CALCIUM CARBONATE DEPOSITION IN
GEOTHERMAL WELLBORES
MIRAVALLES GEOTHERMAL FIELD
COSTA RICA
A Report
Submitted to the Deparment of Petroleum Engineering
of Stanford University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SClENCE
by
Eduardo Granados
June 1983
Stanford Geothermal Program Interdisciplinary Research in Engineering and Earth Sciences
STANFORD UNIVERSITY Stanford, California
SGP-TR-67
CALCIUM CARBONATE DEPOSITION IN GEOTHERMAL WELLBORES
MIRAVALLES GEOTHERMAL FIELD COSTA RICA
BY
Eduardo Granados
June 1983
Financial support was provided through the Stanford Geothermal Program under Department of Energy Contract
No. DE-AT-03-80SF11459 and by the Department of Petroleum Engineering, Stanford University.
ABSTRACT
Calcium carbonate deposition takes place in the wells of
the Miravalles geothermal field in Costa Rica. Data from
three long term flow test periods performed in well PGM-1
are analyzed through different methods, especially for the
third and longest period which took place after mechanical
scale removal had been performed. For this test a
collection of chemical and thermodynamic data is used to
investigate the evolution of the well production with time.
Hotter fluids are suspected to enter the well at the end of
the test, counting for higher enthalpy values and decrease
in scale deposition rate. Remedial actions are suggested to
reduce the scale deposition rate, or to remove the deposits
formed, taken from the experience gained in different
geothermal fields in the world, dealing with the same
problem.
AKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to thank all the persons and institutions that in some form made possible to complete this work. Appreciation is specially expressed to Dr. Jon S. Gudmundsson and Dr. Roland N. Horne for their guidance and support in prepa- ring this report.
~ ~~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
1 . INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1
2 . THE MIRAVALLES GEOTHERMAL FIELD ......................... 3
3 . DRILLING AND COMPLETION ................................. 6
4 . PRODUCTION HISTORY ...................................... 8
4.1 Flow Test Period 1 .................................. 9
4.2 Flow Test Period 2 .................................. 10
4 . 3 Cleaning Operations ................................. 10
4 . 4 Flow Test Period 3 .................................. 11 5 . ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTION MEASUREMENTS ..................... 13
6 . WORLD EXPERIENCE OF CALCIUM CARBONATE ................... 17 7 . CALCIUM CARBONATE CHEMISTRY ............................. 21
8 . CHEMICAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS .......................... 25
8.1 Sampling and Analysis Methods ....................... 25 8.2 Chemical Analysis ................................... 26
9 . DEPOSITION ANALYSIS ..................................... 28 9.1 Electric Power Research Institute Program ........... 28 9.2 National Energy Authority (Iceland) Program ......... 30
9.3 Rice University Method .............................. 32 10 . FLASHING POINT .......................................... 34
11 . REMEDIAL ACTIONS ........................................ 33
11.1 Mechanical Removal ................................. 39
11.2 Running Liner to Wellhead .......................... 40
11.3 Well Location and/or Deepening ..................... 41
12 . CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... 43
REFERENCES .............................................. 45
APPEND1 X
1. INTRODUCTION
In countries like Costa Rica that have no fossil fuel
resources geothermal energy exploration and development are
most important. Geothermal resources in Costa Rica have
been under exploration since 1963. Extensive studies carried
out in the Guanacaste province have resulted in the
discovery of a geothermal field in the slopes of the
Miravalles volcano. I n 1979, the first geothermal well
drilled in Miravalles was put on discharge, setting an
important mark in the history of energy development in Costa
Rica. The Miravalles geothermal field is being explored and
developed by the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad
(ICE), the national utility for electric power generation.
Two more wells were drilled in the Miravalles area for
exploratory purposesqwith the same success of the first one,
and the plans were laid for the continuation of the
explotation of the field.
While testing the existing wells, a very important
problem started to develop: calcium carbonate deposits would
form at the level of the flashing point in the two most
promising wells, thus decreasing their production and
jeopardizing the future of the project itself.
scaling of calcium carbonate is a widely known problem in
-2-
hot water reservoirs, specially those with temperatures in
the range of 200 to 240 'C.
In many instances, a water geothermal reservoir will
change and evolve with time under continuous production
conditions, and sometimes these changes can be significant
in amount and importance and may be detected at the surface.
The changes that occur could vary the conditions governing
the scaling processes either by decreasing or worsening the
problem.
In this paper, a study of such evolution is made by the
treatment of the output behavior of the first and best
producing well in the Miravalles geothermal area.
Both physical and chemical data available are presented
here to show whatever possible trends may be occuring under
continuous production of the well.
It is not the scope of this work to present a "magical"
solution to the calcite scaling problem, but rather to try
to understand the mechanisms that control it. The aim is to
elaborate a simple reservoir model of the field that may
provide the solution of the problem in the near future,
-3-
2. THE MIRAVALLES GEOTHERMAL FIELD
The Miravalles geothermal area is characterized by strong
fumarolic activity, hot springs and rock hydrothermal
alteration. The area is located in the south-western slope
of the Miravalles volcano which is a part of a chain of
quaternary volcanoes known as the Cordillera de Guanacaste.
The Cordillera trends north-west to south-east and is
flanked in the south-western part by a disected plateau
composed of tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks overlaid
by quaternary tuffs and sediments. The geographic location
of the Miravalles field is shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
On the edge of the Miravalles volcano, there is a
geologic feature known as the Guayabo Caldera, which has
apparently been the site of lakes in the past. Its fertile
soil is dedicated to agricultural activity. In part, the
caldera has been buried by volcanic materials.
The first investigations on the potential of the
Miravalles geothermal field for electric power uses were
carried out almost 20 years ago. In 1974, the Instituto
Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) carried out an extensive
investigation of the geothermal area, which included the
following :
-Surface geological reconnaissance
-4-
-Chemistry of waters and gases from hot springs
and fumaroles
-Geothermal gradient measurements
-Regional gravity surveys
-Electrical resistivity surveys
-Regional geohydrology
-Microearthquake detection and ground noise
measurements
At the end of these studies, a report was published (ICE,
1976) with recommendations to extend the exploration and to
drill three deep exploratory wells. The wells were located
one to three km away from the area of fumarolic activity and
in the center of an area characterized by high geothermal
gradients at the surface (200 to 500 'C/km) and low
resistivity values (5-10R-m) at depths of 500 to 800 m.
Fig. 2 shows the area of investigation and some of the
results.
The results obtained from the different exploration
techniques agreed on the existence of an anomalous zone of
about 4 sq. km in area. In addition to the high geothermal
gradients and low resistivity values, the geothermometry
from hot springs and fumaroles showed values of the order of
24OoC. Gravity surveys showed the existence of a graben
-5-
structure that may contain the geothermal reservoir; and the
microearthquake studies, although still incomplete, showed
active fault movement in the area.
-6-
3 . DRILLING AND COMPLETION
The drilling of the first geothermal well in Costa Rica
was carried out with an IDECO-H525-D rig, with a depth
capacity of 1,500 m when using 3 1/2 inch drill pipe. The
drilling started on April 1st. 1979, and was completed on
July 28th. 1979.
The well design and the lithology encountered are shown
in Fig.3. It shows the various casing and hole diameters
and the depth at which the transition between the 7 5/8"
slotted liner and the 9 5/8" production casing occurs, which
corresponds to the point where the calcite problem was found
to be most serious.
The drilling program is shown as Fig.4. A good percentage
of the 4 month period was used for either logging the well
or running production tests. Since this was the first well
to be drilled, it was thought desirable to obtain the
greatest amount of information at all the stages. For this
reason, whenever an important loss of circulation was found,
the drilling was immediately stopped. A lighter drilling
mud was circulated, and a recovery temperature survey run.
When the temperature recovery was fast a further
investigation was carried out by stimulating the well into
production and measuring the output. This technique, even
though slow and expensive, permitted the location of two
important production zones at 304 and 925 m. The first zone
- 7-
was cased off due to its limited potential and shallow
depth, while the second zone is believed to be the major
feed zone of the well (ICE, 1980).
On August 28th. 1979, the well was
first time and its total production est
using the lip pressure method. The
discharge for 3 days.
flow
imater
well
tested for the
d to be 79 kg/s
was kept on
The temperature recovery of the well from. surveys carried
out before and after the first flow test is shown in Fig.5.
In this figure the curve for September 7th. 1979, shows a
temperature reversal at a depth of about 900 m even though
the measurement was carried out after the first 3 three day
flow test.
4 . PRODUCT1 ON HI STORY
After the first production test in August 1979, well
PGM-1 was tested several times for short periods of 2-3 days
for output measurements and sample collection. The output
was measured by the lip pressure method (James, 1975).
Three long term flow tests were carried out on PGK-1.
Table 1 shows the dates, the production (output) and the
wellhead pressure at the beginning and end of each of the
periods.
The ratio of (total production)/(wellhead pressure) is
shown in Fi.6 for the three test periods. It can be seen
that this ratio was almost constant regardless of the
scaling problem in the wellbore. The wellhead and total
flowrate are shown in detail for each of the test periods as
a function of time on Figs.7, 8 and 9.
The equipment used for flow measurements in tests periods
2 and 3 is shown in Fig.10. During test period 3 the well
production output was monitored continuously by recording
the wellhead and l i p pressures, as well as the water flow
rate that separated in the silencer. A diagram of the
equipment used for continuous recording is shown in Fig.11.
-9-
4 . 1 Flow test period 1
The first two test periods were carried out without any
flow restriction in the wellhead. During the first of these,
the calcite deposition problem was discovered. ~ig.7 shows
the rapid decline of both the pressure and the flowrate f o r
this test.
At the end of flow test period 1, some calcite deposits
were discovered on the surface of a temperature instrument
that had been lowered in the well. It had not been possible
to lower the instrument deeper than 900 m due to a
restriction in the wellbore. A l s o , particles found on the
floor of the muffler structure were analized in the
laboratory. Table 2, shows that the particles were 89%
calcium carbonate (ICE, 1981).
On May 1st. 1981, well PGM-1 was killed by gradually
increasing the flow of cold water, on Kay 21st, a caliper
l o g was run in the well (Gearhart-Oven continuous recording
three arm caliper tool). The results of the caliper are
shown in Fig.12. A reduction in diameter was located at a
depth of about 870 m from the original diameter of 177 mm of
the slotted liner, to 88.9 mm. The diameter had therefore
been reduced a maximum 50% and the cross sectional area by
almost 75%. The maximun reduction occur some 20 m below the
liner hanger depth of 8 4 5 m and some 11 m above the point
where the slotted liner starts. In well PGM-1 there are four
joints of blind liner of 7 7/8" connecting the liner hanger
to the slotted pipe. A similar situation was detected in
well PGM-3 which however had been producing for a shorter
period of time.
4 . 2 Flow test period 2
After the caliper logging period, the well was allowed to
warm up and a new period of flow testing began in June 1 9 8 1 .
This test was carried out to follow the production and
pressure decline for a longer period of time. As in test
period 1 the well was discharged without a pressure
restriction at the wellhead.
The total flow rate and wellhead pessure of well PGM-1 in
the flow test period 2 is shown in Figs. 8 and 8A. I t can
be observed that the production decreased from 67 kg/s in
about a thousand hours and suddenly increased to a value of
4 8 kg/s after a maximum discharge pressure measurement had
taken placerwhere it leveled until the end of the test. The
production values were obtained by the lip pressure method.
4 . 3 Cleaning operation
On November 6th. 1 9 8 1 , well PGM-lwas shut in and killed
again with cold water from the top. It was not possible to
run another caliper l og because the calcite obstruction had
increased to a point where it would be dangerous to loose
the tool in the well..
The cleaning procesg, took a longer time (approximately
-11-
120 days) than expected because it had to be done with a
cable tool rig (the only machinery that was available
locally). The cleaning operation stopped at 898 m depth,
well below where maximun calcite deposits had been detected.
A caliper log revealed that the well had been thoughroughly
cleaned.
4 . 4 Flow test period 3
The third test was started on March 3rd. 1982, and lasted
6 months, during this time the production was monitored
continuously. And every two or three weeks a direct
measurement of the well production was carried out with a
60" (diameter) WKM flash separator after which the separated
brine and steam flowrates were measured through orifice
plates. The advantage of this method is the possibility of
comparing the results with the lip pressure method. Usually
the output curves measured by the two methods agreed within
a range of 10%.
Flow test period 3 is the basis of the data interpreted
in this report. The third test period is important because
the well had been cleaned of the deposits that built up in
the first and second tests. The well was therefore in a
"like-new" condition at the beginning of the test.
The measurements in flow test period 3 proved to be very
useful in following the evolution of the well
-12-
characteristics regarding production and chemical changes
with time. After about 200 hours from the beginning of the
test an orifice plate was inserted at the wellhead to
restrict the flowrate. The plate was sized to maintain the
pressure near the maximum discharge pressure of the well at
the beginning of the third test period.
During the direct flow measurements (every 2-3 weeks) and
chemical sampling the procedure was to start the
measurements at a pressure equal to or near the long term
(restricted) wellhead pressure. Then to gradually lower the
pressure and increase the flowrate. At every point the
production performance and chemical samples of the brine,
steam condensate and non-condensable gases were obtained.
All the measurements performed during this test period,
had been tabulated and plotted, and they are shown in Tables
3 through 11, and 15 through 23 and on Figs. 9, 14, and 15
through 43.
-13-
5 . ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTION MEASUREMENTS
The decline in wellhead pressure and flowrate in the
three test periods art shown in Figs.7 to 9. The flowrate in
test periods 2 and 3 is also plotted against cummulative
production in Figs. 13 and 14. There is one aspect of these
output curves that the three test periods have in common;
the ratio of (total production/wellhead pressure) is
constant in each flow test period as shown in Fig.6. The
significance of this observation is not clear, but it may
result from a constant flashing level in the wellbore.
In flow test periods 1 and 2 the flowrate decreased
rapidly initially, exhibiting a concave downward behavior as
shown on Figs.7 and 8 . This behavior may be characteristic
for wells that suffer calcite deposition in the wellbore.
In flow test 2 , a sudden increase of the well flow rate
occurred after about 2000 hours and 3000,000 tonnes of
cummulative production as shown in Figs.8 and 13. This may
have been caused by a maximum discharge pressure test that
was carried out at that time. On the next day the records
showed a higher wellhead pressure and flow rate.
In flow test 3, since the flow was restricted at the
wellhead , it was expected that the well would deposit less
because of the high pressure and low flow rates. Fig.14
shows that this was true. However, a very slight decline was
visible either to a slow rate of deposition or that the
cross sectional area had not been reduced to the critical
point when rapid decline occurs. As it will be shown later,
the precipitation of calcite tends to decrease when the well
is operated at higher pressures.
From the several deliverability tests (flowrate and
enthalpy against wellhead pressure) performed during the six
months of test period 3, it is clear that the productivity
of the well kept decreasing all the time. In Tables 3
through 11 and Figs.15 through 24 the different
deliverability tests carried out are shown. In Fig.24 four
of these tests are plotted together and compared to a test
of October 1980 when the well was clean. The test of April
25th. 1982 shows some scale buildup. At two months (57 days)
after the cleaned well was restarted. Fig.25 shows the
flowrate decrease with time at a separation pressure of 7.5
kg/cm2 (abs) probably caused by the scaling process.
For each specific test the enthalpy was calculated for
downhole conditions. These are shown in Table 12 and plotted
with the deliverability curves in Figs.26 through 34. This
is the enthalpy of the two phase mixture at the surface.
The enthalpy has, shows a shift either to higher or lower
values in some of the tests. This is especially true for
high pressure points. This anomaly can perhaps be explained
by looking at the test procedure that was followed. The
first point of the test is usually the one nearest the
-15-
pressure that the well was at that specific day. Then the
flow was changed to get the next point and so on until the
lowest point was reached. The time between points is nearly
an hour while the well stabilizes its flow at a given
pressure. It is true that any change made at the surface is
also a change in the heat flow regime to or from the well
and the formation. It is unlikely that one hour will
stabilize the heat loss (or gain) to a point that stable
values of enthalpy can be obtained. This holds particularly
true for low flow rates and high wellhead pressures.
Therefore, the values obtained for enthalpy can be
approximated for qualitative purposes, rather than for
quantitative ones. However, some points tend to deviate
more from the mean values than others, usually the last
point. For this reason it would be acceptable to think that
if all the tests are performed in a similar way, using the
same instrumentation and personnel, such deviation should be
the same for every measurement.
Fig.35 shows the mean enthalpy values versus time and the
standard deviation f o r each point without dropping any
offset value. Fig.36 shows the same points and the
correspondent standard deviation adjusted by dropping the
most offset value (when necessary). In this plot it can be
observed that the deviation is almost constant to every
point. It is also important to see from this plot that the
least square fit through all the points shows a tendency of
t h e enthalpy to increase with time. The same behavior was
-16-
observed by James (19811, McNitt, (19811, and by McNitt et
al. (1983).
Another possibility could be a tendency to flash in the
formation rater than in the wellbore, therefore a constantly
increasing steam fraction would be produced with the
correspondent increase in the enthalpy value. This theory
would suggest the possibility of a two phase zone (water and
steam) that develops with the long term tapping of the
reservoir fluids.
A possible explanation for this phenomena is the entrance
of hotter fluids coming from a deeper and hotter source thus
increasing the enthalpy value. This idea seems realistic
since the enthalpy increment rate is small but constant.
-17-
6. WORLD EXPERIENCE OF CALCIUM CARBONATE DEPOSITION
Calcium carbonate deposition in geothermal wells has been
studied in countries where the problem has appeared, either
in the early stages of the field's life or where it has been
a persistent problem throughout the production history of
the field. Different techniques have been developed in
order to cope with the problem (New Zealand, Iceland, Turkey
and Mexico) and perhaps the experience accumulated in those
countries is the most valuable source of ideas and solutions
one can look at when dealing with the problem.
In looking to these experiences, it is worthwhile not
only to consider for calcite deposition, but also silicate
deposition, since both problems may be present at the same
time and may have a similar approach for remedial actions.
In Table 13 such problems have been divided into three
categories:
-Major calcium carbonate deposits
-Minor calcium carbonate deposits
-Complex deposits
The following quote is from the same reference and it is
reproduced here to give an idea about the magnitude of the
problem:
-18-
"Several physical and chemical processes occur
as high temperature water is brought to the
surface through wells and by pipeline into surface
equipment. A steam phase forms in increasing
proportion as pressures decrease along the
pipeline and it contains a large proportion of the
gases originally present in the deep water. The
cooled water is depleted in acidic gases, while
non-volatile constituents undergo concentration.
Mineral deposition may be initiated by these
changes.
A small change in the concentration of a
constituent can represent a sizable deposition
rate in a geothermal well of high output. For
example, a loss of 1 ppm of calcite or silica from
solution in a 20 cm diameter well producing 100
tons of water per hour would give a deposit about
2 mm thick per day over a 1-m length of pipe.
Deposition rates can be much greater than this.
For example, a well in the Tongonan, Leite,
Philippines, area developed aragonite scale at the
rate of 1 mm/h (R. .B. Glover, personnal
communication). Complete blockages of wells have
occured in a matter of days in severe scaling
situations"
-19-
The experience in New Zealand, in the field of Kawerau
shows that the most satisfactory method for calcite removal
is by mechanical reaming. A Failing rig is used to do this
work and in some cases, full productivity of the well is
regained after the operation has been carried out, as was
the case of PGM-1. This infers that the largest bulk of
calcite formed during production occurs in the well casing.
The frequency of reaming is dependent on the nature of the
system, but in the case of Kawerau, it has been found
necessary to clean most wells anually. Acidification was
also tried once in a well in Kawerau with severe damage
caused to the casing by the action of the acid. This results
from the lack of a sufficiently stable inhibitor, capable of
maintaining its properties at high temperatures for a period
of time long enough to allow the complete removal of calcite
(Mahon, 1981).
In Iceland, in the Svartsengi field, a more sophisticated
rig has been tested to clean the wells from its calcium
carbonate deposits while the well is flowing and discharging
the drill-cuttings. In this case, a WABCO 2000 rig was used
with a Grant rotating head, blow out prevention equipment
and a specially designed apparatus that cools the head's
rubber stripper. The first test of the rig proved that the
proposed work procedure and equipment worked (Arneberg,
1981). Other simpler methods have also been used with
success in Svartsengi and other fields in Iceland.
-20-
In Mexico, the removal of silicate deposits from the
wells at the Cerro Prieto field, is often done by mechanical
reaming.
In the state of Nevada, in a well in the Desert Peak
geothermal area, a very innovative method of injecting C02
in the brine before its flashing depth is reached, yielded
positive results by reducing the amount of calcite deposits
in the well during the one month period of the test (Kuwada,
1982 1.
-21-
7 . CALCIUM CARBONATE CHEMISTRY
Calcium carbonate deposition occurs due to a set of
geological, physical and chemical conditions that are
encountered at a given time in a geothermal reservoir.
Geological factors such as groundwater circulation and
mineral composition of the reservoir rocks are important in
understanding the origin and mechanisms governing the scale
forming processes. Physically, the pressure, temperature
and amount of the non-condensable gases and the kinetics and
shape of the calcite deposits are of great importance
(Mahon, 1981).
The geothermal fluids at Miravalles contain sufficient
dissolved gases to increase the pressure at which flashing
occurs by a considerable ammount. When the fluid pressure is
near the flash level, particularly if C02 is present, the
start of the flashing is accomplished by a shift in pH as
the carbonate solution equilibrium is unbalanced by the
release of the gaseous phase of C02. The fluid becomes then
supersaturated with respect to carbonate as the pH continues
to rise, and the calcium present will trigger a
precipitation reaction depositing calcium carbonate on the
walls of the wellbore.
This mechanism may be still more favored if a sudden
increase in the diameter of the well (i.e. a liner hanger)
is present. Therefore, transitions in the casing diameter
-22-
should either be avoided or located at a safe distance above
or below the predicted flash horizon.
There are other reactions that have some influence in the
solution pH, such as the amount of H2S in solution, but for
the purposes of the brine that is present in the Miravalles
reservoir, their contribution is very small,
The flashing point also depends on the partial pressure
of the other gases, besides C02, present in the brine; but
those gases are less soluble than C02 by a factor of nearly
20, and therefore, their effect on the bubble point of the
solution is minimum and it will depend largely on the amount
of C02 present in the solution (Michaels, 1981)
Experimental evidence indicates that the reactions
producing scale can be very rapid, occuring in fractions of
a second, following the creation of oversaturated
conditions. The carbonate scale usually forms as the
mineral calcite, but under some conditions, the mineral
aragonite, which has the same composition as calcite, but
with a slightly different crystal structure, may
precipitate. For all practical purposes, both minerals can
be considered identical (Michaels, 1980).
Calcium carbonate deposition from individual waters vary
from field to field, but the typical reaction can be
represented by the following formulation:
C02(aq) = C02(vap). . . , (EQILIBRIUM)
-23-
HC03- + H+ = CO2(aq) + H20 ...... (FLASHING) Ca2+ + 2HC03- = CaC03 + C02(aq) ..... (DEPOSITION)
It is interesting to notice that in the earlier stages
previous to flash, Ca ions are more abundant than C03 ions;
later, C03 ions are more abundant than Ca ions. Calcite
will form in the first instance, but not in the second,
despite the presence of both an adequate thermodynamic drive
and a reasonable supply in Ca (Michaels, 1980).
In practice, the calcite deposits may occur in the first
20-25 m above the first boiling point. The deposition shape
may tapper off from this point and become almost zero. By
controlling the wellhead pressure, the deposition can be
controlled in such a way that it occurs within the pipe at a
choosen level.
Following an extensive withdrawal of water from a high
temperature aquifer, a general depletion of carbon dioxide
in solution may occur through boiling. The reaction of the
water with the rock minerals is not rapid enough to
equilibrate the rise in pH, favoring the calcite to
precipitate in the formation pores and fissures. This,
however, may be of little importance if it takes place
homogeneously, but if the deposition occurs in a major
contributing fissure, an irreparable decay in flow may occur
(Ellis and Mahon, 1977). The problem may become more severe
if the reservoir fluids are rich in C02 and if the
productivity of the rock is inadequate to fill the wellbore.
-24-
Nancollas and Reddy (1974), conducted a series of
experiments that measured crystal growth over a wide range
of stirring rates. Their conclusion was that the rate of
crystallization is independent on the fluid dynamics of the
system. Therefore, it can be expected that the rate of
scaling would be very little affected by factors such as
flow velocity of the loaded aqueous phases over the scaling
surfaces, unless some other factor like erosion over the
soft deposits takes place.
It is difficult to determine whether or not a fluid from
a specific reservoir will scale during production. The
difficulties are compounded by the fact that conditions
frequently encountered downhole, such as high temperature
and pressure, can not be easily simulated in the laboratory.
Sampling of an aqueous solution brought to the surface for
analysis can give entirely misleading results owed not only
to changes in the original enthalpic conditions, but also to
the fact that the solution may be actively depositing scale
minerals within the well. For this reason, it is extremely
important that the data obtained be consistent with
standardized procedures used in other fields in the world,
for comparative purposes.
-25-
8. CHEMICAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
8.1 Sampling and analysis methods
For flow test periods 2 and 3 , the equipment for
separation and sampling of steam and water shown in Figs.10
and 11 was used. Samples of brine, steam condensate and non-
condensed gas were taken. The steam flow sampled was cooled
in a bath of running water before passing through the
condensing coil. The non-condensed gases were drained at the
outlet of the coil from a flask that contained both
condensed steam and gases. All equipment was flushed for a
given time before the sample was taken.
Since it is easy to control the separation pressures by
using the control valves, four samples were taken at each of
the five or six pressure points of the test, giving a total
of 20- 24 samples analyzed for each test.
In every sampling point, distilled water was used for
washing the bottles. In the case of the water samples, the
bottles were a l s o flushed with the brine flow before taking
the sample. Care was especially taken with the gas flasks,
to avoid air contamination. The samples were packed and
sent to ICE’S laboratories in San Jose. The chemical
analysis were done by using atomic absorption or gas
chromatography.
8 . 2 Chemical Analysis
-26-
When sampling geothermal wells the components of the
steam-water mixture are usually sampled after the it has
passed through the flash separator. This method makes it
difficult to define the state of the carbonate system in the
deep water or in particular to calculate the carbonate
equilibrium. Computer codes are available to simulate
downhole conditions in geothermal wells (EPRI, 1978,
Arnorsson, 1982). They iterate solubility data for selected
geothermal minerals in order to facilitate the evaluation of
solution/mineral equilibria and chemical speciation.
(Arnorsson, 1982).
The use of two computer codes working with the same data
will be analyzed in a separate chapter. The data available
for the tests made on June 2nd., June 24th. and August
8th.,1982 performed in PGM-1 are shown in Table 14. The
separation pressure is known only for the samples of test
periods 2 and 3. The brine composition is adjusted to
wellbore conditions by knowing the steam and liquid
fractions at each sampling point. The values of the brine
for tests 2 and 3 are plotted against the time in hours
since the well was first flow tested on August 27th. 1979.
These plots appear in Figs.37 thorugh 42. In each of these
figures the gap between 18,400 and 23,600 hours corresponds
to the period of well cleanup . Fig.43 shows the Na/K ratio
versus time for the same samples. In Table 15 a more
detailed analysis for four points of the third flow test
period are shown. Special attention should be given to
-2 7-
Figs.40 and 43 since the decreasing values with time of Na/K
may indicate an increase in temperature of the reservoir
fluids (Fournier, 1981). The chloride increase with time
observed in Fig.40 may also be indicative of fluids of
different (higher) temperatures entering the wellbore. Both
tendencies are supported by the increase in enthalpy
discussed earlier and shown in Fig.35.
-2 8-
9. DEPOSITION ANAL1 SI S
9.1 Electric Power Research Institute Program
The Electric Power Research Institute computer code
EQUILIB, reproduces the equilibrium chemicai composition of
gas, liquid and solid phases of an aqueous solution
consistent with the physical laws of balance (EPRI, 1978).
The physical laws obeyed in the computations are elemental
mass conservation, charge neutrality and Gibbs free energy
minimization. The equilibrium data base used in the
calculations contains 8 gases, 200 aqueous species and 187
solid mineral species from 0 to 300 'C.
The EQUILIB code consists of "n" equations in "n"
unknowns where "n" can be a very large number. Depending on
the complexity of the brine, solution of up to 300
simultaneous equations may be required. The algorithm used
for the solution of the matrix uses an iterative procedure
to improve an initial estimate of the solution in sequential
calculations until all of the equations are satisfied,
within selected limits (Roberts, 1983).
When the input has been supplied to the codef the
subprogram EQUILIB-A calculates the equilibrium constants
for the data. A temporary data base addition provides
equilibrium constants for C02, HC1, 02 and H20 as functions
of respective concentrations in the liquid phases. Another
subroutine called GEOTHRM-2 in turn retrieves the
initialized data from the disk and calls for EQUILIB-B to
solve the problem. After the problem has been solved the
subroutine GEOTHRM I11 provides the output (EPRI, 1978).
The input data for the EQUILIB code are given in Table 24
and the output of mineral precipitation is shown in Table 25
for four different runs. The results of the fourth run with
the EPRI code which contained the temperature values
calculated for each test by geothermometry, are plotted in
Figs.44 and 45.
The most important feature of the results obtained is
that in all four runs the calcite values tend to decrease
with time, which was suspected earlier with the increase of
reservoir enthalpy and geothermometry. Excess quartz, was
also expected to increase in value if hotter fluids were
being withdrawn from the reservoir at the end of the test.
From the plots shown in Figs.46 and 47 this can be observed
for wellhead pressures od 7.5, 10 and 12.5 kg/cm2.
Another important characteristic is that the amount of
excess quartz and calcite in the solution is greater at
lower pressures and has the tendency to decrease as pressure
increases. This fact should be taken into account when the
operation of the field is to be started since this will
influence the turbine and separation equipment design. It
will also influence the flashing point of the brine in the
well.
-30-
9.2 National Energy Authority (Iceland) Program
The data that was used in the EQUILIB code was a l s o fed
into the WATCH code develop at the National Energy Authority
in Iceland (Arnorsson et al. 1982 and Svavarsson 1981). This
data appears in tables 16 through 23 and corresponds to
analysis from samples taken at two different wellhead
pressures on June 2nd. and June 24th. 1982 and four
different wellhead pressures on August 12th. 1982. This
code works in a slightly different fashion than the EQUILIB
code but basically the output is the same. The program is
also written in Fortran IV language and the method of
solution is very similar. The calculations are based on the
mineral concentration of the water and steam phases and the
discharge enthalpy, which determines the proportion of the
phases in the flow.
The program can also be used to calculate speciation in
water and steam-water mixtures which have boiled
adiabatically in one stage to specified sets of temperature,
and then cooled down without steam loss to another set of
temperatures. These calculations are useful in evaluating
how boiling and cooling causes the water to depart from
equilibria with specific minerals.
All calculations can be carried out at any specified
temperature within the range of 0 to 370 C. All the
chemical components that occur in major concentrations in
geothermal waters and/or rocks commonly found in geothermal
-31-
systems are included in the program as well as 65 reactions
describing equilibria between 73 aqueous species and 7
gases. Solubility data of 26 commonly occurring geothermal
minerals are a l s o incorporated to facilitate the comparisson
between water chemistry and mineral solubility (Arnorsson,
1982 1.
-32-
9.3 Rice University Method
A field engineering method to predict calcium carbonate
deposition was developed by Odd0 and Tomson (1982). This
method uses commonly measured field parameters and has been
tested for geopressured brines with very interesting
results.
The method calculates the saturation index (Is) and the
pH by using conditional equilibrium constants dependent on
temperature, pressure and ionic strenght, which eliminates
the need for activity coefficients. The method calculates
the Is following the Stiff and Davis (1952) method, but
makes possible an approximation of pH values if they are
unknown. The great advantage of it is that it is relatively
easy to use if total calcium, bicarbonates, pressure,
temperature, dissolved solids or conductivity values and
the mole fraction of C02 in the gaseous phase are known.
Since all these parameters are usually analyzed in
geothermal wells, the method becomes a very useful tool in
the field laboratory because it can also be used to
calculate the brine equilibrium in the surface equipment by
simply varying the conditions accordingly.
Since our data contains all the necessary information
required for this model, the method was handled in the same
way that was presented by Tomson (1983). As with the
computer models, the same values for reservoir temperature
were used from geothermometry calculations. In Table 26,
-33-
the input data for this model is shown as well as the
results. The values for the three tests are plotted versus
wellhead pressure in Fig.48. The similarity of this plot
with the results obtained by the EQUILIB method reveals that
for qualitative purposes the method can be used.
10. FLASHING POINT
The data for test period 3 was also analyzed with a two
phase flow simulator developed by Ortiz (1983). This method
has the flexibility of working with either conditions at the
wellhead (temperature, pressure, deliverability, flowing
enthalpy) or with downhole conditions (reservoir pressure,
temperature and enthalpy) for up to five different diameters
of the pipe.
The output of the program displays the pressure,
temperature, and fluid velocity profiles for both the single
phase and the two phase regions of the well and predicts the
depth of the flashing point for the given set of well
flowing conditions.
For our purposes, the raw data that appears in Tables 15,
17, 20 and 23 was fed into the program and the results
obtained from it as for the depth of the flashing point at
each wellhead pressure (assuming no scaling in the well),
are plotted in Fig.49.
It is difficult to believe that the flashing point will
migrate almost 1300 feet in a 6 month periodas indicated in
Fig.49. The approach followed then, was to take the
reservoir conditions for the earliest flow test performed
after the clean-up operations of the well, which corresponds
to April 29th. 1982 and assume the well completely free of
scale at this point.
The reservoir conditions for a clean well were obtained
from the program for three different wellhead pressures by
feeding it with surface data. Then, for each of the three
wellhead pressure points reservoir conditions were kept
constant as well as the flow rate in the surface but the
diameter of the well was changed.
Since the wellhead pressure during the long term test
oscillated around 10 kg/crn2 (with the orifice plate
restriction at the outlet) it seems reasonable to assume
that the flashing depth had to be between 2125 and 2075
feet. Fig.50 shows for the deliverability test (clean well
conditions) carried out on April 29th. 1982 the conditions
that were assumed to take place during the whole 6 month
test. If the flashing point is assumed to remain unchanged
(or at least within the ranges specified in Fig.501, it is
expectable that the calcite deposits will develop at that
depth too. Therefore, the conditions for the diameter of the
well as shown in Fig.51 were used to simulate the wellhead
pressure decrease that would occur by choking the well over
a lenght of 50 feet at t h e flashing point depth with calcite
deposits, while holding a constant flow at the surface for
each wellhead pressure. The three wellhead pressure points
that were chosen from the test of April 29th. 1982,
correspond t o low, intermediate and high pressure and flow
rates.
The program was run many times for each flow rate
condition, starting with the clean condition of the well and
ending where the well was not capable to sustain the flow
rate specified. Tables No.27 through 29 show the area
decrease and the corresponding wellhead pressure obtained
for the low, intermediate and high flow rate values. For the
case of the intermediate flow rate, more points were
obtained in order to observe the pressure decay point more
accurately.
In Fig.52, the simulated well performance curves obtained
through this method are shown for four different choked
diameters. Then, the next step was to plot on top of those
simulated performance curves the real ones, and in Fig.53
this situation is reproduced, for the deliverability curves
of Jun. 2nd. and June 26th. 1982 . As can be observed, the
well was able to go in August 26th. 1982 far below the last
simulated curve (which stands for the lowest flowing
conditions that was possible to maintain for the proposed
mode 1.
By repeating the same procedure to different wellbore
deposits conditions one should be able to obtain a more
accurate result. The results obtained here are shown only
with the purpose of information, but it is beyond the scope
of this work to obtain the optimum model which can be
probably done by a trial and error procedure.
-37-
Fig.54 reproduces the values of wellhead pressure versus
the choked pipe area obtained from Table 28 for intermediate
flow rates. As it is expected, the wellhead pressure decay
is almost imperceptible at the beginning and very fast at
the end, where the percent of area changes very quickly with
small changes in diameter.
11. REMEDIAL ACTIONS
The effect that well scaling will have On the future
development of the Miravalles geothermal field, Will depend
on the feasibility of solving the problem. Many methods
have been suggested to minimize and/or control the Scaling
problem (McNitt et al. 1983). The methods can be divided as
follows:
1. Periodic cleaning by the mechanical method of drilling
out the calcite
2 . Periodic or continuous suppression of scale by chemical
or CO2 gas injection
3 . Minimizing deposition of scale by operating the wells at
a relatively high wellhead pressure, thereby insuring
flashing above the casing-liner joint
4 . Minimizing scaling potential by running the same diameter
liner from production depth to the wellhead
5 . Avoiding scale by finding zones in the reservoir from
which non scaling fluids can be produced
Among those methods suggested, the mechanical cleaning,
together with running a single diameter in t h e well and a
-39-
further investigation searching for a deeper and hotter
source of the reservoir, will probably minimize the problem
during the exploitation of the field.
The inconvenience of using some of the most recently
developed methods, is that those methods have been tested
for short terms and would be applied still under a testing
basis in the Miravalles field.
Instead, a combination of mechanical cleaning and well
design improvement are techniques that have been used
elsewhere and do not involve the use of any sophisticated
methods. Increased well diameter has reduced frequency of
calcite cleaning in the Svartsengi field in Iceland
(Gudmundsson, 1983) I f carried out with good organization,
it may provide the less costly method that can be applied in
the field, especially under a combined condition of lack of
specialized equipment, manpower and spare parts.
The last option contemplated, of extending the
exploration elsewhere in the field, is strongly supported by
some of the findings of this work and the possibility of
having either an offset or deeper hotter aquifer is quite
good.
11.1 Mechanical Removal
The mechanical removal of calcite deposits seems to be
widely used in areas where the problem has appeared. Mahon
-40-
(1981) states that the use of a Failing rig to remove
calcium carbonate in the field of Kaweraw, New Zealand, is a
common practice. Similar reports from Iceland and Mexico are
known. In the field of Svartsengi (Iceland) and Cerro
Prieto, (Mexico), a more useful technique have been
developed for scale removal by rotary drilling while the
well is producing.
The two techniques that are being used are similar and
the main difference is in the place where the cooling of the
packer that seals against the drill string takes place and
the type of pipe joint used. In the Mexican method, upset
joint, 3" drill pipe is used. Two blow-out preventors are
used, and the cooled drill pipe packer and flow diverter
spool make the height of the substructure almost 30 feet.
The coolhead used in one of the methods employed in
Svartsengi and shown in and shown in Fig.57 seems to offer a
good solution for this inconvenience. Both systems have the
advantage of being able to carry out the whole operation
without exposing the well to thermal shock, either from
warming up or cooling down periods that, when done
repetitively may cause damage in the casing.
11.2 Running Liner to Wellhead
It is likely that the scaling rate can be reduced by
having a uniform diameter from the bottom to the wellhead.
In Cerro Prieto, Mexico, the use of the Hydrill, Super-Flush
-4 1-
joint in 9 5/8" diameter liner, that is cemented to the top
of the reservoir through the use of cementing ports, has
reduced greatly the silicate deposition in the wells. This
type of pipe joint, oposite to the buttress joint, is
internally continuous and leaves a smooth surface in the
joint area.
The use of the technique of cementing through portholes,
provides thus, a smooth pipe of a single diameter from the
reservoir to the wellhead. An increase in production has
also been obtained with this method as compared with the
conventional one, since the 9 5/8" diameter can carry a
bigger production with less pressure losses (Guiza, 1983).
This approach reduces the scaling rate but does not
eliminate it.
11.3 Well Location and/or Deepening
It is common that wells form scale in the wellbore when
they are located peripherically with respect to hotter
regions of a reservoir. In Miravalles, the possibility of
deepening at least one of the existing wells is worth
consideration, since the liner hanger may be still in
operable condition to be retracted.
Another possibility would be to explore with deep
gradient surveys and resistivity soundings in the less
explored zone uphill the Miravalles volcano as suggested by
-42-
McNitt et al. (1983).
The data that has been analized in this paper, strongly
supports this possibility.
12. CONCLUSIONS
1. The results obtained through the study of the
chemistry and deliverability in the second and
third flow test periods , seem to indicate a
possible evolution of the field, that suggests the
possibility of withdrawing in future from hotter
aquifers that may feed the wells after prolonged
periods of time.
2 . Such evolution is shown in this paper starting with
indications from the chemical analysis and
production measurements, and supported with
calculations from geothermometry and computer
models.
3 . Using the two phase flow simulator to reproduce the
scaling process in a cleaned well, appears
promising. The simulator can perhaps be changed to
suit deposition problems or by matching the
solutions by trial and error methods.
4 . From all the parameters analyzed in this study,
careful measurements of the production and
chemistry of the liquid and gas phases seem to be
important when using the computer codes available.
It is equally important to gather as much data as
possible under pre-planned schedules in order to
use, if possible, statistical analysis.
-44-
5 . The use of a simple and qualitative method for the
prediction of calcite precipitation is presented
and seems to work well as the more advanced methods
for the data studied.
6. Mechanical reaming of scale deposits and improved
well design have proven to be effective over long
periods of time in other parts of the world. It
appears to be a workable solution to this important
problem.
7 . Deepening of the existing wells, for investigation
purposes, or extension of the geophysical studies
searching for a hotter source, and therefore, a
less scaling environment is recommended.
1.
2.
3.
4 .
5 .
6.
7.
8.
9.
-45-
REFERENCES
Arneberg, J. E.: "Testing of Equipment for Use in Connection With Workovers in Flowing Geothermal Wells". Paper in preparation. JEA-81-01, Iceland, 1981. sk. Arnorsson, S. : "Mineral Deposits from Iceland Geothermal Waters ,Environmental and Utilization Problems". Society of Petroleum Engineers, 7890, 1979. sk. Arnorsson, S., Svavarsson, H.: "The Chemistry of Geothermal Waters in Iceland. Calculation of Aqueous Speciation from 0 to 370 C". Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Vol. 46, No.9, Sep. 1982.
Ellis, A. J., Mahon, W. A. J.: "Chemistry and Geothermal Systems". Energy, Science and Engineering: Resources, Technology, Management - Academic Press. Belton, Texas, 1977.
EPRI : "Brine Chemistry and Combined Heat/Mass Transfer". Interim Report ER-635, Vol. 1, 1978.
Fournier, R. 0.: In. Ribach L:, Muffler, L. P. J.: "Geothermal Systems: Prlnciples and Case Histories". John Wiley and Sons, 1981.
Grant, M: , Donaldson, I, Bixley, P. "Geothermal Reservolr Engineering". Energy, Science and Engineering: Resources, Technology, Management. Academic Press, Belton, Texas, 1982. ,sk
Guiza, J.: Instituto de Investigaciones Electricas (IIEE), Cerro Prieto, Mexico. Personal comunication, 1983.
Instituto Costarricence de Electricidad: "Prefeasibility Report of the Miravalles Geothermal Area". Internal Paper, 1976.
10. Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad: "Drilling and Production Report for Wells PGM-1, PGM-2 and PGM-3". Internal report, 1980.
11. Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad: "Summary of Investigations and Technical Findings as of November, 1980". Internal report, 1981.
12. Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad: "Results of the Tests Carried Out in Wells PGM-1, PGM-2 and PGM-3 of the Miravalles Geothermal Project". Doc. 1006-81. Oct. 1981.
13. James, R.: "Measurement of Steam-Water Mixtures Discharging at the Speed of Sound to the AtmosDhere". New Zealand Eng. Jour., Vo1.2, Part 2, 1976
-46-
14. James, R.: "Report on Study of Miravalles Wells". Dep. of Sci. and Ind. Res., Wairakei, New Zealand, June, 1981.
15. Mahon, W. A. J.: Dep. of Sci. and Ind. Res., Wairakei, New Zealand, personal comunication, 1981.
16. McNitt, J , Klein, C, Sanyal, S.: "Interpretation of Well Testing Results with Specific Reference to the Calciting problem: Miravalles Geothermal Project, Costa Rica". GeothermEx, Inc, Berkeley, Ca., June, 1981.
17. McNitt, J., Sanyal, S., Klein, C.: "Impact of Scale Deposition on the Feasibility of Developing the Miravalles Geothermal Field, Costa Rica". GeothermEx, Inc, Berkeley, Ca., unpublished report.
18. Michaels, D. E.: "Deposition of CaC03 in Porous Materials by Flashing Geothermal Fluid". Geoth. Res. Eng. Mangmt. Prgm., LBL 10673-GREMP 9, 1980.
19. Michaels, D. E.: "C02 and Carbonate Chemistry Applied to Geothermal Engineering" LBL 11509-GREMP 15, 1981.
20. Oddo, J. , Tomson, M.: "Simplified Calculation of CaC03 Saturation at High Temperatures and Pressures in Brine Solutions". Journal of Petroleum Technology, p. 1583-1590. July, 1982.
21. Ortiz, J.: "Two Phase Flow in Geothermal Wells: Development and Uses of a Computer Code". MS Report, Stanford University, 1983.
22. Roberts, V.: "Analysis of Scale Formation in Geothermal Systems" EPRI, 1983.
23. Stiff, H. A . , Davis, L. E.: "Method for Predicting the Tendency of Oil Field Waters to Deposit Calcium Carbonate". Trans. AIME, 1952.
24. Tomson, Mason : "Inhibitor Evaluation in Geopressured Brines" Rice U. and U. of Houston Project Review, Gas Res. Inst., HOUSton, Texas, Feb., 1983.
LIST OF FIGURES
1.
2.
3 .
4 .
5.
6.
7.
Geographical location of the Miravalles geothermal
field
Geologic and topographic map showing the
exploration technique results
PGM-1 - Well design and lithology PGM-1 - Drilling curve PGM-1 - Temperature recovery
PGM-1 - Decline index versus time for the three
long term tests
PGM-1 - Flow rate and wellhead pressure versus time for test 1
8 A . PGM-1 - Flow rate versus time for test 2
8B. PGM-1 - Wellhead pressure versus time for test 2 9 A . PGM-1 - Flow rate versus time for test 3
9B. PGM-1 - Wellhead pressure versus time for test 3
10. Equipment utilized for flow measurements
11. Surface continuous recording equipment for flow
measurements
12. Caliper logging results for wells PGM-1, PGM-2 and
PGM- 3
13. PGM-1 - Mass flow versus cummulative production for test 2
14. PGM-1 - Mass flow versus cummulative production for test 3
15. PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 4/29/82
1 6 .
1 7 .
1 8 .
1 9 .
2 0 .
2 1 .
2 2 .
2 3 .
2 4 .
2 5 .
2 6 .
27 .
28 .
2 9 .
3 0 .
31.
3 2 .
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 5/13/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 5/27/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability c'urve for test on 6/2/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 6/24 /82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 7/8/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 7/30/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 8/12/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curve for test on 8/26/82
PGM-1 - Deliverability curves for some typical
tests during test 3
PGM-1 - Flowrate versus time for 7 . 5 kg/cm2 (a)
from deliverability curves
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 4/29/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 5/13/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 5/27/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 6/2/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 6/24/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 7/8/82
PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 7/30/82
33. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 8/12/82
34. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for
test on 8/26/82
35. PGM-1 - Mean enthalpy values (without adjustment)
versus time
36. PGM-1 - Mean enthalpy values (adjusted) versus time 37. PGM-1 - Na concentration versus time
38. PGM-1 - K concentration versus time 39. PGM-1 - Ca concentration versus time 40. PGM-1 - C1 concentration versus time
41. PGM-1 - Si02 concentration versus time
42. PGM-1 - HC03 concentration versus time
43. PGM-1 - Na/K concentration ratio versus time
44. Calcite precipitation versus wellhead pressure for
EPRI code
45. Silica precipitation versus wellhead pressure for
EPRI code
4 6 . Calcite precipitation versus time
47. Silica precipitation versus time
48. Saturation index versus wellhead pressure for
simplified model
4 9 . Flashing depth versus wellhead pressure for four
deliverability tests during flow test 3
50. Range of wellhead pressures and flashing depth
assumed for scale simulation
51. Wellbore conditions assumed for scale simulation
52. Flow rate versus wellhead pressure from scale
simulation
53. Real and scale simulated well performance curves
54. Area versus wellhead pressure for scale simulation
55. Equipment utilized in Cerro Prieto, Mexico for
mechanical reaming with the well flowing
56. Equipment utilized in Svartsengi, Iceland for
mechanical reaming with the well flowing
57. Combined cooling chamber and flow restriction for a
12" Grant rotating head utilized in Svartsengi
field, Iceland
c
GEOGRAPHIC LDCATION MAP . h-
0.1s m
lahar ..
IY -S lB SSS a1 tered tuff
..
GEOIxxjy WELrxToCTuRE =Cemented zone
Total loss zone !
v Partial loss zone
FIGURE 3. PGM-1 - Well design and lithology
FIGURE 4 . PGK-1 - Drilling curve
1 0 0
200
300
400
E - 500 a 600
100
a 800
.*
. .
CI
0 - - 0
0,
900
1000
1100
1200
N O T A S SIM BOLOGIA
'020 TERMINADO EL DIA 28-7-79 -=-=-> 13- 8- 79 28-8-79: POZO CERRADO PARA MEDIDA
----- - - - 16-10-79 IO - 10-79
7 - 9 - 7 9 : POZO OESPUES DE PRODUCCION .-- .... .... .... 28-8-79 10-10-79: MEOIDA AL C E R R A R EL POZO -1-s-r 7-9-79
---- 15-5-80 -4-4- 28-8-79
Figure 5 Temperature Recovery
j O I B U J O 0 PLANIFICLICION U f C T R i C A
VERlFlCO PROICCTO O E O f t R I l C O (I I IAVALLL9
POZO P G M I I N Q € bnln
1 REGISTRO DE RECUPERAClON lNSTlTUTO COSTb.!?R!CENSE DE fEMPERAfURI DESPUES
'DE LA P E R F O R X I O N DE E L E C T R I C I D A D
W O V I E M C f R E , I 9 0 0 / 1 - 1 -
W >_
I- H
o
cr> CSL > a 3 \
a c +
i
E (3 Q
0 0 0 * c Q,
0 0 0 m
0 0 0 Tv
0 0 0 4
0
W D a a
C
(d/M) X3CINI 3NIl33Cl
0 0 co
0 0 d-
0
a
cr, L I
m
H
I-
0 e
0
rl
u m al U
H R
S / 9 1 ‘IWv’tl M01d SSVW
U
u-) 0
0 0 0 m
a3 m
0
I I
1 I I I I L 0 4
m
0 0 0 *
0 0 0 c3
0
c/) L I
o x
0 0 0
0 0
m U v1 aJ U
$4 0 tu
d
0 3 4 w
f
LC
w 0
0 C .d
a LC 0 u LC aJ
UI 1
3 0
c
R
I
0 4 0 u w m a 4 u U
e r J
m
0 0
- I
S/91 '331Vtl M01d SSVM
L
W 0
E 0
0
5 3
0
i 0 0 m
4
1
C 0
. c
c 0
LC a U
a aJ
c
In I -
3
L
e 0
LC 0 u
m W a
33S/93>1 ‘M01J lV101
.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0- a I\ a Lo d- m m
E 0
I
. 0 c\(
W L 4
L J C
.
C 0
a al
I
u5 cn W CL
E >
LL
.
c 0
a aJ
I
m (v
33S/9>1 ‘M01A W101
i 3
0 co L
0 Lo
0 v
1 1
0 0 0 co CY
H err
S/% ‘M01i lV101
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS. :::; 950
70k 50 6ol
t-
3 0 : tr 1
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS.
FIGURE 26 . PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for test on 4/29/82
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS.
7 0 L
5 0 F
40k 3 0 F
1
PGM-1:: W VRS,PRESS.
FIGURE27. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for t e s t on 5/13/82
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS,
c, ld
i Q
I- z w
w cr)
-.I a + m e
1000 10501
""E .
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS.
FIGURE 28. .PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for test on 5/27/82
c3 Y \ c, Y
i LL
t- Z W
.
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS. 1100 1 1 1 1 I I I I I l l 1 1 1 1 1 I l l 1 1 1 1 1
loool 950
. -
i
30k I
WELLHEAD PRESSURE, K G / C M 2
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS.
FIGURE29. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability f o r test on 6/2/82
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS.
LL J a I- m I-
- E 1050
t
loool 950 i
t
WELLHEAD PRESSURE, KG/CM2
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS.
FIGURE^^. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for test on 6/24/82
w m \ 0 Y
3' m LL
I- h, I-
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS.
1100
1000
950 i t
i i
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS, .
- .
PGM-1: H VS, PRESS.
I- 1
40
30 L 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15
WELLHEAD PRESSURE, K G / C M 2
PGM-1: W VRS.PRESS.
FIGURE32. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for test on 7/30/82
PGM-1: H VS. PRESS.
z W
0 w
s 6 2
LL J U t- m I-
1100 I l l 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1
10
9
00
50
80
701 60
40k I- i
WELLHEAD PRESSURE, KG/CM2
PGM-1: W VRS,PRESS.
FIGURE 3 3 . PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for t e s t on 8/12/82
PGM-1: H VSn PRESS. 1100 I l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
i rL J < I I- z w
0 w
c3 Y
0 . i
701 I-
50 t 3 0 L
WELLHEAD PRESSURE, KG/CM2
PGM-1: W VRSnPRESSn
FLGURE 34. PGM-1 - Downhole enthalpy and deliverability for t e s t on 8/26/82
0 Ln rL> d
3 0 0 d
0 0 0 (D 0.l
o 0 0 Tr rn
0 0 C
n 4J C
E" U In 3 *n CrJ a U 3 0 c 4J
3 .A
W
I
I
0 Lo 0 e
0 0 0 *
L-l n a 0 Ln a
B .A U
m m L,
2 aJ
a
n
‘I] PI U m 3 -n ‘I] ro Y
m
C 0
u C 0 u
LlJ E I- H
n + U
0 0 0 (D nJ
0 0 0 * c\1
0 0 0 C U G
0 0 (D v cv CY
0 0 r\l 0 r\l w
0 0 0 (D vi
-4 4.J
VI
VI 3
LC aJ 3
C 0
u C 0
.
F-
t 0 0
0 0 m d-
I aJ 6 .r( U
I m
Ol-4
0 0
03
u C 0 u
.
W E I- H
o
D O
-7-4 I x
(3 Q i
3" i 0
0 0
CUL C U G I
I m
Ol- 0 m
C 0
c u 0 u rl u
I
rl
I: I
2
.
i
i
I X
0 0 0
nJL c u d I
w
W
O + 0 OI
0
U F
u :- 1;
.
t-
cn" > n
U
0 0 0 rn rn
0 0 0 0 nl
0
v) c I
m
W x )---I
I-
.rl c,
C 0 .rl U
LC rg
U C aJ C u 0 u m 0 V X
I
4
r I
CJ a
.
0 0 0 a c\1
1 D
0 0 0 03 d
0 0 n
C 0
.A
L)
a c, L
e aJ u e 0 u X \
z I
CJ a
m c*
.
i.a> W
I"
Q, LC 3 m m aJ
a m c aJ rl l-i
Q, 3
c 0
e e
2 3 u H Fr(
EO-3 X 0ZH "LIE> 0001/10W 31131V3
i d- m 0
0 G 0 0 0 Q
a (0
c aJ rl rl aJ 3
C 0
ZO-3 X 0ZH "d9 OOOT:/1014 V3IlIS
.
I
I
u-)
6 d- 6
4
(5
0 0 LC1 c\1
0 0
0
0 0 ' 0 d-
0 O m m
.d
U
O F
0 QI
x I- H
LC
> Q,
C 0
.
W
l- H
0
c(> > CL u H
W E n
0 u-> d
Lo d- 6
0 d- 6
Lo cy)
6 0 c3 (3
N0IlVlIdI33tfd 10%
I
i" I I I I I I I I I I I l l 1 I I I I 0
LC 0 W
a rp
c aJ 6-l
r-i aJ 3
C O O a J
X3aNI N0IlVNllVS
c6 > 1 I- n LLJ I
t i I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 -
0
d- 4
0 4
a3
(D
W - 1-
L 3 0 y1
5 0 3
13 ‘HHld3CI 9NIHSVl.d
’I
-7
t
a Q, ‘0
. 0 m
H err
Reduced d iamete zone (2075-2125
r
KMX3 ADEKE 1205 m FOND0 #)ZO 1300m.
ACABADO
ZONA CEMENTADA
FIGURE 51. Wellbore conditions assumed for s c a l e simulation
6 0
0
LL
Q 0
U’,
>
(3
w
UJ
3 a - h 3 u al C u
E m h
ru 0
h aJ a
m aJ U
0 ln
33S/9)>1 “013 lV101
E 0
Equipment mechanical
utilized in reaming .with
Cerro Prieto, Mexico the well flowing
fo r
I I
l i /
R ~
1 ji il
/ P -- ,
/ I 1 J
I !
i
I # I I U
k T
N
le
Set up of test equipment ot well no.6 Svortsengi
LIST OF TABLES
1. Long term flow tests run at Miravalles well PGM-1
2. Chemical analysis of the particles found in the silencer of PGM-1
3. Production data for deliverability test of 4/29/82
4. production data for deliverability test of 5/13/82
5. Production data for deliverability test of 5/27/82
6. Production data for deliverability test of 6/2/82
7. Production data for deliverability test of 6/24/82
8. Production data for deliverability test of 7/8/82
9. Production data for deliverability test of 7/30/82
10. Production data for deliverability test of 8/12/82
11. Production data for deliverability test of 8/26/82
12. Downhole enthalpy calculated for deliverability tests
14. Chemical analysis of the samples taken during test periods 1, 2 and 3
15. Chemical analysis of the brine and condensate for samples taken during flow test period 3
16. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis for 6/02/82
17. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis €or 6/2/82
18. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis for 6/24/02
19. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis for 6/24/02
21. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis for 8/12/82
23. Selected chemical-physical data for computer analysis for 8/12/82
24. Input data for EPRI code
25. Output data for EPRI code
26. Scaling simulation results for W=260,330 lb/h
27. Scaling simulation results for W=493,258 lb/h
28. Scaling simulation results for W=593,446 lb/h
29. Data f o r Rice University method
d
h
C
bl 1
rn c cl 0
L
0 TABLE^. Chemical analysis of the particles found in the silencer of PGM-1
0.4%
0.-
00%
0-1%
0.W
0.2%
NbA.
1.2%
3.5
* e * i * * *
a 0
(* c
m n .
c m 0 .
* w R O * * * * * * * *
D
0 r. a * * *
* * 0 * I N
c r c rc,
c .
W
e c m * e .
*
15
5 . a
9
9 N
r( al a LC 0 Y(
U cp
a 0 E
.#-I .L
Y a 0 e, 0 4
h)
C 0
+ + J + e
+ +
a
OD S
0
t
* e m
0 m 9 L1
(c c
z
*** ** +* *+ *** o c o o *
* * a
(Y
\ ap
c 0 -4 U 0 3 a 0
* * 0
*** ** *
-hr
i
c 0
0 3 a 0
t r t e
n e
L oU t o t tt
t
t t w t t
t t
t
m *
* a * :
\ rD
d Q, a & 0 W
c, Q
(0 a c 0 .r( L)
iJ
a 1 0
c (Y
0
0
I- 0.
0
c
0
0 0
m
0
I- ro
0
23
c W I-
0
O
C 9
0
c.
e* ** * ** e
o m 9 7 w l -
(Y
?
e * e * *
C
c o c m c u * v e .
lr,
Q, y.
h. V.
***e**** *
*e* ** *
r , m
e ** ** .*e* * e
* aa ww
* * a * u * u e s
t . m c
n * P .
0
0 .
m
c . 0 w r )
0 0
* .
(Y
\ OD
0 m
c, 0
a 0
a 0 0
m . 0
C
10 . m
= m
m
a LC
. QI
w
* a w PI
********* * a
i i s * c
4J 0 3
t L
*. .*
* t
*
e t t , * *
(1
m m 0
t t
*
m a 0
(Y QD
w 0
LC 0 w
a c,
a a c 0
+, .r(
t 9
* G * u
* * o o o . o c o * +
* i
e *
TABLE 1 2
DOWNHOLE ENTHALPY CALCULATED FOR DELIVERABILITY TESTS
4 / 2 9 / 8 2 1 3 . 2 0 1 0 . 5 0
9 . 4 0 8 . 7 0 8 . 0 0 7 . 5 0 6 . 9 0 6 . 2 0 5 . 5 0 5 . 4 0
8 0 . 3 4 s o . 0 9 53.53 5 5 . 6 5 5 8 . 1 1 5 9 . 8 2 6 0 . 6 3 6 2 . 6 6 6 2 . 8 1 6 4 . 2 0
2 . 5 3 4 .85 5 . 9 6 6 . 6 3 7 . 1 9 7 . 6 6 8 . 5 3 9 . 6 3
1 0 . 3 1 1 0 . 7 3
3 2 . 8 7 5 4 . 9 4 5 9 . 5 0 6 2 . 2 8 6 5 . 3 0 6 7 . 4 9 6 9 . 1 6 7 2 . 2 9 7 3 . 1 2 7 4 . 9 3
9 9 4 9 7 4 9 7 7 9 7 7 9 7 3 9 6 9 9 7 1 9 8 0 98 1 9 7 7
5 / 1 3 / 8 2 9 . 0 0 1 5 . 9 3 7 . 0 9 6 3 . 0 2 9 8 3 7 . 2 0 6 0 . 2 7 8 . 5 9 6 8 . 8 6 9 7 5 6 . 2 0 6 3 . 3 1 9 . 6 8 7 2 . 9 8 5 . 4 0
9 7 2 6 4 . 6 3 1 0 . 9 0 7 5 . 5 4 9 7 9
5 / 2 7 / 8 2 1 3 . 3 0 1 0 . 4 0
8 . 3 0 7 . 0 5 6 . 1 0 5 . 4 0
6 / 2 / 8 2 1 2 . 7 5 8 . 8 0 6 . 4 0 5 . 4 0
6 / 2 4 / 8 2 1 3 . 3 5 8 .55 6 . 2 0 5 . 2 0
8 2 . 8 4 $ 1 . 6 1 5 6 . 7 7 6 1 . 4 9 6 6 . 6 6 6 3 . 3 9
3 9 . 3 8 5 4 . 4 7 6 0 . 8 1 6 3 . 0 1
3 5 . 1 6 5 3 . 5 0 5 8 . 4 2 B O . 0 5
4 . 3 2 6 . 2 3 7 . 2 3 8 . 6 2 9 . 9 1
1 0 . 9 4
1 . 7 6 6 . 7 0 9 . 2 6
1 1 . 4 7
2 . 5 4 6 . 5 3 9 . 1 5
1 0 . 6 4
3 7 . 1 6 5 7 . 8 4 6 4 . 0 0 7 0 . 1 2 7 2 . 5 7 7 4 . 3 3
4 1 . 1 4 6 1 . 1 6 7 0 . 0 7 7 4 . 4 8
3 7 . 7 0 6 0 . 0 3 6 7 . 5 7 7 0 . 6 9
1 0 6 9 9 9 3 9 8 3 9 8 4 9 8 4 9 9 0
9 2 3 9 8 3 9 8 3 1 0 0 4
9 7 0 9 7 9 9 8 4 9 9 0
7 / 8 / 8 2 1 4 . 6 0 1 7 . 7 9 3 . 2 4 2 1 . 0 3 1 1 4 7 9 . 9 0 4 6 . 8 4 6 . 0 0 5 2 . 8 3 1 0 0 5 7 . 6 5 5 1 . 9 6 7 . 7 3 5 9 . 6 9 9 9 2 6 . 5 0 $ 5 . 4 9 8 .85 6 4 . 3 4 9 8 8 5 . 7 5 5 6 . 7 9 9 . 7 2 6 6 . 5 1 9 8 7 - 5 . 2 5 5 7 . 4 2 1 0 . 4 7 6 7 . 9 0 9 9 2
7 1 3 0 1 8 2 1 2 . 9 0 8 . 9 0 7 . 0 0 5 . 8 0 - 4 . 9 0
8 / 1 2 / 8 2 1 0 . 5 0 7 . 1 5 5 . 4 0 4 . 5 0
-
3 2 . 4 3 4 4 . 4 9 9 8 . 2 8 5 0 . 8 0 5 3 . 2 0
3 7 . 2 4 4 3 . 2 1 4 6 . 8 1 4 7 . 2 9
1 . 7 7 5 . 8 3 7 . 4 5 8 . 9 0
1 0 . 4 6
2 . 8 0 6 . 7 9 8 . 6 1 9 . 6 0
3 4 . 2 0 5 0 . 3 1 5 5 . 7 3 5 9 . 7 0 6 3 . 6 6
4 0 . 0 4 5 0 . 0 0 5 5 . 4 2 5 6 . 8 9
9 3 6 9 9 3 9 9 4 9 9 7 1 0 0 5
9 2 9 9 9 8 9 9 8 1 0 0 8
8 / 2 6 / 8 2 . 1 3 . 0 0 2 5 . 1 2 2 . 5 1 2 7 . 6 3 1 0 1 7 8 . 5 0 3 8 . 1 4 5 . 7 1 4 3 . 8 6 1 0 0 9 6 . 4 0 4 1 . 6 1 7 . 1 2 4 8 . 7 3 1 0 0 3 5 . 4 0 4 3 . 6 6 8 . 2 1 5 1 . 8 7 1 0 0 8 4 . 6 0 4 3 . 9 1 8 . 8 6 5 2 . 7 7 1 0 1 0 4 . 4 0 4 4 . 1 7 9 . 2 4 5 3 . 4 2 1 0 1 3
I t4 GEOTHEEMAL I ~ E L L S
a . 3.5.
m P . " U . 0 0 0 0 o b l P m n 4 P c ) 2 V I z m s u I z u l
u .
I € .
L L L . 1 1 1 .
I .
m p . .-I iL . 2 0. . I .
n . I € . * A . 0 a. . :. j .
I E .
. d u . - u .
00030
0 0 3 0 3 . . . . . 0 0 0 0 3 O Q 0 . . . . . . . .
0 0 0 0 3 G O U
LC 3 'L1
'3 0 . . C 4, rr: Q c, m 0
n P. OL L.
0000.-
-0-0- . . . . .
d a (II 5
+ 1. -I L. * u.
'-q . + E .
-* . + i. ' J u. 3 U.
t I. A. u. u. + E.
z LL. 3 .L.
0 LTI - 0 UI UI us 1- Ln tc In r- . . . . . . . . . . . . .
us t- .t c- u i- r, I-
Y . '3 . 6 . 0 .
t' . 5 . 1-1 . 0 . - I . . .
al. P 2. E . 6 .
LO . e..
w m o c
-
- -? ...
c A
a I
L
N 00
cu 0
< i e 0 .. W
U b
n
-0oCu30 m o o o * * O N O O O ~ . . . . . .
m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A s . . . .
3 . . . . . \ . . . . e
3 . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . x-Jvl* V ) u x u x u
0~rcvI-i
4 t l 3 c ~ h ' ~ x .
n 4
\ E ul 0 s E
L n o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o N 0 0 0 m t 0 N 0 0 0 - 0 m 0 0 \ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O m O ~ a o e N - 0 0 0 ~ 0 m 0 - m a m a 0 0 3 m e
(4- 0 m
Y
* m a w c 0
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$.I 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b
E O . . .> a u .C( m a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . b E . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u
e m . . . . . . . . . . . . . .a b \ O . . .a . o x w c . I c u . . . m a
U Z . d 0 0 O P d - 4 '0100 r 3 v l a u ~ . ~ m t * r u
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 avl x x 0 F'"
0 a 1 8 u
c a I rl a U .d
6 Q)
c ez w X w 0 W e VI W il il U
U ez E I
U
c
E I
e a il il W 3
hl O N
* \ co d ( u B O VI\ w a E O W x ** o w O B w * e n
m O e ( u N 0 eooo-Ln
o o o o o m . . . . . .
Q, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A n . . . . f . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . x c u v l ~ . m V I u z o x u
o(ux(uw U e x x x s x
n 4
E \ cn r 0
E Y
m o o o o o o o o o o o o m o o N o o o - - - - a 9 o o - o o o o \ . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . m a J c 3 3 m o o m o m o a P - - o o o o o - - o
m - m 9 0 (u 0
PI- (3 rn . m m N
B \ u x
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z x (0' u m L:
m 3 0 VI
P p:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *
. . . . . B
. . . . . >
. . . . . b .....L) . . . . . = , . . . . o n
. . . . . C (
. . . . . CI
n c3
A B w
w u 3 1 x x b;I - e
;Io -QI 0 4 VI4 m o 4 u Y Y
0 0 0 ( u e w w w EXLnLnlA u \ \ \ \ \ 9 0 o e O Y X X X X
a o - . Y * 0 9 P I O
* . . . . . o - - 3 a
0 1 0 0 9 m
m u ao- Y
OI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . * w e * - 0 0 : *
w a 4 z . * a 4
LC d) u a 1
R E a I
c
I: I
L3 a
U t: w I u 0 w W
cu co 3 \
N \ a 0
0 I- * .. n
ococornmcv - o ( u o o f i
- - c o O O O ~ . . . . . . a0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
n e . . . .
3 . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . X N v l U 'n:
v l 0 I U I d O N E N W
U O s X M x s
m o o N O 0
o o m \ * a
- m l n * * o b CI-
. . . n . . . E . . . & . . . a . . . Y . . . . . . w . . . i ) . . . a 0 c o '
0 0 0 0 o a - - o
t-coo0 iv3 N
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m w . 4
x 0 E a
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 m - 0
rn
. . . c
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 0
0 0 4 v ) & V
0 0
0
t.
0 0 0 0 o a o o o m 0 3
m r n
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o . m
4 . a lu u m ~ r
n 4
\ E m 0 c E Y
0 0
0
cu 0
m
* I-
> I-
3 0
I 0 0
U
U
n
n n
o b w
w u b d n n 3 3 s s a v 0 0 O J * f i vlu 0
4 Y Y Y
0 0 0 ( u L 3 w w w z x m m m u \ \ \ \ \ 3 w L 3 w w x x x x x m o p - m
0 0 - 3
N . . . . * O C z l n N
3cI0c) - m
m u m a Y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . . w o -
* . w e * * * e 4 *
w a u z
4 m m 3r d
c Q
-ai
vl w il il
> U
4 d
E 1
U
c
I E P a il il
’ E tr O N
z ** o w
O O * N * Q , ~ 0 0 c z O O F ?
O Q , O O O ~ . . . . . .
00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . n e . . . .
3 . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . . . . .
h’cucnt -0:
v l ~ x u r u O N X N U
w s s x s s
Y . . . . . . . . . . 4
n
e Y
W d a f: 4 v1
0
4
E \ a)
s 0
E
m o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o N 0 0 0 N - - 0 0 - 0 0 0 a 0 Q , 0 \ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L n L n m * m 0 0 m - 0 0 0 N 0 m 0 PfczSln m c r ) m m o
cz- 3 Q,
Y
* m m N F? c3
0 0
a E W CI \ X a
N 0 * r (
vl
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (D m.rc
x u c i l * v1 0 P
p:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . d
u l s u
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . .aJ m l s
0 u r
0 0 0 ( V m w w w
a 1
0
2 W
Q c,
a Q
c si a
W e
I c
E I
23 a
o m o o o Q , a0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
n . . . . . 3 . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . X ’ c u m r r * e
O C U X N W m u 2 u x u 4 2 3 X X ~ S X ‘
n E a Tz Y
w ;r a L U m p: w w U J
4
n
E \ m
c 0
E Y
m o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o N 0 0 0 3 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 N 0 ~ ~ 0 \ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m m - t o 0 0 0 ( u Q ) 0 ~ ~ - - 0 0 0 t 0 3 0
m m m In0
b - 3 Q)
* m m N (u c? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
u . 0 .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x x u Q e m r: tn
3 0 m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PCC . 4 . I Y O L U P O
o 0 0 X
4 0 U
a 4 I- m 0 u . 4 w d 4
a 4 c a w z I- O w 0
m w cl a U > 4 d
c I
w
c I i: W
Q ) m c ? o - - m e m - - o - -
o ~ o o o m . . . . . . m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- . e . . . J . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . * . . .
X N V ) * O C U I N U
* d
a u a u x u w s . v s s s
Y . . . . . . . . . . 4
n 4
E \ m
c 0
E Y
m o 6 o o o o o o o o m o o o o ( u o ~ o - - o o q o o ( u o o o o \ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . m o ~ N ( u o ~ - o o o o t o t o r D m O l 3 3 s * m m o
\1) a0
* m n b c u c? c?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x x u 0 * 6
E m .rl a 3
m 0 n cr Is
4
4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a
m I s
. . . . . .
. . . .
. . . . * * ' I- * u
. u * I - * u
CSP - 3
0 2 u o x u
LC 0 L,
a 3 6 0 0
LC 0
c 3 i
a I
U u e U t-c
U
v1 0 U
3 p m o a o Lnoo-ooLn o m o o o m . . . . . .
Q) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . z . . . . . \ ’ . . . . 3 . . . . * y . . . . . . . . . . x’Ntn3 * e m u Z u Z U
O W I N H
U W X x ’ S x ’ x ’
. 4 w e U
a U
f W I t-c 0 w W
m w a n a 4
4 * E U
\
n: In 0
r c E
I
W
Y
c m o o o o o o o o o o m o o o o N O o 0 ( u - N 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 \ . . . . . ‘ . . . . . . . . . o o o ~ L n o ~ m - o o o W o m o m m m m f t e Ln a 0 e N
a0 (3 Q)
I E 0 a a a w I E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ir a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 (u u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
* \ w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * a (u a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t-c b c a u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W m \ X 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * c( 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H
0 m e r . . . .b
2 e w . , .a E . . . u
0 w w b w . . . . . . . . . . . . m ~ 0 t-c b \ O . . . . . f . . . . . . o x w u uzT.rcta ~ t u t n - t o s ~ . r ( .suo t3 n a o l v ! r x o ~ a m o c u e u m ~ r ~ u
* W O N t
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a0
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . E
a c a
4 0 n p:
U b v1 0 u
4
14 W p: U
J U c er: W T c1 0 W 0
v1 W a J U W U p:
I= I
U
c
r I 13
r w T u 0 W 13
N a0
N \
\ a0 0
c
w b 4 CI
..
- m t o t o t n m e o o r . . . . . . o m o o o c ? m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A . . . . .
3 . . . . . \ . . . . . 3 . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . x(uv1t -0:
u 2 u ~ u x u o (uz (un
4 u x x x x x
n r(
\ E cn 0 c E Y
m o o o o o o o o o o m o o o o ~ o o o * - - ~ o ~ o o c u o o m o \ . . * . . . . . . . . . . . . m o o a e o * N ~ o o o ~ o - o 0 0 3 a m 3 s t m e o
* N a r c? a0
* m O N
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % x u & m * a m
t 0 v1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P 4 * u
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *
. . . . . p
. . . . . a
. . . . . p . . . . . u . . . . . = . . . . m p . . . . o r o r ( *suo
. . . . . n
. . . . . C(
L U ~ L Z C J
T@LE25. Output data for EPRI code
0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 8 / 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 / 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2
1 3 . 7 0 9 . 7 4
1 4 . 2 9 7 . 1 4
1 1 . 4 4 8 . 0 9 6 . 3 4 5 . 4 4
. 3 8 1 1 E - 0 3
. 5 4 8 6 E - 0 3
. 3 4 4 6 E - 0 3
. 5 5 6 0 E - 0 3
. 3 0 6 7 E - 0 3
. 4 1 4 l E - 0 3
. 5 7 9 4 E - 0 3
. 5 7 8 8 E - 0 3
. 2 6 7 2 E - 0 2
. 3 4 4 3 E - 0 2
. 1 9 6 5 E - 0 2
. 2 8 6 8 E - 0 2
. 2 9 5 0 E - 0 2
. 2 9 5 0 E - 0 2
. 2 6 2 0 E - 0 2
. 2 7 8 5 E - 0 2
0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 / 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2
1 3 . 7 0 9 . 7 4
1 4 . 2 9 7 . 1 4
1 1 . 4 4 8 . 0 9 6 . 3 4 5.44
2 .9479S-O5 2 . 3 8 7 6 E - 0 3 2 . 118513-03 2 . 4 0 6 3 E - 0 3 2 2 . 2 8 4 5 E - 0 3 2 . 4 5 9 8 E - 0 3 2 . 4 8 1 OE-03
-
. 4 3 0 0 E - 0 2
.4357E-O2
. 3 0 5 0 E - 0 2 ,378113-02 .4527E-O2 . 3 6 8 8 E - 0 2 . 3 3 5 9 E - 0 2 . 3 4 0 5 E - 0 2
0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 OS/ 1 2 / 8 2
1 3 . 7 0 9 . 7 4
1 4 . 2 9 7 . 1 4
1 1 . 4 4 8 . 0 s 6 . 3 4 5 . 4 4
3 3 3 3 .4059E-O3 3 3 . 2 8 4 5 E - 0 3 3 3 . 4 8 1 0 E - 0 3
- - - - -
0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 0 2 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 6 / 2 4 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 / 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2 0 8 1 1 2 / 8 2
1 3 . 7 0 9 . 7 4
1 4 . 2 9 7 . 1 4
1 1 . 4 4 8 . 0 9 6 . 3 4 5.44
. 2 5 8 2 E - 0 3
. 4 3 8 1 E - 0 3
. 2 1 5 9 E - 0 3 - 4 8 0 6 E - 0 3 . 2 1 8 2 E - 0 3 . 3 3 0 9 E - 0 3 . 5 0 2 4 E - 0 3 .4703E-O3
.3350E-O2
. 4 1 2 2 E - 0 2
. 2 6 4 4 E - 0 2 , 3 5 4 7 E - 0 2 . 3 4 4 9 E - 0 2 . 3 4 4 8 E - 0 2 . 3 \ 18E-02 . 3 4 6 4 E - 0 2
TABLE 27 SCALING SIMULATION RESULTS FOR
9~493,258 LB/H
61 e 31 34.49 15.32 13.85 13.07 12.32 12.17 12.09 11 l 95 11.87 11.80 11.73 11.69 11.68 11.68 11.67 11.66
.7363 -5522 .3681 .3500 .3400 .3300 3280 .3270 .2350 l 3240 .3230 .3220 l 3215 -3214 .3213 ,3212 3211
0.00 25.00 50.00 52.47 53.82 55.18 55.45 55.59 55.86 56.00 56.13 56.27 56.34 56.35 56.36 56.38 56.39
147.24 2125 146.75 2126 141.07 2133 137.27 2135 134.77 2135 128.77 2136 126.18 2136 125.05 2137 121.88 2137 119.11 2137 116.10 2137 111.61 2137 107.69 2137 106.32 2137 104.06 2137 100.49 2137 92.83 2137
TABLE 26 SCALING SIMULATION RESULTS FOR
Q=260,330 LB/H
AREA DIAMETER % CHOKE WHP FLASH INCH2 FEET PSI DEPTH
( A ) FT. ........................................... 61 .31 .7363 34.49 .5522 15.32 .3681 13.07 .3400 12.32 3300 10.18 .3000
4.52 .2000 4.08 .1900
0.00 25.00 50.00 53.82 55.18 59.26 72 84 74.20
209.13 1849 208.80 1850 208.54 1855 208.40 1859 208.30 1860 208.00 1868 200.60 2011 198.20 2060
TABLE 28 SCALING SIMULATION RESULTS FOR
Q=593,446 LB/H
AREA DIAMETER % CHOKE WHP FLASH I NCH2 FEET PSI DEPTH
(A) FT. ........................................... 61.31 .7363 0.00 107.47 2035 34.49 .5522 25.00 106.94 2038 15.32 .3681 50.00 100.56 2068 12.32 .3300 55.18 94.33 2094 11.58 .3200 56.54 75.76 2102
a 0 5
u A
* * * I : * a * * * * * z 2
* * * n h
* * U P * n
s * * * w * I - * o * 4 * *
* . . . . . . .a *(ucUecU-cN * cu * * * o o o o o o o o * o o o o o o o o * O O C d J J Q J U *-9.oI*Q)cDCDQ)
* * U Q O N m 9 0 0
* o o o o o o o o * m c u u f E J n c u h J w * o o o o o o o o * . . . . . . . . * o o o o o o o o *
APPENDIX
SAMPLE111
IBDAlA O t T I .17E-OS* .U7IE-O2. .BOOC-OIt .12OJE-02. .41L-O¶* 0.01 .SZE-W* 0.0. 0.0, 0.0, 0.0. 0.0. ,.SI 0.0. 0 .0 .
0.01 0.0. 0.0. .WSIE-02* 0.01 0.00 0.01 .3106E-O3. .l910ft00, 0.0. 0.0, 0.01 e437IE-020 0.01 0.0, 0 .0 , 0.0. 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.0.
.mWIE-OIv 0.0. .1L-O6. .]E-051 0.01
W P T I A V I 0.0, 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0. 0 . 0 ,
0 .s . 0.0. 0.0. s.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.01 0 .0 , 0 .0 . 0 . 0 , 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0.0, 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0, 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 . 0 . 0 ,
0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.0. 0.0, 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 . 0 , 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0.0. a.0.
OPO OV OlM0 OJFO 0101 OMIT OPH OPT01 ODELCV 01 OF 0 OIOPEY OELECT OlCON OCVUN OCVMX
0.0, 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. O I O . 0 .0 . 0 . 0 , 0.0, 0;o. 0.0. 0;;; 0.0, 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.0, 0.0, 0.0. 0.0, 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 . 0 , 0 .0 , 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 , 0 .0 . 0.0. 0 . 0 , s.0. 0.0, 0 .0 , 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0.0, 0.0, 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.0, 0.0. 0 . 0 , 0 . 0 , 0 . 0 , 0.01 0.0. 0 .0 , 0 .0 , 0 .0 . 0 .0 , 0.0, 0.01 0 . 0 , 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0.01 0.0. 0 . 0 , 0.0. 0.0, 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.0, 0.0, 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 , 0.01 0.0. 0.0. 0 .0 , 0 . 0 , 0.01 0.0. 0 .0 . 0.0. 0 .0 , 0 .0 . 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0 .0 .
- 0 . 0 . 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0.01 0.0. 0 .0 , 0 .0 . I 0.0, . 21, . 0 . . 0 . I 50. . . *E tO l .
I .IE-O4. . 0.01
. 0. 0 . 0 . - -.1S2006594S0541Et02r I .1200029266SS3SEt01. - 0 . 0 ,
. . ..
0
. 0.01 - 0.
>I tUblbNIII 61 LIME 63 FERROUS OXIDE
67 1ULFUR 6S BOEHlllTE
7s SODIUM OXIOE
1.00000002E100 I 1.00004B1)lEt00 8 1.3620054LE-07 2.S0052SOlE-O4 4.62904003E-OS 9.46070192E-03
ii nimrirr
COMPUTER CODE OUTPUT LISTING
PART I: EQUILIB - ELECTRIC PO’K’EX RESEARCH INSTITUTE (USA)
COMPUTER CODE OUTPUT L I S T I N G
PART 11: WATCH - NATIONAL ENER3' AUTHORITY (ICELAND)
10lAL COYCEYTR~TIOY Ill LlEUtD CWASE (MOLESIK0 L I W I D W20)
2 r 1 AL .14WS53E-05
.107?211E-02
.I. NO *
2 Kt 1 A L t t t
3 YAi 4 C A t t I nett 4 FEtt
14 s-- 14 I40104
17 S04-- I0 cos--
20 on- 19 CL-
21 )I* 22 n20 2s sol--- 31 AL(on>** 12 ALlOH)2t 33 AL(on)4- 34 AL(S04)t
41 KCL 35 AL(SO412-
43 KSO4- 45 NACL
47 NA804- 44 naco3-
4* CAOWt IO CACOI I1 CAncolt 52 CAS04
I4 meco3 I3 noont
IS I l E M C O l t I4 ME104 so FE<DH)t I? fC~OMI2 LO fECLt 41 fECL2 42 CECLI- 4s fL804 44 fEttt 47 FEtOMlt4 4s FE1OH)Zt 49 fE(OH)3 70 ?E(OII)4- 71 TECLtt 72 TECL2t 71 fECL3
110 W504- .. - ..
112 1425 111 YCOI- 114 n2co1 115 MCL 141 MlS104- 144 n2s104-- 174 nso1-- 17s nmo1- 114 02
SAMPLE#l (cont)
SI02 535.00 M 1WO.00 K 233.00 CA 48,w RG 0,100 co2 42.55 so4 31.20 OS 0,00 U 3100*00 F O*OO D I S S h W I D S 0,00 AL 0.1000 B 47 ,oooo FE 0,0000 NH3 o.oOO0
BEEP MATER ~PPIO
SI02 467.36 an 1648.35 K 204 6 2 8
ffi 0,088 so4 28.23 U 2717,M f 0.00 DISSaS. O B 0 0
K 0.0877 B 41e2050 FE O.oQ00
cn 42e87
N I W E S C05TA RIM
0.0 0,o 0.0 0.0 0,o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o*o 0.0 0.0 0,o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o*o 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0
IONIC MLm :
coz 1068*78 HZS 0,OO HZ 4,94 02 0.00 cH4 0.22 I 2 81 $ 7 5
m3 0.00
m O R K U S T O F N U N
ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS IN DCEP MTER tlt 0,727 K W - MI- 0.638 F- H3SIM- 0,648 CL- HZSIM- 0,211 Mt HW3- 0 e 615 K t HC03- 0,648 w C03- 0,191 %ti HS- 0.658 m t S-- 0,202 MHC03t HS04- 0 * 658 cmt S04-- 0,180 n6oHt NAS04- 0.674 MUt
0 674 0.638 0,626 0.648 0.626 0.224 0,265 0.685 0.648 0.685 0 * 693 0.615
0.648 01060 0.211 0 v 674 0.- 0,658 0,658 0.211 0,674 0,658 0,191 0.024
Ht (ACT,) 0.00 OH- 0,15 H4SIM 746,61 H3SI04- OeM HZSIM-- 0,00 HhH3SIM 0141 H3B03 235.1 H2BO3- 0,20 H2C03 1460.15 HW3- 34.38 C03- 0.00 H2S 0,OO Hs- 0,00 S-- 0.00 WS04 0.00 HSM- 1.09 sob- HF
15.43 0.00
F- O X 4 CL- 2404 e 71 Ndt 1576e95 K t 197 * 45 c4tt 34.15
IONIC S T R E l T H = 0.07597 IOWIC BAWWX :
CHEMICAL GEOTHERHOMETERS LGREES C
OUARTZ 246,4 CHALCEDfflY 999,9 MK 220e9
0.00 0.OOo 0.00 OtOo0
0.00 O B O o 0
0.00 O.Oo0 0*00 0.Ooo o n 0 0 0.OoQ 0.00 0.000 0.00 O I O O O
0,00 o.Oo0 0.00 0.OOo O+OO -20,654 0,00 -13,890 0.00 -8.014 0.25 -5.490 0.00 -8,709 0+00 -21.096 0.00 -221774 0,00 o*Oo0 0.00 0,OOo 0*00 o.Oo0 0,00 0.000 0.00 o d c 4 o m o.Oo0
M w- 99,399
TEOR, WC. -11,526 -11,242 -2.m -2*110
2,072 99.999 -17,281 99.999 -74,109 -68,790 -37.205 -SA22 -2,121 -2.110
- 3 7 1 7 % -36.035
m oRKUSToFNUN
LOG DISTRIBUTIW CmFICIENTS WZ =-2*49 w2s 0.00 6AS SOLUBILITY RLTIKYIffi FKTOR 1.00
WP UATER (PPI)
SI02 1500 .84 w2 I44 1766.41 H2s II 218.31 Hz ca 45.95 M IG 0,094 CHI SM 30.25 NZ CL 2912,46 NH3 F 0*00 DISSnS, 0,OO AL 0.0940 B 44,1563 FE 0.oOoQ
ACTIVITY UlEFFICIWTS In DEEP WTER Ht 0 * 741 KSM- OH- 0.655 F- HWIM- 0,665 U- H?SI04-- 0.233 Mt H303- 0,632 K t HC03- 0,665 cat t C03-- 0,212 Ntt 6- 0.655 M 0 3 t S-- 0.224 ffiHC03t HSO4- 0 t 674 CAM0 S O k - 0,200 MGWt NASM- 0.690 IM4t
DEEP STEM P m n
74.78 m 2 149)6*91 0.00 m 0.00 0,04 Hz 73.35 0,00 02 0,00 0,00 CHI 3.21 0,59 112 1214.38 0.00 )M3 0.00
0.690 0,655 0,644 0.665 0.644 0,246 0,289 0,700 0.665 0.700 0,708 ova2
CHEnItAL CMIFONENTS IW DEEP WATER (PPII WD LO6 #OLE)
FEtt FEt t t FEOHt FE(OH)3- FE(OHM- F m t t F E ( W 2 t FE(OHi4- FES04t FEUt t FECLZt FEU)-
0,00 o.oO0 0*00 0,OOo 0.00 O.OO0 0*00 0,Ooo 0,oo OIOO0 0,oo O I O O O
0*00 o.oO0 0.00 o.oO0 0,00 0,w 0.00 o.oO0 0.00 -22.015 0100 -14.977 o m -8.732 0.27 -5.468 0.01 -7,155 0.00 -22,m 0.00 -24.328 0.00 O.Oo0 0,00 o.oO0 0.00 O I O O 0
0.00 0.OOO 0.00 o*oO0 o m o.OO0
I Y w C I l E C J M c u I w Y 6OETWITE IIIIGIIETITE
M I T E W T Z ZOISITE
m-IwwTm,