Method selection of microseismic studies depending on the problem being solved

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Biryaltsev E.V.
dc.contributor.author Kamilov M.R.
dc.date.accessioned 2020-01-17T06:29:16Z
dc.date.available 2020-01-17T06:29:16Z
dc.date.issued 2018
dc.identifier https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/method-selection-of-microseismic-studies-depending-on-the-problem-being-solved
dc.identifier Общество с ограниченной ответственностью «Георесурсы»
dc.identifier.citation Георесурсы, 2018, 20, 3 (eng)
dc.identifier.uri https://repository.geologyscience.ru/handle/123456789/14079
dc.description.abstract The article compares two methods of microseismic studies of the maximum likelihood method and the Capon method for detecting the position of microseismic event when observed from the surface in the conditions of the developed deposit or by monitoring the hydraulic fracturing. The results of computational experiments for determining the accuracy of localization of model microseism in space, as well as for various noise levels, for various types of microseismic events and for the allocation of recurring events are presented. Based on the results of the experiments, the conclusion is drawn that the problems of identifying non-recurring events are more confidently solved by maximum likelihood methods, while for the detection of zones of increased fracturing, the method of Capon is best suited.
dc.publisher Общество с ограниченной ответственностью «Георесурсы»
dc.subject hydraulic fracturing monitoring
dc.subject natural fracturing monitoring
dc.subject microseismic events
dc.subject maximum likelihood method
dc.subject superresolution method
dc.subject Capon method
dc.subject seismic moment tensor
dc.title Method selection of microseismic studies depending on the problem being solved
dc.type text
dc.type Article


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record