首页 | 官方网站   微博 | 高级检索  
     

动态图像法与镜下测量法粒度分布结果对比研究
引用本文:陈麦雨,徐守余,张立强,王朝,许紫菁.动态图像法与镜下测量法粒度分布结果对比研究[J].沉积学报,2019,37(3):502-510.
作者姓名:陈麦雨  徐守余  张立强  王朝  许紫菁
作者单位:中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院,山东青岛,266580;中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院,山东青岛,266580;中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院,山东青岛,266580;中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院,山东青岛,266580;中国石油大学(华东)地球科学与技术学院,山东青岛,266580
基金项目:国家科技重大专项(2017ZX05009001)
摘    要:动态图像法、镜下测量法在地下沉积岩粒度分析中的应用研究较为薄弱。对塔里木轮南地区X100井三叠系水下分流河道12块砂岩样品分别采用以上两种方法进行粒度测试,将所测得的各组分含量、粒度曲线及粒度参数进行对比分析,并对镜下测量法粒度结果开展校正研究,以使这两种方法在今后能更广泛地运用于粒度分析。研究结果表明:相较于镜下测量法,动态图像法检测粗组分含量偏大而细组分含量偏小,黏土—粉砂组分和中砂组分是两种方法产生差异的分界线。检测颗粒数目的悬殊和岩石类型是两种方法存在差异的主要原因,测试方法的量程、测量原理和颗粒形状也会造成一定的影响。基于岩性的镜下测量法粒度结果校正,使两种方法的细砂—粗砂组分含量、粒径参数的相关系数从0.25~0.80提高到0.88~0.95,达到了校正基本目的,其准确性得到有效的提高。

关 键 词:粒度测试  粒度分析  动态图像法  镜下测量法  对比与校正
收稿时间:2018-08-08

Comparison of Dynamic Image Analysis and Thin-section Measuring Analysis Grain-size Test Method
CHEN MaiYu,XU ShouYu,ZHANG LiQiang,WANG Zhao,XU ZiJing.Comparison of Dynamic Image Analysis and Thin-section Measuring Analysis Grain-size Test Method[J].Acta Sedimentologica Sinica,2019,37(3):502-510.
Authors:CHEN MaiYu  XU ShouYu  ZHANG LiQiang  WANG Zhao  XU ZiJing
Affiliation:School of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum(East China), Qingdao, Shandong 266580, China
Abstract:Compared with traditional grain-size test methods, research on the application of the dynamic image and thin-section measuring methods in underground sedimentary rock grain-size analysis is currently relatively weak. In this paper, taking 12 sandstone samples from Well X100 in the Lunnan area, Tarim basin and from underwater distributary channels of Triassic, we compared and analyzed the results obtained using the dynamic image and thin-section measuring methods. The content of each grain gradation, grain-size curves, and grain-size parameters are included in the testing results. Then calibration research of the testing results obtained from the thin-section measuring method was carried out. This paper aims to make the two methods more widely applicable to grain-size analysis in the future. The research results show that, compared with results obtained from the thin-section measuring method, the content of coarser sand measured using the dynamic image method is higher and that of finer sand is correspondingly smaller. The clay-to-silt content and medium sand content represent the boundary line which differentiates the two methods. The sharp contrast of detecting particle amount and lithologic characteristics are the main reasons for the difference, upon which the measurement range, measurement principle, and particle shape also exert some influence. The calibration method for the thin-section measuring method proposed here is based on rock type and makes the correlation coefficients (R2) of the testing results (content of fine sand to coarse sand and grain diameters) by the post-calibrated thin-section measuring method with the dynamic image method increase from 0.25-0.80 to 0.88-0.95, achieving the primary purpose of calibration and improving the accuracy of the thin-section measuring method.
Keywords:grain-size test  grain-size analysis  dynamic image analysis  thin-section measuring analysis  comparison and calibration
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《沉积学报》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《沉积学报》下载全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司    京ICP备09084417号-23

京公网安备 11010802026262号