4.7 Article

Evolution of coal permeability: Contribution of heterogeneous swelling processes

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COAL GEOLOGY
卷 88, 期 2-3, 页码 152-162

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.coal.2011.09.002

关键词

Coal permeability; Dual poroelasticity; Heterogeneous swelling; Fracture compaction

资金

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2011QNA17]
  2. Chinese National Natural Science Foundation [50904065]
  3. State Key Laboratory for Geomechanics and Deep Underground Engineering in China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study hypothesizes that coal swelling is a heterogeneous process depending on the distribution of coal voids such as fractures, and that coal matrixes swell due to CO2 sorption while fractures are compressed in response. This explains why coal permeability reduces even when the effective stress on coal samples is kept constant. A dual porosity-dual permeability model, which separately accommodates gas flow and transport in the coal matrix (swelling component) and fracture systems (non-swelling component) and rigorously accommodates the role of mechanical deformations for a dual porosity continuum, was developed and applied to prove this hypothesis. We use observations of a CO2 flow-through experiment on coal constrained by X-ray CT to define the heterogeneous distribution of fracture porosity within the coal sample as a basis of mapping material properties for modeling. Matches between experimentally-measured and model-predicted ensemble permeabilities are excellent. More importantly, the model results illustrate the crucial role of heterogeneous swelling in generating swelling-induced reductions in permeability even when the fractured sample is mechanically unconstrained. These results prove that coal swelling is a heterogeneous process depending on the distribution of coal voids: matrix (swelling component) swells while fractures (non-swelling component) are compacted in response. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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