Microseismic | Passive Seismic Imaging | Webcasts
Upcoming Webcasts
Using Microseismicity to Understand Subsurface Fracture Systems and Increase the Effectiveness of Completions: Eagle Ford Shale, TX
Presenter: John Detring, Geophysicist, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: July 23, 2013 at 10AM CDT
Summary:
This month's webcast focuses on utilizing microseismicity to ascertain an understanding of the subsurface fracture networks and how this information can increase the effectiveness of completions. This presentation is a case study from within the Eagle Ford formation.
Previous Webcasts
Productive-SRV: Proppant Placement and Production Estimation from Microseismic Data
Presenter: Carl Neuhaus, Petroleum Engineer at MicroSeismic, Inc..
Date: June 17, 2013 at 10AM CDT
Summary:
This month’s webcast focuses on how using microseismic data allows users to build an event magnitude calibrated DFN, taking into account the seismic energy of the events, rock properties, and the pumped treatment. Evaluating proppant placement in the calibrated DFN allows you to discern between the part of the SRV that contributes to production in the long term, and the part of the reservoir that was affected by the treatment but may not be hydraulically connected over a longer period of time. Then obtaining reservoir characteristics from microseismic data gives you an idea of permeability that was created with the stimulation in order to evaluate drainage volume from where you are producing. From here you are able to estimate production, as well as refine field development in terms of wellbore spacing. Considering other treatment data, such as pressure and rate, we show how you can make additional recommendations on stage spacing and how to optimize your fluid system based on the signature of a proprietary treatment analysis plot.
Next Generation Downhole Microseismic Monitoring with EventPick Technology
Presenter: Indy Chakrabarti, VP of Strategic Development, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: May 21, 2013 at 10:00 AM CST
Summary:
This short webinar is an introduction and overview of microseismic acquisition and processing techniques and considerations, with a special focus on the new EventPick first arrival picking technology. The session will review optimal scenarios for surface and downhole microseismic solutions in hydraulic fracture mapping, reservoir monitoring and seismicity detection scenarios. In addition, a brief description of the differing microseismic results and uses from each of these techniques will be discussed, including source mechanism characterization and discrete fracture network generation.
Coupled Fluid Flow and Geomechanical Modeling of Unconventional Hydraulic Stimulation: Processing Affecting Recovery
Presenter: Mark McClure, Assistant Professor of Petroleum & Geosystems Engineering at University of Texas at Austin
Date: April 23, 2013 at 10:00 AM CST
Summary:
During hydraulic stimulation in unconventional oil and gas, newly forming and preexisting fractures interact to generate complex fracture networks. We developed a computational model, CFRAC, that couples fluid flow and the stresses induced by fracture deformation in large, complex discrete fracture networks. Modeling these processes with discrete fracture networks is useful because the stresses induced by fracture propagation and deformation are specially heterogeneous and depend on the relative locations and orientations of neighboring fractures. The model also has the capability to describe friction evolution on fractures, allowing it to directly describe the processes giving rise to microseismicity. In this talk, applications to practical problems will be given. Different mechanisms that encourage or inhibit development of productive fracture networks will be summarized. The relationship between microseismicity and deformation will also be discussed.
Uncertainties in Surface and Downhole Microseismic
Presenter: Michael Thornton, CTO MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: March 26, 2013 at 10AM CST CST
Summary:
This month's webcast focuses on the presumption that the two competing microseismic imaging techniques in use today appear at first to be very dissimilar. Downhole microseismic locations are determined from P & S wave travel-time matching, much like traditional earthquake seismology, while surface microseismic imaging is more like pre-stack depth migration of reflection seismic. However, if one considers both techniques as maximum likelihood estimators (MLE), it is possible to show that the two are in fact quite similar. Moreover, the MLE framework provides a basis to compare the two methods in terms of the uncertainties in location estimates and sensitivity to velocity uncertainty..
Improving Event Location Accuracy with Anisotropic Velocity Models
Presenter: Carl Neuhaus, Petroleum Engineer, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: February 19, 2013 at 10:00AM CST
Summary:
This month’s webcast focuses on the application of an anisotropic velocity model in determining microseismic event locations from surface-acquired passive seismic data. The Thomsen parameters ε and δ were determined to accurately locate calibration shots to their known location. Hydraulic fracture events where then imaged and compared to their locations derived from processing incorporating an isotropic velocity model. When compared directly to calibration shot locations derived with an isotropic velocity model, we will show that the absolute average error in calibration shot positioning in all directions was improved by almost 30% and hypocenter events from the hydraulic fracturing treatment depicted a more dense and confined zone of microseismic activity.
Microseismic Monitoring: Methods and Interpretation
Presenter: Mike Mueller, VP Technology Development, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: January 22, 2013 at 10 AM CST
Summary:
The optimal horizontal wellbore orientation is generally orthogonal to the direction of hydraulic fracture propagation. There is a very little publically available data concerning the direction of maximum horizontal stress and natural fracture orientations in the Eagle Ford. In this webinar, the speaker will discuss how source mechanism analysis from surface-based microseismic results shows that the azimuth of hydraulic fractures in the Eagle Ford varies, depending on location. The optimal wellbore orientations varies as well. A range of wellbore orientation in the Eagle Ford Play is estimated using microseismic source mechanism analysis.
Determining Well Bore Orientation Using Source Mechanism Analysis in the Eagle Ford Play
Presenter: Cherie Telker, Geologist, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: November 13, 2012 at 10 AM CST
Summary:
The optimal horizontal wellbore orientation is generally orthogonal to the direction of hydraulic fracture propagation. There is a very little publically available data concerning the direction of maximum horizontal stress and natural fracture orientations in the Eagle Ford. In this webinar, the speaker will discuss how source mechanism analysis from surface-based microseismic results shows that the azimuth of hydraulic fractures in the Eagle Ford varies, depending on location. The optimal wellbore orientations varies as well. A range of wellbore orientation in the Eagle Ford Play is estimated using microseismic source mechanism analysis.
Integrated Microseismic Monitoring for Field Optimization in the Marcellus Shale
Presenter: Carl Neuhaus, Petroleum Engineer, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: October 23, 2012 at 10 AM CST
Summary:
This webcast focuses on an integrative analysis of hydraulic fracture treatments conducted in the Marcellus Shale. The presentation determines how various factors related to the specific reservoir geology in the Marcellus and to what extent the variability of hydraulic fracture treatments impacted the microseismic results. It analyzes stress changes in the reservoir indicated by focal mechanisms to help explain the asymmetry of the microseismicity about the wellbore. Finally, the initial production results are compared to reservoir and engineering parameters to determine if the variability in the microseismic results is due to engineering differences or to spatially-varying reservoir properties.
Understanding Microseismic Positional Uncertainty
Presenter: Mike Mueller, VP Technology Development
Date: September 25, 2012 at 10AM CDT
Summary:
Microseismic event location or position resolution and uncertainty remains one of the most critical aspects of passive seismic for the user community. Understanding the inherent capabilities, limitations and drivers for event locations from downhole, surface and near-surface microseismic acquisition geometries is required to have confidence with ‘beyond the dots’ microseismic applications such as hydrofracture length, height and stimulated rock volume calculations. In this webinar, these capabilities, limitations and drivers are reviewed for both the downhole and the surface acquisition methods.
Geological Interpretations of Microseismic Events to Better Constrain Fracture Models
Presenter: Jon McKenna, Geophysicist, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: August 21, 2012 at 10AM CDT
Summary:
In addition to locating microseismic events, MicroSeismic, Inc.’s surface and shallow buried array passive seismic technology is used to define the geometry and orientations of the fracture networks that are stimulated or induced by hydro-frac treatments. Additional rock mechanics parameters can be combined with additional information contained in the microseismic data to better understand in-situ subsurface stress and failure conditions.
In this webinar, the speaker will discuss focal mechanisms, stress inversion techniques, discrete fracture models constrained by microseismic events, and stimulated rock volume calculations. Additional analysis to be discussed include fractal geometries of event clusters, and event energy analyses can be used to optimize the stimulation treatment.
Understanding the Impact of Natural Fracture Reactivation and Implications for Well Drainage
Presenter: Dr. Sherilyn Williams-Stroud, Chief Geologist, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: July 24, 2012 10:00am CDT
Summary:
Microseismic data obtained from surface or shallow buried array contains a wealth of information that allows interpretation of rock failure mechanisms, fracture plane orientations, and reservoir stress. Analyses of this information in microseismicity from the Marcellus Shale stimulations show reactivation of the regionally persistent joint sets that allows identification of how the reservoir stress state changes during the treatment.
Using b-Value Analysis to Avoid Faults During Fracture Jobs Using Microseismic Monitoring
Presenter: Michael Kratz, Geophysicist, MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: June 19, 2012, 10:00 am CDT
Summary:
In order to gain more insights from microseismic monitoring, organizations are using b-value analysis, a method to estimate stress in the subsurface, to avoid geohazards such as faults in their reservoirs.
Register now to receive a link to this pre-recorded webcast available on microseismic.com on June 19th. MicroSeismic, Inc. geophysicist Michael Kratz will present a Barnett Shale case study, expanding on his EAGE/SPE Unconventional Resources Vienna conference talk.
Advanced Microseismic Analysis for Enhanced Reservoir Characterization
Presenter: Peter M. Duncan Ph.D., Founder and Executive Chairman of MicroSeismic, Inc.
Date: May 11, 2012, 10:00 am CDT
Summary:
The analysis of microseismic monitoring data can make a contribution to reservoir management that extends well beyond the design of the best completion procedures.
Sound intriguing? Tune in as Peter Duncan, Ph.D. shares new insights on how an old technology is being re-engineered to provide insights on structure, stress and reservoir dynamics.
sign up to receive email alerts
