1887
Volume 66, Issue 7
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

We present results of processed microseismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing and detected using dual downhole monitoring arrays. The results provide valuable insight into hydraulic fracturing. For our study, we detected and located microseismic events and determined their magnitudes, source mechanisms and inverted stress field orientation. Event locations formed a distinct linear trend above the stimulated intervals. Source mechanisms were only computed for high‐quality events detected on a sufficient number of receivers. All the detected source mechanisms were dip‐slip mechanisms with steep and nearly horizontal nodal planes. The source mechanisms represented shear events and the non‐double‐couple components were very small. Such small, non‐double‐couple components are consistent with a noise level in the data and velocity model uncertainties. Strikes of inverted mechanisms corresponding to the nearly vertical fault plane are (within the error of measurements) identical with the strike of the location trend. Ambient principal stress directions were inverted from the source mechanisms. The least principal stress, σ, was determined perpendicular to the strike of the trend of the locations, indicating that the hydraulic fracture propagated in the direction of maximum horizontal stress. Our analysis indicated that the source mechanisms observed using downhole instruments are consistent with the source mechanisms observed in microseismic monitoring arrays in other locations. Furthermore, the orientation of the inverted principal components of the ambient stress field is in agreement with the orientation of the known regional stress, implying that microseismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing are controlled by the regional stress field.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12651
2018-06-21
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AllenR.1978. Automatic earthquake recognition and timing from single traces. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America68, 1521–1532.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AndersonE.M.1951. The Dynamics of Faulting and Dyke Formation With Applications to Britain, 2nd edn., 206 pp. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AngelierJ.2002. Inversion of earthquake focal mechanisms to obtain the seismotectonic stress IV – a new method free of choice among nodal planes. Geophysical Journal International150, 568–609.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BaerM. and KradolferU.1987. An automatic phase picker for local and teleseismic events. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America77, 1437–1445.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BaigA. and UrbancicT.2010. Microseismic moment tensors: a path to understanding frac growth. The Leading Edge29(3), 320–324.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. DahmT., MantheiG. and EisenblätterJ.1999. Automated moment tensor inversion to estimate source mechanisms of hydraulically induced micro‐seismicity in salt rock. Tectonophysics306, 1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. EarleP.S. and ShearerP.M.1994. Characterization of global seismograms using an automatic‐picking algorithm. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America84, 366–376.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. EisnerL., HulseyB.J., DuncanP., JurickD., WernerH. and KellerW.2010. Comparison of surface and borehole locations of induced seismicity. Geophysical Prospecting58, 809–820.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. FischerT. and GuestA.2011. Shear and tensile earthquakes caused by fluid injection. Geophysical Research Letters38, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045447.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FoulgerG.R., JulianB.R., HillD.P., PittA.M., MalinP.E. and ShalevE.2004. Non‐double‐couple microearthquakes at Long Valley caldera, California, provide evidence for hydraulic fracturing. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research132, 45–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. GephartJ.W. and ForsythD.W.1984. An improved method for determining the regional stress tensor using earthquake focal mechanism data: application to the San Fernando earthquake sequence. Journal of Geophysical Research89, 9305–9320.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. GrechkaV.2015. On the feasibility of inversion of single‐well microseismic data for full moment tensor. Geophysics80(4), KS41–KS49.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. JechumtálováZ. and EisnerL.2008. Seismic source mechanism inversion from a linear array of receivers reveals non‐double‐couple seismic events induced by hydraulic fracturing in sedimentary formation. Tectonophysics460, 124–133.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. JechumtálováZ. and ŠílenýJ.2001. Point‐source parameters from noisy waveforms: error estimate by Monte Carlo simulation. Pure and Applied Geophysics158, 1639–1654.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. JechumtálováZ., ŠílenýJ., HorálekJ. and DorbathL.2011. Injection 2003 in HDR site Soultz‐sous‐Forêts: microearthquake mechanisms and stress pattern. Third Passive seismic Workshop – Actively Passive, Athens, Greece, PAS21.
  16. LundB. and SlungaR.1999. Stress tensor inversion using detailed microearthquake information and stability constraints: application to Olfus in southwest Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research104, 14947–14964.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MassaM., EvaE., SpallarossaD. and EvaC.2006. Detection of earthquake clusters on the basis of waveform similarity: an application in the Monferrato Region (Piedmont, Italy). Journal of Seismology10, 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MaurerH. and DeichmannN.1995. Micro‐earthquake cluster detection based on waveform similarities, with an application to the western Swiss Alps. Geophysical Journal International123, 588–600.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MichaelA.J.1984. Determination of stress from slip data: faults and folds. Journal of Geophysical Research89, 11517–11526.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. NelsonG.D. and VidaleJ.E.1990. Earthquake locations by 3‐D finite‐difference travel times. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America80, 395–410.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Nolen‐HoeksemaR.C. and RuffL.J.2001. Moment tensor inversion of microseims from the B‐sand propped hydrofracture, M‐site, Colorado. Tectonophysics336, 163–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. PhillipsW.S., RutledgeJ.T., HouseL. and FehlerM.C.2002. Induced microearthquake patterns in hydrocarbon and geothermal reservoirs: six case studies. Pure and Applied Geophysics159, 345–369.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. RutledgeJ.T., YuX. and LeaneyS.2014. The signature of shearing driven by hydraulic opening. AAPG/SEG/SPWLA HEDBERG CONFERENCE “Fundamental Parameters Associated with Successful Hydraulic Fracturing – Means and Methods for a Better Understanding”, Austin, TX.
  24. ShearerP.2009. Introduction to Seismology. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. ŠílenýJ., HillD.P., EisnerL. and CornetF.H.2009. Non‐double‐couple mechanisms of microearthquakes induced by hydraulic fracturing. Journal of Geophysical Research114, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB005987.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. ŠílenýJ. and MilevA.2008. Source mechanism of mining induced seismic events – resolution of double couple and non double couple models. Tectonophysics456, 3–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. SongF.X. and ToksözM.N.2011. Full‐waveform based complete moment tensor inversion and source parameter estimation from downhole microseismic data for hydrofracture monitoring. Geophysics76(6), WC103–WC116.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. SongF.X., WarpinskiN.R. and ToksözM.N.2014. Full‐waveform based microseismic source mechanism studies in the Barnett Shale: linking microseismicity to reservoir geomechanics. Geophysics79(2), KS13–KS30.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. StaněkF. and EisnerL.2017. Seismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing in shales: a bedding plane slip model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth122, 7912–7926.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. StaněkF., EisnerE. and VesnaverA.2017. Theoretical assessment of the full‐moment‐tensor resolvability for receiver arrays used in microseismic monitoring. Acta Geodynamica et Geomaterialia14(2), 235–240.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. TanY. and EngelderT.2016. Further testing of the bedding‐plane‐slip model for hydraulic‐fracture opening using moment‐tensor inversions. Geophysics81(5), KS159–KS168.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. VavryčukV.2007. On the retrieval of moment tensors from borehole data. Geophysical Prospecting55(3), 381–391.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. VavryčukV.2014. Iterative joint inversion for stress and fault orientations from focal mechanisms. Geophysical Journal International199, 69–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. WangX.J., YangX.B., ChiB., SunZ.L. and LiuW.L.2004. Fractures and ground stress of peripheral low permeability reservoirs. Petroleum Geology and Oilfield Development in Daqing5, 88–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. WarpinskiN.R., BranaganP.T., PetersonR.E., WolhartS.L. and UhlJ.E.1998. Mapping hydraulic fracture growth and geometry using microseismic events detected by a wireline retrievable accelerometer array. SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, SPE 40014.
  36. WarpinskiN.R. and DuJ.2010. Source‐mechanism studies on microseismicity induced by hydraulic fracturing. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, SPE 135254.
  37. WcisłoM. and EisnerL.2016. Attenuation from microseismic datasets by the peak frequency method benchmarked with the spectral ratio method. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica60, 547–564.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. WongJ., HanL., StewartR.R., BentleyL.R. and BancroftJ.C.2009. Geophysical well logs from a shallow test well and automatic determination of formation velocities from full‐waveform sonic logs. CSEG Recorder34(4), 20–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. ZimmerU.2011. Microseismic design studies. Geophysics76(6), WC17–WC25.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. ZobackM.D.2010. Reservoir Geomechanics. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12651
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12651
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Data processing; Inversion; 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