Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Effect of pillar width on the stability of the salt cavern field for energy storage Cover

Effect of pillar width on the stability of the salt cavern field for energy storage

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Volume 46 (2024): Issue 3 (September 2024)
By: Katarzyna Cyran and  Michal Kowalski  
Open Access
|Jun 2024

Figures & Tables

Figure 1:

Shape and dimensions of caverns used in numerical simulations.
Shape and dimensions of caverns used in numerical simulations.

Figure 2:

The layout of the cavern field:1, 2, 3 – ring number, pillar width in variant 1 – 80.0 m, variant 2 – 160.0 m, and variant 3 – 240.0 m.
The layout of the cavern field:1, 2, 3 – ring number, pillar width in variant 1 – 80.0 m, variant 2 – 160.0 m, and variant 3 – 240.0 m.

Figure 3:

The numerical model of the cavern field based on the geological structure of the Mechelinki salt deposit.
The numerical model of the cavern field based on the geological structure of the Mechelinki salt deposit.

Figure 4:

Total displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of total displacements were marked by the purple circle.
Total displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of total displacements were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 5:

Vertical displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of vertical displacements were marked by the purple circle.
Vertical displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of vertical displacements were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 6:

Horizontal displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of horizontal displacements were marked by the purple circle.
Horizontal displacements in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of horizontal displacements were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 7:

Von Mises stress in the pillars and contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of von Mises stress were marked by purple circle.
Von Mises stress in the pillars and contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The largest values of von Mises stress were marked by purple circle.

Figure 8:

Von Mises stress in the pillars and contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths at the end and beginning of the last withdrawal period, a cross-section through ring no. 3. The largest values of von Mises stress were marked by the purple circle.
Von Mises stress in the pillars and contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths at the end and beginning of the last withdrawal period, a cross-section through ring no. 3. The largest values of von Mises stress were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 9:

SSR in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The lowest values of SSR were marked by the purple circle.
SSR in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the end of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The lowest values of SSR were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 10:

SF in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the beginning of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The lowers values of SF were marked by the purple circle.
SF in the pillars and the contour zone around the salt caverns for different pillar widths and cavern fields at the beginning of the last withdrawal period. The variants of cavern layouts are presented in rows, while the variants of pillar width are presented in columns. The lowers values of SF were marked by the purple circle.

Figure 11:

Convergence in the cavern fields for different pillar widths (D1, D2, D3) at the end of the last withdrawal.
Convergence in the cavern fields for different pillar widths (D1, D2, D3) at the end of the last withdrawal.

Mechanical parameters applied in the geomechanical analysis_

ParametersAnhydriteRock SaltRock MassSoil
Bulk density (kg/m3)2,4002,4002,4002,000
Young's modulus (MPa)12,0005,00010,000100
Poisson's ratio (−)0.200.450.250.25
Cohesion (kPa)4,00010,9905,0001
Internal friction angle (°)3536.44025
Tensile strength (kPa)1,0002,0002,0001
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2024-0009 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 147 - 163
Submitted on: Oct 31, 2023
Accepted on: May 15, 2024
Published on: Jun 20, 2024
Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
salt caverns for energy storage,
efficient pillar width,
rational planning of cavern field,
stability of cavern field,
safety of storage operation
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Composites,
Porous materials,
Physics,
Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2024 Katarzyna Cyran, Michal Kowalski, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 46 (2024): Issue 3 (September 2024)Next article