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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

102 I I 1 1 1 W K 3 v) v) W K n v) W J 2 v) 2 W 10' v) 100 0 z a io-' MATCH PARAMETERS AP = 1.0 psi t = 1.0 hr PD = 0.1 tdCo =31 tC,,ezs), = 0.4 (CDezs)t-m = 4.0 x 10-3 e-2s = 0.9 Pi = 44.87 psig NO-FLOW BOUNDARY AT Do = SO00 - 0 PRESSURE DATA * PRESSURE-DERIVATlVE DATA SIMULATIONS 10-2 I 1 I I 10-2 io-' 109 10' 102 103 104 DIMENSIONLESS TIME GROUP, t,/Co Figure 5-21. H-8b/Culebra Pumping Test Drawdown Log-Log Plot with INTERPRET Simulation well with a smaller radius. Conversely, a well with a negative skin factor should behave like a well with a larger radius. H-8b, with a skin factor of -7.2 and an actual radius of 0.255 ft, behaves like a well with a radius of about 340 ft. The reason for the two-fold discrepancy between the transmissivity reported by Mercer (1983) and that obtained from this test is not clear. The hydraulic boundary indicated by this test analysis was either not felt by the earlier, shorter test, or was not recognized. Without either data from multiple observation wells or independent geologicfgeophysical information, the orientation of the boundary cannot be determined. Figure 5-22 shows a log-log plot of the H-8b recovery data along with an INTERPRET simulation using exactly the same model as was used in the drawdown simulation (Figure 5-21). In an ideal system, this model should fit both the drawdown and recovery data identically. In general, the fit is excellent until extreme late time, at which point apparent "over-recovery" on the order of 1 psi is observed (most clearly in the rise of the pressure derivative). This over-recovery may be related to residua1 recovery from some pre-test pumping activities associated with checking the pump and filling the discharge lines (INTERA Technologies, 1986). Figure 5-23, a linear-linear plot of both the drawdown (compensated for the initial 3.2psi pump loss) and recovery data along with an INTERPRETgenerated simulation, also shows the generally excellent tit between the data and the simulation, as well as the over-recovery beginning about 70 hr into the recovery period. In general, the H-8b response was very similar to the responses observed at wells H-3b2. H-3b3, and WIPP-13 when those wells were pumped (Beauheim, 1987a and 1987b). At these locations, the Culebra exhibits unrestricted interporosity flow with rapid transition between flow from the fractures only and flow from both the fractures and the matrix This type of response contrasts with the responses observed during pumping tests at wells DOE-1 (see Section 64
102 n" 10' w' a 3 v) v) W a P 2 100 W A 2 0 v) Z z 5 10-1 MATCH PARAMETERS AP = 1.0 psi t 1.0 hr PO = 0.1 t D/C D = 31 f.Cne2Sl, = 0.4 (Cne2S),., = 4.0 x Ae-Zs = 0.9 = 29.55 psig PI NO-FLOW BOUNDARY AT D, = 5000 0 PRESSURE DATA - SIMULATIONS %- PRESSURE-DERIVATIVE DATA 10-2 10-2 lo-' 100 10' 102 103 104 DIMENSIONLESS TIME GROUP, tD/CD Figure 5-22. H-8bICulebra Pumping Test Recovery Linear-Linear Sequence Plot with INTERPRET Simulation 50 I I +PUMP ON 45 ul *- 40 8. w' a 3 v) v) E 35 30 MATCH PARAMETERS AP = 1.0 psi t = 1.0 hr PD = 0.1 tD'CD 31 (CDeZs), = 0.4 (CDeZr),-, = 4.0 x 10-3 Ae-Zs = 0.9 P' = 40.1 psig NO-FLOW BOUNDARY AT Dn = 5000 - SIMULATION lo = 12/6/85 1O:OO 1 I 25 0 100 200 300 ELAPSED TIME, hours Figure 5-23. H-8b/Culebra Pumping Test Linear-Linear Sequence Plot with INTERPRET Simulation 65
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 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 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?