鄂尔多斯盆地延长油田双河西区块长6油藏开发参数

doi:10.7657/XJPG20240506

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

鄂尔多斯盆地延长油田双河西区块长6油藏为低渗透油藏，常规开发指标计算方法并不利于油田进行油藏地质研究、开发政策制定与成本控制。对延长油田双河西区块长6油藏产量递减规律、水驱储量动用程度、注采比、含水率、注水利用状况及采收率进行分析。结果表明：双河西区块长6油藏产量递减规律为双曲递减模式；区块注水开发潜力较大，目前该区块水驱储量控制程度为74.54%，水驱储量动用程度为36.94%，注采连通率为27.27%；合理注采比约为2.5，随着采出程度增加，含水率上升速度先增大，后有所减小；根据存水率、耗水指数及水驱指数可知，开发后期，区块注水开发效果逐渐变好，最终采收率增加，研究区在开发过程中含水上升率应尽量小于6.1%，地层合理压力应大于9.1 MPa，在该开发条件下，研究区最终采收率约为23%。

关键词: 鄂尔多斯盆地, 长6油藏, 递减规律, 水驱储量动用程度, 注采比, 含水率, 注水利用状况, 采收率

Abstract:

The Chang 6 reservoir in the Shuanghexi block of Yanchang oilfield in the Ordos basin is characterized by low permeability. Conventional calculation methods for development indices are not conducive to geological research, policy formulation and cost control for oilfield development. The production decline patterns, producing degree of reserves by water flooding, injection-production ratio, water cut, injected water utilization, and recovery of the Chang 6 reservoir were analyzed. The results show that the production of the Chang 6 reservoir follows a hyperbolic decline pattern. The block has significant potential for water injection development, with the current control degree and producing degree of reserves by water flooding at 74.54% and 36.94%, respectively, and an injection-production connection rate of 27.27%. The optimal injection-production ratio is approximately 2.5. As the recovery efficiency increases, the water cut rises rapidly at the first and then slows down. Based on the water retention rate, water consumption index, and water flooding index, it is evident that in the late stage of development, the water injection effectiveness improves, leading to an increase in ultimate recovery. During the development process, the water cut rise rate should ideally be kept below 6.1%, and the reasonable formation pressure should be maintained above 9.1 MPa. Under these conditions, the final recovery in the study area is approximately 23%.

Key words: Ordos basin, Chang 6 reservoir, decline pattern, producing degree of reserves by water flooding, injection-production ratio, water cut, injected water utilization, recovery

中图分类号:

TE341

陈军军, 杨兴利, 辛毅超, 柳朝阳, 仝波文. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长油田双河西区块长6油藏开发参数[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2024, 45(5): 552-559.

CHEN Junjun, YANG Xingli, XIN Yichao, LIU Zhaoyang, TONG Bowen. Development Parameters of Chang 6 Reservoir in Shuanghexi Block of Yanchang Oilfield, Ordos Basin[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2024, 45(5): 552-559.

图/表 15

表1

表2

表3

表4

图1

图2

图3

表5

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

参考文献 25

[1]	王光付, 廖荣凤, 李江龙, 等. 中国石化低渗透油藏开发状况及前景[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2007, 14(3):84-89.
	WANG Guangfu, LIAO Rongfeng, LI Jianglong, et al. The development situation and future of low permeability oil reservoirs of SINOPEC[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2007, 14(3):84-89.
[2]	刘满平, 封红丽. 40年成就耀眼,油气改革下一步该发力何处[J]. 中国石油和化工, 2019, 35(1):22-27.
	LIU Manping, FENG Hongli. 40 years of brilliant achievements,where should the next step of oil and gas reform be taken?[J]. China Petroleum and Chemical Industry, 2019, 35(1):22-27.
[3]	杨智, 邹才能, 陈建军, 等. “进(近)源找油”:油气地质理论创新与重点领域勘探思考[J]. 石油学报, 2021, 42(10):1310-1324. doi: 10.7623/syxb202110005
	YANG Zhi, ZOU Caineng, CHEN Jianjun, et al. “Exploring petroleum inside or near the source kitchen”:Innovations in petroleum geology theory and reflections on hydrocarbon exploration in key fields[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2021, 42(10):1310-1324.
[4]	王香增, 杨红, 王伟, 等. 延长油田低渗透油藏提高采收率技术进展[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2022, 29(4):69-75.
	WANG Xiangzeng, YANG Hong, WANG Wei, et al. Technical advancements in enhanced oil recovery in low permeability reservoirs of Yanchang oilfield[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2022, 29(4):69-75.
[5]	周立明, 韩征, 张道勇, 等. 中国新增石油和天然气探明地质储量特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1):115-121.
	ZHOU Liming, HAN Zheng, ZHANG Daoyong, et al. Characteristics of incremental proven oil and natural gas geological reserves in China[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2022, 43(1):115-121.
[6]	柴汝宽, 刘月田, 何宇廷, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长组致密砂岩油藏低盐度水驱作用规律[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2022, 41(2):67-74.
	CHAI Rukuan, LIU Yuetian, HE Yuting, et al. Low salinity waterflooding laws in the tight sandstone oil reservoirs of Yanchang formation in Ordos basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2022, 41(2):67-74.
[7]	苏彦春, 王月杰, 缪飞飞. 水驱砂岩油藏开发指标评价新体系[J]. 中国海上油气, 2015, 27(3):60-65.
	SU Yanchun, WANG Yuejie, MIAO Feifei. A new evaluation system for waterflooding sandstone reservoirs[J]. China Offshore Oil and Gas, 2015, 27(3):60-65.
[8]	缪飞飞. 水驱储量控制程度计算方法综述及新方法研究[J]. 石油地质与工程, 2017, 31(4):50-53.
	MIAO Feifei. Calculation methods review of controlling degree in water drive reserves and new method research[J]. Petroleum Geology and Engineering, 2017, 31(4):50-53.
[9]	孙伟. 特高含水期油田开发评价体系及方法研究[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2008.
	SUN Wei. Study of evaluation system and method for oilfield development in high watercut stage[D]. Beijing: China University of Petroleum(Beijing), 2008.
[10]	耿娜, 缪飞飞, 刘小鸿, 等. 水驱储量动用程度计算方法研究[J]. 断块油气田, 2014, 21(4):472-475.
	GENG Na, MIAO Feifei, LIU Xiaohong, et al. Calculation method of reserves producing degree of water flooding[J]. Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field, 2014, 21(4):472-475.
[11]	陈元千. 水驱曲线法的分类、对比与评价[J]. 新疆石油地质, 1994, 15(4):348-355.
	CHEN Yuanqian. Classification,correlation and evaluation of water-drive performance curve analysis method[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 1994, 15(4):348-355.
[12]	贾蕊, 袁泉, 汤欣, 等. 广义气水混驱特征曲线的建立及应用[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(5):562-571.
	JIA Rui, YUAN Quan, TANG Xin, et al. Establishment and application of generalized characteristic curves of gas-water miscible flooding[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2023, 44(5):562-571.
[13]	张瑞, 刘宗宾, 田博, 等. 渤海SZ油田井间单砂体连通性判别及定量评价[J]. 地质科技通报, 2018, 37(5):78-83.
	ZHANG Rui, LIU Zongbin, TIAN Bo, et al. Identification and quantitative evaluation of interwell single sandbody connectivity of SZ oilfield in Bohai sea[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information, 2018, 37(5):78-83.
[14]	郭军辉. 水驱多层砂岩油田注采关系定量评价方法研究[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2012, 34(7):132-135.
	GUO Junhui. Evaluation of injection-production relation of multilayer sandstone oilfields[J]. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2012, 34(7):132-135.
[15]	张志刚, 刘春杨, 刘国志. 低渗透油田储层连通关系动静态综合评价方法[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2019, 31(5):108-113.
	ZHANG Zhigang, LIU Chunyang, LIU Guozhi. Dynamic and static comprehensive evaluation method for reservoir connectivity of low-permeability oilfield[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2019, 31(5):108-113.
[16]	吴琼, 张晓明, 赵殿彪, 等. 新立油田高含水期完善微观注采井网实践与认识[J]. 特种油气藏, 2010, 17(4):75-78.
	WU Qiong, ZHANG Xiaoming, ZHAO Dianbiao, et al. Practice and cognition of microscopic injection-production pattern improvement at high water cut stage in Xinli oilfield[J]. Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2010, 17(4):75-78.
[17]	刘巍, 刘威, 谷建伟, 等. 利用卡尔曼滤波和人工神经网络相结合的油藏井间连通性研究[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2020, 27(2):118-124.
	LIU Wei, LIU Wei, GU Jianwei, et al. Research on interwell connectivity of oil reservoirs based on Kalman filter and artificial neural network[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2020, 27(2):118-124.
[18]	王海更, 汪利兵, 刘洪杰, 等. 利用生产动态及地震资料分析井间河流相砂体连通性[J]. 海洋石油, 2014, 34(3):66-71.
	WANG Haigeng, WANG Libing, LIU Hongjie, et al. Analysis of fluvial sand connectivity with production and seismic data[J]. Offshore Oil, 2014, 34(3):66-71.
[19]	杨国红, 尚建林, 王勇, 等. 油田注水配注合理注采比计算方法研究[J]. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 40(1):44-49.
	YANG Guohong, SHANG Jianlin, WANG Yong, et al. Research on a new calculation method for retional injection-production ratio of water injection allocation of oilfield[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology(Science & Technology Edition), 2013, 40(1):44-49.
[20]	袁迎中, 张烈辉, 何磊, 等. 注采比多元回归分析及合理注采比的确定[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2008, 30(1):299-302.
	YUAN Yingzhong, ZHANG Liehui, HE Lei, et al. Multiple regression analysis and determination of reasonable injection-production ratio[J]. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2008, 30(1):299-302.
[21]	张宏友, 王美楠, 陈晓祺, 等. 一种水驱油藏开发效果评价新方法在渤海油田的应用[J]. 复杂油气藏, 2018, 11(4):51-55.
	ZHANG Hongyou, WANG Meinan, CHEN Xiaoqi, et al. Application of a new evaluating method for development effect of water-flooding reservoir in Bohai oilfield[J]. Complex Hydrocarbon Reservoirs, 2018, 11(4):51-55.
[22]	徐赢, 潘有军, 周荣萍, 等. 油田注水开发期含水率随时间变化规律研究[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2016, 28(4):127-132.
	XU Ying, PAN Youjun, ZHOU Rongping, et al. Water cut change law with time in waterflooding oilfield[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2016, 28(4):127-132.
[23]	罗云龙, 卢祥国, 曹豹, 等. 智能分注分采技术改善水驱开发效果评价方法[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2021, 28(2):119-126.
	LUO Yunlong, LU Xiangguo, CAO Bao, et al. Evaluation method of intelligent separate injection-production technique for improving water-flooding development effect[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2021, 28(2):119-126.
[24]	崔传智, 韩兴源, 邴绍献, 等. 水驱油藏高含水期耗水条带表征指标及分级方法[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2022, 29(3):85-91.
	CUI Chuanzhi, HAN Xingyuan, BING Shaoxian, et al. Characterization indexes and grading method of water-consumption zones in waterflooding oil reservoirs during high water cut period[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2022, 29(3):85-91.
[25]	缪飞飞, 刘小鸿, 戴卫华, 等. 稠油底水油藏生产压差值对采收率的影响[J]. 重庆科技学院学报(自然科学版), 2013, 15(4):17-21.
	MIAO Feifei, LIU Xiaohong, DAI Weihua, et al. Effect of drawdown pressure on recovery ratio in heavy oil reservoir with bottom water[J]. Journal of Chongqing University of Science and Technology (Natural Science Edition), 2013, 15(4):17-21.

开发层系	油井生产总厚度/m	注水井连通厚度/m	水驱储量控制程度/%
开发层系	油井生产总厚度/m	注水井连通厚度/m	厚度定义法	储量丰度定义法	改进的定义法
长$6_{1}^{1}$小层	555.6	464.4	83.59	91.91	78.60
长$6_{1}^{2}$小层	1 135.4	1 126.4	99.20	66.50	83.50
长$6_{2}^{1}$小层	310.8	201.3	64.76	88.24	61.52

开发层系	油井生产总厚度/m	注水井连通厚度/m	吸水厚度/ m	水驱储量动用程度/%
开发层系	油井生产总厚度/m	注水井连通厚度/m	吸水厚度/ m	定义法	水驱特征曲线法	改进的定义法
长$6_{1}^{1}$小层	555.6	464.4	245.3	52.82	43.51	41.51
长$6_{1}^{2}$小层	1 135.4	1 126.4	501.5	44.52	51.12	37.17
长$6_{2}^{1}$小层	310.8	201.3	105.2	52.26	42.11	32.15

开发层系	注采井网总有效厚度/m	注采连通有效厚度/m	注采未连通有效厚度/m			注采对应率/%	注采连通率/%
开发层系	注采井网总有效厚度/m	有注有采	有注无采	有采无注	无注无采	注采对应率/%	注采连通率/%
长$6_{1}^{1}$小层	14 757.54	5 096.60	1 996.11	787.10	1 891.63	53.39	34.54
长$6_{1}^{2}$小层	14 773.00	5 176.75	2 017.41	1 017.95	1 591.69	55.58	35.04
长$6_{2}^{1}$小层	9 679.20	1 183.96	1 763.06	395.84	3 007.02	34.53	12.23

开发时间/年	目前地层压力/ MPa	压力保持水平/ %	压降/ MPa	注采比
2012	5.68	42.39	7.72	1.17
2013	6.60	49.25	6.80	0.72
2014	7.41	55.30	5.99	0.91
2015	8.75	65.30	4.65	1.10
2016	9.69	72.31	3.71	1.63
2017	9.10	67.91	4.30	2.04
2018	8.86	66.12	4.54	1.92
2019	9.14	68.21	4.26	2.65

月注采比范围	井组数量	月注采比
<2.00	3	1.80
2.00~2.25	3	2.15
2.25~2.50	2	2.40
2.50~2.75	3	2.65
2.75~3.00	3	2.80
>3.00	1	3.40