延吉盆地铜佛寺组和大砬子组构造圈闭综合评价
发布时间:2018-04-30 21:02
本文选题:延吉盆地 + 铜佛寺组 ; 参考:《吉林大学》2015年硕士论文
【摘要】:延吉盆地是位于吉林省延边朝鲜族自治州境内的一小型中生代残留断陷盆地,自西向东表现为西部斜坡、中央坳陷、太平隆起与东部坳陷的两坳一隆一斜坡构造格局,南北长50km,东西宽40km,总面积达1670km2。盆地主要发育白垩纪地层,铜佛寺组与大砬子组地层在盆地中广泛分布,发育有数百米厚的砂岩与暗色泥岩,是盆地主要的油气勘探目的层。圈闭是油气聚集的场所,本次研究是在圈闭识别的基础上,以石油地质学理论指导下,选择典型的圈闭评价参数,利用层次分析法等方法对圈闭进行综合评价,优选出有利圈闭,这对发现新的油气藏具有重要参考作用。 根据多口岩心、测井与地震资料分析,以层序地层学为指导,通过对盆地内的地震剖面解释,建立盆地构造格架,识别出多种构造圈闭类型。其中,铜佛寺组识别出18个构造圈闭,以断块、断鼻为主,其面积介于0.5km2~21.35km2,闭合幅度100m~750m;大砬子组识别出18个构造圈闭,同样也以断块、断鼻为主,面积介于0.26km2~39.3km2,闭合幅度50~350m。 有机地球化学测试分析资料表明,铜佛寺组暗色泥岩是盆地主要的烃源岩。有效烃源岩有效烃源岩主要分布在朝阳川凹陷、清茶馆凹陷、德新凹陷三个凹陷中,平均累计厚度在200m左右,分布面积达400多平方公里,该套烃源岩具有一定的资源潜力。烃源岩有机质丰度高,有机碳分布范围0.26%~5.95%,平均值为2.18%;有机质类型以Ⅱ型为主;朝阳川凹陷与清茶馆凹陷中的烃源岩处于低熟~成熟阶段,德新凹陷中的烃源岩处于低熟阶段。 铜佛寺组与大砬子组时期皆为扇三角洲~湖泊沉积环境,砂岩都比较发育。铜佛寺组砂岩砂岩累计厚度介于15.2m~516.09m,平均累计厚度为173.45m,平均累计厚度为190m;大砬子组砂岩分布范围与厚度都较铜佛寺组大,大砬子组砂岩累计厚度介于79.5m~552.57m,平均累计厚度为295.76m。储层物性上,铜佛寺组为孔隙度平均值在8.0%左右,为特低孔、特低渗储层;大砬子组孔隙度在平均值11.5%左右,为低孔、低渗储层。在含油气情况上,盆地中现已发现油气流主要赋存在铜佛寺组储层中,,故铜佛寺组储层为现阶段勘探重点。 根据铜佛寺组与大砬子组不同石油地质条件,对铜佛寺组圈闭从圈闭条件、烃源岩条件、储层条件,保存条件中优选出14项中参数,利用层次分析法确定各项参数权重;对大砬子组圈闭优选9项参数,利用相对比较法确定各项参数权重。从而使每项圈闭评价参数获得较为合理的权重值。 针对本区实际情况,对优选出来的特征参数大小进行分级,给出合理的分值,进而对铜佛寺组与大砬子组圈闭进行综合评价。根据评价结果,铜佛寺组构造圈闭中有2个I类圈闭,5个II类圈闭,11个III类圈闭;大砬子组中有2个I类圈闭,9个II类圈闭,7个III类圈闭。延吉盆地勘探开发的I类有利区主要位于在盆地东部坳陷带东南部的德新凹陷的延4~延9井区、盆地东部坳陷带东北部的清茶馆凹陷延10~延12井区;延吉盆地勘探开发的II较有利区主要位于盆地中部朝阳川凹陷延参1~延1井区以及太平隆起带上;延吉盆地勘探开发III类远景区主要位于朝阳川凹陷延3~延D3井区以及分散分布在盆缘各处。
[Abstract]:The Yanji basin is a small MESOZOIC RESIDUAL fault basin located in the Korean Autonomous Prefecture of Yanbian, Jilin province. From west to East, it shows the western slope, central depression, Taiping uplift and the eastern depression of the two depression and one uplift structure, the north and the south are 50km and the East and the West are 40km. The total area reaches the Cretaceous strata in the 1670km2. basin, the bronze Buddha is mainly developed. The formation of the Temple group and the Dali group is widely distributed in the basin, and the sandstone and dark mudstone are developed hundreds of meters thick. It is the main oil and gas exploration target layer in the basin. The trap is the place of oil and gas accumulation. This study is based on the identification of the traps. Under the guidance of the petroleum geology theory, the typical trap evaluation parameters are selected and the analytic hierarchy process is used. Comprehensive evaluation of traps is made by the method and so on, and favorable traps are selected. This is of important reference for finding new oil and gas reservoirs.
Based on the analysis of multi mouth core, logging and seismic data, guided by sequence stratigraphy, by interpreting seismic profiles in the basin, the tectonic framework of the basin is established and various types of structural traps are identified. Among them, 18 tectonic traps are identified in the cupric Temple group, with the fault block and the fault nose as the main area, with the area of 0.5km2 to 21.35km2 and the closed range of 100m to 750m The 18 structural traps are identified in the great Lazi formation, which are also mainly fault blocks and broken noses, with an area ranging from 0.26km2 to 39.3km2, with a close range of 50 to 350m..
The data of organic geochemistry test and analysis show that the dark mudstone of the copper Buddha Temple group is the main source rock of the basin. The effective source rocks of the effective source rocks are mainly distributed in Chaoyang Sichuan sag, and in the three depression of the Qing tea house depression and Dexin depression, the average accumulative thickness is about 200m and the distribution area is more than 400 square kilometers. Source potential. The organic matter abundance of source rocks is high, the distribution range of organic carbon is 0.26% to 5.95%, the average value is 2.18%, the type of organic matter is type II mainly, the source rock in Chaoyang Sichuan sag and Qing tea house sag is in the stage of low mature to mature, and the source rocks in Dexin sag are in the low mature stage.
The period of the copper Buddha Temple group and the great La formation are both fan delta and lake sedimentary environment, and sandstone is more developed. The cumulative thickness of sandstone sandstone in the copper Buddha Temple group is between 15.2m to 516.09m, the average accumulative thickness is 173.45m, the average accumulative thickness is 190m, and the distribution range and thickness of the sandstones are larger than that of the copper Buddha Temple group, and the sandstones of the great La formation are thicker. In the range of 79.5m ~ 552.57m and the average accumulative thickness of 295.76m. reservoir, the average porosity of the copper Buddha Temple group is about 8%, which is a special low porosity and ultra low permeability reservoir, and the porosity of the big La formation is about 11.5%, the low porosity and low permeability reservoir. In the case of oil and gas, the oil and gas flow in the basin has now been found mainly in the copper Buddha Temple Reservoir. In the layer, the reservoir of the copper Buddha group is the focus of exploration at this stage.
According to the different petroleum geological conditions of the cupric Temple group and the great Lai Zi formation, 14 parameters are selected from the trap condition, the source rock condition, the reservoir condition and the preservation condition, and the weight of each parameter is determined by the analytic hierarchy process. The weight of each parameter is selected and the weight of each parameter is determined by the relative comparison method, and the relative comparison method is used to determine the weight of the parameters. Thus, a reasonable weight value can be obtained by closing the evaluation parameters of each collar.
According to the actual situation in this area, the size of the selected characteristic parameters is classified, and the reasonable score is given. Then the copper Buddha Temple group and the great La group trap are synthetically evaluated. According to the evaluation results, there are 2 I trap, 5 II type trap, 11 III trap, 2 I trap and 9 II class in the big La group. Trap, 7 III traps. The I favorable areas for exploration and development in the Yanji basin are mainly located in the 4 ~ 9 well area in Dexin depression in the southeastern part of the eastern depression of the basin, the 10 ~ 12 well area of the Qing tea house sag in the northeast of the basin in the East of the basin, and the more favorable areas for the exploration and development of the Yanji basin in the central Chaoyang depression in the middle of the basin. In the 1 - Yan 1 well area and the Taiping uplift zone, the exploration and development of the Yanji basin in the Yanji basin is mainly located in the extended 3 ~ D3 well area in Chaoyang Sichuan depression and the scattered distribution in the basin margin.
【学位授予单位】:吉林大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2015
【分类号】:P618.13
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 张川波;延吉盆地晚中生代地层划分和时代问题商榷[J];长春地质学院学报;1980年01期
2 孙德有,吴福元,张艳斌,高山;西拉木伦河-长春-延吉板块缝合带的最后闭合时间——来自吉林大玉山花岗岩体的证据[J];吉林大学学报(地球科学版);2004年02期
3 许岩,刘立,赵羽君;延吉盆地含油气系统与勘探前景[J];吉林大学学报(地球科学版);2004年02期
4 吕延防,付广,姜振学,陈章明;延吉盆地东部坳陷油气运聚系统及有利探区预测[J];长春科技大学学报;1998年01期
5 杨飞,袁东风;利用相关分析法确定圈闭评价中关键地质因数的权重系数[J];成都理工学院学报;1999年03期
6 蒋凌志,顾家裕,郭彬程;中国含油气盆地碎屑岩低渗透储层的特征及形成机理[J];沉积学报;2004年01期
7 陈国民;;油气圈闭综合评价参数体系的构建[J];重庆科技学院学报(自然科学版);2010年04期
8 孙革,郑少林;中国东北中生代地层划分对比之新见[J];地层学杂志;2000年01期
9 吕延防,姜贵周;延吉盆地断裂特征及对油气分布的控制[J];断块油气田;1997年02期
10 邓俊国,王贤,王伟锋;模糊综合评判技术在柳堡断块圈闭评价中的应用[J];断块油气田;1999年06期
本文编号:1826195
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/kejilunwen/diqiudizhi/1826195.html