生物地层格架下湘西北地区五峰组—龙马溪组孔隙结构特征

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2022.055

现代地质 ›› 2022, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (05): 1292-1303.DOI: 10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2022.055

生物地层格架下湘西北地区五峰组—龙马溪组孔隙结构特征

漆洋¹^,²^,³(), 吕春研¹^,²^,³, 王宇慧¹^,²^,³, 唐书恒¹^,²^,³, 郗兆栋¹^,²^,³()

1.中国地质大学(北京) 能源学院,北京 100083
2.海相储层演化与油气富集机理教育部重点实验室,北京 100083
3.非常规天然气地质评价与开发工程北京市重点实验室,北京 100083

收稿日期:2022-01-04 修回日期:2022-06-11 出版日期:2022-10-10 发布日期:2022-11-03
通讯作者: 郗兆栋
作者简介:郗兆栋,男,讲师,1991年出生,矿产普查与勘探专业,主要从事非常规天然气(页岩气)地质方面研究。Email: xizhaod@cugb.edu.cn。
漆洋,女,本科生,2000年出生,资源勘查工程(能源)专业,主要从事非常规天然气(页岩气)地质方面研究。Email: 1597657578@qq.com。
基金资助:
国家科技重大专项“四川盆地及周缘页岩气富集规律与重点目标评价”(2017ZX05035)

Pore Structural Characteristics of Wufeng-Longmaxi Formations Under Biostratigraphic Framework in Northwestern Hunan

QI Yang¹^,²^,³(), LÜ Chunyan¹^,²^,³, WANG Yuhui¹^,²^,³, TANG Shuheng¹^,²^,³, XI Zhaodong¹^,²^,³()

1. School of Energy Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
2. Key Laboratory of Marine Reservoir Evolution and Hydrocarbon Enrichment Mechanism, Ministry of Education, Beijing 100083, China
3. Beijing Key Laboratory of Unconventional Natural Gas Geological Evaluation and Development Engineering, Beijing 100083, China

Received:2022-01-04 Revised:2022-06-11 Online:2022-10-10 Published:2022-11-03
Contact: XI Zhaodong

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究生物地层格架下五峰组—龙马溪组孔隙结构特征,在笔石带划分的基础上结合孔隙结构特征及其影响因素将SY-3井五峰组—龙马溪组划分为LM5—LM7、WF4—LM4、WF2—WF3三个笔石带,并基于扫描电镜、低温氮气吸附实验、高压压汞实验等技术手段,分别对这三个笔石带进行孔隙结构特征的研究和对比。结果表明:LM5—LM7富集黏土矿物,主要发育较大孔径孔隙,以黏土矿物粒间孔为主;WF4—LM4富集有机质,主要发育较小孔径孔隙,以有机质孔为主;WF2—WF3富集石英,主要发育小孔径孔隙,以石英粒间孔为主,但大部分石英粒间孔被黏土矿物和有机质充填。LM5—LM7孔隙发育主要受TOC含量和矿物含量的影响,WF4—LM4孔隙发育主要受TOC含量影响,而WF2—WF3受矿物组分、有机质赋存特征及成岩作用等因素共同影响。不同笔石带由于沉积环境的差异导致其具有不同的有机质丰度及矿物组分,从而导致了孔隙结构的差异。

关键词: 生物地层, 五峰组—龙马溪组, 孔隙结构, 低温氮气吸附实验, 高压压汞实验

Abstract:

To explore the pore structural characteristics of Wufeng-Longmaxi formations under the biostratigraphic framework, these formations in well SY-3 are divided into LM5-LM7, WF4-LM4 and WF2-WF3, based on the pore structural characteristics and influencing factors. The pore structural characteristics of these three graptolite zones are studied and compared by means of scanning electron microscope, low-temperature nitrogen adsorption, and high-pressure mercury injection experiment. The results show that LM5-LM7 is rich in clay minerals and develops mainly macropores (intergranular pores formed by clay minerals). WF4-LM4 is rich in organic matter and develops mainly micropores (organic pores). WF2-WF3 is rich in quartz and develops mainly micropores (intergranular pores formed by quartz). Most of the intergranular pores are filled with clay minerals and organic matter. TOC and mineral contents are the main influence factors of pore development in the LM5-LM7. TOC content is the main influence factor of pore development in the WF4-LM4, and the WF2-WF3 is affected by mineral constituent, organic matter occurrence and diagenesis. Different graptolite zones have different organic matter abundance and mineral constituents due to the different sedimentary environments, which leads to the pore structural difference.

Key words: biostratigraphy, Wufeng-Longmaxi formations, pore structure, low-temperature nitrogen adsorption, high-pressure mercury injection experiment

中图分类号:

漆洋, 吕春研, 王宇慧, 唐书恒, 郗兆栋. 生物地层格架下湘西北地区五峰组—龙马溪组孔隙结构特征[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(05): 1292-1303.

QI Yang, LÜ Chunyan, WANG Yuhui, TANG Shuheng, XI Zhaodong. Pore Structural Characteristics of Wufeng-Longmaxi Formations Under Biostratigraphic Framework in Northwestern Hunan[J]. Geoscience, 2022, 36(05): 1292-1303.

图/表 17

图1 上扬子地台五峰组—龙马溪组岩相古地理图及目标井位(据文献[9]修改)

Fig.1 Lithofacies paleogeographic map and target well location of Wufeng-Longmaxi formations in the upper Yangtze platform (modified from reference [9])

图2 SY-3井五峰组—龙马溪组生物地层格架的划分(据文献[9]修改)

Fig.2 Division of biostratigraphic framework of the Wufeng-Longmaxi formations in well SY-3 (modified from reference [9])

表1 研究区不同笔石带五峰组—龙马溪组有机碳及矿物组分含量

Table 1 Organic carbon and mineral contents of the Wufeng-Longmaxi formations in the different graptolite zones of the study area

笔石带	TOC平均含量/%	石英平均含量/%	黏土矿物平均含量/%
LM5-LM7	0.28	38.58	50.78
WF4-LM4	1.27	47.35	26.20
WF2-WF3	1.08	69.25	16.95
所有笔石带	1.02	50.12	29.43

图3 研究区页岩样品孔隙特征扫描电镜图像 (a)石英间发育的粒间孔;(b)黄铁矿间发育的粒间孔;(c)有机质中发育的有机质孔;(d)脆性矿物基质中发育的粒内孔;(e)黏土矿物间被有机质充填的粒间孔;(f)石英间被有机质充填的粒间孔

Fig.3 SEM images of pore characteristics of shale samples from the study area

图4 滞后回环的分类(据文献[13]修改)

Fig.4 Types of hysteresis loops (modified from reference [13])

图5 不同笔石带页岩样品的氮气吸附-脱附曲线特征

Fig.5 Characteristics of nitrogen adsorption-desorption curves of shale samples in the different graptolitezones

图6 不同笔石带的氮气吸附和脱附分支的孔径分布曲线

Fig.6 Pore size distribution curves of nitrogen adsorption and desorption branches in the different graptolitezones

图7 基于BJH法对吸附分支计算得到的不同笔石带孔径分布曲线

Fig.7 Pore size distribution curves of the different graptolite zones calculated by the BJH method

图8 不同笔石带页岩样品的累积进汞量与孔径的关系

Fig.8 Relationship between cumulative mercury intake and pore size of shale samples in the different graptolitezones

表2 不同笔石带的孔隙结构参数

Table 2 Pore structure parameters of the different graptolite zones

笔石带	BET比表面积/ (m²/g)	BJH孔隙体积/ (cm³/g)	平均孔径/ nm
LM5—LM7	5.406 8	0.015 4	11.411 9
WF4—LM4	6.121 3	0.011 1	7.271 8
WF2—WF3	3.655 6	0.006 2	7.142 3
所有笔石带	5.451 8	0.011 0	8.116 1

图9 研究区页岩样品不同孔径比表面积、孔隙体积的百分含量分布

Fig.9 Percentage distribution of specific surface area and pore volume of shale samples with the different pore sizes in the study area

图10 不同笔石带页岩孔隙BET比表面积、BJH累积孔隙体积及平均孔径的相关性

Fig.10 Correlation of BET specific surface area, BJH cumulative pore volume and average pore size of shale pores in the different graptolite zones

图11 不同笔石带TOC含量与BET比表面积、BJH吸附累积孔隙体积的关系

Fig.11 Relationship between TOC content and BET specific surface area and BJH adsorbed cumulative pore volume in the different graptolite zones

图12 TOC含量与平均孔径的关系

Fig.12 Relationship between TOC content and average pore size

图13 不同笔石带黏土矿物含量与BET比表面积、BJH吸附累积孔隙体积的关系

Fig.13 Relationship between clay mineral content and BET specific surface area and BJH adsorbed accumulated pore volume in the different graptolite zones

图14 不同笔石带石英含量与BET比表面积、BJH吸附累积孔隙体积的关系

Fig.14 Relationship between quartz content and BET specific surface area and BJH adsorbed accumulated pore volume in the different graptolite zones

图15 黏土矿物含量与平均孔径的关系

Fig.15 Relationship between clay mineral content and average pore size

参考文献 27

[1]	李小明, 王亚蓉, 吝文, 等. 湖北荆门探区五峰组-龙马溪组深层页岩微观孔隙结构与分形特征[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2022, 33(4): 629-641.
[2]	陈波, 兰正凯. 上扬子地区下寒武统页岩气资源潜力[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2009, 14(3): 10-14.
[3]	姜振学, 李鑫, 王幸蒙, 等. 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.
[4]	杨峰, 宁正福, 胡昌蓬, 等. 页岩储层微观孔隙结构特征[J]. 石油学报, 2013, 34(2): 301-311.
[5]	郗兆栋, 唐书恒, 李俊, 等. 沁水盆地中东部海陆过渡相页岩孔隙结构及分形特征[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2017, 28(3): 366-376.
[6]	田忠斌, 魏书宏, 王建青, 等. 沁水盆地中东部海陆过渡相页岩微观孔隙结构特征[J]. 煤炭学报, 2017, 42(7): 1818-1827.
[7]	孙寅森, 郭少斌. 渝东南彭水地区龙马溪组页岩孔隙结构特征及吸附性能控制因素[J]. 海相油气地质, 2018, 23(1): 63-74.
[8]	朱炎铭, 王阳, 陈尚斌, 等. 页岩储层孔隙结构多尺度定性-定量综合表征:以上扬子海相龙马溪组为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2016, 23(1): 154-163. DOI
[9]	张兵, 唐书恒, 郗兆栋, 等. 湘西北地区五峰组-龙马溪组生物地层特征及勘探意义[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2021, 33(5): 11-21.
[10]	申宝剑, 仰云峰, 腾格尔, 等. 四川盆地焦石坝构造区页岩有机质特征及其成烃能力探讨--以焦页1井五峰-龙马溪组为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2016, 38(4): 480-488,495.
[11]	张美玲, 李建明, 郭战峰, 等. 涪陵焦石坝地区五峰组-龙马溪组富有机质泥页岩层序地层与沉积相研究[J]. 长江大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 12(11): 17-21.
[12]	LOUCKS R G, REED R M, RUPPEL S C, et al. Spectrum of pore types and networks in mudrocks and a descriptive classification for matrix-related mudrock pores[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2012, 96(6): 1071-1098. DOI URL
[13]	SING K, EVERETT D H, HAUL R, et al. Reporting physisorption data for gas/solid systems[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 1985, 57(4): 603-619. DOI URL
[14]	ROUQUÉROL J, AVNIR D, FAIRBRIDGE C W, et al. Recommendations for the characterization of porous solids (Technical Report)[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 1994, 66(8): 1739-1758. DOI URL
[15]	何余生, 李忠, 奚红霞, 等. 气固吸附等温线的研究进展[J]. 离子交换与吸附, 2004(4): 376-384.
[16]	李俊, 唐书恒, 郎雨, 等. 华北过渡相页岩气储层微观孔隙结构特征:以山西省文水地区为例[J]. 中国矿业, 2015, 24(增): 112-118,127.
[17]	刘圣鑫, 钟建华, 马寅生, 等. 柴东石炭系页岩微观孔隙结构与页岩气等温吸附研究[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 39(1): 33-42.
[18]	GROEN J C, PEFFER L, PÉREZ-RAMÍREZ J. Pore size determination in modified micro- and mesoporous materials. Pitfalls and limitations in gas adsorption data analysis[J]. Microporous & Mesoporous Materials, 2003, 60(1/3): 1-17.
[19]	CLARKSON C R, SOLANO N, BUSTIN R M, et al. Pore structure characterization of North American shale gas reservoirs using USANS/SANS, gas adsorption, and mercury intrusion[J]. Fuel, 2013, 103: 606-616. DOI URL
[20]	陈尚斌, 朱炎铭, 王红岩, 等. 四川盆地南缘下志留统龙马溪组页岩气储层矿物成分特征及意义[J]. 石油学报, 2011, 32(5): 775-782. DOI
[21]	PASSEYQ R, BOHACS K M, ESCH W L, et al. From oil-prone source rock to gas-producing shale reservoir-geologic and petrophysical characterization of unconventional shale-gas reservoirs[J]. SPE, 2010,131350.
[22]	ARTHUR M A, SAGEMAN B B. Marine black shales: depositional mechanisms and environments of ancient deposits[J]. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 1994, 22(1): 499-551. DOI URL
[23]	ALGEO T J, MAYNARD J B. Trace element behavior and redox facies in core shales of Upper Pennsylvanian Kansas-type-cyclothems[J]. Chemical Geology, 2004, 206(3/4): 289-318. DOI URL
[24]	李双建, 肖开华, 沃玉进, 等. 中上扬子地区上奥陶统-下志留统烃源岩发育的古环境恢复[J]. 岩石矿物学杂志, 2009, 28(5): 450-458.
[25]	李艳芳. 上扬子地区晚奥陶世-早志留世页岩地球化学特征、有机质富集及古环境意义[D]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2017.
[26]	牟传龙, 周恳恳, 梁薇, 等. 中上扬子地区早古生代烃源岩沉积环境与油气勘探[J]. 地质学报, 2011, 85(4): 526-532.
[27]	王怿, 戎嘉余, 詹仁斌, 等. 鄂西南奥陶系-志留系交界地层研究兼论宜昌上升[J]. 地层学杂志, 2013, 37(3): 264-274.

生物地层格架下湘西北地区五峰组—龙马溪组孔隙结构特征

Pore Structural Characteristics of Wufeng-Longmaxi Formations Under Biostratigraphic Framework in Northwestern Hunan

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 17

参考文献 27

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李东升, 高平, 盖海峰, 刘若冰, 蔡益栋, 李刚, 周秦, 肖贤明. 川东南地区龙马溪组页岩有机质纳米孔隙结构表征[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(05): 1293-1305.
[2]	张金晴, 李贤庆, 张博翔, 张学庆, 杨经纬, 于振锋. 沁水盆地武乡区块上古生界煤系页岩气储层孔隙特征和孔隙结构[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(06): 1551-1562.
[3]	李庆, 李江山, 卢浩, 齐奉强, 何羽, 安可钦, 李隆禹, 张厚民, 伍岳. 鄂尔多斯盆地南部长7₃页岩层系储层特征及主控因素[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(05): 1254-1270.
[4]	姜秉仁, 邓恩德, 韩明辉, 马子杰. 黔西北地区石炭系祥摆组页岩微观孔隙结构及分形特征[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(04): 1065-1073.
[5]	崔维平, 杨玉卿, 刘建新. 基于岩性相单元和孔隙结构的低孔低渗储层有效性测井识别方法:以西湖凹陷NB1构造为例[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(01): 140-148.
[6]	杨毅, 张恒荣, 袁伟, 杨冬, 胡德胜. 常规砂岩与砂砾岩分形特征对比及成因分析:以乌石凹陷X构造流沙港组为例[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(01): 149-158.
[7]	刘文锋, 张小栓, 刘谨铭, 艾力曼·道尔吉, 杨远峰, 张曦文, 祁利祺, 于景维. AH5井区八道湾组砂质和砾质储层孔隙结构特征及评价[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(06): 1844-1853.
[8]	李阳阳, 李贤庆, 张学庆, 杨经纬, 张博翔, 肖贤明, 于振锋. 沁水盆地阳泉区块太原组煤系页岩孔隙结构特征[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(04): 1033-1042.
[9]	于景维, 牛志杰, 祁利祺, 孙新铭, 柳妮, 张进, 曹嵩. 准噶尔盆地阜北地区头屯河组非均质性综合研究[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(03): 819-831.
[10]	姜秉仁, 杨通保, 石富伦, 韩明辉, 付炜. 黔西地区下石炭统旧司组页岩气聚集条件及含气性分析[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(02): 338-348.
[11]	赵建鹏, 崔利凯, 陈惠, 李宁, 王自亮, 马瑶, 杜贵超. 基于CT扫描数字岩心的岩石微观结构定量表征方法[J]. 现代地质, 2020, 34(06): 1205-1213.
[12]	黄宇琪, 张鹏, 张金川, 杨军伟. 湖北来凤LD-1井龙马溪组页岩孔隙结构特征分析[J]. 现代地质, 2020, 34(04): 828-836.
[13]	胡向阳, 梁玉楠, 吴丰, 廖明光, 张恒荣, 杨冬, 杨毅, 代槿, 钟华明, 吴一雄. 珠江口盆地文昌X-2油田新近系珠江组低阻油层成因机理[J]. 现代地质, 2020, 34(02): 390-398.
[14]	谢淑云, 雷蕾, 焦存礼, 何治亮, 鲍征宇, 马佳怡, 张殿伟, 彭守涛. 鲕粒白云岩内部溶蚀及孔隙非均质性演化研究[J]. 现代地质, 2019, 33(06): 1174-1187.
[15]	王红敏, 旦梦倩, 王春平, 臧欣欣, 陈景华, 郭得龙. 柴西南昆北油田切6区路乐河组储层孔隙结构及物性特征[J]. 现代地质, 2019, 33(06): 1199-1207.