Loading…
On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity
To characterize the stress field at the Grimsel Test Site (GTS) underground rock laboratory, a series of hydrofracturing and overcoring tests were performed. Hydrofracturing was accompanied by seismic monitoring using a network of highly sensitive piezosensors and accelerometers that were able to re...
Saved in:
Published in: | Solid earth (Göttingen) 2018-01, Vol.9 (1), p.39-61 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763 |
container_end_page | 61 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 39 |
container_title | Solid earth (Göttingen) |
container_volume | 9 |
creator | Gischig, Valentin Samuel Doetsch, Joseph Maurer, Hansruedi Krietsch, Hannes Amann, Florian Evans, Keith Frederick Nejati, Morteza Jalali, Mohammadreza Valley, Benoît Obermann, Anne Christine Wiemer, Stefan Giardini, Domenico |
description | To characterize the stress field at the Grimsel Test Site (GTS) underground rock laboratory, a series of hydrofracturing and overcoring tests were performed. Hydrofracturing was accompanied by seismic monitoring using a network of highly sensitive piezosensors and accelerometers that were able to record small seismic events associated with metre-sized fractures. Due to potential discrepancies between the hydrofracture orientation and stress field estimates from overcoring, it was essential to obtain high-precision hypocentre locations that reliably illuminate fracture growth. Absolute locations were improved using a transverse isotropic P-wave velocity model and by applying joint hypocentre determination that allowed for the computation of station corrections. We further exploited the high degree of waveform similarity of events by applying cluster analysis and relative relocation. Resulting clouds of absolute and relative located seismicity showed a consistent east–west strike and 70° dip for all hydrofractures. The fracture growth direction from microseismicity is consistent with the principal stress orientations from the overcoring stress tests, provided that an anisotropic elastic model for the rock mass is used in the data inversions. The σ1 stress is significantly larger than the other two principal stresses and has a reasonably well-defined orientation that is subparallel to the fracture plane; σ2 and σ3 are almost equal in magnitude and thus lie on a circle defined by the standard errors of the solutions. The poles of the microseismicity planes also lie on this circle towards the north. Analysis of P-wave polarizations suggested double-couple focal mechanisms with both thrust and normal faulting mechanisms present, whereas strike-slip and thrust mechanisms would be expected from the overcoring-derived stress solution. The reasons for these discrepancies can be explained by pressure leak-off, but possibly may also involve stress field rotation around the propagating hydrofracture. Our study demonstrates that microseismicity monitoring along with high-resolution event locations provides valuable information for interpreting stress characterization measurements. |
doi_str_mv | 10.5194/se-9-39-2018 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bab81febfc034e5a88d55dbc2fbcd25c</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A524918708</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_bab81febfc034e5a88d55dbc2fbcd25c</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A524918708</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kl1rFDEUhgdRsLS98wcEvBKcNp8zyWUpfiwUCn5ch0xyspvtzGRNMtbFP2_WFXVBTC5yOHnOy8mb0zQvCL4SRPHrDK1qmWopJvJJc0Zkp1olqHr6V_y8ucx5i-vqetoLdtZ8v59R2QAaw_yABiiPADPKJUHOyAcYHTKzQ3ky49hma0ZAm71LZhmDRT4ZW5YEaJ3iY9mgMFc45FhS3NXrFO0DcpDCV3CVjROagk0xQ8g1CGV_0TzzZsxw-es8bz6_ffPp9n17d_9udXtz15r6sNJ2rGOM9d4SokjH5YCZsl4SCQPmhLq-BzfgzitrqeWOeyU643sC1Kq-6zt23qyOui6ard6lMJm019EE_TMR01qbVIIdQQ9mkMTD4C1mHISR0gnhBkv9YB0Vtmq9PGrtUvyyQC56G5c01_Y15YRjKThW_6OIUlhSjJn4Q62rrzrMvjpn7BSy1TeCckVkj2Wlrv5B1e2g2hhn8KHmTwpenRRUpsC3sjZLznr18cMp-_rIHj4mJ_C_7SFYH8ZKZ9BKM6UPY8V-ALwAvuc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1990820035</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Gischig, Valentin Samuel ; Doetsch, Joseph ; Maurer, Hansruedi ; Krietsch, Hannes ; Amann, Florian ; Evans, Keith Frederick ; Nejati, Morteza ; Jalali, Mohammadreza ; Valley, Benoît ; Obermann, Anne Christine ; Wiemer, Stefan ; Giardini, Domenico</creator><creatorcontrib>Gischig, Valentin Samuel ; Doetsch, Joseph ; Maurer, Hansruedi ; Krietsch, Hannes ; Amann, Florian ; Evans, Keith Frederick ; Nejati, Morteza ; Jalali, Mohammadreza ; Valley, Benoît ; Obermann, Anne Christine ; Wiemer, Stefan ; Giardini, Domenico</creatorcontrib><description>To characterize the stress field at the Grimsel Test Site (GTS) underground rock laboratory, a series of hydrofracturing and overcoring tests were performed. Hydrofracturing was accompanied by seismic monitoring using a network of highly sensitive piezosensors and accelerometers that were able to record small seismic events associated with metre-sized fractures. Due to potential discrepancies between the hydrofracture orientation and stress field estimates from overcoring, it was essential to obtain high-precision hypocentre locations that reliably illuminate fracture growth. Absolute locations were improved using a transverse isotropic P-wave velocity model and by applying joint hypocentre determination that allowed for the computation of station corrections. We further exploited the high degree of waveform similarity of events by applying cluster analysis and relative relocation. Resulting clouds of absolute and relative located seismicity showed a consistent east–west strike and 70° dip for all hydrofractures. The fracture growth direction from microseismicity is consistent with the principal stress orientations from the overcoring stress tests, provided that an anisotropic elastic model for the rock mass is used in the data inversions. The σ1 stress is significantly larger than the other two principal stresses and has a reasonably well-defined orientation that is subparallel to the fracture plane; σ2 and σ3 are almost equal in magnitude and thus lie on a circle defined by the standard errors of the solutions. The poles of the microseismicity planes also lie on this circle towards the north. Analysis of P-wave polarizations suggested double-couple focal mechanisms with both thrust and normal faulting mechanisms present, whereas strike-slip and thrust mechanisms would be expected from the overcoring-derived stress solution. The reasons for these discrepancies can be explained by pressure leak-off, but possibly may also involve stress field rotation around the propagating hydrofracture. Our study demonstrates that microseismicity monitoring along with high-resolution event locations provides valuable information for interpreting stress characterization measurements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1869-9529</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1869-9510</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1869-9529</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5194/se-9-39-2018</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Gottingen: Copernicus GmbH</publisher><subject>Accelerometers ; Analysis ; Anisotropic rocks ; Anisotropy ; Clouds ; Cluster analysis ; Computation ; Corrections ; Crack propagation ; Earth science ; Earthquakes ; Elastic anisotropy ; Experiments ; Exploitation ; Fracture mechanics ; Fractures ; Fractures (Geology) ; Geological faults ; Growth ; Hydraulic fracturing ; Hydraulics ; Inversions ; Laboratories ; Localization ; Locations (working) ; Measurement ; Monitoring ; Orientation ; P waves ; Permeability ; Planes ; Propagation ; Relocation ; Rock masses ; Rotation ; Seismic activity ; Seismic velocities ; Seismicity ; Solutions ; Stress ; Stress concentration ; Stress distribution ; Stress measurement ; Stress propagation ; Thrust ; Wave velocity ; Waveforms</subject><ispartof>Solid earth (Göttingen), 2018-01, Vol.9 (1), p.39-61</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Copernicus GmbH</rights><rights>Copyright Copernicus GmbH 2018</rights><rights>2018. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4632-0504 ; 0000-0002-9563-9645 ; 0000-0002-6057-6656 ; 0000-0001-6933-6301 ; 0000-0002-5573-7638 ; 0000-0002-2927-9557</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2414085409/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2414085409?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gischig, Valentin Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doetsch, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maurer, Hansruedi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krietsch, Hannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amann, Florian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Keith Frederick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nejati, Morteza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jalali, Mohammadreza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valley, Benoît</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Obermann, Anne Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiemer, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giardini, Domenico</creatorcontrib><title>On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity</title><title>Solid earth (Göttingen)</title><description>To characterize the stress field at the Grimsel Test Site (GTS) underground rock laboratory, a series of hydrofracturing and overcoring tests were performed. Hydrofracturing was accompanied by seismic monitoring using a network of highly sensitive piezosensors and accelerometers that were able to record small seismic events associated with metre-sized fractures. Due to potential discrepancies between the hydrofracture orientation and stress field estimates from overcoring, it was essential to obtain high-precision hypocentre locations that reliably illuminate fracture growth. Absolute locations were improved using a transverse isotropic P-wave velocity model and by applying joint hypocentre determination that allowed for the computation of station corrections. We further exploited the high degree of waveform similarity of events by applying cluster analysis and relative relocation. Resulting clouds of absolute and relative located seismicity showed a consistent east–west strike and 70° dip for all hydrofractures. The fracture growth direction from microseismicity is consistent with the principal stress orientations from the overcoring stress tests, provided that an anisotropic elastic model for the rock mass is used in the data inversions. The σ1 stress is significantly larger than the other two principal stresses and has a reasonably well-defined orientation that is subparallel to the fracture plane; σ2 and σ3 are almost equal in magnitude and thus lie on a circle defined by the standard errors of the solutions. The poles of the microseismicity planes also lie on this circle towards the north. Analysis of P-wave polarizations suggested double-couple focal mechanisms with both thrust and normal faulting mechanisms present, whereas strike-slip and thrust mechanisms would be expected from the overcoring-derived stress solution. The reasons for these discrepancies can be explained by pressure leak-off, but possibly may also involve stress field rotation around the propagating hydrofracture. Our study demonstrates that microseismicity monitoring along with high-resolution event locations provides valuable information for interpreting stress characterization measurements.</description><subject>Accelerometers</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Anisotropic rocks</subject><subject>Anisotropy</subject><subject>Clouds</subject><subject>Cluster analysis</subject><subject>Computation</subject><subject>Corrections</subject><subject>Crack propagation</subject><subject>Earth science</subject><subject>Earthquakes</subject><subject>Elastic anisotropy</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Exploitation</subject><subject>Fracture mechanics</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Fractures (Geology)</subject><subject>Geological faults</subject><subject>Growth</subject><subject>Hydraulic fracturing</subject><subject>Hydraulics</subject><subject>Inversions</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Localization</subject><subject>Locations (working)</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>Orientation</subject><subject>P waves</subject><subject>Permeability</subject><subject>Planes</subject><subject>Propagation</subject><subject>Relocation</subject><subject>Rock masses</subject><subject>Rotation</subject><subject>Seismic activity</subject><subject>Seismic velocities</subject><subject>Seismicity</subject><subject>Solutions</subject><subject>Stress</subject><subject>Stress concentration</subject><subject>Stress distribution</subject><subject>Stress measurement</subject><subject>Stress propagation</subject><subject>Thrust</subject><subject>Wave velocity</subject><subject>Waveforms</subject><issn>1869-9529</issn><issn>1869-9510</issn><issn>1869-9529</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kl1rFDEUhgdRsLS98wcEvBKcNp8zyWUpfiwUCn5ch0xyspvtzGRNMtbFP2_WFXVBTC5yOHnOy8mb0zQvCL4SRPHrDK1qmWopJvJJc0Zkp1olqHr6V_y8ucx5i-vqetoLdtZ8v59R2QAaw_yABiiPADPKJUHOyAcYHTKzQ3ky49hma0ZAm71LZhmDRT4ZW5YEaJ3iY9mgMFc45FhS3NXrFO0DcpDCV3CVjROagk0xQ8g1CGV_0TzzZsxw-es8bz6_ffPp9n17d_9udXtz15r6sNJ2rGOM9d4SokjH5YCZsl4SCQPmhLq-BzfgzitrqeWOeyU643sC1Kq-6zt23qyOui6ard6lMJm019EE_TMR01qbVIIdQQ9mkMTD4C1mHISR0gnhBkv9YB0Vtmq9PGrtUvyyQC56G5c01_Y15YRjKThW_6OIUlhSjJn4Q62rrzrMvjpn7BSy1TeCckVkj2Wlrv5B1e2g2hhn8KHmTwpenRRUpsC3sjZLznr18cMp-_rIHj4mJ_C_7SFYH8ZKZ9BKM6UPY8V-ALwAvuc</recordid><startdate>20180125</startdate><enddate>20180125</enddate><creator>Gischig, Valentin Samuel</creator><creator>Doetsch, Joseph</creator><creator>Maurer, Hansruedi</creator><creator>Krietsch, Hannes</creator><creator>Amann, Florian</creator><creator>Evans, Keith Frederick</creator><creator>Nejati, Morteza</creator><creator>Jalali, Mohammadreza</creator><creator>Valley, Benoît</creator><creator>Obermann, Anne Christine</creator><creator>Wiemer, Stefan</creator><creator>Giardini, Domenico</creator><general>Copernicus GmbH</general><general>Copernicus Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4632-0504</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9563-9645</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6057-6656</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6933-6301</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5573-7638</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2927-9557</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180125</creationdate><title>On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity</title><author>Gischig, Valentin Samuel ; Doetsch, Joseph ; Maurer, Hansruedi ; Krietsch, Hannes ; Amann, Florian ; Evans, Keith Frederick ; Nejati, Morteza ; Jalali, Mohammadreza ; Valley, Benoît ; Obermann, Anne Christine ; Wiemer, Stefan ; Giardini, Domenico</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Accelerometers</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Anisotropic rocks</topic><topic>Anisotropy</topic><topic>Clouds</topic><topic>Cluster analysis</topic><topic>Computation</topic><topic>Corrections</topic><topic>Crack propagation</topic><topic>Earth science</topic><topic>Earthquakes</topic><topic>Elastic anisotropy</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Exploitation</topic><topic>Fracture mechanics</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Fractures (Geology)</topic><topic>Geological faults</topic><topic>Growth</topic><topic>Hydraulic fracturing</topic><topic>Hydraulics</topic><topic>Inversions</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Localization</topic><topic>Locations (working)</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>Orientation</topic><topic>P waves</topic><topic>Permeability</topic><topic>Planes</topic><topic>Propagation</topic><topic>Relocation</topic><topic>Rock masses</topic><topic>Rotation</topic><topic>Seismic activity</topic><topic>Seismic velocities</topic><topic>Seismicity</topic><topic>Solutions</topic><topic>Stress</topic><topic>Stress concentration</topic><topic>Stress distribution</topic><topic>Stress measurement</topic><topic>Stress propagation</topic><topic>Thrust</topic><topic>Wave velocity</topic><topic>Waveforms</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gischig, Valentin Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doetsch, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maurer, Hansruedi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krietsch, Hannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amann, Florian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Keith Frederick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nejati, Morteza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jalali, Mohammadreza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valley, Benoît</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Obermann, Anne Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiemer, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giardini, Domenico</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Solid earth (Göttingen)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gischig, Valentin Samuel</au><au>Doetsch, Joseph</au><au>Maurer, Hansruedi</au><au>Krietsch, Hannes</au><au>Amann, Florian</au><au>Evans, Keith Frederick</au><au>Nejati, Morteza</au><au>Jalali, Mohammadreza</au><au>Valley, Benoît</au><au>Obermann, Anne Christine</au><au>Wiemer, Stefan</au><au>Giardini, Domenico</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity</atitle><jtitle>Solid earth (Göttingen)</jtitle><date>2018-01-25</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>39</spage><epage>61</epage><pages>39-61</pages><issn>1869-9529</issn><issn>1869-9510</issn><eissn>1869-9529</eissn><abstract>To characterize the stress field at the Grimsel Test Site (GTS) underground rock laboratory, a series of hydrofracturing and overcoring tests were performed. Hydrofracturing was accompanied by seismic monitoring using a network of highly sensitive piezosensors and accelerometers that were able to record small seismic events associated with metre-sized fractures. Due to potential discrepancies between the hydrofracture orientation and stress field estimates from overcoring, it was essential to obtain high-precision hypocentre locations that reliably illuminate fracture growth. Absolute locations were improved using a transverse isotropic P-wave velocity model and by applying joint hypocentre determination that allowed for the computation of station corrections. We further exploited the high degree of waveform similarity of events by applying cluster analysis and relative relocation. Resulting clouds of absolute and relative located seismicity showed a consistent east–west strike and 70° dip for all hydrofractures. The fracture growth direction from microseismicity is consistent with the principal stress orientations from the overcoring stress tests, provided that an anisotropic elastic model for the rock mass is used in the data inversions. The σ1 stress is significantly larger than the other two principal stresses and has a reasonably well-defined orientation that is subparallel to the fracture plane; σ2 and σ3 are almost equal in magnitude and thus lie on a circle defined by the standard errors of the solutions. The poles of the microseismicity planes also lie on this circle towards the north. Analysis of P-wave polarizations suggested double-couple focal mechanisms with both thrust and normal faulting mechanisms present, whereas strike-slip and thrust mechanisms would be expected from the overcoring-derived stress solution. The reasons for these discrepancies can be explained by pressure leak-off, but possibly may also involve stress field rotation around the propagating hydrofracture. Our study demonstrates that microseismicity monitoring along with high-resolution event locations provides valuable information for interpreting stress characterization measurements.</abstract><cop>Gottingen</cop><pub>Copernicus GmbH</pub><doi>10.5194/se-9-39-2018</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4632-0504</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9563-9645</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6057-6656</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6933-6301</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5573-7638</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2927-9557</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1869-9529 |
ispartof | Solid earth (Göttingen), 2018-01, Vol.9 (1), p.39-61 |
issn | 1869-9529 1869-9510 1869-9529 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bab81febfc034e5a88d55dbc2fbcd25c |
source | Publicly Available Content Database |
subjects | Accelerometers Analysis Anisotropic rocks Anisotropy Clouds Cluster analysis Computation Corrections Crack propagation Earth science Earthquakes Elastic anisotropy Experiments Exploitation Fracture mechanics Fractures Fractures (Geology) Geological faults Growth Hydraulic fracturing Hydraulics Inversions Laboratories Localization Locations (working) Measurement Monitoring Orientation P waves Permeability Planes Propagation Relocation Rock masses Rotation Seismic activity Seismic velocities Seismicity Solutions Stress Stress concentration Stress distribution Stress measurement Stress propagation Thrust Wave velocity Waveforms |
title | On the link between stress field and small-scale hydraulic fracture growth in anisotropic rock derived from microseismicity |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T19%3A52%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=On%20the%20link%20between%20stress%20field%20and%20small-scale%20hydraulic%20fracture%20growth%20in%20anisotropic%20rock%20derived%20from%20microseismicity&rft.jtitle=Solid%20earth%20(G%C3%B6ttingen)&rft.au=Gischig,%20Valentin%20Samuel&rft.date=2018-01-25&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=39&rft.epage=61&rft.pages=39-61&rft.issn=1869-9529&rft.eissn=1869-9529&rft_id=info:doi/10.5194/se-9-39-2018&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA524918708%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a519t-6363337fc1191648b039cf818eb0412d77edb06f9cc2c4d4f956af71e2c976763%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1990820035&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A524918708&rfr_iscdi=true |