Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T13:55:40.966Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flow regimes and relative permeabilities during steady-state two-phase flow in porous media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2006

D. G. Avraam  and
A. C. Payatakes
D. G. Avraam
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Patrasand Institute of Chemical Engineering and High Temperature Chemical Processes, PO Box 1414, GR 26500 Patras, Greece
A. C. Payatakes
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Patrasand Institute of Chemical Engineering and High Temperature Chemical Processes, PO Box 1414, GR 26500 Patras, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Steady-state two-phase flow in porous media was studied experimentally, using a model pore network of the chamber-and-throat type, etched in glass. The size of the network was sufficient to make end effects negligible. The capillary number, Ca, the flow-rate ratio, r, and the viscosity ratio, k, were changed systematically in a range that is of practical interest, whereas the wettability (moderate), the coalescence factor (high), and the geometrical and topological parameters of the porous medium were kept constant. Optical observations and macroscopic measurements were used to determine the flow regimes, and to calculate the corresponding relative permeabilities and fractional flow values. Four main flow regimes were observed and videorecorded, namely large-ganglion dynamics (LGD), small-ganglion dynamics (SGD), drop-traffic flow (DTF) and connected pathway flow (CPF). A map of the flow regimes is given in figure 3. The experimental demonstration that LGD, SGD and DTF prevail under flow conditions of practical interest, for which the widely held dogma presumes connected pathway flow, necessitates the drastic modification of that assumption. This is bound to have profound implications for the mathematical analysis and computer simulation of the process. The relative permeabilities are shown to correlate strongly with the flow regimes, figure 11. The relative permeability to oil (non-wetting fluid), kro, is minimal in the domain of LGD, and increases strongly as the flow mechanism changes from LGD to SGD to DTF to CPF. The relative permeability to water (wetting fluid), krw, is minimal in the domain of SGD; it increases moderately as the flow mechanism changes from SGD to LGD, whereas it increases strongly as the mechanism changes from SGD to DTF to CPF. Qualitative mechanistic explanations for these experimental results are proposed. The conventional relative permeabilities and the fractional flow of water, fw, are found to be strong functions not only of the water saturation, Sw, but also of Ca and k (with the wettability, the coalescence factor, and all the other parameters kept constant). These results imply that a fundamental reconsideration of fractional flow theory is warranted.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 293 , 25 June 1995 , pp. 207 - 236
Copyright
© 1995 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, P. M. & Brenner, H. 1988 Multiphase flow in porous media. Ann. Rev. Fluid. Med. 20, 35.Google Scholar
Amaefule, J. O. & Handy, L. L. 1982 The effects of interfacial tensions on relative oil/water permeabilities of consolidated porous media. Soc. Petrol. Engrs J. 22, 371.Google Scholar
Auriault, J.-L. 1987 Nonsaturated deformable porous media: quasastatics. Transport in Porous Media 2, 45.Google Scholar
Auriault, J.-L., Lebaigue, O. & Bonnet, G. 1989 Dynamics of two immiscible fluids flowing through deformable porous media. Transport in Porous Media 4, 105.Google Scholar
Avraam, D. G., Kolonis, G. B., Roumeliotis, T. C., Constantinides, G. N. & Payatakes, A. C. 1994 Steady-state two-phase flow through planar and non-planar model porous media. Transport in Porous Media 16, 75.Google Scholar
Bentsen, R. G. 1974 Conditions under which the capillary term may be neglected. J. Can. Petrol. Tech. Oct.-Dec., 25.Google Scholar
Buckley, S. E. & Leverett, M. C. 1942 Mechanism of fluid displacement in sands. Trans. AIME 146, 107.Google Scholar
Chatzis, J. D., Morrow, N. R. & Lim, H. T. 1983 Magnitude and detailed structure of residual oil saturation. Soc. Petrol. Engrs J. 23, 311.Google Scholar
Constantinides, G. N. & Payatakes, A. C. 1991 A theoretical model of collision and coalescence of ganglia in porous media. J. Colloid Interface. Sci. 141(2), 486.Google Scholar
Constantinides, G. N. & Payatakes, A. C. 1995 Network simulation of steady-state two-phase flow in consolidated porous media. AIChE J. (in press).Google Scholar
Craig, F. F. 1971 The reservoir engineering aspects of waterflooding. Soc. Petrol. Engrs AIME Monograph Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Cruz, V. de la. & Spanos, T. J. T. 1983 Mobilization of oil ganglia. AIChE J. 29, 854.Google Scholar
Dias, M. M. & Payatakes, A. C. 1986a Network models for two-phase flow in porous media. Part 1. Immiscible microdisplacement of non-wetting fluids. J. Fluid Mech. 164, 305.Google Scholar
Dias, M. M. & Payatakes, A. C. 1986b Network models for two-phase flow in porous media. Part 2. Motion of oil ganglia. J. Fluid Mech. 164, 337.Google Scholar
Dullien, F. A. L. 1978 Porous Media. Fluid Transport and Pore Structure. Academic.
Fulcher, G. A., Ertekin, T. & Stahl, C. D. 1985 Effect of capillary number and its constituents on non-phase relative permeability measurements. J. Petrol. Tech. Feb., 249.Google Scholar
Geffen, T. M., Owens, W. W., Parrish, D. R. & Morse, R. A. 1951 Experimental investigation of factors affecting laboratory relative permeability measurements. Petrol. Trans. AIME 192, 99.Google Scholar
Gennes, P. G. de. 1983 Theory of slow biphasic flows in porous media. Phys. Chem. Hydrodyn. 4, 175.Google Scholar
Heavyside, J., Black, C. J. J. & Berry, J. F. 1983 Fundamentals of relative permeability: Experimental and theoretical considerations. 58th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco, CA. October 5–8, Paper SPE 12173.
Hinkley, R. E., Dias, M. M. & Payatakes, A. C. 1987 On the motion of oil ganglia in porous media. Phys. Chem. Hydrodyn. 8 (2), 185.Google Scholar
Honarpoor, M. & Mahmood, S. M. 1988 Relative-permeability measurements: An overview. J. Petrol. Tech. Aug., 963.Google Scholar
Jerault, G. R. & Salter, S. J. 1990 The effect of pore structure on hysteresis in relative permeability and capillary pressure: Pore-level modeling. Transport in Porous Media 5, 103.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. F., Bossler, D. R. & Naumann, V. O. 1959 Calculation of relative permeability from displacement experiments J. Petrol. Tech. Jan., 61.Google Scholar
Jones, S. C. & Roszelle, W. O. 1978 Graphical techniques for determining relative permeability from displacement experiments. J. Petrol. Tech. May, 807.Google Scholar
Jones-Para, J. & Calhoun, J. C. 1953 Computation of a linear flood by the stabilized core method. Trans. AIME 198, 335.Google Scholar
Kalaydjian, F. 1987 A macroscopic description of multiphase flow in porous media involving evolution of fluid/fluid interface. Transport in Porous Media 2, 537.Google Scholar
Kalaydjian, F. 1990 Origin and quantification of coupling between relative permeabilities for two-phase flows in porous media. Transport in Porous Media 5, 215.Google Scholar
Lefebvre du Prey, E. J. 1973 Factors affecting liquid-liquid relative permeabilities of a consolidated porous medium. Soc. Petrol. Engrs. J. Feb., 39.Google Scholar
Leverett, M. C. 1941 Capillary behavior in porous solids. Trans. AIME 142, 152.Google Scholar
Levine, J. S. 1954 Displacement experiments in a consolidated porous system. Trans. AIME 201, 57.Google Scholar
McCaffery, F. G. & Bennion, D. W. 1974 The effect of wettability on two-phase relative permeabilities. J. Can. Petrol. Tech. Oct.-Dec., 42.Google Scholar
Morse, R. A., Terwilliger, P. L. & Yuster, S. T. 1947 Relative permeability measurements on small core samples. Oil Gas J. Aug., 23.Google Scholar
Naar, J., Wygal, G. R. & Henderson, J. H. 1962 Imbibition relative permeability in unconsolidated porous media. Soc. Petrol. Engrs. J. 2, 13.Google Scholar
Ng, K. M., Davis, H. T. & Scriven, L. E. 1978 Visualization of blob mechanisms in flow through porous media. Chem. Engng Sci. 33, 1009.Google Scholar
Ng, K. M. & Payatakes, A. C. 1980 Stochastic simulation of the motion, breakup and stranding of oil ganglia in water-wet granular porous media during immiscible displacement. AIChE J. 26, 419.Google Scholar
Odeh, A. S. 1958 Effect of viscosity ratio on relative permeability. J. Petrol. Tech. 11, 346.Google Scholar
Osoba, J. S., Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A. & Blair, P. M. 1951 Laboratory measurements of relative permeability. Trans. AIME 192, 47.Google Scholar
Owens, W. W. & Archer, D. L. 1971 The effect of rock wettability on oil-water relative permeability relationships. J. Petrol. Tech. July, 873.Google Scholar
Payatakes, A. C. 1982 Dynamics of oil ganglia during immiscible displacement in water-wet porous media. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 14, 365.Google Scholar
Payatakes, A. C. & Dias, M. M. 1984 Immiscible microdisplacement and ganglion dynamics in porous media. Rev. Chem. Engng 2, 85.Google Scholar
Payatakes, A. C., Ng, K. M. & Flumerfelt, R. W. 1980 Oil ganglion dynamics during immiscible displacement: Model formulation. AIChE J. 26, 430.Google Scholar
Philip, J. R. 1970 Flow in porous media. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 2, 177.Google Scholar
Raats, P. A. & Klute, A. 1968 Transport in soils: the balance of momentum. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 32, 452.Google Scholar
Rapin, S. 1980 Behavior of non-wetting oil ganglia displaced by an aqueous phase. MSc thesis, University of Houston.
Rapoport, L. A. & Leas, W. J. 1953 Properties of linear waterfloods. Trans. AIME 198, 139.Google Scholar
Richards, L. A. 1931 Capillary conduction of liquids through porous mediums. Physics 1, 318.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. G., Kerver, J. K., Hafford, J. A. & Osoba, J. S. 1952 Laboratory determination of relative permeability. Trans. AIME 195, 187.Google Scholar
Rose, W. 1972 Fundamentals of Transport Phenomena in Porous Media. IAHR, Elsevier.
Rose, W. 1988 Measuring transport coefficients necessary for the description of coupled two-phase flow of immiscible fluids in porous media. Transport in Porous Media 3, 163.Google Scholar
Rose, W. 1990 Coupling coefficients for two-phase flow in pore spaces of simple geometry. Transport in Porous Media 5, 97.Google Scholar
Rose, W. 1991 Richard's assumptions and Hassler's presumptions. Transport in Porous Media 6, 91.Google Scholar
Sandberg, C. R., Gournay, L. S. & Sippel, R. F. 1958 The effect of fluid-flow rate and viscosity on laboratory determinations of oil-water relative permeabilities. Petrol. Trans. AIME 213, 36.Google Scholar
Taber, J. J. 1958 The injection of detergent slugs in water floods. Trans. AIME 213, 186.Google Scholar
Terwilliger, P. L., Wilsey, L. E., Hall, H. N., Bridges, P. M. & Morse, R. A. 1951 An experimental and theoretical investigation of gravity drainage performance. Trans. AIME 192, 285.Google Scholar
Vizika, O., Avraam, D. G. & Payatakes, A. C. 1994 On the role of viscosity ratio during low capillary number forced imbibition in porous media. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 165, 386.Google Scholar
Vizika, O. & Payatakes, A. C. 1989 Parametric experimental study of forced imbibition in porous media. Phys. Chem. Hydrodyn. 11, 187.Google Scholar
Welge, H. J. 1952 A simplified method for computing oil recovery by gas or water drive. Trans. AIME 195, 91.Google Scholar
Whitaker, S. 1986 Flow in porous media II: The governing equations for immiscible two-phase flow. Transport in Porous Media 1, 105.Google Scholar
Wooding, R. A. & Morel-Seytoux, H. J. 1976 Multiphase flow through porous media. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 8, 233.Google Scholar
Yuster, S. T. 1951 Theoretical consideration of multiphase flow in idealized capillary systems. World Petroleum Cong. Proc., Section II. Drilling and Production. The Hague.Google Scholar