Abstract
Emplacement Engineering can be defined as that portion of a nuclear explosive project that is concerned with the emplacement of the explosive. This definition would then include virtually everything except the design and fabrication of the explosive and the post-shot-effects program. For future commercial application, the post-shot-effects program will essentially disappear. This emplacement portion of a nuclear explosive project constitutes a large fraction of the total project cost, but it has largely been overshadowed by the explosive and explosive-effects portions. As we move into commercial applications. Emplacement Engineering must receive more attention from both industry and government. To place emplacement costs in their proper relationship with total projects costs, we have performed a study of commercial underground nuclear explosive applications such as gas stimulation. Although there are many intangibles in such a study, we have been able to at least obtain some feel for the relative fractional costs of the non-explosive costs compared with the explosive costs. This study involved estimating the cost elements for applications using a single explosive at 5,000 ft, 10,000 ft, and 15,000 ft. For each depth, the cost estimates were made for a range of emplacement hole and explosive diameters. Results of these estimates for
More>>
Hill, Ernest E
[1]
- Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Livermore, CA (United States)
Citation Formats
Hill, Ernest E.
Emplacement engineering.
IAEA: N. p.,
1970.
Web.
Hill, Ernest E.
Emplacement engineering.
IAEA.
Hill, Ernest E.
1970.
"Emplacement engineering."
IAEA.
@misc{etde_20555807,
title = {Emplacement engineering}
author = {Hill, Ernest E}
abstractNote = {Emplacement Engineering can be defined as that portion of a nuclear explosive project that is concerned with the emplacement of the explosive. This definition would then include virtually everything except the design and fabrication of the explosive and the post-shot-effects program. For future commercial application, the post-shot-effects program will essentially disappear. This emplacement portion of a nuclear explosive project constitutes a large fraction of the total project cost, but it has largely been overshadowed by the explosive and explosive-effects portions. As we move into commercial applications. Emplacement Engineering must receive more attention from both industry and government. To place emplacement costs in their proper relationship with total projects costs, we have performed a study of commercial underground nuclear explosive applications such as gas stimulation. Although there are many intangibles in such a study, we have been able to at least obtain some feel for the relative fractional costs of the non-explosive costs compared with the explosive costs. This study involved estimating the cost elements for applications using a single explosive at 5,000 ft, 10,000 ft, and 15,000 ft. For each depth, the cost estimates were made for a range of emplacement hole and explosive diameters. Results of these estimates for explosive-related costs, hole-related costs, and total costs are shown for the three depths. Note that the explosive package outside diameter is assumed as 2 inches less than the hole (or casing) inside diameter for all cases. For the 5,000-ft application the explosive-related costs dominate, and of particular importance is the indicated diameter for minimum total cost which occurs at approximately a 17.5-in. hole (15.5-in. explosive). The hole-related costs are in 'the same range as the explosive-related costs for the 10,000-ft application. For this case, the minimum total cost occurs at approximately a 14-in. hole (12-in. explosive). The 15,000-ft application presents quite a different picture. Here the hole-related costs run two to three times the explosive-related costs, but the diameter of minimum total cost has only decreased to a 12.5-in. hole (10.5-in. explosive). When the total cost curves are compared, the point of minimum total cost provides a curve that appears to be asymptotic to a hole diameter of approximately 12 in. (10-in. explosive). It is also obvious that for the deeper applications, the strong dependence on hole related costs results in an almost linear dependence of total cost to hole depth. The AEC laboratories should develop a small-diameter, low cost nuclear explosive for Plowshare underground engineering applications.}
place = {IAEA}
year = {1970}
month = {May}
}
title = {Emplacement engineering}
author = {Hill, Ernest E}
abstractNote = {Emplacement Engineering can be defined as that portion of a nuclear explosive project that is concerned with the emplacement of the explosive. This definition would then include virtually everything except the design and fabrication of the explosive and the post-shot-effects program. For future commercial application, the post-shot-effects program will essentially disappear. This emplacement portion of a nuclear explosive project constitutes a large fraction of the total project cost, but it has largely been overshadowed by the explosive and explosive-effects portions. As we move into commercial applications. Emplacement Engineering must receive more attention from both industry and government. To place emplacement costs in their proper relationship with total projects costs, we have performed a study of commercial underground nuclear explosive applications such as gas stimulation. Although there are many intangibles in such a study, we have been able to at least obtain some feel for the relative fractional costs of the non-explosive costs compared with the explosive costs. This study involved estimating the cost elements for applications using a single explosive at 5,000 ft, 10,000 ft, and 15,000 ft. For each depth, the cost estimates were made for a range of emplacement hole and explosive diameters. Results of these estimates for explosive-related costs, hole-related costs, and total costs are shown for the three depths. Note that the explosive package outside diameter is assumed as 2 inches less than the hole (or casing) inside diameter for all cases. For the 5,000-ft application the explosive-related costs dominate, and of particular importance is the indicated diameter for minimum total cost which occurs at approximately a 17.5-in. hole (15.5-in. explosive). The hole-related costs are in 'the same range as the explosive-related costs for the 10,000-ft application. For this case, the minimum total cost occurs at approximately a 14-in. hole (12-in. explosive). The 15,000-ft application presents quite a different picture. Here the hole-related costs run two to three times the explosive-related costs, but the diameter of minimum total cost has only decreased to a 12.5-in. hole (10.5-in. explosive). When the total cost curves are compared, the point of minimum total cost provides a curve that appears to be asymptotic to a hole diameter of approximately 12 in. (10-in. explosive). It is also obvious that for the deeper applications, the strong dependence on hole related costs results in an almost linear dependence of total cost to hole depth. The AEC laboratories should develop a small-diameter, low cost nuclear explosive for Plowshare underground engineering applications.}
place = {IAEA}
year = {1970}
month = {May}
}