收稿日期: 2015-08-14
修回日期: 2016-01-26
网络出版日期: 2016-03-10
基金资助
国家高技术研究发展计划（863计划）“页岩气钻完井及储存评价与产能预测技术研究”（编号：2013AA064501）；陕西省科技统筹创新工程计划“陆相页岩气资源地质研究与勘探开发关键技术攻关”（编号：2012KTZB03-01-01）联合资助.
Research and application of shale permeability test method
Received date: 2015-08-14
Revised date: 2016-01-26
Online published: 2016-03-10
为了减小页岩渗透率测试误差与缩减测试时间，针对目前页岩渗透率测试中存在的问题。改进传统脉冲衰减渗透率测试仪器为可变上下游储室体积；增加旁通管线；选用甲烷为页岩渗透率测试气体；并建立考虑吸附的页岩渗透率解释模型；在此基础上对鄂尔多斯盆地长7纯页岩、含砂质夹层页岩和砂质纹层岩心进行测试分析。结果表明:①氦气测试渗透率会高于甲烷测试渗透率，氮气测试渗透率低于甲烷测试渗透率，甲烷测试渗透率可以反映真实天然气渗流规律及页岩渗透率。②兰格缪尔体积和孔隙压力越大有效吸附孔隙度越小。③不考虑吸附会对页岩渗透率的测试造成低估；页岩吸附能力越强、孔隙压力越低、兰格缪尔压力越高时，渗透率低估值越大。④经验证，改进的渗透率测试仪器测试结果是真实可靠的，最多可减小7h总测试时间，并可降低孔隙体积误差所造成的渗透率测试误差。⑤测试流体方向不同会导致不同的渗透率测试结果；吸附对纯页岩渗透率测试低估值最高可达97%，必须进行吸附校正，但对砂质夹层渗透率测试低估值最高仅为7.5%，可以忽略其影响。
曹成，李天太，王晖，许小强，高潮 . 页岩渗透率测试方法研究与应用[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2016 , 27(3) : 503 -512 . DOI: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2016.03.0503
On the basis of existing problems in the shale permeability test,in order to reduce the test errors and time,the upstream and downstream reservoir chambers of traditional pulse decay permeability apparatus are improved into variable volume chambers with a by-pass pipe.Proper test gases are selected to calculate the true permeability value,and the shale permeability interpretation model considering adsorption is established.Tests and analysis are conducted on pure shale,sand shale and intercalation sandy laminated cores of Ordos Basin Chang 7 section.Results show that: (1)Permeability measured with helium is higher than that measured with methane,and lower than that measured with nitrogen,and permeability measured with methane can reflect the real gas seepage rule and shale permeability.(2)The larger the Langmuir volume and the pore pressure,the smaller the effective adsorption porosity.(3)If adsorption is not considered,shale permeability will be underestimated; the extent of underestimation is much bigger with stronger adsorption ability,lower pore pressure and higher Langmuir pressure.(4)The test result obtained from the improved permeability apparatus is reliable,it can reduce up to 7 hours of the total test time,and can reduce system error caused by pore volume errors.(5)Different fluid directions can lead to different permeability test results; the extent of underestimation caused by adsorption is 97% for the pure shale,and must be corrected; for sand interlayer the extent of underestimated caused by adsorption is 7.5%,and can be ignored.
[1]Xu Yongjian,Wu Aijun.The development status of shale gas in the world and its exploration prospect in China[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2010,17(5):1-7,128.[徐建永,武爱俊.页岩气发展现状及勘探前景[J].特种油气藏,2010,17(5):1-7,128.]
[2]Zhang Jingchuan,Jin Zhijun,Yuan Mingsheng.Reservoiring mecahnism of shale gas and its distribution[J].天然气工业,2004,24(7):15-18,131-132.[张金川,金之钧,袁明生.页岩气成藏机理和分布[J].Natural Gas Industry,2004,24(7):15-18,131-132.]
[3]Cui X,Bustin A M M,Bustin R M.Measurements of gas permeability and diffusivity of tight reservoir rocks:different approaches and their applications[J].Geofluids,2009,9(3):208-223.
[4]Cheng Cao,Tiantai Li,Juntai Shi,et al.A new approach for measuring the permeability of shale featuring adsorption and ultra-low permeability［J］.Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering，2016，30（2）：548-556.
[5]Chen T,Stagg P.Semilog analysis of the pulse-decay technique of permeability measurement[J].Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal,1984,24(6):639-642.
[6]Hsieh P A,Tracy J V,Neuzil C E,et al.A transient laboratory method for determining the hydraulic properties of ‘tight’rocks:I.Theory[J].International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts Elsevier,1981,8(3):245-252.
[7]Jones S C.A technique for faster pulse-decay permeability measurements in tight rocks[J].SPE 28450,1997:19-26.
[8]Gao Shusheng,Yu Xinhe,Liu Huaxun.Impact of slippage effect on shale gas well productivity[J].Natural Gas Industry,2011,31(4):55-58,127.[高树生,于兴河,刘华勋.滑脱效应对页岩气井产能影响的分析[J].天然气工业,2011,31(4):55-58,127.]
[9]Cao Cheng,Li Tiantai,Zhang Lei,et al.Shale gas dual porosity-dual permeability model with matrix shrinking[J].Natural Gas Geoscience,2015,26(12):2282-2288.［曹成,李天太,张磊,等.考虑基质收缩效应的页岩气双孔双渗模型[J].天然气地球科学,2015,26(12): 2282-2288.］
[10]Yao Jun,Sun Hai,Fan Dongyan,et al.Transport mechanisms and numerical simulation of shale gas reservoirs[J].Journal of China University of Petroleum:Edition of Natural Science,2013,37(1):91-98.[姚军,孙海,樊冬艳,等.页岩气藏运移机制及数值模拟[J].中国石油大学学报:自然科学版,2013,37(1):91-98.]
[11]Xu Bingxiang,Li Xiangfang,Yin Bangtang.Influence of gas slippage on gas well productivity evaluation[J].Natural Gas Industry,2010,30(10):45-48,119.[徐兵祥,李相方,尹邦堂.滑脱效应对气井产能评价的影响[J].天然气工业,2010,30(10):45-48,119.]
[12]Cao Cheng,Li Tiantai,Liu Gang,et al. Permeability calculation model of shale matrix with the effect of adsorption,slippage and free molecule flow[J].Journal of Xi’an Shiyou University:Natural Science Edition,2015,30(5):48-53.［曹成,李天太,刘刚,等.考虑吸附、滑脱和自由分子流动效应的页岩基质渗透率计算模型[J].西安石油大学学报:自然科学版,2015,30(5):48-53.］
[13]Yu Rongze,Bian Yanan,Qi Yadong,et al.A review of numerical simulation of shale gas reservoirs[J].Oil Gas & Geology,2014,35(1):131-137.[于荣泽,卞亚南,齐亚东,等.页岩气藏数值模拟研究现状[J].石油与天然气地质,2014,35(1):131-137.]
[14]Li Zhiping,Li Zhifeng.Dynamic characteristics of shale gas flow in nanoscale pores[J].Natural Gas Industry,2012,32(4):50-53,123.[李治平,李智锋.页岩气纳米级孔隙渗流动态特征[J].天然气工业,2012,32(4):50-53,123.]
[15]Wang Rui,Zhang Ningsheng,Liu Xiaojuan,et al.Apparent permeability of shale considering the adsorption and diffusion of gas and the effects of temperature and pressure on it[J].Journal of Xi’an Shiyou University：Natural Science Edition,2013,28(2):3,49-53,83.[王瑞,张宁生,刘晓娟,等.考虑吸附和扩散的页岩视渗透率及其与温度—压力之关系[J].西安石油大学学报:自然科学版,2013,28(2):3,49-53,83.]
[16]Wang Rui,Zhang Ningsheng,Liu Xiaojuan,et al.The calculation and analysis of diffusion coefficient and apparent permeability of shale gas[J].Journal of Northwest University:Natural Science Edition,2013,43(1):75-80,88.[王瑞,张宁生,刘晓娟,等.页岩气扩散系数和视渗透率的计算与分析[J].西北大学学报:自然科学版,2013,43(1):75-80,88.]
[17]Gao Cheng,Xu Ruina,Xue Huaqing,et al.The application study based on the permeability measurement models of tight cores[J].Journal of Engineering Thermophysics,2013,34(9):1695-1698.[高诚,胥蕊娜,薛华庆,等.基于致密岩心的渗透率测试模型的应用研究[J].工程热物理学报,2013,34(9):1695-1698.]
[18]Zhang Hongxue,Liu Weiqun,Zhu Li.Fracture permeability model and experiments of shale gas reservoirs[J].Rock and Soil Mechanics,2015,36(3):719-729.[张宏学,刘卫群,朱立.页岩储层裂隙渗透率模型和试验研究[J].岩土力学,2015,36(3):719-729.]
[19]Zhang Kaihong,Chen Yijian,Xu Haiyin.A pressure pulse technique to test liquid permeability of core with low permeability.[J].Petroleum Instrument,1998,12(3):12-14,52.[张开洪,陈一健,徐海莹.测试低渗岩心液体渗透率的压力脉冲技术[J].石油仪器,1998,12(3):12-14,52.]
[20]Li Zhifeng,Li Zhiping,Wang Yang,et al.Comparison and analysis of permeability testing methods on shale gas reservoir[J].Fault-Block Oil & Gas Field,2011,18(6):761-764.[李智锋,李治平,王杨,等.页岩气储层渗透性测试方法对比分析[J].断块油气田,2011,18(6):761-764.]
[21]Yu Rongze,Bian Yanan,Zhang Xiaowei,et al.The review of non-steady permeability test in shale gas reservoir[J].Science Technology and Engineering,2012,12(27):7019-7027,7035.[于荣泽,卞亚南,张晓伟,等.页岩储层非稳态渗透率测试方法综述[J].科学技术与工程,2012,12(27):7019-7027,7035.]
[22]Cui X,Bustin R M,Dipple G.Selective transport of CO2,CH4,and N2 in coals:Insights from modeling of experimental gas adsorption data[J].Fuel,2004,83(3):293-303.
[23]Dicker A,Smits R M.A practical approach for determining permeability from laboratory pressure-pulse decay measurements[C].SPE-17578,1988:285-292.
[24]Shieh J J,Chung T S.Gas permeability,diffusivity,and solubility of poly (4-vinylpyridine)film[J].Journal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer Physics,1999,37(20):2851-2861.
[25]Wang Ying,Li Xiaochun,Wei Ning.Error Analysis of storage-variable transient pulse method for permeability measurement[J].Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2010,29(1):2746-2754.[王颖,李小春,魏宁.变容压力脉冲法渗透系数测量的误差分析[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2010,29(1):2746-2754.]
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
甘公网安备 62010202000678号