URTeC: 2902799

Use of Rate-Transient Analysis Techniques for Evaluating

Experimental Core Permeability Tests for Unconventional Reservoirs

A. Vahedian, C.R. Clarkson*, A. Ghanizadeh, B. Zanganeh, C. Song, H. Hamdi;

Department of Geoscience, University of Calgary
Copyright 2018, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTeC) DOI 10.15530/urtec-2018-2902799

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 23-25 July 2018.

The URTeC Technical Program Committee accepted this presentation on the basis of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). The contents of this paper have
not been reviewed by URTeC and URTeC does not warrant the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information herein. All information is the responsibility of, and, is subject to
corrections by the author(s). Any person or entity that relies on any information obtained from this paper does so at their own risk. The information herein does not necessarily reflect
any position of URTeC. Any reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper by anyone other than the author without the written consent of URTeC

Abstract

Estimation of matrix permeability is critical for evaluating the long-term economic viability of unconventional
reservoirs. Currently, a variety of techniques (e.g. pulse-decay, crushed-rock) are used to measure gas permeability of
tight rocks in the laboratory. However, these laboratory-based methods are not fully representative of different gas
flow regimes that are encountered during field production. In this work, a new experimental setup, and previously-
developed rate-transient analysis (RTA) techniques, are combined to mimic field-scale well-test/production data in
the laboratory for the determination of representative matrix permeability and pore volume in tight rocks.

A new experimental set-up comprised of a vacuum pump, a series of (back-pressure) valves, a high-precision pressure
transducer and flowmeter was developed to simulate gas well-test/production scenarios in the laboratory. The
experimental procedure involves injection of gas (CH4) into one end of a core plug (monitoring the pressure until
equilibrium), followed by constant flowing pressure gas production from the same end that gas was injected. For
analysis of the data, a log-log plot of flow rate versus time is used to first identify the flow regimes during the
production phase. Using previously-derived RTA algorithms, permeability is then estimated using the slope of the
square-root of time plot (if transient linear flow is observed) and distance of investigation calculation (if the end of
linear flow is observed).

In order to test the new apparatus, experimental procedures and RTA algorithms, two experiments under similar
experimental conditions were conducted on a core plug from the Montney Formation, which was previously analyzed
using more conventional methods. The flow-regimes identified during the production cycle were linear flow followed
by boundary-dominated flow for the two experiments. The square-root of time plot yielded permeability estimates of
0.00067 and 0.00072 md from tests A and B, respectively – the distance of investigation (DOI) approach yielded a
permeability estimate of 0.00069 md for both tests. The results of the two experiments are in reasonable agreement
(maximum discrepancy < ± 20%) with permeability measured using the more conventional pulse-decay technique
with methane as the analysis gas (0.00084 md).

Standard laboratory techniques for the determination of permeability in tight rocks are not fully representative of fluid
flow mechanisms that occur during field-scale production. Routine laboratory-based methods either use samples that
are not representative of the “in-situ” reservoir rock (e.g. crushed-rock samples) or represent only unidirectional fluid
flow through the core plug samples (e.g. pulse-decay and steady-state techniques) that does not account for
heterogeneity observed in the field. Integrating the previously-developed rate-transient analysis techniques with a new
experimental set-up, the core testing procedure proposed herein represents a novel approach to the evaluation of tight
rock permeability, better simulating field-scale production than previous approaches.
URTeC 2902799 2

Introduction

Unconventional hydrocarbon reservoirs are important sources of energy in North America. Characterization of these
low-permeability reservoirs requires accurate estimation of key petrophysical properties such as matrix permeability
and porosity. For field-scale applications in tight rocks, permeabilities are routinely determined using different
techniques such as a diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT), rate-transient analysis (RTA) and flow/buildup tests
(FBUT). However, there are some disadvantages associated with field-scale determination of permeability in tight
formations including 1) the time periods required for the field-scale tests are relatively long (weeks/months) and 2)
the calculated permeability values are often adversely affected by field-scale variations in reservoir pressure and
effective stress (Sander et al., 2017) and large-scale heterogeneities in the field (Clarkson et al., 2018). Laboratory-
based methods for determination of permeability, while having their own disadvantages, are useful to at least constrain
field-based estimates under controlled laboratory conditions.

Laboratory-based measurements performed on unconventional reservoir rocks are challenging due to the low
permeability of these rocks. Steady-state methods require a relatively simple experimental setup and utilize analytical
solutions; however, these methods require a long time to achieve steady-state conditions when applied to tight rocks
(Cui et al., 2009). Historically, unsteady-state methods have been considered preferential for permeability
measurements in low-permeability tight rocks due to their time efficiency. To date, various experimental setups have
been developed to utilize unsteady-state methods in tight rocks and to determine permeability on slabbed cores, core
plugs and crushed-rock materials (e.g. Brace et al., 1968; Luffel and Guidry, 1992; Luffel et al., 1993; Jones 1994;
Jones 1997; Cui et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2015). Pulse-decay and pressure-decay (Gas Research Institute; GRI)
methods are among the unsteady-state techniques that are commonly used for gas permeability measurements in ultra-
low permeability rocks (e.g. Lin et al., 1986; Luffel et al., 1993; Escoffier et al., 2005; Fedor et al., 2008; Cui et al.,
2010; Cui and Brezovski, 2013; Firouzi et al., 2014; Ghanizadeh et al., 2015a, b; Mokhtari and Tutuncu, 2015; Yang
et al., 2015; Ghanizadeh et al., 2018). Some of the advantages and disadvantages of steady-state and unsteady-state
(pulse-decay, GRI, profile (probe) permeability) techniques are summarized in Table 1.

The pulse-decay method (Jones, 1997) is one of the most popular laboratory-based methods for permeability
measurements in tight rock. As an example, a pulse-decay permeameter (PDP-250TM; CoreLab®) was used by
Ghanizadeh et al. (2015a) to measure permeability of core plugs obtained from the Montney and Bakken formations
at various effective stress conditions. This instrument covers a permeability range of 10 nd to 100 µd under various
axial/radial loads up to 10,000 psi. Steady-state and unsteady-state methods conducted on core plugs have the
advantage that stress-dependent permeability may be determined. However, the calculated permeability values using
these methods are only representative of unidirectional flow (measured on core plugs drilled either horizontally or
vertically) and do not fully represent the anisotropic (i.e. multidirectional) fluid flow regimes that are encountered in
the field. The GRI (crushed-rock) method is applied to crushed-rock samples at ambient stress conditions (Luffel et
al., 1993). Compared to steady-state and unsteady-state techniques performed on core plugs, the advantages of this
method include relatively short experimental times and the elimination of micro-fractures induced during the coring
process (Handwerger et al., 2011). However, as reported in some of the previous works (e.g. Cui et al., 2009; Tinni et
al., 2012; Cui and Brezovski, 2013), the measured permeability values using the GRI technique are dependent upon
the particle size of the crushed-rock samples. In the GRI technique, the sample has to be crushed to remove the micro-
fractures, but crushed particles must be large enough to maintain the characteristics of the matrix. Therefore, a standard
range of grain size must be considered for measuring permeability. For slabbed cores, a pressure-decay profile (probe)
permeability tool (Jones, 1994) has historically been used in previous works (e.g. Clarkson et al., 2012a; Ghanizadeh
et al., 2015a) for permeability determination in tight rocks. This method is mainly used to identify cm-scale variations
in permeability along the length of slabbed cores and is performed at ambient stress conditions. This technique can be
used to select the best locations for extraction of core plugs from different rock types that can be subsequently analyzed
using pulse-decay or steady-state techniques under “in-situ” stress conditions.
URTeC 2902799 3

Table 1 — Summary of the advantages and disadvantages of various laboratory-based techniques used for permeability
measurements in low-permeability rocks.
.

Technique Advantages Disadvantages

Steady-state • Simple calculations using Darcy’s law (Sander at al.,
permeability 2017).
• Backpressure at the downstream side can be used to
minimize the non-darcy effect and have a better
control on pressure and flow rate (McPhee and
Arthur, 1991).
• Both constant pressure and flow rate conditions
result in similar permeability values (Rushing et al.,
2004).
• Relatively long experimental time to reach
equilibrium, especially for low permeability
samples.
• Low accuracy in flow rate measurements
compared to pressure, especially for lower flow
rates (Malkovsky et al., 2009).
• If the difference between upstream and
downstream pressure is high, then effective stress
induced along the length of the sample is different
and this can affect the permeability values
(Sander at al., 2017).
• Fluid flows only in one direction through core
plug — not fully representative of flow regime at
in-situ.

Pulse-decay • Experimental time is generally shorter than steady- • Fluid flows only in one direction through core
permeability state method. plug — not fully representative of flow regime at
• Suitable for low-permeability samples with in-situ.
permeabilities down to nano-darcy range.

GRI (crushed- • This test is performed on crushed rock material to
rock) permeability reduce the effect of micro-fractures on permeability
(Handwerger et al., 2011).
• Compared to core plugs, crushed-rock material is
more easily collected in horizontal wells (using
IsoJar®)
• Experimental time is relatively shorter than other
techniques that are applied to core plugs
(Handwerger et al., 2011).
• The impact of reservoir effective stress on
measured permeability values cannot be
determined.
• Particle size of the crushed-rock material can
affect the permeability value (Cui et al., 2009,
Tinni et al., 2012, Cui and Brezovski, 2013).
• Large amounts of crushed-rock material (20-30
gr) are required to obtain an accurate and reliable
permeability estimate.
• Permeability values are not corrected for gas
slippage (Klinkenberg) effect.

Profile (probe) • This is a fast technique (approximately 2 minutes per • The impact of reservoir effective stress on
permeability measurement) that can be used to collect large measured permeability values cannot be
amounts of data on slabbed cores in short periods of identified.
time. • It has a lower permeability limit of 0.001 md.
• Permeabilities collected along the length of the Therefore, it is not applicable to many of tight
slabbed core can be used as a screening technique to rocks with permeabilities in the nanodarcy range.
identify different lithologies and rock types
(Clarkson et al., 2012a).
• The permeabilities measured using this method can
be corrected (using complementary pulse-decay
measurements) to represent equivalent in-situ
permeabilities (Clarkson et al., 2012a, Ghanizadeh et
al., 2015a).

None of the routine laboratory-based techniques mentioned above are capable of representing field-scale flow
mechanisms and boundary conditions. In addition, the sample type that is used in some of these techniques (e.g.
crushed-rock material) is not representative of reservoir rock at “in-situ” conditions. Ideally, permeability
measurements in the laboratory should be conducted on core plugs under stress, mimicking the fluid flow mechanism
and boundary conditions that are encountered in the field. In this work, combined with the previously-developed RTA
methods, a new experimental set-up is introduced to mimic field-scale well-test/production scenarios in the laboratory
for determination of matrix permeability on core plugs. The potential application of this technique for determination
of matrix permeability in tight rocks was initially proposed and demonstrated by Clarkson et al. (2012b) and Clarkson
and Qanbari (2013) using modeling/simulation approaches. In this work, however, an experimental set-up has been
designed and constructed for actual permeability measurements in the laboratory to confirm the proof-of-concept for
tight rocks.
URTeC 2902799 4

Theory and Methods

Clarkson et al. (2012b) and Clarkson and Qanbari (2013) demonstrated that rate and pressure transient methods may
be used to estimate permeability of ultra-low permeability samples by simulating experiments using a commercial
simulator. Fig. 1 shows the conceptual model used by Clarkson et al. (2012b) and Clarkson and Qanbari (2013) to
simulate a core test that is consistent with large-scale well-test/production scenarios in the field.

Fig. 1 — Conceptual model used by Clarkson et al. (2012b) and Clarkson and Qanbari (2013) for simulation of a core plug
permeability test. The simulation model consisted of a porous core plug, a reference volume and a tube for injection and
production of gas. Modified after Clarkson et al. (2012b).

The experimental procedure involves injection of gas (CH4) into one end of the core plug and then production of gas
with constant pressure from the same end, after pressure equilibrium is reached. For constant pressure flow, a log-log
plot of flow rate versus time can be used to identify the flow regimes. Transient linear flow is identified with a (-½)
slope line fitted to the data. A downward deviation from the (-½) slope line at late time is identified as boundary-
dominated flow. To calculate permeability, following the same procedure described by Clarkson et al. (2012b), a plot
of rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square-root of time is used (Fig. 2) for analysis of the transient linear flow
regime. The slope of this plot, and the time at the end of linear flow, are used to obtain two independent estimates of
permeability using Eqs. 1 and 2:

𝑓𝑐𝑝 1262𝑇
𝑘𝑎 = ( )2 (1)
𝐴𝑐 𝑚𝑐𝑝
√ɸ𝑖 µ𝑔𝑖 𝐶𝑡𝑖

𝐿𝑐 ɸ𝑖 µ𝑔𝑖 𝐶𝑡𝑖
𝑘𝑎 = ( )2
0.159 𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑓 (2)

where ka is the apparent permeability, µgi and Cti are the gas viscosity and total compressibility at initial gas pressure,
respectively, φi is porosity, T is temperature, Ac is the cross-sectional area of the core plug, mcp is the slope of the
square-root of time plot and fcp is a drawdown correction that can be obtained analytically (Nobakht and Clarkson
2012), Lc is the core plug length, and telf (days) is the end of linear flow (e.g Behmanesh et al. 2015; Clarkson et al.
2012b).
URTeC 2902799 5

Fig. 2 — Rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square-root of time plot; the slope of the plot for the constant flowing
pressure case (mcp) and the time at the end of linear flow (telf) are used to provide two independent estimates of permeability
using Eqs. 1 and 2, respectively.

In addition, an estimation of pore volume of the analyzed core plug can be obtained using Eq. 3:

200.8𝑇√𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑓
𝑉𝑝 = 𝑓𝑐𝑝 (3)
𝑚𝑐𝑝 µ𝑔𝑖 𝐶𝑡𝑖

Fig. 3 — Rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square-root of time plot; the slope of the plot for the constant flowing
pressure case (mcp) and the time at the end of linear flow (telf) can be used to calculate the pore volume of the core plug using
Eq. 3.
URTeC 2902799 6

Experimental Setup and Procedure

The experimental setup (Fig. 4) consists of three 3-way and on-off valves (Swagelok®), a high-precision pressure
transducer (Noshok®), a flowmeter (OMEGA®) and back-pressure regulator (BPR) (Equilibar®). The core holder used
in this setup is an acoustic velocity triaxial core holder (AVC series; CoreLab ®), which is capable of providing
axial/radial loads up to 10,000 psi. Details of the experimental setup are provided by Clarkson et al. (2018).

Fig. 4 — Schematic view of the experimental setup used for rate-transient core analysis experiment.

Prior to gas injection, the volume between the vacuum pump and Valve 1 (including core plug) is evacuated to ensure
the absence of air in the system (Valves 2 and 3 are open during the evacuation). After evacuation, gas (methane) is
injected into the volume between Valves 1 and 3 at a constant pressure – Valve 2 is open during this step to facilitate
the process of gas injection into the core pug from both sides, shortening the equilibration time. After a short period
of time, Valves 1 and 3 are closed (Valve 2 is kept open) and the pressure within the volume between Valve 1 and 3
is monitored using a high-precision pressure transducer until equilibrium is reached. After pressure equilibrium is
reached, gas (methane) production is initiated at a controlled back-pressure using the back-pressure regulator. During
production, the gas flow rate and pressure are monitored using a gas flowmeter and high-precision pressure transducer,
respectively. The recorded flow rates and pressure data are then used to estimate permeability and pore volume of the
analyzed core plug. The experiments can be conducted under controlled confining pressures up to 10,000 psi. In this
study, two experiments at similar experimental conditions are conducted on a low-permeability core plug. In these
tests, an injection pressure of approximately 1450 psia was applied for about 10 minutes for the injection phase. A
back-pressure of approximately 1260 psia was applied for the production phase. Both tests were conducted under a
controlled confining pressure of approximately 2000 psia.

Sample Description

A core plug with a diameter of 1.5” and length of 2” was analyzed in this study. This core plug was drilled horizontally
from core materials obtained from a vertical well drilled within fine-grained sandstone/siltstone intervals of the Upper
Montney Formation (BC, Canada). The present-day fluid saturation is expected to be minimal for the analyzed core
plug as it was not preserved (left unwrapped) since drilling (more than 10 years ago), likely resulting in the evaporation
of the majority of the “in-situ” fluid(s). This core plug was previously subjected to a variety of geochemical and
petrophysical analyses (Ghanizadeh et al., 2018), serving as an important reference sample for the current proof-of-
concept study. A summary of geochemical and petrophysical properties of the analyzed core plug is provided in
Table 2. The selected core plug sample has the following key properties: TOC content: 0.48 wt%; helium porosity:
5.7% and slip-corrected gas (N2) permeability (effective stress: 2277 psi): 0.00079 md. Detailed descriptions of the
methods for determination of TOC content, helium porosity and slip-corrected gas (N2) permeability values are
provided elsewhere (Ghanizadeh et al., 2018). The low TOC content of the analyzed sample suggests that gas
URTeC 2902799 7

adsorption/desorption is negligible and does not have to be taken into account for permeability/pore volume
determinations.

Table 2 — Summary of geochemical and petrophysical data previously collected for the analyzed core plug. Modified after
Ghanizadeh et al. (2018).

Sample Depth Grain Density1 Bulk Density2 Helium Porosity TOC Slip-Corrected Pulse-Decay Gas (N2)
ID (ft) (g/cm3) (g/cm3) (%) (wt. %) Permeability3 (md)

8H 8316.80 2.71 2.55 5.7 0.48 7.9.10-4

1
Obtained using helium pycnometry technique
2
Obtained using calipered dimensions of the analyzed core plug
3
Slip-corrected pulse-decay gas (N2) permeability value evaluated at an effective stress of 2277 psia

Results

In this proof-of concept study, a total of two tests were performed on the Montney core plug at similar experimental
conditions. Two tests were conducted to ensure repeatability of the experiments. The results of each of these tests are
described separately in the following sections. Note that only the production cycle of the experimental procedure is
analyzed.

Test-A. For this first test (Test-A), after initiating the production cycle, the gas flow rate declined until about 8 minutes
(0.005 days) after which the value of gas flow rate reached the lower resolution limit of the flowmeter as a result of
constant reduction in differential pressure (Fig. 5). A log-log plot of flow rate versus time (Fig. 6) allows the transient
linear flow period to be identified with a (-½) slope line, followed by boundary-dominated flow that is characterized
by an exponential decline of flow rate. This sequence of flow regimes agrees well with the simulation study performed
previously by Clarkson et al. (2012b).

Fig. 5 — Evolution of gas flow rate and pressure with time for production cycle of Test-A.
URTeC 2902799 8

Linear Flow

Boundary-Dominated Flow

Fig. 6 — Log-log plot of gas flow rate versus time. Linear flow and boundary-dominated flow are indicated with a (-½) slope
line and exponential decline, respectively.

The end of the transient linear flow regime can be identified (green line) on a plot of rate-normalized-pseudopressure
versus square-root of time (Fig. 7). Using Eqs. 1 and 2, two independent estimates of permeability – 0.00067 and
0.00069 md – are obtained from the slope of the square-root of time plot and distance of investigation method,
respectively.

Fig. 7 — Plot of rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square root of time for Test-A.

Using Eq. 3, pore volume of the analyzed core plug is estimated to be 1.12.10-4 ft3 which agrees well (±1%) with the
pore volume previously obtained from helium pycnometry and calipered dimensions of the core plug at ambient
conditions (1.13.10-4 ft3).

Test-B. To verify the repeatability of the experiments, a second test (Test-B) was performed using the same
experimental conditions as the first test (Test-A). Similar to Test-A, after initiating the production cycle, the gas flow
rate declined until about 9 minutes (0.0065 day) after which the value of gas flow rate reaches the lower resolution
limit of the flowmeter as a result of constant reduction in differential pressure (Fig. 8). In this case, the flowing pressure
is not as constant as in Test-A, resulting in a less smooth rate decline. Despite the observed variations in pressure, the
linear and boundary-dominated flow regimes can still be identified using both a log-log plot of flow rate versus time
URTeC 2902799 9

(Fig. 9a) and gas material balance time (Fig. 9b). Use of material balance time results in a negative unit slope during
boundary-dominated flow.

Fig. 8 — Evolution of gas flow rate and pressure with time for production cycle of Test-B.

a) b)
Linear Flow
Linear Flow

Boundary-Dominated Flow Boundary-Dominated Flow

Fig. 9 — Log-log plot of gas flow rate versus time for Test-B (a). Log-log plot of gas flow rate versus gas material balance
time for Test-B (b). Both plots can be used for identification of flow regimes.

As with Test-A, the end of transient linear flow can be identified (green line) on a plot of rate-normalized-
pseudopressure versus square-root of time (Fig. 10). Using Eqs. 1 and 2, two independent estimates of permeability –
0.00072 and 0.00069 md – can again be obtained from the slope of the square-root of time plot and distance of
investigation method, respectively. Use of linear superposition pseudotime in the square-root time plot can account
for the sudden rate changes caused by changes in flowing pressure (Clarkson, 2013), as illustrated in Fig. 11.
URTeC 2902799 10

Fig. 10 — Plot of rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square root of time for Test-B.

Fig. 11 — Plot of rate-normalized-pseudopressure versus square root of linear superposition pseudotime for Test-B.

History-match of experimental results. In order to verify the permeability estimates obtained from the two tests, a
history-match of the transient linear flow data was performed for Test-A using a constant flowing pressure analytical
model (Eq. 4; Wattenbarger et al., 1998). This model (Fig. 12) simulates transient linear flow followed by boundary-
dominated flow for the case of a well producing from a single planar infinite conductivity fracture that extends to the
reservoir boundary. Application of this method to experimental data is preferred over numerical modeling approaches
for the following reasons: 1) its applicability to the flow regimes observed in the experiment, 2) simplicity of the
approach and 3) it is an exact solution.

𝝅 𝒚𝒆
( )
𝟏 𝟒 𝒙𝒇
= 𝟐 (4)
𝒒𝑫 𝒏𝟐 𝝅𝟐 𝒙𝒇
∑∞
𝒐𝒅𝒅 𝒆𝒙𝒑(− ( ) 𝒕𝑫𝒙𝒇 )
𝟒 𝒚𝒆
URTeC 2902799 11

In Eq. 4, qD is dimensionless flow rate, ye is distance from fracture to the outer boundary (length of the analyzed core
plug in this case), xf is fracture half-length, and tDxf is dimensionless time based on xf. The dimensionless variables in
Eq.4 are defined as:

1 𝑘ℎ(𝑝𝑖 − 𝑝𝑤𝑓 ) (5)

=
𝑞𝐷 141.2𝑞𝐵µ

0.00633𝑘𝑡 (6)
𝑡𝐷𝑥𝑓 =
ɸµ𝐶𝑡 𝑥𝑓2

Fig. 12 — Illustration of linear flow in a well producing from a single planar infinite conductivity fracture. Modified after
Wattenbarger et al. (1998).
For Test-A, an excellent match (Fig. 13) was obtained between the experimental data and the prediction provided by
the Wattenbarger forecast model. It should be noted that the rates in Fig. 13 are double the experimental rates because
the flow rate assumed in the model corresponds to two sides of the hydraulic fracture, whereas flow in the experiment
is in one direction orthogonal to the core plug cross-sectional area. Further, because the Wattenbarger model assumes
rectangular or square fractures whose dimensions are defined by xf and reservoir thickness (h), whereas the core cross-
sectional area is a circle with a diameter equal to the core diameter, in order to use the Wattenbarger model, xf (and
hence h = 2 x xf for this case) had to be adjusted to yield an area equivalent to the cross-sectional area of the core.
With these adjustments in place, the match to the experimental data using the Wattenbarger was achieved using a
permeability of 0.0007 md, which is in very good agreement with the values obtained from the square-root of time
plot/distance of investigation methods from both tests.

Fig. 13 — History-match of experimental results for linear flow period using Wattenbarger forecast model.
URTeC 2902799 12

Discussion

This work presents a new experimental design and procedure for the determination of permeability of ultra-low
permeability core plugs using previously-proven RTA methods which are commonly applied to field-scale production
data. As opposed to the other experimental techniques available in literature, this experimental technique has the
advantage of representing the field-scale flow regimes that are observed during large-scale production in the
unconventional reservoirs (i.e. transient linear flow followed by boundary-dominated flow). Another key advantage
of this technique is the short experimental times that are associated with data collection – for the core plug analyzed
in this study, less than 2 minutes was required to observe both transient linear flow and boundary-dominated flow
during the production cycle.

To validate the methodology and experimental design presented herein, the permeability values obtained from the
RTA approach were compared to (apparent) pulse-decay N2 permeability values measured previously (Ghanizadeh et
al., 2018) under varying mean pore pressure and effective stress conditions for the analyzed core plug. At similar
effective stress condition (500±50 psia), the apparent pulse-decay N2 permeability value (0.00147 md) measured at a
mean pore pressure of 1000 psia is approximately twice the permeability values obtained from RTA methods. Note
that this comparison is not a true “apples-to-apples” comparison because 1) different types of gases (CH4, N2) were
used for RTA and pulse-decay permeability techniques and 2) apparent gas permeability values were different at
different mean pore pressures. Consistent with observations previously reported for shales (e.g. Ghanizadeh et al.,
2014a,b), the use of different gas types may result in different permeability values due to differences in molecular
size, degree of slip flow and gas sorption within the rock matrix. To provide a true “apples-to-apples” comparison,
complementary pulse-decay gas permeability tests were conducted using CH4 under similar experimental conditions
(i.e. effective stress and mean pore pressure). At similar effective stress conditions (500±50 psia), the apparent pulse-
decay CH4 permeability value (0.00084 md) measured at mean pore pressure of 1300 psia is within ±20% of the
permeability values obtained from RTA methods. It is important to note the time taken to obtain pulse-decay
permeability is about 30 minutes which is considerably longer than the time required to reach the end of linear flow
(estimating two independent permeability) in the RTA procedure. The latter discrepancy observed between these
permeability values is minimal considering 1) the experimental errors associated with the tests (up to maximum ±15%)
and 2) the fundamental differences between gas flow regimes and propagation of pressure pulse/decay that are
encountered in these two different techniques. For the analyzed core plug in this study, as outlined earlier, the TOC
content is relatively low (0.48 wt%) and therefore, the adsorption of CH4 is expected to be negligible during the
permeability measurements. However, for the case where there is considerable amount of adsorption/desorption
occurring during the experiment, correction factors can be utilized to correct the permeability values obtained from
the RTA models. This has been demonstrated previously for the simulation cases outlined by Clarkson et al. (2012b).
The apparent permeability values employed in this study using RTA methods, can be corrected for gas-slippage effect
by plotting the apparent permeabilities versus inverse of mean pore pressure (Klinkenberg plot; Klinkenberg, 1941).

Conclusions

In this work, a new experimental setup and procedure is introduced to obtain permeability of tight core plugs using
previously-proven RTA analysis methods. This technique has the advantage of reproducing similar flow regimes and
boundary conditions as those often encountered for larger-scale well production in the field. Analyzing an identical
core plug sample, two independent methods – using the slope of the square-root of time plot and distance of
investigation calculations – are applied to obtain CH4 permeability values in two repeated experiments. The
reproducibility of the CH4 permeability values obtained from the RTA method is very satisfactory (±5%). Further, for
the analyzed core plug, the pore volume estimated from the RTA method agrees very well (±1%) with the pore volume
previously obtained from helium pycnometry and calipered dimensions at ambient condition. Under similar
experimental conditions, there is reasonable agreement (±20%) between the apparent CH 4 permeability values
obtained from the RTA methods and pulse-decay gas permeability techniques. The latter discrepancy observed
between these permeability values is minimal considering 1) the experimental errors associated with the tests (up to
maximum ±15%) and 2) the fundamental differences between gas flow regimes and propagation of pressure
pulse/decay that are encountered in these two different techniques. Another key advantage of the RTA technique is
the short experimental times that are associated with data collection. The end of linear flow was observed in less than
2 minutes from the start of production cycle in repeated tests performed in this study. Further, using the RTA
approaches proposed herein, two independent estimates of permeability and an estimate of pore volume were obtained
for the core plug sample under “in-situ” stress conditions.
URTeC 2902799 13

Standard laboratory techniques for the determination of permeability in tight rocks are not fully representative of fluid
flow mechanisms that may occur during field-scale production of hydrocarbons. Routine laboratory-based methods
are either based on a type of sample material that is not representative of the “in-situ” reservoir rock (e.g. crushed-
rock samples) or represent only unidirectional fluid flow through the core plug samples (e.g. pulse-decay and steady-
state techniques) that deviate from reality. Integrating the previously-developed rate-transient analysis techniques with
a new experimental set-up, the core testing procedure proposed herein is considered a novel approach to obtain
permeability values from tests that mimic field-scale production.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Encana Corporation sincerely for providing funding to purchase the core holder assembly and
experimental items that were used in the construction of the equipment. Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (now
Alberta Innovates) is also thanked for supporting this project. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the sponsors
of the Tight Oil Consortium hosted at the University of Calgary for additional financial support to this project.

Nomenclature

Ac, Cross-sectional area of core plug ft2

B Formation volume factor dimensionless, rcf/scf
Cti, Total compressibility at initial pressure psi-1
fcp, Correction factor dimensionless
h Thickness ft
ka, Apparent permeability to gas md
k Permeability md
Lc Core length ft
mcp Slope of square-root time plot for constant pressure flowing condition dimensionless
pi Initial pressure Psi
pwf Bottom-hole flowing pressure psi
q Gas flow rate Mscf/D
qD Dimensionless flow rate Dimensionless
T Temperature °R
t Production time days
telf Time at the end of linear flow days
tDxf Dimensionless time based on xf dimensionless
Vp Pore volume of core plug ft3
xf Fracture half-length ft
ye Distance from fracture to the outer boundary ft
µgi Gas viscosity at initial pressure cp
φi Porosity dimensionless

References

Behmanesh, H., Clarkson, C.R., Tabatabaie, S.H., and Heidari-Sureshjani, M., 2015. Impact of distance-of-
investigation calculations on rate-transient analysis of unconventional gas and light-oil reservoirs: new formulations
for linear flow. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology 54 (06), 509-519. https://doi.org/10.2118/178928-PA.

Brace, W.F., Walsh, J.B., Frangos, W.T., 1968. Permeability of granite under high pressure. Journal of Geophysical
Research 73 (6), 2225-2236. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB073i006p02225.

Clarkson, C.R., Jensen, J.L., Pedersen, P.K., Freeman, M., 2012a. Innovative Methods for Flow Unit and Pore
Structure Analysis in a Tight Siltstone and Shale Gas Reservoir. American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Bulletin 96 (2), 355–74. https://doi.org/10.1306/05181110171.
URTeC 2902799 14

Clarkson, C.R., Nobakht, M., Kaviani, D. and Kantzas, A., 2012b. Use of pressure- and rate-transient techniques for
analyzing core permeability tests for unconventional reservoirs. Paper SPE 154815 presented at the SPE Americas
Unconventional Resources Conference held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 5-7 June. https://doi.org/10.2118/154815-
MS.

Clarkson, C.R., 2013. Production data analysis of unconventional gas wells: review of theory and best practices.
International Journal of Coal Geology 109-110 (1), 101-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2013.01.002.

Clarkson, C.R., and Qanbari, F., 2013. Use of pressure- and rate-transient techniques for analyzing core permeability
tests for unconventional reservoirs: Part 2. Paper SPE 167167 presented at the SPE Unconventional Resources
Conference-Canada held in Calgary, Alberta, 5-7 November. https://doi.org/10.2118/167167-MS.

Clarkson, C.R., Vahedian A., Ghanizadeh A., Song C., 2018. A new low-permeability reservoir core analysis method
based on rate-transient analysis theory. To be submitted.

Cui, X., Bustin, A.M.M., and Bustin, R.M. 2009. Measurements of gas permeability and diffusivity of tight reservoir
rocks: different approaches and their applications. Geofluids 9, 208–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
8123.2009.00244.x.

Cui, X.A., Bustin, R.M., Brezovski, R., Nassichuk, B., Glover, K., Pathi, V., 2010. A new method to simultaneously
measure in-situ permeability and porosity under reservoir conditions: Implications for characterization of
unconventional gas reservoirs. Paper SPE 138148 presented at the Canadian Unconventional Resources &
International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Canada, 19-21 October. https://doi.org/10.2118/138148-MS.

Cui A, Brezovski R.. 2013. Laboratory permeability measurements of unconventional reservoirs: useless or full of
information? A Montney example from the western Canadian sedimentary basin. Paper SPE 167047 presented at the
SPE Unconventional Resources Conference and Exhibition-Asia Pacific, Brisbane, 11-13 November.
https://doi.org/10.2118/167047-MS.

Escoffier, S., Homand, F., Giraud, A., Hoteit, N., Su, K., 2005. Under stress permeability determination of the
Meuse/Haute-Marne mudstone. Engineering Geology 81, 329-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.06.020.

Fedor, F., Hamos, G., Jobbik, A., Mathe, Z., Somodi, G., Szucs, I., 2008. Laboratory pressure pulse decay permeability
measurement of Boda Claystone, Mecsek Mts., SW Hungary. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 33, S45-S53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2008.10.059.

Ghanizadeh, A, Gasparik, M, Amann-Hildenbrand, A, Gensterblum, Y, Krooss, BM, 2014a. Experimental study of

fluid transport processes in the matrix system of European organic-rich shales: I. Scandinavian Alum Shale. Marine
and Petroleum Geology 51: 79-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2013.10.013.

Ghanizadeh, A., Amann-Hildenbrand, A., Gasparik, M., Gensterblum, Y., Krooss, B.M., Littke, R., 2014b.
Experimental study of fluid transport processes in the matrix system of the European organic-rich shales: II. Posidonia
shale (Lower Toarcian, northern Germany). International Journal of Coal Geology 123: 20–33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2013.06.009.

Ghanizadeh, A., Clarkson, C.R., Aquino, S., Ardakani, O.H. and Sanei, H., 2015a. Petrophysical and geomechanical
characteristics of Canadian tight oil and liquid-rich gas reservoirs: I. Pore network and permeability characterization.
Fuel 153, 664-681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.03.020.

Ghanizadeh, A., Bhowmik, S., Ardakani, O.H., Sanei, H., Clarkson, C.R., 2015b. A comparison of shale permeability
coefficients derived using multiple non-steady-state measurement techniques: examples from the Duvernay
Formation, Alberta (Canada). Fuel 140, 371-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.073.
URTeC 2902799 15

Ghanizadeh, A., Clarkson, C.R., Vahedian, A., Ardakani, O.H., Sanei, H., and Wood, J.M., 2018. Laboratory-based
characterization of pore network and matrix permeability in the Montney Formation: implications for methodology
comparisons. Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, in press.

Handwerger, D.A., Suarez-Rivera, R., Vaughn, K.I., and Keller, J.F. 2011. Improved petrophysical core measurements
on tight shale reservoirs using retort and crushed samples. Paper SPE 147456 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition held in Denver, Colorado, 30 October – 2 November. https://doi.org/10.2118/147456-MS.

Jones, S.C., 1994. A new, fast, accurate pressure-decay probe permeameter. Society of Petroleum Engineers(SPE)
Formation Evaluation 9, 193–199. https://doi.org/10.2118/24757-PA.

Jones, S.C., 1997. A technique for faster pulse-decay permeability measurements in tight rocks. Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE) Formation Evaluation 12 (1), 19-26. https://doi.org/10.2118/28450-PA.

Klinkenberg, L.J., 1941. The permeability of porous media to liquid and gases. API Drilling and Production Practice
41, 200–13.

Lin, C., Pirie, G., Trimmer, D.A., 1986. Low permeability rocks: laboratory measurements and three-dimensional
microstructural analysis. Journal of Geophysical Research 91 (B2), 2173-2181.
https://doi.org/10.1029/JB091iB02p02173.

Luffel, D.L., Guidry, F.K., 1992. New core analysis methods for measuring reservoir rock properties of Devonian
Shale. Journal of Petroleum Technology 44 (11), 1184-1190. https://doi.org/10.2118/20571-PA.

Luffel, D.L., Hopkins, C.W. and Schettler Jr, P.D., 1993. Matrix permeability measurement of gas productive shales.
Paper SPE 26633 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston, Texas, 3-6
October. https://doi.org/10.2118/26633-MS.

Malkovsky, V.I., Zharikov, A.V., Shmonov, V.M., 2009. New methods for measuring the permeability of rock
samples for a single- phase fluid. Izvestiya. Physics of the Solid Earth 45 (2), 89-100.
https://doi.org/10.1134/S1069351309020013.

McPhee, C.A., Arthur, K.G., 1991. Klinkenberg permeability measurements: Problems and practical solutions. In:
Worthington, P.F., Longeron, D. (Eds.), Advances in Core Evaluation II Reservoir Appraisal. Proceedings of the 2nd
Society of Core Analysts European Core Analysis Symposium. Philadelphia. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers,
371-391.

Mokhtari, M., Tutuncu, A.N., 2015. Characterization of anisotropy in the permeability of organic-rich shales. Journal
of Petroleum Science and Engineering 133, 496-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2015.05.024.

Nobakht, M., Clarkson, C.R., 2012. A new analytical method for analyzing production data from shale gas reservoirs
exhibiting linear flow: Constant pressure boundary-condition. Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Reservoir
Evaluation & Engineering 15 (3), 370-384. https://doi.org/10.2118/143989-PA.

Rushing, J.A., Newsham, K.E., Lasswell, P.M., Cox, J.C., Blasingame, T.A., 2004. Klinkenberg-corrected
permeability measurements in tight gas sands: Steady-state versus unsteady-state techniques. Paper SPE 89867
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston, Texas, 26-29 September.
https://doi.org/10.2118/89867-MS.

Sander, R., Pan, Z. and Connell, L.D., 2017. Laboratory measurement of low permeability unconventional gas
reservoir rocks: A review of experimental methods. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 37, 248-279.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.11.041.

Sondergeld, C.H., Newsham, K.E., Comisky, J.T., Rice, M.C, Rai, C.S., 2010. Petrophysical Considerations in
Evaluating and Producing Shale Gas Resources. Paper SPE 131768 presented at the SPE Unconventional Gas
Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 23-25 February. https://doi.org/10.2118/131768-MS.
URTeC 2902799 16

Tinni, A., Fathi, E., Agarwal, R., Sondergeld, C., Akkutlu, Y., Rai, C., 2012. Shale permeability measurements on
plugs and crushed samples. Paper SPE 162235 presented at the SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 October – 1 November. https://doi.org/10.2118/162235-MS.

Wattenbarger, R.A., El-Banbi, A.H., Villegas, M. E. and Maggard, J.B., 1998. Production analysis of linear flow into
fractured tight gas wells. Paper SPE 39931 presented at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional/Low-Permeability
Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, Colorado, 5–8 April. https://doi.org/10.2118/39931-MS.

Yang, Z., Sang, Q., Dong, M., Zhang, S., Li, Y., Gong, H., 2015. A modified pressure pulse decay method for
determining permeabilities of tight reservoir cores. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 27, 236-246.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.08.058.