Document describing the methodology used to determine the accelerometers' three-component orientations at the first EGS Collab testbed using Continuous Active-Source Seismic Monitoring (CASSM) data and hodogram analysis. Original submission: gdr.openei.org/submissions/1166

The U.S. Department of Energy's Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) Collab project aims to improve our understanding of hydraulic stimulations in crystalline rock for enhanced geothermal energy production through execution of intensely monitored meso-scale experiments. The first experiment is being performed at the 4850 ft level of the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF), approximately 1.5 km below the surface at Lead, South Dakota. Here we report on microseismic monitoring of repeated stimulation experiments and subsequent flow tests between two boreholes in the Poorman Formation. Stimulations were performed at several locations in the designated injection borehole at flow rates from 0.1 to 5 L/min over temporal durations from minutes to hours. Microseismic monitoring was performed using a dense 3D sensor array including two cemented hydrophone strings with 12 sensors at 1.75 m spacing accompanied by 18 3-C accelerometers, deployed in 6 monitoring boreholes, completely surrounding the stimulation region. Continuous records were obtained over a two-month period using a novel dual recording system consisting of a conventional 96 channel exploration seismograph and a high-performance 64 channel digitizer sampling sensors at 4 and 100 kHz respectively. Using a standard STA/LTA triggering algorithm, we detected thousands of microseismic events with recorded energy in a frequency range generally above 3 kHz and up to 40 kHz. The locations of these events are consistent with creation of a hydraulic fracture and additional reactivation of pre-existing structures. Using manual pick refinement and double-difference relocation we are able to track the fracture growth to high precision. We estimate the times and locations of the fracture intersecting a monitoring and the production borehole using microseismic events. They are in excellent agreement with independent measurements using distributed temperature sensing, in-situ strain observations and measurements of conductivity changes. This submission includes a microearthquake catalog, raw event files, a subset of the continuous microseismic monitoring data collected during stimulations and flow test activity on 05/22/2018, 05/23/2018, 05/24/2018, 05/25/2018, 06/25/2018, 07/19/2018, 07/20/2018, 12/7/2018, 12/20/2018, and 12/21/2018 (in binary format), and a binary file interpreter to read the continuous microseismic monitoring data. A Stanford Geothermal Workshop paper is also included to describe microseismic monitoring activities at SURF during these periods.

The U.S. Department of Energy's Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) Collab project aims to improve our understanding of hydraulic stimulations in crystalline rock for enhanced geothermal energy production through execution of intensely monitored meso-scale experiments. The first experiment was performed at the 4850 ft level of the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF), approximately 1.5 km below the surface at Lead, South Dakota. The data reported here were collected by the continuous active-source seismic monitoring (CASSM) system (Ajo-Franklin et al., 2011). This system was permanently installed in the testbed and consisted of 17 piezoelectric sources that were recorded by 2-12 channel hydrophone arrays, 18 3-C accelerometers, and 4 3-C geophones at a Nyquist frequency of 24kHz. The source array was activated in a repeated sequence of shots (each source fired 16 times and stacked into resultant waveforms) for the duration of the experiment (April 25, 2018 - March 7, 2019) with few exceptions. Please see the attached documents describing the source / receiver geometry. The data are available in both seg2 (.dat extension) and segy (.sgy extension) format. Each segy file contains multiple seg2 files.

This dataset contains continuous seismic waveform data recorded during stimulation and thermal circulation tests for the Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) Collab Experiment #2, conducted from February to September 2022 at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in Lead, South Dakota. This experiment aimed to study and validate models of geothermal systems by injecting high-pressure fluids into rock formations 1200-1500 meters below the surface, inducing microseismic events. The seismic monitoring system included 16 three-component accelerometers and a 24-channel hydrophone array, installed in boreholes surrounding the test area. Data were recorded at high sampling rates using a continuous waveform recording system to monitor seismic activity in real time. The dataset contains the raw data stored in binary format, with files named based on timestamps, and includes calibration certificates for some sensors to facilitate corrections to real units. Users are strongly advised to consult the accompanying detailed report, which outlines the experimental setup, sensor specifications, installation procedures, and data processing methods. The report also describes important nuances, such as the hardware filters on hydrophones, sensor calibration details, and the naming conventions for the recorded data. Proper use of this dataset may require familiarity with seismic data analysis tools, such as the Obspy Python package, and an understanding of the SEED naming conventions used for channel identification.

As part of the geophysical characterization suite for the first EGS Collab tesbed, here are the baseline cross-well seismic data and resultant models. The campaign seismic data have been organized, concatenated with geometry and compressional (P-) & and shear (S-) wave picks, and submitted as SGY files. P-wave data were collected and analyzed in both 2D and 3D, while S-wave data were collected and analyzed in 2D only. Inversion models are provided as point volumes; the volumes have been culled to include only the points within source/receiver array coverage. The full models space volumes are also included, if relevant. An AGU 2018 poster by Linneman et al. is included that provides visualizations/descriptions of the cross-well seismic characterization method, elastic moduli calculations, and images of model inversion results.

As part of the geophysical characterization suite for the first EGS Collab tesbed, here are the baseline cross-well seismic data and resultant models. The campaign seismic data have been organized, concatenated with geometry and compressional (P-) & and shear (S-) wave picks, and submitted as SGY files. P-wave data were collected and analyzed in both 2D and 3D, while S-wave data were collected and analyzed in 2D only. Inversion models are provided as point volumes; the volumes have been culled to include only the points within source/receiver array coverage. The full models space volumes are also included, if relevant. An AGU 2018 poster by Linneman et al. is included that provides visualizations/descriptions of the cross-well seismic characterization method, elastic moduli calculations, and images of model inversion results.

The dataset contains continuous active-source seismic monitoring (CASSM) data collected during EGS Collab Experiment 2, conducted from February to September 2022 at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in Lead, South Dakota. This experiment aimed to investigate enhanced geothermal systems through high-pressure fluid injections at depths of 1200-1500 meters. The seismic monitoring system included 16 three-component piezoelectric accelerometers and 24 hydrophones installed in boreholes around the injection zones, recording signals from piezoelectric seismic sources. Data were acquired using both continuous and triggered recording systems, with sampling rates of up to 100 kHz. The raw data are organized by timestamps and stored in .dat format, with accompanying log files. Calibration certificates for selected accelerometers are provided to aid in correcting sensor responses, though users are advised to consider possible effects of enclosures and installation on sensor performance. Users are strongly advised to consult the accompanying report, which outlines the experimental setup, data acquisition, sensor specifications, and recording systems.

The EGS Collab Project performed a series of tests to increase the understanding the response of crystalline rock mass to stimulations and fluid circulation to efficiently implement enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) technologies. The EGS Collab team created two underground testbeds at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in Lead SD at a depth of approximately 1.5 km (4850 level) and 1.25 km (4100 level) to examine hydraulic fracturing and hydraulic shearing, respectively. Experiment 2 was designed to examine hydraulic shearing and fluid flow in testbed 2 in amphibolite under a controlled set of stress and fracture conditions. This document summarizes the general geology, natural fractures, and conceptual model(s) of stimulated fracture networks in the testbed 2. The dataset package included here are input and output products associated with Earth Models for the EGS Collab Testbed 2. The earth model datasets are included in the whole package (project) in Leapfrog file format. Also, datasets are given in primary input file format (csv).

The EGS Collab project is developing ~10-20 m-scale field sites where fracture stimulation and flow models can be validated against controlled, small-scale, in-situ experiments. The first multi-well experimental site was established at the 4850 level in the Homestake Mine in Lead, South Dakota, where hydraulic fractures were created at an injection well drilled sub-horizontal from the drift. This file contains the second set of tracer data (also include the data uploaded previously, https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/1128) for the EGS Collab testbed. The tracer tests were conducted during October 2018 - November 2019. Injected tracers include DNA, C-dots (fluorescein nano particles), fluorescein, rhodamine-b, sodium chloride, lithium bromide and cesium iodine. The tracers have been detected in three flowing wells located about 7.5 to 9 meters away from the injection interval. The tracer breakthrough curves from these locations have been adjusted to account for the residence time in the injection and production tubing. The details about the tracer test can be found in Background and Methods of Tracer Tests (Mattson et al. (2019,a,b)) (also included in this package). References Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Plummer, M.A., Hawkins, A., Zhang, Y. and the EGS Collab Team 2019a. Preliminary Collab fracture characterization results from flow and tracer testing efforts. In Proceedings 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, edited, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Hawkins, A., Burghardt, J., Ingraham, M., Plummer, M., and the EGS Collab Team, 2019b. Fracture tracer injection response to pressure perturbations at an injection well. GRC Transactions, Vol. 43, 2019. Neupane, Ghanashyam, Earl Mattson, Adam Hawkins, Mitchell Plummer, and Yuran Zhang. EGS Collab Testbed 1: Tracer data sets. No. 1128. DOE Geothermal Data Repository; Idaho National Laboratory, 2019.

The EGS Collab project is developing ~10-20 m-scale field sites where fracture stimulation and flow models can be validated against controlled, small-scale, in-situ experiments. The first multi-well experimental site was established at the 4850 level in the Homestake Mine in Lead, South Dakota, where hydraulic fractures were created at an injection well drilled sub-horizontal from the drift. This file contains the second set of tracer data (also include the data uploaded previously, https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/1128) for the EGS Collab testbed. The tracer tests were conducted during October 2018 - November 2019. Injected tracers include DNA, C-dots (fluorescein nano particles), fluorescein, rhodamine-b, sodium chloride, lithium bromide and cesium iodine. The tracers have been detected in three flowing wells located about 7.5 to 9 meters away from the injection interval. The tracer breakthrough curves from these locations have been adjusted to account for the residence time in the injection and production tubing. The details about the tracer test can be found in Background and Methods of Tracer Tests (Mattson et al. (2019,a,b)) (also included in this package). References Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Plummer, M.A., Hawkins, A., Zhang, Y. and the EGS Collab Team 2019a. Preliminary Collab fracture characterization results from flow and tracer testing efforts. In Proceedings 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, edited, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Hawkins, A., Burghardt, J., Ingraham, M., Plummer, M., and the EGS Collab Team, 2019b. Fracture tracer injection response to pressure perturbations at an injection well. GRC Transactions, Vol. 43, 2019. Neupane, Ghanashyam, Earl Mattson, Adam Hawkins, Mitchell Plummer, and Yuran Zhang. EGS Collab Testbed 1: Tracer data sets. No. 1128. DOE Geothermal Data Repository; Idaho National Laboratory, 2019.