1887

Abstract

Summary

We develop methodology of moment magnitude estimation for microseismic events. Our method is designed for stacking true amplitude waveforms recorded with surface array. We show that magnitude can be determined from the stack of amplitudes corrected for radiation pattern and propagation effects such as geometrical spreading, attenuation and free surface boundary. From the stack of corrected waveforms we find low frequency limit of displacement of the stack and calculate seismic moment. We show that a traditional method of estimating moment magnitude on each trace and averaging is consistent with stacking method introduced in this paper. This method can be used for much weaker events whereas traditional methodology cannot.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141431
2014-06-16
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aki, K. and Richards, P.
    [2002] Quantitative seismology, University Science Books, Sausalito
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Eisner, L., Williams-Stroud, S., HillA., Duncan, P., and Thornton, M.
    [2010] Beyond the dots in the box: microseismicity-constrained fracture models for reservoir simulation, The Leading Edge, 29(3), 326–333
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Eisner, L., Hallo, M., Oprsal, I., Gei, D., Mohammed, A.
    [2012] The peak frequency of direct waves for microseismic events, Geophysics, 78(6), A45–A49
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Freudenreich, Y., Oates, S.J, Berlang, W.
    [2012] Microseismic feasibility studies – assessing the probability of success of monitoring projects, Geophysical Prospecting, 60(6), 1043–1053
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Green, C., Styles, P. and Baptie, B.
    [2012] Preese Hall shale gas fracturing review & recommendations for induced seismic mitigation, Report to UK DECC
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hanks, T. and Kanamori, H.
    [1979] Moment magnitude scale, Journal of Geophysical Research, 84, 2348–2350
    [Google Scholar]
  7. McKenna, J. P. and Toohey, N.
    [2013] A magnitude-based calibrated discrete fracture network methodology, First Break, 31(9), 45–54
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Scherbaum, F.
    [2001] Of poles and zeros: Fundamentals of digital seismology, Springer, Dordrecht
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Shmeta, J. and Anderson, P.
    [2010] It’s a matter of size: Magnitude and moment estimates for microseismic data, The Leading Edge, 29(3), 296–302
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Stork, A., Verdon, J. and Kendall, J.
    [2013] The Importance of Accurate and Consistent Microseismic Event Magnitudes, 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Extended Abstracts, PS27.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Wessels, S., Kratz, M., De La Pena, A.
    [2011] Identifying fault activation during hydraulic stimulation in the Barnett Shale: source mechanisms, b-values and energy release analyses of microseismicity, 81st SEG Annual Meeting, 1463–1467
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Williams-Stroud, S., Ozgen, C., and Billingsley, R.
    [2013] Case History: Microseismicity-constrained discrete fracture network models for stimulated reservoir simulation, Geophysics, 78(1), B37–B47
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Zhou, R., Huang, G., Snelling, P., Thornton, M., Mueller, M.
    [2013] Magnitude calibration for microseismic events from hydraulic fracture monitoring, 83rd SEG Annual Meeting, 2145–2149
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141431
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.20141431
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