岩性油气藏 ›› 2026, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 77–90.doi: 10.12108/yxyqc.20260407

• 地质勘探 • 上一篇    下一篇

三门峡盆地古近系沉积演化特征及成藏模式

鲁子琦1,2(), 李元昊1,2(), 祝彦贺3, 陈晓智3, 潘新竹3, 翟文彬4, 常益榕1, 单长安1,2   

  1. 1 西安石油大学 地球科学与工程学院， 西安 710065
    2 西安石油大学 陕西省油气成藏地质学重点实验室， 西安 710065
    3 中海油研究总院有限责任公司， 北京 100028
    4 中国石油西部钻探工程有限公司 试油公司， 新疆 克拉玛依 834000
  • 收稿日期:2026-01-28 修回日期:2026-04-11 出版日期:2026-07-01 发布日期:2026-07-06
  • 第一作者:鲁子琦（1999—），女，西安石油大学在读硕士研究生，研究方向为沉积学与石油地质学。地址：（710065）陕西省西安市雁塔区电子二路口东段18号。Email：zqlu597@163.com。
  • 通信作者: 李元昊
  • 基金资助:
    国家十五五“油气重大专项”项目“南海油气成藏机制与勘探开发关键技术”(2025ZD14027)

Sedimentary evolution characteristics and hydrocarbon accumulation models of Paleogene in Sanmenxia Basin

LU Ziqi1,2(), LI Yuanhao1,2(), ZHU Yanhe3, CHEN Xiaozhi3, PAN Xinzhu3, ZHAI Wenbin4, CHANG Yirong1, SHAN Chang’an1,2   

  1. 1 School of Earth Sciences and Engineering， Xi’an Shiyou University， Xi’an 710065， China
    2 Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Petroleum Accumulation Geology， Xi’an Shiyou University， Xi’an 710065， China
    3 CNOOC Research Institute Ltd.， Beijing 100028， China
    4 Well Testing Company， CNPC Xibu Drilling Engineering Co.， Ltd.， Karamay 834000， Xinjiang， China
  • Received:2026-01-28 Revised:2026-04-11 Online:2026-07-01 Published:2026-07-06
  • Contact: LI Yuanhao E-mail:zqlu597@163.com;liyuanh@xsyu.edu.cn

RichHTML

3

PDF (PC)

22

摘要：

三门峡盆地油气勘探潜力较大，但总体勘探程度较低。基于野外露头、二维地震及钻井资料，结合烃源岩有机质丰度测定等手段，以五亩凹陷与平陆凹陷为重点，系统分析了古近系沉积体系与烃源岩发育特征，明确了构造-沉积演化模式及成藏条件。研究结果表明：①三门峡盆地古近系发育5类沉积相、9 类亚相，其中门里组以冲积扇沉积为主，坡底组发育冲积扇、扇三角洲和湖泊沉积，小安组以湖泊沉积为主，柳林河组主要发育冲积扇与辫状河沉积；不同凹陷沉积充填差异显著，相带展布窄且横向迁移快。②盆地构造-沉积演化总体经历“先断后坳” 4 个阶段，初始断陷期（门里期）伸展作用强烈，形成多个孤立深凹；强烈断陷期（坡底期）基底差异沉降显著，湖盆扩张并发生短期湖泛；断-坳转换期（小安期）全区连通稳定沉积，深湖范围达到鼎盛；坳陷沉降期（柳林河期）构造活动趋于稳定，湖盆逐渐萎缩消亡。③研究区烃源岩主要发育于坡底组深湖相黑色泥页岩与小安组深湖—半深湖灰黑色泥岩，优质烃源岩样品占比为25%，其中小安组为主力烃源岩；五亩凹陷小安组TOC值为0.29%~31.10%，平均为2.06%；五亩凹陷坡底组TOC值为0.40%~22.00%，平均为5.33%，部分样品TOC异常偏高或波动较大，与露头保存条件及煤线发育有关。④研究区主要发育“自生自储”、“下生上储”及局部“上生下储”3类成藏组合，整体以近源供烃、短距离运移成藏为主要特征，中央构造带为有利勘探区带。

关键词: 断陷湖盆, 构造演化, 沉积充填, 成藏模式, 烃源岩, 油气勘探潜力, 小安组, 古近系, 三门峡盆地

Abstract:

Sanmenxia Basin has considerable hydrocarbon exploration potential， but its overall exploration degree remains low. Focusing on Wumu Sag and Pinglu Sag， combined with measurements of source rock organic matter abundance， development characteristics of Paleogene sedimentary systems and source rocks were analyzed， and tectono-sedimentary evolution models and hydrocarbon accumulation conditions were clarified based on field outcrop observations， 2D seismic data， and drilling data. The results show that： （1） Paleogene in Sanmenxia Basin deve-loped five sedimentary facies and nine subfacies. Menli Formation is dominated by alluvial fan deposits. Podi Formation develops alluvial fan， fan delta， and lacustrine deposits. Xiao’an Formation is dominated by lacustrine deposits， and Liulinhe Formation mainly develops alluvial fan and braided river deposits. Different sags show significant differences in sedimentary filling， and facies belts are generally narrow and laterally migrate rapidly. （2） The tectono-sedimentary evolution of the basin has gone through 4 stages of “syn-rift to post-rift depression”. During the initial rifting stage， corresponding to Menli period， strong extension produced several isolated deep sags. During the intense rifting stage， corresponding to Podi period， basement experienced significant differential subsidence， leading to lake basin expansion and short-term lacustrine flooding. During the rift-depression transition stage， corresponding to Xiao’an period， the basin became interconnected and entered a relatively stable depositional stage， and the deep-lake reached its maximum scope. During the depression-subsidence stage， corresponding to Liulinhe period， tectonic activity tended to stabilize， and the lake basin gradually shrank and eventually disappeared. （3） Source rocks in the study area are mainly developed in the deep-lake black mud shale of Podi Formation and the deep to semi-deep lake gray-black mudstone of Xiao’an Formation. High-quality source rock samples account for 25% of the total， with Xiao’an Formation representing the principal source rock interval. In Wumu Sag， TOC values of Xiao’an Formation range from 0.29% to 31.10%， with an average of 2.06%， TOC values of Podi Formation range from 0.40% to 22.00%， with an average of 5.33%. The anomalously high TOC values or large fluctuations observed in some samples are related to outcrop preservation conditions and the development of coal streaks. （4） The study area mainly develops three types of hydrocarbon accumulation assemblages， including “self generation and self storage”， “lower generation and upper storage”， and locally “upper generation and lower storage”. Overall， it is characterized by near-source hydrocarbon supply and short-distance migration for reservoir formation， and the central structural belt represents the favorable exploration zone.

Key words: rift lacustrine basin, tectonic evolution, sedimentary filling, hydrocarbon accumulation model, source rock, hydrocarbon exploration potential, Xiao’an Formation, Paleogene, Sanmenxia Basin

中图分类号: 

  • TE121.3

图1

三门峡盆地构造单元及地震测线位置（a）（据文献[13]修改）和古近系岩性地层综合柱状图（b）"

图2

三门峡盆地地震剖面测线及构造地层解释（剖面位置见图1a）"

图3

三门峡盆地新生代构造演化剖面"

表1

三门峡盆地五亩和平陆凹陷古近系沉积特征及演化阶段对比"

层位 五亩凹陷 平陆凹陷 盆地演化
阶段
沉积相 物源供应 气候 主要岩性 沉积相 物源供应 气候 主要岩性
门里组 冲积扇 充足 干旱 砾岩、泥岩 冲积扇 充足 干旱 砾岩 初始断陷期
坡底组 扇三角洲、
冲积扇、湖泊		 充足—
较弱		 潮湿—
半干旱		 砾岩、粗砂岩、
泥岩		 湖泊、
冲积扇、		 较弱—充
足—较弱		 潮湿—
半干旱		 砾岩、页岩、
石膏		 强烈断陷期
小安组 湖泊、
三角洲		 较充足 潮湿—
干旱		 暗色泥岩、
灰岩、砾岩		 湖泊 欠充足 潮湿—
干旱		 灰色—红色泥岩、薄
层灰岩、网状石膏		 断-坳转换期
柳林河组 冲积扇 十分充足 半干旱 厚层砾岩、
少量红色泥岩		 辫状河 充足 半干旱 含砾粗砂岩为主、
灰绿色泥岩		 坳陷沉降期

图4

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷和平陆凹陷古近系门里组沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图5

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷古近系坡底组沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图6

三门峡盆地平陆凹陷沿黄公路剖面古近系坡底组沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图7

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷古近系小安组下部及中条山古生代碳酸盐岩沉积特征"

图8

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷五亩剖面古近系小安组上部及顶部沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图9

三门峡盆地豫峡地1井古近系小安组顶部（1 810~2 060 m，未钻穿）测井综合柱状图（据文献[15]修改）"

图10

三门峡盆地平陆凹陷古近系小安组沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图11

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷和平陆凹陷古近系柳林河组沉积特征（露头位置见图1a）"

图12

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷和平陆凹陷古近系岩性地层综合柱状图"

图13

三门峡盆地古近系沉积相平面演化特征"

图14

三门峡盆地古近系沉积模式"

图15

三门峡盆地五亩凹陷、平陆凹陷古近系小安组和坡底组TOC含量分布特征"

图16

三门峡盆地古近系成藏模式"

[1] 淡伟宁, 陈树光, 李志军, 等. 河套盆地油气勘探新领域及有利方向[J]. 石油学报, 2023, 44(12):2217-2230.
DAN Weining, CHEN Shuguang, LI Zhijun, et al. New fields and favorable directions for oil-gas exploration in Hetao Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2023, 44(12):2217-2230.
[2] 于兴河, 姜辉, 李胜利, 等. 中国东部中、新生代陆相断陷盆地沉积充填模式及其控制因素:以济阳坳陷东营凹陷为例[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(1):39-45.
YU Xinghe, JIANG Hui, LI Shengli, et al. Depositional filling models and controlling factors on Mesozoic and Cenozoic fault basins of terrestrial facies in eastern China:A case study of Dongying Sag of Jiyang Depression[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2007, 19(1):39-45.
[3] 刘震, 陈艳鹏, 赵阳, 等. 陆相断陷盆地油气藏形成控制因素及分布规律概述[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2007, 19(2):121-127.
LIU Zhen, CHEN Yanpeng, ZHAO Yang, et al. Distribution and controlling factors of hydrocarbon reservoirs in continental fault basins[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2007, 19(2):121-127.
[4] 刘池洋, 黄雷, 王建强, 等. 小型含油气盆地成因类型、特征与油气赋存[J]. 地球科学与环境学报, 2024, 46(4):427-453.
LIU Chiyang, HUANG Lei, WANG Jianqiang, et al. Genetic classification,characteristics and hydrocarbon occurrence of small-scale petroliferous basins[J]. Journal of Earth Sciences and Environment, 2024, 46(4):427-453.
[5] 杨占龙, 郝彬, 谭开俊, 等. 中国陆上中小盆地群发育特征与油气勘探方向[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(2):12-31.
YANG Zhanlong, HAO Bin, TAN Kaijun, et al. Geological features and hydrocarbon exploration directions of medium to small-scale basin group,onshore China[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2026, 38(2):12-31.
[6] 何发岐, 於文辉, 马超, 等. 三门峡断陷盆地及邻区深部结构及成因:来自深地震反射与大地电磁测深的证据[J]. 地质学报, 2024, 98(4):1088-1100.
HE Faqi, YU Wenhui, MA Chao, et al. Deep structure and genesis of Sanmenxia fault basin and its adjacent area:Evidence from deep seismic reflection and magnetotelluric sounding[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2024, 98(4):1088-1100.
[7] 南阳油田石油地质志编写组. 中国石油地质志(卷七)[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社,1993:337-347.
Petroleum Geology Editors of Nanyang Oilfield. Petroleum geo-logy of China (Vol.7)[M]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press,1993:337-347.
[8] 李清瑶, 高永进, 陈夷, 等. 北方重要盆地油气资源战略选区调查工作进展[J]. 中国地质调查, 2024, 11(1):1-8.
LI Qingyao, GAO Yongjin, CHEN Yi, et al. Progress in the strategic selection investigation of oil and gas resources in northern important basins[J]. Geological Survey of China, 2024, 11(1):1-8.
[9] 中国地质调查局油气资源调查中心. 三门峡盆地油气资源调查评价报告[R]. 北京: 中国地质调查局, 2024.
Oil and Gas Survey Center,China Geological Survey. Investiga-tion and assessment report on oil and gas resources in Sanmenxia Basin[R]. Beijing: China Geological Survey, 2024.
[10] 赵洪波, 张龙, 沈立娜, 等. 三门峡盆地油气调查优快钻井技术[J]. 钻探工程, 2024, 51(6):111-118.
ZHAO Hongbo, ZHANG Long, SHEN Lina, et al. Efficient drilling technology for oil and gas survey in Sanmenxia Basin[J]. Drilling Engineering, 2024, 51(6):111-118.
[11] 王丹丹, 刘旭锋, 张交东, 等. 河南三门峡盆地古近系构造沉积特征及油气勘探潜力[J]. 中国地质调查, 2025, 12(1):17-28.
WANG Dandan, LIU Xufeng, ZHANG Jiaodong, et al. Structural sedimentary characteristics and oil & gas exploration potentials of Paleogene System in Sanmenxia basin of Henan province[J]. Geological Survey of China, 2025, 12(1):17-28.
[12] 王丹丹, 张交东, 刘旭锋, 等. 河南三门峡盆地构造格架及其油气资源远景分析[J]. 中国地质, 2024, 51(3):719-727.
WANG Dandan, ZHANG Jiaodong, LIU Xufeng, et al. Structural framework of Sanmenxia Basin,Henan province and its oil and gas resources potential analysis[J]. Geology in China, 2024, 51(3):719-727.
[13] 张交东, 刘旭锋, 白忠凯, 等. 三门峡盆地豫峡地1井油气勘探突破及意义[J]. 石油学报, 2025, 46(3):483-498.
ZHANG Jiaodong, LIU Xufeng, BAI Zhongkai, et al. Oil-gas exploration breakthrough and significance of Well Yuxiadi 1 in Sanmenxia Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2025, 46(3):483-498.
[14] 张交东, 周新桂, 杨超, 等. 三门峡盆地地质矿产勘查历程和油气发现启示[J]. 中国地质调查, 2025, 12(1):1-16.
ZHANG Jiaodong, ZHOU Xingui, YANG Chao, et al. Exploration history of geological mineral resources in Sanmenxia basin and implications from oil and gas discovery[J]. Geological Survey of China, 2025, 12(1):1-16.
[15] 王景宣. 三门峡灵宝金矿区域成矿及找矿方向的研究[J]. 河南科技, 2013, 32(5):28.
WANG Jingxuan. Study on the regional mineralization and pro-specting direction of Lingbao gold deposit,Sanmenxia area[J]. Journal of Henan Science and Technology, 2013, 32(5):28.
[16] 贾海民. 河南省三门峡市灵宝市地质与矿产调查研究[J]. 世界有色金属, 2016 (17):51-52.
JIA Haimin. Sanmenxia city in Henan Lingbao city geology and mineral investigation[J]. World Nonferrous Metal, 2016(17):51-52.
[17] 刘瑾, 陈兴强, 王平, 等. 渭河-三门峡盆地三门组沉积充填特征、物源区及其构造意义[J]. 地球科学, 2020, 45(7):2673-2683.
LIU Jin, CHEN Xingqiang, WANG Ping, et al. Sedimentary characteristics,provenance and tectonic significance of the Sanmen Formation in Weihe-Sanmenxia Basin[J]. Earth Science, 2020, 45(7):2673-2683.
[18] 冯兴祥. 三门峡盆地的新构造运动与地震活动[J]. 河南师大学报(自然科学版), 1982, 8(1):49-55.
FENG Xingxiang. Neotectonics movement and earthquake activity in Sanmenxia basin[J]. Journal of Henan Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 1982, 8(1):49-55.
[19] 朱大岗, 孟宪刚, 邵兆刚, 等. 山西平陆地区古近纪河湖相地层的重新厘定与划分[J]. 中国地质, 2008, 35(4):656-669.
ZHU Dagang, MENG Xiangang, SHAO Zhaogang, et al. Revision and classification of Paleogene fluvial-lacustrine strata in the Pinglu area,Shanxi[J]. Geology in China, 2008, 35(4):656-669.
[20] SHI Wei, CHEN Long, CHEN Xingqiang, et al. The Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the faulted basins in the northern margin of the Eastern Qinling Mountains,Central China:Constraints from fault kinematic analysis[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2019, 173:204-224.
[21] 李想, 付磊, 魏璞, 等. 沉积古地貌恢复及古地貌对沉积体系的控制作用:以准噶尔盆地石西地区三叠系百口泉组为例[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(2):38-48.
LI Xiang, FU Lei, WEI Pu, et al. Restoration of sedimentary paleogeography and its control on sedimentary system:A case study of the Triassic Baikouquan Formation in Shixi area of Junggar Basin[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2025, 37(2):38-48.
[22] 张荣强. 平衡剖面技术在莱州湾地区及周围盆地构造分析中的应用[D]. 北京: 中国地质科学院, 2005.
ZHANG Rongqiang. Application of balanced cross-sections about basin structural analysis in Laizhouwan area[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, 2005.
[23] 薄尚尚, 田继先, 李曜良, 等. 川东北地区上三叠统须家河组物源分析[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2024, 36(2):99-112.
BO Shangshang, TIAN Jixian, LI Yaoliang, et al. Provenance analysis of Upper Triassic Xujiahe Formation in northeastern Sichuan Basin[J]. Lithologic Reservoirs, 2024, 36(2):99-112.
[24] 朱筱敏, 陈贺贺, 葛家旺, 等. 陆相断陷湖盆层序构型与砂体发育分布特征[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2022, 43(4):746-762.
ZHU Xiaomin, CHEN Hehe, GE Jiawang, et al. Characterization of sequence architectures and sandbody distribution in continental rift basins[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2022, 43(4):746-762.
[25] 赵贤正, 柳广弟, 金凤鸣, 等. 小型断陷湖盆有效烃源岩分布特征与分布模式:以二连盆地下白垩统为例[J]. 石油学报, 2015, 36(6):641-652.
ZHAO Xianzheng, LIU Guangdi, JIN Fengming, et al. Distribution features and pattern of effective source rock in small faulted lacustrine basin:A case study of the Lower Cretaceous in Erlian Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2015, 36(6):641-652.
[26] 王民, 张宇辰, 邓仔晓, 等. 微波辐射加热对页岩有机质生烃和化学结构的影响机制:与常规加热的对比[J]. 石油学报, 2024, 45(10):1492-1506.
WANG Min, ZHANG Yuchen, DENG Zaixiao, et al. Influence mechanism of microwave irradiation heating on hydrocarbon generation and chemical structure of shale organic matter:A comparison with conventional heating[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2024, 45(10):1492-1506.
[27] 国家能源局. 烃源岩地球化学评价方法:SY/T5735—2019[S]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2019.
National Energy Administration. Geochemicalmethodforsourcerockevaluation:SY/T5735—2019[S]. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2019.
[1] 王彦君, 卞保力, 向辉, 张永军, 孙永兴, 许学龙, 马德龙, 李赟. 准噶尔盆地阜康断裂带周缘二叠纪原型盆地重建及油气勘探潜力[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(4): 126-136.
[2] 李洪玺, 李柱正, 曹永洪, 赵磊, 付宇, 邢超超, 甯濛. 川西北汉南古陆周缘震旦系陡山沱组沉积特征及油气地质意义[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(4): 148-156.
[3] 陈旋, 郝彬, 苟红光, 张晶, 徐雄飞, 杨占龙, 胡军, 何昌松. 吐哈盆地北缘博格达山前二叠系地层划分及其勘探意义[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(3): 24-37.
[4] 蒋龙, 程紫燕, 孙红霞, 刘祖鹏, 李忠新, 田选华, 彭琳雄, 朱丽. 渤海湾盆地渤南洼陷古近系沙三下亚段页岩储层特征及可动孔喉下限[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(3): 54-66.
[5] 赵野, 许鹏, 胡贺伟, 王航, 杨娇娇. 渤海湾盆地盆缘庙西南地区构造特征及控藏作用[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(2): 145-152.
[6] 熊钰, 张维岑, 李亚梅, 耿文爽, 吴道铭, 母丹, 刘通. 高倾角油藏水转气重力驱油效率及界面稳定性预测方法——以渤海湾盆地柳赞地区古近系沙河街组油藏为例[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(2): 178-193.
[7] 常少英, 董科良, 曾溅辉, 杨冀宁, 王孟修, 刘玲利. 塔里木盆地富满油田走滑断裂演化特征及其对油气运聚的影响[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2026, 38(2): 44-55.
[8] 孙远锋, 曹爱锋, 周勇, 高晨曦, 王柯. 渤海湾盆地临南洼陷古近系沙四上亚段沉积演化特征及古地貌控砂模式[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(6): 119-130.
[9] 李春阳, 王勃力, 颜晓, 李可赛, 邓虎成, 苏锦义, 吴亚军, 叶泰然. 川东北元坝地区三叠系须家河组四段致密储层现今地应力测井评价[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(6): 151-161.
[10] 赵宝银, 杨晓利, 徐颖新, 孟令箭, 崔紫瑄, 王方鲁, 刘剑伦, 于福生. 渤海湾盆地南堡凹陷新生代构造演化特征及控藏作用[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(5): 59-69.
[11] 刘冠伯, 陈世加, 李世宏, 邹阳, 李勇. 玛湖凹陷玛中构造带二叠系风城组烃源岩生气潜力及成藏条件[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(5): 83-96.
[12] 严宇洋, 熊连桥, 何幼斌, 陈莹, 赵仲祥, 刘圣乾, 罗进雄, 冯斌. 珠江口盆地惠州凹陷古近纪源-汇系统及其控储作用[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(5): 166-177.
[13] 郑欣, 江东辉, 李昆, 庄建建, 张传运, 杨超, 袁忠鹏, 王嘉琪. 断裂-地貌-沉积坡折控砂模式及油气勘探意义——以东海盆地西湖凹陷保俶斜坡带北段为例[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(4): 95-104.
[14] 李振明, 贾存善, 王斌, 宋振响, 邱岐, 王继远, 徐陈杰, 崔钰瑶. 准噶尔盆地东部石钱滩凹陷石炭系石钱滩组烃源岩特征及资源潜力[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(4): 115-126.
[15] 陈家旭, 陈长伟, 刘国全, 邹磊落, 董晓伟, 刘川, 杨飞, 钟巍. 渤海湾盆地沧东凹陷深凹区古近系孔二段原油充注特征及成藏模式[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2025, 37(4): 136-146.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!

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