MIT Libraries logoDSpace@MIT

MIT
View Item 
  • DSpace@MIT Home
  • Earth Resources Laboratory
  • ERL Industry Consortia Technical Reports
  • View Item
  • DSpace@MIT Home
  • Earth Resources Laboratory
  • ERL Industry Consortia Technical Reports
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Comparison of microearthquake locations using seismic interferometry principles

Author(s)
Melo, Gabriela; Malcolm, Alison E.; Fehler, Michael
Thumbnail
DownloadMelo-Malcolm-Fehle_Comparison of microearthquakes.pdf (242.9Kb)
Other Contributors
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Earth Resources Laboratory
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Mapping, localization, and general characterization of problems in reservoir fracture systems is one of the most important in oil, gas, and geothermal energy production. One way to study and monitor these fracture systems is to analyze the microearthquakes triggered during hydraulic fracturing or stimulation, as these events generally occur along newly created and preexisting fractures. Thus, the location of the microseismic events can be used to characterize the properties of the fracture system. There are many different methods for localizing microearthquakes and, in general, these methods yield different locations, velocity models, and event origin times, due to differences in algorithms and input models. This makes it very difficult to know which one gives the most accurate and consistent results in practice. The goal of this work is to use basic concepts from seismic interferometry for estimating constraints on the P and S traveltimes between two microearthquake locations. Information obtained through seismic interferometry pertains to only the Earth parameters between two receivers or, by reciprocity, two sources. This information is also less dependent on the velocity model, and less susceptible to errors in arrival time picking and noise in the data due to averaging over receivers. This information can then be used to evaluate and compare different sets of results obtained through different localization methods. Here we illustrate this comparison method by comparing localization results from two different methods. For our data set, in particular, seismic interferometry cannot give hard constrains but it gives bounds that can be used to asses results from different localization methods.
Date issued
2012
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/90502
Publisher
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Earth Resources Laboratory
Series/Report no.
Earth Resources Laboratory Industry Consortia Annual Report;2012-13
Keywords
Microseismic, Imaging, Interferometry

Collections
  • ERL Industry Consortia Technical Reports

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

My Account

Login

Statistics

OA StatisticsStatistics by CountryStatistics by Department
MIT Libraries
PrivacyPermissionsAccessibilityContact us
MIT
Content created by the MIT Libraries, CC BY-NC unless otherwise noted. Notify us about copyright concerns.