Gang Wang1,2, Yuanhao Liu1, Qiming Huang1, Enmao Wang3, Ning Liu1. 1. College of Safety and Environment Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China. 2. Mine Disaster Prevention and Control-Ministry of State Key Laboratory Breeding Base, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China. 3. College of Energy and Mining Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China.
Abstract
Coal seam water injection has a significant effect on downhole dust resistance. However, during the operation of coal seam water injection, the seepage of the solution in the coal fractures is impacted by the roughness of coal fractures. Therefore, in this study, distilled water and a sodium lauryl sulfate surfactant were used as seepage solutions, kennel coal was used as the research subject, and four coal samples with different roughness coefficients were prepared for seepage experiments. After the analysis and discussion of the experimental results, it is found that the surface roughness of coal fractures hinders the seepage effect of coal seam water injection. The greater the surface roughness of coal fractures, the smaller the permeability coefficient. Furthermore, increasing the injection pressure and fracture aperture can reduce the influence of coal fracture surface roughness on the permeability coefficient. In addition, after sodium lauryl sulfate is added, the permeability coefficient of the coal sample is reduced. This further reveals the seepage of water injection into coal seams and provides certain guidance for the development of coal seam water injection technology.
Coal seam water injection has a significant effect on downhole dust resistance. However, during the operation of coal seam water injection, the seepage of the solution in the coal fractures is impacted by the roughness of coal fractures. Therefore, in this study, distilled water and a sodium lauryl sulfate surfactant were used as seepage solutions, kennel coal was used as the research subject, and four coal samples with different roughness coefficients were prepared for seepage experiments. After the analysis and discussion of the experimental results, it is found that the surface roughness of coal fractures hinders the seepage effect of coal seam water injection. The greater the surface roughness of coal fractures, the smaller the permeability coefficient. Furthermore, increasing the injection pressure and fracture aperture can reduce the influence of coal fracture surface roughness on the permeability coefficient. In addition, after sodium lauryl sulfate is added, the permeability coefficient of the coal sample is reduced. This further reveals the seepage of water injection into coal seams and provides certain guidance for the development of coal seam water injection technology.
Coal is one of the world’s
three major resources. With the
gradual depletion of shallow coal resources, deep coal mining has
become an important development trend in the future. However, in the
process of deep mining, there are many engineering disaster prevention
and control problems such as rock bursts, floor water inrush, gas
outbursts, and coal dust explosions.[1−4] Since coal seam water injection is an effective
means to prevent outburst and suppress coal dust, it is widely used
in coal fields.[5,6] In addition, coal seam water injection
can increase the water content of the coal mass, change the nature
of the coal mass, and reduce the dust concentration during the mining
process, thereby reducing the hazards of dust to personnel health
and engineering equipment.[7] However, the
mechanism of the coal seam water injection process is complicated,
and the actual parameter setting often depends on experiences. Therefore,
it is necessary to study the effect of the surface roughness of coal
seam pores and fractures on the seepage process of coal seam water
injection. This is of great significance for improving coal seam water
injection technology and ensuring coal mining safety.The surface
roughness of coal fractures is an important parameter
that affects coal permeability. For the mechanism of the influence
of surface roughness of coal fractures on seepage, a lot of research
has been conducted at home and abroad. The joint roughness coefficient
(JRC) was proposed by Barton (1973) as an empirical coefficient to
express the influence of surface roughness and undulation on the surface
shear strength of rock structure.[8,9] Barton et al.[10−12] put forward 10 standard profiles determined through JRC in 1982,
which could better characterize the surface roughness of fractures
and provide a theoretical basis for the subsequent research of the
mechanism of seepage in rough fractures. Turk, Deannan et al.[13] proposed a direct measurement method to describe
JRC and established an equation for the relationship between the undulation
angle of rock mass structural surface and the JRC. Shen et al.[14] validated the model based on the lattice Boltzmann
seepage–dissolution coupling relationship reflected on the
surface of rock mass fractures through two classic numerical examples
and studied the coupling mechanism of seepage–dissolution in
rough rock fractures. They found that the larger the fractal dimension
of the fracture wall, the rougher the geometrical morphology, the
slower the convection and the diffusion speed of the solute, and the
slower the seepage velocity. Cai et al.[15] summarized the basic characteristics of seepage in rough fractures
and related research results and believed that fracture width and
surface roughness would affect fracture seepage characteristics, and
that fracture width and surface roughness would also affect each other.
Zhang et al.[16] developed a single rough
fracture seepage model with different roughness coefficients (JRC)
through numerical simulation software COMSOL. They reported that in
the process of fluid seepage in a rough fracture channel, both the
maximum flow velocity in the fracture and the average velocity at
the outlet gradually decreased with the increase in the JRC value
and that the roughness of the fracture had an obstructive effect on
the seepage. Cui et al.[17] constructed fracture
channels with rough joint surfaces based on the three-dimensional
(3D) Weierstrass–Mandelbrot fractal function, obtained a transparent
and fine fracture model through 3D printing technology, and studied
the effect of fracture width and fractal dimension on the seepage
characteristics of rock fractures. They pointed out that both the
fracture width and the fractal dimension would cause the hydraulic
gradient in the fracture channel to change. Zhang et al.[18] proposed that when the underground space of
coal mine is used to construct underground reservoir, the influence
of water solution seepage on reserved coal pillar and surrounding
rock may threaten the stability of the reservoir. Wang et al.[19] found through laboratory experiments that at
low water injection pressure, adding 0.1 and 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) surfactant solutions would actually hinder seepage, thereby
reducing the permeability coefficient.It is worth noting that
many researchers focused their research
on the influence of fracture roughness from a macro perspective, i.e.,
the influence of the degree of fracture surface undulation on the
seepage in rock and coal fractures, and obtained the effect of rock
and coal fracture joint surfaces on seepage characteristics.[20−24] However, there is still a lack of systematic research on the influence
of the surface roughness of coal fractures on the seepage characteristics
of water injection from the microscopic level, which limits the development
of disaster prevention technology for water injection to a certain
extent. Therefore, it is necessary to study the influence of the width
and surface roughness of a single coal fracture on the seepage characteristics
of water injection. In this paper, the long-flame coal from the Houwenjialiang
Coal Mine in Ordos City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China,
is taken as the research object, and the coal samples with different
fracture surface roughness coefficients are prepared with sandpapers
of different meshes. After different fracture apertures are manually
set and surfactants are added, the changes in the fracture seepage
characteristics are analyzed. Through the self-developed multiscale
loading seepage system, the fracture seepage experiments are carried
out under the conditions of constant axial pressure and confining
pressure and changing liquid injection pressure, and the mechanism
of multiscale influence of fracture surface roughness on coal seepage
characteristics is explored. These findings can provide certain guidance
for the development of coal seam water injection technology and the
systematic study of the water injection seepage.
Experimental Section
Preparation of Coal Samples
The coring
operation was first conducted on the long-flame coal from 60–70
m underground of the Houwenjialiang Coal Mine in Inner Mongolia, China.
Next, a cylinder with a diameter of 25 mm and a height of 50 mm was
taken out and cut into two parts along the center line of the coal
pillar. A total of five half-cylinder coal samples were prepared for
the experiment. Then, the five coal samples were ground with sandpaper
of 7000, 120, 60, 46, and 36 mesh, respectively, to obtain different
surface roughnesses. The smoothest coal sample was chosen as the reference
and the platinum aluminum tape was pasted on it. After that, the remaining
four coal samples were attached to platinum aluminum tape, respectively,
to form a cylindrical coal sample with a rectangular fracture in the
center of the coal pillar, as shown in Figure . In this experiment, different layers of
platinum aluminum tape were used to adjust the fracture aperture.
Finally, the coal samples with different fracture surface roughnesses
required for the multiscale fracture seepage experiment were obtained.
Figure 1
Preparation
process of coal samples.
Preparation
process of coal samples.To ensure the reliability of the experimental process
and results,
the coal samples were first put into a drying box with a drying temperature
of 65 °C. After drying for 24 h, the coal samples were taken
out and wrapped in plastic wrap for later use.
Microscopic Observation
In this experiment,
a LEICA DVM5000 HD ultra-depth-of-field 3D microscope was used to
scan the surface of the prepared coal sample to select points. The
scanning area for each point is a square of 107.23 μm ×
107.23 μm. To ensure the objectivity of the experiment, 10 areas
on the surface of each coal sample were selected for scanning. Through
the observation of coal samples polished by various specifications
of sandpaper, the coal samples polished by 120, 60, 46, and 36 mesh
were finally selected for experimental research. Figure shows the photos of the coal
crack surface with four different roughnesses.
Figure 2
Microscopic structure
and photos of fracture surfaces with different
roughnesses.
Microscopic structure
and photos of fracture surfaces with different
roughnesses.Through the observation of the 10 selected areas
on the surface
of coal fractures, the 10-point height average Rzjis(25) of the microscopic surface irregularity
of each coal fracture was recorded as the roughness coefficient, which
was used as a quantitative indicator for the subsequent seepage analysis
of the water injection effect. Rzjis is defined as
the sum of the average of five contour peak heights (Y) and the average of five contour valley
depths (Y) within the
sampling length L on the center line of the roughness
curve.The 10-point height average of microscopic
surface irregularity of the 10 selected areas on the surface of the
coal sample was calculated as the surface roughness coefficient of
the coal fractures, as shown in Table .
Table 1
Surface Roughness Coefficients of
Coal Fractures Ground with Sandpaper of Different Meshes
sandpaper mesh
120
36
60
46
roughness
coefficient
0.428
0.241
0.16
0.125
Multiscale Loading Seepage System
The structure of the multiscale loading seepage system is shown in Figure .
Figure 3
Structure of the multiscale
loading seepage system.
Structure of the multiscale
loading seepage system.The main purpose of the experiment is to study
the influence of
the surface roughness of coal fractures on the permeability coefficient
under different liquid injection pressures at different fracture apertures.
Through field research, it is learned that when coal seam water injection
is used to prevent dust disasters in the Houwenjialiang Coal Mine,
an SDS surfactant solution with a concentration of 0.1–1% will
be added. Therefore, in addition to distilled water, an SDS surfactant
solution with a concentration of 0.1 and 1% was selected as the seepage
fluid in this experiment. Since the main purpose of this experiment
is to explore the influence of the surface roughness of coal fractures
on the permeability coefficient at the microscopic level, the injection
pressure should not be set too high, and thus the injection pressure
was set to three levels of 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 MPa. In addition, because
the seepage characteristics of coal seam water injection are different
at different fracture apertures, the effect of coal fracture surface
roughness on seepage may be different at different fracture apertures.
To explore this, three fracture apertures of 0.06, 0.12, and 0.18
mm were set in the experiment to ensure the universal applicability
of the experimental results. In this study, each fracture aperture
corresponds to 27 groups of seepage tests.Therefore, a total
of 108 groups of seepage tests were designed
in this study, as shown in Table . The experimental confining pressure and axial pressure
were fixed at 5 and 1 MPa, respectively. The pressurization time for
each experiment was set to 1 h. During each experiment, the injection
flow and the cumulative flow were automatically recorded every 1 min
by the system. The ambient temperature of the laboratory was maintained
at a constant temperature of 25 °C (the temperature is consistent
with the temperature of the outside atmosphere) to eliminate the error
of the experimental results due to temperature factors. In addition,
to ensure the reliability of the experimental data and eliminate the
error caused by data fluctuation in the early seepage stage, the data
after the injection flow reached a steady state were selected for
fitting analysis.
Table 2
Design of Variables for Seepage Experiments
of Coal Sample Fractures with Different Surface Roughnesses
no.
roughness coefficient
injection pressure (MPa)
fracture aperture (mm)
SDS (%)
1–108
0.428
0.241
0.1
0.06
0
0.16
0.2
0.12
0.1
0.125
0.3
0.18
1
In the past, researchers put forward many theories
describing the
conductivity of porous media, among which Darcy’s law is the
most classic and widely used. According to this law, the permeability
coefficient can be used to characterize how easy it is for fluid to
pass through fractures. The larger the permeability coefficient, the
stronger the water permeability of the fracture, and vice versa[26−28]where γ is the bulk density of water, kN/m3; Q is
the amount of water passing through the coal sample per unit time, m3/s; L is
the length of the coal sample, m; A is the cross-sectional area of the coal sample, m2; and p is the pressure difference between
the two ends of the coal sample, KPa.
Result Analysis
Effect of Fracture Surface Roughness on the
Seepage of Distilled Water in Coal Fractures
Figure shows the results of the seepage
experiments at different fracture apertures with distilled water as
the seepage fluid. The green, blue, red, and black scattered points
represent the measured permeability coefficients of coal samples with
the fracture surface roughness coefficients of 0.125, 0.16, 0.241,
and 0.428, respectively, at three injection pressures.
Figure 4
Influence of fracture
surface roughness on the permeability coefficient
of distilled water in coal samples.
Influence of fracture
surface roughness on the permeability coefficient
of distilled water in coal samples.As shown in Figure , when distilled water is used as the seepage fluid,
the coal samples
show two different seepage characteristics at the fracture apertures
of 0.06 and 0.12 mm. The permeability coefficients of the coal samples
with the fracture surface roughness coefficients of 0.428 and 0.241
increase as the injection pressure increases with a small increase
rate, and the increase rate of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient
of 0.428 is less than that of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient
of 0.241. Similarly, the permeability coefficients of the coal samples
with the fracture surface roughness coefficients of 0.16 and 0.125
also increase with the increase in the injection pressure but with
a larger increase rate. This indicates that a rough coal fracture
surface is more likely to affect the seepage process. When the fracture
aperture reaches 0.18 mm, the permeability coefficients of the coal
samples are still related to the surface roughness of the coal samples
at an injection pressure of 0.1 MPa. However, the permeability coefficient
of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.125 is smaller
than that of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.16.
This indicates that as the fracture aperture increases, the effect
of fracture surface roughness on seepage decreases. At a fracture
aperture of 0.18 mm, the permeability coefficients of the coal samples
all show a slow rising trend. In addition, when the injection pressure
is 0.3 MPa, the influence of fracture surface roughness on the permeability
coefficient is significantly reduced. Therefore, both the fracture
aperture and the liquid injection pressure have a certain impact on
the seepage characteristics of coal samples with different fracture
surface roughness coefficients.Figure shows the
ratio of the permeability coefficient of the coal sample with the
roughness coefficients of 0.16, 0.241, or 0.428 to the permeability
coefficient of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.125
with the distilled water as the seepage fluid at three fracture apertures
and three injection pressures. The red dashed line in Figure represents the permeability
coefficient of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.125.
As indicated in Figure , with the increase in the fracture aperture, the difference between
the permeability coefficient ratios of coal samples with different
roughnesses decreases. In general, at the same fracture aperture and
injection pressure, the greater the roughness, the smaller the permeability
coefficient. In addition, with the increase in the injection pressure,
the influence of fracture surface roughness on the seepage increases
at the small openings of 0.06 and 0.12 mm but weakens at the large
fracture aperture of 0.18 mm. This indicates that in the process of
coal seam water injection, the effect of the surface roughness of
coal fractures on the permeability coefficient can be reduced by increasing
the water injection pressure and expanding the fracture aperture.
Figure 5
Permeability
coefficient ratio of distilled water for different
fracture surface roughnesses.
Permeability
coefficient ratio of distilled water for different
fracture surface roughnesses.
Effect of Fracture Surface Roughness on the
Seepage of the SDS Surfactant Solution in Coal Fractures
Figures and 8 show the results of the seepage experiments at
different fracture apertures with 0.1 and 1% SDS solutions as the
seepage fluid, respectively. Figures and 9 show the ratio of the
permeability coefficients of coal samples with three different roughnesses
to that of the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.125 with
0.1 and 1% SDS solutions as the seepage fluids, respectively.
Figure 6
Influence of
fracture surface roughness on the permeability coefficient
of 0.1% SDS.
Figure 8
Effect of fracture surface roughness on the permeability
coefficient
of the 1% SDS solution.
Figure 7
Permeability
coefficient ratio of the 0.1% SDS solution for different
fracture surface roughnesses.
Figure 9
Permeability coefficient ratio of the 1% SDS solution
for different
fracture surface roughnesses.
Influence of
fracture surface roughness on the permeability coefficient
of 0.1% SDS.Figure shows the
influence of fracture surface roughness on the permeability coefficient
for seepage of a 0.1% SDS solution in coal fractures with the other
conditions unchanged. It is obvious that the 0.1% SDS solution still
follows the seepage law of distilled water but the permeability coefficient
drops significantly. This indicates that the 0.1% SDS solution hinders
the seepage process of coal seam water injection.The data from
36 experiments with the 0.1% SDS solution as the
seepage fluid are analyzed, and the permeability coefficient ratios
of three coal samples with roughness coefficients of 0.428, 0.241,
and 0.16 are plotted, as shown in Figure . With Figures and 5 compared, at low injection pressure, the difference between the
permeability coefficient ratios of coal samples for the 0.1% SDS solution
is smaller than that for distilled water. Therefore, at low injection
pressure, the influence of coal fracture surface roughness on the
seepage of the 0.1% SDS solution is less than that of distilled water.Permeability
coefficient ratio of the 0.1% SDS solution for different
fracture surface roughnesses.Figure shows the experimental results with a 1%
SDS surfactant
solution used as the seepage fluid and the other experimental conditions
unchanged. At a fracture aperture of 0.06 mm, the permeability coefficient
is still affected by the fracture surface roughness of the coal sample,
and the permeability coefficients of the four coal samples remain
positively correlated with the injection pressure. When the fracture
aperture reaches 0.12 mm, the permeability coefficients of the four
coal samples are less affected by the surface roughness of the coal
fracture, and the increase rate of the permeability coefficient with
the increase in the injection pressure for the 1% SDS surfactant solution
is less than those for distilled water and the 0.1% SDS solution.
When the fracture aperture reaches 0.18 mm, except for the coal sample
with a roughness coefficient of 0.428, the influence of the fracture
surface roughness of the remaining three coal samples on the permeability
coefficient is negligible. For the 1% SDS solution, when the injection
pressure increases, the effect of fracture surface roughness on the
permeability coefficient does not change significantly compared with
those for distilled water and the 0.1% SDS solution. However, the
1% SDS surfactant solution hinders the seepage process of coal seam
water injection.Effect of fracture surface roughness on the permeability
coefficient
of the 1% SDS solution.The 36 sets of experimental data with 1% SDS solution
as the seepage
fluid are analyzed, and the permeability coefficient ratios of three
coal samples with roughness coefficients of 0.428, 0.241, and 0.16
are plotted, as shown in Figure . The difference between the
permeability coefficient ratios for the 1% SDS solution at different
fracture apertures and liquid injection pressures is significantly
reduced when compared with those for distilled water and the 0.1%
SDS solution. This indicates that a high concentration SDS solution
is more sensitive to the roughness of coal fractures, and that it
not only has an obstructive effect on the seepage in coal fractures
with large roughness but also hinders the seepage in coal fractures
with small roughness.Permeability coefficient ratio of the 1% SDS solution
for different
fracture surface roughnesses.
Hindrance of the SDS Solution to Seepage in
Rough Fractures
Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is commonly
used in coal seam water injection as a wetting agent. Many engineering
experiences have shown that SDS can promote the wettability of the
coal surface, thereby enhancing the water injection effect.[29] To further characterize the influence of an
SDS surfactant solution on the seepage characteristics of coal samples,
the residual permeability coefficient ratio proposed by previous researchers[18] is adopted in this paper, which is the ratio
of the permeability coefficient of the SDS solution to the permeability
coefficient of distilled water.where η is the residual permeability
coefficient ratio, %; KSDS is the permeability
coefficient of SDS solution; and Kwater is the permeability coefficient of water.By monitoring η
during the injection of an SDS solution and comparing the experimental
results at different fracture apertures and SDS concentrations, the
influence of the SDS solution on the seepage in coal fractures is
analyzed. At the three fracture apertures of 0.06, 0.12, and 0.18
mm, the residual permeability coefficient ratios of coal samples at
different injection pressures are obtained, as shown in Figure . The blue and
purple columns represent the residual permeability coefficient ratios
of 0.1 and 1% SDS surfactant solutions, respectively.
Figure 10
Residual permeability
coefficient ratios of two SDS solutions for
coal fractures with different roughnesses.
Residual permeability
coefficient ratios of two SDS solutions for
coal fractures with different roughnesses.At a fracture aperture of 0.06 mm, the SDS solution
has greater
damage to the permeability coefficient of the coal sample. The greater
the injection pressure, the more obvious the damage of the high concentration
SDS solution to the permeability coefficient of the coal sample. As
shown in Figure , the residual permeability coefficient ratio of the coal sample
with a roughness coefficient of 0.125 at an injection pressure of
0.3 MPa is only 12.1%.When the fracture aperture is 0.12 mm,
the residual permeability
coefficient ratio of the SDS solution for the coal sample with a smooth
fracture surface is relatively small at injection pressures of 0.2
and 0.3 MPa. However, under the same conditions, the residual permeability
coefficient ratio of the coal sample with a smooth fracture surface
at a fracture aperture of 0.12 mm is greater than that at a fracture
aperture of 0.06 mm. This indicates that expanding the fracture aperture
and increasing the water injection pressure can significantly improve
the seepage effect of the SDS solution in coal fractures.When
the fracture aperture is 0.18 mm and the injection pressure
is low, the high concentration SDS solution has a better seepage effect
in the coal sample with high fracture roughness than the low concentration
SDS solution, while the low concentration SDS solution has a better
seepage effect in the coal sample with low fracture roughness than
the high concentration SDS solution. When the injection pressure reaches
0.2 and 0.3 MPa, the two concentrations of SDS solutions have the
same hindrance effect on seepage, and the residual permeability coefficient
ratios of the four coal samples are all positively correlated with
the injection pressure. This indicates that increasing the injection
pressure can improve the effect of the SDS solution on the seepage
of coal seam water injection at a large fracture aperture.As
indicated in Figure , when the injection pressure is high, the residual permeability
coefficient ratio of the SDS solution is negatively correlated with
the concentration of the SDS solution at the three fracture apertures.
This is more obvious for the coal sample with a smooth fracture surface
at a small fracture aperture. Therefore, it can be inferred that the
permeability coefficient of the coal sample with a smooth fracture
surface decreases with the increase in the concentration of the SDS
solution at a small fracture aperture. To verify this inference, a
seepage experiment is carried out at an injection pressure of 0.3
MPa and a fracture aperture of 0.06 mm with other experimental conditions
unchanged using the SDS solution with a concentration of 0.1% and
the coal sample with a roughness coefficient of 0.125.Figure indicates
that the permeability coefficient of the coal sample with a fracture
roughness of 0.125 is negatively correlated with the concentration
of the SDS solution. This means that at an injection pressure of 0.3
MPa and a fracture aperture of 0.06 mm, the higher the concentration
of the SDS solution, the greater the damage to the permeability coefficient
of the coal sample with a roughness of 0.125.
Figure 11
Influence of the concentration
of the SDS solution on the permeability
coefficient of the coal sample.
Influence of the concentration
of the SDS solution on the permeability
coefficient of the coal sample.After the experiment, the coal sample was observed
with a microscope,
and the observation result is shown in Figure . The SDS surfactant solution with a concentration
of 0.1% is adsorbed on the rough surface of the coal sample, and the
SDS with a concentration of 0.2% begins to accumulate on the rough
surface of the fracture. This phenomenon is positively correlated
with the concentration of the SDS, which is also the reason for the
obvious decrease in the residual permeability coefficient ratio after
adding SDS. In addition, the downward trend of the residual permeability
coefficient ratio is positively correlated with the concentration
of the SDS.
Figure 12
Microscopic observation of the SDS residue on the fracture
surface.
Microscopic observation of the SDS residue on the fracture
surface.The laboratory experiments aim to verify the influence
of coal
fracture surface roughness on seepage, and thus low injection pressure
is set. According to the experimental results and the actual fact
that adding an SDS surfactant in the coal seam water injection process
is beneficial to coal seam water injection, it is inferred that because
the SDS solution is adsorbed on the surface of coal fractures, the
fracture channels are narrowed, and thus the permeability coefficient
is reduced.
Discussion
Through the observation
using an ultra-depth-of-field 3D microscope,
it is found that the rougher the coal fracture, the larger the irregular
surface area of the fracture, and the longer the path that the solution
flows through during the seepage process. This increases the frictional
resistance that the solution needs to overcome during the seepage
process. Previous researchers have pointed out that the size of the
contact area also has a certain impact on the seepage process. Therefore,
the greater the roughness of coal fractures, the smaller the permeability
coefficient.Owing to the influence of the surface roughness
of coal fractures,
the turbulence of seepage liquid occurs. The rougher the surface of
coal fractures, the more obvious the turbulence. When the fracture
aperture is large, compared with when the fracture aperture is small,
the flow rate of distilled water increases more significantly with
the increase in the injection pressure. The large flow rate overcomes
the turbulence interference caused by the surface roughness of coal
fractures and makes the distilled water move in a state of approximately
laminar flow in the fractures of the four coal samples. This is why
with the increase in the injection pressure, the effect of fracture
surface roughness on seepage increases at a small fracture aperture
and decreases at a large fracture aperture, as shown in Figure .
Figure 13
Mechanism of the influence
of fracture roughness on the flow state
of the solution seepage.
Mechanism of the influence
of fracture roughness on the flow state
of the solution seepage.For a long time, it has been believed that surfactants
can enhance
the effect of coal seam water injection. However, it is indicated
from this experimental study that an SDS surfactant also has an obstructive
effect on seepage. When an SDS solution is used as the seepage fluid,
the permeability coefficient of the coal sample is negatively correlated
with the fracture surface roughness, while the residual permeability
coefficient ratio of the SDS solution is positively correlated with
the fracture surface roughness of the coal sample. As shown in Figure , this indicates
that rough coal fractures are more likely to adsorb the SDS solution,
resulting in narrowed fracture channels and a reduced permeability
coefficient. Although the adsorption capacity of smooth coal fractures
to the SDS solution is weaker than that of rough coal fractures, the
surface morphologies of smooth fractures and rough fractures are changed
after adsorption and tend to be similar. Therefore, the residual permeability
coefficient ratio of smooth coal fractures is smaller than that of
rough coal fractures. This is more obvious in the seepage experiment
of the high concentration SDS solution. For the actual coal seam water
injection process, this problem can be solved by increasing the temperature
of the SDS solution to increase the solubility of SDS.
Figure 14
Mechanism
of the effect of the SDS surfactant on seepage at different
fracture roughnesses.
Mechanism
of the effect of the SDS surfactant on seepage at different
fracture roughnesses.
Conclusions
Through the seepage experiments
of four coal samples with different
fractures surface roughnesses, the influence of coal fracture surface
roughness on seepage under different solutions was studied. The experimental
results were analyzed and the following conclusions were drawn.When distilled water is used as the
seepage fluid, the greater the surface roughness of coal fractures,
the smaller the permeability coefficient. With the increase in the
injection pressure, the effect of fracture surface roughness on seepage
increases at the small fracture apertures of 0.06 and 0.12 mm, and
weakens at the large opening of 0.18 mm. In the actual coal seam water
injection process, the influence of the surface roughness of coal
fractures on the water injection seepage process can be reduced by
increasing the water injection pressure.With an SDS surfactant solution as
the seepage fluid, the main factors affecting the seepage stage of
coal seam water injection are injection pressure, SDS solution concentration,
fracture aperture, and coal fracture roughness. Generally, the larger
the fracture aperture, the higher the permeability coefficient. In
addition, at the same fracture aperture and injection pressure, the
permeability coefficient is negatively related to the concentration
of the SDS solution for smooth coal fractures. At the same fracture
aperture and the SDS solution concentration, the permeability coefficient
is positively related to the injection pressure.SDS surfactant solution can hinder
the seepage stage of coal seam water injection, resulting in a decrease
in the permeability coefficient. The main reason is that the SDS surfactant
is adsorbed on the surface of coal fractures, resulting in narrowed
fracture channels. This adsorption phenomenon is more obvious for
coal samples with higher roughness coefficients.