SUBSURFACE ANALYSIS
& VISUALISATION
← All services

CHARACTERISE / SERVICE 08

Wettability & fluid–rock interaction.

Wettability assessment, fluid compatibility and formation-damage investigations connect rock characterisation with the fluids and conditions that matter to your project.

THE QUESTION

How will the rock and fluids interact?

The same rock can behave differently as fluid composition, saturation history and test conditions change. Define the intended fluid exposure and select representative samples before designing the programme.

Methods & applications

  • Wettability assessment with an agreed test method
  • Fluid–fluid and fluid–rock compatibility investigations
  • Formation-damage testing and permeability response
  • Baseline and post-exposure comparison
  • Integration with mineralogy, CT and core analysis

A clearly scoped delivery.

CTS is your point of contact for planning the programme and bringing the results together. Where specialist laboratory or interpretation input is required, delivery responsibilities are identified in your proposal.

The scope distinguishes the measurement package and its included outputs from additional processing, interpretation and interactive reporting. Sample requirements and method limitations are confirmed before work begins.

SURFACE · COMPATIBILITY · FLOW

Three questions.
One connected programme.

Understand surface preference, check fluid compatibility and investigate changes in flow performance. Select one workstream or connect all three around the same rock and fluid system.

Wettability: contrasting surface preferencesTwo conceptual water droplets on a rock surface in oil: a spreading droplet and a more rounded droplet. No contact-angle measurements are represented. Oil phase More spreadingMore rounded Water phase · surface preference
01 / WETTABILITY

Which fluid favours the surface?

Assess wetting behaviour with the selected fluid system, preparation history and test method. Use the findings to inform displacement interpretation and further SCAL work.

Connect with SCAL interpretation ↗
Fluid compatibility screeningTwo separate fluids feed a mixed-fluid assessment. The graphic represents a test workflow, not a compatibility result. + Fluid AFluid BAssess Composition · conditions · exposure
02 / FLUID COMPATIBILITY

How do the fluids behave together?

Investigate the planned fluids and their interaction with the rock. Agree the mixing or exposure conditions and the observations needed to assess compatibility.

Add mineralogical context ↗
Formation damage: investigating a restricted flow pathA conceptual pore channel between mineral grains with particles at a constriction. This illustrates one possible mechanism, not a measured outcome. Investigate changes in flowRock fabric · fluids · test history
03 / FORMATION DAMAGE

What changes the flow response?

Compare baseline and post-exposure performance using an agreed test sequence. Assess permeability response and use complementary observations to investigate potential impairment mechanisms.

Establish the physical baseline ↗

Conceptual illustrations · not to scale.

BEFORE · EXPOSURE · AFTER

Make the comparison meaningful.

  1. 01

    Establish the baseline

    Record sample condition, preparation and initial properties. Select complementary mineralogy or CT where it will help explain the response.

  2. 02

    Introduce the fluids

    Apply the agreed fluid sequence and exposure or flow conditions, retaining a clear record of composition, temperature and pressure.

  3. 03

    Reassess the response

    Compare the relevant measurements and observations. Separate measured changes from proposed mechanisms and identify further tests where needed.

A CONNECTED WORKFLOW

From question to evidence.

  1. 01

    Define the fluids, conditions and decision

  2. 02

    Characterise the baseline and prepare samples

  3. 03

    Undertake the agreed exposure or flow tests

  4. 04

    Compare responses and report interpretation

Interpretation boundary
Results apply to the samples, fluids and conditions tested. Preparation and saturation history affect interpretation; laboratory findings need geological and engineering context before field application.