SChinaSea 2014 Proof JMPG Revised

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/269931229
Change of Deltaic Depositional Environment and Impacts on Reservoir

Properties, Ya13-1 Gas Field, South China Sea, Marine & Petroleum Geology
Article in Marine and Petroleum Geology · December 2014
CITATIONS READS
0 987
1 author:
Yuan Zhe Ma
Schlumberger Limited
182 PUBLICATIONS 1,495 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Yuan Zhe Ma on 03 March 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Our reference: JMPG 1985 P-authorquery-v9
AUTHOR QUERY FORM
Journal: JMPG Please e-mail or fax your responses and any corrections to:
E-mail: corrections.eseo@elsevier.tnq.co.in
Article Number: 1985 Fax: +31 2048 52789
Dear Author,
Please check your proof carefully and mark all corrections at the appropriate place in the proof (e.g., by using on-screen
annotation in the PDF file) or compile them in a separate list. Note: if you opt to annotate the file with software other than
Adobe Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF file. To ensure fast publication of your paper please
return your corrections within 48 hours.
For correction or revision of any artwork, please consult http://www.elsevier.com/artworkinstructions.
Any queries or remarks that have arisen during the processing of your manuscript are listed below and highlighted by flags in
the proof.
Location Query / Remark: Click on the Q link to find the query’s location in text
in article Please insert your reply or correction at the corresponding line in the proof
Q1 “Highlights” are not provided in the correct format. Please correct the format based on the following
specifications: “Highlights” should consist of 3 to 5 bullet points. Each point should have a maximum of
“125” characters including spaces.
Q2 Reference “Fisher et al., 1969” is cited in the text but not provided in the reference list. Please provide it in
the reference list or delete the citations from the text.
Q3 The citations “Chen, 1993; Reynolds, 1998; Miall, 1978” have been changed to match the author name/date
in the reference list. Please check.
Q4 Please note that part labels H and I have been mentioned in the citation of Figure 6, but the corresponding
part labels are missing in the art work. Kindly check.
Q5 Please check the table legends in Tables 3 and 5.
Q6 Please check the layout of Table 8.
Q7 Please note that part labels C and D of Figure 1 have been mentioned in the captions of Figures 2 and 4, but
the corresponding part labels are missing in the art work of Figure 1. Kindly check.
Q8 Please note that part label D has been mentioned in the caption of Figure 3, but the corresponding part label
is missing in the art work of Figure 3. Kindly check.
Q9 Please check the caption of Figure 11.
Q10 Uncited reference: This section comprises reference that occurs in the reference list but not in the body of
the text. Please position the reference in the text or, alternatively, delete it.
Q11 Please confirm that given names and surnames have been identified correctly.
(continued on next page)

,
Please check this box or indicate
your approval if you have no
corrections to make to the PDF file
Thank you for your assistance.

JMPG1985_grabs ■ 3 September 2014 ■ 1/1
Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1
5
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 6
7
8
Marine and Petroleum Geology 9
10
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpetgeo 11
12
13
14
15
1 16
2 17
3 Highlights
4
We describe a delta deposition that evolved from river-dominated into tide-dominated environment in the South China Sea.
The change in the deltaic depositional environment leads to significant changes in depositional facies and spatial distribution of rock
properties.
At the early stage, fluvial influences prevailed, resulting in a fluvial-dominated delta plain and deposition of many lingual-mouth sand
bars in the delta front.
At the late stage, tide-dominated delta fronts were developed extensively and finger sand bars deposited abundantly in the delta front
as a result of the tidal and wave influences. Q1
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.06.003
0264-8172/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article in press as: Li, S., et al., Change of deltaic depositional environment and its impacts on reservoir propertiesdA braided
delta in South China Sea, Marine and Petroleum Geology (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.06.003
JMPG1985_proof ■ 3 September 2014 ■ 1/16
Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16
55
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect 56
57
58
Marine and Petroleum Geology 59
60
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpetgeo 61
62
63
Research paper 64
65
1 Change of deltaic depositional environment and its impacts on 66
2 67
3 reservoir propertiesdA braided delta in South China Sea 68
4 69
5 Q11 Shengli Li a, Y. Zee Ma b, *, Xinghe Yu a, Ping Jiang c, Mao Li c, Maowen Li c 70
6 a 71
The Key Laboratory of Marine Reservoir Evolution and Hydrocarbon Accumulation Mechanism, School of Energy Resources, China University of
7 72
Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China
8 b
Schlumberger, Denver, CO 80202, USA 73
9 c
Zhanjiang Division of CNOOC Ltd, Zhanjiang 524057, China 74
10 75
11 76
12 a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t 77
13 78
14 Article history: Depositional environment can change through geological time. This paper describes a delta that evolved 79
15 Received 23 September 2013 from river-dominated into tide-dominated. The delta is located in the Ya13-1 field of the South China Sea.
Accepted 5 June 2014
80
16 Understanding the change that occurred in the deltaic setting is important because the change in
Available online xxx 81
17 depositional environments led to changes in spatial distribution of facies and other rock properties.
82
18 The Oligocene sediments of the third member of the Lingshui Formation in the Ya13-1 field were
Keywords: 83
deposited in a river-dominated delta, and later impacted by marine flooding, fluvial and tidal currents. As
19 South China Sea 84
a result of these different influences, the early-stage depositional micro-facies and the sandbody dis-
20 Ya13-1 gas field 85
River-dominated delta
tributions are quite different from those of the later stage. At the early stage, fluvial influences prevailed,
21 resulting in a fluvial-dominated delta plain and deposition of many linguoid sand bars in the delta front. 86
Tide-dominated delta
22 During the late stage of deposition, tide-dominated delta fronts were developed extensively and finger 87
Depositional environment
23 Lithofacies sand bars deposited abundantly in the delta front as a result of the tidal influence. 88
24 Reservoir properties Ya13-1 gas field is laterally divided into two large subareas and vertically into eight stratigraphic 89
25 packages. Because of the different influences of marine flooding that resulted in different interbeds and 90
26 intercalations, the number of stratigraphic packages in the south is different from that in the north. The 91
27 change of deltaic depositional environments also resulted in different reservoir properties between the
92
28 northern and southern regions as the reservoir properties of mouth bars are generally better than dis-
93
29 tributary channels. These depositional characteristics significantly impact the development of the field.
© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 1. Introduction bearing stratigraphic package of the late Oligocene age (An, 1999; 99
35 Xie et al., 2008). Multiple studies on the field's economics and 100
36 Three major types of deltas are commonly distinguished: river- recoverable reserves have been undertaken since initial production 101
37 Q2 dominated, wave-dominated, and tide-dominated (Fisher et al., in 1996 (Zhang et al., 2005). Studies generally agree that Lingshui III 102
38 1969; Galloway, 1975; Coleman, 1982). These deltaic depositional was formed in a delta with dominantly coarse-grained sandstones, 103
39 environments can change at a given location through geological and the sedimentary deposits were impacted by marine flooding. 104
40 time due to several variables, in particular, sea-level change (e.g., Ta However, there are several interpretations regarding the type and 105
41 et al., 2002; Steel et al., 2003; Pore˛ bski and Steel, 2006; Glørstad- sedimentary provenance of the delta. Moreover, the heterogeneity 106
42 Clark et al., 2011; Ahokas et al., 2014). Here we discuss the change and connectivity of the reservoir properties in the gas field are still 107
43 of deltaic depositional environment from fluvial to tidal influence not well understood (Zeng et al., 2011), partly because of the mul- 108
44 during the late Oligocene in the Ya13-1 field in the South China Sea. tiple sedimentary processes and complexity in depositional facies. 109
45 Discovered in 1983, the Ya13-1 field in the Qiongdongnan basin is We propose a new depositional interpretation, in which the 110
46 one of the largest offshore gas fields in the South China Sea. The third delta is the result of successive effects of fluvial and tidal influences. 111
47 member of the Lingshui Formation, Lingshui III, is a main gas- The change of the depositional environments from a fluvial- 112
48 dominated to a tidal-dominated delta explains the difference in 113
49 sedimentary characteristics and sand body patterns in the upper 114
50 * Corresponding author. Schlumberger Ltd., 1675 Broadway, Suite 900, Denver, and lower parts of Lingshui III, and the significant variations in 115
51 CO 80202, USA. Tel.: þ1 303 218 3145; fax: þ1 303 218 3153. reservoir quality. More specifically, a number of marine flooding 116
E-mail address: YMa2@SLB.com (Y.Z. Ma).
52 117
53 118
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.06.003
54 0264-8172/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 119
2 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16
1 events resulted in discontinuous intercalations and more contin- series of down-to-the-south half grabens (Fig. 3). This was followed 66
2 uous interbeds in the sediments of Lingshui III. Major marine by large-scale marine sedimentation into the basin from the 67
3 flooding events associated with relatively high sea levels generated Miocene to the Quaternary (Fig. 2). The YA13-1 gas field is located 68
4 interbeds. Minor marine flooding events associated with relatively in the southwest of the basin and in the western part of the Yanan 69
5 low sea levels caused intercalations. At the early stage of delta Depression (Fig. 3-A). Structurally, the gas field is situated in the 70
6 growth, mouth bars and distal bars (linguoid bars) were well northern Yacheng Spur, which is adjacent to the Yinggehai Basin, 71
7 developed in the delta front; the intercalations of sediments separated by a major fault, F1, in the west (Fig. 3-B). Generally, the 72
8 occurred more frequently, but the lateral distribution of the de- structural positions of the other areas of the gas field are higher 73
9 posits was more discontinuous because of the fluvial dominated than the south-eastern part (Jiang et al., 2008). 74
10 delta. At the late stage, there appeared more finger-like bars in the The study interval is the third member of the Lingshui Forma- 75
11 delta front; intercalations of sediments occurred less frequently, tion, which consists of Upper Oligocene deltaic sediments depos- 76
12 but the lateral distribution of the deposits was more continuous as ited between 29.3 and 27 Ma (Fig. 2). The Lingshui III is of the late 77
13 a result of sea-level fluctuation and tidal impacts. Oligocene age and is constrained between two seismic reflectors, 78
14 The change of deltaic depositional environment led to signifi- T62 and T70 (Figs. 3-C and 2). It is a complete third-order sequence 79
15 cant differences in reservoir properties between the northern and with sea-level first rising then falling (Chen et al., 1993; Wang et al., ,3 80
16 southern regions as reservoir properties of the mouth bars that 1998; Hao et al., 2000b). An unconformity at the top of the Oligo- 81
17 occur more frequently in the south are generally better than the cene (seismic reflection boundary T60, Fig. 2) was resulted from a 82
18 distributary channels, which occur more frequently in the north. drop in sea level, which also caused weathering of the feldspathic 83
19 The mouth bars with coarsening-upward successions generally Oligocene sands of the Lingshui and Yacheng Formations. 84
20 have better reservoir properties than the distributary channels Fifteen wells have been drilled by ARCO China and China 85
21 with fining-upward successions. Offshore Oil Nanhai West since 1979. The YA13-1 gas field is esti- 86
22 This paper shows the deltaic depositional change from fluvial to mated to have recoverable reserves of 3.5 tcf of gas in Oligocene 87
23 tidal dominated environment through the early to late Oligocene in sandstones at about 3700 m depth. The main gas-bearing strata are 88
24 the Ya13-1 field, and the impact of the change on the reservoir deltaic deposits. Delta plain and delta front sandbodies comprise 89
25 properties and heterogeneities. This interpretation provides guid- the entire reservoir of this gas field (Zhang et al., 2005). The field 90
26 ance for resource evaluation, further exploration and development has a high production rate because of overpressure in Qiongdon- 91
27 of the field, and possibly has implications in basin-wide and gnan Basin (Sun, 1994; Shi et al., 2006). 92
28 regional studies. The article includes four parts: (1) geological 93
29 setting of the field, (2) sedimentary characteristics related to the 94
30 evolution of the formation from a river-dominated to a tide- 2.2. Reservoir compartmentalization 95
31 dominated delta, (3) sequence stratigraphy of depositional pack- 96
32 ages in relation to the different marine flooding events, and (4) The structural and sedimentary characteristics were taken into 97
33 impact of sedimentary environment on the reservoir properties. account simultaneously in dividing the field into regions and 98
34 blocks. First, the faults, F1, F2 and F3, are the gas field boundaries in 99
35 the east, north and west, respectively (Fig. 4). According to the three 100
36 2. Geological setting and dataset bounding faults and the fault, Y3, the study area can be divided into 101
37 two large areas: the northern and the southern regions, consistent 102
38 2.1. Geological background and history of the field with the results of the depositional micro-facies distribution (dis- 103
39 cussed in a late section). Idealized delta reservoir models include 104
40 The Qiongdongnan Basin is a continental-margin basin in the fluvial, delta plain, proximal delta front, and distal delta front de- 105
41 northern area of the South China Sea (Fig. 1-A). The basin had an posits (Reynolds et al., 1998; Stanley and Surdam, 1978), and two of 106
42 early rifting phase through the Oligocene (Fig. 2), which created a these depositional systems are clearly identifiable in the study area 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
Figure 1. Map of geological setting. (A) Bathymetric map (Water depth in green, blue and dark blue areas is 200 m, 200e4000 m and more than 4000 m respectively), showing the
63 128
location of the study area and the four major offshore basins in the northern continental shelf of the South China Sea (modified from Hao et al., 2000b). (B) Geological map of the
64 study area (modified from Chen et al., 1998), YA13-1 gas field is located on the upthrown side of No.1 fault which separates Yinggehai Basin and Qiongdongnan Basin. (For 129
65 interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) 130
S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 3
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 Figure 2. (A) Stratigraphic column showing the lithological descriptions, sedimentary facies, and field wide variations in sedimentary thickness of Qiongdongnan Basin 126
62 (modified from Xie et al., 2008 and Wang et al., 1998). (B) Several boundaries are interpreted on a seismic line (beb'). The position of the section is showed in Figure 1-D. Q7 127
63 Note: this is based on seismic lines over the basin as described by Chen et al. (1997), the basin has undergone initial fault depression, principal rifting, postdating, and reactive rapid 128
64 subsidence stages since the Cretaceous. Seismic and borehole records reveal three stratigraphic sequences from the bottom to the top (Fig. 2). Sequence I includes two sequences of 129
the Yacheng Formation and the Lingshui Formation through the Oligocene; sequence II is made up of two subsequences of the Sanya Formation and Meishan Formation from the
65 130
later Miocene to the middle Miocene; sequence III is composed of the Quaternary Yinggehai and Huangliu Formations. No Paleocene deposits have been found.
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
Figure 3. Location map of the gas field. (A) The gas field is at the north part of the Yacheng Spur. (B) The gas field is controlled by the No.1 and No.3 faults and there are paleo-highs in
39 the west part of the gas field. The position of the gas field is showed in C. (C) A section from northwest to southeast (the positions of the section (aea') in this section are shown in D) Q8
104
40 indicates that the bottom boundary of Member Lingshui III is an unconformity and the top boundary is a conformity. There is a small highland named Yacheng Spur, shown in the west. 105
41 106
42 107
(Fig. 5). In a slightly different terminology, we can substitute inner influence on the southern region and North Block II, where a set of
43 108
delta front and distal delta front for proximal delta front and outer marine shale deposits was formed during flooding (Fig. 6).
44 109
delta front respectively (Antonio et al., 2000; Gani and
45 110
Bhattacharya, 2007; Jacob et al., 2009). Distributary channels of 2.3. Data and methods
46 111
the delta plain and the mouth bar of the proximal delta front were
47 112
developed in the northern region. Cores and wireline logs are the main sources of data for the study.
48 113
The northern region of the gas field can be divided into two A database of 18 key wells was selected for this study on the basis of
49 114
blocks: North Block I and North Block II. The delta plain is better core coverage and geographical distribution. Thirteen of these wells
50 115
developed in North Block I; the proximal delta front is better were cored, and more than 1100 m of the core was examined in
51 116
developed in North Block II (Fig. 5). The southern region was detail. Correlation between these wells was constrained by regional,
52 117
divided into four blocks: South Blocks I, II, III and Southwestern palynologically based biostratigraphic schemes.
53 118
Block (Fig. 4). Southwestern Block is located between faults Y5 and The depositional systems and facies of target horizons were
54 119
F1 (Fig. 4). Well A12 has much higher gasewater contact than the defined using the core and well-log data, applying tectonic analysis,
55 120
general gasewater contact of the field. This area seems to be and high-resolution sequence stratigraphy. Throughout the study,
56 121
influenced more by erosion. While proximal delta front prevailed in core, downhole well logging (including dipmeter log) and well-test
57 122
South Blocks I and II, a distal delta front sheet sand and distal bar pressure data have been integrated.
58 123
are better developed in South Block III.
59 124
Because each marine flooding phase did not affect the entire area
60 3. Sedimentary environments and facies 125
of the field (Figs. 5 and 6), different parts of the delta generally have
61 126
different characteristics. During the early formation of Lingshui III,
62 3.1. Lithofacies 127
sea level was low and sea water mainly covered the southeast study
63 128
area, likely in the Low-stand System Tract. Although transgression
64 The grain size of the rocks ranges quite widely, from mud to 129
was limited and had little influence on North Block I, it had significant
65 gravel (Table 1). Sedimentary structures include burrows, soft 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
Figure 4. According to analysis of the depositional micro-facies distribution and the effects of fault, the gas field (The position of the gas field is showed in Fig. 1-C.) has been divided
32 into six reservoir units, which are north block I, north block II, southwest block (A12 well block), south block I, south block II and south block III.
97
33 98
34 sediment deformation, flaser, wavy, ripple, massive, parallel mudstone, with a high sand/mud ratio. The sandstone that contains 99
35 bedding, lenticular intercalations, planar and trough cross bedding gravels is trough cross-bedded, planar cross-bedded and massive 100
36 (Table 1 and Fig. 7). Using the classification scheme for fluvial-delta bedded. The lithofacies are mainly composed of trough cross- 101
37 sediments proposed by Miall (1988), twenty-five lithofacies were bedded gravel (Gt), planar cross bedded gravel (Gp), trough cross- 102
38 identified from the cores in Lingshui III (Table 1 and Fig. 7), bedded sand (St), planar cross-bedded sand (Sp), high angle 103
39 including burrow structure mudstone (Mb), composite-bedded and planar cross-bedded sand (Sph), low angle planar cross-bedded 104
40 burrow structure fine sand (Fcb), planar cross bedded sand (Sp), sand (Spl), massive sand (Sm), massive fine sand (Fm), ripple 105
41 and trough cross bedded gravel (Gt). The diverse lithofacies cross-laminated fine sand (Fr), composite-bedded silty sand (Fc), 106
42 assemblage indicates that the sedimentary facies were in a rela- burrowed structure mudstone (Mb) and composite-bedded 107
43 tively proximity to the sediment provenance and formed a coarse- (mainly lenticular bedded) mudstone (Mc) (Fig. 8-A, Table 1). 108
44 grained delta in the littoral area. Most of the gravels are arranged along the lamina of sedimentary 109
45 cross bedding. Traction currents thus may have been a major 110
46 sediment-transportation mechanism. Channels, distributary chan- 111
47 3.2. Depositional environments 112
nels and interdistributary bays with fining-upward successions are
48 the interpreted major sedimentary micro-facies. The grain size of 113
49 From fossil data (Table 2), authigenic minerals and bioclastics 114
main channels (more gravels) is coarser than that of distributary
50 (Table 3), the sedimentary environment is transitional because of 115
channels; the ratio of sand to mud in channels is higher than that of
51 the characteristics of facies. As a matter of fact, the lithofacies can 116
distributary channels; and the scale of cross bedding in channels is
52 be related to three depositional environments, delta plain, proximal 117
also larger than that of distributary channels (Fig. 8-A).
53 delta front, and distal delta front. These are interpreted according to 118
54 the depositional and erosional architectural element scheme (e.g., 119
55 Howell and Ferm, 1980; Slatt and Mark, 2004; Slatt, 2006; Olariu 120
3.2.2. Proximal delta front
56 and Bhattacharya, 2006; Covault et al., 2009). These in- 121
The lithology of a proximal delta front with high sand/mud ratio
57 terpretations provide a basis for reconstructing the river- 122
is somewhat similar to that of a delta plain, but the proportion of
58 dominated (lower part) and tide-dominated (upper part) delta 123
conglomerates is generally smaller. Pebbly sandstone prevails, and
59 systems. The deltaic depositional system of Lingshui III was formed 124
the sandstone proportion is much higher than in the delta plain.
60 in a littoral and neritic environment, mainly as an open bay (Ruan, 125
The proximal delta front comprises massive gravel (Gm), planar
61 1998; Zhong et al., 2004). 126
cross bedded gravel (Gp), massive sand (Sm), burrowed sand (Sb),
62 composite bedded sand (Sc), trough cross bedded sand (St), planar 127
63 3.2.1. Delta plain cross bedded sand (Sp), high-angle planar cross bedded sand (Spl), 128
64 The delta plain consists of conglomerate, coarse-grained sand- horizontal bedded sand (Sh), massive fine sand (Fm), ripple cross- 129
65 stone gravels, fine-medium-grained sandstone, siltstone and laminated fine sand (Fr), burrow structure fine sand (Fb), 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 Figure 5. Depositional patterns of Member Lingshui III. (A) River dominated delta depositional patterns with linguoid bars. (B) Tide dominated delta depositional patterns with 122
finger bars.
58 123
59 124
60 125
composite bedded and burrow structure fine sand (Fcb), flaser very clear indicators of traction currents. The proximal delta front
61 126
bedded fine sand (Fcf), mudstone (M), burrow structure mudstone also contains abundant burrows. The sand-rich beds form fining-
62 127
(Mb) and soft-sediment deformed mudstone (Md) (Fig. 8-B, upward or coarsening-upward successions, indicative of proximal
63 128
Table 1). The sedimentary textures mainly include trough cross delta front sandbodies, which include distributary channels,
64 129
bedding, planar cross bedding, ripple, and wavy bedding, which are interdistributary bays, mouth bars and sheet sands.
65 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 Figure 6. Interpretation and correlation of sequence stratigraphy, reservoir units, interlays and intercalations. The last column labeled “Long cycle” in this figure is the entire
119
55 Member Lingshui III; the transition surface (see the bold blue line) between 3730 m and 3740 m in Well A7 is the maximum flooding surface (MFS), which generated a set of 120
56 relatively thick and stable shale layers. Generally, Member Lingshui III is a third order depositional sequence/cycle, and it can be further divided into two parts by the MFS, i.e., the 121
57 lower and the upper of Member Lingshui III. This figure shows the vertical reservoir unit correlation between the southern and northern regions of this study area. Member Lingshui 122
III in this gas field can be divided into 8 reservoir units from bottom to top vertically, which are A1, A2, B1, B2-1, B2-2, C1, C2 and D unit, respectively. Unit A1 does not exist in the
58 123
drilling wells (e.g. in well A1) at north block I. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
59 124
60 125
61 126
3.2.3. Distal delta front sand (Scw), massive sand (Sm), wavy bedded and burrowed sand
62 127
The lithofacies of the distal delta front depositional environ- (Sbw), wavy bedded fine sand (Fcw), burrowed fine sand (Fb),
63 128
ment contain planar cross bedded sand (Sp), high angle planar composite bedded silty sand (Fc), mudstone (M), and burrowed
64 129
cross bedded sand (Spl), composite bedded sand (Sc), wavy bedded mudstone (Mb) (Fig. 8-C). Burrows are more developed in
65 130
1 Table 1 66
2 Division of lithofacies of Ya13-1 gas field (The terminologies of lithofacies are modified from Miall, 1988). 67
3 Number Code Lithofacies name Main lithology Sedimentary structure and facies identification 68
4 1 M Mudstone Black mudstone Dark color and pure texture. The burrow
69
5 structures appear locally and the plant 70
6 fragments are highly-developed 71
7 2 Mb Burrow structure mudstone Dull mudstone Calcareous, the burrow structure and the plant 72
fragment are highly-developed
8 73
3 Mc Composite (mainly lenticular) bedded silty Light gray mudstone Silty, the burrow structure and plant fragments,
9 mudstone and has composite bedding 74
10 4 Md Deformation structure mudstone Gray silty mudstone Deformational structure, multi-directional 75
11 5 Fb Burrow structure fine sand Shaly siltstone, fine sandstone or siltstone Mud laminations, burrows, plant fragments 76
12 6 Fc Composite bedded silty sand Shaly siltstone, fine sandstone or siltstone It develops lamina and composite bedding, and 77
a great deal of mica can be seen on the surface of
13 the lamina
78
14 7 Fcb Composite bedded and burrow structure fine Fine sandstone or siltstone Composite bedding, burrows and frequent 79
15 sand muddy laminations, 80
16 8 Fcf Flaser bedded fine sand Siltstone typical flaser bedded, and plant fragments 81
9 Fcw Wavy bedded fine sand Shaly siltstone, fine sandstone or siltstone Wavy bedding and laminations
17 82
10 Fh Horizontal bedded fine sand Siltstone Parallel bedding.
18 11 Fm Massive fine sand Shaly siltstone or siltstone Massive bedding 83
19 12 Fr Ripple cross laminated fine sand Shaly siltstone Wave-ripple bedding 84
20 13 Sb Burrow structure sand Fine sandstoneecoarse sandstone Muddy laminations and burrows 85
21 econglomeratic coarse sandstone 86
14 Sbw Wavy bedded and burrow structure sand Fine sandstone, medium-fine sandstone or Wavy bedding, the burrows some lamina. Mica
22 coarse sandstone is concentrated on the bedding surfaces, and
87
23 glauconite and mica are present 88
24 15 Sc Composite bedded sand Fine sandstoneeconglomeratic coarse Composite bedding and lamina, and some fine 89
25 sandstone carbonaceous plant debris. 90
16 Scw Wavy bedded sand Medium-fine sandstone, conglomeratic coarse Wavy bedding
26 91
sandstone
27 17 Sh Horizontal bedded sand Medium-fine sandstone, conglomeratic and Parallel bedding. 92
28 medium-coarse sandstone 93
29 18 Sm Massive sand Fine sandstoneeconglomeratic coarse Planar cross bedding, muddy laminations, fine 94
30 sandstone carbonaceous plant debris and some mica 95
19 Sp Planar cross bedded sand Fine sandstoneecoarse sandstone Planar-cross-bedding, and glauconite and mica
31 96
locally, muddy laminations and fine
32 carbonaceous plant debris 97
33 20 Sph High angle planar cross bedded sand Medium-coarse sandstone, conglomeratic High angle planar cross-bedding, and multiple 98
34 coarse sandstone erosion surfaces are present locally. 99
21 Spl Low angle planar cross bedded sand Fine sandstoneeconglomeratic coarse Muddy and fine carbonaceous plant debris, low
35 100
sandstone angle planar-cross-bedding, siderite and mica
36 22 St Trough cross bedded sand Fine sandstoneeconglomeratic coarse Trough cross-bedding and muddy laminations,
101
37 sandstone micaceous 102
38 23 Gm Massive gravel Glutenite or conglomerate Planar cross bedded and graded bedding, and 103
39 glauconite is present in beds 104
24 Gp Planar cross bedded gravel Glutenite or fine conglomerate Planar cross-bedding.
40 105
25 Gt Trough cross bedded gravel Glutenite or conglomerate Trough cross-bedding.
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 mudstones than in sandstones. There is very little conglomerate, the lithologic characteristics of the Lingshui III in the downthrown 109
45 and the ratio of sand to mud is low. Sandstone or siltstone displays side of F1 in the west (Well 19-2-1) were interpreted as non-near- 110
46 planar cross bedding, wavy bedding, composite bedding, and provenance (Fig. 3-B, Table 4). On the other hand, there is little 111
47 massive sedimentary textures. The average thickness of sandstone evidence to support the existence of uplift in the south, because the 112
48 is usually no more than 2 m (Fig. 8-C). The distal delta front con- gas field is located right on it. In other words, the main provenance 113
49 tains distributary channels, interdistributary bays, distal bars and was not from the south. Since heavy mineral data provide a means 114
50 sheet sands. to analyze the sedimentary provenance, some unstable and stable 115
51 heavy minerals were collected from core samples (Table 4). These 116
52 3.3. Sediment provenance permit calculations of the coefficient of stability, which is the stable 117
53 mineral content divided by unstable mineral (Table 4). The distri- 118
54 There is no general agreement regarding the sedimentary bution of the coefficient of stability shows that the major sediment 119
55 provenance of the delta in the Ya13-1 gas field (Bai et al., 2011; Wu provenance direction is from either the northwest or the north. 120
56 et al., 2007). The field is located in the Yacheng Spur of the Yanan From the dipmeter log (Fig. 9), the current total azimuth of 121
57 sag, in the west of Qiongdongnan basin. Yinggehai Basin was on its Lingshui III is roughly from southwest to northeast because of the 122
58 southwest side, and they are separated by the fault, F1. The Yacheng tectonic uplifts (see the unconformities after the deposition of 123
59 uplift is on its northeast side (Fig. 1C and D). The gas field was Lingshui III in Figs. 2 and 3) in Neogene (Wang et al., 1998). How- 124
60 located at the upthrown side of F1. The northeast, southwest and ever, when the contemporary structural impact is removed (If not, 125
61 northwest parts were higher in elevation than the southeast part the azimuth does not indicate the true paleocurrent direction), the 126
62 (Fig. 1B and C). paleocurrent direction of the lower part is from the northwest to 127
63 There is some evidence to support the view that the paleo-high the southeast (Fig. 9). Therefore, the sediment provenance of 128
64 structure in the western part of the basin was not a major sediment the study interval is either northwest to southeast or north to 129
65 provenance, but rather just a local sub-provenance; for example, south. According to relative sea-level change (see the last column of 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
Figure 7. Core photographs representative of lithologies and sedimentary structures observed within Member Lingshui III at Ya 13-1 gas field. (A) Fine conglomerate e
42 107
pebbly coarse-grained sandstone with trough cross bedding in Well A1 at 3148.8 m. (B) Pebbly coarse-grained sandstone with bottom cutoff planar cross bedding in Well A2 at
43 3937.8 m. (C) Pebbly coarse-grained to fine-grained sandstone with planar cross bedding of type in Well A2 at 3205.1 m. (D) Pebbly medium-grained sandstone with tangential 108
44 planar cross bedding in Well A1 at 3190.0 m. (E) Pebbly fine-grained sandstone with parallel bedding in Well A1 at 3201.7 m. (F) Pebbly sandstone with interbedded mudstone with 109
45 slump - deformation structures in Well A2 at 3441.1 m. (G) Siltstone with small ripple in Well A2 at 3370.5 m. (H) Mudstone and muddy siltstone with mixed bedding in Well 6 at 110
46 3832.0 m. (I) Shaly siltstone with vertical/oblique burrow in Well A2 at 3339.7 m. (J) Mudstone with interbedded thin sandstone in Well A1 at 3219.3 m. 111
47 112
48 Fig. 2-A), it rose very fast and fell slowly. We can also know that the Maximum Flooding Surface (MFS) (Fig. 6). The delta plain was 113
49 sea-level was low at the beginning of Lingshui III. It indicated that better developed, with well-developed linguoid bars in the lower 114
50 the impact of marine on delta was relative weak in the early stage of part (Fig. 5-A). 115
51 Lingshui III. However, the sea level during the upper Lingshui III The strata in the upper part of the third order sequence were 116
52 was higher (see Fig. 2-A) than that of the lower Lingshui III (Wang developed during high-stand of sea levels and are regressive 117
53 et al., 1998), leading to intense sea wave and tidal impacts (Bai et al., (Fig. 6). Due to the stronger tidal currents, finger bars were formed 118
54 2011) and resulting in the change of the paleo-direction of the and are well developed in the delta front. Sedimentary facies were 119
55 currents. In short, the paleocurrent direction of the upper Lingshui distributed within bays, and the sandbodies were deposited as 120
56 III could have been much more influenced by sea wave and tides. In tidally influenced fingers, which resulted from redistribution of the 121
57 contrast, the paleocurrent direction of the lower part could have linguoid bars by tides. Progradation of the delta in the front, and 122
58 been controlled much more by river flows. porosity were better developed because of the influences of wave 123
59 and tidal activities (Fig. 5-B). 124
60 3.4. Depositional evolution 125
61 3.5. Sandbody distribution 126
62 As stated earlier, Lingshui III is a complete third order sequence 127
63 (the geologic time span is about 2.3 Ma with a sea-level rise and fall Different types of delta are characterized by different types of 128
64 cycle, see Fig. 2-A). The study area was situated at relatively low sea sandbodies. Three basic types of delta with six different sandbody 129
65 level and was more impacted by rivers prior to development of distribution patterns were previously proposed (Galloway, 1975; 130
1 Table 2 66
2 Statistics of fossils on marine or nonmarine environment (After testing data of Zhanjiang Division of CNOOC Ltd, 1990). 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 Table 3 92
Content of marine authigenic minerals and bioclasts in Member Lingshui III. Q5
28 93
29 Interval Well name Metering depth (M) Authigenic mineral (%) Bioclast (%) 94
30 Glauconite Average Echinate Lamellibranch Brachiopod Foram 95
31 96
Member Lingshui III Y2 3732.2e3913.9 0.10 0.50 0.50 ✓ 0.04 ✓
32 Y3 3768.5e3822.2 ✓ / / / ✓ / 97
33 Y4 3897.5e3922.0 0.10 / / / / / 98
34 3922.0e4127.3 ✓ ✓ / / / / 99
Y6 3772.8e3964.2 0.13 0.01 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
35 100
Total content 0.1 0.04 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
36 101
37 ✓e a few, /enot found (After testing data of Zhanjiang Division of CNOOC Ltd, 1990). 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
Figure 8. Vertical lithofacies successions. (A) Delta plain. (B) Proximal delta front. (C) Distal delta front. NB: The lithofacies codes shown in the figure come from Table 3. And
64 the meanings of micro-facies codes are as follows: IB-Interdistributary Bay; DC-Distributary Channel; CH-Channel; SIB-Subaqueous Interdistributary Bay; SS-Sand Sheet; SDC- 129
65 Subaqueous Distributary Channel; MB-Mouth Bar; TSDC-Terminal Subaqueous Distributary Channel; DB-Distal Bar. 130
1 Table 4 66
2 Content of unstable and stable heavy minerals in Member Lingshui III. Statistics are from samples in 5 wells and the well positions are shown in Fig. 1-D. Weight and its 67
percentage of 5 types of unstable heavy minerals and 14 types of stable heavy minerals were calculated. The coefficient of stability is equal to the total content of stable heavy
3 68
mineral divided by that of unstable heavy mineral (After testing data of Zhanjiang Division of CNOOC Ltd).
4 69
5 Well name Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y19-2-1 70
6 Content Weight (mg) Weight percent Weight Weight Weight Weight Weight Weight Weight (mg) Weight 71
7 (%) (mg) percent (%) (mg) percent (%) (mg) percent (%) percent (%) 72
8 Unstable Heavy Biotite 0 0.00 0.4 0.01 0.5 0.05 10.8 0.12 0 0.00 73
9 Mineral Pyrite 486.5 41.48 1105 23.10 220.8 21.51 2130 23.63 361.2 8.95 74
10 Baryte 83.9 7.15 60 1.25 6.3 0.61 218 2.42 381.8 9.46 75
Sphalerite 1.8 0.15 18.30 0.38 0.7 0.07 16.8 0.19 15.6 0.39
11 Zoisite 2.7 0.23 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.5 0.01 0 0.0
76
12 Total 574.9 49.02 1184 24.74 228.3 22.24 2376 26.36 758.6 18.8 77
13 Stable Heavy Zircon 327.8 27.95 644.2 13.47 141.4 13.78 1034 11.47 596.8 14.79 78
14 Mineral Tourmaline 20.00 1.71 551.8 11.54 120.4 11.73 836.5 9.28 415 10.28 79
Garnet 14.40 1.23 111.4 2.33 164.8 16.06 584.1 6.48 114.9 2.85
15 80
Magnetite 12.40 1.06 27.2 0.57 8.7 0.85 58.8 0.65 63.6 1.58
16 Hematite 31.8 2.71 329 6.88 27 2.63 541 6.00 525.3 13.02 81
17 White Ilmenite 146.5 12.49 1386 28.97 245.8 23.95 2470 27.40 1055 26.14 82
18 Chlorite 4.701 0.40 159.8 3.34 29 2.83 485.1 5.38 146.6 3.63 83
19 Rutile 11.40 0.97 104.4 2.18 20 1.95 176.2 1.95 65 1.61 84
Staurolite 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.4 0.04 0 0.00 0.3 0.01
20 Octahedrite 15.80 1.35 219.6 4.59 27.6 2.69 306.3 3.40 218.1 5.40
85
21 Brookite 0 0.00 5.6 0.12 0 0.00 8.1 0.09 6.5 0.16 86
22 Monazite 11.3 0.96 58 1.21 13 1.27 99.6 1.10 69 1.71 87
23 Corundum 0.9 0.08 0.4 0.01 0 0.00 23.8 0.26 0 0.00 88
Fluorite 0.9 0.08 2.4 0.05 0 0.00 13.4 0.15 0.3 0.01
24 89
Total 597.9 50.98 3599 75.26 798.1 77.76 6637. 73.64 3277 81.20
25 Coefficient of 1.04 3.04 3.50 2.79 4.32 90
26 Stability 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
Figure 9. An analysis graph of the total azimuth and paleocurrent direction (excluding the current structural impacts) of lower Member Lingshui III based on dipmeter log data in
64 well A1. In the column of “Total Azimuth”, the azimuth of the rose diagram is from southwest to northeast. However, in the column of “Paleocurrent Direction”, the azimuth of the 129
65 rose diagram is from northwest to southeast because of the tectonic uplift afterward. 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 Figure 10. Integrated vertical depositional sequences (lithofacies associations) and plane configuration of different sandbars. (A) Delta front pattern with linguoid bars, (B) 118
Delta front pattern with finger bars. NB: The meanings of lithofacies codes are shown in Table 3, (C) Tripartite classification of deltas. After Galloway (1975), the two pentagons are
54 the delta types of different intervals in the study area.
119
55 120
56 121
57 122
Coleman and Wright, 1975), as illustrated in Fig. 10-A. In the study In contrast, the tidal-dominated delta of the later stage (i.e. the upper
58 123
area, two types of delta have been distinguished: river-dominated part) is characterized by well-developed finger bars influenced by
59 124
and tide-dominated. The former type of delta exists in the lower tidal currents. Finger bars are typical products of tide-dominated
60 125
part of Lingshui III, with distinct linguoid bars, while the latter type deltas, where muddy sediments are commonly found at the tops,
61 126
exists in the upper part, with distinctive finger bars (Figs. 5 and 10- and the sandy and mudstone sediments change abruptly. As a result
62 127
B, C). of the tidal influence, mixed bedding is well developed in the sand-
63 128
The river-dominated deltaic distributary channels are often bodies; bioturbation and vertical worm borings are also well devel-
64 129
observed with presence of low-angle planar cross bedding (Fig.10-B). oped (Figs. 6H, I and 10C). Q4
65 130
1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 Figure 11. Reservoir properties in Well A13. According to the correlation between pressure measuring results and reservoir units in the well A13, the reservoir unit subdivision 105
41 scheme is credible and the pressure distribution of well A13 can illustrate that the pressures and FZI values of this well in different reservoir units are clearly different. The two
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
106
42 bold red lines are top and bottom boundaries of Member Lingshui III; the bold blue line is the MFS. NB: FZI-Flowing Zone Index, FZI ¼ RQI/4z, RQI ¼ K=4e , 4z ¼ 4e/(1 4e), K- 107
Permeability, 4e-Effective Porosity. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) Q9
43 108
44 109
45 Table 5 110
46 Grain-sized sequence, reservoir heterogeneity and depositional micro-facies distribution of each unit. 111
47 Reservoir Grain-sized sequence Well-log character Variation coefficient Dart coefficient (Tk)/ Heterogeneous Main micro-facies 112
48 unit (Vk)/(mD mD1) (mD mD1) level 113
49 Distribution Average Distribution Average 114
50 range value range value 115
51 D Coarsening-upward Funnel shape 0.2e0.75 0.50 0.66e2.12 1.34 I Mouth bar, distal bar
116
52 C2 Coarsening-upward Funnel shape 0.57e1.71 0.82 1.02e4.56 2.12 III Mouth bar, distal bar 117
53 C1 Fining-upward Bell shape 0.61e1.7 0.92 1.37e5.09 2.35 III Subaqueous distributary 118
54 channel 119
B2-2 Coarsening-upward Funnel shape mingled 0.59e5.09 1.08 1.26e15.2 2.85 IV Mouth bar, distal bar,
55 120
with bell shape, sheet sand
56 cylinder shape 121
57 B2-1 Coarsening-upward Funnel shape 0.31e1.58 0.74 1.02e5.69 2.12 II Mouth bar, distal bar, 122
58 sheet sand 123
59 B1 Fining-upward or Bell shape, funnel shape 0.26e2.27 0.82 1.07e3.74 1.85 II Subaqueous distributary 124
coarsening-upward channel, mouth bar
60 A Fining-upward Cylinder shape mingled 0.41e1.81 0.75 1.22e3.96 2.16 II Distributary channel,
125
61 with funnel shape, bell shape crevasse splay 126
62 rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P ffi 127
63 NB:Vk ¼ ðKi KÞ2 =n=K; Tk ¼ Kmax=K; KeAverage Permeability; KmaxeMaximum Permeability. 128
i¼1
64 Heterogeneous level: I- homogeneity, Vk 0.5, Tk 2.0; II- relative homogeneity, 0.75 Vk > 0.5, 2.2 Tk>>2.0; III- more serious heterogeneity, 1.0 Vk > 0.75, 129
65 2.5 Tk > 2.2; IV- severe heterogeneity, Vk > 1.25, Tk > 2.5. 130
1 Table 6 66
2 Intercalation statistics in each unit of Member Lingshui III. 67
3 Reservoir unit Intercalation number Intercalation thickness/m Intercalation frequency (FI)/ Intercalation density (DI)/ 68
4 (number/m1) (m m1) 69
5 Range Average value Range Average value Range Average value Range Average value 70
6 71
D 0e9 3.4 0.6e9.6 3.37 0.03e0.24 0.14 0.02e0.23 0.11
7 C2 2e9 4.2 1.1e5.95 2.47 0.06e0.29 0.16 0.02e0.24 0.09 72
8 C1 1e9 4.8 1.3e8.91 3.91 0.08e0.24 0.15 0.05e0.21 0.12 73
9 B2-2 1e7 4.4 0.5e8.06 3.24 0.07e0.35 0.17 0.03e0.29 0.11 74
10 B2-1 0e10 4.6 0.5e8.05 3.51 0.05e0.31 0.21 0.03e0.24 0.14 75
B1 0e11 4.57 1.14e10.5 4.79 0.0e0.3 0.15 0.04e0.29 0.15
11 A (A1þA2) 1e17 5.23 0.45e11.18 3.09 0.04e0.39 0.13 0.02e0.24 0.08
76
12 77
13 78
14 79
4. Sequence stratigraphy and reservoir division coarsening-upward successions; Unit B2-1 is generally described
15 80
by coarsening-downward successions with a bell shape; Unit B2-2
16 81
Marine flooding surfaces can be used to distinguish sedimentary is also dominated by a coarsening-upward succession with a funnel
17 82
cycles and facies associations (Dixon et al., 2012). A maximum shape, intermingled with fining-upward successions with bell and
18 83
flooding surface was identified between Unit B2-2 and C1 (Fig. 6). cylindrical shapes. Fining-upward successions prevail in Unit C1
19 84
Based on the orders of sequence boundaries and flooding surfaces, with bell shapes. Unit C2 is dominated by coarsening-upward
20 85
Lingshui IIIea third order stratigraphic sequence, was subdivided successions intermingled with fining-upward successions. Unit D
21 86
into eight fourth-order sequences, termed Units A1, A2, B1, B2-1, is characterized by coarsening-upward successions with funnel
22 87
B2-2, C1, C2 and D (Fig. 6). The boundaries of these stratigraphic shapes. The heterogeneity of each reservoir unit in Lingshui III
23 88
units are marine flooding surfaces, associated with marine trans- varies from moderate to relatively high; Unit B2-2 and Unit C1 are
24 89
gressions. As it was influenced by marine transgression from highly heterogeneous, and Unit D is the most homogeneous among
25 90
southeast to northwest, Unit A in the southern part of the gas field the seven units (Table 5).
26 91
could be subdivided into two units, Unit A1 and Unit A2. As Unit A1
27 92
does not exist in the northern part, the Unit A is thicker in the south 4.2. Interbeds and intercalations
28 93
than in the north of the gas field (Fig. 6). The reservoir unit sub-
29 94
division based on the sequence stratigraphic analysis was Interbeds and intercalations can be used for reservoir unit
30 95
confirmed by the pressure data; there is a significant pressure subdivision, especially shale layers with good lateral continuity. In
31 96
difference in the two adjacent reservoir units in Well A13 (Fig. 11). the study area, the interbeds were formed in the prodelta or
32 97
The flow zone index (Amaefule et al., 1993) of the two adjacent interdistributary bay near the extensive flooding surface, related to
33 98
reservoirs also differ somewhat. the major marine transgression events (Zhou and Wei, 2000). The
34 99
35 interbedded deposits are continuously distributed, providing good 100
36 4.1. Sedimentary successions markers for the subdivisions of stratigraphic packages. Unit A in the 101
37 southern region and North Block II, located at the bottom of the 102
38 Different depositional micro-facies assemblages can form Lingshui III, is divided into two parts in the southern region, A1 and 103
39 different grain-sized successions, such as fining-upward and A2. However, Unit A in North Block I is just a single unit (Fig. 6). The 104
40 coarsening-upward successions. The sedimentary successions in interbed between A1 and A2 is mainly developed in the southern 105
41 the study area are clearly related to the depositional micro-facies in region and North Block II with a thickness of 2e4 m. In contrast, 106
42 different reservoir units (Table 5). The lower part of Unit A is 107
43 dominated by a fining-upward succession with the typical cylin- 108
44 drical shape of an electrical well-logging curve, mingled with a 109
45 funnel shape, or bell shape. Unit B1 has both fining-upward and 110
46 111
47 Table 7 112
48 Porosity and permeability distribution range in each unit in the northern and 113
49 southern regions. 114
50 Reservoir unit Effective porosity (%) Effective permeability 115
51 range (md, logarithm) range 116
52 D Northern region 14.85～18.87 (17.01) 3.08～3.65 (3.42)
117
53 Southern region 14.65～18.53 (16.68) 2.98～3.58 (3.32) 118
54 C2 Northern region 12.68～15.54 (14.29) 2.36～3.37 (2.91) 119
55 Southern region 11.65～16.88 (14.41) 1.37～3.34 (2.62) 120
C1 Northern region 12.94～14.73 (13.92) 1.88～3.09 (2.65)
56 121
Southern region 12.84～16.27 (14.29) 2.48～3.39 (2.91)
57 B2-2 Northern region 12.21～14.91 (13.65) 1.41～3.05 (2.49) 122
58 Southern region 12.79～15.04 (14.42) 1.09～3.39 (2.60) 123
59 B2-1 Northern region 11.87～14.76 (12.92) 1.76～3.08 (2.12) 124
Southern region 11.41～14.75 (13.21) 1.45～2.94 (2.28)
60 125
B1 Northern region 10.21～12.17 (11.35) 0.8～1.74 (1.3)
61 Southern region 10.82～13.05 (11.67) 0.86～1.96 (1.47)
126
62 A Northern region 9.38～11.02 (10.18) 0.44～1.12 (0.68) 127
63 Southern region 9.64～13.29 (11.25) 0.61～2.24 (1.14) 128
64 Note: The meanings of those mathematic numbers in this table are as follows: 129
65 Minimum～Maximum (Average Value). Figure 12. Porosity and permeability of reservoir in the study area. 130
1 Table 8 66
Reservoir properties of different depositional micro-facies in the Ya13-1 gas field. Q6
2 67
3 Property parameter Micro-facies 68
4 Distributary channel Subaqueous distributary channel Mouth bar Distal bar Sheet sand
69
5 70
Porosity (%) 5.71～15.79 (13.38) 9.68～17.2 (13.6) 10.32～20.17 (14.63) 8.51～13.39 (11.42) 9.82～14.44 (12.83)
6 71
Permeability (Md) 51.78～548.89 (351.78) 63.85～776.01 (331.92) 21.4～4973.85 (726.09) 26.74～367.12 (253.71) 6.38～137.78 (55.18)
7 72
8 73
9 74
that interbed is not developed in North Block I. Hence, vertically, hydrodynamic-energy. Distal bars and sheet sands are composed of
10 75
there are seven reservoir units in the northern region and eight in silt and fine-grain sandstones, intermingled with silty shale or
11 76
the southern region. Overall, the interbed between reservoir unit laminar shale. However, the distal bars and sheet sands, despite
12 77
C1 and B2-2 is the thickest, because it is influenced by the MFS in relatively lower porosity and permeability, can still be reservoir
13 78
the Lingshui III. rocks. In short, porosity and permeability are the highest in mouth
14 79
The intercalations are mostly shale, silty shale, fine-grained bars, and they are also quite good in channels (including distribu-
15 80
sandstone and some tight sandstone, and they are generally tary channels and subaqueous distributary channels).
16 81
thinner than the interbeds with poorer continuity. These are Unit A is dominated by distributary channels, and linguoid bars
17 82
muddy deposits associated with delta interdistributary bays and (mouth bars and distal bars), which gradually changes into sub-
18 83
subaqueous interdistributary bays (between subaqueous distribu- aqueous distributary channels and finger bars (mouth bars and
19 84
tary channels and sand bars, or between two sand bars), and their distal bars) in the entire Unit D (Figs. 5 and 10). That is why porosity
20 85
distributions are controlled by secondary marine flooding surfaces. and permeability are lower in Unit A than in the other reservoir
21 86
In the lower parts of the Lingshui III, development of delta dis- units. As mouth bars are more developed in Unit D, it has the
22 87
tributary channels, interdistributary bays results in the well- highest porosity and permeability.
23 88
developed intercalated deposits. On the other hand, in the upper
24 89
part, the intercalations are not well developed in the mouth bar 6. Conclusions
25 90
sandbody because sand bars are more influenced by waves and
26 91
tides. The vertical distribution and evolution of the intercalations This article has described a delta that was evolved from a river-
27 92
are important factors for understanding the vertical segregations of dominated environment into a tide-dominated environment at a
28 93
the reservoir units in the Lingshui III. The amount and average later time. It has discussed the sedimentation, sequence stratig-
29 94
thickness of shale intercalations from Unit A to Unit B2-2 in the raphy, depositional facies, and their impacts on the reservoir
30 95
lower part are greater than those of Unit C1 to Unit D in the upper properties of the rock formations. The deposition of the lower part
31 96
part. The number and frequency of intercalations in different of Lingshui III was dominated by fluvial influences, resulting in a
32 97
reservoir units are different as well (Fig. 6, Table 6). Both interbeds delta front with many linguoid bars and a well-developed delta
33 98
and intercalations can cause permeability barriers, but interbeds plain. The deposition of the upper part was mainly impacted by
34 99
generally have a stronger effect than intercalations because of its tidal influences, resulting in a well-developed delta front with
35 100
larger scales and continuity. many finger bars. The finger sand bars evolved from linguoid bars
36 101
37 as a result of the tidal influences. Because of the change of depo- 102
38 5. Reservoir properties sitional environment from fluvial-dominated to tidal-dominated 103
39 environment, mouth bars, distal bars and other sand bodies in 104
40 Porosity and permeability are related to the burial depth, the delta front are well developed in the upper part of Lingshui III 105
41 generally increasing upward. Porosity and permeability are lowest whereas distributary channel sandbodies are more common in the 106
42 in Unit A, and the highest in Unit D (Table 7). Comparing the lower part. 107
43 southern and northern regions, porosity and permeability values of Understanding the change that occurred in the depositional 108
44 Units A to C2 in the southern region are higher than those of the environment is important because the change in the deltaic 109
45 northern region, but the porosity and permeability values of Unit D depositional environment led to changes in spatial distributions of 110
46 in the southern and northern regions are similar. The cut-off values facies and other reservoir properties. Interbeds and intercalations 111
47 used for porosity and permeability of gas-bearing rocks are 8% and are related to different marine flooding surfaces and are used to 112
48 0.4 md, respectively (Fig. 12). divide the reservoir units. Depositional micro-facies and faults are 113
49 Marine transgressions due to sea-level changes have impacted used to divide the gas field region into two large development 114
50 reservoir properties differently in different regions of the gas field. areas; the southern region generally has more favorable reservoir 115
51 The southern region of the gas field was subjected to intensive properties because reservoir quality of the mouth bars and dis- 116
52 washing and sorting caused by waves and tides. But these activities tributary channels in the proximal delta front is generally better. 117
53 in the northern region were weaker. Because of the transgression Reservoir properties and heterogeneities are impacted by the 118
54 from the period of Unit A to Unit D, and a small-scale landward depositional micro-facies pattern in the different reservoir units. 119
55 regression in later stages, porosity and permeability in the southern Vertically, the reservoir quality generally increases from bottom to 120
56 region are generally higher than in the northern region. top. 121
57 Depositional micro-facies is a dominant factor for porosity and 122
58 permeability distributions, as shown in Table 8. Marine trans- Uncited reference Q10 123
59 gression resulted in the delta evolving from domination by delta 124
60 plain (Unit A) to domination by a distal and proximal delta front Hao et al., 2000a. 125
61 (Unit D). Porosity and permeability are generally higher in the 126
62 mouth bars than in the distributary channels and subaqueous Acknowledgments 127
63 distributary channels, and they are lower in the sheets sand or 128
64 distal bars. This is because the mouth bar sediments are mainly This work was supported by “the Fundamental Research Funds 129
65 composed of coarse-grained sands as a result of the high for the central universities (2-9-2013-97)” and “the Chinese 130
1 National Natural Science Fund Project (41272132)”. We are grateful Howell, D.J., Ferm, J.C., 1980. Exploration model for Pennsylvanian upper delta plain 54
coals, southwest West Virginia. AAPG Bull. 64, 938e941.
2 to acknowledge Zhanjiang Division of CNOOC (China Offshore Oil 55
Jacob, A.C., Brian, W.R., Stephan, A.G., 2009. Outcrop expression of a continental-
3 Company) Ltd. for providing the data, sharing ideas on geological margin-scale shelf-edge delta from the cretaceous Magallanes basin, Chile. 56
4 setting and for the permission to publish this paper. We thank Dr. J. Sediment. Res. 79, 523e539. 57
5 William J. Clark, Dr. Brian Toelle and Mr. James Hurley for reviewing Jiang, P., Li, S.L., Li, M.W., et al., 2008. The method of adopting flooding surfaces in 58
dividing vertical flow zones: an example from the 3rd member of Lingshui
6 and commenting the manuscript, and journal reviewers for the Formation of QDN Basin (in Chinese with English abstract). Earth Sci. Front. 15, 59
7 useful comments and suggestions. 154e159. 60
8 Miall, A.D., 1988. Architectural elements and bounding surfaces in fluvial deposits: 61
anatomy of the Kayenta formation (lower Jurassic), Southwest Colorado. Sedi-
9 ment. Geol. 55 (3e4), 233e240, 247e262.
62
10 References Olariu, C., Bhattacharya, J.P., 2006. Terminal distributary channels and delta front 63
11 architecture of river-dominated delta systems. J. Sediment. Res. 76, 212e233. 64
Ahokas, J.M., Nystuen, J.P., Martinius, A.W., 2014. Stratigraphic signatures of punc- Pore˛ bski, S.J., Steel, R.J., 2006. Deltas and sea-level change. J. Sediment. Res. 76,
12 tuated rise in relative sea-level in an estuary-dominated heterolithic succes- 390e403.
65
13 sion: incised valley fills of the Toarcian Ostreaelv Formation, Neill Klinter Group Reynolds, A.D., Simmons, M.D., Bowman, M.B.J., et al., 1998. Implications of outcrop 66
14 (Jameson Land, East Greenland). Mar. Pet. Geol. 50, 103e129. geology for reservoirs in the Neogene productive series: Apsheron Peninsula, 67
Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., Keelan, D.K., 1993. Enhanced Azerbaijan. AAPG Bull. 82, 25e49.
15 reservoir description: using core and log data to identify hydraulic (flow) units
68
Ruan, P.H., 1998. Tertiary ostracod faunas of the Ying-Qiong Basin in the northern
16 and predict permeability in un-cored intervals/wells. In: SPE 26436, 68th part of the South China Sea and their palaeoenvironment (in Chinese with 69
17 Annual Technology Conference and Exhibition Houston, Texas. English abstract). China Offshore Oil Gas 12, 174e179. 70
An, Z.X., 1999. Some new understanding of formation of Ya13-1 gas field (in Chinese Shi, J.N., Hao, F., Zou, H.Y., 2006. Study on accumulation mechanism of the Ya13-1
18 71
with English abstract). Exp. Pet. Geol. 21, 53e57. efficient natural gas reservoir in Qiongdongnan Basin (in Chinese). Nat. Gas
19 Antonio, B.R., Michael, D.H., John, B.A., 2000. Facies and evolution of the modern Geosci. 17, 807e810. 72
20 Brazos delta, Texas: wave versus flood influence. J. Sediment. Res. 70, 283e295. Slatt, R.M., 2006. Stratigraphic reservoir characterization for petroleum geologists, 73
Bai, Z.H., Li, S.L., Su, Y., Ma, X.Z., Li, M.W., 2011. Provenance analysis of 3rd member geophysicists, and engineers. In: Handbook of Petroleum Exploration and
21 74
of Oligocene Lingshui formation in the Yacheng 13-1 gas field, Qiongdongnan Production, vol. 6. Elsevier, pp. 13e16.
22 Basin (in Chinese with English abstract). Geol. China 38, 384e392. Slatt, R.M., Mark, S., 2004. Geologic Knowledge Key to Reservoir Characterization. 75
23 Chen, H.H., Fu, X.M., Yang, J.M., 1997. Natural gas replenishment in the Ya13-1 Gas Amer. Oil and Gas Reporter, pp. 111e113. 76
24 field in Ying-Qiong Basin, South China sea (in Chinese with English abstract). Stanley, K.O., Surdam, R.C., 1978. Sedimentation on the front of Eocene Gilbert-type 77
Acta Pet. Sin. 18, 32e37. deltas, Washakie Basin, Wyoming. J. Sediment. Res. 48, 557e573.
25 Chen, H.H., Li, S.T., Sun, Y.C., Zhang, Q.M., 1998. Two petroleum systems charge the Steel, R.J., Pore˛ bski, S.J., Mellere, D., et al., 2003. Shelf-edge delta types and their
78
26 YA13-1 gas field in Yinggehai and Qiongdongnan Basins, South China Sea. AAPG sequence-stratigraphic relationships. In: Roberts, H., Rose, N., Fillon, R.H., 79
27 Bull. 82, 757e772. Anderson, J.B. (Eds.), Shelf Margin Deltas and Linked Down Slope Petroleum 80
Chen, P.P.H., Chen, Z.Y., Zhang, Q.M., 1993. Sequence stratigraphy and continental Systems: Global Significance and Future Exploration Potential: Gulf Coast
28 margin development of the northwestern shelf of the South China Sea. AAPG Section, SEPM Foundation, 23rd Annual Research Conference Houston, Texas,
81
29 Bull. 77, 842e862. pp. 205e230. 82
30 Coleman, J.M., 1982. Deltas Processes Models of Deposition for Exploration. Inter- Sun, J.L., 1994. The characteristics of Nanhai Ya13-1 Gas Field and its enrichment 83
national Human Resources Development Corporation Boston, pp. 107e111. pool-formed conditions (in Chinese). Nat. Gas Ind. 14, 1e7.
31 Coleman, J.M., Wright, L.D., 1975. Modern river deltas:, Variability of processes and
84
Ta, T.K.O., Nguyen, V.L., Tateishi, M., et al., 2002. Sediment facies and late Holocene
32 sand bodies. In: Broussard, M.L. (Ed.), Deltas, Models for Exploration. Geol. Soc., progradation of the Mekong River Delta in Bentre Province, southern Vietnam: 85
33 Houston, Texas, pp. 99e149, 555 p. an example of evolution from a tide-dominated to a tide- and wave-dominated 86
Covault, J.A., Romans, B.W., Graham, S.A., 2009. Outcrop expression of a continental- delta. Sediment. Geol. 152, 313e325.
34 87
margin-scale shelf-edge delta from the Cretaceous Magallanes basin, Chile. Wang, G.F., Wu, C.L., Zhou, J.Y., et al., 1998. Sequence stratigraphic analysis of the
35 J. Sediment. Res. 79, 523e539. Tertiary in the Qiongdongnan Basin (in Chinese with English abstract). Exp. Pet. 88
36 Dixon, J.F., Steel, R.J., Olariu, C., 2012. River-dominated, shelf-edge deltas: delivery of Geol. 20, 124e128. 89
sand across the shelf break in the absence of slope incision. Sedimentology 59, Wu, H.S., Zeng, S.J., Huang, H., 2007. Application of multiwell formation evaluation
37 90
1133e1157. methodology in the Yacheng13-1 gas field Economic Recoverable Reserves
38 Galloway, W.E., 1975. Process framework for describing the morphologic and (ERR) (in Chinese with English abstract). Oil Drill. Prod. Technol. 29, 105e109. 91
39 stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional systems. In: Broussard, M.L. (Ed.), Xie, X.N., Müller, D., Ren, J.Y., Jiang, T., 2008. Stratigraphic pattern and evolution of 92
40 Deltas, Models for Exploration. Houston Geol. Soc., Houston, TX, pp. 87e98. the continental slope system in offshore Hainan, northern South China Sea (in 93
Gani, M.R., Bhattacharya, J.P., 2007. Basic building blocks and process variability of a Chinese with English abstract). Mar. Geol. 247, 129e144.
41 cretaceous delta: internal facies architecture reveals a more dynamic interac- Zeng, S.J., He, S.L., Wang, L.J., Wang, L., 2011. Refined modeling of logging reservoir
94
42 tion of river, wave, and tidal processes than is indicated by external shape. parameters based on flow units (in Chinese with English abstract). Nat. Gas Ind. 95
43 J. Sediment. Res. 77, 284e302. 31, 12e15. 96
Glørstad-Clark, E., Birkeland, E.P., Nystuen, J.P., Faleide, J.I., Midtkandal, I., 2011. Zhang, S.L., Xia, B., He, J.X., 2005. Building of the structure model and flow unit layer
44 Triassic platform-margin deltas in the western Barents Sea. Mar. Pet. Geol. 28, model in the Yacheng 13-1 Gas Field (in Chinese with English abstract). Fault-
97
45 1294e1314. block Oil Gas Field 12, 1e4. 98
46 Hao, F., Li, S.T., Gong, Z.S., Yang, J.M., 2000a. Thermal regime, inter-reservoir Zhong, Z.H., Wang, L.S., Li, X.X., et al., 2004. The Paleogene basin-filling evolution of 99
compositional heterogeneities, and reservoir-filling history of the Dongfang Qiongdongnan Basin and its relation with seafloor spreading of the South China
47 Gas Field, Yinggehai Basin, South China Sea: evidence for episodic fluid in-
100
Sea (in Chinese with English abstract). Mar. Geol. Quat. Geol. 24, 29e36.
48 jections in overpressured basins. AAPG Bull. 84, 607e626. Zhou, X.Y., Wei, K.S., 2000. Sequence stratigraphy and source-reservoir-cap rock 101
49 Hao, Y.C., CHEN, P.F., Wan, X.Q., Dong, J.S., 2000b. Sequence stratigraphic analysis of assemblage of QDN basin (in Chinese with English abstract). Oil Gas Geol. 21, 102
the Tertiary in the Qiongdongnan Basin (in Chinese). Geosci. J. Grad. Sch. China 244e248.
50 103
Univ. Geosci. 14, 237e245.
51 104
52 105
53 106
View publication stats

SChinaSea 2014 Proof JMPG Revised

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SChinaSea 2014 Proof JMPG Revised

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Change of Deltaic Depositional Environment and Impacts on Reservoir

Article in Marine and Petroleum Geology · December 2014

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

AUTHOR QUERY FORM

Article Number: 1985 Fax: +31 2048 52789

For correction or revision of any artwork, please consult http://www.elsevier.com/artworkinstructions.

(continued on next page)

Thank you for your assistance.

Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1

Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

2 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 3

4 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 5

6 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 7

8 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 9

10 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 11

12 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 13

14 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16 15

16 S. Li et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2014) 1e16

You might also like