SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition 1998
DOI: 10.2118/49194-ms
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carthage Cotton Valley Fracture Imaging Project - Imaging Methodology and Implications

Abstract: SPE Paper 38577 introduced the Carthage Cotton Valley Hydraulic Fracture Imaging Project and described the initial imaging work. This paper describes the most recent methodology and implications of imaging hydraulic fractures utilizing microseisms recorded by extensive sensor arrays. Initial imaging work utilized a forward modeling approach. This paper will report further on confirmation of the event locations by inversion methods and by using decimation studies. A source parameter analysis will also be presen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comprehensive microseismic testing was also performed at the Cotton Valley Hydraulic Fracture Imaging Project (Walker et al 1998;Mayerhofer et al 2000;Rutledge et al 2004), but there were no ground truth measurements to confirm the microseismic results. Similarly, comprehensive testing was performed at the Mounds Drill Cuttings Injection Field Experiment (Peterson et al 2001), but the microseismicity was very limited as a result of small volumes and low injectate rates, thus making any validation assessment somewhat limited.…”
Section: Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comprehensive microseismic testing was also performed at the Cotton Valley Hydraulic Fracture Imaging Project (Walker et al 1998;Mayerhofer et al 2000;Rutledge et al 2004), but there were no ground truth measurements to confirm the microseismic results. Similarly, comprehensive testing was performed at the Mounds Drill Cuttings Injection Field Experiment (Peterson et al 2001), but the microseismicity was very limited as a result of small volumes and low injectate rates, thus making any validation assessment somewhat limited.…”
Section: Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Microseismic mapping is a technology that has proven valuable for monitoring stimulations in unconventional reservoirs, such as gas shales and tight-gas sandstones (Hart et al 1984;Warpinski et al 1990;Walker et al 1998;Fisher et al 2002;Maxwell et al 2002;Griffin et al 2003;Fisher et al 2004;Warpinski et al 2005;Cipolla et al 2005;Mayerhofer et al 2005;Wolhart et al 2005;Wolhart et al 2006;Shemeta et al 2007;Vulgamore et al 2007;Daniels et al 2007;King et al 2008;Potapenko et al 2009;Waters et al 2009). It is performed by fielding a large array(s) of highly sensitive and high-frequency-response three-component geophones or accelerometers in an offset well(s) in close proximity to an interval that is being stimulated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%