Simultaneous Measurement of Permeability and Effective Porosity in

Rock Formations using Flowing Laser Polarized Xenon

Ruopeng Wang
1,2
; Ross W. Mair
1,2
; Matthew S. Rosen
1
; David G. Cory
2
; Ronald L. Walsworth
1
1
Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
2
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
1. Introduction
Effective Porosity is the fractional volume of pore space
that permits fluid flow in a rock sample. It is lower than the
absolute porosity, which is the fractional volume of pore
space in a porous medium, regardless of whether the pores
are connected or dead-ended. Effective porosity can also be
defined as the ratio of the average fluid velocity (Darcy
velocity), to the mean velocity of a tracer flowing through
the pore space. Effective porosity is the more important
parameter when describing fluid flow under pressure.
Permeability represents the ability of a porous material to
transmit fluid. For linear laminar flow in the low Reynolds
number regime (Re < 1), permeability (k) is the constant of
proportionality relating the volume rate of fluid flow ( ) to
the driving pressure gradient ( ), through Darcys Law (A
is the samples cross-sectional area and is the fluid
viscosity):
2. Introduction
Tortuosity describes the ease of fluid flow through a porous
medium. It can be thought of as the ratio of the actual distance
traveled by a tracer between two points to the direct straight
line distance. Hence, tortuosity is always greater than 1.
Tortuosity has been notoriously difficult to measure
accurately, and the relation between permeability and
tortuosity is a subject of debate in the geophysics community.
We have earlier demonstrated the tortuosity can be
determined in reservoir rock samples using thermally-
polarized xenon restricted diffusion experiments.
Laser Polarization can effectively enhance the NMR signal
from noble gas samples, which otherwise provide very low
signal because of their low density. Our current polarization
apparatus provides
129
Xe polarization of about 1% (an
enhancement of 10
3
) for 4 bar Xe gas pressure. The polarized
gas can be made to flow easily through porous materials.
3. Whats new
Direct measurement of effective porosity
It is difficult to determine effective porosity since it
depends on the volume of mobile fluid inside a rock, which
is not easily measurable. In the literature, absolute porosity
is typically used to approximate effective porosity.
Simultaneous measure of eff. porosity and permeability
Permeability values of rock cores are usually measured
with a steady-state gas flow permeameter, governed by
Darcys Law, while total porosity is approximately
determined using a gas pycnometer. Our new method
enables simultaneous determination of effective porosity
and permeability with gas-phase MRI.
Comparison of measured permeability and tortuosity
Permeability and tortuosity can be measured from samples
from the same rock formation.
4. Experimental Setup
6. Method for Effective Porosity Measurement
NMR signal amplitude is proportional to the volume of
interconnected void space, which forms the flow path for
the Xe gas. Effective porosity is determined from
comparison of signal amplitudes from Xe spins in the rock
and that in the diffuser plate (with known volume of void
space). One must also calibrate for different T
2
s in rock
and the diffuser.
Through holes of known
cross-sectional area A
T
S
T
S
Rock sample with cross-sectional area A
Measured 1D
129
Xe profile along the flow direction
Rock
) / ( exp
) / ( exp
2
2
rock
E
dif
E
T
T
T t
T t
S
S
A
A
n

=
t
E
echo time
T
2
dif
T
2
in diffuser plate
T
2
rock
T
2
in rock
9. Method for Permeability Measurement
5. Pulse Sequences
Penetration depth measurement
Tortuosity measurement
12. Results
Teflon connectors
Teflon diffuser plate
Rock

Steady state Xe flow profiles in samples with very low
permeability show dramatic reductions in profile amplitude
due to Xe depolarization as it travels along the rock.
Effective porosity was estimated from the Xe signal
amplitude in the rock, after correction for polarization losses
in the rock core (black points, above). This correction is
based on the Xe T
1
pressure dependence throughout the core.
P










Laser
Light
Polarizing
Cell with ~
4 bar Xe
Helmholtz Coils
Natural
Abundance Xe
Polarized Xe
TEFLON tubing
4.7 T Magnet
Gradient Coil
Rock Sample
RF Coil
Vacuum
Pump
Mass Flow
Controller
RF
Gx
Gy
Gz
Saturation Delay Profile acquisition
/2 /2 /2 /2
1D profile acquired with steady state laser-polarized Xe
gas flow through a Fontainebleau sandstone sample. T
2
values of 77 and 5 ms in the diffuser and rock were
measured. Fontainebleau has high permeability, and the
xenon passes through with little depolarization
Permeability is determined from the gas pressure drop
across the rock sample and the resulting gas flow rate. We
measure the time-dependence of the penetration depth of
polarized Xe gas in the sample, and derive permeability
from an expression assuming viscous laminar flow:
The procedure for determining the penetration depth is:
Saturate the spin polarization in the sample
Wait a delay time
Measure one-dimensional,
129
Xe spin profile
along flow direction
penetration time
Lsample length
gas viscosity
Piinlet pressure
nporosity
Pooutlet pressure
penetration depth
kpermeability

=
( )
( )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
|

|
|
|
4
3
2
2 2
2
3 2 2 2
3
2 n
k
L
P P
P P P P
L
i o
i i i o
Xenon time-dependent diffusion coefficient (D(t)),
normalized to free diffusion coefficient (D
0
) in Austin chalk,
plotted against diffusion length (D
0
t). The asymptotic
limit of D(t)/D
0
at long length scales is equal to the inverse
of the tortuosity. From such a plot, the homogeneous
length scale (length at which the pore structure becomes
homogeneous) can also be read off . For Austin Chalk, the
tortuosity is 5.6, and the homogeneous length scale ~ 1 mm.
q
kA
P =

q
Tortuosity is measured in sealed, static samples containing
the rock, and a known pressure of Xe and O
2
.
RF
G
g

90
O
90
O
90
O
180
O
180
O
PGSTE-bp } }
t
T
Xe flow profiles in a sample of Fontainebleau sandstone,
acquired using the penetration depth pulse sequence. From
each profile, the polarized xenon penetration depth was
calculated for the corresponding delay time: 6.46 mm for
= 1.0 s; 10.7 mm for = 1.5 s; and 16.5 mm for = 2.0 s.
The gas pressure difference across the rock was 0.020 bar.
Correction for polarization loss (dashed lines) was minimal
for this sample, but significant for lower permeability rocks.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Diffusion Length (mm)
D
(
t
)
/
D
0
NMR measurements of permeability agree well with those
from a standard technique. Effective porosity is consistently
lower than absolute porosity - the deviation between them
increases as permeability decreases. Tortuosity increases as
permeability decreases, however the trend is non-trivial.
Our new method provides a rapid and simultaneous measure
of permeability and effective porosity. Using Xe D(t) we can
also report permeability and tortuosity from the same sample
References
T. Walker, W. Happer, Rev. Mod. Phys., 69, 629 (1997).
R.W. Mair, M.S. Rosen, R. Wang, D.G. Cory, et al., Magn. Reson. Chem., 40, S29 (2002).
R. W. Mair, G. P. Wong, D. Hoffmann, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett., 83, 3324 (1999).
J. Bear, "Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media", Elsevier Inc., New York (1972).
D. B. Stephens, K.-C. Hsu, M. A. Prieksat, et al., Hydrogeol. J., 6, 156-165 (1998).
7. Xe Profile in Fontainebleau Sandstone
11. Tortuosity Measurements 10. Penetration Depths in Fontainebleau Sandstone
8. Xe Profile in Austin Chalk
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

N
M
R

S
i
g
n
a
l

A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
z (mm)
Austin Chalk
Effective porosity
= (18.5 0.9)%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

N
M
R

S
i
g
n
a
l

A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
Teflon
Diffuser
FontaineBleau
Effective porosity
= (11.3 0.7)%
z (mm)
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
mm
Fontainebleau
Permeability
k = 559 + 93 mDarcy
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

N
M
R

S
i
g
n
a
l

A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
= 1.0 s = 1.5 s = 2.0 s
z (mm)
_
Sample Permeability Effective
Porosity
Absolute
Porosity
Tortuosity
LP-Xenon
MRI
Gas perm-
eameter
LP-Xenon
MRI
Gas
Pycnometer
Xenon
D(t)
Fontainebleau 559 93 589 11.3 0.7 12.5 3.45
Edwards Limestone 7.0 0.9 6.8 15.1 1.1 23.3 4.76
Austin Chalk 2.6 0.3 3.6 18.5 0.9 29.7 5.58