湖相页岩油地层岩相组合类型划分及其油气勘探意义——以博兴洼陷沙河街组为例

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2023.01.005

油气藏评价与开发 ›› 2023, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (1): 39-51.doi: 10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2023.01.005

湖相页岩油地层岩相组合类型划分及其油气勘探意义——以博兴洼陷沙河街组为例

林中凯¹(),张少龙^2,³,李传华¹,王敏⁴,闫建平³,蔡进功²(),耿斌⁴,胡钦红⁵

1.中国石化胜利油田分公司油气勘探管理中心，山东东营 257001
2.同济大学海洋地质国家重点实验室，上海 200092
3.西南石油大学地球科学与技术学院，四川成都 610500
4.中国石化胜利油田分公司勘探开发研究院，山东东营 257015
5.德克萨斯大学阿灵顿分校地球与环境科学系，美国 76019

收稿日期:2022-11-07 出版日期:2023-02-26 发布日期:2023-01-30
通讯作者: 蔡进功 E-mail:linzhongkai.slyt@sinopec.com;jgcai@tongji.edu.cn
作者简介:林中凯（1980—），男，硕士，高级工程师，主要从事油气勘探与管理工作。地址：山东省东营市东营区西四路633号胜利油田油气勘探管理中心，邮政编码：257001。E-mail: linzhongkai.slyt@sinopec.com
基金资助:
中国石化胜利油田分公司油气勘探管理中心项目“博兴洼陷页岩油岩相组合及甜点测井评价研究”(30200384-21-ZC0613-0021);国家自然科学基金“陆相页岩油在基质—裂缝体系中的多尺度运移机理研究”(41830431);中国石油—西南石油大学创新联合体科技合作项目“川南深层与昭通中浅层海相页岩气规模效益开发关键技术研究”(2020CX020000);中国石油科技部“十四五”重大专项“川南海相深层页岩气资源潜力及富集规律研究”(2021DJ1901);四川省自然科学基金“页岩气储层低电阻率成因机制及对含气性的影响研究”(2022NSFSC0287)

Types of shale lithofacies assemblage and its significance for shale oil exploration: A case study of Shahejie Formation in Boxing Sag

LIN Zhongkai¹(),ZHANG Shaolong^2,³,LI Chuanhua¹,WANG Min⁴,YAN Jianping³,CAI Jingong²(),GENG Bin⁴,HU Qinhong⁵

1. Manage Center of Oil and Gas Exploration, Sinopec Shengli Oilfield, Dongying, Shandong 257001, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Marine Geology, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
3. School of Geoscience and Technology, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610500, China
4. Institute of Exploration and Development, Sinopec Shengli Oilfield Company, Dongying, Shandong 257015, China
5. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas 76019, USA

Received:2022-11-07 Online:2023-02-26 Published:2023-01-30
Contact: CAI Jingong E-mail:linzhongkai.slyt@sinopec.com;jgcai@tongji.edu.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为实现陆相富有机质页岩油储层高效开发，以东营凹陷博兴洼陷沙三下—沙四上纯上亚段湖相页岩为研究对象，利用岩石薄片、全岩衍射以及主微量元素等多种地质资料，在厘清岩相类型和沉积古环境演化阶段及二者耦合关系的基础上，划分出8种岩相组合类型，并基于不同组合类型页岩油甜点评价参数对比分析，确定了优势组合类型及其平面分布特征。结果表明：①博兴洼陷沙三下—沙四上纯上亚段主要发育富有机质纹层状泥质灰岩和灰质泥岩、富有机质层状泥质灰岩和灰质泥岩以及含有机质块状泥质灰岩和灰质泥岩6种岩相类型；②沙四上纯上至沙三下地层，沉积古环境整体上呈现出古气候由干旱到湿润、古氧化还原性变化不大、古盐度由高到低、古物源由少到多的变化特征，显示出8个演化阶段，对应8种岩相组合类型；③岩相组合F和D分别为沙三下和沙四上纯上亚段有利岩相组合类型，整体产能高且与当前生产实践吻合性较好；平面上，前者主要分布在F159-F156-F160井区，后者主要FYP1-F116-F119和F156-F159-F161井区，为博兴洼陷页岩油富集高产区域。

关键词: 湖相页岩油, 沉积古环境, 岩相组合类型, 平面分布, 博兴洼陷

Abstract:

In order to realize the efficient development of lacustrine organic-rich shale oil reservoir in the lower sub-member of the third member of the Eocene Shahejie Formation and the upper sub-member of the fourth member of the Eocene Shahejie Formation in the Boxing Sag, Dongying depression, the geological data, such as thin sections, X-ray diffraction and the content of major and trace elements are analyzed. After the data analysis, the types of lithofacies and the evolution stage of sedimentary paleoenvironment are determined, and eight lithofacies assemblages are also divided based on the relationship between lithofacies and sedimentary environments. Then, the favorable lithofacies for shale oil exploration and development are determined based on the comparison of geological and engineering “sweet spot” parameters of different lithofacies assemblages. The results indicate that: ① Six lithofacies types of organic-rich laminated argillaceous limestone and limestone mudstone, organic-rich layered argillaceous limestone and limestone mudstone, organic-poor massive argillaceous limestone and calcareous mudstone are mainly developed in the study area; ② The sedimentary paleoenvironment with the characteristics of paleoclimate from arid to humid, little change in paleoredox, paleosalinity from high to low, and paleo-provenance from less to more exhibited eight evolutionary stages, corresponding to eight lithofacies assemblage types; ③ Lithofacies assemblage D and F, with high shale oil productivity, are the favorable in the Es^3L and Es^4U, respectively, and are in good agreement with the production practices. On the plane, the former is mainly distributed in the F159-F156-F160 well areas, and the latter is mainly distributed in FYP1-F116-F119 and F156-F159-F161 well area, which is a shale oil enrichment and high yield area in Boxing sag.

Key words: lacustrine shale oil, sedimentary paleoenvironment, types of lithofacies assemblages, plane distribution, Boxing Sag

中图分类号:

TE121

林中凯,张少龙,李传华,王敏,闫建平,蔡进功,耿斌,胡钦红. 湖相页岩油地层岩相组合类型划分及其油气勘探意义——以博兴洼陷沙河街组为例[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(1): 39-51.

LIN Zhongkai,ZHANG Shaolong,LI Chuanhua,WANG Min,YAN Jianping,CAI Jingong,GENG Bin,HU Qinhong. Types of shale lithofacies assemblage and its significance for shale oil exploration: A case study of Shahejie Formation in Boxing Sag[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 39-51.

图/表 12

图1

图2

表1

博兴洼陷沙三下—沙四上纯上亚段泥页岩样品部分主微量元素测试数据"

层位	主微量元素
层位	Al（%）	Na（%）	Ca（%）	Sr（μg/g）	Ba（μg/g）	V（μg/g）
沙三下	$2.53 ~ 8.91 5.09$	$0.21 ~ 1.71 0.49$	$1.38 ~ 29.63 15.50$	$261.4 ~ 3 ? 486.0 1 ? 075.36$	$223.2 ~ 934.9 508.20$	$20.0 ~ 168.3 78.32$
沙四上纯上亚段	$1.08 ~ 8.33 4.25$	$0.18 ~ 2.25 0.58$	$1.52 ~ 37.75 19.81$	$309.6 ~ 4 ? 281.0 1 ? 769.65$	$58.1 ~ 1 ? 171.0 433.07$	$4.7 ~ 198.9 73.54$
沙三下+ 沙四上纯上亚段	$1.08 ~ 8.94 4.78$	$0.18 ~ 2.25 0.54$	$1.38 ~ 37.75 17.29$	$261.4 ~ 4 ? 281.0 1 ? 380.48$	$58.1 ~ 1 ? 171.0 476.73$	$4.7 ~ 198.9 76.30$

表1

图3

图4

表 2

表3

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

参考文献 35

[1]	邹才能, 杨智, 崔景伟, 等. 页岩油形成机制、地质特征及发展对策[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2013, 40(1): 14-26.
	ZOU Caineng, YANG Zhi, CUI Jingwei, et al. Formation mechanism, geological characteristics and development strategy of nonmarine shale oil in China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(1): 14-26.
[2]	张金川, 林腊梅, 李玉喜, 等. 页岩油分类与评价[J]. 地学前缘, 2012, 19(5): 322-331.
	ZHANG Jinchuan, LIN Lamei, LI Yuxi, et al. Classification and evaluation of shale oil[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2012, 19(5): 322-331.
[3]	孙焕泉. 济阳坳陷页岩油勘探实践与认识[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2017, 22(4): 1-14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2017.04.001
	SUN Huanquan. Exploration practice and cognitions of shale oil in Jiyang depression[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2017, 22(4): 1-14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2017.04.001
[4]	王勇, 王学军, 宋国奇, 等. 渤海湾盆地济阳坳陷泥页岩岩相与页岩油富集关系[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2016, 43(5): 696-704.
	WANG Yong, WANG Xuejun, SONG Guoqi, et al. Genetic connection between mud shale lithofacies and shale oil enrichment in Jiyang Depression, Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2016, 43(5): 696-704.
[5]	张顺, 刘惠民, 陈世悦, 等. 中国东部断陷湖盆细粒沉积岩岩相划分方案探讨——以渤海湾盆地南部古近系细粒沉积岩为例[J]. 地质学报, 2017, 91(5): 1108-1119.
	ZHANG Shun, LIU Huiming, CHEN Shiyue, et al. Classification scheme for lithofacies of fine-grained sedimentary rocks in faulted basins of Eastern China: Insights from the fine-grained sedimentary rocks in Paleogene, Southern Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Acta Geological Sinica, 2017, 91(5): 1108-1119.
[6]	ZENG X, CAI J G, DONG Z, et al. Relationship between Mineral and Organic Matter in Shales: The Case of Shahejie Formation, Dongying Sag, China[J]. Minerals, 2018, 8: 222. doi: 10.3390/min8060222
[7]	YAN J P, ZHANG S L, WANG J, et al. Applying fractal theory to characterize the pore structure of lacustrine shale from the Zhanhua Depression in Bohai Bay Basin, eastern China[J]. Energy&Fuels, 2018, 32(7): 7539-7556.
[8]	ZHANG S L, YAN J P, CAI J G, et al. Fracture characteristics and logging identification of lacustrine shale in the Jiyang Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, Eastern China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2021, 132.
[9]	蒋启贵, 黎茂稳, 马媛媛, 等. 页岩油可动性分子地球化学评价方法——以济阳坳陷页岩油为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2018, 40(6): 849-854.
	JIANG Qigui, LI Maowen, MA Yuanyuan, et al. Molecular geochemical evaluation of shale oil mobility: a case study of shale oil in Jiyang Depression[J]. Petroleum Geology&Experiment, 2018, 40(6): 849-854.
[10]	WANG M, MA R, LI J B, et al. Occurrence mechanism of lacustrine shale oil in the Paleogene Shahejie Formation of Jiyang Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(4): 833-846. doi: 10.1016/S1876-3804(19)60242-9
[11]	沈骋, 任岚, 赵金洲, 等. 页岩岩相组合划分标准及其对缝网形成的影响——以四川盆地志留系龙马溪组页岩为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 98-106.
	SHEN Cheng, REN Lan, ZHAO Jinzhou, et al. Division of shale lithofacies associations and their impact on fracture network formation in the Silurian Longmaxi Formation,Sichuan Basin[J]. Oil&Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 98-106.
[12]	刘惠民, 王勇, 杨永红, 等. 东营凹陷细粒混积岩发育环境及其岩相组合:以沙四上亚段泥页岩细粒沉积为例[J]. 地球科学, 2020, 45(10): 3543-3555.
	LIU Huiming, WANG Yong, YANG Yonghong, et al. Sedimentary Environment and Lithofacies of Fine-Grained Hybrid Sedimentary in Dongying Sag: A Case of Fine-Grained Sedimentary System of the Es⁴[J]. Earth Science, 2020, 45(10): 3543-3555.
[13]	宁方兴, 王学军, 郝雪峰, 等. 东营凹陷细粒沉积岩岩相组合特征[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 42(4): 55-65.
	NING Fangxing, WANG Xuejun, HAO Xuefeng, et al. Fine-grained sedimentary rock lithofacies assemblage characteristics in Dongying depression[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University (Science & Technology Edition), 2020, 42(4): 55-65.
[14]	王敏, 傅爱兵, 李进步, 等. 基于二维核磁确定博兴洼陷页岩可动油饱和度[J]. 地质论评, 2021, 67(S1): 265-266.
	WANG Min, FU Aibing, LI Jinbu, et al. Movable oil saturation determination of shale in Boxing Depression based on 2-D NMR[J]. Geological Review, 2021, 67(S1): 265-266.
[15]	袁静, 周涛, 乔俊, 等. 深层砂砾岩中的深部热流体作用及其地质意义——以渤海湾盆地东营凹陷民丰—盐家地区古近系沙河街组四段为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2022, 43(4): 929-942.
	YUAN Jing, ZHOU Tao, QIAO Jun, et al. Deep hydrothermalism of deep coarse-grained siliciclastic rocks and its geological significance: A case study of the 4 th member of the Paleogene Shahejie Formation in Minfeng-Yanjia area: Dongying Sag, Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Oil and Gas Geology, 2022, 43(4): 929-942.
[16]	TAYLOR S R, MCLENNAN S M. The continental crust: Its composition and evolution[M]. 1985.
[17]	YAN J P, HE X, HU Q H, et al. Lower Es³ in Zhanhua Sag, Jiyang Depression: a case study for lithofacies classification in lacustrine mud shale[J]. Applied Geophysics, 2018, 15(2): 151-164. doi: 10.1007/s11770-018-0678-5
[18]	曾翔, 蔡进功, 董哲, 等. 泥页岩沉积特征与生烃能力——以东营凹陷沙河街组三段中亚段—沙河街组四段上亚段为例[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38(1): 31-43. doi: 10.7623/syxb201701004
	ZENG Xiang, CAI Jingong, DONG Zhe, et al. Sedimentary characteristics and hydrocarbon generation potential of mudstone and shale: a case study of middle submember of member 3 and upper submember of member 4 in Shahejie formation in Dongying sag[J]. Acta petrolei Sinica, 2017, 38(1): 31-43. doi: 10.7623/syxb201701004
[19]	蒋裕强, 宋益滔, 漆麟, 等. 中国海相页岩岩相精细划分及测井预测:以四川盆地南部威远地区龙马溪组为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2016, 23(1): 107-118. doi: 10.13745/j.esf.2016.01.010
	JIANG Yuqiang, SONG Yitao, QI Lin, et al. Fine lithofacies of China’s marine shale and its logging prediction: A case study of the lower Silurian Longmaxi marine shale in Weiyuan area, southern Sichuan basin, China[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2016, 23(1): 107-118. doi: 10.13745/j.esf.2016.01.010
[20]	董春梅, 马存飞, 林承焰, 等. 一种泥页岩层系岩相划分方法[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 39(3): 1-7.
	DONG Chunmei, MA Cunfei, LIN Chengyan, et al. A method of classification of shale set[J]. Journal of China University of Petroleum (Edition of Natural Science), 2015, 39(3): 1-7.
[21]	刘春莲, 秦红, 车平, 等. 广东三水盆地始新统"土+不"心组生油岩元素地球化学特征及沉积环境[J]. 古地理学报, 2005, 7(1): 125-136.
	LIU Chunlian, QIN Hong, CHE Ping, et al. Elemental geochemistry and sedimentary environments of source rocks of the Buxin formation of Eocene in Sanshui Guangdong Province[J]. Journal of Palaeogeography, 2005, 7(1): 125-136.
[22]	吴靖, 姜在兴, 梁超. 东营凹陷沙河街组四段上亚段细粒沉积岩岩相特征及与沉积环境的关系[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38(10): 1110-1122. doi: 10.7623/syxb201710002
	WU Jing, JIANG Zaixing, LIANG Chao. Lithofacies characteristics of fine-grained sedimentary rocks in the upper submember of Member 4 of Shahejie Formation, Dongying sag and their relationship with sedimentary environment[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2017, 38(10): 1110-1122. doi: 10.7623/syxb201710002
[23]	FEDO C M, WAYNE NESBITT H, YOUNG G M. Unraveling the effects of potassium metasomatism in sedimentary rocks and paleosols, with implications for paleoweathering conditions and provenance[J]. Geology, 1995, 23(10): 921-924. doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1995)023<0921:UTEOPM>2.3.CO;2
[24]	JONES B, MANNING D. Comparison of geochemical indices used for the interpretation of paleo-redox conditions in ancient mudstones[J]. Chemical Geology, 1994, 111: 111-129. doi: 10.1016/0009-2541(94)90085-X
[25]	WANG L, SHI T, CHANG D. Indications of the sedimentary environments by the sedimentary characteristics and trace elements of Ordovician Majiagou Formation, Northern Shaanxi salt basin[J]. Geosystem Engineering, 2020, 23: 1-10. doi: 10.1080/12269328.2019.1642145
[26]	王随继, 黄杏珍, 妥进才, 等. 泌阳凹陷核桃园组微量元素演化特征及其古气候意义[J]. 沉积学报, 1997, 15(1): 66-71.
	WANG Suiji, HUANG Xingzheng, SUI Jincai, et al. Evolutional characteristics and their paleoclimate significance of trace elements in the Hetaoyuan Formation, Biyang Depression[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 1997, 15(1): 66-71.
[27]	宋明水. 东营凹陷南斜坡沙四段沉积环境的地球化学特征[J]. 矿物岩石, 2005, 25(1): 67-73.
	SONG Mingshui. Sedimentary environment geochemistry in the shasi section of southern ramp, Dongying Depression[J]. Mineralogy and Petrology, 2005, 25(1): 67-73.
[28]	LIU B, SONG Y, ZHU K, et al. Mineralogy and element geochemistry of salinized lacustrine organic-rich shale in the Middle Permian Santanghu Basin: Implications for paleoenvironment, provenance, tectonic setting and shale oil potential[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2020, 120: 104569.
[29]	张建国, 姜在兴, 刘立安, 等. 渤海湾盆地沾化凹陷沙河街组三段下亚段细粒沉积岩岩相特征与沉积演化[J]. 石油学报, 2021, 42(3): 293-306. doi: 10.7623/syxb202103003
	ZHANG Jianguo, JIANG Zaixing, LIU Li'an, et al. Lithofacies and depositional evolution of fine-grained sedimentary rocks in the lower submember of the Member 3 of Shahejie Formation in Zhanhua sag, Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2021, 42(3): 293-306. doi: 10.7623/syxb202103003
[30]	逄淑伊, 操应长, 梁超. 渤海湾盆地东营凹陷沙四上亚段—沙三下亚段岩相特征及沉积环境——以樊页1井为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40(4): 799-809.
	PANG Shuyi, CAO Yingchang, LIANG Chao. Lithofacies characteristics and sedimentary environment of Es^4U and Es^3L: A case study of Well FY1 in Dongying sag, Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Oil&Gas Geology, 2019, 40(4): 799-809.
[31]	魏巍, Thomas J.Algeo, 陆永潮, 等. 古盐度指标与渤海湾盆地古近系海侵事件初探[J]. 沉积学报, 2021, 39(3): 571-592.
	WEI Wei, Thomas J.Algeo, LU Yongchao, et al. Paleosalinity Proxies and Marine Incursions into the Paleogene Bohai Bay Basin Lake System, Northeastern China[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 2021, 39(3): 571-592.
[32]	RICHMAN R, MULLEN M J, PETRE J E, et al. A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design optimization: all shale plays are not clones of the Barnett Shale[C]// Paper SPE-115258-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, USA, September 2008.
[33]	JARVIE D M, HILL R J, RUBLE T E, et al. Unconventional shale-gas systems: The Mississippian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2007, 91(4): 475-499. doi: 10.1306/12190606068
[34]	KANG Y S, SHANG C J, ZHOU H, et al. Mineralogical brittleness index as a function of weighting brittle minerals—from laboratory tests to case study[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2020, 77: 103278.
[35]	王茂林, 程鹏, 田辉, 等. 页岩油储层评价指标体系[J]. 地球化学, 2017, 46(2): 178-190.
	WANG Maolin, CHEN Peng, TIAN Hui, et al. Evaluation index system of shale oil reservoirs[J]. Geochimica, 2017, 46(2): 178-190.

沉积古环境	判断指标	参考文献
古气候	Na/Al：高值指示干冷，低值指示温暖 CIA：高值反映温暖，低值反映干冷	[22] [23]
古氧化还原	V/Cr：高值指示还原 U/Th：高值指示还原	[24] [25]
古盐度	Sr/Ba：高值代表高盐度	[26] [27]
古物源	Al：高值代表多物源 Ti：高值代表多物源	[28]

沉积古环境段	岩相组合类型	岩心TOC （%）	沉积古环境指标均值
			古气候		古氧化还原		古盐度	古物源
			Na/Al	CIA	U/Th	V/Cr	Sr/Ba	Al（%）	Ti（%）
VIII	H	2.615	0.083	71.390	0.686	1.110	2.290	5.510	0.287
VII	G	2.451	0.083	70.663	0.738	1.002	3.548	4.420	0.210
VI	F	3.497	0.119	67.788	0.785	1.172	3.759	5.272	0.311
V	E	2.265	0.111	68.877	0.752	1.163	4.983	4.522	0.218
IV	D	2.258	0.113	67.884	0.685	1.184	5.122	4.732	0.240
III	C	2.083	0.132	65.463	0.906	1.241	7.112	2.757	0.138
II	B	2.251	0.156	63.801	0.911	1.402	5.694	4.859	0.321
I	A	2.021	0.180	60.558	0.994	11.576	6.223	3.630	0.178

湖相页岩油地层岩相组合类型划分及其油气勘探意义——以博兴洼陷沙河街组为例

Types of shale lithofacies assemblage and its significance for shale oil exploration: A case study of Shahejie Formation in Boxing Sag

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 35

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	罗少辉,王蓉英,岳勇,李斌,魏华动,金仙梅,姜忠正,曹杨. 塔里木盆地西南部寒武系充填层序及沉积样式演化 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(2): 284-296.
[2]	苏娟,杨飞,张军涛,张涛,刘璐,杨佳奇. 中央古隆起对富县地区马五段储层发育的控制 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(2): 297-307.
[3]	熊亮, 曹勤明, 张玲, 王玲辉. 细粒沉积岩岩相划分类型及其油气勘探意义——以四川盆地川西坳陷须家河组五段为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 548-558.
[4]	赵迪, 马森, 操延辉. 中江气田沙溪庙组地震岩石物理分析与预测模式建立 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 608-613.
[5]	张成林,杨学锋,赵圣贤,张鉴,邓飞涌,何沅翰,张德良,王高翔,钟光海. 川南自贡区块页岩储层最佳靶体优选 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(3): 496-505.
[6]	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.
[7]	易同生,陈捷. 黔西石炭系页岩气赋存特征与勘探潜力 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 82-94.
[8]	熊亮,董晓霞,赵勇,魏力民,王同,王岩. 四川盆地华蓥山五峰组—龙马溪组剖面特征及其勘探意义 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 58-67.
[9]	刘君兰,张金川,王胜,陈莉,牛嘉亮. 辉绿岩床侵入对围岩有机质热演化影响的模拟研究——以赵家山下马岭组剖面为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 255-264.
[10]	陈强,李文厚,孙娇鹏,张倩,梁积伟,李智超. 鄂尔多斯盆地南缘岐山曹家沟奥陶系剖面地层和沉积特征 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 246-254.
[11]	赵俊峰,刘池洋,张东东,郭懿萱,齐亚林,吕奇奇,张龙,马奂奂. 鄂尔多斯盆地南缘铜川地区三叠系延长组长7段剖面及其油气地质意义 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 233-245.
[12]	王然,何文军,赵辛楣,刘国良,周作铭,赵毅. 准噶尔盆地吉174井芦草沟组页岩油地质剖面分析 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 192-203.
[13]	周磊,冯兴强,包书景,谭元隆,吴林,张林炎. 皖南泾县地区下三叠统殷坑组晏公堂剖面三维数字露头表征及油气地质意义 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 160-170.
[14]	王红岩,董大忠,施振生,邱振,卢斌,邵男,孙莎莎,张素荣. 川南海相页岩岩石相类型及“甜点”分布——以长宁双河剖面五峰组—龙马溪组为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(1): 68-81.
[15]	周桦,魏力民,王同,王岩,庞河清,张天操. 威荣深层页岩气储层精细评价方法及应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(2): 176-183.