Influence of the effective stress coefficient and sorption-induced strain on the evolution of coal permeability: Model development and analysis
Highlights
► A new coal permeability model under variable stresses is developed. ► The model explains why coal permeability reduces under free swelling conditions. ► The model is implemented into a fully coupled FE model of deformation and flow. ► The FE model recovers the effect of effective stresses on coal permeability.
Introduction
Coal Bed Methane (CBM) is naturally occurring methane gas (CH4) in coal seams. Methane was long considered a major problem in underground coal mining but now CBM is recognized as a valuable resource. Australia has vast reserves of coal-bed methane (about 310–410 trillion m3) (White et al., 2005) and has attracted billions of dollars in foreign investment to develop this resource. CBM recovery triggers a series of coal–gas interactions. For gas production, the reduction of gas pressure increases effective stress which in turn closes fracture aperture and reduces the permeability (McKee et al., 1988, Seidle and Huitt, 1995, Palmer and Mansoori, 1996). As gas pressure reduces below the desorption point, methane is released from coal matrix to the fracture network and coal matrix shrinks. As a direct consequence of this matrix shrinkage the fractures dilate and fracture permeability correspondingly increases (Harpalani and Schraufnagel, 1990). Thus a rapid initial reduction in fracture permeability (due to change in effective stress) is supplanted by a slow increase in permeability (with matrix shrinkage). Whether the ultimate, long-term, permeability is greater or less than the initial permeability depends on the net influence of these dual competing mechanisms (Shi and Durucan, 2004, Chen et al., 2008, Connell, 2009). Therefore, understanding the transient characteristics of permeability evolution in fractured coals is of fundamental importance to the CBM recovery and CO2 storage in coal, which has dual and complementary benefits: the enhanced production of methane and concurrent long-term storage of CO2.
A broad variety of models have evolved to represent the effects of sorption, swelling and effective stresses on the dynamic evolution of permeability over last few decades. In the latest review (Liu et al., 2011), these models are classified into two groups: permeability models under conditions of uniaxial strain and permeability models under conditions of variable stress.
Somerton et al. (1975) investigated the permeability of fractured coal to methane and presented a correlation equation in the prediction of permeability with mean stress. Gray (1987) considered the changes in the cleat permeability as a function of the prevailing effective horizontal stresses, and firstly incorporated the influence of matrix shrinkage into a permeability model. Seidle and Huitt (1995) developed a conceptual matchstick model to explain coal permeability decrease with increasing effective stress. Other stress-based coal permeability models include Harpalani and Chen (1997), Gilman and Beckie (2000), Shi and Durucan (S–D) (2004), and Cui and Bustin (C–B) (2005). Based on cubic geometry, Robertson and Christiansen (2006) described the derivation of a new equation that can be used to model the permeability behavior of a fractured, sorptive-elastic medium, such as coal, under variable stress conditions. Ma et al. (2011) proposed a permeability model based on the volumetric balance between the bulk coal, solid grains and pores, using the constant volume theory proposed by Massarotto et al. (2009).
A number of coal permeability models were developed based on strains. McKee et al. (1988) developed a theoretical permeability model using matrix compressibility as a fundamental property, but did not include the effect of sorption-induced strain on permeability change. Sawyer et al. (1990) proposed a permeability model assuming that fracture porosity (to which permeability can be directly related) is a linear function of changes in gas pressure and concentration. Palmer and Mansoori (P–M) (1996) presented a theoretical model for calculating pore volume compressibility and permeability in coals as a function of effective stress and matrix shrinkage. The P–M model was updated in Palmer et al. (2007). Similarly, the Advanced Resources International (ARI) group developed another permeability model (Pekot and Reeves, 2002). This model does not have a geomechanics framework, but instead extracts matrix strain changes from a Langmuir curve type of strain versus reservoir pressure, which is assumed to be proportional to the gas concentration curve. Zhang et al. (2008) developed a permeability model under variable stress conditions, and was extended to CO2–ECBM conditions by (Chen et al., 2009, Chen et al., 2010). Connell et al. (2010) presented two analytical permeability models for tri-axial strain and stress conditions.
Pan and Connell (2007) developed a theoretical model for sorption-induced strain and applied to single-component adsorption/strain experimental data. Clarkson (2008) expanded this theoretical model to calculate the sorption-strain component of the P–M model. Pan and Connell (2011a) developed an anisotropic swelling model based on their swelling model (Pan and Connell, 2007). The dependence of coal permeability on pore volume compressibility was also investigated (Shi and Durucan, 2010, Tonnsen and Miskimins, 2010).
As reviewed above, there are a large collection of coal permeability models from empirical ones to theoretical ones. These models normally have a set of common assumptions: (1) the overburden stress remains constant; (2) coal deforms under the uniaxial strain condition; (3) the effective stress coefficient is assumed as one; and (4) the sorption-induced strain is totally counteracted by the closure of the fracture aperture. These assumptions have limited their applicability as Liu et al. (2011) concluded that current models have so far failed to explain the results from stress-controlled shrinkage/swelling laboratory tests and have only achieved some limited success in explaining and matching in situ data. Liu et al. (2011) considered the main reason for these failures is the impact of coal matrix-fracture compartment interactions has not yet been understood well and further improvements are necessary as demonstrated in latest studies (Connell et al., 2010, Liu and Rutqvist, 2010, Izadi et al., 2011). In this study, a coal permeability model based on coal matrix-fracture interaction was developed and then implemented into a fully coupled coal deformation and gas transport finite element model to recover the important non-linear responses due to the effective stress effects.
Section snippets
Permeability model development
Previous work of Chen et al. (2011) has reported the findings of a series of experiments conducted for coal samples infiltrated both with non-adsorbing and adsorbing gases – all under conditions of constant pressure difference between the confining stress and the pore pressure. Observations have demonstrated that even under controlled stress conditions the injection of adsorbing gases actually does reduce coal permeability. The swelling strain effect has also been separated from the effective
Permeability model evaluation
A series of gas flow-through experiments have been carried out all under constant pressure difference conditions (Chen et al., 2011), which were defined as the difference between confining stress and pore pressure. First, the effective stress coefficient is measured for the non-adsorbing gas (helium) flow-through experiments. In these experiments, the impact of gas sorption is null and any permeability alteration is considered to be due to the variation in the effective stress coefficient.
Model implementation
In our previous studies (Zhang et al., 2008, Chen et al., 2009, Chen et al., 2010, Liu et al., 2010a, Liu et al., 2010b, Wu et al., 2010, Wu et al., 2011), a series of single poroelastic, equivalent poroelastic, and dual poroelastic models were developed to simulate the interactions of multiple processes triggered by the injection or production of both single gas and binary gas. Many studies have also been carried out by other researchers (Cui et al., 2007, Bustin et al., 2008). In order to
Conclusions
Coal permeability models are required to define the transient characteristics of permeability evolution in fractured coals. A broad variety of models have evolved to represent the effects of sorption, swelling and stresses on the dynamic evolution of permeability. These models can be classified into two groups: permeability models under conditions of uniaxial strain such as Palmer–Mansoori (P–M), Shi–Durucan (S–D) and Cui–Bustin (C–B) models, and permeability models under conditions of variable
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by WA:ERA, the Western Australia CSIRO-University Postgraduate Research Scholarship, National Research Flagship Energy Transformed Top-up Scholarship, and by NIOSH under contract 200-2008-25702. These supports are gratefully acknowledged.
References (49)
- et al.
Impact of CO2 injection and differential deformation on CO2 injectivity under in situ stress conditions
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2010) - et al.
Effect of the effective stress coefficient and sorption-Induced strain on the evolution of coal permeability: experimental observations
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
(2011) Coupled flow and geomechanical processes during gas production from coal seams
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2009)- et al.
An analytical coal permeability model for tri-axial strain and stress conditions
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2010) - et al.
Shrinkage of coal matrix with release of gas and its impact on permeability of coal
Fuel
(1990) - et al.
Permeability evolution of fluid-infiltrated coal containing discrete fractures
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2011) - et al.
On the relationship between stress and elastic strain for porous and fractured rock
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
(2009) - et al.
Linking stress-dependent effective porosity and hydraulic conductivity fields to RMR
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
(1999) - et al.
Evaluation of stress-controlled coal swelling processes
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2010) - et al.
Linking gas-sorption induced changes in coal permeability to directional strains through a modulus reduction ratio
International Journal of Coal Geology
(2010)
Interactions of multiple processes during CBM extraction: a critical review
International Journal of Coal Geology
A simplified permeability model for coalbed methane reservoirs based on matchstick strain and constant volume theory
International Journal of Coal Geology
A theoretical model for gas adsorption-induced coal swelling
International Journal of Coal Geology
Modelling of anisotropic coal swelling and its impact on permeability behaviour for primary and enhanced coalbed methane recovery
International Journal of Coal Geology
Effect of stress on permeability of coal
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics
A dual poroelastic model for CO2-enhanced coalbed methane recovery
International Journal of Coal Geology
Dual poroelastic response of a coal seam to CO2 injection
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
How sorption-induced matrix deformation affects gas flow in coal seams: a new FE model
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
Estimates and rigorous bounds on pore-fluid enhanced shear modulus in poroelastic media with hard and soft anisotropy
International Journal of Damage Mechanics
Impacts of volumetric strain on CO2 sequestration in coals and enhanced CH4 recovery
AAPG Bulletin
Impact of effective stress and CH4–CO2 counter-diffusion on CO2 enhanced coalbed methane recovery
Investigation of CO2 injection induced coal–gas interactions
Case study: production data and pressure transient analysis of Horseshoe Canyon CBM Wells
Adsorption-induced coal swelling and stress: implications for methane production and acid gas sequestration into coal seams
Journal of Geophysics Research
Cited by (156)
Investigation on damage-permeability model of dual-porosity coal under thermal-mechanical coupling effect
2024, Gas Science and EngineeringEffects of creep deformation on the spatial evolution of pore and fracture structures in coal under unloading confining pressure
2024, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining SciencesDynamic effects of rough elements in fractures on coal permeability during different stages of methane extraction
2023, Gas Science and EngineeringA review of influencing factors and study methods of carbon capture and storage (CCS) potential in coals
2023, International Journal of Coal Geology