低压高含水致密气藏气-水相渗特征及生产动态响应

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2024.01.019

油气藏评价与开发 ›› 2024, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (1): 138-150.doi: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2024.01.019

低压高含水致密气藏气-水相渗特征及生产动态响应

郭智栋¹(),康毅力²(),王玉斌¹,古霖蛟³,游利军²,陈明君²,颜茂凌²

1.中国石油煤层气有限责任公司工程技术研究院，陕西西安 710082
2.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
3.中国石油新疆油田分公司采气一厂，新疆克拉玛依 834000

收稿日期:2023-07-12 出版日期:2024-02-26 发布日期:2024-03-05
通讯作者: 康毅力（1964—），男，博士，教授，博士生导师，本刊第二届编委会委员，主要从事储层保护理论及技术、非常规天然气、油气田开发地质研究与教学方面的工作。地址：四川省成都市新都区新都大道8号，邮政编码：610500。E-mail: cwctkyl@163.com
作者简介:郭智栋（1985—），男，硕士，高级工程师，主要从事煤层气等非常规油气的开发工作。地址：陕西省西安市莲湖区劳动路115号，邮政编码：710082。E-mail：290820603@qq.com
基金资助:
中国石油前瞻性、基础性科研攻关项目“煤系地层‘三气合采’立体开发技术研究”(2021DJ2304);中国石油煤层气有限责任公司工程技术研究院项目“大吉区块山1、盒8段致密砂岩及本溪组8号深层煤岩物性评价及储层保护对策研究”(2022-GCYKJ-03)

Gas-water relative permeability characteristics and production dynamic response of low pressure and high water cut tight gas reservoirs

GUO Zhidong¹(),KANG Yili²(),WANG Yubin¹,GU Linjiao³,YOU Lijun²,CHEN Mingjun²,YAN Maoling²

1. Engineering Technology Research Institute of CNPC Coalbed Methane Co., Ltd., Xi'an, Shaanxi 710082, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Reservoir Geology and Development Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610500, China
3. No.1 Gas Production Plant of PetroChina Xinjiang Oilfield Branch, Karamay, Xinjiang 834000, China

Received:2023-07-12 Online:2024-02-26 Published:2024-03-05

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

气-水相渗曲线反映储层综合物性特征，明确致密砂岩气-水相渗行为与气井生产动态的关系，有利于致密气藏高效开发。以鄂尔多斯盆地东缘典型致密砂岩气藏为研究对象，将储层分为3类并开展气-水相渗实验，结合X射线衍射、扫描电镜和核磁共振等岩心分析手段，揭示气-水相渗与气井生产动态曲线的关系。结果表明：①Ⅰ类相渗曲线两相过渡区较宽，孔隙类型以粒间孔为主，Ⅱ类相渗曲线两相过渡区较窄，孔隙类型以粒间孔和晶间孔为主，Ⅲ类储层相渗曲线两相过渡区极窄，孔隙类型以晶间孔为主；②储层黏土矿物含量高，高岭石和绿泥石有利于气水两相流动，伊利石不利于气水两相流动；③孔喉差异大，大致分为3类：中—粗孔喉（大于1.0 μm）、细孔喉（0.1~1.0 μm）和微孔喉（小于0.1 μm），Ⅰ类、Ⅱ类和Ⅲ类储层的中—粗孔喉占比分别约为40%、10%和4%；④根据上述3类储层的气-水相渗特征，可将气井分为3类，其生产动态特征与相渗曲线预测结果均相符，Ⅰ类井主要产层为Ⅰ类储层，有效厚度约为7 m，平均日产气量约为2×10⁴ m³，稳产时间长，Ⅱ类井主要产层为Ⅱ类储层，有效厚度约为5 m，平均日产气量约为1×10⁴ m³，Ⅲ类井主要产层为Ⅲ类储层，有效厚度约为6 m，平均日产气量约为0.5×10⁴ m³，稳产时间极短。通过分析致密砂岩气-水相渗特征预测气井生产动态，揭示了孔隙结构和黏土矿物对气水流动行为的影响，可为制定低压高含水致密气开发过程降阻提效措施提供理论支撑。

关键词: 致密砂岩, 气-水相渗, 孔隙结构, 黏土矿物, 生产动态

Abstract:

The gas-water relative permeability curve reflects the comprehensive physical properties of the reservoir. Clarifying the relationship between the gas-water relative permeability behavior of tight sandstone and the production performance of gas wells is conducive to the efficient development of tight gas reservoirs. Taking the typical tight sandstone gas reservoirs in the eastern margin of Ordos Basin as the research object, the reservoirs are divided into three types and gas-water relative permeability experiments are carried out. Combined with core analysis methods such as X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy and nuclear magnetic resonance, the relationship between gas-water relative permeability and gas well production performance curve is revealed. The results show that: ① The two-phase transition zone of relative permeability curve I is wide, the pore type of which is mainly intergranular pores. The two-phase transition zone of relative permeability curve Ⅱ is narrow, the pore types of which are mainly intergranular pores and intergranular pores. The two-phase transition zone of relative permeability curve Ⅲ is extremely narrow, and the pore type is mainly dominated by intergranular pores; ② The clay mineral content is high. kaolinite and chlorite are conducive to gas-water phase flow. Illite is not conducive to gas-water phase flow; ③ The pore and throat of in the reservoir have large differences and can be roughly divided into three categories: large pores（greater than 1.0 μm）, mesopores（0.1~1.0 μm） and small pores（less than 0.1 μm）. The large pores in the reservoir of class I, Ⅱ and Ⅲ account for about 40%, 10%, and 4%, respectively; ④ The gas wells can be divided into three types, the production performance of which are consistent with the predicted results of the relative permeability curves. The main production layer of the well of class I responds to the reservoir of class I. The effective layer thickness is about 7 m. The average daily production is about 2×10⁴ m³ with a long stable production period. The main production layer of the well of class Ⅱ responds to the reservoir of class Ⅱ. The effective layer thickness is about 5 m. The average daily production is about 1×10⁴ m³. The main production layer of the well of class Ⅲ responds to the reservoir of class Ⅲ. The effective layer thickness is about 6 m. The average daily production is about 0.5×10⁴ m³ with a very short stable production period. By analyzing the gas-water relative permeability characteristics to predict gas well production dynamics, the impact of pore structure and clay minerals on gas-water flow behavior is revealed. This can provide theoretical support for developing measures to reduce resistance and enhance efficiency in the development process of low-pressure, high-water-content tight gas fields.

Key words: tight sandstone, gas-water relative permeability, pore structure, clay mineral, production performance

中图分类号:

TE312

郭智栋, 康毅力, 王玉斌, 古霖蛟, 游利军, 陈明君, 颜茂凌. 低压高含水致密气藏气-水相渗特征及生产动态响应[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(1): 138-150.

GUO Zhidong, KANG Yili, WANG Yubin, GU Linjiao, YOU Lijun, CHEN Mingjun, YAN Maoling. Gas-water relative permeability characteristics and production dynamic response of low pressure and high water cut tight gas reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(1): 138-150.

图/表 17

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

表4

图3

图4

图5

图6

表5

图7

图8

表6

图9

图10

图11

参考文献 31

[1]	倪良田, 钟建华, 王桂林, 等. 吐哈盆地水西沟群致密砂岩气成藏机制新理论——近生近储和自生自储[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2022, 50(3): 176-186.
	NI Liangtian, ZHONG Jianhua, WANG Guilin, et al. A new gas-accumulation theory of tight sandstone gas accumulation in Turpan-Hami Basin-proximal-generation and proximal-storage type and self-generation and self-storage type[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2022, 50(3): 176-186.
[2]	邹才能, 杨智, 董大忠, 等. 非常规源岩层系油气形成分布与前景展望[J]. 地球科学, 2022, 47(5): 1517-1533.
	ZOU Caineng, YANG Zhi, DONG Dazhong, et al. Formation, distribution and prospect of unconventional hydrocarbons in source rock strata in China[J]. Earth Science, 2022, 47(5): 1517-1533.
[3]	贾爱林, 位云生, 郭智, 等. 中国致密砂岩气开发现状与前景展望[J]. 天然气工业, 2022, 42(1): 83-92.
	JIA Ailin, WEI Yunsheng, GUO Zhi, et al. Development status and prospect of tight sandstone gas in China[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2022, 42(1): 83-92.
[4]	赵永强, 倪春华, 吴小奇, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地杭锦旗地区二叠系地层水地球化学特征和来源[J]. 石油实验地质, 2022, 44(2): 279-287.
	ZHAO Yongqiang, NI Chunhua, WU Xiaoqi, et al. Geochemical characteristics and source of Permian formation water in Hangjinqi area, Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2022, 44(2): 279-287.
[5]	王伟, 陈朝兵, 许爽, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长组致密砂岩不同尺度孔喉分形特征及其控制因素[J]. 石油实验地质, 2022, 44(1): 33-40.
	WANG Wei, CHEN Zhaobing, XU Shuang, et al. Fractal characteristics and its controlling factors of pore-throat with different scales in tight sandstones of the Yanchang Formation in the Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2022, 44(1): 33-40.
[6]	WU F, LI Y, BURNHAM B, et al. Fractal-based NMR permeability estimation in tight sandstone: A case study of the Jurassic rocks in the Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2022, 218: 110-118.
[7]	叶礼友, 高树生, 杨洪志, 等. 致密砂岩气藏产水机理与开发对策[J]. 天然气工业, 2015, 35(2): 41-46.
	YE Liyou, GAO Shusheng, YANG Hongzhi, et al. Water production mechanism and development strategy of tight sandstone gas reservoirs[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2015, 35(12): 27-34.
[8]	YANG Y B, XIAO W L, BERNABE Y, et al. Effect of pore structure and injection pressure on waterflooding in tight oil sandstone cores using NMR technique and pore network simulation[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2022, 217: 110-119.
[9]	祝海华, 张廷山, 钟大康, 等. 致密砂岩储集层的二元孔隙结构特征[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2019, 46(6): 1220-1228. doi: 10.11698/PED.2019.06.20
	ZHU Haihua, ZHANG Tingshan, ZHONG Dakang, et al. Binary pore structure characteristics of tight sandstone reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(6): 1220-1228. doi: 10.11698/PED.2019.06.20
[10]	LIU G F, XIE S T, TIAN W, et al. Effect of pore-throat structure on gas-water seepage behaviour in a tight sandstone gas reservoir[J]. Fuel, 2022, 3(1): 12-19.
[11]	计玮. 致密砂岩气储层气水相渗特征及其影响因素——以鄂尔多斯盆地苏里格气田陕234-235井区盒8段、山1段为例[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2019, 49(6): 1540-1551.
	JI Wei. Gas water relative flow of tight sandstone gas reservoirs and its influencing factors: Case study of member 8 of Permian Xiashihezi Formation and member 1 of Permian Shanxi Formation in Shaan Well 234-235 area of Sulige gas field in Ordos Basin[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Earth Science Edition), 2019, 49(6): 1540-1551.
[12]	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.
[13]	葛东升, 蔡振华, 刘灵童, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地东缘临兴地区太原组太2段致密砂岩储层孔隙结构及渗流特征分析[J]. 非常规油气, 2020, 7(6): 11-17.
	GE Dongsheng, CAI Zhenhua, LIU Lingtong, et al. Analysis on microscopic pore structure and seepage characteristics of tight sandstone reservoir of Tai 2 section of Taiyuan Formation in Linxing area, Ordos Basin[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2020, 7(6): 11-17.
[14]	LIU G F, WANG Y F, YIN H, et al. Determination of gas-water seepage characteristics with consideration of dynamic pore-throat structure in a tight sandstone gas formation[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2022, 13(6): 105-126.
[15]	ESMAEILI S, SARMA H, HARDING T G, et al. Review of the effect of temperature on oil-water relative permeability in porous rocks of oil reservoirs[J]. Fuel, 2019, 23(7): 91-116.
[16]	ZHANG J, LI X Z, SHEN W J, et al. Study of the Effect of Movable Water Saturation on Gas Production in Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoirs[J]. Energies, 2020, 13(18): 45-46. doi: 10.3390/en13010045
[17]	YIN X D, SHU J, LI Y L, et al. Impact of pore structure and clay content on the water-gas relative permeability curve within tight sandstones: A case study from the LS block, eastern Ordos Basin, China[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2020, 8(1): 103-124.
[18]	杨玉斌, 肖文联, 韩建, 等. 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, et al. Gas-water flow characteristics and influencing factors of tight sandstone in Danfengchang Gas Field[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2022, 12(2): 356-364.
[19]	LI Y G, XIAO F, XU W, et al. Performance evaluation on water-producing gas wells based on gas & water relative permeability curves: A case study of tight sandstone gas reservoirs in the Sulige gas field, Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry B, 2016, 3(1): 52-58. doi: 10.1016/j.ngib.2016.02.006
[20]	刘喜杰, 马遵敬, 韩冬, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地东缘临兴区块致密砂岩优质储层形成的主控因素[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2018, 29(4): 481-490.
	LIU Xijie, MA Zunjing, HAN Dong, et al. Research on the main factors of high quality tight sandstone reservoir in Linxing block, Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2018, 29(4): 481-490.
[21]	王卓, 赵靖舟, 孟选刚, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地东南部柴上塬区三叠系延长组长6致密油成藏主控因素及富集规律[J]. 石油实验地质, 2022, 44(2): 251-261.
	WANG Zhuo, ZHAO Jingzhou, MENG Xuangang, et al. Key controlling factors and enrichment mechanisms of tight reservoirs in 6th member of Triassic Yanchang Formation, Chaishangyuan area, southeastern Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2022, 44(2): 251-261.
[22]	SHARAWY M E, GAAFAR G R. Impacts of petrophysical properties of sandstone reservoirs on their irreducible water saturation: Implication and prediction[J]. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 2019, 15(6): 118-132.
[23]	PENG L, ZHANG C, MA H L, et al. Estimating irreducible water saturation and permeability of sandstones from nuclear magnetic resonance measurements by fractal analysis[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2019, 11(6): 565-574.
[24]	孙雅雄, 张坦, 丁文龙, 等. 压汞法与数字图像分析技术在致密砂岩储层微观孔隙定量分析中的应用——以鄂尔多斯盆地吴起油田X区块为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2022, 44(6): 1105-1115.
	SUN Yaxiong, ZHANG Tan, DING Wenlong, et al. Application of mercury intrusion method and digital image analysis in quantitative analysis of micro-scale pores in tight sandstone reservoirs: a case study of X block in Wuqi Oil Field, Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2022, 44(6): 1105-1115.
[25]	CHENG Y, ZHANG C, ZHU L Q. A fractal irreducible water saturation model for capillary tubes and its application in tight gas reservoir[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2017, 15(9): 731-739.
[26]	QIAO J C, ZENG J H, CHEN D X, et al. Permeability estimation of tight sandstone from pore structure characterization[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2022, 13(5): 105-116.
[27]	孔星星, 肖佃师, 蒋恕, 等. 联合高压压汞和核磁共振分类评价致密砂岩储层——以鄂尔多斯盆地临兴区块为例[J]. 天然气工业, 2020, 40(3): 38-47.
	KONG Xingxing, XIAO Dianshi, JIANG Shu, et al. Application of the combination of high-pressure mercury injection and nuclear magnetic resonance to the classification and evaluation of tight sandstone reservoirs: A case study of the Linxing Block in the Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2020, 40(3): 38-47.
[28]	李跃刚, 肖峰, 徐文, 等. 基于气水相对渗透率曲线的产水气井开采效果评价——以苏里格气田致密砂岩气藏为例[J]. 天然气工业, 2015, 35(12): 27-34.
	LI Yuegang, XIAO Feng, XU Wen, et al. Performance evaluation on water-producing gas wells based on gas-water relative permeability curves: A case study of tight sandstone gas reservoirs in the Sulige Gas Field, Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2015, 35(12): 27-34.
[29]	潘婷婷, 张枫, 邢昆明, 等. 不同储层相对渗透率曲线归一化方法评价[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2016, 35(3): 78-82.
	PAN Tingting, ZHANG Feng, XING Kunming, et al. Evaluation of the relative-permeability-curve normalizing method for the different reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2016, 35(3): 78-82.
[30]	马云峰, 赵建国, 孙龙, 等. 应力作用下气藏水体微观赋存特征及渗流规律——以鄂尔多斯盆地神木气田二叠系盒8段致密储层为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2023, 45(3): 466-473.
	MA Yunfeng, ZHAO Jianguo, SUN Long, et al. Microscopic occurrence characteristics and seepage law of water bodies in gas reservoir under stress:a case study of tight reservoirs in the eighth member of Permian Shihezi Formation, Shenmu Gas Field, Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2023, 45(3): 466-473.
[31]	何晨毓, 刘丽琼, 肖玉茹, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地红河油田长8油藏效益开发地质评价参数的确定[J]. 石油实验地质, 2023, 45(4): 791-796.
	HE Chenyu, LIU Liqiong, XIAO Yuru, et al. Determination of geological evaluation parameters for profitable development of Chang 8 tight oil reservoir in Honghe oil field, Ordos Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2023, 45(4): 791-796.

类型	孔隙度/%	渗透率/10^-3 μm²	中值半径/μm	排驱压力/MPa	最大孔喉半径/μm	分选系数
Ⅰ类	>12	>1.0	>0.20	<0.5	>1.5	<1.5
Ⅱ类	6~12	0.1~1.0	0.05~0.20	0.5~1.5	0.5~1.5	1.5~2.5
Ⅲ类	<6	<0.1	<0.05	>1.5	<0.5	>2.5

样号	长度/cm	直径/cm	孔隙度/%	渗透率/10^-3 μm²	类型
DJ-1	5.12	2.51	8.39	9.65	Ⅰ
DJ-2	4.94	2.52	9.90	1.40
DJ-3	5.12	2.51	11.73	1.87
DJ-4	5.13	2.53	15.90	0.33	Ⅱ
DJ-5	4.88	2.51	8.69	0.45
DJ-6	5.06	2.51	8.07	0.45
DJ-7	4.94	2.51	7.56	0.15	Ⅲ
DJ-8	5.04	2.52	5.81	0.19
DJ-9	5.11	2.51	5.80	0.15

样号	孔隙度/ %	渗透率/ 10^-3 μm²	束缚水饱和度/%	束缚水气相相对渗透率
DJ-1	8.39	9.52	33.30	0.67
DJ-2	9.90	1.38	40.46	0.57
DJ-3	11.73	1.85	39.26	0.52
DJ-4	15.90	0.33	57.32	0.21
DJ-5	8.69	0.44	58.11	0.18
DJ-6	8.07	0.45	69.65	0.28
DJ-7	7.56	0.15	78.01	0.10
DJ-8	5.81	0.19	69.65	0.28
DJ-9	5.80	0.15	70.17	0.04

类别	S_wi/%	K_rg（S_wi）	S_x/%	K_x（S_x）	S_gi/%	K_rw（S_gi）
Ⅰ	33.56	0.551	58.78	0.121	0	1.000
Ⅱ	59.35	0.110	68.25	0.023	20.32	0.176
Ⅲ	73.23	0.114	78.93	0.028	18.74	0.065

类别	井号	孔隙度/ %	渗透率/ 10^-3μm²	平均日产气量/m³	平均日产水量/m³	主力层厚/m
Ⅰ	DJ-A	12.66	1.32	10 450.18	6.98	7.22
Ⅱ	DJ-B	10.92	0.31	7 792.74	4.27	5.01
Ⅲ	DJ-C	6.11	0.12	5 874.51	1.21	5.98

低压高含水致密气藏气-水相渗特征及生产动态响应

Gas-water relative permeability characteristics and production dynamic response of low pressure and high water cut tight gas reservoirs

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 17

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	王晓明,陈军斌,任大忠. 陆相页岩油储层孔隙结构表征和渗流规律研究进展及展望 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(1): 23-30.
[2]	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.
[3]	赵兰. 致密砂岩储层微裂缝发育特征及对物性的影响——以杭锦旗地区十里加汗区带为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 285-291.
[4]	韩磊,刘俊州,杨睿,张广智,周游. 基于VTI介质的叠前弹性阻抗反演方法应用——以川西坳陷须家河组致密砂岩裂缝性储层为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 313-319.
[5]	游利军,王阳,康毅力,唐际锐,刘江,杨东升. 含水致密砂岩储层热激增渗的物性条件 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 320-328.
[6]	唐波涛,曾冀,陈伟华,陈一鑫,王涛,刘成,冯逢. 川中秋林地区致密砂岩水平井多簇射孔优化设计方法及应用效果 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 337-344.
[7]	刘成川,王勇飞,毕有益. 中江气田窄河道致密砂岩气藏高效开发技术 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 345-355.
[8]	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.
[9]	刘树根, 冉波, 叶玥豪, 王世玉, 杨迪, 罗超, 韩雨樾, 宋金民, 张旋. 贵州习水骑龙村奥陶系五峰组—志留系龙马溪组剖面 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 10-28.
[10]	王英伟,伍顺伟,覃建华,叶义平,高阳,张景. 超临界CO₂浸泡对玛湖不同黏土矿物含量砂砾岩储层渗透率影响 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(6): 837-844.
[11]	刘露,王勇飞,詹泽东,解金凤. 新场J₂s₂致密砂岩气藏水平井采收率主控因素研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(6): 890-896.
[12]	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.
[13]	宋文辉,刘磊,孙海,张凯,杨永飞,姚军. 基于数字岩心的页岩油储层孔隙结构表征与流动能力研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(4): 497-505.
[14]	陈明江,刘俊海,程亮. 强纵向非均质性油藏油水层识别及油水界面精细刻画 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(3): 428-436.
[15]	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.