软岩地层三维地应力测试方法研究——以宁晋盐穴储气库为例

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2096-1693.2026.02.006

石油科学通报 ›› 2026, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (1): 131-142. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-1693.2026.02.006

软岩地层三维地应力测试方法研究——以宁晋盐穴储气库为例

雷雅钧¹^,²(), 杨跃辉²^,³, 牛耀辉⁴, 李世远¹^,⁵, 孙东生²^,³^,^*()

1 中国石油大学(北京)石油工程学院，北京 102249
2 中国地质科学院地质力学研究所，北京 100081
3 自然资源部地应力工程技术创新中心，北京 100081
4 河北省干热岩研究中心煤田地质局第二地质队，邢台 054000
5 中国石油大学(北京)深层地热富集机理与高效开发全国重点实验室，北京 102249

收稿日期:2025-07-24 修回日期:2025-10-28 出版日期:2026-02-15 发布日期:2026-02-12
通讯作者: * 孙东生(1980年—)，研究员，博士生导师，主要从事地应力探测技术研发及应用研究， dongshengsun@cags.ac.cn。
作者简介:雷雅钧(1998年—)，在读博士研究生，主要从事地应力和岩石力学研究， leiyajun1998self@163.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金面上项目(42174122);国家自然科学基金面上项目(52174011);中国地质科学院基本科研业务费项目(DZLXJK202407);中国石油大学(北京)学科前沿交叉探索专项(2462024XKQY006);国家科技重大专项(2025ZD1401400)

Research on three-dimensional in-situ stress testing methods in soft rock formations: A case study of the Ningjin salt cavern gas storage

LEI Yajun¹^,²(), YANG Yuehui²^,³, NIU Yaohui⁴, LI Shiyuan¹^,⁵, SUN Dongsheng²^,³^,^*()

1 School of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China
2 Institute of Geomechanics, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
3 Engineering Technology Innovation Center of In-situ Stress, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100081, China
4 Second Geological Team of Hebei Coalfield Geological Bureau, Xingtai 054000, China
5 State Key Laboratory of Deep Geothermal Resources, China University of Petroleum-Beijing, Beijing, 102249, China

Received:2025-07-24 Revised:2025-10-28 Online:2026-02-15 Published:2026-02-12
Contact: *dongshengsun@cags.ac.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

地应力是地震科学研究、深部资源开发和地下工程建设的重要基础参数。针对强流变软岩地层中水压致裂(Hydraulic Fracturing, HF)法无法直接计算最大水平主应力和非弹性应变恢复(Anelastic Strain Recovery, ASR)法柔量难以准确测定的问题，本文提出一种HF与ASR相结合的软岩地层三维地应力测试方法。该方法通过HF法获取最小水平主应力，结合ASR测试数据反演岩芯非弹性应变恢复柔量，从而计算三维地应力。该方法已在拟建宁晋盐穴地下储气库项目中成功应用，结果表明该方法能够可靠反演深部软岩地层的三维地应力状态。研究为软岩地层地应力获取提供了新的技术途径，可为盐穴储气库建设、非常规油气开发及井壁稳定性评价等方面提供技术支撑。

关键词: 软岩地层, 地应力, 水压致裂法, 非弹性应变恢复法, 非弹性应变恢复柔量

Abstract:

In-situ stress is a fundamental parameter for seismic research, deep resource development, and underground engineering. However, in soft rock formations with strong rheological behavior, the hydraulic fracturing(HF) method cannot directly determine the maximum horizontal principal stress(σ_H), and the anelastic strain recovery(ASR) method often suffers from large uncertainties due to the difficulty of accurately determining the anelastic strain recovery compliance. To address these limitations, this study proposes a novel approach for in-situ 3D stress in soft rock formations that integrates the hydraulic fracturing method with the anelastic strain recovery method. The minimum horizontal principal stress(σ_h) is obtained through hydraulic fracturing tests, while the anelastic strain recovery compliance is back-calculated from ASR data on recovered core samples, enabling the complete in-situ 3D stress tensor to be reconstructed. This combined method has been successfully applied in the Ningjin salt cavern gas storage project, confirming its reliability and applicability in deep soft rock formations. The proposed approach provides a new technical solution for acquiring in-situ stress in soft rock formations and offers valuable support for salt cavern gas storage construction, unconventional hydrocarbon development, and wellbore stability evaluation.

Key words: soft rock formation, in-situ stress, hydraulic fracturing method, anelastic strain recovery method, anelastic strain recovery compliance

中图分类号:

TE822
P55

雷雅钧, 杨跃辉, 牛耀辉, 李世远, 孙东生. 软岩地层三维地应力测试方法研究——以宁晋盐穴储气库为例[J]. 石油科学通报, 2026, 11(1): 131-142.

LEI Yajun, YANG Yuehui, NIU Yaohui, LI Shiyuan, SUN Dongsheng. Research on three-dimensional in-situ stress testing methods in soft rock formations: A case study of the Ningjin salt cavern gas storage[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2026, 11(1): 131-142.

https://sykxtb.cup.edu.cn/CN/Y2026/V11/I1/131

图/表 12

图1 HF法+ASR法综合获取三维地应力测量流程

Fig. 1 The three-dimensional in-situ stress measurement process is comprehensively obtained by using the HF method and the ASR method

图2 Z1井地质简图

Fig. 2 Geological sketch map of Z1 well

图3 新型水压致裂地应力测量系统井下设备

Fig. 3 Downhole instruments of the recently developed HF stress measurement system

图4 HF法实测井下压力和地面流量随时间的变化曲线

Fig. 4 The variation curves of downhole pressure and surface flow over time measured by the HF method

表1 Z1井最小水平主应力测量结果

Table 1 Measurement results of minimum horizontal principal stress in Z1 well

测段中心深度/m	岩性	单切线/MPa	(dt/dP)/MPa	(dP/dt)/MPa	最大差值/MPa	平均值/MPa	σ_h/MPa	σ_v/MPa
2620	泥岩	43.21	42.86	43.50	0.64	43.19	43.19	57.64
2668	泥岩	45.20	43.01	43.37	2.19	43.86	43.86	58.70
2838	盐岩	52.14	51.51	52.38	0.87	52.01	52.01	62.44
2878	盐岩	50.68	49.61	48.53	2.15	49.61	49.61	63.32
2950	盐岩	51.38	51.65	51.13	0.52	51.39	51.39	64.90

图5 Z1钻孔HF法实测最小水平主应力随深度分布图

Fig. 5 Distribution map of minimum horizontal principal stress measured by Z1 drilling HF method with depth

图6 ASR法地应力测试系统

Fig. 6 ASR method in-situ stress testing system

图7 黏贴精密应变片的盐芯样品(2891.40~2891.60 m)

Fig. 7 Salt core sample for bonding precision strain gauge (2891.40~2891.60 m)

图8 Z1井盐岩样品的非弹性恢复应变实测曲线

Fig. 8 Curves of ASR method of salt rock salt rock samples

表2 Z1井偶极声波各向异性处理成果

Table 2 Results of dipole acoustic anisotropy processing in Well Z1

井段/m	σ_h/MPa	σ_H/MPa	σ_H方向/°
2599.9~2602.0	43.3	49.1	98.7
2613.3~2615.3	44.0	49.6	83.4
2617.6~2619.3	43.5	49.1	94.4
2620.3~2622.5	40.7	46.2	96.0
2626.0~2627.4	43.2	47.5	125.1
2700.0~2707.8	46.6	49.4	98.5

图9 柔量比与最小水平主应力的关系曲线

Fig. 9 Minimum horizontal principal stress vs anelastic strain recovery compliance

表3 盐岩地层三维地应力测试结果

Table 3 Three dimensional in-situ stress measurement results of salt rock strata

测深/m	岩性	σ₁/MPa	σ₂/MPa	σ₃/MPa	σ_H/MPa	σ_h/MPa	σ_v/MPa
2891.50	盐岩	64.39	53.91	50.80	54.69	50.83	63.61
2891.70		67.03	52.15	50.60	55.41	50.84	63.62
2938.50		69.22	52.20	50.66	55.29	52.13	64.65
2961.80		68.29	53.70	50.26	54.27	52.80	65.16

参考文献 42

[1]	谢和平. 深部岩体力学与开采理论研究进展[J]. 煤炭学报, 2019, 44(05): 1283-1305.
	[XIE H P. Research review of the state key research development program of China: Deep rock mechanics and mining theory[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2019, 44(5): 1283-1305.]
[2]	石耀霖, 胡才博. 王仁先生在地震预报中的开拓性工作[J]. 地球物理学报, 2021, 64(10): 3429-3441.
	[SHI Y L, HU C B. Pioneering works of Academician Wang Ren in earthquake prediction[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2021, 64(10): 3429-3441.]
[3]	ZHENG K, SHI C, ZHAO Q, et al. Support design method for deep soft-rock tunnels in non-hydrostatic high in-situ stress field[J]. Journal of Central South University, 2024, 31(7): 2431-2445. doi: 10.1007/s11771-024-5738-9
[4]	XU D, HUANG X, JIANG Q, et al. Estimation of the three-dimensional in situ stress field around a large deep underground cavern group near a valley[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2021, 13(3): 529-544. doi: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2020.11.007 URL
[5]	PU Z, TIAN Y, FU J, et al. Stress-sensitive porosity and permeability in carbonate rocks for underground hydrogen storage: A digital rock simulation study[J]. International Journal of Coal Science & Technology, 2025, 12(1): 1-16.
[6]	宫丹妮, 李景翠, 万继方, 等. 多场作用下盐穴储气库腔体稳定性的数值模拟研究[J]. 石油科学通报, 2023, 8(06): 787-796.
	[GONG D N, LI J C, WAN J F, et al. The numerical simulation of the stability of salt cavern gas storage considering multiple fields[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2023, 8(06): 787-796.]
[7]	邢梓萌, 李瑞雪, 邓虎成, 等. 塔里木盆地博孜—大北逆冲推覆带超深层致密砂岩地应力场模拟及分区评价[J]. 石油实验地质, 2025, 47(02): 296-310.
	[XING Z M, LI R X, DENG H C, et al. Simulation and zoning evaluation of in-situ stress field within ultra-deep tight sandstone reservoirs in thrust-nappe structures of Bozi-Dabei area, Tarim Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 2025, 47(2): 296-310.]
[8]	曹慧, 孙东生, 苑坤, 等. 黔南地区-3 km油气深孔地应力测量与构造应力场分析[J]. 中国地质, 2020, 47(1): 88-98.
	[CAO H, SUN D S, YUAN K, et al. In-situ stress determination of 3 km oil-gas deep hole and analysis of the tectonic stress field in the southern Guizhou[J]. Geology in China, 2020, 47(1): 88-98.]
[9]	郭旭升, 胡宗全, 李双建, 等. 深层—超深层天然气勘探研究进展与展望[J]. 石油科学通报, 2023, 8(04): 461-474.
	[GUO X S, HU Z Q, LI S J, et al. Progress and prospect of natural gas exploration and research in deep and ultra-deep strata[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2023, 8(04): 461-474.]
[10]	ROUDINI S, MURDOCH L C, DEWOLF S, et al. Characterizing reservoir boundaries using the shallow strain tensor measured during well tests[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2025: 133743.
[11]	彭建新, 邱金平, 才博, 等. 塔里木超深油气储层改造技术进展[J]. 石油科学通报, 2025, 10(04): 695-708.
	[PENG J X, QIU J P, CAI B, et al. Technical progress of ultra - deep oil and gas reservoir stimulation in Tarim Oilfield[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2025, 10(04): 695-708.]
[12]	HAIMSON B C, CORNET F H. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation—part 3: Hydraulic fracturing (HF) and/or hydraulic testing of pre-existing fractures (HTPF)[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2003, 40(7-8): 1011-1020. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2003.08.002 URL
[13]	ZOBACK M D, BARTON C A, BRUDY M, et al. Determination of stress orientation and magnitude in deep wells[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2003, 40(7-8): 1049-1076. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2003.07.001 URL
[14]	田鹤, 曾联波, 舒志国, 等. 页岩横向各向同性地应力预测模型中弹性参数的确定方法[J]. 地质力学学报, 2019, 25(02): 166-176.
	[TIAN H, ZENG L B, SHU Z G, et al. Method for determining elastic parameters for the prediction model of shale transversely isotropic geostress[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 2019, 25(02): 166-176.]
[15]	PIAO S, HUANG S, WANG Q, et al. Experimental and numerical study of measuring in-situ stress in horizontal borehole by hydraulic fracturing method[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2023, 141: 105363. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2023.105363 URL
[16]	LI P, CAI M, MIAO S, et al. Accurate measurement techniques and prediction approaches for the in-situ rock stress[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14(1): 13226. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-64030-7 pmid: 38851822
[17]	WINDSOR C R. Geotechnical instrumentation and monitoring in open pit and underground mining[M]. London: CRC Press, 2020: 33-52.
[18]	LIU B, ZHU Y, LIU Q, et al. A novel in situ stress monitoring technique for fracture rock mass and its application in deep coal mines[J]. Applied Sciences, 2019, 9(18): 3742. doi: 10.3390/app9183742 URL
[19]	LIN C, ZOU D H S, SUN H. Exploration of measurement methods of 3D in-situ stresses in rock masses[J]. International Journal of Georesources and Environment-IJGE (formerly Int’l J of Geohazards and Environment), 2019, 5: 1-13.
[20]	MOHAMADI A, BEHNIA M, ALNEASAN M. Comparison of the classical and fracture mechanics approaches to determine in situ stress/hydrofracturing method[J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2021, 80: 3833-3851.
[21]	YOKOYAMA T, SAKAGUCHI K, Ito T. Re-opening and shut-in behaviors under a large ratio of principal stresses in a hydraulic fracturing test[C]. ISRM EUROCK, 2017: ISRM-EUROCK-2017-109.
[22]	LIU Y, LI Y, SHI X, et al. Creep monitoring and parameters inversion methods for rock salt in extremely deep formation[J]. Geoenergy Science and Engineering, 2023, 229: 212092. doi: 10.1016/j.geoen.2023.212092 URL
[23]	MCCORMACK K L, MCLENNAN J D, JAGNIECKI E A, et al. Discrete measurements of the least horizontal principal stress from core data: An application of viscoelastic stress relaxation[J]. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 2023, 26(03): 827-841.
[24]	WAWERSIK W R, STONE C M. A characterization of pressure records in inelastic rock demonstrated by hydraulic fracturing measurements in salt[C]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts. Pergamon, 1989, 26(6): 613-627.
[25]	MATSUKI K, TAKEUCHI K. Three-dimensional in-situ stress determination by anelastic strain recovery of a rock core[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Min-ning Sciences, 1993, 30: 1019-1022.
[26]	林为人. 基于岩芯非弹性应变恢复量测定的深孔三维地应力测试方法[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报. 2008, 27(12): 2387-2394.
	[LIN W R. A core-based method to determine three-dime-nsional in-situ stress in deep drilling wells: anelastic strain recovery techninque[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2008, 27(12): 2387-2394.]
[27]	王连捷, 孙东生, 林为人, 等. 地应力测量的非弹性应变恢复法及应用实例[J]. 地球物理学报, 2012, 55(05): 1674-1681.
	[WANG L J, SUN D S, LIN W R, et a1. Ane-lastic strain recovery method to determine in-situ stress and application example[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 2012, 55(05): 1674-1681.]
[28]	ZHANG C, LIN W, HE M, et al. Determining in-situ stress state by anelastic strain recovery method beneath Xiamen: implications for the coastal region of southeastern China[J]. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 2022, 55(9): 5687-5703. doi: 10.1007/s00603-022-02915-7
[29]	SUGIMOTO T, ISHITSUKA K, LIN W. Theoretical investigation on new analyzing procedure of anelastic strain recovery method for stress measurements based on bayesian statistical modeling[J]. Materials transactions, 2021, 62(12): 1695-1702. doi: 10.2320/matertrans.MT-Z2021015 URL
[30]	LIN W, SAKAI Y, KAMIYA N, et al. A review of the anelastic strain recovery (ASR) technique for in-situ stress measurements: A suggested test protocol and further challenges[C]// ARMA US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium. ARMA, 2024: D032S041R002.
[31]	LIN W, KWASNIEWSKI M, IMAMURA T, et al. Determination of three-dimensional in situ stresses from anelastic strain recovery measurement of cores at great depth[J]. Tectonphysi-cs, 2006, 426(1-2): 221-238.
[32]	孙东生, 吕海涛, 王连捷, 等. ASR和DITF法综合确定塔里木盆地7 km深部地应力状态[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2018, 37(2): 383-391.
	[SUN D S, LV H T, WANG L J, et al. Constrain-ed the in-situ stress state of 7 km depth within Tarim Basin by ASR and DITH methods[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 37(2): 383-391.]
[33]	FENG Y, PAN P Z, WANG Z, et al. A novel indirect optical method for rock stress measurement using micro-deformation field analysis[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2024, 16(9): 3616-3628. doi: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2023.10.011 URL
[34]	葛伟凤, 张飞, 陈勉, 等. 盐膏岩DRA-Kaiser地应力测试方法初探[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2015, 34(S1): 3138-3142.
	[GE W F, ZHANG F, CHEN M, et al. Research on geotress measurement using dra-kaiser method in salt-gyps-um formation[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanic-s and Engineering, 2015, 34(S1): 3138-3142.]
[35]	侯冰, 陈勉, 金衍, 等. 多套复合盐层的地应力确定方法[J]. 天然气工业, 2009, 29(01): 67-69+138-139.
	[HOU B, CHEN M, JIN Y, et al. Determination method of ground stress for multiple sets of composite salt beds[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2009, 29(01): 67-69+138-139.]
[36]	LI G, HU Y, LI Q B, et al. Inversion method of in-situ stress and rock damage characteristics in dam site using neural network and numerical simulation—a case study[J]. Ieee Access, 2020, 8: 46701-46712. doi: 10.1109/Access.6287639 URL
[37]	SUN D S, LIN W R, CUI J W, et al. Three-dimensional in situ stress determination by anelastic strain recovery and its application at the Wenchuan earthquake fault scientific drilling hole-1(WFSD-1)[J]. Science China: Earth Sciences, 2014, 57(6): 1212-1220. doi: 10.1007/s11430-013-4739-6 URL
[38]	孙东生. 非弹性应变恢复原地应力测量方法的实验研究及应用[D]. 北京: 中国地质科学院, 2014.
	[SUN D S. Experimental study of anelastic strain recovery in-situ stress measurement methods and its applic-ation[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, 2014.]
[39]	MATSUKI K. Anelastic strain recovery compliance of rocks and its application to in situ stress measurement[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2008, 45(6): 952-965.
[40]	ZHAO K, LIU Y X, LI Y P, et al. Feasibility analys-is of salt cavern gas storage in extremely deep formation: A case study in China[J]. Journal of Energy Storage. 2022, 47: 103649. doi: 10.1016/j.est.2021.103649 URL
[41]	陈群策, 孙东生, 崔建军, 等. 雪峰山深孔水压致裂地应力测量及其意义[J]. 地质力学学报, 2019, 25(05): 853-865.
	[CHEN Q C, SUN D S, CUI J, et al. Hydra-ulic fracturing stress measurements in Xuefengshan deep borehole and its significance[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 2019, 25(05): 853-865.]
[42]	李志强, 牛耀辉, 苏野, 等. 宁晋盐穴储气库构造应力场解析与数值模拟[J]. 地下空间与工程学报, 2024, 20(S2): 848-856.
	[LI Z Q, NIU Y H, SU Y, et al. Analysis and numerical simulation of tectonic stress field of salt cavern gas storage in Ningjin[J]. Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering, 2024, 20(S2): 848-856.]

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

软岩地层三维地应力测试方法研究——以宁晋盐穴储气库为例

Research on three-dimensional in-situ stress testing methods in soft rock formations: A case study of the Ningjin salt cavern gas storage

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 42

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	张木杨, 周恺锐, 李曹雄, 崔欢, 袁晓俊, 苏展鸿, 鲜成钢. 中深层页岩储层天然裂缝稳定性演化规律研究[J]. 石油科学通报, 2026, 11(1): 99-113.
[2]	马天寿；张东洋；陆灯云；谢祥锋；刘阳. 地质力学参数智能预测技术进展与发展方向[J]. , 2024, 9(3): 365-382.
[3]	马天寿；向国富；石榆帆；桂俊川；张东洋. 基于双向长短期记忆神经网络的水平地应力预测方法[J]. , 2022, 7(4): 487-504.
[4]	朱海燕；宋宇家；唐煊赫. 页岩气储层四维地应力演化及加密井复杂裂缝扩展研究进展[J]. , 2021, 6(3): 396-416.
[5]	林伯韬. 疏松砂岩储层微压裂机理与应用技术研究[J]. , 2021, 6(2): 209-227.

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

软岩地层三维地应力测试方法研究——以宁晋盐穴储气库为例

Research on three-dimensional in-situ stress testing methods in soft rock formations: A case study of the Ningjin salt cavern gas storage

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 42

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价