Aligned using the sensitivity analysis of for the probable errors byAligned with the sensitivity analysis

Aligned using the sensitivity analysis of for the probable errors by
Aligned with the sensitivity analysis of for the possible errors by performing a trial-and-error method program [41,42]. On the other hand,to seek out an suitable lumped parameter that defines the wellborewellbore these values are a single order of magnitude reduced than the heat exchange impact. Furthermore, due to the unavailability of your geomechanical and geheat ochemical data, we as shown in Figure 9e. The other 3 parameters–fault thickness, exchange impact, mainly focused Ziritaxestat Metabolic Enzyme/Protease around the hydrothermal behavior of your geothermal sysmatrix thermal conductivity and also the model offers an insight with regards to the accurate system. Short-term validation of this TH matrix precise heat capacity–have approximately 1 C tem characterization, which includes operation. The and porosity the matrix along with the fault zone, variation over 100 years on the permeability porosity of distribution, fault placement and its contribution to the general flow, the wellbore effect around the all round heat exin addition towards the fault zone thermal conductivity, have no effect on the temperature transform, and fluid and rock properties. Consequently, it production for future THM or variation. Interestingly, heat flux has no effect on thebuilds a basis temperature at the surface THMC (thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical) simulations. Our expectation DMPO web regarding are because of the conductive heat flow within the reservoir and because the fault zones the fartheraway in the bottom boundary thought of for the simulation. Essential parameters in this sensitivity analysis show a monotonic impact on the production temperature behavior and they can not explain the sinusoidal temperature fluctuation of far more than 10 C in every year. To verify our assumption with regards to the climate fluctuation impact on the production temperature, we tried to estimate the wellbore heat exchange effect. We found that the wellbore heat exchange is mostly flow-rate dependent parameter and the flow rates for the production data are continual from 41 to 250 days, whereas we are able to see a fluctuation in the recorded temperature. This indicates that the cyclic variability in the production temperature cannot be supported by the wellbore heat exchange argument. Hence, essentially the most suitable cause on the periodic production temperature variability is weather fluctuation on the measuring device.Geosciences 2021, 11, 464 Geosciences 2021, 11,16 of 19 16 ofFigure Sensitivity analysis for 10 10 parameters affecting hydro-thermal processes at at Soultz-sous-For s (a) matrix Figure 11.11. Sensitivity analysis for parameters affecting thethe hydro-thermal processesSoultz-sous-For s forfor (a) matrix hydraulic conductivity, (b) heat flux in the bottom boundary, (c) matrix specific heat capacity, (d) hydraulic conductivhydraulic conductivity, (b) heat flux from the bottom boundary, (c) matrix precise heat capacity, (d) hydraulic conductivity ity of faults (right here K f, may be the fault zone hydraulic conductivity as offered in Table two), (e) porosity ofof fault zone, (f) leakage of faults (here ,0 could be the fault zone hydraulic conductivity as offered in Table two), (e) porosity fault zone, (f) leakage contribution to thethe total fluid flow, (g) matrix porosity, (h) matrix thermal conductivity,fault thickness (here is thethe contribution to total fluid flow, (g) matrix porosity, (h) matrix thermal conductivity, (i) (i) fault thickness (here F0 is fault thickness as given in Table 2), 2), and (j) thermal conductivity in the fault zone. fault thickness as given in Table and (j) thermal.