岩性油气藏 ›› 2024, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (1): 111–120.doi: 10.12108/yxyqc.20240111

• 地质勘探 • 上一篇    下一篇

四川盆地南部中二叠统茅口组岩溶古地貌恢复及特征

张坦1, 贾梦瑶1, 孙雅雄2,3, 丁文龙4, 石司宇5, 范昕禹1, 姚威1   

  1. 1. 中国石化勘探开发研究院 无锡石油地质研究所, 江苏 无锡 214126;
    2. 中国石化江苏油田分公司, 江苏 扬州 225009;
    3. 东北石油大学 地球科学学院 黑龙江 大庆 163318;
    4. 中国地质大学 (北京)能源学院 北京 100083;
    5. 中国石化勘探分公司, 成都 610041
  • 收稿日期:2022-10-09 修回日期:2022-11-09 出版日期:2024-01-01 发布日期:2024-01-02
  • 第一作者:张坦(1994-),男,硕士,工程师,主要从事构造与油气成藏方面的研究工作。地址:(214126)江苏省无锡市滨湖区蠡湖大道2060号。Email:zhangtan@sinopec.com。
  • 通信作者: 孙雅雄(1993-),男,博士,工程师,主要从事非常规油气地质理论与评价方面的研究工作。Email:sunyaxiong2015@163.com。
  • 基金资助:
    中国石化勘探分公司项目“川南地区东吴期古构造特征研究”（编号：35450003-17-ZC0607-0016）与江苏省卓越博士后计划联合资助。

Restoration and characteristics of karst paleogeomorphology of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in southern Sichuan Basin

ZHANG Tan1, JIA Mengyao1, SUN Yaxiong2,3, DING Wenlong4, SHI Siyu5, FAN Xinyu1, YAO Wei1   

  1. 1. Wuxi Research Institute of Petroleum Geology, Sinopec, Wuxi 214126, Jiangsu, China;
    2. Jiangsu Oilfield Company, Sinopec, Yangzhou 225009, Jiangsu, China;
    3. College of Geoscience, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, Heilongjiang, China;
    4. School of Energy Resources, China University of Geosciences(Beijing), Beijing 100083, China;
    5. Sinopec Exploration Company, Chengdu 610041, China
  • Received:2022-10-09 Revised:2022-11-09 Online:2024-01-01 Published:2024-01-02

PDF (PC)

219

摘要： 岩溶古地貌是含油气盆地沉积微相类型、分布范围及储层发育的主控因素，恢复岩溶古地貌对指导油气勘探至关重要。基于钻井、测井及地震等资料，采用沉积速率法和地层厚度对比法对四川盆地南部地区中二叠统茅口组顶部不整合界面的剥蚀厚度进行了精确计算，并根据剥蚀厚度的地区差异及古地貌指示，对岩溶古地貌单元进行了进一步划分。研究结果表明： ①四川盆地南部中二叠统茅口组顶部主要发育平行不整合，仅在局部地区形成角度不整合。早中二叠世，上扬子地台内部沉积稳定，构造运动较弱，沉积速率法与地层厚度对比法相对更适用于研究区的岩溶古地貌恢复。②研究区中二叠统茅口组顶部剥蚀厚度为0～120 m，其中北部剥蚀最强烈，如LG1井区、W4井区代表了岩溶古地貌地势的最高位置，向东南方向剥蚀强度逐渐减弱，地势逐渐降低；剥蚀最薄弱地区位于LS1井东北部，代表了岩溶古地貌地势的最低位置，整体呈现北部高，南部低，东北部最低的地貌格局。③研究区茅口组古地貌特征控制了岩溶作用的发育强度，可划分为岩溶高地、岩溶斜坡、岩溶盆地等3个二级岩溶古地貌单元以及溶峰盆地、溶丘洼地、丘丛谷地、丘丛洼地、丘丛沟谷、峰林平原、残丘平原等7个三级古地貌单元，其中岩溶斜坡易形成良好的储集空间，为油气圈闭的形成奠定了良好的基础，是下一步有利勘探方向。

关键词: 沉积速率法, 地层厚度对比法, 古地貌恢复, 岩溶储集体, 茅口组, 中二叠统, 四川盆地南部

Abstract: Karst paleogeomorphology is one of the main controlling factors of sedimentary microfacies type, distribution range and reservoir development in petroliferous basins. It is very important to restore karst palaeogeomorphology to guide oil and gas exploration. Based on a large number of drilling, logging and seismic data, the denudation thickness of the unconformity interface at the top of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in southern Sichuan Basin was calculated by using sedimentation rate method and stratum thickness comparison method, and the karst paleogeomorphology units were divided according to the regional differences of the denudation thickness and paleogeomorphic indicators. The results show that:(1) The top of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in southern Sichuan Basin mainly developed parallel unconformities, and only formed angular unconformity in local areas. Under the background of stable sedimentation and weak tectonic movement in Upper Yangtze platform during Early and Middle Permian, sedimentation rate method and stratum thickness comparison method are relatively more suitable for the restoration of karst palaeogeomorphology in the study area.(2) The denudation thickness of the top of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in the study area changes from 0 to 120 m. The strongest denudation areas are near the wells LG1 and W4 in the north, which represent the highest position of the karst ancient landform. The denudation intensity gradually weakens towards the southeast, and the terrain gradually decreases. The weakest denudation areas are located in the northeast of well LS1, which represents the lowest position of the karst ancient landform. The overall landscape pattern is "high in the north, low in the south and lowest in the northeast".(3) The paleogeomorphology of Maokou Formation in the study area controls the intensity of karst development, which can be divided into three secondary karst paleogeomorphic units, namely, karst highlands, karst slopes and karst basins, and seven tertiary paleogeomorphic units, including karst peak basins, karst hill depressions, hill cluster valleys, hill cluster depressions, hill cluster gullies, peak forest plains and residual hill plains. Among them, the karst slopes are easy to form good reservoir spaces, laying a good foundation for the formation of oil and gas traps, and are the next favorable exploration direction.

Key words: sedimentary ratio method, stratum thickness comparison method, paleogeomorphologic restoration, karst reservoir, Maokou Formation, Middle Permian, southern Sichuan Basin

中图分类号: 

  • TE122.1
[1] 赵文智, 沈安江, 胡素云, 等.中国碳酸盐岩储集层大型化发育的地质条件与分布特征[J].石油勘探与开发, 2012, 39(1):1-12. ZHAO Wenzhi, SHEN Anjiang, HU Suyun, et al. Geological conditions and distributional features of large-scale carbonate reservoirs onshore China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2012, 39(1):1-12.
[2] 刘树根, 孙玮, 李智武, 等. 四川叠合盆地海相碳酸盐岩油气分布特征及其构造主控因素[J].岩性油气藏, 2016, 28(5):1-17. LIU Shugen, SUN Wei, LI Zhiwu, et al. Distribution characteristics of marine carbonate reservoirs and their tectonic controlling factors across the Sichuan superimposed basin[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2016, 28(5):1-17.
[3] 杨帆, 刘立峰, 冉启全, 等.四川盆地磨溪地区灯四段风化壳岩溶储层特征[J].岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(2):43-53. YANG Fan, LIU Lifeng, RAN Qiquan, et al. Characteristics of weathering crust karst reservoir of Deng 4 member in Moxi area, Sichuan Basin[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2020, 32(2):43-53.
[4] 拜文华, 吕锡敏, 李小军, 等.古岩溶盆地岩溶作用模式及古地貌精细刻画:以鄂尔多斯盆地东部奥陶系风化壳为例[J]. 现代地质, 2002, 16(3):292-298. BAI Wenhua, LYU Ximin, LI Xiaojun, et al. The mode of palaeokarstification andthe fine reconstruction of the palaeogeomorphology in the karst basin:Taking Ordovician karst in eastern Ordos Basin for example[J]. Geoscience, 2002, 16(3):292-298.
[5] 江青春, 胡素云, 汪泽成, 等.四川盆地茅口组风化壳岩溶古地貌及勘探选区[J].石油学报, 2012, 33(6):949-960. JIANG Qingchun, HU Suyun, WANG Zecheng, et al. Paleokarst landform of the weathering crust of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in Sichuan Basin and selection of exploration regions[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2012, 33(6):949-960.
[6] 杨雨然, 张亚, 谢忱, 等. 川西北地区中二叠统栖霞组热液作用及其对储层的影响[J].岩性油气藏, 2019, 31(6):44-53. YANG Yuran, ZHANG Ya, XIE Chen, et al. Hydrothermal action of Middle Permian Qixia Formation in northwestern Sichuan Basin and its effect on reservoirs[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2019, 31(6):44-53.
[7] 黄涵宇, 何登发, 李英强, 等.四川盆地东南部泸州古隆起的厘定及其成因机制[J].地学前缘, 2019, 26(1):102-120. HUANG Hanyu, HE Dengfa, LI Yingqiang, et al. Determination and formation mechanism of the Luzhou paleo-uplift in the southeastern Sichuan Basin[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2019, 26(1):102-120.
[8] 何斌, 徐义刚, 王雅玫, 等. 东吴运动性质的厘定及其时空演变规律[J].地球科学, 2005, 30(1):89-96. HE Bin, XU Yigang, WANG Yamei, et al. Nature of the Dongwu Movement and its temporal and spatial evolution[J]. Earth Science, 2005, 30(1):89-96.
[9] SHI Siyu, DING Wenlong, ZHAO Gang, et al. Calculating the eroded thickness corresponding to a short-term tectonic uplift with Milankovitch theory:A case study of the Middle Permian Maokou Formation in southeastern Sichuan Basin, Southwest China[J]. ACS Omega, 2021, 6(11):7558-7575.
[10] 桑琴, 未勇, 程超, 等.蜀南地区二叠系茅口组古岩溶地区水系分布及岩溶地貌单元特征[J]. 古地理学报, 2012, 14(3):393-402. SANG Qin, WEI Yong, CHENG Chao, et al. Distribution of palaeokarst water system and Palaeogeomorphic unit characteristics of the Permian Maokou Formation in southern Sichuan Province[J]. Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition), 2012, 14(3):393-402.
[11] 肖笛, 谭秀成, 山述娇, 等.四川盆地南部中二叠统茅口组古岩溶地貌恢复及其石油地质意义[J]. 地质学报, 2014, 88(10):1992-2002. XIAO Di, TAN Xiucheng, SHAN Shujiao, et al. The restoration of palaeokarst geomorphology of Middle Permian Maokou Formation and its petroleum geological significance in southern Sichuan Basin[J]. Acta Geological Sinnca, 2014, 88(10):1992-2002.
[12] 张亚, 陈双玲, 张晓丽, 等. 四川盆地茅口组岩溶古地貌刻画及油气勘探意义[J].岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(3):44-55. ZHANG Ya, CHEN Shuangling, ZHANG Xiaoli, et al. Restoration of paleokarst geomorphology of lower Permian Maokou Formation and its petroleum exploration implication in Sichuan Basin[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2020, 32(3):44-55.
[13] 何登发, 李德生, 张国伟, 等.四川多旋回叠合盆地的形成与演化[J].地质科学, 2011, 46(3):589-606. HE Dengfa, LI Desheng, ZHANG Guowei, et al. Formation and evolution of multi-cycle superposed Sichuan Basin, China[J]. Journal of Geology, 2011, 46(3):589-606.
[14] 王学军, 杨志如, 韩冰.四川盆地叠合演化与油气聚集[J].地学前缘, 2015, 22(3):161-173. WANG Xuejun, YANG Zhiru, HAN Bing. Superposed evolution of Sichuan Basin and its petroleum accumulation[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2015, 22(3):161-173.
[15] 田纳新, 徐国强, 李学永, 等.塔中地区早海西期风化壳古岩溶控制因素分析[J].江汉石油学院学报, 2004, 26(2):61-63. TIAN Naxin, XU Guoqiang, LI Xueyong, et al. Analysis of control factors of weathering crust palaeokarst in Early Hercynian of Tazhong area[J]. Journal of Jianghan Petroleum Institute, 2004, 26(2):61-63.
[16] 徐彬. 古地貌恢复方法及研究进展[J]. 中国锰业, 2018, 36(1):65-68. XU Bin. Development of palaeogeomorphology reconstruction[J]. China Manganese Industry, 2018, 36(1):65-68.
[17] 罗冰, 谭秀成, 李凌, 等.蜀南地区长兴组顶部岩溶不整合的发现及其油气地质意义[J].石油学报, 2010, 31(3):408-414. LUO Bing, TAN Xiucheng, LI Ling, et al. Discovery and geologic significance of paleokarst unconformity between Changxing Formation and Feixianguan Formation in Shunan area of Sichuan Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2010, 31(3):408-414.
[18] 强子同, 文应初, 唐杰, 等. 四川及邻区晚二叠世沉积作用及沉积盆地的发展[J].沉积学报, 1990, 8(1):79-90. QIANG Zitong, WEN Yingchu, TANG Jie, et al. Sedimentology and basin evolution of the Upper Permian, Sichuan and west Hubei provinces[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 1990, 8(1):79-90.
[19] 刘曦翔, 淡永, 罗文军, 等.四川盆地高石梯地区灯影组四段顶岩溶古地貌、古水系特征与刻画[J]. 中国岩溶, 2020, 39(2):206-214. LIU Xixiang, DAN Yong, LUO Wenjun, et al. Characterization of karst paleo-geomorphology and the paleo-water system on the top of the 4 th member of the Dengying Formation in the Gaoshiti area, Sichuan Basin[J]. Carsologica Sinica, 2020, 39(2):206-214.
[20] 陈景山, 李忠, 王振宇, 等.塔里木盆地奥陶系碳酸盐岩古岩溶作用与储层分布[J].沉积学报, 2007, 25(6):858-868. CHEN Jingshan, LI Zhong, WANG Zhenyu, et al. Palaekarstification and reservoir distribution of Ordovician carbonates in Tarim Basin[J]. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 2007, 25(6):858-868.
[21] 邬光辉, 李洪辉, 张立平, 等.塔里木盆地麦盖提斜坡奥陶系风化壳成藏条件[J].石油勘探与开发, 2012, 39(2):144-153. WU Guanghui, LI Honghui, ZHANG Liping, et al. Reservoirforming conditions of the Ordovician weathering crust in the Maigaiti slope, Tarim Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2012, 39(2):144-153.
[22] 王英民, 曹正林, 赵锡奎. 鄂尔多斯盆地北部古岩溶储层流体-岩石系统孔隙发育规律及成岩圈闭定量预测[J].矿物岩石, 2003, 23(3):51-56. WANG Yingmin, CAO Zhenglin, ZHAO Xikui. Quantitative study of pore development and fillingzone in the fluid-rock system on the fossil karst reservoir in the north of Ordos Basin, China[J]. Journal of Mineralogy and Petrology, 2003, 23(3):51-56.
[23] 耿晓洁, 林畅松, 吴斌.古地貌对塔中地区鹰山组岩溶结构及分布的控制作用[J].岩性油气藏, 2018, 30(4):46-55. GENG Xiaojie, LIN Changsong, WU Bin. Controlling of paleogeomorphology to characteristics and distribution of karst structures of Ying-shan Formation in Tazhong area[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2018, 30(4):46-55.
[24] 张兵, 郑荣才, 王绪本, 等.四川盆地东部黄龙组古岩溶特征与储集层分布[J].石油勘探与开发, 2011, 38(3):257-267. ZHANG Bing, ZHENG Rongcai, WANG Xuben, et al. Paleokarst and reservoirs of the Huanglong Formation in eastern Sichuan Basin[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2011, 38(3):257-267.
[1] 包汉勇, 赵帅, 张莉, 刘皓天. 川东红星地区中上二叠统页岩气勘探成果及方向展望[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2024, 36(4): 12-24.
[2] 冯斌, 黄晓波, 何幼斌, 李华, 罗进雄, 李涛, 周晓光. 渤海湾盆地庙西北地区古近系沙河街组三段源-汇系统重建[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2024, 36(3): 84-95.
[3] 李毕松, 苏建龙, 蒲勇, 缪志伟, 张文军, 肖伟, 张雷, 江馀. 四川盆地元坝地区二叠系茅口组相控岩溶刻画及预测[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2024, 36(1): 69-77.
[4] 李蓉, 苏成鹏, 贾霍甫, 石国山, 林辉, 李素华. 川西南地区中二叠统栖霞组白云岩储层特征及成因[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2022, 34(4): 103-115.
[5] 蒋中发, 丁修建, 王忠泉, 赵辛楣. 吉木萨尔凹陷二叠系芦草沟组烃源岩沉积古环境[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(6): 109-119.
[6] 张亚, 陈双玲, 张晓丽, 张玺华, 谢忱, 陈聪, 杨雨然, 高兆龙. 四川盆地茅口组岩溶古地貌刻画及油气勘探意义[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(3): 44-55.
[7] 吴丰, 习研平, 张亚, 陈双玲, 姚聪, 杨雨然. 川东—川南地区茅口组岩溶储层分类识别及有效性评价[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(2): 90-99.
[8] 杨雨然, 张亚, 谢忱, 陈聪, 张晓丽, 陈双玲, 高兆龙. 川西北地区中二叠统栖霞组热液作用及其对储层的影响[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2019, 31(6): 44-53.
[9] 梁 宁，郑荣才，邓吉刚，蒋 欢，郭春利，高志勇. 川西北地区中二叠统栖霞组沉积相与缓斜坡模式[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2016, 28(6): 58-67.
[10] 汪 洋，李树同，牟炜卫，史云鹤,聂万才,闫灿灿 . 乌审旗—志丹地区奥陶系岩溶古地貌与马五4 1 气水分布关系[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2016, 28(2): 64-71.
[11] 王文之，田景春，张翔，隆辉，刘冬梅，孙利. 川南丹凤—塘河地区嘉陵江组沉积环境分析[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2011, 23(6): 50-55.
[12] 罗 鹏,李国蓉,施泽进,周大志,汤鸿伟,张德明. 川东南地区茅口组层序地层及沉积相浅析[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2010, 22(2): 74-78.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . 2022年 34卷 2 期 封面[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2022, 34(2): 0 .
[2] 李在光, 李琳. 以井数据为基础的AutoCAD 自动编绘图方法[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(2): 84 -89 .
[3] 程玉红, 郭彦如, 郑希民, 房乃珍, 马玉虎. 井震多因素综合确定的解释方法与应用效果[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(2): 97 -101 .
[4] 刘俊田,靳振家,李在光,覃新平,郭　林,王　波,刘玉香. 小草湖地区岩性油气藏主控因素分析及油气勘探方向[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(3): 44 -47 .
[5] 商昌亮,付守献. 黄土塬山地三维地震勘探应用实例[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(3): 106 -110 .
[6] 王昌勇, 郑荣才, 王建国, 曹少芳, 肖明国. 准噶尔盆地西北缘八区下侏罗统八道湾组沉积特征及演化[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2008, 20(2): 37 -42 .
[7] 王克, 刘显阳, 赵卫卫, 宋江海, 时振峰, 向惠. 济阳坳陷阳信洼陷古近纪震积岩特征及其地质意义[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2008, 20(2): 54 -59 .
[8] 孙洪斌, 张凤莲. 辽河坳陷古近系构造-沉积演化特征[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2008, 20(2): 60 -65 .
[9] 李传亮. 地层抬升会导致异常高压吗?[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2008, 20(2): 124 -126 .
[10] 魏钦廉，郑荣才，肖玲，马国富，窦世杰，田宝忠. 阿尔及利亚438b 区块三叠系Serie Inferiere 段储层平面非均质性研究[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2009, 21(2): 24 -28 .

陇ICP备17006252号
版权所有© 2018 中国石油集团西北地质研究所有限公司《岩性油气藏》编辑部

地址：甘肃省兰州市城关区雁儿湾路535号(陇ICP备17006252号)    电话：0931-8686158;8686058;8686288    邮箱：yxyqc@petrochina.com.cn

甘公网安备 62010202002827号

本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发