A new approach for measuring the permeability of shale featuring

adsorption and ultra-low permeability

ChengCaoabTiantaiLiacJuntaiShiaLeiZhangbShunxunFudBotaoWangdHuiWangb

In view of the basic issues related with shale permeability estimations, an

experimental approach by changing the conventional pressure pulse decay method
was formed. In order to lessen the measurement error caused by the pore volumes
of the conventional technique of pulse decay, Cheng Cao et. Al. developed a new
design so that the upstream and downstream reservoirs volume can be changed.
Also, Cheng Cao et. Al added a by-pass pipe to estimate the bidirectional
permeability quickly, which can decrease the aggregate test time consequently.
Aside from nitrogen or helium, methane was used to measure the shale
permeability in this work, which can be more viable and better comprehend the
genuine gas transport mechanism in shale. However Cheng Cao et. Al also
changed the traditional model of permeability estimations by involving the
physical mechanism of gas adsorption. Cheng Cao et. Al additionally performed
out a series of data analysis and experimental measurements utilizing individual
core samples from pure shale, sand shale, to sandstone, obtained from the Ordos
basin(Chang 7 section) in China. The outcomes demonstrate that: (1) the error
caused by the pore volume of the conventional method is reduced by about half if
variable reservoir volumes are utilized. The aggregate test time is lessened by
around 7 hours by including the by-pass pipe in the apparatus. The measurement
of peremability estimated with methane is higher than that eestimated with
nitrogen while lower than that estimated with helium. (2) The adsorption porosity
of effective gas increments with the decrease in pore pressure and increase in
Langmuir pressure. In the case of without considering gas adsorption, the
measured permeability value will be underestimated, particularly under higher
adsorption capacity, lower pore pressure, , and higher Langmuir pressure. (3) By
utilizing this new mechanical apparatus and the modified permeability
interpretation technique total error is under 10%. The measured permeability
values are more reliable by contrasting the estimations utilizing the new apparatus
with the standard instrument of ProPDP-200 under a similar condition. (4) The
impact of gas adsorption on permeability estimation in shale can't be overlooked,
and the permeability is underestimated by up to 97% in pure shale while by just
7.5% in sandstone if the gas adsorption isn't considered.