1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 68, Issue 8
  5. Article
Volume 68, Issue 8
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478
PDF

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Surface arrays became an important tool for monitoring the induced seismicity in hydraulic fracturing experiments and for assessing the impact of fluid injection on the fracturing process of microearthquakes. The layout of sensors plays a key role in this task because it controls the accuracy of event locations and retrieved seismic moment tensors. We simulate various configurations of grid sensor arrays characterized by a different number of sensors, array span, sensor spacing, depth of sources and various shear/tensile source mechanisms of events. The moment tensor inversion is carried out using synthetically calculated P‐wave amplitudes with added random noise. A bias in the solutions is evaluated by errors in the double‐couple percentage of inverted moment tensors because the double‐couple errors inform us about the sensitivity of the network to detect the shear/tensile fracturing mode of induced microearthquakes. The results show that the accuracy of the double‐couple percentage is mostly controlled by the offset‐to‐depth ratio defined as the ratio of half of the network size to the event depth. The optimum value of is in the range of 0.75–1.5 irrespective of the type of the focal mechanism. If 121 (11 × 11) sensors are distributed in a regular grid and recorded data are characterized by a 10% random noise, the double‐couple error is less than 6%. This error increases, if is not optimum or if the number of sensors is reduced. However, even sparse arrays with 49 (7 × 7) or 16 (4 × 4) sensors can yield a reasonable accuracy, provided the surface grid arrays are designed to have an optimum size.

© 2020 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2020 The Authors. Geophysical Prospecting published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
2020-07-27
2024-04-25

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/gpr/68/8/gpr12997.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Anikiev, D., Valenta, J., Staněk, F. and Eisner, L. (2014) Joint location and source mechanism inversion of microseismic events: benchmarking on seismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing. Geophysical Journal International, 198(1), 249–258.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bentz, S., Martínez‐Garzón, P., Kwiatek, G., Bohnhoff, M. and Renner, J. (2018) Sensitivity of full moment tensors to data preprocessing and inversion parameters: a case study from the salton sea geothermal field. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 108(2), 588–603.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Červený, V. (2001) Seismic Ray Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Chambers, K., Kendall, J.M., Brandsberg‐Dahl, S. and Rueda, J. (2010) Testing the ability of surface arrays to monitor microseismic activity. Geophysical Prospecting, 58(5), 821–830.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Duncan, P.M. (2005) Is there a future for passive seismic?First Break, 23(6), 111–115.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Duncan, P.M. and Eisner, L. (2010) Reservoir characterization using surface microseismic monitoring. Geophysics, 75(5), 139–146.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Eaton, D.W. and Forouhideh, F. (2011) Solid angles and the impact of receiver‐array geometry on microseismic moment‐tensor inversion. Geophysics, 76(6), WC77–WC85.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Eide, C.H., Schofield, N., Lecomte, I., Buckley, S.J. and Howell, J.A. (2018) Seismic interpretation of sill complexes in sedimentary basins: implications for the sub‐sill imaging problem. Journal of the Geological Society, 175(2), 193–209.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Eisner, L., Duncan, P.M., Heigl, W.M. and Keller, W.R. (2009) Uncertainties in passive seismic monitoring. The Leading Edge, 28(6), 648–655.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Eisner, L., Hulsey, B.J., Duncan, P., Jurick, D., Werner, H. and Keller, W. (2010a) Comparison of surface and borehole locations of induced seismicity. Geophysical Prospecting, 58(5), 809–820.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Eisner, L., Williams‐Stroud, S., Hill, A., Duncan, P. and Thornton, M. (2010b) Beyond the dots in the box: microseismicity‐constrained fracture models for reservoir simulation. The Leading Edge, 29(3), 326–333.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Eyre, T.S. and van der Baan, M. (2015) Overview of moment‐tensor inversion of microseismic events. The Leading Edge, 34(8), 882–888.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Eyre, T.S. and van der Baan, M. (2017) The reliability of microseismic moment‐tensor solutions: surface versus borehole monitoring. Geophysics, 82(6), KS113–KS125.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Jansky, J., Plicka, V. and Eisner, L. (2013) Feasibility of jointly locating microseismic events with data from surface and downhole receivers. First Break, 31(7), 35–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Kühn, D. and Vavryčuk, V. (2013) Determination of full moment tensors of microseismic events in a very heterogeneous mining environment. Tectonophysics, 589, 33–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kushnir, A., Rozhkov, N. and Varypaev, A. (2013) Statistically‐based approach for monitoring of micro‐seismic events. GEM—International Journal on Geomathematics, 4(2), 201–225.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kwiatek, G. and Ben‐Zion, Y. (2013) Assessment of P and S wave energy radiated from very small shear‐tensile seismic events in a deep South African mine. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 118(7), 3630–3641.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Kwiatek, G., Martínez‐Garzón, P. and Bohnhoff, M. (2016) HybridMT: a MATLAB/shell environment package for seismic moment tensor inversion and refinement. Seismological Research Letters, 87(4), 964–976.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Mahdevari, S., Shahriar, K., Sharifzadeh, M. and Tannant, D.D. (2016) Assessment of failure mechanisms in deep longwall faces based on mining‐induced seismicity. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 9(18), 709.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Martínez‐Garzón, P., Vavryčuk, V., Kwiatek, G. and Bohnhoff, M. (2016) Sensitivity of stress inversion of focal mechanisms to pore pressure changes. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(16), 8441–8450.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Maxwell, S.C., Rutledge, J., Jones, R. and Fehler, M. (2010) Petroleum reservoir characterization using downhole microseismic monitoring. Geophysics, 75(5), 75A129–75A137.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. McLaskey, G.C. and Lockner, D.A. (2018) Shear failure of a granite pin traversing a sawcut fault. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 110, 97–110.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Onnis, L. and Carcione, J.M. (2017) A seismic ray tracing method based on Fibonacci search. Annals of Geophysics, 60(2), S0220.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ou, G.B. (2008) Seismological studies for tensile faults. TAO: terrestrial. Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, 19(5), 4.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Pesicek, J.D., Cieślik, K., Lambert, M.A., Carrillo, P. and Birkelo, B. (2016) Dense surface seismic data confirm non‐double‐couple source mechanisms induced by hydraulic fracturing induced non‐DC source mechanisms. Geophysics, 81(6), KS207–KS217.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Rudziňski, Ł., Mirek, J. and Lizurek, G. (2017) Identification of seismic doublets occurred on Rudna mine, Poland. Acta Geophysica, 65(2), 287–298.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Růžek, B., Vavryčuk, V., Hrubcová, P., Zedník, J. and Celebration Working Group (2003) Crustal anisotropy in the Bohemian Massif, Czech Republic: observations based on central european lithospheric experiment based on refraction (CELEBRATION) 2000. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(B8), 2392. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JB002242.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Šílený, J. (2009) Resolution of non‐double‐couple mechanisms: simulation of hypocenter mislocation and velocity structure mismodeling. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 99(4), 2265–2272.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Šílený, J. and Vavryčuk, V. (2000) Approximate retrieval of the point source in anisotropic media: numerical modelling by indirect parametrization of the source. Geophysical Journal International, 143, 700–708.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Šílený, J. and Vavryčuk, V. (2002) Can unbiased source be retrieved from anisotropic waveforms by using an isotropic model of the medium?Tectonophysics, 356, 125–138.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Staněk, F., Eisner, L. and Moser, T.J. (2014) Stability of source mechanisms inverted from P‐wave amplitude microseismic monitoring data acquired at the surface. Geophysical Prospecting, 62(3), 475–490.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Staněk, F., Eisner, L. and Vesnaver, A. (2017) Theoretical assessment of the full‐moment‐tensor resolvability for receiver arrays used in microseismic monitoring. Acta Geodynamica and Geomaterialia, 14(2), 235–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Stierle, E., Bohnhoff, M. and Vavryčuk, V. (2014b) Resolution of non‐double‐couple components in the seismic moment tensor using regional networks: 2. Application to aftershocks of the 1999 Mw 7.4 Izmit earthquake. Geophysical Journal International, 196(3), 1878–1888.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Stierle, E., Vavryčuk, V., Šílený, J. and Bohnhoff, M. (2014a) Resolution of non‐double‐couple components in the seismic moment tensor using regional networks: 1. A synthetic case study. Geophysical Journal International, 196(3), 1869–1877.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Thornton, M. and Eisner, L. (2011) Uncertainty in surface microseismic monitoring. SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts. Tulsa, OK: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 1524–1528.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Van Der Baan, M., Eaton, D. and Dusseault, M. (2013) Microseismic monitoring developments in hydraulic fracture stimulation. ISRM International Conference for Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing. Lisbon: International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Vavryčuk, V. (1997) Elastodynamic and elastostatic Green tensors for homogeneous weak transversely isotropic media. Geophysical Journal International, 130(3), 786–800.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Vavryčuk, V. (2001) Inversion for parameters of tensile earthquakes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 106(B8), 16339–16355.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Vavryčuk, V. (2003a) Parabolic lines and caustics in homogeneous weakly anisotropic solids. Geophysical Journal International, 152, 318–334.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Vavryčuk, V. (2003b) Behavior of rays near singularities in anisotropic media. Physical Review B, 67, 054105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.67.054105.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Vavryčuk, V. (2007) On the retrieval of moment tensors from borehole data. Geophysical Prospecting, 55, 381–391.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Vavryčuk, V. (2008) Real ray tracing in anisotropic viscoelastic media. Geophysical Journal International, 175(2), 617–626.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Vavryčuk, V. (2011) Tensile earthquakes: theory, modeling, and inversion. Journal of Geophysical Research, 116(B12), B12320. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008770.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Vavryčuk, V., Adamová, P., Doubravová, J. and Jakoubková, H. (2017) Moment tensor inversion based on the principal component analysis of waveforms: method and application to microearthquakes in West Bohemia, Czech Republic. Seismological Research Letters, 88(5), 1303–1315.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Vernier, J., Gaucher, E., Dasgupta, S.N. and Jervis, M. (2009) Location accuracy of an integrated microseismic monitoring network: a Saudi Arabian case study. EAGE Workshop on Passive Seismic, Limassol, Cyprus.
  46. Wessels, S.A., De La Pena, A., Kratz, M., Williams‐Stroud, S. and Jbeili, T. (2011) Identifying faults and fractures in unconventional reservoirs through microseismic monitoring. First break, 29(7), 99–104.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Zhang, Y., Eisner, L., Barker, W., Mueller, M.C. and Smith, K. (2011). Consistent imaging of hydraulic fracture treatments from permanent arrays using a calibrated velocity model. Third EAGE Passive Seismic Workshop‐Actively Passive 201, March 27–30, Athens, Greece.
  48. Zhao, Y., Yang, T., Bohnhoff, M., Zhang, P., Yu, Q., Zhou, J.et al. (2018) Study of the rock mass failure process and mechanisms during the transformation from open‐pit to underground mining based on microseismic monitoring. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 51(5), 1473–1493.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
Loading
Optimum size and density of surface grid arrays for retrieving accurate shear‐tensile fracturing of microearthquakes
Geophysical Prospecting 68, 2347 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12997
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Acquisition; Inversion; Monitoring; Passive method; Seismics; Surface monitoring

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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