BZ油田注水井调剖酸化联作体系研究

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对BZ油田注水井地层非均质强,单一酸化、调剖无法同时满足增注和减小层间矛盾的问题,在室内开展了酸化、调剖联作体系研究。所用配套酸液体系为单步酸酸液体系,实验评价了其缓速、抑制二次沉淀、溶蚀和配伍性等性能,单岩心酸化后渗透率恢复效果良好。配套调剖剂体系主剂采用阴离子型聚合物,评价了其耐酸性能和岩心封堵能力。采用双岩心夹持流动实验装置模拟非均质地层,分析调剖和酸化的注液顺序对联作处理效果的影响。模拟实验结果显示,先调剖后酸化效果明显,低渗岩心渗透率改善倍比为1.52,高渗岩心得到封堵,渗透率改善倍比为0.29,实现了既缩小层间渗透率差异又启动低渗岩心的目标。

关键词: 注水井, 非均质, 调剖, 酸化, 解堵, 联作

Abstract:

Due to the heterogeneity of the formation of injection wells in BZ oilfield, the single acidification and profile adjustment were impossible to increase the injection and decrease the interlayer contradiction simultaneously. So we studied the combined acidification and profile control system indoors. The supporting acid solution system was one-step acid solution system, and its performance such as retarding speed, inhibiting secondary precipitation, dissolution and compatibility were evaluated experimentally. And then, we obtained that the permeability recovery was good after single core acidizing. The main agent of profile control agent system is anionic polymer, and its acid resistance and core plugging ability were evaluated. A double-core clamping flow test device was used to simulate the non-homogeneous layerss and analyze the influence of the injection sequence of the profile control and acidizing on the combined treatment effect. The simulation results showed that the acidification effect after profile adjustment was obvious, the permeability improvement ratio of low permeability core was 1.52, the permeability improvement ratio of high permeability core was blocked, and the permeability improvement ratio was 0.29. The goal of starting low permeability core by reducing the permeability difference between layers was realized.

Key words: injection well, heterogeneous, profile control, acidification, plugging, combination process

中图分类号:

TE357

刘平礼,张峰超,高尚,陶卫东,冉进喜,皇扶杉. BZ油田注水井调剖酸化联作体系研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2019, 9(2): 60-64.

Liu PingLi,Zhang Fengchao,Gao Shang,Tao Weidong,Ran Jinxi,Huang Fushan. Study on combined system of profile control and acidification of injection wells in BZ oilfield[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2019, 9(2): 60-64.

图/表 10

图1

图2

表1

图3

图4

表2

图5

图6

表3

图7

参考文献 8

[1]	宋志宗 . 岔河集油田注水井分层调剖酸化技术[J]. 油田化学, 2003,20(4):323-326.
[2]	汪本武, 刘平礼, 张璐 , 等. 一种单步法在线酸化酸液体系研究及应用[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2015,44(3):79-83.
[3]	刘平礼, 孙庚, 邢希金 , 等. 砂岩储层酸化智能复合酸液体系研究及应用[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2015,37(6):138-143. doi: 10.11885/j.issn.1674-5086.2013.02.22.04
[4]	刘平礼, 兰夕堂, 王天慧 , 等. 砂岩储层酸化的新型螯合酸液体系研制[J]. 天然气工业, 2014,34(4):72-75. doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2014.04.011
[5]	Elkatatny S, Nasr-El-Din H A . Efficiency of removing filter cake of water-based drill-in fluid using chelating agents utilizing a CT method[C]// paper SPE-155426-MS presented at the SPE Deepwater Drilling and Completions Conference, 20-21 June 2012, Galveston, Texas,USA.
[6]	Nasr-El-Din H, Elkatatny S . Removal efficiency of water-based drill-in fluid filter cake using polylactic acid[C]// paper SPE-154192-MS SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference,4-7 June 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark.
[7]	Mahmoud M A, Nasr-El-Din H A, Wolf C D , et al. Optimum injection rate of a new chelate that can be used to stimulate carbonate reservoirs[J]. SPE Journal, 2010,16(4):968-980.
[8]	Almubarak T, Ng J H, Nasr-El-Din H . Oilfield scale removal by chelating agents: An aminopolycarboxylic acids review[C]// paper SPE-185636-MS presented at the SPE Western Regional Meeting,23-27 April 2017,Bakersfield, California,USA.

pH	配套酸液螯合能力/（mg·g^-1）			土酸螯合能力/（mg·g^-1）
pH	Ca	Mg	Fe	Ca	Mg	Fe
1	521	185	460	0.25	0.13	0.30
3	544	188	463
5	560	190	440
7	582	180	470
9	585	184	460

时间/min	注入压力/MPa	时间/min	注入压力/MPa
0（突破）	13.5	35	10.8
5	12.6	40	10.2
10	11.3	45	9.8
15	11.1	50	9.9
20	10.4	55	10.1
25	10.3	60	10.2
30	10.6

实验组	岩心编号	流速/（mL·s^-1)					岩心改善倍比
实验组	岩心编号	基液	酸液	基液	酸液	基液	岩心改善倍比
1组调—解	1（高渗）	0.173	0.273	0.276	调堵	0.039	0.22
1组调—解	2（低渗）	0.102	0.126	0.128	调堵	0.092	0.9
2组解—调	3（高渗）	0.189	调堵	0.018	0.053	0.056	0.29
2组解—调	4（低渗）	0.067	调堵	0.052	0.093	0.102	1.52

[1]	许国晨, 刘晓文. 提高水井分注测试成功率配套技术研究与应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(6): 773-780.
[2]	梁运培, 张怀军, 王礼春, 秦朝中, 田键, 陈强, 史博文. 连续加载应力下真实裂缝流场和渗透率演化规律数值研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(6): 834-843.
[3]	崔传智, 李怀亮, 吴忠维, 张传宝, 李弘博, 张营华, 郑文宽. 考虑压驱注水诱发裂缝影响的注水井压力分析 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(5): 686-694.
[4]	裴秀玲, 李嘉琪, 马旭飞, 张爱祥, 张蕾蕾, 卢祥国, 何欣. 大庆厚油层内各结构单元分流率变化特征实验研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2023, 13(2): 233-239.
[5]	刘晓,崔彬,吴展. 煤层气井堵塞型递减原因分析及治理——以延川南煤层气田为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(4): 626-632.
[6]	范玲玲. 杭锦旗东部盒1段储层宏观非均质性与气藏类型关系研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(2): 274-284.
[7]	唐建信,钱坤,唐人选. 苏北盆地帅垛复杂断块油田地质工程一体化高效开发实践 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(3): 377-383.
[8]	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.
[9]	王孝刚,史雪枝,朱敏. 深层页岩气井压后井筒堵塞解除技术——以WY23-1HF井为例 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(2): 230-234.
[10]	夏海帮,包凯,王睿,熊炜. 南川区块茅口组泥灰岩胶凝酸酸压试验 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(2): 235-240.
[11]	邵明鲁,岳湘安,贺杰. 微囊引发剂控制聚合凝胶体系成胶实验研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(6): 33-39.
[12]	梁严,王增林,史树彬,郭拥军,胡俊,罗平亚,张新民,曹苗,张伟,刘洋. 稠油驱替-流度控制与非均质性调整——缔合聚合物与HPAM对比 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(6): 65-71.
[13]	邹永莉,邓志强,李同翔,贺三,刘航. 油田注水井能耗评价方法与应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(5): 98-102.
[14]	王跃鹏,孙正财,刘向君,梁利喜. 煤层割理结构及其对井壁稳定的影响研究 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(4): 45-52.
[15]	王喆. 可控冲击波解堵增透技术在延川南煤层气田中的应用 [J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(4): 87-92.