Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “56-32”

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.

Utah FORGE Well 56-32 Sludge XRF

This is an Excel spreadsheet containing the results of X-ray fluorescence from well 56-32 sludge samples. The instrumentation used was a Olympus Vanta M series handheld XRF analyzer. A glass (SiO2) "blank" was analyzed at the beginning and end of each sample batch to detect contamination within the instrument. The standard 2711A was analyzed at the beginning and end of each sample batch to detect drift in instrument precision over time. Material was analyzed in a plastic cup with a prolene thin film cover for minimal interference.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 3: Utah FORGE Well 56-32

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↗

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↗

Utah FORGE Downhole Geophone Seismic Data (August 2022)

This is a link to downhole geophone data collected by Schlumberger. These data were collected in the Utah FORGE deep seismic monitoring wells 58-32 and 56-32. The format is a standard SEGY and the units are bits. To convert to acceleration (m/s2) multiply by 2.333 x 10-7. Use one of the scripts linked below to use wget commands to pull the data.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Deep Wells Temperature Surveys as of September 2022

This Excel spreadsheet contains temperature survey results for Utah FORGE wells 58-32, 78-32, 56-32, 16A(78)-32 and 78B-32. It also contains charts and comparisons, along with a "Data Summary" which provides links to previous GDR submissions with temperature data for each well.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Cape EGS: Frisco Pad Wells Flow Test Microseismic Data

This dataset contains microseismic data acquired during the Frisco pad flow test project led by Fervo Energy, conducted between July 17th - Aug 12th 2024, near the Utah FORGE geothermal site. The microseismic data was collected from various Utah FORGE wells: via Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) fiber in 16B, and two 3-component geophones located in wells 56-32 and 78B. The dataset is structured in SEGY format, where the first six traces represent data from the geophones, and the remaining traces capture DAS data from well 16B. Each SEGY file in this dataset contains triggered microseismic events, with event initiation based on Short-Time Average over Long-Time Average (STA/LTA) detection criteria during the stimulation process. Files are grouped by time intervals and named following the structure "[WellPad][WellName][Month]_[Year]Divine_Trigger[EventNumber].sgy," indicating well pad, well name, date, and event number. Sampling parameters include a spatial sampling of approximately 2 meters for DAS channels and a temporal sampling rate of 2000 Hz, with each data record spanning 1.2 seconds. The files' coordinates are referenced to the location of the FORGE 16A-32 wellhead, positioned at UTM coordinates: Easting 334641.1891 m and Northing 4263443.693 m. The geographic coordinates for this origin are 38.50402147 latitude and -112.8963897 longitude, with an elevation of 1650.0249 meters above sea level.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Cape EGS: Frisco 2-P Well Stimulation Microseismic Data

This dataset contains microseismic data acquired during the Frisco 2-P well stimulation project led by Fervo Energy, conducted between June 1 and June 11, 2024, near the Utah FORGE geothermal site. The microseismic data was collected from various Utah FORGE wells: via Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) fiber in 16B, and three 3-component geophones located in wells 56-32, 78B, and 32. The dataset is structured in SEGY format, where the first nine traces represent data from the geophones, and the remaining traces capture DAS data from well 16B. Each SEGY file in this dataset contains triggered microseismic events, with event initiation based on Short-Time Average over Long-Time Average (STA/LTA) detection criteria during the stimulation process. Files are grouped by time intervals and named following the structure "[WellPad][WellName][Month]_[Year]Divine_Trigger[EventNumber].sgy," indicating well pad, well name, date, and event number. Sampling parameters include a spatial sampling of approximately 2 meters for DAS channels and a temporal sampling rate of 2000 Hz, with each data record spanning 1.2 seconds. The files' coordinates are referenced to the location of the FORGE 16A-32 wellhead, positioned at UTM coordinates: Easting 334641.1891 m and Northing 4263443.693 m. The geographic coordinates for this origin are 38.50402147 latitude and -112.8963897 longitude, with an elevation of 1650.0249 meters above sea level.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 5: Utah FORGE Well 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↗

Analysis of Rig Parameter Data Using Drilling Process Modeling Constraints, Volume 4: Utah FORGE Well 78B-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↗

Prediction and Analysis of Utah FORGE Injection Activities using a Coupled Thermo-hydro-mechanical and Earthquake (THM+E) Modeling Workflow

A coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical (THM) numerical workflow that is capable of modeling seismic slip is critical for the successful development of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). By integrating key physical processes, this workflow enables accurate simulation of temperature and pressure diffusions, stress changes, and induced seismicity. As a result, it serves as a vital tool for predicting induced seismicity and optimizing reservoir stimulation strategies. The Utah FORGE (Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy) project, located near Milford, Utah, is a U.S. Department of Energy initiative aimed at advancing EGS technology. In April 2024, eight new stimulation stages (Stages 3R-10) were conducted in well 16A (injection well) subsequent to the first series of stimulation (Stages 1-3) performed in April, 2022. To monitor the induced seismicity, geophones were deployed in wells 58-32, 56-32, and 78B-32, while fiber optic cables were also installed in wells 16B, 78-32, and 78B-32 to collect microseismic data and detect frac hits Preliminary analyses of microseismic catalogs and fiber optic data suggest that the stimulated fractures in Stages 3R–6 closely align with that generated during Stage 3, indicating that the new stimulations were likely reactivating the previously stimulated fracture. To better understand the underlying process, a comprehensive modeling approach that can accurately capture thermal, hydrological, mechanical, and seismic responses is essential. In this work, we propose and utilize a coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical and earthquake (THM+E) simulation workflow to numerically investigate the stimulation activities on well 16A. The specific objective is to confirm whether the new stimulation stages (Stages 3R–6) reactivated fractures previously stimulated during Stage 3. For this purpose, we perform THM+E simulations individually for Stages 3, 3R, 4, and 5, incorporating the discrete fracture networks (DFNs) created by the plane-fitting technique based on the microseismic catalogs. The simulation workflow consists of two separate models: a THM model and an earthquake model, coupled in a one-way manner. Detailed descriptions of the workflow are provided in Section 3. Simulation results are presented in terms of injection pressure, permeability evolution, and predicted seismic catalogs, which are then compared with field data for further analyses. This report is structured as follows. In Section 2, we present detailed analyses of the field data and propose the hypothesis that the new stimulation stages (Stages 3R–6) were probably reactivating the previously stimulated fractures in Stage 3. In Section 3, we introduce the coupled THM+E workflow and the problem setup to validate our hypothesis, followed by the simulation results for each stage in Section 4. Meanwhile, discussions are included to analyze the model predictions and their comparison with field data. Lastly, we conclude the report and outline future plans in Section 5.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE Phase 3 Native State Model: 2022 Update

This is the Phase 3 native state model update. The Phase 3 numerical model represents a significant subsurface volume below the FORGE site footprint. The model domain of 4.0 km x 4.0 km x 4.2 km is located approximately between depths of 4000 to 4200 meters below land surface. This data archive consists of 10 files, 4 of which are simulation input files and the remaining 6 are simulation output files. There is an included readme.txt file that contains details on each of the data files. The input files include meshes, FALCON code inputs, tabulated data of water properties, temperature values, and model boundaries. The output files include simulation outfiles and point data of modeled material properties.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗