applying petroleum the pressure buildup well test procedure on thermal response test—a novel method for analyzing temperature recovery period
Clicks: 129
ID: 204007
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
129 views
16 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #447 of 526 articles by views in acs combinatorial science
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 526 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The theory of Thermal Response Testing (TRT) is a well-known part of the sizing process of the geothermal exchange system. Multiple parameters influence the accuracy of effective ground thermal conductivity measurement; like testing time, variable power, climate interferences, groundwater effect, etc. To improve the accuracy of the TRT, we introduced a procedure to additionally analyze falloff temperature decline after the power test. The method is based on a premise of analogy between TRT and petroleum well testing, since the origin of both procedures lies in the diffusivity equation with solutions for heat conduction or pressure analysis during radial flow. Applying pressure build-up test interpretation techniques to borehole heat exchanger testing, greater accuracy could be achieved since ground conductivity could be obtained from this period. Analysis was conducted on a coaxial exchanger with five different power steps, and with both direct and reverse flow regimes. Each test was set with 96 h of classical TRT, followed by 96 h of temperature decline, making for almost 2000 h of cumulative borehole testing. Results showed that the ground conductivity value could vary by as much as 25%, depending on test time, seasonal period and power fluctuations, while the thermal conductivity obtained from the falloff period provided more stable values, with only a 10% value variation.
| Reference Key |
kurevija2018energiesapplying
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Tomislav Kurevija;Kristina Strpić;Sonja Koščak-Kolin |
| Journal | acs combinatorial science |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.3390/en11020366
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.