Book contents
- Fundamentals of Rock Physics
- Fundamentals of Rock Physics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Density and Porosity
- 3 Stresses in Rocks
- 4 Mechanical Strain and Elastic Moduli
- 5 Permeability of Rocks
- 6 Mechanical Properties of Fluid-Bearing Rocks
- 7 Acoustic Properties of Rocks
- 8 Electric Resistivity
- 9 Dielectric Properties
- 10 Magnetic Properties of Rocks
- 11 Thermal Properties of Rocks and Minerals
- 12 Radioactive Properties of Rocks
- Index
- References
2 - Density and Porosity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 November 2021
Book contents
- Fundamentals of Rock Physics
- Fundamentals of Rock Physics
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Density and Porosity
- 3 Stresses in Rocks
- 4 Mechanical Strain and Elastic Moduli
- 5 Permeability of Rocks
- 6 Mechanical Properties of Fluid-Bearing Rocks
- 7 Acoustic Properties of Rocks
- 8 Electric Resistivity
- 9 Dielectric Properties
- 10 Magnetic Properties of Rocks
- 11 Thermal Properties of Rocks and Minerals
- 12 Radioactive Properties of Rocks
- Index
- References
Summary
Two definitions of rock density are bulk density and solid matrix or skeleton density. Density depends on porosity, which is classified into open and closed porosity. Types of pores are defined by their interconnectivity, connectivity with surface, and geometry. Due to pore volume decrease with depth, sedimentary rocks possess three types of compressibility: bulk, matrix and pore volume compressibility. Density of rocks varies by density of constituting minerals and total porosity, and may be calculated as an arithmetic mean. Numerical modelling of rock densities may be done using Monte-Carlo simulations or on the basis of the software package Perple_X ’07. The capillary effect of fluid phase in pores depends on the wetting angle and specific surface energy. Drainage and imbibition are two processes that displace and saturate fluid in pores. Mercury porosimetry is a method to estimate pore volume by the intrusion of a nonwetting fluid. Gas-porosimetry relies on the known absorption of gas molecules on the pore surface, which is governed by the Gibbs equation. Kinetics of absorption/desorption processes are described by the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) equation. Focus Box 2.1: Models of porosity. Focus Box 2.2: Grain and atom arrangements in 3D. Focus Box 2.3: BET isotherm.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Fundamentals of Rock Physics , pp. 28 - 65Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Literature
Arsalan, N., Buiting, J. J. & Nguyen, Q. P. (2015). Surface energy and wetting behavior of reservoir rocks. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 467, 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, R. H. & Corey, A. T. (1964). Hydraulic properties of porous solids. Hydraulic paper no. 3, Colorado State University, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
Buckles, R. S. (1965). Correlating and averaging connate water saturation data. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology 9(1), 42–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buntebarth, G. (2002). Volumenvergrößerung von Sedimentgesteinen bei Wassersättigung. Mitteilungen Deutsche Geophysikalische Gesellschaft, Sonderband III, 41–44.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. A. D. (1990). Multivariable phase-diagrams – an algorithm based on generalized thermodynamics. American Journal of Science 290, 666–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertsma, J. (1953). The effect of fluid decline on volumetric changes of porous rocks. Transactions of the AIME 210, 331–340.Google Scholar
Gerya, T. (2010). Introduction to Numerical Geodynamic Modeling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gregg, S. J. & Sing, K. S. W. (1982). Adsorption, Surface Area, and Porosity. Academic Press, London, 303 pp.Google Scholar
Guéguen, Y. & Paulciauskas, V. (1994). Introduction to the Physics of Rocks. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
Hackl, K., Fischer, F. D. & Svoboda, J. (2017). A variational approach to the modelling of grooving in a three-dimensional setting. Acta Materialia 129, 331–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halisch, M., Vogt, E., Müller, C., et al. (2013). Capillary flow porometry – assessment of an alternative method for the determination of flow relevant parameters of porous rocks. Special paper of International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts USA, SCA2013-007, 1–12. doi 10.13140/2.1.4536.0324.Google Scholar
Helland, J. O. & Skjæveland, S. M. (2007). Relationship between capillary pressure, saturation, and interfacial area from a model of mixed‐wet triangular tubes. Water Resources Research 43, W12S10. doi:10.1029/2006WR005698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M. P. A. & Talbot, C. J. (1986). External shapes, strain rates, and dynamics of salt structures. Geological Society of America Bulletin 97(3), 305–323. doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1986)97<305:ESSRAD>2.0.CO;2.Google Scholar
Kalinichenko, V. A. & Sekej-Zenkovitch, S. Y. (1998). On the immiscible fluid displacement in capillary under oscillating pressure drop. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science 18, 244–250.Google Scholar
Kovářová, K., Ševčík, R. & Weishauptová, Z. (2012). Comparison of mercury porosimetry and X-ray microtomography for porosity study of sandstones. Acta Geodynamica et Geomaterialia 9(4–168), 541–554.Google Scholar
Poelchau, H. S., Baker, D. R., Hantschel, T. H., Horsfield, B. & Wygrala, B. (1997). Basin simulation and the design of the conceptual basin model. In: Welte, D. H., Horsfield, B. & Baker, D. R. (Eds.) Petroleum and Basin Evolution: Insights from Petroleum Geochemistry, Geology and Basin Modeling. Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 5–70.Google Scholar
Ramm, A. & Bjorlykke, K. (1994). Porosity/depth trends in reservoir sandstones: assessing the quantitative effects of varying pore pressure, temperature history and mineralogy, Norwegian shelf data. Clay Minerals 29, 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revil, A. (2002). Mechanical compaction of sand/clay mixtures. Journal of Geophysical Research 107(B11), 2293. doi:10.1029/2001JB000318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudnik, R. & Fountain, D. (1995). Nature and composition of the continental crust: A lower crust perspective. Reviews of Geophysics 33(3), 267–309.Google Scholar
Schmoker, J. W. & Halley, R. B. (1982). Carbonate porosity versus depth: A predictable relation for South Florida. AAPG Bulletin 66, 2561–2570.Google Scholar
Schön, J. H. (2011). Physical Properties of Rocks, Handbook of Petroleum Exploration and Production, Vol. 8. Elsevier, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1567-8032(11)08012-8.Google Scholar
Semprich, J., Simon, N. S. C. & Podladchikov, Y. Y. (2010). Density variations in the thickened crust as a function of pressure, temperature, and composition. International Journal of Earth Sciences (Geologische Rundschau) 99, 1487–1510. doi: 10.1007/s00531-010–0557-7.Google Scholar
Shuttleworth, R. (1950). The surface tension of solids. Proceedings of the Physical Society A 63, 444–457.Google Scholar
Singh, K., Bijeljic, B. & Blunt, M. J. (2016). Imaging of oil layers, curvature and contact angle in a mixed wet and a water-wet carbonate rock. Water Resources Research 52(3), 1716–1728. doi: 10.1002/2015WR018072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tenzer, R., Sirguey, P., Rattenbury, M. & Nicolson, J. (2011). A digital rock density map of New Zealand. Computers & Geosciences 37, 1181–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wangen, M. (2000). Generation of overpressure by cementation of pore space in sedimentary rocks. Geophysical Journal International 143, 608–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeşilbaş, M. & Boily, J.-F. (2016). Particle size controls on water adsorption and condensation regimes at mineral surfaces. Nature Scientific Reports 6, 32136. doi: 10.1038/srep32136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, B., Verhasselt, J. Ch., Shvindlerman, L. S. & Gottstein, G. (2010). Measurement of grain boundary triple line energy in copper. Acta Materialia 58, 5646–5653.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by