页岩气井间压窜影响因素分析和防窜对策

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2020.05.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目前页岩气井间压窜问题突出,严重干扰邻井生产。以威远页岩气示范区某区块为研究对象,根据压窜后母井生产特征,提出以母井产量恢复速度为核心的压窜影响程度量化评价指标,并采用灰色关联分析法评价了10项地质、工程影响因素。结果表明,井间距离、母井生产时间、平均单簇用液规模、天然裂缝与压窜程度的灰色关联度较高。在此基础上,评价了子母井位置关系、母井生产时间、单簇用液规模、天然裂缝对压窜程度的影响规律。评价结果表明：①井间压窜以巷道平行模式为主,巷道错位/相对模式压窜次之;②随着母井生产时间增长,母井产量恢复速度、恢复程度趋于降低,建议子井压裂时间控制在母井生产300 d以内;③随着平均单簇用液规模增加,压窜影响程度趋于增强,建议根据母井生产时间和井间位置关系,针对性优化单簇用液规模;④对于贯穿型天然裂缝发育的井段,在设计和施工过程中需要严格控制用液规模、优化射孔参数和施工排量,避免压窜。现场试验表明,该研究成果对页岩气减小井间压窜影响具有指导意义。

关键词: 页岩气, 井间干扰, 压窜, 天然裂缝, 长宁—威远, 灰色关联

Abstract:

Currently, the problem of intra-well frac hit is serious in shale gas, which disturbs the production of nearby wells. Taking the Weiyuan national shale gas demonstration area as the research object, and according to the production characteristics of parent wells, quantitative evaluation index of intra-well frac hit influence based on the recovery rate of parent well production has been put forward. Then ten key geological and engineering parameters affecting intra-well frac hit influence have been analyzed by grey correlation method. The result shows that the grey correlations of intra-well distance, parent well producing time, average fluid volume of single cluster and natural fracture are higher. On this basis, the influence of intra-well position, parent well production time and average fluid volume to intra-well frac hit extent has been evaluated to obtain the following results. Firstly, the main intra-well position of frac hit is parallel, while the secondary is the position of opposite and malposition. Secondly, as the producing time of parent wells increase, the impact of frac hit significantly increases. The suggested optimal operation time of child wells is within 300 produce days of parent wells. Thirdly, as the average fluid volume of single cluster of child wells increases, the impact of frac hit increases too, so that it is suggested to optimize the liquid scale of single cluster according to the production time of parent wells and intra-well position. Lastly, the fluids volume, perforations and slurry rate should be strictly optimized in the section with cut-through natural fracture in order to reduce frac hit risk. Field tests show that the result can provide a reference to reduce the impact of intra-well frac hit of shale gas.

Key words: shale gas, well interference, frac hit, natural fracture, Changning-Weiyuan national shale gas demonstration area, grey correlation

中图分类号:

TE357.1

何乐,袁灿明,龚蔚. 页岩气井间压窜影响因素分析和防窜对策[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(5): 63-69.

HE Le,YUAN Canming,GONG Wei. Influencing factors and preventing measures of intra-well frac hit in shale gas[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2020, 10(5): 63-69.

图/表 13

图1

图2

表1

表2

表3

表4

图3

图4

图5

图6

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 20

[1]	赵文智, 贾爱林, 位云生, 等. 中国页岩气勘探开发进展及发展展望[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2020,25(1):31-44.
	ZHAO W Z, JIA A L, WEI Y S, et al. Progress in shale gas exploration in China and prospects for future development[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2020,25(1):31-44.
[2]	郑有成, 范宇, 雍锐, 等. 页岩气密切割分段+高强度加砂压裂新工艺[J]. 天然气工业, 2019,39(10):76-81.
	ZHENG Y C, FAN Y, YONG R, et al. A new fracturing technology of intensive stage+High-intensity proppant injection for shale gas reservoirs[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2019,39(10):76-81.
[3]	AJANI A A, KELKAR M G. Interference study in shale plays[C]// paper SPE-151045-MS presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, 6-8 February 2012, The Woodlands, Texas, USA.
[4]	KING G E, RAINBOLT M F, SWANSON C. Frac hit induced production losses evaluating root causes, damage location, possible prevention methods and success of remedial treatments[C]// paper SPE-187192-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 9-11 October 2017, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
[5]	MARONGIU-PORCU M, LEE D, SHAN D, et al. Advanced modeling of interwell-fracturing interference: An eagle ford shale-oil study-Refracturing[C]// paper SPE-179177-MS presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, 9-11 February 2016, The Woodlands, Texas, USA.
[6]	PARYANI M, SMAOUI R, POLUDASU S, et al. Adaptive Fracturing to Avoid Frac Hits and Interference: A Wolfcamp Shale Case Study[C]// paper SPE-185044-MS presented at the SPE Unconventional Resources Conference, 15-16 February 2017, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
[7]	林彦兵, 胡艾国, 陈付虎, 等. 红河油田水平井压窜原因分析及防窜对策建议[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2013,3(4):56-61.
	LIN Y B, HU A G, CHEN F H, et al. Horizontal well fracturing channeling cause analysis and channeling prevention countermeasures in Honghe Oilfield[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2013,3(4):56-61.
[8]	滕小兰, 邱玲. 调整井压裂井间干扰实例分析及技术对策[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2011,33(2):88-90.
	TENG X L, QIU L. Example analysis and technical measures for wells interference in adjustment well fracturing[J]. Oil Drilling & Production Technology, 2011,33(2):88-90.
[9]	陈剑, 郭建春, 兰芳. 加密井井间干扰影响因素及对邻井产能的影响[J]. 中外能源, 2015,20(4):54-57.
	CHEN J, GUO J C, LAN F. Influencing factors and effect on adjacent well productivity ofinterwell interference in infilled wells[J]. Sino-Global Energy, 2015,20(4):54-57.
[10]	唐云, 康毅力, 王永恒, 等.致密砂岩油藏压窜井产量影响因素[A].中国力学大会-2015论文摘要集[C].上海:中国力学学会、上海交通大学: 2015.
	TANG Y, KANG Y L, WANG Y H, et al. The Influencing factors on Production of Frac Hit Well in Tight sand Oil Reservoirs[A]. CSTAM, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. CCTAM 2015[C]. CSTAM, Shanghai Jiao Tong University: CSTAM, 2015.
[11]	李继庆, 刘曰武, 黄灿, 等. 页岩气水平井试井模型及井间干扰特征[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2018,30(6):138-144.
	LI J Q, LIU Y W, HUANG C, et al. Multi-stage fracturing horizontal well interference test model and its application[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2018,30(6):138-144.
[12]	位云生, 王军磊, 齐亚东, 等. 页岩气井网井距优化[J]. 天然气工业, 2018,38(4):129-137.
	WEI Y S, WANG J L, QI Y D, et al. Optimization of shale gas well pattern and spacing[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018,38(4):129-137.
[13]	郭建林, 贾爱林, 贾成业, 等. 页岩气水平井生产规律[J]. 天然气工业, 2019,39(10):53-58.
	GUO J L, JIA A L, JIA C Y, et al. Production laws of shale-gas horizontal wells[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2019,39(10):53-58.
[14]	肖寒. 威远区块页岩气水平井基于灰色关联分析的产能评价方法[J]. 油气井测试, 2018,27(4):73-78.
	XIAO H. Production evaluation method based on grey correlation analysis for shale gas horizontal wells in Weiyuan Block[J]. Well Testing, 2018,27(4):73-78.
[15]	聂玲, 周德胜, 郭向东, 等. 利用灰色关联法分析低渗气藏压裂影响因素[J]. 断块油气田, 2013,20(1):133-136.
	NIE L, ZHOU D S, GUO X D, et al. Analysis on influencing factors of postfracture response in low permeability gas reservoir with gray correlation method[J]. Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field, 2013,20(1):133-136.
[16]	曲占庆, 黄德胜, 毛登周, 等. 基于灰色关联法的低渗气藏压裂效果影响因素分析[J]. 西北大学学报(自然科学版), 2014,44(4):603-609.
	QU Z Q, HUANG D S, MAO D Z, et al. The influencing factors of fracturing effects in low permeability gas reservoir with gray correlation method[J]. Journal of Northwest University(Natural Science Edition), 2014,44(4):603-609.
[17]	梁承春, 王国壮, 解庆阁, 等. 解水锁技术在超低渗油藏分段压裂水平井中的应用[J]. 断块油气田, 2014,21(5):652-655.
	LIANG C C, WANG G Z, JIE Q G, et al. Application of water-unblocking technology in staged fracturing horizontal wells of untra-low permeability reservoir[J]. Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field, 2014,21(5):652-655.
[18]	曾庆磊, 庄茁, 柳占立, 等. 页岩水力压裂中多簇裂缝扩展的全耦合模拟[J]. 计算力学学报, 2016,33(4):643-648.
	ZENG Q L, ZHUANG Z, LIU Z L, et al. Fully coupled modeling for multiple clusters growth of hydraulic fractures in shale[J]. Chinese Journal of Computational Mechanics, 2016,33(4):643-648.
[19]	周彤, 陈铭, 张士诚, 等. 非均匀应力场影响下的裂缝扩展模拟及投球暂堵优化[J]. 天然气工业, 2020,40(3):82-91.
	ZHOU T, CHEN M, ZHANG S C, et al. Simulation of fracture propagation and optimization of ball-sealer in-stage diversion under the effect of heterogeneous stress field[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2020,40(3):82-91.
[20]	柳占立, 王涛, 高岳, 等. 页岩水力压裂的关键力学问题[J]. 固体力学学报, 2016,37(1):34-49.
	LIU Z L, WANG T, GAO Y, et al. The key mechanical problems on hydraulic fracture in shale[J]. Chinese Journal of Solid Mechanics, 2016,37(1):34-49.

x₀	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅	x₆	x₇	x₈	x₉	x₁₀
0.072	133	1 816	605	12.0	3	48	400	1	5	2 735
4.220	7	3 226	538	10.2	6	96	400	1	5	2 870
9.210	1	3 092	515	10.4	6	96	400	1	4	2 800
0.049	596	1 958	392	13.0	5	80	500	2	3	2 678
0.080	88	2 200	733	12.0	3	48	450	2	5	2 432
0.447	61	1 980	660	12.2	3	48	500	1	1	2 724
0.033	885	1 886	629	13.3	3	48	350	1	4	2 505
0.004	1 037	2 047	682	13.4	3	48	900	1	5	2 478
0.002	1 022	1 910	637	14.1	3	48	600	2	5	2 582
0.023	1 033	1 897	474	13.5	4	48	900	2	2	2 694

y₀	y₁	y₂	y₃	y₄	y₅	y₆	y₇	y₈	y₉	y₁₀
0.007 8	0.128 3	0.562 9	0.376 2	0.794 7	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.444 4	0.250 0	1.000 0	0.766 5
0.458 2	0.006 8	1.000 0	0.334 6	0.675 5	1.000 0	1.000 0	0.444 4	0.250 0	1.000 0	0.804 4
1.000 0	0.001 0	0.958 5	0.320 3	0.688 7	1.000 0	1.000 0	0.444 4	0.250 0	0.800 0	0.784 8
0.005 3	0.574 7	0.606 9	0.243 8	0.860 9	0.833 3	0.833 3	0.555 6	0.500 0	0.600 0	0.750 6
0.008 7	0.084 9	0.682 0	0.455 8	0.794 7	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.500 0	1.000 0	0.681 6
0.048 5	0.058 8	0.613 8	0.410 4	0.807 9	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.555 6	0.250 0	0.200 0	0.763 5
0.003 6	0.853 4	0.584 6	0.391 2	0.880 8	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.388 9	0.250 0	0.800 0	0.702 1
0.000 4	1.000 0	0.634 5	0.424 1	0.887 4	0.500 0	0.500 0	1.000 0	0.250 0	1.000 0	0.694 5
0.000 2	0.985 5	0.592 1	0.396 1	0.933 8	0.500 0	0.500 0	0.666 7	0.500 0	1.000 0	0.723 7
0.002 5	0.996 1	0.588 0	0.294 8	0.894 0	0.666 7	0.500 0	1.000 0	0.500 0	0.400 0	0.755 0

x₀	x₁	x₂	x₃	x₄	x₅	x₆	x₇	x₈	x₉	x₁₀
1.000 0	0.805 8	0.473 8	0.575 7	0.388 5	0.503 9	0.503 9	0.533 8	0.673 6	0.335 0	0.397 2
1.000 0	0.525 5	0.479 9	0.801 7	0.697 0	0.479 9	0.479 9	0.973 2	0.706 0	0.479 9	0.590 8
1.000 0	0.333 5	0.923 3	0.423 8	0.616 3	1.000 0	1.000 0	0.473 6	0.399 9	0.714 2	0.699 0
1.000 0	0.467 5	0.453 8	0.677 0	0.368 8	0.376 5	0.376 5	0.476 0	0.502 6	0.456 7	0.401 5
1.000 0	0.867 8	0.426 1	0.527 8	0.388 7	0.504 3	0.504 3	0.504 3	0.504 3	0.335 2	0.426 2
1.000 0	0.979 8	0.469 3	0.580 1	0.397 0	0.525 5	0.525 5	0.496 5	0.712 7	0.767 5	0.411 5
1.000 0	0.370 4	0.462 5	0.563 3	0.363 0	0.501 7	0.501 7	0.564 7	0.669 8	0.385 6	0.417 1
1.000 0	0.333 4	0.440 8	0.541 3	0.360 4	0.500 2	0.500 2	0.333 4	0.667 0	0.333 4	0.418 7
1.000 0	0.336 6	0.457 9	0.558 0	0.348 7	0.500 1	0.500 1	0.428 6	0.500 1	0.333 3	0.408 6
1.000 0	0.334 7	0.460 5	0.631 0	0.359 3	0.429 4	0.501 2	0.333 8	0.501 2	0.557 0	0.399 1

蚂蚁体属性值	天然裂缝强度	压窜井次/ 次	占比/ %	平均母井生产时间/d
<-0.3		14	42.4	762
>-0.3	发育	19	57.5	281

类型	压窜风险段段长/m	平均单段长/m	单段簇数/簇	平均单段液量/m³	平均单簇液量/m³	排量/ （m³·min^-1）
试验井	301	60.2	3~4	1 548	442	12.0
对比井	860	66.2	3	1 985	662	14.1