56th EAEG Meeting 1994
DOI: 10.3997/2214-4609.201409783
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SP Monitoring during the hydraulic fracturing using the TG-2 well

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Grinat et al [2004] monitored the surface SP response during field stimulations at a depth of 3790 m but observed no correlation between the SP anomalies and injection events. Finally, Kawakami and Takasugi [1994] and Marquis et al [2002] reported surface SP data during hydraulic stimulation of deep hot dry rock geothermal reservoirs, demonstrating good correlation between the temporal SP variation and injection pressure and flow rate. Surface anomalies up to 40 mV correlated to both injection and flow‐back events.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Grinat et al [2004] monitored the surface SP response during field stimulations at a depth of 3790 m but observed no correlation between the SP anomalies and injection events. Finally, Kawakami and Takasugi [1994] and Marquis et al [2002] reported surface SP data during hydraulic stimulation of deep hot dry rock geothermal reservoirs, demonstrating good correlation between the temporal SP variation and injection pressure and flow rate. Surface anomalies up to 40 mV correlated to both injection and flow‐back events.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Surface anomalies up to 40 mV correlated to both injection and flow‐back events. Kawakami and Takasugi [1994] also reported the spatial surface SP variation but did not mention the orientation of the induced fracture or whether a correlation to fracture geometry was evident. We have undertaken a research program to monitor the spatial and temporal SP response during hydraulic fracturing in the laboratory and to investigate the origins of these signals.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recorded signals are composed by in situ signals and telluric currents, which correspond to the main source of noise in addition to cultural activity (50 Hz and harmonics). For monitoring purposes, the removal of cultural noise and telluric currents can be accomplished by filtering the SP measurements using the magnetic variations recorded with a magnetometer and a reference station for the self-potential survey (Kawakami and Takasugi, 1994).…”
Section: Further Improvements In Estimating the Water Table With Selfmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Corrections can be accomplished, for example, by filtering the self‐potential measurements with specific filters based on the magnetic variations recorded with a magnetometer and a reference station for the self‐potential survey. Kawakami and Takasugi [1994] have shown that such a procedure reduced the noise due to telluric currents from 30 mV to 3 mV.…”
Section: Sensitivity Of Electrographymentioning
confidence: 99%