Favorable Drilling Target Selection Based on Drillability Analysis and 3D Geological Modeling: A Case Study in the Wumishan Formation, Xiong’an New Area

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2022.088

Abstract

Abstract:

Aiming at the characteristics of strong heterogeneity and poor drillability of deep dolomitic geothermal reservoirs in the Wumishan Formation in the Xiong’an New Area, and based on the abundant drilling, core, thin sections and logging interpretation data, we established the lithologic logging interpretation models for the strata at Xiong’an, and divided the lithologies of the Wumishan Formation into five types, i.e., crystalline dolomite, granular dolomite, microbial dolomite, siliceous dolomite and brecciated dolomite.Combined with the drillability parameters such as compressive strength, hardness and abrasiveness, the drillability of brecciated dolomite and columnar stromatolitic dolomite in the Wumishan Formation are classified as easy-drill level, that of granular dolomite and laminite are classified as medium-drill level, and that of massive dolomicrite and siliceous dolomite are classified as hard-drill level.The 3-D geological model of Xiong’an is established by using geological modeling, to clarify the strata and lithology distribution regularity and drillability variety in the study area.The Niutuozhen uplift and Rongcheng uplift are finally delineated as the drilling target areas with the highest drilling efficiency and lowest drilling cost.Gaoyang low uplift, Tongkou-Yanling low buried-hill zone, Renqiu low buried-hill zone, Niubei slope and Lixian slope are sub-favorable potential drilling targets.The depression areas are the highest risk drilling target due to their high cost and technical challenge.The results provide reference for drilling geological design, technical optimization and efficiency improvement of deep karstic geothermal reservoirs at Xiong’an.

Key words: Xiong’an New Area, Wumishan Formation, 3D geological model, rock mechanics, drillability parameter

CLC Number:

P618.13

LU Kai, LIU Ling, BAO Zhidong, JI Hancheng, LIU Jinxia, LI Lei, LI Jin, BAO Yifei, NIU Bo, CHEN Zhenliang, CAO Yingzhuo, CHEN Xinyi, LI Zongfeng. Favorable Drilling Target Selection Based on Drillability Analysis and 3D Geological Modeling: A Case Study in the Wumishan Formation, Xiong’an New Area[J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(05): 1398-1410.

Figures/Tables 14

Fig.1 Diagram of structural units and strata distribution of the Xiong’an New Area

Fig.2 Contour maps of burial depth of major strata in the Xiong’an New Area

Fig.3 Logging chart of lithology identification of siliciclastic rocks in the Xiong’an New Area[22]

Table 1 Distribution of strength and hardness of common siliciclastic rocks (modified from Wang et al.[24])

岩石	单轴抗压强度(MPa)	硬度(MPa)
砾岩	10~150	200~3300
粗砂岩	140
中砂岩	150
细砂岩	185
泥(页)岩	14~60	200~1700

Fig.4 Photographs showing rock types of the Wumishan Formation in/around the Xiong’an New Area

Fig.5 Logging chart of lithological identification of the Wumishan Formation in the Xiong’an New Area

Table 2 Test results of rock mechanics of the Wumishan Formation in the Xiong’an New Area

岩石样品	抗压强度测试			硬度 (MPa)		研磨性 (λ)
岩石样品	围压 (MPa)	抗压强度 (MPa)		硬度 (MPa)		研磨性 (λ)
块状泥晶白云岩	0	290.0	2054.4 2568.0		10.0
	20	437.0
	40	506.0
角砾白云岩	0	102.0	1811.1 1324.5		6.6
	20	272.0
	40	488.0
柱状叠层石白云岩	0	139.0	1189.4 1297.5		6.5
	20	262.0
	40	364.0
硅质白云岩	0	223.0	3216.8 3162.7		9.7
	20	398.0
	40	584.0
层纹石	0	169.0	2216.6 1621.9		8.6
	20	312.0
	40	551.0

Fig.6 Test results of rock drillability parameters of the Wumishan Formation in Xiong’an New Area

Table 3 Division of rock hardness (modified from Wang et al.[24]and Yin et al.[28])

硬度分类	软	中软	中硬	硬	坚硬	极硬
硬度 (MPa)	≤250	250~ 1000	1000~ 2000	2000~ 4000	4000~ 6000	>6000

Table 4 Abrasiveness distribution of stratigraphy (modified from Zou et al.[29] and Yuan et al.[30])

研磨性指标	分级
λ<2	低(Ⅰ)
2≤λ<4	中低(Ⅱ)
4≤λ<8	中(Ⅲ)
8≤λ<16	中高(Ⅳ)
16≤λ<32	高(Ⅴ)
λ≥32	极高(Ⅵ)

Table 5 Drillability classification of the Wumishan Formation in the Xiong’an New Area

雾迷山组岩性	抗压强度	硬度	研磨性	可钻性分级
柱状叠层石白云岩	Ⅰ	Ⅰ	Ⅰ	易
角砾白云岩	Ⅱ	Ⅱ	Ⅱ	易
层纹石、颗粒白云岩	Ⅲ	Ⅲ	Ⅲ	中
硅质白云岩	Ⅳ	Ⅴ	Ⅳ	难
块状泥晶白云岩	Ⅴ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ	难

Fig.7 Stratigraphic interface model of the Xiong’an New Area

Fig.8 Three-dimensional geological and grid models of lithology distribution in the Xiong’an New Area

Fig.9 Three-dimensional model sections of the Xiong’an New Area

References 30

[1]	陈墨香. 华北地热[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1988: 1-214.
[2]	陈墨香. 中国地热资源: 形成特点和潜力评估[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1994: 1-39.
[3]	阎敦实, 于英太. 京津冀油区地热资源评价与利用[M]. 武汉: 中国地质大学出版社, 2000: 1-179.
[4]	庞忠和, 孔彦龙, 庞菊梅, 等. 雄安新区地热资源与开发利用研究[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2017, 32(11): 1224-1230.
[5]	庞忠和, 庞菊梅, 孔彦龙, 等. 大型岩溶热储识别方法与规模化可持续开采技术[J]. 科技促进发展, 2020, 16(增): 299-306.
[6]	高鹏举, 董向宇, 刘凡柏, 等. XD-40型钻机在雄安新区地热勘探井施工中的应用[J]. 钻探工程, 2021, 48(8): 72-77.
[7]	樊腊生, 贾小丰, 王贵玲, 等. 雄安新区D03地热勘探井钻探施工实践[J]. 探矿工程(岩土钻掘工程), 2020, 47(10): 13-22.
[8]	鲁锴, 鲍志东, 季汉成, 等. 雄安新区蓟县系雾迷山组岩溶热储特征、主控因素及有利区预测[J]. 古地理学报, 2019, 21(6): 885-900.
[9]	何登发, 单帅强, 张煜颖, 等. 雄安新区的三维地质结构: 来自反射地震资料的约束[J]. 中国科学(地球科学), 2018, 48(9): 1207-1222.
[10]	周从安, 李先平, 辛玮江, 等. 冀中坳陷牛驼镇凸起潜山内幕勘探成藏条件研究[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2010, 15(2): 29-32, 84.
[11]	马峰, 王贵玲, 张薇, 等. 雄安新区容城地热田热储空间结构及资源潜力[J]. 地质学报, 2020, 94(7): 1981-1990.
[12]	李绍柄, 翟振生, 靳雅敏, 等. 河北省文安—霸县地区地震地质研究[J]. 华北地震科学, 1983, 1(2): 37-44.
[13]	王贵玲, 高俊, 张保建, 等. 雄安新区高阳低凸起区雾迷山组热储特征与高产能地热井参数研究[J]. 地质学报, 2020, 94(7): 1970-1980.
[14]	鲍志东, 季汉成, 梁婷, 等. 中新元古界原生白云岩: 以中国典型台地区为例[J]. 古地理学报, 2019, 21(6): 869-884.
[15]	赵澂林, 许元恺, 白光勇, 等. 太行山中北段高于庄组—雾迷山组的沉积特征及其相分析[J]. 华东石油学院学报, 1977, 1(3): 118-138, 181.
[16]	LU K, BAO Z D, SHENG M, et al. Influence of internal textures in fracture development in dolostones: A case study in the Mesoproterozoic Wumishan Formation in the Jizhong Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, North China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2021, 125: 104877. DOI URL
[17]	王贵玲, 李郡, 吴爱民, 等. 河北容城凸起区热储层新层系: 高于庄组热储特征研究[J]. 地球学报, 2018, 39(5): 533-541.
[18]	曹瑛倬, 鲍志东, 鲁锴, 等. 冀中坳陷雄县地热田主控因素及成因模式[J]. 沉积学报, 2021, 39(4): 863-872.
[19]	张胜, 韩春元, 杜新江, 等. 测井岩性解释模型构建技术及在薄储层反演中的应用[J]. 石油地球物理勘探, 2018, 53(增): 316-323, 20.
[20]	张超, 张立强, 陈家乐, 等. 渤海湾盆地东营凹陷古近系细粒沉积岩岩相类型及判别[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2017, 28(5): 713-723.
[21]	曾萱, 张宏国, 赵婧. 渤海东部馆陶组岩性特征及成藏规律[J]. 海洋地质前沿, 2017, 33(11): 28-35.
[22]	罗群, 卫建荣. 测井组合识别-地震联合反演法预测薄层生物灰岩: 以沾化凹陷孤北斜坡区沙一段底部为例[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2008, 30(2): 103-106, 643.
[23]	刘慧盈, 汪新伟, 毛翔, 等. 雄安新区岩溶热储钻井地质关键要素分析[J]. 东北石油大学学报, 2021, 45(4): 69-81.
[24]	王益民, 张辉, 陈胜, 等. 基于地质力学的可钻性分析方法研究: 以塔里木盆地库车山前地区为例[J]. 石油工业技术监督, 2016, 32(9): 41-45.
[25]	ARENAS C, CABRERA L, RAMOS E. Sedimentology of Tufa facies and continental microbialites from the Palaeogene of Mallorca Island (Spain)[J]. Sedimentary Geology, 2007, 197(1/2): 1-27. DOI URL
[26]	LOUCKS R G. Paleocave carbonate reservoirs: Origins, burial-depth modifications, spatial complexity, and reservoir implications[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 1999, 83: 1795-1834.
[27]	柏松章, 唐飞. 裂缝性潜山基岩油藏开发模式[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 1997: 340-341.
[28]	尹宏锦. 地层各向异性——岩石可钻性研究[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 1989, 11(1): 15-22, 102.
[29]	邹德永, 袁军, 邢晨, 等. 针对金刚石钻头的岩石研磨性测定方法[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 40(4): 73-80.
[30]	袁军, 邹德永, 钟洪娇, 等. 适合于石油钻井地层岩石研磨性测定的标准磨损件研制[J]. 中国科技论文, 2016, 11(11): 1249-1253.