渤海盆地锦州25-1区块中部泥岩地层井壁失稳机理及钻井液对策

耿立军; 刘峰; 冮鹏; 董新柔; 刘伟; 李博佳

doi:10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2025.01.006

渤海盆地锦州25-1区块中部泥岩地层井壁失稳机理及钻井液对策

doi: 10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2025.01.006

1.
中海石油(中国)有限公司天津分公司, 天津300452
2.
中海油能源发展股份有限公司, 天津300452
3.
中国石油大学(北京)油气资源与探测国家重点实验室, 北京102249

详细信息

作者简介:
耿立军，高级工程师，硕士，现在主要从事钻完井研究工作。电话：13342182233；E-mail：1187638228@qq.com

中图分类号: TE254.3
计量
- 文章访问数: 128
- HTML全文浏览量: 54
- PDF下载量: 51
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-08-04
- 修回日期: 2024-10-18
- 刊出日期: 2025-02-01

Mechanisms of Borehole Wall Destabilization in Drilling Shale Formations in the Central Part of Block Jinzhou-25-1 in Bohai Basin and Drilling Fluid Countermeasures

1.
Tianjin Branch of CNOOC (China) Limited, Tianjin 300452
2.
Cnooc Energy Development Co., LTD., Tianjin 300452
3.
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Exploration, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249

摘要

摘要: 渤海盆地锦州25-1区块中部东营组泥页岩地层井壁失稳状况频发。根据泥页岩组构、理化性质分析及力学特性测试结果，发现泥页岩水化膨胀所导致的强度弱化及易沿层理面的剪切滑移是该层位主要失稳机理。基于泥页岩强度弱化及沿层理面滑移特性，从基本性能、封堵性、抑制性、维持力学强度等角度对水基PEM及合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系进行对比评价优化。研究结果表明，合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系在滚动回收率、线性膨胀率、高温高压滤失量及维持泥页岩力学强度等方面均具有明显优势，同时配合（2%～2.5%）纳米材料乳胶封堵剂PF-NSEAL能够对泥页岩微裂缝进行有效封堵。现场应用表明，优化后的合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系在两口大位移井的应用过程中起到了大幅降低复杂情况，提效43.7%的良好应用效果，为解决锦州25-1区块井壁失稳问题提供了技术支撑。
- 锦州25-1区块 /
- 泥页岩 /
- 井壁失稳 /
- 钻井液 /
- 封堵性
Abstract: Well drilling in the central part of the block Jinzhou-25-1 in Bohai basin has frequently encountered borehole wall destabilization when drilling the Dongying formation shales. Based on the analyses of the components and structure of the shales as well as the measurement of their mechanical properties, it was found that the borehole wall destabilizes mainly in two mechanisms, first is the weakening of the shales caused by hydration and swelling, second is the shearing slip of the formations along the bedding planes. Based on this understanding, a water based drilling fluid PEM and a synthetic based drilling fluid BIODRILL S were compared for their performance from several aspects such as basic properties, plugging capacity, inhibitive capacity and the ability to maintain mechanical strength of a formation etc. It was found that the BIODRILL S drilling fluid has several advantages over the PEM drilling fluid, such as high percentage of shale cuttings recovery in hot rolling test, lower linear expansion rate, lower high temperature high pressure filtration rate as well as better performance in maintaining the mechanical strength of the shale formations. A nano-latex plugging agent PF-NSEAL was added into the BIODRILL S drilling fluid at concentrations between 2% and 2.5%, rendering it better microfracture plugging performance. In field operation, the optimized BIODRILL S drilling fluid was used to drill two extended reach wells, the number of downhole problems was greatly reduced, and the drilling rate was increased by 43.7%. The use of the optimized BIODRILL S synthetic based drilling fluid has provided a technical support for solving the borehole wall destabilization problem encountered in block Jinzhou-25-1.
- Block Jinzhou-25-1 /
- Mud shale /
- Borehole wall destabilization /
- Drilling fluid /
- Plugging property

HTML全文

图 1 东营组地层返排岩屑图及扫描电镜结果

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 无浸泡、水基PEM钻井液浸泡后东营组泥岩单轴、三轴抗压强度实验

注：1^#、2^#配方无浸泡，3^#、4^#配方水基PEM钻井液浸泡。

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 合成基BIODRILL S体系浸泡后单三轴抗压强度应力应变曲线

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 不同PF-NSEAL用量钻井液的滤失量

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 封堵效果电镜观察图

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 东营组全岩矿物组分测试结果

样品	垂深/ m	矿物含量/%
样品	垂深/ m	石英	钾长石	斜长石	方解石	白云石	菱铁矿	其他	黏土矿物
1	1450	18.0	2.9	3.4	23.9			0.4	51.4
2	1450	20.6	2.7	3.7	5.4			10.7	56.9
3	1481	14.6	2.2	2.8	8.3		12.3	15.1	44.7
4	1452	19.9	3.5	4.3	8.1	2.9		2.8	58.5
5	1450	23.2	3.6	5.1	7.7			2.6	57.8

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 东营组黏土矿物组分测试结果

样品	垂深/ m	黏土矿物相对含量/%							混层比/%
样品	垂深/ m	S	I/S	It	Kao	C	C/S	Pa	I/S	C/S
1	1450		83	13	4				75
2	1450		79	15	6				55
3	1481		88	8	4				60
4	1452		76	19	5				50
5	1450		83	11	6				55

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 东营组泥岩水基PEM钻井液浸泡前后单三轴抗压强度测试

岩心	长度/ mm	直径/ mm	m/ g	钻井液	围压/ MPa	p/ MPa	杨氏模量/ GPa	泊松比
1^#	40.93	25.33	43.33	无浸泡	0	26.594	8.252	0.255
2^#	47.78	25.15	50.04	无浸泡	20	61.861	2.135	0.152
3^#	40.47	25.12	48.10	1^#	0	18.460	4.657	0.251
4^#	40.33	24.92	47.99	1^#	20	32.540	5.214	0.214
注：1^#为现场所用水基PEM钻井液体系。

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 天然泥岩的分类及所属类别

分类	分类依据	泥岩分类	主要理化性质		主要力学特征			地层类型
分类	黏土矿物	泥岩分类	膨胀率/%	回收率/%	UCS/MPa	泊松比	E/GPa	地层类型
一类	S为主，S>50%	软泥页岩	>20	<30	<30	>0.30	1.3～6.0	完整地层
二类	S/I、I为主S/I+I>70%	硬脆性泥页岩	12～22	30-60	20～60	0.30～0.35	6.0～20.0	完整地层
三类	I、I/S为主，I/S+I>60%		7～14	60～90	50～120	0.15～0.35	10.0～33.0	裂缝层理组合地层
四类	I为主，I>70%		<7	>90	100～160	<0.20	>25.0	裂缝层理组合地层

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 不同温度老化后合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系性能评价结果

T_老化/℃	ρ/（g·cm⁻³）	T/℃	$ {\varphi _6}/{\varphi _3} $	Gel/（Pa/Pa）	AV/mPa·s	PV/mPa·s	YP/Pa	ES/V	FL_HTHP（90℃）/mL
40	1.40	15	13/12	9.0/15.5	38	26	12	674	2.0
40	1.40	50	13/12	8.0/11.0	25	15	10	802	2.0
60	1.40	15	12/11	7.0/11.5	37	26	11	711	2.2
60	1.40	50	13/12	7.0/9.0	25	15	10	795	2.2
90	1.40	15	12/11	7.0/11.5	37	26	11	702	2.4
90	1.40	50	12/11	7.0/9.0	25	15	10	763	2.4

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 两种钻井液性能评价实验结果对比

钻井液配方	ρ/ g·cm⁻³	$ {\varphi _6}/{\varphi _3} $	Gel/ Pa/Pa	PV/ mPa·s	YP/ Pa	ES/ V	FL_HTHP 90℃/mL
2^#	1.45	14/13	7.0/13.0	22	10.5	850	2.0
	1.48	13/12	7.0/13.0	20	10.0	850	2.0
	1.50	13/12	6.0/13.0	21	10.0	830	2.0
1^#	1.40	10/8	3.5/5.0	25	14.0		2.8
1^#	1.40	10/9	3.5/5.0	17	13.5		3.6
注：1^#为现场所用水基PEM钻井液体系，2^#为未优化合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系；测试温度为65℃。

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系浸泡后岩心单三轴抗压强度测试结果

岩心编号	长度/mm	直径/mm	质量/g	围压/MPa	抗压强度/MPa	杨氏模量/GPa	泊松比
5^#	45.12	25.42	51.23	0	23.115	3.82	0.245
6^#	43.92	25.17	50.18	20	45.852	4.71	0.309

下载: 导出CSV

表 8 合成基BIODRILL S钻井液添加不同用量PF-NSEAL老化后性能对比结果

PF-NSEAL/%	$ {\varphi _{600}}/{\varphi _{300}} $	$ {\varphi _{200}}/{\varphi _{100}} $	$ {\varphi _6}/{\varphi _3} $	Gel/（Pa/Pa）	ES/V	FL_HTHP/mL
0	42/25	15/10	5/5	2.5/3.5	850	3.0
1	42/25	18/12	6/5	3.0/4.0	840	2.6
2	38/24	19/13	6/5	3.0/4.5	835	2.4
3	40/24	18/12	6/5	3.0/4.5	930	2.8
注：老化条件为60℃、16 h；高温高压滤失量的条件为90℃。

下载: 导出CSV

表 9 不同钻井液体系实际钻井参数对比

钻井液体系	套管摩阻系数	裸眼摩阻系数	岩屑浓度/%	平均工期对比/d
1^#	0.21	0.26	4.59	14.53
3^#	0.15	0.19	1.40	8.18
注：1^#为现场所用水基PEM钻井液体系，3^#为优化后合成基BIODRILL S钻井液体系。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(18)

[1]	FAIRHURST C. Measurement of in-situ rock stresses. With particular reference to hydraulic fracturing[J]. Rock Mech, 1964, 2:7056203.
[2]	黄荣樽, 白家祉, 周煜辉. 斜井井壁张性裂纹的位置及走向与井眼压力的关系[J]. 石油钻采工艺,1993,15(5):7-11. HUANG Rongzun, BAI Jiazhi, ZHOU Yuhui. Relationship between location and strike of wall tension crack and borehole pressure[J]. Oil Drilling & Production Technology, 1993, 15(5):7-11.
[3]	邓金根, 郭东旭, 周建良, 等. 泥页岩井壁应力的力学-化学耦合计算模式及数值求解方法[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2003,22(z1):2250-2253. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2003.z1.027 DENG Jingen, GUO Dongxu, ZHOU Jianliang, et al. Mechanics-chemistry coupling calculation model of borehole stress in shale formation and its numerical solving method[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2003, 22(z1):2250-2253. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2003.z1.027
[4]	黄荣樽, 陈勉, 邓金根, 等. 泥页岩井壁稳定力学与化学的耦合研究[J]. 钻井液与完井液, 1995, 12(3): 18-24, 28. HUANG Rongzun, CHEN Mian, DENG Jingen, et al. Coupling study of wellbore stability mechanics and chemistry of mud shale[J]. Drilling Fluid & Completion Fluid, 1995, 12(3): 15-21, 25.
[5]	王萍, 屈展. 基于核磁共振的脆硬性泥页岩水化损伤演化研究[J]. 岩土力学,2015,36(3):687-693. WANG Ping, QU Zhan. NMR technology based hydration damage evolution of hard brittle shale[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2015, 36(3):687-693.
[6]	狄明利, 赵远远, 由福昌, 等. 西江区块古近系地层井壁失稳机理分析及钻井液体系优化[J]. 中国海上油气,2020,32(1):134-141. DI Mingli, ZHAO Yuanyuan, YOU Fuchang, et al. Analysis on wellbore instability mechanisms and drilling fluid system optimization for the Paleogene strata in Xijiang block[J]. China Offshore Oil and Gas, 2020, 32(1):134-141.
[7]	崔治军. 锦州25-1油田大位移井井眼净化技术研究[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2017. CUI Zhijun. Study on wellbore purification technology of large displacement well in JZ25-1 oilfield[D]. Beijing: China University of Petroleum(Beijing), 2017.
[8]	徐四龙, 余维初, 张颖. 泥页岩井壁稳定的力学与化学耦合(协同)作用研究进展[J]. 石油天然气学报,2014,36(1):151-153. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-9752.2014.01.032 XU Silong, YU Weichu, ZHANG Ying. Research progress of mechanical and chemical coupling (synergistic) effects on wellbore stability of mud shale[J]. Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2014, 36(1):151-153. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-9752.2014.01.032
[9]	祝春荣, 韦阿娟, 沈东义. 辽东湾地区锦州25-1油田油气成藏特点和运聚模拟研究[J]. 海洋石油,2011,31(3):17-22. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-2336.2011.03.017 ZHU Chunrong, WEI Ajuan, SHEN Dongyi. Pooling characteristics and hydrocarbon migration and accumulation modeling research in JZ25 - 1 oilfield in Liaodongwan area[J]. Offshore Oil, 2011, 31(3):17-22. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-2336.2011.03.017
[10]	叶四桥, 陈雨爽, 曾彬, 等. 岩层厚度对砂泥岩水平互层岩体力学特性的影响[J]. 勘察科学技术,2021(1):1-5,15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3946.2021.01.002 YE Siqiao, CHEN Yushuang, ZENG Bin, et al. Influence of rock thickness on mechanical characteristics of horizontal interbedded of sandstone and mudstone[J]. Site Investigation Science and Technology, 2021(1):1-5,15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3946.2021.01.002
[11]	张矿生, 欧阳勇, 谢江锋, 等. 天环坳陷页岩气井井壁失稳机理及防塌钻井液技术研究与应用[J]. 科学技术与工程,2022,22(29):12791-12799. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2022.29.011 ZHANG Kuangsheng, OU YANG Yong, XIE Jiangfeng, et al. Research and application of wellbore instability mechanism and anti-sloughing drilling fluid technology for shale gas wells in Tianhuan depression[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2022, 22(29):12791-12799. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2022.29.011
[12]	蔚宝华, 闫传梁, 邓金根, 等. 锦州25-1油田井壁稳定问题[J]. 科技导报,2013,31(14):41-45. doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.14.006 YU Baohua, YAN Chuanliang, DENG Jingen, et al. Wellbore stability problem of Jinzhou 25-1 oil field[J]. Science & Technology Review, 2013, 31(14):41-45. doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.14.006
[13]	金军斌, 张杜杰, 李大奇, 等. 顺北油气田深部破碎性地层井壁失稳机理及对策研究[J]. 钻采工艺,2023,46(1):42-49. doi: 10.3969/J.ISSN.1006-768X.2023.01.07 JIN Junbin, ZHANG Dujie, LI Daqi, et al. Study on the wellbore instability mechanisms and drilling fluid countermeasures of deep fractured formation in Shunbei oil and gas field[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2023, 46(1):42-49. doi: 10.3969/J.ISSN.1006-768X.2023.01.07
[14]	刘晓东, 董昆, 沈哲. 屏蔽暂堵型储层保护钻开液在曹妃甸的应用[J]. 天津科技,2017,44(10):83-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8945.2017.10.022 LIU Xiaodong, DONG Kun, SHEN Zhe. Application of shielding temporary-bridge reservoir protection drilling fluid in CFD oilfield[J]. Tianjin Science & Technology, 2017, 44(10):83-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8945.2017.10.022
[15]	张雪梅, 张贵磊, 严海源, 等. 合成基钻井液固相絮凝分离评价及应用[J]. 当代化工,2023,52(3):730-734. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-0460.2023.03.046 ZHANG Xuemei, ZHANG Guilei, YAN Haiyuan, et al. Evaluation and application of solid phase flocculation separation of synthetic base drilling fluid[J]. Contemporary Chemical Industry, 2023, 52(3):730-734. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-0460.2023.03.046
[16]	彭三兵, 李斌, 韩东东, 等. BIODRILL S合成基钻井液在垦利区块首次应用[J]. 钻井液与完井液,2024,41(1):60-67. doi: 10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2024.01.006 PENG Sanbing, LI Bin, HAN Dongdong, et al. First application of the synthetic-Based drilling fluid BIODRILL S in block Kenli of Bohai oilfield[J]. Drilling Fluid & Completion Fluid, 2024, 41(1):60-67. doi: 10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2024.01.006
[17]	侯杰, 李浩东, 于兴东, 等. 松辽盆地陆相致密油井壁失稳机理及钻井液对策[J]. 钻井液与完井液,2021,38(5):598-604. doi: 10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2021.05.009 HOU Jie, LI Haodong, YU Xingdong, et al. Mechanisms of borehole wall instability of terrestrial tight oil wells in Songliao basin and drilling fluid countermeasures[J]. Drilling Fluid & Completion Fluid, 2021, 38(5):598-604. doi: 10.12358/j.issn.1001-5620.2021.05.009
[18]	王晨, 杨超, 贾未鸣, 等. 聚合物微球制备与复合体系封堵性能研究[J]. 当代化工,2023,52(4):858-861,866. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-0460.2023.04.021 WANG Chen, YANG Chao, JIA Weiming, et al. Preparation of polymer microspheres and plugging performance of microspheres based composite system[J]. Contemporary Chemical Industry, 2023, 52(4):858-861,866. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-0460.2023.04.021