Click to view article in PDF format.
GCMicroseismic Data from Hydraulic Fracturing Can Locate Faults*
Carlos Cabarcas1 and Oswaldo Davogustto2
Search and Discovery Article #41119 (2013)
Posted March 25, 2013
*Adapted from the Geophysical Corner column, prepared by the authors, in AAPG Explorer, February, 2013, and entitled "Micro MDPs Can Be a Big Tool in Fault Finding". Editor of Geophysical Corner is Satinder Chopra ([email protected]). Managing Editor of AAPG Explorer is Vern Stefanic
11Hilcorp Energy Company, and University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma
2University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma
Microseismic technology is crucial these days for understanding reservoirs and planning development programs:
seismic
activity generated during hydraulic fracturing.
wave
is referred to as a fault, and the energy released by such a movement propagates as a
seismic
wave
; a measure of this energy within the domain of microseismic technology is referred to as magnitude.
magnitudes
should characterize fault reactivation.Magnitude is usually one of the
parameters
derived from borehole microseismic measurements. Additionally, microseismic recording sensors only detect microseismic events occurring within a certain radius from them - usually no more than a few thousand feet.
One way to quantify this phenomenon is with a Magnitude vs. Distance Plot (MDP). This plot shows the relationship between the energy associated with a particular event and its distance from the monitor well. The MDP is a useful analysis tool in microseismic interpretation for all the information it summarizes on a simple graphic display.
Events with a combination of highest magnitude and highest distance away from the monitor well define the maximum detection distance, which can be used to plan the maximum distance for monitor well placement in future jobs. The rest of the recorded events populate the middle upper left portion of the MDP graph, forming a quasi-triangular pattern. The presence of faults in the subsurface - and their reactivation during hydraulic stimulation - thus becomes noticeable on MDPs, because
magnitudes
of events associated with fault reactivation are usually higher than the rest.
|
|
We use the Magnitude vs. Distance Plot (MDP) to discern fault reactivation in this microseismic monitoring exercise, performed real-time during hydraulic fracturing operations. In
Figure 1, the higher More than a year after the stimulation of the well associated with
Figure 1, newly available 3-D reflection In Figure 2 we show sections with and without the microseismic events. The overlay of microseismic events on the 3-D By computing similarity on the 3-D Figure 3 also shows that the azimuth of the event cloud associated with the fault reactivation is different from the azimuth inferred from previous stimulation stages. This characteristic, solely based on microseismic event location, provides another tool to derive subsurface geological information not generally emphasized. We suggest that in the absence of additional supporting data, an azimuth change observed from microseismic sets - coupled with anomalously high The example presented here serves to validate and support the use of microseismic-derived MDPs as a tool to identify fault reactivation in the absence of additional subsurface data. Moreover, when combined with other independent measurements, MDPs could unequivocally characterize the reactivation of a fault based on higher amplitudes and possible azimuth changes. We also show that 3-D We would like to thank the management of Hilcorp Energy Company for permission to publish this work, as well as its support on the application of new technologies. In addition, we would like to thank Seitel Inc. for permission to publish their |
General statement