International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882

Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

CORROSION BEHAVIOUR AND EFFECTS OF DRILLING MUD

1

ADINDU C IYASARA; 2J.E.O OVRI

DEPARTMENT OF CERAMIC & GLASS TECHNOLOGY
AKANU IBIAM FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC, UNWANA, NIGERIA
2
DEPARTMENT OF MATERIALS & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING
FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, OWERRI, NIGERIA
1

ABSTRACT
Drilling mud as an essential chemical in the oil industry is widely applied in all drilling operations. A recent survey
revealed that despite the incessant incidents of drilling equipment failures in service, corrosion assessment of drilling mud
has been neglected. Hence, correlation between its chemical composition, properties and corrosion effect is lacking.
Against this backdrop therefore, the corrosion effects of drilling mud on mild steel, the major component of drilling
equipment used in the oil industry was undertaken in order to establish hindsight of the basic concept of drilling mud
corrosion; and proffer necessary and acceptable control measures. Specimens were exposed to salt water mud, oil base
mud and borehole water environments. The weight losses and corrosion rates were evaluated at intervals of seven days
using the weight loss and electrochemical methods for a period of forty two days. The specimens were also subjected to
visual examination. The two independent corrosion monitoring techniques gave similar results. The salt water mud was
the most corrosive with average corrosion rate values of 3.55 X 10 -4 mpy and -0.71mV which was attributed in part to the
high concentration of Cl- ions, followed by borehole water (2.40 X 10-4 mpy; - 0.66mV) and lastly oil base mud (1.0 X 104
mpy; -0.48 mV). The result of the visual examination revealed general corrosion in all the environments investigated.
Keywords: Drilling mud, Mild steel, Corrosion rate, electrochemical method, General corrosion.

1. INTRODUCTION
Corrosion is becoming an increasing global threat to the integrity of oil and gas facilities whose major component is steel
with its attendant economic wastages and associated environmental hazards [1]. These facilities include pipelines,
platforms, vessels (storage tanks), drill pipes and well casings. The economic wastages include but are not limited to
downtimes, production losses, contamination and equipment failures; whilst environmental hazards include pollution,
spill, destruction of flora and fauna, fire outbreak and fatalities [2].
In the petroleum sector, particularly in the drilling industry, drilling mud is widely applied in drilling operations. Drilling
mud refers to a suspension of solid materials in water or oil, or of solids and droplets of one of these liquids dispersed in
the other [3]. These solids consist of clays and organic colloids added to provide the necessary viscous and filtration
properties [4].
The three main types of drilling mud are water base mud, oil base mud and gas mud. The solid particles when suspended
in either fresh water or salt water constitute a water base mud. Hence, we have freshwater mud and salt water mud which
is dependent on the nature of the water. Oil base mud is formulated with only oil as the liquid phase and is often used as a
coring fluid. Although oil base muds pick up water from the formation, no additional water or brine is added.
Oil base mud systems are special drilling muds developed to overcome certain undesirable characteristics of water base
mud primarily due to the properties of water such as its abilities to dissolve salts, to interfere with the flow of oil and gas
through porous rocks, to promote the disintegration and dispersion of clays, and to effect corrosion of steel [5].
The application of drilling mud in drilling operations is mainly for lubricating the drillstring thereby reducing friction,
transportation, suspension and dropping off cuttings, supporting the walls of the wellbore, controlling pressure and
stabilization of the wellbore [4,5].
Drilling additives (chemicals) are usually added to the drilling mud to promote required functions and changes in the
properties of the mud. Such properties include; density (weight), viscosity, yield point, gel strength, fluid loss and surface
tension. The most commonly used chemicals in rotary drilling are but not limited to barite (BaSO 4), bentonite clay and
organic polymers.
Barites and similar weighting materials possessing high specific gravity (>4.0) have been used to successfully raise
drilling mud density, to control formation pressures, check formation caving and facilitate pulling dry pipe [4,5,6].
www.ijsret.org

917

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

Bentonite clay is added to fresh water mud or oil base mud for the purposes of increasing hole cleaning capacity
(increasing viscosity), reducing water seepage or filtration into permeable formations, forming a filter cake of low
permeability, promoting hole stability in poorly cemented formations and avoiding or overcoming loss of circulation. The
colloidal properties of organic polymers such as starch, guar gum (Variflo), carboxy methyl-cellulose
(CMS),polyaccrylamide-polyaccrylate (INSTAPAC-425), and polyanionic cellulosic polymer (REL-PAC) are used in
drilling muds to reduce filtration, stabilize clays, flocculate drilled solids, increase carrying capacity and incidentally to
serve as emulsifiers and lubricants [5,6,10].
Despite these wide and fundamental applications of drilling mud in drilling operations, correlation between its chemical
composition, properties and corrosion behavior is lacking. It is against this background that this research is carried out to
evaluate the corrosion behavior of drilling mud and assess its effects on the drilling facilities.

2. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
The test specimens used for this work were mild steel coupons obtained from Shell Petroleum Development Company
(SPDC) Limited, Port-Harcourt, Nigeria.
The coupons were of uniform dimension (7.30 X 2.20 X 0.50 cm) and the chemical composition as supplied by the
manufacturer is given in table 1.0.
The chemical compositions of the drilling muds (salt water mud and oil base mud) as supplied by MISWACO Ltd, PortHarcourt, Nigeria and borehole water used in this research are given in tables 2.0 and 3.0 respectively; while the pH
values of the environments at room temperature are shown in table 4.0.
The initial weights of the coupons were taken to the nearest 0.001 g on a digital electronic weighing machine (OHAUS
Adventurer), degreased and dried in acetone (Analar grade) before total immersion in the different storage tanks
containing the mud samples and borehole water. The mud tanks were stationed at the on-going drilling site (Well 4/6,
OSSU Field) owned by NNPC/Addax petroleum Development Nigeria Limited.
Corrosion rates of the coupons were monitored by weight loss technique and electrochemical method (Potential
measurement). The weight loss of each of the coupons was determined at intervals of seven days for a period of six weeks
(Four two days) while the corrosion potential measurement was taken at the same interval using Cu/CuSO4 reference
electrode connected to the digital multimeter. The weight loss within the immersion period was determined as the
difference between the initial weight prior to immersion and final weight after immersion, and the corresponding
corrosion rate calculated.
The coupons were visually examined progressively with the aim of identifying the nature of the oxide scales clinging to
the surfaces of the specimens and the type of corrosion occurring.

C
0.18

Element
Weight
%

Si
0.24

Table 1.0: Chemical composition of the mild steel

Mn
Cu
P
S
Cr
Ni
0.50
0.20
0.03
0.04
0.10
0.12

Sn
0.02

Fe
Bal

Table 2.0: Compositions of Salt Water Mud and Oil Base mud
Mud
type

Specific
Gravity

1.20
Salt
water
4.35
Oil
base

Ions
Percentage
%

Ca(OH)2
(Lime)
Ib/bbl
-

Ba2+
mg/L

Ca2+
mg/L

Clmg/L

OHmg/L

SO42mg/L

95.30

BaSO4
(Barite)
Ib/bbl
-

98,200

173,700

10.00

208.10

12.40

15,40
0

3,900

6,900

17,100

27,000

CO20.85

SO320.73

Water
bbl/bb
l
0.93

Oil
(ECD99)
bbl/bb
-

CaCl2
(Brine)

1.00

OH
7.97

Table 3.0: Composition of Borehole water

Cl
NO3Fe2+
Na+
Mg2+
1.20
0.29
0.20
4.70
3.00
-

www.ijsret.org

918

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

Table 4: pH Values of the environments at room temperature

Environment
pH Values
Salt water mud
6.20
Oil Base mud
10.00
Borehole water
5.46

3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The corrosion behavior of mild steel in drilling mud and borehole water (control) was studied by monitoring the electrode
potential and weight loss. The results of the weight loss which were converted to corrosion (penetration) rates and the
electrochemical (electrode potential) measurements are given in tables 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 respectively. The corrosion rates
were calculated using the following relationship [27]:

Where CR = corrosion rate in mils per year (mpy)

W = Weight loss in grams (g)
D = Density of the steel = 7.87g/cm3
A = Total surface area of coupon = 40.85 cm2
T = Exposure time in hours (hr)
The graphs of weight loss, corrosion rate and electrode potential dependence with time are shown in figures 1.0 - 3.0.

MEDIUM
SALT
WATER MUD
OIL BASE
MUD
BOREHOLE
WATER

MEDIUM
SALT
WATER MUD
OIL BASE
MUD
BOREHOLE
WATER

MEDIUM
SALT
WATER MUD
OIL BASE
MUD
BOREHOLE
WATER

1ST DAY
0.00

TABLE 5.0: WEIGHT LOSS OF SAMPLES (g)

EXPOSURE PERIODS (DAYS)
7TH DAY
14TH DAY
21ST DAY
28TH DAY
0.052
0.089
0.129
0.125

35TH DAY
0.123

42ND DAY
0.120

0.00

0.02

0.026

0.030

0.032

0.030

0.028

0.00

0.04

0.068

0.074

0.080

0.076

0.071

TABLE 6.0: CORROSION RATE MEASUREMENTS (mpy X 10-4)

EXPOSURE PERIODS (DAYS)
1ST DAY
7TH DAY
14TH DAY
21ST DAY
28TH DAY
35TH DAY
0.00
5.14
4.40
4.25
3.09
2.43

42ND DAY
1.98

0.00

1.98

1.29

0.99

0.79

0.59

0.46

0.00

3.96

3.36

2.44

1.98

1.50

1.17

TABLE 7.0: ELECTRODE POTENTIAL MEASUREMENTS (mV)

EXPOSURE PERIODS (DAYS)
ST
TH
TH
1 DAY
7 DAY
14 DAY
21ST DAY
28TH DAY
35TH DAY
-0.65
-0.71
-0.72
-0.75
-0.73
-0.70

42ND DAY
-0.68

-0.47

-0.49

-0.49

-0.50

-0.48

-0.47

-0.45

-0.60

-0.64

-0.68

-0.70

-0.70

-0.67

-0.63

www.ijsret.org

919

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

Fig.1.0: Time dependence of the weight loss (g) of samples in the studied environments

Fig.2.0: Time dependence of the Corrosion rates (mpy) of samples in the studied environments

www.ijsret.org

920

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

Fig.3.0: Time dependence of the Electrode potentials (mV) of samples in the studied environments

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The environments examined contain corrosion inducing ions predominantly Cl- , OH- and SO42- ions. Therefore, these
environments are considered aggressive and toxic to most engineering materials including steel.
The results of figure 1.0 showed that the weight loss of the steel in salt water mud increased with time during the first 21
days while the steel in oil base mud and borehole water increased upto 28 days. This observation was attributed to the fact
that the rate of chemical reaction increases with time [28].
However, further exposure of the steel samples to the media resulted to a decrease in weight loss, and this behavior
could be explained from the concept of passivity [29]. As shown in figure 1.0, the highest weight loss occurred in salt
water mud (1.29g) at the 21st day, followed by borehole water (0.08g) and oil base mud (0.032g) obtained at the 28th day
of the test.
The highest weight loss associated with salt water mud was as a result of high concentration of chloride ions it contained
(see table 2.0) which have concomitant high corrosion inducing effects. The Cl- ions combine with the iron (II) ions
(Fe2+) component of the steel to produce FeCl2 (solid product) which further reacts with dissolved oxygen and water.
Fe2+(aq) + 2Cl-(aq)
2FeCl2(s) + O2(g) + 2H2O (l)

Fecl2 (s)

(1.0)
Fe2O3(s) + 4HCl (aq)

(1.1)

Fe2O3 (s) is the corrosion product observed on the surfaces of the steel samples which is permeable to oxygen and water.
Hence, it does not form a protective layer on the steel surfaces, and the corrosion process continues [20, 30]. OH 2- and
SO42- ions in borehole water and oil base mud played similar roles as Cl- ions, but were affected by their low
concentrations as contained in the media, hence loss corrosion effects.
In the relationship between corrosion rate and exposure time of steel as depicted in figure 2.0, the corrosion rate was
highest in the salt water mud, followed by borehole water and oil base mud. The corrosion rates decreased with exposure
times in all the environments examined. This experimentally observed behaviour was due in part to the formation of an
impermeable protective oxide film on the surfaces of the steel. This is called passivation. In this state, the steel is said to
be passive or noble [31, 32], and does not corrode easily. The aggressive ions in the various environments could not be
absorbed into the passive layers, hence decrease in corrosion rates.
Figure 3.0 showed that the electrode potentials of the steel in all the examined environments decreased with time within
the first 21 days, and increased on further exposure to the environments. The electrode potential (Voltage) decreased as
www.ijsret.org

921

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

the resistance increased (in obedience to Ohms law) due to the corrosion product formed on the steel surfaces [33].
Hence, the lower the electrode potential, the higher the corrosion. The increase in electrode potential (decrease in
corrosion) observed after 21 days of the test was attributed to the concept of passivity as explained in figure 2.0.
Due to the chemical, physical and electronic properties of the oxide films, metal dissolution (chemical reaction) is lowered
resulting to increase in electrode potential. Therefore, the steel samples exposed to salt water mud exhibited the lowest
electrode potential (highest negative potentials) indicating high weight loss and corrosion rate, followed by borehole water
and oil base mud respectively.
The visual examination of the steel samples in all the environments were observed with brownish coloured corrosion
products uniformly distributed on the steel samples. These corrosion products were hydrated iron oxides, hence general
corrosion. Black deposits (which occurred as patches) suspected to be iron sulphides were also observed on the surfaces of
the steel samples.
The severity of the corrosion product was highest in the steel exposed to the salt water mud, followed by borehole water
and oil base mud. This was attributed to the high concentration of corrosion inducing ions particularly chloride ions
predominant in the salt water mud.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from the results of this investigation:
The steel investigated was found to undergo general (uniform) corrosion in all the environments.
Chloride ions are approved to be a very aggressive corrosion inducing ions.
Salt water mud was the most corrosive due to the presence of high concentration of Cl- ions, followed by
borehole water and oil base mud.

REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]

A.K Samant (2003). Corrosion problems in oil industry Need More Attention.
file://G:/ONGC print.htm
J.E.O Ovri (2004). Vandalization of Oil pipelines and the corrosion factor. Journ. Corr.Sci.
&Techn. Special Edition1.1
API Southern Committee (1981). Principles of Drilling Fluid Control. University of
Texas- Austin. 25-64
H.C.H Darley & George R. Gray (1988). Composition and Properties of Drilling
and Completion Fliuds. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston-Texas
John H. Berry (2008). Drilling Fluids, Properties and Functions. CETCO Drilling
Products. West Drive, Arlington Heights
Classifications of Fluid Systems (Jun, 2008). World OiI Journ. 105-110
API RP 13-2 Recommended Practices for Field Testing Oil Base Drilling Fluid (2005);
4th Ed, American Petroleum Institution
Aguta, R.M. (2002). Well Control and Blowout Prevention. Kosoko Press Ltd, Owerri. 22-26
Patterson, S.H, et al(1975). Clays, Industrial Minerals and Rocks. AIME,New York. 519-585
Clark, R.K.; et al (1976); Polysacrylamide/Potassium Chloride Mud for Drilling Water Sensitive Shales.
Journ. Pet. Techn. 719-726
Micheal, D. Erwin, et al (Oct.2004). Driling Fluid Development to Minimize Imbition Induced Water
Trapping. World Oil Journ. 15-30
Patton, C.C., Corrosion (Jul 22, 29, 1974). Fatigue Causes Bulk of Drillstring Failures and Dissolved
Gases are Key Corrosion Culprits. Oil& Gas Journ. 163-168, 67-69
www.touchoilandgas.com/corrosioncontrol (2008)
Cox, T & Davis N (Apr.20, 1976). Oxygen Scavengers. Drilling. 68
Edet, S. O (1997). Corrosion Behavior of Mild Steel Plate in Drilling Fluid.Unpublished M.Sc Thesis,
University of Port-Harcourt, Nigeria.
Garreth, et al (Oct. 1-3, 1978). Chemical Scavengers for Sulphides in Water Base Driling Fliuds. SPE
Paper 7499, Annual Meeting, Houston.
Ijeoma, M.N.C (1991). Elements of Corrosion and Protection. Autocentury, Enugu. 1-88

www.ijsret.org

922

International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 0882
Volume 4, Issue 9, September 2015

[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]

[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]

[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]

Chesser, B.G, et al (Sept. 14, 1970). Corrosive Aspects of Copper Carbonate in Drilling Fluids. Oil & Gas
Journ. 82-85
Carley, L.L., et al (Nov.11-12,194). Practical Solutions to Combat Detrimental Effects of H2S during
Drilling Operations. SPE Paper 5198, Symposium on Sour Gas and Crude. Tyler
Donald, R. Askeland & Pradeep P. Phule (2006). The Science and Engineering of Materials. Nelson,
Canada. 805-828
Bush, H.E (Oct.6-9, 1974). Treatment of Drilling Fluid to Combat Corrosion. SPE Paper 5123. Annual
Meeting Houston.
Hudgins, C.M Jr (Dec.1970). H2S Corrosion can be controlled. Pet. Eng. 33-36
www.corrosion-doctors.org/pipelinefailurehtm (2007)
Mauzy, H.L (Nov.1973). Minimize Drill Strings Failures Caused by H2S. World Oil Journ. 65-70
F.K.J. Ideriah & P.P. Jumbo (Nov. 17-20, 1999); Corrosion Failure Investigation and Analysis of
Pipeline Steels. Procs. 2nd Intl. Corr. Conf. Corrosion Nigeria 99, held at Nicon Hilton Hotel, Abuja.
102-111
E.C. Rollason (1973); Metallurgy for Engineers. ELBS and Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd. 45-58
J.E.O Ovri & B.G. Ofeke (Jun.1998). The Corrosion of Mild Steel in a Marine Environment. Journ. Sci.
Eng. Techn. 5(2) 1117-1129
Osarolube, E. et al (Jun.2008). Corrosion Behaviour of Mild and High Carbon Steel in Various Acidic
Media. SCi. Res. & Essay Vol. 3(6) 224-228
Idenyi, N. E., et al (2004). The Corrosion Behaviour of Recrystallized Mild Steel in Various
Tetraoxosulphate (iv) acid (H2SO4) concentrations. Journ. Corr. Sci. and Techn. Special Edition 1.1. 5457
Atkinson, J.T.N & H. Van Droffelaar (1982). Corrosion and its Control. NACE, Houston-Texas
A. Gupta & S. Kumar (2004); Materials Science for Engineers. CBS Publishers, New Delhi, India. 405426
C. Umezurike (2008). Engineering Materials Design: Properties, Selection and Uses. Pam Unique
Publishers, Port-Harcourt. 380-384
J.E.O. Ovri (Sept.1998). The Corrosion of Steel Reinforcements In Concrete In Acidic and Fresh Water
Environments. Nig. Corr. Journ. Vol. 1. 1-10

www.ijsret.org

923