Research Article  Open Access
A Method of Differentiating the EarlyTime and LateTime Behavior in PressurePulse Decay Permeametry
Abstract
The pressurepulse decay is a preferred technique for determining permeability of unconventional gas reservoir rocks. The pressurepulse decay often shows quite different characteristics during the early time and the later time. Most approaches for estimating the permeability proposed in the literature are required to use the latertime pressurepulse decay measurements. However, the latertime data are often selected subjectively, lacking a universal criterion. In this paper, a method of differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior for pressurepulse decay test is proposed. The analytical results show that the critical time (dimensionless time) of early/latetime decay characteristics mainly depends on the volume ratios, and it increases first and then decreases with the volume ratios. The critical time for cases with same chamber sizes is much less than that for cases with unequal chamber sizes. Applicability of the proposed methods is examined using a numerical simulator, TOUGH+REALGASBRINE. The numerical results show that the pressure gradient along the sample varies nonlinearly at the early time and becomes a constant at the late time. Then, the proposed method is applied to real data for permeability estimation. It is found that the earlytime behavior is negligible as the volume ratio takes on small values. As the volume ratios increase, the deviation becomes significant and considerable permeability errors will be produced if these earlytime data are used.
1. Introduction
Permeability is typically considered the critical parameter for commercial gas production [1–3], geological storage facilities for CO_{2} [4], and radioactive waste storage [5]. Quantitative description and modeling of singlephase flow or multiphase flow in porous media require accurate estimation of permeability and the relationship between capillary pressure, saturation, and permeability [6–8]. The pressurepulse decay is a widely used method for permeability measurement of tight rocks. It is initially proposed by Brace et al. [9] for the determination of permeability in tight rocks. This technique is based on the analysis of the differential pressure between the upstream and downstream circuits within a sample. Note that Brace’s solution assumed constant pressure gradient in the sample and ignored compressive storage effect. Hsieh et al. [10] and Dicker and Smits [11] extended Brace’s model to include compressive storage effect in their analytical solutions of the problem. Jones [12] introduced a factor “” to simplify Dicker and Smits’s solution, which was further developed by Cui et al. [13] by taking consideration of sorption effects. Moreover, multiple optimized methodologies have been developed based on the conventional pulse decay technique. Lasseux et al. [14] suggested a step decay method that enables accurate, simultaneous characterization of the Klinkenbergcorrected permeability, Klinkenberg coefficient, and porosity from gas permeability experiments. Yang et al. [15] presented a modified pressurepulse decay method for determining permeabilities of tight reservoir cores. In their method, only one gas chamber is applied at one end of the test core sample, while the other end of the core is sealed. Feng et al. [16] proposed a new experimental design by creating dual pressure pulses to avoid the pressure disturbance due to compressive storage and adsoprtion/desorption effect during the course of measurement. Hannon [17] provided a bidirectional model of pressurepulse decay permeametry, which reaches equilibrium more than 7.5 times faster than the standard pressurepulse decay. The pressure decay will deviate from the exponential behavior in the earlytime period, and considerable error may result if earlytime data are used for permeability calculation [18, 19]. As a result, most of the authors [12, 15, 19–21] used the latetime measurements for permeability calculation. On the other hand, the earlytime measurements may contain important information about the rock samples. For example, Kamath et al. [22] employed earlytime data to estimate heterogeneity in the sample and Zhao et al. [23] utilized earlytime data to analyze the nonlinear flow behavior. However, the time point differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior was not clearly defined and was often somewhat arbitrary in literature. The objective of this study is to develop a physically sound and mathematically accurate method for differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior.
2. Method for Differentiating the EarlyTime and LateTime Behavior
2.1. EarlyTime and LateTime Behavior
The governing equation for fluid flow in the core sample using the pressurepulse decay method can be specified as follows [9, 11]:with initial and boundary conditions:where denotes the distance along the sample; is real time; refers to sample length; , , , and refer to fluid compressibility, fluid viscosity, porosity, and permeability, respectively; , , and refer to the volume of sample pore, upstream chamber, and downstream chamber, respectively; and and are the pressure of the upstream chamber and downstream chamber, respectively.
Brace et al. [9] assumed that the pressure gradient was constant along the length of the sample (i.e., ) and presented a simplified solution asin whichwhere is the final pressure when .
The general analytical solution of equation (1) in terms of dimensionless differential pressure,
was presented by Dicker and Smits [11]:where are the roots of equation (7); and are the ratios of pore volume to upstream and downstream, respectively; and is dimensionless time, defined in equation (8):
The analytical solution of equation (6) includes an earlytime behavior and a latetime behavior. In the earlytime period, the effect of the downstream boundary condition is not felt. Although the earlytime data can be used to investigate heterogeneity in core samples [22], more information than can be obtained from flow tests along is required. Therefore, the latetime solution, dominated by the first term in equation (6), is recommended for routine permeability calculation [12, 19].
Jones [12] simplified equation (6) into a similar form as Brace et al.’s by introducing a factor “” as
Therefore, the latetime solution for predicting permeability was then given as
Brace’s solution of equation (4) can be treated as a particular latetime solution of Dicker and Smits’s for .
Dicker and Smits [11] present convincing reasons that the volume of upstream and downstream chambers should be equal. On one hand, equal volumes could keep the mean pore pressure constant. A desirable situation of symmetry can be created by making upstream and downstream volumes identical, which indicates that any pressure decreases in the upstream chamber can be offset by an equal downstream pressure increase. On the other hand, equal chamber volumes make equation (6) become a single exponential quickly, since all even terms of equation (6) cancel when . Figure 1 presents the relationship between dimensionless pressure and time obtained from the general analytical solution (equation (6)) for . The dashed lines and the solid lines refer to the first term and all terms in the summation (equation (6)), respectively. The first term (i.e., the latetime solution), representing the singleexponential behavior of pulse decay curve, overlaps the general solution for almost the entire portion of pressure decay when is small. However, with the increase of volume ratios , the contributions of higher terms to the first term increase, leading to significant deviation of pressure decay curve from singleexponential behavior at the early time. Consequently, Jones [12] and Feng [19] recommend that the latetime pressure decay should be used for permeability calculation. However, neither of them figured out the time point differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior.
2.2. Contribution Rate and Critical Time
Figure 2 shows the first six terms of the series in equation (6). As can be seen from the figure, the first term dominates and the remaining terms vanish after a certain time. Therefore, a contribution rate is defined as the contribution of the first term to all terms in equation (6), which can be expressed aswhere is the th term in equation (6). As the contribution ratio approaches to 1 (i.e., the first term overlaps the general solution), the earlytime behavior can be neglected. At this time, a time point can be obtained from equation (11) when is estimated. We define such time point, , as “critical time.” Note that the accuracy of estimating will significantly influence the critical time .
Figure 3 shows the evolution of critical time with . Two distinct features can be seen from Figure 3. First, it is apparent that an increasing trend of critical timecan be observed whenincreases. This is an indication that the period of earlytime prolongs and more earlytime data should be discarded when calculating permeability. Second, the critical time first increases when the volume ratio is lower than a certain value (about 1, i.e., the pore volume equals to the chamber volume) and then decreases when the volume ratio is higher than that value.
The accuracy in permeability measurement mainly depends on the slope of latetime solution. To investigate the influence of contribution ratio on permeability calculation, the slope of latetime solution was calculated under variable values. Table 1 shows the analytical results of the slope and error coefficient at varied values. Note that the slope at an value of 99.999% was taken as a reference. It can be seen that the error coefficient is completely negligible when volume ratios are small. However, the influence of contribution ratio on the permeability calculation becomes strengthened when (e.g., small volume chambers are used). Specifically, when , the error coefficient () increases from 0.041% to 10.645% with contribution ratio ranging from 90% to 99.99%. This will lead to at least 10.645% of the computation error of permeability. Therefore, a high value (>99.9%) is recommended when small volume chambers are used.

2.3. The Influence of Unequal Chamber Sizes on Critical Time
Different chamber sizes between upstream and downstream have been chosen by some scholars to have a speedup of the measurement [24, 25]. However, such configuration increases the period of early time significantly. As shown in Figure 4, the critical time for cases with same chamber size is less than 0.2, but it increases to about 0.4 for cases with unequal chamber size due to the contribution of even terms in equation (6). Meanwhile, as the ratio of to increases, the critical time increases at a certain value.
2.4. Physical Sound of Late Time
A numerical simulator, TOUGH+REALGASBRINE (TOUGH+), is employed to simulate pressurepulse decay tests. TOUGH+ is based on a finite volume approach and is a successor to the TOUGH2 family of codes for fluid and heat flow [26]. In the numerical tests, the chambers and core sample are assumed as parts of one system. To simulate an actual chamber, the porosity of the chamber is set to 1, and large permeability values are used. 102 column elements (2 for chambers, 100 for rock sample) are built in the numerical model. Since the dimensionless differential pressure mainly depends on volume ratios, four cases involving different volume ratios in magnitude order are numerically calculated. The operating parameters are listed in Table 2.

Figure 5 shows the pressure gradient along sample length over time elapsed. As can be seen from the figures, the pressure gradient along the sample varies nonlinearly at the early time. After the time over , a constant pressure gradient is attained, which not only illustrates that the early time cannot be applied for permeability calculation but also illuminates the usefulness of our method for determination of critical time. Moreover, when is small, the earlytime period is in seconds (real time) and the pressure gradient is constant over most of its range (Figure 4(a)). When is large, the earlytime period could be minutes or even hours, and the pressure gradient becomes constant only at the late time. This suggests that the most important assumption of Brace’s solution, assuming a constant pressure gradient, is invalid when is small.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
3. Application to Permeability Measurement
In this section, we applied the method of differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior into laboratory permeability tests. Previous studies [12, 16] demonstrated that a smaller volume chamber could trigger faster pressurepulse decay and thus reduce the measurement time. The price to be paid for the time saving is that more early time must be discarded during the process of permeability calculation. To experimentally investigate the effect of volume ratio on the permeability measurement, two sets of experiments with different volume ratios are carried out on a selfmade “Triaxial Seepage System for Rock (TSSR)” (Figure 6). The detailed experimental schemes are listed in Table 3.

3.1. Equipment
TSSR system is composed of five main units: triaxial cell, loading unit, temperature control unit, vacuum unit, and data collection unit. The experimental setup (shown in Figure 6) is mainly configured with a transient flow apparatus for the permeability test of rocks and is capable of measuring rock permeability under different stress fields, pore pressures, and temperatures. The system can also allow the calculation of the pore volume from Boyle’s law. Confining pressure and axial stress are loaded to the core sample by a hydraulic water pump. Gas pressure is controlled by cooperation of a pressurized gas pumping system and a pressure reducing valve. Prior to gas flow tests, the chamber volumes are calibrated using an impermeable stainlesssteel sample, yielding the upstream and downstream volumes of 23.6 cm^{3} and 20.0 cm^{3}, respectively.
3.2. Sample Preparation
Shale and rocklike sample, with significant difference in pore volume, were selected for experimental study. The rocklike sample, with dimensions of 50 mm in diameter and 100 mm in length, was made of a mixture of ordinary Portland cement, sand, and water at a ratio of 1 : 1.2 : 0.65 [27].
Blocks of shale sample were first extracted from a quarry located in Liutang in Shizhu Country, China. Then, a cylindrical core sample with dimensions of 50 mm in diameter was sampled from the shale block. The length of the shale sample was cut to 33.5 mm for two purposes. For one thing, the shorter the length is, the smaller the pore volume will be. For another, a short length helps to reduce measurement time since shale has ultralow permeability. The density of the shale sample is 2.55 g/cm^{3}, and the porosity is 2.0%. Figures 7 and 8 show the wellprepared samples and their pore characteristics. It can be seen that the pore diameter of shale (less than 1 μm) is much smaller than that of the rocklike sample (about 1.8 mm).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(a)
(b)
(c)
3.3. Experimental Procedures
The permeability tests were carried out using the conventional pressurepulse decay proposed by Brace et al. [9]. The pure gas used in this study was He at a purity of 99.999%. The system was kept to be initially at a uniform pore pressure throughout. Then, the pressure of upstream was increased suddenly to produce a pressure difference. The pressuretime responses were recorded to estimate permeability. Test 1 was conducted at constant effective stress of 3 MPa to keep the pore volume unchanged. While test 2 was conducted at a constant pore pressure of 2 MPa and confining pressures ranging from 5 MPa to 20 MPa to investigate the effects of pore volume on pressure decay. Note that all these tests were conducted at high pore pressure (≥2 MPa) to reduce the effects of gas slippages.
3.4. Experimental Results
When the dimensionless differential pressure is plotted with dimensionless time, the curves of test 1 will be similar and situated close to each other due to the constant pore volume. Examination of Figure 9(a) shows that this is indeed the case. Another feature which can be observed in Figure 9(a) is that almost all pressure data follow the exponential behavior. This illustrates that as the volume ratio takes on small values, the role played by the earlytime pressure response in permeability estimation is negligible; therefore, no additional work is needed to differentiate the earlytime and latetime behavior. Moreover, to demonstrate the validity of the tests, the exact analytical solution (equation (6)) is also plotted in Figure 9(a). The figure clearly illustrates that the experimental results and analytical results matched each other very well, supporting the success of our tests.
(a)
(b)
Figure 9(b) shows the experimental results of test 2. In the semilogarithmic graph, the earlytime behavior deviates from a straight line significantly due to the contribution of higher terms; thus, considerable errors in permeability may result if the earlytime data is used. From Figure 9(b), we also see that the slope of the straight line part decreases with the confining pressure due to the reduction of pore volume, which comes with a weaker deviation. This indicates that the contribution of higher terms decreases with pore volume reduction. Then, the critical time is calculated through equation (11). The latetime data were fitted by a linear function as plotted in Figure 9(b). The permeability of the core sample, therefore, can be computed from the slope of the latetime fitting lines by equation (10). Table 4 shows the estimated permeability of samples using the latetime pressure data. As expected, the permeability decreases with the increase of confining pressure.

4. Conclusion
The earlytime pressure decay data cannot be used for permeability estimation in pressurepulse tests though it is useful for sample heterogeneity investigation. A method for differentiating the earlytime and latetime behavior is proposed. It is validated by a TOUGH+ simulator and is applied into the laboratory tests for permeability calculation. Based on the work completed, the conclusions are summarized as follows:(1)As the volume ratio increases, the critical time appears to have a declining trend after an initial ascent. The critical time for cases with same chamber volumes is much less than that for cases with unequal chamber volumes(2)The numerical results show that the pressure gradient along the sample varies nonlinearly at the early time and becomes a constant at the late time. The time for pressure gradient to attain constant increases with volume ratios; it could be hours for pressure gradient to attain constant at large volume ratios(3)The earlytime behavior is negligible when the volume ratio is smaller than 0.1. With the increase of volume ratios, the deviation of pulse decay curve from singleexponential behavior increases, and the latetime data should be used for permeability calculation
Data Availability
All the data and computer codes for this paper can be available by contacting the corresponding author, whose email address is as follows: zytyut1@126.com. They can also be obtained by contacting the first author, whose email address is as follows: 20151601005@cqu.edu.cn.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51374257 and No. 50804060). It was also supported by the China Scholarship Council (CSC) for the second author’s visit at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The authors would like to acknowledge Lehua Pan from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for the continuous encouragement and guidance.
References
 R. Sander, Z. Pan, and L. D. Connell, “Laboratory measurement of low permeability unconventional gas reservoir rocks: a review of experimental methods,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 37, pp. 248–279, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. Salahshoor, M. Fahes, and C. Teodoriu, “A review on the effect of confinement on phase behavior in tight formations,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 51, pp. 89–103, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Z. J. Pan, J. P. Ye, F. B. Zhou, Y. Tan, L. D. Connell, and J. Fan, “CO2 storage in coal to enhance coalbed methane recovery: a review of field experiments in China,” International Geology Review, vol. 60, pp. 754–776, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. Rutqvist, D. W. Vasco, and L. Myer, “Coupled reservoirgeomechanical analysis of CO2 injection and ground deformations at In Salah, Algeria,” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 4, pp. 225–230, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Senger, E. Romero, and P. Marschall, “Modeling of gas migration through lowpermeability clay rock using information on pressure and deformation from fast air injection tests,” Transport in Porous Media, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 563–579, 2018. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. M. Hassanizadeh, M. A. Celia, and H. K. Dahle, “Dynamic effect in the capillary pressuresaturation relationship and its impacts on unsaturated flow,” Vadose Zone Journal, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 38–57, 2002. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 B. AtaieAshtiani, S. Majid Hassanizadeh, and M. A. Celia, “Effects of heterogeneities on capillary pressuresaturationrelative permeability relationships,” Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, vol. 56, no. 34, pp. 175–192, 2002. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 L. Zhuang, S. M. Hassanizadeh, C. Z. Qin, and A. de Waal, “Experimental investigation of hysteretic dynamic capillarity effect in unsaturated flow,” Water Resources Research, vol. 53, pp. 9078–9088, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 W. F. Brace, J. B. Walsh, and W. T. Frangos, “Permeability of granite under high pressure,” Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 73, pp. 2225–2236, 1968. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. Hsieh, J. Tracy, C. Neuzil, J. Bredehoeft, and S. Silliman, “A transient laboratory method for determining the hydraulic properties of ‘tight’rocksdI. Theory,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science and Geomechanics Abstracts, vol. 18, pp. 245–252, 1981. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. Dicker and R. Smits, “A practical approach for determining permeability from laboratory pressurepulse decay measurements,” in International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, Tianjing, China, 1988. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. C. Jones, “A technique for faster pulsedecay permeability measurements in tight rocks,” SPE Formation Evaluation, vol. 12, pp. 19–26, 1997. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 X. Cui, A. M. M. Bustin, and R. M. Bustin, “Measurements of gas permeability and diffusivity of tight reservoir rocks: different approaches and their applications,” Geofluids, vol. 9, 223 pages, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 D. Lasseux, Y. Jannot, S. Profice, M. Mallet, and G. Hamon, The ‘Step Decay’: a New Transient Method for the Simultaneous Determination of Intrinsic Permeability, Klinkenberg Coefficient and Porosity on Very Tight Rocks, Presented at the International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts, Aberdeen, Scotland, 2012.
 Z. Yang, Q. Sang, M. Dong, S. Zhang, Y. Li, and H. Gong, “A modified pressurepulse decay method for determining permeabilities of tight reservoir cores,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 27, pp. 236–246, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Feng, J. Liu, and S. Harpalani, “Optimized pressure pulsedecay method for laboratory estimation of gas permeability of sorptive reservoirs: part 1background and numerical analysis,” Fuel, vol. 191, pp. 555–564, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. J. Hannon, “Alternative approaches for transientflow laboratoryscale permeametry,” Transport in Porous Media, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 719–746, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. He and K. Ling, “Measuring permeabilities of MiddleBakken samples using three different methods,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 31, pp. 28–38, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Feng, “An optimized transient technique and flow modeling for laboratory permeability measurements of unconventional gas reservoirs with tight structure,” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 46, pp. 603–614, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 T. Chen and P. W. Stagg, “Semilog analysis of the pulsedecay technique of permeability measurement,” Society of Petroleum Engineers. Journal, vol. 24, pp. 639–642, 1984. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. Darabi, A. Ettehad, F. Javadpour, and K. Sepehrnoori, “Gas flow in ultratight shale strata,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 710, pp. 641–658, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. Kamath, R. Boyer, and F. Nakagawa, “Characterization of core scale heterogeneities using laboratory pressure transients,” SPE Formation Evaluation, vol. 7, pp. 219–227, 1992. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Y. L. Zhao, L. Y. Zhang, W. J. Wang, J. Z. Tang, H. Lin, and W. Wan, “Transient pulse test and morphological analysis of single rock fractures,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 91, pp. 139–154, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. J. Sutherland and S. P. Cave, “Argon gas permeability of New Mexico rock salt under hydrostatic compression,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science and Geomechanics Abstracts, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 281–288, 1980. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Y. M. Metwally and C. H. Sondergeld, “Measuring low permeabilities of gassands and shales using a pressure transmission technique,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 1135–1144, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 G. J. Moridis and K. Pruess, User’s Manual of the TOUGH+ Core Code v1.5: a GeneralPurpose Simulator of NonIsothermal Flow and Transport through Porous and Fractured Media, Report LBNL1871E, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, 2014.
 Y. L. Zhao, L. Y. Zhang, W. J. Wang, C. Z. Pu, W. Wan, and J. Z. Tang, “Cracking and stressstrain behavior of rocklike material containing two flaws under uniaxial compression,” Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 49, pp. 2665–2687, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Yu Zhao et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.