Mapping the microseismic activity during a hydraulic treatment is widely used to determine the geometry of the stimulated fracture network. Microseismic maps provide reliable information on the development of fracture symmetry, half-length, azimuth, width and height, and their dependence on the treatment parameters and reservoir characteristics. Beyond that, these fracture geometries are used to better understand fracture modeling and even production characteristics.

Fiber-optic-based distributed temperature sensing (DTS) arrays provide almost immediate updates of the near-wellbore temperature distribution in approximately one-meter intervals. In injection treatments, the near-wellbore temperature distribution can be used to determine isolation effectiveness, the relative amount of fluid each perforation cluster takes, fracture initiation points, and effective fluid diversion. In production analysis, DTS measurements can quantify production rates from each perforation interval, crossflow rates while shut-in, and fluid types recovered from each perforation interval.

The detailed near-wellbore results available through DTS coupled with the far-field geometry acquired through microseismic mapping provide an accurate picture of the completion effectiveness. Microseismic mapping results often show adequate resolution over a large area but lack the fine resolution that would allow it to identify near-wellbore effects in the meter range. When modeling and interpreting the treatment geometry obtained by the microseismic-event distribution, it is important to include the correct near-wellbore effects, which are readily accessible through DTS measurements. Combining the two diagnostic tools is valuable for real-time decision making, post-treatment analysis, and production analysis to assess the completion effectiveness.

Incorrect assumptions about perforation breakdown, fracture-initiation points, interval isolation, or limited-entry effectiveness can lead to misinterpretations of the microseismic results. Using both diagnostic tools provides firm answers to the overall completion effectiveness. This paper focuses on three distinct aspects of combining the analysis of microseismic mapping and DTS. The first is the real-time aspect, wherein real-time decisions and adjustments are made during the fracture treatment with the objective of manipulating the results towards the desired outcome. The second is using both tools to perform more accurate postfracture analysis, including calibrated fracture modeling, entry effectiveness, correct interval spacing, and stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) analysis. The third area covered is combining these diagnostic tools with a production analysis, which is acquired through analysis of the temperature data.

You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.