THE RECOVERY OF PROTOTYPE BASIN AND ITS CONTROL OVER THE DEPOSITION IN THE LOWER THIRD SUB-MEMBER AND FOURTH MEMBER OF THE SHAHEJIE FORMATION IN THE SOUTH SLOPE ZONE OF THE LAIZHOUWAN SAG
-
摘要: 莱州湾凹陷南部斜坡带后期经历多次大规模构造运动改造，导致原始盆地面貌不清，沉积体系分布不明确。以构造演化分析为主线，通过地震解释、声波时差法和趋势厚度法相结合，对沙河街组早期沙四段-沙三下亚段沉积时期的原型盆地面貌及其配置关系进行了恢复，并明确了不同沉积体系的平面分布及控制因素。研究表明：（1）沙四沉积时期，莱南斜坡带整体受断裂伸展活动引起的块体差异升降，西部受两组东西向断层分割形成3个东西向展布的断槽，东部及南部为潍北凸起的隆起区，早期断层分割东西古地貌变化；（2）沙三下沉积时期，整体快速沉降，西部受东西向断裂差异抬升，形成局部高地，潍北凸起东部一部分后期逐渐淹没于水下，形成宽缓台地背景；（3）不同物源体系供给控制了沙四段扇三角洲与辫状河三角洲差异分布，古地貌与物源差异供给共同控制了沙三下亚段湖相碳酸盐岩与风化残积相的发育与垂向分布。沉积体系的发育和分布对于盆地原型面貌具有重要的响应关系。Abstract: The south slope zone of the Laizhouwan Sag in the late stage has been reformed in many large-scale tectonic movements, resulting in the unclear appearance of the original basin and the unclear distribution of the sedimentary system. Based on the tectonic evolution analysis as the main line, through seismic interpretation, sound wave time difference method and trend thickness method, prototype basin at the sedimentary period and its configuration relationship have been recovered in the lower third sub-member and the fourth member of the Shahejie Formation at the early paleogene, and the planar distribution and controlling factors of different sedimentary system have been cleared. Study showed that:(1)At the sedimentary period of the fourth member of the Shahejie Formation, the whole south slope zone of the Laizhouwan Sag were lifted and dropped due to block differences caused by fault extension, in the west three east-west spreading fault trough were formed by two groups of east-west trending faults and the east and south areas were the uplift areas of the Weibei salient.The early faults resulted in the palaeogeomorphology differences in the east and west. (2)At the sedimentary period of the lower third sub-member of the Shahejie Formation, the whole south slope zone went through rapid settlement and the west part was uplifted by the differences between the east and west faults, forming a local highland. Part of the eastern Weibei salient submerged in water later, forming broad platform. (3)Different provenance supply systemcontrolledthe differential distributionin Fan delta and braided river delta of the fourth member of the Shahejie Formation. Geomorphology together with the provenance supply differentiation controlled the development of lacustrine carbonate rocks and weathered eluvial facies and their vertical distribution in the lower third sub-member of the Shahejie Formation. The development and distribution of sedimentary systems have an important response relation to basin prototype.
-
0. 前言
隧道是在山岭地区修建高速公路常见的一种地下建筑物, 连拱和分离式隧道是目前高速公路隧道的两种形式。连拱隧道由于具有线形顺畅、使用占地面积小等特点, 而在城市道路用地受限、山区地形复杂、道路辗线困难等情况下获得了广泛的应用。从力学上讲, 连拱隧道施工是不可逆的非线性演化过程, 他的最终状态不是唯一的, 而是与应力路径或应力历史有关。其在施工过程中的受力演化机制非常复杂, 施工过程中围岩的稳定性、初衬和二衬的受力情况、中墙的受力特征和稳定性等已成为工程技术人员关注的焦点。有限元法在模拟隧道的分步开挖和适时支护方面具有独特的优点, 随着计算机技术的不断进步, 得到了越来越广泛的采用。当前, 有关单洞隧道施工力学行为的三维有限元分析的文献并不鲜见[1~3], 研究结果对隧道的设计和施工起了很积极的作用。对双连拱隧道的研究也已深入, 文献[4~6]用二维有限元对连拱隧道的力学行为进行了较为全面的研究, 文献[7~10]则采用三维数值模拟的方法进行研究, 但成果往往集中于某一方面, 如地表沉降、中墙受力状态的演变、塑性区的发展等, 如文献[11]那样用三维有限元对双连拱隧道浅埋偏压洞身段的施工力学响应行为进行系统研究和全面分析的文献尚不多见。
本文所做的工作是:在考虑洞身浅埋偏压与洞口仰坡耦合作用的条件下, 采用功能强大的MARC有限元软件, 对某高速公路浅埋偏压连拱隧道出口段施工全过程进行三维数值模拟, 得出塑性区分布和发展、拱顶下沉、正应力与剪应力的集中和转移、中隔墙竖向应力随施工过程的变化规律, 研究结果对同类隧道的设计和施工具有参考和借鉴意义。
1. 依托工程概况及工程地质条件
隧道全长215米, 采用曲中墙连体隧道结构形式, 纵坡为2. 499 %。隧道区处于区域上塔前-赋春逆冲推覆构造带之塔前~赋春主断裂构造下盘, 主断裂距隧道洞身不足百米。受区域地质构造环境的影响, 隧道区裂隙发育, 岩体破碎。洞口均由千枚状砂质板岩强风化带组成, 岩土结构以蠕动状松散结构为主, 碎块状松散结构次之, 稳定性较差。
2. 三维有限元模型的建立
在X方向左右边界取至自然山脊和山谷线, 至隧道左右边墙距离约为5倍的单洞跨度, 两边施加X向的水平位移约束。在Y方向自由上边界取至地面, 下边界取至距开挖洞底4倍洞高处并施加竖向位移约束。在Z方向选取长度40m, 整个Z=40m平面取Z向水平位移约束。考虑实际施工情况, 对Z=0平面(洞口)而言, 坡体前缘线5m以下和洞周5m开外的交集部分取Z向水平位移约束。见图 1。
二衬、初衬和岩石都采用8节点三维实体等参单元, 共35700个; 锚杆用三维杆单元(图 2), 共3120个; 锚杆单元节点与实体单元节点完全重合, 总节点36393个。
假设锚杆是线弹性材料, 隧洞围岩和混凝土是弹塑性材料, 采用Drucker—Plager屈服准则。初始荷载均为岩土体的自重荷载。
另外, 隧洞锚杆是按梅花形布置, 径向间距0. 8米, 但是建模时为减少单元数量, 单元的尺寸大于实际的锚杆分布间距, 所以锚杆截面积为折算面积。围岩及其它材料的参数如表 1所示。
表 1 模型材料力学参数一览表Table 1. Mechanical parameters of model materials
工况的模拟应尽可能与实际施工过程一致。但由于实际过程比较复杂, 而且某些施工过程可能同时进行, 因此只能依照实际的施工进度, 对施工步骤进行简化, 以尽量减少数值模拟计算的工作量, 同时又能够反映施工过程中所关心的问题。由于实际施工中一次性开挖长度经常可达30m, 考虑到最危险情况, 将所选取段按通槽开挖进行模拟。开挖采取“杀死”单元, 初期支护和二衬施做采取改变单元属性来“激活”[12]。
采用中导坑台阶法施工, 施工工序为:Lcase 0, 自重作用下初始状态的模拟; Lcase1, 开挖中导洞; Lcase2, 中导洞支护; Lcase3, 浇注中墙; Lcase4, 右洞上台阶开挖; Lcase5, 右洞上台阶初期支护; Lcase6, 开挖左洞上台阶; Lcase7, 左洞上台阶初期支护; Lcase8, 右洞下台阶开挖; Lcase9, 右洞下台阶初期支护; Lcase10, 浇筑右洞二衬及仰拱; Lcase11, 左洞下台阶开挖; Lcase12, 左洞下台阶初期支护; Lcase13, 浇筑左洞二衬及仰拱。右洞靠山谷一侧, 浅埋; 左洞靠山脊, 相对深埋。相对位置可参见图 1。
3. 动态数值模拟结果分析[13~16]
3.1 拱顶下沉
图 3、图 4中:坐标0处为洞口边界, 埋深8m;坐标40处为洞内边界, 埋深40m。位移系MARC输出后, 用Excel消掉自重作用下的初始位移(Lcase 0)后生成。图 5、图 6中: Lcase 0的拱顶下沉为自重作用下的初始值, 与施工影响无关。左右洞拱顶节点等间距(8m)分布, 两洞节点号由洞口至洞内依次增大, 左洞为92 —4395, 右洞为40 —3019。拱顶下沉小结:
图 3 左洞拱顶下沉与进洞距离关系曲线图Figure 3. Curves of vault displacement vs.distance for the left tunnel
图 4 右洞拱顶下沉与进洞距离关系曲线图Figure 4. Curves of vault displacement vs.distance for the right tunnel
图 5 左洞拱顶下沉与工况步关系曲线图Figure 5. Curves of vault displacement vs.loadcases at different vault points for the left tunnel
图 6 右洞拱顶下沉与工况步关系曲线图Figure 6. Curves of vault displacement vs.loadcases at different vault poins for the right tunnel1.从拱顶下沉与工况步关系曲线图(图 5、图 6)看, 隧道位移释放主要发生在隧道中导洞开挖(Lcase1), 左、右洞各自上台阶(左洞Lcase6、右洞Lcase4)开挖之时, 其他施工步对拱顶下沉影响不大。
2.埋深相对较大的山脊侧左洞拱顶下沉比山谷侧右洞拱顶下沉大, 前者最大4. 72cm, 后者最大3. 81cm, 均发生在进洞40m处(图 3、图 4)。各工况步拱顶下沉由洞口至洞内有逐渐增大的趋势, 这很可能是由于埋深不断增大引起的。在浅埋条件下, 拱顶下沉有随埋深增大而增大的趋势, 洞内稳定不容忽视。
3.实测拱顶下沉位移一般2~3cm, 计算值相对偏大, 但这正好反应了计算模型和参数选取的合理性。开挖是引起拱顶下沉的主要因素, 而监测工作往往是滞后于开挖的, 开挖初期释放掉的部分位移, 未能在监测数据里反映出来。
3.2 应力集中分析
a剪应力(图 7):
图 7 Lcase2-Lcase7-Lcase10-Lcase13剪应力集中云图(进洞20m)Figure 7. Shear stress distribution around the tunnel during construction剪应力集中小结:
1.中导洞支护(Lcase2)的剪应力集中在墙底和拱腰上角点; 在左右洞上台阶开挖完毕后(Lcase7), 中墙的倒梯形墙基剪应力也非常集中; 中墙墙底的剪应力集中区随着左右洞二衬和仰拱的施作而减弱, 而墙顶的则增强。
2.施工完毕, 仰拱成了剪应力集中的区域, 比二衬的拱墙和边墙发育, 说明仰拱在支护中发挥了很重要的作用, 应及时施作。
b正应力(图 8):
图 8 Lcase1-Lcase7-Lcase11 -Lcase13正应力集中云图(进洞20m)Figure 8. Normal stress distribution around the tunnel during construction正应力集中小结:
1.按MARC规定, 应力“拉正压负”。中导洞开挖完毕(Lcase1)隧道顶部即出现拉应力区, 由于岩土体抗拉能力弱, 因此, 顶部是易发生塌方的部位, 应超前或及时支护。
2.左右洞上台阶开挖初支后(Lcase7)洞顶仍然出现明显的拉应力区, 山脊侧洞顶的拉应力区仍然较大。说明山脊侧更容易坍方, 初支还不能保证隧道的稳定, 应及时施作二衬。
3.随着左洞下台阶的开挖, 隧道两侧边墙都出现了明显的压应力区, 这显然是由于隧道的偏压推挤作用引起的。
4.随着二衬及仰拱的及时完成, 隧道周边应力转移, 压应力集中区基本消失, 二衬及仰拱成为正应力集中区。
3.3 塑性区分析
塑性区小结(图 9):
图 9 Lcase2-Lcase7- Lcase11- Lcase13塑性区分布云图(进洞20m)Figure 9. Plastic zone distribution around the tunnel during construction1.中导洞开挖初期支护后(Lcase2)两侧和墙脚皆有塑性区发育, 说明中导洞虽然截面小, 但其稳定性仍是一个不可忽视的问题。
2.左右洞上台阶开挖后(Lcase7), 中导洞的支护仍未拆除, 所以其下部仍然出现较大塑性区, 这是由于中导洞支护拱向两侧传递推力的缘故。说明:该阶段不拆除中导洞支护, 可以发挥其支护作用, 有利于中隔墙稳定。
3.施工支护完毕阶段(Lcase11、Lcase13)山脊侧中墙墙踵和隧道边墙塑性区比山谷侧发育, 说明施工完毕后山脊侧所受压力比山谷侧大, 失稳最易在山脊侧发生。
3.4 中墙竖向应力分析(图 10、图 11、图 12)
图 10 Lcase3-Lcase7-Lcase8-Lcase10-Lcase11-Lcase13中墙σy分布云图(进洞20m)Figure 10. σy distribution of the mid-leading wall during construction
图 11 中墙横断面(距洞口20m)上部两侧节点σy 随工况步变化曲线图Figure 11. Curves of σy vs.loadcases for the top mid-leading wall nodes on two sides
图 12 中墙横断面(距洞口20m)下部两侧节点σy随工况步变化曲线图Figure 12. Curves of σy vs.loadcases for the bottom mid-leading wall nodes on two sides说明:图 11和图 12中应力拉正压负。由于施工中采用改变单元属性来“激活”支护, Lcase 0的节点σy值实质是岩体在该点的自重应力, Lcase1和Lcase2工况步由于中导洞开挖(杀死单元), 节点σy值为0。而中墙在Lcase3才施作, 所以, 分析中墙节点应力的变化应从Lcase3开始。为避免边界条件影响, 研究对象取距洞口20m的横断面。节点15362和14816分别为该横断面上部的山脊侧节点和山谷侧节点; 节点14753和15425分别为该横断面下部山脊侧节点和山谷侧节点。
中墙竖向应力小结:
1.中导洞开挖施作中墙后(Lcase3)σy基本为负值, 说明中隔墙主要受压, 但山脊侧受压更明显, 说明隧道偏压。
2.从σy分布云图看(图 10), 在开挖形态对称条件下(Lcase7、Lcase11-Lcase13), 中墙竖对称条件下(Lcase7、Lcase11-Lcase13), 中墙竖向应力处于相对对称状态。随着右洞下台阶开挖(Lcase8), 中墙山谷侧成了受压集中区, 说明开挖导致山体有向外移动的趋势, 其推挤作用使中墙受到明显的偏压作用。右洞初衬和二衬的施作(Lcase10)并没使中墙偏压应力作出很大的调整, 说明非对称开挖是引起中墙偏压的关键因素。
3.从中墙横断面(距洞口20m)上部两侧σy随工况步变化曲线看(图 11), 山脊侧上部节点15362在山谷侧右洞上台阶开挖后(Lcase3-Lcase4)出现了明显的拉应力, 山谷侧节点14816在山脊侧左洞开挖(Lcase6-Lcase7)后, 也出现了明显拉应力, 15362节点几乎同时由受拉变成受压状态, 而此时中墙下部节点(15425、14753)仍处于受压状态。
4.从中墙横断面(距洞口20m)下部两侧σy随工况步变化曲线看(图 12), 中墙下部山脊侧节点14753在山谷侧右洞下台阶开挖(Lcase7-Lcase8)后出现最大竖向拉应力0. 903MPa, 山谷侧节点15425受最大压应力3. 031MPa。隧道施作完成后(Lcase13)中墙两侧所受压应力相差很小, 说明中墙倾覆失稳、拉裂破坏或压致破坏最可能在非对称开挖的单侧隧道的下台阶开挖期间发生。
4. 主要结论
通过对连拱隧道的施工进行动态模拟, 深入理解了隧道的施工力学响应行为, 归纳起来, 可得到以下一些主要结论:
1) 实测拱顶下沉位移一般2~3cm, 计算最大值4~5cm, 相对偏大, 但这正好反应了计算模型和参数选取的合理性。开挖后、支护前的位移变化最大, 而监测工作相对滞后, 初期开挖已经释放掉部分位移, 未能在监测数据里反映出来。浅埋条件下, 拱顶下沉随埋深增大而增大, 洞内稳定不容忽视。
2) 施工完毕, 二衬和仰拱成了应力集中区, 是主要的受力结构, 施工中应及时施作以使其发挥作用。
3) 开挖完毕, 抗拉能力弱的隧道顶部岩土体出现拉应力区, 是易发生塌方的部位, 应及时支护或采用大管棚等措施超前支护。左右洞上台阶开挖初支后洞顶仍然存在明显的拉应力区, 初支还不能保证隧道的稳定, 应及时施作二衬和仰拱。随着施工完毕, 两侧边墙附近压应力集中区转移消失, 二衬及仰拱呈现拉应力集中的状态, 隧道受力状态得到了良好改善。
4) 中墙墙底的剪应力集中区和施工完毕后中墙墙踵出现的塑性区都说明中墙的基础稳定问题不可忽视。塑性区在左右洞上台阶开挖后最发育, 隧道在该施工段最易失稳, 施工时应作好相应的监测工作。由于偏压作用, 施工支护完毕, 中墙墙踵和隧道山脊侧边墙塑性区比山谷侧发育。可采用中墙基础锚固、在山脊侧施作偏压衬砌等方法, 来加强隧道的稳定性。
5) 中墙竖向应力状态在施工过程中经过了复杂的调整, 在开挖形态非对称条件下, 隧道出现最不利的偏心受压(受拉)状态, 初衬和二衬的施作并未让此状态得到有效改善。而开挖形态对称施工步的中墙应力则处于相对对称状态。因此, 对称开挖是防止中墙倾覆失稳、拉裂破坏或压致破坏的最有效措施。
-
图 1 莱州湾凹陷南部斜坡带区域位置
Figure 1. Regional location of the south slope zone of the Laizhouwan Sag
图 2 莱州湾凹陷南部斜坡带典型地震解释剖面(剖面位置见图 1)
Figure 2. Typical seismic interpretation profiles of the south slope zone of the Laizhouwan Sag
图 3 莱州湾凹陷南部斜坡带典型剖面构造演化分析
Figure 3. Tectonic evolution analysis of typical profiles of the south slope zone of the Laizhouwan Sag
图 4 KL16-1-2井泥岩声波时差法计算剥蚀厚度
Figure 4. Denudation thickness of mudstone in KL16-1-2 well calculated by sound wave time difference method
图 5 沙四—沙三下亚段沉积时期盆地原型
Figure 5. Basin prototype at the sedimentary period in the lower third sub-member and the fourth member of the Shahejie Formation
图 6 东西部不同位置剥蚀厚度差异(剖面位置见图 5)
Figure 6. Denudation thickness difference at different locations in the east and west
图 7 沙四—沙三下亚段沉积体系展布
a—沙四段沉积体系展布；b—沙三下亚段沉积体系展布
Figure 7. Distribution of sedimentary system in the lower third sub-member and the fourth member of the Shahejie Formation
-
[1] 薛永安, 柴永波, 周园园.近期渤海海域油气勘探的新突破[J].中国海上油气, 2015, 27(1):1~9. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/96273A/201501/663900562.htmlXUE Yongan, CHAI Yongbo, ZHOU Yuanyuan. Recent new breakthroughs in hydrocarbon exploration in Bohai sea[J]. China Offshore Oil and Gas, 2015, 27(1):1~9. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/96273A/201501/663900562.html [2] 侯艳平, 朱德丰, 任延广, 等.贝尔凹陷构造演化及其对沉积和油气的控制作用[J].大地构造与成矿学, 2008, 32(3):300~307. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=ddgzyckx200803006HOU Yanping, ZHU Defeng, REN Yanguang, et al. Tectonic evolution and its controlling on sedimentation and hydrocarbon accumulation in Beir depression[J].Geotectonica et Metallogenia, 2008, 32(3):300~307. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=ddgzyckx200803006 [3] 姜素华, 边凤青, 王鹏, 等.惠民凹陷孔店期盆地原型格架对油气成藏的影响[J].中国海洋大学学报, 2009, 39(3):483~489. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYYT199904016.htmJIANG Suhua, BIAN Fengqing, WANG Peng, et al.Impact of basin prototype structure in Kongdian stage on petroleum accumulation in Huimin depression[J].Periodical of Ocean University of China, 2009, 39(3):483~489. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYYT199904016.htm [4] 余海洋.长岭断陷火石岭组原型盆地恢复及勘探方向分析[J].石油地质, 2013, 33(2):21~25. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgsykt201302004YU Haiyang. Restoration of Changling Rift Huoshiling Formation basin prototype and analysis of exploration orientation[J]. Petroleum geology, 2013, 33(2):21~25. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgsykt201302004 [5] 任红民, 陈丽琼, 王文军, 等.苏北盆地晚白垩世泰州期原型盆地恢复[J].石油实验地质, 2008, 30(1):52~57. doi: 10.11781/sysydz200801052REN Hongmin, CHEN Liqiong, WANG Wenjun, et al. Restoration of prototype basins of late cretaceous Taizhou period in the northern Jiangsu basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2008, 30(1):52~57. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11781/sysydz200801052 [6] 李英强, 何登发.四川盆地及邻区早侏罗世构造-沉积环境与原型盆地演化[J].石油学报, 2014, 35(2):219~232. doi: 10.7623/syxb201402002LI Yingqiang, HE Dengfa. Evolution of tectonic-depositional environment and prototype basins of the early Jurassic in Sichuan Basin and adjacent areas[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2014, 35(2):219~232. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.7623/syxb201402002 [7] 韩少甲, 赵俊峰, 刘池洋, 等.渤海海域庙西凹陷古近纪沙三段沉积期原盆面貌恢复[J].地质论评, 2014, 60(2):339~347. http://or.nsfc.gov.cn/bitstream/00001903-5/57468/1/1000007253804.pdfHAN Shaojia, ZHAO Junfeng, LIU Chiyang, et al. Restoration of the Original Sedimentary Extent of Miaoxi Sag in Bohai Sea during the Sedimentary Period of the Third Member of Shahejie Formation in Paleogene[J]. Geological Review, 2014, 60(2):339~347. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://or.nsfc.gov.cn/bitstream/00001903-5/57468/1/1000007253804.pdf [8] 彭文绪, 辛仁臣, 孙和风, 等.渤海海域莱州湾凹陷的形成和演化[J].石油学报, 2009, 30(5):654~660. doi: 10.7623/syxb200905004PENG Wenxu, XIN Renchen, SUN Hefeng, et al. Formation and evolution of Laizhou Bay Sag in Bohai Bay[J].Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2009, 30(5):654~660. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.7623/syxb200905004 [9] 牛成民.渤海南部海域莱州湾凹陷构造演化与油气成藏[J].石油与天然气地质, 2012, 33(3):424~431. doi: 10.11743/ogg20120312NIU Chengmin. Tectonic evolution and hydrocarbon accumulation of Laizhouwan depression in southern Bohai Sea[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2012, 33(3):424~431. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11743/ogg20120312 [10] 王永利, 武强, 王应斌.莱州湾凹陷西走滑带构造演化特征及对油气成藏的影响[J].石油地质与工程, 2010, 24(2):5~7. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=hnsy201002002WANG Yongli, WU Qiang, WANG Yingbin. Structural evolution characteristics of west strike-slip zone in Laizhouwan depression and its effect on hydrocarbon accumulation[J]. Petroleum geology and engineering, 2010, 24(2):5~7. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=hnsy201002002 [11] 史浩, 周东红, 吕丁友.莱州湾凹陷东部新生代走滑构造特征及油气勘探意义[J].海洋石油, 2014, 34(3):34~39. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/95970A/201403/662317064.htmlSHI Hao, ZHOU Donghong, LV Dingyou.Cenozoic Strike-slip Tectonic Character and the Significance of Oil and Gas Exploraton in Eastern Laizhou Bay[J].Offshore Oil, 2014, 34(3):34~39. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/95970A/201403/662317064.html [12] 辛云路, 任建业, 李建平.构造-古地貌对沉积的控制作用-以渤海南部莱州湾凹陷沙三段为例[J].石油勘探与开发, 2013, 40(3):302~308. doi: 10.11698/PED.2013.03.06XIN Yunlu, REN Jianye, LI Jianping. Control of tectonic-paleogeomorphology on deposition:A case from the Shahejie formation Sha 3 member, Laizhouwan sag, southern Bohai sea[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(3):302~308. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11698/PED.2013.03.06 [13] 王改卫, 杜晓峰, 加东辉, 等.莱州湾凹陷沙三中段高精度层序地层格架及沉积体系演化[J].沉积与特提斯地质, 2015, 35(4):17~24. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/98500A/201504/667707539.htmlWANG Gaiwei, DU Xiaofeng, JIA Donghui, et al. High-precision sequence stratigraphic framework and sedimentary system evolution in the middle submember of the 3rd member of the Shahejie Formation in the Laizhouwan depression[J]. Sedimentary Geology and Tethyan Geology, 2015, 35(4):17~24. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/98500A/201504/667707539.html [14] 王亮, 陈国童, 牛成民, 等.莱州湾凹陷构造演化对含油气系统的控制作用[J].大庆石油地质与开发, 2011, 30(3):8~13. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/91950X/201103/38122968.htmlWANG Liang, CHEN Guotong, NIU Chengmin, et al. Controlling effects of structural evolution of Laizhou Bay sag on petroleum system[J]. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2011, 30(3):8~13. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/91950X/201103/38122968.html [15] 杨波, 胡志伟, 李果营, 等.渤海莱州湾凹陷南部斜坡带构造特征及油气成藏规律[J].中国海上油气, 2016, 28(5):22~29. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/96273A/201605/669915770.htmlYANG Bo, HU Zhiwei, LI Guoying, et al. Tectonic characteristics and hydrocarbon accumulation rules in south slope of Laizhouwan sag in Bohai sea[J]. China Offshore Oil and Gas, 2016, 28(5):22~29. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/96273A/201605/669915770.html [16] 加东辉, 徐长贵, 杨波, 等.辽东湾辽东带中南部古近纪古地貌恢复和演化及其对沉积体系的控制[J].古地理学报, 2007, 9(2):155~166. doi: 10.7605/gdlxb.2007.02.004JIA Donghui, XU Changgui, YANG Bo, et al. Paleogene palaeogeomorphology reconstruction and evolution and its control on sedimentary systems in central-southern Liaodong Zone, Liaodongwan bay[J]. Journal of Palaeogeography, 2007, 9(2):155~166. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.7605/gdlxb.2007.02.004 [17] 王均, 薛金宝, 薛冰宇.渤海莱州湾凹陷古近系沙四段上亚段沉积体系研究[J].内蒙古石油化工, 2011, 7:206~208. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZHSD201103001.htmWANG Jun, XUE Jinbao, XUE Bingyu.Depositional System of the Upper Sha4 Formation (Paleogene)in Laizhouwan Sag, Bohai Bay[J].Inner Mongulia Petrochemical Industry, 2011, 7:206~208. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZHSD201103001.htm [18] 张玥, 昝灵, 张坤.渤南洼陷北部陡坡带沙四上亚段~沙三下亚段砂砾岩沉积特征[J].石油天然气学报, 2014, 36(1):10~13. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/94420A/201401/48525378.htmlZHANG Yue, ZAN Ling, ZHANG Kun.Conglomerates Sedimentary Characteristics of Es3u-Es4L in the Northern Steep Slope of Bonan Sag[J].Journal of Oil and Gas Technology, 2014, 36(1):10~13. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cqvip.com/QK/94420A/201401/48525378.html [19] 王居峰.陆相断陷盆地陡坡带沉积相类型和沉积演化特征-以东营凹陷民丰地区沙三段、沙四段为例[J].天然气地球科学, 2008, 19(5):611~617. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=trqdqkx200805006WANG Jufeng.Sedimentary Facies Types and Evolution Features on Steep Slope Belt in Terrestrial Fault-depressed Basin-A Case in Sha 3 and 4 Member of Minfeng Area in Dongying Depression[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2008, 19(5):611~617. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=trqdqkx200805006 [20] 马立祥, 邓宏文, 林会喜, 等.济阳坳陷三种典型滩坝相的空间分布模式[J].地质科技情报, 2009, 28(2):66~71. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZKQ200902011.htmMA Lixiang, DENG Hongwen, LIN Huixi, et al.Three kinds of spatiotemporal models of typical beach and bar sedimentary facies in Jiyang depression[J]. Geological science and technology information, 2009, 28(2):66~71. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZKQ200902011.htm [21] 宋章强, 赖维成, 牛成民, 等.渤海海域湖相碳酸盐岩地震-地质综合预测方法及应用[J].石油与天然气地质, 2009, 30(4):444~449. doi: 10.11743/ogg20090409SONG Zhangqiang, LAI Weicheng, NIU Chengmin, et al.An integrated seismic-geological approach to predict lacustrine carbonate rock in the Bohai Sea waters[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 2009, 30(4):444~449. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.11743/ogg20090409 [22] 王永利, 武强, 姚长华, 等.莱州湾西构造带断裂特征及其对油气成藏的控制[J].海洋石油, 2011, 31(1):28~32. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-HYSY201101008.htmWANG Yongli, WU Qiang, YAO Changhua, et al. Characteristics of faults and their control to hydrocarbon accumulation in the western tectonic zone of Laizhou Bay Sag[J]. Offshore Oil, 2011, 31(1):28~32. (in Chinese with English abstract) http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-HYSY201101008.htm 期刊类型引用(7)
1. 官大勇，杜晓峰，王启明，王志萍. 渤海海域莱州湾凹陷沙三段水道型湖底扇发育特征与沉积模式. 地球科学. 2023(02): 503-516 . 
百度学术2. 杨海风，涂翔，赵弟江，张丙亮，王雪莲，王波. 渤海湾盆地莱州湾凹陷沙河街组第三、第四段烃源岩有机相特征. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版). 2021(01): 72-81 . 百度学术3. 汪晓萌，彭光荣，吴静，柳琼瑶，李振升，蔡国富，袁阳. 珠江口盆地恩平21洼文昌组沉积期原型盆地及其对优质烃源岩的控制. 大地构造与成矿学. 2021(01): 158-167 . 百度学术4. LIANG Haoran，XU Guosheng，YU Qing，XU Fanghao，WANG Deying，CHEN Zhiyuan. Paleosalinity and Its Association with Organic Matter: A Case Study from the Eocene Shahejie Formation, Laizhou Bay Sag, Bohai Bay Basin(China). Journal of Ocean University of China. 2021(04): 741-754 . 必应学术5. 王航，杨海风，黄振，白冰，高雁飞. 基于可容纳空间变化的河流相演化新模式及其控藏作用——以莱州湾凹陷垦利A构造为例. 岩性油气藏. 2020(05): 73-83 . 百度学术6. 王启明，杜晓峰，宛良伟，付鑫，李晓辉. 渤海海域莱南斜坡带沙三下亚段混合沉积发育特征及主控因素. 地球科学. 2020(10): 3645-3662 . 百度学术7. 冯冲，王清斌，谭忠健，代黎明，刘晓健，赵梦. 富火山碎屑地层复杂岩性测井分类与识别——以KL16油田为例. 石油学报. 2019(S2): 91-101 . 百度学术其他类型引用(3)
-
下载:
下载:
百度学术
计量
- 文章访问数: 235
- HTML全文浏览量: 94
- PDF下载量: 4
- 被引次数: 10
