Next Article in Journal
Electromagnetic Investigation of Innovative Stator–Permanent Magnet Motors
Previous Article in Journal
Unbalanced Magnetic Pull Calculation in Ironless Axial Flux Motors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Favorable Fracture Area of Deep Coal Reservoirs Using a Combination of Field Joint Observation and Paleostress Numerical Simulation: A Case Study in the Linxing Area
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 18
Issue 9
10.3390/en18092398
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Multilayer Gas-Bearing System and Productivity Characteristics in Carboniferous–Permian Tight Sandstones: Taking the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin, as an Example

by
Ming Chen
1,2,
Bo Wang
3,*,
Haonian Tian
2,
Junyi Sun
2,
Lei Liu
4,5,
Xing Liang
6,
Benliang Chen
7,
Baoshi Yu
6 and
Zhuo Zhang
6
1
College of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China
2
PetroChina Coalbed Methane Company Limited Linfen Branch, Linfen 042202, China
3
Information Institute of the Ministry of Emergency Management of PRC, Beijing 100029, China
4
Key Laboratory of Coalbed Methane Resources and Reservoir Formation Process, Ministry of Education, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221008, China
5
School of Resources and Geosciences, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
6
PetroChina Zhejiang Oilfield Company, Hangzhou 311100, China
7
Huainan Mining (Group) Co., Ltd., Huainan 232001, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2025, 18(9), 2398; https://doi.org/10.3390/en18092398
Submission received: 21 March 2025 / Revised: 24 April 2025 / Accepted: 27 April 2025 / Published: 7 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exploration and Development of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources: Latest Advances and Prospects: 3rd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Carboniferous–Permian strata in the Daning–Jixian Block, located on the eastern edge of the Ordos Basin, host multiple sets of tight gas reservoirs. However, systematic research on the characteristics and gas production differences of multilayer tight sandstone gas-bearing systems remains limited. Based on geochemical signatures, reservoir pressure coefficients, and sequence stratigraphy, the tight sandstone gas systems are subdivided into upper and lower systems, separated by regionally extensive Taiyuan Formation limestone. The upper system is further partitioned into four subsystems. Depositional variability from the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member has generated diverse litho-mineralogical characteristics. The Shan 1 and He 8 Members, deposited in low-energy delta-front subaqueous distributary channels with gentle topography, exhibit lower quartz content (predominantly feldspar lithic sandstone and lithic quartz sand-stone) and elevated lithic fragments, matrix, and clay minerals (particularly chlorite). These factors increase displacement and median pressures, resulting in inferior reservoir quality. By comparing and evaluating the gas production effects under different extraction methods, targeted optimization recommendations are provided to offer both theoretical support and practical guidance for the efficient development of this block.

1. Introduction

Amid the global transformation of the energy landscape, the exploitation of unconventional natural gas has emerged as a critical focus in contemporary energy strategies [1,2,3,4,5,6].
Among these, tight sandstone gas is progressively becoming a major contributor to natural gas production [7]. The Ordos Basin in China, rich in tight sandstone gas reserves, has seen the development of several significant fields, such as Sulige and Shenmu, resulting in notable achievements in exploration and production [8,9,10].
The exploitation of tight sandstone gas in the Ordos Basin still faces several challenges. Notably, the Upper Paleozoic coal measures along the basin’s eastern edge are governed by the sequence framework, with multilayer gas-bearing systems [11]. These systems exhibit distinct fluid pressure profiles and reservoir characteristics [12], leading to significant variations in gas production during both single-layer and multi-layer co-production extraction processes. To improve the understanding of these gas-bearing systems and optimize production efficiency, comprehensive research and detailed analysis are essential.
In single-layer production, the gas output of tight sandstone is primarily influenced by factors such as sedimentary environment, diagenesis, reservoir thickness, pressure coefficient, porosity, permeability, and gas saturation [13,14,15]. Due to the small scale, poor continuity, and low pore permeability of the sand bodies, a multi-layer co-production approach is commonly employed for their development. However, interlayer interference significantly impacts gas production during co-production processes [16]. To elucidate the characteristics of interlayer interference in low-permeability sandstone systems, previous studies have extensively explored this issue through numerical and physical simulations [17,18,19,20]. Research indicates that greater pressure and permeability differences between gas reservoirs lead to stronger interlayer interference.
The Carboniferous–Permian strata in the Daning–Jixian Block, located on the eastern edge of the Ordos Basin, host multiple sets of tight gas reservoirs. The exploitation of tight sandstone gas within the study area encompasses both single-layer production and multi-layer co-production. However, systematic research on the characteristics and gas production differences of multilayer tight sandstone gas-bearing systems remains limited. There are significant differences in gas production among wells that co-produce from different gas-bearing systems. This study aims to thoroughly analyze the geological characteristics, reservoir formation mechanisms, and factors contributing to gas production differences within the multilayer tight sandstone gas-bearing system in the Daning–Jixian Block. By comparing and evaluating the gas production effects under different extraction methods, targeted optimization recommendations are provided to offer both theoretical support and practical guidance for the efficient development of this block.

2. Geological Setting

2.1. Block Location

The Daning–Jixian Block occupies a tectonically critical position at the southern terminus of the Jinxi fold belt, adjacent to the southeastern structural margin of the Yishan slope within the Ordos Basin. To the north, it adjoins the Shilou West Block and the Changqingzizhou–Qingjian Block, while to the south, it is bordered by the Yichuan–Huanglong Block and the Yanchuan South Block. The eastern boundary is defined by the Lvliang Mountain, and to the west, it is bordered by the Yan’an–Yanchang Block. The Yellow River traverses the western portion of the block. Administratively, the Hedong area falls under the jurisdiction of Yonghe, Daning, Jixian, and Xixian in Shanxi Province, while the Hexi area is governed by Yanchuan, Yanchang, and Yichuan counties in Shaanxi Province [21,22,23].

2.2. Stratigraphic Sequence

The Carboniferous to Permian strata in the Daning–Jixian Block comprise predominantly continental to transitional facies of coal-bearing sandstones and mudstones intercalated with marine layers. Permian sequences are dominated by continental deposits, while transitional facies and marine limestones are primarily developed in the lower Benxi and Taiyuan Formations. This study focuses on five sets of target layers: the Benxi Formation, the Taiyuan Formation, the Shan 2 and Shan 1 Members of the Shanxi Formation, and the He 8 Member, corresponding to five third-order sequences (SQ1-SQ5) (Figure 1).
The Benxi Formation is bounded at its base by ferruginous–aluminous rocks and at its top by the upper Paleozoic lower coal group (Coal Seams 8# and 9#), with a thickness of 35–45 m. The upper section consists of coal seams interbedded with thin limestone lenses and quartz sandstones, while the lower section comprises quartz sandstones or bauxitic mudstones. Representing third-order sequence SQ1, the Benxi Formation records a northeast-to-southwest transition from open marine transgression to restricted regression, with the uppermost 8# Coal Seam formed during widespread regressive swampification.
Conformably overlying the Benxi Formation, the Taiyuan Formation is bounded at its top by the base of the Beichagou Sandstone and at its base by the Miaogou Limestone. It spans 25–40 m in thickness, thinning westward. The formation is subdivided into two members (Tai 1 and Tai 2) based on sedimentary cycles and lithofacies associations. Tai 1 Member of the Taiyuan Formation is dominated by lithologies including medium- to coarse-grained sandstone, argillaceous siltstone, bioclastic micritic limestone, marl, and coal. The base of the Taiyuan Formation exhibits characteristics of rapid transgression, where the thick bioclastic micritic limestone of the Tai 2 Member directly overlies No. 8 Coal Seam of the Benxi Formation. This limestone unit displays high bioclastic content and is laterally traceable across the study area. Following the tectonic regime transition at the top of the Benxi Formation, the transgression direction of the Taiyuan Formation evolved from southeast to northwest. The entire Taiyuan Formation records a depositional transition from rapid oscillatory transgression at its top to subsequent regression, primarily comprising the Miaogou Limestone, Maoergou Limestone, Xiedao Limestone, Qiligou Sandstone/Limestone, and Dongdayao Limestone. Vertically, these units constitute an independent third-order sequence (SQ2).
The Shanxi Formation, conformably overlies the Taiyuan Formation, bounded at its base by the Beichagou Sandstone. It ranges from 90 to 110 m in thickness, thinning westward, and is divided into two members (Shan 2 and Shan 1, ascending order):
Shan 2 Member (45–60 m): A coal-bearing clastic succession dominated by quartz sandstone and lithic sandstone, interbedded with thin siltstone, mudstone, and coal seams, representing a key productive layer. It constitutes third-order sequence SQ3, characterized by subaqueous distributary channel sandstones and multiple coal seams.
Shan 1 Member (40–50 m): Comprises delta-front deposits of lithic quartz sandstone, fine- to medium-grained lithic sandstone, and argillaceous rocks, corresponding to SQ4.
The Shihezi Formations, classified as fluvial-deltaic deposits, are bounded at their base by the Luotuobo Sandstone, which is capped by a variegated mudstone layer with high natural gamma-ray values, aiding stratigraphic correlation between the Shihezi and Shanxi Formations. The Shihezi Formations are subdivided into eight ascending members (He 8–He 1). The Lower Shihezi Formation (He 8–He 5) exhibits a thickness ranging between 120 and 160 m and is predominantly composed of pebbly coarse sandstone, medium- to coarse-grained sandstone, and interbedded lithic quartz sandstone with mudstone. The sandstones display large-scale cross-bedding. Member He 8 represents lacustrine-delta front deposits and forms an independent third-order sequence (SQ5) through vertical stacking.

3. Characterization and Division of Gas-Bearing Systems

The coal-bearing strata of the Daning–Jixian Block contain multiple sets of carbonaceous mudstone and coal seams, which release substantial amounts of gas during thermal evolution. Due to the cyclical nature of sequence stratigraphy, multiple sets of marine mudstones, sandy mudstones, and limestone layers that act as water and gas barriers have formed vertically. These layers exhibit extremely low permeability, resulting in the establishment of multilayer gas-bearing systems within the vertical profile [23,24].

3.1. Gas Geochemical Characteristics

Methane (CH4) concentrations in all gas-producing layers generally exceed 90%. Notably, the Benxi Formation exhibits a lower average CH4 concentration compared to other intervals. The δ13CCH4 (stable carbon isotopic ratios of CH4) values display an initial decrease followed by a gradual increase from the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member. Both CH4 concentration and δ13CCH4 values in the Benxi Formation differ significantly from those of other layers, indicating that the Benxi Formation belongs to a distinct gas-bearing system. Furthermore, pronounced variations in δ13CCH4 values between the Taiyuan Formation and He 8 Member further corroborate the compartmentalization of these layers into separate gas systems (Figure 2).

3.2. Reservoir Pressure System

Analysis of gas well test data, including initial production pressure recovery tests and static pressure point measurements, reveals that the dominant reservoirs—the Shan 2 Member and the Benxi Formation—exhibit relatively high original formation pressure coefficients, averaging 0.84 and 1.07, respectively. In contrast, non-dominant reservoirs display lower pressure coefficients, characteristic of low-pressure gas layers: the He 8 Member averages 0.59, while the Shan 1 Member and Taiyuan Formation average 0.76 and 0.72, respectively. Significant disparities in reservoir pressure coefficients are observed across layers, particularly for the Benxi Formation, which markedly diverges from other layers (Figure 3).

3.3. Division of Gas-Bearing Systems

The Taiyuan Formation is distinguished by multiple thick limestone and argillaceous limestone layers [25], with the stable, thick limestone of Tai 2 Member serving as a hallmark of tight gas accumulation within the Upper Paleozoic stratigraphic sequences of the Daning–Jixian Block. Regional geological analysis confirms that the thick limestone units in the Taiyuan Formation exhibit extensive lateral continuity, providing an effective stratigraphic barrier. In the absence of fault or fracture conduits, natural gas generated from source rocks in the Shan 2 Member and the Benxi Formation is restricted from vertical migration across this sealing layer. Integrating tight sandstone gas geochemical signatures and reservoir pressure characteristics, the study area is vertically partitioned into two major gas-bearing systems:
The upper gas-bearing system is sourced by coal-measure source rocks within the Taiyuan Formation and Shan 2 Member. The lower gas-bearing system (I) is sourced by coal-measure source rocks of the Benxi Formation, primarily localized within the Benxi strata. Due to cyclical variations in the internal sequence stratigraphic framework, the upper gas-bearing system exhibits heterogeneity in stratigraphic thickness, hydrocarbon generation potential, reservoir–cap rock combinations, reservoir physical properties, and water and gas barrier conditions across different sequences. These variations are reflected in distinct geochemical indicators and reservoir pressure coefficients [26]. Consequently, the upper gas-bearing system is further subdivided into four subsystems (II–V) (Figure 1).

4. Reservoir Characteristics in Different Gas-Bearing Systems

4.1. Litho-Mineralogical Characteristics

Thin-section analysis reveals the compositional characteristics of sandstones across stratigraphic units in the study area as follows. Benxi Formation sandstones exhibit quartz content of 87.07%, feldspar content of 1.77%, lithic fragment content of 4.23%, and minor matrix/cement, classifying as quartz sandstone. Taiyuan Formation sandstones contain 78.57% quartz, 0.11% feldspar, 4.23% lithic fragments, low matrix content, and moderate cementation, dominated by quartz sandstone with subordinate lithic quartz sandstone. Shan 2 Member sandstones comprise 74.95% quartz, 0.44% feldspar, and 11.2% lithic fragments, primarily lithic quartz sandstone and quartz sandstone, characterized by a relatively high content of matrix. Shan 1 Member sandstones show 66.44% quartz, 8.25% feldspar, and 15.32% lithic fragments, dominated by lithic quartz sandstone and quartz sandstone. He 8 Member sandstones contain 68.06% quartz, 8.77% feldspar, and 14.63% lithic fragments, predominantly lithic quartz sandstone and quartz sandstone (Figure 4).
A general trend indicates progressively increasing quartz content with stratigraphic depth, accompanied by decreasing feldspar and lithic fragment abundances. These variations are attributed to differences in the quartz content of sediment sources at different layers and the dissolution of other minerals by acidic fluids during diagenesis [27] (Table 1).
Clay mineralogical analysis reveals variations in mineral content across different layers within the study area. The He 8 and Shan 1 Members exhibit high chlorite content. The Shan 2 Member is characterized by abundant kaolinite, low chlorite, and reduced total clay content. The Taiyuan Formation displays low kaolinite and chlorite concentrations but elevated total clay content (Table 2 and Table 3). With increasing stratigraphic depth, illite content progressively increases, whereas the abundances of mixed-layer illite/smectite, kaolinite, and chlorite systematically decrease (Figure 5). Kaolinite predominantly occurs in coarse-grained, well-sorted sandstones, where its high crystallinity preserves intergranular micropores, resulting in minimal impact on permeability. In contrast, chlorite primarily occur as grain-coating and pore-lining, which readily occlude pore throats and significantly reduce permeability.

4.2. Pore Types

Extensive studies have been conducted on pore types within the Carboniferous–Permian tight sandstone reservoirs of the Daning–Jixian Block [27,28,29], with dissolution pores identified as the dominant pore type [30]. This study statistically analyzes pore characteristics across tight sandstone gas reservoirs using cast thin-section data. The results reveal that reservoirs from the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member are predominated by intragranular and intergranular dissolution pores, with subordinate occurrences of intercrystalline pores. In terms of pore area percentage, the He 8 and Shan 2 Members exhibit relatively higher values (4.41% and 4.91%, respectively), while the Shan 1 Member and the Taiyuan Formation display lower percentages (Table 4; Figure 6).

4.3. Pore Throat Structure

Guo et al. [31] statistically analyzed mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) curves from numerous samples of the main sandstone reservoirs in the Daning–Jixian area, concluding that the Benxi Formation and Shan 23 Sub-Member exhibit well-developed pore throats conducive to fluid flow, while other layers display inferior throat connectivity. This study further compiles and compares MICP parameters from 170 sandstone samples across the study area (Table 5). The results indicate that the Taiyuan Formation reservoirs exhibit the highest average displacement pressure (1.06 MPa) and median pressure (15.39 MPa), followed by the He 8 and Shan 1 Members, while the Shan 2 Member and the Benxi Formation show relatively lower values (Figure 7a,b). From the He 8 Member to the Benxi Formation, the average throat radius progressively increases (Figure 7c). The Taiyuan Formation displays a markedly lower average sorting coefficient compared to other units, suggesting more uniform pore-size distributions (Figure 7d). Although the average maximum mercury saturation varies minimally among units, the average mercury withdrawal efficiency decreases with increasing stratigraphic depth (Figure 7e).

4.4. Reservoir Physical Properties

Core petrophysical analyses reveal comparable porosity values but significant permeability disparities across the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member. Porosity in units from the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member primarily ranges between 1 and 10%, with an average of 4.5%, 4.5%, 5.9%, 4.8%, and 5.8% for the five sets of strata, respectively (Figure 8a). In contrast, permeability in the He 8 Member, Shan 1 Member, and Taiyuan Formation is notably low (0.005–10 mD), averaging 0.52 mD, 0.39 mD, and 0.58 mD, respectively. The Shan 2 Member and the Benxi Formation exhibit higher permeabilities (0.01–100 mD), with averages of 5.72 mD and 3.04 mD. Despite minor porosity variations, a subtle decreasing trend in porosity with depth is observed. The superior permeability in the Shan 2 Member, followed by the Benxi Formation, is attributed to depositional setting and diagenetic features [32] (Figure 8b).‌
Higher quartz content enhances reservoir resistance to mechanical compaction, promoting the formation of superior reservoir qualities. Increasing average quartz content correlates with a linear rise in core porosity and a power-law increase in permeability (Figure 9a,b). The relatively high quartz content in the Shan 2 Member is a key factor contributing to its favorable petrophysical properties. Conversely, clay minerals occlude macroporosity, reducing pore dimensions and complicating pore morphology, thereby impairing flow capacity [33]. Elevated clay mineral content corresponds to a linear decline in porosity and a power-law reduction in permeability, demonstrating an inverse relationship between quartz and clay mineral impacts on tight sandstone reservoir quality (Figure 9c,d).

4.5. Analysis of Sedimentary Environment

Reservoir characterization highlights the dominant control of depositional processes on lithological and petrophysical properties in the Daning–Jixian tight sandstone reservoirs (Table 6). Depositional variability from the Benxi Formation to the He 8 Member has generated diverse litho-mineralogical characteristics. The Shan 1 and He 8 Members, deposited in low-energy delta-front subaqueous distributary channels with gentle topography, exhibit lower quartz content (predominantly feldspar lithic sandstone and lithic quartz sandstone) and elevated lithic fragments, matrix, and clay minerals (particularly chlorite). These factors increase displacement and median pressures, resulting in inferior reservoir quality. In contrast, the Shan 2 Member, formed in high-energy, narrow delta-front subaqueous distributary channels constrained by erosional paleotopography, is dominated by medium- to fine-grained (lithic) quartz sandstone with minimal clay content, yielding lower displacement/median pressures and enhanced petrophysical performance. The Benxi Formation, deposited in barrier coast facies (barrier bars and tidal channels) under strong tidal influence, comprises pebbly sandstones, conglomeratic sandstones, and coarse-grained quartz sandstone with low matrix, cement, and clay content, collectively contributing to low displacement/median pressures and favorable reservoir properties.

5. Productivity Characteristics

5.1. Single-Layer Production

The study area features five primary gas-producing layers. Gas production data for the Shan 2 Member predominantly derive from the Shan 23 Sub-Member. Average daily gas production for single-layer extraction are 11,998.15 m3/d (Benxi), 12,628.45 m3/d (Taiyuan), 23,469.23 m3/d (Shan 2), 7801.31 m3/d (Shan 1), and 1386.03 m3/d (He 8), with the Shan 2 Member exhibiting the highest yield, followed by the Taiyuan and Benxi Formations, while the He 8 Member shows the lowest productivity (Table 7).
This analysis does not incorporate the influence of engineering factors on gas production. Integrated analysis of gas layer gas saturation, porosity, thickness, and permeability reveals that productivity within individual layers is primarily controlled by reservoir thickness, porosity, and gas saturation [34]. Strong correlations between petrophysical properties and initial productivity indicate that production disparities are dominantly governed by reservoir characteristics, which critically determine gas recovery efficiency. Average gas production correlates significantly with permeability but shows negligible association with porosity (Figure 10a,b). Lower permeability in the He 8 and Shan 1 Members results in diminished productivity, whereas the Shan 2 Member, with optimal petrophysical properties, achieves the highest yield. The average median pressure is closely associated with the average gas production, exhibiting a linear relationship with a correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.64. Increasing median pressure (indicative of tighter reservoirs) corresponds to declining production (Figure 10c), while larger average throat radius weakly enhance productivity (Figure 10d).

5.2. Multi-Layer Co-Production

To enhance productivity, multi-layer co-production strategies were implemented in select wells:
Benxi + Taiyuan co-production: Average yield ranges from 3223.65 to 9629.97 m3/d (mean: 6426.81 m3/d), significantly lower than individual layer outputs.
Benxi + Shan 2 co-production: Average yield spans 1492.42 to 26,965.00 m3/d (mean: 12,765.43 m3/d), underperforming Shan 2 single-layer extraction.
Shan 1 + Shan 2 co-production: Average yield ranges from 5248.38 to 62,991.64 m3/d (mean: 27,477.10 m3/d), exceeding individual layer performances.
Shihezi + Shan 2 co-production: The average yield of 4406.05 m3/d (865.79–9362.28 m3/d) falls between individual layer outputs.
Shihezi + Shan 1 + Shan 2 co-production: The average yield of 1736.80 m3/d (1087.74–2984.00 m3/d) underperforms all individual layers (Figure 11).
Co-production compatibility refers to the capacity of vertically stacked reservoirs to achieve synergistic fluid production under co-production conditions. Co-production compatibility varies across layers in the study area. While Benxi + Shan 2 co-production yields intermediate values, Benxi + Taiyuan co-production underperforms due to interlayer interference. Conversely, Shan 1 + Shan 2 co-production demonstrates superior compatibility, likely attributable to short inter-reservoir distances, similar pressure coefficients. Reservoir characteristics, including gas saturation, permeability, pressure, and thickness, represent pivotal parameters that significantly impact multi-layer co-production. When the production layers exhibit comparable characteristics, compatibility is predominantly governed by disparities in gas saturation and reservoir pressure. Conversely, when the characteristics differ, compatibility is mainly governed by permeability and effective thickness. By analyzing the threshold values or interference indices of various parameters, the compatibility of sandstone layer extraction can be further assessed [16,35].
Currently, non-dominant layers contribute minimally to daily production rates and cumulative gas production shares, reflecting uneven reserve utilization. Future strategies should prioritize enhancing reservoir stimulation intensity in these non-dominant layers to boost gas recovery. Additionally, to optimize single-well productivity during co-production, rigorous evaluation of co-produced layers against threshold parameters is essential to quantify interlayer interference and mitigate its adverse effects.

6. Conclusions

(1)
The Carboniferous–Permian tight sandstone gas systems in the Daning–Jixian Block are categorized into upper and lower systems, separated by the regionally extensive Taiyuan Formation limestone. The upper system is further divided into four distinct subsystems based on geochemical signatures, reservoir pressure coefficients, and sequence stratigraphy.
(2)
The depositional environments play a critical role in controlling the lithological and petrophysical characteristics of the reservoirs. The Shan 1 and He 8 Members, formed in low-energy delta-front subaqueous distributary channels with gentle topography, display lower quartz content and higher proportions of lithic fragments, matrix, and clay minerals (especially chlorite), leading to higher displacement and median pressures, which negatively impact reservoir quality. In contrast, the Shan 2 Member, deposited in high-energy, narrow delta-front subaqueous distributary channels, is characterized by medium- to fine-grained (lithic) quartz sandstone with low clay content, offering improved petrophysical performance. The Benxi Formation, deposited in barrier coast facies with strong tidal influence, consists of pebbly sandstones, conglomeratic sandstones, and coarse-grained quartz sandstone with low matrix, cement, and clay content, collectively contributing to low displacement/median pressures and favorable reservoir properties.
(3)
During single-layer production, the Shan 2 Member exhibits the highest gas production, followed by the Taiyuan and Benxi Formations, while the He 8 Member demonstrates the lowest yield. In multi-layer co-production scenarios, certain combinations (e.g., Benxi + Shan 2) yield intermediate production between their individual single-layer outputs, while others (e.g., Benxi + Taiyuan) produce less than the output of two or three individual layers, indicating poor interlayer compatibility. Future strategies should prioritize enhancing reservoir stimulation intensity in these non-dominant layers to boost gas recovery and carefully managing interlayer effects to maximize gas production.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.C., B.W., H.T. and J.S.; methodology, M.C., B.W., H.T., J.S., L.L., X.L., B.C., B.Y. and Z.Z.; investigation, M.C., B.W., H.T., J.S., L.L., X.L., B.C., B.Y. and Z.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, M.C.; writing—review and editing, B.W.; project administration, M.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Key Application Science and Technology Project of PetroChina Company Limited (grant number 2023ZZ18-01) and Science and Technology Funding Project of Huaneng Group Headquarters (grant number HNKJ20-H87).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in this article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors Ming Chen, Junyi Sun, and Haonian Tian were employed by the company PetroChina Coalbed Methane Company Limited Linfen Branch. Authors Xing Liang, Baoshi Yu and Zhuo Zhang were employed by the PetroChina Zhejiang Oilfield Company. Author Benliang Chen was employed by the Huainan Mining (Group) Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare that this study received funding from Key Application Science and Technology Project of PetroChina Company Limited and Science and Technology Funding Project of Huaneng Group Headquarters. The funder had the following involvement with the study: study design, collection, and analysis.

References

  1. Iqbal, S.M.; Hu, D.; Hussain, J.; Ali, N.; Hussain, W.; Hussain, A.; Nyakilla, E.E. Integrated reservoir characterization and simulation approach to enhance production of tight sandstone gas reservoir, Sulige gas field, Ordos Basin, China. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2025, 138, 103846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kadkhodaie, R.; Kadkhodaie, A.; Rezaee, R. Study of pore system properties of tight gas sandstones based on analysis of the seismically derived velocity deviation log: A case study from the Perth Basin of western Australia. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2021, 196, 108077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Shen, J.; Li, K.; Zhang, H.; Shabbiri, K.; Hu, Q.; Zhang, C. The geochemical characteristics, origin, migration and accumulation modes of deep coal-measure gas in the west of Linxing block at the eastern margin of Ordos Basin. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2021, 91, 103965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Qu, J.; Shen, J.; Guo, Y.; Sang, G.; Cao, Y.; Li, W. Variations of CH4 release pathways and processes in progressively pulverized Coals: Insights from multi-fractal analysis and experimental Validation. Fuel 2025, 381, 133471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zheng, D.; Ozbayoglu, E.; Miska, S.; Zhang, J. Experimental study of anisotropic strength properties of shale. In Proceedings of the ARMA US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, Atlanta, GA, USA, 25–28 June 2023; p. ARMA-2023. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rafieepour, S.; Zheng, D.; Miska, S.; Ozbayoglu, E.; Takach, N.; Yu, M.; Zhang, J. Combined experimental and well log evaluation of anisotropic mechanical properties of shales: An application to wellbore stability in bakken formation. In Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Virtual, 26–29 October 2020; p. D021S015R006. [Google Scholar]
  7. Yu, H.J.; Wang, Z.J.; Li, J.B. Key technological progress and breakthrough direction for the development of complex tight gas reservoirs in Changqing gas field, Ordos Basin. Acta Pet. Sin. 2023, 44, 698–712. [Google Scholar]
  8. Liu, E.R. Study on Tight Gas Enriching Mechanism of the Shanxi Formation in the Eastern Zhoukou Depression of the Southern North China Basin. Ph.D. Thesis, China University of Petroleum, Beijing, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  9. Dong, X.X.; Meng, X.Z.; Pu, R.H. Occurrence characteristics of movable fluids based on the division of pore throat system in tight gas reservoir by fractal theory. Nat. Gas Ind. 2023, 43, 78–90. [Google Scholar]
  10. Dai, J.X.; Dong, D.Z.; Ni, Y.Y.; Gong, D.Y.; Huang, S.; Hong, F.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Q.Y.; Wu, X.Q.; Feng, Z.Q. Distribution patterns of tight sandstone gas and shale gas. Pet. Explor. Dev 2024, 51, 667–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shen, Y.L.; Qin, Y.; Shen, J. Sedimentary control mechanism of the superimposed gas bearing system development in the Upper Palaeozoic coal measures along the eastern margin of the Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Ind. 2017, 37, 29–35. [Google Scholar]
  12. Shen, J.; Qin, Y.; Zhang, B.; Li, G. Superimposing gas-bearing system in coal measures and its compatibility in Linxing block,east Ordos Basin. J. China Coal Soc. 2018, 43, 1614–1619. [Google Scholar]
  13. Cheng, C. Influencing factors of productivity of tight sandstone gas in the Xiashihezi Formation of the Yanchuannan gas field. J. Geol. 2015, 39, 133–137. [Google Scholar]
  14. Shi, S. Study on Comprehensive Evaluation Method of Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoir. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dong, Q. A Research of Geological Controlling Factors of Gas Well Productivity in Tight Gas Reservoir: An Example from SuX Area in Sulige Gas Field. Master’s Thesis, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  16. Liu, H.; Gao, S.; Fang, F.; Jiao, C.; Li, Q.; Ye, L.; An, W.; Zhang, J. Model of cross-flow interference index and application for multi-layer commingled production in Sulige tight sandstone gas reservoir, Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Geosci. 2023, 34, 950–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liao, Y. Experimental Simulation and Field Application of Multi-Layer Combined Production in Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoirs. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  18. Tan, Y.H.; Guo, J.Z.; Zheng, F.; Xu, W.F. Physical simulation on seepage features of commingled production and right time of production conversion for gas wells. Oil Gas Geol. 2015, 36, 1009–1015. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang, M.Y. Numerical Simulation Study of Influence Factors of Multilayer Fractured Vertical Well Productivity in Tight Gas Reservoir. Master’s Thesis, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  20. Xu, X.H.; Wang, Y.; Lin, J.D.; Liu, X.W.; Gan, Y. Commingled production characteristics of multi-pressure-system tight gas reservoirs and experiment of the developing mode optimization. Pet. Geol. Oilfield Dev. Daqing 2020, 39, 153–161. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhao, L.; Wen, G.; Li, X.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Shi, X.; Yang, M. Evaluation of the “Sweet Spot Area” of Tight Sandstone Gas Reservoirs in the Shanxi Formation 2-3 Sub-member of the Daning-Jixian Block in the Ordos Basin. Nat. Gas Ind. 2018, 38, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  22. Dong, L.; Lin, Y.X.; Wu, Y.C.; Li, X.; Xing, Y.S.; Ma, X.W.; Shu, Y. Physical property and gas content characters of sandstone in Daning-Jixian Area Upper Paleozoic. China Energy Environ. Prot. 2018, 40, 87–94. [Google Scholar]
  23. Tian, W.; Zhao, S.; Tian, F.; Li, X.; Huo, W.; Zhong, G.; Li, S. Symbiotic Combination and Accumulation of Coal Measure Gas in the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Margin of Ordos Basin, China. Energies 2023, 16, 1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yang, S.; Li, S.; Tian, W.; Zhong, G.; Wang, J. Sequence stratigraphic analysis of superimposed coal measure gas-bearing system in Daning-Jixian block, eastern margin of Ordos Basin, China. Front. Earth Sci. 2024, 18, 611–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Xiang, Y.J.; Lou, L.; Sun, J. Marine-continental transitional sequence and coal accumulation model during Late Carboniferous to Early Permian in the southeast margin of Ordos Basin. J. Northeast Pet. Univ. 2023, 47, 104–116. [Google Scholar]
  26. Qin, Y.; Shen, J.; Shen, Y.L. Joint mining compatibility of superposed gas-bearing systems: A general geological problem for extraction of three natural gases and deep CBM in coal series. J. China Coal Soc. 2016, 41, 14–23. [Google Scholar]
  27. Wang, M.Z. Study on the Characteristics of Sandstone Reservoir of Benxi-Taiyuan Formation in Daning Block. Master’s Thesis, China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  28. Li, Z.X. The Research of Characteristies and Its Controlling Factors of Sandstone Reservoir Lithogenous Phase of Taiyuan-Shanxi Formation in Daning-Jixian Area. Master’s Thesis, China University of Geosciences, Beijing, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  29. Dang, J.C. Study on Natural Gas Enrichment Rules and Sweet Spot Evaluation of He 8 Member in Daning-Jixian Area. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  30. Shi, S.; Er, C.; Zhang, W. Pore Structure Characteristics of Upper Paleozoic Tight Reservoir in Daning—Jixian Area of Ordos Basin and Its Relationship with Clay Minerals. J. Xi’an Shiyou Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2023, 38, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  31. Guo, L.L.; Li, Z.B.; Zhang, W.; Lin, W.G.; Yang, M.M.; Zhao, Y. Analysis of pore structure of main tight sandstone reservoirs in Daning-Jixian Block of Ordos Basi. Nat. Gas Ind. 2018, 38, 18–23. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kadkhodaie-Ilkhch, R.; Kadkhodaie, A.; Rezaee, R.; Mehdipour, V. Unraveling the reservoir heterogeneity of the tight gas sandstones using the porosity conditioned facies modeling in the Whicher Range field, Perth Basin, Western Australia. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2019, 176, 97–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Teng, Y.X. Study on the Pore Structure and Seepage Characteristics of the Shanxi Formation in the Daning-Jixian Area of Eastern Ordos. Master’s Thesis, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sun, J.; Chen, M.; Wang, B.; Wang, G.; Tian, H.; Hou, J.; Zhu, B. Analysis of Factors Influencing Tight Sandstone Gas Production and Identification of Favorable Gas Layers in the Shan 23 Sub-Member of the Daning-Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin. Processes 2024, 12, 1810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhong, G.; Li, S.; Tang, D.; Tian, W.; Lin, W.; Feng, P. Study on Co-production compatibility evaluation method of multilayer tight gas reservoir. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2022, 108, 104840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 18 02398 g001
Figure 1. Stratigraphic column of Well Daji 35.
Figure 1. Stratigraphic column of Well Daji 35.
Energies 18 02398 g001
Energies 18 02398 g002
Figure 2. CH4 concentration and δ13CCH4 values in each gas-producing layer. (a) CH4 concentration values in each gas-producing layer; (b) δ13CCH4 values in each gas-producing layer.
Figure 2. CH4 concentration and δ13CCH4 values in each gas-producing layer. (a) CH4 concentration values in each gas-producing layer; (b) δ13CCH4 values in each gas-producing layer.
Energies 18 02398 g002
Energies 18 02398 g003
Figure 3. Comparison of average pressure coefficients in different layers.
Figure 3. Comparison of average pressure coefficients in different layers.
Energies 18 02398 g003
Energies 18 02398 g004
Figure 4. Clastic composition of sandstone in different layers.
Figure 4. Clastic composition of sandstone in different layers.
Energies 18 02398 g004
Energies 18 02398 g005
Figure 5. Comparison of various clay mineral content.
Figure 5. Comparison of various clay mineral content.
Energies 18 02398 g005
Energies 18 02398 g006
Figure 6. Statistics histogram of pore type.
Figure 6. Statistics histogram of pore type.
Energies 18 02398 g006
Energies 18 02398 g007
Figure 7. Comparison of mercury injection parameters in different layers. (a) Comparison of displacement pressure in different layers. (b) Comparison of median pressure in different layers. (c) Comparison of average throat radius in different layers. (d) Comparison of sorting coefficient in different layers. (e) Comparison of maximum mercury saturation and mercury withdrawal efficiency in different layers.
Figure 7. Comparison of mercury injection parameters in different layers. (a) Comparison of displacement pressure in different layers. (b) Comparison of median pressure in different layers. (c) Comparison of average throat radius in different layers. (d) Comparison of sorting coefficient in different layers. (e) Comparison of maximum mercury saturation and mercury withdrawal efficiency in different layers.
Energies 18 02398 g007
Energies 18 02398 g008
Figure 8. Comparison of porosity and permeability in different layers. (a) Comparison of porosity in different layers; (b) comparison of permeability in different layers.
Figure 8. Comparison of porosity and permeability in different layers. (a) Comparison of porosity in different layers; (b) comparison of permeability in different layers.
Energies 18 02398 g008
Energies 18 02398 g009
Figure 9. Quartz–clay mineralogical controls on porosity–permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs. (a) Quartz content controls on porosity trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (b) quartz content controls on permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (c) clay content controls on porosity trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (d) clay content controls on permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs.
Figure 9. Quartz–clay mineralogical controls on porosity–permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs. (a) Quartz content controls on porosity trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (b) quartz content controls on permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (c) clay content controls on porosity trends in tight sandstone reservoirs; (d) clay content controls on permeability trends in tight sandstone reservoirs.
Energies 18 02398 g009
Energies 18 02398 g010
Figure 10. The relationship between the average values of various parameters and the average gas production. (a) The relationship between the average values of porosity and the average gas production; (b) the relationship between the average values of permeability and the average gas production; (c) the relationship between the average values of median pressure and the average gas production; (d) the relationship between the average values of average throat radius and the average gas production.
Figure 10. The relationship between the average values of various parameters and the average gas production. (a) The relationship between the average values of porosity and the average gas production; (b) the relationship between the average values of permeability and the average gas production; (c) the relationship between the average values of median pressure and the average gas production; (d) the relationship between the average values of average throat radius and the average gas production.
Energies 18 02398 g010
Energies 18 02398 g011
Figure 11. Comparison of gas production in different layers.
Figure 11. Comparison of gas production in different layers.
Energies 18 02398 g011
Table 1. Statistical of litho-mineralogical characteristics.
Table 1. Statistical of litho-mineralogical characteristics.
LayersNumber of
Samples		Clastic Composition (%)Interstitial Material (%)
QuartzFeldsparLithic FragmentTotalMatrixCementTotal
He 8 5068.068.77 14.6391.461.487.068.54
Shan 1 7366.448.25 15.3290.002.207.7910.00
Shan 24974.954.44 11.2090.591.527.899.41
Taiyuan 2378.570.11 10.3589.030.0010.9610.96
Benxi2087.071.77 4.2393.070.056.896.93
Table 2. Statistics of clay minerals.
Table 2. Statistics of clay minerals.
LayersMixed-Layer Illite/Smectite (%)Illite (%)Kaolinite (%)Chlorite (%)Ferruginous–Aluminous Serpentine (%)
He 8 25.45 14.00 16.27 26.27 18.00
Shan 1 38.00 41.16 6.63 12.79 1.42
Shan 230.00 56.43 13.57 //
Taiyuan 16.50 80.50 3.00 //
Table 3. Quantitative analysis of some minerals in sedimentary rocks.
Table 3. Quantitative analysis of some minerals in sedimentary rocks.
LayersNumber of SamplesQuartz
(%)		Plagioclase
(%)		Calcite
(%)		Dolomitic
(%)		Siderite
(%)		Clay Minerals (%)
He 8 22 73.40 2.13 6.38 //18.09
Shan 1 19 69.92 4.18 3.99 /1.1320.78
Shan 27 84.36 1.26 /4.83 0.578.99
Taiyuan 6 56.37 //18.57 /25.07
Table 4. Statistical average of pore characteristic parameters.
Table 4. Statistical average of pore characteristic parameters.
LayersNumber of SamplesIntragranular Dissolved Pore (%)Intergranular Dissolved Pore (%)Intercrystalline Pore (%)Matrix Dissolved Pore (%)Residual Primary Pores (%)Mold Pore (%)Pore Area Percentage (%)
He 8 4130.6033.8821.319.841.093.284.91
Shan 1 4647.1333.7612.743.821.271.272.86
Shan 24236.1840.2017.590.000.006.034.41
Taiyuan 1037.5012.5050.000.000.000.001.60
Benxi 2221.5735.2933.331.960.007.843.48
Table 5. Average of mercury injection parameters.
Table 5. Average of mercury injection parameters.
LayersNumber of SamplesDisplacement Pressure (MPa)Median Pressure (MPa)Average Throat Radius (μm) Sorting CoefficientMaximum Mercury Saturation (%)Mercury Withdrawal Efficiency (%)Residual Mercury Saturation (%)
He 8 520.86 21.70 0.49 2.46 80.14 38.83 47.29
Shan 1 410.64 15.79 0.32 2.23 83.50 40.55 44.79
Shan 2490.51 6.57 2.75 2.57 81.15 28.45 59.51
Taiyuan 101.06 15.39 8.71 1.41 79.54 35.55 60.41
Benxi 180.44 5.52 6.34 2.19 84.05 22.67 38.74
Table 6. Control of sedimentation on litho-mineralogical characteristics.
Table 6. Control of sedimentation on litho-mineralogical characteristics.
Stratigraphic UnitReservoir LithologyDepositional SettingHydrodynamic CharacteristicsLitho-Mineralogical Features
He 8 Fine-grained lithic quartz sandstone, feldspar lithic sandstoneDelta-front subaqueous distributary channelsGentle topography, moderate hydrodynamic energyRelatively low quartz content; dominated by lithic quartz sandstone and feldspathic litharenite; elevated lithic fragments, matrix, clay minerals (notably chlorite).
Shan 1
Shan 2Medium- to fine-grained (lithic) quartz sandstoneDelta-front subaqueous distributary channels constrained by erosional paleotopographyNarrow channels, high hydrodynamic energyElevated matrix content; low total clay minerals; clay fraction dominated by kaolinite.
Taiyuan Fine-grained quartz sandstoneBarrier bar deposits in barrier coast faciesStrong tidal influenceLow matrix content; high cementation; elevated total clay minerals (predominantly kaolinite).
Benxi Pebbly sandstone, conglomeratic sandstone, coarse-grained quartz sandstoneBarrier bar and tidal channel deposits in barrier coast faciesStrong tidal influenceLow matrix and cement content; reduced total clay minerals.
Table 7. Gas production at different layers.
Table 7. Gas production at different layers.
Single-Layer ProductionBenxi Taiyuan Shan 2Shan 1 He 8
Gas production (m3/d)Minimum209.72512.212185.05915.101050.30
Maximum42,160.1742,605.7713,6806.9939,145.971721.75
Average11,998.1512,628.4523,469.237801.311386.03
Multi-Layer Co-ProductionBenxi+ TaiyuanBenxi+ Shan 2Shan 1 + Shan 2Shihezi + Shan 2Shihezi + Shan 1 + Shan 2
Gas production (m3/d)Minimum3223.651492.425248.38865.791087.74
Maximum9629.9726,965.0062,991.649362.282984.00
Average6426.8112,765.4327,477.104406.051736.80
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, M.; Wang, B.; Tian, H.; Sun, J.; Liu, L.; Liang, X.; Chen, B.; Yu, B.; Zhang, Z. Multilayer Gas-Bearing System and Productivity Characteristics in Carboniferous–Permian Tight Sandstones: Taking the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin, as an Example. Energies 2025, 18, 2398. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18092398

AMA Style

Chen M, Wang B, Tian H, Sun J, Liu L, Liang X, Chen B, Yu B, Zhang Z. Multilayer Gas-Bearing System and Productivity Characteristics in Carboniferous–Permian Tight Sandstones: Taking the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin, as an Example. Energies. 2025; 18(9):2398. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18092398

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Ming, Bo Wang, Haonian Tian, Junyi Sun, Lei Liu, Xing Liang, Benliang Chen, Baoshi Yu, and Zhuo Zhang. 2025. "Multilayer Gas-Bearing System and Productivity Characteristics in Carboniferous–Permian Tight Sandstones: Taking the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin, as an Example" Energies 18, no. 9: 2398. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18092398

APA Style

Chen, M., Wang, B., Tian, H., Sun, J., Liu, L., Liang, X., Chen, B., Yu, B., & Zhang, Z. (2025). Multilayer Gas-Bearing System and Productivity Characteristics in Carboniferous–Permian Tight Sandstones: Taking the Daning–Jixian Block, Eastern Ordos Basin, as an Example. Energies, 18(9), 2398. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18092398

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop