海相高成熟页岩气储层孔隙连通关系——以彭水地区龙马溪组为例

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

孔隙连通关系影响着页岩气的渗流及产出程度,但对页岩连通关系的研究还相对薄弱。以彭水地区五峰—龙马溪组页岩气层为例,通过多种实验手段刻画页岩的连通孔隙组合类型,分析孔喉连通关系。研究发现,页岩储层发育有机孔相互连通、有机孔—微裂缝连通、有机孔—黏土孔连通和黏土孔—晶间孔连通4类组合关系。以有机孔相互连通组合为主的富有机质页岩,符合短导管状孔喉组合模式,孔喉比最小;而以有机孔—黏土孔相互连通组合为主的中、贫有机质页岩,为短导管和树形孔隙复合模式,孔喉比较大。当TOC（有机碳含量）/黏土矿物含量比值减小时,树形孔隙比例增多,孔喉比也会变小。小孔喉比和高含量的有机孔相互连通孔隙组合,有利于减弱压裂液滞留产生的水锁伤害。

关键词: 页岩储层, 孔隙组合, 孔喉连通性, 孔喉结构, 彭水地区

Abstract:

Micro-pore connectivity affects the seepage and production of shale gas, but there are less research on shale connectivity currently. Taking the Wufeng-Longmaxi formation shale gas reservoir in Pengshui area as an example, the connected pore assemblages of shale gas reservoirs were classified, and then the pore-throat connections of different types of shales were discussed based on a variety of experimental methods. Four types of connected pore assemblages were classified in shale, that is, organic pore interconnection, organic pore-micro-fracture interconnection, organic pore-clay pore interconnection, and clay pore-intergranular pore interconnection. Organic-rich shale, mainly composed of interconnected organic pore assemblages, conforms to the short-conduit pore-throat assemblage model with the minimum pore-throat ratio. While medium-low organic shale, mainly composed of interconnected organic pore-clay pore assemblages, is a composite model of short-conduit and tree-shaped pore with the relatively large pore-throat ratio. When the ratio of TOC/clay mineral content decreases, the tree-shaped pore-throat ratio increases and the pore-throat ratio decreases. The combination of small pore throat ratio and high content organic pore interconnection is conducive to reducing water lock damage caused by fracturing fluid retention.

Key words: shale reservoirs, pore assemblages, pore-throat connectivity, pore-throat structure, Pengshui area

中图分类号:

TE37

肖佃师,卢双舫,房大志等. 海相高成熟页岩气储层孔隙连通关系——以彭水地区龙马溪组为例[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2019, 9(5): 45-53.

Dianshi XIAO,Shuangfang LU,Dazhi FANG, et al. Pore connectivity of marine high-maturity shale gas reservoirs: A case study in Longmaxi formation, Pengshui area[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2019, 9(5): 45-53.

图/表 9

图1

表1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图 6

图7

图8

参考文献 25

[1]	邱振, 邹才能, 李建忠 , 等. 非常规油气资源评价进展与未来展望[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2013,24(2):238-246.
[2]	邹才能, 丁云宏, 卢拥军 , 等. “人工油气藏”理论、技术及实践[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2017,44(1):144-154.
[3]	金之均, 胡宗全, 高波 , 等. 川东南地区五峰组—龙马溪组页岩气富集与高产控制因素[J]. 地学前缘, 2016,23(1):1-10.
[4]	邹才能, 董大忠, 王玉满 , 等. 中国页岩气特征、挑战及前景(一)[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2015,42(6):689-701.
[5]	贾爱林, 位云生, 金亦秋 . 中国海相页岩气开发评价关键技术进展[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2016,43(6):949-955.
[6]	郭旭升, 李宇平, 刘若冰 , 等. 四川盆地焦石坝地区龙马溪组页岩微观孔隙结构特征及其控制因素[J]. 天然气工业, 2014,34(6):9-16.
[7]	TANG X, JIANG Z, SHU J , et al. Characteristics and origin of in-situ gas desorption of the Cambrian Shuijingtuo Formation shale gas reservoir in the Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Fuel, 2017,187:285-295.
[8]	康毅力, 张晓怡, 游利军 , 等. 页岩气藏自然返排缓解水相圈闭损害实验研究[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2017,28(6):819-827.
[9]	张琴, 刘畅, 梅啸寒 , 等. 页岩气储层微观储集空间研究现状及展望[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2015,36(4):666-674. doi: 10.11743/ogg20150417
[10]	SUN M, YU B, HU Q , et al. Pore connectivity and tracer migration of typical shales in south China[J]. Fuel, 2017,203:32-46.
[11]	YANG R, HAO F, HE S , et al. Experimental investigations on the geometry and connectivity of pore space in organic-rich Wufeng and Longmaxi shales[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology. 2017,84:225-242.
[12]	YANG R, HE S, YI J Z , et al. Nano-scale pore structure and fractal dimension of organic-rich Wufeng-Longmaxi shale from Jiaoshiba area, Sichuan Basin: Investigations using FE-SEM, gas adsorption and helium pycnometry[J] . Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2015,70(1):27-45.
[13]	KLAVER J, HEMES S, HOUBEN M , et al. The connectivity of pore space in mudstones: insights from high-pressure Wood’s metal injection, BIB-SEM imaging, and mercury intrusion porosimetry[J]. Geofluids, 2015,15(4):577-591.
[14]	HU Q, LIU X, GAO Z , et al. Pore structure and tracer migration behavior of typical American and Chinese shales[J]. Petroleum Science, 2015,12(4):651-663.
[15]	何希鹏, 高玉巧, 唐显春 , 等. 渝东南地区常压页岩气富集主控因素分析[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2017,28(4):654-664.
[16]	GB/T 31483-2015B/T 31483-2015. 页岩气地质评价方法[S].北京: 中国标准出版社, 2015.
[17]	WASHBURN E W . The dynamic of capillary flow[J]. Physical Review, 1921,17(3):273-283.
[18]	THOMMES M . Physical adsorption characterization of nanoporous materials[J]. Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 2010,82(7):1059-1073.
[19]	JIANG C B, BRYANT S, DAIGLE H. A bundle of short conduits model of the pore structure of gas shale[C]// paper URTEC-2169349-MS presented at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference,20-22 July 2015,San Antonio, Texas, USA.
[20]	SAKHAEE-POUR A, BRYANT S L . Effect of pore structure on the producibility of tight-gas sandstones[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2014,98(4):663-694. doi: 10.1306/08011312078
[21]	XIAO D S, JIANG S, THUL D , et al. Combining rate-controlled porosimetry and NMR to probe full-range pore throat structures and their evolution features in tight sands: A case study in the Songliao Basin, China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2017,83:111-123
[22]	胡宗全, 杜伟, 彭勇民 , 等. 页岩微观孔隙特征及源—储关系——以川东南地区五峰组—龙马溪组为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2015,36(6):1001-1008. doi: 10.11743/ogg20150615
[23]	王香增, 张丽霞, 雷裕红 , 等. 低熟湖相页岩内运移固体有机质和有机质孔特征——以鄂尔多斯盆地东南部延长组长7油层组页岩为例[J]. 石油学报, 2018,39(2):141-151.
[24]	刘乃震, 柳明, 张士诚 . 页岩气井压后返排规律[J]. 天然气工业, 2015,35(3):50-54.
[25]	张涛, 李相方, 王永辉 , 等. 页岩储层特殊性质对压裂液返排率和产能的影响[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2017,28(6):828-838.

编号	深度/ m	是否参与建模	TOC/ %	石英/ %	黏土/ %	孔体积/（cm³·g^-1）	计算孔体积/ （cm³·g^-1）	不同类型孔隙占比/%
编号	深度/ m	是否参与建模	TOC/ %	石英/ %	黏土/ %	孔体积/（cm³·g^-1）	计算孔体积/ （cm³·g^-1）	有机孔	黏土矿物有关孔	脆性矿物晶间孔
PY1-2	2 156.98	是	3.52	63.0	29.0	0.011 1	0.010 6	70.6	10.4	19.0
PY1-6	2 151.20	是	3.63	55.6	23.3	0.010 5	0.010 8	71.6	8.2	20.2
PY1-13	2 134.77	是	1.88	41.0	32.0	0.004 6	0.007 0	44.4	29.4	26.2
PY1-22	2 106.35	是	0.90	34.0	34.0	0.005 9	0.005 5	27.2	40.1	32.7
LY1-6	2 828.68	是	4.87	55.8	23.0	0.014 8	0.013 5	77.2	6.6	16.3
LY1-12	2 820.24	是	4.50	53.0	22.0	0.012 1	0.012 7	75.8	6.6	17.6
LY1-18	2 805.50	是	1.70	41.0	30.0	0.006 2	0.006 7	42.3	29.1	28.5
LY1-19	2 794.40	是	1.38	33.8	41.0	0.006 5	0.006 5	35.0	40.5	24.5
LY1-9	2 824.42	否	5.04	58.6	21.8	0.015 4	0.013 8	60.4	10.2	29.4
LY1-17	2 807.46	否	2.40	37.0	38.0	0.008 9	0.008 3	47.7	29.4	22.9
PY1-1	2 157.78	否	2.22	40.3	42.7	0.008 3	0.008 0	45.9	34.5	19.6
PY1-23	2 097.51	否	0.61	33.0	26.0	0.004 6	0.004 4	23.0	38.1	38.9