IADC/SPE 27452

Effects of New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment

Elastomers
R.P. Badrak, Hydril Co.
lADe Member
Copyright 1994, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1994 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Dallas, Texas, 15-18 February 1994.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/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 or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The
material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the IADC or SPE, their officers, or members. Papers presented at IADC/SPE meetings are subject to pUblication
review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should
contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A. Telex, 163245 SPEUT.

ABSTRACT

drilling fluids and compatible elastomers.

Environmentally safe drilling fluids have been the

subject of considerable interest from governments,
operators, oil companies and drilling fluid
manufacturers. The use of these drilling fluids has
been increasing, this has been especially true for
offshore drilling operations.
Drilling fluids can chemically alter the properties of
elastomers used in drilling equipment, severely
affecting life and function. The products affected
include blowout preventers (BOPs), pulsation
dampeners, downhole mud motors and drilling bits.
This study centers on the effects of selected
environmentally safe drilling fluids on BOP and
pulsation dampener elastomers.

INTRODUCTION
Drilling Fluids

Environmental concerns are an important factor in

petroleum drilling and production operations.
Environmental regulations imposed by governmental
agencies in the United States and the oil producing
countries in the North Sea region have been the cause
of change in the use and formulation of oil base
muds.

The properties of these elastomers are presented

before and after drilling fluid exposure. The property
changes were evaluated with respect to equipment
function and performance and exposure time. A wide
variation was found in property changes which were
dependent upon elastomer and drilling fluid
composition.

Oil base muds have advantages over water based

drilling fluids including increased bore stability and
rate of penetration (Rap), reduced gas hydration and
higher temperature stability. Unfortunately, oil based
muds are known for their negative environmental
impact. Drilling operations result in waste material
such as cuttings which carry with them the drilling
fluids which are used in the drilling operation. It has
been reported that about 90 % of all oil discharged
offshore has been due to oil base mud and cuttings
from using oil based mud. 2

The performance of elastomers in drilling fluids is

strongly dependent upon drilling fluid chemistry,
operating temperature and the type of elastomer
chosen for service.
Caution and testing were
recommended when selecting environmentally safe

For offshore operations, the advantages of the oil

base drilling muds have caused operators to either
barge cuttings back to shore, grind and inject mud
cuttings or develop more environmentally safe drilling
fluids. These fluids have been better water based

209

Effects' of New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment Elastomers

mud systems, synthetic oil based systems and mineral

oil based systems with lower aromatic hydrocarbon
content.
The new environmentally acceptable synthetic oil
drilling fluids have been classified according to the
chemical structure; the three classes which have been
reported to have extensive field experience are esters,
ethers and polyalphaolefins. 3
Elastomers
Oil tool elastomers for drilling operations are tailored
for oil base or water based drilling fluids. Within
these categories, the level of performance due to
mechanical properties is the primary concern of
drilling equipment suppliers.
Elastomers are
developed and selected for mechanical performance
with environmental interactions secondary.
The emergence of synthetic drilling fluids has caused
tool manufacturers and operators to examine the
effect of drilling fluids on their equipment. 4,5
Effect Upon Oil Tools
Premature field failures of down hole motors which
were attributed to the new synthetic oil drilling fluids
have been reported. 5
Hydril started testing the effects of some of the newer
generation drilling fluids in 1992 at the request of one
of the North Sea operators. One of the initial fluids
examined, an ester based drilling fluid, resulted in
property changes that would affect the successful use
of our oil tool products at the design limits. This
alarmed us sufficiently that we embarked on a study
of commercially available synthetic oil drilling fluids.
This publication and presentation is the result of these
initial investigations.
EXPERIMENTAL

Test Fluids

IADC/SPE 27452

selected on the basis of being commercially available

and representing a wide variety of base compositions.
All test fluids were tested as mixed drilling muds;
the effect of exposure to carrier fluids alone is not
reported in this study.
Of the nine test fluids tested, three were based upon
esters. One fluid was tested from each of the
following base compositions: ether base, low aromatic
content mineral oil, polyalphaolefin, terpene and one
drilling fluid identified as being "synthetic oil" only
were tested. A #2 diesel fuel oil was tested.
The fluid samples were obtained from five drilling
mud manufacturers (Anchor Drilling Fluids, Baroid,
International Drilling Fluids, MI Drilling Fluids, and
Milpark Drilling Fluids) and two operators.
Elastomers Tested
Five different elastomers are reported here. These
elastomers were selected because of the different
degrees of resistance to oil base drilling fluids,
varying product applications and different elastomer
classifications.
All elastomer samples were cut from cured sheet and
obtained from Hydril Rubber Operations. The
elastomer compounds tested had been known to
exhibit hardness changes in diesel fuel ranging from
a slight increase in Shore A hardness to a decrease of
15 Shore A hardness points.
Four of the five elastomer compounds had
applications in BOPs, the remaining compound was
used for pulsation dampener bladders. One of the
compounds was an annular BOP compound and three
had varying applications in ram BOPs.
One each of the following elastomers based upon
acrylonitrile compounds were tested: nitrile (NBR),
carboxylated nitrile (XNBR), hydrogenated nitrile
(HNBR) , and hydrogenated carboxylated nitrile
(HXNBR). One epichlorohydrin (BCO) which is a
chlorinated elastomer was tested.

The drilling fluids tested and reported herein were

210

IADC/SPE '27452 .

R.P. Badrak

Test Procedure

epichlorohydrin compound.
applications are identified below:

Standard ASTM tensile specimens were used for the

immersion tests. The tensile specimens measured
approximately 4.5" x 1" x 0.1" with a 1" gage
section.

The

compound

NBR = Annular BOP Compound

HNBR = Pulsation Dampener Compound
XNBR = Ram BOP Compound
XHNBR = Ram BOP Compound
ECO = Ram BOP Compound

Stainless steel reaction bombs with a 350cc internal

volume were used in conjunction with a 15 liter
constant temperature water bath. The reaction bombs
utilized threaded stainless steel end caps with virgin
TeflonQD seals.

Hardness Measurements
The hardness measurements taken before and after
exposure are presented in Table 1.

The initial elastomer mass per unit volume in the test

cells were about 0.1 grams/cc. The samples were
identified by cell number and a series of notches cut
into the specimens. Each cell was loaded with known
test specimens and the drilling fluid.

The nitrile rubbers exhibited a wide variation in

response to test fluid exposure; the hardness change
varied from no change to a drop of 26 Shore A
points. The epichlorohydrin varied from an increase
of 8 Shore A in test fluid "F" to a decrease of 12
Shore A in test fluid "H". The changes in hardness
are presented in Figure 1.

The test cell was set at 185 OF + 5OF and this range
was maintained throughout the entire test program.
Unless otherwise specified, the test period was
approximately 1 week. The specimens were weighed,
dimensionally measured and hardness tested (Shore
A) initially and after known time periods in the test
cells. These measurements were made in the 10 - 20
minute range after removal from the test cell.

Weight (Mass) Measurements

The weight measurements of the tensile specimens
taken initially and after about 1 week exposure are
presented in Table 2.

The tensile specimens were tested in accordance

ASTM D412. Post test tensile measurements were
made within two hours of removal from the test
environment.

Nitrile rubbers were found to generally increase in

mass. However, there were instances where the NBR
compound decreased mass. The mass change in the
epichlorohydrin compound was harder to predict in
that both increases and decreases were observed.
Figure 2 contains the mass changes after exposure to
the test fluids.

RESULTS
The eight drilling fluids are labelled "A" through "H"
in the data presented herein. The comparison #2
diesel fuel oil is listed as "diesel" and when base
room temperature properties prior to test fluid
exposure are listed, the label "none" applies.

Length and Volume Measurements

The indicated property changes (as a function of

drilling fluid) are represented in each of the Tables
and Figures for four nitrile compounds and one

211

The length measurements of the tensile specimens

taken initially and after about 1 week exposure to the
test environment are presented in Table 3.
Measurements in the thickness and width were found
to change proportionately; for example a length of
4.5" which swells 10% was also found to swell in
width about 10%. The volume swells were calculated

Effects' of New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment Elastomers

on the basis of uniform swelling (on a percentage

basis) in all directions.
The changes in dimensions/volume paralleled the
trends noted earlier for the weight measurement
results. These volume changes are presented in
Figure 3.

Tensile Properties
The tensile strengths initially and after immersion in
each of the test fluids are presented in Table 4. The
changes in tensile strength after immersion in the nine
test fluids are presented in Figure 4.
The tensile elongations of the five elastomeric
compounds before and after exposure to the drilling
fluids are presented in Table 5 and changes in the
tensile elongations are presented in Figure 5.

IADC/SPE 27452

properties occurred beyond the 200 - 300 hour

immersion periods. These conditions make life and
use prediction extremely difficult.

Elastomer Properties In Various Drilling Fluids

The property changes with respect to drilling fluid
test environment were varied. Even within the same
type of base fluid, esters for example, a wide
variation of property changes were measured.
Three different ester based drilling muds were
examined, each resulted in a different degree of
elastomer degradation. The effect on the oil tool
elastomers tested ranged from severe property
degradation to very slight property changes.

Comparison of Diesel Fuel Oil #2 With Other

Drilling Fluids
The hardness, volume and mass changes resulting
from exposure to the diesel at 185F were slightly
greater than most drilling fluids examined. The mass
and volume generally increased in the 2 % - 30 %
range.

DISCUSSION
Effect of Immersion Time
Measurements of property changes with respect to
immersion time revealed trends that were pertinent to
determining the performance of elastomers in drilling
fluids. In the majority of drilling fluid and elastomer
combinations reported in this study, the properties
changed over a short period of time (within the first
24 - 72 hours) and then stabiized with very little
additional change.
Examples of these property
changes as a function of time are presented in Figures
6 and 7 for hardness and volume changes
respectively.
The property stabilization within short time cycles
indicated that whatever reaction or interaction with
the environment was complete. If short term
property changes are acceptable, then longer term
exposure should also be acceptable.

The diesel physical property changes were similar to

the ester based drilling fluids examined. The decrease
in tensile strength (of nitriles) was found to be in the
12 % - 25 % range after immersion in the diesel fuel
oil; this compares to typical decreases of 3 % to 50 %
in other drilling fluids.

Differences Between Elastomer Compounds

The property change variations between the nitrile
rubbers were as significant as the changes that were
due to variations as a result of specific test fluid. For
example, the percent change in tensile elongation for
the four nitriles varied from approximately +40% to
-50% in diesel whereas the nitrile compound
(designated "NBR") varied from about 10% in test
fluid A" to about 35 % in test fluid C. The decrease
in nitrile hardness ranged from about 3 Shore A
points to about 15 Shore points A in diesel whereas
the nitrile compound decreased from 2 Shore A points
II

There were instances with some drilling fluid and

elastomer combinations where a continued change in

212

IADC/SPE 27452

R.P. Badrak

in test fluids A and B to about 25 Shore A points in

test fluid H. The relative change due to specific
rubber compound was less pronounced with respect to
volume and tensile strength changes when compared
to the variations due to test fluid.
The epichlorohydrin compound resulted in property
changes that were often very different from the
recorded nitrile property changes. For example, the
epichlorohydrin frequently increased hardness after
exposure to the test fluid whereas all nitrile
compounds remained either unchanged or decreased
hardness. The epichlorohydrin compound exhibited
volume swells that were generally less than the
nitrile. The epichlorohydrin compound also typically
exhibited large increases in tensile strengths and the
greatest decreases in tensile elongation (see Figures 3
and 4 respectively).
The tensile elongation decreased after exposure to all
of the test fluids with the exception of the
hydrogenated carboxylated nitrile compound
(designated XHNBR) which exhibited increases in
tensile elongation. The tensile elongation decreases
associated with the diesel fuel oil were less than most
of the other fluids examined. The same trend was
detected for increases in tensile elongation in the
epichlorohydrin compound. The percent changes in %
elongation with respect to drilling fluid and elastomer
compound are presented in Figure 4.

Most rubber applications can tolerate at least a

+ 20 % effect on tensile strength, a hardness drop of
10 Shore A points and a 20 % volume swell. On this
basis, only one of the drilling fluids tested presented
a clear problem with respect to seal performance.
One drilling fluid and the diesel fuel oil requires
some caution in application.
The elastomers tested exhibited a wide range of
response to the various drilling fluids. The knowledge
of these property changes permit continued work in
the selection of elastomeric compounds for increased
seal life and performance to the new generation
drilling fluids by application.
From field seal performance, Hydril ram and annular
BOPs have provided good service and seal life in a
variety of these new synthetic oil drilling fluids
including all of the major types of fluids previously
mentioned (ester, ether, etc).

CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions have been drawn from this
investigation:
1) Most of the drilling fluids tested resulted in
very minor changes in elastomer properties.
The different fluids exhibited different effects
upon oil tool elastomers.

Effect of Drilling Fluids on Seal Performance

2) The property change variations between nitrile

rubbers were large and significant.

Different oil tool applications requires different

elastomer properties for the tool to perform the
designed sealing function. For example, an annular
BOP requires moderate rubber strength levels with
very large tensile elongations (and high 300%
modulus). However, some ram BOP applications
requires very high tensile strengths and relatively low
tensile elongations. For good seal life, these sealing
elements must exhibit a combination of fatigue
resistance and required properties with designed
deflection.

3) The elastomer property changes stabilized in

most drilling fluid - elastomer combinations
within the first 24 - 72 hours.
4) Additional testing is required to estimate the
seal life in these drilling muds.
5) Caution and testing are recommended when
selecting drilling fluids and compatible
elastomers.
213

IADC/SPE 27452

Effects of New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment Elastomers

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author thanks the assistance of W.D. Breach and Dr. D.W. Carlson, both of Hydril Rubber Operations,
for providing technical assistance without which this project could not have been conducted.

REFERENCES
1) Friedheim, J.E., Hans, G.J. and Ray, C.R.: "An Environmentally Superior Replacement for Mineral
Oil Drilling Fluids", paper 23062 presented at the SPE Offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, United
Kingdom, September 3-6, 1991.
2) Montgomery, M.: "Many Disposal Methods Available for Oil Base Drill Cuttings", The American Oil
& Gas Reporter, August, 1993, pages 28 - 31.
3) Candler, J.: "Synthetic-Based Muds Lower Pollution", The American Oil & Gas Reporter, August,
1993, pages 32 - 38.
4) Parker, B.: "Putting Elastomers to the Test", Offshore Engineer, September, 1993, pages 59 - 60.
5) Kubena, E.J., Ross, K.C., Pugh, T.L., and Huycke, J.: "Performance Characteristics of Elastomers
Evaluated in Various Drilling Fluids", paper 21960 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, March 11-14, 1991.

TABLE 1: HARDNESS MEASUREMENTS

Rubber
Type

Hardness, Shore A in Noted Fluid (l week exposure time at 185F)

None

Diesel

68

I
I

82

NBR

79

77

74

I
I

78

I
I

68

78

70

I
I

56

71

70

59

70

55

89

89

82

87

82

69

95

95

94

96

91

85

84

I
I

89

87

92

--

72

HNBR

64

79

75

69

I
I

XNBR

90

84

XHNBR

97

95

85

I
I

ECO

84

89

97

76

87

94

86

I
I

TABLE 2: MASS CHANGES AFfER IMMERSION TESTS

Rubber
Type

Diesel ;

Mass Change, Percent, after 1 week immersion in noted fluid at 185F

-.
I
I
I
I
I
D
A
B
C
E
F
G
!

NBR

10.8% :

4.7%

4.8%

. I

HNBR

20.0% !

-0.7%

4.0%

-15.2%
2.9%

-2.5%

12.8%

0.5%

! 4.2%

15.5%

8.3%

4.4%

3.4%

14.1%

0%

3.2%

21.9%

10.2%

24.6%

XNBR

4.5%

10.5%

4.8%

5.1 %

6.8%

! 11.2%

5.8%

! 8.4%

23.6%

-2.0%

1.3%

I
I

I
I

I
I

9.7%

2.8%

XHNBR

ECO

16.9% :
2.8%

1.9%

! 11.0%

I
I
I

6.0%

-1.5%

I
I

214

-0.5%

-1.1 % !

4.0%

IADC/SPE 27452

R.P. Badrak

TABLE 3: VOLUME CHANGES AFTER IMMERSION TESTS

Rubber
Type

Volume Change, Percent, after 1 week immersion in noted fluid at 185F

I

Diesel !

NBR

10.1%

3.6%

HNBR

22.3%

I
I

4.3%

XNBR

17.5%

I
I

8.1%

XHNBR

7.0%

I
I

ECO

5.3%

I
I

I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I

-0.5%
3.8%

I
I

I
I
I
I

I
I

0.5%

I
I

I
I

3.8%

I
I

14.2%

2.4%

I
I

5.0%

I
I

19.7%

5.3%

I
I

I
I

-6.6%
2.6%

6.6%

I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I

2.7%

4.8%

0.5%

I
I

2.6%

1.3%

I
I

2.2%

I
I

5.3%

I
I

1.4%

12.6%

I
I

-2.2%

I
I

-3.3%

I
I

1.2%

I
I

0.7%

I
I

-1.7%

0.1%

4.0%

I
I

I
I

16.7%

I
I

24.3%

12.0%

I
I

24.7%

! 10.0%
I
I

--

I
I

24.7%

I
I

15.5%

I
I

3340

TABLE 4: TENSILE STRENGTH MEASUREMENTS

Rubber
Type

None

Diesel

I
I
I
I

Tensile Strength, PSI in Noted Drilling Fluid

I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
B
D
E
C
~

4565

I
I

3370

I
I

4140

I
I

3740

3490

I
I

3460

I
I

3340

I
I

I
I

3935

I
I

3870

I
I

3710

4235

--

I
I

2195

2685

I
I

2745

I
I

--

I
I

2490

4010

I
I

4755

I
I

--

3510

I
I

1815

I
I

1770

I
I

--

I
I

2170

I
I

440

--

I
I

505

HNBR

4300

3300

XNBR

3365

2660

3230

I
I

3000

I
I

2965

I
I

2880

I
I

XHNBR

5415

3980

I
I

5020

I
I

4750

I
I

4880

I
I

4730

ECO

1865

2215

I
I

2165

I
I

2245

I
I

2155

2030

I
I

3265

--

I
I

3700

3540

NBR

TABLE 5: TENSILE ELONGATION MEASUREMENTS

Rubber
Type

Tensile Elongation, PSI in Noted Drilling Fluid

None

Diesel

I
I

NBR

600

465

545

HNBR

620

505

535

XNBR

300

235

XHNBR

155

220

ECO

420

210

!
i
!
i
~

.
I
I

I
I

445
485

I
I

I
I

I
I
I

400

I
I

415

I
I

415

515

I
I

520

I
I

560

I
I

540

I
I

--

I
I

450

185

I
I

185

I
I

205

I
I

200

--

I
I

270

240

I
I

250

I
I

240

I
I

255

I
I

--

I
I

215

115

I
I

105

I
I

75

I
I

--

I
I

270

240

I
I

215

245

I
I

250

I
I

170

I
I

145

I
I

115
215

~
I

8 Effects of New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment Elastomers

IADC/SPE 27452

10

lSI

til

~
~
.d -10 - ... --- ------- ... ------ -------- -------

ij

-- - ... ------ - ---- -

---

_---- ------- ------- -------- ------- - -_ ...... ------- ---- ... -- -

-- -

l:I)
l:I)

(1)

-20

......

NE R
BR
-30 -I!IX~ BR--- ---- ... -- -------- ------- - --- ------- ---- ... -- -_ ... ----:::IJX~ NBR
l'ZJ

CH~

I:81IE( 0

-40

diesel

Drilling Fluid
Figure 1: Hardness Changes

Change in Volume, %

'lit

rzlNBR
::.::HNB

r?

aXNB

-~~~

R------- -------- -----"-- -------- -------- --------- -------- --

S3ECO

__::-:

. ,---

;'

..-

--- -------- -------- ----- ... -- --------

Figure 2: % Volume Changes

216

--~

:I

----- ... --- --

IADC/SPE 27452

RP. Badrak

Change in TS, %

q-

C")

....

------ - -

--- - ------ - ------ -

------~-

--------- ----------

------

.......,11!III1If-L-t~-+L+"ft1P!11'fLL......t-.......!t'I-'--t-1.....IoI-'--t-I'.....

~ -Q ~ -- ---:~--- -~:I--- -~I-- -~ i -- _D~ Ii ~- --~ lir--~ !:

ii

~ -t=f~~o

q-I

o
'9

g
I

.i.i. .

--L,"

-- ----------

--------- ---------- --------- --------- --------- ----------

ij

Ii

--~

--r1 -.

~-HNBR
::
_::_----- --------- ---------- --------- --------- --------- ---------- --~~---_.

aXNBR

::

_~_~~e~

~~

Q;lECO

~-L---'_....l----!-__~---'--L.--'--~--'--_=_-.l...-.~---''--..,_L_-I
diesel
ABC
D
E
F
H

Drilling Fluid
Figure 3: Percent Tensile Strength Changes

Change in Elongation, %

co
o
CD

o
qo

I--ft..ft_U1llh-+-t
_ _~~~.j--+ft-1
_ _111!!'Rrr-+".....-ftl'.11~~
__ --.Alii...-+--n
_ _Qrft'h-I~_.1

qI

CD
I

o
co
o
o
....

o
N
"7

-t=f~~-

~_::HNBR
-ii-~-BR

------

--------. ---------- --------- --------- --------- -----. - --.-----.

_~_~~e~

eo_e.

Q;lECO
L...--L---'_....l----!-_~---'----'L..--'--~--'--_=_-.l...-.~---''---..,_L_-I

diesel

ABC

Drilling Fluid
Figure 4: Percent Change in % Elongation

217

10 Effects oj New Generation Drilling Fluids on Drilling Equipment Elastomers

IADC/SPE 27452

9u..d=-------~---~-__,

85 ----,~-------------------------------------------

S-_

() 8

c5j
vi
(I)

~
"E.

B------- ------------------f:]

------------------------------------------------ NBR-drilling fluid G

BXNBR-drilling fluid G
TNBR-drilling fluid B
75 ------------------------------------------------- 0'<NBR-drilling fluid B

i -..,r--T---------T
"-

'~
"\

70.

----------:JJI.-~----------------~-------

65 0=------:5=0:-----1:-::0=0---::-15=-:0:---~200
Time,
hours

Figure S: Effect of Time on Hardness Changes

35 r---------~-----.

~ 25 ----- --------------.-----------------------

Gi
01
Tc 20 --- --------'>-.,.,.- --- - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- - - - - - - - - -- ..NBR-drilling fluid G
CI:I
...........
E1XNBR-drilling fluid G
Ii
'Y-----TNBR-drilling fluid H
~ 15 _l ------------------------------------------ E)<NBR-drilling fluid H

fi

.2

.,

B '-- ----.---------.-. -'-.0

,-

10 - --~--------------------------------------

':-.Jf.- .JI.

- - - - - - - - - - -...

------------------------------------------50

100

150

200

Time,
hours

Figure 6: Effect of Time on Volume Changes

218