苏里格气田二叠系山西组曲流河储集层岩相与构型

doi:10.7657/XJPG20250304

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

常规曲流河储集层表征通常利用直井密井网资料，缺少井间资料，导致曲流河构型单元平面组合不可靠。以苏里格气田二叠系山西组为钻探目标的SSF-AH水平井+大井组为例，利用水平井和直井资料进行曲流河储集层岩相识别及构型解剖。结果表明：研究区岩相划分为4类，从Ⅰ类到Ⅳ类，沉积时期水动力逐渐减弱，Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类是主要的含气岩相，Ⅲ类和Ⅳ类岩相多不含气；水平井钻遇曲流河储集层构型单元组合模式主要有横跨式、纵跨式和穿越式3种；曲流河河道砂体宽度为900~1 100 m，边滩砂体长度为650~800 m，平均为720 m，边滩砂体宽度为800~1 000 m，平均为910 m，废弃河道宽度小于100 m；边滩砂体通常由4~5期侧积砂体构成，侧积体厚度为0.4~1.5 m，平面宽度为120~220 m；侧积泥岩厚度为0.2~0.4 m，垂向密度为0.5~0.8条/m，平面密度为0.011条/m。利用水平井+大井组资料能够提高构型表征结果的精度。

关键词: 鄂尔多斯盆地, 苏里格气田, 山西组, 曲流河, 岩相, 构型单元, 水平井

Abstract:

Conventional characterization of meandering river reservoirs typically relies on data from densely-spaced vertical wells, but insufficient inter-well data results in unreliable planar combinations of architectural elements. Taking the SSF-AH horizontal well + large well group targeting the Permian Shanxi formation in Sulige gas field as an example, and by integrating horizontal and vertical well data, the lithofacies of the meandering river reservoirs were identified, and the reservoir architecture was analyzed. The results demonstrate that the lithofacies in the study area can be classified into four types. Type Ⅰ to Ⅳ shows a gradually decreasing hydrodynamic force during deposition. Types Ⅰ and Ⅱ constitute the main gas-bearing lithofacies, while Types Ⅲ and Ⅳ are generally non-productive. Three combination patterns of architectural elements of the meandering river reservoir are identified: transverse-spanning, longitudinal-spanning, and intercrossing. The sand bodies of the meandering river channels are 900-1 100 m wide; the sand bodies of point bars are 650-800 m long (avg. 720 m) and 800-1 000 m wide (avg. 910 m); and the width of abandoned channels are generally less than 100 m. The point bars are typically composed of 4-5 stages of lateral accretion sand bodies, with the thickness ranging from 0.4 to 1.5 m individually and the planar width ranging from 120 to 220 m. The lateral acceretion mudstones are 0.2-0.4 m thick, with a vertical density of 0.5-0.8 beds per meter and a planar density of 0.011 beds per meter. The integration of horizontal wells with large well groups can improve the accuracy of architecture characterization.

Key words: Ordos Basin, Sulige gas field, Shanxi formation, meandering river, lithofacies, architectural element, horizontal well

中图分类号:

TE122.2

马志欣, 李进步, 付斌, 白慧, 李浮萍, 马生晖, 贾金娥. 苏里格气田二叠系山西组曲流河储集层岩相与构型[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2025, 46(3): 280-287.

MA Zhixin, LI Jinbu, FU Bin, BAI Hui, LI Fuping, MA Shenghui, JIA Jin’e. Lithofacies and Architecture of Meandering River Reservoirs in Permian Shanxi Formation, Sulige Gas Field[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2025, 46(3): 280-287.

图/表 8

图1

图2

图3

表1

图4

图5

表2

图6

参考文献 23

[1]	MIALL A D. Architectural-element analysis:A new method of facies analysis applied to fluvial deposits[J]. Earth Science Reviews, 1985, 22:261-308.
[2]	MIALL A D. The geology of fluvial deposits,sedimentary facies,basin analysis and petroleum geology[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1996.
[3]	涂乙, 戴建文, 杨娇, 等. 番禺油田群稠油油藏储集层构型特征及剩余油挖潜[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2024, 45(2):189-198.
	TU Yi, DAI Jianwen, YANG Jiao, et al. Architectures of and remaining oil potential tapping in heavy oil reservoirs of Panyu oilfield group[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2024, 45(2):189-198.
[4]	周恒, 马世忠, 何宇, 等. 苏里格盒 8下段砂质辫状河心滩构型模式及剩余气分布规律[J]. 特种油气藏, 2023, 30(5):18-27. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6535.2023.05.003
	ZHOU Heng, MA Shizhong, HE Yu, et al. Architecture model of sandy braided river island in the lower He8 member of Sulige and residual gas distribution rule[J]. Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2023, 30(5):18-27.
[5]	吴胜和. 储层表征与建模[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2010.
	WU Shenghe. Reservoir characterization & modeling[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2010.
[6]	罗贺元, 罗水亮, 李林祥, 等. 孤东油田四区馆陶组曲流河储层构型表征及对剩余油的控制[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2023, 42(1):134-141.
	LUO Heyuan, LUO Shuiliang, LI Linxiang, et al. Characterization of meandering river reservoir architecture and control on remaining oil in Guantao formation of Block 4 in Gudong oilfield[J]. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2023, 42(1):134-141.
[7]	刘金库, 胡杨, 伍燚. 苏里格气田盒8段辫状河储集层构型空间展布[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(2):144-150.
	LIU Jinku, HU Yang, WU Yi. Spatial distribution of architectures of braided river reservoirs in He 8 member,Sulige gas field[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2023, 44(2):144-150.
[8]	雷涛, 任广磊, 李晓慧, 等. 砂质辫状河心滩沉积演化规律与沉积构型特征:基于沉积数值模拟的认识[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2023, 44 (6):1595-1608.
	LEI Tao, REN Guanglei, LI Xiaohui, et al. Sedimentary evolution pattern and architectural characteristics of mid-channel bars in sandy braided rivers:Understanding based on sedimentary numerical simulation[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2023, 44(6):1595-1608.
[9]	吴胜和, 岳大力, 刘建民, 等. 地下古河道储层构型的层次建模研究[J]. 中国科学D辑:地球科学, 2008, 38(增刊Ⅰ):111-121.
	WU Shenghe, YUE Dali, LIU Jianmin, et al. Hierarchy modeling of subsurface palaeochannel reservoir architecture[J]. Science in China Series D:Earth Sciences, 2008, 38(Supp. Ⅰ):111-121.
[10]	岳大力. 曲流河储层构型分析与剩余油分布模式研究:以孤岛油田馆陶组为例[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2006.
	YUE Dali. The study on architecture analysis and remaining oil distribution patterns of meandering river reservoir:A case study of Guantao formation,Gudao oilfield[D]. Beijing: China University of Petroleum(Beijing), 2006.
[11]	张吉, 余浩杰, 马志欣, 等. 苏里格致密砂岩气储层定量表征[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2019.
	ZHANG Ji, YU Haojie, MA Zhixin, et al. Quantitative characterization for tight sandstone gas reservoir in the Sulige gas field[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2019.
[12]	何贤科, 娄敏, 蔡华, 等. 西湖凹陷C油田花港组浅水三角洲储集层构型[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(5):517-527.
	HE Xianke, LOU Min, CAI Hua, et al. Architecture of shallow-water delta reservoir of Huagang formation in C oilfield,Xihu sag[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2023, 44(5):517-527.
[13]	邵长印, 宋璠, 张世奇, 等. 渤海湾盆地黄河口凹陷SC7区块古近系东营组二段下亚段滩坝储集体构型特征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2024, 45(2):486-501.
	SHAO Changyin, SONG Fan, ZHANG Shiqi, et al. Architectural characteristics of beach-bar reservoirs in the lower submember of the 2nd member of the Paleogene Dongying formation in Block SC7,Huanghekou sag,Bohai Bay Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2024, 45(2):486-501.
[14]	李莉妃, 任启强, 杨田, 等. 多级构型界面下致密砂岩储层构造裂缝发育特征:以川西坳陷须家河组二段为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2024, 46(4):722-734.
	LI Lifei, REN Qiqiang, YANG Tian, et al. Development characteristics of structural fractures in tight sandstone reservoirs under multi-level configuration interfaces:A case study of second member of Xujiahe formation in western Sichuan depression[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2024, 46(4):722-734.
[15]	孙以德, 刘常妮, 李浩男, 等. 基于密井网和井间示踪剂资料的浅水三角洲单砂体沉积构型研究:以东营凹陷胜坨油田二区沙二段1-2砂组为例[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2024, 31(2):39-47.
	SUN Yide, LIU Changni, LI Haonan, et al. Study on sedimentary architecture of single sand body in shallow water deltas based on dense well pattern and interwell tracer data:A case study of Es₂1 and Es₂2 in Shenger district of Shengtuo oilfield,Dongying sag[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2024, 31(2):39-47.
[16]	黄文松, 陈和平, 李胜利, 等. 基于水平井信息的辫状河岩相单元与砂体定量研究:以委内瑞拉奥里诺科重油带MPE3区块为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39(2):409-418.
	HUANG Wensong, CHEN Heping, LI Shengli, et al. Quantification of braided-river lithofacies units and sandbody based on horizontal well data:A case of MPE3 block in Orinoco heavy-oil zone,Venezuela[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2018, 39(2):409-418.
[17]	石耀东, 王丽琼, 臧苡澄, 等. 苏里格气田致密砂岩气藏剩余气分布特征及其挖潜[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2023, 44(5):554-561.
	SHI Yaodong, WANG Liqiong, ZANG Yicheng, et al. Distribution and potential tapping strategies of remaining gas in tight sandstone gas reservoirs[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2023, 44(5):554-561.
[18]	李进步, 李娅, 张吉, 等. 苏里格气田西南部致密砂岩气藏资源评价方法及评价参数的影响因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(4):730-743.
	LI Jinbu, LI Ya, ZHANG Ji, et al. Resource evaluation method and influence factors of its parameters for tight sand gas reservoir in southwestern Sulige gas field[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2020, 41(4):730-743.
[19]	官伟, 刘池洋, 李涵, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地苏里格气田东南区气藏凝析油产出规律[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2022, 43(1):52-58.
	GUAN Wei, LIU Chiyang, LI Han, et al. Production behaviors of condensate oil from gas reservoirs in southestern Sulige gas field,Ordos Basin[J]. Xinjiang Petroleum Geology, 2022, 43(1):52-58.
[20]	赵荣华, 田景春, 郝海燕, 等. 苏里格气田苏76、苏77井区山西组岩相类型及沉积相[J]. 断块油气田, 2012, 19(1):70-74.
	ZHAO Ronghua, TIAN Jingchun, HAO Haiyan, et al. Rock facies type and sedimentary facies of Shanxi formation in Su 76 and Su 77 well area,Sulige gas field[J]. Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field, 2012, 19(1):70-74.
[21]	胡一然. 大牛地气田山西组岩相及沉积相平面分布研究[D]. 成都: 成都理工大学, 2015.
	HU Yiran. Shanxi formation in Daniudi gas field and the distribution of sedimentary facies and lithofacies study[D]. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology, 2015.
[22]	王越, 陈世悦, 李天宝, 等. 扒楼沟剖面二叠系辫状河砂体构型与非均质性特征[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 40(6):1-8.
	WANG Yue, CHEN Shiyue, LI Tianbao, et al. Braided river sand body architecture and heterogeneity of Permian in Palougou outcrop[J]. Journal of China University of Petroleum(Edition of Natural Science), 2016, 40(6):1-8.
[23]	LEEDER M R. Fluviatile fining upwards cycles and the magnitude of palaeochannels[J]. Geological Magazine, 1973, 110(3):265-276.

构型单元	归一化自然伽马	归一化全烃含量	岩屑录井
边滩	0.02~0.35 （0.10，0.07）	0.11~0.69 （0.40，0.22）	浅灰—灰色中砂岩、细砂岩
废弃河道	0.31~0.71 （0.54，0.53）	0.05~0.26 （0.15，0.16）	灰—深灰色粉砂岩、泥岩
泛滥平原	0.64~0.93 （0.82，0.81）	0.02~0.11 （0.06，0.05）	深灰— 灰黑色泥岩

5级构型单元	4级构型单元				3级构型单元
曲流带宽度	满岸深度/m	废弃河道宽度/m	边滩砂体宽度/m	边滩砂体长度/m	侧积体厚度/m	侧积体平面宽度/m	侧积泥岩厚度/m	侧积泥岩垂向密度/ （条·m^-1）	侧积泥岩平面密度/ （条·m^-1）
900~1 100（980）	3.5~9.1（6.7）	<100	800~1 000（910）	650~800（720）	0.4~1.5（1.2）	120~220（150）	0.2~0.4	0.5~0.8	0.011