丹凤场气田致密砂岩气水渗流特征及影响因素

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2022.02.011

油气藏评价与开发 ›› 2022, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (2): 356-364.doi: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2022.02.011

丹凤场气田致密砂岩气水渗流特征及影响因素

杨玉斌¹(),肖文联¹(),韩建²,苟玲²,李闽¹,周克明³,欧阳沐鲲²,陈黎²

1.西南石油大学油气藏地质及开发工程国家重点实验室,四川成都 610500
2.中国石油西南油气田分公司重庆气矿,重庆 400021
3.中国石油西南油气田勘探开发研究院,四川成都 610213

收稿日期:2021-03-10 出版日期:2022-04-26 发布日期:2022-05-07
通讯作者: 肖文联 E-mail:1256360921@qq.com;joshxiao@163.com
作者简介:杨玉斌（1994—）,男,在读博士研究生,主要从事非常规油气渗流物理及其在油气田开发中的应用研究工作。地址：四川省成都市新都区新都大道8号西南石油大学,邮政编码：610500。E-mail: 1256360921@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金面上项目“致密砂岩气藏岩石非线性有效应力耦合机制研究”(51874248);国家自然科学基金联合基金重点支持项目“黏度可控的原位增黏体系构建及高效驱油机理研究”(U19B2010)

Gas-water flow characteristics and influencing factors of tight sandstone in Danfengchang Gas Field

YANG Yubin¹(),XIAO Wenlian¹(),HAN Jian²,GOU Ling²,LI Min¹,ZHOU Keming³,OUYANG Mukun²,CHEN Li²

1. State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610500, China
2. Chongqing Gas Mine, Southwest Oil and Gas Field Branch of CNPC, Chongqing 400021, China
3. Exploration and Development Research Institute, PetroChina Southwest Oil and Gas Field, Chengdu, Sichuan 610213, China

Received:2021-03-10 Online:2022-04-26 Published:2022-05-07
Contact: XIAO Wenlian E-mail:1256360921@qq.com;joshxiao@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了认识驱替压差对不同类型储层气相渗流能力的影响,明确不同类型储层的合理开采压力,以丹风场气田须家河组主力储层Ⅱ类和Ⅲ类致密砂岩为研究对象,借助核磁共振技术开展两类储层致密岩样在不同驱替压差下的气驱水实验,分析了驱替压差对两类储层气相流动能力的影响。结果表明：驱替压差对Ⅱ类和Ⅲ类储层岩样中气相流动特征的影响程度不同。Ⅱ类储层岩样中气相流动特征主要受驱替压差的影响,驱替压差越大,气相流动能力越强,且主要影响小孔喉中的流动能力;Ⅲ类储层岩样中气相流动特征不仅受驱替压差影响,而且还受储层的孔隙结构约束,当驱替压差与储层毛管压力相接近时气相流动能力最强。因此,对于丹凤场气田不同类型致密砂岩储层,在开采时应采用最佳生产压力使气相流动处于最佳状态。

关键词: 气水两相流动, 核磁共振, 微观孔隙结构, 致密气, 须家河组

Abstract:

In order to understand the influence of displacement pressure on the gas flow capacity for different types of reservoirs and clarify the reasonable production pressures of different types of reservoirs, the tight sandstones of the main reservoir type Ⅱ and Ⅲ in the Xujiahe Formation of Danfengchang Gas Field are taken as the research object. And with the help of the NMR technology, the gas-flooding experiments of the tight rock samples of the two types of reservoirs under different displacement pressures are carried out to analyze the effect of displacement pressure on the gas flow capacity. The results show that the the pore structure and the displacement pressure difference have different effects on the gas flow characteristics of the rock samples in type Ⅱ and type Ⅲ reservoir. The gas flow characteristics of the rock samples in type Ⅱ reservoir are mainly affected by the displacement pressure difference. The greater the displacement pressure difference, the stronger the gas flow ability. And it mainly affects the flow ability in the small pore throat. While the pore structure and displacement pressure difference of type Ⅲ reservoir rock samples affect the gas flow characteristics together. When the capillary pressures of the layers are close to each other, the gas flow capacity is the best. Therefore, for tight sandstones in different types of reservoirs in Danfengchang Gas Field, the best production pressure should be used to achieve the best gas flow capacity during production.

Key words: gas-water two-phase flow, NMR（nuclear magnetic resonance）, microscopic pore structure, tight gas reservoir, Xujiahe Formation

中图分类号:

TE311

杨玉斌,肖文联,韩建,苟玲,李闽,周克明,欧阳沐鲲,陈黎. 丹凤场气田致密砂岩气水渗流特征及影响因素[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 356-364.

YANG Yubin,XIAO Wenlian,HAN Jian,GOU Ling,LI Min,ZHOU Keming,OUYANG Mukun,CHEN Li. Gas-water flow characteristics and influencing factors of tight sandstone in Danfengchang Gas Field[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2022, 12(2): 356-364.

图/表 10

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

表2

图6

图7

表3

参考文献 23

[1]	黄素, 胡雪涛. 丹凤场构造须家河组储层特征及主控因素分析[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2011, 34(2):11-14.
	HUANG Su, HU Xuetao. Reservoir characteristics and main controlling factors of Xujiahe Formation in Danfengchang structure[J]. Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 2011, 34(2): 11-14.
[2]	李晓平. 地下油气渗流力学[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2015.
	LI Xiaoping. Underground oil and gas seepage mechanics[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2015.
[3]	全国石油天然气标准化技术委员会. 岩石中两相流体相对渗透率测定方法:GB/T 28912-2012[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2012.
	China Oil and Natural Gas Standardization Technology Committee. Test method for two phase relative permeability in rock: GB/T 28912-2012[S]. Beijing: China Standards Press, 2012.
[4]	HONARPOUR M, MAHMOOD S M. Relative-permeability measurements: An overview[J]. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 1988, 40(8): 963-966. doi: 10.2118/18565-PA
[5]	ZHOU Q L, LIU H H, BODVARSSON G S, et al. Flow and transport in unsaturated fractured rock: effects of multiscale heterogeneity of hydrogeological properties[J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2003, 60(1): 1-30. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7722(02)00080-3
[6]	RAMSTAD T, IDOWU N, NARDI C, et al. Relative permeability calculations from two-phase flow simulations directly on digital images of porous rocks[J]. Transport in Porous Media, 2012, 94(2): 487-504. doi: 10.1007/s11242-011-9877-8
[7]	XIAO B Q, FAN J T, DING F. Prediction of relative permeability of unsaturated porous media based on fractal theory and Monte Carlo simulation[J]. Energy & Fuels, 2012, 26(11): 6971-6978. doi: 10.1021/ef3013322
[8]	高树生, 叶礼友, 熊伟, 等. 大型低渗致密含水气藏渗流机理及开发对策[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2013, 35(7):93-99.
	GAO Shushen, YE Liyou, XIONG Wei, et al. The seepage mechanism and development countermeasures of large-scale low-permeability tight water-bearing gas reservoirs[J]. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2013, 35(7): 93-99.
[9]	何更生, 唐海. 油层物理[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2011.
	HE Gengsheng, TANG Hai. Reservoir physics[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2011.
[10]	AHMADI M A. Connectionist approach estimates gas-oil relative permeability in petroleum reservoirs: Application to reservoir simulation[J]. Fuel, 2015, 140(1): 429-439. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.058
[11]	DACY J M. Core tests for relative permeability of unconventional gas reservoirs[C]// Paper SPE-135427-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, September, 2010.
[12]	TOTH J, BODI T, SZUCS P, et al. Convenient formulae for determination of relative permeability from unsteady-state fluid displacements in core plugs[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2002, 36(1): 33-44. doi: 10.1016/S0920-4105(02)00249-8
[13]	HAMOUDA A A, KAROUSSI O, CHUKWUDEME E A. Relative permeability as a function of temperature, initial water saturation and flooding fluid compositions for modified oil-wet chalk[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2008, 63(1): 61-72. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2008.10.002
[14]	SHEN P, ZHU B, LI X B, et al. An experimental study of the influence of interfacial tension on water-oil two-phase relative permeability[J]. Transport in Porous Media, 2010, 85(2): 505-520. doi: 10.1007/s11242-010-9575-y
[15]	董鑫旭, 冯强汉, 王冰, 等. 苏里格西部致密砂岩储层不同孔隙类型下的气水渗流规律[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2019, 26(6):36-45.
	DONG Xinxu, FENG Qianghan, WANG Bing, et al. Gas-water percolation law of tight sandstone reservoirs with different pore types in western Sulige[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2019, 26(6): 36-45.
[16]	王文举. 致密砂岩气藏气水两相渗流特征实验研究[D]. 北京:中国石油大学(北京), 2017.
	WANG Wenju. Experimental study on characteristics of gas-water two-phase flow in tight sand gas reservoir[D]. Beijing: China University of Petroleum(Beijing), 2017.
[17]	李海波, 郭和坤, 杨正明, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地陕北地区三叠系长7致密油赋存空间[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2015, 42(3):396-400.
	LI Haibo, GUO Hekun, YANG Zhengming, et al. The occurrence space of Triassic Chang 7 tight oil in the northern part of Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2015, 42(3): 396-400.
[18]	CHEN M, LI M, ZHAO J Z, et al. Irreducible water distribution from nuclear magnetic resonance and constant-rate mercury injection methods in tight oil reservoirs[J]. International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Technology, 2018, 17(4): 443-457. doi: 10.1504/IJOGCT.2018.090972
[19]	倪坚强. 苏里格低渗致密砂岩气藏气水两相渗流机理实验研究[D]. 北京:中国地质大学(北京), 2016.
	NI Jianqiang. Experimental study on gas-water two-phase seepage mechanism of Sulige low-permeability tight sandstone gas reservoir[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences(Beijing), 2016.
[20]	CIVAN F, DONALDSON E C. Relative permeability from unsteady-state displacements with capillary pressure included[J]. SPE Formation Evaluation, 1989, 4(2): 189-193. doi: 10.2118/16200-PA
[21]	莫邵元, 何顺利, 雷刚, 等. 致密气藏气水相对渗透率理论及实验分析[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2015, 26(11):2149-2154.
	MO Shaoyuan, HE Shunli, LEI Gang, et al. Theoretical and experimental analysis of gas-water relative permeability in tight gas[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2015, 26(11): 2149-2154.
[22]	张瑞. 致密气砂岩气水相渗特征研究[D]. 西安:西北大学, 2014.
	ZHANG Rui. Research on gas-water permeability characteristics of tight gas sandstone[D]. Xi’an: Northwest University, 2014.
[23]	HUANG H X, SUN W, JI W M, et al. Effects of pore-throat structure on gas permeability in the tight sandstone reservoirs of the upper triassic Yanchang formation in the western Ordos Basin, China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2018, 162: 602-616. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2017.10.076

岩样编号	岩样长度（cm）	岩样直径（cm）	渗透率（10^-3μm²）	孔隙度（%）	储层类型	参考驱替压差（MPa）	实验驱替压差（MPa）
DQ001-1-12	5.84	2.55	0.795	9.30	Ⅱ	1.30	0.70
DQ001-1-13	5.50	2.48	0.784	9.72		1.34	1.30
DQ001-1-14	5.76	2.46	0.759	8.89		1.30	2.00
DQ001-1-22	5.62	2.53	0.254	8.82	Ⅲ	2.24	1.20
DQ001-1-26	5.78	2.55	0.261	8.73		2.20	2.20
DQ001-1-27	5.68	2.53	0.259	8.71		2.20	3.10

储层类型	岩样编号	驱替压差Δp	残余水下气相相对渗透率	残余水饱和度（%）	等渗点处相对渗透率	等渗点饱和度（%）
Ⅱ类储层	DQ001-1-12	小于p_c	0.40	48.84	0.013	71.02
	DQ001-1-13	趋向于p_c	0.65	34.21	0.013	69.00
	DQ001-1-14	大于p_c	0.99	30.34	0.014	66.07
Ⅲ类储层	DQ001-1-22	小于p_c	0.13	67.35	0.008	85.00
	DQ001-1-26	趋向于p_c	0.48	40.31	0.009	70.11
	DQ001-1-27	大于p_c	0.16	47.45	0.003	74.00

储层类型	岩样编号	最小可动流体横向弛豫时间
储层类型	岩样编号	下限（ms）	上限（ms）
Ⅱ类储层	DQ001-1-12	0.28	102.00
	DQ001-1-13	0.17	105.00
	DQ001-1-14	0.10	101.00
Ⅲ类储层	DQ001-1-22	0.16	98.00
	DQ001-1-26	0.10	46.42
	DQ001-1-27	0.07	56.94

丹凤场气田致密砂岩气水渗流特征及影响因素

Gas-water flow characteristics and influencing factors of tight sandstone in Danfengchang Gas Field

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 23

相关文章 11

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	阎丽妮, 朱宏权, 叶素娟, 朱丽. 新场构造带须家河组二段“饼状”缝的成因及油气地质意义 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 559-568.
[2]	张庄, 章顺利, 何秀彬, 谢丹, 刘妍鷨. 川西坳陷须家河组二段裂缝发育特征及形成主控因素——以合兴场气田为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 581-590.
[3]	陈秀林, 王秀宇, 许昌民, 张聪. 基于核磁共振与微观数值模拟的CO₂埋存形态及分布特征研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(3): 296-304.
[4]	李颖,李茂茂,李海涛,于皓,张启辉,罗红文. 水相渗吸对页岩储层的物化作用机理研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(1): 64-73.
[5]	李楚雄,申宝剑,卢龙飞,蒋启贵,潘安阳,陶金雨,丁江辉. 松辽盆地沙河子组页岩孔隙结构表征——基于低场核磁共振技术 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(3): 468-476.
[6]	范希彬,蒲万芬,单江涛,杜代军,覃建华,高阳. 致密砾岩油藏CO₂吞吐提高采收率可行性研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(6): 831-836.
[7]	孙藏军,黄磊,吴浩君,姜永,王迪. 渤海海域B构造特低渗—低渗储层酸敏性评价 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(5): 703-708.
[8]	熊亮,庞河清,赵勇,魏力民,周桦,曹茜. 威荣深层页岩气储层微观孔隙结构表征及分类评价 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(2): 154-163.
[9]	杜洋,雷炜,李莉,赵哲军,倪杰,刘通. 深层页岩气水平井压后生产管理与排采技术 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(1): 95-101.
[10]	王安龙. 基于常规测井资料综合评价延川南致密砂岩气层 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2019, 9(2): 75-79.
[11]	李虎,范存辉,秦启荣,张玮,吴全鹤. 川东北元坝中部地区须家河组致密储层裂缝特征及成因探讨 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2018, 8(2): 1-6.