湖相重力流沉积特征及发育模式——以苏北盆地高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组为例

doi:10.7623/syxb201603007

石油学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (3): 348-359.DOI: 10.7623/syxb201603007

湖相重力流沉积特征及发育模式——以苏北盆地高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组为例

袁静¹, 梁绘媛², 梁兵³, 董道涛¹, 闵伟², 宋璠¹, 李鹤永³

1. 中国石油大学地球科学与技术学院山东青岛 266580;
2. 中国石油化工股份有限公司胜利油田分公司山东东营 257000;
3. 中国石油化工股份有限公司江苏油田分公司江苏扬州 225012

收稿日期:2015-09-21 修回日期:2016-01-11 出版日期:2016-03-25 发布日期:2016-04-12
通讯作者: 袁静,女,1972年6月生,1993年毕业于石油大学(华东)石油地质专业,1999年获石油大学(北京)理学博士学位,现为中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院教授,主要从事储层沉积学和储层地质学研究。Email:drjyuan@163.com
作者简介:袁静,女,1972年6月生,1993年毕业于石油大学(华东)石油地质专业,1999年获石油大学(北京)理学博士学位,现为中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院教授,主要从事储层沉积学和储层地质学研究。Email:drjyuan@163.com
基金资助:
中国石油化工股份有限公司科技攻关项目(P13125)资助。

Sedimentary characteristics and development model of lacustrine gravity flow: a case study of Dainan Formation in deep sag belt of Gaoyou depression, Northern Jiangsu Basin

Yuan Jing¹, Liang Huiyuan², Liang Bing³, Dong Daotao¹, Min Wei², Song Fan¹, Li Heyong³

1. School of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum, Shandong Qingdao 266580, China;
2. Sinopec Shengli Oilfield Company, Shandong Dongying 257000, China;
3. Sinopec Jiangsu Oilfield Company, Jiangsu Yangzhou 225012, China

Received:2015-09-21 Revised:2016-01-11 Online:2016-03-25 Published:2016-04-12

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

以苏北盆地高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组一段-戴南组二段五亚段为研究对象,以岩心精细观察和岩石薄片镜下鉴定为主要手段,结合测录井资料解释等描述重力流沉积特征和岩相特征,综合考虑沉积特征、形成过程、支撑机理及沉积机理等因素划分重力流类型,根据古构造和古地理背景、重力流类型和转化特征综合分析建立重力流发育与转化模式。研究结果表明:高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组主要发育碎屑流、浊流和液化流3种沉积物重力流和滑动-滑塌这一重要的斜坡沉积物重力流触发机制;其中以碎屑流最为常见,根据其沉积物粒度构成特征划分为砾质碎屑流、砂质碎屑流和泥质碎屑流,根据其物质来源划分为外源型碎屑流和内源型碎屑流。识别出8种重力流沉积岩相和4类重力流沉积典型岩相组合。建立了不同物源条件下的重力流发育与转化模式,包括断阶带物源方向的双断阶混源型、多断阶混源型和斜坡带物源方向的内源型模式。断阶带重力流来自物源老山,以砾质碎屑流、砂质碎屑流、泥质碎屑流、浊流为主,所属沉积相类型包括扇三角洲、近岸水下扇和湖底扇;斜坡带重力流物源为三角洲前缘沉积物,以滑动-滑塌、液化流、砂质碎屑流、浊流为主,形成风暴浪基面之上的事件沉积体和深湖区的湖底扇。

关键词: 重力流, 碎屑流, 流体转化, 发育模式, 高邮凹陷

Abstract:

Taking the sub-member 5 of Member 2 of Dainan Formation in deep sag belt of Gaoyou Depression, Northern Jiangsu Basin as a research object, based on core observation and microscopic identification of rock thin-sections in combination with logging data interpretation, this study describes the sedimentary and lithofacies characteristics of gravity flow. The main types of gravity flows are divided by comprehensively considering the sedimentary characteristics, formation process, as well as supporting and sedimentary mechanism. The development and transform models of gravity flows are established according to the paleo-tectonic and paleo-geographic background as well as the types and transform characteristics of gravity flows. The research results indicate that three types of sediment gravity flows, such as debris flow, turbidities and liquefied flow, are mainly developed in Dainan Formation along the deep sag belt of Gaoyou Depression, where slip-collapse is identified as an important trigger mechanism of slope sediment gravity flows. Among them, debris flow is most commonly found, and divided into gravel debris flow, sandy debris flow and muddy debris flow according to the grain-size composition of sediment. It can also be divided into extrabasinal type and intrabasinal type according to material source. There is a combination between eight types of gravity-flow sedimentary lithofacies and four types of typical gravity-flow sedimentary lithofacies. The development and transformation models of gravity flows in different provenance conditions are established, including double fault-terrace mixed-source mode and multiple fault-terrace mixed-source mode in terms of fault-terrace belt provenance as well as intrabasinal source mode in terms of slope belt provenance. The gravity flows of fault-terrace belt are derived from parent rock area, dominated by gravel debris flow, sandy debris flow, muddy debris flow and turbidities, of which the sedimentary facies include fan delta, near-shore subaqueous fan and sublacustrine fan. The gravity flows of slope belt are sourced from the delta front sediments, dominated by slip-collapse, liquefied flow, sandy debris flow and turbidities, thus forming the event sedimentary body above storm wave base and sublacustrine fan in deep lake zones.

Key words: gravity flow, debris flow, flow transform, development model, Gaoyou sag

中图分类号:

TE122.1

袁静, 梁绘媛, 梁兵, 董道涛, 闵伟, 宋璠, 李鹤永. 湖相重力流沉积特征及发育模式——以苏北盆地高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组为例[J]. 石油学报, 2016, 37(3): 348-359.

Yuan Jing, Liang Huiyuan, Liang Bing, Dong Daotao, Min Wei, Song Fan, Li Heyong. Sedimentary characteristics and development model of lacustrine gravity flow: a case study of Dainan Formation in deep sag belt of Gaoyou depression, Northern Jiangsu Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2016, 37(3): 348-359.

参考文献

[1] Johnson D.The origin of submarine canyons[J].Journal of Geomorphology,1938,1:111-340.
[2] Kuenen P H,Migliorini C I.Turbidity currents as a cause of graded bedding[J].The Journal of Geology,1950,58(2):91-127.
[3] Bouma A H.Sedimentology of some flysch deposits:a graphic approach to facies interpretation[M].Amsterdam:Elsevier,1962.
[4] Shanmugam G,Moioal R J.Reinterpretation of depositional processes in a classic flysch sequence(Pennsylvanian Jackfork Group),Ouachita Mountains,Arkansas and Oklahoma[J].AAPG Bulletin,1995,79:672-695.
[5] Shanmugam G.High-density turbidity currents:are they sandy debris flows[J].Journal of Sedimentary Research,1996,66(1):2-10.
[6] Shanmugam G.Ten turbidite myths[J].Earth-Science Reviews,2002,58(3/4):311-341.
[7] 鲜本忠,安思奇,施文华.水下碎屑流沉积:深水沉积研究热点与进展[J].地质论评,2014,60(1):39-51.
Xian Benzhong,An Siqi,Shi Wenhua.Subaqueous debris flow:hotspots and advances of deep-water sedimentation[J].Geological Review,2014,60(1):39-51.
[8] 杨田,操应长,王艳忠,等.深水重力流类型、沉积特征及成因机制——以济阳坳陷沙河街组三段中亚段为例[J].石油学报,2015,36(9):1048-1059.
Yang Tian,Cao Yingchang,Wang Yanzhong,et al.Types,sedimentary characteristics and genetic mechanisms of deep-water gravity flows:a case study of the middle submember in Member 3 of Shahejie Formation in Jiyang depression[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2015,36(9):1048-1059.
[9] 庞雄,朱明,柳保军,等.南海北部珠江口盆地白云凹陷深水区重力流沉积机理[J].石油学报,2014,35(4):646-653.
Pang Xiong,Zhu Ming,Liu Baojun,et al.The mechanism of gravity flow deposition in Baiyun sag deepwater area of the northern South China Sea[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica,2014,35(4):646-653.
[10] 梁兵.高邮凹陷断层-岩性油气藏勘探技术与实践[J].中国石油勘探,2013,18(4):36-49.
Liang Bing.Fault-lithologic reservoir exploration technology and practice in Gaoyou sag[J].China Petroleum Exploration,2013,18(4):36-49.
[11] 马晓鸣.高邮凹陷构造特征研究[D].青岛:中国石油大学,2009.
Ma Xiaoming.Research of structural characteristics of Gaoyou depression[D].Qingdao:China University of Petroleum,2009.
[12] 王玺.高邮凹陷主要断裂体系特征研究[D].青岛:中国石油大学,2011.
Wang Xi.Study on the characteristics of major fault systems in Gaoyou sag[D].Qingdao:China University of Petroleum,2011.
[13] Middleton G V,Hampton M A.Sediment gravity flows:mechanics of flow and deposition[C]//Middleton G V,Bouma A H.Turbidity and deep-water sedimentation:short course lecture notes,Part I.California:Los Angeles,1973:1-38.
[14] Middleton G V,Hampton M A.Subaqueous sediment transport and deposition by sediment gravity flows[C]//Stanley D J,Swift D J P.Marine sediment transport and environmental management.New York:Wiley,1976:197-218.
[15] Lowe D R.Sediment gravity flows; Ⅱ,depositional models with special reference to the deposits of high-density turbidity currents[J].Journal of Sedimentary Petrology,1982,52(1):279-297.
[16] Shultz A W.Subaerial debris-flow deposition in the upper Paleozoic Cutler Formation,western Colorado[J].Journal of Sedimentary Research,1984,54(3):759-772.
[17] Shanmugam G.Deep-water processes and facies models:implications for sandstone petroleum reservoirs[M].Amsterdam:Elsevier,2006.
[18] Shanmugam G.50 years of the turbidite Paradigm(1950s-1990s):deep-water processes and facies models-a critical perspective[J].Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2000,17(2):285-342.
[19] Mulder A,Alexander J.The physical character of subaqueous sedimentary density flows and their deposits[J].Sedimentology,2001,48(2):269-299.
[20] Talling P J,Masson D G,Sumner E J,et al.Subaqueous sediment density flows:depositional processes and deposit types[J].Sedimentology,2012,59(7):1937-2003.
[21] 王德坪.湖相内成碎屑流的沉积及形成机理[J].地质学报,1991,65(4):299-316.
Wang Deping.The sedimentation and formation mechanism of lacustrine endogenic debris flow[J].Geological Review,1991,65(4):299-316.
[22] Shanmugam G.深水砂体成因研究新进展[J].石油勘探与开发,2013,40(3):294-301.
Shanmugam G.New perspectives on deep-water sandstones:implications[J].Petroleum Exploration and Development,2013,40(3):294-301.
[23] Le Roux J P.Can dispersive pressure cause inverse grading in grain flows?-Discussion[J].Journal of Sedimentary Research,2003,73(2):333-334.
[24] 鲜本忠,万锦峰,董艳蕾,等.湖相深水块状砂岩特征、成因及发育模式:以南堡凹陷东营组为例[J.岩石学报,2013,29(9):3287-3299.
Xian Benzhong,Wan Jinfeng,Dong Yanlei,et al.Sedimentary characteristics,origin and model of lacustrine deep-water massive sandstone:an example from Dingying Formation in Nanpu depression[J].Acta Petrologica Sinica,2013,29(9):3287-3299.
[25] 李林,曲永强,孟庆任,等.重力流沉积:理论研究与野外识别[J].沉积学报,2011,29(4):677-688.
Li Lin,Qu Yongqiang,Meng Qingren,et al.Gravity flow sedimentation:theoretical studies and field identification[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2011,29(4):677-688.
[26] 袁静.山东惠民凹陷古近纪震积岩特征及其地质意义[J].沉积学报, 2004,22(1):41-46.
Yuan Jing.The property and geological significance of seismites of Paleogene in Huimin sag,Shandong province[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2004,22(1):41-46.
[27] 李存磊,任伟伟,唐明明.流体性质转换机制在重力流沉积体系分析中应用初探[J].地质论评,2012,58(2):285-296.
Li Cunlei,Ren Weiwei,Tang Mingming.Preliminary study on gravity flow depositional system based on fluid properties conversion theory[J].Geological Review,2012,58(2):285-296.
[28] 邹才能,赵政璋,杨华,等.陆相湖盆深水砂质碎屑流成因机制与分布特征——以鄂尔多斯盆地为例[J].沉积学报,2009,27(6):1065-1075.
Zou Caineng,Zhao Zhengzhang,Yang Hua,et al.Genetic mechanism and distribution of sandy debris flows in terrestrial lacustrine basin[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2009,27(6):1065-1075.
[29] 李相博,刘化清,张忠义,等.深水块状砂岩碎屑流成因的直接证据:"泥包砾"结构——以鄂尔多斯盆地上三叠统延长组研究为例[J].沉积学报,2014,32(4):611-622.
Li Xiangbo,Liu Huaqing,Zhang Zhongyi,et al. "Argillaceous parcel" structure:a direct evidence of debris flow origin of deep-water massive sandstone of Yanchang Formation,Upper Triassic,the Ordos Basin[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2014,32(4):611-622.
[30] 张雷,李振海,张学娟,等.重力流沉积岩相划分及其发育规律[J].中国石油大学学报:自然科学版,2015,39(1):17-24.
Zhang Lei,Li Zhenhai,Zhang Xuejuan,et al.Lithofacies classification and development rule of gravity flows deposits[J].Journal of China University of Petroleum:Edition of Natural Sciences,2015,39(1):17-24.

湖相重力流沉积特征及发育模式——以苏北盆地高邮凹陷深凹带戴南组为例

Sedimentary characteristics and development model of lacustrine gravity flow: a case study of Dainan Formation in deep sag belt of Gaoyou depression, Northern Jiangsu Basin

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	张家强, 李士祥, 李宏伟, 周新平, 刘江艳, 郭睿良, 陈俊霖, 李树同. 鄂尔多斯盆地延长组7油层组湖盆远端重力流沉积与深水油气勘探——以城页水平井区长7₃小层为例[J]. 石油学报, 2021, 42(5): 570-587.
[2]	王家豪, 王华, 肖敦清, 蒲秀刚, 韩文忠, 张伟. 陆相断陷湖盆异重流与滑塌型重力流沉积辨别[J]. 石油学报, 2020, 41(4): 392-402,411.
[3]	朱光有, 赵坤, 李婷婷, 付小东, 张志遥, 陈志勇, 王鹏举. 中国华南地区下寒武统烃源岩沉积环境、发育模式与分布预测[J]. 石油学报, 2020, 41(12): 1567-1586.
[4]	赵坤, 李婷婷, 朱光有, 张志遥, 李婧菲, 王鹏举, 闫慧慧, 陈永进. 下寒武统优质烃源岩的地球化学特征与形成机制——以鄂西地区天柱山剖面为例[J]. 石油学报, 2020, 41(1): 13-26.
[5]	张忠涛, 张向涛, 孙辉, 石宁, 张博, 冯轩. 珠江口盆地渐新世陆架边缘三角洲沉积特征及其对成藏的控制作用[J]. 石油学报, 2019, 40(s1): 81-89.
[6]	李映涛, 漆立新, 张哨楠, 云露, 曹自成, 韩俊, 尤东华, 肖红琳, 肖重阳. 塔里木盆地顺北地区中—下奥陶统断溶体储层特征及发育模式[J]. 石油学报, 2019, 40(12): 1470-1484.
[7]	厚刚福, 徐洋, 孙靖, 王力宝, 宋明星, 郭华军, 李亚哲, 陈扬. 三角洲前缘—湖盆深水区沉积模式及意义——以准噶尔盆地盆1井西凹陷三工河组二段一砂组为例[J]. 石油学报, 2019, 40(10): 1223-1232.
[8]	张恒, 蔡忠贤, 漆立新, 云露, 曹自成, 沙旭光. 塔中隆起中-下奥陶统岩溶水文地貌条件及控储机制[J]. 石油学报, 2018, 39(9): 990-1005.
[9]	牛杏, 杨香华, 严德天, 庄新国, 王波, 霍沈君, 许晓明. 澳大利亚North Carnarvon盆地中生代气候环境演变与优质烃源岩发育机制[J]. 石油学报, 2018, 39(8): 902-915.
[10]	黄银涛, 文力, 姚光庆, 姜平. 莺歌海盆地东方区黄流组细粒厚层重力流砂体沉积特征[J]. 石油学报, 2018, 39(3): 290-303.
[11]	崔宇, 李宏军, 付立新, 肖飞, 王辉, 段润梅, 张津宁, 冯建园, 杨子玉, 赵宗举. 歧口凹陷北大港构造带奥陶系潜山储层特征、主控因素及发育模式[J]. 石油学报, 2018, 39(11): 1241-1252.
[12]	陈广坡, 李娟, 吴海波, 彭威, 李敬生, 谢明贤, 张斌, 石小茜. 陆相断陷湖盆滑塌型深水重力流沉积特征、识别标志及形成机制——来自海拉尔盆地东明凹陷明D2井全井段连续取心的证据[J]. 石油学报, 2018, 39(10): 1119-1129.
[13]	操应长, 杨田, 王艳忠, 李文强. 超临界沉积物重力流形成演化及特征[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38(6): 607-621.
[14]	夏景生, 刘晓涵, 王政军, 文雯, 唐小云. 渤海湾盆地南堡凹陷西部东营组三段-沙河街组一段砂质碎屑流沉积特征及油气勘探意义[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38(4): 399-413.
[15]	夏志远, 刘占国, 李森明, 王艳清, 王鹏, 管斌. 岩盐成因与发育模式——以柴达木盆地英西地区古近系下干柴沟组为例[J]. 石油学报, 2017, 38(1): 55-66.