Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DRILLING”

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.

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

At least 1,549 records · Page 86
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

Geocellular Model of Mt. Simon Sandstone for University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign DDU feasibility study

The geocellular model of the Mt. Simon Sandstone was constructed for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign DDU feasibility study. Starting with the initial area of review (18.0 km by 18.1 km [11.2 miles by 11.3 miles]) the boundaries of the model were trimmed down to 9.7 km by 9.7 km (6 miles by 6 miles) to ensure that the model enclosed a large enough volume so that the cones of depression of both the production and injection wells would not interact with each other, while at the same time minimizing the number of cells to model to reduce computational time. The grid-cell size was set to 61.0 m by 61.0 m (200 feet by 200 feet) for 160 nodes in the X and Y directions. Within the model, 67 layers are represented that are parameterized with their sediment/rock properties and petrophysical data. The top surface of the Mt. Simon Sandstone was provided by geologists working on the project, and the average thickness of the formation was taken from the geologic prospectus they provided. An average thickness of 762 m (2500 feet) was used for the Mt. Simon Sandstone, resulting in 60 layers for the model. Petrophysical data was taken from available rotary sidewall core data (Morrow et al., 2017). As geothermal properties (thermal conductivity, specific heat capacity) are closely related to mineralogy, specifically the percentage of quartz, available mineralogical data was assembled and used with published data of geothermal values to determine these properties (Waples and Waples, 2004; Robertson, 1988). The Mt. Simon Sandstone was divided into three separate units (lower, middle, upper) according to similar geothermal and petrophysical properties, and distributed according to available geophysical log data and prevailing interpretations of the depositional/diagenetic history (Freiburg et al. 2016). Petrophysical and geothermal properties were distributed through geostatistical means according to the associated distributions for each lithofacies. The formation temperature was calculated, based on data from continuous temperature geophysical log from a deep well drilled into the Precambrian basement at the nearby Illinois Basin Decatur Project (IBDP) where CO2 is currently being sequestered (Schlumberger, 2012). Salinity values used in the model were taken from regional studies of brine chemistry in the Mt. Simon Sandstone, including for the IBDP (e.g., Panno et al. 2018). After being reviewed by the project's geologists, the model was then passed onto the geological engineers to begin simulations of the geothermal reservoir and wellbores.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Appalachian Basin Play Fairway Analysis Thermal Risk Factor and Quality Analyses

*This submission revises the analysis and products for Thermal Quality Analysis for the northern half of the Appalachian Basin (https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/638)* This submission is one of five major parts of a Low Temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis. Phase 1 of the project identified potential Geothermal Play Fairways within the Appalachian basin of Pennsylvania, West Virginia and New York. This submission includes a subset of the necessary shapefiles, rasters, datasets, code, and references to code repositories that were used to create the thermal resource and risk factor maps as part of the project. This subset is those contents that were improved upon during calendar year 2016. Figures are provided as examples of some shapefiles and rasters. See also: Final Report: Low Temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis for the Appalachian Basin (https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/899). The 2015 data submission should be visited to obtain: 1) the regional standardized 1 square km grid used in the project as points (cell centers), polygons, and as a raster, 2) the raw well data for the state well temperature databases, 3) the COSUNA section shapefile and formation thermal conductivities by state as *.xlsx files, 4) the sediment thickness map and 30 m Digital Elevation Model for the Appalachian Basin as GeoTIFF raster files, 5) the BHT correction sections shapefile and drilling fluid databases as *.csv files, 6) the unbuffered interpolation regions as shapefiles, 7) several 50 km buffered interpolation regions as shapefiles, 8) several gridded interpolation regions as raster files, 9) an R script for organizing the thermal data and running the local spatial outlier analysis, 10) shapefiles and rasters for the prediction, uncertainty, and cross validation of the temperature at 1.5 km, 2.5 km, and 3.5 km depth, 11) shapefiles and rasters for the prediction, uncertainty, and cross validation depth to 100 degrees C, 12) an ArcGIS toolbox for thermal risk factor models, 13) an ArcGIS model for extracting results specific to each county of interest, 14) thermal resource cross section plots, 15) the geothermal Play Fairways.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Penn State Lab Testing Fluid-Rock Interaction in Geothermal Reservoirs

This project focused on assessment and discovery of fluid-rock interaction in geothermal reservoirs. We accomplished work in four main areas: 1) fracture formation and the relationship between fluid flow and shear failure, 2) assessment of fracture geometry and fluid permeability using novel acoustic measurements, 3) an improved understanding of how drilling, injection and geothermal production influence local seismicity, and 4) development of process based models for using induced seismicity to assess the critical stress-state in Earth's crust. This submission contains relevant true triaxial granite and shale experiments and associated run sheets accompanied with links to final technical report and presentation project slides.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

EGS Collab Testbed 1: Second Set Tracer Test Results

The EGS Collab project is developing ~10-20 m-scale field sites where fracture stimulation and flow models can be validated against controlled, small-scale, in-situ experiments. The first multi-well experimental site was established at the 4850 level in the Homestake Mine in Lead, South Dakota, where hydraulic fractures were created at an injection well drilled sub-horizontal from the drift. This file contains the second set of tracer data (also include the data uploaded previously, https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/1128) for the EGS Collab testbed. The tracer tests were conducted during October 2018 - November 2019. Injected tracers include DNA, C-dots (fluorescein nano particles), fluorescein, rhodamine-b, sodium chloride, lithium bromide and cesium iodine. The tracers have been detected in three flowing wells located about 7.5 to 9 meters away from the injection interval. The tracer breakthrough curves from these locations have been adjusted to account for the residence time in the injection and production tubing. The details about the tracer test can be found in Background and Methods of Tracer Tests (Mattson et al. (2019,a,b)) (also included in this package). References Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Plummer, M.A., Hawkins, A., Zhang, Y. and the EGS Collab Team 2019a. Preliminary Collab fracture characterization results from flow and tracer testing efforts. In Proceedings 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, edited, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Hawkins, A., Burghardt, J., Ingraham, M., Plummer, M., and the EGS Collab Team, 2019b. Fracture tracer injection response to pressure perturbations at an injection well. GRC Transactions, Vol. 43, 2019. Neupane, Ghanashyam, Earl Mattson, Adam Hawkins, Mitchell Plummer, and Yuran Zhang. EGS Collab Testbed 1: Tracer data sets. No. 1128. DOE Geothermal Data Repository; Idaho National Laboratory, 2019.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

EGS Collab Testbed 2 Preliminary Test Wells Locations and Orientations

The EGS Collab project is evaluating a site for Experiment 2 (hydraulic fracturing/shearing) at a depth of 1.25 km in the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) on the 4100 Level. Two early test holes were drilled in an alcove (formerly known as Battery Charging Station) near Yates Shaft. One of the test hole is about 50 m where as the other hole is about 10 m. This submission package includes well head locations, total lengths of boreholes, their orientations (gyro data). The reported boreholes orientation data were primarily obtained with REFLEX GYRO (TM) survey right after the completion of each hole. Well head locations were ascertained by Laser/LiDAR survey of the drift around the Testbed 2. Note: The coordinate system used is local Homestake Mine Coordinate (HMC) system from an old gold mine that was in operation for over 100 years.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

EGS Collab Testbed 2: Laser Scanned 4100 L Drift Map

The EGS Collab project is evaluating a site for Experiment 2 (hydraulic fracturing/shearing) at a depth of 1.25 km in the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) on the 4100 Level. Two early test holes were drilled in an alcove (formerly known as Battery Charging Station) near Yates Shaft. Recently, we conducted a laser survey around the Testbed 2 to capture the details of the drift. This submission package includes the laser scanned drift map around the Testbed 2. The drift map data are presented in AutoCAD (*dxf), Leapfrog mesh (*.msh), and point cloud (*.csv) file formats. Note: The coordinate system used is local Homestake Mine Coordinate (HMC) system from an old gold mine that was in operation for over 100 years.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Planned Trajectory

This submission includes an Excel spreadsheet containing the Utah FORGE deep well 16A(78)-32 planned trajectory including UTM coordinates, elevations, and depths from the well head to the toe. This proposed new injection well is expected to descend vertically to a depth of approximately 1810 m and then extend laterally at an angle to a MD of approximately 3290 m and a maximum vertical depth of approximately 2584 m. There is approximately 1500 m of basin fill at the well head, and less than that above the simulation region with the targeted reservoir region fully enclosed in granitoid basement. The last 60 m of the well will be open hole. Drilling is planned for October 2020. Please direct questions to the Utah FORGE team: utahforge@utah.edu and check the Utah FORGE website: https://utahforge.com after October for more information.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Geothermal Permitting and NEPA Timeline Analysis

In this analysis, we outline the types of NEPA-related analyses and approvals (e.g., environmental assessment), and we provide examples of geothermal development activities (e.g., well drilling) that might require each type of approval, including an overview and discussion of the specific permits. We conducted an in-depth analysis of timelines specific to each NEPA analysis type, and we analyzed a sample of geothermal projects to identify factors that increased NEPA review timelines. Based on that analysis, we identified proven and potential strategies that can assist geothermal projects by lowering the time necessary to navigate the NEPA process, while maintaining the efficacy of the federal environmental review intact. We also identified areas of potential improvement in NEPA efficiency within each phase of geothermal development. Shortening project timelines can effectively decrease the perceived risk profiles of geothermal development projects. This submission includes a paper, poster, and presentation for the Geothermal Resources Council (GRC) summarizing geothermal permitting and NEPA timeline analysis. Also included are two spreadsheets detailing the NEPA timeline analysis and environmental assessments (EA).

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Utah FORGE: Phase 3 Ground Water Level Monitoring Data

Groundwater data around the Utah FORGE site has been collected to determine the piezometric levels and compositional variability. Field measurements in 2020 are designed to obtain and survey new groundwater wells that have been drilled on the distal periphery of the Utah FORGE project area. The spreadsheet included in this submission contains ground water level data from the Utah FORGE site as monitored from wells WOW-2 and WOW-3. The well locations are also provided as UTM, Zone 12, NAD83 coordinates.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Utah FORGE: Phase 3 Microgravity Data

A 4D microgravity survey began in early 2019 in order to benchmark surface and subsurface elevations prior to Phase 3 drilling and stimulation campaigns. Microgravity stations are collocated with GPS deformation benchmarks and use the same location survey data. Surveys are undertaken on a quarterly basis. The focus of current activities is comparative analysis of GPS survey results and InSAR analysis (see GDR Submission 1251) to check seasonal variance and to evaluate possible changes in the groundwater elevation. The attached zip file contains a text file and an Excel spreadsheet containing Utah FORGE Phase 3 processed "final" microgravity data through time. The data are identical in both files. The spreadsheet is only supplied for convenience. There is also a ReadMe.txt file that describes the field headings.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utah FORGE Well 16A(78)-32 X-ray Diffraction Data

This submission contains x-ray diffraction data taken from 3,600 to 10,987 feet deep in well 16A(78)-32 in the Roosevelt Hot Springs Geothermal Area as part of the Utah FORGE project. 78 rock samples were taken. Samples are taken in a range of ten feet at 100 foot increments. Mineral abundances are given in weight percent of the sample, with results rounded to the nearest whole number. Fields marked with tr (trace) indicate that mineral is present, but that its abundance calculated from the Rietveld refinement was less than one weight percent; that it was observed in the clay-sized fraction, but not the bulk; and/or that it was observed in low abundance during petrographic analyses. The samples were taken between 10/29/2020 and 12/24/2020 during the drilling of well 16A(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Subsurface Characterization and Machine Learning Predictions at Brady Hot Springs Results

Geothermal power plants typically show decreasing heat and power production rates over time. Mitigation strategies include optimizing the management of existing wells - increasing or decreasing the fluid flow rates across the wells - and drilling new wells at appropriate locations. The latter is expensive, time-consuming, and subject to many engineering constraints, but the former is a viable mechanism for periodic adjustment of the available fluid allocations. Data and supporting literature from a study describing a new approach combining reservoir modeling and machine learning to produce models that enable strategies for the mitigation of decreased heat and power production rates over time for geothermal power plants. The computational approach used enables translation of sets of potential flow rates for the active wells into reservoir-wide estimates of produced energy and discovery of optimal flow allocations among the studied sets. In our computational experiments, we utilize collections of simulations for a specific reservoir (which capture subsurface characterization and realize history matching) along with machine learning models that predict temperature and pressure timeseries for production wells. We evaluate this approach using an "open-source" reservoir we have constructed that captures many of the characteristics of Brady Hot Springs, a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA. Selected results from a reservoir model of Brady Hot Springs itself are presented to show successful application to an existing system. In both cases, energy predictions prove to be highly accurate: all observed prediction errors do not exceed 3.68% for temperatures and 4.75% for pressures. In a cumulative energy estimation, we observe prediction errors that are less than 4.04%. A typical reservoir simulation for Brady Hot Springs completes in approximately 4 hours, whereas our machine learning models yield accurate 20-year predictions for temperatures, pressures, and produced energy in 0.9 seconds. This paper aims to demonstrate how the models and techniques from our study can be applied to achieve rapid exploration of controlled parameters and optimization of other geothermal reservoirs. Includes a synthetic, yet realistic, model of a geothermal reservoir, referred to as open-source reservoir (OSR). OSR is a 10-well (4 injection wells and 6 production wells) system that resembles Brady Hot Springs (a commercially operational geothermal field in Nevada, USA) at a high level but has a number of sufficiently modified characteristics (which renders any possible similarity between specific characteristics like temperatures and pressures as purely random). We study OSR through CMG simulations with a wide range of flow allocation scenarios. Includes a dataset with 101 simulated scenarios that cover the period of time between 2020 and 2040 and a link to the published paper about this project, where we focus on the Machine Learning work for predicting OSR's energy production based on the simulation data, as well as a link to the GitHub repository where we have published the code we have developed (please refer to the repository's readme file to see instructions on how to run the code). Additional links are included to associated work led by the USGS to identify geologic factors associated with well productivity in geothermal fields. Below are the high-level steps for applying the same modeling + ML process to other geothermal reservoirs: 1. Develop a geologic model of the geothermal field. The location of faults, upflow zones, aquifers, etc. need to be accounted for as accurately as possible 2. The geologic model needs to be converted to a reservoir model that can be used in a reservoir simulator, such as, for instance, CMG STARS, TETRAD, or FALCON 3. Using native state modeling, the initial temperature and pressure distributions are evaluated, and they become the initial conditions for dynamic reservoir simulations 4....

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

EGS Collab Experiment 2: Testbed Well Orientation Data

This dataset contains the north seeking gyro data for each of the 11 boreholes drilled at the Experiment 2 testbed on the 4100 foot level of the SURF (Sanford Underground Research Facility). Each gyro file is in individual folders for each well. A single folder called 'E2 All Well Trajectories' contains the trajectories for all the wells but in the mine coordinate system. An image of the well layout is provided in a PowerPoint.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

EGS Collab Experiment 2: Wireline Geophysical Well Logs

This is the full wireline geophysical datasets for characterization of the EGS Collab Experiment #2 testbed. A metadata fill is included within the dataset explaining the logs, fracture picks, etc. Eleven boreholes were drilled for this testbed and each one was logged with north seeking gyro, optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, fluid temperature conductivity, resistivity and gamma, and full waveform sonic. In these folders are the processed results as text, csv and pdf files along with the raw data which will need to be read by WellCAD.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Steptoe Valley NV Data Compilation: Understanding a Stratigraphic Hydrothermal Resource through Geophysical Imaging

Sandia National Laboratories partnered with a multi-disciplinary group of subject matter experts to evaluate a stratigraphic geothermal resource in Steptoe Valley, Nevada using both established and novel geophysical imaging techniques. Provided here are a compilation of newly acquired data over the area and select modeling efforts. This encompasses a 3D geological model (inclusive of full Leapfrog files, Leapfrog viewer files, and XYZ data for faults and stratigraphy) with embedded geophysical modeling, controlled-source electromagnetic (CSEM) and magnetotelluric (MT) data packages, aqueous spring geochemistry data, seismic reflection interpretations, and a gravity data package. The stratigraphic reservoir in Steptoe Valley was previously discovered during oil and gas exploration. Subsequent studies, such as the Nevada Play Fairway Analysis, added data which further highlighted potential resource targets in the basin. Geophysical surveys, complimented with refined geologic mapping and geochemical sampling, were deployed to further characterize the resource. The resulting 3D geologic interpretation, conceptual model refinements, and reservoir simulations suggest that a power-capable reservoir is economically accessible in the Paleozoic carbonates of the deep/central basin. Additional geophysical characterization and exploration drilling efforts are recommended to calibrate interpretation and determine where/how to potentially develop the Steptoe resource. The geophysical tools, interpretations, lessons learned, and publicly available data generated by this study establish an exploration methodology to inform decisions for successful development of stratigraphic reservoirs.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

COMSOL Models and Simulation Results for Closed-Loop Geothermal Systems with Thermal Enhancements

The Closed-Loop Geothermal Working Group and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have studied the performance of disc-shaped and linear thermal enhancements (conductive material introduced around a wellbore) in closed-loop geothermal systems. COMSOL models were developed to investigate the increase in heat production in systems with thermal enhancements compared to those without, across a range of scenarios. This dataset includes two example COMSOL models, a summary of the simulation results, and a link to an accompanying paper. Studied are idealized versions of two thermal enhancement designs: (1) existing or newly created fractures surrounding the wellbore, filled with highly conductive material, and (2) a 'fishbone structure,' where short wellbores are drilled radially outward from the main wellbore and filled with highly conductive material.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

EGS Collab Experiment 1: Wireline Geophysical Well Logs

This is the full wireline geophysical datasets for characterization of the EGS Collab Experiment #1 testbed on the 4850 level. A metadata file is included within the dataset explaining the logs, fracture picks, etc. Eight boreholes were drilled for this testbed and each one was logged with north seeking gyro, optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, fluid temperature conductivity, resistivity and gamma, and full waveform sonic. In these folders are the processed results as text, csv, and pdf files, along with the raw data which will need to be read using WellCAD software.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Utah FORGE: Wells 16A(78)-32 and 16B(78)-32 Stimulation Pressure and Circulation Data April, 2024

This dataset consists of all of the pressure pumping data for Utah FORGE Well16A78-32 fracturing stages, Well 16B78-32 fracturing stages, and a 9-hour circulation test which took place after all of the frac plugs were drilled out. Fracturing in the wells took place in stages from April 3rd to April 17th, while the circulation test occurred on April 27th, 2024. Data is in excel files, with ReadMe files for each of the .zip folders that detail what data is available. Also attached here is wellhead pressure data from Pason that is referred to in the ReadMe files.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗