Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 70

W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

CONTENTS
Page
Objectives 3
Resumé 5
1.1 Introduction 6
General 6
The anatomy of a drilling fluid 7
Drilling fluid planning 7
Economics 8
1.2 Density and pressure gradients 10
Introduction 10
Units 10
Formation stress and pressure 10
Formation fracture gradient 12
Impact on drilling operations 13
Drilling fluid density 13
1.3 Rheology 15
Introduction 15
Terminology 15
Drilling fluid viscosity model 16
Rheological model 18
Model description 20
Conclusion 21
1.4 Hydraulics 23
Introduction 23
Optimisation theory 23
Optimising process 25
Routine monitoring 26
1.5 Borehole instability 27
Introduction 27
Hole erosion 27
Swelling shale 28
Spalling shale 28
Sloughing shale 29
Salt formations 30
1.6 Clay Chemistry 31
1.7 Inhibition 35
Inhibiting chemicals 35
Inhibiting polymers 36
Inhibitive systems 37

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 1


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Page
1.8 Invert oil emulsion systems 41
Introduction 41
Theory 41
Engineering 41
Monitoring 43
1.9 Contaminants 44
Introduction 44
Chemical contaminants 45
Treatment 45
Treatment chemistry 47
1.10 Temperature 48
1.11 Drilled Solids 50
Introduction 50
Effect 50
Prevention 51
Monitoring and evaluation 53
1.12 Drilling problems 54
Bit balling 54
Torque and drag 54
Differentially stuck pipe 54
Lost circulation 55
Corrosion 57
1.13 Well Control 58
1.14 Cementing 60
1.15 Drill-in, completion and well intervention fluids 62
Introduction 62
Productivity impairment 62
Well bore fluid design 62
Well bore fluid preparation 65
Lost circulation 66
Appendix 1 : Terminology and symbols 68

2 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

OBJE CTIVES
After studying this Part, consulting other relevant documents and, if necessary, discussions with
your mentor, you will be able to:

• • list the primary functions of a drilling fluid


• • describe the process of designing a drilling fluid
• • list the components that may be used in a drilling fluid
• • list the constraints on the choice of drilling fluid product
• • explain how the economic performance of a drilling fluid system is measured
• • name the characteristics of a product (other than price) which have an effect on its
economic performance
• • name all the various units used for measuring the density of a drilling fluid and give the
corresponding values for fresh water
• • name the various salts used in drilling fluids for increasing the density
• • give the maximum densities achievable with the above-mentioned salts
• • give the grain densities of the solids commonly found, or used, in drilling fluids
• • explain what are “viscosity”and “shear rate”
• • describe the different kinds of viscosity behaviour found in fluids
• • define (in simple terms) laminar and turbulent flow and explain the advantages and
disadvantages of each
• • describe the rheological behaviour which is considered ideal for a drilling fluid, and
explain why
• • calculate the values of rheological parameters from measurements made
• • explain the concept of “equivalent circulating density”
• • explain what factors determine the upper and lower limits of circulating rate in a drilling
fluid system
• • explain the methods available to the drilling fluid engineer for controlling unstable shales
• • name the types of encapsulating polymer, and explain why they are used
• • list the common contaminants of water based drilling fluids, and give their possible
sources
• • explain the effect of the above contaminants on the various components of a drilling fluid
• • explain how to treat drilling fluid which has been contaminated by calcium
• • list the maximum temperatures at which common drilling fluid products can be used
• • explain why drilled solids should be removed from a drilling fluid
• • describe how undesirable solids can be removed from drilling fluid
• • describe how the drilling fluid can be a factor in causing and/or curing common
mechanical drilling problems
• • explain why small volumes (“pills” or “slugs”) of high density drilling fluid may be
required, and give a typical composition

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 3


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

• • explain why the drilling fluid may affect the success of a cement job
• • explain why the drilling fluid may have to be replaced before drilling into the objective
hydrocarbon reservoir
• • list the primary causes of production impairment
• • explain the effect of temperature on brine systems
• • explain why bridging materials may be deliberately added to a drilling-in or work-over
fluid, and name the three options
• • explain why oxygen corrosion is not normally a problem in completion fluids

4 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

RESUMÉ
The purpose of this Part is to explain the logic behind selecting, preparing, running and
modifying both drilling fluids and drilling-in, completion and well intervention fluids. The
objective is to provide an awareness of the role of these fluids in well construction, so that the
Well Engineer can convey a clear specification to the contractor and he in turn can provide, and
maintain, a ‘fit-for-purpose’product.
It is not a recipe book of formulations and remedies for all occasions (these don’t exist), or a
theoretical dissertation on the physico-chemical properties of drilling fluids (these already exist).

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 5


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.1 – INTROD UCTION


1.1.1 GENERAL
Man has been excavating the ground to recover the earth’s resources since before recorded
history. The drilling industry has long been a part of this occupation. It has come a long way
since the Chinese and Egyptians first started using boring machines. Today our industry is
capable of
• drilling to over 20 km depths
• drilling 10m diameter shafts
• drilling 8 km horizontally at 3 km depth, and turning at right angles.
• extracting geothermal energy at 400°C
• drilling in 5 km water depths
• drilling square holes
Truly remarkable feats. One of the controlling factors in this development has been the
corresponding strides made in drilling fluid technology. Today we can formulate fluids to:
• withstand over 200°C
• transport pipeline debris over 192 km
• carry 5kg pieces of metal vertically from depths over 1,000m
• transport gold ore vertically from 4,000m
but regrettably there is often a large discrepancy between what we can have and what we often
use.
The name ‘Mud Doctor’has been used for many years as a humorous title for the drilling fluids
engineer. Although quite funny, it is not that far from the truth for the drilling fluid can be viewed
as the life blood of the drilling operation. It cleanses the system, delivers energy and carries
“antibodies” to combat system problems. Without it drilling cannot operate at peak performance.
The drilling fluid engineer’s role is to ensure that the drilling operation remains fit and healthy.
To do this effectively he must be knowledgeable of the anatomy of the body (formation and well)
and diagnose for genetic defects (downhole problems) and the blood disorders (contaminants).
He must then specify remedial treatments to ensure the correct physico-chemical balance is
maintained to maximise performance.
However, in some respects, the name has also developed somewhat from “Witch Doctor”. The
mud industry has historically been secretive about how to plan and run a drilling fluid.
Expressions such as ‘experience’, ‘in-house expertise’and ‘trade secrets’have often been
bandied about to limit the spread of knowledge. Sometimes it can almost appear to be “Black
Magic”, with the old Mud Doctor throwing in a secret ingredient or two and getting dramatic
effects. This secrecy has often blinded the drilling fluids industry to the needs of their customers
– if the latter don’t know how it is done they may not want to challenge what is recommended
for fear of appearing ignorant.
One reason given for this restriction of information has been the protection of R&D and training
investment. “No company can afford to give away its technical and commercial advantage”.
Equally we cannot afford to have inefficient and expensive drilling fluids; that compromises our
technical and commercial advantage. The ultimate goal, for all, is the well being of our
operations. The responsibility for resolving any potential conflict lies with both sides.
Understanding and properly using drilling fluids does produce successful wells, ignorance can,
and often does, have the opposite effect.

6 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.1.2 THE ANATOMY OF A DRILLING FLUID


What is the difference between Mud and a Drilling Fluid? Mud is a mixture of dirt and water
whereas a Drilling Fluid can be:
a Tool to
Maximise Results and
Minimise Costs
What are the Functions of a Drilling Fluid? Classically these have been listed as being to:
• deliver sufficient energy to the bit to assist drilling.
• clean the drilling face of newly made cuttings.
• cool, clean and lubricate the bit.
• drive any downhole motor or turbine.
• transport the cuttings out of the hole.
• suspend the cuttings during periods without circulation.
• stabilise the sides of the borehole.
• maintain an impermeable barrier on the borehole wall opposite porous and permeable
formations
• provide hydrostatic head to avoid the influx of formation fluids into the borehole.
• release the carried cuttings before recirculating into the hole.
• to transmit data to surface .
This list of functions does not however accurately portray the true role of the fluid in the drilling
operation nor does it indicate the potential impact upon the business. Like a doctor, or scientist,
the fluids engineer needs all of the facts and must evaluate the whole picture before formulating
an effective solution.
Putting the key functions from above into
context against where in the system they
are required, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.1,
a clearer picture starts to emerge, not
only of what the fluid is supposed to do,
but where, how and under what
conditions.
By analysing the functions of the drilling
fluid in the context of the operation we
can build up a better understanding of the
way it must perform, and under what
influencing conditions. Thus we are able
to prescribe the optimum specification for
the job to be done, monitor the
performance and carry out remedial
treatments to rectify any short fallings.

1.1.3 DRILLING FLUID


PLANNING
All of a drilling fluid’s functions are
important, however the specific goals of a
particular drilling operation will place Figure 6.1.1 : Functions of a drilling fluid
different emphasis on them; for example,
drilling through a water sensitive shale will
place more emphasis on the borehole stability aspect than would drilling through a competent

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 7


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

limestone. The key to efficient drilling fluid design, and well planning, is using a logical,
structured approach to programming. Such an approach encompasses:
• specifying and ranking the goals and expectations of the operation.
• recognising the system requirements to achieve the goals.
• identifying the drilling fluid functions within the system requirements.
• matching the drilling fluid properties with the functions.
• profiling the performance under the varying condition for optimum additive selection.
Throughout it is essential that the planning engineer liaise with all interested parties involved
with the well.
Firstly a ranked set of objectives has to be defined and agreed. For example: Is it an exploration
well? Then petrophysical logging may be important to monitor progress against prognosis. Thus
a near gauge hole with minimum fluid invasion would be a key requirement. What type of logs
are required? Some are sensitive to salt, others are sensitive to oil.
Secondly, the specific fluid properties required to achieve the goals should be listed in a
planning table. Each property should then be examined specifically as to the requirements
throughout the circulating system. Having defined this model of optimum performance,
components can then be selected. Where variance from the ideal occurs the design should be
re-examined, with respect to the prioritised objectives, to gauge the impact that less than
maximum performance may have.
As well as satisfying the operational objectives materials chosen must meet a number of
“common requirements”such as HSE, compatibility with the make-up water and compatibility
with other additives.
Once the potential components have been identified, on a performance basis, then, and only
then, should the economics be reviewed. The costs examined should be on an overall well
basis. A balance must be always be sought between combating foreseeable problems and
overkilling all possible eventualities.

1.1.4 ECONOMICS
One of the major, and perhaps the most influential, planning and operating parameters is ‘cost’.
“Cost control”and “expense reduction”have developed as everyday catch phrases within our
industry, and rightly so. We have finite resources of funds with which to find, develop and
produce hydrocarbons.
Our goal is to reduce the cost of the whole operation. We must be careful not to just focus on
the price on individual products or elements. We can all calculate that saving 20% on a
US$1,000 item is not equal to a consequential loss of 1% on a US$40,000 operation due to
using a sub-optimal drilling fluid. The key objective is to minimise the cost of well construction
and maximise productivity.
For example, compare a reasonably quality bentonite based drilling fluid, costing approximately
US$50/m3, versus a more expensive polymer based fluid, costing around $88/m3. Initially it
would appear that the bentonite based fluid offer significant savings over the polymer fluid.
However, consider the implications when drilling through the reservoir section of a well to be
completed barefoot. If the damaging nature of the bentonite filter cake, which is chemically inert,
reduces the production from an estimated 1,000 m3 per day to 900 m3 . A remedial stimulation
treatment to remove the damage could cost upward of $50,000. It is easy to see that it would
not take too long to lose any advantage gained from the cheaper drilling fluid. This is not to say
that more expensive is better. The essential factor is getting a fit-for-purpose product.
Drilling fluid planning must consider the overall effect and economics on the operation,
particularly the cost per barrel of production; this is the ultimate goal. Cutting corners in one

8 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

area may not necessarily result in a cost saving in the overall project. Maximising the results is
as important as, if not more so than, reducing the cost. The result from a properly structured
planning process will be the optimum fluid for achieving the specified goals with the minimum
overall operational cost, and thus give:
Maximum Return on Investment

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 9


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TO PIC 1.2 – D EN SITY & PR ESSU R E GR A D IEN TS


1.2.1 INTRODUCTION
The process of laying down the various formations and the subsequent actions on the ground
by movements within the earth’s crust create abnormal conditions in the rocks through which
the operation will drill. These create specific problems that the drilling fluid must overcome.
Uncontrolled production of formation fluids and gases can be a safety risk, hazardous to the
environment and a loss of revenue for the Company and the asset holder. The drilling fluid is
the first line of defence against such occurrences. The second defence mechanism is
containment within the well.
The optimum density of the drilling fluid is a balance between exerting enough downhole force
to overbalance the pressure within the formation whilst not compromising the integrity of the
wellbore.

1.2.2 UNITS
Specific Gravity (S.G.) is the Table 6.1.1 : Units of pressure, "fluid gradient" and density
dimensionless ratio of a
material’s density to that of a Oilfield SI Value for Other Oilfield Value for
standard solution of fresh fresh water Units fresh water
water at sea level. Pressure kPa psi
Gradient kPa/m 9.81 psi/ft 0.433
S.G. 1
3
Density Kg/m 1000 p.p.g 8.33
lbs/cu.ft. 62.4

1.2.3 FORMATION STRESS & PRESSURE

SEDIMENTARY ROCK FORMATION


Generally, in oilfield drilling the formations penetrated have been built up by the deposition of
sediments. As this process continues the underlying material is subjected to increasing force.
Interstitial water is gradually squeezed out and the minerals are compacted into sedimentary
rocks.

STRESSES
The stresses acting on the rock in the subsurface can
be resolved into three orthogonal components. These
are called the principal stresses (σn).
Normally both the vertical and horizontal principal
stresses will increase with depth. The two are related
by the fact that the rock is laterally constrained by the
neighbouring rock. However regional tectonics may
cause other effects. If the stresses are of different
magnitude then the convention is: σ1 > σ2 > σ3.
Figure 6.1.2 : Principal Rock Stresses

10 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The vertical, or overburden, stress is generally expressed as a gradient; S/z. This can be
derived by integrating the formation density log.
As a rule of thumb: Overburden Gradient ˜ 22·6 kPa/m (1 psi/ft)
Each principal stress is composed of two elements: the stress exerted on the rock (σf ) and that
exerted on the pore fluids (pf ).

NORMAL FORMATION PRESSURE.


The initial sediments are laid down with about 60 - 70%v water. This material is gradually buried
deeper and deeper under the slow process of deposition.
At a burial depth of approximately 1000 m (±3,000 ft) grain to grain contact occurs for the
majority of the minerals and the material is regarded as a rock. At this stage it contains about 26
- 30%v water. In the mudstone/claystone /shale formations the water is held as layers between
the clay platelets by forces other than purely physical confinement (bound water).
As the pressure increases from more overlying sediments, and the temperature rises with
burial, more water is stripped from between the layers of clay particles. At around 2,000m
(±7,000 ft) sufficient energy has built up in the system to have fully dislodged one layer of bound
water from the clay structure. Further layers are removed by approximately 5,000 m (±16,500
ft), 10,000 m (±33,000 ft) and 20,000 m (±65,000 ft).
Mixing with generated hydrocarbons, the released water slowly migrates through the very low
permeability environment of the clays until it finds a more permeable formation, such as a sand.
The excess fluid bleeds through this zone back towards the surface. With geological time the
pressure in the shale is relieved back to the equivalent of a column of water to that depth. The
pressure in the pore spaces is therefore equal to the hydrostatic column of the water. The
remainder of the overburden stress is supported by the rock matrix. This is termed a ‘normally’
pressured formation.
The water escaping from the compacting clay formations leaves behind some of the originally
dissolved salts. With increasing depth the pore water has an increasing salinity resulting in a
higher fluid density. Thus the pressure exerted increases with depth. This can be determined by
integrating the resistivity log.
As a rule of thumb: A ‘normal’pressure gradient of 10·5 kPa/m (0·465 psi/ft) can be used to
depths down to 3,000m.

ABNORMAL PRESSURE
If at any time the shale, or the permeable formation, is isolated then the excess pore fluid
cannot bleed off. Then the increasing overburden will be born by the incompressible pore fluid.
Thus it will be overpressured by the added mass of the formations from the depth where it was
isolated to its current depth.
Rapid deposition, or regional tectonic movement, can create additional stress on the rock. This
can accelerate the release of bound water beyond the bleed off rate of the low permeability
shale.
An uplifted, isolated, formation will retain the original internal pressure. Leaks along a fault, or
through a bad cement job, can connect a lower, higher pressured formation with a higher zone.
These formations will have a higher than normal pressure gradient.
Any one of the above phenomena raises the pressure of the fluid in the pore spaces higher
than normal. This is termed an ‘abnormally’pressured formation. Multiple overpressure
situations are sometimes termed ‘supernormally’pressured formations.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 11


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

SUBNORMAL PRESSURE
The opposite effect can occur when two faults drop a centre block, graben faulting. A normally
pressured zone is suddenly (in geological terms) at a depth greater than its equivalent column
of water pressure.
A reservoir, produced for some time, may be depleted to below the normal hydrostatic pressure
gradient.

1.2.4 FORMATION FRACTURE GRADIENT


Subsurface formations have a limited capacity to withstand an imposed wellbore pressure
before they fail. Below 1,000 m failure will usually be a fracture in the vertical plane
perpendicular to the least principal stress.
Normally the formations become more resistant to failure the more compacted (buried) they are,
thus the weakest rock exposed in the wellbore during drilling is usually at the last casing seat.

MINIMUM FRACTURE INITIATION PRESSURE


The minimum pressure at which a formation will breakdown or fracture is denoted by the
expression: Pi = Pf + σ3 + T
Where: Pi = ‘Fracture’, ‘formation breakdown’or ‘leak-off’pressure
Pf = ‘Formation’or ‘pore’pressure.
σ3 = Minimum rock stress
T = Tensile rock strength (= 0 for uncemented formations).
TECTONICALLY STRESSED AREAS
Different horizontal stresses must be taken into account
when calculating the fracture gradient.

DEVIATED WELLS
Well deviation means that the overburden stress is no
longer parallel to the well. Therefore it must be included
in the calculation. The software package STABOR
gives estimates of the fracture gradient as a function of
tectonic stresses and wellbore deviation.

OFFSHORE APPLICATIONS
In onshore applications all stresses are effective from Figure 6.1.3 : Fracture gradient v. deviation
the surface. When drilling offshore the overburden and
fracture gradients are only effective below the sea floor, see Figures 6.1.4a & 4b. In deep water
operations this can have a significant impact on maximum fluid gradients and casing setting

Figure 6.1.4a : Pressure-depth plot – onshore Figure 6.1.4b : Pressure-depth plot – offshore

12 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

depths.

ABNORMALLY PRESSURED FORMATIONS


The strength of the rock is proportional to the rock matrix stress. Abnormally pressured pore
fluids are supporting more of the principal stress and the rock matrix stress is lower. Therefore
the gap between the formation pressure and the fracture gradient will be lower.

FLUID LEAK OFF TEST


A direct measurement of Pi is sometimes carried out by pressurising the formation until it fails.
This is known as a ‘leak-off’or ‘micro-frac’test. In drilling operations the result is often
expressed as the Equivalent Maximum Mud Gradient:
EMMG = Current Mud Gradient + Pi /D f

1.2.5 IMPACT ON DRILLING OPERATIONS


Pore fluids in an isolated porous formation within a shale will also be over pressured. However,
unlike the shale, the contents will be mobile and can bled into a lower pressure region very
quickly; resulting in a kick.
The overpressured shale will want to relieve the pressure into the hole if the drilling fluid
pressure gradient is lower. However the extremely low permeability of the shale will not let the
pore fluid flow easily so the force exerts itself on the rock in the vicinity of the borehole. If the
shale is plastic (generally high water content, 10% to 30%; rapid burial cause) it will deform and
squeeze into the borehole (swelling shale). If the shale is firm and brittle (generally low water
content - < 7%; sealed venting of pressure cause) it will spall off in pieces (sloughing shale).
Drilling into a subnormally pressured formation with a higher drilling fluid pressure gradient can
result in higher rates of leak-off. This can lead to differential sticking of the pipe and reservoir
impairment. If the overbalance is higher than the strength of the formation then it will fracture
resulting in loss of circulation.

1.2.6 DRILLING FLUID DENSITY


For well control of subsurface pressures the drilling fluid pressure gradient must be equal to or
greater than that of the pore fluid. However it must not be so high as to exceed the fracture
gradient of the weakest zone.

WEIGHTING MATERIALS

Salts & Brines


The liquid phase of the drilling fluid will have a specific density or gravity. The common base
fluids are water and oil (SG ~0.8). The density of water can be increased with salts.
Brine densities are reduced at higher temperatures, due to thermal expansion, but are
increased at higher pressures following compression. For both effects corrections have to be
applied during the design and operation of a brine – see Table 6.1.3.
Temperature correction : Table 6.1.2 : SG of saturated brine for common salt systems
ρ2 = ρ1 − δ(∆Τ)
where δ= ∆ρ/∆Τ correction Salt S.G Salt S.G Salt S.G
(kg/m3/°C) KCl 1.16 NaCl 1.19 CaCl2 1.39
Pressure correction :
ρ2 = ρ1 + λ(∆P) NaBr 1.50 CaBr2 1.72 ZnBr2 2.31
Na- 1.4 K- 1.5 Cs- 2.6
Formate Formate Formate
K2CO 3 1.5
WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 13
February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

where λ = ∆ρ/∆P correction


(kg/m3/100kPa)
Table 6.1.3 : Temperature and pressure corrections for common brines

Brine Maximum Density δ λ


kg/m3 kg/m3/oC kg/m3/100kPa
NaCl 1,190 0.24 0.0331
CaCl2 1,390 0.54 0.0296
NaBr 1,500 0.71 0.0365
CaBr2 1,720 0.71 0.0383
ZnBr2/CaBr2/CaCl2 1,920 0.78 0.0383
ZnBr2/CaBr2 2,310 1.04 0.0540

Solids
Insoluble material may be suspended in the drilling fluid to raise its bulk density to increase the
effective hydrostatic pressure.

Table 6.1.4 : Grain SG for common weighting materials

Material S.G Material S.G Material S.G


Sand 2.6 Clay 2.4 Limestone 2.7
Barite 4.2 Hematite 5.0 Galena 6.5

14 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.3 – RHEOL OG Y


1.3.1 INTRODUCTION
One of the most influential properties of the drilling fluid is its viscosity. Understanding the role
of viscosity in drilling, and other operations, and being able to match viscosity requirements to
the conditions prevalent for that requirement is a key factor in optimising the efficiency of the
fluid.

1.3.2 TERMINOLOGY

Rheology
The science of the deformation and flow of matter. Common usage - the analysis of a fluid’s
viscosity behaviour under variable shear rate conditions.

Shearing Stress
A stress that acts tangentially to a face.

Shear Stress (τ)


Shear force per unit area of action. [Newtons per square meter or Pascals]

Shear Strain (γ
)
Shear displacement divided by the thickness of the fluid element. [dimensionless]
γ
Shear Rate (δ/δt - but usually written as γ
)
Time rate of change of the shear strain (or shear strain rate). [sec-1. “reciprocal seconds”]
This is the condition which changes most throughout the circulation system. Fluid, in laminar
flow, moves as parallel layers and has a profile of changing velocity with distance from the
walls. The Shear Rate is an average representation of the movement relationship of the layers
of fluid in a cross section of the flow path.

Viscosity (µ)
A fluid’s internal resistance to flow (the shear stress at the shear rate). [Newton seconds per
square meter, or Poise]

Newtonian Fluids
The shear stress of the fluid is constantly proportional to the shear rate (τ =µ γ
).

Non-Newtonian Fluids
The shear stress of the fluid is not constantly proportional to the shear rate. There are a number
of different models and the key ones are discussed later in this Topic.

Pseudoplastic Fluids
Non-Newtonian fluid where the viscosity varies inversely to the shear rate; it is thinner at higher
shear rates (“Shear Thinning”).

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 15


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Thixotropic Fluids
Time dependent viscosity. Such fluids exhibit a
hysteresis (difference) between the shear stress/shear
rate plot when applying and removing energy to the fluid.
The degree of shift is often related to a realignment of
particles with attractive tendencies.

Gel Strength
Thixotropic fluids often exhibit an increase of viscosity
with time when at rest. In drilling fluid terminology this is Figure 6.1.5 : Viscosity-time relationship
referred to as the Gel Strength. [Newtons per square for a thixotropic fluid
meter or Pascals]

Rheopectic Fluids
Time dependant fluids exhibiting the opposite phenomenon to thixotropic fluids. Often high
solids content slurries have rheopectic behaviour.

Yield Stress
The Shear Stress required to overcome internal inertial forces.

Turbulent Flow
Chaotic flow characterised by intense mixing caused by eddies.

Laminar Flow
Smooth flow that is devoid of disturbances such as eddies, characterised by parallel layer
movement.

Reynolds Number (N Re)


The ratio of the inertial forces to the viscous forces. [dimensionless]. Commonly used to
determine the velocity at which a fluid’s flow regime changes from laminar to turbulent.

1.3.3 DRILLING FLUID VISCOSITY MODEL


An analysis of the various viscosity requirements on the drilling fluid, throughout the circulating
system, against the influencing conditions will give us a model of the ideal drilling fluid rheology.

VISCOSITY REQUIREMENTS FOR DRILLING


Inside the drill string the fluid is purely commuting to the bit. No constructive (or destructive)
work is being done. At the high velocities required in the drill string, overcoming the fluid’s
internal resistance to flow consumes a large proportion of the input pump energy. If the viscosity
in this region can be kept to a minimum then this energy can be conserved and better used to
assist drilling. The normal flow rate range in the drill string corresponds to a shear rate range of
approximately 200 to 2,000 sec-1.
At the bit the fluid is passing through small nozzles to generate higher velocities to impact onto
the rock to assist drilling. The functions of the fluid at this point are to cool the bit, clean the bit,
and remove the cuttings. The first two are a direct function of the velocity of the fluid, which can
be maximised as a consequence of minimising energy losses in the drill string.

16 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The third function is also influenced by the consistency of the fluid. If we imagine the action of a
roller cone bit; it is making very fine microfractures in the rock. When these join up a cutting is
generated. However the density of the fluid is normally maintained above that of the formation
pressure (well control). This differential pressure holds the cutting in place. If the drilling fluid
can permeate into the fractures it will equalise the pressures around the cutting and lubricate
the surfaces to facilitate easier removal. With the high jet velocity created by the bit nozzle, the
fluid exerts additional hydraulic force to assist in removing the cuttings. If the consistency of the
drilling fluid is thick like that of honey it will not penetrate. If it is thin like water then the
resistance to flow into the fractures is significantly lower. Thus a very low viscosity is required at
the drilling face. The shear rate range involved is from 5,000 to 100,000 sec-1.
Once the fluid commences its upwards journey the shear rate environment is dramatically
reduced and the viscosity requirements are radically different. The generated cuttings must be
efficiently removed from the hole. Their vertical transportation is a function of the uphole velocity
of the fluid and their downward fall within that fluid (Stokes Law).
If the diameter of the drilled hole is enlarged (“washed out”) , and the fluid’s resistance to
cuttings slip remains the same, then the transport efficiency will reduce, as shown in Table
6.1.5.
Table 6.1.5 : Transport efficiency

Annular fluid Cuttings slip Net Cuttings Transport


Hole Size
velocity velocity velocity efficiency
311 mm (12. / ") 1
4 30 9 21 70%
387 mm (15. / ") 1
4 18 9 9 50%
533 mm (21") 9 9 0 0%

To ensure consistent cuttings transport the fluid must be able to increase its resistance to the
slippage of the cuttings inversely proportional to the fluid velocity. The annulus shear rate in the
range of 5 to 100 sec-1.
If the pumps are stopped then the uphole fluid velocity is zero. But the cuttings can continue to
slip. They can accumulate around the drill string and stick the pipe. Thus, when at rest, the fluid
must build a very high resistance to the cuttings settling. It is normally accepted that the shear
rate around a particle in a viscous fluid at rest corresponds to a range of 0·1 - 1 sec-1.
When the pumps are restarted we do not want the fluid to have an excessively high resistance
to commence movement. This would be manifested as a high pressure at the bottom of the
hole. This could be sufficient to overcome the strength of the rock and cause loss of whole fluid.
Thus we want a minimum of thixotropy.
The profile of the velocity of the various parallel layers influences the way in which the cuttings
are transported. If the profile is parabolic as in Newtonian fluids the cuttings will move outwards
to the lower velocity layers, thus slowing their net velocity. If the profile is flatter (higher
pseudoplasticity) the cuttings will tend to stay in the same position in the fluid for more efficient
transportation.
If the ratio of the inertial forces to the viscous forces exceeds a certain value (NRe 3,000 - 4,000)
then the fluid flow will become turbulent. The magnitude of the transition point is controlled
(proportionately) by the fluid’s ability to react to the rate of the imposed shear (pseudoplasticity).
Inhibiting invasion of fluid into a permeable zone is essential to protect the formation and
facilitate higher quality well data. The viscosity of the fluid can be utilised to limit fluid loss (in
addition to or in place of a filter cake). A thick fluid consistency will have a high resistance to
flow along the permeation channels limiting the ability of the fluid to invade. However in the
reservoir section, this fluid must be removed for maximum recovery of the hydrocarbons.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 17


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Therefore the invading fluid, with its high resistance, needs to thin rapidly on the application of a
greater force acting towards the borehole and flow easily out of the formation. The shear rates
on entering a typical permeable sand formation are in the range of 0·01 to 0·5 sec-1.
When the cuttings laden fluid reaches the surface, it must be rapidly processed to limit recycling
of the drilled material. Due to the design of the fluid so far settling of the cuttings would take too
long. Solids removal equipment utilise inertia, momentum and acceleration differences (due to
mass differences between the fluid and the particles) to facilitate liquid/solid separation. Fluid
resistance to the movement of the solids should be at a minimum. The processing equipment
shear rate usually corresponds to the range of 200 to 5,000 sec-1.

IDEAL MODEL
Analysing the viscosity requirements of the drilling fluid leads to an ideal model being:
Above 200 sec-1 - minimum viscosity.
200 - 5 sec-1 - a controlled viscosity inversely proportional with shear rate.
-1
5 - 1 sec - a very high viscosity, easily thinning with an increase in the shear rate.
-1
Below 1 sec - an ultra high viscosity, rapidly thinning with an increase in the shear
rate.

OPTIMUM MODEL
Common drilling fluids do not behave on such an exacting basis. However most behave as
pseudoplastic fluids. What is required is a best match viscosity profile to the ideal model
established; an optimum model.
The optimum model is a viscosity profile
where the viscosity at the higher shear
rates is thinner and at the lower shear
rates is ever increasing with a reduction
in shear, without any hysteresis
between the increasing and decreasing
shear rate curves. This describes a fluid
with rheological profile termed non-
thixotropic, pseudoplastic.
This model forms the basis for the
specification for the drilling fluid
Figure 6.1.6 : Optimum viscosity model for a drilling fluid
rheology. Each hole section will have a
specification that addresses the individual needs of the drilling operation and resultant product.

1.3.4 RHEOLOGICAL MODEL


Historically three methods have been commonly used to describe the viscous behaviour of a
drilling fluid; the Marsh Funnel Viscosity, the Bingham Plastic Rheology Model and the Power
Law Rheology Model.

MARSH FUNNEL VISCOSITY (MFV)


The Marsh Funnel Viscosity test measures the time taken for a unit volume of drilling fluid to
flow through a standard tube section. The test has a number of limitations. It generates a high
shear rate, in the range of 2,000 to 20,000 sec-1, and provides only a single data point. Due to
the complexity of drilling fluid composition it is not possible to extrapolate this data to other
ranges of shear. Thus the MFV cannot be used to evaluate performance in those regions of the
circulating system. In addition the primary controlling parameters vary throughout the test

18 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

making detailed analysis highly complicated. However due to the simplicity and robustness of
the Marsh Funnel it remains the most useful tool for quick, routine monitoring for change.

COAXIAL DIRECT READING VISCOMETER (VG METER, VISCOMETER OR


RHEOMETER)
The VG meter is used to provide multiple
data points to allow for more detailed
analysis of the drilling fluid’s viscosity
profile. The outer rotating sleeve speed can
be varied to produce different shear rates in
the annulus around the bob. Shear stress is
measured by the deflection of the dial
attached to the bob which is held by a
spring of known resistance. The instrument
configuration is such every 1° of deflection
is 5·11 cP/sec-1. Figure 6.1.7 : Co-axial viscometer

BINGHAM PLASTIC MODEL (PV &


YP)
The Bingham Plastic Model describes a fluid which is Newtonian and has an initial yield stress.
Mathematically the model can be represented as:
τ = PV(γ
) + YP
The slope of the line (Newtonian viscosity region) is called the Plastic Viscosity (PV) and the
intercept with the y axis (initial yield stress) is the Yield Point (YP). The model descriptors are
calculated from two readings taken at 1,022 and 511 sec-1 (to give the data directly in viscosity
units).
PV = [600 rpm Reading] - [300 rpm Reading]
YP = [300 rpm Reading] - [PV]
As can be seen in Figure 6.1.8, the model does approximate the typical drilling fluid viscosity
profile in the medium shear rate ranges and therefore can be used for interpretation in this
region. The predominant factor affecting this part of the viscosity profile is the concentration of
solids in the drilling fluid. The PV is a useful indicator of resistance in the drill string. The model
deviates significantly in the lower shear rate range, corresponding to the annular regions. The
YP is not a usable descriptor for interpretation of performance.
As MFV and PV are applicable
for only medium and high
shear rate ranges they are
useful for a quick look
evaluation but cannot be used
to predict performance at the
lower shear rates of the
annulus region.

Figure 6.1.8 : Rheology model fits for common drilling fluid viscosity profile

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 19


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

POWER LAW MODEL (N & K)


The Power Law Model describes a fluid which is Non-Newtonian (Pseudoplastic) with no initial
yield stress. Mathematically the model can be represented as:
τ = K(γ )n or µ = K(γ )n-1
When plotted on a log-log graph of viscosity versus shear rate it yields a straight line. The Flow
Index ‘n’is the slope of the line (degree of pseudoplasticity). The Consistency Factor ‘K’is the
vertical displacement of the line (thickness or consistency). The model descriptors are
calculated from readings taken at 511 and 5.11 sec-1. (one corresponding to the drill string and
the other to the annulus).
n = (Log [300 rpm Reading] - Log [3 rpm Reading])/2
K = 5·11 x [300 rpm Reading] / 511n
As can be seen in Figure 6.1.8 the model does approximate the typical drilling fluid viscosity
profile at the lower shear rate ranges and therefore can be used for interpretation in this region.
A lower ‘n’indicates a larger viscosity change with variations in shear and is primarily influenced
by the type of viscosifier. ‘K’is the consistency of the fluid and is primarily influenced by the
concentration of the viscosifier.

1.3.5 MODEL DESCRIPTION


The Power Law Model of rheology can be used to describe the key annular region parameters
of the optimum model:
• sufficient carrying and suspension ability to remove the cuttings.
• a rate of viscosity change with shear variation sufficient to maintain effective hole
cleaning.
The PV of the Bingham Plastic Model is used when calculating pressure losses in the drill
string.

DRILLING FLUID RHEOLOGY SPECIFICATION


Using a ranked list of objectives the design engineer must then determine what will be the ‘fit-
for-purpose’rheology required. This, of course, will be influenced by many variables; including
hole sizes, formations, data requirements, cementation requirements, rig equipment etc.
However the two over-riding factors will be the transportation efficiency required and the
cuttings settling rate when the fluid is acquiescent (not moving). Once these have been
determined, ranges for the Power Law indices ‘n’and ‘K’can be derived.
These are the specifications which the fluids engineer will use to prepare and manage the
rheology of the drilling fluid.

FIELD MONITORING
The essential factors in field management of drilling fluid rheology are:
• a quick recognition of any deviation from the specification.
• distinguishing the type and degree of non-conformance.
• identifying the probable cause of, and remedial action for, the change.
Therefore any monitoring procedure must produce a fair representation of the fluid in use
against the optimum model established.
Neither of the two classic models fully represents the typical viscosity profile of a field used
drilling fluid. More complicated models exist, however their interpretation is correspondingly
more complex and other factors, such as instrument error and well irregularities, negate their
practical use.

20 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The dial readings from the viscometer plotted directly onto a log-log graph give a visual
representation of the viscosity profile of the drilling fluid. This representation can be easily
compared against the fluid’s specification. Without calculation, the fluid can be qualitatively, and
fairly reliably, assessed for its capacity to do the job. In addition, errors in reading the instrument
are quickly spotted as the resultant graph will not be smooth. Quantification of performance
using the graph derived data will be more accurate.
The key benefit of this system of rheology monitoring is the simplicity for field application of a
very sophisticated, and relatively accurate representation of performance against the
specification model. This is particularly useful when troubleshooting problems. The specific
short falls can be easily identified and readily explained to anyone. Also when the fluid is
blamed for an operational deficiency, its performance in that region of shear rate can be clearly
and visibly assessed.

FIELD APPLICATION

Product Performance
Having identified the optimum model of viscosity required, then available viscosifiers can be
evaluated functionally for performance and then economically to select the most fit-for-purpose
material.
Using the plot, functional
efficiency is evaluated
against the optimum model.
A material’s strong and
weak points can be
properly compared with
other materials. After
eliminating poor
performance material the
remaining contenders can
be economically evaluated
by comparing the cost to
prepare a fluid with a
specific consistency.
Figure 6.1.9 : Direct viscosity plot
Problem Analysis
When a change in viscosity is identified (say through a change in MFV) the specific region of
variation can be easily identified and assessed. This will direct the engineer to the right area for
remedial action. Having identified the area for corrective treatment, and having an evaluation of
materials available he can formulate an effective treatment.

Pilot Testing
The engineer can pre-test the potential impact of a treatment by pilot testing and comparing the
two plots. This will also give him an assessment of how much material will be needed to return
the fluid to specification.

1.3.6 CONCLUSION
The MFV is useful to monitor for change. The Bingham Plastic and Power Law Models should
only be used as a quick look analysis. They should not be used as specification parameters,
performance indicators nor as the basis for assessing non-conformance or recommending
remedial treatments.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 21


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The direct plot of the fluid viscosity versus the shear rate is a more reliable drilling fluid
management tool.
• It provides a specification the drilling fluid that targets operational performance.
• Rheology modifiers can be logically chosen based upon true performance and
economics.
• Non-conformance can be properly assessed and remedial treatments verified.
The more readings that can be taken (i.e. Fann 6 or 9 speed) the more accurate will be the
evaluation.

22 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.4 – HY DRA ULICS


1.4.1 INTRODUCTION
Managing the effective use of available hydraulic energy to assist hole excavation is a key
factor in drilling optimisation.

IMPACT FORCE (I.F.)


The bit nozzles provide a high energy jet to:
• inject fluid into the microfractures to equalise pressure around, and apply hydraulic lift to,
the cuttings.
• flush away the newly made cuttings from the drilling face.
• blast the bit teeth and cutters to keep them clean.
• circulate heat away from the high energy areas of the bit (cutters and bearings)
Maximising the Impact Force (I.F.) and Crossflow Velocity are the key factors in optimising bit
hydraulics.

EQUIVALENT CIRCULATING DENSITY (E.C.D.)


Energy is consumed in circulating the fluid up the annulus. This manifests itself as an additional
pressure effect on the bottom of the hole. This pressure could exceed the strength of a weak
formation resulting in a fracture and loss of integrity.

MANAGING ANNULAR VELOCITIES


A minimum velocity is required for efficient cuttings removal and a maximum velocity is set to
avoid erosion of weak formations.

CALCULATION ACCURACY
The pressure drop calculations for the bit nozzles are normally accurate. Calculated pressure
drops in the drill string are also generally within acceptable limits. However calculating pressure
drops in the annulus are subject to many indeterminable variables, such as hole size, wall
roughness and downhole fluid viscosity.

1.4.2 OPTIMISATION THEORY

OBJECTIVE
To optimise the application of input hydraulic energy at the bit to assist hole excavation whilst
maintaining the other circulation criteria.

CONTROLLING FACTORS

Minimum & Maximum Flow Rate


The maximum flow rate is dictated by two factors:
• avoiding hole erosion,
• controlling the total pressure in the annulus acting on the formation at its weakest point.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 23


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Up to a certain shear rate the viscosity of the fluid can control the fluid flow to discrete laminae
moving in one direction (Laminar Flow). Above this shear rate, excess internal friction begins to
create random disorder causing eddies to develop (Transitional Flow). At higher shear rates
greater disruption occurs (Turbulent Flow). In practice it is considered that this transition is
demarcated by a Reynold’s Number (NRe ) of 3,000.
It is desirable to keep the fluid in laminar flow in the annulus as an essentially non-moving layer
against the borehole wall will act as a protective barrier against erosion. In turbulent flow, the
random action of the fluid disrupts this layer and impinges directly upon the formation.
Therefore the maximum flow rate should be less than transition to turbulent flow (Critical
Velocity; Vc).
The loss of energy in circulating the fluid up the annulus manifests itself as a pressure drop (Pa)
which acts on the bottom of the hole; in addition to the pressure due to the Hydrostatic Head of
the column of the fluid (Pm). The total effective pressure (ECD) should not exceed the pressure
at which the formation fractures and takes fluid ingress (Equivalent Maximum Mud Gradient or
Leak Off Pressure). This limit will be derived from offset well experience or a Leak-Off Test. In
certain circumstances, such as deep, slim and high pressure drilling, the maximum circulation
rate may be governed by an ECD ceiling.
The minimum flow rate will be determined by the required hole cleaning efficiency.
As a rule of thumb the minimum Va should be >2 times the Vs. Refer also to the Well Engineers
Notebook, page E-5.

Surface Pressure Limitations


The surface equipment of the rig has a maximum working pressure rating. Normally the
contractor does not like to exceed 85% of this as maintenance requirements dramatically
increase.
Thus there is a maximum pressure that can be applied to the circulation of the drilling fluid.

Friction Losses in the Circulating System


Energy is consumed in overcoming frictional resistance to moving the fluid around the
circulation system. The drilling fluid design should target reducing these losses to an acceptable
range that allows sufficient energy to be available to assist drilling progress.
Input data inaccuracies preclude individual assessment of these pressure losses. In addition
they are all non-productive. Therefore, for the purposes of optimising energy application at the
bit they can be regarded as a single entity.
Minor changes in a drilling assembly will not normally have a significant effect on Ps, the system
losses (ie all the downhole pressure losses with the exception of those across the bit). However
adjustment for some downhole tools, such as turbines or mud-motors, can be made with the
manufacturer’s data.

Bit Nozzles - Total Flow Area


Having determined the limitations and controlling factors, the complete circulating system can
then be evaluated to select the bit nozzles that maximise the amount of energy that can be
directed to the bit.

24 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.4.3 OPTIMISING PROCESS

GRAPHICAL METHOD
A graphical process for optimising bit hydraulics is:
• 1) Determine the operating limits:
• Maximum pump rate based upon maintaining laminar flow in the annulus or limiting the
ECD.
• Minimum pump rate to ensure adequate hole cleaning.
• Maximum allowable surface pressure.
• 2) Determine the available pressure drops at the bit versus the pump rate:
• At the end of a bit run, record the circulating pressures (Pt) at three pump rates (Q);
these should be spread across the working range for the hole (also applicable to the Well
Control Worksheet).
• For each flow rate calculate the pressure drop across the bit nozzles or TFA (Pb)
• Subtract Pb from Pt to determine the remaining ‘system’pressure loss (Ps).
• confirm the actual nozzles when the bit is recovered.
• 3) Create a graph with the operating limits:
• On log-log paper draw a boundary line at the minimum and maximum (annular velocity)
pump rates.
• Draw a boundary line for the maximum allowable surface pressure.
• Plot the total circulation pressures (Pt) against pump rates.
• At the intercept with the maximum surface pressure draw a boundary line for the
maximum pump rate; if lower than the previous maximum allowable (annular velocity)
flow rate.
• 4) Create a plot of the ‘system’pressure losses versus pump rate.
• Plot the determined Ps against the respective circulation rates.
• Draw a line through the ‘system’losses inside the operating limits.
• This line can be subsequently interpolated/extrapolated for any circulating rate.
• 5) Plot the design criteria line:
• Maximum I.F. occurs when ∆Ps = ±0·5∆Pt
• 6) Determine the optimum pump rate.
• Intercept of the ‘system’pressure loss with the design criteria line.
• If the intercept is outside of a boundary limit then review the limit, drilling fluid properties
or design criteria and determine the required pump rate as appropriate for the operation.
• 7) Calculate the total flow area to achieve the optimum or available pressure drop at the bit.
• Subtract Ps at the optimum required flow rate from the maximum allowable surface
pressure.
• Use the Well Engineer’s Notebook, page E-3, to calculate the total flow area required
through the nozzles.
• 8) Determine the nozzles required to approximate the flow.
• Use the table on page E-4 of the Well Engineers Notebook to choose the nozzles which
give a flow area closest to the calculated area.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 25


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

• If the nozzles are below a minimum size (to avoid plugging off) then re-examine the flow
properties to increase the transition flow rate (Vc) to allow an increase in the pumping
rate or reduce Ps.
• Alternatively blanking off one nozzle can allow smaller flow areas with larger jets.

CALCULATION METHOD
The Well Engineers Notebook (page E-3/4) contains all the necessary equations for optimising
bit hydraulic horsepower or jet impact force by means of calculations.

1.4.4 ROUTINE MONITORING


Periodic monitoring is restricted to analysing the ECD to ensure well integrity and maintain
pressure control.
As stated previously annular pressure drop calculations are inappropriate due to input data
inaccuracy. The most practical method to determine the ECD is to calculate the drill string and
bit hydraulics and subtract them from a reasonably accurate standpipe pressure (choke gauge).
Direct calculations should only be used in critical cases and must be properly calibrated against
measured total annulus pressure losses.

26 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.5 – BORE H OLE INSTABILITY


1.5.1 INTRODUCTION
An unstable borehole can pose major problems for the drilling, and subsequent, operations:
• Fill on trips increasing the drilling time and reducing bit life.
• Swelling formations producing tight hole.
• Hole washout compromising cementation.
• Caving formations that may result in stuck pipe.
There are many symptoms but there only a few causes of borehole instability. The key to
effective problem solving is identification and treatment of the source, not the effect. Details of
the various preventative or remedial actions are covered in subsequent Subtopics.

1.5.2 HOLE EROSION


CAUSE
Hole erosion results from the hydraulic impact on formations with poor inter-grain cementation.
Generally it is caused by turbulent fluid flow in the annulus or excessive circulation in one place
with the bit off bottom.

IMPACT
The annular fluid velocity will be reduced in enlarged hole sections. If the drilling fluid is not
highly pseudoplastic, the cuttings can concentrate in this area. Eventually they may form a ‘mud
ring’or ball of agglomerated cuttings, which in severe cases can lead to hole pack-off and stuck
pipe.
Many logging tools require contact with the borehole wall. If the washout is irregular the tool
contact will be intermittent giving poor data. If the hole is excessively large the tool may not
even contact the wall. Ledges may cause the logging tools to hang-up.
During well killing operations if a gas bubble encounters a washout it will expand laterally and
the height will reduce proportionately, changing the hydrostatic pressure. If it re-enters a near
gauge portion, the opposite will happen. Choke control will need to be accurate and rapid to
maintain the bottom hole pressure constant.
Ledges may hold up casing, particularly in deviated holes. Good cementing practice requires
turbulent flow to ensure proper drilling fluid removal. Large washed out sections may cause the
flow to become laminar and induce channelling or poor drilling fluid removal. Eddies in the flow
may cause entrapment of drilling fluid pockets in the cement.

PREVENTION

• • Keep the flow regime laminar, where possible. Maintain highly pseudoplastic rheology
(n<0·5); the critical Reynold’s Number is inversely proportional to the flow Index ‘n’.
• • High low shear rate viscosity has been successfully used to resist movement of loose
formation grains. Along with the reduced flow rate requirements this makes an excellent
fluid for unconsolidated formations.
• • Minimise circulating off bottom. Always reciprocate the pipe a full kelly length. When
circulating bottoms up, remove one or two pipe joints half way through so as to relocate the
impact area.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 27


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

• • In silty formations examine the possibility of water sensitive clays causing further
destabilisation. If suspected, test with small treatments of inhibiting chemicals or polymers.
• Use of K+ to combat such instability has proven detrimental in some areas. Lattice
collapse is thought to lead to mechanical instability. One such area is in the northern region
of the Malay Basin.
CURE
None. Once the problem has manifested itself the only action is careful planning for subsequent
activities.

1.5.3 SWELLING SHALE


CAUSE
Swelling shale is the plastic deformation into the wellbore of high water content shales. This
often occurs in the younger formations in the upper hole sections. It is the result of water
imbibition by a smectitic shale. In deep, older, formations it is caused by entrapped fluids
(abnormal pressure).

IMPACT
The annular diameter is reduced. The drill string, logging tools and casing may not easily pass
through. Increased annular friction pressure losses may raise the ECD above the fracture
pressure for a lower zone. .

PREVENTION

• • Ensure that the fluid pressure gradient is higher than that of the formation.
• • For the younger clays, evaluate an inhibitor to mitigate water imbibition effect. Cl-, Ca++
and PO4--- generally prove effective. The reaction rate of K+ is too slow. Encapsulating
polymers are ineffective in stopping water imbibition over a long period; though they may
assist in maintaining cuttings integrity.

CURE

• • If the problem is not underbalanced drilling fluid density, apply an inhibitor. Increase
dosage gradually and observe reaction. If no effect is noted, a long chain encapsulating
polymer may assist in the short term.
• • The problem is most easily handled if water imbibition is controlled from the outset. Once
it has started it is generally very difficult to control or reverse.

1.5.4 SPALLING SHALE

CAUSE
Spalling shale is caused by the formation pressure exceeding the drilling fluid hydrostatic
pressure; Pf > Pm The rock’s low permeability resists pressure equalisation. If the differential is
higher than the tensile strength the rock will fail by ‘exploding’into the wellbore. The spalled
pieces are often long and twisted; like shrapnel.

28 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

IMPACT
Apart from hole enlargement, covered above, spalling can have a major impact on drilling.
Large pieces can quickly build up in the annulus and can pack-off around the larger diameters
(i.e. stabilisers and bit); blocking circulation and sticking the pipe .

PREVENTION

• • Ensure that the fluid pressure gradient is higher than that of the formation. (Except when
underbalanced drilling is being undertaken, the borehole pressure should always be higher
than the formation pressure. If not, then a kick would result if a porous and permeable zone
is penetrated.)
CURE

• • Raise the drilling fluid density. Examine the cuttings on the shakers for confirmation of
the effect of the treatment. Be aware, however, of the fracture pressure limit.

1.5.5 SLOUGHING SHALE

CAUSE
Sloughing shale is caused by brittle failure resulting from differential rock stress. This can be
due to tectonic activity or deviation of the well bore from vertical. The rock can fail in either
tension or compression depending upon the orientation of the stresses to the wellbore wall. The
sloughed pieces tend to be slivers or flat shapes for tensile failure and block shapes for
compressive failure.

IMPACT
Comparable with spalling shale.

PREVENTION

• • The drilling fluid hydrostatic cannot fully oppose the maximum rock stress. However
maintaining a positive pressure overbalance against the formation pressure will help to hold
the failed rock pieces in place.
• • Wellbore fluid communication with the pore fluid will raise the near wellbore pore
pressure and negate the differential effect. Pore isolation techniques such as TAME
(Thermally Activated Mud Emulsion) or IOES (Invert Oil Emulsion Systems) will maintain the
differential effect.
• • In some formations water imbibition can accelerate destabilisation. If suspected, test with
small treatments of inhibiting chemicals, generally Cl- and K+.

CURE

• • The problem is most easily handled if a positive overbalance is maintained from the
outset. Once sloughing has started it can be very difficult to control or reverse.
• • Slowly raising the fluid density can maintain a positive differential for a longer period.
• • Apply pore isolating techniques; TAME or IOES.
• • If the problem is not underbalanced pressure, apply an inhibitor. Increase dosage
gradually and observe reaction. If no effect is noted a long chain encapsulating polymer may
assist in the short term.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 29


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.5.6 SALT FORMATIONS

CAUSE
Salt formations can cause problems as a result of wellbore instability through plastic
deformation or dissolution by undersaturated water based fluids.

EFFECT
Plastic deformation results in a reduced wellbore size while dissolution causes hole washout.

PREVENTION

• • Sufficient fluid density to resist plastic flow; for the period needed to drill and case off the
section.
• • Use a saturated salt water based drilling fluid or an inert IOES.

CURE

• • If the problem is not severe, use the preventative measures above.


• • Plastically deformed salt can be washed out with an undersaturated brine.
There is no cure for washed out salt sections – these cannot be replaced.

30 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.6 – CLAY CHEMISTRY


1.6.1 INTRODUCTION
The vast majority of formations drilled are marine, clastic (sedimentary) formations. The bulk of
these are mudstones and shales, which are predominantly composed of clay. Therefore it is
helpful to know something about the basic chemistry, composition and reactive nature of these
minerals.

1.6.2 CLAY TYPES

GENERAL COMPOSITION
The normally encountered clays are similar in composition and structure. They are formed by
the weathering of igneous minerals. They are then transported by the streams and rivers and
deposited in lakes, swamps and the seas. Burial compacts them into sedimentary rocks.
Each clay lattice is made up of two sheets of silica tetrahedra with a central sheet of alumina
octahedra. The tips of the tetrahedra point towards the centre of the lattice, and with one of the
hydroxyls of the octahedral sheet form a common layer. The lattices are continuous in the x and
y directions (horizontal plane) and are stacked one above the other in the z direction (vertical).
The O-- layers of each tetrahedra base are adjacent to O-- layers of the neighbouring lattice, with
the consequence that there is a weak bond and an excellent cleavage plane between them. In
between the lattices, bound water is oriented such that the two hydrogens face each layer of
oxygens.
Differences between the
various clays encountered
are primarily due to
substitution of the aluminium
in the central octahedral
layer and silica in the outer
tetrahedral layers by other
multivalent cations. This
creates a charge imbalance
which is compensated by
adsorbed exchange of
cations in the interlattice
zone. Chlorite is the
exception in that the
interlattice zone is filled with
a further molecular sheet
structure.
Figure 6.1.10 : Clay lattice building blocks

DIAGENESIS
Diagenesis is the sequence of increasing modification (diagenesis), through this substitution
and exchange.
Feldspar (source mineral for weathering)
Smectite
Mixed Layer Clay (a smectite to illite graduation)
Illite

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 31


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Muscovite
Conversion to the next clay group in
the sequence is catalysed by
increasing input energy from the depth
of burial and geothermal heat. The
sequence is marked by a reduction
from high reactivity, to water and ion
exchange, to inert interlattice activity.
This is a result of the ever decreasing
interlattice separation and the binding
effect of the Potassium (K+), which
‘fixes’adjacent clay platelets into their
most stable condition.

Figure 6.1.11 : Clay diagenesis cycle

Smectite (Montmorillonite, Bentonite)


Slight substitution in the clay lattice results in about 0·66 anionic (-ve) charge of per cell unit.
This is balanced by exchangeable cations (+ve) adsorbed between the unit layers.
A main feature of the smectite group is the
wide interlattice gap and weak bonding. Water
and other polar molecules can enter between
the unit layers and cause the lattice to expand
in the z direction. The interlattice dimension
varies from 9·6 Å to complete separation.
The interlattice cations are loosely bound and
can be readily exchanged; with the
replacement power ranking of
Li<Na<K<Ca<Mg<Al.
The two main exchangeable cations are Na +
and Ca++. The multivalent cation smectite is
less reactive with water. Calcium more readily
exchanges with sodium than sodium replaces
calcium. This phenomenon is used in drilling
fluid design for stabilising smectite clay
sections.
The Potassium ion is unique in that its
hydrated size, and co-ordination properties, fit
exactly into the basal oxygen sheet of the
Figure 6.1.12 : Smectite clay structure tetrahedral layer. When exchanged for the
other cations the interlattice distance
decreases to the minimum height, the potassium is very difficult to remove and the lattices are
essentially fixed. This is the final stage in the diagenesis of smectite to illite.
This phenomenon is used to stabilise clays that have been exposed to sufficient pressure and
temperature for diagenesis, but where the original depositional environment was deficient in
potassium (i.e. lacustrine).

32 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Illite
Illite is a transitional stage in the
diagenesis of smectite to muscovite. The
lattice structure is the same as smectite
except that there is a higher degree of
substitution of Al+++ for Si ++++. The charge
deficiency is increased to 1·3 – 1·5 per
unit cell, mostly in the silica sheets and
therefore closer to the surface. K+ is the
fixed interlattice cation.
Because of these differences, the illite
lattices are relatively fixed in position, so
that polar ions cannot enter readily
between them and cause expansion. Thus
they are not very sensitive to water.
The traditional shale classification (after
Mondshine) shown in Table 6.1.6 clearly
shows the diagenetic trend. With Figure 6.1.13 : Illite-Muscovite clay structure
increasing burial, the water content
decreases, the density increases, the salinity rises and the amount of reactive (high Cation
Exchange Capacity) clay decreases. Exceptions are formations with abnormal pressures (high
water content and porosity) and where the original deposition environment was deficient in
potassium (high CEC).

Table 6.1.6 : Shale classification This classification


can be used to
Water Density Salinity CEC Texture broadly
content categorise shales
% g/cc g/l meq/100g into different
inhibition
1 70-25 1.2-1.5 >20 20-40 Soft requirements, as
2 25-15 1.5-2.2 20-60 10-20 Firm shown in Table
6.1.7.
3 15-5 2.2-2.5 40-100 3-10 Hard
4 5-2 2.5-2.7 60-330 0-3 Brittle
5 10-2 2.3-2.7 40-250 5-20 Firm-Hard

Table 6.1.7 : Shale inhibition requirements

Instability Mechanism Stabilising Requirements


1 Rapid hydration, swelling Chemical change
and dispersion
2 Hydration, slight swelling, Isolation from water,
spalling chemical retarding.
3 Slight hydration, spalling, Isolation, differential
tectonic stress pressure
4 Tectonic stress Differential pressure
5 Hydration, spalling Isolation from water,
chemical diagenesis

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 33


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

CHLORITE
Chlorite is a mixed layer clay derived from the different
source minerals. The structure is basically the same as the
other clays except that in between the mica layers is a free
floating alumina octahedral ‘brucite’layer. The deficiency
charge on the talc layers is balanced by the excess charge
on the brucite sheet. The bonding between the sheets is
partly electrostatic and partly due to adjacent sheets of
oxygen and hydroxyl ions. The fixed nature of the structure
precludes adsorption of dipolar molecules.
Thus it is non-reactive to water.

Figure 6.1.14 : Chlorite clay structure

KAOLINITE
Kaolinite has a slightly different structure. It is a two layer
type which is equi-dimensional in the x and y directions. The
charges within the lattice are balanced. Hence there are no
adsorbed interlattice ions and it is non-expanding.
Thus it is non-reactive to water.

Figure 6.1.15 : Kaolinite clay structure

34 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.7 – INHIBITION


1.7.1 INHIBITING CHEMICALS

INTRODUCTION
There are three approaches to stopping the clay formations deteriorating upon contact with the
drilling fluid:
• slow down the clay-water reaction or render the clay inert (inhibiting chemicals).
• limit the penetration into the shales (polymers, asphaltenes and polyglycols)
• render the drilling fluid inert (invert oil emulsion systems)
In the younger shales the main destabilising mechanism is dispersion of the clay lattices by
penetration of water into the interlattice zone. Limiting water penetration in these formations is
difficult due to their rapid reaction rate. Using IOES is generally not economic due to the large
volumes required and the potential for downhole losses. The main stabilising mechanism is the
use of inhibitive chemicals.

CATION EXCHANGE

General
The interlayer cations, which control the dispersion of clay lattices, are exchangeable. Many
factors influence this reaction.
The replacing power of the common cations is Na+<K+<Ca++<Mg++<NH4 +. The exchange is
stoichiometric and the laws of mass action hold. Increased concentration of the replacing cation
results in greater exchange. The ease of release depends not only on the ion, but also upon the
other ions filling the remainder of the exchange positions. Replaceability varies with the nature
of the anions present in the solution; Ca++ in the hydroxyl form is more available for exchange
than the sulphate variety. The pH dramatically affects the reaction. Fixation of the exchange
cations varies with the size of ions of the same valence. For ions of equal valence, those that
are the least hydrated have the greatest energy of replacement. K+ fits into the basal oxygen
sheet and remains fixed. The internal clay structure also plays an important role.
With so many influencing factors, predicting the response of a particular shale is potentially
unreliable. In exploration drilling the estimate will generally be reliant upon experience in
surrounding areas. In development drilling, cores (albeit sidewall cores) are available and
should be tested to determine the most effective solution. Recovered cuttings cannot be used
as they will have already undergone some alteration.

Chloride
Highly ionic solutions, particularly those with monovalent anions severely reduce the rate of
water imbibition by smectite clays. The most common, and most economical, is chloride (Cl-);
usually as common salt, NaCl. In offshore applications this is readily available (and free) from
the sea water (20,000 mg/l).

Calcium
The Ca++ smectite is considerably less reactive to water than the Na+ variety. Ca++ preferentially
replaces Na+. Common sources of calcium are: CaCl2, Ca(OH) 2 [lime] and CaSO4.2H2O [gyp].
Calcium drilling fluids are more difficult to run as most common additives adversely react with
divalent ions; there are some tolerant materials available. High calcium systems, in conjunction

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 35


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

with high temperatures and hydro-aluminium silicates (clays), can form a type of cement,
rendering the drilling fluid irretrievably solid.

Magnesium
Mg++ reacts similarly to Ca++ . However many more additives are adversely sensitive to Mg++.

Potassium
A primary agent in the diagenesis of smectite to illite/muscovite. The process is normally slow
(geological time) and requires high energy (pressure and heat). However in some cases (K+
deficient deposition environments) the reaction does progress fast enough to be beneficial.
Commonly K+ is provided by KCl.
K+ activity can be negated by high concentrations of Na +. K+ varieties of common fluid additives,
such as KOH and K2CO 3, are available. When using sea water, ensure sufficient K+
concentration to exceed that of the Na+ .
Once fashionable were Potassium-Lime/Gyp systems. It was theorised that first the Ca++ would
convert the reactive Na+ smectite to the low reactive type and then the slower reacting K+ would
then convert the smectite to sub-illite. Exchange chemistry indicates that this cannot happen.
KOH has been promoted as a stabiliser for reactive clays. However, the OH- radical is the prime
clay dispersive element; therefore this reaction is dubious.

Phosphate
Complexing of the phosphate anion with the exchangeable cations can preclude cation
exchange and water imbibition. The most commonly employed forms are PO4- or P2O 7-. Bit
balling additives are phosphate surfactants. Most phosphates have a temperature limit of 65°C;
though Na2 HPO2 can be used up to ±200°C.

Other Compounds
Periodically other chemicals are investigated or promoted. The reactions, and any side effects,
should be thoroughly investigated before field testing.

1.7.2 INHIBITING POLYMERS


In the more competent shales the naturally low permeability resists ingress of water, within the
time frame of drilling the section, and the shales are usually composed of the less reactive Illite.
The main destabilising mechanism is differential tectonic stress.
The drilling fluid cannot permanently protect the formation against this deterioration. However it
can mitigate the effect by providing a restraining differential pressure to hold the failed pieces in
place. To maintain this protection until casing point the fluid must resist pressure equalisation
into the shale for that length of time.
Cuttings from these formations also need protection from the annular environment. They are
subjected to considerable force and abrading action in their journey. Maintaining them at the
largest possible size facilitates easier and earlier removal at the surface. This protection must
be rapid as the cuttings are being attacked immediately they are released from the bottom of
the hole.

ENCAPSULATING POLYMERS
Coating the exposed clay edges at the well bore wall with high molecular weight polymers to
slow down or try and repel the water is not effective. Such materials are too large to effectively
stop pressure transmission.

36 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The limited success reported in Table 6.1.8 : Comparative molecular sizes


the field is attributed to a
mechanical binding effect from Material Size (Å) Material Size (Å)
these highly adsorptive
materials or to other Pore throat 10–50 Salts 1–5
mechanisms in the system, Low m.wt. 5–50 High m.wt. 50–500
such as increased polymers polymers
pseudoplasticity.
Bentonite 10,000 Barytes >10,000

Encapsulating polymers can provide sufficient protection to the cuttings to allow them to be
transported to the surface. Application is limited to the shales that produce actual cuttings during
drilling (medium to hard). The soft shales mechanically disintegrate too easily, and every small
particle of shale will take up polymer. This consumes expensive material for no benefit in
keeping the particles together.

PAC (Poly Anionic Cellulose)


PAC is a modified CMC. It is a relatively long chain polymer that is Poly Anionically charged.

PHPA (Partially Hydrolysed Polyacrylate/Amide)


PHPA is a synthetic long chain copolymer based upon acrylic acid. The side chains are highly
anionic.

HYDROPHOBIC POLYMERS
These materials are anionic asphaltene like substances. Application is limited to high
temperature wells where they can soften and bond to the borehole walls. Like encapsulating
polymers, they do not stop pore pressure penetration. Their limited success in certain areas is
attributed to a mechanical binding effect.

BLOCKING AGENTS

TAME (Thermally Activated Mud Emulsion)


Outside of invert oil emulsion systems the only available material to effectively block the pore
throats and stop pressure transmission are polyglycols.
These molecules are normally soluble in a drilling fluid at surface conditions. When the
temperature passes a critical point, the polyglycols change to an insoluble phase; this transition
is called the cloud point. The resultant micro-gels are large enough to block the shale pore
throats and stop pressure transmission.
The transition temperature can be regulated with the choice of polyglycol and salinity of the
base water to match the cloud point with the formation temperature. The polymer then
penetrates the pore throat, heats up, comes out of solution and blocks further penetration.

1.7.3 INHIBITIVE SYSTEMS


DESIGN
Having decided to use an inhibiting system, selection then proceeds to satisfy all the criteria to
drill the well.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 37


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Selection Criteria
In addition to those already discussed, other performance criteria are:
• Fluid Invasion
- Minimum petrophysical log interference
- Minimum reservoir impact
• Filter Cake Minimise differential sticking
• Lubricity Minimum drilling energy loss
The drilling fluid must also satisfy some common requirements, such as:
• Environmental Non toxic and safe
• Temperature Tolerant to the expected downhole & surface temperatures
• Compatibility No adverse reaction with other additives
• Contamination Tolerant of expected contaminants
• Ease of use Minimum manpower
• No Lumping Maximum utilisation
• Rapid mixing Fast preparation in emergency

Selection Process
Each phase is analysed. The fluid properties are investigated to determine the performance
levels required. Additives are compared against the models. The economics of the various
products are then evaluated to select the optimum fluid for the well.

TYPICAL FORMULATIONS
The salt polymer systems follow the same basic make-up. Typical components are: hardness
sequestrant, inhibiting salt, viscosifier, encapsulating polymer, filter cake polymer, hydroxide,
defoamer, biocide, lubricant (high angle directional only), anti-scalant, corrosion protection,
weighting material and oxygen scavenger.

Saltwater Polymer

Upper hole sections where hole stability is from type 1 and 2 shales and uncemented
formations.
• Inhibiting Salt
- NaCl (low concentrations)
- CaCl2 (low concentrations)
- Phosphate (low concentrations) for bit balling.
• Pore Fluid Isolation
- Polyglycol
• Viscosifier
- Bentonite
- CMC Hi Vis (upper sections)
- Xanthan Gum (lower critical sections)
• Encapsulator
- PAC (type 2 shale only)
- PHPA (type 2 shale only)
• Filter cake
- Bentonite (uncemented formations)
- Stabilised starch
- CMC Lo Vis

38 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

• pH
- Caustic Soda (NaOH)
Salt Polymer
Type 2, 3 and 4 shales. Additives in addition, or alternative to, those listed for the saltwater-
polymer system:
• Inhibiting Salt
- NaCl (up to saturation)
• Viscosifier
- Xanthan Gum

KCl Polymer
Type 5 shales. Additives in addition, or alternative to, those listed for the salt-polymer system:
• Inhibiting Salt
- KCl ( 3 to 7 % for freshwater based)
(10 to 15 % for sea water based)
• pH Caustic Potash (KOH)
There are many individual variations depending upon the specific goals to be achieved, the
conditions prevailing and the economics of the operation. The above are purely meant as typical
guidelines.

ENGINEERING
The key to successfully drilling unstable ground is maintaining stable properties and
composition.
In addition the system must be adaptable to variances from the original hypotheses. Unless
permanently converted , any potentially troublesome formation will revert to being problematic if
the stabilising mechanism is diluted or removed. Most fluid designs are based upon what will
probably happen, some on what might happen, but very few upon what will happen. Thus the
engineer must be aware of changes in the formation and its relation to the drilling fluid. If a
change is observed or if the fluid is not inhibiting the formation sufficiently he must adjust the
right parameters accordingly.
A key requirement for effective management of the inhibitive drilling fluid is single function
additives. Individual properties can then be adjusted without interference to the other properties.
This is essential for maintaining overall efficiency.

Monitoring Performance
The key to proper engineering of the inhibited fluid is being able to recognise the indicators of a
problem.

Penetration rate
The penetration rate can be an indicator of increased porosity in a shale section due to
abnormal pressure.

Cuttings and Cavings


The cuttings being screened at the shakers are a primary indicator of what is happening
downhole.
Class 1 shales Poor quality cuttings.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 39


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Class 2 shales Good sized, though soft, cuttings when properly inhibited.
Class 3 shales Hard cuttings when properly inhibited.
Class 4 shales Very hard. These generally cannot be broken with the finger nail.
Class 5 shales Good firm cuttings when properly inhibited.
Shape and size Long teeth rock bits and PDC’s give big cuttings, carbide buttons give small
chips, diamonds give very small cuttings. The driller is a good reference on
this subject. Long slivers indicate geopressure. Blocks indicate stress
compressive failure, slivers or flat shape tensile failure.
Volume An increase in the amount of cuttings could indicate a higher ROP, improved
cutting inhibition, deterioration of the borehole , or a slug of poorly transported
cuttings.
A decrease could indicate increased borehole inhibition, increasing dispersion
of the formation, or decreasing transport efficiency.

Hole Conditions
Tight hole and excessive torque indicate either that the hole is less than gauge, or poor cuttings
removal. Reduced gauge can be due to swelling of water sensitive young clays or geopressured
plastic formations, whilst poor cuttings removal is due to poor hole cleaning.

Background Gas
In abnormally pressured formations extra gas is contained in the larger porosity.

Bottoms up lag time


Any washed out or undergauge sections will affect the circulation time.

Drilling fluid Properties


Several drilling fluid properties can give an insight into the effect of the fluid on hole stability.
An increase in fine solids may indicate dispersion of the formation clays.
If KCl is being employed the take-up of K+ by the formation can be interpreted by analysing
plots of the K+ and Cl- concentrations . If the K+ is being consumed the plots will diverge with an
increasing Cl-. If the plots are parallel then no K+ is being taken out of the system.

Property Control and Adjustment


An inhibited drilling fluid should be designed where each major property is controlled with a
single function additive. The make up will generally be:
• Viscosifier
• Inhibiting Chemical
• Encapsulating Polymer
• Filtrate Reducing Agent
• Weighting Material
Replacement volume, for new hole drilled, should be with whole, prepared fluid. This will
minimise variations to properties resulting from addition variations.

40 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.8 – INVERT OIL EMULSION SYSTEM


1.8.1 INTRODUCTION
A non aqueous fluid in contact with a water sensitive clay will not have the problem of
interaction and dispersion of the lattices. An immiscible liquid will have a capillary resistance to
flow into the minute pore throats of the shale, thus resisting pore pressure penetration.
Therefore a drilling fluid based upon an oil medium can resist borehole instability from both of
these mechanisms.

1.8.2 THEORY
It is not practical to use an all oil drilling fluid. In any drilling operation there are numerous
sources of water; including released connate water. Encapsulated, high salinity water has an
osmotic interaction with the shale. This reduces the desire to imbibe water. Thus the invert oil
emulsion system (IOES) was developed.
The encapsulated water must be evenly disseminated and emulsified to resist coalescence. The
emulsifier is a surfactant (a fatty acid soap) that makes the surface of the water droplet oil wet
and repellent to water. {Oil in water emulsifiers work in the opposite way by making oil droplets
water wet and repellent to oil.}
This barrier acts as a semi-permeable membrane. It is selective in allowing the passage of
water without allowing any of the dissolved salts to pass. The clays in the formations being
drilled contain interlayer water. The encapsulated water is made more saline than the connate
water. By the process of osmosis it pulls water from the formation. This negates the desire of
the newly drilled rock to ‘sponge’up fluid from the drilling fluid.
IOES have a low coefficient of friction due to the natural lubricating properties of the base oil.
This can be advantageous in high angle wells. They are particularly efficient and cost effective
on multi-well platforms and sites where the fluid can be reconditioned and reused.
IOES is not preferred on exploration wells as the oil interferes with visual hydrocarbon spotting,
gas chromatography and a number of the normally used logging parameters.
The primary disadvantages with IOES is the cost of the base oil and the environmental impact.

1.8.3 ENGINEERING

BASE OIL
A primary restriction on the use of IOES is the potential health and environmental impact of the
base oil. Diesel, the traditional medium, is unacceptable due to the content of aromatic
hydrocarbons. So called ‘Low Toxicity’mineral oil is also not preferred as it still has an
unacceptably high impact on the environment.
Several modified vegetable and animal (fish) oils have been developed and are marketed under
the name of ‘Pseudo Oil Base Mud’. Whilst apparently acceptable within the current legislative
limits these are still oil base fluids and can have a range of impacts on the environment.
Before specifying an IOES all HSE factors must be evaluated; such as oxygen consumption on
biodegradation, the toxicity of all breakdown products, nutrient blanketing and additive toxicity.

OIL/WATER RATIO
The desired ratio will depend upon the density, viscosity and the amount of water expected to
be absorbed. If a lot of water is drawn then the salinity of a low water content drilling fluid would

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 41


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

be quickly reduced - the expected water intake per circulation should be no more than 0·5% of
the water content of the drilling fluid.
Most oil systems operate comfortably in the range of oil/water ratio of 90/10 to 65/35; though
some systems can be prepared to handle ratios as high as 35/65.

EMULSIFIERS
The encapsulating barrier of the emulsifier is the main protection against water contact with the
shales. It must be strong enough the resist the differential pressure applied at the wellbore wall.
The hydroxyl ion converts the fatty acid to the emulsifying surfactant. Lime, Ca(OH)2, is used; to
be compatible with the CaCl2 salinity of the water phase.

SALINITY
Because of its higher attraction for water (activity) CaCl2 is the preferred salt.
There are two schools of thought on the concentration required to drill a hole: balanced (Exxon
promoted) and overbalanced (industry, incl. Shell, promoted) activity.
In the balanced activity system the engineer matches the desire to absorb water (activity) of the
IOES to the activity of the formation. The main problems with this concept are:
• The activity is based upon measurements on the cuttings, which have already been
exposed to the oil mud and stress relieved. Their activity has been modified.
• Over a long section of drilling the formation may change its activity. Which formation to
balance?
In the overbalanced concept the IOES is run with a considerably higher salinity. The objective is
to create a differential force towards the wellbore. This will provide an extra protection against
any desire for the formation to imbibe fluid.
An important point to remember when making Ca Cl2 additions is its natural water content, 72-
77% or 95-98%, and its hygroscopic nature. Old stocks should always be checked in the retort.
The water content will affect both the oil/water ratio and the final solution salinity.

Determining Salinity Requirements


To ensure that the IOES has a higher activity it is essential to determine the actual activity of the
formation.
Several methods of direct measurement have been proposed, however all use the already
modified cuttings.
By analysing all of the influencing factors, an activity balance can be established.
To Formation From Formation
Hydrostatic Head of the Drilling fluid Pore Pressure
Desire from Salinity of Connate Water Desire from Salinity of Drilling Fluid
Matrix Stress Relief of Formation
The lowest IOES activity should balance or exceed the highest formation activity.

VISCOSIFIER
An emulsion has a base consistency; comparable to that of dispersed, fine, solids. Amine
treated bentonite, called organophyllic clay, is the primary viscosifier for IOES. It provides a
bentonite like viscosity.

42 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

FLUID LOSS
The bentonite filter cake is supplemented with amine treated lignite and other materials that
decrease the cake permeability.

CONDITIONER
A term given to an additive (often Lecithin based) that oil wets normally water wet solids such as
barytes to disperse them in the continuous oil phase..

THINNER
A chemical strips the amine from the organophyllic clay rendering it ineffective. The
disadvantage is that any other amine treated material is also stripped and subsequent additions
of viscosifier may be affected.

WEIGHTING AGENTS
These are as per water based drilling fluids.
Note that Barytes which has been recovered by a flotation process may be coated in a water
wetting surfactant which could create problems in an IOES application.

1.8.4 MONITORING
Apart from the normal properties it is important to ensure that the IOES has an activity
overbalance and emulsion stability.
The activity balance should be regularly updated for formation pressure and salinity changes.
The best method of evaluating the emulsion stability is by examining the filtrate from a High
Temperature High Pressure fluid loss test. The filtrate should contain no oil. Otherwise the
membrane has not been effective at this pressure overbalance. If water is observed, emulsifier
must be added to reinforce the membrane.
A quick check of the emulsion stability can be made with the Emulsion Stability Meter. It uses
an imposed voltage potential to determine the resistance to coalescing the water droplets to
pass the current. However it should only be used as an initial screening tool. Confirmation of
stability must be made with the fluid loss test.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 43


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.9 – CONTAMINANTS


1.9.1 INTRODUCTION
A contaminant is an intruding element that adversely impacts upon the functions of the drilling
fluid. It could be an ion, drilled solids, temperature or even water. This Topic deals with chemical
contaminants, their effect on water based bentonite and polymer fluids, identification tests and
treatment guide-lines.

1.9.2 CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS

SOURCES
The main chemical contaminants are:
• Divalent Cations Calcium/Magnesium
• Monovalent Anion Chloride
• Acid Gases H2S, CO2
The sources of the contaminant can be manifold and it is critical to the treatment decision that
this be identified. If it is a short term event then remedial treatment may suffice. However, if it is
likely to be a long term contamination then conversion to a more tolerant fluid type may be
required.
Table 6.1.9 : Normal Sources of Contamination

Gypsum
CaSO4.2H2O Seawater NaCl
Formation
Anhydrite
CaSO4 Saltwater Flow NaCl
Formation
Calcium Chloride
Green
Ca(OH) 2 Salt Formation Na/K/Mg.Cl
Cement
Accidental Lime, Gypsum, Accidental NaCl, KCl,
Additions Cement, CaCl2 Additions CaCl2
Mg.SO4,
Magnesium Formation Gases Formation H2S, CO2
KCl.MgCl2

EFFECTS
Contaminants have varying effects on different drilling fluid materials; due to composition and
ionic variances. See Table 6.1.10
Flocculated bentonite will have a higher low shear viscosity and increased thixotropy.
Precipitated polymers will be taken out of solution and their influence reduced.

IDENTIFICATION
Most contamination can be deduced from the routine density and Marsh Funnel tests and a
simple pH measurement.
Solids increase the density and viscosity, water has the opposite effect. Gas drops the density,
but raises the viscosity. Cement contains lime which raises the pH while the acid gases lower it.
In the event of formation or accidental contamination the Total Hardness test, which identifies
both Calcium and Magnesium, will suffice to differentiate it from Chloride contamination. It is
used in preference, as chlorides cannot be treated out.

44 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

In some case the Calcium and


Magnesium need to be further
differentiated as some of the newer
generation polymers are sensitive to only
one. The supplier should advise on such
idiosyncrasies.
H2S can be readily differentiated from CO2
by a gas detector and its unique odour.
However care should be taken with high
pH fluids as the H2S may be in solution
and not immediately detectable.
Carbonate treatment of Ca++ and Mg++
contamination can dramatically affect the
pH/Alkalinity of the drilling fluid. This is
covered more fully under property testing,
but suffice it to say that alkalinity should
always be tested when Carbonate ions Figure 6.1.16 : Contaminant identification
have been used.

Table 6.1.10 : Generalised reactions to contaminants

Material Ca/Mg Cl Acid Gases


Mildly
Bentonite Strongly flocculated Mildly flocculated
flocculated
Starch No effect No effect No effect
CMC/PAC Strongly precipitated No effect No effect
HEC No effect No effect No effect
Guar Gum Strongly precipitated No effect No effect
Rendered non-ionic
Polyacrylate/Amide
Strongly precipitated (decreased viscosity) No effect
(PHPA)
(no effect on encapsulation)
pH<11.0: No effect
Xanthan No effect No effect
pH>11.0: Precipitated

1.9.3 TREATMENT
CALCIUM/MAGNESIUM
Short term contamination can readily be treated out with a sequestrant, see Table 6.1.11. The
choice will depend on availability, application, environment and the resultant effect on the fluid.
Long term contamination requires a change to a tolerant drilling fluid. ‘Gyp’and ‘Lime’drilling
fluids are very inefficient in terms of rheology, with high friction pressure losses and poor
carrying characteristics. But their worst feature is the progressive Gel Strengths that can
develop during trips (particular at elevated bottom hole temperatures), resulting in high surge
and swab effects and excessive pump pressures to break circulation. This can, in part, be
controlled with ‘thinners’(also called ‘deflocculants’); though their use should be limited because
they effect the low shear part of rheology profile by reducing interparticle attraction.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 45


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Modern polymer technology has developed products which are tolerant to high levels of Ca++
and Mg++ whilst providing good fluid properties for efficient operation, see Table 6.1.12.

Table 6.1.11 : Sequestrants for Treating Ca/Mg Contamination

Soda Ash Na2CO 3 Rapid acting with increase in pH. Over treatment in bentonite systems
causes fragile gels.
Bicarb NaHCO3 Moderate reaction. The acid radical buffers the increase in pH. More
difficult to over treat.
---
Phosphate PO4 Fast reaction. Lowers the pH. Strong deflocculant for
++
bentonite.
Useful for polymer systems sensitive to pH and Ca (such as
Xanthan). Phosphate can contribute to stabilising reactive clays.
Polyphosphates have a temperature limitation of 200oC; while
pyrophosphates will break down at 75oC to the clay flocculating
orthophosphate.

Table 6.1.12 : Polymers for Use in Ca/Mg Contaminated Fluids

Xanthan is stable in most cases; excluding heavy cement contamination


Viscosifier (high pH).
HEC is stable in all calcium/magnesium solutions.
Starch is the most effective polymer for calcium and magnesium
Filter Cake contaminated systems. Several synthetic polymers are available and
HEC can provide some fluid loss control.
++ ++ +
Ca and Mg are inhibitors for young, highly water sensitive, clays. K
Clay
has been used in conjunction with them, but the effectiveness in the
Stabiliser
presence of such a high concentration of other ions is unproved.

CHLORIDE
There is no chemical treatment to remove the Chloride ion. Unless the contamination is a one
off occurrence, the system must be converted to compatible products. Most polymers work
effectively in salt solutions up to sea water concentration. Various products are discussed in the
sections on salt polymer systems.

ACID GASES
H2S can be held in solution in the safe HS- and S-- form by maintaining the fluid’s pH above 9.
Remedial treatment uses sequestering ions for H2S, these are Fe++ and Zn ++. Zinc compounds
(as Carbonate or Chelate) are used as a pre-treatment and for moderate levels of
contamination (<1,000 mg/l). A special form of sintered Fe2O 3 (sponge) is sometimes used;
however it is a solid and creates surface processing problems.
In solution CO2 is in the bicarbonate form. Calcium is used as the sequestrant.

OTHER
Borate (B4O 7--) can be found in sea water. It can affect some polymers, but most particularly
Guar Gum. Removal treatment is expensive, hence a change of polymer is recommended.

46 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.9.4 TREATMENT CHEMISTRY


In the treatment of contaminants the objective is to remove the majority of the offending ion,
without introducing new complications. It is desirable to match the amount of treatment and
offending contaminant.

CALCIUM WITH SODA ASH (ANHYDRITE SOURCE)


Equation Ca+++ CO3-- = CaCO3 ? (precipitate)
(1g/l) (2·5 g/l)
Carbonate constitutes 56·6% of Soda Ash; thus 2·83 g/l is required.
SODIUM BICARBONATE
Equation Ca++ + HCO3- = CaCO3 ⇓ (precipitate) + H+
(1g/l) (2,5 g/l)
Bicarbonate constitutes 72·6% of Sodium Bicarbonate: thus 2.1 g/l is required.
H2S WITH ZINC
Equation S-- + Zn ++ = ZnS ⇓ (precipitate)
(1g/l) (x g/l)
3 gm/l will remove 500 mg/l.
H 2S WITH IRON
Equation S-- + Fe++ = FeS ⇓ (precipitate)
3 gm/l will remove 200 mg/l.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 47


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.10 – TEMPERATURE


1.10.1 DEGRADATION LIMITATIONS
Nearly all drilling fluid additives have a temperature limitations.
Table 6.1.13 : Temperature limits for common materials

Material Temp oC Material Temp oC


Bentonite 200 Attapulgite/Sepiolite 400
Lignosulphonate 175 Lignite 260
Pyrophosphates 75 Polyphosphates 200
Copolymer Deflocculants 200 Guar Gum 65
Cellulosic Polymers 140 Xanthan Gum 150
PHPA 200 Asphaltines 260
Starch 70 Other Synthetic Polymers 200
Barite no limit Calcium Carbonate 600
NaCl/KCl/CaCl2 no limit Na2CO 3/NaHCO3 no limit

The polysaccharide polymers can be extended by the use of oxygen and free radical
scavengers. Potassium formate will extend long chain polysaccharides, like xanthan gum, up to
190°C.
Note that the actual degradation characteristics of a product may vary and should be checked
with the supplier.

1.10.2 TEMPERATURE RESPONSE


In high temperature applications bentonite based fluids can exhibit an unusual response. Initially
the slurry will thin, as do most drilling fluids. However, with prolonged exposure to temperatures
over 175°C the surface charge and water envelope change in nature. The fluid begins to
develop a high progressive gel structure. This results in a very thick drilling fluid on bottom that
requires a very high pump pressure to re-initiate flow. The problem can be combated by the use
of deflocculants (which must be tolerant to the temperatures as well). However care must be
taken with this method as the thinned fluid may be compounded by the initial temperature
thinning effect, resulting in very poor suspension characteristics.
All viscosifying polymers thin with increasing temperature. There are two primary aspects to the
effect:
• Viscosity reduction at the elevated temperatures.
• Viscosity regain upon cooling.
The specific response is individual to each polymer. The temperature response curves for both
low and high shear rates (recommended 5·11 sec-1 and 511 sec-1) should be requested from the
supplier. Reduction in the Consistency Index ‘K’can be compensated by raising the
concentration. But an increase in the Flow Index ‘n’shows a loss of performance potential.

48 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Table 6.1.14 : Temperature Effects on Common Polymers

% Initial viscosity % Initial viscosity


Polymer
@ 135oC on cooling
Xanthan 40 95
Guar 0 0
Cellulosics 25 65
Synthetics 10 90

Note that the temperature response of blended materials should be conducted on the final slurry
as synergistic or antagonistic effects may significantly alter the results.

1.10.3 BREAKDOWN PRODUCTS


Lignosulphonate breaks down and gives off S- and SO2-- gases which are corrosive and lower
the pH of the drilling fluid rendering remaining lignosulphonate ineffectual.
Deflocculating pyrophosphates convert to the strongly flocculating orthophosphates.
Most polymers simply break along the backbone to yield smaller, less effect, polymeric chains.
The natural polymers (Starch, Guar, Xanthan etc.) on breaking do not cause any side effects.
Cellulosics, and synthetic polymers, can produce shorter chain end products that are strong
deflocculants.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 49


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.11 – DRILLED SOLIDS


1.11.1 INTRODUCTION
It has been said that “without drilled solids there would be no need for a drilling fluid engineer”.
To some respect this is true. A large proportion of the day to day treatments are in response to
the effects of unremovable solids and to replace volume lost via the solids removal equipment.
The drilling process breaks the formations into small cuttings. During the journey to surface they
are subjected to various abrading forces further reducing them in size. The larger sizes are
readily separated by the shale shaker, and other solids removal equipment. But the finer
particles are harder to remove.
Recycling of these smaller particles in the circulating system reduces the performance of the
drilling operation, is potentially damaging to the production zone and can be a safety risk.

1.11.2 EFFECT
DRILLING FLUID
Solids incorporation in the drilling fluid raises the fluid density and viscosity. Maintenance to a
maximum limit will require dilution; increasing cost. Viscosity effects will raise the ECD impact
on the bottom of the hole.
Incorporated solids provide increased surface area upon which the base liquids adsorb. This
reduces the free fluid for flow, raising the consistency of the fluid. The solids are essentially inert
and do not have the ability to provide a pseudoplastic (shear thinning) rheology. This reduces
drilling performance.
The incorporated drilled solids are generally angular, blocky shaped, particles. In the filter cake
they create porosity and permeability. Thus the cake continues to leak filtrate to the formation.
This results in a continuing build up of cake, increasing the potential for differential sticking of
the drill string.

DRILLING RATE
The recycled solids are good bridging particles. They restrict the flow of fluid into the fractures
made by the bit thus reducing the drilling rate.
The angular, hard, particles abrade and erode components in the circulating system. This can
cause premature failure resulting in expensive downtime, repairs (mud pumps), and possibly
the failure of safety devices.

PRODUCTION POTENTIAL
The bridging effect of the incorporated drilled solids also impacts upon the permeable
production zone. Once in place the particles are very difficult to remove. The composition of the
solids is mostly silica (SiO2) and clay which are inert to all chemicals except hydrofluoric acid
(HF).

WEIGHTING UP POTENTIAL
The consistency of a drilling fluid is proportional to the surface area of incorporated solids.
Allowing for the effects of viscosifying additives, there is a limit to the amount of solids that a
fluid can incorporate before it is rendered unpumpable. If a kick is taken, it may not be possible
to weight up if this limit will be exceeded.

50 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.11.3 PREVENTION

IN HOLE
The main preventative measure is to ensure that the cuttings are transported to the surface with
as little degradation as possible. This means minimising exposure time and protecting against
weakening.
The rheology of the drilling fluid should provide a high net cuttings velocity (Vf -Vs) and a flat
flow profile to minimise cuttings tumbling. Turbulent flow increases the amount of inter-
particulate collision, increasing degradation. A well designed fluid rheology plays a very
important role in minimising cuttings degradation.
A key element in protecting weak cuttings is a rapid coating with an isolating layer. Highly
anionic, high molecular weight polymers, such as PHPA, can quickly attach to the clay and
provide a suitable barrier.

SURFACE REMOVAL
Surface processing equipment also provide mechanical degradation forces. Rapid removal is
essential in controlling the incorporation of fine drilled solids.

Shale Shakers
The most effective solids removal equipment is the shale shaker. It can handle a wide size
variation and makes a definitive size cut.
If the cuttings are not excessively degraded the shaker is capable of removing the vast majority
of the solids. Multiple units with fine screens, and a suitable drilling fluid design, have removed
up to 85% of the drilled material; with the cut as low as 440 µm.

Hydrocyclones
These use acceleration to separate solids by mass differential. They come in various sizes, but
the most common sizes are:
Desanders8" - 12"
Desilters 4" - 6"
Because of the time needed for separation the hydrocyclone removes a varying proportion of a
range of particle sizes. The cut point is stated as where the cyclone removes 50% of that
particle size. Factors influencing the cut points are shape of particle, density of particle, quantity
of particles, rheology & density of the fluid, shape and length of cone, vortex finder and
discharge orifice.
The specific performance curves are available from the manufacturer.
Table 6.1.15 : Cut Points for Common Hydrocylones

Cone Size D 50 Cone Size D 50 Cone Size D 50


12" 140µm 10" 100 µm 8" 75 µm
6" 50 µm 4" 35 µm 2" 20 µm

Mud Cleaner
Where expensive, or environmentally sensitive, base liquids are used the hydrocyclone can be
used as a concentrator to allow finer screening. This reduces the volume processed by the

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 51


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

screen to improve separation efficiency. In oilfield terminology this has been called a mud
cleaner.

Centrifuge
The last stage in mechanically treating the drilling fluid is the decanting centrifuge. This uses the
same principles as the hydrocyclone. However more energy can be utilised and the influencing
parameters can be varied to tune separation to the solids in the system. It is capable of
removing particles down to about 2 µm.
A variation on the mud cleaner concept is to use a hydrocyclone as a concentrator before
centrifuging.

Flocculants
Chemical flocculants increase the effective particle size and hence quantity of material
separated at each removal stage.
A common flocculant used is FeCl3. This material is a severe skin irritant.

Equipment Sequence
It is important that the removal of drilled solids is conducted in a size decreasing sequence. The
larger particles should be treated by equipment more suited to handle them. Apart from the
aspect of overloading the subsequent equipment, the finer particle treating machines use
increasing energy and thus have a higher mechanical degradation effect.
No fluid should by-pass any stage of treatment. Topping up of tanks must be with already
treated fluid.
Solids removal equipment should not be bypassed for any reason, even lost circulation. Lost
circulation materials are cheaper than the drilling fluid and circulating system components.

Dilution
Dilution is generally an expensive method of removing drilled solids effects. It does not remove
the solids but reduces their concentration. Until discarded with the excess volume they are still
in the system, abrading to finer and finer particles with more and more surface area. In nearly all
cases mechanical removal is cheaper.
As a rule of thumb it takes 25 m3 of dilution for every 1 m3 of solids retained in the fluid.

CURE
Solids removal with a centrifuge (or dilution if insufficient centrifuge capacity).

NO CURE

Deflocculants
These are not a remedial treatment against the build up of drilled solids. They do not remove
the solids.
Deflocculants attach to the negative charges on reactive clays reducing interparticle attraction.
In a bentonite based drilling fluid, the deflocculant will preferentially coat out on the desirable
Na+ Bentonite; negating its beneficial effects.
Deflocculants remove the attraction forces that contribute to the low shear rate viscosity which
is providing beneficial carrying capacity (to minimise cuttings exposure time ).

52 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

In non bentonite based systems, the deflocculant will be ineffectual as it has no reactive
material to work on.
Deflocculants are a cosmetic cover-up of the effects of a solids build-up. They do not remove
the effect and can be likened to taking an aspirin for a bullet wound to the head. They should
only be used in emergency to get the drilling fluid to a usable state. Solids removal should then
be used to restore the desired properties.

1.11.4 MONITORING AND EVALUATION


Each situation must be evaluated separately. A mass balance of volume drilled versus solids
removed will highlight the effectiveness of each removal stage.
The economics of solids removal equipment can be quickly evaluated by comparing the dilution
cost to maintain a specific solids content against the cost of using proper SRE.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 53


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.12
1.12.1 BIT BALLING
Water sensitive, young shales can form soft sticky clay when exposed to water. This sticky clay
can adhere to water wet metal. If the problem becomes severe the clay may block the annulus,
or cover the bit completely.

PREVENTION

• • Ensure good bit and hole cleaning.


• • Specify an inhibitive fluid to limit the water imbibition. Ca++, Cl- and PO4--- ions are
generally very effective.

CURE

• • Apply a concentrated slug of phosphate surfactant to ensure oil wetting of the metal
surfaces.
• • Apply an inhibitor to limit the water imbibition.

1.12.2 TORQUE AND DRAG


Torque is rotational resistance arising from contact with the wellbore. Drag is the linear
resistance. Excessive wall contact and sticky clays / thick filter cake can increase the torque
and drag; reducing drilling efficiency

VERTICAL HOLES
In vertical holes torque and drag are usually well within tolerable levels. High values are an
indicator of a more specific problem and should be investigated to determine the actual cause.
Curing without such an investigation may mask a more serious problem.

DEVIATED HOLES
In deviated holes the drill string is in more intimate contact with the wall. Over long sections the
contact may eventually require a lubricant to optimise the delivery of power.
Again, excessive build up of torque and drag is generally an indicator of a different problem and
all possible causes should be thoroughly investigated before applying treatments with
lubricants.

ADDITIVES
Several proprietary brands of lubricant are available. They are based upon blends of mineral
oils or processed vegetable and fish oils. The choice is based upon proven performance and
HSE considerations.
The use of straight diesel oil is bad practice. It is toxic, has a very low surface adsorption
potential and is rapidly emulsified in the fluid rendering it ineffectual.

1.12.3 DIFFERENTIALLY STUCK PIPE


The inability to move the drill string can result from a number of circumstances; many of which
have already been covered. The remaining, drilling fluid related, cause is differential sticking.

54 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

CAUSE
Differential pressure, towards the formation, also acts on any pipe in contact with the filter cake.
A soft, thick, cake can act like a ‘suction’cup and hold the pipe in place.

PREVENTION

• • Ensure that the minimum drilling fluid density, to safely drill the well, is maintained.
• • Use additives that will give a thin, tough, slick, impermeable cake under downhole
conditions.
• • Use fluted or spiral drill collars.
• • Do not let pipe remain stationary longer than absolutely necessary and never when
pumping.
CURE

• • Carefully(!) reduce the mud gradient (well control!)


• Immediately reduce the pump rate and commence jarring. Do not stop pumps entirely as the
cuttings must be circulated out to avoid complicating the problem.
• • Spot one of the proprietary blended spotting fluids (packaged oil based fluids).
• Use sufficient to cover the zone plus 10% above. A further volume is required, as the pill
should be moved 5 m up the hole every 10 minutes to ensure good contact. Normally
soaking time should be approximately 1 hour. Therefore an extra 30 m of annular volume is
needed.
• The spotting fluid should be weighted to prevent an ingress of formation fluid.
• • Failing this an overshot with a drilling face is needed. During fishing the drilling fluid must
be highly treated to minimise new filter cake build up. High levels of lubricant should be
used to minimise friction on both overshot and drill string. The fluid density must be kept to a
minimum to ensure that the overshot is not stuck as well.

1.12.4 LOST CIRCULATION


INTRODUCTION
When the hydrostatic pressure of the fluid exceeds the invasion resistance fluid will be lost to
the formation. When the permeability channels exceed a size that the normal drilling fluid cake
or particles cannot bridge then whole fluid will be lost into the formation. This is lost circulation.
The severity of the loss will dictate the criticality of the situation and the response required.
Seepage losses (less than 25% of the circulating rate) are usually treated as a routine problem
without interfering with the ongoing operation. Severe losses (above 25%) are considered
hazardous and require ongoing operations (excluding well control) to be halted until remedial
action has resolved the problem.
In certain circumstances, incurable problem with manageable risk, losses may be untreated.

Prevention
Minimum overbalance of hydrostatic head, plus ECD.

Cure
• • Cut down the pump rate

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 55


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

• • Reduce the overbalance


• • Block the permeation channels.

CONVENTIONAL MATERIALS

Plating Materials
These are materials such as mica, cellophane flakes and paper sacks that supplement the filter
cake. This cure is often temporary as the cake can be later removed by the actions of downhole
tool and fluid.

Bridging and Blocking Materials


These are materials such as ground limestone, nut hulls and fibres that enter the permeation
channels and bridge off. These are effective in stopping losses into both course granular
formations and small fractures. The effect is generally permanent.

SPECIAL TECHNIQUES

Foam
To produce a lighter hydrostatic column. The average density of a drilling foam is less than 1·2
kPa/m.

Plugging Material
Granular bentonite swells by imbibing the formation and drilling fluid water to form a plug of
plastic material.
A ‘Gunk’ squeeze (DOB) is created with powdered bentonite dispersed in oil (1,100 kg/m3). The
slurry is pumped into the offending zone. On contact with water the bentonite hydrates and
forms a plastic plug.
‘DOB2C’is a variation on the gunk squeeze. Cement replaces 60% of the bentonite. The
resultant plug is stronger and more permanent.
Hydrational polymers (called super-absorbants) can take up to 1,000 times their own weight of
fresh water. The unhydrated grains are lost to the formation. They absorb water from the
formation and swell to occupy the volume of the absorbed water. The space or fracture is then
filled with a gel.

Floating Mud Cap


When incurable lost circulation is below a zone of high pressure a ‘floating mud cap’can be
used. Lighter fluid is pumped down the drill string for drilling. In the annulus a column of higher
density fluid is maintained by continual injection into the top of the annulus. Both fluids are lost
into the thief zone, along with the drilled cuttings, but sufficient hydrostatic head is maintained
on the high pressure zone to control an influx.
This method requires very careful planning and good logistics. Connections and trips are
difficult operations under these conditions. If the heavy column of drilling fluid cannot be
maintained then a kick will be taken and an underground blowout may result.

56 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.12.5 CORROSION

INTRODUCTION
Corrosion is the destruction of metal by chemical or electrochemical interaction with the
environment. In drilling the main effect of corrosion is weakening of the drill pipe resulting in
washouts or pin failure.
The major corrodants encountered are carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and
dissolved oxygen (O2). In salt based drilling fluids the corrosion potential can be enhanced by
the presence of dissociated ions. Influencing factors are the chemical composition of the fluid,
temperature, velocity, pressure and metallurgy. The specific reactions are complex with more
than one type of corrosion possible. Specific details on the reactions and interplay should be
sought from the corrosion engineers.

TREATMENT
Oxygen is the most commonly occurring corrodant in the drilling fluid. Sodium Sulphite powder
and Ammonium Bisulphite liquid are the two most common oxygen scavengers used.
Treatments are usually based upon maintaining 100 mg/l excess sulphite in the system.
Additions should be made directly at the mud pump suction so that oxygen is removed at the
point of entering the system.
Oil wetting agents lay a monomolecular layer of hydrocarbon based fluid against the metal
components to minimise water, ion and oxygen contact.
Scale (calcium, magnesium or iron carbonate) can form a precipitate layer on metal surfaces.
The layer can seal the metal from the environment, and from corrosion control treatments.
Under the layer initial corrosion establishes a galvanic system which leads to further corrosion.
Organic phosphates are used to precipitate divalent ions which would otherwise react with the
carbonate to form the scale.
As previously discussed hydrogen sulphide is directly scavenged from the system.
Sulphate reducing bacteria cause sulphide corrosion in an anaerobic environment. The
organisms utilise hydrogen formed by electrochemical corrosion during their growth to reduce
sulphate to H 2S. Various bactericides are available. In polymer fluids these are often required to
prevent degradation of the polymers.

MONITORING
The corrosion coupon is a ring placed into a tool joint. It gives an accurate measure of the
corrosion rate taking place inside the drill string. The coupon must be accurately weighed and
visually checked.
The galvanic probe gives a continuous, and instantaneous reading, of the corrosion taking place
on two sacrificial pieces of metal (brass and iron). It gives an qualitative indication of changes to
the corrosion rate.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 57


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 13 – WELL CONTROL


Being able to control subsurface pressures is critical for the safety of the whole drilling
operation. This Topic deals only with the drilling fluid aspects of well control. Well control
procedures are not covered.

1.13.1 PREVENTION
Except when under-balanced drilling, the pressure exerted by the drilling fluid must be higher
than the bottom hole formation pressure.
Where abnormal pressures are present the drilling fluid density must be routinely and frequently
checked. Additions of water (or oil) at all locations on the rig must be controlled and monitored.

1.13.2 EFFECTS OF KICK TYPES

SALT WATER
Dilution of additives and flocculation of bentonite are the major problems. In IOES the water
must be rapidly emulsified to prevent water wetting the weighting material which will then drop
out.

OIL
Entrained oil acts as a solid in water-based drilling fluids. In IOES it dilutes additive
concentration and density.

GAS
In IOES gas can be soluble in the hydrocarbon phase whilst under pressure. This complicates
annular pressure response during well killing as the gas comes out of solution and rapidly
expands higher in the well.

1.13.3 CURE
Raise the density of the fluid to control the pore pressure and circulate out the influx. Any
detrimental impact on the drilling fluid should be treated as soon as possible.

1.13.4 PREPAREDNESS
It is important to know the circulating volume and rate at which density can be increase with the
rig’s mixing system.

1.13.5 KICK AND LOST CIRCULATION


If one of the formations exposed is weak and cannot withstand the wellbore pressures then lost
circulation will occur, complicating the well killing procedure.

LOSSES ABOVE KICK


The problem is to provide a variable hydrostatic head whereby the exerted pressure at the kick
zone is sufficient to kill the well and the pressure at the loss zone is insufficient to lose drilling
fluid. A tricky situation.
In severe cases, trying to circulate different density fluids around will not be successful. The
generally accepted method is to set a barytes plug over the overpressured zone. This will

58 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

provide a very heavy and impermeable barrier. The losses can then be cured before drilling
ahead
The plug is basically a slurry of barytes and water that is pumped down the drill pipe and placed
at the bottom of the wellbore. The purpose of the barytes plug is twofold:
• Kill the well
• Settle and mechanically plug the wellbore.
The composition of a barytes plug is:
• Water 0·5 m3
• Barytes 320 kg
• Deflocculant:
- Phosphate 2 kg/m3
- Lignosulphonate 8 kg/m3 (+ Caustic 3 kg/m3)
- Lignite 12 kg/m3 (+ Caustic 3 kg/m3)
- Synthetic Polymer 2 kg/m3
The barytes plug is mixed and pumped on the fly; usually with a cement unit. Once started,
pumping cannot stop until the plug is outside the drill string. Otherwise it will bridge off and stop
any circulation capability.

LOSSES BELOW KICK


This is the more difficult situation of the two. The losses must be tackled first and then the well
killed.
However the influx must be controlled from rising up the annulus. Weighted fluid must be
continually pumped into the top of the annulus to stop ingress of the kick material. Low density
drilling fluid must be continually pumped in through the drillpipe to satisfy the losses to the thief
zone thus minimising the loss of weighted fluid.
When remedial action taken to combat the lost circulation, it must be mixed separately to the
circulating fluid and then placed without stopping circulation to avoid losing control.
The major problem is being able to prepare all of the drilling fluids fast enough to maintain
control.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 59


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.14 – CEMENTING


Successful primary cementation requires an uncontaminated annulus of cement with good bond
to the pipe and borehole. Key factors for the cement slurry to achieve this are: a consistent hole
shape throughout the section and good displacement of the drilling fluid.

1.14.1 HOLE CONDITION


Drilling fluid displacement from inconsistent washouts is difficult to achieve.
Enlarged hole sizes require higher pumping rates to achieve turbulence for good scouring of the
annulus to remove the drilling fluid and filter cake.
Excessive hole enlargement requires larger volumes of cement to be pumped. Apart from the
expense, the slurry will require conditioning to modify the thickening time. Whenever additives
are used there is a possibility of an incorrect assessment of the dosage required. Unlike faulty
drilling fluids treatments, poor cement conditioning is permanent.
Proper fluid design, to produce a stable and relatively consistent hole shape, is essential.

1.14.2 DRILLING FLUID CONDITION


A properly designed and maintained drilling fluid should need no conditioning for either running
casing or cementing. It should already provide good suspension, have low energy flow and be
easy to displace.

1.14.3 DRILLING FLUID - CEMENT SPACERS


The key factors in designing the cement spacer are:
• Avoiding contamination of either fluid.
• Displacement of all drilling fluid in front of cement
• Removal of any filter cake that has developed.
RHEOLOGY
The rheology of the spacer should be designed to ensure complete displacement of the drilling
fluid. The rheology should promote easy transition into turbulent flow to assist scouring.

VOLUME
The annular height of the spacer should be sufficient to have >4 minutes of contact time.

FORMULATION
Water is the simplest spacer. It can be easily pumped in turbulence and has the minimum
contamination potential. A light cement slurry (scavenger slurry) is the next simplest spacer.
The cement grains provide some scouring effect to assist in filter cake erosion.
For complicated operations the spacer may require special additives. With IOES the pipes and
formations are oil wet. Cement bonding may be compromised. A water wetting surfactant is
often added to the spacer.
For overpressure situations the length of the spacer column should be kept to a minimum to
avoid well control problems. The spacer can be weighted with salt (up to 1·2 S.G.). Otherwise a
scavenger slurry can be used to achieve sufficient spacer density.
High temperature, high pressure wells may require specially designed weighted spacers. These
should be thoroughly tested for compatibility with both fluids before usage.

60 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

1.14.4 CEMENT PLUGS


Sometimes a problem during drilling (such as lost circulation, stuck pipe, kick control or
deviation correction) requires a cement plug to be placed in the hole. Problems in setting these
plugs above lower density drilling fluids, without a bridge plug, can arise from unstable
interfaces causing the fluids to intermingle thus contaminating the integrity of the plug.
This can be avoided by spotting a high consistency pill below the intended cement plug. A
thixotropic rheology is better suited to this application as the gel strength is more able to resist
the flow tendency of the heavier cement. The pill should be prepared by adding bentonite to the
existing fluid to get maximum consistency with a pumpable fluid. For the average polymer
based drilling fluid 7% to 8% bentonite (pre-hydrated) can be added to give the fluid needed
thixotropy.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 61


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

TOPIC 1.15 – DRILL-IN, COMPLETION AND WELL


INTERVENTION FLUIDS
1.15.1 INTRODUCTION
Once the top of the reservoir is reached there must be a change in the criteria for the design of
the fluids to be used in the well. In addition to achieving the operational processes there is the
need to protect the reservoir from impairment. Therefore the drilling fluid is generally re-named
to 'drill-in' fluid to ensure that the right mind-set is achieved. In effect the drill-in fluid should be
regarded as a completion or well intervention fluid. Therefore all fluids will be regarded within
this category. Specific criteria for the operational aspect will conform to those covered in
previous chapters (i.e.: rheology)
The design criteria remain essentially the same except that the fluid should not have a negative
impact on the reservoir production (or injection) potential.

1.15.2 PRODUCTIVITY IMPAIRMENT


There are two terms used in connection with a reduction in permeability caused by the drilling
process:
• Damage is defined as “a reduction in permeability in the immediate near wellbore
region”.
• Impairment is defined as “an irreversible reduction in permeability in the immediate near
wellbore region”.
Most damage manifests itself in the near well bore area – the zone of damage is consequently
called the “skin”. The resulting effect on production is termed the “skin effect”.
The mechanisms of damage are:
• particles plugging the formation pore throats or fractures
• drilling and completion fluids reacting with formation water to form a precipitate
• emulsion from mixing oil and water and stabilising with natural or introduced surfactants
• surfactants changing the wetting characteristics (anti bit balling additives and invert oil
emulsifiers)
Of these mechanisms particle plugging is by far the major contributory factor; though emulsions
and oil wetting changes from IOES fluids can affect the effective fluid viscosity. Therefore the
major attention in design is on ensuring that the plugging mechanism does not result in
irreversible permeability reduction.

1.15.3 WELLBORE FLUID DESIGN


The primary design criterion for drill-in, completion and well intervention fluids is to ensure
minimum impairment of the reservoir. In most cases it will be difficult to eliminate all material
that will cause impairment. Therefore in most cases the design will allow for a damage
mechanism, via a reversible process, to initially protect the reservoir and then allow maximum
permeability regain.

DENSITY CONTROL
In most cases the fluid will be prepared using a brine to achieve the density required for well
control. If the required density cannot be achieved then 'acid soluble' weighting agents are

62 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

generally used. In some circumstances (high density with perforated completions) insoluble
solid weighting agents are used.
Refer to Topic 1.2.6 for information on using soluble salts as weighting agents.

CRYSTALLISATION TEMPERATURE
Care must be taken with brine solutions (including those with polymers added) to ensure that
they are used above the crystallisation point. Otherwise the salt can precipitate and the salinity
and density will drop and the viscosity will increase.
The crystallisation temperature is the temperature at which the brine is saturated with respect to
one of the salts that it contains. Below the crystallisation temperature, this least soluble salt
becomes insoluble and precipitates. The crystals can be either salt solids or freshwater ice.
The salt will crystallise first at the coolest location (usually the tanks). If the salt crystals settle in
the pits, the density of the brine pumped downhole will be lower. As more crystals form, without
settling, they will increase the brine viscosity. Eventually the viscosity can become so high that
the brine appears to be frozen solid. It cannot be pumped and the lines are plugged. In deep
offshore wells this cooling point could be in the riser; with the disastrous consequences of a
'frozen' annulus.
• First Crystal To Appear (FCTA): This is the temperature at which visible crystals start to
form. It appears at the first inflexion in the cooling curve. It will include some super-
cooling effect.
• True Crystallisation Temperature (TCT): This is the maximum temperature reached
following the super-cooling minimum. It is the FCTA if no super-cooling takes place.
• Last Crystal To Dissolve (LCTD): This is the temperature at which crystals disappear, or
the inflexion point in the heating curve.
TCT is the best measure of the crystallisation temperature of a brine. The test procedure
defined in API Recommended Practices 13J should be used.
For treated brines both the raw salt solution and the final mix should be tested as additives can
have a significant effect. For example Xanthan Gum and Starch are crystallisation temperature
suppressants.
The crystallisation temperature can be altered by changing the brine composition. As a rule the
lower the TCT the higher the price. Therefore, selecting a brine with an excessively low
crystallisation temperature can be very costly. You should specify a TCT a few degrees below
the lowest expected temperature.

FORMATION COMPATIBILITY.
There are three areas of concern with respect to compatibility: rock, water and hydrocarbons.

Rock
The primary concern is whether the fluid will cause swelling/dispersion of the formation clays in
the pore spaces.
Normally providing some salinity will cure this problem. This is usually achieved by using 3%
NH4Cl or 2% KCl. However, in some cases, a higher salinity can also destabilise the formation
clays. It is generally difficult to assess whether formation clays will be affected by a fluid without
extensive core flush testing.
However as a general rule, if the same ionic character as the original formation water can be
maintained then the clays should remain in equilibrium. Hence some areas now use
'Dehydration Water' to formulate Drill-in and CWI Fluids.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 63


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

Water
The chief concern is the formation of precipitates, or scales. The most common scales are
calcium and iron carbonates; calcium, barium and strontium sulphates; sodium chloride; iron
sulphide; and silicates. Scale can be formed due to:
• mixing incompatible waters (divalent cations and anions react together)
• solubility change with temperature
• solubility change with temperature and pressure.
For example: certain saturated CaBr2/CaCl2 brines can cause NaCl to precipitate from saturated
NaCl formation water. A 60°C TCT brine will give strong precipitation whilst a -37°C brine will
have no reaction.
Compatibility checks on all waters should always be confirmed by testing at downhole
conditions.

Hydrocarbons
The chief concern is the formation of emulsions or the destabilisation of heavy crude
components that precipitate as sludge. Generally low to moderate salinity brines will not be
problematic. It is only the heavy, fully saturated brines that will cause problems; particularly
those with a very high or very low pH.
Surfactants added to the system may exacerbate the problem.
Compatibility testing with core flushing should be carried out.

FLUID/SOLID INVASION CONTROL.


Large overbalance, high permeable streaks and long perforated or open-hole sections can
cause substantial loss of fluid to the formation. Such losses are expensive and may increase
production impairment potential.
To minimise the potential for production impairment many wells are deliberately 'damaged' with
materials that will naturally disappear or can be removed. These materials can be bridging
agents (sized particulates) viscosifiers or cross-linked polymers.

Bridging Materials (including lost circulation materials)


There are currently three basic options for bridging : sized salt, ground CaCO3 and oil soluble
resin.
Sized salt is the basis of the Thixsal and Bridgsal systems. It requires a saturated brine base.
The major advantage of the system is that the solute for the bridging agent is water. The
disadvantages are that the base brine density is high and not suitable for depleted reservoir
applications, the wash water solution can cause formation damage and the dissolving process
can be slow (using rig time or delaying production).
Ground CaCO3 is the most common bridging material used, especially in the case of major fluid
losses. The advantages are that it is cheap and the dissolving action with acid is vigorous
promoting easy removal. The disadvantages are that the acid solution is dangerous and
corrosive.
Oil soluble resin is currently not used outside of some limited applications in stimulation as it is
not always fully oil soluble when used in water based systems.
Particle size must be chosen such that the smallest grain will be > 33% of the largest pore
throat size. This is normally selected after examining cores and scanning electron microscope
photos.

64 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

The filter cake formed by the bridging agents, if maintained externally may not be robust enough
to survive the activities being conducted in the well. Therefore it is often supplemented with a
binding agent such as starch. This is selected because it is generally not damaging in its own
right and is fully acid soluble.

Viscosifiers
High filtrate viscosities can damage the effective permeability of the formation (increasing m to
decrease Q). It is essential to use fully acid soluble polymers such as HEC and Biopolymer
(Xanthan Gum).
Viscosifiers will also be required when using bridging particulates (albeit at a lower
concentration). The key factor in selecting the material is high quality pure material that is
degradable under the conditions of use. For example: HEC comes in many grades; some with
high concentrations of acid insoluble impurities. Xanthan Gum is not readily acid degradable
below 65°C.

Crossed Linked Polymers


These are rarely used in working fluids except during hydraulic fracturing due to the difficulty to
control the process without affecting a circulating fluid.

CORROSION
The electrically conductive nature of brines provides an environment favourable for the
corrosion of metal to occur. Given that it is not practical to stop corrosion the aim is to reduce it
to an acceptable level. For temporary fluids (CWIF) this is generally set as <10 kg/m2/yr using a
corrosion coupon test. For packer fluids this must be lower due to the prolonged exposure.
For most brine based systems the key agent for corrosion is oxygen. The solubility of oxygen
decreases as the saturation point of the salt is approached. Even though a brine may initially
contain oxygen, if it is not replenished it will soon deplete as a result of the corrosion process.
Therefore oxygen scavengers are not used. In brines to be circulated ammonium bisulphite is
generally used to scavenge the oxygen.
Film forming amine corrosion inhibitors are not recommended as they are also adsorbing on
silica and silicates and may cause impairment. Organophosphate inhibitors are also not used as
they often give incomplete coverage and can result in galvanic cell corrosion.
Very dense bromide brines have a very low pH which means that they can cause leaching
corrosion (preferentially dissolving grains in the steel).
Bacterial growth can cause acid conditions to develop. Additions of high shock, degradable
biocides are sometimes used.

1.15.4 WELLBORE FLUID PREPARATION


Despite all of the best planning and pre-testing, poor preparation of the fluids to be used in the
reservoir section is still the major source of production impairment.

SOLIDS
Solids, other than those deliberately added, can be picked up from the drilling process, dirty
tanks, the drill water supply or even airborne sources.

POLYMERS
Non-completion grade HEC contains high concentrations of partially- or un-reacted cellulose
material that can block pore throats. This cellulose material is not acid soluble.

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 65


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

HEC and Xanthan which is not fully hydrated can have minute polymer 'lumps' which
subsequently hydrate in place causing blockage and hence impairment. This polymer blockage
is often difficult to access with acid stimulation.

FILTRATION
Both HEC and Xanthan, when fully hydrated will pass through a 2mm filter cell. Therefore to
ensure that no damaging materials have been included the fluid should be filtered to less than
the pore through size before adding the bridging agent.
To ensure that fluid will readily pass through the filters without excessive blocking the solution
should be tested with the API fluid loss test. Both polymers will pass through the Watman 50
filter paper.

1.15.5 DAMAGE/IMPAIRMENT REMOVAL


The key factor is to ensure that all of the "damaging" material is removed to restore original
formation permeability. This is more easily said than done.

• • In carbonate formations acidising the matrix can release the bridging solids. It is
essential however that the acid solution is not too strong. Otherwise it will dissolve the first
point of contact, establish a path to the permeable formation and be "lost" before it can
remove all of the cake. Too often a report states "Got good losses immediately upon
contacting with acid". This usually means that some cake is still there to impair production.
• The acid wash treatment should be lower strength, at or near balance to the reservoir
pressure and should preferably be viscosified to resist seepage into the formation.
• • Inert solids are difficult to remove. Surging and jetting can be tried, though success is
usually very low.
• • Emulsion blocks can be treated with a demulsifier but success is very low.
• • Surfactants can restore the wetting characteristics but success is very low

66 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids 67


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

APPENDIX – TERMINOLOGY A ND S YMBOLS


The drilling industry uses technology from various sources; internal and external. Consequently
different symbols often depict the same data unit or the same symbols represents different data.
This can lead to confusion for the uninitiated. For example ‘d’is sometimes used to denote
depth. However, in rock mechanics ‘z’is used for depth. In engineering ‘d’is used to denote
diameter.
Standard drilling fluid symbols and terminology have been used in this Part – the ones most
commonly used. These may differ from those that you are familiar with.

Standard Units
All working units are ‘standard Shell’oilfield SI. Alternate units are shown in brackets where
appropriate. Pressure is in Pascals (Pa).
Table 6.1.16 : Symbols used

Symbol Denotes Symbol Denotes Symbol Denotes


r radius d diameter π pi
l length w width h height
difference/
D depth ∆ δ, λ Correction Factors
differential
µm micron/micrometer k 1000 M 1,000,000
P pressure T temperature v volume
ρ density Q pump rate V velocity
γ shear rate τ shear stress µ viscosity
θ dial reading n power law index K consistency factor
ε energy ω work σ stress
φ angle C constant c constant
log log10 ln natural logarithm ± approximately
Reaction
â á Reaction Gas
precipitate

68 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids
W181 – Preparation for the Wellsite Drilling Fluids

WEDLP Edition 10

SECT I ON 6 PART 1

D R I L L I N G FL U I D S

70 WEDLP Edition 10 : S6P1 – Drilling fluids


February 2001

Вам также может понравиться