Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 172 (2019) 489–492

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Comparative pore surface area in primary and secondary porosity in T

sandstones
Daniel R. Nolansnyder, John Parnell∗
School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB24 3UE, United Kingdom

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Primary and secondary porosity in sandstones possess different pore geometry characteristics, but these are not well quantified.
Sandstone The pore surface area in 2 suites of sandstones exhibiting only primary porosity (Permo-Triassic, Northern Ireland) and only
Porosity
secondary porosity (Cambrian, England) were measured using JMicrovision soft-ware. The data show pore surface areas per
Secondary porosity
unit pore volume ∼2.5 times as great in the secondary porosity compared to the primary porosity. This difference is great
Pore surface area
Reservoir enough to have a significant impact on properties dependent on pore surface area, including oil production and capacity for
Deep biosphere microbial colonization in the deep biosphere.

1. Introduction dissolution of feldspar grains, and compare their pore surface areas.

Pore geometry is a subject for study for petroleum geologists and 2. Methods
engineers who are concerned with the potential of subsurface rocks to
function as hydrocarbon reservoirs. Quantitative data is required at a range of Two sets of sandstones were chosen that are comparable in grain size,
scales from whole sand bodies to micro-pores, to predict their capacity and sorting (fine-to medium-grained, well sorted) and degree of com-paction
deliverability. One of the most fundamental approaches to documenting pore (predominantly grain point contacts before grain dissolution). Primary
geometry is image analysis (e.g. Anguy et al., 1999; Fens, 2000; Cerepi et al., porosity was imaged in fluviatile sandstones of the New Red Sandstone
2002; Yang et al., 2013). This study utilizes a simple image analysis (Permo-Triassic) of Northern Ireland, in which pore outlines are well defined
procedure to assess the difference between two fundamental pore types, by iron oxide grain coatings (Fig. 1A and B). The sandstones were sampled
primary and secondary porosity in sandstones. from the Kingsmill borehole (depth 343.8 m), the Larne 1 borehole (1103.4
Secondary porosity is of fundamental importance to the pro-spectivity of m), the Blacks Factory, Newtonards, borehole (depth 47.2 m) and surface
siliciclastic reservoirs. The development of secondary porosity, i.e. porosity exposures at Lissan Estate and Bonds Mill Bridge (localities in Parnell, 1992).
generated during mineral dissolution during burial, is ubiquitous in These sandstones were sampled as part of a hydrocarbon exploration
sandstones that contain feldspars, as the feld-spars are readily dissolved by programme (Parnell, 1992; Fitzsimons and Parnell, 1995). Secondary porosity
acidic pore fluids (Schmidt and McDonald, 1979). Numerous studies (e.g. was imaged in shallow marine sandstones of the Cambrian Comley
Giles and de Boer, 1990; Taylor et al., 2010) conclude that secondary porosity Sandstone, Shropshire, England (Fig. 1C and D), in which a solid oil residue
is the norm for sandstone successions, and in some cases it represents the helps to preserve and define intricate pore shape in partially dissolved feld-
majority of the porosity. spars (Parnell, 1987; Parnell et al., 2017). This allows us to measure only
secondary porosity, not primary porosity that has been subse-quently
The recognition of secondary porosity is important to reservoir ex- modified. The Comley Sandstone was sampled at Robin's Tump, Shropshire.
ploitation, as primary and secondary porosity differ in associated per- Both sandstones have well-documented diagenetic histories (Parnell, 1987,
meability, heterogeneity of porosity, and pore surface area. However there is 1992). The mean grain sizes recorded from the Permian of the Kingsmill
surprisingly little data in the public domain to demonstrate these purported Borehole and from the Cambrian Comley Sandstone are 1.3 ± 0.5 mm and 1.1
differences. In this study, we present data based on image analysis of two sets ± 0.5 mm respectively, indicating that they are of comparable nature.
of sandstones, one containing just primary pores and the other containing
abundant secondary pores due to partial

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Parnell).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.09.095
Received 7 October 2016; Received in revised form 10 September 2018; Accepted 30 September 2018
Available online 02 October 2018
0920-4105/ © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
D.R. Nolansnyder, J. Parnell Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 172 (2019) 489–492

Fig. 1. Thin section micrographs of case study

sandstones. A,B, Triassic sandstones exhibiting
unaltered sand grain boundaries outlined by iron
oxides, and homogenous primary porosity. C,D,
Cambrian sandstone in which feldspar grains are
partially dissolved to form irregular secondary
porosity with high surface area. Porosity is oil-filled
(black).

The study uses one example each of primary and secondary por-osity, but 3. Results
we believe that they are representative. Both examples are based on 5 to 10
thin sections, so represent an average of many rock samples. They are also The mean porosities for the New Red Sandstone (primary porosity) and
characteristic of their type: the Permo-Triassic samples are typical of Comley Sandstone (secondary porosity) are 19.6% and 9.0% re-spectively.
mineralogically mature (quartz-rich) sandstones with high primary porosity, The mean surface area ratios are 0.17 and 0.31 respectively. Thus, the mean
and the Cambrian samples are typical of feldspar-bearing sandstones in surface area ratio for secondary porosity is 1.8 times that for primary porosity,
showing partial dissolution of the feld-spars (e.g. Haszeldine et al., 1999; i.e. there is 1.8 times as much surface area per unit volume. The mean ratio of
Taylor et al., 2010). A large global database of sandstone compositions shows 1.8 belies a variation in ratios depen-dent on the total area measured. In the
a mean feldspar content of about 20% (Taylor et al., 2010). largest pores, of about 10,000 square microns, the ratio is as high as 2.3,
reflecting a greater level of detail that can be measured in the perimeter of the
The thin sections were first examined with a Meisi Techno micro-scope. secondary pores. The measurements at up to 10 x higher resolution also show
Once a pore space was selected, an Infinity 1 camera with Infinity Analyze that the greater detail evident in the secondary pore perimeter raises the mean
software was used to capture an image of the pore, at ×20 magnification. The ratio by about 40%, i.e. to about 2.5, but had reached a constant ratio at this
clearest forty images were chosen for each pore type. Analysis of the eighty level.
images was undertaken using JMicrovision 1.2.7. The colour spectrum for
each image was adjusted to maximise the contrast between the pore and the The average ratio for primary pores at ×1 is 0.035 and for sec-ondary
surrounding mineral. Porosity was measured by a background extraction, pores at ×1 is 0.072 (Table 1). The average ratio for primary pores at ×10 is
which allows the user to manipulate the red, green, and blue spectra within 0.014 and for secondary pores at ×10 is 0.033. The mean primary surface area
the image to highlight a single feature. With the help of a histogram, specific ratio decreased by 61% and the mean sec-ondary pore surface area ratio
points within the spectrum can be chosen for display in the image. This real decreased by 55%. While the ratio will decrease as magnification increases,
time method allows manipulation of the level of colour to one that best secondary porosity surface area is still greater.
displays porosity. Then the area and perimeter of each pore was mea-sured,
using the JMicrovision 2D measurement tool. A proxy for pore surface area is
given by the ratio pore of perimeter and pore area, the ‘pore surface area ratio’ Table 1
(Ehrlich et al., 1984). An autotrack option was used to create a custom Perimeter/area (p/a) ratios for primary and secondary pores measured at ×1 and x10.
polygon to outline each measured pore space. A number of the measured
secondary pores contained grain material within the pore space, which would
Sample Number at x1 p/a Ratio Sample Number at x10 p/a Ratio
be connected to the pore margin in 3-D. In these cases, additional
measurements were made of the enclosed grain material, and appropriate secondary 34 0.044 Secondary 34 0.02
adjustments made to the pore are and perimeter values. To test whether Secondary 5 0.049 Secondary 5 0.023
secondary 20 0.062 secondary 20 0.028
measurements made at a greater resolution would give a different result, a
secondary 12 0.083 Secondary 12 0.041
secondary pore was measured at progressively higher magnification up to 10 x secondary 26 0.123 secondary 26 0.051
the standard resolu-tion. primary 2 0.017 primary 2 0.007
primary 10 0.013 primary 10 0.005
primary 26 0.034 primary 26 0.013
primary 32 0.044 primary 32 0.016
primary 21 0.067 primary 21 0.028
Primary ×1 mean 0.035 Primary ×10 mean 0.014
Secondary ×1 mean 0.072 Secondary ×10 mean 0.033

490
D.R. Nolansnyder, J. Parnell Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 172 (2019) 489–492

parameters, including permeability and irreducible water content

(Morgan and Gordon, 1970; Baker et al., 2015).
(iii) Greater surface area means a larger template for the growth of authigenic
minerals, especially clay minerals, and for further dis-solution (Hodson,
1999; Gautier et al., 2001).
(iv) Microbes are ubiquitous in sandstone aquifers to at least 2 km depth
(McMahon and Parnell, 2014; Probandt et al., 2018), and the
overwhelming majority are resident on grain surfaces, rather than
suspended in the pore fluid (Alfreider et al., 1997; Griebler et al., 2002).
Therefore, greater surface area means capacity for a greater microbial
cell density in the deep biosphere.
(v) In addition to the capacity for microbial loading, the surface area affects
the mobility of bacteria, and hence offers a means of their control
(Asadishad et al., 2011; Bai et al., 2016).

The origin of secondary porosity at depth has been re-evaluated since

early studies emphasized its importance (Schmidt and McDonald, 1979). It is
now appreciated that new porosity cannot be readily added at depths of > 100
m where fluid flow is limited and slow, and feldspar dissolution is most
marked at shallow depths (Taylor et al., 2010; Bjørlykke and Jahren, 2012).
However there is some potential for re-distribution of porosity to create pores
with evolved shapes (Giles and de Boer, 1990). Notwithstanding whether
secondary pores are gener-ated at shallow depths or by local redistribution at
deeper levels, many sandstones exhibit grain dissolution pores at depths of
several kilo-metres. There is, however, considerable variation in the
proportion of total porosity attributed to secondary dissolution. In three
studies each based on hundreds of sandstones in thin section, the proportion
of secondary porosity is 60–65% (Loucks et al., 1979), 11% (Taylor et al.,
2010) and 45% (Wang et al., 2011), i.e. a mean value of about 40%. Using the
ratio of 2.5 for pore surface area between secondary and primary porosity
measured in this study, these three values equate to pore surface areas
represented by secondary porosity 79–82%, 24% and 67% of the total area,
respectively. Where the proportion of porosity represented by secondary
porosity is 30% or more, the pore surface area is predominantly in the
secondary porosity. More simply, the total pore surface area increases due to
the contribution of secondary por-osity. For secondary porosity proportions of
10%, 40% and 60% of the total porosity, the pore surface area is increased by
15%, 60% and 90% respectively.

Our measurements are for sandstones that have been buried to depths of
∼2 km. The calculation of the contribution of secondary porosity is based on
Fig. 2. Cross-plot of pore area and pore perimeter data for case studies of pri-mary and mean secondary porosity values from large data-bases covering depths from
secondary porosity. A, full data: B, close-up of data near origin in A. surface down to 3 km. The mean values belie variations in secondary porosity
with depth, but these variations are specific to individual case studies and not
readily predictable. In some cases, secondary porosity created near the surface
The combined plot of area vs. perimeter data (Fig. 2) confirms that, for the
same pore area, secondary porosity consistently exhibits a higher perimeter, will collapse and be eliminated as it is buried, while in other cases it may be
and hence higher surface area ratio. pre-served by stable surrounding grain frameworks (Nagtegaal, 1978). These
Morgan and Gordon (1970) state that larger pores have a smaller surface two possibilities could lead to decreasing and increasing pro-portions of
area while smaller pores have a greater one. Primary and sec-ondary surface secondary porosity with progressive depth. In the case of the Comley
area ratios were plotted against pore area to determine how much off an affect Sandstone, the secondary pores have not collapsed. By using a mean value for
the pore area would have on the results (Fig. 3). Fig. 3 shows that surface area proportion of secondary porosity, we are assessing the global influence on
for both primary and secondary pores increases as the pore area decreases. pore area. If most generation of secondary porosity is at shallow depths
The figure also highlights that the secondary pore surface area is higher than (Taylor et al., 2010; Bjørlykke and Jahren, 2012), the influence of secondary
porosity to surface area is relevant to all depth ranges. In the case of
that of primary pores with the same area, indicating that pore area has no
direct effect when comparing the two. subsurface microbial populations, which are most abundant at shallow depth
(McMahon and Parnell, 2014), we infer that secondary porosity helps to
enhance microbial abundance by providing additional surface area for
4. Discussion colonization at all depths.

Pore surface area is important for several reasons:

5. Conclusions
(i) Where oil adheres to the grain surfaces, increased pore surface area
The sample sets measured in this study have provided quantitative
means a greater proportion of the oil is adhering to the rock.
evidence of the different pore surface area exhibited by primary and
(ii) Increased surface area influences other important production
secondary porosity in sandstones. At the maximum resolution, the

491
D.R. Nolansnyder, J. Parnell Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 172 (2019) 489–492

Fig. 3. Cross-plot of surface area and pore area, showing that surface area for both primary and secondary pores increases as the pore area decreases. Secondary pore surface area is
higher than that of primary pores with the same area, indicating that pore area has no direct effect when comparing the two.

secondary porosity exhibits about 2.5 x the pore surface area of the primary B.E.T. surface areas? Geochem. Cosmochim. Acta 65, 1059–1070.
porosity, for equivalent pore volume. For a sandstone with 40% of the total Giles, M.R., de Boer, R.B., 1990. Origin and significance of redistributional secondary
porosity. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 7, 378–397.
porosity consisting of secondary pores, the total pore surface area would be Griebler, C., Mindl, B., Slezak, D., Geiger-Kaiser, M., 2002. Distribution patterns of at-tached
increased by 60%. and suspended bacteria in pristine and contaminated shallow aquifers studied with a in situ
sediment exposure microcosm. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 28, 117–129.
Haszeldine, R.S., Wilkinson, M., Darby, D., Macaulay, C.I., Couples, G.D., Fallick, A.E.,
Acknowledgements Fleming, C.G., Stewart, R.N.T., McAulay, G., 1999. Diagenetic porosity creation in an
overpressured graben. In: Fleet, A.J., Boldy, S.A. (Eds.), Petroleum Geology of Northwest
This research was supported by STFC grant ST/I506102/1. DRN Europe: Proceedings of the 5th Conference. Geological Society, London, pp. 1339–1350.
undertook measurements for a project contributing to an MSc degree in
Hodson, M.E., 1999. Micropore surface area variation with grain size in unweathered alkali
Integrated Petroleum Geoscience at the University of Aberdeen. Skilled feldspars: implications for surface roughness and dissolution studies. Geochem.
technical support was provided by J. Bowie. Cosmochim. Acta 62, 3429–3435.
Loucks, R.G., Dodge, M.M., Galloway, W.E., 1979. Importance of secondary leached
porosity in Lower Tertiary sandstone reservoirs along the Texas Gulf Coast. Trans. Gulf
References Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 29, 164–172.
McMahon, S., Parnell, J., 2014. Weighing the deep continental biosphere. FEMS (Fed.
Alfreider, A., Krössbacher, M., Psenner, R., 1997. Groundwater samples do not reflect Eur. Microbiol. Soc.) Microbiol. Ecol. 87, 113–120.
bacterial densities and activity in subsurface systems. Water Res. 31, 832–840. Morgan, J., Gordon, D., 1970. Influence of pore geometry on water-oil relative perme-ability.
Anguy, Y., Belin, S., Bernard, D., Fritz, B., Ferm, J.B., 1999. Modelling physical properties of J. Petrol. Technol. 22, 1199–1208.
sandstone reservoirs by blending 2D image analysis data with 3D capillary pressure data. Nagtegaal, P.J.C., 1978. Sandstone-framework instability as a function of burial diagen-esis.
Phys. Chem. Earth 24, 581–586. Journal of the Geological Society of London 135, 101–105.
Asadishad, B., Ghoshal, S., Tufenkji, N., 2011. Method for the direct observation and Parnell, J., 1987. The occurrence of hydrocarbons in Cambrian sandstones of the Welsh
quantification of survival of bacteria attached to negatively or positively charged Borderland. Geol. J. 22, 173–190.
surfaces in an aqueous medium. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 8345–8351. Parnell, J., 1992. Hydrocarbon potential of northern Ireland: III. Reservoir potential of the
Bai, H., Cochet, N., Pauss, A., Lamy, E., 2016. Bacterial cell properties and grain size permo-triassic. J. Petrol. Geol. 15, 51–70.
impact on bacteria transport and deposition in porous media. Colloids Surfaces B Parnell, J., Baba, M., Bowden, S., Muirhead, D., 2017. Subsurface biodegradation of crude
oil in a fractured basement reservoir, Shropshire, UK. Journal of the Geological
Biointerfaces 139, 148–155.
Society, London 174, 655–666.
Baker, R.O., Yarranton, H.W., Jensen, J.L., 2015. Practical Reservoir Engineering and
Characterization. Gulf Professional Publishing, Oxford. Probandt, D., Eickhorst, T., Ellrott, A., Amann, R., Knittel, K., 2018. Microbial life on a sand
Bjørlykke, K., Jahren, J., 2012. Open or closed geochemical systems during diagenesis in grain: from bulk sediment to single grains. ISME J. 12, 623–633.
sedimentary basins: constraints on mass transfer during diagenesis and the prediction of Schmidt, V., McDonald, D.A., 1979. The Role of Secondary Porosity in the Course of
porosity in sandstone and carbonate reservoirs. AAPG (Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.) Bull. 96, Sandstone Diagenesis, vol. 26. SEPM Special Publication, pp. 175–207.
2193–2214. Taylor, T.R., Giles, M.R., Hathon, L.A., Diggs, T.N., Braunsdorf, N.R., Birbiglia, G.V.,
Cerepi, A., Durand, C., Brosse, E., 2002. Pore microgeometry analysis in low-resistivity Kittridge, M.G., Macaulay, C.I., Espejo, I.S., 2010. Sandstone diagenesis and reservoir
sandstone reservoirs. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 35, 205–232. quality prediction: models, myths, and reality. AAPG (Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.) Bull. 94,
Ehrlich, R., Kennedy, S.K., Crabtree, S.J., Cannon, R.L., 1984. Petrographic image ana-lysis, 1093–1132.
I. Analysis of reservoir pore complexes. J. Sediment. Res. 54, 1365–1378. Wang, R., Shen, P., Zhao, L., 2011. Diagenesis of deep sandstone reservoirs and a quantitative
Fens, T.W.F., 2000. Petrophysical Properties from Small Rock Samples Using Image model of porosity evolution: taking the third member of Shahejie Formation in the
Analysis Techniques. Delft University Press, Delft, pp. 199. Wendong Oilfield, Dongpu Sag as an example. Petrol. Explor. Dev. 38, 552–559.
Fitzsimons, S., Parnell, J., 1995. Diagenetic History and Reservoir Potential of Permo-triassic
Sandstones in the Rathlin Basin, vol. 93. Geological Society Special Publication, pp. 21– Yang, Y.S., Liu, K.Y., Mayo, S., Tulloh, A., Clennell, M.B., Xiao, T.Q., 2013. A data-con-
35. strained modelling approach to sandstone microstructure characterisation. J. Petrol. Sci.
Gautier, J.-M., Oelkers, E.H., Schott, J., 2001. Are quartz dissolution rates proportional to Eng. 105, 76–83.

492