proiect spe

© All Rights Reserved

3 views

proiect spe

© All Rights Reserved

- Force convection experiment
- Internal Forced Convection Question ONLY
- IES
- Mechanical Engineering
- Homework for transport process
- MECHANICAL ENGINEERING indian engineering services SYLLABUS
- Thermal Analysis of Convection and Radiation in Finned Heat
- UPSC - IES Syllabus - Mechanical Engineering Paper I
- PR Innovation Award Laser Technology 2014
- Determining Multilayer Formation Properties From Transient Temperature and Pressure Measurements
- IES paper 1 & 2
- Low Power Two Phase Thermal Control Systems
- Numerical Investigation of Laser Drilling
- Ies Me New Syllabus
- Lec2
- Hw 5
- Ies Syllabus
- 602818
- Thermal Performance of a Phase Change Material-Based Latent Heat Thermal Storage Unit
- Analisis Termico

You are on page 1of 7

N. Bjorndalen, H.A. Belhaj, SPE, K.R. Agha and M.R. Islam, SPE, Dalhousie Unversity

Copyright 2003, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Eastern Regional/AAPG Eastern Section

Joint Meeting held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., 610 September 2003.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of

information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as

presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to

correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any

position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at

SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of

Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper

for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is

prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300

words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous

acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE,

P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract

The need for a new method of drilling oil and gas wells is

immense. Current drilling techniques used were developed at

the beginning of the last century. Many problems persist with

this method including downtime due to dull bits, the lack of

precise vertical or horizontal wells and formation fluid leakage

during drilling due to the lack of a seal around the hole. Laser

drilling is a new technology that has been proposed as a

method to eliminate the current problems while drilling and

provide a less expensive alternative to conventional methods.

Although lasers have found widespread use in many

industries, it is only recently that research in this area has been

redirected to the oil and gas industry.

A numerical model was developed and verified with

previously published experimental data. A detailed parametric

study is included and experimental design considerations are

discussed. Laser drilling has great potential to revolutionize

the oil and gas industry. Design considerations for a field

application are presented, with discussion on economical and

environmental impacts.

Introduction

Rotary drilling, developed 100 years ago, is the basic method

used to reach gas and oil formations. Although this method

has been proven to be successful over the years, technological

advances have lead to the suggestion of a more efficient way

of drilling. Laser drilling can increase penetration rate by

greater than 100 times over the conventional rotary drilling

methods1 and the problems linked to dull drill bits and the

associated downtime due to this can be eliminated as well as

wastes created from drilling mud. The potentials of lasers for

drilling have been pointed out by many2-4. The development of

downhole laser drilling machines, laser-assisted drill bits,

laser-perforation tools, and sidetrack and directional laser

drilling devices are all possible with the advancement of laser

technology5. Lasers have already been applied in the mining

for about three decades.

Due to advancements in laser technology, some

experimental work on this topic has recently been undertaken.

Graves and OBrien6 conducted an experiment to determine

the feasibility of the US Armys MIRACL (Mid Infrared

Advanced Chemical Laser) for drilling gas wells. MIRACL is

a continuous wave laser with a wavelength of 3.8 m and a

power output of 600 to 1200 kW. The laser was directly

pointed at a slab of sandstone and a 2.5 inch deep hole was

created after only 4.5 seconds of exposure. This resulted in the

removal of 5.5 pounds of rock and an equivalent rate of

penetration (ROP) of 166 ft/hr. OBrien et al3 tested various

types of cores under various conditions with the US Air

Forces Chemical Oxygen-Iodine Laser (COIL) and found

some success. Batarseh7 utilized both MIRACL and COIL and

determined the effect of stresses and saturation on the

laser efficiency.

Modeling of laser drilling, cutting and scribing has been

addressed by a number of investigators. One-dimensional

drilling models8-11 and one-dimensional analytical heat

conduction with laser energy incident on a metal surface

model12 have been examined. Blackwell13 studied high

intensity energies focused on metal and concluded that a metal

explosion below the surface occurs due to the effects of

thermal stresses. He explained this explosive material removal

by stating that the maximum temperature (before the phase

change occurs at the exposed surface) lies inside the body

because of the heat loss to the surroundings. Modest and

others14-16 presented a numerical solution to the problem and

studied the effects of thermal stresses in ceramic.

This paper addresses the thermal process involved in laser

drilling of sandstone and limestone rocks as well as aluminum

and mild steel. A numerical simulation was developed based

on the fundamental heat transfer and fluid flow phenomena

(conduction, melting and vaporization) responsible for

material removal by laser drilling process.

Mathematical Formulation

In order to develop the mathematical formulation of laser

drilling process appropriate for the laser rock interaction, the

following assumptions were made17:

on the surface of the rock. The energy flux arriving at

a particular location is independent of the distance

from the surface on which it impinges.

SPE 84844

environment are treated via an interfacial heat

transfer coefficient.

The radiation heat losses from the surface are treated

by considering the Stefan-Boltzman law.

Sandstone is assumed to be infinite in all inplane

directions. A null heat transfer condition is set up at

the lateral boundaries to the modeled domain.

Material removal is assumed to occur only by

volatilization, i.e. melt ejections are neglected.

All the thermo-physical properties are assumed to be

independent of temperature.

It is assumed that the pulse-on-time is much shorter

than the pulse-off-time and therefore all the plasma

generated will be extinguished between pulses.

The velocity of the liquid metal inside the hole is

neglected and the temperature distribution within the

liquid is assumed to be linear.

The incident laser energy is instantly converted into

heat at the target material (sandstone) and the laser

beam does not penetrate into the sandstone, i.e. the

sandstone is assumed to be opaque.

(LD) process. A laser beam is incident upon the top surface of

the target (rock), which absorbs a fraction of the incident light

energy causing material melting followed by vaporization.

The physical process taking place during the material removal

are a combination of heat transfer, thermodynamics and fluid

flow with a free surface boundary at the liquid-vapor interface

(SLV) and a moving boundary condition at the liquid-solid

interface (SLS). This kind of problem along with its moving

boundary conditions is termed as the Stefan problem.

Laser-rock interaction can be divided into three main

stages and has beed described in detail by Agha et al.17.

First Stage: Preheating. This stage can be classified as a pure

conduction stage with a convective-radiative boundary

condition at the surface. The energy equation used during this

stage is the simple heat conduction equation;

2 T 1 T 2 T

k 2 +

+

+ q Laser

r r y 2

r

T

=

t

C P

...(1)

The thermal penetration depth was evaluated by;

= t

Second Stage: Melting. During this stage, the liquid-surface

temperature is below the saturation temperature and, therefore,

the liquid-vapor-interface velocity is zero. An energy balance

at the solid-liquid interface during this stage is expressed as;

SSL

=

t

2

TS

TL SSL

K S y K L y 1 + r

h SL

..(2)

liquid-surface temperature reaches the saturation temperature.

The mathematical equations involved in this stage are more

complicated because the vaporization, melting and conduction

equations have to be solved simultaneously. The energy

balance at the liquid-vapor interface can be expressed as;

SLV

=

t

abs q Laser ,i

KL

(TSat Tm ) 1 + SSL

H Liq.

r

[h LV + C PL (TSat Tm )]

.(3)

The thickness of the liquid layer is given by;

HLiq. = SSL-SLV

Laser Energy Transfer. There are three main processes by

which lasers transfer energy into a rock; Absorption,

Reflection and Scattering. In this paper, it is assumed that the

laser source is operated in pulse mode only and, therefore the

laser power is both a function of space and time. Thus;

Where I(r) and T(t) are arbitrary functions of space and time,

respectively. The laser operating characteristics determines

these shape functions. The spatial intensity profile was

assumed to take the following Gaussian profile18;

2q 0

I(r ) =

R 2

r

2

R

were solved numerically by using the Crank-Nicholson

method in which old and new time temperature values were

employed utilizing the iterative implicit method.

Results and Discussion

Verification of the numerical model was made by comparing

of previously published experimental results for sandstone,

and limestone3 as well as aluminum and mild steel11.

Although aluminum and mild steel would not be encountered

in the reservoir, the authors feel that it is important to verify

the model under a variety of cirucumstances. Figures 2 and 3

are comparisons between simulated and experimental result of

mild steel and aluminum. The results are based on a hole

developed from one-pulse of 1.5 ms. The numerical simulated

predicts the experimental results. It does however predict a

SPE 84844

purposes, it is best to predict a smaller hole or greater energy

requirements than what would actually be required.

Figure 4 shows the comparison between the numerical and

experimental results for sandstone and limestone. The

numerical model predicts higher specific energy consumption

than the experimental results. This is most likely due to the

assumption that vaporization is the only method of removing

rock. Experimentally, at shallow depths and small exposure

times, melted rock may be forced out of the hole and thus

there would be less energy consumed to remove a unit of rock.

At greater depths, one can expect that all of the rock removal

will be due to vaporization. Figure 5 compares the lasing time

for the same drilled depths for the limestone and sandstone

samples. It is apparent that the sandstone takes more time

than the limestone to remove the same volume of rock. This

result reconfirms the results of Figure 4 since the

relationsoinship between specific energy and drilled depth is

inversely proportional. It is also interesting to note that the

model does not account for the effect of gas formation in the

hole due to vaporization. This formation would result in a

greater specific energy requirement. It is evident from the

results that gas formation is not a factor in this case. As lasing

time progresses it is expected that the specific energy

requirements would surpass the predicted ones if gas

formation is not accounted for.

The depth of the liquid layer created due to lasing is

depiced in Figures 6 and 7. It is evident that a Gaussian

profile is created during this process. Figure 6 shows the

numerical results for sandstone and limestone under 10

MW/cm2 of power. The sandstone melted layer is slightly less

than the limestone layer. Since the specific energy needed for

sandstone is greater than limestone, then the melted layer

should have a lesser depth throughout the melting time. Also,

with greater melted depth of limestone, melt ejection methods

such as waterjet in combination with lasers would accelerate

the rate of penetration more than with the sandstone sample.

As well, it is expected that the melted layer of rock around the

circumference of the hole will not have enough energy applied

to it to begin the vaporization process. In other words, there

will be a layer of rock around the hole that will never vaporize

and thus will solidify in a less porous and impermeable form.

It is also expected that some of the melted rock will be forced

into the surrounding formation. This layer will create a type

of sheath3 that has the potential to act as casing for the drilled

hole. This inturn may exclude casing used in traditional

drilling altogether, in this case, a huge cut in drilling cost

would be expected. Since the limestone has a greater melted

area, this sheath may be thicker affecting both the distance that

perforations can penetrate and should penetrate. Figure 7

illustrates the numerical predictions for sandstone and

limestone when 100 MW/cm2 of power is induced. The

results are very simililar to Figure 6. When comparing the

sandstone predictions, the depth of the melted section is very

close with the 100 MW/cm2 showing a slightly less value.

When comparing the limestone predictions, the depth of

melted layer is less for the 100 MW/cm2 results. Since the

power is greater, it can be assumed that the melted layer will

be less and vaporization will occure at a faster rate. As the

specific energy of sandstone is greater than that of limestone,

power is needed to vaporize the rock. Therefore, a greater

change in power would be needed to show a drastic change in

the melted depth.

Figure 8 compares the effect of lasing time on drilling

speed or ROP for 10 and 100 kW. As the lasing time

increases, the ROP decreases for both the 10 and 100 kW

cases. There is a greater decrease in the first 20 seconds

followed after which the ROP stabilizes somewhat. This is

especially true for the 10 kW case where the slope becomes

almost horizontal. It is expected that with an increase in time,

the 100 kW case will also show a horizontal slope. The initial

decrease in the slope is due to an increase in interaction of the

laser with the rock and and increase in the surface area of the

hole over time. With a greater interaction, more energy will

be lost to the rock and subsequently the ROP will decrease.

As time passes however, the surface area and rock interaction

becomes constant and the ROP stabilizes. Inversly, from

Figure 9 there is a greater increase in the depth of the hole

during the initial 20 seconds than there is after 20 seconds.

This is due to the previously mentioned reasons for ROP.

Increaseing the power from 10 kW to 100 kW, triples the hole

depth over 100 seconds.

The change in specific energy for increasing laser time

with different power ranges is shown in Figure 10. As the

lasing time increases, the specific energy requirements

increase. This is due to increased laser-rock interaction. As

well, from Figure 10 it is evident that as the power increased

the specific energy increases. This means that more energy is

utilized to remove one unit of rock. This correlation is very

important when trying to optimize the hole depth and mimize

the energy comsumption. The relationship shows that it is

more energy efficient and inturn less costly to use a lowerpowered laser.

Design Considerations

Two aspects of design considerations need to be addressed,

laboratory and field. Most importantly, the key to the success

of laser drilling is to determine how laboratory results can be

related to practical purposes.

Most laboratory studies

conducted to date are measured on a scale of centimeters and

seconds 3, 6, 7, 19. The challenge of petroleum engineers has

always been to develop laboratory results that are suitable for

scaling-up. For laser drilling, with an increase in lasing time,

one of the major factors that will effect the ROP is the

formation of gases in the hole. These gases may not only pose

a threat to ROP but my also be a health hazard as well.

Batarseh7 reported that gas that is formed due during lasing

has toxic potentials. Experimentally, longer lasing times need

to be examined to determine the extent of the gas formation.

Depending on this extent, technologies may have to be

developed to clean the hole of the gas, similar to the way

drilling mud is used today, and thus increase ROP. One

method that may be utilized for the elimination of this

problem is a waterjet. Longer lasing times lead to greater

lasing depths. Therefore future experimental studies should

attempt to use larger slabs of rock. Reservoir pressures and

temperatures also need to be considered. Increasing the

pressure exherted on the rock should have a decrease in the

ROP. Batarseh7 did study the effect of stresses during lasing

requirements. In this case though the stresses were not

quantified and therefore little conclusions can be made as to

the extent of the effect of reservoir pressure on lasing. A

detailed quantitative study needs to be conducted to better

understand this phenomenon. Incresing the temperuature of

the rock sample should have a decrease in ROP. Althought

the effect would most likely be slight; this area still needs to

be examined. As well, rock-fluid interaction has to be

understood. Previous studies show that saturated cores

increase the specific energy7. It was found that gases are

formed when lasing saturated cores. The amount of gas and

the composition needs to be determined. The degree to which

saturated rock will affect drilling into a reservoir has to be

determined. Most importantly, a combination of stresses,

temperatures and staturations should be studied

simulataneously. As well, the effect that laser has on the area

around the hole will have to be determined. There will be

some laser energy transferred in the form of heat to the

surrounding area. What effect this will have on the stability of

the area will have to be determined.

Implemenations of laser drilling into the field will require

a major change in the equipment that is used today.

Integration will be the key to maintaining suitable costs. Since

a sheath will be formed around the hole drilled, casing and

piping can be eliminated as well as all equipment associated

with this. Since the height of the derrick is dependant on the

length of the pipe it can greatly be reduced. The weight of the

laser will have to be supported by this equipment. Currently,

the rigs power system is used for the hoising system and the

fluid circulation system. With the implementation of drilling,

the power systems main function will be to operate the laser.

The hoisting system will still be utilized to move the laser into

position just above ground level but it is not expected that the

laser will be sent into the hole. The hoisting system will

especially be important during offshore operations since the

laser will have to be in close contact with the ocean floor.

Drilling mud will be eliminated since the laser vaporizes rock.

There will be little need for rotary systems since the drill bit

will be eliminated. Once the laser has entered the reservoir, it

most likely will vaporize the oil or gas that invades the hole,

thus blowout will no longer be a great threat. The well control

system can be modified to control the laser. A change in

specific energy requirements is a signal that the laser has

reached the reservoir. Implementation of lasers into the

drilling industry is a complex operation involving many more

factors than the ones discussed here.

Conclusions

The numerical model developed was successful in predicting

the experimental results. The numerical model was utilized to

develop predictions of specific energy, ROP, and melted layer

and this gives insight into future design factors. It is

interesting to note that drilling speed decreases over time and

inversely hole depth and specific energy increases over time.

As well, with an increase in power there is an increase in

specific energy. This must be kept in mind when designing a

laser drilling system. The numerical model presented does not

account for the vapor that will accumulate in the hole when

the hole depth becomes large. A model that predicts these

SPE 84844

field conditions.

Many design considerations must be taken into account

before laser drilling can be accomplished. Numerical

modeling laks consideration of important processes taking

place during lasing rocks. More experimental investigation is

needed to fully understand the lasing operation and to enhance

the integrity of the numerical models.

Field applicatiuon is long way to go, although studying the

role of reservoir pressures, temperatures, and fluid saturations

increases the reliability of laser drilling. As well, field

equipment must be designed to meet the changes in

drilling requirements.

Nomenclature

CP: specific heat (L2/ T2)

HLiq: thickness of liquid layer (L)

hLV: latent heat of vaporization, (M/T2L)

hSL:latent heat of melting, (M/T2L)

k: thermal conductivity (ML/ T3)

KS: thermal conductivity of solid (ML/ T3)

KL: thermal conductivity of liquid (ML/ T3)

qLaser: energy generation of laser source per unit volume

(M/LT3)

r: radial distance (L)

R: maximum radial distance (L)

SLV: thickness at liquid-vapor interface (L)

SSL: thickness at solid-liquid interface (L)

T: temperature ()

TS: temperature of solid ()

TL: temperature of liquid ()

t: time (T)

y: distance into the slab (L)

abs:absorption coefficient

: thermal diffusivity (L2/T)

: thermal penetration depth (L/T)

: density (M/L3)

TSat: saturation temperature ()

Tm: melting temperature ()

I(r): laser intensity

T(t): temperature

Acknowledgement

Funding of the research was possible through several grants

from the Federal Government of Canada and

petroleum industries.

References

1.

2.

3.

for Drilling and Completing Gas Wells. Journal of Petroleum

Technology, (Feb. 1999) pp 50-51.

Graves, R.M. and OBrien, D.G.: Targeted Literature Review:

Determining the Benefits of StarWars Laser Technology for

Drilling and Completing Natural Gas Well,. GRI-98/0163,

(July 1998)

OBrien, D.G., Graves, R.M. and OBrien, E.A.: StarWars

Laser Technology for Gas Drilling and Completions in the 21st

Century. SPE 56625, presented at the 1999 SPE Annual

Technical Conference, Houston Texas, Oct. 3-6.

SPE 84844

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

inch X 2.54

ft X 3.048

mile X 1.609344

lbm X 4.535924

Btu (mean) X 1.05587

md X 9.869233

horsepower X 7.456999

Hp-hr/yd3 X 3.511212

E+ 00 = cm

E- 01 = m

E+ 00 = km

E- 01 = kg

E+ 03 = J

E-16 = m2

E- 01 = kW

E- 03 = kJ/cm3

SLV (y,r,t)

SSL

Vapor

Heated

zone

Liquid

y

Fig 1 Physical model of Laser Drilling (LD) process

Radial Distance, m

0

50

100

150

200

D e p th , m

5.

Petroleum Research. SPE 68799, presented at the 2001 SPE

Western Regional Conference, Bakersfield, CA, March 26-30.

Gaddy, D., Moritis, G. and True, W.: OTC Papers Highlight

Technological Advances. Oil & Gas Journal, (May 18, 1998)

pp. 46-48.

Graves, R.M. and OBrien, D.G.: StarWars Laser Technology

Applied to Drilling and Completing Gas Wells. SPE 49259,

presented at the 1998 SPE Annual Technical Conference and

Exhibition, New Orleans, LA., Sept 27-30.

Batarseh, S.: Application of Laser Technology in the Oil and

Gas Industry: An Analysis of High Power Laser-Rock

Interaction and its Effect of Altering Rock Properties and

Behavior. PhD Dissertation, Colorado School of Mines, 2001,

192 pgs.

Dabby, F. W. and Paek, U.: High intensity laser induced

vaporization and explsion of solid materials. IEEE J. Quantum

Electron, 1972, 8: 106.

Yilbas, B. S.: Numerical Approach to Pulsed Laser Heating of

Semi-Infinite Aluminum Subsatnce. J. Heat and Mass

Transfer, 1996.,31: 279.

Wagner, R. E.: Laser Drilling Mechanics J. Applied Physics,

1974., 45: 4631.

Chen, C. L. and Mazumder, J.: One-Dimensional Steady State

Model for Damage by Vaporization and Liquid Expulsion due to

Laser-Material Interation J. Applied Physics, 1987, 62: 4579.

Zubair, S. M and Chaudhry, M. A.: Heat Conduction Problem

in a Semi-Infinte Solid Due to Time Dependent Laser Source J.

Heat and Mass Transfer, 1996, 39: 3067.

Blackwell, B. F.: Temerpature Profile in Semi-Infinite Body

with Exponential Sourece and Convective Boundary

Conditions. ASME J. Heat Transfer, 1990, 112: 567.

Ramanathan, S. and Modest, M. F.: Effects of Varialbe

Thermal Properties on Evaporative Cutting with a Moving CW

Laser Heat Transfer in Space Heating, 1990, HTD-135: 101.

Ramanathan, S. and Modest, M. F.: CW Laser Drilling of

Composite Cermaics Proc. Of ICALEO91, Laser Material

Processing, San Jose, CA, 1992, 74: 305.

Roy, S. and Modest, M. F.: CX Laser Machining of Hard

Ceramics Part I: Effects of 3-D Conduction, Variable

Properties and Various Laser Parameters Int. J. Heat and Mass

Transfer, 1993, 36: 3515.

Agha, K.R., Belhaj, H. A., Mustafiz, S., Bjorndalen, N. and

Islam, M.R.: Numerical Investigation of the Prospects of High

Energy Laser in Drilling Oil and Gas Wells Petroleum Science

and Technology, (in press) accepted in March, 2003.

Bauerle, D.: Laser Processing and Chemistry. 2nd edition,

Springer Publishing, 2000.

Gahan, B.C., Parker, R.A., Batarseh, S., Figueroa, H., Reed,

C.B. and Xu, Z.: Laser Drilling: Determination of Energy

Required to Remove Rock, presented at the 2001 SPE Annual

Technical Meeting and Dinner, New Orleans, LA, Sept. 30

Oct. 3.

Numerical Study

Ref. [11]

500

1000

[11]

1500

Current Study

2000

Fig. 2 Comparison of numerical and experimental studies

for Aluminum

Radial Distance, m

0

50

100

150

200

Depth, m

4.

500

1000

Numerical Study

Ref. [11]

exp. Data, Ref.

[11]

Current Study

1500

2000

Mild Steel

SPE 84844

r/R

0

50

-1

45

Numerical

20

LS2X

15

10

2.0E-10

3.0E-10

SSL (m)

25

1.0E-10

BG1

Numerical

30

LS1Y2A

35

2SS+2Y1

40

0.5

0.0E+00

4.0E-10

5.0E-10

6.0E-10

7.0E-10

8.0E-10

0

L im esto n e

S an d sto n e

at the melting

time

(start of melting)

(just before evap.

takes place)

Sandstone

Limestone

9.0E-10

consumption and that obtained experimentally17

2

MW/cm Laser Power

Drilling speed, 10 kW

1.8

1.5

-0.5

6

5

4

3

2

1.2

0.9

0.6

0.3

1

0

0

Sandstone

Limestone

seconds of lasing with limestone and 8 seconds with sandstone

20

-0.5

Depth, 10 kW

0

0.5

80

100

r/R

-1

40

60

Lasing time (seconds)

Depth, 100 kW

60

0.0E+00

50

Depth (cm)

2.0E-09

SSL (m)

4.0E-09

6.0E-09

8.0E-09

1.0E-08

(just before Evap.

takes place)

(start of melting)

40

30

20

10

0

Sandstone

Limestone

1.2E-08

Fig. 6 - Liquid layer thickness in sandstone and limestone for 10

2

MW/cm Laser Power

20

40

60

Fig 9 The effect of lasing time on depth

80

100

SPE 84844

250

Power = 50 kW/cm2

200

SE (kJ/cm3)

40

150

30

20

100

10

50

0

0

20

40

60

80

100

17

different incident laser power intensity -- for sandstone

- Force convection experimentUploaded byseharis7
- Internal Forced Convection Question ONLYUploaded byIzzudin Hussein
- IESUploaded byVenu Terdal
- Mechanical EngineeringUploaded bySachin Kalsi
- Homework for transport processUploaded byHaiqal Aziz
- MECHANICAL ENGINEERING indian engineering services SYLLABUSUploaded byArivukani Venkatasamy
- Thermal Analysis of Convection and Radiation in Finned HeatUploaded bySunil Verma
- UPSC - IES Syllabus - Mechanical Engineering Paper IUploaded byRohit Kumar
- PR Innovation Award Laser Technology 2014Uploaded byMuhammad Irsad Husein
- Determining Multilayer Formation Properties From Transient Temperature and Pressure MeasurementsUploaded byEduardoMaldonadoCruz
- IES paper 1 & 2Uploaded byRohit Jindal
- Low Power Two Phase Thermal Control SystemsUploaded byBrijesh Kumar
- Numerical Investigation of Laser DrillingUploaded bymohamadi42
- Ies Me New SyllabusUploaded byVinayDarling
- Lec2Uploaded byOmar Ezzat
- Hw 5Uploaded bysam9montgomery
- Ies SyllabusUploaded byjithinaravind007
- 602818Uploaded byJulio Humberto Díaz Rondán
- Thermal Performance of a Phase Change Material-Based Latent Heat Thermal Storage UnitUploaded byManish Rathod
- Analisis TermicoUploaded byMartín Zúñiga Contreras
- 2-Heat Conduction EquationUploaded byashvini gautam
- Determine Recharge and Discharge AreaUploaded bymuhammadfarid
- Thermal Analysis of a Fireplace Using ANSYSUploaded bySyed Meesam Ali Naqvi
- Solutions Assignment 9Uploaded bySusmita Panda
- Lec NotesUploaded byabbey
- forster_paper.pdfUploaded byavi0341
- Heat and mass transferUploaded byJanardhana
- Grade 6 Science Practice (SPK School)Uploaded byDita Listyani Pribadi SDK Banda
- CADCAM OUUploaded bySafeeruddin Khan
- Heat TransferUploaded byVenkatasairamreddy Kandula

- PAR for the Year 2011-2012Uploaded byAbhijeet Singh Kadian
- Unit-1 QBUploaded byShobha Kumar
- Nchrp_rpt_763_Evaluation of the Moisture Susceptibility of WMA TechnologiesUploaded byAyyanna Habal
- DSP Project Research PaperUploaded byHas Nain Khaan
- 5100HD Moisture in Natural GasUploaded byAnonymous J37Ljisq
- KAIZENUploaded byDeepali Mane
- 22002_10_Datasheet_14825_Toothed_belt_pulleys_T10_profile--en.pdfUploaded byAli Ali
- 01. Mandaue Galleon Trade v. AndalesUploaded byBuen G. Arq
- CON PleaUploaded byjaguarspice
- Protective Coatings for Steel ReservoirsUploaded byAnonymous HargxqR
- Disinfectant ValidationUploaded byazaidi85
- Organization DesignUploaded byPamella Guntala
- FMEAUploaded byrusitadian
- Maple Getting Started GuideUploaded byarpanmath
- Documento Final de Maestria - Laura Prada ModificadoUploaded byJohn Jairo Ortiz Martinez
- Concrete Construction Article PDF_ Guide for Pumping Lightweight Concrete.pdfUploaded byisaias
- DM III MultitestUploaded byluatkv
- canon1Uploaded byHarshita Channa
- SW274_IG_enUploaded byThi Khách
- Simpson Model 260 Volt-Ohm-MilliammeterUploaded byGleizer Ferreira
- PATOQPATOS_CHB.pptxUploaded byRegine Dela Fuente
- ZFS.pdfUploaded bygbenga
- TESTINGUploaded byPranaya Patro
- Cisco Switch Guide[1]Uploaded byJavier Percy Chumpitaz Anchiraico
- Associate Builders vs Delhi Development Authority on 25 November, 2014Uploaded bysreevarsha
- 219121.pdfUploaded byMococo Cat
- [CCNA] Cisco Commands Cheat Sheet #3Uploaded byresearcherjack
- Canoy vs. OrtizUploaded byYahiko Yamato
- adexlUploaded byPramod Reddy R
- Readme.txtUploaded byalfian