• Title/Summary/Keyword: 의미망 프로그램

Search Result 51, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

Performance Test of Hypocenter Determination Methods under the Assumption of Inaccurate Velocity Models: A case of surface microseismic monitoring (부정확한 속도 모델을 가정한 진원 결정 방법의 성능평가: 지표면 미소지진 모니터링 사례)

  • Woo, Jeong-Ung;Rhie, Junkee;Kang, Tae-Seob
    • Geophysics and Geophysical Exploration
    • /
    • v.19 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-10
    • /
    • 2016
  • The hypocenter distribution of microseismic events generated by hydraulic fracturing for shale gas development provides essential information for understanding characteristics of fracture network. In this study, we evaluate how inaccurate velocity models influence the inversion results of two widely used location programs, hypoellipse and hypoDD, which are developed based on an iterative linear inversion. We assume that 98 stations are densely located inside the circle with a radius of 4 km and 5 artificial hypocenter sets (S0 ~ S4) are located from the center of the network to the south with 1 km interval. Each hypocenter set contains 25 events placed on the plane. To quantify accuracies of the inversion results, we defined 6 parameters: difference between average hypocenters of assumed and inverted locations, $d_1$; ratio of assumed and inverted areas estimated by hypocenters, r; difference between dip of the reference plane and the best fitting plane for determined hypocenters, ${\theta}$; difference between strike of the reference plane and the best fitting plane for determined hypocenters, ${\phi}$; root-mean-square distance between hypocenters and the best fitting plane, $d_2$; root-mean-square error in horizontal direction on the best fitting plane, $d_3$. Synthetic travel times are calculated for the reference model having 1D layered structure and the inaccurate velocity model for the inversion is constructed by using normal distribution with standard deviations of 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 km/s, respectively, with respect to the reference model. The parameters $d_1$, r, ${\theta}$, and $d_2$ show positive correlation with the level of velocity perturbations, but the others are not sensitive to the perturbations except S4, which is located at the outer boundary of the network. In cases of S0, S1, S2, and S3, hypoellipse and hypoDD provide similar results for $d_1$. However, for other parameters, hypoDD shows much better results and errors of locations can be reduced by about several meters regardless of the level of perturbations. In light of the purpose to understand the characteristics of hydraulic fracturing, $1{\sigma}$ error of velocity structure should be under 0.2 km/s in hypoellipse and 0.3 km/s in hypoDD.