查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩特征及测井识别
|
摘要
查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩是一个潜在的含油岩系,但岩性识别不准,未形成工区内有效的火山岩岩性识别技术。通过对研究区火山岩典型井的岩心观察,结合岩石薄片及测井资料,厘定了查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩的岩性分类,明确了火山岩的喷发岩相模式,分析了火山岩的测井响应特征,提出了火山岩岩性测井识别方法。研究表明,查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩可细分为6种岩性,发育4种岩相,喷发岩相模式为火山通道相—爆发相—溢流相—火山沉积相。根据识别出的岩性标定测井,分析每种岩性的测井响应特征,利用交会图法,综合多曲线、多元信息判别火山岩岩性。
The volcanic rocks of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression are a potential petroliferous rock series, but the lithology identification of volcanic rocks is still a problem to be solved, with no effective identification technology in the work area till now. Based on core observation and detailed analysis of thin sections and logging data of the typical wells of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression, this article defines the lithology classification of volcanic rocks, ascertains the eruptive lithofacies pattern of volcanic rocks, analyzes the logging response characteristics of volcanic rocks, and presents the logging identification methods of volcanic rocks. The research shows that the lithologies of volcanic rocks of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression can be classified into six types. At the same time, it develops four types of petrofacies in this study area, from the volcanic vent facies to explosive facies to overflow facies to volcanic-sedimentary facies. According to the identified lithological calibration and well logs, each of the lithologic logging response characteristics can be identified. Using cross plots, composite curve and multivariate information, the lithology of volcanic rocks can be judged synthetically.
The volcanic rocks of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression are a potential petroliferous rock series, but the lithology identification of volcanic rocks is still a problem to be solved, with no effective identification technology in the work area till now. Based on core observation and detailed analysis of thin sections and logging data of the typical wells of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression, this article defines the lithology classification of volcanic rocks, ascertains the eruptive lithofacies pattern of volcanic rocks, analyzes the logging response characteristics of volcanic rocks, and presents the logging identification methods of volcanic rocks. The research shows that the lithologies of volcanic rocks of the Suhongtu Formation in Chagan Depression can be classified into six types. At the same time, it develops four types of petrofacies in this study area, from the volcanic vent facies to explosive facies to overflow facies to volcanic-sedimentary facies. According to the identified lithological calibration and well logs, each of the lithologic logging response characteristics can be identified. Using cross plots, composite curve and multivariate information, the lithology of volcanic rocks can be judged synthetically.
引文
[1]张招崇,骆文娟.中国新生代火山岩岩石学、地球化学与年代学研究进展[J].矿物岩石地球化学通报,2011,30(4):353-360.
[2]OLAVSDOTTIR J,ANDERSEN M S,BOLDREEL L O.Reservoir quality of intrabasalt volcaniclastic units onshore Faroe Islands,North Atlantic Igneous Province,northeast Atlantic[J].AAPG Bulletin,2015,99(3):467-497.
[3]SRUOGA P,RUBINSTEIN N.Processes controlling porosity and permeability in volcanic reservoirs from the Austral and Neuquén basins,Argentina[J].AAPG Bulletin,2007,91(1):115-129.
[4]冯冲,王清斌,王立红,等.莱州湾凹陷垦利16-A构造火山岩岩性特征与测井识别[J].断块油气田,2018,25(3):316-321.
[5]冯玉辉,于小健,黄玉龙,等.辽河盆地新生界火山喷发旋回和期次及其油气地质意义[J].中国石油大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(5):50-56.
[6]黄薇,朱映康,肖丽梅.火山岩期次划分及分布预测方法:以松辽盆地徐家围子断陷安达凹陷为例[J].天然气工业,2015,35(5):1-7.
[7]罗静兰,林憧,杨知盛,等.松辽盆地升平气田营城组火山岩岩相及其储集性能控制因素分析[J].石油与天然气地质,2008,29(6):748-757.
[8]林伶,李洪香,杨朋.风化店中生界火山岩储层特征与油气成藏模式[J].地质学刊,2017,41(2):224-229.
[9]李笑梅.宋站凸起营城组火山岩分布特征及气藏分布规律[J].断块油气田,2017,24(6):771-774.
[10]马尚伟,罗静兰,陈春勇,等.火山岩储层微观孔隙结构分类评价:以准噶尔盆地东部西泉地区石炭系火山岩为例[J].石油实验地质,2017,39(5):647-654.
[11]陈欢庆,胡永乐,赵应,等.火山岩储层地质研究进展[J].断块油气田,2012,19(1):75-79.
[12]袁晓光,李维锋,董宏,等.克百地区二叠系火山岩储层特征及其控制因素分析[J].断块油气田,2015,22(4):445-449.
[13]汤艳杰,陈福坤,彭澎.中国盆地火山岩特性及其与油气成藏作用的联系[J].岩石学报,2010,26(1):185-194.
[14]张雨晴,王晖,宋来明,等.火成岩古潜山储层裂缝表征方法[J].断块油气田,2017,24(6):775-778.
[15]房倩,国殿斌,徐怀民.银额盆地查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩储层特征[J].地层学杂志,2014,38(4):454-460.
[16]刘爱永,李令喜,杨国臣,等.查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩储层及其油气成藏特征[J].油气地质与采收率,2014,21(4):54-57.
[17]刘小红.查干凹陷火成岩岩性识别方法研究[D].青岛:中国石油大学(华东),2009.
[18]王惠民,靳涛,杨红霞.银根盆地查干凹陷火成岩岩相特征及其识别标志[J].新疆石油地质,2005,26(3):249-252.
[19]王明艳.查干凹陷火山岩储层特征与分布预测[D].北京:中国地质大学(北京),2006.
[20]杨占龙,郭精义,陈启林,等.银根盆地查干凹陷火山沉积岩岩相特征及其识别标志[J].沉积学报,2005,23(1):67-72.
[2]OLAVSDOTTIR J,ANDERSEN M S,BOLDREEL L O.Reservoir quality of intrabasalt volcaniclastic units onshore Faroe Islands,North Atlantic Igneous Province,northeast Atlantic[J].AAPG Bulletin,2015,99(3):467-497.
[3]SRUOGA P,RUBINSTEIN N.Processes controlling porosity and permeability in volcanic reservoirs from the Austral and Neuquén basins,Argentina[J].AAPG Bulletin,2007,91(1):115-129.
[4]冯冲,王清斌,王立红,等.莱州湾凹陷垦利16-A构造火山岩岩性特征与测井识别[J].断块油气田,2018,25(3):316-321.
[5]冯玉辉,于小健,黄玉龙,等.辽河盆地新生界火山喷发旋回和期次及其油气地质意义[J].中国石油大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(5):50-56.
[6]黄薇,朱映康,肖丽梅.火山岩期次划分及分布预测方法:以松辽盆地徐家围子断陷安达凹陷为例[J].天然气工业,2015,35(5):1-7.
[7]罗静兰,林憧,杨知盛,等.松辽盆地升平气田营城组火山岩岩相及其储集性能控制因素分析[J].石油与天然气地质,2008,29(6):748-757.
[8]林伶,李洪香,杨朋.风化店中生界火山岩储层特征与油气成藏模式[J].地质学刊,2017,41(2):224-229.
[9]李笑梅.宋站凸起营城组火山岩分布特征及气藏分布规律[J].断块油气田,2017,24(6):771-774.
[10]马尚伟,罗静兰,陈春勇,等.火山岩储层微观孔隙结构分类评价:以准噶尔盆地东部西泉地区石炭系火山岩为例[J].石油实验地质,2017,39(5):647-654.
[11]陈欢庆,胡永乐,赵应,等.火山岩储层地质研究进展[J].断块油气田,2012,19(1):75-79.
[12]袁晓光,李维锋,董宏,等.克百地区二叠系火山岩储层特征及其控制因素分析[J].断块油气田,2015,22(4):445-449.
[13]汤艳杰,陈福坤,彭澎.中国盆地火山岩特性及其与油气成藏作用的联系[J].岩石学报,2010,26(1):185-194.
[14]张雨晴,王晖,宋来明,等.火成岩古潜山储层裂缝表征方法[J].断块油气田,2017,24(6):775-778.
[15]房倩,国殿斌,徐怀民.银额盆地查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩储层特征[J].地层学杂志,2014,38(4):454-460.
[16]刘爱永,李令喜,杨国臣,等.查干凹陷苏红图组火山岩储层及其油气成藏特征[J].油气地质与采收率,2014,21(4):54-57.
[17]刘小红.查干凹陷火成岩岩性识别方法研究[D].青岛:中国石油大学(华东),2009.
[18]王惠民,靳涛,杨红霞.银根盆地查干凹陷火成岩岩相特征及其识别标志[J].新疆石油地质,2005,26(3):249-252.
[19]王明艳.查干凹陷火山岩储层特征与分布预测[D].北京:中国地质大学(北京),2006.
[20]杨占龙,郭精义,陈启林,等.银根盆地查干凹陷火山沉积岩岩相特征及其识别标志[J].沉积学报,2005,23(1):67-72.