draft disclaimer this contractor document was prepared for

DRAFT DISCLAIMER

This contractor document was prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), but has not

undergone programmatic, policy, or publication review, and is provided for information only.

The document provides preliminary information that may change based on new information or

analysis, and is not intended for publication or wide distribution; it is a lower level contractor

document that may or may not directly contribute to a published DOE report. Although this

document has undergone technical reviews at the contractor organization, it has not undergone a

DOE policy review. Therefore, the views and opinions of authors expressed do not necessarily

state or reflect those of the DOE. However, in the interest of the rapid transfer of information,

we are providing this document for your information.

I Ir- A rck~c GO *1*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~q , t"/ q

has',im -ISLTR97-0002 1

Pre-ExperimentThermal-Hydrological-Mechanical Analysesfor the ESF Heated Drift Test

Nicholas D. Francis, Steven R. Sobolik, Clifford K. Ho,Rover R. Eaton, Dale Preece

Nuclear Waste Management Center

Sandia National LaboratoriesAlbuquerque, NM 87185

Three-Dimensional Mesh of the Heated Drift Used for theThermal-Mechanical Calculations

SLTR97-0002 -

Pre-Experiment Thermal-Hydrological-Mechanical Analysesfor the ESF Heated Drift Test

Nicholas D. Francis, Steven R. Sobolik, Clifford K. Ho,Roger R. Eaton, Dale Preece

Nuclear Waste Management CenterSandia National Laboratories

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document describes pre-test analyzes performed for the Heated Drift comp6nent of the DriftScale Test in the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) at Yucca Mountain. The heating phase ofthe Heated Drift test is planned to begin in December 1997. The analyses documented in thisreport are pre-experiment thermal-hydrological-mechanical (T-H-M) analyses modeling theresponse of the the heated drift and surrounding rock induced by the horizontally-emplaced in-drift canister heaters and wing heaters with a total power output of approximately 210'220 kW.The experimental T-H-M response will be determined by measurements of temperature, moisturecontent, and displacement on and within the test block. The analyses performed include thermal-hydrological and thermal-mechanical calculations, with predictions of 'temperatures anddisplacements at selected locations in the drift where multi-point borehole extensometers (MPBX)will be installed. Input parameters for the calculations were obtained as much as possible fromeither the Heated Drift site or the nearby Single Heater Test site.

Thermal-hydrologic (T-H) modeling is performed using' a two-dimensional (X-Z) cross-sectionalmodel domain representing the center of the experiment, a two-dimensional (Y-Z) longitudinalmodel domain used to characterize edge cooling effects as a result of unheated rock mass at eitherend of the drift, and a three-dimensional "periodic boundary" model used to assess the effects ofmodel dimensionality on the T-H model predictions. Temperature-time histories at ESF-HD-MPBX-7, 8, 9, and 10 are presented for the 2.-3, and 4 year heating'scenarios with year'cooling.Time-histories predictions are given for 'both' high and low permeability rock at this specifiedlocation." Additionally, temperature and liquid saturation contours are shown for each of the T-Hmodels'applied in the analyses. Temperature and liquid saturation profiles are given for both highand low permeability rock at 6 month intervals for the different heating scenarios.

Temperature-time history predictions near the center of the experiment (at the locations of theprobes ESF-HD-MPBX-7, 8, 9, and 10) indicate'maxim um collar emperatures of 260'C, 3007C,and 330'C, respectively for 2, 3, and 4 year full power heating cycles.- The high permeabilityresults are approximately 10C less. Temperature results at other borehole locations off centerwill be lower as a result of edge cooling into surrounding unheated'rock rass. 'Both'cases (lowand high rock bulk permeability) indicate transport of energy by convection. The high bulkpermeability cases indicate a constant temperature refluxing zone driven by buoyant convection.

ia

Temperature contours indicate the location of important isotherms (960 C, 200'C) at differenttimes during heating. Liquid saturation profiles indicate the location of dry-out zone and theextent of the condensate shedding. The low permeability cases indicate the formation of asymmetrical dry-out zone above and below the heater horizon. The high bulk permeability casesindicate the formation of an asymmetric dry-out zone with preferential drying below the heaters.It is note that for both cases, the formation of a large condensate zone forms below the heaterdue to water shedding. The longitudinal Y-Z model indicates the importance of edge cooling onboth the temperature predictions as well as the location of water shedding around the unheatedends of the drift. Also, the 2-D X-Z cross-section model is compared to the 3-D periodic X-Y-Zmodel in order to assess the effects of dimensionality of the problem. It is noted that the 2-Dmodel very accurately predicts the drift wall and surrounding rock temperatures. This isimportant as computational efficiency and the use of 2-D models will allow for extendedanalyses including the use of alternative conceptual models such as the dual permeability model.

Predictions of the displacement-time histories in the host rock during the heating and coolingphases of the heated drift test at selected MPBX anchor locations indicate maximum extensionfor any probe from collar to deepest anchor of about 15 mm. Displacement magnitudes wereshown to be a strong function of the choice of thermal expansion coefficients. Also, predictionsfor the sequential drift mine-by MPBX's indicate that their measurements may be used as anindicator of rock mass elastic modulus because of the predicted difference in behavior betweenusing an intact rock value of 36.8 GPa versus a value of 10 GPa obtained from nearby Goodmanjack testing. Bulk permeability over the range of values measured at the heated drift site was notshown to be a strong factor in the general thermal-mechanical behavior or the magnitudes ofthermally-induced displacements.

This work was performed by Sandia National Laboratories under Yucca Mountain Project SUBSnumber 1.2.3.14.2. The SNL Work.Agreement WA-0332 (SNL, 1996) details the SNL QualityAssurance procedures that governed the work described in this document. The completion of thisdocument satisfies CRWMS M&O Level 4 Milestone SP9318M4. Table I outlines the criteriafor these miilestones and where they are met in this report. The completion of this milestonesupports the M&O Level 3 Milestone SP3305M3, due July 16, 1997.

Table 1. List of Milestone Criteria Satisfied by This ReportLevel 4 Milestone I qB9318M4 is a letter report completed and reviewed by 6113/1997. This rporz documentsthe results of thermal-hydrologic and thermal-mechanical analyses of the heated drift test which will predict thetemperature, liquid saturation, and displacement profiles in the tunnel rock at intervals of one week for the firsttwelve weeks, and one month thereafter from the start of both the heating and cooling phases of the test.Criteria for SP9318M4 LocationDiscussion of planned heated drift test geometry Sections 3 and 4Discussion of all thermal-hydrologic input parameters Section 3Discussion of thermal-hydrologic analyses Sections 3 and 5.1Temperature-time histories for selected thermocouples Appendix AContour plots of temperatures at selected times Appendix B and CContour plots of liquid saturation at selected times Appendix BDiscussion of all thermal-mechanical input parameters Section 4Discussion of thermal-mechanical analyses Sections 4 and 5.2;Displacement-time histories for selected displacement sensors Appendix D

Table of Contents

Introduction ,. 11.1 Background 1

1.1.1 Linkage of the ESF Thermal Test to the SCP and Subsequent ProgramDirectives 5

1.1.2 Information Needs Addressed by the Heated Drift Test 6.1.1.3 Relevant Processes 7

1.2 Heated Drift Test 111.3 Schedule 12

2. Task Description 133. Thermal-Hydrologic Modeling Approach 15

3.1 Introduction 153.2 General De-ription of the'TherImal-Hydrologic Models 163.3 General Description of the Conceptual Model 163.4 General Description of the Hydrologic and Thermal Properties 18

3.4.1 Hydrologic Properties ; 183.4.2 Thermal Properties 20

3.5 General Description of the Test (and Modeled) Geometry 223.5.1 Construction of the Model Domains 23

3.5.1.1 Heated drift and wing heater geometry 233.5.1.2 Canisterheatergeometry , 263.5.1.3 Concrete inv&rt geometry 263.5.1.4 Concrete liner'geometry 26

3.5.2 Determination of the Outer Boundary Locations 263.6 General Description'of the 2-D X-Z Cross-Section 28

3.6.1 Description of Mesh 283.6.2 Initial Conditions 283.6.3 Boundary Conditions 313.6.4 Simulation Procedure 31

3.7 General Description of the 2-D Longitudinal Model Domain 323.7.1 Longitudinal Mesh 323.7.2 Initial Cointions 323.7.3 Boundary Conditions 35

3.7.3.1 Perimeter elements 353.7.3.2 Heat generation elements 35

3.7.4 Simulation Procedure 363.8 General Description of the 3-D X-Y-Z Model Domain 37

3.8.1 Description of Mesh 373.8.2 Initial Conditions 373.8.3 Boundary Conditions 383.8.4 Simulation Procedure 38

4. Thermal-Mechanical Modeling Approach ' 404.1 Introduction 404.2 General Description of the Thermal-Mechanical Models 404.3 General Description of the Conceptual Model 43

I

4.4 Description of the Mechanical Properties - 444.5 Description and Methods for the T-M Calculations 48

4.5.1 Mesh Geometry Information 484.5.2 Initial and Boundary Conditions 484.5.3 Simulation Procedure 48

5. Model Results 505.1 Thermal-Hydrologic 50

5.1.1 Temperature-Time History Results 505.1.2 Temperature and Liquid Saturation Contours 51

5.1.2.1 Temperature and liquid saturation contours for the X-Z cross-section model 52

5.1.2.2 Temperature and liquid saturation contours for the Y-Zlongitudinal model 53

5.1.2.3 Temperature and liquid saturation contours for the 3-D X-Y-Zmodel 54

5.2 Thermal-Mechanical 555.2.1 Displacement Predictions at the Middle of the Heated Drift 555.2.2 Displacement Predictions Along the Length of the Heated Drift 575.2.3 Radial Displacement Predictions from the Sequential Mining Drift 57

6.0 Summary 59References 61Appendix A: Predicted Temperature-Time Histories for the Heated Drift from the 2-D

Cross-Section Thermal-Hydrologic Calculations A-IAppendix B: Contour Plots of Predicted Temperatures and Liquid Saturations from the

Thermal-Hydrologic Calculations B-1Appendix C: Selected Three-Dimensional Temperature Fields Interpolated from 2-D

Thermal-Hydrologic Calculations, and Used as Inputs to the Thermal-Mechanical Calculations C-I

Appendix D: Predicted Displacement-Time Histories at Selected MPBX AnchorLocations D-1

1. Introduction

This document describes pre-test analyses performed for the Heated Drift component of the DriftScale Test in the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) at Yucca Mountain. The heating phase ofthe Heated Drift test is planned to begin in December 1997. The SNL Work Agreement WA-0332 (SNL, 1996) defines pre-experiment thermal-hydrological-mechanical (T-H-M) analysesmodeling the response of the welded tuff in-the heated drift and surrounding rock induced by thehorizontally-emplaced in-drift and wing heaters with a total power output of approximately210 kW. The experimental T-H-M response will be'determined by measurements of temperature,moisture content, and displacement on and within the test block. The T-H-M analyses performedinclude thermal-hydrological and thermal-mechanical calculations. Input parameters for thecalculations were obtained as much as possible from either the Heated Drift site or the nearbySingle Heater Test site. This work was performed by Sandia National Laboratories under YuccaMountain Project WBS number 1.2.3.14.2. The SNL Work Agreement WA-0332 (SNL, 196)details the' SNL Quality Assurance procedures that governed the work described in this document.The completion of this document satisfies CRWMS M&O Level 4 Milestone SP93 18M4.

1.1 Background

The Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) Thermal Test, shown schematically in Figure 1-1, is anintegral part of the program of site investigations to characterize Yucca Mountain in Nye County,Nevada for the permanent disposal of 'spent nuclear fuel and high level nuclear waste. Thepurpose of the ESF Thermal Test is to, understand better the coupled thermal, mechanical,hydrological, and chemical processes likely toi exist in the rock mass surrounding the potentialgeologic repository at Yucca Mountain. Plans for a suite of in situ thermal tests to be conductedin the ESF began with the Site Characierization Plan (SCP) (DOE 1988). The planning basisdocumented in the SCP has evolved over the past several years to meet the changing needs andupdated knowledge base of the project. The most recent iteration, in which the SCP thermaltesting program was re-evaluated and consolidated, is discussed in In Situ Thermal TestingProgram Strategy (DOE 1995). The ESF Thermal Test is being conducted in a facilityspecifically constructed for this purpose in the middle nonlithophysal (tptpmn) lithologic unit ofthe Tc'opah Spring Welded Tuff (TSw2) thermomechanical unit, the prop z)d repositoryhorizon.

The ESF Thermal Test is comprised of a single heater test (SHT), and a drift scale test (DST)which is comprised of a sequential drift mining test (SDMT), a plate-loading test (PLT), and aheated drift test (HDT). In the DST, the local rock mass will be heated by electrical heatersplaced in horizontal boreholes drilled into the ribs at the springline and canister within the HeatedDrift itself. ,Ultimately, thermal-mechanical-hydrological-chemical (TMHC) behavior in the localrock mass and the performance prototype ground support systems will be measured in the mainDST. Additional thermo-mechanical responses will be measured in the SDMT and the PLTportion of the DST.

I

Floor Heaters

PRELIMINARY(Not to Scale)

U

Figure I-1. Schiematic of ESF Thernial Test Facility

To NorthPortal

'CS 17+17

.. FF

- Middle Non-LMophysal

(a) ESF Location

Po"ible GhostV -cae -. is-- -. 1- I

Upp" rljop"Bsl Zons

l Aim Mlddlo Nondho~~~~~~~~~~~~~~physal 70-b

.~~ I Hatdn Drifi Hired Drt I ~ ~~~~~ X-enct on

..'

Poebiy100 m BO m t B0 m I

r-w ---' A

(b) Stratigraphic Location

I

REFERENCE ONLY(Not to Scale) D

Figure 1-2. General Location of the ESF Thermal Test L

:3

Connecting Drift

Niche

HeateDrift

Began: Jan. 19, '96

d

Drift

ThermomechanicalAlcove Extension

ThermomechanicalAlcove

'iSF NCenterline @ CS 28+27 ESF Main Drift

Figure 1-3. Plan View of the ESF Thermal Test Facility

The ESF Thermal Test facility general location and plan view are shown in Figures 1-2 and 1-3,respectively. The ESF Thermal Test will consist of an east-west observation drift drivendownward from the ESF main drift, a connecting drift, and the heated drift constructed parallel tothe observation drift. The orientation of the heated drift is nominally N720W. Measurements willbe made via instruments placed in boreholes drilled from the observation, connecting, and heateddrifts.

1.1.1 Linkage of the ESF Thermal Test to the SCP and Subsequent Program Directives

The linkage of the ESF Thermal Test to the SCP and subsequent program directives has been'wellchronicled over the past eight years. The following citations represent current Yucca MountainSite Characterization Project documents that describe scientific plans for the ESF Thermal Test.These documents, together with related study plans, include: - -

Site Characterization Plan (DOE 1988) Studies- Section 8.3.1.15.1.5 Excavation Investigations- Section 8.3.1.15.1.6 In Situ Thermomechanical Properties- Section 8.3.1.15.1.7 In Situ Mechanical Properties- Section 8.3.4.2.4.4 Engineered Barrier System Field Tests

Technical Implementation Plan for WBS 1.2.3 Investigations (YMP 1995)

In Situ Thermal Testing Program Strategy (DOE 1995)In Section 8.3 of the SCP, a number of in situ tests were proposed to investigate various aspectsof thermal performance. These tests included measurement of thermal properties, investigationsof TM effects on drift stability, and study of coupled TMHC processes that may affect the near-field and waste package'performance or the far-field natural system performance. The objectiveof this suite of tests was to provide data for use in determining site suitability, for direct input intorepository and waste package design, for model development and validation, and for performanceassessments of preclosure safety and postclosure performance. In the SCP, the conceptual natureof the testing program .'*s discussed along v.ith the explicit ties to the data needs. Each tst wasexpected to provide primary or confirmatory information for resolving specific performance anddesign issues within the SCP issues hierarchy. The tests were divided into two main' categories:tests focused principally on TM processes to resolve preclosure and postclosure repository designissues (Section 8.3.1.15.1), and tests'focused 'on resolving postclosure waste package design andnear-field performance issues (Section 8.3.4.2.4). In-"addition to simple parameter measurement,the test objectives include the need to provide data to assist validation of thermal and mechanicalmodels to be used for repository' desifn 'and erformance assessment, as well as the need todemonstrate that regulatory requirements could be met. The embodiment of these objectives intothe test program resulted in tests that simulate the repository emplacement geometry'and thermalloading strategy. Table 1-1 provides a'summary of someof the'issues'and information/data needsaddressed by the'in situ thermal testing program. Note that not all aspects of the SCP will beaddressed in the ESF Thermal Test. Rather it will focus primarily on obtaining a betterunderstanding of the TMHC behavior in the local rock mass.

5

Table -1. SCP Issues and Data Needs

Testing Program Issues Information/Data Needs

Thermal/ 1.6 Ground Water Travel Time Thermal properties of the rock massMechanical Tests 1.10 Waste Package-Postclosure * Thermal expansion

1.11 Underground Deformation modulus at elevated temperatureConfiguration-Postclosure Mechanical properties of fractures at elevated

1.12 Shaft and Borehole Seals temperature2.4 Waste Retrievability Thermal performance of backfill materials4.2 Nonradiological Health and Near-field permeability changes at elevated

Safety temperature4.4 Preclosure Thermal effects on ground support

Design/Feasibility

Waste Package/ 1.10 Waste Package-Postclosure Near-field thermal historyNear-Field 1.11 Underground Distribution of liquid water and saturationEnvironment Tests Configuration-Postclosure levels

2.4 Waste Retrievability Changes in near-field mineralogy and fluidchemistry resulting from thermal loadingChanges in near-field hydrologic propertiesresulting from thermal loadingRock-mass thermal and mechanical propertiesMechanical and hydrological properties offractures

1.1.2 Information Needs Addressed by the Heated Drift Test

The information and data needs for the thermal testing program, identified in the SCP (DOE1988) and further refined in the In Situ Thermal Testing Program Strategy (DOE 1995) are listedin Table 1-2. These needs which are described in three basic terms (bounded, conservative, andsubstantially finished), provide the anticipated status of information and data following thecompletion of the ESF Thermal Test.

The nomenclature of the ESF Thermal Tests used in Table 1-2 are defined as follows:

B(Bounded)-The extreme values (low and high) are known

C(Conservative)-Only one extreme value is known and it will contribute to conservativecalculation of a corresponding behavior.

SF (Substantially Finished)-The information and data is mostly known

Also included in the table are the various end users of the data (Waste Package Design,Repository Design, and Performance Assessment) as well as the degree (conservative, bounded,or substantially finished) to which the data must be known for the initial license application.

6

Table 1-3 provides a comprehensive listing of information needs in terms of parameters to bemeasured in the ESF Thermal Test. Also included in the table are the corresponding instruments,'which will measure these parameters in the SHT and/or DST.

1.1.3 Relevant Processes

Table 1-4 provides a matrix of thermally related processes and parameters which are consideredrelevant to the Heated Drift Test. Specifically, four types of processes are identified: thermal,mechanical, hydrological, and chemical. Each process consists of at least four subprocesses whichare labeled in terms of their importance as either primary or secondary. Primary processes willreceive much emphasis and will be addressed drectly in the ESF Thermal Test. Secondaryprocesses will receive less attention but their understanding will be advanced as a result of theESF Thermal Test.

Discussion of the matrix of processes presented in Table 1-4 alludes to the appropriateness of thetemporal and spatial scales in the ESF Thermal Tests. On a comparative basis, the temporal andspatial scales planned for the ESF Thermal Test are approximately equivalent or substantiallylonger and larger than other thermal tests associated with geologic disposal of nuclear waste(DOE, 1995). This favorable comparison with other thermal tests combined with the ESFThermal Test objective to understand better-the coupled TMHC processes ensures, to a largedegree, that the planned temporal and spatial scales'are appropriate. By linking the objective tothe TMHC processes, investigators can address' scaling issues properly because emphasis is placedon heating and cooling a substantial volume of rock such that observable dryout and rewettingzones are created.

In summary, the temporal and spatial scales are suitable for the ESF Thermal Test such thatemphasis can be placed on understanding better, the TMHC coupled processes which influencepost-closure behavior. Characterizing other post-closure behavior is outside the scope of the ESFThermal Test.

7

I

Table 1-2. Summary of Information Needs for the Thermal Testing Program(based on DOE 1995)

Data and Information Needs CustomersWaste Repository Performance Assessment

Package DesignDesign

Preclosure PostclosureNear-field TMHC Processes

Changes in Rock Saturation B N/A N/A BDrift Humidity B C (Ventilation) N/A B

Water Chemistry (liquid reflux) B C (GS) N/A BPropagation of "drying front" N/A N/A N/A BResidual water saturation B N/A N/A B

Drainage/reflux of liquid by fracture flow B N/A N/A B(heterogeneity, heat pipes, fast paths)

Rock mass and fracture permeability changes N/A N/A N/A B(induced by construction and thermal load)

Conductive/convective heat transfer B N/A N/A BRock Mass Properties over a Range of Temperature ______ ______ ______

Thermal heat capacity (specific heat) SF N/A N/A BThermal conductivity SF N/A N/A B

Thermal expansion N/A SF SF B

Deformation modulus N/A SF SF BStrength N/A B B BNormal and shear compliance N/A B SF* N/AShear strength of fractures N/A B SF* N/ACohesion of fractures N/A B SF* N/A

Drift Response/Stability under Thermal B B B BConditionsGround Support and Design Feature Interactions at Elevated Temperatures

Rock mass/ground s ) rt N/A SF 3 N/A

Effect of materials on near-field water C C (GS) C (GS) Cchemistry

TH properties of backfill C C (for N/A Cemplacement) I _I

In situ waste package material corrosion C N/A N/A C* To achieve the stated level of confidence, laboratory or bench-scale tests are required. In situ tests can onlyprovide gross estimates. Nomenclature: C-Conservative; B-Bounded; SF-Substantially Finished; GS-GroundSupport;N/A-Not Applicable

8

. Itm

Table 1-3. Listing of Parameters and Corresponding Instrumentation

Information Needs/Parameters Instrumentation Types

Heat Capacity (Specific Heat) Resistance Temperature Detectors (RTD)* Thermocouples* Rapid Evaluation of K and Alpha-Thermal Probes (REKA)

Thermal Conductivity * Resistance Temperature Detectors (RTD)* Thermocouples* Rapid Evaluation of K and Alpha-Thermal Probes (REKA)

Thermal Expansion Multi-Point Borehole Extensometers (MPBX)* Wire Extensometers

Deformation Modules Goodman Borehole Jack* Plate-Loading

Rock-Mass Ground Support Interaction * Rock Bolt Load Cells* Pull Tests* -Multi-Point Borehole Extensometers (MPBX). Wire Extensometers* Strain Gage Arrays

Changes in Rock Saturation Humicaps* Neutron Logging* Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)

Propagation of "Drying Front" Humicaps. * Neutron Logging

* Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)* Resistance Temperature Detectors (RTD)

Residual Water Saturation in "Dry Zone" Humicaps* Neutron Logging* Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)

Drainage/Reflux of Liquid by Fracture Flow Infrared Imaging* Detailed Fracture Mapping* Fluid Sampling* Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)* Resistance Temperature Detector (RTTD)

Rock-Mass and Fracture Permeability * Gas Pe~rmeability MeasurementsChanges - Gas Gage Pressure Transducers

In Situ Stress and Stress Orientation * Hydraulic Fracturing

Convergence, Convergence Rate, and Rock- * --Multi-Point Borehole Extensometers (MPBX)Mass Displacement _ Tape Extensometers

Wire Extensometers

Air Permeability Borehole Packers with Pressure Transducers

Moisture Content and Water Potential * Borehole Packers with Psychrometers and Transducers

Relative Humidity and Drift Wall Moisture * Humicaps* Infrared Imaging Camera

Table 1-4. Matrix of Processes Relevant to the Heated Drift Test

9

Heat Related Processes and Parameters Heated Drift Test

Thermal

Conduction Primary

Convection Primary

Radiation Primary

Heat Pipes Primary

Enhanced Diffusion SecondaryEffect of Percolation on Temperature Distribution Primary

Hydrological

Sub-Boiling Mobilization (toward drift) Primary

Sub-boiling Mobilization (away from drift) Primary

Dry-out Zone Formation (boiling/sub-boiling) Primary

Two Phase Water Movement From Dry-Out Zone PrimaryVapor Movement from Condensation Zone Primary

Shedding/Drainage from Condensation Zone Primary

Imbibition in Condensation Zone Primary

Vapor Removal (engineered system) Secondary

Rewetting Time Primary

"Downspout" Rewetting Primary

Effect of Lateral Condensation on Downspout Rewetting Primary

Mechanical

Rock-Mass Properties Primary

Drift Stability, Preclosure PrimaryDrift Stability, Postclosure Primary

Fracture Aperture Change Secondary

New Fracture Formation Secondary

Near Field Stress/Displacement Primary

Ground Support-Rock Mass Interaction Primary

ChemicalReturn Water Chemistry (to waste package) Primary

Evolution of Near Field Water Chemistry Primary

Change to Hydrologic Pathways Primary

Change to Matrix Transport Properties Secondary

10

1.2 Heated Drift Test

Elements of the emplacement drift test and the plate source test as described in the repprt In SituThermal Testing Program Strategy, have been combined into the DST. As shown in Figure 1-1,the main test in the ESF Thermal Test is the heated drift, approximately 47.5 m long. Canisterand wing heaters, simulating the thermal pulse from drift-emplaced waste packages in multipledrifts, will heat the local rock mass. Canister heaters are intended to simulate waste packageswithin the emplacement drifts whereas wing heaters simulate the influence of waste packages inadjacent emplacement drifts. The change in temperature of the rock will be measured atnumerous locations by Resistance Temperature Detectors (RTDs) and thermocouples installed inboreholes drilled from the -heated drift (HD), connecting drift, and the observation drift.Additionally, changes in rock displacement, moisture content, relative humidity, and chemistrywill be measured by a variety of instruments inserted in boreholes strategically-located in the threedrifts. Responses from instrumented ground support systems within the HD will also be measuredas the local rock-mass temperature increases. It is possible the heating period in the DST will beas long as four years. Test results will be evaluated at the end of two years of heating to decidewhether to continue heating and for how long. The heating phase will be followed by a coolingphase of comparable duration. The heated drift will be isolated by a bulkhead which will includean observation window and a vent to avoid and measure pressure buildup. The vent will beinstrumented to measure flow rate, temperature, and humidity.

The objectives of the Drift Scale Test (DST) include the following:

* Examine the near-field TMHC environment that may impact the waste package such as- transient temperature distribution and possible formation of heat pipes- chemical changes from drying and reflux conditions- changes in rock saturation before, during, and after the test- propagation of the drying and subsequent re-wetting regions, including potential condensate

cap and drainage, at intermediate rock-mass scale- residual saturation levels in the dry zones- drift humidity, temperature, and air pressure- changes in rod -mass and fracture permeability- thermal expansion and deformation modulus of the rock- drift response and stability including ground support systems

* Provide a conceptual model and hypothesis test bed for thermal and coupled models used toexamine the interrelationships between thermal, mechanical, hydrological, and chemicalbehavior such that realistic bounds can be developed on the expected near- field environment.

* Measure corrosion rates on typical waste package materials subjected to in situ conditions.* Observe the effects of thermal loading on prototypical ground support systems.

It is a natural extension to the scope of the ESF Thermal Test to consider previous heater tests.Lessons learned from other heater tests, as documented by the DOE (1995), were an integral partof the planning process for the ESF Thermal Tests. Previous heated tests from whichobservations such as physical size, processes observed, failure occurrence, logistical problems,

11

and data interpretation, are listed below:

* G-Tunnel Underground Facility (Nevada)* Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (New Mexico)* Underground Research Laboratory (Canada)* Basalt Waste Isolation Project (Washington)* Stripa Underground Test Facility (Sweden)* Avery Island (Louisiana)

Although a direct comparison is difficult, it appears the ESF Thermal Test is at least comparableand in many instances superior to other heater tests in the following categories:

* Volume of rock heated above 1000C (approximately 30,000 cubic m)* Duration of heating (2 to 4 years) and cooling (2 years) periods* Heater power (approximately 210 kW)* Processes measured (4-TMHC)* Number of sensors installed (approximately 5,000)* Number of boreholes (approximately 210)* Length of boreholes (approximately 4,000 m)

Note that the above statistics represent a composite of all components of the ESF Thermal Testwhich includes primarily the SHT and DST, although the DST is by far the larger component.

1.3 Schedule

The DST is scheduled to be started on December 8, 1997 (heater turn on). The heating periodmay continue for as long as four years while the cooling period may be two years or more. At theend of two years of heating, an evaluation will be conducted from which the DOE will decidewhether to continue the heating and for how long.

12

2. Task Description

The Heated Drift test facility was still under construction as the analyses described in -this reportwere being conducted.- Therefore, some technical information required as input for theseanalyses, including heater locations and outputs, instrumentation locations, and DST site-specificT-H-M rock properties were based on design data and site-specific rock property data from theSinge Heater Test. The selection of all input for these analyses was based on informationavailable on February 1, 1997, The testing scenario for the Heated Drift Test that will be modeledby the analyses described in this document is as follows.

* A Heated Drift facility approximately matching the Drift Scale Test facility description inFigures 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 has been excavated. The tunnel is approximately 5 m in diameterwith a concrete invert of 1.3 m maximum thickness installed, and 47.5 m in length.

* Nine canister heaters will be emplaced in the Heated Drift. The canister L-aiers are in theform of canisters aontaining linear heating elements with a combined output of 7.5 kW percanister. Fifty wing heaters will be located in the rock mass in boreholes drilled horizontal andperpendicular to the axis of the Heated Drift. Each wing heater will have an inner segmentgenerating 1145 watts output at full power and an outer segment generating 1716 watts at fullpower. The estimated maximum power output for all the heaters is 210.55 kW. (OnFebruary 1, 1997, the best available estimate for total heater output was 215 kW; this value isused in the analyses described in this report.)

* Multi-point borehole extensometers (MPBXs), rod extensometers and anchor pins, sraingages, thermocouple probes, and moisture sensors will be installed into the rock per the testdesign as documented in the ESF Thermal Test design document (CRWMS M&O, 1996);their locations have been determined.

* The heaters are turned on at full capacity (-210 kW total) for a period of two, three, or fouryears, during which temperature, displacement, and moisture content measurements are taken.After the heating period, the heater is turned off; the measurements are continued for anadditional period of two years.

The following tasks are defined to predict the T-H-M response of the TSw2 rock surrounding theHeated Drift during the Drift Srqle Test.

Task 1: Thermal-Hydrological Predictions for the Heated Drift TestA series of calculations to predict the thermal-hydrological response of the rock to the presence ofthe heaters were performed. The calculations were performed with the multi-phase, three-dimensional thermal-hydrological code TOUGH2 (Pruess, 1991), Version 3.2 in SNL's SoftwareConfiguration Management System. These calculations provide temporal predictions of temp-erature at the in situ locations of the thermocouples, and predictions of liquid saturation in theblock over time for comparison with moisture-sensing gages (neutron probes, electrical resistivitytomography, and humicaps). Predicted two- and three-dimensional temperature and saturationbehavior will be presented in this report with contour plots at selected times, and temperature-time histories at selected thermocouple locations. The predicted temperature histories for theentire test block were used as input to the thermal-mechanical calculations (Task 2).

13

Task 2: Thermal-NIechanical Predictions for the Heated Drift TestA series of calculations to predict the thermal-mechanical response of the rock to the presence ofthe heater were performed. The calculations were performed with the finite element nonlinearstructural mechanics code JAC3D (Biffle, 1993), Version 6.1-04 in SNL's Software ConfigurationManagement System. These calculations provide temporal predictions of displacements at the insitu locations of the MPBXs and rod extensometers.

14

3. -Thermal-Hydrologic Modeling Approach

3.1 Introduction

The thermal-hydrologic (T-H) calculations provide the temperature, liquid saturation, and gasphase'pressure distributions in the host rock'during the heating and cooling phases of the Drift-Scale Heater Test (DST) by solving the coupled conservation equations of energy and masstransfer. Heating phases of 2, 3, and 4 years are considered in the analyses coupled with 2 yearsof cooling after the heaters are turned off. The resulting temperature fields (at different timesinto heating and cooling) obtained from the T-H calculations are used as inputs to the thermal-mechanical (T-M) calculations used to provide predicted rock displacements during theexperiment.

The T-H calculations are based on the, early measured predictions by LBNL (personalcommunication from Yvonne Tsang, LBNL) of the range in bulk permeabilities obtained fromthe DST area. In each of the cases described in the following sections, T-H simulations havebeen completed for low and high bulk permeability cases. The site specific values used here arein the range of 2.19 millidarcy to 6.4 darcy for the low and high bulk permeabilities,respectively. More recent permeability data obtained by LBNL indicate that the high bulkpermeability value used may be overestimated by a factor of about 3. Although the upper endvalue used in the analysis is higher,'it'is'still considered a bounding value for a high bulkpermeability simulation. This range of values obtained from the DST area is nearly the same asthose previously obtained from the SHT block (DTN LB960500834244.001,TDJF 305605). Thepotential solutions may fall within the range considered. It is also noted, based on the ongoingresults obtained from the single heater test (SHT) area, that the lower bulk permeabilities arepotentially more representative of the experimental location, particularly for early heating times.

The source of heat' for this experiment includes 9 waste package type canister heaters placedinside the heated drift and 100 (50 on each side' of the 'heated drift) wing-heaters that areborehole emplaced directly into surrounding host rock adjacent to the heated drift. Each sidecontains 25 inside wing heaters and 25 outside wing heaters.. The inside wing heaters operate ata slightly lower power outp: than the outside urits.' This heater specification results in roughly220 kW of total power input into the overall test area.

The following sections will describe the T-H 'models used to characterize the test area, theconceptual model used in the analyses, descriptions of the thermal and hydrologic propertiesapplied in the simulations, a description of the'test (and modeled) geometry, and a specificdescription of the approach applied to each of the T-H models used to provide temperature datainput for the T-M models.

Finally, it is noted that all available DST data, including site-specific hydrologic properties suchas permeability and/or any test geometry and layout information, were frozen for this set of T-Hanalyses as of 02/07/97. Any additional changes in geometric layout or hydrologic or thermalproperties that occurred after this date can be readily incorporated into any future calculationsfor the DST.

15

3.2 General Description of the Thermal-Hydrologic Models

Three different thermal-hydrologic models are developed in order to characterize the T-H DSTheating results. Due to the extensive size of the experimental test area and the limiting geometryof the wing heaters (i.e., small diameter), two representative 2-D models and a simplified "unitcell" 3-D model are used to determine the temperature fields encompassing the entire test area.The development of a full 3-D T-H model for the entire test area (including the drift and othersurrounding features) including the necessary grid refinement required for each of the wingheaters would result in a very computationally intensive model domain with an excessivenumber of volume elements needed to describe the fundamental fluid and heat flow processes.Therefore, a modified product solution (refer to Section 4.3) was used to obtain pseudo-3-Dtemperature predictions for the entire test area based on the results of the simplified 2-D T-Hmodel simulations. The 3-D "unit cell" model can be used in a limited way to assess theaccuracy of the approximate solution used to obtain the overall pseudo-3-D temperature fields.

A two-dimensional cross-section model is used to determine the temperatures ir the X-Z plane(where Z is vertical and hence parallel to the gravity vector). This model is a symmetry plane(i.e., near the center of the test area) and assumes that the drift length is infinitely long (i.e.,infinite in the Y direction parallel to the axis of the drift). This 2-D model, however, is unableto accurately account for the edge cooling effects near the ends of the heated drift. This modeldomain will be the basis model in the product solution used to generate a 3-D temperature fieldfor the thermal-mechanical calculations (refer to Section 4.3).

A second two-dimensional model is used to determine the effects of edge cooling along the endsof the heated drift. This longitudinal model domain is used to determine the temperatures in theY-Z plane. This model uses an areal averaged amount of the total heat input (- 220 kW) to theDST, including the heater cans in drift and the borehole emplaced wing heaters. The heat inputis then scaled to the appropriate modeled area. This model includes the concrete invert in thedrift floor as well as the insulated bulkhead and the concrete liner at the end of the heated drift.The longitudinal model domain will serve as the scaling component in the product solution andis used to account for edge effects near the ends of the drift (refer to Section 4.3).

A three-dimensional "unit cell" T-H model is used to determine the effects of dimensionalitynear the center of the heated drift (results given in Appendix B). This model is also used toguide the determination of the appropriate scaling factors for the product solution used to obtainthe 3-D temperature results of the entire test area from the lower dimensional models.

3.3 General Description of the Conceptual Model

The porous medium at the DST area contains both fractures and rock matrix, each with its ownset of characteristic properties. Typical conceptual models used to characterize such a systeminclude an equivalent continuum model (i.e., an equivalent porous medium with averagedfracture and matrix properties), a dual permeability model (DKM) (i.e., a porous mediumcontaining separate fracture and matrix continua), and a random, discrete fracture model. ThisT-H model analysis makes use of the equivalent continuum model (ECM) for computational

16

efficiency. It may be determined, based on the scale of the problem, that a DKM may be a more.accurate representation of condensate drainage during the heating cycle.

The ECM assumesthat thermodynamic equilibrium exists between the fractures and matrix.The fracture and matrix properties are pore: volume averaged to produce parameters thatrepresent a single effective porous material. The effective porous material can behave as matrixor fracture depending on the phase of the fluid and the bulk liquid saturation of the material.Using an ECM formulation for'heat and mass transfer, effective material properties can bedefined as the following:

Ohb to +(1 Oi) p*(3-1)

Sb = s +S (l-))4m (3-2), 'Of +(I170lf.

Kt, =f O + ,(I-t,) (3-3)

where X is the effective porosity, Sb is the effective liquid saturation, K is the effective (bulk)permeability, all a function of rock matrix (subscript m) and fracture (subscriptJ) properties. Itis assumed in the T-H analyses thatthe test'area properties are homogeneous as well as isotropic.That is, the material properties do not vary with location or direction (X, Y Z).

The unsaturated zone is characterized by two-phase gas and liquid. Water is represented in boththe liquid and gas phases. For two-phase flow in a partially saturated porous medium, functionsrelating liquid saturations and liquid relative permeability to capillary pressure are required. Thevan Genuchten (1980) two-phase characteristic functions for capillary pressure and liquid phaserelative permeability are used with the ECM formulations defined above.

*1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

17

3.4 General Description of the Hydrologic and Thermal Properties

3.4.1 Hydrologic Properties

Hydrologic properties such as porosity (fracture and matrix), permeability (fracture and matrix),characteristic curve data (fracture and matrix), and in situ liquid saturations are required for theT-H calculations performed using the code TOUGH2 (Pruess, 1991). Some of the data comesfrom the DST area itself (i.e., bulk permeability ranges), while other data comes from the SingleHeater Test area (SHT) (i.e., fracture frequency). Other hydrologic data come from boreholemeasurements and are representative of the Middle Nonlithophysal (Tptpmn) unit propertiesobtained by Flint, 1996. Table 3-la lists all the hydrologic input values used for the DSTanalyses and the sources for each. When necessary, DST hydrologic properties are consistent(or calculated in a consistent manner) with the hydrologic property calculations performed forthe SHT (Sobolik et al., 1996).

Table 3-la. Hydrologic Values Used in the T-H CalculationsHydrologic parameter Value Source, CommentsBulk permeability, m2 Initial (1/97) air-permeability test results for

Low value 2.16x10'3' the DST See Comment I below.High value 6.35x 10 '7

Matrix porosity 0.11 See Comment 2 below.Matrix permeability, m2 (and 4.0xl0' DTN's GS940808312231.008,corresponding saturated (4.0x 10'") GS950608312231.006, GS960808312231.001hydraulic conductivity, m/s)Fracture density, fractures/M3 7.6 Sobolik et al., 1996 (for the Single Heater Test

.calculations).

Fracture porosity Derived value; see Comment 3 below.Low value 1.143x104High value 1.639x10 3

Fracture permeability, rn2 Derived value; see Comment 3 below.Low value 1.885x10'"High value 3.8736x109 _

Matrix van Genuchten a, I/Pa 6.40x10 7 See Comment 2 below.Matrix van Genuchten 1.47 See Comment 2 below.Matrix residual saturation 0.18 See Comment 2 below.Initial (in situ) liquid saturation 0.92 DTN GS950408312231.004; see Comment 2

below.

Fracture van Genuchten a, Derived value; see Comment 3 below.1/Pa

Low value 1.044x104

High value 1.497x10''Fracture van Genuchten ( 3.0 Altman et al., 1996; see Comment 4 below.Fracture residual saturation 0.03 Altman et al., 1996; see Comment 4 below.

18

In addition to hydrologic properties for the host rock, hydrologic -properties (porosity, perm-eability, initial liquid saturation, etc.) for the concrete invert and concrete end liner wererequired for the T-H analyses (refer to Table 3-lb). These values are approximated from valuesobtained from the WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) database for material properties and/orfrom handbook values (Merritt, 1968). The characteristic relative permeability curves areassumed to follow the Brooks-Corey representation while the capillary pressure curve followsthe Leverett's function given in TOUGH2 (Pruess, 1991).

Table 3-lb. Hydrologic Values Used for Concrete in the T-H CalculationsHydrologic parameter Value Source, CommentsBulk permeability, m2

l l.Ox 10" WIPP database for concrete materials.Porosity 0.05 WIPP database for concrete materials.Initial liquid saturation 0.0 Handbook value for an average aggregate size

(Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, Merritt,1968).

Residual liquid saturation 0.0

Comments regarding the hydrologic values listed in Table 3-la:

1. Rock bulk permeability ranges are obtained from the initial (early results 1/97) airpermeability field tests conducted at the DST. This range of values obtained from the DSTarea is nearly the same as those previously obtained from the SHT block (DTNLB960500834244.001,TDIF 305605).

2. The matrix porosity, van Genuchten curve fitting parameters X and 13, residual saturation,and in situ liquid saturation values are all average values based on measurements from eightboreholes'in the Middle Nonlithophysal unit (Tptpmn). The documentation of the values forthese parameters can be found in Flint, 1996. The datasets which contain the data used forthese parameters are the following:

DTN GS950408312231.004 Physical properties and water potentials of core from boreholeUSW SD-9

DTN GS940508312231.006 Core analysis of bulk density, porosity, particle density and insitu saturation for borehole UE-25 UZ#16

DTN GS950608312231.007 Physical properties and water content of core from boreholeUSW NRG-6

DTN GS951 108312231.009 Physical properties, water content, and water potential forborehole USW SD-7

DTN GS951108312231.011 Physical properties, water content, and water potential forborehole USW UZ-7a

DTN GS951108312231.010 Physical properties'and water content for borehole USWNRG-7nA

DTN GS950308312231.002 Laboratory measurements of bulk density, porosity, and watercontent for USW SD- 12

19

---

3. The fracture porosity, permeability, and van Genuchten curve fitting parameter a for the lowand high bulk permeability cases may be calculated in terms of the bulk and matrixparameters. The equation for the relationship between bulk, matrix, and fracturepermeability is given in equation (3-3). The fracture porosity is related to the fractureaperture and the fracture frequency ff by the equations 4 = fx5, where ff =(7.6 fractures/m')x(l in), and K = 52/12. The intrinsic fracture permeability is subsequentlycomputed using equation (3-3) with all other quantities known. The van Genuchten cc for thefractures is related to the air entry pressure and based on the commonly-used relationshipwith surface tension a of water at 250 C, = /2a, where 0a=0.072 Nlm.

4. The van Genuchten P for fractures has not been measured. It has been common practice inthe Yucca Mountain Project to assign 53 a high value (such as the value of 3.0 used here) toproduce a steep gradient in the moisture retention curve, thereby simulating either totallyempty or totally full, clean, parallel fractures. The residual saturation in the fractures of 0.03has been used in previous :;terature (e.g., Altman et al., 1996).

5. The bulk permeability of the drift elements were assumed equal to that of the rock.

The tortuosity of the path followed during the gas phase diffusional process is assumed constantfor this analysis and the tortuosity coefficient is maintained for the thermal-hydrologic runs atT=0.2. Also, it was assumed for these analyses that matrix and fracture porosity andpermeability do not vary as a result of thermal-mechanical processes; this coupling may beincorporated in future analyses.

3.4.2 Thermal Properties

Thermal properties of the host rock include such quantities as thermal conductivity (both wetand dry), heat capacity, grain density, and thermal expansion are required for the T-Hcalculations performed using TOUGH2 and the T-M calculations performed with JAC3D. Theproperties used in the T-H analyses are given in detail in this section. Some of the thermalproperties used in the DST analyses come from site-specific data from the nearby SHT (i.e., drythermal conductivity); others come from borehole data from the Middle Nonlithophysal unit(Tptpmn), in which the DST resides. Also requtred for the T-H analyses, thermal properties forthe heater materials where obtained using handbook properties of copper, bulkhead propertiesusing handbook values of an insulation material, and handbook values of concrete propertiesapplied to the invert and end liner. Table 3-2 lists all the thermal property input values used forthe DST analyses and the sources for each.

20

I t -' I, as, .o I

Table 3-2. Thermal Values Used in the T-H-M CalculationsThermal parameter Value Source, CommentsRock Grain density, kg/m3 2526. DTN GS95008312231.004 (Physical

properties and water potentials of core fromborehole USW SD-9); average particledensity for 105C oven-dried samples,Middle Nonlithophysal zone (Tptpmn)

,_____ _ 728.8-845.8 ft.Thermal conductivity K 1.67 DTN SNL22080196001.001, TDIF 305593(dry) of the'rock mass, see Comment 1.W/m-KThermal conductivity K 2.1 . RIB value for the wet value of to--rnal(wet) of the rock mass, conductivity at the repository horizonW/m-K (TSw2).Heat capacity of the rock 928. DTN SNLOlC12159302.002, TDIFgrain cD, J/kg-K 305182; see Comment 2 below.Thermal conductivity. Kh= 0.03 W/m-K; Handbook values for air (Incropera anddensity, and heat capacity of p=0.995 kg/m3 ;:' DeWitt, 1985).air -c=1009 J/kg-KThermal conductivity. K,%= 60 W/m-K; 'see Comment 3 below for explanation of thedensity, and heat capacity of p=0.995 kg/M3;- treatment of radiation heat transfer in theair (the radiation equivalent c =1009 J/kg-K heated drift.thermal conductivity) ' _ _

Thermal conductivity. - Kl= 0.0447 W/m- Handbook values for insulation (Sobolik etdensity, and heat capacity of K; p=32 kjfrn3; al, 1996).the insulation bulkhead c,=835 J/kg-KThermal conductivity. K,h= 1.40 W/m-K; Handbook values for concrete (Incroperadensity, and heat capacity of p=2300 kg/m3 ; and DeWitt, 1985).the concrete liner and invert: c.=880 Jfkg-K 'Thermal conductivity and K.=401 W/rr.-K; Handbook properties for copper (Incrnperaheat capacity of the hearer p=8933 kg/M3 and DeWitt, 1985).material Ic =385 J/kg-'K _

Comments regarding the thermal values listed in Table 3-2:

1. Thermal conductivity measurements'were perfoimred on four tuff samples from the SHT testblock(DTN SNL22080196001.001,'TDIF 305593). A total of 36 measurements were takenat temperatures ranging from 30'C to 2890C.. The samples were exposed to ambient roomconditions for some time before'testing, which likely resulted in drying of the samples. Notestiig''was performed to'distinguish between "wet" and "dry" thermal conductivity of thematerial, so 'for the DST calculations reported here, these values were assumed to produce a"dry" average thermal conductivity of 1.671 W/rn-K for all samples.

21

--

2. Thermal capacitance (pcp) measurements were taken from Middle Nonlithophysal (Tptpmn)samples over a temperature range of 250 C to 3000C (DTN SNLOC12159302.002, TDIF305182). Average values of thermal capacitance were obtained for two temperature ranges -25°C to 750C, and 1000 C to 3000C - and then those two values were averaged to obtain anaverage value for the entire temperature range. Using the rock's grain density and porosity,the thermal capacitance of water, and a liquid saturation of 0.2 (derived from moisturecontent data of room-dried samples from the SHT test block: DTN SNL22080196001.002),the heat capacity of the dry rock of 928 J/kg-K was obtained.

3. The air thermal conductivity is modified (increased by over three orders of magnitude) in theheated drift section in order to approximate the radiant heat transfer from the canister heatersto the floor and walls of the drift. It is assumed that the canister heater and the walls willbehave as blackbodies during the radiant heat transfer process. The enhanced value of the airthermal conductivity is based on an average heater canister and wall temperature after 2years of heating. The form of the equivalent thermal conductivity used to approximateradiation heat transfer inside the drift is computed with the following:

XA, = f(T+ T2 T2 + 22 X (3-4)

where Ax is the distance between the radiating surface and the receiving surface, T. and T2 arethe absolute temperatures of each surface, and a is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. It was foundthat, for the temperature ranges experienced by the drift wall and canister heaters during theexperiment, the equivalent drift thermal conductivity may range from K,? = 60 to 90 W/m-K.The canister surface temperature remains nearly constant for approximate drift air thermalconductivities of 20 W/m-K or greater based on sensitivity analyses. The rate of energy transferfrom the drift wall surface into the host rock is conduction limited and is controlled by theresistance to heat transfer associated with the host rock as shown in Ho and Francis, 1996 (inparticular for the lower permeability cases).

3.5 General Description of the Test (and Modeled) Geometry

Figure 3-1 displays a simplified schematic of the heated drift test layout. This figure is intendedto indicate the major modeled features included in the T-H analyses such as the surroundingwing heaters, nine canister heaters, insulated bulkhead, and the concrete liner at the end of theheated drift. Not shown in this figure but included in the analysis is the concrete invert that runsthe entire length of the drift. It is noted that this figure is not to scale and the relative positionsof the canister heaters (which very nearly fill the entire heated drift) are shown only in aqualitative sense. In order that one may apply the automated MESHMAKER feature included inTOUGH2 for model domain gridding purposes, the actual cylindrical geometry of theexperiment is approximated by transforming it into a surface area equivalent rectangular (X-Y-Z) coordinate system. The resulting (X-Z) cross-sectional model (refer to Section 3.6) and the(Y-Z) longitudinal model (refer to Section 3.7) are shown in Figures 3-2 and 3-3, respectively.The "unit cell" 3-D model (refer to Section 3.8) location is oriented through the center canister(canister number 5 of 9) and spans to the midpoint between adjacent canisters. Therefore, it

22

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

includes one-half of a drift heater canister with its periodic boundary (in the Y direction) fallingmid-way between two canister heaters while including the heat for approximately one and one-half wing heaters on a side. Each of the wing heaters are separated by 1.83 m. The (X-Z) modelis representative of an infinitely long drift. The results of this 2-D cross-section model are usedto approximate the results of the actual test very near the center of the experiment where thetemperatures are the highest. The (Y-Z) longitudinal model will capture the effects of theunheated rock mass at either end of the heated drift and will be used to characterize the effects ofedge cooling during the heating and cooling phases of the experiment.

3.5.1 Construction of the Model Domains

Since heat transfer is a surface area phenomenon, the total surface area of the actual cylindricalgeometry is maintained as a constant when constructing the rectilinear grid representation of thetest. Therefore, as an example, the heated drift diameter of 5 m is transformed into a totalsurface area- equivalent paralllepiped with a drift dimension of 3.93 m on a side (refer to Figure3-2). The length of the heated drift is the actual value of 48 m (refer to Figure 3-3).Additionally, the relative mass of concrete invert (i.e., the volume fraction of concrete invert inthe heated drift) and the actual mass of concrete liner at the end of the heated drift have beenpreserved in the working rectilinear numerical model domains.

3.5.1.1 Heated drift and wing heater geometry

The height of the surface area equivalent drift (3.93 m) is computed using the heated drift radiusof 2.5 m as:

hd,:o = >2 nrfO = 3.93 meters (3-5)

This relationship neglects the surface area -of the ends of the drift itself. This assumption isconsidered reasonable due to the fact that length of the heated drift (48 in), and subsequently itssurface area, is much greater than the end of the drift and its diameter (5 in), and subsequently itssurface area. The modeled wing heater geometry is also computed using equation (3-5). For awing heater diameter of 0.096 m, the modeled surface area equivalent wing heater height is0.0754 m. As before, the ends are neglected due to the very large aspect ratio between wingheater length and diameter.

23

Figure 3-1. Schematic of the Heated Drift Layout

24

A 100

I 100 )m o-~~~~~~~~~~b...

3.93 x 3.93 mHeated Drift

1.36x 1.36imHeater Can

105.5m

Material,m high

z

Lx

Wing Heaters:4.686 m segments

NOT TO SCALE

v

Figure 3-2. X-Z Two-Dimensional Cross-Section Through the Mid-Section of the Test

.0 1140 m I

3.93 m A.65m 12m 63imI _ I ,1 m

-1- 4 I I c-* 1o-P-, ~A A

I

-H 13.25 m I

.

.2 0.725 m

T ,. - _1 10.685 m

48 .4 m

0.3425 m I.

105.5 m

NOT TO SCALE- I:I

y

i gure 3-3. Y-Z Longitudinal Model Used to Determine Edge EffectsFigure 3-3. Y-Z Longitudinal Model Used to Determine Edge Effects

25

I

3.5.1.2 Canister heater geometry

The same type of calculation is used to transform the cylindrical canister heater into a surfacearea equivalent parallelepiped. In this case, however, the area of the ends of the canisters areincluded since the heater length and diameter are of the same order. This results in a modeledheater canister of 1.36 m on a side. The following equation is used to obtain the canister heightdimension:

27c r,t,, 1,, + 2 r = 4h,, I,,, + 2hza,

(3-6)

he,, = 1.36meters

where ra is the radius of the act-al heater canister, is the length of the can;-'r and hc, is theunknown surface area equivalent height of the modeled, rectilinear, canister heater.

3.5.1.3 Concrete invert geometry

The maximum actual height of concrete invert is approximately 1.2 m. Based on this and theradius of the heated drift, the resulting area represented by the invert is approximately 3.624 m2

out of the total cross-sectional area of the heated drift. The modeled height of the concreteinvert as placed into transformed, rectilinear, coordinates is computed with the followingrelationship:

h 4Ad hdt 4(3.624m 2X3.93m)

h1R = ln-a -nf = :50) = 25meters (3-7)

It is noted from this relationship that the volume fraction of concrete invert in the actual drift isidentical to that of the surface area equivalent (i.e., rectilinear geometry) drift. That is, therelative amounts of concrete invert mass are exactly identical for both the actual test and themodeled geometry.

3.5.1.4 Concrete liner geometry

The total amount of concrete mass in the end liner is conserved in the T-H calculations (thisinformation applies to the longitudinal model domain only, Figure 3-3). Equating concrete massactual to the modeled mass equivalent, the end liner thickness used in the modeled, rectilinear,geometry is approximately 0.3 m. The concrete liner is a total of 12 m in length at the end of theheated drift. The concrete liner is assumed to have the same thermal and hydrologic propertiesas the concrete invert.

3.5.2 Determination of the Outer Boundary Locations

The extent and approximate location of the modeled T-H domain (i.e., the outer boundaries forthe X-Z, Y-Z, and X-Y-Z models) is based on a one-dimensional, transient heat conduction

26

solution for a constant temperature boundary (the drift wall) at four years of heating into a semi-infinite medium. The resulting temperature distribution is governed by an error function (ERF)'solution and is dependent on the thermal diffusivity of the material. For an average thermalconductivity (wet plus dry divided by 2), the temperature distribution approaches the initialvalue approximately 40 to 60 m away from the source. Therefore, within and beyond thisdistance, the medium is not aware of the high temperature source. The assumption of negligiblethermal influence at this distance from the drift wall (40-60 m) is assumed to be a limiting casefor the T-H analyses for the DST. This is due to 'the fact that the error function temperaturesolution assumes'that all energy transport (conducted) is in only one direction.

The T-H analyses includes, at a minimum, multi-dimensional heat transfer, therefore, reducingthe thermal influence in any one direction. Therefore, for the case of low or no convection, it isassumed that an outer boundary approximately no 'less than 40 m away from the drift wall isadequately removed from the source for the multi-dimensional cases and in the time framesconsidered. This outer boundary location (i.e., 40 m removed from the thermal -source) isapplied for side or bottom boundaries only. In the case of higher bulk permeabilities, energytransport is not limited by conduction heat transfer. Therefore, in all cases considered, the topboundary is located no less'than 60 m away from the drift wall in order to accommodate theconvection component of energy transfer away from the source.

. . . . . . . .~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~

27

--

3.6 General Description of the 2-D X-Z Cross-Section

3.6.1 Description of Mesh

A two-dimensional X-Z cross-section of the drift-scale heater test has been simulated usingTOUGH2. The numerical mesh consists of 36 columns of rectangular elements that span 100meters in the X-direction and 35 rows of rectangular elements that span 105 meters in the Z-direction, comprising a total of 1260 elements. As discussed earlier, the size of the domain waschosen so that the thermal perturbation would occur well within the boundaries of the modeleddomain. The non-uniform grid is refined in the vicinity of the drift to accommodate the canisterheaters and the borehole emplaced wing heaters. Conversely, the mesh is coarser further awayfrom the drift towards the boundaries.

The two-dimensional X-Z model consists of a heater situated on concrete invert inside a drift.Because the grid elements are rectangular, the simulated dimensions of the drift and canisterheater were chosen to preserve the surface area of the actual materials (for heat transfer). Theheight of the invert was chosen to yield the same volumetric ratio of invert to heated drift. Wingheaters, consisting of inner- and outer-heating elements, also extend horizontally away from thedrift into the surrounding rock (TSw2). Figure 34a shows the location of the centroids of theelements representing the different materials, including the boundary elements along theperimeter of the model. Figure 34b shows an expanded view of Figure 3-4a in the vicinity ofthe drift. Tables 3-la, 3-lb, and 3-2 present the thermal and hydrologic properties of thedifferent materials used in the simulations.

3.6.2 Initial Conditions

The model domain was equilibrated before the heater was "turned on" by allowing the system toreach an ambient steady-state during a one million year equilibration run. During theequilibration run, the entire domain was comprised of only TSw2 material. The heater, drift,and invert materials were omitted. A geothermal gradient of approximately 0.02 C/m (Soboliket al., 1996) was established bz fixing the upper an.d lower boundaries (shown in Figure ?-4a) attemperatures of 250C and 27.250C, respectively. A liquid saturation of 0.92 was imposed at thelower boundary, and hydrostatic conditions were established throughout the domain. Followingthe equilibration run, the heater, drift, and invert materials were added, and a relative humidityof 100% was specified within the drift, which was calculated using the simulated temperaturesand pressures of the equilibrated elements located in the drift domain.

28

kgplt.xzgrid.new

U

-20-

-40

-60

-80

-100

. . . .. . . F-I . * - * * *

*~~ .. ...... _ . ..

- ~ ~~~ ... TSw2

- ~ ~~~ ... Heater. ............ . .

. _ * ..... Ln , vs

* ........ Botindar

. . . _ .. I

. . _ . SI

* ** * .; . . .4*.. .

.* . . * , S 4* *..,.a... .. * . 4

. . . , ..

. . . .. . .... _* . *

. 5. . ..

0 20 40 60 80 100X (m)

Figure 3-4a. Element centroids and associated materials for two-dimensional X-Z grid.

29

kgpltxzgrid.closeup-50 I I I I Ia , , , I I rh I I I , r I , , 5 , I , , ff , I , T n r I . . . .

# TSw2

* Heater

* D it*{l .-

-55., . . .. 4*t *t 4 * *

-60-

N

-. . ............

_ . . . .* .................................... -s 4 .4

. . . . . . . . . *4 *** t

. .4 ...... ...

- . .........-65. . . . ... ........... ............................. .

I . . *

. ............ ................................... +

-704- I . . 4.+ .. . . I.

* .

-7c !, I I

30 35 40 45 50X (m)

55 60 65 70

Figure 3-4b. Expanded view of element centroids and associated materials for two-dimensional X-Z grid.

30

3.6.3 Boundary Conditions

The equilibrated pressures, liquid saturations, and temperatures along the four boundaries of themodeled domain were then fixed in preparation for the heating phase. These perimeter elementsallowed liquid, gas, and heat fluxes to occur across the boundaries during the heating simulation,but the values of their state variables remained constant. No infiltration was applied during thesimulations.

The simulated heat generation in the two-dimensional X-Z model was calculated using thereported heat output of the canister heaters (8000 W) and wing heaters (1145 W inner; 1719 Wouter). The heat output was scaled accordingly to yield a generation rate for the canister heater,inner wing heater, and outer wing heater per unit depth in the Y-dimension. The spacingbetween each heater can was calculated to be 4.65 m + 0.685 m - 5.335 m. The simulated heatgeneration for the, canister heater was therefore 8000/5.335 = 1499.5 W/m. Similarly, thesimulated heat generation of the inner and outer wing heaters was calculated, based on a wingheater spacing of 1.83 m, to be 625.68 W/m and 939.34 W/m, respectively. The generation rateswere held constant during the heating phase of the simulations.

3.6.4 Simulation Procedure

Three heating scenarios consisting of 2, 3, and 4 year heating periods were considered. In eachcase, a 2 year cooling period (no heat output) followed each heating period. In addition, bothhigh- and low-permeability scenarios were considered to simulate the possible range of bulkpermeabilities associated with the fractured tuff (TSw2) surrounding the drift. Therefore, a totalof six simulations were performed using the two-dimensional X-Z model. In each, statevariables were processed at pre-determined times during the heating and cooling periods. Thesetemperatures were then passed on to the thermal-mechanical simulations.

. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 .

31

3.7 General Description of the 2-D Longitudinal Model Domain

3.7.1 Longitudinal Mesh

This T-H model domain is required in order to determine the influence of the unheated rockmass at either end of the heated drift. Figure 3-3 represents a schematic for the longitudinalmodel domain necessary to determine edge effects. The working numerical MESH includingcolor indicators at volume element centroids for the different material types is shown in Figure3-5a. An expanded view of the drift represented in the longitudinal numerical MESH is shownin Figure 3-5b. In the heated portion of the drift, the air thermal conductivity is enhanced usingequation (3-4) in order to include the effects of radiant heat transfer from the canister heaters tothe drift walls and invert in an empty drift. In the initial drift region not containing canisterheaters, the air thermal conductivity is the standard handbook value for air ( 0.03 W/m-K).This drift region is separated from the heated drift by a 1 m thick insulation bui.;.nead. Theheated drift region is 48 m in total length with nine heaters emplaced 0.3425 m from the ends ofthe drift and about 0.685 m apart inside of the drift. The concrete liner is located in theremaining 12 m of heated drift and encompasses approximately 2.2 heated canisters. Themodeled domain contains 35 rows of rectangular elements that span approximately 105 m in theZ-direction. The Y-direction contains 68 rows of rectangular elements that span 140 m. Gridrefinement occurs within and around the drift. The model domain becomes more coarse awayfrom the drift moving towards the outer boundaries. The Y-Z model domain contains 2380elements and is very computationally efficient.


The initial conditions for the T-H test geometry applied to Figures 3-5 are selected asrepresentative values at the depth of the Middle Nonlithophysal tuff. A constant geothermalgradient of approximately 0.02'C/m is assumed throughout this region. The temperature at thetop of the test geometry is specified to be 250C. The temperature at the bottom of the heater testmodeled geometry is thus calculated to be 27.250 C. The bottom boundary is also assigned aconstant gas-phase pressure of 0.87 bar. The initial liquid saturation is specified to be 0.92throughout the model domain; this value is based on narby SD-9 borehole data. ThM modeldomain is then 'equilib.aLed" for 1,000,000 years without the heater in place (Pruess and Tsang,1993) in order to obtain nearly steady state initial conditions for the temperature, gas-phasepressure, and liquid saturation at the onset of the heating process. The top boundary is specifiedas a constant temperature boundary, while the gas-phase pressures and liquid saturations arecalculated with TOUGH2 by running out to a steady state condition. The bottom boundary is afixed location at the specified liquid saturation (S,,,=0.92), temperature (T=27.250 C), and gasphase pressure (P1,=0.87 bar). The TOUGH2 code then calculates steady state values fortemperature, gas-phase pressure, and liquid saturation at all other locations in the modeleddomain (refer to Figure 3-5a for grid refinement). In this equilibrated case, an initial hydrostaticpressure distribution is obtained for the gas phase. The initial distribution of temperature isgoverned by the geothermal gradient. It should be noted that the constant property boundarycondition implies that the "equilibrated values" of (T, Sliql P,.) are maintained as constants duringthe heated simulations.

32

kgpltnickyznewU

-20

-40-

t.

t.

I.

r

. . .

. . . . . . - . . . . . .- . 4 + . . . . . . . * . . . . & . . . . *.

T.Sw2HeaterDrift

* In',Tr* Insulation

Drift (no r(iadoll)

.4-N

-60-

-80-

4 4 . .4 4 -..�.

iii �ii�I

4 4 . 4 4 4 4.-.-.

.I. .. .

.. . ...

,. . .

. . . ..

. . ._..

. . ._..

.. . _..

. . . ..

.. . ....

Hi i i

..*. . .. .. .

. .. .. .

4.. .4.

. .. .. .

I.I....I

. . . ..

..4. I..

. ... .

4 .. 4.

.I.. ....

I.....

.......

.. .....

4.. ..J I4.4 4. 44 4 4 . 4 + 4

i i IiI. * . .

I

t.

t.

I

-100 .

0

4 4 ..... 4 4 44 * 4 4 4 4 444444 44444 444444 4444 I

.-. . . . .

* I.

.1 I .- r -

20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Y (m)

Figure 3-5a. Element centroids and associated materials for two-dimensional Y-Z grid.

33

kgPlt.niCk~yzClOSe

-1

N

. .... .... ..........

TSw2HeaterDrift

55 11.C InsulationDri ft (no radiation)

* .44.. 4 4 4+.

* ~ ::z~ 3 3 8 3 I IUU I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a I I II I I I I a ,.s: : S

.70V V V * V V V VV V~4

-1

I

It' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Y ()

Figure 3-5b. Expanded view of element centroids and associated materials for two-dimensional Y-Z grid.

34


3.7.3.1 Perimeter elements

The boundary conditions (T, Sljq P.") for the 2-D longitudinal model domain are illustrated usingFigure 3-3 or 3-5a. The surrounding boundaries are assumed to be located far enough awayfrom the heat source (refer to the discussion' in section 3.5.2) such that the thermodynamicproperties at the outer locations remain constant in time during the heating process (for constantpower heating times limited to 4 years total). The top (Y, Z = 0 m)and bottom boundaries (Y, Z= - 105.5 m) are maintained constant at all times at the values obtained or specified during theTOUGH2 equilibration procedure. These properties do not vary in space (Y is perpendicular togravity). The two side boundaries, (Y = 0 m, Z) and (Y = 140 m, Z), are maintained constant atall times during the heating process at the values obtained during the equilibration procedure.Unlike the top and bottom Lundaries, these properties vary in space (Z is parallel to thedirection of gravity), but not in time.

3.7.3.2 Heat generation elements

The average areal power density obtained for the DST is equated to the average areal powerdensity applied to the longitudinal (Y-Z) model domain. Therefore, an equivalent fractionalamount of heat will be input to the 2-D modeled geometry as is input to the actual areal extent ofthe heater experiment. In order to obtain an approximate experimental totalheat output of220 kW, the canister'heaters output 8 kW each (9 total), the inside wing heaters output 1.145 kWeach (50 total), and the outside wing heaters output 1.719 kW each (50 total). Based on the planarea of the heated drift test, this corresponds to a specified areal power density of the test.

The actual areal power densities of each heat source (canister heater, inside wing heater, andoutside wing heater) are computed as' the following:

N W

APD it- NQc =2113 2 (3-8)

where equation (3-8) represents the areal power density for all canister heaters, N is the'totalnumber of drift heaters (=9), and A. is the plan area of the drift and stand-off between the driftwall and the inside wing heaters. A similar areal based expression is obtained for the insidewing heaters as the following:

APDnwin = 122.8 (3-9)

Finally, for the outside wing heaters: r

APDOUi g 2085' (3-10)outwing. m

35

- -

The area averaged total for the DST is obtained from the following expression:

A A..- A., wAPDa,.g =- APD,,,, + h'i"n APD.,,g + owing APD,,.,Mg = 17652(3-11)

A,.l Atral A o(al m

averaged over the footprint of the DST. Equation (3-11) is equated to the power density of thelongitudinal model as the following:

APD = Qu el(3-12)as Ad l

where the And,, is known and the model heat generation rate is computed from equations (3-1 1)and (3-12). The total mo'el heat output (i.e., the scaled value based on the 2-D longitudinalmodel domain area) is concentrated into the nine canister heaters in order to establish, overall,the effects of the unheated rock mass surrounding the experiment with respect to the entireamount of heat input by the canisters as well as the emplaced wing heaters (i.e., equations 3-11and 3-12).


The simulation procedure is carried out in a two step process. The first step is to obtain a fullyequilibrated model domain that serves as the initial conditions (of the host rock) for each of theheating simulations. This step occurs with refined gridding for the drift and other featuresalready in place, however, all material elements are first initialized as those of the surroundinghost rock. After 1,000,000 years simulated (without the heat source), the rock model domaincontains equilibrated values for the gas-phase pressure, liquid saturation, and formationtemperature. These serve as the initial conditions for the specific host rock elements as shown inFigure 3-5. For an equilibrated model domain with the host rock elements in place; drift,concrete invert and liner, and bulkhead properties are then placed in the numerical MESH file aswell as in the initial conditions file. Therefore, model initial conditions are specified for each ofthe materials in the domia with the rock in equilibrium based on the hydrologic properties andthe in situ saturation of this region.

The specific details of the numerical mesh are shown in Figure 3-5 with each of the differentmaterial identifiers in place. The engineered material specific elements (i.e., concrete invert,etc.) possess initial conditions based on assumption or established handbook data (Merritt,1968). The drift element initial conditions are for a constant temperature of 250 C and an airmass fraction based on an assumed drift relative humidity of approximately 100%. The concreteinvert and end liner initial liquid saturation is 0.8 based on an average aggregate size (Merritt,1968). The bulkhead and heater elements are initially dry.

With the equilibrated rock and specialty elements (i.e., drift, invert, liner, heater, etc.) in place,the heating simulations may proceed. This is step two in the calculation procedure. Individualheat outputs for each of the generating elements of volume V; in the model domain are obtained

36

from equation (3-12) and scaled by the total volume of all 'generating elements. Therefore, a.consistent amount of heat output is placed into the 2-D model domain that is consistent with theactual test.

Heating simulations were performed for 2, 3, and 4 years of heating with 2 additional years ofcooling. The T-H simulations included both low and high bulk permeability representationsapplied to an equivalent continuum conceptual model. It is assumed that the drift permeability(i.e., the convection of the gas-phase in the drift) is limited by that of the rock. Therefore, thedrift bulk permeability is assumed identical'to that of the surrounding rock. It may be thatconvection developed within the drift is greater'than that in the rock, this feature will in generalbe contained inside the drift as the resistance'to fluid flow (gas and vapor) in the'rock is indeedcontrolled by the rock fracture properties.. Additionally, convection heat transfer in the drift willnot be the dominant mode of heat transfer as radiation is the primary (approximated by a verylarge air thermal conductivity in this analysis) mode of heat transfer from the canister heatersurface to the drift walls at the temperatures predicted by the analyses.

3.8 General Description of the 3-D X-Y-Z Model Domain

3.8.1 Description of Mesh

A three-dimensional TOUGH2 model of the drift-scale heater test was created by furtherdiscretizing the two-dimensional X-Z model in the Y-dimension. The numerical mesh consistsof 36 columns in the X-direction, 35 rows in the Z-direction, and 6 columns of elements in theY-direction. The X- and Z-discretization are identical to the two-dimensional X-Z model. Theboundaries in the Y-direction reflect symmetry.at the midpoint of a canister heater and at themidpoint of the spacing between canister heaters. Figure 3-6 shows a plan view (X-Y) of themodeled three-dimensional domain that illustrates the location of the heater can relative to thedrift elements, as well as the wing heaters. The three dimensional model consists of the samematerials presented in the two-dimensional X-Z model: a canister heater, wing heaters (inner andouter), concrete invert, drift, and TSw2.


The three-dimensional model was equilibrated for one million years in the same mannerdescribed for the two-dimensional models. A specified geothermal gradient was established byfixing the top and bottom boundary temperatures of the model, and hydrostatic liquid saturationswere simulated using a constant bottom liquid saturation of 0.92. Following the equilibrationrun, the heater, drift, and invert materials were added, and a relative humidity of 100% wasspecified within the drift, which was calculated using the simulated temperatures and pressuresof the equilibrated elements located in the drift domain.'

37


The equilibrated pressures, liquid saturations, and temperatures along the six boundaries of themodeled domain were then fixed to maintain boundary conditions for the three-dimensionalheating simulations. These perimeter elements allowed liquid, gas, and heat fluxes to occuracross the boundaries during the heating simulation, but the values of their state variablesremained constant. No infiltration was applied during the simulations.

The simulated heat generation in the two-dimensional X-Z model was calculated using thereported heat output of the heater can (8000 W) and wing heaters (1145 W inner; 1719 W outer).Because only half a canister heater was modeled, the simulated heat generation for the three-dimensional model was 4000 W. The heat output of the simulated wing heaters was calculatedby scaling the heat output by the ratio of the length of the modeled domain (in the Y-dimension)to the spacing of the wing heaters. Thi- ratio was equal to 2.6675/1.83 = 1.46. Therefore, thesimulated heat genera.ion of the inner and outer wing heaters was 1671 W and 2510 W,respectively. The generation rates were held constant during the heating phase of thesimulations.


Three heating scenarios consisting of 2, 3, and 4 year heating periods were considered for thethree-dimensional simulations. In each case, a 2 year cooling period (no heat output) followedthe heating period. Only the low-permeability scenario was considered for the three-dimensional runs. In each simulation, state variables were processed at pre-determined timesduring the heating and cooling periods. These temperatures were then passed on to the thermal-mechanical simulations.

38

kgpIt.dxz.grid.cIoseup70 I I

65 . .

60 . .* .

55 . . . * .

$ 4 4

55 . _ .

. . . * * *

'-50 : '

45

4O * * * * * * _.

35 | TSw2HeaterDrift

30 I- I0 1 2 3

Y (m)

Figure 3-6. Expanded plan view (X-Y) of element centroids and associated materials forthree-dimensional X-Y-Z grid.

39

4. Thermal-Mechanical Modeling Approach

4.1 Introduction

The thermal-mechanical (T-M) calculations predict the displacement and stress distributions inthe host rock during the heating ad cooling phases of the Drift-Scale Heater Test (DST) bysolving temperature-dependent, quasi-static mechanics equations in three dimensions. Heatingphases of 2 and 4 years are considered in the analyses coupled with 2 years of cooling after theheaters are turned off. The resulting temperature fields (at different times into heating andcooling) obtained from the T-H calculations are used as inputs to the T-M calculations used toprovide predicted rock displacements during heating.

The results of the calculations are used to predict the temperature-dependent displacements at thegage locations for each of the MPBX's installed. Two MPBX's have been located in boreholesdrilled parallel to the heated drift's axis, primarily for evaluating the thermal expansion of therock mass at varying temperatures. Three sets of four MPBX's are planned at stations within theheated drift to measure radial displacements and potential asymmetric behavior. Typical MPBXmeasurements are made using anchors attached to connecting rods which are themselvesconnected to gages mounted in a protective "head" mounted at the borehole collar.

The thermal-mechanical code JAC3D (Biffle, 1993) was run individually for each predicted temp-erature field at the temperature time-planes provided from the TOUGH2 calculations. These calc-ulations, produced predictions of displacements and stresses the same times as for the thermal-hydrologic calculations.

4.2 General Description of the Thermal-Mechanical Models

The three-dimensional T-M calculations were performed with the following assumptions:

* The heaters are turned on at full power for 2 or 4 years. The calculations simulate thethermal-mechanical response of the test block through the period the heater is on.

* The temperature fields from the 2-D longi'.udinal and 2-D cross-section thermal-hydrologica!calculations described in Section 3 were used as input to the JAC3D calculativas. A productsolution routine was created to convert the two 2-D temperature fields into an approximate3-D field; this routine is described in Section 4.3.

* The thermal conductivity used for the rock mass in the T-H calculations was taken from thevalues measured from intact rock samples. This decision is based upon the assumption thatthe presence of the fractures and test instrumentation will have negligible influence on therock mass thermal conductivity.

* Isotropy was assumed for all thermal-mechanical properties.* The existence of the thermocouples, MPBXs, boreholes, and all other instrumentation, wiring,

and grout in the test block are assumed to have no effect on the thermal-mechanical propertiesof the rock mass.

* Overburden was included in the thermal-mechanical analyses, and stress changes resultingfrom overburden, mechanical relief from tunneling, and thermal expansion were calculated.

40

The calculations were performed as follows. First, the entire computational domain, includingthe original in situ rock located in the heated drift before the tunnel excavation occurred, wasmodeled with the appropriate overburden (calculated to be 3.80 MPa) as the top boundarycondition. Second, the tunnel "rock" was removed (by the use of "element death" i JAC3D),and the resulting stress changes were simulated. Third, the temperature fields from thethermal-hydrologic calculations were input to JAC3D to calculate stresses and displacements.

* The rock mass elastic modulus used in the T-M calculations was taken from both SHT andDST data. Two values are used for these calculations. The value which was used as our"base case" value was taken from a combination of intact rock modulus measurements fromsamples from the heated drift, and rock mass quality measurements of the heated drift andconnecting drifts. The other value is a rock mass value based on Goodman Jack testing nearthe SHT site. For these analyses, the rock mass modulus is assumed to be constant withregard to temperature.

* The thermal expansion characteristics used for the rock mass in the T-M calculations weretaken from the values measured from the Single Heater Test site. Two sets of data are usedto simulate the thermal expansion characteristics. One set of data is from measurements fromintact rock samples from the SHT. The other set includes approximate rock mass valuescomputed from displacement and temperature measurements from the SHT; this approach forthermal expansion includes the effects of the constrained rock mass and of fractures.

* The effect of different values of bulk permeability is addressed in two sets of calculations,using the low and high values described in Section 3.

Figure 4-1 shows the three-dimensional computational mesh used for the thermal-mechanicalcalculations. The view presented features the vertical plane of symmetry through the axis of theheated drift. Figure 4-1 is presented in color to show the excavated tunnel, tunnel invert andliners, and the bulkhead, which have all been explicitly identified in the mesh with theirappropriate properties.

41

ll5i"?

Vertical Symmetry Plane

Invert (yellow)

z

x

Horizontal Cut-Away Plane for X-Y Plane Viewsof Temperature and Displacement

Figure 4-1. Three-Dimensional Mesh of thelHeated Drift Used forthe JAC3D Thermal-Mechanical Calculations

I . .

42

4.3 General Description of the Conceptual Model

The calculations were performed with the finite element nonlinear structural mechanics codeJAC3D (Biffle, 1993). The temperature predictions from TOUGH2 described in Section 3 wereused as the input temperatures for the thermal-mechanical calculations. The temperatures fromthe two-dimensional longitudinal (Y-Z plane) and two-dimensional cross-section (X-Z plane)thermal-hydrologic calculations were used to produce three-dimensional temperature contoursfor the thermal-mechanical mesh at each time step. The X-Z TOUGH2 calculations simulate a"symmetry" plane in the middle of the drift, with wing heaters on each side. Therefore, thetemperature contours from the X-Z calculations were assumed to more appropriately model theaxial conductive and convective heat transfer, and thus chosen as the standard results for eachtime step. Accordingly, the temperature contours of the 3-D T-M mesh near the center of thetunnel should match those for the 2-D cross-sectional calculations, and the 2-D longitudinalcalculations should be ..,ed to modify the cross-sectional contours for edge effects. Thisscenario was used to produce the mathematical model used to translate the 2-D T-H temperatureresults to the 3-D T-M mesh:

T(t) =To +;(To T (TCmaX O max4To! e c,max Tocffm

0;=l+ max~l )) -[T -T0 J (4-1)Yend Ynd tI..ax of max

where T(t)i = Temperature at T-M mesh node i at time t,Toji = Temperature at time t=O (before heating) at T-M mesh node iTcj i = Interpolated temperature at time t at a point with the same X and Z

coordinates as T-M mesh point i in the 2-D cross-sectional simulationTc max = Maximum temperature at time t in the 2-D cross-sectional simulationTo:m,, = Temperature at time t=O at the same point as Tcm,, in the 2-D cross-

sectional simulationTLj = Interoolated temperature at time t at a point with the same Y and Z

coordinates as T-M mesh point i in the 2-D longitudinal simulation'r.,. = Maximum temperature at time t in the 2-D longitudinal simulationTo.max = Temperature at time t=O at the same point as T,,,, in the 2-D

longitudinal simulationYi = Y coordinate at T-M mesh point iymid = Y coordinate at the middle of the heated section of the driftyend = Y coordinate at a point 10 meters past the end of the canisters in the drift

Equation 4-1 preserves the radial temperature profiles (due to the explicit modeling of both the in-drift heater canisters and the wing heaters) predicted by the 2-D cross-sectional T-H calculationsat the middle of the drift, and allows the 2-D longitudinal profiles to define the shape of the temp-erature contours near the drift ends. Appendix C shows plots of the estimated 3-D temperaturefields at 2 and 4 years of heating. Several views are used: two views showing the temperature

43

Table 4-1. XA~ chanical Values Used in the T-H-M Calculations --

Mechanical parameter Value Source, CommentsDry bulk density of SHT block rock. 2263. - DTN SNL22080196001.002, TDIF 305602kg/m 3 (from SHT data)RMR values for the thermal test Category Value DTN SNF32020196001.015, TDIF 306063;alcoves' surfaces by rock mass 1 67.4 see Comment I in this section.quality category 2 76.1

3 80.14 83.35 87.1

Thermal expansion of TSw2 rock From 7.47-51.47 as a DTN SNL22080196001.001, TDIF 305593surrounding tunnel, glm/m-0C function of (from SHT intact rock data); see Comment 3

temperature; See Table below.4-2 below.

Thermal expansion of concrete in 12.6 Handbook datainvert and liners, jxm/m-0CThermal expansion of SHTin situ 5.27 forT<60'C, 5.02 (DTN SNF35110695001.004, TDIF 306088);rock during heating phase, pm/m-0C for T>60'C see Comment 3 belowYoung's modulus for intact rock, 36.8 DTN SNL02100196001.001, TDIF 306126GPa . - (intact rock data from Heated Drift samples)Young's modulus for rock mass Category Value Derived values; see Comment 2 in thisbased on RMR values, GPa 1 27.2 section.

2 36.83 36.84 36.85 36.8

Young's modulus (rock mass) chosen 36.8 (base case value) See Comment 2 belowfor the T-M calculations. GPa 10.0 (Goodman jack)Poisson's ratio for intact rock (and 0.201 DTN SNL02100196001.001, TDIF 306126for rock mass) (intact rock data from Heated Drift samples)Overburden pressure on JAC3D DST 3.80 Calculated from data in Engstrom andcomputational domain, MPa Rautman, 1996

Comments regarding the mechanical values listed in Table 4-1:

1. RMR valucs were calculated using the approach described in Bieniawski (1979) from datataken along the thermal test alcoves connecting the ESF Main Drift to the end of the HeatedDrift (DTN SNF32020196001.015, TDIF 306063). For determining rock mass elasticmoduli, the RMR was calculated without adjustment for joint orientation. The RMR valueswere grouped into five categories of rock mass quality based on frequency of occurrence of5%, 20%, 40%, 70% and 90% (Rock Mass Quality Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5,respectively). The procedures employed in these calculations follow the Drift DesignMethodology (Hardy and Bauer, 1991).

2. Serafim and Periera (1983) developed a correlation between the RMR and rock mass elasticmodulus that was recommended for use by Hardy and Bauer (1991) and is shown by theequation

45

Table 4-2. Thermal Expansion and Thermal Strain Data from Specimensfrom the Thermal Test Alcove

(from DTN SNL22080196001.001. TDIF 305593) ..Temperature Range (C) MCTE Thermal Temperature Range (C) MCTE Thermal

Heating Cycle Strain Cooling Cycle Strain.Low High gm/m-0C m/m High Low !im/m-0C m/m

25 0 300 275 26.49 4.025xIO-325 50 7.47 1.867xlO 4 275 250 36.1 3.122x10 3

50 75 8.88 4.087x i04 250 225 32.77 2.303x10-375 100 9.64 6.497xlO4 225 200 23.77 1.709x10-3100 125 10.01 9.000x0 4 200 175 18.98 1.234xi0-3125 150 10.72 1.168x10-3 175 150 14.21 8.790x10 4

150 175 11.26 1.449x10-3 150 125 12.08 5.770x1 04

175 200 12.78 1.769x10-3 125 100 10.82 3.065xlO 4

200 225 15.66 2.165x10-3 100 75 10.27 4.975xlO-5

225 250 19.47 2.652xlo-3 75 50 9.18 -1.798xlO 4

250 275 29.69 3.394x10-3 50 35 8.43 -3.062xl04275 300 51.7 4.687x10-3 I

An estimate of the in situ thermal expansion characteristics was made from the MPBX andthermocouple measurements from the SHT (DTN SNF35110695001.004, TDIF 306088).The in situ value is less than the intact rock value by about 30% for the lower temperatureranges, and the discrepancy increases for higher temperatures. Both the SHT intact rock andSHT in situ values for thermal expansion are evaluated in the T-M calculations.

47

* Alternate rock mass elastic mrodulus value of 10 GPa,based on preliminary results GoodmanJack tests near SHT site (reported by authors), all other base case values remaining the same

* Temperatures from the high bulk permeability simulation, KYb=6.35x 10 2 m2, all other basecase values remaining the same

* Alternate thermal expansion values based on in situ values calculated from SHT temperatureand displacement test data (5.27 jim/m-0C) (DTN SNF35110695001.004, TDIF 306088)

In addition, calculations for two years of cooling following two years of heating were alsoperformed. Predicted three-dimensional temperature contours are presented in Appendix C, anddisplacement-time histories of selected MPBX anchor locations are discussed in Section 5.

49

the conceptual model used to describe the mechanism of heat and fluid flow, and thehomogeneity of the surrounding host rock. The following results are described for the ECMconceptual model with isotropic and homogeneous rock properties. Additional analyses shouldbe conducted implementing the actual complexities seen in the surrounding host rock whileincorporating conceptual models that may better describe the actual mechanism of fluid and heatflow.

The temperature-time history results at the collar locations indicate the highest predictedtemperatures at all of the borehole locations. The low bulk permeability results at the collar ofESF-HD-MPBX-7 indicate a maximum drift wall temperature of approximately 260'C, 300'C,and 330'C, respectively for 2, 3, and 4 year continuous full power heating. The higher rockbulk permeability temperature predictions at this (collar) location are approximately 10'C lessthan the lower permeability rock. In general, the low permeability temperature predictions aregreater than the high -;mcability temperature predictions. At very early times, however, aslight increase in the convection heat transfer aids in the transport of energy away from the heatsource towards the rock wall. The higher bulk permeability rock will result in a slightly greatertemperature as heat is convected more readily from the canister heater to the drift wall. Thisprocess occurs while the medium is below the boiling point and the drying front is justbeginning to move away from the drift wall. At further locations along the borehole (i.e.,anchors 1 through 4), convection effects become more pronounced in the higher bulkpermeability simulations as is evident by the prolonged constant temperature regions (T = 960C)and the bumps (i.e., inflection points) in the temperature predictions of both permeability cases.At the furthest point along the MPBX in the borehole, anchor 4, convective heat transfer resultsin a slight increase in the predicted temperatures of the high permeability rock when comparedto the low bulk permeability cases.

The same general trends are observed in the temperature predictions for ESF-HD-MPBX-9 and -10 as well. Convection heat transfer influences the temperature predictions with increasingdistance from the collar at later times particularly for the higher bulk permeability cases. It isnoted that the predicted temperature at the collar of ESF-HD-MPBX-10 is slightly greater thanthe collar predictions at the other locations due to the proximity of this specific collar location tothe canister heaters.

5.1.2 Temperature and Liquid Saturation Contours

Contour plots (refer to Appendix B) of predicted temperatures and liquid saturations are shownat 6 month intervals for each of the thermal-hydrologic models used to analyze the heated driftarea. The Y-Z longitudinal model results illustrate the impact of edge cooling while the X-Zmodel results provide T-H predictions at the center of the heated drift experiment. The 3-D X-Y-Z model results are shown only for the low bulk permeability case with a 2 year heating andcooling cycle.

The heating results for the low bulk permeability case are shown for each of the heating cycles.It is noted that identical times (later in the simulation) are not repeated for the longer heati igcycles (3 and 4 year heating). For example, consider 3 year heating, 2 year cooling; thedisplayed results begin at 30 months simulated since the early heating times (6 - 24 months) are

51

network begins to flow. Subsequently, the condensate water;would enter the fracture domainand leave the system via the connected fracture network out the bottom of the test.

An additional theory should also be investigated.- It is an argument regarding the formation of a: dry-out zone and subsequently a condensate zone based on the degree of fracture connection. It

is possible that the in situ water located in unconnected pore volumes within the matrix will notreadily evaporate (due to large pore pressures) and thus mobilize in vapor form to regions wherecondensation may occur. This implies a reduction in the growth of the dry-out zone and thus theformation of such a large condensate zone. In situ water around connected fracture features willreadily mobilize in the form of vapor. Water in matrix pore space not near connected fracturesmay be transport limited by the permeability of the matrix itself. Therefore, water will not bereadily mobilized with some moisture remaining in the system at temperatures much higher than96 0C.

The high permeability results are qualitatively similar to the low permeability uid saturationpredictions. In this case, however, the condensate shedding and high saturation build-up belowthe heater horizon is somewhat larger in extent and duration than in the low permeability cases.Additionally, the formation of the dry-out zone is asymmetrical and is somewhat larger in extentand duration. *

5.1.2.2 Temperature and liquid saturation contours for the Y-Z longitudinal model

The temperature contours from the Y-Z longitudinal model domain are used to establish theeffects of edge cooling near the ends of the heated drift. At early times (i.e., 6-12 months), thetemperature profiles are quite'tabular indicating small effects due to unheated rock mass at thedrift 'ends and bulkhead. ' Wih continued heating (12-18 months), the temperature profilesbecome elliptical in shape thus indicating an increasing influence due to the unheated rock massnear the ends surrounding the'drift. The 960 C isotherm indicates that edge cooling is animportant phenomenon approximately 18-24 months into full power heating. This trend(increasing importance of edge cooling effects at late times) continues for the longer heatingcycle scenarios considered.' These results are similar for the high bulk permeability cases, butthey are delayed in time by approximately 6 months.

The high bulk permeability temperature profilc indicates a very flat 960C isotherm above the'drift and somewhat below (not as large in extent) due to the development of the refluxing zonessustained by the buoyant gas-phase convection. At later times during the high permeabilitysimulations, 24 months'and beyond,,temperatures greater than the 960C isotherms indicate thatedge cooling is an important effect and should notbe neglected in model analyses. It may alsobe important to consider the ventilation effects on the bulkhead side of the heated drift in futureanalyses.

Liquid saturation results indicate the development of a condensate'zone with water sheddingaround the far end (adjacent to' the concete liner) of.the heated drift. Regions ofhigh liquidsaturation'exist both above and below the drift (above and below the dry-out zone) with moreextensive high saturations forming below the dry-out zone. Water shedding finally occursentirely around the bulkhead end of the drift during the 4 year heating scenario at about 48

53

-

5.2 Thermal-Mechanical

Appendix D contains predictions of the displacement in the host rock during the heating andcooling phases of the heated drift test at selected MPBX anchor locations. Heating scenarios of4 years heating, and 2 years heating-2 years cooling, are presented in Appendix D. The 3-Dtemperature fields used as input to the T-M calculations were obtained from the T-H calculationsby the process described in Section 4.3, and selected temperature fields are included in AppendixC. The displacement-time history results presented in Appendix D are for: ESF-HD-MPBX-7, -9, and -10, located at the approximate midpoint of the heated drift experiment (boreholes 154-157; refer to Section 5.1); ESF-HD-MPBX-1, which runs horizontally along the length of theheated drift approximately 7 m south of the center line; and SDM-MPBX-2, located in thesequential mining borehole which is at the same Y-coordinate as the borehole 154 through 157(roughly the midpoint of the heated drift). All the predictions presented in Appendix D are ofdisplacement of the host rock at each anchor location elative to its corresponding collar.

The sensitivity of the predictions to different determinations of rock mass elastic modulus, rockmass thermal expansion, and bulk permeability has been addressed in the T-M calculations. Asdescribed in Section 4.5.3, four cases are used for simulation: 1) a "base case" with a rock masselastic modulus E=36.8 GPa and thermal expansion values cz=7.47-51.47 gtm/m-0 C as a functionof temperature, both based on intact rock measurements, and a low bulk permeabilityK,=2.16x10' 5 M2; 2) an in situ elastic modulus case, where E=10 GPa based on Goodman Jackmeasurements near the SHT; 3) an in situ thermal expansion case, where ox5.27 pm/m-0C basedon SHT displacement and temperature data; and 4) the high bulk permeability case,Kb= 6 .3 5 x 1012 2 , for which a different set of temperature predictions from the T-H calculationsis input to the T-M calculations. The base case calculations were run for both the heatingscenarios described above (the 2-year heating, 2-year cooling and the 4-year heating scenario).The other three cases were run to simulate the 4-year heating scenario to provide comparisonswith the base case.

5.2.1 Displacement Predictions at the Middle of the Heated Drift

The displacement-time history results presented Figures D-1 through D-15 in Appendix D arefor ESF-HD-MPBX-7, -9, and -10 (boreholes 154-157), located 21 m from the heated driftbulkhead, at the approximate center of the heated drift experiment . ESF-HD-MPBX-7 will belocated in a borehole drilled into the ceiling of the drift at an orientation of 300 from the vertical,with the collar location at the drift wall about 1.3 m from the centerline. ESF-HD-MPBX-9 willbe located vertically upward from the top of the drift. ESF-HD-MPBX-10 will be locatedvertically downward from the top of the concrete invert.

Figure D-l shows the predicted displacement relative to the collar of the four anchors in MPBX-7 for the 2-years heating, 2-years cooling scenario. Anchors 1, 2, 3, and 4 are 1, 2, 4, and 15 m,respectively, from the collar. (As the MPBXs had not yet been installed when these analyseswere performed, for the purposes of these analyses the collar is assumed to be at the rocksurface, or the invert surface for those with vertical-down orientation.) Note that during the two-year heating period, the anchors 1, 2, and 3 extend outward from the drift wall equally for thefirst month or so, indicating that only Anchor I is experiencing rock deformation due to thermal

55

interaction with the liners"'and end effects. A preiiminafy',look at the results of the T-Mcalculations indicates these results are indeed predicted by the computational model. Timeconstraints did not allow for a thorough examination and presentation of the T-M calculations atthese locations in this report, but the authors will examine these results more closely in the nextfew months and intend to report their findings in early FY98.

5.2.2 Displacement Predictions Along the Length of the Heated Drift

The displacement-time history results presented Figures D-16 through D-21 in Appendix D arefor ESF-HD-MPBX-1, which runs horizontally along the length'of the heated drift at an (X-Z)location of (7.0 m, 3.5 m). MPBX 1 has six anchor stations, located 7.5, 15, 25, 27, 39, and45 m away from the collar (Anchor 1 through 6, respectively).

Figure D-16 shows the predicted displacement relative to the collar of the six anchors in MPBX-1 for the 2-years heating, 2-years cooling scenario. Anchor 1 is outside the heated region, andall the other anchors are within it. Note tha: the heat in the drift is pushing Anchor 1 toward thecollar, and causing the other anchors to extend away from the collar. After the heater is'turnedoff, the contraction of the rock to initial conditions is slow due to the heat capacity of the rockand the large volume that is heated.! Figures'D-17 through D-20 show displacements for the 4year heating scenario for the four rock property cases. Three of the cases predict very similarresults, with the alternate rock mass modulus case (E=10 GPa) providing the largest predicteddisplacements. A direct comparison'of the four-cases at Anchor 6 is presented in Figure D-21.The SHT in situ thermal expansion coefficient predicts significantly less displacements than theother cases.

5.2.3 Radial Displacement Predictions from the' Sequential Mining Drift

The displacement-time history results presented Figures D-22 through D-28 in Appendix D arefor SDM-MPBX-2, which is located in a borehole drilled from the primary thermal test alcove(or observation drift) toward the heated drift for the sequential drift mining experiment. Thelocation of this borehole (number 43) is at the same Y-coordinate as the borehole 154 through157. Borehole 43 is drilled at an ankle of 11 below horizontal and is 26.5 m long, with the endof the borehole withri I :n of the wall of the heated drift. SDM-MP13X-2 has six anchorstations, located 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, and 25 m away from the collar (Anchor 1' through 6,respectively). As the collar for this borehole is in the observation, the displacements plotted inFigures D-22 through D-27 are relative to a point far away fr6m this test.

Figures D-22 through D-25 show the predicted displacement relative to the collar of the sixanchors in SDM-MPBX-2 for the 4-years heating' scenario, for all 'four of the rock massproperties cases. As the heaters turn on, all four cases show all six anchors with negativedisplacement, meaning that the expanding rock near the heateddrift is compressing the rockbetween there and the observation drift. However, for all the cases except the alternate rockmass modulus (E=10 GPa) case, the two anchor stations furthest from'the collar (i.e., closest tothe heated drift) eventually move in extension with respect to the collar, probably indicating thatthe rock near the heated drift is expanding into the drift and resulting in some tunnel closure; thisis consistent with the other MPBX results.- The fact that the E=10 GPa case does not predict a

57

6.0 Summary

Thermnal-hydrological and thermal-mechanical analyses were performed to predict temperatures,saturations, and displacements in and around the heated drift. The results presented inAppendices A through D are to be used as first-cut predictions of the T-H-M parameters beingmeasured during the heated drift experiment.

Temperature-time history predictions near the center of the experiment (at the locations of theprobes ESF-HD-MPBX-7, 8, 9, and 10) indicate maximum collar temperatures of 260'C, 300'C,and 330'C, respectively for 2, 3, and 4 year full power heating cycles. The high permeabilityresults are approximately 100C less. Temperature results at other borehole locations off centerwill be lower as a result of edge cooling into surrounding unheated rock mass. Both cases (lowand high rock bulk permeability) indicate transport of energy by convection. The high bulkpermeability cases indicatz a constant temperature refluxing zone driven by buoyant convection.

Temperature contours indicate the location of important isotherms (960 C, 2000 C) at differenttimes during heating. Liquid saturation profiles indicate the location of dry-out zone and theextent of the condensate shedding. The low permeability cases indicate the formation of asymmetrical dry-out zone above and below the heater horizon. The high bulk permeability casesindicate the formation of an asymmetric dry-out zone with preferential drying below the heaters.It is note that for both cases, the formation of a large condensate zone forms below the heaterdue to water shedding. The longitudinal Y-Z model indicates the importance of edge cooling onboth the temperature predictions as well as the location of water shedding around the unheatedends of the drift. Also, the 2-D X-Z cross-section model is compared to the 3-D periodic X-Y-Zmodel in order to assess the effects of dimensionality of the problem. It is noted that the 2-Dmodel very accurately predicts the drift wall and surrounding rock temperatures. This isimportant as computational efficiency and the use of 2-D models will allow for extendedanalyses including the use of alternative conceptual models such as the dual permeability model.

The formation of extensive condensate zones both above and below the heater horizon(surrounding the dry-out zone) indicate large scale movement of water during the heating phaseof the experiment. Water is removed from the dv-out zone and transported to cooler regionswhere condensation allows for an increase in the matrix saturation. This condensate zonepersists even into the cooling phase. The extent and duration of the water build-up in theexperimental system may be driven by the application of the equivalent continuum model(ECM) used to characterize heat and fluid flow in the model. The assumptions governing theECM will restrict water transport in the matrix (low permeability) until the matrix is very nearlysaturated (i.e., a result of capillary pressure equilibrium). Liquid flow will be maintained atrelatively low velocities. Fracture like water flow will not occur in this model until thiscondition is obtained. Therefore, the development of a very large condensate zone will result inresponse to the assumption in conceptual model (refer to Appendix B)

In reality, fracture/matrix non-equilibrium will allow fractures to flow at matrix saturationsmuch less than 1.0. Therefore, water can exit the system without the matrix saturationsapproaching highly saturated conditions. If this is the case, water may drain from the system asit is vaporized and later condensed and removed from the system for good as it flows out of the

59

References , ,

Altman, S.J., B.W. Arnold, C.K. Ho, S.A. McKenna, R.W. Barnard, G.E. Barr, and R;R. Eaton,1996. Flow Calculationsfor' Yucca Mountain Groundwater Travel Time (GWITT-95),SAND96-0819, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Bieniawski, Z.T., 1979. Engineering Rock Mass Classification, Wiley-Interscience Publication,John Wiley & Sons, New Yoik.

Biffle, J.H, 1993. JAC3D - A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Computer Program for theNonlinear Quasi-static Response of Solids with the Conjugate Gradient Method,SAND87-1305, Sandia Natiohal Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

CRWMS M&O, 1996. Test Design, Plans and Layout Report for the ESF Thermal Test, M&OReport BAB000000-01717-4600-00025 'Rev 01, September 20, 1996, Yucca MountainSite Characterization Project, TRW Environmental Safety Systems, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS940508312231.006, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 303221 (Core analysis of bulk density, porosity, particle density and in situ saturationfor borehole UE-25 UZ#16).

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS94080831223 1.008, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 303458, "Physical and Hydrologic Properties of Rock Outcrop Samples at YuccaMountain, Nevada," USGS OFR 95-280, by L.E. Flint, A.L. Flint, C.A. Rautman, andJ.D. Istok.

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS950308312231.002, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 304164 (Laboratory measurements of bulk density, porosity, and water content forUSW SD-12 from Mar. 19 to !Aug. 11, 1994).

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS950408312231.004, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 304288 (Physical prupert:'es and water potentials'of core from borehole USW SD-9).

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS950608312231.006, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 304420 (Water Permeability of Core from SD-9, Feb. 28 to Apr. 17, 1995).

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS950608312231.007, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 304427 (Physical properties and water potentials of core from borehole USW NRG-6, Mar. 19, 1994 to Mar. 27, 1995).

Data Tracking Number (DTN) GS951'108312231.009, Technical Data Information Form (TDIF)No. 305056 (Physical properties, water content, and water potential for borehole USWSD-7).

61

from the Single Heater Test Area in the Thermal Testing Facility at Yucca Mountain,Nevada).

Engstrom, D.A., and C.A. Rautman, 1996. Geology of the USW SD-9 Drill Hole, YuccaMountain, Nevada, SAND96-2030, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NewMexico.

Flint, L., 1996 (in review). Matrix Properties of Hydrogeologic Units at Yucca Mountain,Nevada, USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 96-XX, U.S. Geological Survey,Las Vegas, Nevada.

Francis, N.D., S.R. Sobolik, and S. Ballard, 1997 (in review). "Thermal-Hydrologic-MechanicalAnalyses of the In Situ Single Heater Test, Yucca Mountain, Nevada," Sixth Symposiumon Multiphase Transport in Porous Media, 1997 ASME International MechanicilEngineering Congress and Exposition.

Hardy, M.P., and S.J. Bauer, 1991. Drift Design Methodology and Preliminary Application forthe Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project, SAND89-0837, Sandia NationalLaboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Ho, C.K., and N.D. Francis, 1996. "The Effects of Conduction, Convection, and Radiation onthe Thermodynamic Environment Surrounding a Heat-Generating Waste Package,"Proceedings of the Thermal Hydraulics Division of the American Nuclear Society,presented at the 1996 National Heat Transfer Conference, Houston, TX.

Incropera, F.P., and D.P. DeWitt, 1985. Introduction to Heat Transfer, John Wiley and Sons,New York.

Merritt, F.S., 1968. Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, McGraw-Hill Book Company, NewYork.

Pruess, K.. 1991. TOUGH2--A General-Pur-ose Simulator for Multiphase Fluid and HeatFlow, LBL-29400, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California.

Pruess, K., and Y. Tsang, 1993. "Modeling of Strongly Heat-Driven Flow Processes at aPotential High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada,"Proceedings, Fourth High Level Radioactive Waste Management InternationalConference, April 26-30, 1993, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), 1996. "Drift Scale Test: Test Design," Work AgreementWA-0332, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Serafim, J.L., and J.P. Periera, 1983. "Consideration of the Geomechanical Classification ofBieniawski," Proceedings, International Symposium on Engineering Geology andUnderground Construction, pp. 1133-1144.

63

Appendix A: Predicted Temperature-Time Histories for the Heated Drift from the 2-DCross-Section Thermal-Hydrologic Calculations

ESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Collar Location)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

C.0.

L-

a)

2LEi

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000

ESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Anchor 1)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

3000

ci

4.

L-

coIaWCL

200

Low Permeability.*__ -High Permeability.*_

_.......... ........... .................... .............. .. ..

.. . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . ... . . . .. . . . .

0 500 1000Time (Days)

1500 2000

A-l

-1 l

ESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Anchor 2)2 Year!Heating,2 Year Cooling

400 -- - - - - -.

_ - Low Permeability- - - High Permeability_. . . . . . . ..... I...............-- -- -- ,

: - : I

............................ ;...................

C.)iZ.,

C-

EC)

17-

300

200 . : - I..................... : ................................................................

, * I * . _

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 - 500 1 000I Time (Days)

1500 2000


400 ��5 r - a - I I - - * �

, 300

a,

i: 200

E1

k2 100

_ - Low Permeability_ - - High Permeability_ ..

.. ._......... *. .... ...-... ...... . . . . .

_.............. ....... ..................... ...................

~~~ .. _ A.~~~~~~~~~~...................

01

I 500 - 1000- Time (Days)

1500 2000

A-2


400 _ a I a _

- Low Permeability- - High Permeability

300 .. ......... _

0

~~~2Ya etng 2 Yea 0Coling

4 200 .

- Low Pemablt

io.

0 5 00 1 0 00 1 5 00 2 00 0Ti me (D a ys)

ESF-HD-MPBX 9 (Collar Location)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' i- Low Permeability- High Permeability

O 300 _ ...... ~~... ................. ................. .......................... .

30 0 i.,,A CV... ............... 00.CD

1200 ...................................... _.... ...................... _C)

0 500 1000 1500.0 ..0 500 1000 1500 2000

Time (Days)

A-3

ESF-HD-MPBX-9 (Anchor 1)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

5.0w

i:

ax

E

a)

L-

300

200

100

- ~ ~ ~~~~ ...........

.. . ... . . . . .. .. . .. . .. .

* . I . . . .

CI I I Iuuui Time (Days)

2000


0-C)a).

EcoI-

0 500 1000 -1500! Time (Days)

2000

A-4


400 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

- - Low Permeability_ - - High Permeability- - - - - - - - - - - - - . .

_ ' , I i

ffi

. . _

: _. , _

. . _

: _. . . _

: _...................................................... .......................................................................... _

0

I-

I.

Iano-

300

200

100

_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- -:

_. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . ... .. . . . ... .. .. ... ..

_ . .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. .. . .. . . . -1

:'.0 . . . - - - - - - - -

0 500 1000Time (Days)

1500 2000


5.I-

a)

L.

E1-

OE0 500 1000 1500

Time (Days)2000

A-5

ESF-HD-MPBX-10 (Collar Location)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

3000

a)

L-.

Ei-1--

200

100

- Low Permeability- High Permeability

I .......... .................... . _

..........~~~~~~~~~~~~~_. .............. ............. .......

00 500 '1000

i Time (Days)1500 2000

ESF-HD-MPBX-1O (Anchor 1)2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

0C)

a)EL

ECD

300

200

100

OE_0 500 - 1000 1500

! 'Time (Days)2000

A-6

- -


400 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0

0.

Ea,

300

200

100

Low Permeability_--High Permeability

_..................... .................. ... .............. .. ..

_ ~. .. . .. ... . .. . . . .... . . .. . . . . .

I I I I -

00 500 1000

Time (Days)1500 2000


400


0a,

I-

CUax

Ei-

300

200

: :. .,. .

....... ... ..................................... ............................... ..... .

. .

_ . .

_ . .

_ .

_ , . .

_ . .

_ . .

_ .

_ : : :_ . .

_ .

. . .

10 O ~ ........... . .w ... ft**:..

_~~~~ -

0 500 1000Time (Days)

1500 2000

A-7

ESF-HD-MPBX-10 (Anchor 4)2 YearHeating, 2 Year Cooling

400 .- Low Permeability

- - High Permeability

300 _ .................... ................................ I'll ........................

i: 00 ~............................................................... ...................

1300 - -r--'---r------

0

0 500 1000 1500 2000-Time (Days)

L~.

0~ .

0 ~ ~ ~ ..0 10010020

A-8


400- Low Permeability- - High Permeability

.... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

I-%

O0-

a)L-

4-'

co

CLEci

:......................... ..........................

100

0 i i

0 500 1000Time (Days)

1500 2000


400

,- 300C-0

ci

a 200L.

C)ECD- 100

00 500 1000 1500

Time (Days)2000

A-9

... ,,,w


400


.1 _I_. I I I I _

.... -,. .. I _.: .. ........... . . .. . . . .1. %)UU00)o uI-

, 200

a1I- inn

-. ,................

~~~~~~~~~~~~~...... . . . .. . . . .

:

.

.-............... ...................

\ - - - -_

0 500 1000* ^-Time (Days)

1500 2000

ESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Anchor 3)3 YearlHeating, 2 Year Cooling

400

C3.

a)

EI-

300

200

100

- Low PermeabilityHigh Permeablity!

........ ...... .................. ......................................

-. ....... . . .. . .

03 500 - 1000 .

Time (Days); 1500 2000

A-1O


I-0

c)L-

I-a)C.2CD

.

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000

ESF-HD-MPBX-9 (Collar3 Year Heating, 2 Year

Location)Cooling

5-0

.

2

I--

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000

A-I1

....


400 -


_ 3 0.. .. ... 0. .. _. .. ......... ................................. ................ ....-%300.

200 I........... ....

1 00 ........ .............. e ............... .... __

OF . . .

0 500 1000 .1500 2000Ti me (D a ys)


400 Low Permeability

_ -High Permeability

_3 00 _ ............. ..... .......... .......... ....... ............ ._

C-

-1 200 ... ..... ...

100 0 ......- .............._-.-- ..._ ... le ... _.... ....._

0

0 500 1000 .1500 2000Ti me (Days)

A-12


400 - _ _ _ _ I ._ I 'I ' ' I I


co 3200 _ ........ ...... ............................................ ......................_

i: 100 _ ... ..... ........ ...... ........ ...............................0a,~,

v .

0 500 1000 1500 2000Ti me (D a ys)


400 Low Permeability

_ -High Permeability_3 0 0.. .......... ............................... ............... .................. ..........

0.

2 .......... 3.Year.Heating, 2 Year C g .....

100 _ ....... , _

OF __ .--

0 5 00 1 0 00 1 50 0 2 00 0Ti m e (PDraeyas)

A- 13


0

aZ,

a)To

Eal

I-

oE0 500 1000 1500

i Time (Days)2000

f I. . .


400

, 3000.

a)1-

M: 200I-a)a-Ea)I-, 100

00 500 2000

Time (Days)

A-14


0a,I-

ML.0.

EI-

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000


A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0

I-

ax

0a0.El'-

4uu

300

200

_ - Low_ -High

Pe:ebi:t

PermeabilityPemaiiy...... . ................. ...................... .......................

......................... ~~. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I , I I I I I I I I I . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 500 1000Time (Days)

1500 2000

A-15

ESF-HD-MPBX-1 0 (Anchor 4)3 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400 _


I.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

)3 0 0 ... ............... ..................................... ....................:-

E5 2 00 ................... ..... ......................................... ..................._a)

E100 50.................... .....................I ..........................................

0 500 1 000 1 500 2000Time (Days)

A-16

.-


400

.3nn

00

a)L.

c 200 _ax.E

00100 _

O

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000


0

dl

4-

0)aE.diI-

O E0 500 1000 1500

Time (Days)2000

A- 17

ESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Anchor 2)4 Year Heating,' 2 Year Cooling

I ..

0L

CD

I-

au

2000

I .I . .-: IESF-HD-MPBX-7,8 (Anchor 3)

4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

, 300 L)0-

in 200 _ -a)

EF 100

OI 0

. . . . ... . . a

- Low Permeabill- - High Permeabil

_... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .....

. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ....................

.............. .................... .................................. _

. .

i-- . i,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

' 500 '1000-Time (Days)

1500 2000

A-18


0

0-

L.coL.

ECD

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000


400

0

0)a,

I-

L.

EC,

300

200

100

00 500 1000 1500

Time (Days)2000

A-19

a:: -


400

0

0a-

a-

Ei)

300

200


. ....... ... ...........

_~~~~~~~. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ;<....... ... ...

_.8. . ....... . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . .. .100

00 500 1000

i 1:Time (Days)1500 2000

ESF-HD-MPBX-9 (Anchor 2)4 Year' Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400

0.

a)

a-0s

E0)

300

200

100

I - Low Permeability-- High Permeability

. ' _ _.. ....... _

00 500 1 000

i Time (Days)1500 2000

A-20


400 - * i

- Low Permeability- High Permeability

_3 0 0 _ .... ............... ....................................... ....... ......................

75 2 00 _ .... .......

Ei-100 .. .. .. . ...... ..............

0 500 1000 1500 2000Time (Days)


400

Low PermeabilityHigh Permeability

_3 0 0 ......... ... .............. ...... .. .............. .................. ..................

c:200 _....... - _

Ea)

100 .................... ........................................................

0 5 00 1 0 00 1 5 00 2 00 0Time (Days)

A-21

ESF-HD-MPBX-10 (Collar Location)4 Year- Heating, 2 Year Cooling

400 £ S al..&

_ - Low Permeability- - High Permeability

3OO30 . ................... :. . . . . .. ............ .............. . .... '.

Ca 2 00 ......................... .. ..........

100 .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . ............... ...

0

0 520000 0 1500 2000Ti me (D a ys)

ESF-Hb-mpBx-1o (Anchor 1)4 Year eating, 2 Year Cooling

400

0 Low Permeability. * _- High Permeability

3 ° ................................. ................ ........ ..

n 2 00 _. .... ............ . ............................. . ................

1 00 .... .. .. .................. ..-. .. . .. ! .. . .. .;. . .. . .-. .

- . 0 !50 1000 1500 2000Ti m e (D a ys)

A-22


0-

0

0.

0

0F- . i . . . _._i____________I

0 500 1000 1500Time (Days)

2000


400

U

0

L-

c

L-

a)

L

0.

300

200

100

Low Permeability | * * |- - High Permeability

* p p p .. ..... p .......... ............... p j

.. . . . . . . .. . .. .

E. . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .

00 500 1000

Time (Days)1500 2000

A-23


400


_3 00 ..... .... .....O ~ ~ ~ ........ . ..... .. _.

CL

0.

0 50 0 1000 1500 2000Time (Days)

A-24

Appendix B: Contour Plots of Predicted Temperatures and Liquid Saturations from theThermal-Hydrologic Calculations

X-Z Cross Section ModelLow Bulk Perm., 2 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

Temperature

EN

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100)

6 Months

.1.. ~ .......20 40..............0

....... ,{ s . . . . . . . ... . . .

.......................... ......................... _

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

D

12 Months

.... . . ... . ... . . . . ... .

.. . .. . . .... ..

. . . .

I

20 40 60 i80 100x(m)

I I . I...I

20 40 60x (m)

80 100

-- 300C C - - -~ - - - i50°C. -- 2000C - 2700C I18 Months

;. ... ..... ... ..... ......

. . ~ ~~........ ..

. . . N

24 Months0.

-20 .............. I.........

/ . . . ...~~20t - ~~~~.---.-.--- ........60 ....... .....

-80 .. . . .. . . . . .. .

-100 ................- .*1

020 40 60 80 -Cx (m)

I 20 40 60 ' 80 100x (m)

10

I -- 300C --. -6960 C --- 1500C - . 2000C 2700C

B-I

X-Z Cross Section ModelLow Bulk Perm!, 2 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

I Temperature

0

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100

30 MonthsK' ~~~...........

L.. ' ,.,,.......................... ..................

-2(

-4(

-6(

-8t

-1 0(

36 Months

O ,......................

.. . * . ... . .. .

O ....................................

.3.. .

.

: -_?-;\:O -N-

N .! Jw -

o3 .. C.\..._...jz...

N

R .

20 40 60 80 10 x (m)

0 20 40 60 '80 100x (m)

-- 300C - -- 50C - 960C . - 1250C 1500C

42 Months 48 Months0

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100

/ .-..- . :

. .

........................

: - :2 . . _

.5 _..N

0 . . .0

-20 ... -

-40 . . . .... -.

/ // '-60 .. ............

-80

-100 ..... . ..... . . . .

0 20 40 60x (m)

.. ... d/...........

-p

: p

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

80 100

r- 300 C -.-.- 500 C 960C . 1250 C 1500C]-- 300C -- - - -- 960C 1250''C - 1500C

B-2

- --


Temperature

30 Months 36 Months

EN

EN

-2

-41

-61

-81

-101

-21

-4

-6

-8

-10

D

D0

D

I

.... .. .

................ .......................... X

_ _

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

C

-........... ...........

* \ ~.........I

I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

-- 300C 960C --- 1500C . 2000C - 3200C

42 Months

10 ......................................

0.

/. ' \

0 0 2.. >vo;. .,/e.\\ //

10 _,,,,,,, ,,,,, A,,, ,,, N.,.I.I...

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100(

48 Months

........................ ........

:-. _:--: 1 :. ' . *~, I. .

.. .. .. .. ...... ..........

/: / _ _:'.:/N. A {,;:.

I ';- ',i

a 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

D 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

B-3

X-Z|Cross Section ModelLow Bulk Perni., 3 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

! Temperature

54 Months0.O2 .. .. . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . .

-20 . ........ ...

N-60 ... \}

-80.

0 20 40 60 80 10x (m)

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

L

60 Months

. .... . \ . . . . . . . . . . . .

N, . . . .: -

I I I:

DO I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

-- 300 C --- 500C - *-960C .... 1250 C - 1500C]

I

I

i -

t II I

I -. .

I .:,

i

B-4

-


Temperature

0

-20

-40E

N -60

-80

-100

01

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100

42 Months

,... . . .. . . ... .. . .

................. ..... ...........

......... 7 ...... /.....>

. . . . . ...... ... .. .... ... .. .. ..20 4 60 .

. \ . . ..N

. N

20 40 60 80 1i0

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100J

48 Months

, .. .. . . .N. ./

.~ . . .\.: : :

.................,/ . N .

'0 I 20

[

x (m)4U bU U 1UU

x ()

-- 300C 960C - - - 150C ...... 2000C 3400C

54 Months

NI .. ....

.. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .

0

-20

-40-

N -60

-80

-100

60 Months

[ .-.... N. ]

, / . . .'

I :\ \ -... , /:

F.\.'. ' ,.,/ I F \ ': #'-'' /

L .N -

I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

0 20 40 60x (m)

80 100

I -- 300C 500C --- 960C .-- 125°C - 1500C]

B-5

.X-Z Cross Section ModelLow Bulk Perm., 4 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

I Temperature

-2

-4

N -6

-8

-10

66 Months0..I

!0 ... ......... ......................*. . e '.

10 ... ... ......-''- ....-I o./ .. ....... ,.....

\ *' .- _ / /

as . , /.............

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100.L

72 Months

.......... ..........IA .....

-/ nNt~''h

. . . /

......... _...............

.......... ...................

20 4 0 6 0 8 0 100x (m)

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m) I

-- 300C 500C - -- 960C . ..... 1250C 1500C1 -- I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

B-6

X-Z Cross Section ModelHigh Bulk Perm., 4 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

Temperature

0

-20

-40

N -60

-80

-100

6 Months

.......... ,.

~~~~~~~~~............... ......

........................ .;. - .

*~~~~~~ -, I -- ,_ .......

0

-20

-40

N -60

-80

-100

12 Months

( ... ...... .........

................ ........ ................. v

................ ... .......... : : : },e . -

: I: : /

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

- - 300C 960C - - - 1500C . 2000C 3300C

N

0

-20

* -40

-60

-80

-100

C

18 Months* . I ..* *

.. .. . . .. . .. .. . ... . ... .. .

.. . ..5 .s ... .. . .. ... ' . . -1

~~~~~~~.. ..... -,'__... -* ./ . .

t- :.:- . i

EFQ

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

(

24 Months

- ! ! !.. . .. . . . .. . - . .. .. .

L i. . .'.. ... .

> > > * @

I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

) 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

B-7


Temperature

30 Months 36 Months

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

N .* 7* I �

* *�

/* 7

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80 .

'-100

0

-

. ~ ~ ~~~ ...... _ _.. .

: / ~ ~{ ..

. . . . ..

....... '. . .. . .. . .. .;. .. . .;.

) 20 40 '60x(m)

80 100 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

[ - - 300C 960C --- 1500C .. 200C- 3300C I

EN

-20

¶0

-60

-80

-100

t

42 Months

...................................

., . . . ....

. . {: : : :N-

- . . .4 /...... . u; ; ; ;~~~/

.sK . ./. 7 ... N *

. _ _

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

C

48 Months

............

.... .... .... ... .... .... ... .......

20 40 60 80 10x (: )

D 20 40 60x (m)

80 100 D0

| -- 300C - 96°C .-1S0°C . 2000C 3300C)

B-8

I X-Z Cross Section ModelHigh Bulk Perm., 4 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

Temperature

0

-20

-40EN -60.

-80

-100

C

54 Months

..........................................

.__

1 - <* N

1.. . . .

.... \ ,;1 s,, * _._._. * /

......... .....- ......-/

'N .

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100C

60 Months

-S.

..... ... .I... ...

......... .... . ...................

: i - :

I :,' : \

-- 1''---' .o..' .)

_- -. :-::1

I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

D 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

| -- 300C 500C --- 960C . 1250C - 1500C

0

-20

-40

EN -60

-80

-100

66 Months

.. . -. . I

I . ~~.-.- . -. I

t / . '

It / / /.. ' I

t 5 5 -- A 5'\ : :.II

L : _.__. :../N . -

N

-2

-4

-6

-8

-1 C

72 Months

I0L .. . . . . . .. . .....

0 ...i. / ..........

!0k--- -. _.............. V 7. , . .. ... ..

)O

.0 .. . ... .I ........

. 1 1 1 . . I . 1

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

- 300C - 500C - - - 960C . 1250C- 1500C

B-9


Liquid Saturation

,

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

a

6 Months

.. ...... ..

................. ..........................

....... - .........

....... ......... .,.. . .. .. .

-2

-4

4 -6

-8

.-.10

12 Months

.0.

0 .. . . !- .. . . . ... ...

'O .... .. .I .. ..

0.

0............................

0 20 40 60 80 10x (m)

F%

I 20 40 60x (m)

80 100 '0

| -- 0.01 -.-.-. 0.45 .......... 0.85. 0.95

0

. -20

-40

E

N -60

-80

-100

i 8 Months

I. '....................... ........

........... ................

.. ..: .. .

. . . ..............

. . ....... ..... ..

0 20@@* 40 60 8 -

, EN

.-20.

-60

-80

-100C

24 Months

.... .... ... . .... .. ..

. . . . .. . . .

..........................................

.. : : -

..... . _

'0 Ix (m)

20 40 60 80 100x (m)

-- 0.01 0.45 - -0.85 0.95

B-10


Liquid Saturation

-2

-4-6

N .6

-8

-10

30 Months

0O .....................

0 ....... ....

0O ...... ............... ' .._

0 20 40 60 80 IC

N

0

-20:

-40.

-60:

-80 .

-100

0

36 Months

............. .. ..............,_

. . ~~. .. . ... .

.. ~~~........ . ...

I0 Ix ()

zu qu bUx (m)

vu uu

-- 0.01 ----- 0.45 * --- - -0.85 0.95

-20

-40E5-

N -60

-80

-100

(

42 Months

,.. ....... ......

.........................................E

0

-20.

-40

-60.

-80 .

-100

a

48 Months

~~~~....... ..........

.. .. .. . . .

.......-... . . .- . . . .. . . . .t. . .

.

: :

D 20 40 60x (m)

80 100 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

- - 0.01 ----- 0.45 ......... 0.85 0.95

iB-ll


Liquid Saturation

.2

-4EN -6

-8

-10

30 Months

0*

. . .

0 20 40 60 80 100i x(m)

EN

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

36 Months

0

O .. .. . .. .. .-.,.- ,.......0

!0 .... . ... ...

* .. . ... .0OS.

0O_-\^ .

0 20 40 60x (m)

80 100

-- 0.01 - -- 0.45 . ----- 0.85 0.95

EN

-2

4

-6

-8

-10

42 Months

O ... ~~~..............

.0 ...... ..... ..... ................

0.

0 . .. ..

..... I.... ..I , I .,. 1 ... _...........__

EN

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

48 Months

O ... . . .. . . .................' ! '

0 -... .0 ........ . ........

10 _.. ...:..I... . . . . .. .. .... ..0Ok~

0O ' ., L ,...,' 0 20 40 60 80 100

x (m)0 20 40 60 80 100

x (m)

[ -- 0.01 -.--- 0.45 *------- 0.85 0.95

B-12


Liquid Saturation

54 Months 60 Months

-20 .......-........... 2 ........... 2.......-20 .. .. .......

-40 40....... . ......

.... .... 40 . .

-40 ........ .... .... .......- 60 ....... ::....., ... ....... ::

N b.60 it N -6 L |-80 -..... .... .I... 80 ... ... .. ...

-100 ..- 100. . .

0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100x (m) x (m)

| -- 0.01 -.-.-- 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

B-13

- X-Z Cross Section ModelLow Bulk Perm., 4 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling.iui Sa. t

Liquid'Saturation

42 Months..

-20 . . . .

-40 ..... ...............

40. - .

-60 . . .

-80 . ........., ; ...

-100 . .......... :0 20 40 60 80 100

x (m)

N

-2

-4

-6

-8

- -10

48 Months0 ...... ! *

[O *-^s'-;z .. ' .... .......... _

0 ..... .. .....

0 ......

0 20 40 60x (m)

80 100

| -- 0.01 --- 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

0

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100

54 Months

..............

............... ..... ...... ......

~~~~~~..... .. .. ..; .; .................. ......... ; .;

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

)a

60 Months

................ .................

. , . .......:

.......... ........ ........

0 20 40 60x (m)

80 100 I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

I -- 0.01 ----- 0.45 ....... 0.85 0.95

B-14


Liquid Saturation

66 Months0.

-20 .... .... ... .. .... ... .

-40..

N -60 ...... N...

-80 ....... ..... .. .

-100 .. .. ......0 20 40 60 80 100

x (i)

72 Months

0 20 40 60 80 100x ()

-- 0.01 ...... 0.45 ...... 0.85 ~ 0.95

B. 15

- X-Z Cross Section ModelHigh Bulk Perm., 4-Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

Liquid Saturation

E

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

6 Months

'O ....... .......... ...

...........ssts% W......................

.,

i0O .-

0 .. . .

0 .................... ... ... .

N

-2

-.4

-6

-8

-10

12 Months

. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .

'O ...... ......... ............

01 ............. ..............

0.._........... ........

.0O 20- 40 60 80 100x (m)

0 20 40 :60 80 100x (m)

- - 0.01 ----- 0.45 . -- 0.85 0.95 ]7.

0

-20

*40EN -60

-80

-100I

18 Months

I... ...........j,

. . * .0 20 40 60 80 1 0

EN

-2

-4

-6

-1 c

24 Months

O ..... ............. ..

0 . ..-..........

10,,tssss ......... :::.... ........ ; X ........;0 ....................

.4....- ,,..: : .ID. , .

-4-A .-...... X, ,te

la 0 -20x (ni)

40 60x (m)

80 100

-- 0.01 --- 0.45 .. 0.85 0.95I ... .

B-16


Liquid Saturation

30 Months

O2 ..' . .. ... .. .. . .. . .'..'!..''..''..! '

-20 .......

N-60.

-80 ..... .....

-100

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

36 Months

-20

E 44-.'' <''''

N -60 . ... . .

-80 ... . .

-100

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

I - - 0.01 ------ 0.45 ------- 0.85 0.95

42 Months

-20 . . . . . .. . . . ... . .. .. ..~4-4.

4..-40 ............ .. :..

N -60 . .......

-80 ....

-100

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

48 Months0.

-20.

-40 .......

-60. ...........

-80 ....

-100

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

- - 0.01 ------ 0.45 --.--- 0.85 0.95

B-17

; -n "U.. la


Liquid Saturation

C

-2C

-40

N -60

-80

-100

0

-20

-40

N -60

-80

-100

.

64 Months, . . . . . . . . . .

.: : : :

. . . ..

.........................................

. ...........

,: .-- --. :

_ :: ,fa: ::.J_ sS, +...... .. A; s ),.

.\ . . ..

.) *. (. .

. l . . ........ ......... .. . k . .......

. . . . . . ... ... . . . . . . . . . . .

N

60 Months

0.--40 .. ..

-40 . ...... . .. ....

-60 ....

-80 .. . .... , .....

-100

0 r 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

20 40 60 80 100x (m)

-- 0.01, ----- 0OA5 ........... 0.85 -0.95

66 Months 72 Months

20~... . .. . . ........ 2 ... . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . ... .... ... ..

..... ........ .. -40 ...... ......

_,:.=: :.,........ .. ....... -'-60 .:: ...... :........ ..... .... , N -6 0 .......

l . _ g... ~~~~-80 ---- *----

I ~~~~~~~~-100 _:V:-, -10 . ........... .......

0 20 40 60 -80 100 0 20 40 -60 80 10x (m) 'x (m)

-- 0.01 ---- 0.45 . 0.85 0.95

ID

B-18

Y-Z Longitudinal ModelLow Bulk Perm., 2 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Temperature

6 Months 12 Months

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120a

... . . . . . .... * .. .. .. . . . . .

............. .......................... .

. ~~~~~~............ .......... ....-.:-- 8............. . ........... .. .. . .. .

.....................................

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120

.... . . . ., ....... . .

. . . .. . . . . . . . . . ......... . ..

~~~~~~~.................... .......... .. . .. . . -.. - -- - - - - -

............ ............. .. . .. .. ._.

I 50 100y (m)

150 I 50 100 150y (m)

I - - 300C --- 960C --- 150C . 2000C - 2500C

18 Months

N

.0

-20

* -40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

......

........... ........ .. .........

* ----- -. -- N.. -- - -.... ...........---

: :.

-

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120

24 Months

.... .. . ...... ..........

.. . .. . .: . . . ... . .. .. .. .

I 50 100y (m)

150 3 50 100y (m)

150

| -- 300C --- 960C --- 1500C 2000C 2500C|

B- 19

Y-Z-Longitudinal ModelLow Bulk Perm., 2 Year Heating,-2 Year Cooling

Temperature

0

-20

-40

£ -60N

-80

-100

_vln

30 Months

('21c.... ;- .\.~~~~~~.C........

' ! - S . . .

_ .- ..

N

' O

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120a

36 Months

. . 1J)' ! '

. ./.

....... .. ;............. . .^. . . .. . .

~~~~~~~~~....... .....N,,....

.* . . .. ._,_,_,_ /*~ ~ _ _ i

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 50 100

y (m)150 I 50 100

y ()150

- - 30 0C -.-.- 500C - - - 960C ........ 1250C - 1500C ]

N

42 Months0

-20 _.........................................

-602 0 ........r-

-80 '. . .. .. .. . .,,-10-.......- -.

-1200 50 100 150

y ()

-20

- -40

F -60N

*-100

.- 120C

48 Months

. -

'I.J . . ............... ...... .. .. ..

,- :I1- :_.._ *E./

-;-- I

D 50

y (m)100 150

- - 300C --- 50 0C - - - 960C . .... -125°C - 1500C

B-20


Temperature

30 Months 36 Months0 0

-20 -20 ..................

-40 .............- 40................... ...... 4 .........

-60 . -0.f ......... sI ........... ..

-80 / * . .. . -80 ....... .......

-100 ..... ... -100 ............ - .-

-120 . . . . -120..0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

y (m) y (m)

| -- 30 0C 960C --- 1500C . 2000C- 3100C1

42 Months 48 Months0 0

-2 ........... .............. -2 ......... ..................-40a....../ ;___ a? -.40Act. __.._\X -20 -20 . .;;

-40 ...... -40

E ...... .... .. -6E. ..N 6 I 60) ....

-80 ....... ....... -80...

-100 -- - -100 .........

-120 . . . .- 120 . . ...0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

y (m) y (m)

-- 300C --- 500C - - - 960C .--- 1250 C 1500C

B-21


-Temperature

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

- 54 Months

l .

- ....... .. :...j

~~~~............ . I.,, .

......._.i,............... ............

0 o50 100 ify (m)

60 Months...............

U

-20

-40

E -60 N

-80.

-100

-120 )

.............. _ ...............

,1, K ~~~~~~~. .. .. ... ..... .. . .. . .. 5

~ ~ I *;: _ ; ............ ... }

........... ._.............7

50 I ' 50y (m)

100 150

-- 30 0C --- 50 0C --- 960C . 1250C - 1500C i

I. -.. I' -

. -

B-22

- |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- Y-Z Longitudinal ModelLow Bulk Perm., 4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Temperature

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120a

42 Months

* _i-- _-

.. _...... ... J

. ............ ~-............... ............

U

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-1 20

... .... - ..

::

_ .. .......

48 Months

._ _ - - - - - - - - -. I 50 100

y (m)150 0 50 100

y (m)150

- - 300C ---- 960C - -- 1500C-.... 2000C 3500C I

-

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

54 Months

.. :.............

.

I. . ..............1

............. .......... .._;

N

60 Months

0.-S

-20 ........... ..................

-40. /-/ - . .. . . .

-60

-80 ... ....... _-_...-./ .

-1.00 . -- ............

-120..0 50 100 150

y (m)D 50 100

y (m)150

-- 300C -.-. 500C --- 96°C ..... 125°C - 1500C

B-23


Temperature

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

66 Months

l ......... _. , .'..... ....

/ r..... .. > \

_I .. (> ..... _._.: ' ': :

72 Months0

-20

-40

£ -60N

-80

-100

.. flon

.........................

~~~........ .... . . ,*- / - . -

_.... .. ,....-.... .. \..

......... - N........

Tj7.. . ..

. .. . . . . . . . .ov.. _ _ . . . . . .

0 50 100

y (m)150 0 50 100

y (m)150

|-- 300 C - 5-0- S0C --- 960C . 1250C- 1500C

B-24

Y-Z Longitudinal ModelHigh Perm, 4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Temperature

EN

0

-20

-40

-60.

-80

-100

-120 a

6 Months

~~~. . .. . . . . ... . ... .. . ... . . . . .

_.............. .............. .............

_.................. ........................... N

12 Months0.

-20 .......................................

. .-40 . ....... .. .........

-80 . .............

100

120 . . ;. .50 100

y (m)150 0 50 100

y (m)150

[ - - 300C 960C --- 1500C *. 2000C - 3400C I[

I

0

-20

* -40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

18 Months

..........................................

. ......... .. ;;,-....... .\

. . ...

_ .: . .....................................

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

24 Months

.. .

. .. . . . . . .... .. ..

..

0 50 100y (m)

150 0 50 100y (m)

150

[ -- 300C - 960C --- 1500C 0.2000C - 3400C I

B-25

Y-Z Longitudinal ModelHigh Perm, 4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Temperature

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120c

30 Months

/ :S

-_

............ ..............

....... -= .....

.......................... .............

~~. . ..................... . .

0

-20

-40

.E -60N

-80

-100

. - -12050 0~ c

36 Months

.. .. . . . . .: .... ... . . . . . . .

' .

: :

.....................................

/: :E~~~~~.............,

.,,..........

............. ..... .. ............ ........

\. ./

... . .

I 50 100y (m)

15 I .50y (m)

100 150

-- 300 C --- 960C .- - - 1500 C ... 2000C - 3400I - - -~~ - . - - - . ~ o

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

42 Months

: :

- . --.. v.............

/ . ..

I ;,'-.-.... . \*''''I ' ''''t --i=@s P.. ........... ..... ... ... ..

.... ...... /. o .

0

-20

-40

E . -60NI

-80

-100

--120* c

48 Months

: .. .. . . . .. . .. .

./ ... . ..... ..

............. ...........,y~~~~~~~...... .. . ... _.

-..- : :.

.,, ;.-,,

I 50 I 100 150y (m)

D 50 , 100y (m)

150

-- 300C--- 960 C'- - - 15600C..200 0 6 3400C

B-26

I

Y-Z Longitudinal ModelHigh Perm, 4 Year Heating, 2 YearCooling

Temperature

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-1 20

54 Months

... .........

.. /. .... a..~~~~~~~..... ........

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-12

60 Months

/ .-; ~ ~ . ......

I * ! ~:~-' iji

.. _ -... 2

I..... . . . S9

0 50 100y (m)

150 0 50 100y (m)

150

-- 300 C 50 0C - - - 96 0C . 125C - 1500C

°0

-20F

-40

E -60 N

-80

-100

-120FL

66 Months. ..........r.l..

[~. ,;. _N.j

?**i.-:*~ : \

...... .....................

... . ....

. ......

N

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

72 Months

........ : - ,,;./r

. .... . .. .-.. . .. . .. ... . . . . .

I 50 100y (m)

150 D 50 100y (m)

'O

- - 300C -.--- 500C - - - 960C . 125 0C - 150 0C

B-27


Liquid Saturation

EN

6 Months

-20 ..............-40 *.........................................-40 -

-60 .

-80 . . .

100 ......................................

120

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

12 Months

.. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ,. . . ... .

.........................................

_................. ............

............. .............. ............

.............. .. ............ ............

0 50 100y (m)

150 I 50 100y (m)

150

- - 0.01 - --- 0.45 0.85 . 0.95I - - - .. ...

EN

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120

-18 Months

~. .. .. .. ..

.................. ............-

......... ..........

............. ...... .. , .. . .. .^. .

I.,_

24 Months0

-20

-40

e -60

-80

-100

-,-120(

......... ...F .-.. vv ..... s* ........ ..........- 4

.. . .. . .... .. .

D ~50 100 15y(m

D 50 100 150y (m)

*O

-- 0.01 -.-.-. 0.45 " 0.85 . 0.95

B-28


Liquid Saturation

-2

-4

E -6N

-8

-10

-12

30 Months

o0.,.............

0 . ...=, .. ...

0 ..... .

HO......

no . . .. . . . . ..

36 MonthsU

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-1 on

_ , , _. ... . . .. . ... .. . .. . .

..............

_ .. .. .. . . . . . ... ............ . .

............ ....... . . . .. . . . .

�v. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0 50 100y (m)

150 0 50 100y (m)

150

I -- 0.01 ----- 0.45 *.---.-.0.85 0.95

42 Months 48 Months

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120c

* . . *.

.........................................

.:.......

.......... ..........

................. ......

._N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C,

: :

........................... .....................-

.......... ...........

................ ........

0 100 EI 50 100y (m)

150 ioy (m)

{ -- 0.01 ----- 0.45 ... 0.85 0.95

B-29

- Y-Z Longitudinal ModelLow Bulk Perm., 3 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Liquid Saturation

-4

%- -6N

-8

-10

-12

30 Months

o'0 ... . . .. . . . .

0 ..... .....-

0 . .

N

Q 0

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

36 Months

.. .. . ...... ...- ...

........... ... . . . . . .0 50 100

y (m)15 D 50

y (m)100 150

[ -- 0.01 - ------ 0.45 . 08 09*-------. -.0.85 - ~ 0.95

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120)

42 Months

.................................

..... ... =. , ..............

........ . ....... -

.......... .... ... -....-

.. .. . . . . . . .

N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-1 20

... . . . .. ... . . . .... . . . . . . . .

.. . . . . . . . . .

L........ . .... .........

F ,........... --................

48 Months

I 50 100y (m)

150 0 50 100 1'y (m)

*O

| -- 0.01 -.-- 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

B-30


Liquid Saturation

54 Months 60 Months0 . 0

-20 . . .............. -20 .. ,

-40 _........:: - ........... _ . .. ....... ........:-40.~~~....-40.

-6 / .. \/ :=\:Ei .60 ........ w ...... . £-60 ------ .i . ....N (-ad ( We )

-80 ........ .. -80 ...

-100 ........ -100 ......... .

-120__ -120..0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

y (m) y (m)

I -- 0.01 ---- 0.45 0.85 0.95

B-31

Y-Z Longitudinal Model-Low Bulk Perm., 4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Liquid Saturation

N

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

42 Months: : I.

K........ ...... ..... :

.... .. .... .

........ ..... . .. . ...... .........

...... ......... .......

^. . . . . , , , , , . , , v , .T T T t t w w ff

U

-20

-40

%E-60N

-80

-100

-120

. . . . . ..

_.. : .......... _

.. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... .

48 Months

3 50y (m)

100 150 0 50 100y (m)

1

-- 0.01 --- 0.45 . 0.85 0.95

i

0-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

54 Months

......... S. ..............

r . .3..

D 50 100 150

k (e'A'y'(in

60 Months

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-1201C

.. . .. . . . .. ... . .. . .. . . . . .

. . ........

..... . . .

. .. .. . ......

;0

D 50 100y (m)

IE

I -- 0.01 ----- 0.45 .. 0.85 0.95

B-32


Liquid Saturation

66 Months 72 Months

N

0

-20

-40.

-60

-80.

-100 .

-120 a

-. ,

_ .......... .;

........ .....

\: :

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

........... . .

_..;..... .. . .... ......

.- . . ..- . . . . i.... . . . .....

50 100y (m)

150 D 50 100y (m)

150

[ -- 0.01 ---- 0.45 .......... 0.85 ~ 0.95

B-33

Y-Z Longitudinal ModelHigh Bulk Perm., 4 Year Heating, 2 Year Cooling

Liquid Saturation

-2

--4

E -6N

-8

-10

-12

6 Months

0.No.............. ............................

[0 ....... ........ ..........

;O......... , ::.... ...0- ~ ~ ., .

0O**10 ............... ......................

O ... . . . . ... .. ... .. ..... .. ..0.

0 50 100 15

E

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120L

12 Months

.............. . . . .. . . ; . . . . . .

........ .... ....

. . . . ..............

. .....

.

50y (m)

50 100y (m)

150

-- 0.01 --- 0.45 .. 0.85 0.95

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C

18 Months

'.....................................................

_ ; Ad~~~~~.............

........ ......... .......

........... ...... ....... ...........

.....................

N--

24 Months0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120c

f :~~. ,....................... .........

.... ... ; ......... .... . .

.. . . . . .. . ........ .. . . . .

'0D 50 100y (m)

15 D 50 100.y (m)

150

-- 0.01 -- 0.45 * 0.85 0.95

B-34


Liquid Saturation

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

30 Months

* - -.. .......... .................8;

~~~~~~~~...........

...... ..... . ...............

.......... .... ..

..... ... ......

0 50 100 150y (in)

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120L

36 Months

... ................................

~~~~~~. . ......... E'

........ ... ... ........... . . . . ....... .* ----''' ' ' I'''''

.......... ,

50 100 1y (m)

I -- 0.01 ---- 0.45 *-.-- 0.85 0.95

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120C,

42 Months

............. ...... ............... ,s

........ .... . .

........ .... ... .......

......... ........ .. .. .... ....... _

.. . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . .

E

0

-20

-41

-60

-80

-100

-120C

48 Months

t ~~~.........

. ..... ... )F ~~~~~~~..... .......

r........ . . . ....

0

50I 50 100y (m)

150 D 50 100y (m)

15

| -- 0.01 ------ 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

B-35


Liquid Saturation

54 Months0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

-120

I I......... ...... ..... i;....... _

0

-20

-40

E -60N

-80

-100

- -120

60 Months. ..........

-... .. ......

* 1 . .....' ......

, ,

500 50 100 150 0 50 100y (m)

1'y (m)

2 -- 0.01 --- 0.45 *--------.0.85 0.95

0

-20

-40

E-60N

-80

-100

-1 20

66 Months

........

r . .. . .....

.. .. . .,.. ......

,> : ~.n.. ...........^:

72 Months~~~. ... . . . . .

iI

0

*-20

-40

E.-60

-80

-100

-120-11." .. c

'''''''..~~~ ~ . . '' . ...

_ .. : ....,............... ...... S..

* '.... ..

. ....

. 1. .,_-- - - -. -. - - - - - - -.

0 * 50 100y (mn)

150 D 50 100y (m)i

150

1- -- 0.01 ..... .0.45 :---0.85 -0.95 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ._ . -

B-36

3-D X-Y-Z ModelLow Bulk Perm., 2 Years Heating, 2 Years Cooling

Temperature

NN

EN

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

I

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

6 Months

...... ... ........ ......... ................ .X

............ . . ... ...............

, ,.. . _)

N........,,_ ^ ..............

...... . .. ....... .. .. . ............ .. .... ...

N

0 :

-20:

-40

-60.

-80 .

-100

a

... ... ... .. . . . ... . . .

12 Months..........- -.............. ------

I *I 20 40 60 80 100

x (m)20 40 60 80 100

x (m)

-- 300C 960C --- 1500C...... 2250C 2800C

18 Months 24 Months

.. .. .. .. .. . . .. . ... . . .

*... ....... . . . . .. . . . ... . . . . .. . ..N

I-

N

0

-20.

-40

-60.

-80

-100

:~ :: .

..................................-

. .........

20 40 60 80 100x (m)

I 20 40 - 60 80 100x (m)

-- 30C ----- 96°C --- 1500C ........ 225C - 2800Cl

B-37


- Temperature

N

30 Months

-20.

-40 >.........

-60-

-80 ~_......

-100 .... ....

0 20 40 60 80 1Cx(m)

E.N

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100!

.. . T § . . . .. . ... . . . ... . . .

........... ...........

: . : :

. /. -

,' ,_ - *1 .s\

* _ _

. -

36 Months

I

I0. I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

- - 30°C - 500C -' - 960C . 125C - 150°C I~~ ~~~~ .I ................................

42 Montl- - - - - - - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

is - 4 Months

E

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

.. ,,.: /:

. __.

_

-0 -

.. .... ... . . . 2 ....... .. . . . . .. .. .

.. .. - . . .

- -80........ ......\ .......i l _ FJ ~~~-60.- -- ........ ... .. .. .. ....*, '. .> ./--- 1-0 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

0 80 100 0 20 40 60X (m)

1 3

8010

D 20 40 '6X (m)

-- 300C 50°C -_-- 96°C ..... 125°C - 150°C

B-38


Liquid Saturation

0

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100

6 Months

... . ,,*...............

............... .................

~~~~~~~~. . ...... . ...

0

-20

-40

EN -60

-80

-100

12 Months

.... ,... .,.....j....,.

....... .... .. . . .

.. .. ... .. . ... . .

.. .. . . . . . ........ ......... .....

0 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

0 20 40 60 80. 100x (m)

| -- 0.01 --- 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

0

-20

-40

N -60

-80

-100(

18 Months

.. .. ... . . ... .. .

.. . . . . . . .. . . . . ....... ..

N

0

-20

-60

-80

-100

24 Months

... .. .. . . .. .

.. . ...... . ... . .. .. ... .

.... . . ... .. .

. .... ... ...

r 20 40 60 80 10x ()

D 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

10

| -- 0.01 ----- 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

B-39

i~~~~~~~~~~~


Liquid Saturation

30 Months. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0

-20

-40EN -60

-80

-100)

-

.................

................ ...........................

~~~~~~~~~........ ......--@v:Or'

........ ..... .....

-S

N

30

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100C

36 Months

........ .. .. ..

............ . .................. , ..................... _

........... ... ........------- _

I 20 40 60x (m)

80 11 I 20 40 60 80 100x (m)

-- 0.01 --- 0.45 .......... 0.85 - 0.95

-2

-4

N -6

-8

-10

42 Months

'O ........ ....... ........................

10 _ ::.........._

0o ....... ........v

0 .................. ........................

0 20 40 60 80 IC

c

-2C

-4CEN -6C

-80

-10C(

48 Months

..... ~...............

. .. .... . . .. . . .

........... ... ........ ...............

" _ . .. t: 77 t'~

l0 0x (m) -

20 40 60x (m)

80 100

I -- 0.01 ------ 0.45 .......... 0.85 0.95

B-40

Appendix C: Selected Three-Dimensional Temperature Fields Interpolated from 2-DThermal-Hydrologic Calculations, and Used as Inputs to the Thermal-Mechanical

Calculations

mm -m - ----- wi- -m- - - -

30

20

10

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-I

- O

-20 I

-30 I

-40 -- a

kT;am

( kClM2= = w -Q il- - - - -. -- --- - - -I

-

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:I1OF 1 1

TEMP

R= 26.0B- 52.0C= 78.00 = 104.0

130.0F = 156.0G = 182.0i- 208.0

- 234.0J= 260.0

X= 276.1

TIME 2.000

z

Y A

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90 -

- 100

-1 10 Hl I I I I I I I I I I l I-- I I I

-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

FLgure C-i: Temperature contours on heated draft vertLcaL symmetrS pLane(through 2 years of heatLng)

m - - - - - - - - - - -- m - -

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:I1 OF 11

TEMP

R =B =C =D =

F =,G =1 -1 =

26.0 -52.078.0

104.0130.0156.0182.0208.0234.0260.0

)X= 276.1

TIME 2.000

X A I

FLgire C-2: OrthogonaL vLew aLong heated drLft vertLcaL(through 2 ears of heating)

symmetry pLane

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:1 OF 1 1

TEMP

Ft 2 6.0/ 5 2.0C~ 7 8.00= 1 04.0

1 30.0F= 1 56.06= 1 82.0

2I 208.02 234.02= 260.0

ED= 2 6.3= 2 29.7

T IME 2.00 0

x

FLgure C-3: Cut awao vLew - Lower haLf of computatLonaL domaLn(t rough 2 ears of heatLng)

- - - - - - - = - - - - - -

70

60

5 0

40

30

20

10

0

- 10

- 20

- 30

- 40

- 5 0

- 60

- 70

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:I OF

TEMP

A= 26.0B 52.0C= 78.0D = 104.0

130.0F= 156.0G= 182.011 - 208.0

= 234.0J= 260.0

9= 26.3M= 229.7

TIME 2.000

Y

z x-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 - 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

FLgure C-4: Top vLew LookLng down at horLzontaL cut-awaS(through 2 ears of heat ng)

- - m - - - - - - - - -

10

0

- 10

- 20

-30

- 40

- 50

- 60

- 70

- 80

- 9 0

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS f9CTIVE:11 OF 11

TEMP

R= 26.0B.- 52.0.C 78.0D- 104.0

130.0F= 156.0G= 182.0II 208.01 234.0J= 260.0

X- 276.1

TIME 2.000

z

X ,-50 -40 . -30 -20 - 10 0 10 20 30 40 50

FLgure C-5: Cut owaq through mLdpoLnt of tunneL(through yeors of heatLng)

-- - - - - an - - m - - - - - -

30

20

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:11 OF 11

10

0

- 10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

- 9 0

- 100

-1 10

TEMP

a=

F =

Gl ='1=11=J-=

26.052.078.0

104.0130.0156.0182.0208.0234.0260.0

K= 349-.0

, . '. .

.TIME 4.000

z/.\

| I I | | I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 a < kY-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

FLgure C-6: Temperature contours on heated drLft vertLcaL snmetry pLane(through 4 ears of heatLng)

--- m- - - -- mm--- - - - -

I [-_ I MGNIFIED BY 1.000ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:I1 OF 11

TEMP

A=B=C=D=

F= G=

I = ,

X ,

26.052.078.0104.0130.0156.0182.0208.0234.0260.0

349.0

TIME 4.000

FLgure C-7: OrthogonaL vLew aLong heated drLft vertLcaL symmetry pLane(through 4 years of heating)

- - --- - - - - - - -

MRGNIFIEO BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS CTIVE:- -- / 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OF 1 1

TEMP

Al 2 6.0.R - 52.0e 78 .0

10 4.0* 130.0

F= 1 56.0G= 1 82.0

2I 208.0I 2 231.0J= 2 6.0

ED= 2 6.4= 3 00.6'

TIME ~4. 0 00

x

F'Lure C-8: Cut awa vLew - Lower hLf of computatLonaL domaLn(t rough 4 ears f heatLng)

----- - - - - - - m

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

- 10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

MAGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS RCTIVE:1 OF 11

TEMP

R= 26.0B 52.0C= 78.00= 104.0

130.0F= 156.0G= 182.01l- 208.0I= 234.0J= 260.0

= 26.4X = 300.6

TIME 4.000

Y

z >X-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

FLgure C-9: Top vew LookLng down at horLzontaL cut-awaS(through 4 ears of heatung)

- - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -

10 I I I I I I I I I I MGNIFIED BY 1.000

ELEMENT BLOCKS ACTIVE:11 OF 11

0

10

-20 TEMPAl= 2 6.0[3-i 5 2.0

-30 .......3 _ = 7 8.0

-40 _ Z / = 3 _ F 13~~~~~~~~~~~~0 I0 0F = 1 56.0- 40 G = 1 82.050 0 f ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~11=_ 2 08.0

_1TI = 234.0J = 2 60.0

5 0 ) 3 4 9.

-60

-70

TIME 4.00 0

-80

- 9 0

z

,xXC <,-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50

FLgure C-O: Cut away through mdpoLnt(through 4 ears of heat Lng)

of tunneL

i

Appendix D: Predicted Displacement-Time Histories at Selected M[PBX Anchor Locations

HD-MPBX-7(Base Case: E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, Intact rock a;

7.OOE-03 z y neauing, z y cooling)

6.00E-03 ._/_~Arnchor4,1 lm from

coffar- --- Anchor 3,4 m

: Anchor2,2 mc5.00E-03 0 - * * * ... Anchor 1,m

-EO

e *4.OOE-03

C.-

E6.21 3.OOE-03

0.a2.OOE-03/

1."020 .. ,''''''''---

O.OOE+OOn 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

I

I .I

Time, years

Figure D-1

HD-MPBX-7(Base Case: E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb,

Intact rock a,4 years heating)1.20E-02

1.00E-02

SO

: 8.00E-03 -

C1 6.OOE-03

E0.a,:,

_ 4.OOE-03o

0.

2.O0E-03

O.OOE+OO0

-- - -Anchor 4, 15 mn fromcollar

- - - - Anchor 3,4 m

~ Anchor2,2 m

------ Anchor ,1 m

-II-

alo'

. .

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D-2

1.00E-02

9.OOE-03

8.OOE*03

7.OOE-03.c

E or6.OOE-03,E

* (0

5.OOE-03

('CE .2 4.GOE-03

x

: 3.00E-03

2.00E-03

1.GOE-03

O.OOE+00

-1.OOE-03

HD-MPBX-7(E=10 Gpa, low Kb, Intact rock a,

4 years heating)

Anchor 4, 15 m fromcoffar .

- -- - Arr-hor 3, 4 m

Anchor 2,2 m

- ..... I . ..

Archr 1,1m

,-, . /

.

I. ... .. .

0.5 1.5 2

Time, years

: 2.5 3 3.5 : 4

Figure D-3

HD-MPBX-7(E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, SHT In situ ,

4 years heating)7.OOE-03 -

6.OOE-03

c5.00E-030

E Em

E

c 0

= U

-. 00E0

1 A 4.OOE-03 -

OOEO

E .20 2 3.OOE-03-- *0

a ,

.92.OOE-03

1 .OOE-03--

O.OOE+00 0

Anchor 4,15 m fromcollar

- - - Anchor 3,4 m

- Anchor 2,2 m

..-..-. Anchor 1, m

,,,0

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D4

HD-MPBX-7(E=36.8 Gpa, high Kb, Intact rock a,

4 years heating)1.00E-02

9.00E-03

8.OO-03

.

Anchor 4, 15 m fromcoUlar

- - - Anchor 3,.4 m

- Anchor 2,2 m

-.-.-- Anchorl ma-~~~~~~~~ 0

E.

Vt!n

000- . . ..,

2.OOE-03

1.GOE-03

nsonv.vvc-vv0 0.5 1 1.5 -2 2.5 3 3.5

Tlme, years

4

Figure D-5

HD-MPBX-7, Anchor 1Comparlson Between Cases

5.OOE-03

4.50E-03 Base Case

- --- E=IOGPa

~S SHT therm. exp.

4.00E-03 ......- High Kb

o3.50E-030,I,

-Ea 3.OOE-03

12.50E-03

E S

1.0E-03

1 .OOE-03

5.00E-04

O.OOE+000 0.5

I

I * .

* 'O

*' .

I-

i I

_la. ffi I< Z Z.0 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D-6

HD-MPBX-7, Anchor 4Comparison Between Cases

1.20E102

Base Case

1.00E 02 --- E=10GPa

SHT theme. exp.

. ..... High Kb.

c 8.00E-03

E ..0,

0i i6.OOE-03

E ..

O.OOE+00. ~~~ ~~0.5 1 1.5 2-

-2.001E-03

.. I

I. I

2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D-7


Intact rock a, 4 years heating)1 .OOE-02

9.OOE-03

8.OOE-03

Anchor 4. 15 m frmcollar

- -- Anchor 3,4 m

| n Anchor 2.2 m

---- Anchorl,l m

0.

1 .OOE-03

O.OOE+000.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

*1 .OOE-03Time, years

Figure D-8

... �...


A ,,--lrs haet*nnn9.OOE-03 -- rl l~ll

8.OOE-03 Anchor4, 15mfromcoffar

. -- Anchor 3,4 m

7.OOE-03 Anchor 2,2 m

- - - .Anchorl,1 m

C 6.OOE-03_

E,

EX a 5.OOE-03

' c 4.GOE-03C -~

E 0

X. 3.OOE-03 --

2.OOE-03

1.00E-03 --

O.OOE+00 - I

0.5 1 1.5 2.

-1.OOE-03Time, years

'1:1

I .

2.5 3 3.5

Figure D-9

HD-MPBX-9(E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, SHT In situ a,

4 years heating)6.OOE-03

5.00E-03

- 4.COE-03

0

-EM X

o 2 3.00E-03

o E

-

C

E22 2.002-03

a. S

0

'S 1.00E-03

O.OOE+00

-1.00E-03

Anchor 4, 15 m fromcollar

- - -* Arhor 3,4 m

Anchor 2,2 m

--.--- Arrhor 1, m

,'

,' .0

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D- 10

HD-MPBX-9(E=36.8 Gpa, high Kb, Intact rock a,

9.00E-03 - . 4 years neating)

8.00E-03

Anchor 4, 15 m frorn ,collar

7.00E-03 - - Anchor 3,4 m

- Anchor 2, 2 m

E .OOE-O3 .. L...Anchor1,Im

_ d4.00E-03 - v ,-

0 1F

E °/

U >e 3.OOE-03

°2.0012-03 -

1.OOE-03

a O 3.OOE+OO-02 2 3I5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 35 4

-1 .OOE-03

Time, years

Figure D-I I

.. . ..


Intact rock a, 4 years heating)1.60E-02

1.40E-02

1.20E-02

01

--E CL LGE-02

Ej

- c 8.OOE-03

E.2e ,

.

?t 6.OOE-03

4.00E-03

2.00E-03

O.OOE+00

Anchor 4,15 mfrom collar

- - - - Anchor 3,4 m

Archor 2, 2 m

..- Anchorl,1 m

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Time, years

4

Figure D-12.

HD-MPBX-1 0(E=10 Gpa, low Kb, Intact rock a,


1.20E-02-

- Anchor 4,15 mfrom collar

- --- Anchor 3.4 m

Anchor 2, 2 rT

...-.. Anchorl,l m

.1

2.002-03

O.00E+000 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Time, years

4

Figure D-13

HD-MPBX-1 0(E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, SHT In situ a,


1.OOE02

0a

so

zu 8.00E-03-E XL

ME 0

0 P

_ 4.OOE.03l

U :,

U 0

I .OOE-03

E 00E 0

O.O0 " LU I~~

- ~ -Anchor 4, 15 mfrom collar

- -- Anchor 3,4 m

Anchor 2,2 m

-.-.- - Anchor 1,1 m

.

/

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Tlme, years

Figure D-14

HD-MPBX-1 0(E=36.B Gpa, high Kb, Intact rock a,

4 years heating)1.40E.02

1.20E-02

~Anchor 4, 1 5 mfrom collar --

- - - Anchor 3 4 m

~Anichor 2, 2 mn1,

- - - - Anchor1i m. #

w.

V.L.LA

-a

2.0012-03

O.OOE+000 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Tlme, yearstI

Figure D-15


Intact rock a; 2 y heating, 2 y cooling)8.00E03

7.00E-03

6.00E-03

c

a 5.OOE-030

.E

o a 4.002-03o E .:-. c

= '

3.002-03

@7 A

A. 2.002-03

> .OOE-03

0.OOE+00

-1 .OOE-03

I

/ .-. \

_, -I. . _

//1 Anchor 6

-- - -Anchor 5

Anchor 4..-...-Anchor 3

- -Anchor 2

Anchor 1

01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.0

I

0- - - -

_ _ P

2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D-16

HD-MPBX-1

.40E-02 (Base Case: E-36.8 Gpa, low Kb,

I.40E-02 Intact rock a, 4 years heating)

1 .20E.02

1.OQE-02

.2

EAnchors

c 6.OE03t) .

2.OOE-C3

nc'" '6-~~x _ ~~~-

O.COE+

5,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

1.5 ~~~~~ ~~2.5 3.5

4

-2.00Em03 yearstime, years

Figure D-17



1 .20E-02

1.OOE-02

E a-8.OOE 030

0 I

0 C

' .OOE-03E °iso C

-0

4.OOE-03CL-

2.OOE 03

O.OOE+00

-2.OOE-03

. I-.

Anchor 6- - -- Anchor 5

Anchor 4------ Anchor 3- -Anchor 2

Anchor 1

- - -…

1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Time, years

Figure D-18

... - . I . .... , -- �- -.. - --

8.OOE 03

7.OOE.03 -

6.OOE-03 j

HD.MPEBX.1(E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, SHT In situ a,

4 years heating)

I

-

.-

.I

40

1.OOE-03

--

--

--

O.OOE+Oo

-1.OOE-03Time, years

Figure D-19

HD-MPBX-1(E=36.8 Gpa, high Kb, Intact rock c,


1.00E-02

eB.OOE-030hi

, rE a.-E

-0

0 11 6.OOE-03

o E =m

2.00-

k) *-Om

C -iGIC

E .224.OOE-03

a. 0

U,0

'-2.OOE-03

O.OOE.OO

-2.0OE-03

-A cAnchor 6- - - Anchor 5

- Anchor 4..Anchor 3

- -Anchor 2

Anchor l

- - - - - - -

Tlme, years

Figure D-20

HD-MPBX-1, Anchor 6Comparison Between Cases

1.40E-02

.0

el

1.20E-02

OP K

E

A> ,a

4-

i --- -,

-I

tv

Base Case- --- E=10GPa

SHT In siltu therm. exp.. .High Kb- a

I

I%

2.00E-03

O.OOE+000 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Time, years4

Figure D-21

SDM-MPBX-2(Base Case: E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb,

intact rock a, 4 years heating)2.OOE-03

I .50E-03

1 .OOE-03

5.OOE-04c

0

~ s 5.OOE-O4

E0

C C

E .21.00E-03

._

.2.OOE-03

-2.50E-03

-3.OOE-03

-3.50E-03

1 2.5 3 3.5 4 Anchor 6- - - Anchor S

Anchor 4- Anchor 3

- -Anchor 2

Anchor 1

-== = =~ _ _ _ -_ __

Time, years

Figure D-22

* SDM-MPBX-2. . (E=10 Gpa, low Kb, Intact rock a,

4 years heating)

O.OOE+O0

.5.OOE-04

-1.00E-03

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

S

0,

E r-1.50E-03

- C 401

~ -2.OE-O301E0

3-2.50E-03E .0 - .

-3.OOE-03

-3.50E 03

-4.OOE-03

-s_,

.% . Anchor6

>,-@-- Anchor 5Anchor 4

.- --- Anchor 3- -Anchor 2

Anchor 1

. .

.,.

.I ',

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W. f-- - -ft__1%, %%ft

- ._.. %1% .

Time, years

Figure D-23

SDM-MPBX-2(E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, SHT in situ a,

4 years heating)1.OOE-03

5.OOE04

S0F

,

e 0O.OOE+OO

C) 81

-cC >a E 5.0E0_~ , C

W C

-. OOE*03

-1W.50E-03

1.5 2.5 3 3.5 4

~Anchor 6- - -- Anchor 5

Anchor 4..-.-. Anchor 3

- -Anchor 2

-~ Anchor 1

%%f- - - -- -- - - - - --

Time, years

Figure D-24

' ''- ''.. ...- . I ........ .. . . ..... '. '. .! .. I. _ _ . .. . .._ _ _.....,

SDM-MPBX-2(E=36.8 Gpa, high Kb, Intact rock a,


1.00E-03

5.OOE-04

C

0E 0

-o

TC -'

4 c

1 1-1.001 030

-a.

-1 .OE-03

-2.OOE-03

-2.50E-03

._. - I �..1. '

3 3.5 4 -AAnchor 6- - - - Anchor 5

Anchor 4

--Anchor 3- -Anchor 2

Anchoi I

Time, years

Figure D-25

SDM-MPBX-2, Anchor 1Comparison Between Cases

O.OOE+00 I1 0.5 1 1.5 2 2

-5.00E-04

0

0,

0 ~ ~ \ C

'I'\

E 1.0E*03

C*.

x

. ,2.50E

.3.00E-03 Base Case-*-E=10 GPa

.~SHT herm. exP.

... High Kb-3.50E-03

-4.OOE-03

.5 3 3.5 4

.5.

.5-.-.-

- 55.

Time, years

Figure D-26

:

SDM-MPBX-2, Anchor 6Comparison Between Cases

2.OOE-03

1.50E-03- ~ Base Case

- - - E=IOGPa

SHT therm. exp.

--High Kb

i . .

I ..

I . .

t3.

, . 0

1.5 2 2.5 3 . 3.5 4.

5.0012-04 -\ 1 .

.- .--- I-l-, -

-1.OOE-03

Time, years

Figure D-27

SDM-MPBX-2(Base Case: E=36.8 Gpa, low Kb, Intact rock a;

2 years heating, 2 years cooling)2.OOE-03

l .50E-03

1.00E-03

C 5.00E-040

EE-EG oO.OOE+O0

e

OO g 5.00E-04C> c

E .2

roH%.00E-030

C

0°:1.50E-03

-2.OOE-03

-2.50E-03

-3.00E-03

Anchor 6- -- Anchor 5

Anchor 4------ Anchor 3- -Anchor 2

Anchor I

I

. 2.5

-D

_%%Wftm __-- _ _ Jr

Time, years

Figure D-28

draft disclaimer this contractor document was prepared for

Documents