Quantitative Evaluation Method of HPMI Pore-throat Distribution Based on NMR Calibration

Xiao-long SUN; Xian-guo ZHANG; Cheng-yan LIN; Zhong-xiang ZHAO; Cun-fei MA; Jian-li LIN

doi:10.15898/j.cnki.11-2131/td.201706110097

2017 Vol. 36, No. 6

Article Contents

Article navigation > Rock and Mineral Analysis > 2017 > 36(6): 601-607

Next Article Previous Article

Xiao-long SUN, Xian-guo ZHANG, Cheng-yan LIN, Zhong-xiang ZHAO, Cun-fei MA, Jian-li LIN. Quantitative Evaluation Method of HPMI Pore-throat Distribution Based on NMR Calibration[J]. Rock and Mineral Analysis, 2017, 36(6): 601-607. doi: 10.15898/j.cnki.11-2131/td.201706110097

Citation:

Xiao-long SUN, Xian-guo ZHANG, Cheng-yan LIN, Zhong-xiang ZHAO, Cun-fei MA, Jian-li LIN. Quantitative Evaluation Method of HPMI Pore-throat Distribution Based on NMR Calibration[J]. Rock and Mineral Analysis, 2017, 36(6): 601-607. doi: 10.15898/j.cnki.11-2131/td.201706110097

Quantitative Evaluation Method of HPMI Pore-throat Distribution Based on NMR Calibration

1.
School of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, China
2.
Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Reservoir Geology, Qingdao 266580, China

More Information

Corresponding author: Xian-guo ZHANG, zhangxianguo@upc.edu.cn

Received Date: 11 June 2017

Revised Date: 20 July 2017

Accepted Date: 14 August 2017

Abstract

Abstract

Pore throat distribution is an important factor controlling the physical properties of low-permeability and tight sandstone reservoirs. The evaluation of pore throat distribution is based on the analytical methods of micro features of reservoirs, and it is necessary to synthesize multiple methods to quantify the pore throat distribution. Quantitative evaluation method of High Pressure Mercury Injection (HPMI) pore throat distribution was developed based on Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) calibration. Fluid states can be identified by the comparison of transverse relaxation time T₂ spectrum before and after centrifugation, which enables the redefining of T₂ boundaries (T₂₁ and T₂₂) of three pore components of NMR. Furthermore, pore throat is divided into irreducible fluid pore throat, transition fluid pore throat and movable fluid pore throat accordingly. T₂ boundaries are then converted to pore throat radius boundaries r₁ and r₂ by the correlativity between T₂ value and pore throat radius. Finally, pore throat distribution is evaluated quantitatively by statistics of the content of various types of pore throat (S₁, S₂ and S₃). This method combines the advantages of HPMI describing fluid states and NMR characterizing pore throat size. The method was applied to evaluate the pore throat distribution of low-permeability and tight sandstone reservoirs in the Huagang Formation of Xihu Depression. The average conversion coefficient C between T₂ value and pore throat radius is 0.0079, and pore throat radius boundaries r₁ and r₂ are 60 nm and 160 nm, respectively. Pore throat is classified into four types according to the content of various types of pore throat, which provides new parameters and thought for further reservoirs evaluation.
- Nuclear Magnetic Resonance /
- percentages of three pore components /
- T₂ cutoff value /
- high pressure mercury injection /
- pore-throat distribution

FullText(HTML)

References

[1]	毕明威, 陈世悦, 周兆华, 等.鄂尔多斯盆地苏里格气田苏6区块盒8段致密砂岩储层微观孔隙结构特征及其意义[J].天然气地球科学, 2015, 26(10):1851-1861. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2015.10.1851 CrossRef Google Scholar Bi M W, Chen S Y, Zhou Z H, et al.Characteristics and significance of microscopic pore structure in tight sandstone reservoir of the 8th Member of Lower Shihezi Formation in the Su6 area of Sulige Gasfield[J].Natural Gas Geoscience, 2015, 26(10):1851-1861. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2015.10.1851 CrossRef Google Scholar
[2]	罗静兰, 刘新社, 付晓燕, 等.岩石学组成及其成岩演化过程对致密砂岩储集质量与产能的影响:以鄂尔多斯盆地上古生界盒8天然气储层为例[J].地球科学——中国地质大学学报, 2014, 39(5):537-545. Google Scholar Luo J L, Liu X S, Fu X Y, et al.Impact of petrologic components and their diagenetic evolution on tight sandstone reservoir quality and gas yield:A case study from He 8 Gas-bearing reservoir of upper paleozoic in Northern Ordos Basin[J].Earth Science-Journal of China University of Geosciences, 2014, 39(5):537-545. Google Scholar
[3]	赖锦, 王贵文, 柴毓, 等.致密砂岩储层孔隙结构成因机理分析及定量评价——以鄂尔多斯盆地姬塬地区长8油层组为例[J].地质学报, 2014, 88(11):2119-2130. Google Scholar Lai J, Wang G W, Chai Y, et al.Mechanism analysis and quantitative assessment of pore structure for tight sandstone reservoirs:An example from Chang 8 oil layer in the Jiyuan area of Ordos Basin[J].Acta Geologica Sinica, 2014, 88(11):2119-2130. Google Scholar
[4]	何文祥, 杨乐, 马超亚, 等.特低渗透储层微观孔隙结构参数对渗流行为的影响——以鄂尔多斯盆地长6储层为例[J].天然气地球科学, 2011, 22(3):477-482. Google Scholar He W X, Yang L, Ma C Y, et al.Effect of micro-pore structure parameter on seepage characteristics in ultra-low permeability reservoir:A case from Chang 6 reservoir of Ordos Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2011, 22(3):477-482. Google Scholar
[5]	刘曦翔, 丁晓琪, 王嘉, 等.砂岩成分对储层孔隙结构及天然气富集程度的影响——以苏里格气田西区二叠系石盒子组8段为例[J].天然气工业, 2016, 36(7):27-32. Google Scholar Liu X X, Ding X Q, Wang J, et al.Influence of sandstone composition on pore structures and gas enrichment degree:A case study on the 8th member of Permian Shihezi Fm in the Western Sulige gas field, Ordos Basin[J].Natural Gas Industry, 2016, 36(7):27-32. Google Scholar
[6]	Sakhaee-Pour A, Bryant S L.Effect of pore structure on the producibility of tight-gas sandstones[J].AAPG Bulletin, 2014, 98(4):663-694. doi: 10.1306/08011312078 CrossRef Google Scholar
[7]	蔡芃睿, 王春连, 刘成林, 等.运用扫描电镜和压汞法研究江汉盆地古新统-白垩系砂岩储层孔喉结构及定量参数特征[J].岩矿测试, 2017, 36(2):146-155. Google Scholar Cai P R, Wang C L, Liu C L, et al.Study on pore structure and quantitative parameters of the Paleocene-Cretaceous sandstone reservoir in Jiangling Depression by SEM and mercury injection method[J].Rock and Mineral Analysis, 2017, 36(2):146-155. Google Scholar
[8]	庞河清, 曾焱, 刘成川, 等.基于氮气吸附-核磁共振-氩离子抛光场发射扫描电镜研究川西须五段泥质岩储层孔隙结构[J].岩矿测试, 2017, 36(1):66-74. Google Scholar Pang H Q, Zeng Y, Liu C C, et al.Investigation of pore structure of a argillaceous rocks reservoir in the 5th Member of Xujiahe Formation in Western Sichuan, using NAM, NMR and AIP-FESEM[J].Rock and Mineral Analysis, 2017, 36(1):66-74. Google Scholar
[9]	Desbois G, Urai J L, Hemes S, et al.Multi-scale analysis of porosity in diagenetically altered reservoir sandstone from the Permian Rotliegend (Germany)[J].Journal of Petroleum Science & Engineering, 2016, 24(2):128-148. Google Scholar
[10]	张冲, 张超谟, 张占松, 等.致密气储层岩心束缚水`饱和度实验对比[J].天然气地球科学, 2016, 27(2):352-358. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.16721926.2016.02.0352 CrossRef Google Scholar Zhang C, Zhang C M, Zhang Z S, et al.Comparative experimental study of the core irreducible water saturation of tight gas reservoir[J].Natural Gas Geoscience, 2016, 27(2):352-358. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.16721926.2016.02.0352 CrossRef Google Scholar
[11]	白松涛, 程道解, 万金彬, 等.砂岩岩石核磁共振T₂谱定量表征[J].石油学报, 2016, 37(3):382-391. doi: 10.7623/syxb201603010 CrossRef Google Scholar Bai S T, Cheng D J, Wan J B, et al.Quantitative characterization of sandstone NMR T₂ spectrum[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2016, 37(3):382-391. doi: 10.7623/syxb201603010 CrossRef Google Scholar
[12]	窦文超, 刘洛夫, 吴康军, 等.基于压汞实验研究低渗储层孔隙结构及其对渗透率的影响——以鄂尔多斯盆地西南部三叠系延长组长7储层为例[J].地质论评, 2016, 62(2):502-511. Google Scholar Dou W C, Liu L F, Wu K J, et al.Pore structure characteristics and its effect on permeability by mercury injection measurement:An example from Triassic Chang-7 reservoir, Southwest Ordos Basin[J].Geological Review, 2016, 62(2):502-511. Google Scholar
[13]	刘卫, 肖忠祥, 杨思玉, 等.利用核磁共振(NMR)测井资料评价储层孔隙结构方法的对比研究[J].石油地球物理勘探, 2009, 44(6):773-778. Google Scholar Liu W, Xiao Z X, Yang S Y, et al.Comparative studies on methods of evaluation of reservoir pore structure by using NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) well logging data[J].Oil Geophysical Prospecting, 2009, 44(6):773-778. Google Scholar
[14]	王振华, 陈刚, 李书恒, 等.核磁共振岩心实验分析在低孔渗储层评价中的应用[J].石油实验地质, 2014, 36(6):773-779. doi: 10.11781/sysydz201406773 CrossRef Google Scholar Wang Z H, Chen G, Li S H, et al.Application of NMR core experimental analysis in evaluation of low-porosity and low-permeability sandstone reservoirs[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2014, 36(6):773-779. doi: 10.11781/sysydz201406773 CrossRef Google Scholar
[15]	邹才能, 朱如凯, 吴松涛, 等.常规与非常规油气聚集类型、特征、机理及展望——以中国致密油和致密气为例[J].石油学报, 2012, 33(2):173-187. doi: 10.7623/syxb201202001 CrossRef Google Scholar Zou C N, Zhu R K, Wu S T, et al.Types, characteristics, genesis and prospects of conventional and unconventional hydrocarbon accumulations:Taking tight oil and tight gas in China as an instance[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2012, 33(2):173-187. doi: 10.7623/syxb201202001 CrossRef Google Scholar
[16]	肖亮, 肖忠祥.核磁共振测井T_2cutoff确定方法及适用性分析[J].地球物理学进展, 2008, 23(1):167-171. Google Scholar Xiao L, Xiao Z X.Analysis of methods for determining NMR T_2cutoff and its applicability[J].Progress in Geophysics, 2008, 23(1):167-171. Google Scholar
[17]	何雨丹, 毛志强, 肖立志, 等.核磁共振T₂分布评价岩石孔径分布的改进方法[J].地球物理学报, 2005, 48(2):373-378. Google Scholar He Y D, Mao Z Q, Xiao L Z, et al.An improved method of using NMR T₂ distribution to evaluate pore size distribution[J].Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2005, 48(2):373-378. Google Scholar
[18]	李爱芬, 任晓霞, 王桂娟, 等.核磁共振研究致密砂岩孔隙结构的方法及应用[J].中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 39(6):92-98. Google Scholar Li A F, Ren X X, Wang G J, et al.Characterization of pore structure of low permeability reservoirs using a nuclear magnetic resonance method[J].Journal of China University of Petroleum (Natural Science), 2015, 39(6):92-98. Google Scholar
[19]	李军, 金武军, 王亮, 等.利用核磁共振技术确定有机孔与无机孔孔径分布——以四川盆地涪陵地区志留系龙马溪组页岩气储层为例[J].石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37(1):129-134. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160118 CrossRef Google Scholar Li J, Jin W J, Wang L, et al.Quantitative evaluation of organic and inorganic pore size distribution by NMR:A case from the Silurian Longmaxi Formation gas shale in Fuling area, Sichuan Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology, 2016, 37(1):129-134. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160118 CrossRef Google Scholar
[20]	周尚文, 刘洪林, 闫刚, 等.中国南方海相页岩储层可动流体及T₂截止值核磁共振研究[J].石油与天然气地质, 2016, 37(4):612-616. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160420 CrossRef Google Scholar Zhou S W, Liu H L, Yan G, et al.NMR research of movable fluid and T₂ cutoff of marine shale in South China[J].Oil & Gas Geology, 2016, 37(4):612-616. doi: 10.11743/ogg20160420 CrossRef Google Scholar