1887
  1. Home
  2. Conferences
  3. Conference Proceedings
  4. SPE/EAGE European Unconventional Resources Conference and Exhibition
  5. Conference paper

Abstract

Abstract

Optimization of stimulation is key to successful development of unconventional reservoirs. Microseismic monitoring is the most powerful tool to help us understand where and what is happening during and after the stimulation. Yet very little is understood about the relationship between microseismicity and hydraulic fractures: some believe microseismic events are part of the hydraulic fractures, some believe they are resulting from stress changes and fluid leak-off. Microseismic datasets with accurate event locations complemented with source mechanisms lead us to a new level of understanding of the interaction between hydraulic fracturing and seismic response. There are at least four geomechanical models to explain observed failure mechanisms and the opening (or closing) of hydraulic fractures (seismic tensile opening, leak-off cloud of seismicity around the hydraulic fracture, shearing between aseismic tensile opening and horizontal fractures shearing on vertical planes). Unfortunately none of these models is consistent with observations presented in this study. Hence we developed a new geomechanical model of bedding plane slippage and vertical shearing induced by hydraulic fractures in shale reservoirs.

We present a case study including detailed source mechanism inversion for a microseismic dataset from hydraulic fracturing of a shale gas play in the North America. We observe source mechanisms dominated by shear failure with dip-slip and strike-slip sense of motion. The dip-slip mechanisms are prevailingly oriented with shear planes along the maximum horizontal stress. This can be explained as slippage on beddings planes caused by aseismic opening of hydraulic fractures. The strike-slip mechanism show small but real components of non-shear deformation. This can be also explained as slippage on vertical plane perpendicular to maximum horizontal stress with slight opening as these events are direct part of the hydraulic fracture. This model explains large energy difference between seismic and hydraulic energy, and prevailing orientation of the shear planes of the induced microseismic events. In addition, the bedding planes are weak planes in the shale formation likely to fail. The model can better constrain fundamental parameters of induced hydraulic fractures and describe hydraulic fractures and their interaction with the shale plays.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.2118/167676-MS
2014-02-25
2024-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.2118/167676-MS
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aki, K., Fehler, M., Aamodt, R.L., Albright, J.N., Potter, R.M., Pearson, C.M., and Tester, J.W.,
    1982. Interpretation of seismic data from hydraulic fracturing experiments at the Fenton Hill, New Mexico, hot dry rock geothermal site. Journal of Geophysical Research87(B2): doi: 10.1029/0JGREA0000870000B2000936000001. issn: 0148–0227.
     https://doi.org/10.1029/0JGREA0000870000B2000936000001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baig, A., and Urbancic, T.
    , 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]
  3. Duncan, P. M.
    , 2005. Is there a future for passive seismic?: First Break, 23, 111–115.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Duncan, P.M., and Eisner, L.
    , 2010. Reservoir characterization using surface microseismic monitoring. Geophysics, 75(5), P. 75A139–75A146, doi: 10.1190/1.3467760
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3467760 [Google Scholar]
  5. Eisner, L., Williams-Stroud, S., Hill, A., Duncan, P., Thornton, M.
    , 2010. Beyond the dots in the box: microseismicity-constrained fracture models for reservoir simulation, The Leading Edge, Vol. 29, No. 3, 326–333
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Harper, T.R., and Last, N.C.
    , 1990. Response of fractured rock subject to fluid injection Part II. Characteristic behavior. Tectonophysics, 172, 33–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Hubbert, M.K., and Willis, D.G.,
    1957. Mechanics of hydraulic fracturing. Jour. Petroleum Tech., v. IX, no. 6, p. 153–166.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Jechumtálová, Z., and Eisner, L.
    2008. Seismic source mechanism inversion from a linear array of receivers reveals non-double-couple seismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing in sedimentary formation. Tectonophysics, 460, 124–133, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2008.07.011.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Nolen-Hoeksema, R.C., and Ruff, L.J.
    , 2001. Moment tensor inversion of microseisms from the B-sand propped hydrofracture, M-site, Colorado. Tectonophysics, 336: 163–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Pearson, C.
    , 1981. The relationship between microseismicity and high pore pressures during hydraulic stimulations experiments in low permeability granitic rocks. Journal of Geophysical Research86 (B9), 7855–7864.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Phillips, W.S., Fairbanks, T.D., Rutledge, J.T., Anderson, D.W.
    , 1998. Induced microearthquake patterns and oil-producing fracture systems in Austin chalk. Tectonophysics289, 153–169.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Rutledge, J.T., and Phillips, W.S.
    , 2003. Hydraulic stimulation of natural fractures as revealed by induced microearthquakes, Carthage Cotton Valley gas field, east Texas, Geophysics, 68, 441–452.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Rutledge, J., Downie, R., Maxwell, S., and Drew, J.
    , 2013. Geomechanics of Hydraulic Fracturing Inferred from Composite Radiation Patterns of Microseismicity. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Ann. Tech. Conf. and Exh., New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Paper 166370
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Shapiro, S.A.
    , 2008Microseismicity - a tool for reservoir characterization. Publisher: EAGE Publications by, 2008
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Staněk, F., and Eisner, L.
    , 2013. A New model explaining inverted source mechanisms of microseismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Staněk, F., Eisner, L., and Moser, T.J.
    , 2013. Stability of source mechanisms inverted from P-wave amplitude microseismic monitoring data acquired at the surface, submitted to Geophysical Prospecting
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Šílený, J.
    , 2009. Resolution of Non-Double-Couple Mechanisms: Simulation of Hypocenter Mislocation and Velocity Structure Mismodeling, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 99, No. 4, 2265–2272
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Vavryčuk, V.
    , 2001. Inversion for parameters of tensile earthquakes. Journal of Geophysical Research106 (B8), 16339–16355.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. , 2007. On the retrieval of moment tensors from borehole data. Geophysical Prospecting55 (3), 381–391.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Vernik, L.
    , 1993. Microcrack-induced versus intrinsic elastic anisotropy in mature HC--source shales. Geophysics, 58(11), 1703–1706. doi: 10.1190/1.1443385
     https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443385 [Google Scholar]
  21. Warpinski, N.
    , 1997. Microseismic and deformation imaging of hydraulic fracture growth and geometry in the C sand interval, GRI/DOE M-Site Project. Proceedings 1997 Society of Petroleum Engineering, Ann. Tech. Conf., San Antonio, Texas. Paper 38573.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.2118/167676-MS
Loading
A New Geomechanical Model Explaining Source Mechanisms of Events Induced by Hydraulic Fracturing in Shale
Conference Proceedings 2014, 1 (2014); https://doi.org/10.2118/167676-MS
/content/papers/10.2118/167676-MS
/content/papers/10.2118/167676-MS
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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