logo

SCIENCE CHINA Technological Sciences, Volume 63 , Issue 6 : 1055-1065(2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-019-1460-6

Experimental study on the influence of temperature cycle on low-rank coal permeability

More info
  • ReceivedAug 30, 2019
  • AcceptedOct 8, 2019
  • PublishedApr 14, 2020

Abstract

The formation temperature is a key factor affecting coalbed methane (CBM) migration in reservoirs. Both the prediction of CBM production and prevention of mine gas disasters require the understanding on the controlling mechanism of temperature on coal permeability. We experimentally examined the evolution of permeability for natural low-rank coal samples under various stresses and cyclic temperature conditions. Apparent permeability and intrinsic permeability decrease significantly when the temperature increases and they only partially recover after the temperature returns. The permeability loss decreases greatly with the increasing number of temperature cycles. The permeability loss due to the rising temperature and the irreversible permeability loss for a whole temperature cycle decrease prominently with increasing confining stress. The impacts of swelling/shrinking of coal matrix, roughness of surface, pore compressibility and weakly bound water in coal on temperature sensitivity of coal permeability are investigated.


Funded by

the National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant,Nos.,41731284,&,41902293)

and the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China(Grant,No.,2017M622551)


Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41731284 & 41902293), and the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 2017M622551).


References

[1] Zou J P, Chen W Z, Yang D S, et al. Fractal characteristics of the anisotropic microstructure and pore distribution of low-rank coal. AAPG Bull, 2019, 103: 1297-1319 CrossRef Google Scholar

[2] Mark C, Gauna M. Evaluating the risk of coal bursts in underground coal mines. Int J Min Sci Tech, 2016, 26: 47-52 CrossRef Google Scholar

[3] Qin L, Zhai C, Liu S, et al. Mechanical behavior and fracture spatial propagation of coal injected with liquid nitrogen under triaxial stress applied for coalbed methane recovery. Eng Geol, 2018, 233: 1-10 CrossRef Google Scholar

[4] Clarkson C R, Bustin R M. Variation in permeability with lithotype and maceral composition of Cretaceous coals of the Canadian Cordillera. Int J Coal Geol, 1997, 33: 135-151 CrossRef Google Scholar

[5] Liu J S, Chen Z W, Elsworth D, et al. Evolution of coal permeability from stress-controlled to displacement-controlled swelling conditions. Fuel, 2011, 90: 2987-2997 CrossRef Google Scholar

[6] Mazumder S, Scott M, Jiang J. Permeability increase in Bowen Basin coal as a result of matrix shrinkage during primary depletion. Int J Coal Geol, 2012, 96-97: 109-119 CrossRef Google Scholar

[7] Vishal V, Ranjith P G, Pradhan S P, et al. Permeability of sub-critical carbon dioxide in naturally fractured Indian bituminous coal at a range of down-hole stress conditions. Eng Geol, 2013, 167: 148-156 CrossRef Google Scholar

[8] Jasinge D, Ranjith P G, Choi S K. Effects of effective stress changes on permeability of Latrobe Valley brown coal. Fuel, 2011, 90: 1292-1300 CrossRef Google Scholar

[9] Perera M S A, Ranjith P G, Choi S K, et al. The effects of sub-critical and super-critical carbon dioxide adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling on the permeability of naturally fractured black coal. Energy, 2011, 36: 6442-6450 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Meng Z P, Shi X C, Li G Q. Deformation, failure and permeability of coal-bearing strata during longwall mining. Eng Geol, 2016, 208: 69-80 CrossRef Google Scholar

[11] Perera M S A, Ranjith P G, Choi S K, et al. Investigation of temperature effect on permeability of naturally fractured black coal for carbon dioxide movement: An experimental and numerical study. Fuel, 2012, 94: 596-605 CrossRef Google Scholar

[12] Karrenbach M, Cole S, Ridge A, et al. Fiber-optic distributed acoustic sensing of microseismicity, strain and temperature during hydraulic fracturing. Geophysics, 2018, 84: D11-D23 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[13] Meng Z P, Li G Q. Experimental research on the permeability of high-rank coal under a varying stress and its influencing factors. Eng Geol, 2013, 162: 108-117 CrossRef Google Scholar

[14] Teng T, Wang J G, Gao F, et al. A thermally sensitive permeability model for coal-gas interactions including thermal fracturing and volatilization. J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 2016, 32: 319-333 CrossRef Google Scholar

[15] Salmachi A, Haghighi M. Feasibility study of thermally enhanced gas recovery of coal seam gas reservoirs using geothermal resources. Energy Fuels, 2012, 26: 5048-5059 CrossRef Google Scholar

[16] Wang S C, Zhou F B, Kang J H, et al. A heat transfer model of high-temperature nitrogen injection into a methane drainage borehole. J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 2015, 24: 449-456 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Fang H H, Sang S X, Liu S Q. Numerical simulation of enhancing coalbed methane recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection. Pet Sci, 2019, 16: 32-43 CrossRef Google Scholar

[18] Teng T, Xue Y, Zhang C. Modeling and simulation on heat-injection enhanced coal seam gas recovery with experimentally validated non-Darcy gas flow. J Pet Sci Eng, 2019, 177: 734-744 CrossRef Google Scholar

[19] Pashin J C, McIntyre M R. Temperature-pressure conditions in coalbed methane reservoirs of the Black Warrior basin: Implications for carbon sequestration and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Int J Coal Geol, 2003, 54: 167-183 CrossRef Google Scholar

[20] Li Y, Tang D Z, Xu H, et al. In-situ stress distribution and its implication on coalbed methane development in Liulin area, eastern Ordos basin, China. J Pet Sci Eng, 2014, 122: 488-496 CrossRef Google Scholar

[21] Zhu W C, Wei C H, Liu J, et al. A model of coal-gas interaction under variable temperatures. Int J Coal Geol, 2011, 86: 213-221 CrossRef Google Scholar

[22] Yin G, Jiang C, Wang J G, et al. Combined effect of stress, pore pressure and temperature on methane permeability in anthracite coal: An experimental study. Transp Porous Media, 2013, 100: 1-16 CrossRef Google Scholar

[23] Oudinot A Y, Schepers K C, Gonzalez R J. An integrated reservoir characterization, geostatistical analysis, optimized history-matching and performance forecasting study of the 9-section, 30-well pump canyon CO2 ECBM/sequestration demonstration site, San Juan basin, New Mexico. In: Proceedings of international coal bed and shale gas symposium 2008. Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 2008. Google Scholar

[24] Jalili P, Serkan S S, Cinar Y. CO2 storage in abandoned coal mines. In: Proceedings of 11th underground coal operators conference, University of Wollongong & the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australia, 2011. 355–360. Google Scholar

[25] Li Z Q, Xian X F, Long Q M. Experiment study of coal permeability under different temperature and stress. J China Univ Min Tech, 2009, 38: 523–527. Google Scholar

[26] Zhao Y S, Qu F, Wan Z J, et al. Experimental investigation on correlation between permeability variation and pore structure during coal pyrolysis. Transp Porous Media, 2010, 82: 401-412 CrossRef Google Scholar

[27] Feng Z J, Wan Z J, Zhao Y S, et al. Experimental study of permeability of anthracite and gas coal masses under high temperature and triaxial stress. Chin J Rock Mech Eng, 2010, 29: 689–696. Google Scholar

[28] Wang K, Du F, Wang G. Investigation of gas pressure and temperature effects on the permeability and steady-state time of Chinese anthracite coal: An experimental study. J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 2017, 40: 179-188 CrossRef Google Scholar

[29] Wu S, Tang D Z, Li S, et al. Effects of geological pressure and temperature on permeability behaviors of middle-low volatile bituminous coals in eastern Ordos Basin, China. J Pet Sci Eng, 2017, 153: 372-384 CrossRef Google Scholar

[30] Feng Z J, Zhao Y S, Wan Z J. Experiment study of the thermal deformation of in-situ gas coal. In: Rock Mechanics: Achievements and Ambitions-Proceedings of the 2nd ISRM International Young Scholars’ Symposium on Rock Mechanics, 2011. 103–108. Google Scholar

[31] Qu H Y, Liu J S, Chen Z W, et al. Complex evolution of coal permeability during CO2 injection under variable temperatures. Int J Greenh Gas Control, 2012, 9: 281-293 CrossRef Google Scholar

[32] Licht Jr. W, Stechert D G. The variation of the viscosity of gases and vapors with temperature.. J Phys Chem, 1944, 48: 23-47 CrossRef Google Scholar

[33] Benenson W, Harris J W, Stöcker H, et al. Handbook of Physics. Cham: Springer Science and Business Media, 2006. Google Scholar

[34] Skawinski R. Considerations referring to coal swelling accompanying the sorption of gases and water. Arch Min Sci, 1999, 44: 425–434. Google Scholar

[35] Faiz M M, Saghafi A, Barclay S A, et al. Evaluating geological sequestration of CO2 in bituminous coals: The southern Sydney Basin, Australia as a natural analogue. Int J Greenh Gas Control, 2007, 1: 223-235 CrossRef Google Scholar

[36] Pini R, Ottiger S, Burlini L, et al. Role of adsorption and swelling on the dynamics of gas injection in coal. J Geophys Res, 2009, 114: B04203 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[37] Pan Z J, Connell L D. Modelling of anisotropic coal swelling and its impact on permeability behaviour for primary and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Int J Coal Geol, 2011, 85: 257-267 CrossRef Google Scholar

[38] Zou J P, Chen W Z, Yang D S, et al. The impact of effective stress and gas slippage on coal permeability under cyclic loading. J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 2016, 31: 236-248 CrossRef Google Scholar

[39] Gamson P D, Beamish B B, Johnson D P. Coal microstructure and micropermeability and their effects on natural gas recovery. Fuel, 1993, 72: 87-99 CrossRef Google Scholar

[40] Giffin S, Littke R, Klaver J, et al. Application of BIB-SEM technology to characterize macropore morphology in coal. Int J Coal Geol, 2013, 114: 85-95 CrossRef Google Scholar

[41] Scheidegger A. The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. London: University Of Toronto Press, 1958. Google Scholar

[42] Somerton W H, Söylemezoḡlu I M, Dudley R C. Effect of stress on permeability of coal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstracts, 1975, 12: 129-145 CrossRef Google Scholar

[43] Jiang C B, Duan M K, Yin G Z, et al. Experimental study on seepage properties, AE characteristics and energy dissipation of coal under tiered cyclic loading. Eng Geol, 2017, 221: 114-123 CrossRef Google Scholar

[44] Mavor M J, Gunter W D. Secondary porosity and permeability of coal vs. gas composition and pressure. SPE Reserv Eval Eng, 2006, 9: 114-125 CrossRef Google Scholar

[45] Pan Z J, Connell L D, Camilleri M. Laboratory characterisation of coal reservoir permeability for primary and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Int J Coal Geol, 2010, 82: 252-261 CrossRef Google Scholar

[46] Li Y, Tang D Z, Xu H, et al. Experimental research on coal permeability: The roles of effective stress and gas slippage. J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 2014, 21: 481-488 CrossRef Google Scholar

[47] Klinkenberg L J. The permeability of porous media to liquids and gases. In: Drill Production Practices. New York, 1941. 200–211. Google Scholar

[48] Guo X, Zou G F, Wang Y H, et al. Investigation of the temperature effect on rock permeability sensitivity. J Pet Sci Eng, 2017, 156: 616-622 CrossRef Google Scholar

[49] Letham E A, Bustin R M. The impact of gas slippage on permeability effective stress laws: implications for predicting permeability of fine-grained lithologies. Int J Coal Geol, 2016, 167: 93-102 CrossRef Google Scholar

[50] Wang G D, Ren T, Wang K, et al. Improved apparent permeability models of gas flow in coal with Klinkenberg effect. Fuel, 2014, 128: 53-61 CrossRef Google Scholar

[51] Dang W G, Konietzky H, Frühwirt T, et al. Cyclic frictional responses of planar joints under cyclic normal load conditions: Laboratory tests and numerical simulations. Rock Mech Rock Eng, 2019, 38 CrossRef Google Scholar

[52] Dang W G, Wu W, Konietzky H, et al. Effect of shear-induced aperture evolution on fluid flow in rock fractures. Comput Geotech, 2019, 114: 103152 CrossRef Google Scholar

[53] Doranehgard M H, Siavashi M. The effect of temperature dependent relative permeability on heavy oil recovery during hot water injection process using streamline-based simulation. Appl Thermal Eng, 2018, 129: 106-116 CrossRef Google Scholar

[54] Esmaeili S, Sarma H, Harding T, et al. Review of the effect of temperature on oil-water relative permeability in porous rocks of oil reservoirs. Fuel, 2019, 237: 91-116 CrossRef Google Scholar

[55] Nakagawa T, Komaki I, Sakawa M, et al. Small angle X-ray scattering study on change of fractal property of Witbank coal with heat treatment. Fuel, 2000, 79: 1341-1346 CrossRef Google Scholar

[56] Niu S W, Zhao Y S, Hu Y Q. Experimental ivestigation of the temperature and pore pressure effect on permeability of lignite under the in situ condition. Transp Porous Media, 2014, 101: 137-148 CrossRef Google Scholar

[57] Yu Y M, Liang W G, Hu Y Q, et al. Study of micro-pores development in lean coal with temperature. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 2012, 51: 91-96 CrossRef Google Scholar

[58] Akbarzadeh H, Chalaturnyk R J. Structural changes in coal at elevated temperature pertinent to underground coal gasification: A review. Int J Coal Geol, 2014, 131: 126-146 CrossRef Google Scholar

[59] Arenillas A, Rubiera F, Pis J J, et al. Thermal behaviour during the pyrolysis of low rank perhydrous coals. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis, 2003, 68-69: 371-385 CrossRef Google Scholar

[60] Saarenketo T. Electrical properties of water in clay and silty soils. J Appl Geophys, 1998, 40: 73-88 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    (Color online) Scanning electron microscopy images observed parallel to coal beddings.

  • Figure 2

    (Color online) Scanning electron microscopy images observed perpendicular to coal beddings.

  • Figure 3

    (Color online) Low permeability testing system. 1-triaxial cell; 2-coal sample; 3-nitrile rubber membrane; 4-heating elements; 5-high pressure nitrogen; 6-regulate valve; 7-sensor of input gas pressure; 8-bubble flow meter; 9-micro flow meter; 10-transfer switch; 11-oil tank; 12-triaxial loading equipment; 13-cell oil temperature and data acquisition equipment; 14-computer.

  • Figure 4

    (Color online) Cyclic temperature path and the gas pressure path under different confining stresses. (a) Cyclic temperature path; (b) the gas pressure path.

  • Figure 5

    (Color online) Permeability experimental results for sample #1 under the hydrostatic stress 8 MPa. (a) The 1st ascending temperature; (b) the 1st descending temperature; (c) the 2nd ascending temperature; (d) the 2nd descending temperature.

  • Figure 6

    (Color online) Permeability experimental results for sample #2 under the hydrostatic stress 8 MPa. (a) Ascending temperature; (b) descending temperature.

  • Figure 7

    (Color online) Permeability experimental results for sample #1 under the hydrostatic stress 10 MPa. (a) The 1st ascending temperature; (b) the 1st descending temperature; (c) the 2nd ascending temperature; (d) the 2nd descending temperature.

  • Figure 8

    (Color online) Permeability experimental results for sample #2 under the hydrostatic stress 10 MPa. (a) Ascending temperature; (b) descending temperature.

  • Figure 9

    (Color online) Gas slippage effect fitting for the 1st temperature cycle of sample #1. (a) Ascending temperature; (b) descending temperature.

  • Figure 10

    (Color online) Intrinsic permeability results for sample #1 under cyclic temperature condition. (a) Hydrostatic stress is 8 MPa; (b) hydrostatic stress is 10 MPa.

  • Figure 11

    (Color online) Intrinsic permeability results for sample #2 under cyclic temperature condition. (a) Hydrostatic stress is 8 MPa; (b) hydrostatic stress is 10 MPa.

  • Figure 12

    (Color online) PLR results for different rock samples based on experimental results from Guo et al. [48].

  • Figure 13

    (Color online) Coal samples with different sizes for measuring weight.

  • Figure 14

    (Color online) Mass loss rate of coal samples under different temperatures.

  • Table 1   Table 1 The main indicators of coal under normal temperature obtained by coal quality tests

    Indicators

    Value

    Indicators

    Value

    Indicators

    Value

    Maximum vitrinitereflectance, Ro,max (%)

    0.567

    Mineral matter content (%)

    10.87

    Mean photopermeability (%)

    76.5

    Vitrinite content (%)

    78.59

    Moisture content(air dry basis), Mad (%)

    4.67

    Gross calorific value (air dry basis), Qgr,ad (MJ kg−1)

    22.85

    Inertinite content (%)

    4.21

    Ash yield (dry basis), Ad (%)

    25.34

    Average bulk density,ρ (kg m−3)

    1340

    Exinite content (%)

    1.25

    Volatile matter (dryash-free basis), Vdaf (%)

    46.41

  • Table 2   Table 2 Permeability loss rate calculation results for the first temperature cycle

    Sample No.

    Hydrostatic stress (MPa)

    Permeability loss rate (PLR)

    The 1st ascending temperature (°C)

    The 1st descending temperature (°C)

    25

    35

    45

    55

    65

    75

    55

    45

    35

    25

    #1

    8

    0.34

    0.38

    0.38

    0.42

    0.53

    0.52

    0.41

    0.38

    0.40

    0.31

    10

    0.65

    0.65

    0.63

    0.62

    0.66

    0.67

    0.70

    0.67

    0.64

    0.65

    #2

    8

    0.22

    0.19

    0.21

    0.32

    0.35

    0.38

    0.33

    0.34

    0.29

    0.32

    10

    0.34

    0.33

    0.35

    0.37

    0.58

    0.56

    0.48

    0.42

    0.41

    0.43

  • Table 3   Table 3 Permeability loss rate calculation results due to temperature increasing

    Coal sample No.

    Hydrostatic stress (MPa)

    Permeability loss rate due to temperature increasing PLR

    The 1st ascending temperature

    The 2nd ascending temperature

    #1

    8

    0.684

    0.638

    10

    0.571

    0.587

    #2

    8

    0.615

    10

    0.472

  • Table 4   Table 4 Irreversible permeability loss rate due to temperature change calculation results due to temperature increasing

    Coal sample No.

    Hydrostatic stress (MPa)

    Irreversible permeability loss rate due to temperature change IPLR

    The 1st temperature cycle

    The 2nd temperature cycle

    #1

    8

    0.318

    0.260

    10

    0.196

    0.171

    #2

    8

    0.308

    10

    0.103

Copyright 2020  CHINA SCIENCE PUBLISHING & MEDIA LTD.  中国科技出版传媒股份有限公司  版权所有

京ICP备14028887号-23       京公网安备11010102003388号