Standard

A case study on receiver-clamping quality assessment from the seismic-interferometry processing of downhole seismic noise recordings. / Yaskevich, Sergey; Duchkov, Anton A.; Myasnikov, Artem.

In: Geophysics, Vol. 84, No. 3, 01.05.2019, p. B195-B203.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

BibTeX

@article{3532400f7dca45da81311b6617c00597,
title = "A case study on receiver-clamping quality assessment from the seismic-interferometry processing of downhole seismic noise recordings",
abstract = "For downhole microseismic monitoring of hydraulic fracturing, the acquisition is performed using a set of three-component (3C) seismic receivers attached firmly to the borehole wall by a clamping mechanism. Such an acquisition cannot be repeated, and it is focused on recording weak signals. Thus, proper installation of the receivers is especially crucial for microseismic applications. We have developed a case study of using a seismic-interferometry approach for assessing the receiver's installation quality from ambient-noise records. Crosscorrelation of one vertical receiver noise records with the others allows us to retrieve the direct body wave propagating along the receiver array. Our observations indicate that the inability to retrieve the direct body wave is an indicator of clamping issues. Our case study does not support the emergence-frequency hypothesis reported in the literature (that higher frequencies present in the retrieved body-wave spectrum imply better clamping quality). Another conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing provides a stable assessment of the clamping quality only for the vertical receivers. Thus, one gets only partial diagnostics of the clamping quality for the 3C downhole tool. This is important because the horizontal components may be affected more by the clamping issues compared with the vertical components. The overall conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing of noise records is recommended for the assessment of the downhole receiver installation prior to microseismic monitoring. It does not provide complete diagnostics but comes for free (does not need any additional technological operations or extra time).",
keywords = "acquisition, downhole receivers, interferometry, microseismic, tube wave, WAVE",
author = "Sergey Yaskevich and Duchkov, {Anton A.} and Artem Myasnikov",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2019",
month = may,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1190/geo2018-0293.1",
language = "English",
volume = "84",
pages = "B195--B203",
journal = "Geophysics",
issn = "0016-8033",
publisher = "SOC EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICISTS",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A case study on receiver-clamping quality assessment from the seismic-interferometry processing of downhole seismic noise recordings

AU - Yaskevich, Sergey

AU - Duchkov, Anton A.

AU - Myasnikov, Artem

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2019 Society of Exploration Geophysicists. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - For downhole microseismic monitoring of hydraulic fracturing, the acquisition is performed using a set of three-component (3C) seismic receivers attached firmly to the borehole wall by a clamping mechanism. Such an acquisition cannot be repeated, and it is focused on recording weak signals. Thus, proper installation of the receivers is especially crucial for microseismic applications. We have developed a case study of using a seismic-interferometry approach for assessing the receiver's installation quality from ambient-noise records. Crosscorrelation of one vertical receiver noise records with the others allows us to retrieve the direct body wave propagating along the receiver array. Our observations indicate that the inability to retrieve the direct body wave is an indicator of clamping issues. Our case study does not support the emergence-frequency hypothesis reported in the literature (that higher frequencies present in the retrieved body-wave spectrum imply better clamping quality). Another conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing provides a stable assessment of the clamping quality only for the vertical receivers. Thus, one gets only partial diagnostics of the clamping quality for the 3C downhole tool. This is important because the horizontal components may be affected more by the clamping issues compared with the vertical components. The overall conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing of noise records is recommended for the assessment of the downhole receiver installation prior to microseismic monitoring. It does not provide complete diagnostics but comes for free (does not need any additional technological operations or extra time).

AB - For downhole microseismic monitoring of hydraulic fracturing, the acquisition is performed using a set of three-component (3C) seismic receivers attached firmly to the borehole wall by a clamping mechanism. Such an acquisition cannot be repeated, and it is focused on recording weak signals. Thus, proper installation of the receivers is especially crucial for microseismic applications. We have developed a case study of using a seismic-interferometry approach for assessing the receiver's installation quality from ambient-noise records. Crosscorrelation of one vertical receiver noise records with the others allows us to retrieve the direct body wave propagating along the receiver array. Our observations indicate that the inability to retrieve the direct body wave is an indicator of clamping issues. Our case study does not support the emergence-frequency hypothesis reported in the literature (that higher frequencies present in the retrieved body-wave spectrum imply better clamping quality). Another conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing provides a stable assessment of the clamping quality only for the vertical receivers. Thus, one gets only partial diagnostics of the clamping quality for the 3C downhole tool. This is important because the horizontal components may be affected more by the clamping issues compared with the vertical components. The overall conclusion is that seismic-interferometry processing of noise records is recommended for the assessment of the downhole receiver installation prior to microseismic monitoring. It does not provide complete diagnostics but comes for free (does not need any additional technological operations or extra time).

KW - acquisition

KW - downhole receivers

KW - interferometry

KW - microseismic

KW - tube wave

KW - WAVE

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063795301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1190/geo2018-0293.1

DO - 10.1190/geo2018-0293.1

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85063795301

VL - 84

SP - B195-B203

JO - Geophysics

JF - Geophysics

SN - 0016-8033

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 19357527