页岩岩相组合划分标准及其对缝网形成的影响——以四川盆地志留系龙马溪组页岩为例

doi:10.11743/ogg20210109

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

页岩气储层需通过水力压裂实现经济产能，但不同页岩岩相组合类型具有不同的压裂改造效果。综合考虑矿物组分、储层物性、层理缝和层理对缝网形成的影响，结合露头、岩心发育特征和压裂改造特征，以四川盆地志留系龙马溪组页岩为研究对象，建立了Ⅰ型(FA1)、Ⅱ型(FA2)、Ⅲ型(FA3)和Ⅳ型(FA4)共4类页岩相组合划分标准。研究表明，FA1受明显成岩改造，胶结充填裂缝极为发育，压裂前期可优先激活形成缝网，但易发生压裂施工异常，导致裂缝扩展受限；FA2受沉积作用控制明显，易形成优势储集层与优势可压裂层的高密度交互；FA3和FA4受陆源物质影响较大，被改造能力较差，对缝网形成的促进作用不明显。总体上，FA1与FA2岩相组合是压裂施工的甜点。研究成果对储层压裂改造选井选层和压裂方案设计具有理论支撑和现场指导意义。

关键词: 页岩岩相组合, 成岩作用, 压裂, 裂缝, 储层, 龙马溪组, 四川盆地

Abstract:

A commercial development of shale gas reservoirs largely depends on the effect of hydraulic fracturing.However, shale of different lithofacies associations responds differently to the treatment.The study used the Silurian Longmaxi Formation shale in the Sichuan Basin as an example to conduct a division of lithofacies associations and an analysis on the impact of the associations upon fracture networks.The roles of mineral composition, physical properties, beddings and bedding-parallel fractures of the shale in the formation of fracture networks were analyzed and then integrated with characterization of crops, cores and stimulation effect of hydraulic fracturing in the shale to define the association divisions.The results show that there are four types of lithofacies associations in the shale.Type Ⅰ association (FA1) is obviously the result of diagenesis modification and contains well-developed calcite-filled fractures, which can be activated preferentially to generate fracture networks but are also likely to confine the expansion of fractures during the earlier stage of fracturing.Type Ⅱ (FA2) shows evident signs of sedimentary control and tends to contain interbeds of promising gas reservoirs with crackable reservoirs.Type Ⅲ (FA3) and Type Ⅵ (FA4) are dominated by terrigenous components in comparison and are difficult to crack to from fracture networks.In all, FA1 and FA2 are the potential sweet spots for fracturing.The study is of theoretical support and on-site guiding significance to target formation selection and scheme design in fracturing.

Key words: shale lithofacies association, diagenesis, fracturing, fracture, reservoir, Longmaxi Formation, Sichuan Basin

中图分类号:

TE122.2

沈骋,任岚,赵金洲,等. 页岩岩相组合划分标准及其对缝网形成的影响——以四川盆地志留系龙马溪组页岩为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 98-106, 123. doi: 10.11743/ogg20210109 Cheng Shen,Lan Ren,Jinzhou Zhao,et al. Division of shale lithofacies associations and their impact on fracture network formation in the Silurian Longmaxi Formation, Sichuan Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2021, 42(1): 98-106, 123. doi: 10.11743/ogg20210109

图/表 11

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

表1

图7

表2

图8

表3

参考文献 30

1	刘乃震, 王国勇. 四川盆地威远区块页岩气甜点厘定与精准导向钻井[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2016, 43 (6): 978- 985.
	Liu Naizhen , Wang Guoyong . Shale gas sweet spot identification and precise geo-steering drilling in Weiyuan Block of Sichuan Basin SW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2016, 43 (6): 978- 985.
2	Yang Li , Dehua Zhou , Weihong Wang , Tingxue Jiang , et al. Development of unconventional gas and technologies adopted in China[J]. Energy Geoscience, 2020, 1 (1-2): 55- 68. doi: 10.1016/j.engeos.2020.04.004
3	沈骋, 任岚, 赵金洲, 等. 页岩储集层综合评价因子及其应用-以四川盆地东南缘焦石坝地区奥陶系五峰组-志留系龙马溪组为例[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2017, 44 (4): 649- 658.
	Shen Cheng , Ren Lan , Zhao Jinzhou , et al. New comprehensive index and its application on evaluation in shale gas reservoirs: A case study of Upper Ordovician Wufeng Formation to Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation in southeastern margin of Sichuan Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration & Development, 2017, 44 (4): 649- 658.
4	郭旭升, 胡东风, 魏志红, 等. 涪陵页岩气田的发现与勘探认识[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2016, 21 (3): 24- 37. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2016.03.003
	Guo Xusheng , Hu Dongfeng , Wei Zhihong , et al. Discovery and exploration for Fuling shale gas filed[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2016, 21 (3): 24- 37. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2016.03.003
5	谢军, 赵圣贤, 石学文, 等. 四川盆地页岩气水平井高产的地质主控因素[J]. 天然气工业, 2017, 37 (7): 1- 12.
	Xie Jun , Zhao Shengxian , Shi Xuewen , et al. Main geological factors controlling high production of horizontal shale gas wells in the Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2017, 37 (7): 1- 12.
6	曾庆才, 陈胜, 贺佩, 等. 四川盆地威远龙马溪组页岩气甜点区地震定量预测[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2018, 45 (3): 406- 414.
	Zeng Qingcai , Chen Sheng , He Pei , et al. Quantitative seismic prediction of shale gas sweet spots in Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation, Weiyuan area, Sichuan Basin, SW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration & Development, 2018, 45 (3): 406- 414.
7	沈骋. 页岩缝网形成的地质影响机制及储层综合评价研究[D]. 成都: 成都西南石油大学, 2018.
	Shen Cheng. Research on geological influence mechanisms for fracture network forming and its application on reservoir comprehensive evaluation[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Petroleum University, 2018.
8	Zhao Zhihong , Wu Kaidi , Fan Yu , et al. An optimization model for conductivity of hydraulic fracture networks in the Longmaxi shale, Sichuan basin, Southwest China[J]. Energy Geoscience, 2020, 1 (1-2): 47- 54. doi: 10.1016/j.engeos.2020.05.001
9	田鹤, 曾联波, 徐翔, 等. 四川盆地涪陵地区海相页岩天然裂缝特征及对页岩气的影响[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41 (3): 474- 483.
	Tian He , Zeng Lianbo , Xu Xiang , et al. Characteristics of natural fractures in marine shale in Fuling area, Sichuan Basin, and their influence on shale gas[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2020, 41 (3): 474- 483.
10	任岚, 林然, 赵金洲, 等. 基于最优SRV的页岩气水平井压裂簇间距优化设计[J]. 天然气工业, 2017, 37 (4): 69- 79.
	Ren Lan , Lin Ran , Zhao Jinzhou , et al. Cluster spacing optimal design for staged fracturing in horizontal shale gas wells based on optimal SRV[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2017, 37 (4): 69- 79.
11	任岚, 林然, 赵金洲, 等. 页岩气水平井增产改造体积评价模型及其应用[J]. 天然气工业, 2018, 38 (8): 40- 49.
	Ren Lan , Lin Ran , Zhao Jinzhou , et al. A volume evaluation model and its application to shale gas well stimulation[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018, 38 (8): 40- 49.
12	郭旭升, 胡东风, 李宇平, 等. 海相和湖相页岩气富集机理分析与思考: 以四川盆地龙马溪组和自流井组大安寨段为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2016, 23 (2): 18- 28.
	Guo Xusheng , Hu Dongfeng , Li Yuping , et al. Analyses and thoughts on accumulation mechanisms of marine and lacustrine shale gas: A case study in shales of Longmaxi Formation and Da'anzhai Section of Ziliujing Formation in Sichuan Basin[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2016a, 23 (2): 18- 28.
13	许丹, 胡瑞林, 高玮, 等. 页岩纹层结构对水力裂缝扩展规律的影响[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2015, 42 (4): 523- 528.
	Xu Dan , Hu Ruilin , Gao Wei , et al. Effects of laminated structure on hydraulic fracture propagation in shale[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2015, 42 (4): 523- 528.
14	赵文韬, 侯贵廷, 张居增, 等. 层厚与岩性控制裂缝发育的力学机理研究--以鄂尔多斯盆地延长组为例[J]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 51 (6): 1047- 1058.
	Zhao Wentao , Hou Guiting , Zhang Juzeng , et al. Study on the develo-pment law of structural fractures of Yanchang Formation in Longdong Area, Ordos Basin[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2015, 51 (6): 1047- 1058.
15	Rickman R, Mullen M J, Petre J E, et al. A practical use of shale petrophysics for stimulation design optimization: all shale plays are not clones of the Barnett shale[C]//SPE Annual Technical Confere-nce and Exhibition, 21-24 September 2008, Denver, Colorado, USA. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/115258-MS.
16	刘致水, 孙赞东. 新型脆性因子及其在泥页岩储集层预测中的应用[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2015, 42 (1): 117- 124.
	Liu Zhishui , Sun Zandong . New brittleness indexes and their application in shale/clay gas reservoir prediction[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2015, 42 (1): 117- 124.
17	赵金洲, 任岚, 胡永全. 页岩储层压裂缝成网延伸的受控因素分析[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 35 (1): 1- 9.
	Zhao Jinzhou , Ren Lan , Hu Yongquan . Controlling factors of hydraulic fractures extending into network in shale formations[J]. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University (Science & Technology Edition), 2013, 35 (1): 1- 9.
18	Olson J E, Bahorich B, Holder J. Examining hydraulic fracture natural fracture interaction in hydrostone block experiments[C]//SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, 6-8 February 2012, The Woodlands, Texas, USA. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/152618-MS.
19	刘洪林, 郭伟, 刘德勋, 等. 海相页岩成岩过程中的自生脆化作用[J]. 天然气工业, 2018, 38 (5): 17- 25.
	Liu Honglin , Guo Wei , Liu Dexun , et al. Authigenic embrittlement of marine shale in the process of diagenesis[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018, 38 (5): 17- 25.
20	郭旭升, 胡东风, 魏祥峰, 等. 四川盆地焦石坝地区页岩裂缝主控因素及对产能的影响[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37 (6): 799- 808.
	Guo Xusheng , Hu Dongfeng , Wei Xiangfeng , et al. Main controlling factors on shale fractures and their influences on production capacity in Jiaoshiba area, the Sichuan Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2016, 37 (6): 799- 808.
21	Nie Haikuan , Li Donghui , Liu Guangxiang , et al. An overview of the geology and production of the Fuling shale gas field, Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Energy Geoscience, 2020, 1 (3-4): 147- 164. doi: 10.1016/j.engeos.2020.06.005
22	邓继新, 唐郑元, 李越, 等. 成岩过程对五峰—龙马溪组页岩地震岩石物理特征的影响[J]. 地球物理学报, 2018, 61 (2): 659- 672.
	Deng Jixin , Tang Zhengyuan , Li Yue , et al. The influence of the diagenetic process on seismic rock physical properties of Wufeng and Longmaxi Formation shale[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2018, 61 (2): 659- 672.
23	张东晓, 杨婷云. 页岩气开发综述[J]. 石油学报, 2013, 34 (4): 792- 801.
	Zhang Dongxiao , Yang Tingyun . An overview of shale-gas production[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2013, 34 (4): 792- 801.
24	杨洋. 川南长宁地区下志留统龙马溪组页岩储层研究[D]. 成都: 成都西南石油大学, 2016.
	Yang Yang. Study of Long Ma Xi Shale Reservoir Locating in Southern Sichuan Changning Area[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Petroleum University, 2016.
25	赵金洲, 沈骋, 任岚, 等. 页岩储层不同赋存状态气体含气量定量预测: 以四川盆地焦石坝页岩气田为例[J]. 天然气工业, 2017, 37 (4): 27- 33.
	Zhao Jinzhou , Shen Cheng , Ren Lan , et al. Quantitative prediction of gas contents in different occurrence states of shale reservoirs: A case study of Jiaoshiba shale gasfield in the Sichuan Basin[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2017, 37 (4): 27- 33.
26	王玉满, 王淑芳, 董大忠, 等. 川南下志留统龙马溪组页岩岩相表征[J]. 地学前缘, 2016, 23 (1): 119- 133.
	Wang Yuman , Wang Shufang , Dong Dazhong , et al. Lithofacies chara-cterization of Longmaxi Formation of the lower Silurian, southern Sichuan[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2016, 23 (1): 119- 133.
27	Zheng Herong, Zhang Jincai, Qi Yuanchang. Geology and geomechanics of hydraulic fracturing in the Marcellus shale gas play and their potential applications to the Fuling shale gas development[J]. Energy Geoscience. Volume 1, Issues 1-2, 2020, Pages 36-46. ISSN 2666-7592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engeos.2020.05.002.
28	赵圣贤, 杨跃明, 张鉴, 等. 四川盆地下志留统龙马溪组页岩小层划分与储层精细对比[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2016, 27 (3): 470- 487.
	Zhao Shengxian , Yang Yueming , Zhang Jian , et al. Micro-layers division and fine reservoirs contrast of Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation shale, Sichuan Basin, SW China[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2016, 27 (3): 470- 487.
29	赵金洲, 许文俊, 李勇明, 等. 页岩气储层可压性评价新方法[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2015, 26 (6): 1165- 1172.
	Zhao Jinzhou , Xu Wenjun , Li Yongming , et al. A new method for fracability evaluation of shale-gas reservoirs[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2015, 26 (6): 1165- 1172.
30	谢军, 张浩淼, 佘朝毅, 等. 地质工程一体化在长宁国家级页岩气示范区中的实践[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2017, 22 (1): 21- 28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2017.01.004
	Xie Jun , Zhang Haomiao , She Chaoyi , et al. Practice of geology-engineering integration in Changning State Shale Gas Demonstration Area[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 2017, 22 (1): 21- 28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2017.01.004

岩相组合与划分指标	FA4	FA3	FA2	FA1
层理缝指数/(条·mm·m^-1)	< 40	40~60	40~80	>80
裂缝充填程度	未充填、半充填	半充填	全充填	全充填
长英质矿物/%	< 50	< 50	>50	>50
碳酸盐矿物/%	0~75	>20	< 20	< 20
孔隙度/%	3~5	< 3	3~5	>5
TOC/%	< 3	< 3	2~3	>3
层理密度/(层·m^-1)	< 60	60~120	>120	60~120

样品号	相组合	矿物含量/%			TOC/%	泊松比	杨氏模量/GPa	泊杨脆性指数
样品号	相组合	碳酸盐矿物	长英质矿物	粘土矿物	TOC/%	泊松比	杨氏模量/GPa	泊杨脆性指数
S-18	FA1	6.8	53.0	37.4	3.54	0.168	35.19	0.653
S-50	FA1	8.2	60.8	28.3	4.77	0.177	37.00	0.668
S-52	FA1	8.4	61.4	27.6	4.23	0.179	38.11	0.689
S-15	FA2	7.3	53.5	38.3	3.45	0.163	36.79	0.710
S-19	FA2	7.5	51.8	37.4	3.42	0.166	38.30	0.738
S-31	FA2	10.8	46.7	39.6	2.30	0.170	38.32	0.725
S-35	FA2	10.8	51.8	34.5	3.95	0.169	39.40	0.755
S-41	FA2	9.9	60.4	26.7	5.51	0.181	38.60	0.695
S-23	FA3	23.6	39.5	29.8	4.03	0.167	34.91	0.649
S-33	FA3	10.2	51.9	35.1	3.46	0.178	37.81	0.685
S-43	FA3	34.5	45.7	18.6	2.94	0.180	37.37	0.668
S-45	FA3	32.4	41.4	25.1	2.99	0.181	37.57	0.669
S-6	FA4	6.3	46.5	40.6	2.67	0.166	34.83	0.651
S-8	FA4	11.0	47.7	42.8	3.22	0.168	35.33	0.657
S-12	FA4	7.5	46.2	43.5	3.01	0.171	35.94	0.662
S-20	FA4	9.0	40.9	47.0	3.77	0.165	32.48	0.595
S-22	FA4	11.0	45.5	40.7	3.09	0.164	34.26	0.643

单井	压裂段	页岩相组合	异常段分析
H1	2	FA1	近井地带裂缝发育，滤失较大，扩展受限
	10	FA1	近井地带裂缝发育，滤失较大，扩展受限
	18	FA1	滤失较大，缝宽受限，砂堵
H2	3、5	FA3	扩展受限，砂浓度提升受限，加砂困难
	7	FA2	压力陡升，扩展受限
	11	FA1	压力陡升，砂敏感，扩展受限
	12	FA1	扩展受限，砂浓度提升受限，加砂困难
H3	1	FA2	井筒污染严重
	5	FA3	天然缝网影响，动态缝宽不足，进砂通道受限
	9	FA1	凝灰岩影响，砂堵，液体滤失量大，缝宽受限
	15	FA3	砂堵，液体滤失量大，缝宽受限

[1]	何治亮, 聂海宽, 李双建, 刘光祥, 丁江辉, 边瑞康, 卢志远. 特提斯域板块构造约束下上扬子地区二叠系龙潭组页岩气的差异性赋存[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 1-15.
[2]	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.
[3]	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.
[4]	王红岩, 施振生, 孙莎莎, 张磊夫. 四川盆地及周缘志留系龙马溪组一段深层页岩储层特征及其成因[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 66-75.
[5]	卢志远, 何治亮, 余川, 叶欣, 李东晖, 杜伟, 聂海宽. 复杂构造区页岩气富集特征—以四川盆地东南部丁山地区下古生界五峰组-龙马溪组为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 86-97.
[6]	蔡全升, 陈孝红, 张国涛, 张保民, 韩京, 陈琳, 李培军, 李炎桂. 鄂西宜昌地区下古生界五峰组-龙马溪组页岩气储层发育特征与勘探潜力[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 107-123.
[7]	孙莎莎, 董大忠, 李育聪, 王红岩, 施振生, 黄世伟, 昌燕, 拜文华. 四川盆地侏罗系自流井组大安寨段陆相页岩油气地质特征及成藏控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 124-135.
[8]	刘忠宝, 胡宗全, 刘光祥, 刘珠江, 刘晧天, 郝景宇, 王鹏威, 李鹏. 四川盆地东北部下侏罗统自流井组陆相页岩储层孔隙特征及形成控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 136-145.
[9]	朱洪建, 琚宜文, 孙岩, 黄骋, 冯宏业, AliRaza, 余坤, 乔鹏, 肖蕾. 构造变形作用下页岩孔裂隙结构演化特征及其模式——以四川盆地及其周缘下古生界海相页岩为例[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 186-200, 240.
[10]	舒志国, 周林, 李雄, 刘皓天, 曾勇, 谢洪光, 姚明君, 王艳春. 四川盆地东部复兴地区侏罗系自流井组东岳庙段陆相页岩凝析气藏地质特征及勘探开发前景[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 212-223.
[11]	何希鹏, 卢比, 何贵松, 任建华, 王伟, 陈祖华, 高玉巧, 房大志. 渝东南构造复杂区常压页岩气生产特征及开发技术政策[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 224-240.
[12]	陆亚秋, 梁榜, 王超, 刘超, 吉靖. 四川盆地涪陵页岩气田江东区块下古生界深层页岩气勘探开发实践与启示[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2021, 42(1): 241-250.
[13]	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.
[14]	马德芹, 田景春, 林小兵, 文龙, 徐亮. 四川盆地二叠系长兴组生物礁发育的差异性及控制因素[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(6): 1176-1187.
[15]	祖克威, 范凌霄, 王波, 曹东升, 管聪, 李中超, 程秀申. 四川盆地普光地区嘉陵江组二段碳酸盐岩储层裂缝发育规律[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(6): 1188-1196.