Search Documents

By D. F. Hewett

CONTENTS PAGE Introduction 1 Geologic features of eastern Oregon 2 Geology of the Sumpter quadrangle 2 Rocks older than the ore deposits 3 Rocks younger than the ore deposits 8 Lodes of the Sumpter quadrangle 8 Areal distribution 8 Geologic distribution 9 Major features of the veins 9 Mineralogy and texture of the veins 13 Ore deposits zonally disposed around the Bald Mountain batholith . . . . 13 Summary of mineralogy and texture 32 Zonal relations 33 Ore deposits zonally disposed around Greenhorn Mountain batholith . . . 36 Zonal relations 37 Relation of textural features to zonal arrangement of veins 37 Summary of zonal relations 38 Comparison with similar districts 39 Outlook for the district 40 INTRODUCTION IN an earlier report on the Sumpter quadrangle1 it was briefly stated that the quartz lodes of that region might be separated into several groups or belts on the basis of the kind and abundance of the minerals of which they are composed, and that these belts were disposed as areal zones around the principal intrusive mass of the region. When the opportunity to revisit the region was offered in 1929, as a result of a cooperative agreement between the State Mining Board of Oregon and the United States Geological Survey, it seemed advisable to pay particular attention to this feature of the lodes, in the hope that if the idea of zonal relations was confirmed it might serve as a guide in exploitation.

Jan 1, 1931

By R. N. Edmondson, L. Mair, M. Tenenbaum

It is the policy of The Metallurgical Society to provide, in the TRANSACTIONS OF THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY OF AIME, a prompt and accurate medium for publication of reports of significant new research in both the scientific and engineering aspects of metallurgy. Papers submitted to the Society are judged by competent reviewers according to established criteria for technical merit, accuracy, originality, and presentation. STAFF: Editor, Dr. Gerhord Derge; Editorial Assistant, M. A. Redmyrski; Staff Coordinator, James J. Burke. THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: W. R. Hibbard, Jr., President; J. C. Kinnear, Jr., Past-President; John Chipmon, Vice President; T. D. Jones, Treosurer; R. W. Shearman, Secretary. PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE OF THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: A. w. Thornton, Chairman; Dennis Carney, John Chipman, J. C. Fulton I. H. Hollomon H. H. Kellogg, A. E. Lee, R. Maddin, J. D. Sullivan, and D. Swan. Review and selection of manuscripts is under the supenision of the following Publications Committees: Extractive Metallurgy Division: T. 0. King Chairman; S. J. Dickenson, R. P. Hermsdorf R. Schuhmann. Jr.. and P. T. Stroup. Institute of Metals Division: Robert Maddin, Chairman F. Lincoln Vogel Jr., Vice-chairman, W. A. Baikofen, R. W. Boliuffi J. H. Bechtold M. B. Beyer. R S. Busk, C. G. Gaetzel, Paul Gordon C. D. Groham, Jr., Robert F. Hehe-mann,' R. I. Joffee, F. c. Joumot Jr lrving R. Kramer A. J. Lena Harold Morglin, C. J. McHargue, Russell A: Meussner, J. B. Newkirk H. W. Paxton, G. E. Pellissier, I. S, Servi, Alon U. Seybolt, A. J. Shaler, and Jack Washburn. Iron and Steel Division: J. C. Fulton, Chairman; T. B King, F. C. Langenberg, W. 0.. Philbrook, and T. 0. Winkler. Published bimonthly by the American Institute of Mining Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers Inc., 29 West 39th Street, New York 18, N. Y. Telephon: pEnnsvlvanio 6-9220. Subscription 522 Per year for non-AIME members in United States and North South and Central America; $25 foreign;, $5 for AIME members. Single copies, 54.00, single copies foreign, $5.00. The AIME is not responsible for any statement made or opinion expressed In its publications . . . Copyright 1958 by the American lnstltute of Mining Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers Inc. . . . Registered cable address AIME New York , . . lndexed in Engineering Index Industrial Arts Index and Chemical Abstrats . . . Application for second class mail privileges ii pending at New York, N. Y. Volume 212, Number 4.

Jan 1, 1959

By F. S. Young

Previous laboratory and field experimentation has demonstrated the effect of several variables on drilling rate.1-5 These results have been incorporated into optimization theories6-" for the purpose of reducing drilling cost. Minimum-cost drilling theories rely on a combination of historical data and empirical prediction techniques for selecting optimum bit weight and rotary speed. Past solutions have required extensive use of computing equipment because of both the complexity of the mathematical formulations and the large number of parameters involved. Field attempts to apply these computed results have frequently failed because of the uncertainty of input data requirements. Humble has developed an on-site computer system to control bit weight and rotary speed and thereby implement the concepts of minimum-cost drilling. This system can (1) perform short interval drilling rate tests for formation evaluation, (2) use the results of these tests as input information to solve minimum-cost drilling formulas, and (3) control bit weight and rotary speed in accordance with these computed solutions. The purpose of this paper is to describe the computer control system and present results of initial field testing. Theoretical Considerations Minimum-cost drilling (MCD) requires a quantitative evaluation of the variables involved. Several forms of a basic mathematical model have been sug-gested.'?,' "he relationships reported here form the basis for the solution programmed in this work. Four equations are used, expressing drilling rate, bit bearing wear, bit tooth wear, and cost. A solution for minimum-cost drilling assuming constant bit weight and rotary speed over the entire bit life has been programmed for use in computing MCD schedules. This solution is subject to certain limiting assumptions such as those discussed by Graham et a1.I2: 1. Drilling cost is the summation of bit cost, rotating cost, connection cost and hoisting cost. 2. Diamond bits are excluded. 3. Bit life is limited by either bearing failure or tooth wear, or by a combination of operational factors that make it cheaper to pull an incompletely consumed bit. 4. Circulating hydraulics are adequate and do not limit drilling rate. 5. Bit weight considerations exclude hole deviation. 6. Drilling rate is a function of only bit weight, rotary speed, and degree of tooth dullness; that is, the effects of pressure, lithology, fluid properties hydraulics and drill string dynamics are ignored. In equation form, the four MCD expressions are as follows:

Jan 1, 1970

By A. B. Cook, C. J. Walker, G. B. Spencer

Although water will displace oil from a petroleum reservoir to a greater extent than gas will, there are some reservoirs in which gas rather than water should be used for pressure maintenance. This is indicated by the high-percentage oil recovery in the case history reports on the Pickton field1 in East Texas and the Raleigh field2 in Mississippi. In gas cycling, total oil recovery includes vaporized products from the immobile oil in addition to oil produced by displacement. If a large part of the immobile oil is vaporized, total oil recovery may be higher than that obtainable from pressure maintenance by water injection. However, the amount of immobile oil vaporized may range from almost 0 to 100 percent, and no simple and reliable method has been presented in the literature for calculating oil vaporization. Development of such a method was the purpose of this study. Several papers concerning the calculation of oil vaporization have been published,3 6 and each is based on the concept dealing with K values — equilibrium constants for the various components in reservoir oils. (K for a component in a system of vapor and liquid in equilibrium is the mole fraction in the vapor phase divided by the mole fraction in the liquid phase.) This appears to be the most logical approach. Yet, the problem is too great for a perfect solution, even with modem laboratories to analyze oils and high-speed digital computers to perform calculations; the number of components in reservoir oils is too large. Because of their complexity no two reservoir oils are exactly alike. Also, K values change not only with variations in pressure and temperature but also with composition of the reservoir oil. In addition, during gas cycling, the lighter hydrocarbons tend to vaporize first. Thus, the reservoir oil becomes more dense and less volatile as gas cycling continues. Furthermore, the greatest amount of oil vaporization occurs near the injection well. Therefore, a simplified method is required for calculating oil vaporization because a rigorous method is not practical. The present methods of calculating vaporization generally require knowledge of the reservoir oil composition in which the mole fractions of the lighter components through hexanes are given; the remaining oil is described as C, + (heptanes and others of greater molecular weights). Assigning one K value for the C,+ system provides the simplest solution, but this incorrectly assumes that K for C, + does not change as gas cycling continues. This assumption can cause large errors because the K value may become less than a thousandth of the original after a large amount of oil vaporization. Another way to solve the problem is to determine changing K values for C, + according to how much of the C, + has been vaporized. To determine these values a sample of the reservoir oil is injected into a pressure-volume cell, and dry gas is batched in and out of the cell. Appropriate measurements and tests are made to determine K

Jan 1, 1970