Você está na página 1de 26

Original Article

Energy Exploration & Exploitation


Identification of the coal 2018, Vol. 36(2) 204–229
! The Author(s) 2017

structure and prediction of DOI: 10.1177/0144598717723815


journals.sagepub.com/home/eea

the fracturability in the No. 8


coal reservoir, Gujiao block,
China
Bo Huang,1,2 Yong Qin,1 Wanghong Zhang1 and
Gang Wang3

Abstract
Five boreholes were selected in the Gujiao block, Xishan, Taiyuan, China, as calibration wells to
identify the coal structure. The geophysical-log responses of the coal structure in the No. 8 coal
reservoir, Gujiao block, were investigated using coal-core logging combined with actual observa-
tions in the borehole profile of the coal mine. Natural gamma, density, apparent resistivity, and
sonic travel time logs were extracted at 0.15 m intervals from 41 undeformed coal, 29 cataclastic
coal, and 48 granulated coal regions. Box plots and Fisher’s maximum separation criterion were
used to screen and identify sensitive log responses of the coal structure. The coal structure was
identified in 31 boreholes using the available logs in the block, and the layered distribution
patterns of the coal structure were discussed. The fracturability of the coal structure was divided
into types using cluster analysis based on the thickness ratio of the coal structure and the rela-
tionship between the coal structure and its permeability. The results show that sensitive log
responses for identifying undeformed coal and cataclastic coal are natural gamma, followed by
density and apparent resistivity; log responses for identifying cataclastic coal and granulated coal-
mylonitized coal are sonic travel time, apparent resistivity and natural gamma. The sensitive log
response data were integrated and coal structure identification models were constructed based
on the principle of amplifying the log responses to identify the coal structure in the No. 8 coal
reservoir. The reservoir generally contains two or three dirt bands, and the coal structure is
divided into several independent layers, with the cataclastic coal and granulated coal-mylonitized
coal distributed in the middle of the reservoir. The coal structure was classified into four types
1
Key Laboratory of Coalbed Methane Resources and Reservoir Formation Process, Ministry of Education, China
University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China
2
Department of Resources and Environment Engineering, Henan University of Engineering, Zhengzhou, China
3
School of Earth Science and Engineering, Hebei University of Engineering, Handan, China
Corresponding author:
Yong Qi, Key Laboratory of Coalbed Methane Resource and Reservoir Formation Process, Ministry of Education, South
Jiefang Road, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province 221008, China.
Email: yongqin@cumt.edu.cn
Creative Commons CC-BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use,
reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as
specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Huang et al. 205

and four subtypes through cluster analysis of the boreholes. Under the control of the Malan
syncline, type I and type II are developed in the No. 8 coal reservoir in the southern part of the
study area and in the east and north wings of the Malan syncline; they have good fracturability.
Type III and type IV are mainly present in the No. 8 coal reservoir at the synclinal axis; they have
poor fracturability. For type IV dominated by granulated coal, it is difficult to improve the reser-
voir permeability by fracturing; therefore, other strengthened permeability-improving measures
should be considered.

Keywords
Digital geophysical logging, coal structure, coal reservoir, Gujiao block

Introduction
The Gujiao block in the Xishan coalfield, Shanxi Province, China, has rich coal-bed methane
(CBM) resources (Mo et al., 2008) and is one of the blocks constructed in recent years for the
large-scale development of CBM in China. After the formation of the coal-bearing strata,
the Gujiao block has experienced Hercynian, Yanshanian, and Himalayan tectonic move-
ments, causing varying degrees of tectonic destruction in the coal reservoirs. The high het-
erogeneity of the coal structure results in considerable variations in the permeability of the
main coal reservoir (Li, 2001; Li et al., 2012; Meng et al., 2011; Pan et al., 2012; Wang et al.,
2013). On the one hand, the variations severely affect the well production of CBM (Pan
et al., 2012; Xu et al., 2015); on the other hand, they make it difficult to determine a favor-
able production region and well location. Scientific prediction of the coal structure in the
main coal reservoir is the primary technical issue that guides CBM exploration and devel-
opment in this region.
Coal structure can be identified using various methods such as geological analysis, rock
mechanics, and logging. Differences in the physical and chemical properties of coal result in
a good correlation between coal structure and log responses (Fu et al., 2009a; Peng et al.,
2008; Teng et al., 2013, 2015; Yao et al., 2011). As the level of either structural destruction or
deteriorated coal structure increases, the apparent resistivity, sonic travel time, and caliper
log responses are enhanced and the natural gamma and density log responses are attenuated
(Teng et al., 2015; Yegireddi and Bhaskar, 2009; Zhou and Yao, 2014). Thus, geophysical
logging is the most cost-effective method to have high reliability (Chen et al., 2013; Li et al.,
2016; Gan et al., 2016).
Coal core cataloguing and underground coal wall observation corresponding to one or
multiple log responses allows for qualitative and quantitative identification of the coal struc-
ture in boreholes. For instance, caliper log changes in the X and Y directions combined with
resistivity and natural gamma changes were used for the qualitative evaluation of coal
structure by Chen et al. (2013). Based on the relationship between resistivity and rock
structural characteristics, the Archie formula was used both to calculate the pore structure
index of tectonically deformed coal and to quantitatively identify the coal structure
(Yao et al., 2011). Log responses were combined to quantitatively identify the coal structure
based on the principle of amplifying the log response (Xie and Fan, 2013). Neural networks
and support vector machines were also used to predict coal structure (Ghosh et al., 2016;
Guo, 2015; Rolon et al., 2009). However, there are differences in the physico-chemical
properties and log responses of the coal structure in different regions; thus, there is a need
206 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

to screen the sensitivity parameters and their combinations for log responses of coal struc-
ture (Hatherly, 2013; Teng et al., 2015).
Currently, hydraulic fracturing is the most economically feasible method to increase the
fracture connectivity and permeability of coal reservoirs (Pant et al., 2015). Moderate stress
damage can increase the fractures and permeability of coal reservoirs. However, sustained
high stress can destruct coal into granules, changing the cleat system of coal and significantly
reducing the permeability of the coal reservoir (Meng and Li, 2013; Meng et al., 2016). Thus,
hydraulic fracturing actually decreases the permeability of granulated-mylonitized coal (Guo
et al., 2014).
In this study, we analyzed the coal structure in 31 boreholes of the No. 8 coal reservoir
using the log responses of the coal structure in five calibration wells and model validation in
another well. Furthermore, we predicted the fracturability of this coal reservoir and its
regional distribution.

Geological setting
The Xishan coalfield is located in the middle section of the Shanxi fault on the Sino-Korean
paraplatform. This coalfield is adjacent to the Taiyuan basin and the Qinshui depression in
the southeast and close to the Yuxian-Yangqu east–west-striking fault-fold belt in the north.
The coalfield is bounded by the Ximing, Jinci, and Qingduan faults (north to south) in the
east and by the Lvliang uplift in the west (Figure 1). The Gujiao block is situated in the
Northwestern Xishan coalfield and covers the well fields of Dongqu, Xiqu, Tunlan, and
Malan (Wang et al., 2015a). This block has mainly developed into the undulating Malan
syncline from south to north, and there are a series of short synclines (anticlines) and oblique
NE- and NEE-trending faults on its east wing, including the Gujiao-Tounanmao,
Wangfeng-Suilaomu, and Duerping-Yaerya fault zones.
This block has experienced multiple tectonic movements and has a complex structure with
developed folds and faults (Guan and Li, 2001; Wang, 1993). During the Indosinian, an SN-
trending compression and uplift of the Northern Xishan coalfield resulted in a NNE-striking
fold that was extremely wide and gentle. This is the basis for the Early Yanshanian, a SEE–
NWW-trending compression that developed a NW- and NEE-trending shear structure that
laid the tectonic framework of the Xishan coalfield. During the Middle Yanshanian, a NW-
trending compression resulted in a large complex syncline and a NNE-striking fault struc-
ture. During the Late Yanshanian, NE-trending tensional shear normal faults were formed
under a NNW-SSE-trending dextral extensional stress. For instance, the Gujiao-Nanmao,
Wangfeng-Suilaomu, and Duerping fault zones were formed in the Gujiao block during this
period. During the Himalayan, the Qingjiao and Ximing faults formed approximately par-
allel in the axial direction under the NNE–SSW-trending compressional stress; because of
the obstruction by an ancient formation and the Yanshanian intrusions of the Huyan
Mountain, the terrain acted like the Malan syncline, showing a clockwise rotation and
folding in an undulating pattern. During neotectonic movement, the NNW-SSE-trending
movement activated the NW-trending shear structure that formed at an early stage and
formed normal faults and cut through the NE-trending faults. During this period, because
of the rotation of the Ordos block, nearly EW-trending and NEE-trending faults rotated
northward and formed the present tectonic pattern.
The Yanshanian is the most important period of tectonic formation and transformation
in the study area with respect to the development of folds and faults. Additionally, magma
Huang et al. 207

Figure 1. Map of Gujiao blocks showing the major structures (modified from Wang et al.).

heat baking in Huyan Mountain during the Yanshanian led to the volatilization of organic
matter in the coal and shrinkage of the coal matrix, which generated pores and contracted
fractures. Dynamic compression by magma intrusion resulted in overlaying of the exogenous
fractures and endogenous fractures (cleats); this changed the scale of the fractures in the coal
reservoir, increased the fracture ratio and improved the permeability (Liu et al., 2005). The
development of pores and fractures in the coal reservoir was bound to reduce the strength of
the coal and make it more susceptible to destruction and deformation.
The coal-bearing strata primarily comprise the Upper Carboniferous Taiyuan formation
and the Lower Permian Shanxi formation in the Gujiao block (Figure 2). The Taiyuan
formation is 84–136 m thick (generally 100 m thick), and the Shanxi formation is 30–70 m
thick (generally 60 m thick) (Wang et al., 2015a). The target reservoirs for CBM development
are the No. 2 coal reservoir of the Shanxi formation and the Nos. 8 and 9 coal reservoirs of
the Taiyuan formation. In the No. 8 coal reservoir, the maximum vitrinite reflectance ranges
between 1.14 and 2.30% with an average of 1.67%; the vitrinite content is in the range of
57.40–87.16% with an average of 71.67%; the inertinite content ranges from 5.67 to 34.13%
with an average of 19.92%; the exinite content ranges from 0 to 1.67% with an average
0.51%; and the ash yield is in the range of 8.14–35.26% with an average of 14%.

Methods of coal structure identification


Classification of the coal structure
According to the National Standards of the People’s Republic of China (GB/T30050-2013),
coal structure is classified into four types—primary undeformed, cataclastic, granulated,
and mylonitized—based on the macroscopic characteristics of the structure such
208 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 2. Stratigraphic column of the permo-carboniferous coal-bearing strata in the Gujiao blocks
(modified from Wang et al.).
Huang et al. 209

as distinguishability of the coal rock composition, bedding integrity, coal fragmentation


level, fracture and fold development level, and hand-tested coal strength. Mylonitized coal
is rarely distributed within the study area; however, both mylonitized coal and granulated
coal have low permeability and poor fracturability for hydraulic fracturing (Guo et al.,
2014). Therefore, coal structure was classified into three types—undeformed coal (I), cata-
clastic coal (II), and granulated coal-mylonitized coal (III–IV)—based on the fracturability
of the coal and the distinguishability of the coal structure using geophysical logging.

Log data and sensitivity of log responses


Because of the influence of various factors such as the tectonics, stress, burial depth, and coal
thickness, the coal structure shows high heterogeneity in the layered and regional distribu-
tions. We selected five wells—X1, X15, X20, X32, and X34—as the calibration wells (Figure 2)
to calibrate the log responses of the coal structure in the No. 8 coal reservoir. The calibration
wells generally covered different tectonic zones of the Gujiao block. X34 was used as a
validation well to validate the accuracy of the mathematical model established in this
study for the identification of the coal structure.
The logs of the calibration wells included apparent resistivity, natural gamma, density,
sonic travel time, and caliper logs. Coal-core logging and borehole observations of the coal
mine showed that the coal structure of the No. 8 coal reservoir was dominated by unde-
formed coal, cataclastic coal, and granulated coal, with a small amount of mylonitized coal.
The log response data were collected at 0.15 m intervals, corresponding to the coal structure
of the calibration wells. A comparative study found that as the level of coal destruction
increases, the natural gamma and density log response values decrease and the resistivity and
sonic travel time-log responses gradually increase.
Box plots and Fisher’s maximum separation criterion (Formula 1) were used to screen
and identify sensitive log responses of the undeformed coal and cataclastic coal, along with
the cataclastic coal and granulated coal-mylonitized coal. The higher the log response value
(Ij) of the coal structure, the more sensitive the log response (Wang et al., 2014). The sensitive
logs were combined, and a numerical model for identifying the coal structure was established
based on the principle of amplifying the log response (Xie and Fan, 2013). Similarly, the log
responses of the other boreholes that had well logs but lacked an actual measurement of the
coal structure because of a lack of core samples extracted at 0.15 m intervals to predict the
coal structure.
"X
nA X
nB
#
 2 2 2
Ij ¼ x Aj  x Bj ðxAij  xAj Þ þ ðxBij  xBj Þ ð1Þ
i¼1 i¼1

xAij—the ith sample value of well log j for coal with a type A coal structure; xBij—the ith
sample value of well log j for coal with a type B coal structure; xAj—the mean value of all of
the sample data for log element j of type A coal structure; and xBj—the mean value of all of
the sample data for log element j of type B coal structure.

Fracturability of the core reservoir


There is a normally distributed relationship between coal structure and coal reservoir per-
meability (Guo et al., 2010; Lv et al., 2012). A quantitative indicator of coal structure
210 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

(i.e. GSI) can be used to link the relationship between these two factors (Formula 2):
2
K ¼ a þ becðGISGISm Þ ð2Þ

K—coal permeability; a, b, and c—constants; GSI—geological strength index of the coal


structure; and GSIm—maximal permeability corresponding to the geological strength index
of the coal.
The GSI value of coal is determined by assessing the distinguishability of the coal struc-
ture, the fracture development level, the crumpled mirror surface, the strength, and the
development level of the coal structure surface of the different structures of the coal. The
GSI value decreases as the level of coal destruction increases, i.e. 65–100 for undeformed
coal, 45–65 for cataclastic coal, 20–45 for granulated coal, and 0–20 for mylonitized coal
(Guo et al., 2014). As the GSI decreases, coal deformation is enhanced and the permeability
exponentially increases from undeformed coal to reach a maximum in the cataclastic coal
stage; thereafter, an exponential decay occurs in the granulated coal-mylonitized coal stage.
Hydraulic fracturing measures can increase reservoir permeability for undeformed coal and
cataclastic coal; however, the effects of hydraulic fracturing decrease permeability for granu-
lated coal-mylonitized coal. Meanwhile, the thickness ratio of the coal structure varies in the
coal reservoir, which results in differences in fracturability. Thus, we calculated the thickness
ratio of different types of coal structures in the boreholes and used Q-type hierarchical
clustering analysis to cluster the boreholes. We classified the coal structure type of the
coal reservoir based on borehole data and further evaluated the fracturability of the coal
reservoir on a regional scale.

Mathematical model for identification of the coal structure


Coal structure logging of the calibration wells
The coal structure of the calibration wells is composed of undeformed coal, cataclastic coal,
and granulated coal-mylonitized coal with complex stratification (Figure 4). The coal struc-
ture and dirt band thickness in the calibration wells (Table 1) show that the wells have a coal
structure that is more than 0.7 m thick, except for well X20, which has a 0.3 m thick layer of
cataclastic coal that is favorable for collecting the log response data of the coal structure.
Undeformed coal has a complete, massive, wide-banded structure with little or no devel-
opment of exogenous fractures from tectonic activity. This coal has no crumpled surface,
and the hard coal is unlikely to break; the macrolithotype of this coal is clearly distinguish-
able and is generally semi-dull or dull coal (Figure 3(a)). Because of tectonization, cataclastic

Table 1. The coal structure and dirt band thickness of No.8 coal seam in the calibration wells.

Undeformed coal Cataclastic coal Granulated–mylonitized Dirt band Total


Well thickness, m thickness, m coal thickness, m thickness, m thickness, m

X1 0.95 1.32 1.72 0.58 4.57


X15 1.68 0.76 1.40 0.21 4.05
X20 1.74 0.30 2.32 0.15 4.51
X32 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.35 3.05
X34 1.35 1.30 0.80 0.00 3.35
Huang et al. 211

Figure 3. Typical macroscopic characteristics of the coal structure of the No. 8 coal seam in Gujiao
block. (a) Undeformed coal (well X32); (b) cataclastic coal (X20); (c) granulated coal (X32); (d) mylonitized
coal (X15).

coal has more developed exogenous fractures and slightly dislocated beddings with slight
displacements on the fracture surface. The coal is relatively complete in terms of having a
massive structure. The macrolithotype of this coal is clearly distinguishable, and the coal is
relatively hard and easy to break (Figure 3(b)). The granulated coal structure is severely
destructed, and the coal is cut into small granules with multiple sliding surfaces (Figure 3(c)).
Mylonitized coal is scaly or powdery and fractures cannot be observed by the naked eye; the
coal has crumpled sliding surfaces that are highly developed (Figure 3(d)).

Log response of the coal structure in the calibration wells


The well logs of the No. 8 coal reservoir from X1, X15, X20, X32, and X34 are shown in
Figure 4. For single wells, the natural gamma log and density log show consistent fluctu-
ations as the coal structure changes; these two logs have similar shapes, and the log data
have a high correlation (Figure 8). The sonic travel time log and deep lateral resistivity log
data have similar results (Figure 4). The coal structure of the calibration wells has no sig-
nificant caliper log responses; therefore, the caliper log is not suitable for identifying the coal
structure in this area (Figure 4).
For undeformed coal, the natural gamma log shows a box-shaped negative anomaly. It is
funnel-shaped because of the effects of the surrounding rocks in the roof and floor of the
reservoir. The top of the curve is approximated by a gentle wavy shape. The density log is
box-shaped with a high amplitude that fluctuates at the peak point. It is bell-shaped because
of the effects of the surrounding rocks in the roof and floor of the reservoir. The sonic travel
time log has a high amplitude, is box-shaped, and is relatively smooth at the top of the curve.
The apparent resistivity log shows box-shaped positive anomalies and the curve is
undulating.
For cataclastic coal, the natural gamma log has a markedly decreased amplitude com-
pared with the undeformed coal, and the curve is box-shaped. The density log also shows
markedly decreased amplitude values compared with the undeformed coal, and the curve is
box-shaped with jagged fluctuations at the peak point. The sonic travel time log has a high
amplitude and is box-shaped, and the top of the curve is relatively smooth. The amplitude of
apparent resistivity shows no significant changes compared with the increase in undeformed
coal structure, and the curve is step-shaped.
For granulated coal-mylonitized coal, the amplitude of the natural gamma and density
logs is not significantly different compared with the cataclastic coal, and the curves have
212 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 4. Logging curve characteristics of the No. 8 coal seam in five calibration wells. (a, X1; b, X15;
c, X20; d, X32; e, X34).

similar shapes. The sonic travel time log has a greatly increased amplitude compared with
the cataclastic coal, and the top of the curve shows gentle wavy undulations. The apparent
resistivity shows a greatly increased amplitude compared with the cataclastic coal, and the
curve is convex-shaped with substantial wavy undulations at the top of it.
The form characteristics of the well logs (Figure 4) and the log response data of the
calibration wells (Table 2) show that the natural gamma and density log values decrease
as the destruction of the coal increases, whereas the apparent resistivity and sonic travel time
log values increase as coal destruction increases.

Factors influencing the log responses of coal structure


The coal lithotype, fracture, and contents of ash, water, and radioactive elements in a coal
reservoir are major factors that affect the log responses of coal structure. We collected 13
coal samples with different structures in the vertical profile of a calibration well, X32.
Combined with borehole measurements of the cleat density and the macrolithotype of the
Huang et al. 213

Table 2. Logging intervals of natural gamma (GR), density (DEN), deep resistivity (LLD), and sonic–
interval transit time (AC), ascertained by coal textures of No. 8 coal seam in five calibration wells.

Coal structure GR/PA/KG(101) DEN (g/cm3) LLD (


M) AC (mm/s)

Undeformed coal 4.05–8.46 1.32–1.90 21.30–178.68 408.63–498.67


Cataclastic coal 2.31–4.31 1.22–1.41 22.96–282.40 413.64–501.63
Granulated–mylonitized coal 0.51–5.68 1.08–1.37 184.68–759.89 490.15–659.00

Table 3. Tset date of coal structure of the No. 8 coal sample in well X32, including cleat density, vitri-
nite content, ash content, rocks (A), and water content.

Cleat density
(/5 cm) V (%) Aad (%) Rocks (A) Mad (%)

Min–Max/
Coal structure Min–Max average

Undeformed coal 4–7 29.3–89.7/49.6 10.01–35.26/21.76 0.17–0.33/0.23 0.98–1.15/1.05


Cataclastic coal 10–14 42.7–63.2/52.9 14.25–15.09/14.6 0.17–0.19/0.18 0.87–1.23/1.00
Cataclastic coal 10–16 26.3–95/63.8 8.14–13.75/11.37 0.11–0.18/0.17 0.96–1.11/1.03

coal, we measured the inherent water content (Mad%), ash content (Aad%), maceral content
(%) (Sun et al., 2017; Qin et al., 2016), and U, Th, and K contents of the coal samples
(Table 3).
We used the coefficient of the natural gamma radiation from the rocks (A), i.e. the total
number of gamma photons emitted by the radioisotopes U, Th, and K per second per gram
of rock, to characterize the natural gamma log value (Formula 3; Zhang et al., 2000). The
contents of U, Th, and K were substituted into Formula (3) to calculate the dimensionless
value, A, for the 13 samples from the vertical profile (Table 3).
A ¼ AU WU þ ATh WTh þ Ak Wk ð3Þ

where AU, ATh, and Ak are the number of gamma photons emitted per second per gram of
U, Th, and K, respectively; and WU, WTh, and Wk are the weight percentages of U, Th, and
K, respectively.
In X32, the macrolithotype of the undeformed coal is dominated by semi-dull and dull
coal with a small amount of semi-bright coal. The macrolithotype of the cataclastic coal is
dominated by semi-bright and semi-dull coal. The macrolithotype of the granulated coal-
mylonitized coal is dominated by semi-bright coal with a small amount of bright coal, and
vitrinite content is significantly higher compared to the cataclastic coal and undeformed coal
(Figure 5; Table 2). The dull coal and semi-dull coal are dense and hard with high toughness
and high density; these two types of coal are less prone to destruction and deformation under
in-situ stress. The semi-bright coal and bright coal have high brittleness and low density and
therefore are easily broken (Xu et al., 2016). Thus, cataclastic coal and granulated coal have
developed fractures with significantly increased cleat density and markedly decreased ash
214 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 5. Vertical variations of coal textures of No. 8 coal coring samples, cleat density, rocks (A),
water content, maceral content, and ash content in wells X32.

content and an A value comparable to undeformed coal (Figure 5; Table 2). Figure 5 and
Table 2 show no significant differentiation in the inherent water content in the coal structure.
In summary, the cleat density, maceral content, ash content, and coefficient of radioactiv-
ity A of the coal structure show significant differentiation and have good correlations with
the log responses (Figure 6). The undeformed coal has an intact coal seam and poorly
developed fractures with a high density; it also has low sonic travel time log responses.
The granulated coal-mylonitized coal is severely destructed and well fractured with a low
density, and it has high sonic travel-time log responses (Figure 6(a)). The A value is posi-
tively correlated with the natural gamma value, whereas the ash content is negatively corre-
lated with the apparent resistivity of the coal seam. The undeformed coal ranks highest for A
value and ash content, whereas the granulated coal is the lowest for these two indicators.
Thus, the log responses of the undeformed coal are high natural gamma and low apparent
resistivity values; the log responses of granulated coal are low natural gamma and high
resistivity values (Figure 6(b)).

Sensitivity of log responses and identification model of the coal structure


As stated above, the macrolithotype of the coal, fracture density, ash content, and coefficient
of the natural gamma radiation A value exhibit a ‘‘jump’’ when the coal structure changes.
For instance, the fracture density of the cataclastic coal and granulated coal is considerably
higher than that of the undeformed coal, whereas the values are close between the cataclastic
coal and granulated coal. The log responses of the coal structure may also show similar
changes.
We measured the vertical coal structure in X1, X15, X20, X32, and X34 and extracted the
log responses at 0.15 m intervals in these calibration wells. Overall, we extracted the values of
the density, natural gamma, apparent resistivity, and sonic travel time from 41 undeformed
coal, 29 cataclastic coal, and 48 granulated coal samples. Figure 7(a) and (b) shows that the
undeformed coal samples have significantly greater density log and natural gamma log
Huang et al. 215

Figure 6. Vertical variations of coal textures of No. 8 coal seam coring samples, cleat density, rocks
(A), ash yields and logging data in wells X32.

values than the cataclastic coal samples; most of the data points are located above data of
the cataclastic coal, with a few overlapping data points. The log data were normalized. The I
values of the natural gamma, density, resistivity, sonic travel time log responses for iden-
tifying the undeformed coal and cataclastic coal are 0.09, 0.05, 0.03, and 0.004, respectively,
calculated by Fisher’s maximum separation criterion. The higher the I value, the larger the
difference within the same log response value between different coal structures, which iden-
tifies log response values that are sensitive enough to identify the coal structure. Thus, the
sensitive responses for identifying the undeformed coal and cataclastic coal are the density
and natural gamma log, followed by the resistivity log. Figure 7(c) and (d) shows that for the
granulated coal-mylonitized coal, the majority of the sonic travel time and apparent resist-
ivity log values are located in the upper portion of the vertical axis, which are significantly
higher than the close log values of the cataclastic coal and undeformed coal. The AC values
216 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 7. A box figure of the logging response value of different coal structures in the No. 8 coal seam.

of the granulated coal-mylonitized coal and cataclastic coal are within the ranges of 490.15–
658.99 and 413.64–501.63 mm/s, respectively, and overlap at 490.149–501.6335 mm/s; the LL3
values are 184.68–759.89 and 22.96–282.40
/m, respectively, and overlap at 184.68–
282.40
/m. The ranges of overlap are small. For the cataclastic coal and granulated coal-
mylonitized coal, the I values of the sonic travel time, resistivity, natural gamma, and density
log responses are 0.07, 0.04, 0.02, and 0.009, respectively, calculated using Fisher’s maximum
separation criterion. Thus, the sensitive responses for identifying the cataclastic coal and
granulated coal-mylonitized coal are sonic travel time and apparent resistivity logs, followed
by the natural gamma log.
As shown in Figure 8(a), the DEN and GR values of the cataclastic coal are mainly
concentrated in the middle, right of the axis, with a small span of data points. The DEN and
GR values of the undeformed coal are located on the upper, left of the axis, with a large span
of data points. The DEN and GR values of the undeformed coal and cataclastic coal show
good linear correlations. Figure 8(b) shows that the AC and LL3 log data of cataclastic coal
are mainly concentrated in the middle, bottom of the axis, whereas the data of granulated
coal-mylonitized coal are located at the upper, left of the axis; the span of these data points is
relatively large, and the AC and LL3 values of the cataclastic coal and granulated coal-
mylonitized coal have positive exponential correlations.
In summary, the undeformed coal and cataclastic coal can be identified by a combination
of DEN, GR, and LL3; the cataclastic coal and granulated coal-mylonitized coal can be
Huang et al. 217

Figure 8. Log intersections of the coal structure in the No. 8 coal seam: (a) DEN–GR log intersections;
(b) AC–LLD log intersections.

identified by a combination of AC, LL3, and GR. Based on the principle of amplifying the
sensitive log responses (Xie and Fan, 2013), we constructed mathematical models for iden-
tification of the coal structure based on coal structure type and obtained the coal structure
identification indices n1 and n2.
The mathematical model for identifying undeformed coal and cataclastic coal is as
follows:
ðDEN  10GRÞa ðDEN  10GRÞ3
n1 ¼ 1 ¼ 1 ð4Þ
LL3 a LL33

The mathematical model for identifying cataclastic coal and granulated coal-mylonitized
coal is as follows:
ð0:01LL3  0:01ACÞb ð0:01LL3  0:01ACÞ2
n2 ¼ 1 ¼ 1 ð5Þ
ð10GRÞb ð10GRÞ2

In Formula (4), the selection of constants a and b overcomes the interference of the less
sensitive LL3 for the identification of undeformed coal and cataclastic coal and ensures that
n1 of undeformed coal is greater than that for cataclastic coal. We substitute the minimum
response value of (DEN  GR)/LL3 for undeformed coal and the maximum response value
of (DEN  GR)/LL3 for cataclastic coal into Formula (4). When the constant a (integer) is
adjusted to be 3, n1 of undeformed coal is greater than or equal to cataclastic coal. Similarly,
the b value in Formula (5) b is adjusted to 2. n1 is negatively correlated with the level of coal
destruction. The minimum n1 of the undeformed coal in the calibration wells is calculated to
be 44.28, which means that an n1 greater than or equal to 44.28 indicates undeformed coal.
n2 is positively correlated with the level of coal destruction, and the minimum n2 of the
granulated-mylonitized coal in the calibration wells is 33.21, which means that an n2 greater
than or equal to 33.21 indicates granulated-mylonitized coal. We extract the log data cor-
responding to boreholes at 0.15 m intervals. Undeformed coal and granulated-mylonitized
coal are identified using Formulas (4) and (5); the remaining interval is considered cataclastic
coal (Figure 9).
218 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 9. Comparison of coal textures from No. 8 coal seam coring (a) and the results identified from
mathematical model (b) in well X35.

From the bottom to the top, the coal structure in the validation borehole X35 consists of
undeformed coal, cataclastic coal, granulated coal, undeformed coal, cataclastic coal, unde-
formed coal, cataclastic coal, cataclastic coal, and undeformed coal; the coal structure
identified by well logging is consistent with the measured coal structure (Figure 9). In the
study area, thick limestone is commonly developed at the roof of the No. 8 coal reservoir,
which has a much higher apparent resistivity than a coal reservoir, resulting in a distortion of
the apparent resistivity log from the coal reservoir. The curve is finger-shaped with large
undulations, which leads to uncertainties in the identification of coal structure using the log
identification model. The error of identification of the coal structure in the upper part of the
X35 borehole may be related to this issue.
Additionally, because of the influence of adjacent strata and the logging resolution,
extraction of the log data from a coal reservoir often generates large errors at the roof
and floor of a coal reservoir or a boundary between dirt bands and a coal seam. For instance,
the natural gamma value reaches 0.87 pA/kg and the density is 1.90 g/cm3 at the boundary
between the roof and the coal seam (Figure 9). Finally, interference from temperature,
pressure, and coal seam fluids can also cause errors in the identification of coal structure
by well logging, and these factors are difficult to overcome (Teng et al., 2015). Nevertheless,
integrated sensitive logs can still identify the coal structure in the No. 8 coal reservoir in the
study area with relative accuracy.

Distribution of coal structure and division of fracturability


Layered distribution of coal structure
Using the identification method described above, we identified the coal structure in 31 bore-
holes that had well logs but did not have direct observations from core sampling using the
log data of the five calibration wells (Figure 10).
The No. 8 coal reservoir commonly contains two or three dirt bands, and the coal seam
consists of 4–12 coal structures. The coal seam is primarily composed of comprises
Huang et al. 219

Figure 10. Vertical distribution of 36 wells’ coal textures in the Gujiao block. The results were inferred
from the logging data using the mathematical model.

cataclastic coal and granulated coal, which alternate in layers in the middle part of the
reservoir. Undeformed coal is generally developed in the roof and floor of the coal reservoir,
whereas granulated coal is developed at the top of a small number of boreholes; the coal
seam has a complex structure and high heterogeneity (Figure 10). The development level of
the deformed coal generally has a positive correlation with the thickness of the coal seam
(Qin et al., 2000). For the split coal seam, a lateral change in the thickness of the same coal
seam is positively correlated with the level of the coal seam destruction (Zhu et al., 1996). In
the study area, a similar conclusion is obtained by ranking the boreholes based on coal seam
thickness (Figure 10). Coal seam structure has a role in coal development, which primarily
limits the layered distribution of the coal (Wang et al., 2003). In this study area, one or two
dirt bands are commonly developed in the coal seam, and the coal seam generally shows
multiple-interlayered complex structures.

Regional distribution of coal structure


We integrated the sensitive log responses, identified the coal structure in 31 supplementary
exploration boreholes, and drew the thickness contours of the undeformed coal, cataclastic
coal, and granulated coal-mylonitized coal in the No. 8 coal reservoir (Figures 11, 12, and
14, respectively). Figure 11 shows that the thickness of undeformed coal ranges between 0
and 2.68 m. The coal is relatively thick in the west and northwest parts, 0.8–1.8 m, whereas
the layer is relatively thin along the NE-trending tectonic zone, e.g. approximately 0.8 m in
wells X1 and X9 to X25. The thickness of the dirt bands is between 0.72 and 1.72 m in the
eastern and southeastern parts of the coal reservoir. Because of the influence of dirt bands,
the thickness of the undeformed coal is generally 0.8 m or less, and the coal structure in the
boreholes exhibits a multilayered distribution, e.g. X3, X27, X28, and X33.
220 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 11. Isopach map of the No. 8 coal seam undeformed coal in the Gujiao block.

The wide gentle Malan syncline and NE-trending fault zone control the distribution of
cataclastic coal in the study area. The Malan syncline is steep in the west and gentle in the
east; the west wing has an inclination of 11–27 and the east wing has an inclination of 6–14 ,
which are asymmetrical; the NE-trending faults are intensive. Cataclastic coal is mainly
developed near the axis of the NS-trending Malan syncline and the NE-trending intensive
faults area. The coal seam is destructed by a relatively strong compression near the axis of
the Malan syncline; for example, the thickness of cataclastic coal ranges between 1.2 and 2 m
in boreholes X21, X23, and X24. Faults are intensive in the vicinity of boreholes X2, X4, and
X8 in the east and X13, X14, and X17 in the northeast of the study area. The tectonic stress
is relatively high, and cataclastic coal is developed with a thickness between 1 and 3 m
(Figure 12). Figure 13 shows that the thickness ratio of undeformed coal to cataclastic
coal exhibits a zonal distribution along the axis of the Malan syncline. The thickness ratio
is relatively low and the coal seam suffers serious destruction and deformation in the two
wings of the Malan syncline and the northeastern part of the tectonic development. This
indicates that folds and faults are critical factors that control the coal structure in this area.
Huang et al. 221

Figure 12. Isopach map of the No. 8 coal seam cataclastic coal in the Gujiao block.

The granulated coal-mylonitized coal has a distribution similar to that of the cataclastic
coal. Based on the premise of ignoring the inherent impact of coal thickness, the develop-
ment of granulated coal is also affected by the NS-trending Malan syncline and NE-trending
faults. The granulated coal and cataclastic coal show NS- and NE-trending alternating
distributions on a regional scale. In the west wing of the Malan syncline, the coal seam
has a large dip with a few faults; in the east wing, the wide and gentle coal seam has a small
dip with a developed fault. The granulated coal overall shows a banded distribution along
the axis of the Malan syncline. Under the effect of compression by the axis of the Malan
syncline and faults on the east wing, a 1–1.4 m thick granulated coal distribution zone is
formed near boreholes X9 and X27 along the axis of the NS-trending Malan syncline. The
coal seam has a large dip and small faults developed near boreholes X25 and X26 at the
turning end of the synclinal axis, forming another granulated coal distribution zone. Overall,
because of the combined effects of the Malan syncline, faults, coal seam dip, and coal seam
222 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 13. Isopach map of the thickness ratios of undeformed + cataclastic coal of the No. 8 coal seam.

thickness, granulated coal is developed in the two wings of the syncline and the development
level is higher in the north than in the south (Figure 14).
Additionally, the distribution of coal structure is affected by coal seam depth (Teng et al.,
2015). In general, the greater the coal seam depth, the higher the geostress and tectonic stress
exerted on the coal seam; therefore, the coal seam is more prone to destruction and deform-
ation. Figure 13 shows that the trend in the thickness ratio of undeformed to cataclastic coal
obliquely crosses the contour of coal seam depth. This indicates that the depth of the coal
seam is not the primary factor affecting the distribution of the coal structure in this area. In
the SN direction, the thickness ratio of undeformed to cataclastic coal appears to be high in
the north and low in the south because it is influenced by the coal seam being ‘‘shallow in the
north and deep in the south.’’ In the EW direction, under the control of the Malan syncline,
there is no clear trend between the depth and the coal structure.
Overall, in the study area, folds and faults are developed, whereas the coal seam com-
monly contains dirt bands. The depth of the coal seam is shallow in the north and deep in the
Huang et al. 223

Figure 14. Isopach map of the No. 8 coal seam granulated–mylonitized coal in the Gujiao block.

south, whereas the coal seam is thick in the north and thin in the south. The development of
coal structure is not balanced, and the seam shows strong heterogeneity. In the southeastern
part of the study area, the coal seam in the region centered at borehole X31 has small
thickness, no tectonic development, and a small formation dip with no development of
cataclastic coal and granulated coal (Figures 12 and 14).

Division of hydraulic fracturability of the coal seam


To quantitatively characterize the coal structure, Guo et al. (2014) and Lv et al. (2012) fitted
a relationship between the quantitative value of the coal structure (GSI) and permeability
using data from a coal structure stress-strain-permeability whole-process evolution experi-
ment. These authors concluded that measures that improve permeability, such as hydraulic
fracturing, are unsuitable for granulated coal-mylonitized coal. Based on the fracturability
of the coal structure and given the strong heterogeneity and complex coal structure of the
224 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Figure 15. Hierarchical diagram of the No. 8 coal seam in 36 wells.

Table 4. Cluster results and hydraulic fracturability-divisived results of No. 8 coal seam in 36 wells.

Well Undeformed coal Cataclastic coal Cataclastic–mylonitized coal Cluster

x25,x30,x26,x6,x12,x1,x28 18.87–28.10a 27.47–37.60 39.19–52.02 III4


x20,x31,x10,x36,x11,x32,x5,x15 31.91–44.16 6.65–30.99 29.41–45.16 III3
x18,x34,x3 40.30–45.83 35.30–43.75 10.42–22.52 III2
x16,x19,x21,x23,x24 29.79–37.85 37.21–50.37 14.15–28.05 III1
x17,x35,x29,x7 54.92–68.97 20.49–43.04 0.00–24.59 I
x2,x13,x4,x8,x14 0.00–28.57 48.61–79.69 0.00–43.79 II
x22,x27,x9,x33 0.00–21.37 15.00–25.00 63.63–83.00 IV
a
Ratio of coal structure thickness.

No. 8 coal reservoir in the study area, we calculated the thickness ratios of the undeformed
coal, cataclastic coal, and granulated coal-mylonitized coal in each borehole and then clus-
tered the boreholes using Q-type hierarchical cluster analysis (Figure 15). We calculated the
accuracy using the weighted distance between boreholes and clustered them using the longest
distance method (Wang et al., 2015b). Furthermore, 36 boreholes in the study area were
classified into types I, II, III, and IV and subtypes III1, III2, III3, and III4 (Table 4). Based on
the borehole types in the cluster analysis, we drew a division map of the hydraulic fractur-
ability of the coal seam (Figure 16).
As Figure 16 shows, the type I area is distributed in the southern part of the study area on
the two wings of the Malan syncline; the formation dip is gentle, and the coal seam layer is
thinner than in the northern part. The coal structure is dominated by undeformed coal (55–
69%), followed by cataclastic coal. The proportion of granulated coal is the lowest of the
Huang et al. 225

Figure 16. Division map of the hydraulic fracturability of the No. 8 coal seam, Gujiao block.

four types (Table 4). For example, the permeability of a coal reservoir based on the reservoir
strength for a type I area dominated by undeformed coal can be improved using straight-well
fracturing and horizontal-well segmental fracturing (Mayerhofer et al., 2008).
The type II area is distributed in the eastern and northeastern parts of the study area on
the east wing of the Malan syncline where faults are developed. In this area, cataclastic coal
is predominant (49–80%), followed by granulated coal; the proportion of undeformed coal is
the lowest of the four types. In the type II area dominated by cataclastic coal, the coal
reservoir permeability is at the optimum level. The naked-eye cave method and radial water-
injection measures (Logan, 1994) are recommended for deplugging and improving the per-
meability of the near-borehole section.
The most widely distributed area is the type III area. It shows a banded distribution
mainly along two wings and the axis of the Malan syncline. Cataclastic coal and granulated
coal dominate. Based on the proportion of structural coal, the coal structure is subdivided
226 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

into subtypes III1, III2, III3, and III4; as the subtype number increases, the proportion of
undeformed coal and cataclastic coal decreases, whereas the proportion of granulated coal
increases. Subtypes III1 and III2 are transitional types from II to III, and the coal mainly
consists of cataclastic coal and undeformed coal; methods to improve the reservoir perme-
ability were previously described for type I and II areas. Subtypes III3 and III4 are transi-
tional types from III to IV, which can refer to the measures for reservoir permeability
improvement in a type IV area.
The type IV area is mainly located at the axis of the Malan syncline. Because it was affected
by tectonic stress, granulated coal dominates (64–83%), followed by cataclastic coal; unde-
formed coal accounts for the lowest proportion of the four types. The hydraulic fracturing
technique appropriate for undeformed coal is unsuitable for this type of area, and commin-
gling production is recommended. In this area, the coal seam and interlayer of less than 10 m
were simultaneously perforated; commingling with limited-entry fracturing improved gas pro-
duction two- to three-fold compared with a single reservoir (Guo et al., 2014).

Conclusions
In the study area, the macrolithotype, fracture density, coefficient of natural gamma radi-
ation A, and ash content of the No. 8 coal reservoir show significant differentiation and
discontinuity. These factors have good correlations with the log responses of coal structure
and are critical factors that control the log responses of the coal structure in the No. 8 coal
reservoir in the study area.
Based on the sensitive log responses of the coal structure to the physico-chemical differ-
entiation in the reservoir, undeformed coal and cataclastic coal can be identified by natural
gamma, density, and resistivity, in order of preference. The sensitive log responses for iden-
tifying cataclastic coal and granulated coal rank as apparent resistivity, sonic travel time,
and natural gamma. The sensitive log responses were integrated and based on the principle
of amplifying the log responses. We quantitatively identified the coal structure of the bore-
holes and predicted the layered distribution of the coal structure.
According to the thickness ratio of different coal structures on a regional scale, the No. 8
coal reservoir is divided into four types and four subtypes. Type I, II, III1, and III2 areas are
located on the wings of the Malan syncline in the south of the study area, where straight-well
hydraulic fracturing, horizontal-well segmental fracturing and the volume optimization and
near-borehole un-plugging commonly used for shale gas are suitable for this reservoir. Type
III3, III4, and IV areas are located around the axis of the Malan syncline. These areas of this
reservoir are unfavorable for reservoir improvement using hydraulic fracturing; commin-
gling production of adjacent seams and interlayers is recommended for these areas.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Geology Section of the Xi Shan Coal Electricity Group and the Xi Shan
Lan Yan Limited Liability Company for providing the exploration well logging data and collecting
coal samples.

Declaration of conflicting interests


The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.
Huang et al. 227

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article: The project was financially supported by the CBM Mutual Funds of Shanxi
Province (2012012001) and the National Science and Technology Major Project (2011ZX05034-004), a
special fund for fostering major projects at the China University of Mining and Technology
(JF147424).

References
Chen Y, Tang DZ, Xu H, et al. (2013) The distribution of coal structure in Hancheng based on well
logging date. Journal of China coal Society 38(8): 1435–1442 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Fu XH, Qin Y, Wang GX, et al. (2009a) Evaluation of coal structure and permeability with the aid of
geophysical logging technology. Fuel 88: 2278–2285.
Gan T, Balmain B and Sigbatullin A (2016) Formation evaluation logoff results comparing new gen-
eration mining-style logging tools to conventional oil and gas logging tools for application in
coalbed methane (CBM) field development. Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering 34:
1237–1250.
Ghosh S, Chatterjee R and Shanker P (2016) Estimation of ash, moisture content and detection of coal
lithofacies from well logs using regression and artificial neural network modelling. Fuel 177:
279–287.
Guan Y and Li H (2001) The structural framework and evolution of Taiyuan area. Journal of Liao
Ning Technical University: Natural Science 20(01): 32–35 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Guo Y (2015) Logging Evaluation of Basic Parameters for Unconventional Reservoir Based on the
Nonlinear Learning Theory. Beijing: China University of Mining and Technology, pp. 65–80 (in
Chinese).
Guo H, Bai Y and Lin H (2014) Experimental study on permeability characteristics in complete
evolution process of coal structure and its significance. Journal of China Coal Society 39(11):
2263–2268 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Guo H, Su XB, Xia DP, et al. (2010) Relationship of the permeability and geological strength index
(GSI) of coal reservoir and its significance. Journal of China Coal Society 35(8): 1319–1322
(in Chinese with English abstract).
Hatherly P (2013) Overview on the application of geophysics in coal mining. International Journal of
Coal Geology 114(4): 74–84.
Li H (2001) Major and minor structural features of a bedding shear zone along a coal seam and
related gas outburst, Pingdingshan coalfield, northern China. Fuel & Energy Abstracts 43(4):
246–246.
Li C, Liu D, Cai Y, et al. (2016) Fracture permeability evaluation of a coal reservoir using geophysical
logging: A case study in the Zhengzhuang area, southern Qinshui Basin. Energy Exploration &
Exploitation 34(3): 1–13.
Li S, Tang D, Xu H, et al. (2012) Advanced characterization of physical properties of coals with
different coal structures by nuclear magnetic resonance and X-ray computed tomography.
Computers & Geosciences 48: 220–227.
Liu H, Wang H, Zhao G, et al. (2005) Influence of the tectonic thermal events in Yanshan epoch on
coalbed methane enrichment and high productivity in Xishan coal field in Taiyuan. Natural Gas
Industry 25(1): 29–32 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Logan T (1994) Improving dynamic open-hole completion techniques in the San Juan Basin. Quarterly
Review of Methane from Coal Seams Technology 11(3/4): 13–18.
Lv RS, Peng SP and Xu YY (2012) Experimental on the relationship between permeability of gas-
bearing coal and coal body structure. Journal of Chongqing University 35(7): 114–118 (in Chinese
with English abstract).
228 Energy Exploration & Exploitation 36(2)

Mayerhofer MJ, Lolon EP, Warpinski NR, et al. (2008) What is stimulated reservoir volume (SRV)?
SPE 119890: 1–13.
Meng L, Jiang Y, Zhu J, et al. (2011) Experimental study of different gases on permeability of tectonic
coal. Procedia Engineering 26: 1176–1183.
Meng Z and Li G (2013) Experimental research on the permeability of high-rank coal under a varying
stress and its influencing factors. Engineering Geology 162(14): 108–117.
Meng Z, Liu S and Li G (2016) Adsorption capacity, adsorption potential and surface free energy of
different structure high rank coals. Journal of Petroleum Science & Engineering 146: 856–865.
Mo R, Zhao J and Wang Y (2008) Current status and prospect of exploration and development of
Gujiao CBM Project. Environmental Science & Technology 5: 3–7.
Pan J, Hou Q, Ju Y, et al. (2012) Coalbed methane sorption related to coal deformation structures at
different temperatures and pressures. Fuel 102: 760–765.
Pant LM, Huang H, Secanell M, et al. (2015) Multi scale characterization of coal structure for mass
transport. Fuel 159: 315–323.
Peng S, Du W, Yuan C, et al. (2008) Identification and forecasting of different structural coals by
P-wave and S-wave from well-logging. Acta Geologica Sinica 82: 1311–1321.
Qin SJ, Gao K, Wang JX, et al. (2016) Organic geochemistry of the Late Permian coals from the
Huoshaopu and Jinjia Mines, Liupanshui Coalfield, China. Energy Exploration & Exploitation
34(6): 881–898.
Qin Y, Ye J, Lin D, et al. (2000) Relationship between coal reservoir thickness and its permeability and
gas bearing property. Coal Geology & Exploration 28(1): 24–27 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Rolon L, Mohaghegh SD, Ameri S, et al. (2009) Using artificial neural networks to generate synthetic
well logs. Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering 1(4): 118–133.
Sun YZ, Zhao CL, Püttmann W, et al. (2017) Evidence of widespread wildfires in a coal seam from the
middle Permian of the North China Basin. Lithosphere. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1130/L638.1
Teng J, Yao Y, Liu D, et al. (2013) Identification of coal petrologic-structure by using geophysical
logging data: A case study of the coals of Hancheng coalbed methane field. Applied Mechanics &
Materials 317: 795–798.
Teng J, Yao Y, Liu D, et al. (2015) Evaluation of coal texture distributions in the southern Qinshui
basin, North China: Investigation by a multiple geophysical logging method. International Journal
of Coal Geology 140: 9–22.
Wang Z (1993) Geo-structure of XiShan coalfield in Taiyuan. Xishan Technology 1: 1–6 (in Chinese).
Wang H, Dong S and Huang Y (2014) Application of identifying tectonic coal with discriminant analysis
method based on logging date. Coal Technology 33(12): 317–320 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang S, Elsworth D and Liu J (2013) Permeability evolution during progressive deformation of intact
coal and implications for instability in underground coal seams. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics & Mining Sciences 58: 34–45.
Wang SQ, Wang Y and Cao XM (2003) Geological controls of coal body structure at No.1 mine in
Shizuishan mine area. Journal of Xi’An University of Science and Technology 23(1): 41–45 (in
Chinese with English abstract).
Wang G, Qin Y, Xie Y, et al. (2015a) The division and geologic controlling factors of a vertical
superimposed coalbed methane system in the northern Gujiao blocks, China. Journal of Natural
Gas Science & Engineering 24: 379–389.
Wang JX, Wang Q, Shi J, et al. (2015b) Distribution and enrichment mode of Li in the No. 11 coal
seam from Pingshuo mining district, Shanxi province. Energy Exploration & Exploitation 33(2):
203–216.
Xie X and Fan M (2013) Quantitative identification of deformed coals based on logging response.
China Coalbed Methane 10(5): 27–29 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Xu H, Tang D, Mathews J, et al. (2016) Evaluation of coal macrolithotypes distribution by geophysical
logging data in the Hancheng Block, eastern margin, Ordos Basin, China. International Journal of
Coal Geology 165: 265–277.
Huang et al. 229

Xu H, Tang D, Zhao J, et al. (2015) Geologic controls of the production of coalbed methane in the
Hancheng area, southeastern Ordos Basin. Journal of Natural Gas Science & Engineering 26(4):
156–162.
Yao J, Sima L and Zhang Y (2011) Quantitative identification of deformed coals by geophysical
logging. Journal of China Coal Society 36(1): 94–98 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Yegireddi S and Bhaskar G (2009) Identification of coal seam strata from geophysical logs of borehole
using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Journal of Applied Geophysics 67(1): 9–13.
Zhang J, Liu Q and Liang X (2000) Discussion on the application of natural gamma spectrometry log
to reservoir prediction. Oil Geophysical Prospecting 35(3): 395–400 (in Chinese with English
abstract).
Zhou F and Yao G (2014) Sensitivity analysis in permeability estimation using logging and injection-
falloff test data for an anthracite coalbed methane reservoir in Southeast Qinshui Basin, China.
International Journal of Coal Geology 131: 41–51.
Zhu X, Xu F and Li Q (1996) Development characteristics of destroyed coals and influence factors in
Nantong coal mine area. Coal Geology & Exploration 24(2): 28–30 (in Chinese with English
abstract).

Você também pode gostar