中文摘要：

因为水力的断裂的基于表面的监视没被地上凿穿几何学或困难在维持表面下的设备限制，它正在成为监视的 microseismic 的逐渐地普通的部分。直接为监视区域决定一个精确速度模型的能力影响 microseismic 事件地点的精确性。然而，为有表面仪器的地点的速度模型刻度对几个原因困难：井木头大小经常不精密或不完全，产出难处理的模型；穿孔射击的起源时间不总是是精确的；并且当仅仅穿孔射击被使用时，倒置获得的速度模型的非唯一变得特别有问题。在这份报纸，我们建议一条新途径克服这些限制。我们从很好记载数据建立一个起始的速度模型，然后使用双差别到达的错误为在井木头速度模型和媒介的真速度结构之间的不合身的衣服作为一项代理措施预定的根平均数平方(RMS ) 。双差别 RMS 错误被使用减少一很快模仿了为模型 perturbance 退火，并且一件样品双差别 RMS 错误设定然后被选择决定实验阀值。这阀值价值被放在选择样品，和阀值范围被选择的在内的旅行时间的一个适当数字的最小的 RMS 附近。相应速度模型然后被用来重定位穿孔射击。我们与最小的相对地点错误把速度模型用作 microseismic 地点的基础。与准确输入速度模型一起的数字分析证明尽管大差别在计算、真的速度模型之间存在，穿孔射击仍然装与建议技术被定位到他们的实际位置；穿孔的地点不确是 < 2 m。地数据上的进一步的测试表明这种技术的有效性。

英文摘要：

Because surface-based monitoring of hydraulic fracturing is not restricted by borehole geometry or the difficulties in maintaining subsurface equipment, it is becoming an increasingly common part of microseismic monitoring. The ability to determine an accurate velocity model for the monitored area directly affects the accuracy of microseismic event locations. However, velocity model calibration for location with surface instruments is difficult for several reasons： well log measurements are often inaccurate or incomplete, yielding intractable models; ori- gin times of perforation shots are not always accurate; and the non-uniqueness of velocity models obtained by inver- sion becomes especially problematic when only perforation shots are used. In this paper, we propose a new approach to overcome these limitations. We establish an initial velocity model from well logging data, and then use the root mean square （RMS） error of double-difference arrival times as a proxy measure for the misfit between the well log velocity model and the true velocity structure of the medium. Double-difference RMS errors are reduced by using a very fast simulated annealing for model perturbance, and a sample set of double-difference RMS errors is then selec- ted to determine an empirical threshold. This threshold value is set near the minimum RMS of the selected samples, and an appropriate number of travel times within the threshold range are chosen. The corresponding velocity models are then used to relocate the perforation-shot. We use the velocity model with the smallest relative location errors as the basis for microseismic location. Numerical analysis with exact input velocity models shows that although large differences exist between the calculated and true velocity models, perforation shots can still be located to their actual positions with the proposed technique; the location inaccuracy of the perforation is 〈2 m. Further tests on field data demonstrate the validity of this technique.