库车坳陷构造挤压对流体压力的影响
|
摘要
库车坳陷新生代以来处于强挤压的构造环境中,并且自山前向坳陷内部逆冲推覆,形成了现今断裂、逆冲推覆、断层相关褶皱等复杂构造面貌。正是由于研究区构造复杂,挤压强烈,坳陷内部流体动力发生、发展同其他盆地有着显著差异。在超压方面,除了沉积超压外,还有重要的构造挤压超压。对构造挤压背景下库车坳陷流体压力特征研究以及构造挤压超压贡献的评价有利于更好的认识前陆盆地中,构造应力场同流体动力场之间的关系,对前陆盆地油气成藏规律的研究有着重要的指导作用。
本次论文以前人研究成果为依据,通过野外地质调研,利用野外断裂、褶皱、节理产状等信息辅以磁组构实验和岩石声发射对库车坳陷新生代以来构造挤压大小、方向做了研究。通过对比现今实测地层压力与利用泥岩压实曲线中等效深度法确定的最大埋深时期过剩压力,研究了库车坳陷流体压力特征。在对研究区新生代以来膏泥盐岩分布规律研究的基础上,定量的评价库车坳陷不同构造单元构造超压贡献。经过分析、总结最终得到的主要认识与成果如下：
库车坳陷现今压力分布在平面上有所差异,目的层位下白垩统巴什基奇克组同古近系库姆格列木组均反映出：自前陆冲断带至坳陷,压力梯度逐渐减小,在塔北隆起地层压力降为静水压力。
从泥岩压实曲线获知,整个库车坳陷从山前到塔北欠压实普遍存在,最大埋深时期过剩压力在坳陷中多大于10MPa。
库车坳陷新生代以来经受了多期构造挤压,从野外调研、地震剖面观测、磁组构分析均表明新生代以来研究区强烈挤压,库车坳陷构造格局也定型于此阶段。构造挤压多以南北向为主,向西、向东误差小于30°,且最大挤压应力主要分布在50MPa—100MPa之间。
古近系膏泥盐岩分布在平面上有所差异,两个高值区分别位于克拉苏西段大北地区以及拜城凹陷中部,自高值区向北厚度逐渐变薄,向南至塔北隆起YM2地区膏泥盐岩几乎尖灭。
库车坳陷中,构造挤压超压大小与所处构造单元位置关系密切,坳陷内部构造挤压贡献率为20%—50%之间,塔北地区构造超压不存在。
Kuqa Depression has been involved in the tectonic setting of strong compression since Cenozoic. It thrusts from foreland of the orogen to the depression with complex structures such as faults, thrusts and fault—related folds. It is distinct from the other basins by hydrodynamic occurrence and its development. In terms of overpressure, there is not only deposition overpressure, but also tectonic overpressure, which is very important in forland basin. Thus, the characteristic study of fluid pressure in Kuqa Depression and evaluation of the contribution from over pressure of the tectonic compression are significant in understanding the relationship between tectonic stress field and fluid dynamic field in foreland basins, meanwhile, they play important roles in guiding the study of hydrocarbon accumulation in foreland basins.
Based on previous research results, applyed by structrual analysis (fault, folds, joints), test of anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility(AMS), the test of AE in this thesis to study the orientation and magnitude of the tectonic compression since Cenozoic. Characteristics of fluid pressure are analysed beteen the excess pressure measured and that calculated by the time of largest buried depth period though compaction curve of mudstone. On the basis of distribution of mud and gypsum and salt rock of Kumugeliemu Formation and Suweiyi Formation,and quantitative evaluation is obtained of the contribution of overpressure of the tectonic compression in different tectonic units.The most significant fruits and major recognition of this thesis can be summarized as follows.
Fluid pressure measurement indicates that the distribution of abnormal pressure in Kuqa Depression is various. Both of the pressure of Bashenjiqike Formation and Kumugeliemu Formation shows the same regulation:pressure gradient reduces from the foreland thrust belt to the depression, and the north Tarim uplift is just drops to hydrostatic pressure.
Compaction curves of mudstone show that undercompaction was common in the entire Kuqa Depression from the foreland thrust belt to the north Tarim uplift. The excess pressure during the largest buried depth period was mostly over 1 OMpa.
Kuqa Depression has experienced multi—periods of tectonic compression since Cenozoic. Field observation, seismic profiles, as well as magnetic fabric analysis show strong compression in the study area. The structural framework of the Kuqa Depression also was formed during this stage. The studies above indicate that the direction of the tectonic compression is mainly N—S direction with the deviation which is less than 30°to the west and east, and the maximum compressive stress range from 50Mpa to 100Mpa.
Horizontal distribution of Paleogene mud, gypsum, and salt rocks is various. It reaches the peak in the Dabei area of east Kelasu and in middle of the Baicheng Sag. The thickness of mud, gypsum, and salt rocks reduce from the to north and south,and in the area of Yingmai of the north Tarim uplift it almost pinches.
The contribution of over pressure of the tectonic compression is closely related to tectonic unit in the Kuqa Depression. The evaluation results show that the contribution rate of internal depression ranges from 20%—50% in the Kuqa Depression, while no tectonic compression exists in the north Tarim uplift.
本次论文以前人研究成果为依据,通过野外地质调研,利用野外断裂、褶皱、节理产状等信息辅以磁组构实验和岩石声发射对库车坳陷新生代以来构造挤压大小、方向做了研究。通过对比现今实测地层压力与利用泥岩压实曲线中等效深度法确定的最大埋深时期过剩压力,研究了库车坳陷流体压力特征。在对研究区新生代以来膏泥盐岩分布规律研究的基础上,定量的评价库车坳陷不同构造单元构造超压贡献。经过分析、总结最终得到的主要认识与成果如下：
库车坳陷现今压力分布在平面上有所差异,目的层位下白垩统巴什基奇克组同古近系库姆格列木组均反映出：自前陆冲断带至坳陷,压力梯度逐渐减小,在塔北隆起地层压力降为静水压力。
从泥岩压实曲线获知,整个库车坳陷从山前到塔北欠压实普遍存在,最大埋深时期过剩压力在坳陷中多大于10MPa。
库车坳陷新生代以来经受了多期构造挤压,从野外调研、地震剖面观测、磁组构分析均表明新生代以来研究区强烈挤压,库车坳陷构造格局也定型于此阶段。构造挤压多以南北向为主,向西、向东误差小于30°,且最大挤压应力主要分布在50MPa—100MPa之间。
古近系膏泥盐岩分布在平面上有所差异,两个高值区分别位于克拉苏西段大北地区以及拜城凹陷中部,自高值区向北厚度逐渐变薄,向南至塔北隆起YM2地区膏泥盐岩几乎尖灭。
库车坳陷中,构造挤压超压大小与所处构造单元位置关系密切,坳陷内部构造挤压贡献率为20%—50%之间,塔北地区构造超压不存在。
Kuqa Depression has been involved in the tectonic setting of strong compression since Cenozoic. It thrusts from foreland of the orogen to the depression with complex structures such as faults, thrusts and fault—related folds. It is distinct from the other basins by hydrodynamic occurrence and its development. In terms of overpressure, there is not only deposition overpressure, but also tectonic overpressure, which is very important in forland basin. Thus, the characteristic study of fluid pressure in Kuqa Depression and evaluation of the contribution from over pressure of the tectonic compression are significant in understanding the relationship between tectonic stress field and fluid dynamic field in foreland basins, meanwhile, they play important roles in guiding the study of hydrocarbon accumulation in foreland basins.
Based on previous research results, applyed by structrual analysis (fault, folds, joints), test of anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility(AMS), the test of AE in this thesis to study the orientation and magnitude of the tectonic compression since Cenozoic. Characteristics of fluid pressure are analysed beteen the excess pressure measured and that calculated by the time of largest buried depth period though compaction curve of mudstone. On the basis of distribution of mud and gypsum and salt rock of Kumugeliemu Formation and Suweiyi Formation,and quantitative evaluation is obtained of the contribution of overpressure of the tectonic compression in different tectonic units.The most significant fruits and major recognition of this thesis can be summarized as follows.
Fluid pressure measurement indicates that the distribution of abnormal pressure in Kuqa Depression is various. Both of the pressure of Bashenjiqike Formation and Kumugeliemu Formation shows the same regulation:pressure gradient reduces from the foreland thrust belt to the depression, and the north Tarim uplift is just drops to hydrostatic pressure.
Compaction curves of mudstone show that undercompaction was common in the entire Kuqa Depression from the foreland thrust belt to the north Tarim uplift. The excess pressure during the largest buried depth period was mostly over 1 OMpa.
Kuqa Depression has experienced multi—periods of tectonic compression since Cenozoic. Field observation, seismic profiles, as well as magnetic fabric analysis show strong compression in the study area. The structural framework of the Kuqa Depression also was formed during this stage. The studies above indicate that the direction of the tectonic compression is mainly N—S direction with the deviation which is less than 30°to the west and east, and the maximum compressive stress range from 50Mpa to 100Mpa.
Horizontal distribution of Paleogene mud, gypsum, and salt rocks is various. It reaches the peak in the Dabei area of east Kelasu and in middle of the Baicheng Sag. The thickness of mud, gypsum, and salt rocks reduce from the to north and south,and in the area of Yingmai of the north Tarim uplift it almost pinches.
The contribution of over pressure of the tectonic compression is closely related to tectonic unit in the Kuqa Depression. The evaluation results show that the contribution rate of internal depression ranges from 20%—50% in the Kuqa Depression, while no tectonic compression exists in the north Tarim uplift.
引文
[1]贾承造,宋岩.中国前陆盆地油气地质理论与勘探实践.中国石油勘探开发研究院.2005.06
[2]宋岩,魏国齐,赵孟军,等.前陆盆地油气成藏条件与富集规律研究.中国石油勘探开发研究院,2006.03
[3]于震亮等.藏外流体的流体驱动力、流动过程与圈闭供气量计算.西北大学地质学系,2003.11
[4]魏国齐,肖安成,张成元,等.库车、阿瓦提、塔西南前陆盆地构造演化与油气.石油勘探开发研究院廊坊分院,2000.12
[1]Bartons N, Bandis S, Bakhtar K. Strength, deformation and conductivity coupling of rock joints[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts,1985,22 (3):121-140
[2]Borradail G J. Correlation of strain with anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS) [J]. Pure and Applied Geophysics,1991,135 (1):15-29
[3]Borradail G J, Henry B. Tectonic applications of magnetic susceptibility and its anisotropy[J]. Earth Science Review,1997,42:49-93
[4]Dickinson G. Geological aspects of abnormal reservoir pressure in Gulf Coast, Louisiana[J]. AAPG Bulletin,1953,37:410-432
[5]Graham J W. Significance of magnetic anisot ropy in Appalachian sedimentary rocks [A]. In Steinhart Steinhart J S.Smith T J, eds. The earth beneath continents, Geophysical Monograph Series 10 [C]. Washington D C:American, Geophysical Union,1966,627-648
[6]Jeffrey R. Allwardt, G. Eric Michael, Chuck R. Shearer, et al.2D modeling of overpressure in a salt withdrawal basin, Gulf of Mexico, USA[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology,2009,26: 464-473
[7]Kaiser J. A study of acoustic phenomena in tensile tests [D]. PhD Thesis, Technische Hochschule Munchen, Munich, Germany,1950
[8]Mark R. P. Tingay, Richard R. Hillis. Origin of overpressure and pore—pressure prediction in the Baram province, Brunei[J]. AAPG Bulletin,2009,93 (1):51 - 71
[9]Mazlan Madon. Overpressure development in rift basins:an example from the Malay Basin, offshore
Peninsular alaysia[J]. Petroleum Geoscience,2007,13 (1):169-180
[10]Noorished J. A finite — element method for coupled stress and fluid analysis in fractured rock masses[J]. International Jouranal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts,1982,19 (3):185-193.
[11]Rathore J S. Henry B. CoMParison of strain and magnetic fabrics in Dalradian rocks from the southwest Highlands of Scotland[J]. Journal of Structural Geology,1982,4 (3):373-384
[12]Sibson R H. Crustal stress, faulting and fluid flow[J]. Geological Society Special Publication,1994, 78:69-84
[13]Terzaghi K, Peck R B, Mesri G. Soil Mechanics in Enginerering Practice[J]. Third Edition,1956
[14]Xiaorong Luo, Zhaoming Wang. Overpressure generation and evolution in a compressional tectonic setting, the southern margin of Junggar Basin, northwestern China[J]. AAPG Bulletin,2007,8 (8):1123-1139
[15]陈宝宁.陆相断陷盆地断裂系统与异常压力分布特征初探—以济阳坳陷东营凹陷为例[J].石油实验地质,2005,27(12)：601-605
[16]陈发景,汪新文,陈昭年,等.前陆盆地分析[M].北京：地质出版社,2007
[17]陈勉,金衍,张广清,等.石油工程岩石力学[M].北京：科学出版社,2008
[18]陈书平,金之钧,孙海龙,等.库车前陆区中—新生代盆山波动耦合[J].西安石油大学学报(自然科学版),2004,19(4)：24-28
[19]陈书平,汤良杰,余一欣.天山南北前陆盆地新生代变形与天山造山带的波动耦合[J].中国科学：D辑,2004,38(增刊1)55-62
[20]陈书平,汤良杰,贾承造,等.库车坳陷西段盐构造及其与油气的关系[J].石油学报.2004,25(1)：30-34
[21]丁原辰,张大伦.声发射抹录不净现象在地应力测量中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,1991,10(4)：331-326
[22]丁原辰,孙宝珊,汪西海,等.塔里木盆地北部油田古应力的AE法测量[J].地质力学学报,1996,2(2)：19-25
[23]丁原辰,孙宝珊,汪西海等.塔北油田现今地应力的AE法测量[J].地球科学,1997,22(2)：215-218
[24]丁原辰.声发射法古应力测量问题讨论[J].地质力学学报,2000,6(2)：45-52
[25]杜治利,王清晨,周学慧,等.中新生代库车-南天山盆山系统隆升历史的裂变径迹证据[J]．岩
石矿物学杂志,2007.26(5)：399-408
[26]付广,吕延防.断层垂向封油气性综合定量评价方法探讨及应用[J].地质科学,2005,40(4)：476-485
[27]付志新.超压对断层垂向封闭作用的定量研究[J].大庆石油地质与开发,2008,27(4)：16-20
[28]何登发,吕修祥,林永汉,等.[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1996
[29]胡剑风,刘玉魁,杨明慧,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造特征及其与油气的关系[J].地质科学,2004,39(4)：580-588.
[30]黄少英,王月然,魏红兴,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造特征及形成演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：117-123
[31]贾承造,魏国齐,王良书等.中国塔里木盆地构造特征与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1997
[32]贾承造,何登发,雷振宇,等.前陆冲断带油气勘探[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2000
[33]贾承造.前陆冲断带油气勘探[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2000
[34]贾承造.中国喜马拉雅构造运动的陆内变形特征与油气矿藏富集[J].地学前缘,2007,14(4)：96-104
[35]贾东,陈竹新,罗良,等.断层相关褶皱的磁组构与有限应变：川西岷江冲断构造的实例分析[J].自然科学进展,2007,17(2)：188-195
[36]贾进斗.天山南北前陆冲断带油气地质条件对比及有利勘探领域分析[J].中国石油勘探,2006,11(4),21-25
[37]金文正,汤良杰,王清华,等.库车前陆盆地东秋里塔格构造带构造分段特征[J].大地构造与成矿学,2007,31(3)：300-307
[38]李德生.中国西部含油气盆地的地质特征. [M].北京：石油工业出版社,1992
[39]李景明,刘树根,李本亮等.中国西部有C-型前陆盆地形成演化与油气聚集[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2006
[40]李军,王贵文,欧阳健.利用测井信息定量研究库车坳陷山前地区地应力[J].石油勘探与开发,2001,28(5)93-95
[41]李明诚.石油与天然气运移[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2004
[42]李学森,熊国锦.钻井岩心重定向的古地磁方法及其可靠性[J].石油勘探与开发,2006,33(5)：581-585
[43]李日俊,吴根耀,雷刚林,等.新疆库车新生代前陆褶皱冲断带的变形特征、时代和机制[J].地质科学.2008,43(3)：488-506
[44]李忠,王清晨.库车-天山盆山系统与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2007
[45]梁文天,张国伟,鲁如魁.西秦岭北缘武山-鸳鸯镇构造带磁组构特征[J].地学前缘,2008,15(4)：298-306
[46]刘志宏,卢华复,李西建,等.库车再生前陆盆地的构造演化[J].地质科学,2000,35(4)：482-492
[47]卢华复,贾东,蔡东升,等.塔里木和西天山古生代板块构造演化.见：童晓光,梁狄刚,贾承造：塔里木盆地石油地质研究[C]北京：科学出版社,1996,235-245
[48]卢华复,贾东,陈楚铭等.库车新生代构造性质和变形时间[J],地学前缘,1999,6(4)：215-221
[49]吕修祥,金之钧,周新源,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷与膏盐岩相关的油气聚集[J].石油勘探与开发,2000,27(4)：20-21
[50]罗良,贾东,陈竹新,等.川西北磁组构演化及其揭示的应变特征[J].地质通报.2006,25(11)：1342-1348
[51]罗晓容.断裂开启与地层中温压瞬态变化的数学模拟[J].石油与天然气地质,1999,4(3)：1-6
[52]罗晓容.构造应力超压机制的定量分析[J].地球物理学报,2004,47(6)：1086-1093
[53]石宝珩,周堃,关德范等.扬子海相地质与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1993：262-269
[54]石万忠.库车坳陷构造挤压增压的定量评价及超压成因分析[J].石油学报,2007,28(11)：59-65
[55]寿建峰,斯春松,张达,等.库车坳陷下侏罗统岩石古应力场与砂岩储层性质[J].地球学报,2004,25(4)：447-452
[56]宋岩,赵孟军,柳少波,等.中国3类前陆盆地油气成藏特征[J].石油勘探与开发,2005,32(3)：1-6
[57]宋岩,魏国齐,赵孟军,等.中国中西部前陆盆地石油地质特征[M].北京：科学出版社,2007
[58]宋岩,柳少波,赵孟军,等.中国中西部前陆盆地油气分布规律及主控因素[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2008
[59]孙宝珊,丁原辰,邵兆刚,等.声发射法测量古今应力在油田的应用[J].地质力学学报,1996,2(2)：11-17
[60]孙雄,洪汉净,马宗晋.构造应力作用下流体运动的动力学分析—构造流体动力学[J].地球学报,1998,19(2)：150-157
[61]孙雄.构造应力场对油气运移的影响[J].石油勘探与开发,1998,25(1)：1-4
[62]汤良杰,贾承造,皮学军,等.库车前陆褶皱带盐相关构造样式[J]．中国科学(D辑),2003,33(1)：38-46
[63]汤良杰,李京昌,余一欣,等.库车前陆褶皱-冲断带盐构造差异变形和分段性特征探讨[J].地质学报,2006,80(3)：313-320
[64]汤良杰,贾承造,王英明,等.塔里木叠合盆地构造解析与应力场分析[M].北京：科学出版社,2007
[65]万桂梅,汤良杰,金文正,等.盐岩在库车坳陷中的作用[J].西南石油大学学报(自然科学版),2008,30(1)：14-18.
[66]万天丰.古构造应力场[M].北京：地质出版社,1988
[67]王飞宇,张水昌,张宝民,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷中生界烃源岩有机质成熟度[J].新疆石油地质.1999,20(3)：1-7
[68]汪新,贾承造.南天山库车冲断褶皱带构造变形时间-以库车河地区为例[J].地质学报,2002,76(1)：55-63
[69]汪新,贾承造,杨树锋.南天山库车褶皱冲断带构造几何学和运动学[J].地质科学,2002,37(3)：372-384
[70]汪新,贾承造,杨树锋,等.南天山库车冲断褶皱带构造变形时间-以库车河地区为例[J].地质学报,2002,76(1)55-63
[71]汪新,唐鹏程,谢会文,等.库车坳陷西段新生代盐构造特征及演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：57-65
[72]王清晨,张仲培,林伟.库车盆地-天山边界的晚第三纪断层活动性质与应力状态[J].科学通报,2003,48(24)：2553-2559
[73]王清晨,张仲培,林伟等.库车-天山盆山系统晚第三纪变形特征[J].中国科学(D辑),2004,34(增刊)：45-55
[74]王小凤.构造应力场、流体势场对柴达木盆地西部油气运聚的控制作用[J].地质通报,2006,25(10)：1036-1044
[75]王月然,魏红兴,蒋荣敏,等.库车坳陷中段盐相关构造形成控制因素[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：66-75
[76]王招明,钟瑞,赵培荣,等.库车前陆盆地露头区油气地质[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2004
[77]王招明,王国林,肖中尧,等.库车前陆盆地天然气生烃动力学[M].北京：科学出版社,2005
[78]王震亮,张立宽,施立志,等.塔里木盆地克拉2气田异常高压的成因分析及其定量评价[J].地质论评,2005,51(1)：55-63
[79]王震亮.川西地区上三叠统异常流体压力主要形成机制[J].石油与天然气地质,2007,28(2)：43-50
[80]王震亮.库车坳陷古流体动力与天然气成藏特征分析[J].石油与天然气地质,2007,28(12)：809-815
[81]魏国齐,李本亮,陈汉林,等.中国中西部前陆盆地构造特征研究[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2008
[82]邬光辉, 刘玉魁,罗俊成,等.库车坳陷盐构造特征及其对油气成藏的作用[J].地球学报,2003,24(3)：249-253
[83]邬光辉,王招明,刘玉魁,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造运动学特征[J].地质论评,2004,50(5)：476-483
[84]武红岭,王小凤.油田构造应力场驱动油气运移的理论和方法研究[J]．石油学报,1999,20(5)：7-12.
[85]武红岭,王小凤.多孔介质构造应力驱油的固流祸合分析[J].石油勘探与开发,2006,33(1)76-89
[86]许建新,马海州,杨来生,等.库车盆地古近纪和新近纪构造环境与蒸发岩沉积[J].地质学报.2006,80(2)：228-236
[87]余一欣,马宝军,汤良杰,等.库车坳陷西段盐构造形成主控因素[J]．石油勘探与开发,2008,35(1)：23-27
[88]余一欣,汤良杰,杨文静,等.库车坳陷盐相关构造与有利油气勘探领域[J].大地构造与成矿学,2007,31(4)：404-411
[89]余一欣,汤良杰,杨文静,等.库车前陆褶皱-冲断带前缘盐构造分段差异变形特征[J].地质学报,2007,81(2)：166-173
[90]岳乐平,王建其,邸世祥.油气田钻井岩心及岩心裂缝方位确定的古地磁原理与方法[J].地球物理学进展,1997,12(3)：71-76
[91]曾联波,谭成轩,张明利.塔里木盆地库车坳陷中新生代构造应力场及其油气运聚效应[J].中国科学：D辑,2004,34(增刊1)：98-106.
[92]曾联波.喜马拉雅运动对库车坳陷油气成藏的影响[J].地球科学,2002,27(11)：741-744
[93]曾联波.构造挤压对库车坳陷异常地层压力的影响[J].地质论评,2004,50(9)：471-475
[94]曾联波,王贵文.塔里木盆地库车山前构造带地应力分布特征[J].石油勘探与开发,2005,32(3)：59-60
[95]张朝军,田在艺.塔里木盆地库车坳陷第三系盐构造与油气[J].石油学报,1998,19(1)：6-10
[96]张仲培,林伟,王清晨.库车坳陷克拉苏-依奇克里克构造带的构造演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2003,27(4)：327-336
[97]张仲培,王清晨.库车坳陷节理和剪切破裂发育特征及其对区域应力场转换的指示[J].中国科学(D辑),2004,34(增刊1)：63-73
[98]赵靖舟,李启明.塔里木盆地油气藏形成与分布规律[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2003
[99]赵靖舟.前陆盆地天然气成藏理论及应用[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2003
[100]赵文智,何登发.中国含油气系统的基本特征与勘探对策[J].石油学报,2002,23(4)：1-11
[101]周新源.前陆盆地尤其分布规律[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2002
[102]周兴熙,张光亚,李洪辉,等.塔里木盆地库车油气系统的成藏作用[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2002
[2]宋岩,魏国齐,赵孟军,等.前陆盆地油气成藏条件与富集规律研究.中国石油勘探开发研究院,2006.03
[3]于震亮等.藏外流体的流体驱动力、流动过程与圈闭供气量计算.西北大学地质学系,2003.11
[4]魏国齐,肖安成,张成元,等.库车、阿瓦提、塔西南前陆盆地构造演化与油气.石油勘探开发研究院廊坊分院,2000.12
[1]Bartons N, Bandis S, Bakhtar K. Strength, deformation and conductivity coupling of rock joints[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts,1985,22 (3):121-140
[2]Borradail G J. Correlation of strain with anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS) [J]. Pure and Applied Geophysics,1991,135 (1):15-29
[3]Borradail G J, Henry B. Tectonic applications of magnetic susceptibility and its anisotropy[J]. Earth Science Review,1997,42:49-93
[4]Dickinson G. Geological aspects of abnormal reservoir pressure in Gulf Coast, Louisiana[J]. AAPG Bulletin,1953,37:410-432
[5]Graham J W. Significance of magnetic anisot ropy in Appalachian sedimentary rocks [A]. In Steinhart Steinhart J S.Smith T J, eds. The earth beneath continents, Geophysical Monograph Series 10 [C]. Washington D C:American, Geophysical Union,1966,627-648
[6]Jeffrey R. Allwardt, G. Eric Michael, Chuck R. Shearer, et al.2D modeling of overpressure in a salt withdrawal basin, Gulf of Mexico, USA[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology,2009,26: 464-473
[7]Kaiser J. A study of acoustic phenomena in tensile tests [D]. PhD Thesis, Technische Hochschule Munchen, Munich, Germany,1950
[8]Mark R. P. Tingay, Richard R. Hillis. Origin of overpressure and pore—pressure prediction in the Baram province, Brunei[J]. AAPG Bulletin,2009,93 (1):51 - 71
[9]Mazlan Madon. Overpressure development in rift basins:an example from the Malay Basin, offshore
Peninsular alaysia[J]. Petroleum Geoscience,2007,13 (1):169-180
[10]Noorished J. A finite — element method for coupled stress and fluid analysis in fractured rock masses[J]. International Jouranal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts,1982,19 (3):185-193.
[11]Rathore J S. Henry B. CoMParison of strain and magnetic fabrics in Dalradian rocks from the southwest Highlands of Scotland[J]. Journal of Structural Geology,1982,4 (3):373-384
[12]Sibson R H. Crustal stress, faulting and fluid flow[J]. Geological Society Special Publication,1994, 78:69-84
[13]Terzaghi K, Peck R B, Mesri G. Soil Mechanics in Enginerering Practice[J]. Third Edition,1956
[14]Xiaorong Luo, Zhaoming Wang. Overpressure generation and evolution in a compressional tectonic setting, the southern margin of Junggar Basin, northwestern China[J]. AAPG Bulletin,2007,8 (8):1123-1139
[15]陈宝宁.陆相断陷盆地断裂系统与异常压力分布特征初探—以济阳坳陷东营凹陷为例[J].石油实验地质,2005,27(12)：601-605
[16]陈发景,汪新文,陈昭年,等.前陆盆地分析[M].北京：地质出版社,2007
[17]陈勉,金衍,张广清,等.石油工程岩石力学[M].北京：科学出版社,2008
[18]陈书平,金之钧,孙海龙,等.库车前陆区中—新生代盆山波动耦合[J].西安石油大学学报(自然科学版),2004,19(4)：24-28
[19]陈书平,汤良杰,余一欣.天山南北前陆盆地新生代变形与天山造山带的波动耦合[J].中国科学：D辑,2004,38(增刊1)55-62
[20]陈书平,汤良杰,贾承造,等.库车坳陷西段盐构造及其与油气的关系[J].石油学报.2004,25(1)：30-34
[21]丁原辰,张大伦.声发射抹录不净现象在地应力测量中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,1991,10(4)：331-326
[22]丁原辰,孙宝珊,汪西海,等.塔里木盆地北部油田古应力的AE法测量[J].地质力学学报,1996,2(2)：19-25
[23]丁原辰,孙宝珊,汪西海等.塔北油田现今地应力的AE法测量[J].地球科学,1997,22(2)：215-218
[24]丁原辰.声发射法古应力测量问题讨论[J].地质力学学报,2000,6(2)：45-52
[25]杜治利,王清晨,周学慧,等.中新生代库车-南天山盆山系统隆升历史的裂变径迹证据[J]．岩
石矿物学杂志,2007.26(5)：399-408
[26]付广,吕延防.断层垂向封油气性综合定量评价方法探讨及应用[J].地质科学,2005,40(4)：476-485
[27]付志新.超压对断层垂向封闭作用的定量研究[J].大庆石油地质与开发,2008,27(4)：16-20
[28]何登发,吕修祥,林永汉,等.[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1996
[29]胡剑风,刘玉魁,杨明慧,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造特征及其与油气的关系[J].地质科学,2004,39(4)：580-588.
[30]黄少英,王月然,魏红兴,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造特征及形成演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：117-123
[31]贾承造,魏国齐,王良书等.中国塔里木盆地构造特征与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1997
[32]贾承造,何登发,雷振宇,等.前陆冲断带油气勘探[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2000
[33]贾承造.前陆冲断带油气勘探[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2000
[34]贾承造.中国喜马拉雅构造运动的陆内变形特征与油气矿藏富集[J].地学前缘,2007,14(4)：96-104
[35]贾东,陈竹新,罗良,等.断层相关褶皱的磁组构与有限应变：川西岷江冲断构造的实例分析[J].自然科学进展,2007,17(2)：188-195
[36]贾进斗.天山南北前陆冲断带油气地质条件对比及有利勘探领域分析[J].中国石油勘探,2006,11(4),21-25
[37]金文正,汤良杰,王清华,等.库车前陆盆地东秋里塔格构造带构造分段特征[J].大地构造与成矿学,2007,31(3)：300-307
[38]李德生.中国西部含油气盆地的地质特征. [M].北京：石油工业出版社,1992
[39]李景明,刘树根,李本亮等.中国西部有C-型前陆盆地形成演化与油气聚集[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2006
[40]李军,王贵文,欧阳健.利用测井信息定量研究库车坳陷山前地区地应力[J].石油勘探与开发,2001,28(5)93-95
[41]李明诚.石油与天然气运移[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2004
[42]李学森,熊国锦.钻井岩心重定向的古地磁方法及其可靠性[J].石油勘探与开发,2006,33(5)：581-585
[43]李日俊,吴根耀,雷刚林,等.新疆库车新生代前陆褶皱冲断带的变形特征、时代和机制[J].地质科学.2008,43(3)：488-506
[44]李忠,王清晨.库车-天山盆山系统与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2007
[45]梁文天,张国伟,鲁如魁.西秦岭北缘武山-鸳鸯镇构造带磁组构特征[J].地学前缘,2008,15(4)：298-306
[46]刘志宏,卢华复,李西建,等.库车再生前陆盆地的构造演化[J].地质科学,2000,35(4)：482-492
[47]卢华复,贾东,蔡东升,等.塔里木和西天山古生代板块构造演化.见：童晓光,梁狄刚,贾承造：塔里木盆地石油地质研究[C]北京：科学出版社,1996,235-245
[48]卢华复,贾东,陈楚铭等.库车新生代构造性质和变形时间[J],地学前缘,1999,6(4)：215-221
[49]吕修祥,金之钧,周新源,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷与膏盐岩相关的油气聚集[J].石油勘探与开发,2000,27(4)：20-21
[50]罗良,贾东,陈竹新,等.川西北磁组构演化及其揭示的应变特征[J].地质通报.2006,25(11)：1342-1348
[51]罗晓容.断裂开启与地层中温压瞬态变化的数学模拟[J].石油与天然气地质,1999,4(3)：1-6
[52]罗晓容.构造应力超压机制的定量分析[J].地球物理学报,2004,47(6)：1086-1093
[53]石宝珩,周堃,关德范等.扬子海相地质与油气[M].北京：石油工业出版社,1993：262-269
[54]石万忠.库车坳陷构造挤压增压的定量评价及超压成因分析[J].石油学报,2007,28(11)：59-65
[55]寿建峰,斯春松,张达,等.库车坳陷下侏罗统岩石古应力场与砂岩储层性质[J].地球学报,2004,25(4)：447-452
[56]宋岩,赵孟军,柳少波,等.中国3类前陆盆地油气成藏特征[J].石油勘探与开发,2005,32(3)：1-6
[57]宋岩,魏国齐,赵孟军,等.中国中西部前陆盆地石油地质特征[M].北京：科学出版社,2007
[58]宋岩,柳少波,赵孟军,等.中国中西部前陆盆地油气分布规律及主控因素[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2008
[59]孙宝珊,丁原辰,邵兆刚,等.声发射法测量古今应力在油田的应用[J].地质力学学报,1996,2(2)：11-17
[60]孙雄,洪汉净,马宗晋.构造应力作用下流体运动的动力学分析—构造流体动力学[J].地球学报,1998,19(2)：150-157
[61]孙雄.构造应力场对油气运移的影响[J].石油勘探与开发,1998,25(1)：1-4
[62]汤良杰,贾承造,皮学军,等.库车前陆褶皱带盐相关构造样式[J]．中国科学(D辑),2003,33(1)：38-46
[63]汤良杰,李京昌,余一欣,等.库车前陆褶皱-冲断带盐构造差异变形和分段性特征探讨[J].地质学报,2006,80(3)：313-320
[64]汤良杰,贾承造,王英明,等.塔里木叠合盆地构造解析与应力场分析[M].北京：科学出版社,2007
[65]万桂梅,汤良杰,金文正,等.盐岩在库车坳陷中的作用[J].西南石油大学学报(自然科学版),2008,30(1)：14-18.
[66]万天丰.古构造应力场[M].北京：地质出版社,1988
[67]王飞宇,张水昌,张宝民,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷中生界烃源岩有机质成熟度[J].新疆石油地质.1999,20(3)：1-7
[68]汪新,贾承造.南天山库车冲断褶皱带构造变形时间-以库车河地区为例[J].地质学报,2002,76(1)：55-63
[69]汪新,贾承造,杨树锋.南天山库车褶皱冲断带构造几何学和运动学[J].地质科学,2002,37(3)：372-384
[70]汪新,贾承造,杨树锋,等.南天山库车冲断褶皱带构造变形时间-以库车河地区为例[J].地质学报,2002,76(1)55-63
[71]汪新,唐鹏程,谢会文,等.库车坳陷西段新生代盐构造特征及演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：57-65
[72]王清晨,张仲培,林伟.库车盆地-天山边界的晚第三纪断层活动性质与应力状态[J].科学通报,2003,48(24)：2553-2559
[73]王清晨,张仲培,林伟等.库车-天山盆山系统晚第三纪变形特征[J].中国科学(D辑),2004,34(增刊)：45-55
[74]王小凤.构造应力场、流体势场对柴达木盆地西部油气运聚的控制作用[J].地质通报,2006,25(10)：1036-1044
[75]王月然,魏红兴,蒋荣敏,等.库车坳陷中段盐相关构造形成控制因素[J].大地构造与成矿学,2009,33(1)：66-75
[76]王招明,钟瑞,赵培荣,等.库车前陆盆地露头区油气地质[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2004
[77]王招明,王国林,肖中尧,等.库车前陆盆地天然气生烃动力学[M].北京：科学出版社,2005
[78]王震亮,张立宽,施立志,等.塔里木盆地克拉2气田异常高压的成因分析及其定量评价[J].地质论评,2005,51(1)：55-63
[79]王震亮.川西地区上三叠统异常流体压力主要形成机制[J].石油与天然气地质,2007,28(2)：43-50
[80]王震亮.库车坳陷古流体动力与天然气成藏特征分析[J].石油与天然气地质,2007,28(12)：809-815
[81]魏国齐,李本亮,陈汉林,等.中国中西部前陆盆地构造特征研究[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2008
[82]邬光辉, 刘玉魁,罗俊成,等.库车坳陷盐构造特征及其对油气成藏的作用[J].地球学报,2003,24(3)：249-253
[83]邬光辉,王招明,刘玉魁,等.塔里木盆地库车坳陷盐构造运动学特征[J].地质论评,2004,50(5)：476-483
[84]武红岭,王小凤.油田构造应力场驱动油气运移的理论和方法研究[J]．石油学报,1999,20(5)：7-12.
[85]武红岭,王小凤.多孔介质构造应力驱油的固流祸合分析[J].石油勘探与开发,2006,33(1)76-89
[86]许建新,马海州,杨来生,等.库车盆地古近纪和新近纪构造环境与蒸发岩沉积[J].地质学报.2006,80(2)：228-236
[87]余一欣,马宝军,汤良杰,等.库车坳陷西段盐构造形成主控因素[J]．石油勘探与开发,2008,35(1)：23-27
[88]余一欣,汤良杰,杨文静,等.库车坳陷盐相关构造与有利油气勘探领域[J].大地构造与成矿学,2007,31(4)：404-411
[89]余一欣,汤良杰,杨文静,等.库车前陆褶皱-冲断带前缘盐构造分段差异变形特征[J].地质学报,2007,81(2)：166-173
[90]岳乐平,王建其,邸世祥.油气田钻井岩心及岩心裂缝方位确定的古地磁原理与方法[J].地球物理学进展,1997,12(3)：71-76
[91]曾联波,谭成轩,张明利.塔里木盆地库车坳陷中新生代构造应力场及其油气运聚效应[J].中国科学：D辑,2004,34(增刊1)：98-106.
[92]曾联波.喜马拉雅运动对库车坳陷油气成藏的影响[J].地球科学,2002,27(11)：741-744
[93]曾联波.构造挤压对库车坳陷异常地层压力的影响[J].地质论评,2004,50(9)：471-475
[94]曾联波,王贵文.塔里木盆地库车山前构造带地应力分布特征[J].石油勘探与开发,2005,32(3)：59-60
[95]张朝军,田在艺.塔里木盆地库车坳陷第三系盐构造与油气[J].石油学报,1998,19(1)：6-10
[96]张仲培,林伟,王清晨.库车坳陷克拉苏-依奇克里克构造带的构造演化[J].大地构造与成矿学,2003,27(4)：327-336
[97]张仲培,王清晨.库车坳陷节理和剪切破裂发育特征及其对区域应力场转换的指示[J].中国科学(D辑),2004,34(增刊1)：63-73
[98]赵靖舟,李启明.塔里木盆地油气藏形成与分布规律[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2003
[99]赵靖舟.前陆盆地天然气成藏理论及应用[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2003
[100]赵文智,何登发.中国含油气系统的基本特征与勘探对策[J].石油学报,2002,23(4)：1-11
[101]周新源.前陆盆地尤其分布规律[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2002
[102]周兴熙,张光亚,李洪辉,等.塔里木盆地库车油气系统的成藏作用[M].北京：石油工业出版社,2002