SPE-188173-MS

Microseismic Monitoring: A Tool for Evaluating Fracture Complexity in

Various Geological Settings

J. Le Calvez, S. Hanson-Hedgecock, and C. N Fredd, Schlumberger

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 13-16 November 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Understanding the created fracture geometry is key to the effectiveness of any stimulation program,
as fracture surface area directly impacts production performance. Microseismic monitoring of hydraulic
stimulations can provide in real-time extensive diagnostic information on fracture development and
geometry. Thus, it can help with the immediate needs of optimizing the stimulation program for production
performance and long-term concerns associated to field development. However, microseismic monitoring
is often underutilized at the expense of productivity in the exploration and appraisal phases of a field.
Geology is a fundamental element in the design of a stimulation program and the interpretation of its
results. Rock properties and geomechanics govern the achievable fracture geometry and influence the type
of fluids to be injected in the formation and the pumping schedule. Rock layering controls the location
of the monitoring device, guides the depth at which perforations should be located, and influences how
hydrocarbons flow within the formation. Despite this importance, the impact geology may have on the
stimulation results is often overlooked as it is all too common to see assumed laterally homogeneous
formations, invariant stress field (both laterally and vertically), stimulated fractures having a symmetric
planar geometry, etc.
As exploration and appraisal moves toward active tectonics areas (as opposed to relatively quiet
passive margins and depositional basins), understanding the impact of complex geology and the stress
field on fracture geometry is critical to optimizing stimulation treatments and establishing robust field
development plans. Mapping of hypocenters detected using microseismic monitoring is an ideal tool to
help understand near- and far-field fracture geometry. Additionally, moment tensor inversion performed on
mapped hypocenters can contribute to understanding the rock failure mechanisms and help with evaluating
asymmetric and complex fracture geometry. Understanding this fracture complexity helps address key
uncertainties such as achievable fracture coverage of the reservoir.
We present the results of several hydraulic fracture stimulations in various geological environments
that have been monitored using microseismic data. We illustrate with these case studies that in some
rare cases, simple radial and planar fracture system (often mislabeled penny shape-like fracture) may be
generated as predicted using simple modeling techniques. However, in most cases, the final fracture system
geometry is complex and asymmetric, largely governed by stress, geologic discontinuities, rock fabric, etc.
2 SPE-188173-MS

Understanding this impact and optimizing the well design to enhance productivity is key to evaluating
reservoir potential and commercial viability during exploration and appraisal phases and for maximizing
return on investment during development.

Introduction - Integrated Workflows for Hydraulic Fracturing Planning

Economically viable production in low permeability, complex tight reservoirs and source rocks has been
enabled by innovations in horizontal drilling and multistage hydraulic fracturing completions pioneered for
use in shale production in North America. Challenges to hydraulic fracturing in such reservoirs includes
fracture initiation and generating a fracture network with the sufficient reservoir contact and wellbore
connectivity to enable production. This multistage hydraulic fracturing completions methodology is now
being applied in a variety of basins around the world in a variety of tectonic settings with complex geology
and geomechanics (Figure 1). These areas include the Middle East and North Africa, South China, and
Argentina that experience severe compression.

Figure 1—EIA Map of World Shale Resource Assessments, last updated 24 September 2015,
Resources in most of the Middle East were not included in the EIA report (Source: U.S. Energy
Information Administration, Sept 2015, https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/worldshalegas/)

The geologic, stratigraphic, rock fabric, tectonic setting and regional to local scale stress stateof these
tectonically complex settings can greatly influence the initiation and ultimate geometry of hydraulic fracture
networks. This presents challenges to hydraulic fracture stimulations planning since each reservoir and
basin has different geologic and geomechanical properties of varying complexity. The heterogeneity and
complex structural, stratigraphic and rock properties directly impacts the ability to initiate fracture growth
and generate a fracture network with the sufficient reservoir contact and wellbore connectivity to enable
production.
Integrating accurate models of geologic complexity with workflows for developing and evaluating
completions strategies is key to optimizing stage spacing, perforation plans, stimulation designs, and
well spacing that is effective in generating fracture networks with sufficient surface area, height, length
and complexity for economically viable production (e.g., Hyrb et al., 2014; Gurmen et al., 2016). These
integrated workflows typically begin by a detailed characterization of the geology, rock fabric, tectonics,
stress state, and rock properties of the reservoir and surrounding formations (Figure 2, left panel, 1. Reservoir
Characterization). Accurate models of the expected hydraulic fracture stimulation geometry and controls
SPE-188173-MS 3

(e.g. unconventional fracture models), as well as the conductivity distribution requires information about
the natural fracture network, the strata and structural history of a region of (Miller et al., 2013; Hryb, et
al., 2014; Yu et al., 2015).

Figure 2—(Left panel) Hydraulic fracturing models developed through the integration of (1) geologic and
structural reservoir characterization models, (2) fracture propagation models and (3) production models are
used in evaluating different unconventional completion strategies. (Right panel) Real-time microseismic
monitoring is important in evaluating the performance of hydraulic fracturing stimulations and in providing
information about for calibrating and developing improved fracture models for future stimulations.

Mechanical earth modelsare generated from a variety of geologic, petrophysical, geomechanical, and
geophysical information, which characterizes the complexity and heterogeneity of the reservoir and
completion properties in the formations of interest (Figure 2, left panel, 1. Reservoir Characterization).
This may include 3D seismic surveys, acoustic impedance (AI) and other seismic-derived property volumes
(e.g., Bulk modulus, Poisson’s ratio, etc.), microseismic surveys, sonic logs, rock cores, burial history,
petrophysical measurements from well logs, etc. Natural fracture patterns and the regional stress field
are also mapped using such multi-domain, multi-scale information as borehole images and 2D and 3D
seismic surveys, which are then used to develop and calibrate fracture propagation models (Figure 2, left
panel, 2. Fracture Propagation). The mechanical earth models may also be used to generate maps to asses
drilling, fracturing, and operational risks. Integrating the hydraulic fracturing models (Figure 2, left panel,
4. Hydraulic Fracturing Model) developed through integration of the geologic and structural models with
production simulation models and risk maps (Figure 2, left panel, 3. Production) allows decision makers to
assess how different completion strategies will perform and determine the optimum stimulation plan.
Microseismic monitoring provides a valuable tool to evaluate hydraulic fracture treatments in real-time
and its use in planning and managing reservoir development has increased dramatically. Microseismic
event locations, source characteristics and attributes provide an immediate estimate of hydraulic fracturing
geometry that can be quickly evaluated with respect to completion plan and expected fracture growth (Figure
2, right panel). Microseismic event derived attributes such as fracture azimuth, height and length, location
and complexity, are used to determine the extent of fracture coverage of the reservoir target and effective
stimulated volume, as well as in diagnosing under-stimulated sections of the reservoir and in planning
re-stimulation of under-producing perforations and wells. Microseismic event locations are also key in
avoiding hazards during stimulation, e.g. faults, karst, aquifers, etc. Modifications to treatment plans are
commonly made because of microseismic interpretations.
Additionally, microseismic monitoring results are used in updating and calibrating geologic and structural
models used in planning completions. Advanced information about the inelastic deformation of the fracture
source (fracture plane orientation and slip) that generates the microseismic signal is obtained through
moment tensor inversion. The moment tensor can describe any source type, e.g. explosion, tensile crack
4 SPE-188173-MS

opening or closing, slip on a plane or any combination thereof. Since hydraulic fracture microseismicity is
the result of high-pressure injection of fluids and proppant to open fracture paths, moment tensor inversion
can be used to determine fracture opening and closing events from shear displacements, providing valuable
information to engineers as to whether their fractures pathways are open or closed. Moment tensors also
provide a direct measurement of the local stress-strain regime, fracture orientations, and changes to the local
stresses and fracture orientation through time that can be used to develop and calibrate discrete fracture
network (DFN) models (Yu et al., 2014).
Integrated workflows leveraging multi-scale, multi-domain measurements and microseismic
interpretation enables optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment for increased production. These
integrated completions planning workflows use a wide variety of information about the geology (e.g.,
lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock
properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation) to improve hydraulic fracturing models. This leads
to improved hydraulic fracture stimulations, completion plans, well placement and ultimately, improved
production. For example, microseismic event locations and attributes may be integrated and compared with
treatment pressure records, proppant concentration, and injection rate to better evaluate the completion plan
(Downie et al., 2015).
Here we present the results of several hydraulic fracture stimulations in various geological environments
that show the workflow from planning, monitoring, evaluations and calibration of improved hydraulic
fracture models. We illustrate that in most cases, the final fracture system geometry is complex
and asymmetric, largely governed by stress, geologic discontinuities, rock fabric, etc. Ultimately, we
demonstrate that ignoring the geology (e.g., lithology, stress contrast, natural fracturing, structural or
depositional dip, faulting), and the associated rock properties, (e.g., noise, slowness, anisotropy, attenuation)
can potentially lead to poor stimulation and sub-optimal production performance.

Completions Planning using Completion Quality and Reservoir Quality to

Characterize Basin Complexity
Heterogeneity along the wellbore and across a field can be characterized using reservoir quality (RQ)
and completions quality (CQ) indices (Baihly et al. 2010; Cipolla et al, 2011; Gurmen et al, 2016). The
reservoir quality index (RQ) characterizes expected reservoir productivity through parameters including
gas- or oil-in-place, total and effective porosity, permeability, irreducible water saturation, pore pressure
and hydrocarbon saturation, viscosity, and maturity. The completions quality index (CQ), derived from
mechanical earth models, incorporates the in-situ state of stress, formation elastic properties to help
characterize the potential to generate sufficient hydraulic fracture surface area and connectivity to permit
sustained hydrocarbon flow from the formation to the wellbore at economic rates. The in-situ state of stress
includes information about ordering, orientation, anisotropy in near and far field regions relative to the
wellbore, which are dependent on the elastic properties (e.g. Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio), pore
pressure, tectonic stress and strain, faults and heterogeneity in those properties. The near-borehole stresses
may have been altered during drilling and can impact perforation efficiency, fracture initiation, fracture
width and geometry, and potential for fines production. Far-field stresses will also impact fracture geometry,
containment, orientation, conductivity and complexity. Fracture conductivity may also be impacted by
the formation clay content and type. The combining of the CQ and RQ into composite quality index
classes(CQI), using the completions advisor method of Cipolla et al. (2011), provides a way to classify
regions of the wellbore and basin based on their production and hydraulic fracturing characteristics.
To address basin complexity, Gurmen et al. (2016) described an integrated completions planning
workflow that incorporates the geologic information about the reservoir and completions quality variation
along the wellbore and laterally within the basin to improve hydraulic fracturing completions and improve
production. Three CQ classes were introduced to characterize the risk of developing hydraulic fracture
SPE-188173-MS 5

complexity in the horizontal plane and the associated impact on well delivery and production performance.
The CQ classes indicate the expected hydraulic fracture geometry at a given location and are analyzed
in the context of a wellbore trajectory in a given local stress state and rock fabric. CQ class 1 denotes
locations where conditions lead to the formation of vertical hydraulic fractures (typically in regions where
the overburden stress in the local maximum stress, minimal interference from rock fabric). CQ class 2
denotes locations where conditions lead to the formation of a T-shaped or twist/turn in the hydraulic fracture
(typically where the overburden stress is intermediate to the principal horizontal stresses and has minimal
rock fabric influence). CQ class 3 denotes locations where conditions lead to the formation of hydraulic
fracture with predominantly horizontal components (typically where the overburden stress is less than the
principal horizontal stresses and/or has complicated local horizontal rock fabrics). CQ Class 3 regions are
at high risk of forming hydraulic fractures with predominantly horizontal components and results in a high
risk of screen out and poor production performance due to insufficient vertical connectivity to the reservoir.
The CQ classes are calculated at a local level as a function of the stress state, rock fabric, and completion
design:
(1)
These CQ classes can be mapped along the wellbore (see Figure 3, far left column) (Gurmen et al, 2016)
and spatially throughout a basin using seismic derived mechanical earth models (see Figure 4) (Aziz et
al. 2015). Mapping the heterogeneity of CQ classes can aid the optimal placement of cluster spacing and
fracture staging to target preferred RQ and CQ regions and improving production performance.

Figure 3—Example of completions quality classes (right-most column) in

the Khazzan sandstone field, Oman (modified from Gurmen et al., 2016)
6 SPE-188173-MS

Figure 4—Completions quality side view (left panel) and map view (right
panel) for a region in northern Kuwait (modified from Aziz et al. 2015)

Similar workflows have been used in other regions with complex geology and geomechanics, which
subsequently resulted in significant increases in production performance (e.g. Babatunde et al. 2013;
Ejofodomi et al. 2014; Wigger et al. 2014; Al-Kharraa 2015). These areas include the Middle East and
North Africa, and Argentina that experience severe compression. The heterogeneity and complex structural,
stratigraphic and rock properties of these basins directly impacts the effectiveness of hydraulic fracturing
treatment and production.

Microseismic Monitoring in Complex Geology for Rapid Completions

Evaluation
During hydraulic fracture stimulations, real-time microseismic monitoring is a key tool used to map fracture
development and to rapidly evaluate stimulation performance (Figure 2 right panel). Thus, its use in
planning and managing reservoir development has increased dramatically. Microseismic event locations,
source characteristics and other attributes provide an immediate estimate of fracturing extent that can be
quickly compared to the completion plan. Microseismic event derived attributes such as fracture azimuth,
height and length, location and complexity are typically used to determine the extent of fracturing of the
target formation and effective stimulated volume, as well as in diagnosing under-stimulated sections of the
reservoir. Microseismic event locations also are key in avoiding hazards during stimulation, e.g. faults, karst,
aquifers, etc. Given the information from real-time microseismic monitoring, mechanical earth models and
completions plans can be made in near real-time.
Zakhour et al. (2015) shows an example of a hydraulic fracture treatment, in the Eagle Ford shale, that
used microseismic monitoring results to rapidly evaluate and modify completions plans in a region crossed
by faults. The Eagle Ford Shale is an upper Cretaceous hydrocarbon bearing marl in south Texas that
varies in thickness from 50-300 ft (15-91 m) and is bounded by the lower Cretaceous Buda Limestone and
overlain by the Austin Chalk. The formation has relatively low clay content and a calcite volume greater
than 50%, which combined with the highly laminated, impermeable and anisotropic nature of the reservoir
makes designing an effective completions plan challenging. Two wells (labelled A and B) were drilled with
horizontal laterals running parallel to each other approximately 330 ft (100 m) apart that cross several faults
while targeting a thin interval of the Eagle Ford shale.(see Figure 5).
SPE-188173-MS 7

Figure 5—Side view of the well geometry of a two well hydraulic fracturing treatment in the Eagle Ford shale. The treatment
wells intersected a major fault in the middle of the laterals and some minor antithetic fault near the toe. Monitoring of
treatment of wells A and B was done using an array with 12, 3-component geophones. (modified from Zakhour et al., 2015)

To aid the completions design, a full suite of logs was run in the lateral of well B to collect key
geomechanical and petrophysical rock properties of the formations and assess reservoir quality and
completion quality. Good and poor reservoir quality and log-derived completions quality parameters were
determined along the well, in a manner not dissimilar to the methods described above. This was then used
to aid in optimizing stage intervals and perforation cluster placement, with the lateral of well B divided into
frac stages with similar log-derived geomechanical properties with perforation clusters placed in ideally
lower stress portions of the lateral (Figure 6). Figure 6 shows the suite of logs in well B (columns 1-7);
log-derived CQ, RQ and composite indices (columns 10-12) with the chosen perforation intervals (columns
13-14). The perforation intervals based on a composite quality index (column 14) are designed toreduce the
differential stresses across clusters in comparison to the geometrical completions designthat is used in well
A (column 13). Both wells include a buffer around the fault zone where no perforations are placed.
8 SPE-188173-MS

Figure 6—Well B log suite, CQ, RQ and composite indices with the chosen perforation intervals (right 2 columns). The
perforation intervals based on a CQI index show changes in placement with respect to the geometrical completion
design which in theory should reduce the differential stresses across clusters. (modified from Zakhour et al., 2015)

Microseismic monitoring was then used to help evaluate the completions in well A and B, with event
location done using an array of 3-component geophones located in the vertical of well C (Figure 5). The
observed microseismic events were well bounded within the Austin Chalk and Eagle Ford formations.
Though, examination of the individual stages show indications of unexpected formation packing, potential
screenouts and abnormal distributions of microseismic activity. Toe-ward stages displayed the expected
microseismic activity and pressure responses for normal hydraulic fracturing treatments. Near both sets
of faults the microseismic events align to the fault, pressure increases and less proppant was placed. Near
the fault zone, the geometric completions plan of well A only has 4-11% of proppant placement achieved,
while the engineered completions plan of well B shows a 76-100% proppant placement and more normal
pressures than similarly located stages of well A. The strong alignment of events with the major fault led
to real-time decisions to skip stages to avoid any loss of treatment fluid. The faults also act as a barrier that
limits the fracture height growth and desired conductivity of the fracture network, which is to be avoided.
The microseismic event growth also shows the changes in the stress orientation in the treatment region
that occur when crossing faults. The microseismic derived hydraulic fracture dimensions show that events
align along azimuth ~N37-40°E near the fault in the middle of the lateral, while the later stages are rotated
to ~N64-84°E (Figure 8), indicating a rotation in the principal stresses. Further information regarding the
stress state could be obtained from moment tensor inversion, however the monitoring geometry in this case
did not allow for determination of moment tensor solutions.
SPE-188173-MS 9

Figure 7—Side view of microseismic events detected during hydraulic fracture treatment of well A and
B with respect to the Austin Chalk, Eagle Ford shale and Buda limestone surfaces. Major and minor
antithetic faults are show in addition to the location of the monitor well. (modified from Zakhour et al., 2015)

Figure 8—Microseismic fracture dimensions for well A (left panel) and well B (right panel). (modified from Zakhour et al., 2015)

Microseismic monitoring has been utilized in the Middle East region to support completion optimization
during appraisal phases of shale and tight gas projects. Bartko et al (2015) integrated microseismic
monitoring and production logs to evaluate various hydraulic fracturing technologies in a horizontal well
completed with a cemented liner in a shale play in Saudi Arabia (Figure 9). Although direct comparison
of the fracturing technologies is complicated by the heterogeneity of the reservoir quality and completion
quality along the length of the wellbore, this approach provided an understanding of the fracture geometry
and upward fracture growth which aided optimization of future treatments in this shale formation. The
authors recommended limiting the number of treatment variables to improve interpretation of the results.
10 SPE-188173-MS

Figure 9—Microseismic monitoring integrated with production logs to evaluate

fracturing technologies in a shale play in Saudi Arabia (Bartko et al, 2015)

KacKenzie et al (2013) utilized microseismic monitoring to evaluate various hydraulic fracturing

technologies in a horizontal well during appraisal of the Barik tight gas reservoir in the Sultanate of Oman.
The microseismic events demonstrated relatively planar transverse fractures aligned with the expected
principal stress direction and an asymmetric fracture in stage 3 (Figure 10). The microseismic event activity
demonstrated vertical fracture height growth across siltstone/shale layers, thereby achieving good reservoir
contact from top to bottom. This verification of good vertical reservoir contact addressed a key uncertainty
of the appraisal program and provided key information for optimizing future fracturing treatments in the
field.

Figure 10—Microseismic monitoring illustrating fracture asymmetry in stage 3 (left panel)

and good vertical reservoir contact in stage 4 (right panel) during multistage hydraulic
fracturing of the Barik tight gas formation in the Sultanate of Oman (KacKenzie at al, 2013)

Briner et al (2016) presented the use of microseismic monitoring to evaluate performance of fracturing
treatments in an open-hole multistage completion in a challenging HPHT environment under strike-slip
SPE-188173-MS 11

condition in the Amin tight gas sandstone formation in the Sultanate of Oman. The reservoir is located
at a depth of 4,500 to 5,000 m (14,763 and 16,404 ft) and has temperatures up to 175C (347F). To
enable successful microseismic monitoring under these extreme conditions, global best practices and local
experience were applied to the geophone selection and operational procedures. Results of the multistage
treatment in the open hole packer/frac sleeve completion are shown in Figure 11, which demonstrates that
stages 3, 4, and 5 all treated the same zone. The lack of isolation between stages was confirmed by tracer
logs. Further evaluation of the geomechanics and fracture initiation for this case indicates the likelihood
that the hydraulic fractures initiated longitudinally at the wellbore and grew across the packers. Although
the horizontal wellbore was drilled parallel to the minimum horizontal stress direction to enable transverse
fractures, hydraulic fractures are expected to initiate longitudinally in an open hole completion in this strike-
slip environment before turning to align with the far-field stresses (Waters et al, 2016). This case highlights a
risk associated with applying open-hole multistage completions in a strike slip environment and is consistent
with the completion design recommendations provided for CQ Class 2 by Gurmen et al (2016). More
advanced microseismic interpretation such as moment tensor solutions could provide further insight into
the root cause of stage overlap in this case.

Figure 11—Microseismic events indicating poor stage isolation in an open-hole multistage

completion in strike-slip environment in the Sultanate of Oman (Briner eta l, 2016)

Moment Tensor Solutions and Their Insights Into Hydraulic Fracture Growth
Geometry permitting, moment tensor inversion can provide advanced information about the inelastic
deformation of the fracture source (fracture plane orientation and slip) that generates the microseismic
signal. The moment tensor can describe any the deformation types of the microseismic source (e.g.,
explosion, tensile crack opening or closing, slip on a plane or any combination thereof). This can be
used to help determine fracture opening and closing events from shear displacements, providing valuable
information to engineers as to whether their fractures pathways are open or closed. Moment tensors also
provide a direct measurement of the local stress-strain regime, fracture orientations, and changes to the local
stresses and fracture orientation and give insight into the stratigraphic and structural factors that control
fracture propagation through time (e.g. Maxwell et al., 2015; Rutledge et al., 2015; Staněk et al., 2015) The
insights into hydraulic fracture growth obtained from moment tensor solutions can then be used to develop
and calibrate discrete fracture network (DFN) models (Yu et al., 2014).
While much of the fracture growth illuminated by microseismic event locations may be controlled by the
regional stresses, there are also cases where fracture network growth is primarily driven by local stresses,
rock fabric, and rock properties of the different formations. Rutledge et al., (2015) demonstrates how
moment tensor solutions can illustrate the controls imposed by stratigraphic layering on the growth of
hydraulic fractures and provide insight into the mechanisms of that growth. For example, moment tensor
12 SPE-188173-MS

solutions for local stress controlled hydraulic-fracture microseismic events mayexhibit fairly uniform source
mechanisms along the length of the microseismic event cloud, with typically strike-slip or dip-slip events
(Rutledge et al., 2015). The dominant mode of deformation for these events is shear with one nodal plane
closely aligned to the principal-stress direction (<15°) (Figure 12). By contrast, in a hydraulic fracture
induced system dominantly controlled by regional stresses, one would expect to see in the microseismic
events a diverse range of focal source mechanisms optimally oriented for shear deformation (~30° from
the principal stress direction).

Figure 12—Aligned microseismic events (modified from Rutledge et al., 2015)

Three case-studies of microseismic event populations with principal-stress aligned dip-slip and/or strike-
slip mechanisms are described in Rutledge et al. 2015. A hydraulic fracture treatment in the Barnett
Shale illustrates the aligned dip-slip events (Figure 13). Hydraulic fracture stimulation of two perforation
intervals 200 ft apart were simultaneously treated and monitored by a 20-level vertical array of 3-component
geophones. Events were located showing the geometry of the fractures. Both intervals produced vertical
fractures with bands of events at separate depths with an aseismic zone between the bands. The events
occurring early during treatment, located in the lower band spreading laterally with most growth occurring
at the margins of the leading edges. The growth of the events into the shallowest intervals occurs in the
later stages of treatment. The first-motion and amplitude patterns of the mapped events were used to
resolve the focal mechanisms of the microseismic fracture events, which indicate two populations of dip-
slip mechanisms with a vertical modal plane striking parallel to the trend of the microseismic events and
to the regional SHmax, but with opposite sense of slip.
SPE-188173-MS 13

Figure 13—(a) Map view and (b) side view of microseismic locations
from the Barnett Shale. (modified from Rutledge et al., 2015)

Similar to the Barnett Shale case, microseismic event populations from the Carthage Cotton Valley and
Sawyer Canyon Sands gas fields in eastern and southwestern Texas, respectively, show alignment of events
near to the known SHmax direction in bands of different depths separated by aseismic zones (Figure 14).
Focal mechanism solutions indicate strike-slip mechanisms oriented within about 10° of the event trend and
SHmax and including left-lateral and right-lateral mechanisms for the Cotton Valley dataset and oriented
with in 10° of the event trend with left-lateral mechanisms for the Canyon Sands dataset.
To explain how these regular dip-slip and strike-slip microseismic events are generated the author
proposes a model of vertical hydraulic fracture growth through flat-lying, layered stratigraphy. The
boundaries between the formation layers acts as mechanical discontinuities, while the vertical hydraulic
fracture acts like the deformation of a joint through layered rock. The aligned dip-slip mechanisms represent
the vertically propagating hydraulic fracture stepping-over when a bedding plane is reached, which causes
shearing along that bedding plane. The strike-slip mechanism represents the breakup of the hydraulic
fracture into arrays of en echelon cracks near bedding surfaces (fringe cracks) respectively.
14 SPE-188173-MS

Figure 14—Microseismic events from the Cotton Valley (left) and Canyon Sands (right) (modified from Rutledge et al., 2015)

This contrasts with the explanation that microseismic deformation generally results from activation of
the natural fracture system and release of tectonic stress through leak off and pore-pressure coupling into
the surrounding rock. The traditional explanation of hydraulic fracture seismicity holds that increased
pore pressure reduces the effective normal stress and allows the rock to fail more easily. This mechanism
would predict a diverse range of focal mechanisms aligned optimally for shear deformation (~30° from
the principal stress direction). The alignment at low angles to the SHmax of the Barnett Shale, Cotton Valley
and Canyon Sands source mechanisms is problematic with this explanation since by reducing pore pressure
the failure is likely to occur at higher angles. While changes in the local stress caused by the fracture
opening could explain the conjugate strike-slip shearing in the Cotton Valley, the Canyon Sands shows no
conjugate shearing, only left-lateral displacement. The geometry and source mechanisms describe indicate
that microseismicity is associated more directly with near-field stress/strain conditions and mechanical
stratigraphy of the formations in the treatment region.

Microseismic Fracture Network Modeling Insights Into Fracture Growth and

Completions Planning
The insights that microseismic locations, source parameters, and moment tensor solutions have provided
are invaluable to accurate models of hydraulic fracture network growth used in planning stimulations. They
provided constraints on the local stress-strain regime, fracture orientations, and changes to the local stresses.
Additionally, information derived from microseismic moment tensor solutions has helped advance models
of hydraulic fracture networks and predicted flow path complexity. Observations of microseismic locations
and moment tensor solutions allowed such models to progress from the over simplified single, large planar
fracture to that of a complex fracture network (Maxwell et al. 2002; Cipolla et al. 2008; Maxwell et al. 2015).
These complex discrete fracture network (DFN) models are generated from a variety of information
including from seismic ANT tracking volumes, FMI image logs, etc. DFNs can also be extracted
from microseismic event locations and from the fracture plane positions and orientations derived from
microseismic moment tensor solutions (Yu et al. 2015) (Figure 15). These microseismic calibrated discrete
fracture network (DFN) models give a more realistic model of hydraulic fracture growth, which can be used
SPE-188173-MS 15

as input to reservoir simulation, completion and stimulation models (e.g. unconventional fracture models)
to aid in treatment planning.

Figure 15—DFN network derived from microseismic events and moment tensor solutions. Example from a hydraulic
fracture stimulation in the Cardium formation, west central Alberta, Canada. (modified from Yu et al. (2015)

These unconventional fracture model (UFM) simulations incorporate a variety of information about the
formation and treatment properties to simulate the expected hydraulic fracture response to a treatment plan.
Some of those properties include the stress state, elastic properties (Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, etc.),
porosity and permeability of the formation, natural fractures, which can be obtained from a DFN, seismic,
borehole logs, etc. In modeling fracture growth, the UFM takes into account material balance, fluid and
proppant transport, pressure calculations and interaction among simultaneously growing fractures (stress
shadows).
UFM simulations may be used to test different fracture geometries resulting from different well and
completion designs. In calibrating a UFM, engineers can use treatment data such as pump pressure, fluid
volumes and proppant loadings to guide numerical calculations and use the observed microseismic events
to constrain the models. These UFM simulations yield predictions of stimulated fracture geometry and
conductivity distributions that engineers use to iteratively calibrate the model, adjusting the UFM input
parameters to minimize the difference between fracture geometry predictions and observed microseismic
event locations and deformation.
16 SPE-188173-MS

Once calibrated, the hydraulic fracture geometries predicted by the UFM can be incorporated into
future reservoir simulations. Engineers use the calibrated reservoir models to forecast the hydrocarbon
recovery and to perform sensitivity analysis, varying parameters such as vertical well placement, lateral
well landing, the number of stages and the number of perforation clusters per stage, perforation interval
selection, treatment schedule, reservoir parameters such as permeability and porosity, etc. Additionally, the
UFM simulation models can be used to examine the treatment and formation parameters that could result
in anomalous microseismic patters(e.g., gaps, fault activation, asymmetry, offset well interactions).
These more rigorous and detailed UFM models are better at predicting the complicated fracture pattern
than the simple models based on more simple bi-wing, radial and planar fracture system. For example,
Yu et al. (2015) shows an example of the results of a UFM simulation calibrated with a DFN derived
from microseismic observations of hydraulic fracture stimulations in the Cardium formation, west central
Alberta, Canada (Figure 16). The fractures generated from the microseismic DFN calibrated UFM and
expected treating pressures are a better match to the observed data than the predictions generated by the
planar fracture model.

Figure 16—Comparison of fractures generated from a UFM calibrated using a DFN extracted from microseismic data (left
panel) and fractures generated from more simple planer fracture simulation (right panel) (modified from Yu et al. (2015).

Summary
The geologic, stratigraphic, rock fabric, and stress state of tectonically complex settings can greatly
influence the initiation and ultimate geometry of hydraulic fracture networks. The heterogeneity and
complex reservoir properties directly impacts the ability to initiate hydraulic fracture growth and generate
a fracture network with the sufficient reservoir contact and wellbore connectivity to enable production.
Integrating accurate models of geologic complexity with workflows for developing and evaluating
completions strategies is key to producing plans that are effective in generating economically viable
production.
SPE-188173-MS 17

Microseismic monitoring of hydraulic fracture stimulations provides an important toolfor optimization

of completion designs and enables real-time evaluation of fracturing extent that can be used to quickly
adaptcompletion plans to subsurface heterogeneity. Advanced analysis of microseismic events and moment
tensor inversion can provide additional information about the inelastic deformation of the fracture source
(fracture plane orientation and slip) that generates the microseismic signal. This provides information
about deformation type of the microseismic source and the stress field that can be used in calibrating
unconventional fracture models (UFM) used in planning stimulations. These more geologically and
geomechanically rigorous, detailed UFM models are better at predicting the complicated fracture pattern
than the simplified planar fracture system models.
Microseismic monitoring is a valuable tool to help address the greater uncertainty in hydraulic
fracture geometry and production performance in complex basins. Although implementation may be more
challenging in exploration and appraisal phases due to the availability of offset wells for monitoring,
operators are leveraging microseismic data to help accelerate the learning curve in challenging plays.

References
Al-Kharraa, H., Al-Ameer, A., Al-Qahtani, F. et al. 2015. Integration of Petrophysical and Geomechanical Properties
forEnhanced Fracture Design. Presented at the SPE Saudi Arabia Section Annual Technical Symposium and
Exhibition, AlKhobar, Saudi Arabia, 21–23 April. SPE-178032-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/178032-MS.
Aziz, S., Subbiah, S.K. et al. 2015. Comprehensive Geomechanical Model for Field Development for Drilling and
CompletionOptimization in Carbonate and its’ Impact on Production. SEG/SPE Workshop, Monitoring Giant
Carbonate Field: Fad orFuture? Abu Dhabi, UAE, 13–25 April.
Babatunde, A., Aso, I.I., Terry, I.J. et al. 2013. Stimulation Design for Unconventional Resources. Oilfield Review 25
(2): 34-46.
Baihly, J. D., Malpani, R., Edwards, C. et al. 2010. Unlocking the Shale Mystery: How Lateral Measurements and Well
Placement Impact Completions and Resultant Production. Presented at the Tight Gas Completions Conference, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, 2–3 November. SPE-138427-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/138427-MS.
Bartko, K. M., Coffin, B., & Tineo, R. (2015, March 8). Technology-driven Approach to Develop Shale Gas in Saudi
Arabia. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/172695-MS
Briner, A., Nadezdhin, S., El Gihani, M., Al-Wadhahi, T., El-Taha, Y. C., Harrasi, O., & Kelkar, S. (2016, September 26).
Pushing to the Extreme&mdash;Microseismic Monitoring of Hydraulic Fracturing in an HP/HT Horizontal Well in
the Sultanate of Oman. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/181506-MS
Cipolla, C. L., Warpinski, N.R., Mayerhofer, M.J. 2008. Hydraulic fracture complexity: Diagnosis, remediation, and
exploitation. Presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, Society of
Petroleum Engineers
Cipolla, C. L., Lewis, R. E., Maxwell, S. C. et al. 2011. Appraising Unconventional Resource Plays: Separating
ReservoirQuality from Completion Effectiveness. Presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference,
Bangkok, Thailand, 15–17 November. IPCT-14677-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-14677-MS.
Downie, R., Le Calvez, J., Dean, B., and Rutledge, J. 2015. Correlation and interpretation of microseismic responses using
pressure measurements in offset observation wells. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference,
The Woodlands, 3-5 February, SPE-173386-MS.
Ejofodomi, E. A., Varela, R. A., Cavazzoli, G. et al. 2014. Development of an Optimized Completion Strategy
in the VacaMuerta Shale with an Anisotropic Geomechanical Model. Presented at the SPE/EAGE European
Unconventional ResourcesConference and Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, 25–27 February. SPE-167806-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/167806-MS.
Gurmen, M. Nihat; Fredd, Christopher N.; Batmaz, Taner; Kurniadi, Stevanus dwi; Zeidi, Omar Al; Kanneganti, Kousic;
Nasreldin, Gaisoni; Khan, Safdar; Tineo, Roberto; Subbiah, Surej Kumar. 2016. Completion Quality Classes to
Characterize Basin Complexity: New Framework to Incorporate Localized and Regional Reservoir Heterogeneity into
Field Exploration and Development Optimization. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/181659-MS
Hryb, D., Archimio, A., Badessich, M., Ejofodomi, E, Diaz, A., Cavazzoli, G., Pichon, S. 2014. Unlocking the true
Potential of the Vaca Muerta Shale via an Integrated Completion Optimization Approach. Presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 24-27 October, SPE-170580-MS.
Kuuskraa, V., Stevens, S., and Moodhe, K., 2013. Technically Recoverable Shale Oil andShale Gas Resources: An
Assessmentof 137 Shale Formations in 41Countries Outside the United States Prepared for: U.S. Energy Information
Administration, June 2013, by Advanced Resources International, Inc.
18 SPE-188173-MS

MacKenzie, A., Clark, R. A., & Al Anboori, A. (2013, January 28). Microseismic Leads to Improved Understanding of
Hydraulic Fracturing in a Sultanate of Oman Tight Gas Well. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/164007-MS
Maxwell, S., Urbancic, T.I., Steinsberger, N., Zinno, R., 2002. Microseismic imaging of hydraulic fracture complexity in
the Barnett Shale. Presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Maxwell, S., Chorney, D. and Goodfellow, S., 2015. Microseismic geomechanics of hydraulic-fracture networks: Insights
into mechanisms of microseismic sources. The Leading Edge34(8)http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle34080904.1
Miller, C., Hamilton, D., Sturm, S., Waters, G., Taylor, T., Le Calvez, J., and Singh, M. 2013. Evaluating the Impact
of Mineralogy, Natural Fractures and In Situ Stresses on Hydraulically Induced Fracture System Geometry in
Horizontal Shale Wells. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, Woodlands, 4-6 February,
SPE-163878-MS.
Rutledge, J., Yu X., and Leaney, S. 2015, James Rutledge, Xin Yu, and Scott Leaney 2015. Microseismic shearing driven
by hydraulic-fracture opening: An interpretation of source-mechanism trends." The Leading Edge, 34(8), 926–928,
930, 932–934. https://eureka.slb.com:2802/10.1190/tle34080926.1
Staněk, F., Jechumtálová, Z., Eisner, L. 2015. Microseismic geomechanics of hydraulic-fracture networks: Insights into
mechanisms of microseismic sources. The Leading Edge34(8)http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/tle34080904.1
Waters, G., & Weng, X. (2016, September 26). The Impact of Geomechanics and Perforations on Hydraulic Fracture
Initiation and Complexity in Horizontal Well Completions. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/181684-MS
Wigger, E., Viswanathan, A., Fisher, K. et al. 2014. Logging Solutions for Completion Optimization
in UnconventionalResource Plays. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 25 February. SPE-167726-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/167726-MS.
Yu, X., Rutledge, J., Leany, S., Sun, J., Pankaj, P., Weng, X., Onda, H., Donovan, M., Nielsen J., and Duhault, J.,
2015. Integration of microseismic data and an unconventional fracture modeling tool to generate the hydraulically
induced fracture modeling tool to generate the hydraulically induced fracture network: A case study from the Cardium
Formation, West Central Alberta, Canada, Presented at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, 20-22July. URTeC 2154594.
Yu, X., Rutledge, J., Leany, S., Maxwell, S., 2014. Discrete fracture network generation from microseismic data using
moment tensor constrained Hough transforms, Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference
held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 4-6 Feb. SPE 168582.
Zakhour, N. Sunwall, M., Benavidez, R., Hogarth, L., Xu, Jian,2015. Real-Time use of microseismic monitoring for
horizontal completion optimization across a major fault in the Eagle Ford formation. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic
Fracturing Technology Conference, Woodlands, TX, USA, 2-5 February 2015, SPE-173353-MS.