孔隙度测定误差及其控制方法研究

鲍云杰; 李志明; 杨振恒; 钱门辉; 刘鹏; 陶国亮

doi:10.11781/sysydz201904593

孔隙度测定误差及其控制方法研究

doi: 10.11781/sysydz201904593

鲍云杰^1,2,3,4,
李志明^1,2,3,4,
杨振恒^1,2,3,4,
钱门辉^1,2,3,4,
刘鹏^1,2,3,4,
陶国亮^1,2,3,4

1. 中国石化石油勘探开发研究院无锡石油地质研究所, 江苏无锡 214126;
2. 中国石化油气成藏重点实验室, 江苏无锡 214126;
3. 页岩油气富集机理与有效开发国家重点实验室, 江苏无锡 214126;
4. 国家能源页岩油研发中心, 江苏无锡 214126

基金项目:

国家科技重大专项"大型油气田及煤层气开发：中国典型盆地陆相页岩油勘探开发选区与目标评价"（2017ZX05049001）资助。

详细信息

作者简介:
鲍云杰(1963-),男,硕士,高级工程师,从事测试技术与页岩油气评价研究。E-mail:baoyj.syky@sinopec.com。

中图分类号: TE122.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 1507
- HTML全文浏览量: 356
- PDF下载量: 210
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2019-01-04
- 修回日期: 2019-05-20
- 刊出日期: 2019-07-28

Porosity measurement error and its control method

BAO Yunjie^1,2,3,4,
LI Zhiming^1,2,3,4,
YANG Zhenheng^1,2,3,4,
QIAN Menhui^1,2,3,4,
LIU Peng^1,2,3,4,
TAO Guoliang^1,2,3,4

1. Wuxi Research Institute of Petroleum Geology, SINOPEC, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214126, China;
2. SINOPEC Key Laboratory of Petroleum Accumulation Mechanisms, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214126, China;
3. State Key Laboratory of Shale Oil and Gas Enrichment Mechanisms and Effective Development, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214126, China;
4. State Energy Center for Shale Oil Research and Development, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214126, China

摘要

摘要: 随着油气勘探领域的扩大，孔隙度测试样品的岩性及形态呈现多样化的发展趋势。在生产与科研实践中发现，相同的样品不同实验室孔隙度测定结果存在差异，给孔隙度资料的应用带来了困扰，孔隙度测定面临着新的挑战。从影响孔隙度测定结果的岩样总体积和骨架体积2个关键参数入手，分析了其测试误差对孔隙度测定结果的影响，发现测试相对误差为0.5%，1.0%，1.5%时，造成的孔隙度绝对误差分别为0.5，0.9，1.4，二者的测试误差对孔隙度测定精度的影响程度相近，应该予以有效控制；分析了岩样骨架体积和总体积测试误差控制现状，认为岩样骨架体积测试依托较为成熟的方法和装置，测试误差能够得到有效控制。总体积测试技术发展滞后，测定过程中关键参数获取受随机的人为因素影响，导致不同操作人员及不同实验室测定结果存在差异。探讨了有效控制孔隙度测定误差的方法，介绍了基于流体变密度测定原理的岩石样品总体积测定系统。该系统对样品的岩性和形态没有限制性要求，实现了岩样总体积测定的自动化；可以减少人为因素对测试的影响，岩样总体积测定平均相对误差0.5%，能够将孔隙度测定绝对误差控制在0.5左右，可用来缩小不同实验室测定结果差异。
- 岩样总体积 /
- 孔隙度 /
- 测定误差 /
- 控制方法
Abstract: With the expansion of oil and gas exploration, the lithology and morphology of porosity test samples show diverse development trends. Porosity measurement faces new challenges because the same sample may have different laboratory porosity measurement results, limiting the application of porosity data. Starting from two key parameters of the total volume and skeleton volume of the rock sample, the influence of test error on the porosity measurement results was analyzed. It is found that when the relative error of the test is 0.5%, 1.0% and 1.5%, the absolute error of porosity is 0.5, 0.9 and 1.4, respectively. The test error of the two has similar influence on the accuracy of porosity measurement, and should be effectively controlled. The current situation of error control of rock sample skeleton volume and total volume was analyzed. Volume testing relies on more mature methods and devices, and its test error can be effectively controlled. The development of total volume testing technology lags behind. The acquisition of key parameters in the measurement process is affected by random human factors, resulting in differences between different operators and different laboratory results. The method for effectively controlling porosity measurement error was discussed. A total sample volume measurement system for rock samples based on the fluid density determination principle was introduced, which has no restrictive requirements on the lithology and morphology of the sample, and automates the determination of the total volume of rock sample. The influence of human factors on the test can be reduced. The average relative error of the total volume of rock sample is 0.5%, and the absolute error of porosity measurement can be controlled to about 0.5, which can be used to narrow the difference of measurement results in different laboratories.
- total volume of rock sample /
- porosity /
- measurement error /
- control method

HTML全文

参考文献(12)

[1]	古茜.页岩气储层孔隙度测量方法综述及展望[J].国外测井技术,2017,38(6):19-24. GU Qian.Review and prospect of porosity measurement methods for shale gas reservoirs[J].World Well Logging Technology,2017,38(6):19-24.
[2]	孙建孟,宗成林,董旭,等.基于核磁共振的页岩粉碎样品孔隙度研究[J].测井技术,2017,41(5):512-516. SUN Jianmeng,ZONG Chenglin,DONG Xu,et al.Porosity measurement of crushed shales using NMR[J].Well Logging Technology,2017,41(5):512-516.
[3]	杨泽皓,董明哲,宫厚健,等.测量页岩径向渗透率和孔隙度的新方法[J].石油学报,2015,36(4):482-489. YANG Zehao,DONG Mingzhe,GONG Houjian,et al.A new method to measure radial permeability and porosity of shale[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2015,36(4):482-489.
[4]	杨巍,薛莲花,唐俊,等.页岩孔隙度测量实验方法分析与评价[J].沉积学报,2015,33(6):1258-1264. YANG Wei,XUE Lianhua,TANG Jun,et al.Analysis and evaluation of different measuring methods for shale porosity[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2015,33(6):1258-1264.
[5]	魏亚强,李国敏,董艳辉.三维激光扫描与气体置换联合测定岩石有效孔隙率[J].地质科技情报,2015,34(4):212-216. WEI Yaqiang,LI Guomin,DONG Yanhui.Determinating effective porosity by the combination of three-dimensional laser scanning and gas displacement[J].Geological Science and Technology Information,2015,34(4):212-216.
[6]	李军,武清钊,路菁,等.页岩气储层总孔隙度与有效孔隙度测量及测井评价:以四川盆地龙马溪组页岩气储层为例[J].石油与天然气地质,2017,38(3):602-609. LI Jun,WU Qingzhao,LU Jing,et al.Measurement and logging evaluation of total porosity and effective porosity of shale gas reservoirs:a case from the Silurian Longmaxi Formation shale in the Sichuan Basin[J].Oil & Gas Geology,2017,38(3):602-609.
[7]	刘淑芹,汪秀一,徐喜庆,等.孔隙度、渗透率测定结果差异性[J].大庆石油地质与开发,2016,35(1):76-79. LIU Shuqin,WANG Xiuyi,XU Xiqing,et al.Differences in the tested results of the porosity and permeability[J].Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing,2016,35(1):76-79.
[8]	张涛,张希巍.页岩孔隙定性与定量方法的对比研究[J].天然气勘探与开发,2017,40(4):34-43. ZHANG Tao,ZHANG Xiwei.Comparative study on qualitative and quantitative methods for shale pore characterization[J].Natural Gas Exploration and Development,2017,40(4):34-43.
[9]	李新,刘鹏,罗燕颖,等.页岩气储层岩心孔隙度测量影响因素分析[J].地球物理学进展,2015,30(5):2181-2187. LI Xin,LIU Peng,LUO Yanying,et al.Analysis of influencing factors on porosity measurement of shale gas reservoir core[J].Progress in Geophysics,2015,30(5):2181-2187.
[10]	陈思宇,田华,柳少波,等.致密储层样品体积测量对孔隙度误差的影响[J].石油实验地质,2016,38(6):850-856. CHEN Siyu,TIAN Hua,LIU Shaobo,et al.Influence of bulk volume measurement on porosity error in tight reservoir core plug analysis[J].Petroleum Geology & Experiment,2016,38(6):850-856.
[11]	付永红,司马立强,张楷晨,等.页岩岩心气测孔隙度测量参数初探与对比[J].特种油气藏,2018,25(3):144-148. FU Yonghong,SIMA Liqiang,ZHANG Kaichen,et al.Preliminary study and comparison of shale core gas-porosity test parameters[J].Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs,2018,25(3):144-148.
[12]	鲍云杰,鲍芳,李志明.基于磁性液体的岩样总体积测试方法[J].计测技术,2014,34(1):39-41. BAO Yunjie,BAO Fang,LI Zhiming.Method of measuring total volume of rock samples based on magnetic fluid[J].Metrology & Measurement Technology,2014,34(1):39-41.