1887
Volume 67, Issue 5
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A key task of exploration geophysics is to find relationships between seismic attributes (velocities and attenuation) and fluid properties (saturation and pore pressure). Experimental data suggest that at least three different factors affect these relationships, which are not well explained by classical Gassmann, Biot, squirt‐flow, mesoscopic‐flow and gas dissolution/exsolution models. Some of these additional factors include (i) effect of wettability and surface tension between immiscible fluids, (ii) saturation history effects (drainage versus imbibition) and (iii) effects of wave amplitude and effective stress. We apply a new rock physics model to explain the role of all these additional factors on seismic properties of a partially saturated rock. The model is based on a well‐known effect in surface chemistry: hysteresis of liquid bridges. This effect is taking place in cracks, which are partially saturated with two immiscible fluids. Using our model, we investigated (i) physical factors affecting empirical Brie correlation for effective bulk modulus of fluid, (ii) the role of liquids on seismic attenuation in the low frequency (static) limit, (iii) water‐weakening effects and (iv) saturation history effects. Our model is applicable in the low frequency limit (seismic frequencies) when capillary forces dominate over viscous forces during wave‐induced two‐phase fluid flow. The model is relevant for the seismic characterization of immiscible fluids with high contrast in compressibilities, that is, for shallow gas exploration and CO monitoring.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12782
2019-04-16
2020-08-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BarenblattG.I., EntovV.M. and RyzhikV.M.1990. Theory of fluid flows through natural rocks. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BonnD., EggersJ., IndekeuJ., MeunierJ. and RolleyE.2009. Wetting and spreading. Reviews of modern physics, 81, 739.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BormashenkoE.Y.2013a. Wetting of real surfaces (Vol. 19). Walter de Gruyter.
  4. BormashenkoE.2013b. Wetting of real solid surfaces: new glance on well‐known problems. Colloid and Polymer Science291, 339–342.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BrieA., PampuriF., MarsalaA.F. and MeazzaO.1995 (January). Shear sonic interpretation in gas‐bearing sands. In SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
  6. BroadheadM.K.2012. Effect of contact line motion on QP and QS for partially saturated rocks. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2012 (pp. 1–6). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
  7. BrunnerW. and SpetzlerH.A.2001. Observations of time‐dependent meniscus behavior with implications for seismic attenuation in three‐phase systems. Geophysical Research Letters28, 1867–1870.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. ChenH., AmirfazliA. and TangT.2013. Modeling liquid bridge between surfaces with contact angle hysteresis. Langmuir, 29, 3310–3319.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. ChibowskiE.2008. Surface free energy of sulfur—Revisited I. Yellow and orange samples solidified against glass surface. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science319, 505–513.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. CoussyO.2011. Mechanics and physics of porous solids. John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. De GennesP.G., Brochard‐WyartF. and QuéréD.2013. Capillarity and wetting phenomena: drops, bubbles, pearls, waves. Springer Science & Business Media.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. De SouzaE.J., GaoL., McCarthyT.J., ArztE. and CrosbyA.J.2008. Effect of contact angle hysteresis on the measurement of capillary forces. Langmuir24, 1391–1396.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. EthingtonE.F.1990. Interfacial contact angle measurements of water, mercury, and 20 organic liquids on quartz, calcite, biotite, and Ca‐montmorillonite substrates (No. 90‐409). US Geological Survey.
  14. FredlundD.G., RahardjoH. and FredlundM.D.2012. Unsaturated soil mechanics in engineering practice. John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. GassmannF. 1951. Uber die elastizitat poroser medien. Vierteljahrsschrift der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zurich96, 1–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. HudsonJ.A.1988. Seismic wave propagation through material containing partially saturated cracks. Geophysical Journal International92, 33–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. IwasakiT., TatsuokaF. and TakagiY.1978. Shear moduli of sands under cyclic torsional shear loading. Soils and Foundations18, 39–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. JouleJ.P.1851 (January). On the mechanical equivalent of heat. In Abstracts of the Papers Communicated to the Royal Society of London (Vol. 5, p. 839). The Royal Society.
  19. KnightR. and Nolen‐HoeksemaR.1990. A laboratory study of the dependence of elastic wave velocities on pore scale fluid distribution. Geophysical Research Letters17, 1529–1532.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. KnightR., Pyrak‐NolteL.J., SlaterL., AtekwanaE., EndresA., GellerJ., et al. 2010. Geophysics at the interface: response of geophysical properties to solid‐fluid, fluid‐fluid, and solid‐solid interfaces. Reviews of Geophysics48, RG4002 .
    [Google Scholar]
  21. KraemerE.O.1931. A Treatise on Physical Chemistry (ed H.S.Taylor). D. Van Nostrand Company, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. LaugaE., BrennerM. and StoneH.2007. Microfluidics: the no‐slip boundary condition. In Springer Handbook of Experimental Fluid Mechanics (pp. 1219–1240). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. LavrentievM.A. and ShabbatB.V.1973. Methods of the Theory of Complex Variable Functions. Nauka, Moscow.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LiD., WeiJ., DiB., DingP. and ShuaiD.2017. The effect of fluid saturation on the dynamic shear modulus of tight sandstones. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering14, 1072.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. LibbyB. and MonsonP.A.2004. Adsorption/desorption hysteresis in inkbottle pores: a density functional theory and Monte Carlo simulation study. Langmuir20, 4289–4294.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. MangaM., BeresnevI., BrodskyE.E., ElkhouryJ.E., ElsworthD., IngebritsenS.E., … & WangC.Y.2012. Changes in permeability caused by transient stresses: field observations, experiments, and mechanisms. Reviews of Geophysics50, RG2004.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. MashinskiiE.I.2004. Variants of the strain‐amplitude dependence of elastic wave velocities in rocks under pressure. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering1, 295.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. MavkoG. and JizbaD.1991. Estimating grain‐scale fluid effects on velocity dispersion in rocks. Geophysics56, 1940–1949.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. MavkoG. and MukerjiT.1998. Bounds on low‐frequency seismic velocities in partially saturated rocks. Geophysics63, 918–924.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MavkoG., MukerjiT. and DvorkinJ.2009. The Rock Physics Handbook: Tools for Seismic Analysis of Porous Media. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. MavkoG.M. and NurA.1979. Wave attenuation in partially saturated rocks. Geophysics44, 161–178.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. McBainJ.W.1935. An explanation of hysteresis in the hydration and dehydration of gels. Journal of the American Chemical Society57, 699–700.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. MiksisM.J.1988. Effects of contact line movement on the dissipation of waves in partially saturated rocks. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth93, 6624–6634.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. MurphyW.F.1984. Acoustic measures of partial gas saturation in tight sandstones. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth89, 11549–11559.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. MurphyW.F.III, WinklerK.W. and KleinbergR.L.1986. Acoustic relaxation in sedimentary rocks: dependence on grain contacts and fluid saturation. Geophysics51, 757–766.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. MuskhelishviliN.I.1977. Some Basic Problems of the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity. Springer, Berlin.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. MüllerT.M., GurevichB. and LebedevM.2010. Seismic wave attenuation and dispersion resulting from wave‐induced flow in porous rocks—A review. Geophysics75, 75A147–75A164.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. MoerigR., WaiteW.F., BoydO.S., GettingI.C. and SpetzlerH.A.1996. Seismic attenuation in artificial glass cracks: physical and physicochemical effects of fluids. Geophysical Research Letters23, 2053–2056.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. NourifardN. and LebedevM.2018. Research note: the effect of strain amplitude produced by ultrasonic waves on its velocity. Geophysical Prospecting.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. PapageorgiouG., AmalokwuK. and ChapmanM.2016. Theoretical derivation of a Brie‐like fluid mixing law. Geophysical Prospecting64, 1048–1053.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. PrideS.R., BerrymanJ.G. and HarrisJ.M.2004. Seismic attenuation due to wave‐induced flow. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth109, B01201.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. PruessK. and TsangY.W.1990. On two‐phase relative permeability and capillary pressure of rough‐walled rock fractures. Water Resources Research26, 1915–1926.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. QiQ., MüllerT.M., GurevichB., LopesS., LebedevM. and CaspariE.2014a. Quantifying the effect of capillarity on attenuation and dispersion in patchy‐saturated rocks. Geophysics79, WB35–WB50.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. QiQ., MüllerT.M. and RubinoJ.G.2014b. Seismic attenuation: effects of interfacial impedance on wave‐induced pressure diffusion. Geophysical Journal International199, 1677–1681.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. RenW. and EW.2007. Boundary conditions for the moving contact line problem. Physics of Fluids19, 022101.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. RozhkoA.Y.2016. Two‐phase fluid‐flow modeling in a dilatant crack‐like pathway. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering146, 1158–1172.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. RozhkoA.Y. and A.Bauer2018. Contact line friction and surface tension effects on seismic attenuation and effective bulk moduli in rock with a partially‐saturated crack. Geophysical Prospecting.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. SantosJ.E., DouglasJ.Jr, CorberóJ. and LoveraO.M.1990. A model for wave propagation in a porous medium saturated by a two‐phase fluid. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America87, 1439–1448.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. ShiZ., ZhangY., LiuM., HanaorD.A. and GanY.2018. Dynamic contact angle hysteresis in liquid bridges. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects555, 365–371.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. SkemptonA.W.1954. The pore‐pressure coefficients A and B. Geotechnique4, 143–147.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. SpencerJ.W. and ShineJ.2016. Seismic wave attenuation and modulus dispersion in sandstones. Geophysics81, D211–D231.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. TadmorR.2004. Line energy and the relation between advancing, receding, and young contact angles. Langmuir20, 7659–7664.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. TisatoN., ChapmanS., ZhaoQ., GrasselliG. and QuintalB.2015. Seismic wave attenuation in rocks saturated with bubbly liquids: experiments and numerical modeling. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts (pp. 3254–3258). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
  54. TisatoN., GrasselliG., QuintalB. and PodladchikovY.2014. Seismic wave attenuation in fluid‐saturated rock as result of gas dissolution. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts (pp. 1985–1990). Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
  55. TutuncuA.N., PodioA.L., GregoryA.R. and SharmaM.M.1998. Nonlinear viscoelastic behavior of sedimentary rocks, Part I: Effect of frequency and strain amplitude. Geophysics63, 184–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. VernikL. and KachanovM.2012. On some controversial issues in rock physics. The Leading Edge31, 636–642.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. VerwerK., EberliG., BaechleG. and WegerR.2010. Effect of carbonate pore structure on dynamic shear moduli. Geophysics75, E1–E8.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. WaiteW., MoerigR. and SpetzlerH.1997. Seismic attenuation in a partially saturated, artificial crack due to restricted contact line motion. Geophysical Research Letters24, 3309–3312.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. WalshJ.B.1965. The effect of cracks on the compressibility of rock. Journal of Geophysical Research70, 381–389.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. WangZ., SchmittD.R. and WangR.2015. Does wettability influence seismic wave propagation in liquid‐saturated porous rocks?Geophysical Journal International203, 2182–2188.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. WollnerU. and DvorkinJ.2018. Effective bulk modulus of the pore fluid at patchy saturation. Geophysical Prospecting66(7), 1372–1383.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. WyllieM.R.J., GregoryA.R. and GardnerG.H.F.1958. An experimental investigation of factors affecting elastic wave velocities in porous media. Geophysics23, 459–493.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. YaminskyV.V.2000. Molecular mechanisms of hydrophobic transitions. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology14, 187–233.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. YarushinaV.M. and PodladchikovY.Y.2010. Plastic yielding as a frequency and amplitude independent mechanism of seismic wave attenuation. Geophysics75, N51.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. ZhangY.2016. Static and dynamic behaviour of inter‐granular liquid bridges: hysteresis of contact angle and capillary forces. Master's thesis, University of Sydney.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. ZhangY., NishizawaO., KiyamaT. and XueZ.2015. Saturation‐path dependency of P‐wave velocity and attenuation in sandstone saturated with CO2 and brine revealed by simultaneous measurements of waveforms and X‐ray computed tomography images. Geophysics80, D403–D415.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. ZimmermanR.W.1990. Compressibility of sandstones (Vol. 29). Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12782
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12782
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): partial saturation , Rock physics , seismic rock properties and surface phenomena
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error