基于核磁冻融技术的煤的孔隙测试研究

doi:10.11743/ogg20160120

石油与天然气地质 ›› 2016, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (1): 141-148.doi: 10.11743/ogg20160120

• 技术方法 • 上一篇

基于核磁冻融技术的煤的孔隙测试研究

郭威^1,2, 姚艳斌^1,2, 刘大锰^1,2, 孙晓晓^1,2, 高杨文³

1. 中国地质大学(北京)非常规天然气地质评价及开发工程北京市重点实验室, 北京 100083;
2. 中国地质大学(北京)能源学院, 北京 100083;
3. 上海纽迈电子科技有限公司, 上海 200062

收稿日期:2015-09-15 修回日期:2015-11-07 出版日期:2016-02-08 发布日期:2016-03-02
通讯作者: 姚艳斌(1978-),男,教授、博士生导师,非常规油气地质。E-mail:yyb@cugb.edu.cn。 E-mail:yyb@cugb.edu.cn
作者简介:郭威(1989-),男,硕士研究生,矿产普查与勘探。E-mail:realgw95@163.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41472137);全国优秀博士学位论文作者专项资金项目(201253);山西省煤基重点科技攻关项目(MQ2014-01)。

Research on measurement of pores in coals with NMRC technique

Guo Wei^1,2, Yao Yanbin^1,2, Liu Dameng^1,2, Sun Xiaoxiao^1,2, Gao Yangwen³

1. Beijing Key Laboratory of Unconventional Natural Gas Geology Evaluation and Development Engineering, Beijing 100083, China;
2. School of Energy Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China;
3. Shanghai Niumag Electronic Technology Co. Ltd, Shanghai 200062, China

Received:2015-09-15 Revised:2015-11-07 Online:2016-02-08 Published:2016-03-02

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用核磁冻融测孔法（NMRC）和低温氮吸附BJH法对6组不同变质程度煤样进行了孔隙结构和孔体积测试对比实验，首次探讨了将核磁冻融测孔技术应用于煤储层孔隙结构研究的可能性与可行性。研究表明，针对同一煤样，NMRC法测得的总孔体积明显大于BJH法。造成这种现象的原因主要有两个方面：一是，与BJH法相比，NMRC法能够测得更多的封闭孔的孔隙信息；二是，BJH法的计算模型本身存在一定局限性，在测量10 nm以下的微孔和部分中、大孔方面能力有限。不同煤阶煤样的测试结果表明，NMRC法测得的总孔体积随煤岩镜质组反射率增高呈现“先降低后升高”的变化趋势，这与孔隙度随煤阶的变化规律一致；而BJH法的测量结果存在异常值，与上述规律不符。整体上，NMRC法在定量识别煤储层“全孔隙”方面较其他常规方法具有明显的优势；同时，该方法受制样等人为因素的影响较小，是一种可拓展应用于非常规储层孔隙结构的新方法。

关键词: 核磁共振冻融测孔法, 低温氮吸附法, 孔隙结构, 封闭孔, 煤

Abstract: This study compared measurement results of total pore volume and pore size distribution of 6 coal samples with different coal ranks by using the Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Cryoporometry (NMRC) and low-temperature nitrogen adsorption BJH method.Meanwhile,the possibility and feasibility of applying NMRC to analysis of coal pore size distribution were evaluated for the first time. Results show that the total pore volume measured by NMRC is significantly larger than that of BJH method for the same coal sample.This is mainly caused by two factors. Firstly,in comparison with the BJH method,the NMRC can measure more closed pores.Secondly,the BJH model itself has some limitations in calculating the pore volumes of most micropores (<10 nm) and some meso-and macro-pores.Measurement results of coal samples with different coal ranks indicate that the total pore volume measured by NMRC shows a trend of decrease followed by an increase with increasing coal rank.This trend is consistent with the trend of the change of coal porosity with increasing coal rank.In contrast,the total pore volume measured by BJH does not match the trend of the change of coal porosity with increasing coal rank,due to the existence of outlier values in the measurement results of BJH method.Compared with the conventional methods,the NMRC has advantages in quantifying coal total porosity.Moreover,the results of NMRC are less influenced by some artificial factors.Thus,NMRC is a new method that can be applied to the measurement of pore structure of unconventional reservoirs.

Key words: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Cryoporometry(NMRC), low-temperature nitrogen gas adsorption, pore structure, closed pore, coal

中图分类号:

TE132.2

郭威,姚艳斌,刘大锰,等. 基于核磁冻融技术的煤的孔隙测试研究[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37(1): 141-148. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160120 Guo Wei,Yao Yanbin,Liu Dameng,et al. Research on measurement of pores in coals with NMRC technique[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2016, 37(1): 141-148. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160120

参考文献

[1] 王崇孝,罗群,宋岩,等.纳米石油地质学:非常规油气地质理论与研究方法探讨[J].石油实验地质,2014,36(6):659-667. Wang Congxiao,LuoQun,SongYan,etal.Nano-meter petroleum geo-logy:Discussion about geology theory and research method of unconventional petroleum[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2014,36(6):659-667.
[2] Mitchell J,Beau W,Webber J,et al.Nuclear magnetic resonance cryoporometry[J].Physics Reports,2008,461(1):1-36.
[3] Gane P A C,Ridgway C J.Comparison of NMR cryoporometry,mercury intrusion porosimetry,and DSC thermoporosimetry in characterizing pore size distributions of compressed finely ground calcium carbonate structures[J].Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,2004,43(24):7920-7927.
[4] Ritter H L,Drake L C.Pressure porosimeter and determination of complete macropore-size distributions[J].In.deng.chem.anal.ed,1945,(12):782-786.
[5] Barrett E P,Joyner L G,Halenda P P.The determination of pore volume and area distributions in porous substances[J].Journal of the American Chemical Society,1951,(1):373-380.
[6] 姚艳斌,刘大锰,蔡益栋,等.基于NMR和X-CT的煤的孔裂隙精细定量表征[J].中国科学:地球科学,2010,40(11):1598-1607. Yao Yanbin,Liu Dameng,Cai Yidong,et al.The pore fracture fine quantitative characterization based on NMR and X-CT[J].Science in Chinese,2010,40(11):1598-1607.
[7] Yao Y,Liu D,Che Y,et al.Petrophysical characterization of coals by low-field nuclear magnetic resonance(NMR)[J].Fuel,2010,89(7):1371-1380.
[8] Yao Y,Liu D.Comparison of low-field NMR and mercury intrusion porosimetry in characterizing pore size distributions of coals[J].Fuel,2012,95(1):152-158.
[9] 王振华,陈刚,李书恒,等.核磁共振岩心实验分析在低孔渗储层评价中的应用[J].石油实验地质,2014,36(6):773-779. Wang Zhenhua,ChenGang,LiShuhen,etal.Application of NMR core experimental analysis in evaluation of low-porosity and low-permeability sandstone reservoirs[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2014,36(6):773-779.
[10] Gun'ko V,Turov V,Bogatyrev V.Unusual properties of water at hydrophilic/hydrophobic interfaces.[J].Adv Colloid Interface Sci,2005,118(1-3).
[11] Strange J H.,Webber J B W.Spatially resolved pore size distributions by NMR[J].Measurement Science & Technology,1997,8(5):555-561.
[12] Petrov O V,Furó I.A joint use of melting and freezing data in NMR cryoporometry[J].Microporous & Mesoporous Materials,2010,136(1-3):83-91.
[13] Jackson C L,McKenna G B.The melting behavior of organic materials confined in porous solids[J].Journal of Chemical Physics,1990,93(12):9002-9011.
[14] Petrov O.V,Furó I.Curvature-dependent metastability of the solid phase and the freezing-melting hysteresis in pores[J].Physical Review E,2006,73(1):302-309.
[15] Petrov O V,Furó I.NMR cryoporometry:Principles,applications and potential[J].Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy,2009,54(2):97-122.
[16] ISO15901,固体材料孔径分布与孔隙率的压汞法和气体吸附法测定-第2部分:气体吸附法分析介孔和宏孔[S].2006:4-5. ISO15901,Pore size distribution and porosity of solid materials by mercury porosimetry and gas adsorption-Part 2:Analysis of mesopores and macropores by gas adsorption[S].2006:4-5.
[17] Strange J H,Mitchell J.Characterising porous media[J].Novel NMR & EPR Techniques,2006:407-430.
[18] 吴建国,刘大锰,姚艳斌.鄂尔多斯盆地渭北地区页岩纳米孔隙发育特征及其控制因素[J].石油与天然气地质,2014,35(4):542-550. Wu Jianguo,Liu Dameng,Yao Yanbin,et al.Characteristics and controlling factors of nanopores in shales in Weibei,Ordos Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2014,35(4):542-550.
[19] 张琴,刘畅,梅啸寒,等.页岩气储层微观储集空间研究现状及展望[J].石油与天然气地质,2015,36(4):666-674. Zhang Qin,Liu Chang,Mei Xiaohan,etal.Status and prospect of research on microscopic shale gas reservoir space[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2015,36(4):666-674.
[20] 李军,路菁,李争,等.页岩气储层"四孔隙"模型建立及测井定量表征方法[J].石油与天然气地质,2014,35(2):266-271. Li Jun,LuJing,LiZheng,et al.‘Four-pore’ modeling and its quantitative logging description of shale gas reservoir[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2014,35(2):266-271.
[21] Alexeev A D,Vasilenko T A,Ulyanova E V.Closed porosity in fossil coals[J].Fuel,1999,78(6):635-638.
[22] Chen Y,Wei L,Mastalerz M,et al.The effect of analytical particle size on gas adsorption porosimetry of shale[J].International Journal of Coal Geology,2015,138:103-112.
[23] Shiko,Elenica.NMR and gas sorption studies of structure-transport relationships in porous media[J].University of Bath,2013:48.
[24] Xiong J,Liu X,Liang L.Experimental study on the pore structure characteristics of the Upper Ordovician Wufeng Formation shale in the southwest portion of the Sichuan Basin,China[J].Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering,2015,22:530-539.
[25] Groen J C,Peffer L A A,Pérez-Ramirez J.Pore size determination in modified micro-and mesoporous materials.Pitfalls and limitations in gas adsorption data analysis[J].Microporous &Mesoporous Materials,2003,60(3):1-17.
[26] 李杰林,周科平,张亚民,等.基于核磁共振技术的岩石孔隙结构冻融损伤试验研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2012,31(6):1208-1214. Li Jielin,Zhou Keping,Zhang Yamin,et al.Experimental study of rock porous structure damage characteristics under condition of freezing-thawing cycles based on nuclear magnetic resonance technique[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2012,31(6):1208-1214.
[27] Alnaimi S M.The characterization of porous solids by NMR[J].Magnetic Resonance Imaging,1994,12(2):257-259.

基于核磁冻融技术的煤的孔隙测试研究

Research on measurement of pores in coals with NMRC technique

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	姜振学, 李鑫, 王幸蒙, 王国臻, 仇恒远, 朱德宇, 姜鸿阳. 中国南方典型页岩孔隙特征差异及其控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 41-53.
[2]	王濡岳, 胡宗全, 董立, 高波, 孙川翔, 杨滔, 王冠平, 尹帅. 页岩气储层表征评价技术进展与思考[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 54-65.
[3]	霍建峰, 高健, 郭小文, 易积正, 舒志国, 包汉勇, 杨锐, 罗涛, 何生. 川东地区龙马溪组页岩不同岩相孔隙结构特征及其主控因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(6): 1162-1175.
[4]	史今雄, 曾联波, 谭青松, 王继鹏, 张云钊, 李宏为. 沁水盆地南部煤岩储层天然裂缝有效性及对煤层气开发的影响[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(3): 617-626.
[5]	杨天博, 何治亮, 金振奎, 张军涛, 李双建. 川西北中二叠统超深层白云岩储层孔隙结构及控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(1): 116-131.
[6]	田伟超, 卢双舫, 王伟明, 李进步, 李壮, 李杰. 三塘湖盆地卡拉岗组火山岩风化壳储层微纳米孔隙演变机制及与含油性关系[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40(6): 1281-1294,1307.
[7]	李东晖, 聂海宽. 一种考虑气藏特征的页岩含气量计算方法——以四川盆地及其周缘焦页1井和彭页1井为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40(6): 1324-1332.
[8]	刘莹, 刘海燕, 杨海长, 王东东, 宋广增, 吕大炜, 陈莹, 李增学. 琼东南盆地古近纪成煤沉积体系类型及特征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2019, 40(1): 142-151.
[9]	马平华, 邵先杰, 霍梦颖, 褚庆忠, 霍春亮, 梁武斌. 煤储层地质建模思路与方法——以鄂尔多斯盆地东南缘韩城矿区为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39(3): 601-610.
[10]	袁学浩, 姚艳斌, 甘泉, 刘大锰, 周智. TOUGH-FLAC^3D热流固耦合模拟煤储层水力压裂过程[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39(3): 611-619.
[11]	王勃, 姚红星, 王红娜, 赵洋, 李梦溪, 胡秋嘉, 樊梅荣, 杨春莉. 沁水盆地成庄区块煤层气成藏优势及富集高产主控地质因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39(2): 366-372.
[12]	周三栋, 刘大锰, 蔡益栋, 姚艳斌, 焦永艳, 任世君. 低阶煤吸附孔特征及分形表征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2018, 39(2): 373-383.
[13]	周立宏, 滑双君, 孙超囡, 代昆, 牟智全. 大港油田上古生界煤系烃源岩地球化学特征与二次成烃[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2017, 38(6): 1043-1051.
[14]	倪春华, 包建平, 刘光祥, 朱建辉, 吴小奇, 翟常博. 煤成气干燥系数影响因素探讨——以鄂尔多斯盆地北部上古生界为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2017, 38(6): 1098-1104,1216.
[15]	冯立杰, 贾依帛, 岳俊举, 王金凤. 煤层气开采关键地质影响因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2017, 38(6): 1105-1112.