ARMA 12-235

Accurate Bottomhole Pressure for Fracture Gradient Prediction and

Drilling Fluid Pressure Program - Part I
Mokhtari M., Ermila M. and Tutuncu A.N.
Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado, USA

Copyright 2012 ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association

th
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 46 US Rock Mechanics / Geomechanics Symposium held in Chicago, IL, USA, 24-27 June
2012.
This paper was selected for presentation at the symposium by an ARMA Technical Program Committee based on a technical and critical review
of the paper by a minimum of two technical reviewers. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA, its officers,
or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of
ARMA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied.
The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: Deepwater casing and cementing operations require more precise prediction of bottomhole pressure in order to avoid
kicks, wellbore collapse and induced lost circulation incidents since the pore pressure/fracture gradient window is narrow in deepwater
environments. To obtain more accurate bottomhole pressure, one should consider not only the hydrostatic pressure, but also the
annular flow of fluids under realistic downhole conditions. In this study, we applied Yield Power Law model in the equations of
motion within the annulus to represent the rheological properties of drilling fluids and cements more realistically. In addition, we have
investigated the effect of eccentricity on both the pressure losses and velocity profiles. In the part II of this research, we consider more
effective downhole parameters such as pipe rotation and the size of annulus. Finally, by incorporating all these effects, we will be able
to analyze induced lost circulation incidents with better precision for obtaining and calibrating the fracture gradient.

1. Introduction
Annular flow of drilling fluids and cement are critical
components of drilling and completion operations.
Cutting transport, cementing efficiency, well control and
wellbore stability are all closely related to velocity
profile and pressure drop in the annulus.
Drilling fluids and specially cements exhibit both yield
stress and shear thinning behavior. Therefore, Yield
Power Law (YPL) model, also known as Herschel-
Bulkley or yield pseudo-plastic, can better represent
their rheological properties than traditional Power Law
or Bingham-Plastic models. There is also tendency for
the drilling string or casing to be eccentric in the hole,
especially in deviated and horizontal wells. One of the
objectives of this study is to simulate the flow of YPL
fluids in eccentric annuli using computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) techniques.
The flow of fluids in pipes and annulus has been studied
by exact analytical [1-7], slot-approximate [8, 9],
experimental [10-12] and numerical [13-21] approaches.
Analytical solution for the flow of fluids with complex
rheological properties in composite geometries is either
impossible or requires simplification of the problem. As
a result, numerical approaches are appealing in solving
complicated fluid dynamics problems. However,
numerical modeling approach also fails due to
discontinuity in vanishing shear rates since it creates
infinite viscosity and difficulty in tracking the location
of yield surfaces [22]. To overcome this problem,
Papanastasiou [23] proposed a modified Bingham-
Plastic model. Frigaard and Nouar [24], Burgos and
Alexandrou [25] investigated the application of
regularization methods such as Papanastasiou model for
the flow of visco-plastic fluids. Mitsoulis and Abdali
[26] regulated the Herschel-Bulkley model in the similar
way proposed by Papanastasiou.

Another objective of our study is to obtain a more

accurate estimation of bottomhole pressure in realistic
conditions by considering the effect of eccentricity and
rheological properties and we consider more effective
downhole parameters in part II of this research that will
be the subject of another paper. Finally, we will be able
to analyze induced lost circulation events to extract more
accurate fracture gradient estimation.

2. Theory
The approximate solution for the laminar flow of
Herschel-Bulkley fluids in concentric annulus that could
be represented by a slot, can be obtained by substituting
the Newton’s law of viscosity, rheological model and
Figure 1: Annulus slot with “! "  ! # ” height
configuration used in the modeling study presented.
2.3. Herschel-Bulkley Rheological Model

    $%& ' When || ) 

shear rate formula into the equation of motion,
considering the boundary conditions and finally

%&  0 When || * 
integration [modified from 8, 12].
(6)
The general form of equation of motion in Cartesian
coordinates is given in Eq. 1 [27]: 2.4. Shear Rate

   
.   
 0 0 0 0
2 -.  /  .  /  . 2 / 3 
  
 1   1  

%&  + 4

(1)

2 0 0

  
 
2  2
   
The velocity profile for the flow of a Herschel-Bulkley

5 5
fluid in a concentric annulus is illustrated in Figure 1. 

(7)
Integrating Eq.2 will result in Eq. 8 when   0 
(The annulus is horizontal; therefore, the gravity is in

incompressible, and the flow to be steady (/  0
“y” direction). The fluid is assumed to be
6   and " 8 ", unknown, is the constant of
varies exclusively in y-direction. Hence:   0,  
and laminar. Moreover, the flow is in x-direction which
integration.
0,   0,   0, 0
  
     9  8 (8)

provides " 9: ":

2.1 Equation of Motion Applying Eq. 8 in the right boundary of plug zone
X-component:
9:  
;1 <;=

0      
  
(9)
(2)
Y-component Similarly, Eq. 10 can be obtained by applying the left

0  

boundary of plug zone:

9> 
;1 ?;=
(3)

(10)
2.2. Newton’s Law of Viscosity
In the right side of plug zone, (%&  

              0 (4) 
) the Herschel-

    

Bulkley model can be written as:

 '
   .  $ . / /=8  9

(5)

(11)
 J J J
\N]^^?]J^ O(]^?]J
(JI 
_ (
( 
_ (6< 
U[ c ×
1  (]  ×
0;1
boundary condition (  0 @ 9  0 and B  '
6 à _
Integration of Eq. 11 by considering the no-slip
^ ?]J 
J ^
0J/_ . <6/( <b
_ _
f1 J
< <6
[ c
provides the velocity profile of that region as:
(g^ hgJ ` _
J
 D<6 ;1 <;= D<6
J ^
  E. 1 =  /  . / F
?C ; <; 0_. <6/( <b
(21)
_ _
(D<6 C C C
0 * 9 * 9:
;
(12) Following the same procedure, the pressure drop for
Bingham-Plastic fluids can be obtained [9]:

the plug zone velocity that is the velocity at 9  9:: ∆ j 
08.kk(l  6mm.n(l
;1
 o
By substituting Eq.9 in the above equation, we can find
C
^ ?lJ  ^ ?lJ 
^ (22)
 D
  . / ; 9: * 9 * 9>
GHIJ
D<6 C
(13)
3. Computational Fluid Dynamics

region by considering %&  5  5    and  

 
Doing similar approach for the left side region of plug As illustrated in the derivations above, the analytical

0 @ 9  ℎ results in:
solution for the flow of Herschel-Bulkley fluids even in
concentric annuli that is approximated by a slot is
complex. Therefore, computational fluid dynamics
'
  .  $ . / /

approach is usually used in solving such complex fluid
(14) dynamics problems. We also used the numerical

N8    ℎ O
approach with Reynolds numbers obtained to specify the
D<6

  M D<6 P ; 9> * 9 * ℎ
6
flow to be laminar. Eq. 23 and Eq. 25 were used to

N8    9 O
(D<6C H
check laminar flow for Bingham Plastic and YPL fluid
respectively.

p]q  0.816
tl
(15)

Plug velocity is the velocity at 9> in the Eq. 15:

uG,vw_xyGH
(23)

8.60}~;1 (l^?lJ 
 D $
  . / ; 9: * 9 * 9>
(Q?R HIJ :,z{'|Q:D 
(24)
D<6 C
(16)

(0?' .X0  X6 /
'
4(2€  1 ƒ  Š
2
Equations 13 and 16 are equal. Hence:

(ℎ  9> D<6 =9:D<6 & 9:  9>  ℎ p]q  ‚ ‰

€ ‚ .X0  X6 /  $ „2(2€  1‡ ‰
' '

  2 €…:∗ ˆ
(17)

Summation of Eq. (9) and (10), will give us:

8  
Q (25)
0
T  …:∗  1  .'<6/
;1
(18)
Q 6
_
0
(19) (26)
^‹(^_IJ
;1 <C+ 4
   ^  ^
_Œ-„ ^ ‡h„ J ‡3Ž„ ^ ‡ h„ J ‡ 
^ ^ ^ ^
The flow rate can be obtained by integration of velocity
over cross-sectional area:

U  V8  W X9 
Q

V8 G  W X9  V R  W X9  V  W X9
  Q
Entrance effect was eliminated by using Eq. (27).

G R oq  0.06(X0  X6  p]q
(20)
(27)
Considering that Wℎ  Y (Z00  Z60  and ℎ  (Z0  Z6 , To overcome the discontinuity in the numerical solving
the relationship between flow rate and pressure loss can of fluids with yield stress, Papanastasiou modification to
be obtained as follows [12]. the Bingham-Plastic model, that was also adapted to
Herschel-Bulkley fluids by Mitsoulis and Abdali [26],
was applied.
  
1   (?D‘   $%& '
&
(28)

Eccentricity is defined as:

]
’
^ ?]J
(29)

where δ is the distance between the centers of two

cylinders. Hence, eccentricity is zero when two cylinders
are concentric and it is one when the outer surface of the
inner cylinder touches the inner wall of the outer
cylinder. The meshing of wellbore/drilling string
annulus with 50% eccentricity is shown in Fig. 2. The
grid size was chosen small enough to make the solutions
grid independent.

The fluid density of 1500 kg/m~, plastic viscosity of 0.3

Pa.s, inner pipe radius of 0.01 m, outer pipe radius of
0.02, and velocity of 0.3 m/s were assigned as input to
the numerical model.
Figure 2: Gridding of an annulus with 50% eccentricity.

4. Results and Discussions

Bottomhole pressure is usually defined by equivalent

circulating density as:

—…˜  ™š  .0.1 /
›G__œœž
Ÿ 
(30)

Pressure drop in annulus is important in designing the

drilling fluid program, especially in deepwater drilling
where there is a narrow margin between pore pressure
and fracture pressure, in casing while drilling and slim
hole drilling that encounter substantial pressure drop in
annulus or in cementing where both hydrostatic and
pressure loss is significant. The pressure losses obtained
in later sections can be substituted in Eq. 30 to obtain the Figure 3: Comparison between the pressure losses
ECD. Moreover, the velocity profile in eccentric annulus obtained from CFD with slot approximate solution
is critical, especially in mud displacement by cement, or (Eq.22, Bingham-Plastic model).
in cutting transport of deviated wells.
yield stresses. However, still it is in a reasonable
matching.
4.1. Bingham-Plastic Fluid Flow in Concentric
The cross section of an annular velocity profile is shown
Annuli in Fig. 4. The x axis, “r”, is the distance from the left
side of annulus toward right side. Yield stress has a
The slot-approximate analytical solution to the
major effect on velocity profile and pressure loss in
Bingham-Plastic fluids flow in concentric annulus was
annulus. As illustrated in Fig. 4, the plug zone shrinks
provided in the Eq. 22. The comparison of the CFD
when the yield stress decreases and finally it diminishes
results with the slot-approximate solution was applied to
at zero yield stress (Newtonian fluid). The flat velocity
investigate the validity of the CFD model. The pressure
profile explains why spacers with higher yield stress can
losses in the concentric annulus at various yield stresses
be useful in displacing drilling fluids in concentric
obtained from CFD studies are compared with Eq. 22 annulus in order to improve cement efficiency.
results in Fig. 3.A good match between these two sets of
results at low yield stresses (mostly encountered in
drilling) is obvious. The discrepancy increases at higher
Figure 4: Effect of yield stress on velocity profile of
Bingham-Plastic fluids flow in concentric annulus, “r” is
the distance from the left side of annulus.
By adjusting the flow rate, the bottomhole pressure can
be controlled. The linear relationship between flow rate
and pressure loss in a concentric annulus is shown in
Fig. 5. While the discrepancy between the CFD results
and the slot approximate solutions is negligible, it
increases when the flow rate is increased.
The effect of flow rate or inlet velocity on velocity
profile in a concentric annulus is shown in Fig. 6 (only
the left side of annulus is shown for clarity). The plug
zone shrinks as the inlet velocity is increased.
4.2. Bingham-Plastic Fluids Flow in Eccentric
Annuli
The effect of eccentricity on pressure loss of Bingham-
Plastic fluids with different yield stresses is illustrated in
Fig. 7. The pressure drop decreases as the eccentricity
increases. Moreover, when the yield stress is increased,
the pressure drop increases and eccentricity has less
impact on reducing pressure drop (the ratio of pressure
drop in fully eccentric annulus to the concentric annulus
is 0.6 for the yield stress of 100 while it is 0.43 for the
zero yield stress). This amount of reduction in annular
pressure loss is significant and can be critical in wells
with narrow pore pressure/fracture gradient window.
Although eccentricity is not an output from wellbore
data to get advantage of it directly, perhaps a
probabilistic approach would be helpful especially in
deviated wells that have more tendencies to eccentricity.
Moreover, the effect of eccentricity can be incorporated
in analyzing drilling fluids related problems.
Figure 5: Comparison of pressure drop obtained from
CFD with slot approximate rate (YP=25 Pa).
Figure 6: Effect of inlet velocity in a concentric annulus.
Effect of eccentricity on velocity profiles of Bingham-
Plastic fluids with yield stress of 100, 25, 5 and 0 Pa are
shown in Fig. 8, 9, 10, and 11, respectively. Comparing
these Figures provide valuable information about the
effect of yield stress on velocity profile of the narrow
section of annulus which is of paramount importance in
mud displacement by cement or cutting transport. When
the yield stress is 100 Pa, the velocity is negligible in the
narrow gap at eccentricity of 50 % while it reaches to a
negligible value at eccentricity of 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9 for
the yield stresses of 25, 5, and 0 Pa, respectively. This
slow or no flow conditions in narrow side of annulus is a
reason for poor cutting transport and cementing in wells
with tendency for eccentricity. The lower velocity
profile at higher yield stress shows that spacers with
higher yield stress may not be as helpful in sweeping the
narrower gap of high eccentric annuli which is opposite
of what was said before in the concentric simulation.
Figure 7: Effect of eccentricity on pressure drop
(Bingham-Plastic).
Figure 8: Effect of eccentricity on flow of Bingham-
Plastic fluids (YP=100).
Figure 9: Effect of eccentricity on flow of Bingham-
Plastic fluids (YP=25).
Figure 10: Effect of eccentricity on flow of Bingham-
Plastic fluids (YP=5).
Figure 11: Effect of eccentricity on flow of Bingham-
Plastic fluids (YP=0).
4.3. Herschel-Bulkley Fluid Flow in Concentric
Annuli
Pressure losses at different power-law indexes in a
concentric annulus are obtained by CFD analysis and are
compared with the slot-approximate results of Eq. 21.
Fig. 12 shows when the fluid is more shear-thinning, n
decreases, the pressure drop decreases in a non-linear
manner. Moreover, the impact is more pronounced at
lower yield stresses. There is a good match between the
approximate solution and the CFD result. This figure
also shows how much error can be encountered if the
yield stress is ignored by using Power-Law model or if
the shear thinning is ignored by using Bingham-Plastic
model.
4.4. Herschel-Bulkley Fluid Flow in Eccentric
Annuli

The impact of eccentricity on pressure drop of Herschel-

Bulkley fluids is given in Fig. 13. The pressure loss is
reduced to almost half of its concentric counterpart at
n=1, and to 0.6 times of its concentric counterpart at
n=0.6. The impact of power-law index on velocity
profile of Herschel-Bulkley fluids flow in concentric
annulus is given in Fig.14. The plug zone region shrinks
as the power-law index values are increased. This impact
is more pronounced at fully eccentric case given in Fig.
15. Finally, the effect of eccentricity on velocity profile
of a shear-thinning fluid with yield stress of 25 Pa is
depicted in Fig. 16. The velocity in the narrower section
Figure 14: Effect of power-law index on velocity profile
of the annulus reaches negligible values at the
of Herschel-Bulkley fluids flow in a concentric annulus.
eccentricity of 0.4.

Figure 12: Comparison between pressure losses obtained Figure 15: Effect of power-law index on velocity profile
from CFD with the slot approximates results (Herschel- of Herschel-Bulkley fluids flow in a fully eccentric
Bulkley). annulus.

Figure 16: Effect of eccentricity on flow of a shear

Figure 13: Effect of eccentricity on pressure drop thinning Herschel-Bulkley fluids flow in eccentric
(Herschel-Bulkley).
annuli.
Conclusions
Pressure loss calculations and velocity profile
determination in wellbore and drill string annular space
have significant importance in successful drilling and
completion of a well. Computational fluid dynamics
approach was applied to simulate the flow of Herschel-
Bulkley fluids by Papanastasiou’s regularization
approach in eccentric annuli. The annular pressure loss
drops to less than its half with an increase of
eccentricity. Increase in yield stress raises pressure loss
substantially and creates wider plug zone velocity which
can help displacement efficiency in concentric annulus.
But higher yield stress reduces the velocity in the
narrower gap of eccentric annulus which is not desired.
Pressure loss decreases when the fluid is more shear
thinning. Altogether, considerable error is possible in
ignoring either the yield stress or shear thinning behavior
of fluids by imposing either Power-Law or Bingham-
Plastic models. By incorporating more effective
parameters on downhole pressure, it would be possible
to analyze drilling fluids related problems such as
induced lost circulation and to obtain calibration for
better fracture gradient determination in such incidents.
Nomenclature
ρ: Density(kg/m^3
v: Velocity(m/s
t: Time(s
p: Pressure loss gradient(Pa/m
τ: Shear stress(Pa
γ& : Shear rate(s ?6 
τ¼ : Yield stress(Pa
K: Plastic viscosity(Pa. s¿ 
m: Stress growth exponent(s
h: Slot height(m
w: Slot width(m
τ :
q: Flow rate(m~ /s
Shear stress at the wall (Pa)
R 0:
R 6:
Inner radius of outer cylinder (m)
d0 :
Outer radius of inner cylinder (m)
d6 :
Inner diameter of outer cylinder (m)
∆pÆ:
Outer diameter of inner cylinder (m)
NÈÉ :
Frictional pressure loss (Pa)
lÉ : Entrance length(m
Reynolds number
δ: Distance between the center of inner and
outer cylinder(m
e: Eccentricity
References
1. Melrose, J.C., J.G. Savins, W.R. Foster, and
E.R. Parish. 1957. A practical utilization of the
theory of Bingham Plastic flow in stationary
pipes and annuli. presented at 32nd annual fall
meeting of society of petroleum engineers in
Dallas, Texas
2. Hanks, R.W. 1979. The axial laminar flow of
Yield-Pseudoplastic fluids in concentric annulus.
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Process
Design and Development, 18(3)
3. Buchtelova, M. 1988. Comments on “The axial
flow of Yield-Pseudoplastic fluids in a
concentric annulus”. Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, 27(8), 1557-1558
4. Fordham, E.J., S.H. Bittleston, and M. Ahmadi
Tehrani. 1991. Viscoplastic flow in centered
annuli, Pipes, and Slots. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research, 30, 517-524
5. Gucuyener, H.I., and T. Mehmetoglu. 1992.
Flow of Yield-Pseudo-Plastic fluids through a
concentric annulus. AIChE Journal, 38(7),
6. Filip,P., and J. David. 2003. Axial Couette-
Poiseuille flow of Power-Law viscoplastic fluids
in concentric annuli. Journal of Petroleum
Science and Engineering. 40, 111-119
7. Bird, R. B., G.C. Dai, and B.J. Yarusso. 1983.
The rheology and flow of viscoplastic materials.
Reviews in Chemical Engineering. 1(1)
8. Bourgoyne, A.T., M.E. Chenevert, K. Millheim,
and F.S. Young. 1986. Applied drilling
engineering. Society of Petroleum Engineers,
USA
9. Guo, B., and G. Liu. 2011. Applied drilling
circulation systems, hydraulics, calculations, and
models. 27-48, Gulf Professional Publishing,
Burlington, USA
10. Founargiotakis, K., V.C. Kelessidis, and R.
Maglione. 2008. Laminar, transitional, and
turbulent flow of Herschel-Bulkley fluids in
concentric annulus. Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering. 86, 676-683
11. Kelessidis, V.C., R. Maglione, C. Tsamantaki,
and Y. Aspirtakis. 2006. Optimal determination
of rheological parameters for Herschel-Bulkley
drilling fluids and impact on pressure drop,
velocity profile and penetration rates during
 drilling. Journal of Petroleum Science and 22. Zhu, H., Y.D. Kim, and D. De Kee.2005. Non-
Engineering. 53, 203-224 Newtonian Fluids with a Yield Stress. Journal
12. Kelessidis, V. C., P. Dalamarinis, and R. of Non-Newtonian Fluids Mechanics.129, 177-
Maglione. 2011. Experimental study and 181
prediction of pressure losses of fluids modeled 23. Papanastasiou, T. C. 1987. Flows of materials
as Herschel-Bulkley in concentric and eccentric with yield. Journal of Rheology. 31(5), 385-404
annuli in laminar, transitional and turbulent 24. Frigaard, I.A., and C. Nouar. 2005. on the usage
flows. Journal of Petroleum Science and of viscosity regularization methods for visco-
Engineering. 77, 305-312 plastic fluid flow computation. Journal of Non-
13. Bittleston, S.H., and O. Hassager. 1992. Flow of Newtonian Fluid mechanics. 127, 1-26
viscoplastic fluids in a rotating concentric 25. Burgos, G. R., and A.N. Alexandrou. 1999. on
annulus. Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid the determination of yield surfaces in Herschel-
Mechanics.42, 19-36 Bulkley fluids. Journal of Rheology, 43(3)
14. Walton, I.C., and S.H. Bittleston. 1991. The 26. Mitsoulis, E., and S.S. Abdali. 1993. Flow
axial flow of a Bingham Plastic in a narrow simulation of Herschel-Bulkley fluids through
eccentric annulus. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, extrusion dies. Canadian Journal of Chemical
222, 39-60 Engineering, 71, 147-160
15. Szabo, P., and O. Hassager. 1992. Flow of 27. Bird, R.B., W.E. Stewart, and E.N. Lightfoot.
viscoplastic fluids in eccentric annular 2007. Transport phenomena. 843-851, John
geometries. Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Wiley and Sons, USA
Mechanics. 45, 149-169
16. Chatzimina, M., C. Xenophontos, G.C.
Georgiou, I. Argyropaidas, and E. Mitsoulis.
2007. Cessation of annular Poiseuille flows of
Bingham Plastics. Journal of Non-Newtonian
Fluid Mechanics. 142, 135-142
17. Beverly, C.R., and R.I Tanner. 1992. Numerical
analysis of three-dimensional Bingham Plastic
flow. Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid
Mechanics, 42, 85-115
18. Hussain, Q.E., and M.A.R, Sharif. 1998.
Analysis of Yield-Power-Law fluid flow in
irregular eccentric annuli. Journal of Energy
Resources Technology, 120, 201-207
19. Pereira, F.A.R., C.H. Ataide, and M.A.S.
Barrozo.2010. CFD approach using a discrete
phase model for annular flow analysis. Latin
American Applied Research, 40, 53-60
20. Escudier, M.P., P.J. Oliveira, F.T. Pinho, and S.
Smith. 2002. Fully developed laminar flow of
non-Newtonian liquids through annuli:
comparison of numerical calculations with
experiments. Experiments in Fluids, 33,101-111
21. Hussain, Q.E., and M.A.R. Sharif. 2000.
Numerical modeling of helical flow of
viscoplastic fluids in eccentric annuli. AIChE
Journal, 46(10)