4.7 Article

Image-Based Upscaling of Permeability in Opalinus Clay

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH
卷 123, 期 1, 页码 285-295

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2017JB014717

关键词

image-based upscaling; shales; permeability

资金

  1. Swiss National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (NAGRA) as part of the SHARC consortium
  2. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Curtin University of Technology
  3. NAGRA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an approach for upscaling permeability in Opalinus Clay from pore scale to a coarser scale, where pores cannot be resolved and where the transport properties are controlled by the geometry of the clay matrix considered as a distinct phase. Microstructures reconstructed from multiscale image data are cellular models with different sizes of basic building blocks, the so-called voxels. Flow simulations were performed on the basis of the grid that is naturally inherent in the coarser-scale image data that were acquired by synchrotron X-ray computed tomography. Thereby, the spatial distribution of permeability at this coarser scale was determined from image data at the pore scale acquired by focused ion beam nanotomography. Then, coarse-scale microstructures with different clay matrix contents were used as input for flow simulations, which allowed predicting the vertical and horizontal bulk permeability at the mesoscale. In agreement with results of other workers, it turned out that vertical (cross-plane) permeability K-v decreases with increasing clay content, which can be explained in that the presence of coarse nonclayey grains increases permeability of the porous clay matrix when compared to a matrix consisting only of fine-grained shales. Mesoscale permeability anisotropy K-h/K-v increases from about 1 to 2 if the clay content increases from 0.2 to 0.9. The predicted permeability behavior is discussed and compared to results from experiments and other predictive models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据