Beauheim 1987 - Waste Isolation Pilot Plant - U.S. Department of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Two type-curve matches are shown with the test data on Figure 5-71. The early-time data were best fit by a type curve characteristic of damaged (i.e., having a positive skin) wells, whereas the late-time data were best fit by a type curve characteristic of undamaged (i.e., having a neutral or no skin) wells. The two typecurve matches also provide contrasting transmissivity estimates. The transmissivity derived from the early-time match is about 4 x 10-3 ftz/day, while that from the late-time match is about 7 x 10-5 ftzfday (Table 5-3). These observations indicate that the P-18 wellbore may be poorly connected hydraulically to a small portion of the Culebra having a higher transmissivity than more-distant portions. The contrast between the transmissivity of the Culebra and that of the well "skin" may decrease as the transmissivity of the Culebra decreases with distance from P-18, resulting in the neutral skin shown by the late-time data. The fact that the slope of the data on Figure 5-71 changes abruptly as opposed to smoothly appears to indicate that the change in transmissivity is discrete rather than gradational. Drilling of the borehole may have caused minor fracturing of the formation around the hole, which may have led to a slightly enhanced transmissivity in the immediate vicinity of the hole. Casing, cementing, and perforation may have resulted in a poor connection between the wellbore and the surrounding formation, resulting in the positive skin observed. Given the peculiarities in the response to the P-18 slug test and the uncertainties as to their cause, the transmissivity of the Culebra at P-18 remains poorly defined. The estimate provided by the early-time type-curve match does not appear to be valid beyond the immediate vicinity (a few feet?) of the well. The transmissivity estimate provided by the late-time type-curve match may not be quantitatively reliable because the time match between the data and the type curve, which defines the transmissivity, would probably be greater, thus indicating a lower transmissivity, if the hydraulic response of the Culebra had been more consistent (i.e-, homogeneous). In summary, the transmissivity estimate from the early-time data, 4 x 10-3 ftz/day, is probably unrealistically high, but is reliably a maximum value. The estimate from the late-time data, 7 x 10-5 ft*/day, is probably more representative of the Culebra in the vicinity of P-18, but cannot be interpreted as a minimum value. 5.2.2.19 ERDA-9. Two falling-head slug tests were performed in November 1986 to evaluate the transmissivity of the Culebra at ERDA-9. The first was initiated on November 20, 1986. The test lasted about 18 hr, by which time over 99% of the induced pressure differential had dissipated. Figure 5-72 is a semilog plot of the slug-test data, along with the best-fit type curve. This fit provides a transmissivity estimate of 0.45 ftZ/day for the Culebra at ERDA-9 (Table 5-3). The second test began on November 24, 1986, and lasted about 16 hr. A semilog plot of the data from this test is presented in Figure 5-73, along with the best-fit type-curve match. This match is very similar to that used to fit the data from the first test, and provides a similar transmissivity estimate of 0.47 ft2/day (Table 5-3). The data from these tests are reported in Stensrud et al. (1987). 5.2.2.20 Cabin Baby-1. Two falling-head slug tests were performed at Cabin Baby-1 to evaluate the transmissivity of the Culebra at that location. The first test was initiated on March 10, 1987 and the second was initiated on March 12, 1987. Complete dissipation of the induced pressure differential was achieved during the first test, and about 99% dissipation during the second. The data from these tests are presented in Stensrud et al. (1987). Figure 5-74 is a semilog plot of the data from the first test, along with the best-fit type curve. This fit provides a transmissivity estimate of 0.28 ftzjday for the Culebra at Cabin Baby-1 (Table 5-3). The semilog plot of the data from the second test (Figure 5-75) shows an identical type-curve match with a slightly better overall fit, leading to a second transmissivity estimate of 0.28 ft*/day (Table 5-3). 5.2.2.21 DOE-1. After an 8-hr step-drawdown test of the Culebra conducted at DOE-1 on May 3, 1983 indicated that the productivity of the well was much higher than previously believed, a 440-hr pumping test was conducted beginning on May 6, 1983. The average pumping rate during the test was 9.93 gpm. After the pump was turned off, pressure recovery in the well was monitored for nearly 422 hr. The fluid- 100
p' pi = 83.15 psig 124.84 PSIg t =0.365hr 10-3 10-2 10' 100 10' 102 ELAPSED TIME, hours Figure 5-72. ERDA-S/Culebra Slug-Test #1 Plot 1 .o 0.9 MATCH PARAMETERS 0.8 p' = 84.00 prig pi = 124.07 psig 0.7 t = 0.35 hr 0.6 0 I 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 = 328:11:30:42 nn -.- 10-3 10-2 lo-' 100 ELAPSED TIME, hours 10' 102 Figure 5-73. ERDA-S/Culebra Slug-Test #2 Plot 101
Page 1 and 2:
SANDIA REPORT SAND87 -0039 UC - 70
Page 3 and 4:
SAND87-0039 Unlimited Release Print
Page 5:
a transmissivity of about 7 x 10-2
Page 8 and 9:
5 . TEST OBJECTIVES AND INTERPRETAT
Page 10 and 11:
3-18 3-19 3-20 3-21 3-22 3-23 3-24
Page 12 and 13:
5-35 H-l5/Culebra Drillstem and Slu
Page 14 and 15:
5-78 5-79 5-80 5-81 5-82 5-83 5-84
Page 16 and 17:
A-2 A-3 A4 A-5 A-6 Single-Porosity
Page 18 and 19:
'H-6 o DOE-2 OHIPP-13 OAIPP 12 OH-1
Page 20 and 21:
WlPP site. The aggregate thickness
Page 22 and 23:
deep. The gamma-ray log used to gui
Page 24 and 25:
3347.11 ft \ - -12.25-inch HOLE -8.
Page 26 and 27:
~ 3409.6 n __ - - HOLOCENE DEPOSITS
Page 28 and 29:
Ylf M (t -1wt 5 n nch REAMED BOREHO
Page 30 and 31:
3418.96 n 7.875-inch REAMED BOREHOL
Page 32 and 33:
2.375-inch TUBING 4.5-inch. 9.5 Ibl
Page 34 and 35:
WELL CASING 2.375-inch TUBING TEST-
Page 36 and 37:
1.5-Inch GALVANIZED PIPE WELL CASIN
Page 38 and 39:
I I I I PRE-TEST STATIC PRESSURE i/
Page 40 and 41:
(or areal extent) of the aquifer on
Page 42 and 43:
:7001 J EQUILIBRATION / r.. .......
Page 44 and 45:
Once straddle tests proved impossib
Page 46 and 47:
1300 c - J PRE-TEST PRESSURE IN TES
Page 48 and 49:
- < a m L: * m 3 L a I Start Date:
Page 50 and 51: uildups were caused by the natural
Page 52 and 53: TABLE 5-1 EFFECTIVE DST FLOW RATES
Page 54 and 55: TABLE 5-2 SUMMARY OF NON-CULEBRA SI
Page 56 and 57: simulation shown, however, uses a t
Page 58 and 59: 1 .o 0.9 0.8 p' = 79.08 paig pi = 6
Page 60 and 61: ~ ~~ TABLE 5-3 SUMMARY OF CULEBRA S
Page 62 and 63: Two factors raised questions about
Page 64 and 65: 102 I I 1 1 1 W K 3 v) v) W K n v)
Page 66 and 67: 5.2.2.21 below) and DOE-2 (Beauheim
Page 68 and 69: ..A 225 - PRESSURE ABOVE TEST INTER
Page 70 and 71: 10' n ui K 3 v) v) W a n v) v) 100
Page 72 and 73: 10' MATCH PARAMETERS O n w a 3 v) v
Page 74 and 75: ..CI__._._..__....__.I 5.2.2.6 H-15
Page 76 and 77: 8.0 1 I I I MATCH PARAMETERS AP 1.0
Page 78 and 79: - 200 150 5 - EQUILIBRATION \Feu 'S
Page 80 and 81: 4.0 1 I 1 1 3.0 I n 2.0 1 .o 0.0 0.
Page 82 and 83: 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0
Page 84 and 85: 3.0 .hl c El2 2.0 . v n I P 1 .o MA
Page 86 and 87: EI€3- 0.9 "O I OOATA - TYPE CURVE
Page 88 and 89: 4.0 I I I 3.0 MATCH PARAMETERS AP =
Page 90 and 91: 1 .o 0.9 0.8 0.7 1 MATCH PARAMETERS
Page 92 and 93: 1 .o 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0 2 0.5 I 0.4
Page 94 and 95: 1.0, 0 I 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 MA
Page 96 and 97: P-15 was bailed on four occasions i
Page 98 and 99: 1 .o 0.9 0.8 - p’ = 78.93 prig p,
Page 102 and 103: 0 5 I ELAPSED TIME. hours Figure 5-
Page 104 and 105: 10’ 1 I I I n a w 5 100 v) v) W a
Page 106 and 107: MATCH PARAMETERS -ip 10 PSI 150 t 1
Page 108 and 109: Considering that all other pumping
Page 110 and 111: I ,EQUILIBRATION BUILDUP Elapsed Ti
Page 112 and 113: 0 9. w 10’ K =a 100 v) v) W a n v
Page 114 and 115: 10’ I I I a J P 100 v) v) W a n v
Page 116 and 117: ~ ~. SLUG t i /- i 3 Start Date 07
Page 118 and 119: Figure 5-94 is a log-log plot of th
Page 120 and 121: was followed by a 92-minute FBU. Th
Page 122 and 123: 10’ 1 1 1 1 a n w’ a = 100 v) v
Page 124 and 125: and anhydrite, and were not conside
Page 126 and 127: 4.0 MATCH PARAMETERS .A. L. 21% 3.0
Page 128 and 129: Estimates of the static formation p
Page 130 and 131: 10’ n w 2 100 v) v) w a P v) v) w
Page 132 and 133: OWIPP-28. 70 OWIPP-27.650 OWIPP-30.
Page 134 and 135: to Nash Draw where no halite is pre
Page 136 and 137: observations regarding the potentia
Page 138 and 139: 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Single-w
Page 140 and 141: REFERENCES Bachman, G.O. 1984. Regi
Page 142 and 143: INTERA Technologies, Inc. 1986. WlP
Page 144 and 145: Stensrud, W.A.; Bame, M.A.; Lantr,
Page 146 and 147: (A-4)
Page 148 and 149: distinct value of Coe2s. Pressure-d
Page 150 and 151:
The wellbore storage coefficient is
Page 152 and 153:
where: n = number of normal sets of
Page 154 and 155:
(A-21) and for spherical blocks the
Page 156 and 157:
where: tp* = Vfq, V = total flow pr
Page 158 and 159:
Figure A-5. Semilog Slug-Test Type
Page 160 and 161:
A.4 INTERPRET WELL-TEST INTERPRETAT
Page 162 and 163:
DISTRIBUTION: U. S. Department of E
Page 164 and 165:
INTERA Technologies, Inc. (9) 6580
Page 166 and 167:
WlPP Public Reading Room Carlsbad M
Page 168 and 169:
Nationale Genossenschaft fur die La
show all

Beauheim 1987 - Waste Isolation Pilot Plant - U.S. Department of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?