Page 136 - Fundamentals of Gas Shale Reservoirs
P. 136

116   PORE GEOMETRY IN GAS SHALE RESERVOIRS

            Kale S, Rai C, Sondergeld C. Rock typing in gas shales. Paper presented   September  13–18,  1998;  New  Orleans,  LA.  DOI:
              at  SPE Annual Technical  Conference  and Exhibition;  September   10.1190/1.1820060.
              19–22, 2010a; Florence, Italy. DOI: 10.2118/134539­MS.  Pittman ED. Relationship of porosity and permeability to various
            Kale S, Rai C, Sondergeld C. Petrophysical characterization of   parameters  derived from  mercury  injection‐capillary  pressure
              Barnett  shale.  Paper  presented  at  SPE  Unconventional  Gas   curve for sandstone. AAPG Bull 1992;76:191.
              Conference; February 23–25, 2010b; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.   Prodanovic M, Lindquist WB, Seright RS. Porous structure and
              DOI: 10.2118/131770­MS.                              fluid partitioning in polyethylene cores from 3D X‐ray microto­
            Katz AJ, Thompson AH. Quantitive prediction of permeability in   mographic imaging. J Colloid Interface Sci 2006;298
              porous rock. Phys Rev 1986;34:8179.                  (1):282–297.
            Kenyon WE, Takezaki H, Straley C, Sen PN, Herron M, Matteson   Quantachrome Instruments. Autosorb AS‐1/ASWin Gas Sorption
              A, Petricola MJ. A laboratory study of nuclear magnetic reso­  System Operation Manual. Quantachrome Instruments:
              nance relaxation and its relation to depositional texture and pet­  Boynton Beach, FL; 2008.
              rophysical properties—Carbonate Thamama Group, Mubarraz   Rezaee MR, Jafari A, Kazemzadeh E. Relationships between per­
              Field,  Abu Dhabi. Middle East Oil Show; Bahrain; 1995;   meability, porosity and pore throat size in carbonate rocks using
              Copyright 1995; Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.  regression analysis and neural networks. J Geophys Eng
            King, GE.  Thirty years of gas shale fracturing: what have we   2006;3:370.
              learned? Paper presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference   Ross  DJK,  Marc  BR. The  importance  of  shale  composition  and
              and Exhibition; September 19–22, 2010; Florence, Italy. DOI:   pore structure upon gas storage potential of shale gas reservoirs.
              10.2118/133456­MS.                                   Mar Pet Geol 2009;26 (6):916–927.
            Kolodzie S. Analysis of pore throat size and use of the Waxman‐
              Smits equation to determine OOIP in Spindle Field, Colorado.   Rouquerol J, Avnir D, Fairbridge CW, Everett DH, Haynes JM,
              Society of Petroleum Engineers, 55th Annual Fall  Technical   Pernicone N, Ramsay JDF, Sing KSW, Unger KK.
              Conference, Paper 9382; 1980.                        Recommendations for the characterization of porous solids.
            Kuila U, Prasad M. Surface area and pore‐size distribution in clays   Pure Appl Chem 1994;66 (8):1739–1758.
              and shales. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition;   Rushing JA, Newsham KE, Blasingame TA. Rock typing‐keys to
              Denver, CO: Society of Petroleum Engineers; 2011.    understanding productivity in tight gas sands. Paper presented
            Lenormand R, Fonta O. Advances in measuring porosity and per­  at SPE Unconventional Reservoirs Conference; February
              meability  from  drill  cuttings.  SPE/EAGE  Reservoir   10–12, 2008; Keystone, CO. DOI: 10.2118/114164­MS.
              Characterization and Simulation Conference;  Abu Dhabi:   Shaw JC, Reynolds MM, Burke LH. Shale gas production potential
              Society of Petroleum Engineers; 2007.                and technical challenges in western Canada. Paper presented at
            Lenormand R, Bauget F, Ringot G. Permeability measurement on   Canadian International Petroleum Conference; June 13–15,
              small rock samples. International Symposium of the Society of   2006; Calgary, Alberta. DOI: 10.2118/2006­193.
              Core Analysts; 2010; Halifax, Canada.              Swanson BF. A simple correlation between permeabilities and mer­
            Looyestijn WJ.  Distinguishing  fluid  properties  and  producibility   cury capillary pressures. SPE J Pet  Technol 1981;33
              from NMR Logs. Paper presented at the 6th Nordic Symposium   (12):2498–2504.
              on Petrophysics; 2001; Norway.                     Talabi OA, Alsayari S, Blunt MJ, Dong H, Zhao X. Predictive pore
            Lowden B. Some Simple Methods for Refining Permeability   scale modeling: from 3D images to multiphase flow simula­
              Estimates from NMR Logs and Generating Capillary Pressure   tions. Paper presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference and
              Curves. ResLab‐ART: Suffolk; 2009.                   Exhibition; September 21–24, 2008; Denver, CO. DOI:
            Luffel DL.  Advances in Shale Core  Analysis. Gas Research   10.2118/115535.MS.
              Institute: Houston; 1993.                          Volokitin Y, Looyestijn WJ, Slijkerman WFJ, Hofman J. A practical
            Ma S, Jiang M‐X, and Morrow NR. Correlation of capillary   approach to obtain primary drainage capillary pressure curves
              pressure relationships and calculations of permeability. Paper   from NNR core and log data. Petrophysics—Houston
              presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition;   2001;42:334–343.
              October 6–9, 1991; Dallas, TX. DOI: 10.2118/22685.MS.  Washburn EW. Note on a method of determining the distribution of
            Minh CC, Sundararaman P. NMR petrophysics in thin sand/shale   pore sizes in a porous material. Proc Natl  Acad Sci USA
              laminations. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition;   1921;7:115–116.
              2006; San Antonio, TX.                             Wyllie MRJ, Gregory  AR. Fluid flow through unconsolidated
            Nelson PH. Pore‐throat sizes in sandstones, tight sandstones, and   porous aggregates: effect of porosity and particle shape on
              shales. AAPG Bull 2009;93 (3):329–340.               Kozeny‐Carman constants. Ind Eng Chem 1955;47
            Owolabi OO,  Watson RW. Estimating recovery efficiency and   (7):1379–1388.
                permeability from mercury capillary pressure measurements for   Zahid S, Bhatti A, Khan H, Ahmed T. Development of unconven­
              sandstones. Paper presented at SPE Eastern Regional Meeting;   tional gas resources: stimulation perspective. Paper presented at
              November  2–4,  1993;  Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania.  DOI:   Production and Operations Symposium; March31 to April 3,
              10.2118/26936­MS.                                    2007; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. DOI: 10.2118/107053­MS.
            Pape H, Clauser C, Iffland J. Permeability prediction for reservoir   Zhi‐Qiang M, Yu‐Dan H, Xiao‐Jun R. An improved method of
              sandstones and basement rocks based on fractal pore space   using NMR T2 distribution to evaluate pore size distribution.
                geometry. Paper presented at 1998 SEG  Annual Meeting;   Chin J Phys 2005;48 (2):412–418.
   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141