1–10Google Scholar
  35. Liu K, Ostadhassan M, Bubach B (2016a) Pore structure analysis by using atomic force microscopy. URTEC 2448210Google Scholar
  36. Liu K, Ostadhassan M, Jabbari H, Bubach B (2016b) Potential application of atomic force microscopy in characterization of nano-pore structures of Bakken formation. In: Society of petroleum engineers, 2016Google Scholar
  37. Liu K, Ostadhassan M, Zhou J, Gentzis T, Rezaee R (2017) Nanoscale pore structure characterization of the Bakken shale in the USA. Fuel 209:567–578Google Scholar
  38. Lopes R, Betrouni N (2009) Fractal and multifractal analysis: a review. Med Image Anal 13(4):634–649Google Scholar
  39. Malhi Y, Román-Cuesta RM (2008) Analysis of lacunarity and scales of spatial homogeneity in IKONOS images of Amazonian tropical forest canopies. Remote Sens Environ 112(5):2074–2087Google Scholar
  40. Mandelbrot BB (1982) The fractal geometry of nature. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Mandelbrot BB (1983) The fractal geometry of nature. WH Freeman & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Mendoza F, Verboven P, Ho QT et al (2010) Multifractal properties of pore-size distribution in apple tissue using X-ray imaging. J Food Eng 99(2):206–215Google Scholar
  43. Plotnick RE, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (1993) Lacunarity indices as measures of landscape texture. Lands Ecol 8(3):201–211Google Scholar
  44. Qi H, Ma J, Wong P (2002) Adsorption isotherms of fractal surfaces. Colloid Surf A 206(1):401–407Google Scholar
  45. Ravikovitch PI, Haller GL, Neimark AV (1998) Density functional theory model for calculating pore size distributions: pore structure of nanoporous catalysts. Adv Colloid Interfac 76:203–226Google Scholar
  46. Russel DA, Hanson J, Ott E (1980) Dimension of strange attractors. Phys Rev Lett 45(14):1175–1178Google Scholar
  47. Sahouli B, Blacher S, Brouers F (1997) Applicability of the fractal FHH equation. Langmuir 13(16):4391–4394Google Scholar
  48. Sanyal D, Ramachandrarao P, Gupta OP (2006) A fractal description of transport phenomena in dendritic porous network. Chem Eng Sci 61(2):307–315Google Scholar
  49. Schmitt M, Fernandes CP, da Cunha Neto JAB et al (2013) Characterization of pore systems in seal rocks using nitrogen gas adsorption combined with mercury injection capillary pressure techniques. Mar Pet Geol 39(1):138–149Google Scholar
  50. Shi K, Liu CQ, Ai NS (2009) Monofractal and multifractal approaches in investigating temporal variation of air pollution indexes. Fractals 17:513–521Google Scholar
  51. Smith TG, Lange GD, Marks WB (1996) Fractal methods and results in cellular morphology—dimensions, lacunarity and multifractals. J Neurosci Methods 69(2):123–136Google Scholar
  52. Sorelli L, Constantinides G, Ulm F-J, Toutlemonde F (2008) The nano-mechanical signature of ultra high performance concrete by statistical nanoindentation techniques. Cem Concr Res 38(12):1447–1456Google Scholar
  53. Sun M, Yu B, Hu Q et al (2016) Nanoscale pore characteristics of the Lower Cambrian Niutitang Formation Shale: a case study from Well Yuke# 1 in the Southeast of Chongqing, China. Int J Coal Geol 154:16–29Google Scholar
  54. Takashimizu Y, Iiyoshi M (2016) New parameter of roundness R: circularity corrected by aspect ratio. Prog Earth Planet Sci 3(1):1–16Google Scholar
  55. Tang P, Chew NYK, Chan HK et al (2003) Limitation of determination of surface fractal dimension using N2 adsorption isotherms and modified Frenkel–Halsey–Hill theory. Langmuir 19(7):2632–2638Google Scholar
  56. Tang X, Jiang Z, Jiang S et al (2016) Effect of organic matter and maturity on pore size distribution and gas storage capacity in high-mature to post-mature shales. Energy Fuels 30(11):8985–8996Google Scholar
  57. Ulm FJ, Vandamme M, Bobko C et al (2007) Statistical indentation techniques for hydrated nanocomposites: concrete, bone, and shale. J Am Ceram Soc 90(9):2677–2692Google Scholar
  58. Vasseur J et al (2015) Heterogeneity: the key to failure forecasting. Sci Rep 5:13259Google Scholar
  59. Wang H et al (2012) Fractal analysis and its impact factors on pore structure of artificial cores based on the images obtained using magnetic resonance imaging. J Appl Geophys 86:70–81Google Scholar
  60. Wong HS, Head MK, Buenfeld NR (2006) Pore segmentation of cement-based materials from backscattered electron images. Cem Concr Res 36(6):1083–1090Google Scholar
  61. Yao Y, Liu D, Tang D et al (2008) Fractal characterization of adsorption-pores of coals from North China: an investigation on CH4 adsorption capacity of coals. Int J Coal Geol 73(1):27–42Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mehdi Ostadhassan
    • 1
  • Kouqi Liu
    • 1
  • Chunxiao Li
    • 1
  • Seyedalireza Khatibi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Petroleum EngineeringUniversity of North DakotaGrand ForksUSA

Personalised recommendations