Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “16A”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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 OSTI2021

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Drilling Data

This dataset includes survey data, drilling data, daily reports, summaries of daily operations, and rig photos from the drilling of Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32, which is a highly deviated deep well. It was completed 60 days ahead of schedule. Rig move in began 10/22/2020 and drilling commenced on 10/30/2020, and total depth was reached on 12/18/2020. Drilling was followed by a diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT), logging, and circulating casing. The rig was released on 1/12/2021. The upper part of the well was drilled vertically through approximately 4,700 feet of sediments before penetrating into high strength, crystalline granite. The well was deviated at a 65 degree angle from vertical after reaching a depth of 6,000 ft. This angle was maintained for the remainder of the well's trajectory. The well ultimately reached a true vertical depth of 8,559 feet, and a total measured depth of 10,987 feet. Preliminary measurements indicate temperatures at the "toe" of the well will exceed 442 degrees F (228 degrees C). Approximately 74 ft of core of the granitic and metamorphic rocks that will form the FORGE reservoir was also recovered.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Logs

This dataset contains all well logs from Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32. This includes the mud log, Sanvean Technologies logs, and Schlumberger logs. Please see the file descriptions below for information about each log.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utah FORGE Well 16A(78)-32 Core Photos

Images of core samples collected from Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32. These images were created by stitching together multiple photographs resulting in a circumferential view of the cores exterior in two dimensions. Core footages (measured depths) are indicated in the file names, and are annotated on each image. The images, of which there are 30 in the .zip file, are in a .jpg format.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE Well 16A(78)-32 Stimulation Data (April, 2022)

This is a set of data related to the stimulation program at Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32 during April, 2022. This includes daily reports, 1 second Pason data, tracer data, and shear stimulation data and information including a report of an evolving prognosis for the stimulation operations.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE: Seismic Event Catalogue from the April, 2022 Stimulation of Well 16A(78)-32

This dataset includes earthquake catalogues for the three stages of the 2022 well 16A(78)-32 stimulation provided by Geo Energie Suisse. Events in these catalogues have been visually inspected. There are additional events of lower signal to noise that were automatically detected. Those events will require additional analysis and processing. Times are recorded in UTC (Coordinate Universal Time), and the coordinate reference system is UTM Zone 12N, NAD83.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Stimulation Tracer Test Results

This archive contains data from the tracer test performed during the Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32 stimulation. This includes: 1. the raw data file from Pason in the csv format; 2. a one-page Word document from Pason that explains the headers and units used in their data file; 3. an Excel spreadsheet with concentration data and relevant Pason flow data; 4. a Word document with jpg versions of concentration charts (Figs. 1-3) and a tracer mass recovery chart (Fig. 4).

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE: Phase 1a Tensor Strainmeter Data for the April, 2022 Stimulation of Well 16A(78)-32

Data from two Tensor Optical Fiber Strainmeters that were operational during Stages 1, 2, and 3 of the April, 2022 stimulation of well 16A(78)-32. Each csv file contains data from each stimulation stage (stage1, stage2, stage3) for both Phase 1a strainmeter installations (FS01, formerly FS-C, and FS02, formerly FS1-2) in human-readable comma-separated value text files. There are two header lines in each file describing the data contained in that column along with their units, respectively. Data have been decimated from 2 to 1 Hz to match the Pason data found in the linked GDR dataset below (16A78-32 Stimulation Pason Data). These files contain the time series spanning the same time interval as the Pason data as well as ambient data for 5 hours before the stimulation and 5 hours following shut in. The station locations were chosen based on their proximity to the borehole seismometers owned and operated by the University of Utah. See README.txt for more information.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE: Updated Seismic Event Catalogue from the April, 2022 Stimulation of Well 16A(78)-32

These are revised catalogs, related to the April, 2022 well 16A(78)-32 stimulation (phases 1,2, & 3), provided by Geo Energie Suisse (GES) that include additional events at the start of Stage 1 and some tidying up of some locations. These catalogs also include events for additional events that were auto-located to provide a larger dataset for statistical analyses, like b-value calculations. The actual auto-locations have been removed to prevent spurious location plots being created. Times are recorded in UTC (Coordinate Universal Time), and the coordinate reference system is UTM Zone 12N, NAD83.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE: Powder X-ray Diffraction Data from Well 16A(78)-32 Core

This dataset from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) consists of four raw X-ray diffraction (XRD) scans and preliminary results of quantitative XRD analysis. The scanned samples were prepared from four subcores, which came from various depths of the FORGE well 16A(78)-32 core. Desired core lengths were selected from available core photos (on GDR), provided by FORGE personnel, and subcored at LLNL. The XRD scans were collected in May 2023 at LLNL as pre-experimental characterization data for these subcores, which will be used in core-flooding experiments at LLNL and in triaxial direct shear experiments at Los Alamos National Laboratory as part of DOE Project 5-2428. XRD scans are in RAW file format (e.g., FORGE-5477-full.raw) and are suitable for viewing and analysis using open-source quantitative XRD software (e.g., Profex; www.profex-xrd.org ) and/or other proprietary instrument software.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32 Core Analysis Results

This dataset features petrographic, X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), and Scanning Electron Microscopy Analyses of core samples from well 16A(78)-32, which serves as the injection well for the Utah FORGE Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) project. In addition to an overview of the analysis, the following items have been included here: images of 21 entire thin sections in plane-polarized and cross-polarized light from 16 depths, scanning electron microscope back scatter electron photomosaic maps of 21 thin sections from 16 depths, bulk XRD data from 16 depths, clay-sized XRD patterns from 16 depths, an optical petrography report, and scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy analyses of eight selected samples.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Utah FORGE: 16B(78)-32 RFS DSS Strain Change Rate vs. Depth During 16A(78)-32 Stimulation

This dataset contains strain change rate versus depth data acquired using a Rayleigh frequency shift (RFS) distributed strain sensing (DSS) system during hydraulic stimulation of well 16A(78)-32 at the Utah FORGE site in April 2024. The data were collected from an optical fiber installed in the annulus of production well 16B(78)-32, approximately 300 feet from the injection well. The dataset includes tabulated strain data and an explanation of the methodology used to generate the frac log, which integrates strain change rate signals over selected time windows to identify fracture events.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 1: Summary of Utah FORGE Wells 16A(78)-32, 56-32, 78B-32 and 16B(78)-32

Drill rig parameter measurements are routinely used during deep well construction to monitor and guide drilling conditions for improved performance and reduced costs. While insightful into the drilling process, these measurements are of reduced value without a standard to aid in data evaluation and decision making. In the main body of this work (Volume 1), a method is demonstrated whereby rock reduction model constraints are used to interpret drilling response parameters; the method could be applied in real-time to improve decision-making in the field and to further discern technology performance during post-drilling evaluations. Drilling parameters are evaluated using laboratory-validated rock reduction models for predicting the phenomenological response of drag bits (Detournay and Defourny, 1992) in computational algorithms. The method presented has applicability to development of advanced analytics on future geothermal wells using real-time electronic data recording for improved performance and reduced drilling costs. A drilling cost model is also used to show the tradeoff between rate of penetration and bit life and the influence on interval drilling costs. Details of the bit specifications and performance are cataloged in an independent volume, documented under separate cover, for each of the four wells, and include Volume 2: Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32; Volume 3: Utah FORGE 56-32; Volume 4: Utah FORGE 78B-32 and Volume 5: Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1987

Transonic analysis of the F-16A with under-wing fuel tanks - An application of the TranAir full-potential code

Initial results obtained using the TranAir transonic full-potential code are presented for a fully configured F-16A geometry, including two 370-gal under-wing fuel tanks, at freestream Mach numbers of 0.6 and 0.9 and angle of attack of 4 deg. The geometry is modeled using surface panels, and the flow field is defined by a rectangular array of flow-field grid points. The paneled geometry is embedded within this rectangular flow field. By avoiding the use of surface-conforming flow-field grids, the modeling generality afforded by surface panels can be utilized to analyze very complex configurations in the transonic flow regime.

Madson, Michael D.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Numerical simulation of an F-16A at angle of attack

The transonic flowfield around an F-16A fighter configuration at a moderate incidence angle is simulated by solving the Navier-Stokes equations on a single-block grid. The numerical solution matches experimental freestream conditions with a mach number of 0.85, 16 degrees angle of attack, and a characteristic Reynolds number of 12.75 million. MacCormack's explicit algorithm is used in conjuction with a local time step and consecutive mesh refinement procedure to accelerate numerical convergence. The Baldwin-Lomax algebraic model provides turbulent closure. Computed surface pressure distributions and the aircraft lift coefficient compare favorably with wind tunnel data. The drag coefficient in the simulation overpredicts the experimental value by 8 percent.

Huband, G. W.↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2025

Characterizing Stress Roughness at Utah FORGE Through Simulation of Hydraulic Fracture Growth During 16A Stage 3 Stimulation

In most geologic formations, the vertical gradient of the minimum horizontal stress (𝜎 h ) exceeds the hydrostatic gradient, often driving hydraulic fractures to propagate upward. However, observations indicate that the upward growth of real hydraulic fractures is less pronounced than theoretical predictions based on smoothly varying 𝜎 h fields. In fact, the layered structure of sedimentary rocks hinders fracture propagation across layers, partially explaining the limited height growth observed in practice (Zoback et al., 2022). While crystalline rocks lack the pervasive layered fabric of sedimentary formations, they still possess structural fabric formed over their geologic history, resulting in inherently "rough" in situ stress fields. Recent studies have identified another key factor: the "roughness" of in situ stress, characterized by temporal, relatively short-wavelength fluctuations superimposed on the overall stress gradient. This stress roughness leads to apparent toughness anisotropy, where the vertical toughness appears significantly larger than the horizontal toughness (P. Fu et al., 2019; Dontsov & Suarez-Rivera, 2021). Neglecting the effects of rock fabric and stress roughness can yield inaccurate predictions of hydraulic fracture geometry and growth rates at larger length scales.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗