Microseismic at HFTS2: A Story of Three Stimulated Wells

A microseismic data set was acquired at Hydraulic Fracturing Test Site 2 (HFTS2) in the Delaware Basin (Texas, USA) by the HFTS2 consortium as a part of data-collection program designed to help maximize the efficiency of hydraulic fracturing, understand the impacts of nearby depleted zones, and increase the production of hydrocarbons. Advanced methods of microseismic monitoring applied at HFTS2 include 1) native synchronization of five monitor arrays, 2) real-time location of microseismic events, 3) joint event-hypocenter/ velocity-model inversion that locates microseismic events simultaneously with constructing azimuthally anisotropic velocity models, 4) high-resolution reservoir imaging, utilizing microseismic events as downhole sources. HFTS2 microseismic data set illustrated the influence of geologic complexity, variations in treatment designs, and the presence of parent wells on the efficiency of hydraulic fracturing. Three Wolfcamp wells, Boxwood 1H, 2H, and 4H, were stimulated sequentially, exhibiting very different patterns of microseismicity. When the Boxwood 1H well is stimulated, its toe stages quickly reacted to the presence of depleted Bitterroot section to the east of the Boxwood pad, extending microseismic events over 3,000 ft to the east. This behavior changes dramatically after the treatment passes the Bitterroot section at the toe, and the heel stages in 1H showed tight microseismic grouping around the stimulated well, indicative of treatment of virgin reservoir rock. The Boxwood 2H demonstrates this same pattern of behavior between the toe and heel stages of the well, suggesting that the depleted Bitterroot section remains easier to refracture than adjacent non-depleted rock. Microseismic activity associated with Boxwood 4H treatment is distinctly different from those in Boxwood wells 1H and 2H. The events generated during stimulation of 4H are hardly influenced by the depleted Bitterroot section and fill the space between the previously stimulated 1H and 2H wells. Overall, microseismic patterns suggest that treatment fluids tend to find the weakest passages through geologic formations, and the relative well positions and treatment sequence have a significant impact on fracture geometry, as indicated by microseismic event locations.