﻿ M气田系统试井解释方法研究 Method for Systematic Well-Test Interpretation in M Gas Field

Journal of Oil and Gas Technology
Vol.38 No.04(2016), Article ID:19227,7 pages
10.12677/JOGT.2016.384039

Method for Systematic Well-Test Interpretation in M Gas Field

Tao Zhang1, Yan Chen2, Jun Li3, Peng Chen2, Ruozhu Li4, Lei Zhang3, Yanqiu Wang4, Yu Liu4

1School of Information and Mathematics, Yangtze University, Jingzhou Hubei

2Key Laboratory of Exploration Technologies for Oil and Gas Resources (Yangtze University), Ministry of Education, Wuhan Hubei

3Research Institute of Exploration and Development, Tarim Oilfiled, Korle Xinjiang

4Tarim Oilfiled Company, PetroChina, Korle Xinjiang

Received: Aug. 1st, 2016; accepted: Oct. 7th, 2016; published: Dec. 15th, 2016

ABSTRACT

Influenced by the starting pressure gradient in low permeability reservoirs, there existed many problems in well test data obtained with conventional productivity equation interpreting system. By taking M Gas Field for example, starting from percolation theory, a productivity equation for fractured vertical wells considering the starting pressure gradient was established. By comparing the difference between the equation and the productivity equation of vertical well in conventional gas reservoir fracturing, a modified equation is obtained for it by modifying the binomial expression productivity equation, the correct equation was used for interpreting the tested data. The results from the modified binomial expression productivity equation and the binomial expression deliverability equation with the exponential productivity equation are compared, and combined with actual production performance, rationality of calculating the open flow capacity with the method is presented. The result provides reference for the development of M Gas Field.

Keywords:M Gas Field, Systematic Well Test, Modified Binomial Productivity, Open Flow Capacity

M气田系统试井解释方法研究

1长江大学信息与数学学院，湖北 荆州

2油气资源与勘探技术教育部重点实验室(长江大学)，湖北 武汉

3中石油塔里木油田分公司勘探开发研究院，新疆 库尔勒

4中石油塔里木油田分公司，新疆 库尔勒

1. 引言

M气田位于长岭凹陷南部，属于典型的低孔特低渗凝析气田 [1] 。由于储层内孔隙和渗透率低，气体在储层内流动时存在一定的启动压力梯度 [2] [3] [4] 。系统试井是一种气藏生产时间中广泛采用的产能试井方法，其测试数据主要采用二项式产能方程法和指数式产能方程法进行解释。采用二项式产能方程法和指数式产能方程法进行解释时，由于未考虑启动压力梯度的影响，造成了解释出的无阻流量偏大，或产能曲线为负值 [5] [6] 。笔者针对M气田采用直井压裂开发的实际，推导了考虑启动压力梯度的压裂直井产能方程；然后利用压裂直井产能方程变形得到了二项式产能方程的修正方程，并利用得到的产能方程对测试数据进行了解释；最后将修正二项式产能方程法、二项式产能方程法和指数式产能方程法解释的结果进行了对比，并结合实际生产动态说明了该方法计算无阻流量的合理性。

2. 压裂直井产能方程

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

3. 修正二项式产能方程

(5)

(6)

(7)

4. 实例应用

Table 1. Systematical test result data in Well C1

Table 2. C1 Well system test interpretation result data sheet

Figure 1. Log-log curve of well pressure recovery in Well C1

Figure 2. Modified binomial productivity equation curve

Figure 3. The binomial productivity equation curve

Figure 4. Exponential productivity equation curve

Figure 5. Production performance curve in Well C1

5. 结论

1) 从渗流理论出发，推导了考虑启动压力梯度时低渗透储层压裂气井的产能方程，并建立了修正二项式产能方程。

2) 利用比修正二项式产能方程法、二项式产能方程法和指数式产能方程法对C1井进行了试井解释，发现利用二项式产能方程法和指数式产能方程法解释结果偏高。

3) 根据系统试井解释结果和实际生产动态特征，修正二项式产能方程计算的该井无阻流量结果比较合适，其大小为14.4 × 104 m3/d。

Method for Systematic Well-Test Interpretation in M Gas Field[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2016, 38(04): 73-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.12677/JOGT.2016.384039

1. 1. 张东清. 龙凤山气田北209井钻井提速技术[J]. 石油钻探技术, 2016, 44(4): 22-26.

2. 2. 冯文光. 非达西低速渗流的研究现状与进展[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 1986, 13(4): 76-80.

3. 3. 郭肖, 伍勇. 启动压力梯度和应力敏感效应对低渗透气藏水平井产能的影响[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2007, 28(4): 539-543.

4. 4. 刘启国, 王瑞, 李邢, 等. 考虑启动压力梯度和高速非达西效应的低渗透气藏水平井产能[J]. 油气田地质与采收率, 2010, 17(5): 53-56.

5. 5. 王富平, 黄全华, 孙雷, 等. 低渗透气藏气井一点法产能预测公式[J]. 新疆石油地质, 2010, 31(6): 651-533.

6. 6. 王卫红, 沈平平, 马新华, 等. 低渗透气藏气井产能试井资料分析方法研究[J]. 天然气业, 2005, 25(11): 76-78.

7. 7. 刘方玉, 马华丽, 蒋凯军, 等. 压裂后气井的产能评价方法分析[J]. 油气井测试, 2010, 19(5): 35-38.