1887

Abstract

Summary

Currently there are four widely discussed theories how microseismicity interacts with hydraulic fracturing. Each theory has different implication for interpretation of microseismicity in the reservoir modeling. Therefore, better understanding of relationship between microseismicity and hydraulic fracture stimulation is needed before further reservoir models are developed and applied. That would lead to more precise estimation of hydrocarbon production and give greater value to microseismic. We may use either seismic or non-seismic methods. While non-seismic methods provide independent view on hydraulic fracture they seem to be limited in the amount of information on the relationship between hydraulic fracture and microseismicity. We propose microseismic monitoring of directivity as the most promising way to find out the orientation of fault planes and determine a slip vector on them. It seems to be the most suitable method but requires sensors in multiple azimuths and well coupled due to high frequency signals. We suggest using DAS sensors which are capable of sampling high frequency and may provide continuous data along long offset at reasonable costs.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800071
2018-03-26
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baig, A., and T. I.Urbancic
    (2010), Microseismic moment tensors: A path to understanding frac growth, The Leading Edge, 29(3), 320–324, doi:10.1190/1.3353729.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3353729 [Google Scholar]
  2. Eisner, L., S.Williams-Stroud, A.Hill, P.Duncan, and M.Thornton
    (2010), Beyond the dots in the box: microseismicity-constrained fracture models for reservoir simulation, The Leading Edge, 29(3), 326–333, doi: 10.1190/1.3353730.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3353730 [Google Scholar]
  3. Grechka, V., and W.Heigl
    (2017), Microseismic Monitoring, eISBN: 978-1-56080-348-5, print ISBN: 978-1- 56080-347-8, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560803485
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Grechka, V., ZhaoLi, BoHowell, and V.Vavryčuk
    (2016), Single-well moment tensor inversion of tensile microseismic events. Geophysics, 81(6), KS219–KS229. DOI: 10.1190/geo2016‑0186.1
    https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2016-0186.1 [Google Scholar]
  5. GrechkaV., P.Mazumdar, S.A.Shapiro
    , 2010, Predicting permeability and gas production of hydraulically fractured tight sands from microseismic data: Geophysics, 75(1):B1–B10, doi: 10.1190/1.3278724
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3278724 [Google Scholar]
  6. Hull, R.A., R. Meek, H. Bello, and Douglas Miller
    (2017), Case History of DAS Fiber-Based Microseismic and Strain Data, Monitoring Horizontal Hydraulic Stimulations Using Various Tools to Highlight Physical Deformation Processes (Part A). Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, 24–26July2017: pp. 3050–3062.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. JanskáE., EisnerL., and I.Opršal
    (2014), Vector Fidelity of Downhole Receivers for Microseismic Monitoring Revisited. Fifth passive seismic workshop in Lisbon. PSP18
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Karrenbach, M., A. Ridge, S. Cole, K. Boone, D. Kahn, J. Rich, K. Silver, and D. Langton
    (2017), DAS Microseismic Monitoring and Integration With Strain Measurements in Hydraulic Fracture Profiling. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Austin, Texas, 24–26July2017: pp. 1316–1330.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Klimes, L.
    (2012), Sensitivity of seismic waves to structure. Stud. geophys. geod., 56, 483–520.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Rutledge, J.T., and W.S.Phillips
    (2003), Hydraulic stimulation of natural fractures as revealed by induced microearthquakes, Carthage Cotton Valley gas field, east Texas, Geophysics, 68(2), 441–452, doi:10.1190/1.1567214.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1567214 [Google Scholar]
  11. Rutledge, J.T., W.S.Phillips, and M.J.Mayerhofer
    (2004), Faulting induced by forced fluid injection and fluid flow forced by faulting: An interpretation of hydraulic fracture microseismicity, Carthage Cotton Valley gas field, Texas, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am, 94, 1817–1830.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Rutledge, J.T., R.Downie, S.Maxwell, J.Drew, and T.Fischer
    (2013), Extension-shear microseismic mechanisms during hydraulic fracturing, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2013, 2067–2072. doi: 10.1190/segam2013‑1387.1.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1387.1 [Google Scholar]
  13. Staněk, F., and L.Eisner
    (2013), New model explaining inverted source mechanisms of microseismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2013, 2201–2205, doi: 10.1190/segam2013‑0554.1.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0554.1 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2017), Seismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing in shales: A bedding plane slip model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 122. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JB014213
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Starr, J. and R.Jacobi
    (2017) Simultaneous use of microseismic monitoring and DAS-strain measurements to analyze the anatomy of a hydraulic stimulation in the Marcellus Shale. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts2017: pp. 2841–2845.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Warpinski, N.R., D.A.Northrop, R.A.Schmidt, W.C.Vollendorf, and S.J.Finley
    , (1981), The Formation Interface Fracturing Experiment: An In Situ Investigation of Hydraulic Fracture Behavior Near a Material Property Interface. Sandia National Laboratories Report SAND81-0938.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Williams-Stroud, S., C.Ozgen, and R.L.Billingsley
    (2013), Microseismicity-constrained discrete fracture network models for stimulated reservoir simulation, Geophysics, 78 (1), B37–B47, doi: 10.1190/geo2011‑0061.1.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0061.1 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800071
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800071
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error