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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MATCH PARAMETERS -ip 10 PSI 150 t 1 Ohr PO 0.079 FT ui a 3 cn 130ikxk cn w a i r)n , i i i I + - * + DATA - SIMULATION +PUMP OFF 'lot to 5/6/83 1O:OO I I I 100 0 200 400 600 800 100 ELAPSED TIME, hours Figure 5-79. DOE-l/Culebra Pumping Test Linear-Linear Sequence Plot with INTERPRET Simulation Drawdown responses probably related to the DOE-1 pumping were noted at wells H-3, H-1, P-17, and possibly H-4 during routine water-level monitoring. Because these responses were not anticipated, however, no pre-test baseline water-level monitoring had been performed at these wells. Consequently, the presence or absence of pre-existing water-level trends and water levels precisely at the beginning of DOE-1 pumping are not defined. In addition, well H- 4c was being pumped for a tracer test during all phases of the DOE-1 pumping test, which may have influenced some of the water levels observed. Because of these uncertainties concerning the observed water-level data, the observation-well "responses" were not interpreted. 5.2.2.22 Engle. The Engle well was pumped for a period of 165.5 hr beginning November 4, 1983, to collect water-quality samples. The pumping rate was held at a nearly constant 9.8 gpm for approximately the first 97 hr of pumping. Pressure-drawdown data collected over this period are amenable to interpretation. Recovery data were collected for only one hr after the pump was turned off, producing nothing useable for interpretation. A more complete description of this test and the test data are contained in Stensrud et at. (1987). Figure 5-80 shows a log-log plot of the Engle drawdown data, along with simulations of the data generated by INTERPRET. Late-time scatter of the data, particularly of the pressure-derivative data, is probably related to pumping-rate fluctuations. The model used for the simulations is representative of a single-porosity medium with a transmissivity of 43 ftz/day (Table 5-3). Assuming a Culebra porosity of 20%, a total-system compressibility of 1.0 x 10-5 psi-1, and a fluid viscosity of 1.0 cp, the skin factor for this simulation is about 4.2. A dimensionless Homer plot of the drawdown data, along with a simulation generated using the same model, is shown in Figure 5-81. Again, the simulation matches the test data well until the data scatter at late time, indicating that an appropriate model was selected. 106
n a 102 J K 3 IO’ cn VI W K n VI VI w a 2 0 cn 5 100 I n MATCH PARAMETERS AP = 1.0 psi t = 1.0 hr PO = 0.33 t,/C, = 45 COe2S = 1.0 x 108 PI = 83.31 psig 0 PRESSURE DATA * * h 8 PRESSURE-DERIVATIVE DATA f - SIMULATIONS * I 1 I lo-’ I lo-’ 100 10’ 102 103 104 DIMENSIONLESS TIME GROUP. tD/CD Figure 5-80. Engle/Culebra Pumping Test Drawdown Log-Log Plot with INTERPRET Simulation MATCH PARAMETERS AP = 1.0 psi t = 1.0 hr PD = 0.33 fdcD =45 CDe2’ = 1.0 x 108 P’ = 83.31 psig ,/ + DATA - SIMULATION 1 I 1 -1 0 1 2 3 4 DIMENSIONLESS SUPERPOSITION FUNCTION: FLOW PERIOD 1 I Figure 5-81. EngleKulebra Pumping Test Drawdown Dimensionless Horner Plot with INTERPRET Simulation
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 100 and 101: Two type-curve matches are shown wi
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 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?