Page 370 - Fundamentals of Gas Shale Reservoirs

350 WETTABILITY OF GAS SHALE RESERVOIRS

(a) (b)
1
1 Fort Simpson 0.8 Fort Simpson
Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6 Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6
(horizontal)
(vertical)
0.8

0.4
0.4
0.2
Water
Water
0
0 Oil 0.2 Oil
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5 SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5
(c) (d)
1 (horizontal) 0.8 (vertical)
1
Muskwa
Muskwa
Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6 Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6 Oil
0.8

0.4
0.4
0.2
Water
0
0 Oil 0.2 Water
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5 SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5
(e) (f)
1 (horizontal) 0.8 Otter Park
1
Otter Park
Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6 Imbibed volume/pore volume 0.6 Oil
(vertical)
0.8

0.4
0.4
Oil
0.2
0 Water 0.2 Water
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5 SQRT(t), Hrs^0.5
FIGURE 16.9 Comparison between imbibition rate of DI water and kerosene in horizontal (a, c, e) and vertical (b, d, f) crushed‐shale packs
from FS (a, b), M (c, d), and OP (e, f) sections.

To investigate the effect of pore network connectivity on artificially well connected. In addition, a crushed‐shale pack
the imbibition behavior, Xu and Dehghanpour (2014) con- is relatively isotropic compared with intact samples that
ducted several horizontal and vertical imbibition experi- are significantly anisotropic. The shale samples were first
ments on crushed shale packs produced from the Horn River crushed into around 1‐µm diameter particles, and then packed
shale members. The objective was to investigate water and into 1‐in. diameter and 10-in long plastic tubes. The shale
oil imbibition behaviors in a synthesized porous medium, in packs were confined to prevent the possible expansion dur-
which both hydrophobic and hydrophilic pore networks are ing the imbibition tests. Interestingly, Figure 16.9 shows that