体积压裂技术在苏里格气田水平井开发中的应用——以苏53区块为例

Application of stimulated reservoir volume to horizontal wells in Sulige gas field——A case study in Su53 block

关键词:  体积压裂  采收率  水平井  苏里格气田  非常规气藏 

Key words:  stimulated reservoir volume  recovery factor  horizontal well  Sulige gas field  unconventional gas reservior

摘要:

体积压裂技术是非常规气藏后期改造的关键技术之一。苏里格气田属于致密砂岩气藏,为了实现水平井高效开发,提高气藏最终采收率,以苏53区块为例,以体积压裂适用的基本地质条件为依据,对苏里格地区水平井体积压裂适用性进行分析。同时,借用数值模拟方法,对水平井采用不同压裂改造方式进行模拟对比。结果 表明:①苏里格气田储层具有微裂缝较发育、渗透率低、石英含量高等地质特征,满足体积压裂改造的基本储层条件；②通过模拟结果对比,苏里格气田水平井实施体积压裂效果明显优于常规压裂。另外,利用裂缝监测技术、FAST和TOPAZE软件等对2012年实施的5口体积压裂水平井进行了效果分析,认为:①体积压裂水平井平均单井加砂量、液量、裂缝条数等参数明显优于常规压裂水平井；②体积压裂水平井初期平均日产气约为12×10⁴ m³,平均无阻流量、动储量分别为77.9×10⁴ m³/d、1.75×10⁸ m³,均为动态Ⅰ类井。

Abstract:

In recent years, the stimulated reservoir volume becomes one of key transformation technologies for unconventional gas reservior. Sulige gas field is a tight sandstone gas reservoir. In order to realize high effective development for horizontal well and improve ultimate recovery of the gas reservoir, based on basic geological conditions for stimulated reservoir volume, the applicability of stimulated reservoir volume was analyzed for horizontal well in Su53 block of Sulige gas field. Meanwhile, different fracturing transformation ways used in horizontal wells were contrasted by numerical simulation method. There were two results:firstly, the main characteristics of the reservoir were low permeability,microfracture, high quartz content and so on, which are main reservoir conditions for stimulated reservoir volume. Secondly, the result of numerical simulation shows that the effect of stimulated reservoir volume was better than normal fracture. In addition, this paper analyzed the stimulated reservoir volume effect of five horizontal wells in 2012 by fracture monitoring technique, namely FAST software and TOPAZE software. The result showed that fracture parameters of stimulated reservoir volume were better than normal fracture. All horizontal wells were first class wells, whose average daily production was 12×10⁴ m³/d in the early days; the average capacity of open-flow was 77.9×10⁴ m³/d, and average dynamic reserve was 1.75×10⁸ m³.