SPE-170924-MS

Measurement and Analysis of 3D Stress Shadowing Related to the Spacing

of Hydraulic Fracturing in Unconventional Reservoirs
T. Dohmen, J. Zhang, and J.P. Blangy, Hess Corporation

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 27–29 October 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Industry experience in unconventional plays shows that production performance does not scale up in
simple increments when adding hydraulic fracture stages in closely spaced completions. That is, adding
stages to a planned well by reducing the stage spacing does not proportionally enable additional
hydrocarbon production on a per stage basis. Instead, closer stage spacing incrementally adds less
hydrocarbon production per stage. Determining the appropriate stage spacing is an optimization step that
the industry has approached by drilling statistically significant numbers of wells to separate the effects of
completions from the effects of geologic variations. We propose leveraging and integrating microseismic
data with associated measurements to analyze and model the effects of reduced stage spacing while
drilling fewer wells.
Hess Corporation is using downhole geophones to monitor microseismic events associated with
hydraulic fracturing in horizontal wells with different completion stage spacings in the Middle Bakken
Play and the Utica Play. By constructing a small 3D structural model around each well, we create depth
histograms of microseismic events. The events are measured in relation to a common stratigraphic
boundary in order to identify how hydraulic fractures interact. Stage to stage analysis of these histograms
shows a systematic interference phenomenon, which we demonstrate by applying 2D Fast Fourier
Transform, correlation, and quantile analysis to the histograms.
A comparison of three horizontal wells stimulated with different stage spacing and in different plays
shows that hydraulic fractures in closely spaced stages interfere with each other by cyclically bouncing
out-of-zone. We find from microseismic observation that the stress shadowing induced by closely spaced
stages exhibits a 3D behavior. That is, when hydraulic fractures develop in-zone, as planned, stress
accumulates and forces subsequent completions preferentially upward, out-of-zone. As stress accumulates
in the zone above, the following fractures reform and are back in-zone in a repetitive cycle. We believe
that the physics controlling incremental hydrocarbon production per stage is related to this observed
cyclical reduction of the in-zone fracture area. We then analyze the changes to in-situ stress induced by
closely-spaced hydraulic fracturing, using a simple model. The concept uses geomechanical principles to
explain the in-zone and out-of-zone phenomenon observed in multi-stage fracturing. In the future, we plan
to apply 3D stress shadowing theory to our completion models to optimize the stage spacing of our
production wells.
2 SPE-170924-MS

Figure 1—Bakken production per well after 30, 90, 180, and 365 days vs. stage count (above) and production per stage vs. stage count (below). Data
from the NDIC public database and graphs courtesy of Neil Decker, Hess Bakken Team.

Introduction
Placing multiple hydraulic fractures in a horizontal well is a highly effective method to increase per well
production. However, the production performance is not only dependent on the hydraulic fracturing
process, but also on the spacing of the horizontal wells (Dohmen et al., 2013) and the spacing of multiple
hydraulic fracture stages. Industry experience in unconventional plays shows that production performance
does not scale up in simple increments when adding hydraulic fracture stages in closely spaced
completions. Instead, closer stage spacing incrementally adds less hydrocarbon production per stage (Fig.
1). Therefore, determining the appropriate stage spacing is an important step in well performance
optimization.
Models have been proposed for determining optimal stage spacing by numerically simulating reservoir
pressure interference over time (e.g., Clarkson and Beierle, 2011; Ye et al., 2013). The diminished per
stage returns of closer stages are evident from the start of production (Fig. 1b). We propose that this is
due to the stress interaction between a growing hydraulic fracture and the previous hydraulic fractures
placed in a lateral. Our observation of cyclical upward growth of fractures in multi-stage fracturing from
microseismic monitoring suggests that as stresses build, some fracture stages are pushed partially out of
the zone of interest. Then, as subsequent stages develop above the reservoir, it makes it easier for the next
stages to return to the zone of interest.
SPE-170924-MS 3

To properly simulate the propagation of multiple fractures for a completion stage in a horizontal well,
the fracture model needs to take into account the interaction between adjacent hydraulic fractures, often
referred to as the ‘‘stress shadow’’ effect. It is well known that when a single planar hydraulic fracture
is opened under a finite fluid net pressure (exerted by hydraulic treatment pressure and resisted by the
minimum stress), it induces a stress field in the surrounding rocks that is proportional to the net pressure
(Kress et al., 2013). Sneddon (1946) provides the analytical solution to interference between parallel
fractures. In recent years, numerical fracture network models involving 2D and 3D finite element and
finite difference methods have been developed to simulate the interaction of multiple hydraulic fractures
in horizontal wells in unconventional reservoirs (e.g., Roussel and Sharma, 2011; Bunger et al., 2012;
Kress et al., 2013; Wong et al., 2013; Castonguay et al., 2013; Wu and Olson, 2013). The results of these
modeling studies are summarized below.
Using a 3D numerical model, Roussel and Sharma (2011) studied the stress interference induced by the
creation of propped hydraulic fractures in horizontal wells. Their result demonstrates that a transverse
fracture initiated from a horizontal well may deviate away from the previous fracture. Furthermore, stress
interference (or reorientation) increases with the number of fractures created and depends on the sequence
of fracturing. Their numerical calculation of the fracture spacing required to avoid fracture deviation
during propagation demonstrates the potential advantages of alternate fracture sequencing and zipper fracs
to improve the performance of stimulation treatments in horizontal wells.
Bunger et al. (2012) modeled planar fracture growth using a coupled 2D numerical fracture simulator.
Their result shows that fracture curving is associated with a combination of opening and sliding along the
previously placed hydraulic fracture, as well as the previous fracture’s disturbance of the local stress field
because of its propped width.
Based on an enhanced 2D displacement discontinuity method, Kress et al. (2013) computed fracturing-
induced stresses and fracture turning due to the stress shadow effect. Their results for simple cases of two
fractures show that fractures can either attract or repel each other depending on their initial relative
positions. They also found that if the formation has a small stress anisotropy, fracture interaction could
lead to dramatic divergence of the fractures, as they tend to repel each other. On the other hand, for large
stress anisotropy, there is limited fracture divergence because the fractures must propagate in the direction
of maximum stress.
Castonguay et al. (2013) presented a 3D fracture simulation of multiple interacting non-planar fractures
in three dimensions. Their model provides insight into how the number of simultaneously growing
fractures affects fracture shapes, how changes in fluid viscosity can cause fractures to grow together or
grow apart, and how limited-entry at the perforations affects the propagation of interacting fractures.
Most recently, Wong et al. (2013) and Castonguay et al. (2013) showed fractures propagating upward
in order to escape the confinement implied by stress shadowing. Their numerical models of multiple
fractures forming at once through multiple perforation clusters pumped in a single stage show how the
central fractures are more likely to escape upward. We notice a trend in these recent papers of including
more realistic 3D observations of closure stress. Consequently, the models exhibit more examples of
upward fracture growth.
Based on microseismic data measured during hydraulic fracturing of Hess wells, we find that the stress
shadowing induced by closely spaced stages exhibits a 3D behavior, which is very different from the
current modeling results. Our observations show that when hydraulic fractures first develop in-zone, as
planned, stress accumulates and forces subsequent completions preferentially upward, out-of-zone. This
condition gradually emphasizes upward growth until as stress accumulates in the zone above the reservoir,
subsequent fractures reform in-zone in a repetitive cycle. We propose leveraging and integrating
microseismic data with associated measurements to analyze and model the effects of reduced stage
spacing. By making appropriate measurements and using numerical models to predict this observed effect
we expect to optimize the stage spacing cost/benefit ratio, while drilling fewer wells. We present a
4 SPE-170924-MS

straightforward method for determining the vertical shifts of microseismic activity near the wellbore
where formation contact and fracture conductivity are most critical. We also examine fracture vertical
growth into the bounding layers. A conceptual stress shadowing model explains the field observations.

Microseismic Observations of Hydraulic Fracturing in Closely Spaced

Stages
Hess Corporation is using downhole geophones to monitor microseismic events associated with hydraulic
fracturing in horizontal wells with different completion stage spacings in the Middle Bakken Play and the
Utica Play. In the following, we show the results of analyzing microseismic events from three wells in
these two plays. The first well, Well A, is from the Utica Play in Ohio and is a 5,000 ft long lateral section
with 15 stages placed in plug and perf fashion in a cased and cemented borehole. Each stage was 290 ft
long with four perf clusters spaced at 70 ft, and about 70 ft from the closest perfs in the previous stage.
The second well, Well B, is also from the Utica with a 5,000 ft long lateral. It was cased and cemented
with its stages 230 ft apart, each with four perf clusters 50 ft apart. The last well, Well C, is from the
Bakken Play in the Williston Basin (Dohmen et al., 2014). It is a hybrid design with 19 sliding-sleeve
stages followed by another 10 stages of plug and perf and all using tubing held within an open hole by
packers that pressure isolates the successive stages. Stage spacing here was nominally 250 ft.
In each case, nearby monitor wells were instrumented with geophones to record microseismic events
and determine hypocenter locations while the completions took place. Our analysis relies on looking at
depth histograms of the points grouped by stage in order to gain a statistically significant measure of the
depth range encountered by the fracturing process. By creating histograms of the position of microseismic
events relative to a prominent stratigraphic boundary, we avoid confusion resulting from the effects of dip
over the length of the lateral or from variations in the placement of the perforated interval where the lateral
crosses bedding. This requires building a 3D structural model using geosteering results from the drilling
of the lateral to develop a cross section along the borehole and using tops from the monitor well or nearby
wells to determine structure away from the lateral. Geosteering provides a one-dimensional view
extrapolated into two dimensions along the plane of the lateral, so it does not include variations in layer
thickness. However, in these examples, our understanding of the structure is that it is mostly simple with
planar dip in the regions around the wells. A small 8 to 10 foot fault is identified from geosteering in stage
2 of Well C with another possible fault in stage 18.

Analysis of Depth Histograms of Microseismic Events

2D Fast Fourier Transform and Correlations
Fig. 2 shows the process of constructing histograms for Well A from the Utica Play in Ohio. Fig. 2a shows
a profile view of the microseismic event locations relative to the borehole. Fig. 2b shows the geosteering
profile and 3D structure near the borehole. Fig. 2c shows histograms of relative frequency of points by
depth above the Trenton Formation for each stage. These are referenced to the Trenton Limestone (red
line), a prominent carbonate platform underlying the reservoir section. The yellow triangles show the
average perforation depth for each stage. On the right side of the plot, the wellbore crosses stratigraphy,
such that the well lies in the same stratigraphy for stages 1 through 7 and crosses bedding in stages 8
through 15. The green line in Fig. 2c is the average value of deepest 15% of the microseismic events in
each stage - representing the quantile at the low side of each histogram.
Analysis of the histograms shows a clear pattern of two “bounces” of the histogram centers along the
length of the borehole. This is very well represented by the quantile measurement shown by the green line
at the average depth of the deepest 15% level. Beginning with the first stage at the toe of the well (left
side of the plot in Fig. 2c), fracs are centered at the borehole. The fractures in the following stages
gradually move upward by about 200 ft (stages 3 through 6). They subsequently return to the borehole in
SPE-170924-MS 5

Figure 2—Construction of microseismic event depth histograms for Well A. Part (a) shows the hypocenter locations in 3D depth view, (b) shows a
3D structural model constructed from the 2D geosteering profile, nearby well tops, and one stage of events in the grey cloud, and (c) shows the
calculated histograms of relative frequency of hypocenters relative to the prominent Trenton Limestone (red line). Yellow triangles are the average
perforation depth at each stage. Green line is the average value of the deepest 15% quantile of associated microseismic events.

the middle of the well (stages 7 through 10), and then the pattern repeats. We use two quantitative methods
to analyze the histograms: 2D Fast Fourier Transform and correlation. The 2D FFT is a method of looking
at 2D patterns in much the same way that a frequency spectrum represents a one-dimensional time series.
We applied this using MATLAB™ to the series of numbers representing the histograms in Well A and
obtained the result shown in Fig. 3a For comparison purposes, we applied several tests of synthetically
generated data representing higher order bounces as shown in Figs. 3b through 3d. There is some
similarity with the x-pattern in the synthetic two-bounce example. This verifies that the microseismic-
6 SPE-170924-MS

observed depth histograms of multi-stage fractures

behave in a two-bounce cycle along the wellbore
axial direction,
Table 1 shows the results of the correlation anal-
ysis of Well A, in which each histogram, taken as a
series of values representing the relative frequency
of points in each depth bin, is correlated with all of
the other histograms. Correlation is a measure of
similarity. The highlighted numbers show that the
histograms are similar to their immediate neighbors
and to other histograms located about 6 or 7 stages
distant (and again to histograms located 12 to 14
stages further away). These areas of high correlation
are shown in orange in Table 1. Thus, the correla-
tion coefficients are a quantitative indication of the
the two bounces that we observed in well A.
Quantile Analysis
Quantiles measure the depth of a portion of the
histogram, and for values that change slowly from
one stage to the next, this method is a reasonable
way to track the bounces. Faulting and pump pres-
sures might affect the top of the histogram depth
range in any given stage. Following the bottom of
the histogram seems best for tracking the cycles we
are looking for related to stress shadowing. The Figure 3—2D Fast Fourier Transforms for a) the actual histograms
green line in Fig. 2c shows the average value of the from Well A, b) synthetic two-bounce case, c) synthetic fourbounce case,
and d) two bounces with a flat trend added.
deepest 15% of the points from each histogram. It
has a loopy two-bounce structure within the length of the lateral. The stresses were building in the zone
of interest as initial stages were pumped so that at some point the stresses accumulating in the reservoir
zone diminish the stress contrast at the top of the fractures allowing them to propagate upward. As stress
accumulates higher in the section, new fractures are able to reform close to the borehole and the process
repeats. In the following section, we consider a conceptual model of stress shadowing for single and
multiple frac stages.

Conceptual Model of Stress Shadowing

Analytical Solution of Stress Shadowing

Sneddon (1946) gave an analytical solution for the stress distribution in the neighborhood of a long 2D
crack (plane strain condition) in a homogeneous isotropic elastic solid under an internal pressure. His
solution can be used to illustrate the stress perturbation caused by a hydraulic fracture (as shown in Fig.
4) under an internal treatment pressure. Warpinski and Teufel (1987) assumed the induced stresses near
the center of a fracture (at z ⫽ 0) are representative of the stresses over a large area. Therefore, we can
obtain a simplified solution to explain the effect of stress shadowing on closely spaced hydraulic fractures.
From Sneddon’s solution and according to Warpinski and Teufel (1987), the induced stress increments in
the minimum horizontal stress direction (x-direction), the vertical stress direction (z-direction) and the
maximum stress direction (y-direction) at z ⫽ 0 can be written in the following forms:
SPE-170924-MS 7

Table 1—Correlation coefficients between histograms in Well A.

(1)

(2)

Because the fracture is markedly long compared

to its height, the condition of 2D plane strain can be
used to obtain the induced stress in the maximum
horizontal direction, i.e.:
(3) Figure 4 —Schematic cross-section cut in the minimum horizontal stress
direction of a long hydraulic fracture propagated in the maximum
Where ⌬␴x, ⌬␴y, ⌬␴z are the induced incremen- horizontal stress direction (perpendicular to the page).

tal stresses in the minimum horizontal stress, the

maximum horizontal stress, and the vertical stress directions, respectively; pn is the net pressure in the
fracture and approximately equal to the difference of the treatment pressure of the hydraulic fracturing and
the in-situ minimum horizontal stress, pn ⫽ pt – ␴h; pt is the treatment pressure of hydraulic fracturing;
␴h is the in-situ minimum horizontal stress; hf is the fracture height; x is the distance away from the center
of the fracture; ␯ is the Poisson’s ratio of the rock.
Assuming the superposition principle is applicable for the stress changes in the perturbed area, then the
stress shadow causes the minimum horizontal stress to increase to ␴h ⫹ ⌬␴x, the maximum horizontal
stress to increase to ␴H ⫹ ⌬␴y, the vertical stress to increase to ␴V ⫹ ⌬␴z.

Conceptual Model Applied to Hess Data

Eq.1 and Fig. 5 show that the induced incremental minimum horizontal stress increases as the fracture
height and injection pressure increase. Based on hydraulic fracturing data in the Bakken formation (the
treatment pressure pt ⫽ 11500 psi, in-situ minimum horizontal stress of 7,860 psi; hence, net pressure pn
⫽ pt – ␴h ⫽ 3640 psi), we plot the relationship of the induced stresses versus the distance away from the
center of a fracture in two cases of fracture heights (hf ⫽ 300 ft and hf ⫽ 100 ft, as shown in Fig. 5). Fig.
5 demonstrates that the treatment pressure exerts a compressive stress in the direction normal to the
fracture on top of the minimum in situ stress, which is equal to the net pressure at the fracture face, but
quickly falls off with the distance from the fracture. At a distance beyond one fracture height, the induced
stress is only a small fraction of the net pressure. Stress shadow is a term often used to describe the
8 SPE-170924-MS

Figure 5—Induced stresses in surrounding area along the fracture cross-section direction of a hydraulic fracture. (a) fracture height of 300 ft; (b)
fracture height of 100 ft. Greater fracture height impacts the stresses over a larger area.

Figure 6 —Induced minimum horizontal stresses versus the spacing of the hydraulic fractures for a fracture height of 300 ft and an injection pressure
of 11500 psi. The smaller the fracture spacing, the stronger the stress shadowing effect in the surrounding rock.

increase of stress in the direct vicinity of this fracture. If a second hydraulic fracture is created parallel to
the existing open fracture, and if the second fracture falls within the stress shadow, then, it will have a
closure stress greater than the original in situ stress, hence a higher fracture initiation pressure.
The modeling results in Fig. 5a indicate that a typical hydraulic fracture with a height of 300 ft causes
a significant increase in the minimum horizontal stresses for the distance (x) less than 300 ft away from
the fracture. This implies that if the spacing of the two hydraulic fractures is less than 300 ft, the stress
shadowing or interference is strong (Fig. 6). The induced stresses may change the in-situ stress state,
directions, and stress regimes in the interference area, causing subsequent fractures to grow in a
non-planar fashion or alter propagation direction. Comparing Fig. 5a to Fig. 5b, we see that a greater
fracture height has a larger impact area of the stress. Fig. 6 shows that a smaller spacing of the hydraulic
fractures creates a stronger stress shadow and stress impact. Results were calculated using equation (1).

Conceptual Model Applied to Multi-stage Fracturing

The fracture initiation pressure is much more dependent on the minimum horizontal stress than the other
in-situ stresses, as shown in Eq. 4 (Haimson and Fairhurst, 1967; Zhang and Roegiers, 2010).
(4)
SPE-170924-MS 9

Figure 7—Well-logging-estimated original minimum horizontal stress in a vertical well in the Bakken reservoir. The dashed lines show the
sequentially elevated minimum stress, i.e., the “stress shadow”, as fractures are added to the well with each new fracture contributing according to
Sneddon’s crack model. After three fractures are generated, the minimum stress at the location of the fourth frac is highly altered, and the stress
barrier above the reservoir almost disappears.

Where pb is the breakdown pressure; ␴h, ␴H are the minimum horizontal stress and the maximum
horizontal stress, respectively; pp is the pore pressure; T0 is the tensile strength of the rock.
From the previous section, we know that stress shadowing causes the minimum horizontal stress to
increase to ␴h ⫹ ⌬␴x. From Eq. 4, we see the fracture initiation position and propagation direction will
be altered if the change in the minimum horizontal stress is large enough. The increase in the minimum
horizontal stress will make the fracture initiation pressure (pb) increase greatly, which makes the
formation harder to frac. When the stress increase is significant, particularly in the case of closely spaced
hydraulic fractures, it will cause the new hydraulic fractures to redirect. This will often result in fracture
growth and propagation preferentially upward, if the minimum horizontal stress is lower in the shallower
formation.
Here we examine an example of how stresses might change in the Bakken reservoirs. Fig. 7 shows the
original in-situ stress estimated from well logs. The right side of Fig. 7 illustrates how the minimum
horizontal stress changes due to stress shadowing after three parallel fractures are generated. We assume
that superposition of the induced stresses can be used to calculate the new minimum stresses at the
locations of the new fractures based on Sneddon’s solution.
It can be seen from Fig. 7 that after the first three fractures are generated the minimum stress at the
location of the next frac is highly altered and the stress barrier at the top of the early fractures almost
disappears. This is because the stress shadow will increase the minimum horizontal stress in the planned
fracture zone and reduce the stress contrast at the overburden of the Upper Bakken formation that provides
containment of the fracturing. Therefore, subsequent hydraulic fractures will grow upward because of a
reduced stress contrast with the overburden of the reservoir.
10 SPE-170924-MS

Figure 8 —Depth histograms of microseismic events from Well B, a nineteen stage well in the Utica Play. Red line is the top of the Trenton Limestone,
and green line is the quantile contour at the top of the deepest 15% of the points.

Figure 9 —Depth histograms in a 10,000 ft long lateral. Well C in the Bakken Play with sliding-sleeve completions in the first 19 stages. Plug and perf
for stages 20 through 29. Red line is at the top of the Middle Bakken. Green line is the average value of the deepest 15%.

Discussion
Results from two other analyzed wells are shown in Figs. 8 and 9, verifying what we have observed in
Well A. Fig. 8 is the set of histograms from Well B, a 19-stage well in the Utica. The spacing between
stages is 230 ft in this well, and the amount of sand pumped is greater than in Well A. The well shows
three or four bounces, and in this case with characteristic spacing of 1,320 ft per bounce. The green line
is the contour at the 15% level. Well B in Fig. 8 was drilled in the identical stratigraphy using geosteering
to maintain its position in the section. We removed the stages where plugs moved from the plot. Fig. 9
shows histograms from Well C, a Bakken example, which includes some obvious effects of faulting. Stage
2 in Well C included an 8 to 10 foot fault identified by the geosteering, and in this stage, points climb to
SPE-170924-MS 11

Figure 10 —Schematic representation of fractures caused by closely spaced hydraulic fracs in Well A. If initial fracs interact and send successive fracs
up, then following fracs may once again develop in-zone.

900 ft above the zone of interest. As successive stages were pumped, the points come back to the borehole
suggesting that fluid is being emplaced at the level of the microseismic activity, and that the associated
stress shadow in that interval is providing enough additional stress contrast to limit height growth in
following stages. This result suggests that the process of multi-stage fracturing in a lateral well is
potentially a self-correcting process. That is, when fracture energy begins to develop out-of-zone, the
stress shadow allows successive stages to begin again in-zone. Except for stages 11 and 18 in Fig. 9, which
show some height growth related to faults or natural fractures, the rest of the stages show a cyclical series
of rising and falling steps more like a sawtooth. In this case, the red line represents the top of the Middle
Bakken reservoir and the wellbore is deliberately geosteered to lie in the same layer (Fig. 9). The
histograms extend into the Three Forks, a deeper oil productive zone, contact with which might account
for some variation in production by stage.
We expect that different stress profiles and different mechanical properties of the layers surrounding
the borehole would naturally lead to differences in how the stages interact. While patterns are different
from the two basins, the basic observation of cyclical bounces in the microseismic activity seems to be
common. Our concept of what happens to the hydraulic fractures because of stress shadowing is shown
in Fig. 10.
Conclusions
A stress “shadow” is expected to develop as closely spaced pressurized fractures are introduced in the
typical unconventional completion sequence employed today in multi-stage laterals. The stress shadow
increases the minimum horizontal stress in the reservoir or planned fracturing zone. This gradually
reduces the stress contrast with the natural barriers that contain the fracturing, so that for closely spaced
stages, additional hydraulic fractures will eventually grow upward or downward (out-of-zone) depending
on where there is a smaller minimum stress contrast in the overburden or underburden of the reservoir.
Then, as fracturing-induced stresses accumulate outside the zone of interest, they make it easier for
subsequent fractures to remain in-zone, leading to a cyclical variation in frac height down the wellbore.
If the “bounce” is large compared to the reservoir interval, then we should expect a predictable variation
in productivity from the stages.
12 SPE-170924-MS

We find, from observations of microseismic events accompanying fracturing in multi-stage laterals that
fracture stages tend to cyclically propagate out-of-zone; while, current numerical models tend to show
fractures confined to a zone of interest or restrict fracture development within a 2D plane. Microseismic
data from downhole geophones track these movements in three wells we have analyzed. The microseismic
observation and our analysis show periodic “bounces” of the microseismic activity by approximately 50
to 200 ft vertically. This is enough distance to significantly affect the amount of fracture contact within
the producing intervals. Quantile analysis seems to be a useful measurement to make the bounces plainly
observable. History shows it is necessary to drill many wells to separate the effect of a given completion
strategy from the normal geologic variations affecting production. By taking into account microseismic
observations like these, we believe that it will be possible to confidently determine the optimal stage
spacing for a play with a reasonable ratio of cost and production improvement.

Acknowledgements
The authors thank the management of Hess Corporation for permission to publish this paper. We would
like to acknowledge the Bakken Team and Utica Team for their efforts in hydraulic fracturing operations
and microseismic monitoring.

References
Bunger A.P., Zhang X., Jeffrey, 2012. Parameters Affecting the Interaction Among Closely Spaced
Hydraulic Fractures. SPE140426, SPE Journal, p. 292–306.
Castonguay, S.T., Mear, M.E., Dean, R.H., Schmidt, J.H., 2013. Predictions of the Growth of Multiple
Interacting Hydraulic Fractures in Three Dimensions. SPE166259.
Clarkson, C.R., and Beierle, J.J., 2011. Integration of microseismic and other post-fracture surveil-
lance with production analysis: A tight gas study. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 3,
382–401.
Dohmen, T, Zhang, J., Li, C., Blangy, J.P., Simon, K. M., Valleau, D. N., Ewles, J. D., Morton, S.,
and Checkles, S., 2013. A New Surveillance Method for Delineation of Depletion using Microseismic and
its Application to Development of Unconventional Reservoirs. Paper SPE 166274 presented at the SPE
annual technology conference in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Dohmen, T, Blangy, J.P., Zhang, J., 2014. Microseismic Depletion Delineation. Interpretation, Vol.
2(3), Aug. 2014.
Haimson, B. C. and Fairhurst, C., 1967. Initiation and extension of hydraulic fractures in rocks, SPE
Journal, 7, 310 –318.
Kress, O., Weng X., Gu, H., Wu, R., 2013. Numerical Modeling of Hydraulic Fractures Interaction in
Complex Naturally Fractured Formations. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 46(3):555–568.
Roussel, N.P., Sharma, M.M., 2011. Optimizing Fracture Spacing and Sequencing in Horizontal Well
Fracturing. SPE 127986.
Sneddon, I.N. 1946. The Distribution of Stress in the Neighbourhood of a Crack in an Elastic Solid.
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 187(1009): 229 –260.
Warpinski, N.R., Teufel L.W., 1987. Influence of geologic discontinuities on hydraulic fracture
propagation. JPT, pp. 209 –220.
Wong, S., Geilikman, M., and Xu, G., 2013. The Geomechanical Interaction of Multiple Hydraulic
Fractures in Horizontal Wells. In book of “Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing” edited by A.P.
Bunger, J. McLennan and R. Jeffrey, ISBN 978-953-51-1137-5.
Wu, K., Olson, J.E., 2013. Investigation of the Impact of Fracture Spacing and Fluid Properties for
Interfering Simultaneously or Sequentially Generated Hydraulic Fractures. SPE Production & Opera-
tions, November, 2013: 427–436.
SPE-170924-MS 13

Ye, P., Chu, L., Harmawan, I., Williams, M., 2013. Beyond Linear Analysis in an Unconventional Oil
Reservoir. SPE 164543.
Zhang, J., Roegiers, J.-C., 2010. Discussion on “Integrating borehole-breakout dimensions, strength
criteria, and leak-off test results, to constrain the state of stress across the Chelungpu Fault, Taiwan”.
Tectonophysics, 492, 295–298.