SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ultimate pressure”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

652 records · Page 37

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2021

Development of Additively Manufactured Complex Tools for Autoclave Cure Composites

IACMI Project 4.9, Tooling for Composites with Washout Features Produced by Additive Manufacturing, assembled a team including the industry lead, Ability Composites, NREL and Colorado State University (CSU). Ability Composites had originally expressed interest in alternate methods of producing tooling for composite parts. In follow-up discussions, it became clear that one of the bigger tooling challenges revolved around small production volume composite parts that were tooled on washout material due to the complex geometry. To build an understanding of the potential, both from a technology and a cost perspective, for replacing conventional washout tooling with 3D printed thermoplastic tooling, a number of commercially available dissolvable FDM printing materials were evaluated, leading to tooling representative of commercial articles of interest to Ability Composites. Ultimately, Ability Composites was able to directly compare autoclave processed prepreg composite parts produced on conventional washout tooling to composite parts molded on 3D printed dissolvable tooling produced at CSU. Small, laboratory test specimens were developed to investigate the structural performance of the candidate materials under autoclave processing conditions, which were nominally 121 °C (250 °F) and 345 kPa (50 psi). In addition, several internal structural configurations (infills) were evaluated under autoclave conditions using model materials. The results of these tests indicated that two materials, Stratasys ST 130 and Infinite Materials Solutions Aquasys 180 (AQ 180), were the best candidates, given the specified autoclave processing conditions. ST-130 was slightly more robust than AQ-180; however, the AQ-180 was carried forward as it was dissolvable in water, not requiring the basic solution needed to dissolve ST-130. Based on the preliminary material and 3D printed structures evaluations, larger tools with a truncated square pyramid geometry were created to produce prepreg composite test articles for 3D printed dissolvable tool evaluation under standard autoclave fabrication conditions. Two tools were manufactured using ST-130 and one tool using traditional ceramic washout tooling media. The tools were evaluated for geometric fidelity and surface roughness changes before and after carbon fiber/epoxy prepreg composites were manufactured on the tooling. The autoclave processing did not impact the geometry significantly and was completed at 121 °C and 345 kPa, indicating satisfactory tool performance. The results from surface roughness testing of both the resulting composite and the associated tooling indicated that an adequate surface resulted without the need for a surface sealing step, as was required for the conventional washout tooling. Based on results of the truncated pyramid tests as a basis, ST-130, AQ-120 and AQ-180 materials were carried forward to the tool geometry of interest to Ability Composites. These hollow rectangular bent ducts, which were complex in nature and not extractable after cure, were used to understand the impacts of tool material and thickness. One ST-130 tool was produced as a partially solid part, with an enclosed 40% dense infill region to reduce weight and material use. This was the same approach evaluated in the truncated pyramid portion of the study. This tool was to be envelope vacuum bagged and directly compared to a monolithic tool of conventional washout material. The traditional monolithic ceramic tool was manufactured by Ability composites using CNC-based subtractive methods. An additional five dissolvable polymer tools, manufactured from ST-130, AQ-120, and AQ-180, using a hollow design were 3D printed and used to produce carbon fiber/epoxy composite evaluation articles. These hollow dissolvable tools were expected to be less influenced by the autoclave conditions as the wall was solid and vacuum bagging was inside and outside the tool. This alternative geometry was also evaluated as an option in techno-economic modeling. Print times were reduced from in excess of 3 days to under 30 hours, while surface quality and and tool integrity were substantially improved in the transition from the partially solid tool to the hollow tooling concept. Ability Composites produced autoclave-cured prepreg ducts on each of these tools. The autoclave conditions utilized were more severe than those of the initial trials, reaching temperatures of 160 °C and a pressure of 414 kPa. Under these conditions, the partially solid 3D printed tool with skin and 40% dense infill crushed significantly; however, the thicker ST-130 hollow tool showed good promise, deforming only slightly. The thinner hollow tool walls were unsuccessful as were the other materials. Overall, the hollow tool manufacturing process saved significant amounts of time and material in manufacturing as compared to the solid ducts and produced composite surface quality improvements compared to the traditional washout tooling. The TEM was developed to allow direct comparisons between conventional washout tool manufacturing processes and those developed at CSU. It also allowed for two separate 3D printed tool geometries to be analyzed and compared. In this case, the square bent duct tool geometry was determined to be representative of common washout tools. This geometry was compared with a scaled-up version of it to assess differences in the two manufacturing processes based on tool size. The model was developed to make use of user input in the form of geometry details, process steps, manufacturing parameters, bulk material costs, capital equipment costs, and general costs to calculate overall labor, material, capital equipment, and energy costs per manufactured tool for the conventional and additive manufacturing processes for the two representative geometries. It was also able to estimate step-by-step process times for the manufacturing process and geometries. Based on significant input from Ability Composites and CSU from their knowledge gained from hands-on manufacturing of the 3D printed bent duct tool geometry, costs and process times were calculated for the two manufacturing processes. Results showed that the additive manufacturing techniques developed at CSU can substantially reduce the costs of tool manufacturing by reducing labor times and material usage. This is because additive manufacturing is a relatively hands-off process and allows for the tool design to be optimized to reduce material usage. The disadvantage, however, is that process times for additive manufacturing are significantly longer. The three-dimensional (3D) printing process is slow if tight tolerances are required, but the analysis did show that print times could be reduced with the hollow tool geometry. Also, further advances in additive manufacturing could expedite the process. Costs and process times for the tool washout process were calculated separately. They showed that costs are relatively insignificant when compared to the overall tool manufacturing processes, but with increases in tool size, costs for the conventional manufacturing approach are larger than for additive manufacturing. Again, the washout process for conventional tools is very hands-on, whereas for additively manufactured tools the print medium is dissolved in an automated detergent bath at the sacrifice of process time. The analysis showed that optimizing the additively manufactured tools may also reduce washout times. Overall, Project 4.9 demonstrated that commercially available dissolvable 3D printing materials exist that can be used to produce dissolvable tooling capable of surviving prepreg composites fabrication under autoclave conditions of 121 °C (250 °F) and 345 kPa (50 psi). An alternative hollow dissolvable tool design was developed which was structurally superior to the initial concept and was cost and time effective versus conventional washout tooling. The 3D printed sacrificial tool required no added surface sealing steps prior to composite part layup and cure, offering a significant advantage over the porous conventional washout tooling.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2022

Using Natural Gas Liquids to Recover Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources (Final Report)

This document presents final technical findings for the project Using Natural Gas Liquids to Recover Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources (FE0031782). The project is part of the U.S. Department of Energy Oil and Gas Program to develop and advance technologies that can significantly improve the recovery efficiencies of unconventional oil and gas resources. The overall objective of this project is to improve the ultimate recovery from unconventional oil and gas (UOG) resources in the United States by developing a method for using unrefined natural gas liquids (NGLs) as treatment fluids to improve hydrocarbon production. Horizontal extended-lateral drilling coupled with high volume hydraulic fracturing has significantly increased production from UOG resources in the U.S. However, the recovery efficiency is low compared to the estimated oil and gas in place. Recent data indicate that less than 10% of the oil in the liquid-rich UOG reservoirs is produced. Alternative completion methods using NGLs could increase production (Battelle, 2016; Wan et al., 2013; Wan, 2013; Downey et al, 2021); however, field validation tests are needed to develop an approach that is economical, efficient, and compatible in the UOG setting to advance towards commercial deployment. This project aims to develop and field test a method to improve recovery of oil resources in UOG shale plays by using Y-Grade NGLs, or a similar combination of NGLs, as treatment fluids. Refined NGLs have been used as a hydraulic treatment fluid in UOG plays for decades and are shown to be particularly effective because their miscibility with oil allows oil to flow more freely; however, the use of Y-Grade (unrefined) NGLs has not been studied. The use of Y-Grade NGLs would be advantageous over refined NGLs because Y-Grade NGLs do not require infrastructure or investment in refining and are already being produced from many UOG reservoirs. The concept was tested and monitored in the field at a commercial well site owned by project partner Hopco, Ltd. The project team, which consists of multiple oil and gas operators, Linde Gas North America LLC (Linde) and the Ohio Division of Geological Survey (ODGS), has extensive experience with oil and gas production in the Appalachian basin and the ability to work together quickly to solve technical issues and research needs. A key part of the proposed work was the use of existing wells for field testing and monitoring. A total of four wells (three vertical and one horizontal) were available for this project. One of the vertical wells was utilized as the test well for the NGL treatment test. A nearby vertical well was used for microseismic monitoring. The remaining vertical well and the horizontal well provided a baseline for typical UOG production in the oil window of the Utica/Point Pleasant (UPP). Major technical tasks of the project include characterization of the geotechnical properties of the UPP with an emphasis on the field site; design and planning for the NGLs testing; field testing and monitoring; analysis and integration of field data; and economic and resource/reserve assessment. The Shoman monitoring well and Doughty NGL treatment well were successfully plugged back during September-October 2020 in preparation for treatment and monitoring. A nitrogen diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT) was completed on the Doughty well on July 22, 2021, consisting of 133,000 scf (91 Bbl.) of nitrogen. A nitrogen foam frac was completed in the Utica-Point Pleasant interval on August 17, 2021 with funding from outside sources. A microseismic monitoring array was installed in the Shoman well and monitored microseismic activity during the Doughty well frac job. Y-Grade NGL injection commenced on August 26, 2021. A total of 215 Bbl. was injected but the job was shut down due to a small leak on the suction hose on the pump truck. The Y-Grade treatment resumed on August 27, 2021 and an additional 726 Bbl. of Y-Grade NGL was injected at a well head pressure of 3850 psi. Total volume of injected Y-Grade over the two days of injection was 941 Bbl. The well was shut-in for 17 days following injection to allow the Y-Grade NGLs to soak on the formation. Y-Grade treatment flow back commenced on 9/13/2021 on a weekly basis. Production data, including surface pressures, oil, nitrogen, natural gas, and flow times was measured and recorded. Periodic gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine composition of flowback gas. As of July 2022, the treatment well had produced 726 Bbl of oil and 2,888 mcf gas. In August 2022, tubing and packer in the well were removed and a pump was installed to enhance oil recovery. Currently, the operator is producing the well about 2 days a week for a few hours. The performance of the NGL treatment test was evaluated based on reservoir simulations of the treatment process, processing of well testing data, analysis of micro seismic monitoring data, and production data analysis. This analysis suggested that oil production in the small test would continue through 2025. Upscaling the treatment to a horizontal Utica Point-Pleasant well would allow more oil recovery, but the process would involve more investment, services, and operational support. An economic analysis was conducted for scenarios aimed at upscaling the NGL treatment process for more typical horizontal UPP wells in the Appalachian Basin.

02 PETROLEUM↗

NASA NTRS2013

Dynamics and Control of a Disordered System in Space

In this paper, we present some ideas regarding the modeling, dynamics and control aspects of granular spacecraft. Granular spacecraft are complex multibody systems composed of a spatially disordered distribution of a large number of elements, for instance a cloud of N grains in orbit, with N greater than 10(exp 3). These grains can be large (Cubesat-size) or small (mm-size), and can be active, i.e., a fully equipped vehicle capable sensing their own position and attitude, and enabled with propulsion means, or entirely passive. The ultimate objective would be to study the behavior of the single grains and of large ensembles of grains in orbit and to identify ways to guide and control the shape of a cloud composed of these grains so that it can perform a useful function in space, for instance, as an element of an optical imaging system for astrophysical applications. This concept, in which the aperture does not need to be continuous and monolithic, would increase the aperture size several times compared to large NASA observatories such as ATLAST, allowing for a true Terrestrial Planet Imager that would be able to resolve exo-planet details and do meaningful spectroscopy on distant world. In the paper, we address the modeling and autonomous operation of a distributed assembly (the cloud) of large numbers of highly miniaturized space-borne elements (the grains). A multi-scale, multi-physics model is proposed of the dynamics of the cloud in orbit, as well as a control law for cloud shape maintenance, and preliminary simulation studies yield an estimate of the computational effort, indicating a scale factor of approximately N(exp 1.4) as a function of the number of grains. A granular spacecraft can be defined as a collection of a large number of space-borne elements (in the 1000s) designed and controlled such that a desirable collective behavior emerges, either from the interactions among neighboring grains, and/or between the grains and the environment. In this paper, each grain is considered to be a highly miniaturized spacecraft which has limited size and mass, hence it has limited actuation, limited propulsive capability, limited power, limited sensing, limited communication, limited computational resources, limited range of motion, limited lifetime, and may be expendable. The modeling and dynamics of clouds of vehicles is more challenging than with conventional vehicles because we are faced with a probabilistic vehicle composed of a large number of physically disconnected vehicles. First, different scales of motion occur simultaneously in a cloud: translations and rotations of the cloud as a whole (macro-dynamics), relative rotation and translation of one cloud member with respect to another (meso-dynamics), and individual cloud member dynamics (micro-dynamics). Second, the control design needs to be tolerant of the system complexity, of the system architecture (centralized vs. decentralized large scale system control) as well as robust to un-modeled dynamics and noise sources. Figure 1, top left, shows the kinematic parameters of a 1000 element cloud in orbit. The motion of the system is described with respect to a local vertical-local horizontal (LV-LH) orbiting reference frame (x,y,z)=F(sub ORF) of origin O(sub ORF) which rotates with mean motion omega and orbital semi-major axis R(sub 0). The orbital geometry at the initial time is defined in terms of its six orbital elements, and the orbital dynamics equation for point O(sub ORF) is propagated forward in time under the influence of the gravitational field of the primary and other external perturbations, described below. The origin of this frame coincides with the initial position of the center of mass of the system, and the coordinate axes are z along the local vertical, x toward the flight direction, and y in the orbit normal direction. The assumptions we used to model the dynamics are as follows: 1) The inertial frame is fixed at Earth's center. 2) The orbiting Frame ORF follows Keplerian orbit. 3) the cloud system dynamics is referred to ORF. 4) the attitude of each grain uses the principal body frame as body fixed frame. 5) the atmosphere is assumed to be rigidly rotating with the Earth. Regarding the grains forming the cloud: 1) each grain is modeled as a rigid body; 2) a simple attitude estimator provides attitude estimates, 3) a simple guidance logic commands the position and attitude of each grain, 4) a simple local feedback controller based on PD control of local states is used to stabilize the attitude of the vehicle. Regarding the cloud: 1) the cloud as a whole is modeled as an equivalent rigid body in orbit, and 2) an associated graph establishes agent connectivity and enables coupling between modes of motion at the micro and macro scales; 3) a simple guidance and estimation logic is modeled to estimate and command the attitude of this equivalent rigid body; 4) a cloud shape maintenance controller is based on the dynamics of a stable virtual truss in the orbiting frame. Regarding the environmental perturbations acting on the cloud: 1) a non-spherical gravity field including JO (Earth's spherical field) zonal component, J2 (Earth's oblateness) and J3 zonal components is implemented; 2) atmospheric drag is modeled with an exponential model; 3) solar pressure is modeled assuming the Sun is inertially fixed; and 4) the Earth's magnetic field is model using an equivalent dipole model. The equations of motion are written in a referential system with respect to the origin of the orbiting frame and the state is propagated forward in time using an incremental predictor-corrector scheme. A representative cloud with varying number of grains is simulated to identify the limitations in computation time as the number of grains grows. We derive a control law to track a desired surface in the ORF (equivalently to maintain a reference cloud shape) by defining an error from a desired surface shape, and designing a control law that is exponentially stable and reduces the tracking error to zero. Figure 1 (top right) shows a comparison of various requirements for simulation of single spacecraft vs. granular spacecraft, indicating the high degree of complexity that needs to be taken into consideration. The ORF components of control force required by one of the grains is, for this particular case, in the micro-Newton range. However, no attempt has been made yet to reconfigure (or re-orient) the cloud configuration internally, for which forces in the milli-Newton level are expected, depending on the time required to do the reconfiguration. Figure 1, bottom, shows the computation time as a function of the number of grains, indicating an order N(exp 1.43) scaling on a 8 Gb, 1067 MHz RAM MacOSX computer with a 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor. With this metric, the same simulation for a system of N=1000 grains would take 5.4 hours, and 146 hours (i.e., 6 days) for a system with N=10,000 grains. Therefore, efficient ways to simulate this complex system, where not only the time scales of natural system dynamics, but also the sampling times of the Guidance, Navigation, and Control are included, remain to be explored. Additional details on the cloud modeling, dynamics, and control will be described in the paper.

simulation↗

DOE OSTI2020

Hydropower Geotechnical Foundations: Current Practice and Innovation Opportunities for Low-Head Applications

Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to challenges frequently encountered with traditional approaches. With this understanding, it is critically important to understand and document the current state of practice for hydropower geotechnical foundations, identify key challenges, and define opportunities for innovative solutions. To this end, this report documents the current state of practice across the three main phases of geotechnical foundation development: (1) geotechnical site assessment, (2) design, and (3) construction for hydropower systems. It also describes the major challenges with conventional approaches and identifies opportunities for innovation to reduce hydropower foundations costs, timelines, and risks. Key takeaways from this report include the following: Approximately 80% of available low-head sites are expected to have foundations on soil beds rather than rock beds, suggesting that rockfill and earthfill dams may be the most cost-effective conventional dam type for new projects.; Geotechnical and geologic investigation activities are time-consuming and expensive but are essential to define the parameters and criteria needed for foundation design.; Certain riverbed soil and bedrock types present significant technical challenges or require expensive foundation construction, which can prove financially prohibitive for low-head project development.; Modular hydropower design and prefabricated modular foundations represent a promising but unproven paradigm for new hydropower development. Design and construction approaches using optimized and highly repeatable, reliable components would benefit project cost, time, and risk but require additional research and development.; Temporary construction features for foundations, including cofferdams, water diversion, and water control systems, can prove costly and have inherent construction risk.; For economically viable development, hydropower geotechnical foundations should be limited to 4 to 15% of the project’s total initial capital costs. Many proposed projects have experienced cost overruns attributable to foundation difficulties or surprises during construction. These overruns may have been due to inadequate investigations, lack of adequate engineering effort to tailor the structures to site geology and topography, and/or contractual terms, among other considerations.; Challenges for hydropower foundations and opportunities for innovative technology solutions are identified in the following areas (consistent with the three main phases of foundation development): Geotechnical site assessment, Foundation design and materials, Construction methods and technology. Ultimately, this report aims to provide information about geotechnical foundations for low-head hydropower and to motivate transformative technologies to support hydropower growth.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗