枯竭气藏型碳酸盐岩储气库地质力学建模与完整性评价

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2025.05.020

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

储气库对保障国家能源安全与调峰保供至关重要，储气库在运行中易出现断层活化、局部盖层突破等状况，引发气体泄漏风险，因此有必要分析其力学完整性。为了明确X储气库应力变化的内在规律、提高储气库运行压力上限、提升整体储气效能，综合地质、地震、测井、生产和室内实验数据，建立了X储气库一维、三维地质力学模型，融合生产历史拟合与循环注采情况，建立了四维动态地质力学模型；分析了注采过程中盖层、储层、底托层、断层应力变化规律和力学完整性，并综合注采能力与力学完整性开展注采方案优化。结果表明：①X储气库龙潭组盖层杨氏模量较小、泊松比较大、强度较弱，岩性越偏泥岩，模量越小，水平向应力越小；②盖层原始地应力呈走滑断层状态，储层原始地应力为逆断层状态；③X储气库注采过程中，盖层和底托层应力变化较小、破坏风险低；④储层孔隙压力变化明显，且变化幅度大于应力；⑤注采过程中，储层基质破坏风险较低，主要注采区域在注气后破坏风险增大，断层在井底压力高于原始气藏压力约3 MPa时有滑移风险；⑥在保证X储气库力学完整性前提下，优化注采方案后的累计注气量较优化前增加约34%。研究成果可为X储气库地应力分析、力学完整性评价工作提供理论和方法支撑。

关键词: 碳酸盐岩储气库, 地质力学建模, 力学完整性, 四维地应力, 断层滑移, 注采优化

Abstract:

Gas storage facilities are crucial for ensuring national energy security and stabilizing supply during peak-demand periods. However, during operation, gas storage facilities are prone to risks such as fault reactivation and local caprock breakthrough, potentially leading to gas leakage. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze their mechanical integrity. To clarify the stress variation patterns of the gas storage X and enhance the upper limit of the operational pressure and overall storage efficiency, this study integrated geological, seismic, logging, production, and laboratory data to establish one-dimensional and three-dimensional geomechanical models of the gas storage X. Based on production history matching and cyclic gas injection and production patterns, a four-dimensional dynamic geomechanical model was established. The stress variation patterns and mechanical integrity of the caprock, reservoir, base support layer, and faults during the injection and production process were analyzed. The injection-production plans were optimized by considering deliverability and mechanical integrity. The results showed that: (1) The Longtan Formation caprock of the gas storage X was characterized by a relatively low Young’s modulus, high Poisson’s ratio, and weak mechanical strength. The more argillaceous the lithology, the lower the modulus and the smaller the horizontal stress. (2) The initial in-situ stress state of the caprock corresponded to a strike-slip faulting regime, while the reservoir corresponded to a reverse faulting stress regime. (3) During the injection-production process of the gas storage X, the caprock and base support layer experienced minimal stress variation and posed low failure risk. (4) The pore pressure of the reservoir changed significantly, and the pressure variation was greater than stress changes. (5) During the injection-production process, the risk of matrix failure in the reservoir was low, but the failure risk increased in the main injection-production area after gas injection. There was a slip risk when the bottom hole pressure exceeded the original gas reservoir pressure by about 3 MPa. (6) Under the condition of ensuring the mechanical integrity of the gas storage X, the optimized injection-production plan yielded an approximately 34% increase in cumulative gas injection compared to pre-optimization. The results provide theoretical and methodological support for in-situ stress analysis and mechanical integrity evaluation of the gas storage X.

Key words: carbonate gas storage, geomechanical modeling, mechanical integrity, four-dimensional in-situ stress, fault slip, injection-production optimization

中图分类号:

TE822

陈渝页,唐源霜,周鸿, 等. 枯竭气藏型碳酸盐岩储气库地质力学建模与完整性评价[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2025, 15(5): 912-920.

CHEN Yuye,TANG Yuanshuang,ZHOU Hong, et al. Geomechanical modeling and integrity evaluation of gas storage rebuilt from depleted carbonate gas reservoir[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2025, 15(5): 912-920.

图/表 10

表1

不同层位岩石力学参数动静态转换关系"

层位	杨氏模量	泊松比	抗压强度	抗拉强度
龙潭组	$E s t a = 0.8 E d y n 0.85$	$ν s t a = 0.65 ν d y n 1.05$	$S U C S = 1.7 E s t a 1.65$	$S T E N S = 0.02 S U C S$
茅口组	$E s t a = 0.85 E d y n 0.9$	$ν s t a = 0.55 ν d y n 1.1$	$S U C S = 1.55 E s t a 1.3$	$S T E N S = 0.05 S U C S$

表1

表2

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

参考文献 29

[1]	YANG Y, LI L, WANG X, et al. Simulation study of hydrogen sulfide removal in underground gas storage converted from the multilayered sour gas field[J]. International Journal of Coal Science & Technology, 2023, 10(1): 71.
[2]	糜利栋, 曾大乾, 刘华, 等. 天然气地下储气库智能化建设关键技术及其发展趋势[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2): 581‑592.
	MI Lidong, ZENG Daqian, LIU Hua, et al. Key technologies and development trends for intelligent construction of underground gas storage facilities[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2024, 45(2): 581‑592.
[3]	糜利栋, 曾大乾, 李遵照, 等. 中国石化地下储气库智能化建设进展及展望[J]. 世界石油工业, 2023, 30(6): 88‑95.
	MI Lidong, ZENG Daqian, LI Zunzhao, et al. Progress and prospect of intelligent of Sinopec underground gas storage[J]. World Petroleum Industry, 2023, 30(6): 88‑95.
[4]	糜利栋, 曾大乾, 刘华, 等. 中国石化地下储气库一体化综合平台研发与应用[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(6): 781‑788.
	MI Lidong, ZENG Daqian, LIU Hua, et al. Development and application of Sinopec integrated management platform for underground gas storage[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 781‑788.
[5]	杨学峰, 闫伟林, 周聪, 等. 基于实验的碳酸盐岩气藏储量计算: 以X气藏为例[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2024, 47(3): 12‑22. doi: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2024.03.002
	YANG Xuefeng, YAN Weilin, ZHOU Cong, et al. Experiment-based reserve calculation for carbonate gas reservoirs: Taking X gas reservoir as an example[J]. Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 2024, 47(3): 12‑22. doi: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2024.03.002
[6]	糜利栋, 张睿, 曾大乾, 等. 在产气藏季节调峰选区评价体系及标准[J]. 天然气工业, 2025, 45(2): 73-83.
	MI Lidong, ZHANG Rui, ZENG Daqian, et al. Evaluation system and standard of seasonal peak-shaving and area selection for gas reservoirs under production[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2025, 45(2): 73-83.
[7]	郑鑫, 赵昱超, 赵梓寒, 等. 缝洞型碳酸盐岩储气库地应力变化特征及力学完整性研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2024, 14(5): 814-824.
	ZHENG Xin, ZHAO Yuchao, ZHAO Zihan, et al. Mechanism investigation on in-situ stress characteristics and mechanical integrity of fracture-cavity carbonate underground gas storage reservoir[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(5): 814-824.
[8]	贾善坡, 付晓飞, 王建军. 孔隙型地下储气库圈闭完整性评价[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2020.
	JIA Shanpo, FU Xiaofei, WANG Jianjun. Evaluation of trap integrity of porous underground gas storage[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2020.
[9]	邓惠, 杨胜来, 刘义成, 等. 缝洞型碳酸盐岩底水气藏水侵规律预测新方法[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 2023, 46(2): 37‑43. doi: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2023.02.005
	DENG Hui, YANG Shenglai, LIU Yicheng, et al. A new method for predicting water-invasion laws in fractured-vuggy carbonate gas reservoirs with bottom water[J]. Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 2023, 46(2): 37‑43. doi: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2023.02.005
[10]	袁飞宇, 王鸿鹏, 乐平, 等. 缝洞型碳酸盐岩油藏单井注气影响因素模拟分析[J]. 非常规油气, 2023, 10(4): 86‑94.
	YUAN Feiyu, WANG Hongpeng, YUE Ping, et al. Simulation analysis of influencing factors of single well gas injection in fracture-vuggy carbonate reservoir[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2023, 10(4): 86‑94.
[11]	‎MI L, GUO Y, LI Y, et al. Evaluation of the dynamic sealing performance of cap rocks of underground gas storage under multi-cycle alternating loads[J]. Energy Geoscience, 2024, 5(4): 129‑136.
[12]	张东星. 断块油气藏型储气库封闭性评价研究: 以大港油田板中北储气库为例[J]. 广东石油化工学院学报, 2018, 28(3): 30‑33.
	ZHANG Dongxing. Study on UGS sealing evaluation of fault-block oil & gas reservoir: A case study of the Banzhongbei UGS in Dagang oilfield[J]. Journal of Guangdong University of Petrochemical Technology, 2018, 28(3): 30‑33.
[13]	刘林, 桑琴, 曹建, 等. 枯竭气藏改建储气库盖层封闭能力综合评价: 以川西北中坝气田须二气藏为例[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2022, 41(6): 42‑50.
	LIU Lin, SANG Qin, CAO Jian, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of sealing capacity of depleted gas reservoir reconstructed to gas storage: A case study of Xu 2 gas reservoir in Zhongba Gas Field, northwest Sichuan[J]. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2022, 41(6): 42‑50.
[14]	阳小平, 程林松, 何学良, 等. 地下储气库断层的完整性评价[J]. 油气储运, 2013, 32(6): 578‑582.
	YANG Xiaoping, CHENG Linsong, HE Xueliang, et al. Faults integrity assessment of underground gas storage[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2013, 32(6): 578‑582.
[15]	赵昱超, 罗瑜, 李隆新, 等. 地下储气库地应力模拟研究与地质完整性评估: 以相国寺为例[J]. 地质力学学报, 2022, 28(4): 523‑536.
	ZHAO Yuchao, LUO Yu, LI Longxin, et al. In-situ stress simulation and integrity evaluation of underground gas storage: A case study of the Xiangguosi underground gas storage, Sichuan, SW China[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 2022, 28(4): 523‑536.
[16]	BAKHTIARI M, SHAD S, ZIVAR D, et al. Coupled hydro-mechanical analysis of underground gas storage at Sarajeh field, Qom formation, Iran[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2021, 92: 103996.
[17]	JEANNE P, ZHANG Y, RUTQVIST J. Influence of hysteretic stress path behavior on seal integrity during gas storage operation in a depleted reservoir[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2020, 12(4): 886‑899.
[18]	朱海燕, 宋宇家, 唐煊赫. 页岩气储层四维地应力演化及加密井复杂裂缝扩展研究进展[J]. 石油科学通报, 2021, 6(3): 396‑416.
	ZHU Haiyan, SONG Yujia, TANG Xuanhe. Research progress on 4-dimensional stress evolution and complex fracture propagation of infill wells in shale gas reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2021, 6(3): 396‑416.
[19]	ZHANG G, ZHU S, ZENG D, et al. Sealing capacity evaluation of underground gas storage under intricate geological conditions[J]. Energy Geoscience, 2024, 5(3): 100292.
[20]	褚洪涛. 基于LM区块断层稳定性评价的储气库注采方案设计[D]. 大庆: 东北石油大学, 2023.
	CHU Hongtao. Design of gas storage injection and production scheme based on fault stability evaluation of LM block[D]. Daqing: Northeast Petroleum University, 2023.
[21]	李进步, 夏勇, 王德龙, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地低渗岩性气藏型储气库建库设计与运行优化关键技术[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2023, 34(8): 1442‑1451. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2023.03.005
	LI Jinbu, XIA Yong, WANG Delong, et al. Key technologies of construction design and operation optimization for underground gas storage of low permeability lithologic gas reservoirs in Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2023, 34(8): 1442‑1451. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2023.03.005
[22]	张东旭, 张烈辉, 唐慧莹, 等. 致密油多级压裂水平井流-固全耦合产能数值模拟[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2022, 49(2): 338‑347. doi: 10.11698/PED.2022.02.12
	ZHANG Dongxu, ZHANG Liehui, TANG Huiying, et al. Fully coupled fluid-solid productivity numerical simulation of multistage fractured horizontal well in tight oil reservoirs[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2022, 49(2): 338‑347.
[23]	WANG B, JIANG Y, ZHANG Q, et al. Shear behaviors of intermittent joints subjected to shearing cycles under constant normal stiffness conditions: Effects of loading parameters[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2025, 17(5): 2695‑2712.
[24]	LI H, LI X, LIU H. Analytical solution for evaluating the effects of buried fault dislocation on segmental tunnel considering the plastic yield behavior of circumferential joints[J]. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 2024, 97: 319‑332.
[25]	ZHANG L, ZHANG C, LIU N, et al. The normal stiffness effect on fault slip mechanical behaviour characteristics[J]. Engineering Geology, 2024, 338: 107609.
[26]	范桃园, 吕承训, 吕古贤. 构造成矿作用的地应力分析: 研究现状与思考[J]. 现代地质, 2024, 38(4): 865-872.
	FAN Taoyuan, Chengxun LYU, Guxian LYU. Analysis of crustal stress in tectonic ore-forming processes: Research status and thought[J]. Geoscience, 2024, 38(4): 865-872.
[27]	孙自明, 卞昌蓉, 刘光祥. 峨眉山地幔柱主要研究进展及四川盆地二叠纪成盆动力学机制[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(5): 1089-1099.
	SUN Ziming, BIAN Changrong, LIU Guangxiang. Advances on the understanding in the Emeishan mantle plume and dynamic mechanism of the Permian Sichuan Basin Formation[J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(5): 1089-1099.
[28]	CAI W J, DENG J E, FENG Y C, et al. 3D geomechanics modeling of Indonesia B oilfield and its application in wellbore stability[J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2022, 15(4): 358.
[29]	吕古贤, 张宝林, 胡宝群, 等. 构造物理化学的理论纲要和应用前景[J]. 现代地质, 2024, 38(4): 837-852.
	Guxian LYU, ZHANG Baolin, HU Baoqun, et al. Theoretical outline and application prospects of tectonophysicochemistry[J]. Geoscience, 2024, 38(4): 837-852.

层位	深度/m	闭合压力/MPa
龙潭组	2 114	40.2
龙潭组	2 137	41.5
茅口组	2 197	48.9
	2 255	34.6
	2 319	41.8