Technology and Application on Reservoir Architecture Characterization Based on Sandbodies Spatial Orientation

  • Zhixin MaEmail author
  • Ji Zhang
  • Wen Xue
  • Wensheng Wang
  • Bin Fu
  • Weifeng Sun
  • Qianqian Fan
  • Ya Li
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering book series (SSGG)


As the high percent of effective sandbody thickness, the braided river reservoir becomes an important exploration and exploitation area. The Shihezi group lower eighth section of Sulige gas field is a typical sandy braided river reservoir. Strong reservoir heterogeneity is the main restriction factor of gas field development. Su X adding area, for instance. Reference to the analysis results of modern sedimentary and ancient outcrop configuration, a new reservoir architecture characterize method is put forward. The new methods realize river channel sandbody spatial orientation by “changes on bottom of sandbody and microfacies overlay regular pattern” and realize channel bar sandbody spatial orientation by “logging cycle, silt layer position, and microfacies overlay characteristic.” The reservoir structure analysis on river channel and channel bar has carried out, and the effective sandbody control effect from reservoir configuration unit has analyzed. The characterization results show: ① There are two main plane combinations in the single channel sandbody of Shihezi group eighth section in research; they are banded channel whose width is 1000–2000 m and sheet scale channel whose width is 1500–4000 m. ② The main reservoir configuration units include the channel bar, braided river channel, and flood plain, and the channel bar is the main reservoir element. ③ The sandbodied scales are different because of different genetic type. The thickness of channel bar always is 3–5 m, the width is 250–300 m, and the length is 500–900 m. The width of braided river channel is always less than 200 m. The deposition pattern presents “alternate channel and bar, wide bar and narrow channel” on flat. ④ Five-level configuration units control effective sandbody macro-distribution, four-level configuration units are the main control factor, and three-level configuration units have little effect on the distribution of effective sandbodies. The method has been successfully used on well location optimization in Sulige gas field. It have reference value to the same type Reservoir configuration analyze.


Sandbodies spatial orientation Microfacies overlay Braided river reservoir Reservoir architecture characterization Single river channel Channel bar 



1. National Science and Technology major projects “The development demonstration project of a large low permeability lithostratigraphic hydrocarbon reservoirs in Ordos Basin” (No. 2016ZX05050).

2. PetroChina Company Limited Science and Technology major projects “Study on stable production and enhanced oil recovery technology in Changqing gas field” (No. 2016E-0509).


  1. 1.
    Miall AD (1985) Architectural-element analysis: a new method of facies analysis applied to fluvial deposits. Earth Sci Rev 22:261–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu S (2010) Reservoir characterization & modeling. Petroleum Industry, Beijing, pp 136–174Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wu S, Yue D, Liu J et al (2008) Hierarchy modeling of subsurface palaeochannel reservoir architecture. Sci China Seri D Earth Sci 51(Suppl II):126–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu S, Zhai R, Li Y (2012) Subsurface reservoir architecture characterization: current status and prospects. Earth Sci Fornt (China Univ Geosci (Beijing) Peking Univ) 19(2):15–23Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin Y, Wu S, Yue D et al (2013) Fine anatomizing reservoir architecture of fan-delta front: a case study on dujiatai reservoir in shu2–6–6 block. Liao he oilfield. Nat Gas Geosci 24(2):335–344Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Best JL, Ashworth PJ, Bristow CS et al (2003) Three-dimensional sedimentary architecture of a large mid-channel sand braid bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh. J Sediment Res 73(4):516–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lynds R, Hajek E (2006) Conceptual model for predicting mudstone dimensions in sandy braided-river reservoirs. AAPG Bull 90(8):1273–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lunt IA, Sambrook Smith GH, Best JL et al (2013) Deposits of the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River: implications for the use of modern analogs in reconstructing channel dimensions in reservoir characterization. AAPG Bull 97(4):553–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miall AD (1996) The geology of fluvial deposits: sedimentary facies, basin analysis and petroleum geology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp 74–98Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robinson JW, Mccabe PJ (1997) Sandstone-body and shale-body dimensions in a braided fluvial system: Salt Wash Member (Morrison Formation), Garfield County, Utah. AAPG Bull 81(8):1267–1291Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liao B, Zhang W, Li L et al (1998) Study on modern deposit of a braided stream and facies model: taking the Yongding river as an example. Acta Sedimentol Sin 16(1):34–40Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma F, Zhang S, Wang L (2003) Sedimentary characteristics and microfacies of fluvial deposits of mordern Nen River at Damagang area. J Daqing Pet Inst 25(2):8–11Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lunt IA, Bridge JS, Tye RS (2004) A quantitative, three-dimensional depositional model of gravelly braided rivers. Sedimentology 51:377–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peakall J, Ashworth PJ, Best JL (2007) Meander-bend evolution, alluvial arthitecture, and the role of cohesion in Sinuous river channels: a flume study. J Sediment Res 77:197–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Skellya RL, Bristowb CS, Ethridge FG (2003) Architecture of channel-belt deposits in an aggrading shallow sandbed braided river: the lower Niobrara River, northeast Nebraska. Sed Geol 158:249–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghazi S, Mountney NP (2009) Facies and architectural element analysis of a meandering fluvial succession: the Permian Warchha Sandstone, Salt Range, Pakistan. Sed Geol 221:99–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corbeanu RM, Soegaard K, Szerbiak RB (2001) Detailed internal architecture of a fluvial channel sandstone determined from outcrop, cores, and 3-D ground-penetrating radar: example from the middle Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone, east-central Utah. AAPG Bull 85(9):1583–1608Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leeder MR (1973) Fluvial fining-up wards cycles and the magni-tude of paleochannels. Geol Mag 110(3):265–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu Z, Jiao Y (1996) Composition of facies meandering river origin and relationship of its spatial configuration an-on the spot geologic investigation on sedimentology of Mesozoic outcrop in Eerduosi Basin. Pet Geol Oil Dev Daqing 15(3):6–9Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ma S, Yang Q (2000) The depositional model, 3-D architecture and heterogeneousmodel of point bar in meandering channels. Acta Sedimentol Sin 18(2):241–247Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ma S, Sun Y, Fan G (2008) The method for studying thin inter-bed architecture of burial meandering channel sandbody. Sedimentol Sin 26(4):632–638Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yin B, Wu S, Yue D et al (2008) Recognizing abandoned channel with underground dense well pattern and its application in Sabei oilfield. J Oil Gas Technol 30(4):33–36Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bai Z, Wang Q, Du Q et al (2009) Study on 3D-architecturegeology modeling and digital simulation in meandering reservoir. Acta Pet Sin 30(6):898–907Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liu Y, Hou J, Song B (2011) Characterization of interlayers within braided-river thick sandstones: a case study on the Lamadian oilfield in Daqing. Acta Pet Sin 32(5):836–840Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li S, Song X, Jiang Y et al (2011) Architecture and remaining oil distribution of the sandy braided river reservoir in the Gaoshangpu oilfield. Pet Explor Dev 38(4):474–481Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang C, Yin T, Yu C et al (2013) Reservoir architectural analysis of meandering channel sandstone in the delta plain based on the depositional process. Sedimentol Sin 31(4):653–661Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jiao Q, Gao J, Hou J et al (2009) Reservoir architecture of multiplex glutenite on alluvial fan. Geol Sci Technol Inf 28(6):57–63Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yi Z, Wu S, Du Q et al (2010) An accurate anatomizing method for structure of reservoir ofallnvial fan: a case study on lower Karamy formation, Liuzhong area, karamay oilfield. J Jilin Univ Earth Sci 40(4):940–945Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wen L, Wu S, Wang Y et al (2011) An accurate method for anatomizing architecture of subsurface reservoir in mouth bar of fluvial dominated delta. J Cent South Univ Sci Technol Ed 42(4):1073–1078Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xin Z (2008) Analysis on archintecture of mouth bar of fluvial dominated delta. Geol Rev 54(4):527–531Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sun T, Mu L, Zhao G (2014) Classification and characterization of barrier-intercalation in sandy braided river reservoirs: taking Hegli oilfield of Muglad Basin in Sudan as an example. Pet Explor Dev 41(1):112–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bai Z (2010) Study on the 3D architecture geological modeling of braided fluvial sandbody. J Southwest Pet Univ Sci Technol Ed 32(6):21–24Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    He Z, Fu J, Xi S et al (2003) Geological features of reservoir formation of Sulige gas field. Acta Pet Sin 24(2):6–12Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang Y, Xu X, Fu X et al (2007) Research on the sedimentary facies characteristics of upper Paleozoic reservoir in Su6 region, Sulige gas field. J Northwest Univ Nat Sci Ed 37(2):266–271Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wen H, Zheng R, Gao H et al (2007) Sedimentary facies of the 8th member of lower Shihezi formation in Su6 area, Sulige gas field. Sedimentol Sin 25(1):90–97Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang Y, Bao H, Jia Y et al (2008) Analysis on control factors of sandstone reservoir of the upper Paleozoic in Ordos Basin. J Palaeogeogr 10(1):25–32Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chen F, Lu T, Da S et al (2008) Study on sedimentary facies of braided stream and its application in geological modeling in Sulige gas field. Pet Geol Eng 22(2):22–24Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li J, Yang X (2009) Geological characteristics of gas reservoirs in well block 36–11 of Sulige gas field. J Oil Gas Technol 31(4):62–65Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yin Z, Yu X, Lu G (2006) Sedimentary facies of 8th member of shihezi fm in block Su6 in Sulige gas fileld. Nat Gas Ind 26(3):26Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Shenghe Wu, Youliang Ji, Dali Yue et al (2013) Discussion on hierarchical scheme of architecture units in clastic deposits. Geol J China Univ 19(1):12–22Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yin X, Peng S, Li H et al (2007) A new micro-facies study method of braid river reservoir based on flow unit. Geol Sci Technol Inf 26(3):26–27Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sun T, Mu L, Wu X et al (2014) A quantitative method for architectural characterization of sandy braided-river reservoirs: taking Hegli oilfield of Muglad Basin in Sudan as an example. Acta Pet Sin 35(14):715–724Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Xing B (2014) Establishment of the braided river reservoir geology bank and its application: Daqing Changyuan oilfield La-Sa piece of Pu I as an example. J Northeast Pet Univ 38(6):715–724Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Qinghua Chen, Ming Zeng, Fengqi Zhang et al (2004) Identification of single channel in fluvial reservoir and its significance to the oilfield development. Pet Geol Recovery Effi 11(3):11–15Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li Y, Fan A, Li F et al (2009) Reservoir properties and control factors of Permian sands in Sulige gas field. Ordos Basin. Spec Oil Gas Reservoir 16(6):12–14 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yang L, Chen B, Li S et al (2013) Pattern of genesis-based mudstone distribution for sandy braided river: a case study of sandy braided-river outcrop, datong, Shanxi province, China. Nat Gas Geosci 24(1):93–99Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang S, An W, Chen P et al (2013) Characteristic and development techniques of Sulige tight gas pool. Nat Gas Geosci 24(1):138–145Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    He D, Jia A, Ji G et al (2013) Well type and pattern optimization technology for large scale tight sand gas, Sulige gas field. Pet Explor Dev 40(1):79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhixin Ma
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ji Zhang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wen Xue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wensheng Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bin Fu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Weifeng Sun
    • 1
    • 2
  • Qianqian Fan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ya Li
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Sulige Gas Field Research Center of Chang Qing Oilfield Company, PetroChinaXi’anChina
  2. 2.State Engineering Laboratory of Low Permeability Oil & Gas Field Exploration and DevelopmentXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations