Influence of Correction of Interfacial Tension and Wetting Angle to the Pore Size Distribution of Shale by Means of High Pressure Mercury Porosity:A Case Study of Qingshankou Formation in Songliao Basin

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2018.01.19

Abstract

Abstract:

It is very important to study the pore structure of shale reservoirs for the exploration and development of shale oil and gas. The high pressure mercury intrusion method is widely used in the study of shale pore structure and pore size distribution. Some scholars have studied the wettability of mercury in graphene materials. It has been found that the interfacial tension γ and wetting angle θ of liquid mercury in the pores are a function of pore radius r. According to this understanding, the traditional data processing method, which regards the interfacial tension γ and wetting angle θ as determinants in the Washburn equation, shows obvious irrationality. So it is necessary to correct the parameters of Washburn equation. In this paper, the high-pressure mercury intrusion test was carried out in the Qingshankou Formation of the Songliao Basin. The data of the mercury intrusion corrected by the Washburn equation before and after the correction were analyzed. It was found that the volume fraction of the micropores (<2 nm) obtained after the calibration was increased by 118%, mesoporous (2 to 50 nm) volume proportion decreased by 7%, macroporous (>50 nm) volume ratio of the basic unchanged. The pore size distributions of the shales can be more accurately characterized by the pore size distributions obtained after the calibration.

Key words: shale, Washburn equation, pore size distribution, high pressure mercury intrusion, interfacial tension, wetting angle

CLC Number:

TE122.2

JIN Jiyang, XUE Haitao, TIAN Shansi, WU Cunzheng, LI Ying, ZHOU Bin, ZHAO Rixin. Influence of Correction of Interfacial Tension and Wetting Angle to the Pore Size Distribution of Shale by Means of High Pressure Mercury Porosity:A Case Study of Qingshankou Formation in Songliao Basin[J]. Geoscience, 2018, 32(01): 191-197.

Figures/Tables 7

Table 1 Geo-chemical data of shale sample

编号	深度/ m	TOC/ %	Tmax/ ℃	S₁/ (mg·g^-1)	S₂/ (mg·g^-1)	HI/ (mg·g^-1)
SL1-9	511.6	4.21	441	0.13	33.7	800
SL1-13	1 985	1.73	444	1.28	11.06	639
JL1	666.8	4.96	441	0.68	34.81	702
JL3	1586.8	5.85	442	2.77	40.89	699

Fig.1 Interfacial tension γ, wetting angle θ vs.radius r

Fig.2 The cumulative pore volume pore size distribution curves before and after calibration

Fig.3 The pore size distribution curves before and after the calibration

Fig.4 The pore volume percentage of JL-1 well before and after different pore diameters improved

Fig.5 The volume increment percentage of JL-1 well after modification improved

Fig.6 Comparison of N2 adsorption data in JL-1 well and before and after mercury fixation

References 35

[1]	贾承造, 郑民, 张永峰. 中国非常规油气资源与勘探开发前景[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2012, 39(2): 129-136.
[2]	贾承造, 郑民, 张永峰. 非常规油气地质学重要理论问题[J]. 石油学报, 2014, 35(1): 1-10. DOI
[3]	邹才能, 张国生, 杨智, 等. 非常规油气概念、特征、潜力及技术——兼论非常规油气地质学[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2013, 40(4): 385-399, 454.
[4]	白斌, 朱如凯, 吴松涛, 等. 非常规油气致密储层微观孔喉结构表征新技术及意义[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2014, 19(3): 78-86.
[5]	朱如凯, 邹才能, 张鼐, 等. 致密砂岩气藏储层成岩流体演化与致密成因机理——以四川盆地上三叠统须家河组为例[J]. 中国科学(D辑:地球科学), 2009, 39(3): 327-339.
[6]	朱如凯, 白斌, 崔景伟, 等. 非常规油气致密储集层微观结构研究进展[J]. 古地理学报, 2013, 15(5): 615-623.
[7]	张金川, 汪宗余, 聂海宽, 等. 页岩气及其勘探研究意义[J]. 现代地质, 2008, 22(4): 640-646.
[8]	薛海涛, 田善思, 王伟明, 等. 页岩油资源评价关键参数——含油率的校正[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37(1): 15-22.
[9]	宋岩, 姜林, 马行陟. 非常规油气藏的形成及其分布特征[J]. 古地理学报, 2013, 15(5): 605-614.
[10]	郭旭升. 南方海相页岩气“二元富集”规律——四川盆地及周缘龙马溪组页岩气勘探实践认识[J]. 地质学报, 2014, 88(7): 1209-1218.
[11]	李吉君, 史颖琳, 黄振凯, 等. 松辽盆地北部陆相泥页岩孔隙特征及其对页岩油赋存的影响[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 39(4): 27-34.
[12]	屈乐, 孙卫, 杜环虹, 等. 基于CT扫描的三维数字岩心孔隙结构表征方法及应用——以莫北油田116井区三工河组为例[J]. 现代地质, 2014, 28(1): 190-196.
[13]	黄家国, 许开明, 郭少斌, 等. 基于SEM、NMR和X-CT的页岩储层孔隙结构综合研究[J]. 现代地质, 2015, 29(1): 198-205.
[14]	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.
[15]	汤永净, 汪鹏飞, 邵振东. 压汞实验和误差分析[J]. 实验技术与管理, 2015, 32(5): 50-54.
[16]	朱如凯, 吴松涛, 苏玲, 等. 中国致密储层孔隙结构表征需注意的问题及未来发展方向[J]. 石油学报, 2016, 37(11): 1323-1336. DOI
[17]	焦堃, 姚素平, 吴浩, 等. 页岩气储层孔隙系统表征方法研究进展[J]. 高校地质学报, 2014, 20(1): 151-161.
[18]	公言杰, 柳少波, 朱如凯, 等. 致密油流动孔隙度下限——高压压汞技术在松辽盆地南部白垩系泉四段的应用[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2015, 42(5): 681-688.
[19]	WANG S, JAVADPOUR F, FENG Q H. Confinement correction to mercury intrusion capillary pressure of shale nanopores[J]. Science, 2016, 6(10): 1-12. DOI URL
[20]	WASHBURN E W. The dynamics of capillary flow[J]. Phys Rev, 1921, 17(3): 273-283. DOI URL
[21]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局. GBT 21650.1-2008 压汞法和气体吸附法测定固体材料孔径分布和孔隙度第1部分:压汞法[S]. 北京: 中国国际出版社, 2008.
[22]	王志伟, 王民, 卢双舫, 等. 基于高压压汞法的泥页岩储层分形研究——以松辽盆地青山口组湖相泥岩为例[J]. 河南科学, 2015, 30(7): 1206-1213.
[23]	唐华瑞, 韩灵杰, 王杏杏, 等. 基于压汞实验的粘土微孔隙分布特征研究[J]. 广西大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 44(1): 228-233.
[24]	张涛, 王小飞, 黎爽, 等. 压汞法测定页岩孔隙特征的影响因素分析[J]. 岩矿测试, 2016, 35(2): 178-185.
[25]	杨峰, 宁正福, 孔德涛, 等. 高压压汞法和氮气吸附法分析页岩孔隙结构[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2013, 24(3): 450-455.
[26]	颜鑫, 周继承, 邓新云. 纳米碳酸钙四大纳米效应应用表现[J]. 化工文摘, 2008, 4(4): 44-47.
[27]	王海宁, 万怡灶, 李建, 等. 纳米纤维组织工程支架及其纳米效应研究进展[J]. 材料导报, 2007, 21(4): 13-16, 20.
[28]	张延瑞, 孟永钢. 气体平均自由程纳米尺度效应的蒙特卡罗模拟[J]. 润滑与密封, 2006, 179(7): 5-7, 11.
[29]	何金钢. 流体敏感性损害对页岩纳米孔的影响[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 38(1): 98-104.
[30]	柳波, 吕延防, 冉清昌, 等. 松辽盆地北部青山口组页岩油形成地质条件及勘探潜力[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2014, 35(2): 280-285.
[31]	李占东, 王义军, 胡慧婷, 等. 松辽盆地北部青山口组一段泥页岩储集层特征[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2015, 36(1): 20-24.
[32]	薛海涛. 碳酸盐岩烃源岩评价标准研究[D]. 大庆: 东北石油大学, 2004.
[33]	辛仁臣, 王树恒, 梁江平, 等. 松辽盆地北部西斜坡青山口组三段四级层序格架内沉积微相分布[J]. 现代地质, 2014, 28(4): 782-790, 798.
[34]	侯读杰, 冯子辉, 黄清华. 松辽盆地白垩纪缺氧地质事件的地质地球化学特征[J]. 现代地质, 2003, 17(3): 311-317.
[35]	张枝焕, 吴聿元, 俞凯, 等. 松辽盆地南部长岭地区青山口组原油的地球化学特征及油源分析[J]. 现代地质, 2002, 16(4): 389-397.