Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “well 16A78-32 core analysis”

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 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↗

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↗

Utah FORGE 2439: A Multi-Component Approach to Characterizing In-Situ Stress

Core-based in-situ stress estimation, Triaxial Ultrasonic Velocity (labTUV) data, and Deformation Rate Analysis (DRA) data for Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32 using triaxial ultrasonic velocity and deformation rate analysis. Report documenting a multi-component approach to characterizing in-situ stress at the U.S. DOE FORGE EGS site: laboratory, modeling and field measurement. Core-based methods for in-situ stress estimation were applied using samples from 5 intervals within the Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32 well. At three of these locations, Triaxial Ultrasonic Velocity (labTUV) tests were performed, resulting in experimentally-determined relationships between wave velocities and stresses. Non-monotonic increase in the velocity-stress relationships are inferred provide evidence of stress history and are therefore used to estimate in-situ stress magnitudes. Additionally, Deformation Rate Analysis (DRA) tests were run on core plugs from various orientations at each of the 5 sampling locations. These, too, provide evidence of stress history based on stress-strain behavior. A novel Weight of Evidence (WoE) method was developed as a means of synthesizing in-situ stress evidence from these two types of tests. Results indicate the minimum horizontal stress gradient ranges from 0.58 psi/ft to 0.69 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 values between 0.66 psi/ft and 0.69 psi/ft. The vertical stress gradient ranges from 1.05 psi/ft to 1.12 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 zones given results between 1.09 psi/ft and 1.12 psi/ft. The maximum horizontal stress gradient ranges from 0.98 psi/ft to 1.34 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 zones falling between 0.98 psi/ft and 1.24 psi/ft. The stress regime thus appears to be on the edge between normal faulting and strike-slip faulting, potentially flipping back and forth between the two regimes due to variability of rock properties, structures such as faults, and/or thermal anomalies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗