Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163

www.elsevier.com/locate/ces
A mechanistic model to determine the critical ow velocity required to
initiate the movement of spherical bed particles in inclined channels
A. Ramadan
a,
, P. Skalle
a
, S. T. Johansen
b
a
Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
b
SINTEF Material and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Received 28 June 2001; received in revised form 18 June 2002; accepted 4 November 2002
Abstract
This study presents a mechanistic model that predicts the critical velocity, which is required to initiate the movement of solid bed
particles. The model is developed by considering uid ow over a stationary bed of solid particles of uniform thickness, which is resting
on an inclined pipe wall. Sets of sand bed critical velocity tests were performed to verify the predictions of the model. An 80 mm ow loop
with recirculation facilities was constructed to measure the critical velocities of the sand beds. The tests were carried out by observing the
movement of the bed particles in a transparent pipe while regulating the owrate of the uid. Water and aqueous solutions of PolyAnoinic
Cellulose were used as a test uid. The critical velocities of four sand beds with dierent particle size ranges were measured. The
model was used to predict the critical velocities of the beds. The model predictions and experimentally measured data show satisfactory
agreement. The results also indicated that the critical velocity is inuenced by the properties of the uid, ow parameters, and particle size.
? 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Modeling; Mathematical; Solids transport; Non-Newtonian uid; Hydrodynamics; Particles
1. Introduction
One of the primary functions of the drilling uid is to
transport drilled cuttings out of the hole. The problem of
cutting transport in vertical wells has been studied for many
years. The transport eciency in vertical wells is often eval-
uated by determining the relative velocity between the cut-
tings and the drilling uid. For good hole cleaning, vertical
ow is preferable because cuttings fall in the opposite di-
rection to the drilling mudow. For an inclined well, the
direction of cuttings settling is still vertical, but the uid ve-
locity has a reduced vertical component. This decreases the
muds capability to suspend drilled cuttings. At a high angle
of inclination a particle that sediments through the mud has
a short distance to travel before striking the borehole wall.
Once it has reached at the wall, the particle has little chance
to be entrained because local uid velocities near the wall
are very low and insucient to re-entrain the particle into

Corresponding author. Dr. A. Ramadan NTNU Department of

Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics Trondheim, Norway. Tel.:
+47-140-325-07-303; fax: +47-140-32-50-7733.
E-mail address: rahahmed@yahoo.ca (A. Ramadan).
the ow. Consequently, the particle resident time in the an-
nular space increases signicantly resulting in a higher con-
centration of cuttings in the wellbore and the formation of
a cuttings bed that creates operational problems (Sierman
& Becker, 1990).
The most common drilling problems related to cuttings
transportation are either insucient hole cleaning or exces-
sive annular uid velocity that leads to borehole erosion and
higher pressure drop. Considerable borehole erosion may
create borehole stability problems which require running an
extra string of casing or modifying the drilling uid. More-
over, operating at higher frictional pressure drop increases
the hydrostatic pressure signicantly, which may result in
fracturing of the formation. Consequently, current drilling
practice is to keep the hydrostatic pressure as far below the
formation fracturing pressure as possible while drilling. On
the other hand, if minimum drilling uid velocity (critical
velocity) for the cuttings removal is not attained, circula-
tion will be ineective and time consuming. Rasi (1994) has
suggested that insucient hole cleaning usually results in a
buildup of cuttings concentration in the annulus resulting in
the sticking of the pipe as shown in Fig. 1. Obviously, cut-
tings beds impede drill pipe movement, and may result in
0009-2509/03/$ - see front matter ? 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
doi:10.1016/S0009-2509(03)00061-7
2154 A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163
Fig. 1. Sticking of pipe during tripping operation.
extended rig time and higher cost of operation. Therefore,
determination of optimum uid velocity that ensures the re-
moval of cuttings bed with minimum cost of operation and
time is the main objective of the present study.
Since the introduction of directional wells, considerable
eorts have been made to solve the cuttings transport prob-
lem in highly deviated and horizontal wells. Two dierent
solution methodologies are taken as a strategy for the inves-
tigations. The rst one is an experimental method, which
develops empirical relations to predict hole cleaning from
laboratory observations of a pilot well. Another method is
a theoretical approach, which analyzes the physical phe-
nomenon involved in the cleaning process in order to build
a mathematical model. Such a mathematical model is as-
sumed to be capable of predicting the optimum mudow
velocity required to transport the cuttings. Some of the ex-
perimental and theoretical studies come to the same conclu-
sion. However, there are still some remaining controversial
and vague issues that require a detailed and improved un-
derstanding of the mechanisms that initiate the movement
of the bed particles.
Two of the recent modeling studies are those of Clark
and Bickham (1994) and Zou, Patel, and Han (2000). Clark
and Bickham present a mechanistic model for determining
the minimum uid velocity for transporting cuttings without
the formation of a cuttings bed. They also performed critical
velocity test runs using 5 and 8 in ow loops with dierent
uids (water and solutions of HEC and Xanthan Gum). The
predictions of the model showed some agreements with the
test results. Accordingly, they concluded that the mechanical
relationship between the uid and the cuttings particle can
be a means to link the drilling parameters to the critical
velocity.
2. Basic assumptions
Mathematical modeling of the solids bed erosion phenom-
ena requires a considerable idealization of the hydrodynam-
ics in the channel owand the mechanics of the bed particles.
The stochastic interaction forces also need to be replaced
by mean or representative values in order to achieve math-
ematical simplicity. The assumptions applied in the present
Table 1
Basic assumptions in the mechanistic model
Bed Particles Fluid velocity
Uniform thickness Uniform size No uctuation
Void free Uniform density Obeys law of the wall
Stationary Uniform angle of Steady
friction
Uniform rearrange- Spherical
ment
model are given in Table 1. Mostly these assumptions try
to represent non-uniform bed and ow properties by their
mean values. However, the assumption of uniform thickness
faces a challenging problem when ripples are formed. When
we take the average bed thickness we reduce the diculty of
dening the critical velocity since the velocity varies along
the length of a ripple. The formation ripples in the ow does
not only aect the magnitude of the turbulence but also
alters the average ow eld, resulting in three-dimensional
secondary currents. Nevertheless, ripples do not form fre-
quently except when the bed particles are comparable with
the viscous sublayer and when the ow velocity is close to
the critical velocity (Henderson, 1966). Therefore their
formation is determined by the ow condition and bed
properties, and will not be a serious restriction to the
applicability of the model. Normally, the removal of a solid
bed is performed at considerably higher velocity than the
critical velocity.
Furthermore, the velocity prole is assumed to follow
the law of the wall. The applicability of this law, even for
an extremely high relative wall roughness was suggested
by Einstein and El-Samni (1949). Therefore, this law can
be used in estimating the local velocity at the center of a
bed particle. Einstein and El-Samni also measured a random
uctuation of lift force acting on a hemisphere placed in the
turbulent velocity eld and the result indicated that there is
a signicant uctuation in the lift force. Hence, the model
prediction may give us a conservative value by neglecting
the transport enhancing characteristics of turbulent ows.
We also assumed stratied and stationary bed conditions,
because this is the typical condition during cuttings trans-
portation. Moreover, it is preferable to obtain a sucient
transport rate with a lower-pressure drop or with a lower
owrate. Beside this, cuttings beds are considered to have
low uidity and high static friction, resulting in a stationary
bed. Consequently, sliding occurs at a very high bed shear
stress. In such situation it is dicult to run at suciently
high velocity to provide sliding and transport. Moreover, the
bed is assumed to have a uniform rearrangement as shown
in Fig. 2. The average angle of repose of the sand beds was
measured and found to be 30

.
Finally, it is important to assume there are no solids par-
ticles suspended in the uid. Otherwise, the collision of the
suspended particle to the stationary bed particles may have
great inuence in initiating the movement of the bed par-
ticles in addition to the hydrodynamic forces. During the
A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163 2155
Fig. 2. Uniform arrangement of bed particles for 30

angle of repose.
collision of the particles, the bed particle may lift o the
surface and travel in ballistic type of trajectories returning
to the surface. The inuence of collision mainly depends
on the size of the suspended particles and the bed particles. If
the sizes of the suspended particles are relatively very small
then the eect of the particle collision will be negligible.
3. Modeling procedure
3.1. Forces involved in particle transportation
The knowledge of forces acting on a single bed particle
is important in the analysis of solids particle transportation
and resuspension. The interaction between a bed particle
and the uid is realized through momentum exchange. Such
a momentum transfer will impose an external force on the
particle in addition to the force of gravity. The ow of the
uid over a bed exerts hydrodynamic forces on the parti-
cles, which can be strong enough to initiate the motion of a
bed particle by overcoming the stabilizing forces (force of
gravity and plasticity). Therefore, it would be necessary to
study the details of these forces to dene the state of mo-
tion and the trajectory of a given bed particle. The buoy-
ancy force has a positive eect on particle transportation by
acting against gravity.
Plastic force is due to the gel strength of the uid. How-
ever, often the beds contain clay materials that are able to
alter the rheology of the pore uid. Plastic force is only con-
sidered when a particle is stationary on the surface of the bed.
As a result, it is normally considered during the determina-
tion of the threshold condition of a bed particle with plastic
uids. Often the plastic force, F

acting on a single bed par-

ticle is approximated by F

=0.25d
2

t
,
, assuming as if the
bottom hemisphere of the particle is bounded by stagnate
uid as shown in Fig. 3, where t
,
is the yield stress of the
uid. However, Clark and Bickham (1994) have been pre-
sented a more accurate estimation method, which is based on
Slip-line eld theory. Accordingly, the plastic force required
to lift a particle from a stagnant layer of plastic uid is esti-
mated by F

=0.5d
2

t
,
[[+(}2[) sin
2
[cos [sin [],
where [ is the angle of repose.
Drag and lift forces are experienced when any body moves
relative to its surrounding uid. These forces are the result
of pressure and shear stress that can be obtained by the in-
Flow

Stagnant fluid region

Fig. 3. Stagnant uid surrounding a bed particle.

w
pdA
dis
dA
u
Drag force
Lift force
N

Fig. 4. Drag and lift force acting on the surface of a bed particle.
tegration of pressure and shear stress across the surface of
a particle as seen in Fig. 4. However, it is dicult to deter-
mine these distributions experimentally or mathematically.
Therefore, theoretically the net hydrodynamic force can be
calculated as (Gerhart, Gross, & Hochstein, 1992)
F =
_

J
n
dA +
_
t
dis
J
t
dA, (1)
where J
n
and J
t
are unit vectors perpendicular and tangential
to the particle surface, respectively.

is the dynamic pres-

sure distribution on the surface of a particle (

=
t

st
,
where
t
is the total pressure distribution and
st
is the hy-
drostatic pressure distribution), and t
dis
is the wall shear
stress distribution on the surface of a particle. Drag and lift
are the components of the force F in the ow direction and
normal to it. Therefore the formula for drag and lift forces
can be written based on their components:
F
D
=
_
(

cos 0
w
+ t
dis
sin 0
w
) dA (2)
and
F
L
=
_
(

sin 0
w
+ t
dis
cos 0
w
) dA (3)
respectively, where 0
w
is the angle between the normal vec-
tor J
n
and the local ow velocity u. According to Eq. (2),
in physical terms the drag force is the sum of the pressure
drag (the rst term in the integral) plus the friction drag. The
above equations, Eqs. (2) and (3) are valid for any body in
2156 A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163
a uid. However, the diculty in their use lies in obtaining
the appropriate shear stresses and dynamic pressure distri-
butions on the body surface. As a result, other applicable
and convenient methods are often used in practice. The drag
force acting on a bed particle disregarding the lift can be
expressed by Tsuji, Kato, and Janaka (1991):
F
D
= C
D

4
d
2

1
2
j
[
u
2

6
d
3

d
dx
+ [
D
, (4)
where [
D
is the unsteady part of the drag force, u is
the local relative velocity at the center of the particle,
d

is the particle diameter, C

D
is the drag coecient,
d}dx is the global pressure gradient. The rst term on
the right-hand side of Eq. (4) is the steady part of the
drag force at zero-pressure gradient and the second is the
pressure gradient term. The unsteady part of the drag, [
D
includes the added mass and Basset history forces which
accounts for the diusion of vorticity generated at the
particle surface into the surrounding uid. The unsteady
part of the drag force and the pressure gradient force
are negligible in steady uniform ows and low-pressure
gradient ows, respectively (Caulet, van der Lans,
& Luyben, 1996; Meng & van der Gelg, 1991).
The drag coecient, C
D
is a function of the shape, size,
orientation, and surface roughness of the bed particles, uid
properties and ow parameters. Consequently, it is depen-
dent on the particle Reynolds number, Re

. Fitting dierent
experimental curves, White (1991) has presented a corre-
lation that can be used to estimate the drag coecient of
spherical and smooth particles for numerical calculation:
C
D
=
24
Re

+
6
1 + Re
0.5

+ 0.4. (5)
Eq. (5) can be valid for Newtonian and non-Newtonian u-
ids if the denition of the particle Reynolds number is the
same in both cases (Dedegil, 1987). Therefore, it is better
to dene the particle Reynolds number in a more general
form, which is applicable hereafter as
Re

=
u
2
j
[
t
. (6)
The shear stress, t in the denominator will be determined
by the rheological model of the uid at representative shear
rate u}d

. The drag coecient from Eq. (5) is applicable for

a single particle without the presence of a neighboring par-
ticle. Therefore, it is necessary to account for the variation
of drag coecient due to the presence of other neighboring
particles on a surface of a solids bed. This variation in drag
coecient is mainly dependent on the distance between the
particles and the angular position relative to the direction of
the velocity eld. Liang, Hong, and Fan (1996) made an ex-
tensive experimental study on the variation of drag force due
to the presence of other neighboring particles and the angu-
lar position. The result of this experimental study showed
that the drag force varies signicantly with angular position.
Accordingly, the drag ratio, D
R
of drag forces with/without
the presence of a neighboring particle varies from 1.05 to
0.35. The mean value of the ratio becomes about 0.85 if we
consider all the positions around a bed particle. Therefore,
taking the average value of 0.85 for correcting the drag force
would be more reasonable.
Drag force is present in all types of ow around a solids
bed particle and is mostly superior over other forces during
particle transportation. However, lift on a spherical parti-
cle is present only if there is asymmetry in the ow eld.
In channel ow, the existence of no slip condition at the
surface of the bed creates the asymmetry in the ow that
is responsible for the lifting of a particle. Saman (1965)
showed that a small spherical particle moving through a very
viscous liquid in a slow shear ow experiences a lift force.
He derived a formula for the lift force acting on a particle
due to the velocity variation by considering a particle far
from any solid boundaries and constant velocity gradient.
The derivation of his formula is based on obtaining a sin-
gular solution of the NavierStokes equation. After minor
adjustment for bed particles the Samans lift force formula
reads:
F
L
= 1.615
ud
2

j
v
0.5
_
du
d,
_
0.5
, (7)
where v is the kinematic viscosity and , is the vertical dis-
tance from the mean bed level. Saman introduced the gra-
dient Reynolds number, Re
G
=d

(du}d,)}v, which is used

as a parameter for a limiting applicability of his formula. His
formula is applicable when both Re

and Re
G
are less than
unity and Re

Re
0.5
G
. These physical restrictions simply
imply a large pipe Reynolds number and very small particles
that are not close to the wall. By taking a similar analogy
of drag coecient, the lift coecient, C
L
, is dened as
C
L
=
F
L
1
2
(}4)d
2

u
2
j
[
. (8)
Combining Eqs. (7) and (8) it is possible to expressed the
lift coecient by
C
L
= 4.11
_
d

u Re

du
d,
_
0.5
. (9)
3.2. Near-bed velocity prole
As seen from Eqs. (4) and (7) the hydrodynamic forces
depend on the local velocity at the center of the particle.
Therefore, in order to complete the model it is necessary
to prescribe a model for the local velocity at the bed parti-
cles. In turbulent ows, the near-bed velocity prole is of-
ten described by the law of the wall. For Newtonian uids a
generalized formulation of the law of the wall that is valid
throughout the viscous sublayer as well as through the tur-
bulent boundary layer is given by (Persen, 1972):
,
+
=
w

+ A(e
w
1 w 0.5w
2
0.33w
3
0.0417w
4
), (10)
A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163 2157
where w=u
+
, A=0.1108, the von Karman constant, =0.4,
the dimensionless velocity u
+
=u}U
t
, the dimensionless dis-
tance ,
+
=,U
t
}v, where the friction velocity U
t
=(t
b
}j
[
)
0.5
.
On the other hand, if the dimensionless bed particle size,
d
+

= d

U
t
}v, is greater than 70, then velocity prole is
highly dependent on the roughness of the bed. As a result
the above formulation of the law of the wall will not be ap-
plicable (Gerhart et al., 1992; White, 1991). In such a con-
dition, bed particles disrupt the ow in the viscous sublayer
and eventually completely break up the sublayer resulting
in fully turbulent ow. Consequently, the viscous sublayer
does not exist and only a logarithmic prole dominates the
region. Therefore, for rough beds the average roughness is
taken as the characteristic length and the velocity prole es-
timated by
u
U
t
= 2.44 ln(,}e) + 8.5, (11)
where the mean bed roughness is, e which can be conve-
niently replaced by the bed particle diameter, d

(Mehta &
Lee, 1994). The law of the wall applies for the outer layer.
In the outer layer the velocity prole depends on the maxi-
mum velocity, U
max
, pipe diameter, bed friction factor, den-
sity of the uid, and distance from the mean bed level. Thus,
based on experimental observation, an approximate veloc-
ity prole of the outer region is given as a power-law form
(Gerhart et al., 1992):
u
U
max
=
_
2,
D
h
_
n
[
, (12)
where D
h
is the hydraulic diameter of the channel. The max-
imum velocity is estimated as (Gerhart et al., 1992)
U
max
=
(n
[
+ 1)(2n
[
+ 1)
2n
2
[
U, (13)
where U is the mean ow velocity. The value of n
[
is
related to the friction factor [ by the empirical expression as
n
[
=[
0.5
. The power-law prole cannot be used to obtain
the slope at the wall and the center of the pipe. Therefore,
near the bed the velocity gradient can be estimated from the
law of the wall.
In order to apply the law of the wall for Bingham uid
the eective viscosity can be used instead of the Newtonian
viscosity. However, in the case of power-lawuids the use of
the eective viscosity concept in the calculation of near-bed
velocity prole does not yield an accurate result (Bourgoyne,
Millheim, Chenvert, & Young, 1991). Therefore, for these
uids the law of the wall has to be modied. Bobok (1991)
has presented formulas to estimate the velocity prole of
the power law uids in channels. Accordingly, the velocity
prole in the viscous sublayer is expressed as
u
U
t
= U
(2n)}n
t
_
j
[
K
_
1}n
,, (14)
where n is the power law index and K is the consistency
index. Outside the viscous sublayer the velocity prole is
F
D
F
L
W
F
P
P

Fluid flow
x
y

Fig. 5. Forces acting on a single bed particle.

expressed by
u
U
t
=
1

_
_
1
2,
D
h
+ ln
_
1
_
1
2,
D
h
__
+
U
max
U
t
.
(15)
The maximum velocity, U
max
is calculated by
U
max
U
t
=
_
U
2n
t
j
[
K
_
1}n
o
1

_
1 + ln
o
D
h
_
, (16)
where o is the thickness of the viscous sublayer, which is
estimated by
o =
_
12
Re

_
1}n
_
U
U
t
_
(2n)}n
D
h
(17)
where Re

is estimated as
Re

=
U
2n
D
2
h
j
[
K}8((6n + 2)}n)
n
(18)
3.3. Conditions for mechanical equilibrium
According to the mechanistic model, the net lifting force
or net rotating torque acting on a single bed particle deter-
mines the state of motion of the particle. A positive value
of the net lift force or the net rotating torque is required to
displace a bed particle. After neglecting the unsteady part of
the drag and pressure gradient force, the forces acting on a
single solids bed particle is as shown in Fig. 5. These forces
are the weight of the particle in the uid (W), the lift force
2158 A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163
Table 2
Model equations used in particle mechanics modeling
Force Model equation
Lift

8
d
2

C
L
ju
2
Drag

8
d
2

D
R
C
D
ju
2
Plastic

4
d
2

t
,
Net gravity

6
d
3

(j
s
j)q
(F
L
), the drag force (F
D
), and the plastic force (F

). A
contact point (P) with a neighboring particle is considered as
the axis of rotation during rolling. If we neglect the friction
between the bed particles and assume the bed particles are
at the threshold condition then the balance of forces in the
,-direction becomes
F
,
= F
L
F

W sin : = 0, (19)
where F
,
is the net upward force acting in the ,-direction
and : is the angle of inclination. The models used for eval-
uating the forces in Eq. (19) are presented in Table 2. By
substituting these models into Eq. (19) the net upward force
can be expressed as
F
,
=

2
d
2

j
[
_
C
L
u
2
4

t
,
2j
[

sin :(s 1)q

3
_
, (20)
where s is the ratio of the uid density to the solid density,
j
s
. In order to lift a particle from the surface of a bed,
this force needs to be positive. In equilibrium condition the
force becomes zero. Consequently, the local critical velocity
for lifting, u
R
can be estimated by equating the term in the
brackets in Eq. (20) to zero. Thus
u
L
=
_
2t
,
C
L
j
[
+
4d

sin :(s 1)q

3C
L
_
0.5
. (21)
It is also important to note that the critical velocity in Eq.
(21) is a function of the lift coecient, which by itself is a
function of the critical velocity. As a result, the determina-
tion of the critical velocity requires an iterative procedure.
Moreover, the lift force is dependent on other ow param-
eters.
Laboratory tests indicated the existence of the rolling of
particles over the surface of a bed during solids transport
in inclined channels. Especially at high inclination angles
the particles roll and bounce along the bed. The origin of
this rolling motion can be seen again in a similar way by
considering a rotating torque I
P
at point P as seen in Fig.
5. If we assume a bed particle is at the threshold condition
for rolling and neglecting the friction force between the bed
particles, then the equation for I
P
reads
I
P
=
d

2
(F
D
sin [ + F
L
cos [ F

cos [
W sin(: + [)) = 0, (22)
Angle of inclination [degrees]
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
0
1
F
y

p
u
R
u
L
Fig. 6. Pattern of critical velocity, rolling torque and net lift force in an
inclined (uphill) channel.
where [ is the angle of repose. If we again use Table 2 to
replace the forces in Eq. (22) by their model then we will
obtain the following simplied equation for the torque:
I
P
=
d
3

j
[
4
_
D
R
C
D
sin [ + C
L
cos [
4
u
2

t
,
cos [
2j
[

q(s 1) sin([ + :)
3
_
. (23)
The rolling of the particles along the bed occurs when this
torque becomes positive. Rolling is the most dominant trans-
port mechanism in highly deviated channels. The rolling
torque generally increases with mudow velocity. The local
critical velocity for rolling, u
R
can be obtained by calculat-
ing the local velocity that makes the term in the brackets
zero, thus:
u
R
=
_
6t
,
cos [ + 4d

q(s 1) sin([ + :)
3(D
R
C
D
sin [ + C
L
cos [)
_
0.5
. (24)
The local velocities, which are calculated by Eqs. (21) and
(24) have to be converted to the mean velocity, using the ve-
locity prole (see Section 3.2). Usually, the two calculated
mean critical velocities from Eqs. (21) and (24) are dier-
ent. Therefore, the lower value has to be taken as the crit-
ical velocity and the dominating transport mechanism, also
considered as the one that gives the lower critical velocity.
At this stage, it is more interesting to analyze Eqs. (20),
(21), (23) and (24) when the angle of inclination varies
from the inclined to horizontal. Accordingly, the net lifting
force Eq. (20) has a minimum value at an angle of 90

and
a maximum value at 0

. Similarly the net rolling torque Eq.

(23), has a minimum value at :=90[

and a maximum at
:=[

. Therefore, 0

or 90

is the maximum point for the

net rolling torque. Therefore, the patterns of critical velocity
curves will look like the curves in Fig. 6. In addition, the
gure shows the eect of the angle of inclination on the net
rolling torque and lifting force. The existence of a minimum
A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163 2159
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of the owloop.
Fig. 8. Test section with stationary sand bed.
critical ow velocity at around : = 90 [ is also veried
experimentally in several previous studies (Brown, Bern, &
Weaver, 1989; Clark & Bickham, 1994). Furthermore, the
pattern of critical velocity for lifting and rolling that
are shown in Fig. 6 obviously indicates the superiority of
one mechanism over the other at a given angle of inclina-
tion. For that reason, the lifting mechanism is very much
expected to occur at a low angle of inclination (less than
15

) but rolling takes place in both intermediate and near

horizontal angles. The gure also demonstrates the wak-
ening of the net lifting force as the inclination of angle
increases and simultaneously, the net rolling torque reduces
until the angle reaches 90 [

, then the torque begins to

recover. In spite of this, we have to note the random nature
of the net lifting force and the rolling torque that originates
from the stochastic behavior of particle size, shape, density,
rearrangement and the velocity eld. Therefore, it is theoret-
ical to assume a single mechanism of cuttings transportation
over the bed at any time. Hence, during cuttings transporta-
tion both rolling and lifting mechanisms are simultaneously
involved but one may show superiority over the other.
4. Experimental procedure
The experiments were conducted in a ow loop that has a
circular channel with uid re-circulation facilities. The ow
loop is designed so that the ow is fully developed and free
of any entrance eect at the test section. A diagram of the
loop is presented in Fig. 7. It consists of the following items:
(i) the channel (test section) that is made up of a 4 m long
transparent pipe with internal diameter of 70 mm as seen in
Fig. 8; (ii) the overhead tank (V102) to maintain constant
pressure head at the inlet of the channel; (iii) the circulation
2160 A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163
Table 3
Critical velocity sand beds with water
Particle Critical Reynolds Particle Critical Reynolds
size range velocity number size range velocity number
(mm) (m/s) (mm) (m/s)
0.1250.5 0.26 17286 0.51.2 0.31 20611
0.1250.5 0.26 17286 0.51.2 0.34 22605
0.1250.5 0.22 14627 2.03.5 0.50 33243
0.1250.5 0.25 16622 2.03.5 0.52 34573
0.1250.5 0.27 17951 2.03.5 0.52 34573
0.1250.5 0.26 17286 2.03.5 0.48 31913
0.1250.5 0.28 18616 2.03.5 0.49 32578
0.1250.5 0.26 17286 2.03.5 0.54 35903
0.1250.5 0.25 16622 2.03.5 0.49 32578
0.51.2 0.32 21276 4.55.5 0.59 39227
0.51.2 0.34 22605 4.55.5 0.56 37232
0.51.2 0.30 19946 4.55.5 0.56 37232
0.51.2 0.30 19946 4.55.5 0.56 37232
0.51.2 0.30 19946
Table 4
Critical velocity of sand bed with PAC
Particle size Critical Reynolds Particle size Critical Reynolds
range (mm) velocity (m/s) number range (mm) velocity (m/s) number
0.1250.5 0.53 2159 2.03.5 0.56 2306
0.1250.5 0.51 2072 2.03.5 0.56 2306
0.1250.5 0.49 1957 2.03.5 0.53 2159
0.51.2 0.65 2807 2.03.5 0.56 2306
0.51.2 0.74 3344 4.55.5 0.55 2262
0.51.2 0.62 2627 4.55.5 0.55 2262
0.51.2 0.70 3073 4.55.5 0.52 2120
2.03.5 0.51 2057 4.55.5 0.53 2174
tank (V101) for re-circulating the uid and preparing of the
PAC solution; (iv) the hydrocylone (C103) to separate the
solids downstream of the channel; and (v) the centrifugal
pump (P104) to recycle the uid. A continuous ow of uid
in the channel is achieved by maintaining a constant uid
level in the overhead tank. Minimum and maximum level
switches are used to regulate the pump in accordance with
the uid level in the overhead tank. The magnetic owme-
ter (FR), placed upstream of the channel and the dierential
pressure transmitter (DP) are used to measure the owrate
and the pressure drop, respectively. Both are connected
to a personal computer for on-line display and recording.
Temperature measurements of the uid were made at the
circulation tank. A manually operated valve, 0.03, placed
downstream of the hydrocyclone was used to regulate the
owrate. The channel is connected to detachable union
joints at both ends. The sand used for each test was charged
through one of these joints. The tests were performed by
placing a liter of sand bed in the test section. The thick-
ness of the sand bed in the channel was kept uniform (i.e.
approximately 8.4 mm at the center as shown in Fig. 8)
along the length of the test section using a leveling stick.
The critical velocity was measured by visual observation of
the movement of the bed particles. The subjectivity of the
measurements was minimized by isolating the person who
detected the critical conditions from the data record. The
critical owrate is measured as the average of two owrates
(the owrate that initiates a general movement of particle
over a bed at subcritical ow conditions and the owrate
that stops a general movement of bed particle over a bed at
a supercritical ow condition). The rheologies of the PAC
solutions were measured using rotational rheometer. The
result indicated that the solution is a power-law uid with
the consistency index K = 0.050 Pa s
0.7
and power law in-
dex n = 0.7. During the test run, the temperature of the test
uid was maintained at 20

C.
5. Experimental results and model predictions
Tables 3 and 4 present experimental results of critical
velocity tests of water and PAC, respectively. The tests
were performed by placing 1 l of sand bed in the test
section. As presented in Tables 3 and 4 the critical velocity
A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163 2161
Table 5
Average critical velocity of PAC solution and water with 1-l sand bed in a horizontal channel
Particle size range (mm) PAC solution Water
Velocity (m/s) 90% condence Velocity (m/s) 90% condence
interval (%) interval (%)
0.1250.5 0.5111 3.64 0.2573 3.29
0.51.2 0.6770 6.76 0.3164 3.65
2.03.5 0.5425 2.94 0.5054 2.65
4.55.5 0.5379 1.98 0.5645 2.03
Average particle size [mm]
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

v
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

[
m
/
s
]
0.
0 2 4 6
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Experimental
Mechanstic model
Inertial particles greater than
the viscous sublayer thickness
Fig. 9. Critical velocity as a function of average particle size using water.
measurements were performed repeatedly for identical con-
ditions. This was done mainly to check the reproducibility
of the critical velocity measurements. Consequently, the
critical velocities that were measured during identical test
runs are statistically analyzed and presented in Table 5.
The analysis illustrates that the concept of critical velocity
is a well-founded fact. As shown in the table, the measure-
ments are reproducible within the error margin of 4 and
7% for water and PAC tests, respectively, at 90% degree
of condence. In addition to this, the table indicated that
the average critical velocity of the beds increases with the
particle size for water tests. However, for PAC test runs
the critical velocities of the beds increase rst and then
decrease with the particles size.
The critical velocity test results and predictions of the par-
ticle the model for water test run is presented in Fig. 9. The
gure indicates that the model prediction curves follow the
pattern of the experimental data with a maximum deviation
of 25%, even though the pattern of the test data for water is
signicantly dierent from that of PAC solution, which is
presented in Fig. 10. The existence of such patterns in the
critical velocity curves has its own hydrodynamic explana-
tion. The model prediction indicates that these patterns are
the result of the interaction of the bed particles with the ve-
locity eld. Near the bed the velocity prole has dierent
layers: (i) the viscous sublayer; (ii) the buer zone; (iii) the
logarithmic layer and (iv) the outer layer. The particles have
the chance to be inside any of these layers depending on
the hydrodynamics of the ow and the size of the particle.
As a result, when a particle is in the viscous sublayer, the
local velocity becomes too small to initiate the movement
of the particle. However, if the bed particle protrudes into
the logarithmic and outer layers, then the local velocity can
be strong enough to initiate the movement. Detailed result
from the model indicated that particles larger than 0.7 mm
are not fully submerged in the viscous sublayer. Instead they
get the chance of being dragged by the action of the strong
local velocity. Hence, for particles larger than the viscous
sublayer thickness, as the particle size increases, the change
in the local velocity becomes relatively little and does not
compensate for simultaneous inertial variation (the mass of
the particle, which is proportional to the cube of the parti-
cle diameter). Consequently, the critical velocity rises with
increasing particle size. For particles less than 0.7 mm the
model predictions show that the critical velocity decreases
as the particle size increases. Previous experimental stud-
ies (Hjulstr om, 1935) on critical velocity of ne sand also
supports this prediction.
For PAC test runs the critical velocity decreases, as the
particles become coarser, beginning from 0.8 mm. In this
case the protruding particles are inside the viscous sublayer,
because the viscous sublayer thickness of PAC solution is
much thicker than water. In the viscous sublayer the veloc-
ity gradient is relatively high to compensate for the inertial
change that arises from the coarsening of the particles. Con-
sequently, a lesser critical velocity is required when the par-
ticles become coarser within the viscous sublayer. In contrast
to this, when bed particles become too small, increasing the
particle size increases the critical velocity. This is mainly
due to the weakening of the pressure drag for non-inertial
particles. As a result, the increase in the local velocity does
not compensate for the inertial change (change in the mass
of a particle). For such small bed particles the movement
is initiated by the shearing action of the uid. Therefore,
the tiny particles need lesser mean critical velocity than the
coarse ones in this range. As shown in Fig. 10 both the model
and the data indicate the presence of this phenomenon. A
detailed result from the model shows that as the particles
2162 A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163
Average particle size [mm]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

v
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

[
m
/
s
]
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Measured
Mechanistic model
Non inertial particles
Inertial particles in the viscous
sublayer
Fig. 10. Critical velocity as a function of average particle size using PAC.
Angle of inclination [degrees]
20 40 60 80
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

v
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

[
m
/
s
]
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
d
p
= 3 mm
d
p
= 5 mm
Fluid: Water
Fig. 11. Model prediction of the critical velocities as a function of angle
of inclination for dierent beds.
become very small the particle Reynolds number becomes
very little. For very small particle Reynolds number the drag
force is proportional to (u d

) while in the case of high

particle Reynolds number the drag force is proportional to
(u d

)
2
. Accordingly, the eect of local velocity and par-
ticle size on the drag force is relatively strong for inertial
particles.
A critical velocity prediction of the model as a function
of angle of inclination is presented in Fig. 11. The result in-
dicated that the angle of inclination and particle size signi-
cantly aect the critical velocity of the sand beds. Moreover,
the critical velocity curves of dierent sand bed show similar
pattern. The result also conrms the theoretically assumed
patterns of the critical velocity curves in Section 3.3 (Fig. 6).
Consequently, the critical velocity has the maximum value
close to 60

of inclination and the minimum at small angles

of inclination. However, at very low angles of inclination
(near vertical) the ow patterns changes from stratied to
slug ow (Clark & Bickham, 1994). As a result our deni-
tion of the critical velocity may not hold true, because the
mechanistic model approach assumes that there is a strati-
ed bed on the channel wall. Therefore, close to a vertical
angle of inclination the model should not be used, instead
other model such as KelvinHelmholtz stability model can
be applied (Clark & Bickham, 1994).
6. Conclusions
The critical velocity predictions of the mechanistic model
show satisfactory agreement with the measured result and
previous studies.
The critical velocity of solids in an inclined channel is
signicantly inuenced by the particle size in relation
with the viscous layer thickness. Accordingly, there are
three cases: (i) non-inertial particles submerged in the
viscous layer where the critical velocity increases with
the particle size; (ii) inertial particles submerged in the
viscous layer where the critical velocity decreases as the
particle size increases; (iii) inertial particles protruded to
the logarithmic and outer layers where the critical velocity
increases with the particle size.
The critical velocity is also inuenced by the angle of
inclination and attains its maximum value when the angle
is close to the complementary angle to the angle of repose.
The present model can be applicable to predict the critical
velocities of solid beds in horizontal and highly deviated
channels for both Newtonian and non-Newtonian uids.
A. Ramadan et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 58 (2003) 21532163 2163
Notation
d

mean diameter of bed particles

d}dx global pressure gradient
[ friction factor of the bed
[
D
unsteady part of the drag force
F
D
drag force
F
L
lift force
F

plastic force
F
,
net upward force acting on a bed particle
q gravitational acceleration
K uid consistency index
n ow behavior index
N unit vector normal to the particle surface
pressure
Re Reynolds number
Re

particle Reynolds number

Re
G
gradient Reynolds number
u local velocity at the center of a bed particle
U mean ow velocity in a channel
u
+
dimensionless velocity
U
max
maximum uid velocity in the channel
u
L
local critical velocity at the center of the par-
ticle for lifting the particles
u
R
local critical velocity at the center of the par-
ticle for rolling the particles
U
t
friction velocity
W weight of a particle in a uid
, vertical distance from the mean bed level
,
+
dimensionless distance
A area
C
D
drag coecient
D
h
hydraulic diameter of a layer
Greek letters
: angle of inclination from vertical
[ angle of repose
I
P
rotating torque at point P
von Karman constant
j
s
density of solid particle
j
[
density of the uid
0
w
angle between the normal vector and the local
velocity
t shear stress
t
b
shear stress on the bed
t
dis
shear stress distribution around a bed particle
t
,
yield stress
v kinematic viscosity
Acknowledgements
The authors express their appreciation to the sta of the
workshop and the laboratory at the Department of Petroleum
Engineering and Applied Geophysics, NTNU for their as-
sistance in building the ow loop. The work was nanced
by Statoil, and we thank them for their support.
References
Bobok, E. (1991). Fluid mechanics for petroleum engineers (pp.
287345). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publisher B.V.
Bourgoyne, A. T., Millheim, K. K., Chenvert, M. E., & Young, F. S.
(1991). Applied drilling engineering (pp. 150155). Richardson: SPE
Text book.
Brown, N. P., Bern, P. A., & Weaver, A. (1989). Cleaning deviated holes:
New theoretical and experimental studies. SPE paper 18636, Presented
at the 1989 SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, February
28March 3, 1989 (pp. 171180). Richardson: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
Caulet, P. J. C., van der Lans, R. G. J. M., & Luyben, K. Ch. A.
M. (1996). Hydrodynamic interactions between particles and liquid
ows in biochemical application. Chemical Engineering Journal, 62,
193206.
Clark, R. K., & Bickham, K. L. (1994). A mechanistic model for cuttings
transportation. SPE paper 28306, Proceedings of the SPE 69th Annual
Technical Conference, New Orleans, 2528 September 1994 (pp.
139153). Richardson: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Dedegil, M. Y. (1987). Particle drag coecient and settling velocity
of particles in non-Newtonian suspensions. Journal of Fluids
Engineering-Transactions, ASME, 109(3), 319323.
Einstein, H. A., & El-Samni, E. A. (1949). Hydrodynamic forces on a
rough wall. Reviews of Modern Physics, 21(3), 520524.
Gerhart, P. M, Gross, R. J., & Hochstein, J. I. (1992). Fundamental of uid
mechanics (pp. 480650). New York: Addison Wesley Publishing
Company.
Henderson, F. M. (1966). Open channel ow (pp. 405485). New York:
Macmillan Series.
Hjulstr om, F. (1935). Studies of the morphological activity of River
Fyris. Bulletin XXV, Uppsala: Geological Institute of Uppsala.
Liang, S. C., Hong, T., & Fan, L. S. (1996). Eect of particle arrangement
on the drag force of a particle. International Journal of Multiphase
Flow, 22, 285306.
Mehta, A. J., & Lee, S. (1994). Problems in linking the threshold condition
for the transport of cohesionless and cohesive sediment grain. Journal
of Coastal Research, 10(1), 170177.
Meng, H., & van der Gelg, C. W. M. (1991). Particle trajectory
computations in steady non-uniform liquid ows. Liquid Solid Flows,
ASME, 118, 183190.
Persen, L. N. (1972). Boundary layer theory (pp. 83130). Trondhiem:
Tapir.
Rasi, M. (1994). Hole cleaning in large, high-angle wellbores. SPE paper
27464, Proceedings IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, 1518
February 1994. Richardson: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Saman, P. G. (1965). The lift on small sphere in a slow shear ow.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 22, 385400.
Sierman, T. R., & Becker, T. E. (1990). Hole cleaning in full-scale
inclined wellbores. SPE paper 20422, Presented SPE Annual
Conference, New Orleans, 2326 September 1990 (pp. 115120).
Richardson: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Tsuji, Y., Kato, N., & Tanaka, T. (1991). Experiments on the unsteady
drag and wake of a sphere at high Reynolds-numbers. International
Journal of Multiphase Flow, 17(3), 343354.
White, F. M. (1991). Viscous uid ow (2nd ed.) (pp. 181200). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Zou, L., Patel, M. H., & Han, G. (2000). A new computer package for
simulating cuttings transport and predicting hole cleaning in deviated
and horizontal wells. SPE paper 64646, Presented at the SPE
International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China,
710 November 2000. Richardson: Society of Petroleum Engineers.