A. SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................2 B. INTRODUCTION :................................................................................................................2 C. THEORY: ...............................................................................................................................3 D. EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT........................................................................................6 E. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND OBSERVATIONS ............................................7 F.

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS: ..................................................8 G. (H) (I) (J) SAMPLE CALCULATIONS: .........................................................................................14 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: .........................................................................................16 ERROR ANALYSIS: .......................................................................................................17 CONCLUSION: ................................................................................................................17

A. SUMMARY The topic investigated in this experiment was permeability determination of a porous media. This is important because in petroleum engineering together with porosity, permeability forms the two major characteristics of reservoir rocks. In addition to been porous, a reservoir rock must have the ability to allow petroleum fluids to flow through its interconnected pores; hence the term permeability which is a measure of how well a porous media allows the flow of fluids through it. The objectives of this lab were to determine the absolute permeability of sand porous media, and to determine the relative permeability of multi-phase flow (water and oil). To carry out the experiment, a permeability/fluidisation studies apparatus manufactured and supplied by Armfiled (Ltd) was used. See figure1. Two separate experiments were carried out; one with constant bed height and the other one with varying bed height. From the experiment, the absolute permeability of the sand porous media for the first experiment (when the bed height was kept constant) was estimated to be 553 millidarcy. When the bed heights were varied, the estimated absolute permeability carried accordingly. For bed height of 1.27 cm, the absolute permeability was 53.33 millidarcy, for bed height of 2.25cm, the absolute permeability was 110.23 millidarcy, for bed height of 3.00cm, and the absolute permeability was 264.55 millidarcy. In addition, it was found that the values of permeability for the second experiment were smaller than those ones for the first experiment. It was also found that using Coreys law, a relative permeability curve can be drawn for fluids (oil and water) flowing through a porous media. Based on the curve, it was found that relative permeability is saturation dependent. The proportional relationship between the flow rate, viscosity, length of rock bed sample, permeability, cross sectional area of the rock bed sample and the pressure was observed. B. INTRODUCTION : The objectives of this lab were to determine the absolute permeability of sand porous media, and to determine the relative permeability of multi-phase flow (water and oil). This experiment was important because knowledge of it would show how well a porous media allows fluids to flow through it, and as petroleum engineers, one of the interest in reservoir rocks is how easily petroleum will flow through them to the wellbore from where they are transported
Page 2 of 17

to the surface. The property which allows this flow is called permeability. The higher the permeability, the easier it will be for fluids to flow and, other things being equal, the higher the production rate from a particular well (OPITO, 2011). It is pertinent to know that the fluid may be a liquid or a gas. However, the only fluid that was used in this lab was water. The permeable material that was used in this lab was a packed bed medium of sand. C. THEORY: Permeability and porosity forms two of the important properties of reservoir rocks. This is because as petroleum engineers, the main interest in reservoir rocks is knowing how much space is available for storage of petroleum and how easily petroleum would flow to the wellbore from where they can be transported to the surface. The property that allows us to know the former is porosity while that of the latter is permeability. In this lab, the focus was on permeability. This is a measure of how well a porous medium permits the flow of fluids through it. The permeability of a rock sample is very important because it controls the directional movement and the flow rate of the reservoir fluids in the formation (Tarek, 2010). Basically, permeability could be of three types; absolute permeability, relative permeability and effective permeability. Absolute permeability: This has to do with the permeability measured when a single fluid

is present in the rock. In other words, the rock is 100% saturated with a single fluid or phase such as oil, gas or water. In this case, the permeability of the rock does not depend on the properties of the fluid flowing through it, it depends on the properties of the reservoir rock or the porous medium. Thus, a change in the hydraulic pressure of the fluid here does not affect this type of permeability. Effective permeability: In this case, there is the presence of more than one fluid (gas, oil

and/or water) in the rock since reservoir fluids interface with each other during their movement through a porous medium. Consequently, the sum of the effective permeability of all the phases will always be less than the absolute permeability (Tiab and Donaldson, 2004). Relative Permeability: This is a measure of the ratio of the effective permeability of a

given fluid to its absolute permeability. In other words, in the presence of more than one fluid, the ratio of the effective permeability of any phase to the absolute permeability of the rock is known as the relative permeability (kr) of that phase. For example, the relative permeability of the oil, gas and water would be kro = ko/k, krg = kg/k, krw = kw/k respectively. This describes the extent to which the fluids hinder one another.
Page 3 of 17

Where: kro is the relative permeability of the oil ko is the effective permeability of the oil k is the absolute permeability of the phase in question krg is the relative permeability of the gas kg is the effective permeability of the gas krw is the relative permeability of the water kw is the effective permeability of the water (Dimensionless) (Darcy) (Darcy) (Dimensionless) (Darcy) (Dimensionless) (Darcy)

The equation that defines permeability in terms of measurable quantities is Darcys law. This equation was given by French engineer; Henry Darcy in 1856. This equation is given by:

Where: is the flow rate K is permeability is the cross sectional area of bed is the pressure drop is the viscosity of the fluid is the length of the bed (cm3/s) (Darcy) (cm2) (atm) (cP) (cm)

The above equation can be transposed for the permeability K as: (2) For the above equation to be valid, four conditions must be met. (1) (2) (3) (4) The porous material must not react chemically with the flowing fluid. There must be a single phase flow. There must be no accumulations. The Reynolds number based on superficial velocity must be on the order of 1.

In addition, the flow must be a viscous flow. That is the rate of the flowing fluid is sufficiently low to be directly proportional to the potential gradient (Tiab and Donaldson, 2004).

Page 4 of 17

In the case of the relative permeability of a porous medium, it is imperative to define a new quantity to account for the microscopic interactions between the liquids, which generates a capillary pressure that can cause fluctuations in the pressure gradient across the sample. This is often the case in real-life applications where the flow is multi-phase flow. An example is petroleum in engineering, where water and oil flow simultaneously through porous rock. In this case, the Darcy equation can be written individually for each fluid/phase that flows in the pore as: =( Where : Qi = flow rate of phase i K = absolute permeability of medium Kri = the viscosity of the phase i P = pressure drop L = length of the medium A = cross sectional area of medium (cm3/s) (mD) (cP) (atm) (cm) (cm2) ) (3)

The term in bracket is referred to as the mobility of phase/fluid i and Kkri represents the total permeability of phase i. There are many factors that could affect the permeability of a porous medium. They include: (1) Particle size distribution: The permeability of a porous medium decreases with decreasing particle size. This is because the smaller the particles, the smaller the size of the pores between the medium. In other words, if the rock is composed of large and flat grains uniformly arranged, the permeability will be high and vice versa. That is there tends to be a reduction in the pore spaces, thereby reducing porosity and consequently permeability. (2) Porosity: The relationship between permeability and porosity can be said to be more of a qualitative one and is not directly or indirectly quantitative in any way. This is because it is possible to have a very high porosity without having any permeability at all, as in the case of pumice stone where effective porosity is nearly zero, also in clays and shales . However, the degree of compaction of the particles that make up the matrix has an

Page 5 of 17

immense effect on the size of the void space, thus affecting the porosity and invariably affecting the permeability too. (3) The degree of saturation: The degree to which the voids are filled with water plays a crucial role in permeability measurements. This is because blockage of the pores by air bubbles can be crucial and have significant uncertainty in determining the permeability. The degree of saturation must be greater than 85% to validate Darcys law. In this case, air will not be continuous; it will be isolated in bubbles. The reverse will be the case. (4) Temperature: Generally, an increase in temperature will lead to an increase in the viscosity of the fluid, this would in turn increase the permeability and vice versa. (5) (6) Overburden pressure: Permeability is reduced by overburden pressure. Cementation: The extent of the cementation and the location of the cementing material within the pore space can also influence the permeability of a porous medium. Permeability is usually expressed in Darcy but because one Darcy is a relatively high permeability as the permeability of most petroleum reservoir rocks is less than one Darcy. In order to avoid the the use of fractions in describing permeability, the millidarcy is widely used. In SI units, the darcy is expressed as micrometers squared ( 1 Darcy = 0.987 * 10-8 cm2 = 0.987 1 Darcy = 1000 mD The Permeability of reservoir rocks may range from 0.1 to 1,000 or more millidarcies. The quality of a
reservoir as determined by permeability in millidarcy (mD) may be judged as poor if k < 1, fair if 1< k < 10, moderate if 10 < k < 50, good if 50 < k < 250 and very good if k > 250 mD.

):

D. EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT In order to carry out the experiment, a permeability/fluidisation studies apparatus manufactured and supplied by Armfield (ltd) was used. See figure 1 below.

Page 6 of 17

Manometer

Flow meter Packed bed sand medium

Thermometer

Figure 1: Picture of experimental equipment E. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND OBSERVATIONS The working principle of the experiment is quite simple. It simply involves varying the flow rates (not above 500 cm3/min, so as not to cause fluidisation) and recording the corresponding pressure drop. At first, all the valves were kept closed and then the pump was switched on. When a constant trickle from the overflow pipe indicated a constant water level in the overhead tank, the experiment was started. Keeping the inlet and outlet valves (1 to 4) closed, the manometer valves (5to 8) were opened. The drain tube from valve 4 was inserted into a beaker placed on the water tank to prevent any of the bed material that passed through the sieve returning to the system. A thermometer was then placed in the beaker to indicate the water temperature. The bed height (L) was recorded along with the water & mercury manometer zero levels. Valves 1 and 4 were opened to admit water through the column in a down flow direction.

Page 7 of 17

Valve 1 was then used to adjust the flow rate (Q) and the manometer levels were both recorded for the various flow rate. The temperature was recorded at the beginning of the experiment and at the end of the experiment to obtain the water average temperature. For part B of the experiment, data were given for pressure drop and flow rates for two fluids; oil and water at different saturations. Here the two fluids were injected simultaneously in the cylinder of the sand sample which was assumed to be the same sample used in part A.

For the second experiment, the bed heights were varied at different flowrates. In this case, the sand samples were poured into a measuring cylinder to various heights (12.70mm, 22.50mm and 30.00m). Then the difference in fluid pressures where calculated from h1 h2, knowing the density of the fluid (in this case water). In both cases, it was observed that the differential pressure increased with increase in flowrate which is in agreement with Darcys law. F. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS: The experimental results and calculated results are are shown in tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6 and 7. Table1. Experimental results for absolute permeability determination Run no. 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 Flow rate (cm3/min) 50 100 150 200 250 400 450 500 P1 (mmH2O) 240 228 213 197 180 110 90 65 P2 (mmH2O) 258 272 290 309 320 407 430 460 P (mmH2O) 18 44 77 112 140 297 340 395

Table2. Measured values and calculation of results (Glass beads)

Page 8 of 17

Length of the bed (cm) Diameter of the bed (cm) Area of the bed (cm2) Average temperature (C)

32 3.8 11.34 18.75 P1 = 264

Pressure at zero flow rate (mmH2O) Permeability (Darcy) Gradient of graph

P2 = 267 0.55 5.10 *10-3 atm/cm3/s

Table 3. Calculated results for absolute permeability determination. Run no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Flow rate (cm3/s) 0.83 1.67 2.5 3.33 4.17 5.00 5.83 6.67 7.50 8.33 P1 (* 10-3 atm) 23.24 22.07 20.62 19.07 17.43 15.78 14.72 10.65 8.71 6.29 P2 (* 10-3 atm) 24.98 26.33 28.08 29.92 31.56 33.50 34.85 39.41 41.63 44.54 P (*10-3 atm) 1.74 4.26 7.46 10.85 14.13 17.72 20.13 28.76 32.92 38.25 K (Darcy)
1.34 1.11 0.95 0.87 0.83 0.80 0.82 0.65 0.64 0.61

Page 9 of 17

45 40

Pressure gradient (* 10-3 atm)

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Flow rate (cm3/s)

Figure 2: Graph of pressure gradient against flow rate Table 4. Calculated results for relative permeability determination using Coreys law. P (atm)

Case

Qw(cc/s)

Qo(cc.s)

kw

krw

ko

kro

80%W, 20% O

0.03

192.059

0.316

2.371

0.004

60% W, 40% O

0.05

37.938

0.063

37.938

0.197

40%W, 60% O

0.06

2.371

0.004

37.938

0.51

20% W,80% O

0.08

553

Page 10 of 17

1.2
1 Relative permeability krw, kro
No water flows

No oil flows

0.8 0.6 krw

0.4
0.2 0 0 -0.2 20 40 60 80 100

kro

Irreducible water saturation

Residual oil saturation

Water saturation sw (%)

Figure 3: Relative permeability curve for oil and water using Coreys law Table 5. Calculated results of relative permeability using Darcy Law P (atm)

Case

Qw(cc/s)

Qo(cc.s)

kw

krw

ko

kro

80%W, 20% O

0.03

470.3

0.85

470.3

0.85

60% W, 40% O

0.05

225.7

0.408

423.3

0.765

40%W, 60% O

0.06

141.1

0.255

470.3

0.85

20% W,80% O

0.08

70.55

0.128

440.9

0.797

Page 11 of 17

0.9
0.8 Relative permeability krw, kro 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 krw kro

20

40 60 Water saturation sw (%)

80

100

Figure 4: Relative permeability curve for oil and water using Darcys law Table 6: Experimental results for second permeability experiment L (mm) P1 (mmH2O) P2 (mmH2O) P (mmH2O) Flowrate (cm3/min) 60 80 100 120 60 80 100 120 60 80 100 120

12.70

86 73 75 101 82 98 99 75 40 52 65 89

78 61 62 82 66 74 68 41 17 21 27 44

8 12 13 19 16 24 31 34 23 31 38 45

22.50

30.00

Page 12 of 17

Table 7: Calculated results for absolute permeability determination for second permeability experiment. L (cm) 1.27 h1 (cm) 86 73 75 101 82 98 99 75 40 52 65 89 h2 (cm) 78 61 62 82 66 74 68 41 17 21 27 44 h (cm) 8 12 13 19 16 24 31 34 23 31 38 45 Flowrate (cm3/s) 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 P (Pa) 784.8 117.72 127.53 186.39 156.96 235.44 304.11 333.54 225.63 304.11 372.78 441.45 P (* 10-4atm) 77.5 11.62 12.59 18.39 15.49 23.24 30.01 32.92 22.27 30.01 36.79 43.57 k (darcy) 0.053 0.071 0.089 0.107 0.110 0.147 0.184 0.220 0.265 0.353 0.441 0.529

2.25

k (mD) 53.33 71.11 88.88 106.66 110.23 146.97 183.72 220.46 264.55 352.73 440.92 529.10

Figure 5: Graph of pressure gradient against flow rate

Page 13 of 17

G. SAMPLE CALCULATIONS:

(a)

Sample calculations for test 1 (absolute permeability determination)

(i)

Differential pressure: When P1 = 240 mmH2O and P2 = 258 mmH2O Therefore, differential pressure P h2 h1 276 258 18 mm ( H 2O)

(ii)

Gradient of the graph in figure 1:

Converting from cm3/min to cm 3 / sec : For example when Q = 50 cm3/min

Q 50 cm 3 / min 0.83cm 3 / sec 60 sec/ min

Converting differential pressure from mmH2O to atm. For example when differential pressure = 395 mmH2O
P .g.h 1000 9.81 395 10 3 38 .25 10 3 atm 101325

Gradient = (iii)

= 5.10 * 10-3 atm/cm3/s

Absolute permeability: Using equation 2:

Where: = 1 cP, Length of bed (L) = 320 mm = 32cm, Diameter of bed (d) = 38mm = 3.8cm Area of bed, A
K

d 2
4

3.14 (3.8) 2 11 .34 cm 2 4

L
A P

L A Gradient
= 0.55 Darcy

1 32 11.34 5.10 10 3

(b) (i)

Sample calculations for test 2 (relative permeability determination) Relative permeability using Coreys law: )

Relative permeability of oil, Kro = ( Kro = ( = 0.004

Page 14 of 17

( Krw = ( (ii) )

Relative permeability using Darcys law: =( )

From equation (3)

Transposing for

Kw = Krw Kw = 0.73

K = 470.3 Darcy

Kw = Krw Kw = 0.85 (c) (i)

K = 470.3 Darcy

Sample calculations for experiment 2 (varying bed heights) Calculation of difference in fluid pressure:

Knowing the density of the fluid (1000kg/m3), the difference in fluid pressure can be calculated from P .g.h Where

= 1000kg/m3,

g = 9.81m/s2

h = h1 h2 = (86 78)cm = 8cm = 0.08m atm

(ii)

Absolute permeability: Using equation 2:

Where: = 1 cP, Length of bed (L) = 12.70mm = 1.27cm, Diameter of bed (d) = 38mm = 3.8cm Area of bed, A

d 2
4

3.14 (3.8) 2 11 .34 cm 2 4

Page 15 of 17

L
A P

L A Gradient
= 0.0533 Darcy

1 1.27 11.34 2.10 103

(H)

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS:

From figure 1, it can be seen that there is a direct proportionality or relationship between flow rate and pressure difference. This means that as the flow rate increases, there will be a corresponding increase in the pressure gradient. This can also be seen from table 3 when the flow rate was 0.83 cm3/sec (50 cm3/min), the pressure gradient was 1.74 atm. (18 mm H2O). Then when the flow rate was increased to 1.67 cm3/s (100 cm3/min), the pressure gradient increased to 4.26 atm. (44 mm H2O) hence a graph of pressure gradient against flow rate gave a straight line graph. Referring to table 3 and 7, as the pressure gradient increases, there was a reduction in permeability. This is in line with equation (2). However, it must be noted that as stated earlier, the absolute permeability of a porous medium is a property of the medium and is independent of the fluid used. It must be noted, that this assumption will only be true, if there viscous flow prevail. That is the rate of the flowing fluid is sufficiently low to be directly proportional to the potential gradient (Honarpour and Mahmood, 1988). In part B; relative permeability determination, it was observed that relative permeability is a function of saturation of the phases present in the medium unlike the case of absolute permeability where the pores of the medium are 100% saturated with a particular type of fluid. It can be seen from the relative permeability curve in figure 4 that the relative permeability of the sand medium to water was sharply decreasing when the water saturation was reduced. This could be due to the occupation of the larger pores or flow paths by the oil phase; that is the water phase has been displaced by the oil phase. When this happens, it is said that a wet fluid has been displaced by a non-wetting fluid, and this process is called drainage. The relative permeability in figure 4 curve also shows that the relative permeability of the oil phase approaches unity whereas that for the water phase is restricted. Thus at the same saturation, the value of the oil phase relative permeability was greater than that of the water phase. Referring to figure 5, a relative permeability curve was plotted for the values of the relative permeability calculated using Darcys law. It can be seen that there was a similar sort of
Page 16 of 17

behaviour for the water phase but not for the oil phase, this goes to show that Darcys law is not suitable when the flow is not a single phase flow. For the second experiment where the bed heights were varied, at a particular flowrate with varying bed height, there was an increase in the differential pressure (P). This can be seen in table For example, when the flowrate was 1.00cm3/s at a bed height of 1.270cm, the differential pressure was 77.5 * 10-4atm compared to when the flowrate was still 1.00cm3/s with a bed height of 2.250cm where the differential pressure was 15.49 * 10-4atm. This follows through when the flowrate remained the same but at a bed height of 3.000cm where the differential pressure increased to 22.27 * 10-4atm. At a particular bed height with increased flowrate, the differential pressure also increased accordingly too. In terms of the permeability, comparing both permeabilities obtained from both experiments; the one in the first experiment were the bed height was constant was higher than the second experiment were the bed heights were varied. The reason for this could be that the first experiment could be likened to consolidated sandstones while the second one could be likened to unconsolidated sandstones. Hence, the permeability for the former was higher than the latter.

(I)

ERROR ANALYSIS: As it is with every experiment, it must be noted that some errors could have arose in this experiment, this maybe in terms of systematic, random or human error. Some factors that could be considered as possible sources of error are:

(1) The packed sand bed may not be representative of the reservoir rock because reservoir rocks are not homogeneous rather they are heterogeneous. (2) The sampling process may be biased in the sense that there may be a temptation to select the best parts of the sand medium for testing. (3) The permeability of the sand medium may be altered probably when they were gotten from the original sample, or even when they were cleaned and packed. (J) CONCLUSIONS: At the end of this experiment, the following conclusions can be drawn: (i) For absolute permeability determination, the medium must be 100% saturated with a particular type of fluid. (ii) Absolute permeability does not depend on the properties of the flowing fluid; it only depends on the properties of the medium.

Page 17 of 17

(iii) During the flow of fluid through a porous medium, there is proportional relationship between the flow rate and the pressure gradient. (iv) Relative permeability is dependent on the saturation of the different phases in the medium. (v) There is a proportional relationship between flow rate, viscosity, length of rock bed sample, permeability, cross sectional area of the rock bed sample and pressure gradient.

Page 18 of 17

Nomenclature

Symbols A g K kri

Units cm2 m/s2 D

Meaning Area of the bed Acceleration due to gravity Permeability Relative permeability for phase i Relative oil permeability Relative water permeability Relative gas permeability

kro krw krg L P pi Q qi Sw So Scw cP

i

m Pa Pa cm3/s cm3/s

Length of the bed Pressure difference Pressure difference in phase i Flow rate Flow rate in phase i Water saturation Oil saturation Connate water saturation difference or change Viscosity Viscosity of phase i Density

cP kg/m3

Page 19 of 17

REFERENCES Honarpour, M and Mahmood, S.M. (1988) Relative-Permeability Measurements: an Overview. Journal of Petroleum Technology. Vol.40, No. 8. Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers. pp 963-966. [Online] Available from: http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/servlet/onepetropreview?id=00018565&soc=SPE [accessed 23 October 2013]. Tarek, A. (2010) Reservoir Engineering Handbook. 4th ed. Oxford: Elsevier Inc. Chapter 4 & 5. Tiab, D and Donaldson, E.C. (2012) Petrophysics: theory and practice of measuring reservoir rock and fluid transport properties. 3rd ed. Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing. Chapter 3. OPITO (2011) Oil Well Drilling Technology Workbook: Petroleum Open Learning. Aberden: OPITO.

Page 20 of 17

Page 21 of 17