1 / 25

What Determines Transport Behaviour in Different Porous Media?

What is the signature of flow / transport in porous media? What is impact of structural/flow heterogeneity?. Science . What Determines Transport Behaviour in Different Porous Media?. Applications. Contaminant Transport Development of miscibility in CO 2 storage in aquifers

marnin
Download Presentation

What Determines Transport Behaviour in Different Porous Media?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What is the signature of flow / transport in porous media? • What is impact of structural/flow heterogeneity? Science What Determines Transport Behaviour in Different Porous Media? Applications Contaminant Transport Development of miscibility in CO2storage in aquifers Mixing in CO2injection in gas and light oil fields BrankoBijeljic, Ali Raeini, PeymanMostaghimi and Martin Blunt Dept. of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London

  2. Networks Images Transport – Dispersion Distributions vs. Average Values? Sandpack Sandstone Carbonate Bijeljic , Muggeridge and Blunt, Water Resour. Res. (2004) Flow - Permeability Valvatne and Blunt, Water Resour. Res. (2004)

  3. Physically Describe Heterogeneity:PDF of Transit Times in Image Voxels y ( t) ~ t –(1+b) b= 0.7 Portland limestone Pe = uavL / Dm tb = t / t1b DL/Dm ~ t2b; 0 < b < 1 t1b = R /uav Bijeljic, Mostaghimi and Blunt, Phys. Rev. Lett., 2011 Truncated power-law with wide range of transit times across image voxels

  4. NMR Flow Propagators : Displacement in non-Fickian Transport t=0.106s; 0.2s;0.45s;1s;2s Beadpack P() Probability of displacement Bentheimer sandstone <>0 =uavt average displacement Portland carbonate Scheven et al.(2005)

  5. X ray Stokes equation Random walk microtomography + = + 2 Ñ = m Ñ r x r x t dt t ( , ) ( , ) u p 0 + X X adv diff Pore scale:Direct Simulation on micro-CT images FVM , Open Foam (Raeini, Blunt & Bijeljic, J. Comp. Phys., 2012) (Mostaghimi, Bijeljic & Blunt, SPE Journal, 2012) In each time step move particles by advection & diffusion

  6. Beadpack Sandstone Carbonate Pore Space Pressure field Difference in: connectivity tortuosity & distribution Velocity field

  7. Variograms:Porosity and Velocity . porosity Beadpack Sandstone velocity Carbonate L = p V/S

  8. PDF Velocity magnitude of u (at the voxel centers) uav average flow speed narrowest spread - single tube widest spread - carbonate

  9. Plume Evolution:Beadpack initial uav=0.91mm/s t=0.106s t=0.2s t=0.45s t=1s t=2s - few high u - no retardation - Gaussian Distance travelled (mm)

  10. Plume Evolution:Bentheimer sandstone initial uav=1.03mm/s t=0.106s t=0.2s t=0.45s t=1s t=2s - more high u - stagnant - structure Distance travelled (mm)

  11. Plume Evolution:Portland carbonate initial uav=1.3mm/s t=0.106s t=0.2s t=0.45s t=1s t=2s • - even higher u • even more • stagnant Distance travelled (mm)

  12. Model Results: Transport and Flow Spread in velocity distribution defines transport, Bijeljic et al., Phys. Rev. E, 2012

  13. Model vs. NMR data t=0.106s t=0.2s (a) beadpack uav=0.91mm/s (b) sandstone uav=1.03mm/s (c) carbonate uav=1.3mm/s t=0.45s t=1s Bijeljic et al., Phys. Rev. E, 2012 t=2s

  14. Carbonate types with distinct transport behaviour ME1 ME2 Normalised velocities as the ratios of the magnitude of u at the voxel centers divided by the average flow speed uav. 5-500 uav

  15. Carbonates: Image and Flow Properties L = p V/S

  16. Carbonates: Variograms of Porosity and Velocity . porosity velocity

  17. Velocity distributions in the images of carbonate rock Normalised velocities as the ratios of the magnitude of u at the voxel centers divided by the average flow speed uav.

  18. Different type of transport in carbonates Diffusion from stagnant to flowing regions. In the heterogeneous samples, there is no typical, average velocity. Sampling at later times, longer lengths, with more structure. No representative transport speed. Challenge for upscaling. Implications for reactive transport? td = t / tdiff

  19. Plume Evolution:Mt Gambier, Pe =200 initial t=0.1s t=0.3s t=1s t=3s t=10s Distance travelled (mm) Less stagnant

  20. Plume Evolution:Mt Gambier, Pe =10 initial t=0.1s t=0.3s t=1s t=3s t=10s Less stagnant and more diffusive Distance travelled (mm)

  21. Plume Evolution:Estaillades, Pe =200 initial t=0.1s t=0.3s t=1s t=3s t=10s Distance travelled (mm) More stagnant

  22. Carbonates:Resolution vs. Image Size P() <>0 =uavt PDF Velocity average displacement Probability of displacement

  23. Impact of Pe tadv= L /uav tdiff= L2/ Dm Pe = tadv/ tdiff

  24. CONCLUSIONS • Different generic non-Fickian transport behaviour demonstrated in carbonates compared to sandstones and beadpacks • Different non-Fickianbehaviour due to different spread in velocity distribution and connectivity • Agreement with NMR flow propagators experiments on rock cores in the pre-asymptotic regime • Different non-Fickianbehaviour associated with impact of Pe • - A priori predictions of transport possible

  25. THANKS! Prof. MasaProdanovic, Dr. Hu Dong Elettra synchrotron: GiulianaTromba, Franco Zanini, OussamaGharbi , Alex Toth & Matthew Andrew Qatar Petroleum, Shell and the Qatar Science & Technology Park Imperial College Pore-scale Modelling Consortium

More Related