HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chen, Q. Articles by Yue, Y. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chen, Q. Articles by Yue, Y. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Chen, Q. Articles by Yue, Y. Related Collections Water Pollution Ground Water Quality

Variations of Permeability and Pore Size Distribution of Porous Media with Pressure

^a Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance and Atomic and Molecular Physics, Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 71010, Wuhan, 430071, China
^b Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, Institute of Hydromechanics and Water Resources Management, ETH-Hoenggerberg, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Profile schematic map of the nonmagnetic core holder. (1) Core sample, (2) fiberglass, (3) nylatron distributor, (4) teflon tube, (5) inlet for confining pressure, (6) inlet for injection, (7) outlet.

View larger version (128K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) scan of sample from Core 20.

View larger version (154K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) scan of sample from Core 39.

View larger version (176K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) scan of sample from Core 52.

View larger version (83K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Voxel porosity distribution of Core 39.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Relation between porosity ratio and effective overburden pressure.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Relation between porosity ratio and effective overburden pressure of Core 20.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Relation between porosity ratio and effective overburden pressure of Core 39.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Relation between porosity ratio and effective overburden pressure of Core 52.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Relation between permeability ratio K/K0 and effective overburden pressure.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 11. Relation between permeability ratio K/K0 and effective overburden pressure of Core 20.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 12. Relation between permeability ratio K/K0 and effective overburden pressure of Core 39.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 13. Relation between permeability ratio K/K0 and effective overburden pressure of Core 52.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 14. Changes in the distribution of relaxation time T2 with effective overburden pressure of Core 20.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 15. Changes in the distribution of relaxation time T2 with effective overburden pressure of Core 39.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 16. Changes in the distribution of relaxation time T2 with effective overburden pressure of Core 52.