Because surface-based monitoring of hydraulic fracturing is not restricted by borehole geometry or the difficulties in maintaining subsurface equipment, it is becoming an increasingly common part of microseismic monit...Because surface-based monitoring of hydraulic fracturing is not restricted by borehole geometry or the difficulties in maintaining subsurface equipment, it is becoming an increasingly common part of microseismic monitoring. The ability to determine an accurate velocity model for the monitored area directly affects the accuracy of microseismic event locations. However, velocity model calibration for location with surface instruments is difficult for several reasons： well log measurements are often inaccurate or incomplete, yielding intractable models; ori- gin times of perforation shots are not always accurate; and the non-uniqueness of velocity models obtained by inver- sion becomes especially problematic when only perforation shots are used. In this paper, we propose a new approach to overcome these limitations. We establish an initial velocity model from well logging data, and then use the root mean square （RMS） error of double-difference arrival times as a proxy measure for the misfit between the well log velocity model and the true velocity structure of the medium. Double-difference RMS errors are reduced by using a very fast simulated annealing for model perturbance, and a sample set of double-difference RMS errors is then selec- ted to determine an empirical threshold. This threshold value is set near the minimum RMS of the selected samples, and an appropriate number of travel times within the threshold range are chosen. The corresponding velocity models are then used to relocate the perforation-shot. We use the velocity model with the smallest relative location errors as the basis for microseismic location. Numerical analysis with exact input velocity models shows that although large differences exist between the calculated and true velocity models, perforation shots can still be located to their actual positions with the proposed technique; the location inaccuracy of the perforation is 〈2 m. Further tests on field data demonstrate the validity of this technique.展开更多
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.41074074)
文摘Because surface-based monitoring of hydraulic fracturing is not restricted by borehole geometry or the difficulties in maintaining subsurface equipment, it is becoming an increasingly common part of microseismic monitoring. The ability to determine an accurate velocity model for the monitored area directly affects the accuracy of microseismic event locations. However, velocity model calibration for location with surface instruments is difficult for several reasons： well log measurements are often inaccurate or incomplete, yielding intractable models; ori- gin times of perforation shots are not always accurate; and the non-uniqueness of velocity models obtained by inver- sion becomes especially problematic when only perforation shots are used. In this paper, we propose a new approach to overcome these limitations. We establish an initial velocity model from well logging data, and then use the root mean square （RMS） error of double-difference arrival times as a proxy measure for the misfit between the well log velocity model and the true velocity structure of the medium. Double-difference RMS errors are reduced by using a very fast simulated annealing for model perturbance, and a sample set of double-difference RMS errors is then selec- ted to determine an empirical threshold. This threshold value is set near the minimum RMS of the selected samples, and an appropriate number of travel times within the threshold range are chosen. The corresponding velocity models are then used to relocate the perforation-shot. We use the velocity model with the smallest relative location errors as the basis for microseismic location. Numerical analysis with exact input velocity models shows that although large differences exist between the calculated and true velocity models, perforation shots can still be located to their actual positions with the proposed technique; the location inaccuracy of the perforation is 〈2 m. Further tests on field data demonstrate the validity of this technique.
