SPE 131052

A New Method to Evaluate the Gas Migration for Cement Slurries

Zhu Haijin,Qu Jiansheng,Liu Aiping,Zou Jianlong,and Xu Jiaxing, CPOE

Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the CPS/SPE International Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition in China held in Beijing, China, 8–10 June 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by a CPS/SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or
members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers 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 acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
The oil industry wrestled with the problem of gas migration after cementing for many years. As yet an extensive research has been
carried out on the problem of gas migration. A lot of corresponding slurries were developed, and most of them have been used
successfully in some districts but not total alleviation of the problem. The main reason is the lack of a method to evaluate the gas
migration of cement slurries when considering actual well parameters.
In this paper, based on previous art of the method to scale-down well parameters to laboratory for more realistic testing of cement
recipes, by establishing the method of measuring cement slurries’ static gel strength to gain the development of the annular column
hydrostatic pressure, a new method to evaluate the gas migration for cement slurries was developed. This method depends on the
decline of upper annular column hydrostatic pressure, and can be used to evaluate the ability of the cement slurry in controlling gas
migration. Several cement slurries were investigated by this method. The laboratory tests were presented with good repeatability,
and could be used to test the ability of cement slurries in controlling gas migration.
In field applications, this method has been used in designing cement recipes when cementing gas wells in Chuanyu Area of China.
The ability of cement slurries in controlling gas migration has been tested. The field results were consistent with the laboratory
tests, and demonstrated the method could be used to guide cement slurries design effectively.

Introduction
Annular gas flow after cementing has been a problem in the industry for many years. The oil industry has paid much attention to
gas well zonal isolation problems and there is an extensive literature on the subject.
Rae et al[1] classified the problems of annular gas migration into two distinct groups- “primary” and “secondary”. The “primary”
gas migration is that occurs within a few hours or at most, some days after cementing operation. Stewart and Schouten [2] showed
that gas could migrate vertically through the cement, the inner cement/casing micro-annular, and the outer cement/formation
micro-annular or through all those three. Based on the research of gas migration through cement, the methodology [1, 3] to predict
gas migration of post-placement has been paid much attention. In this work, we only deal with “primary” gas migration through
cement.
During the early art on gas migration through cement, Tinsley et al [4] used a kind of test equipment to study gas migration through
cement under constant confining pressure. Similar equipment was used in following researches [2, 5, 6]. These test equipments using
constant confining pressure, can not be used in the research of specific well cement receipt.
After the cement is displaced and left behind the pipe, several processes start to take place in the slurry. These processes [6] include
dehydration of the liquid phase, gelation of the slurry, settling of the solid particles, and packing of the solid particles. The ability
of the cement to transmit hydrostatic pressure is a function of the cement slurry gel strength [7]. Sabins et al [8, 9] discussed the
changes taking place during this period, and found that the gel strength with value of 500lb/100ft2 was sufficient to prevent gas
percolation through a cement column. Rogers et al[10] established the definition that transition time was the period from 100
lb/100ft2 until 500lb/100ft2.
Moon et al [11, 12] developed an acoustic method for determining the static gel strength of slurries, which provided a continuous,
non-mechanical measurement. Beirute and Cheung [13] introduced a method to scale-down well parameters to laboratory conditions
for more realistic testing of cement recipes to be used to control wellbore migration of formation after cementing. The method
2 SPE 131052

proposed mainly considered the situation that the offending gas zone and the low pressure zone were very close to each other in a
specific well.
Experimental Procedure
Test Equipment Description: The cement slurries examined in the laboratory for this work were subjects to a variety of tests.
These tests included standard API HTHP Fluid Loss testing, as well as non-API gas migration model and static gel strength (SGS)
testing.
Fluid Loss: The HTHP slurry fluid loss tests were all performed following API RP-10B standards, and all the HTHP slurry fluid
loss tests should be performed before gas migration tests and SGS tests.
SGS: There are no any industry standard methods for the determination of SGS in oilfield cement systems. ISO is evaluating three
different types of laboratory test devices in order to develop such standard method [10]. In this work, one of those three types, an
ultrasonic test devices（SGSA, Chandler） was used in determination of cement SGS. All SGS determination was performed with
SGSA in this work.
In this work, the general procedure for SGS test using SGSA is as follows:
1. For tests run at temperatures below 89℃, the slurry is mixed according to the current API mixing procedure. The sample is then
stirred for 20 minutes in an atmospheric consistometer at the test temperature. The cement slurry is then transferred to the
preheated SGSA. The test is run at the test temperature.
2. For tests run at temperatures above 89℃, the slurry is mixed according to the current API mixing procedure. The sample is then
stirred for 20 minutes in an atmospheric consistometer at 89℃. The cement slurry is then transferred to the SGSA preheated at
89℃. And then the temperature is increased to the test temperature with the cell valves closed. After the test temperature is
reached, the test is performed as described.
Gas migration: A gas flow test model similar to one described by Beirute and Cheung [13] was utilized for test slurry resistance to
internal gas flow during setting. The equipment (Fluid Migration Analyzer, Chandler) and test methods are designed to evaluate a
particular cement composition ability to contain fluid in a formation under specific well conditions. The device simulates a cement
column placed against a gas reservoir. There are two stages for each gas migration test, named the fluid loss stage (the first stage)
and the gas migration stage (the second stage). Fine screens and regulated backpressure are employed to simulate fluid loss to
adjacent formations. Pressure is applied from the top of the cell through the cement column. The pressure is adjusted as a test
progress to simulate pressure reduction in the column above caused by cement gelation. The pressure control procedure has been
redesigned which will be showed in the following work.
The method described by Beirute and Cheung [13] mainly dealt with two close gas zones. It could not been used to treat only one
gas zone in a specific well, or two distant gas zones in a well. So it is necessary to redesign some procedure of the test method.
In this work, the entire annular cement column was considered as a composition of many cement columns which have the length of
100 feet. It is assumed that only the first column close to the gas reservoir is channeled by the gas, then another one next to the first
one may be channeled. So whether the first cement column being channeled by the gas is crucial. The first 100ft-long cement
column close to the gas reservoir is the objective of this work. With this assumption, the SGS of the annular cement slurry is
measured, and the hydrostatic pressure reduction at the location in the cement column can be calculated in time by Equation (1)
[14]
. Then the variation of the annular hydrostatic column pressure is obtained.
SGS  L
Pr  （1）
300  ( D  d )
Where,
Pr= pressure reduction due to gel strength, psi
SGS=static gel strength of the cement column above the given location, lb/100ft2
L=measured length of the cement column above the given location, ft
D=diameter of the hole, in
d=diameter of the casing, in
During the first stage of the gas migration test, the pressure control program is consistent with the one as Beirute and Cheung [13]
described. During the second stage of the gas migration test, the pressure control program is some different from Beirute and
Cheung [13]. After the gas migration test begins, the top of the first 100ft-long cement column close to the gas zone is considered as
the discharged part of lower pressure, and the hydrostatic column pressure above the top of the first 100-ft long cement column is
considered as the discharged pressure. So the discharged pressure calculated alters with the SGS until to the zero. Then the
SPE 131052 3

discharged pressure of the test progress could be calculated by Equation (2) [13]:
 2 L
P1C   P 2C  C P 2
2W
2 
 P1W   （2）
 LW 
Where,
P1C= cell discharge pressure
P2C= 400psi
LC= 0.5ft
LW= 100ft
P2W= pressure of gas bearing formation, psi
P1W= hydrostatic column pressure above the first 100ft-long cement column, psi
New well parameters are designed in this work, which is showed as table 1. In this specific well, the cement slurry develops SGS
to 100 lb/100ft2 when the hydrostatic column pressure equals to the pressure of gas bearing formation. The pressure of the test
program is showed as table 2.
Table 1 Parameters of the Sample Well
Depth of high pressure gas zone, ft 10000

Depth of discharged zone, ft 9900

Top of cement column, ft 5000
The pressure of gas zone, psi 7800
The pressure of discharged zone, psi Actual hydrostatic column pressure
BHCT, ℃ 75
BHST, ℃ 90
Casing diameter, in. 5
Average hole diameter, in. 8
Density of the mud in the hole, lb/gal 14.5
Density of the slurry to be used, lb/gal 16.4
4 SPE 131052

Table 2 Pressure Schedule of the Sample Well

Gas zone pressure(back
Cement pore Back pressure
Time SGS pressure bottom/ injection
pressure top
pressure)
min lb/100 ft2 psi psi psi
0 934
20 823
30 767
40 712
50 656 Back pressure bottom: 400 --
60 601
70 545
80 490
90 434
100 392
110 386
160 360
210 333
250 310
270 298
320 Confine pressure: Injection pressure: 400 268
340 440 255
350 248
400 213
450 174
500 124
550 39
～ 0
In this work, the general procedure for gas migration test using Fluid Migration Analyzer is as belows:
1. For tests run at temperatures below 89℃, the slurry is mixed according to the current API mixing procedure. The sample is then
stirred for 20 minutes in an atmospheric consistometer at the test temperature. The cement slurry is then transferred to the
preheated Fluid Migration Analyzer. The test is run at the test temperature according to Pressure Schedule.
2. For tests run at temperatures above 89℃, the slurry is mixed according to the current API mixing procedure. The sample is then
stirred for 20 minutes in an atmospheric consistometer at 89℃. The cement slurry is then transferred to the Fluid Migration
Analyzer preheated at 89℃. And then the temperature is increased to the test temperature with the cell valves closed. After the test
temperature is reached, the test is performed as described.
According to the result generally accepted, the transition time is the period from 100 lb/100ft2 until 500 lb/100ft2. The parameters
of the sample well cement slurry are just able to meet such situation. Once the cement slurry develops SGS to 100 lb/100ft2, the
second stage of gas migration begins. These parameters can be used to test the gas migration properties of different cement
slurries. When evaluating the gas migration for cement slurries, the time used for the preparation of gas migration test should be
controlled in line with that for SGS test.

Examples of gas flow tests on some cement recipes

In this work, many tests have been run using the proposed procedure. The same imaginary well conditions described before in
this paper were used to design the following tests unless indicated. Table 3 gives the general composition of the slurries.
SPE 131052 5

Table 3 Slurry Composition

Cement recipes
1 G Cement +Fluid Loss Control Agent F1+ Retarder R+ Water
2 G Cement +Fluid Loss Control Agent F2+Dispersant D+ Retarder R+ Water
3 G Cement + Fluid Loss Control Agent F1 + Anti-gas Migration A+ Retarder R+ Water
4 G Cement + Fluid Loss Control Agent F1 +Expanding Agent E+ Retarder R+ Water
Table 4 gives properties of the slurries in Table 3. The slurries were designed to have a thickening time of 150 minutes at 75℃ .
Slurry 1 only contained Fluid Loss Control Agent F1, which controled fluid loss by reducing permeability of cement filter cake.
Slurry 2 contained Dispersant D and Fluid Loss Control Agent F2 which controled fluid loss by forming film at the interface of gas
and slurry. Slurry 3 contained Fluid Loss Control Agent F1 and Anti-gas Migration Agent A which was some kind of latex. Slurry
4 contained Fluid Loss Control Agent F1 and Expanding Agent E which was a lattice expansion agent. Table 4 also shows
transition time of SGS and other properties of the cement recipes. All SGS of the slurries were determined using SGSA earlier.
Table 4 Slurry Properties
Thickening time Fluid loss Free water Transition time of SGS
Density
(min) (cc/30min) (cc) (min)
(lb/gal)
75℃ 75℃ 75℃ 75℃
1 16.4 152 32 0.1 10
2 16.4 161 39 0.1 54
3 16.4 165 29 0.0 13
4 16.4 169 31 0.1 16
Slurry 1
Figure 1 showed the pressure controls of slurry 1, and Figure 2 showed the results of gas migration test. Fluid Loss Control Agent
F1 controlled fluid loss by reducing permeability of cement filter cake. According to Figure 2, only using fluid loss control agent
was effective for fluid loss control, as could be seen from the first fluid loss stage, which was below 10 cc. But this additive could
not immobilize slurry filtrate inside pore spaces of cement structure. When pore pressure of cement slurry fell to the pressure of
gas reservoir, the anti-gas migration ability of the slurry was inadequate. As could be seen from Figure 2, during the second stage
of the test, the filtrate inside the pore spaces of the cement structure was eventually replaced by gas. Then gas flow was observed.
2000 2000 2000 2000

1800 1800 1800 1800

1600 1600 1600 1600

Cement Discharge Pressure (Through Piston) (psig)

1400 1400 1400 1400

Formation Pore Pressure (Cell Bottom) (psig)

Confining Pressure (Above Piston) (psig)

Cement Pore Pressure (psig)

1200 1200 1200 1200

1000 1000 1000 1000

800 800 800 800

600 600 600 600

400 400 400 400

200 200 200 200

0 0 0 0
0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 1 Pressure Control of Slurry 1

6 SPE 131052

200 500 3 200

180 450 2.7 180

160 400 2.4 160

Formation Fluid Inflow Rate (N2) (Standard ml/min)

140 350 2.1 140

Fluid Migration Volume (Scale B) (Atm-ml)

Cement Fluid Loss (Scale A) (ml)

Piston Displacement (inches)

120 300 1.8 120

100 250 1.5 100

80 200 1.2 80

60 150 0.9 60

40 100 0.6 40

20 50 0.3 20

0 0 0 0
0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 2 Gas Flow Test of Slurry 1

Slurry 2
Figure 3 showed the pressure controls of slurry 2, and Figure 4 showed the results of gas migration test. Fluid Loss Control Agent
F2 controlled fluid loss by forming a film above cement filter cake. According to Figure 4, using Fluid Loss Control Agent F2 was
also effective for fluid loss control, as could be seen from the first fluid loss stage. Even this additive could immobilize slurry
filtrate inside pore spaces of cement structure by forming film to some degree, but the film was not stable or effective enough at
the test temperature. When pore pressure of cement slurry fell to the pressure of gas reservoir, the anti-gas migration ability of the
slurry was inadequate either. As could be seen from Figure 4, during the second stage of the test, the filtrate inside the pore spaces
of the cement structure was not immobilized in the cement structure. Gas flow was observed in this test later.
2000 2000 2000 2000

1800 1800 1800 1800

1600 1600 1600 1600

1400 1400 1400 1400

Cement Discharge Pressure (Through Piston) (psig)
Formation Pore Pressure (Cell Bottom) (psig)

Confining Pressure (Above Piston) (psig)

1200 1200 1200 1200

Cement Pore Pressure (psig)

1000 1000 1000 1000

800 800 800 800

600 600 600 600

400 400 400 400

200 200 200 200

0 0 0 0
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 3 Pressure Control of Slurry 2

200 200 3 200

180 180 2.7 180

160 160 2.4 160

140 140 2.1 140

Formation Fluid Inflow Rate (N2) (Standard ml/min)
Fluid Migration Volume (Scale B) (Atm-ml)
Cement Fluid Loss (Scale A) (ml)

120 120 1.8 120

Piston Displacement (inches)

100 100 1.5 100

80 80 1.2 80

60 60 0.9 60

40 40 0.6 40

20 20 0.3 20

0 0 0 0
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 4 Gas Flow Test of Slurry 2

SPE 131052 7

Slurry 3
Figure 5 showed the pressure controls of slurry 3, and Figure 6 showed the results of gas migration test. According to Figure 4, by
adding some kind of latex （Anti-gas Migration Agent A）to slurry 1, as Anti-gas Migration Agent A had the ability to coalesce
and form an impermeable film among cement structure, the anti-gas migration ability of slurry 3 was better than slurry 1. No gas
flow was observed in this test.
2000 2000 2000 2000

1800 1800 1800 1800

1600 1600 1600 1600

Cement Discharge Pressure (Through Piston) (psig)

Formation Pore Pressure (Cell Bottom) (psig)

Confining Pressure (Above Piston) (psig)

1400 1400 1400 1400

Cement Pore Pressure (psig)

1200 1200 1200 1200

1000 1000 1000 1000

800 800 800 800

600 600 600 600

400 400 400 400

200 200 200 200

0 0 0 0
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 5 Pressure Control of Slurry 3

200 200 3 200

180 180 2.7 180

160 160 2.4 160

F orm ation F luid Inflow R ate (N 2) (Standard m l/m in)
F luid M igration Volum e (Sc ale B) (Atm -m l)

140 140 2.1 140

C em ent F luid Los s (Sc ale A) (m l)

Pis ton D is plac em ent (inc hes )

120 120 1.8 120

100 100 1.5 100

80 80 1.2 80

60 60 0.9 60

40 40 0.6 40

20 20 0.3 20

0 0 0 0
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 6 Gas Flow Test of Slurry 3

Slurry 4
Figure 7 showed the results of gas migration test. According to Figure 7, gas flow was observed in this test. This kind of expanding
slurry were not effective in preventing annular gas flow since the expansion of Expanding Agent E took place after final set. So
adding this kind of expanding agent to slurry 1 did not improve its ability for anti-gas migration.
8 SPE 131052

200 200 3 200

180 180 2.7 180

160 160 2.4 160

140 140 2.1 140

Formation Fluid Inflow Rate (N2) (Standard ml/min)

Fluid Migration Volume (Scale B) (Atm-ml)
Cement Fluid Loss (Scale A) (ml)
120 120 1.8 120

Piston Displacement (inches)

100 100 1.5 100

80 80 1.2 80

60 60 0.9 60

40 40 0.6 40

20 20 0.3 20

0 0 0 0
0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00
Time (HH:MM)

Figure 7 Gas Flow Test of Slurry 4

Field Case
Using the method, a number of cement recipes of liner job had been researched in Chuanyu Area of China. The field results were
consistent with the laboratory tests. Some representative examples are presented.
Well 1
The hole to be cemented was 7-in liner at a depth of 5002m, the gas zones were found from 4609m until 4800m. The hole size was
81/2-in. The last casing was 95/8-in set at 4207m. The top of the liner was at 3709m. The density of drilling mud and slurry cement
were 20.5 lb/gal and 20.7 lb/gal. Using the cement recipe 3 as this paper mentioned before and adding some weighting material,
the cement recipe was evaluated in laboratory test and no gas flow observed. For the record, a CBL/VDL was run and showed
good bond. In summary, this was an excellent job.
Well 2
The hole to be cemented was 5-in liner at a depth of 6990m, the gas zones were found from 6736m until 6938m. The hole size was
57/8-in. The last liner was 7-in set at 5990m. The top of the liner was at 4850m. The density of drilling mud was 10.2 lb/gal. The
density of the lead slurry and tail slurry were 11.3 lb/gal and 15.9 lb/gal. Using the cement recipe 3 this paper mentioned before as
the tail slurry and adding some light material to the recipe as lead slurry, the cement recipe of tail slurry was evaluated in
laboratory test and no gas flow observed. Later a result of CBL/VDL showed that was an excellent cementing job.
Well 3
The hole to be cemented was 7-in liner at a depth of 5645m, the gas zones were found from 3344m until 3425m. The hole size was
81/2-in. The last casing was 95/8-in set at 3335m. The top of the liner was at 3150m. The density of drilling mud was 16.3 lb/gal.
The density of the lead slurry and tail slurry were both 18.0 lb/gal. Using the cement recipe 1 as this paper mentioned and adding
some weight material to the recipe, the cement recipe of tail slurry later was evaluated in laboratory test later after cementing and
gas flow observed. The result of CBL/VDL later showed a failure job.

Conclusion
1. The problem of gas flow through cement is a very complex issue, only controlling fluid loss of slurry or emphasizing short
transition time are not adequate.
2. A method has been developed to evaluate the anti-gas migration ability of cement slurry.
3. The method attempts to consider the annular cement column of a specific well as a composition of many cement columns which
have the length of 100 feet. And by evaluating whether the gas will flow through the column closest to the gas reservoir, the gas
flow problem of annular cement column is given out.
4. Field application shows that the method can be used to tailor the cement recipes of a specific well.
SPE 131052 9

References
1. Rae, P., Wilkins, D. and Free, D.:“A New Approach to the Prediction of Gas Flow after Cementing”. SPE, NO 18622
2. Stewart, R.B. and Schouten, F.C.:“Gas Invasion and Migration in Cemented Annuli:Causes and Cures”. SPE, NO 14779
3. Bour, D.L., Wilkinson, J.G.:“Combating Gas Migration in the Michigan Basin”. SPE, NO 19324
4. Tinsley, J. M., Miller, E. C., Sabins, F. L. and Sutton, D.L.:“Study of Factors Causing Annular Gas Flow Following Primary
Cementing”. SPE, NO 8257
5. Bannister, C.E., Shuster, G.E., Wooldridge, L.A., Jones, M.J. and Birch, A.G.:“Critical Design parameters to Prevent Gas
Invasion during Cementing Operations”. SPE, NO 11982
6. Cheung P.R., Beinrte R. M.:“Gas Flow in Cements”. SPE, NO 11207
7. Sutton, D.L., Ravi, K.M. :“New Method for Determining Downhole Properties That Affect Gas Migration and Annular
Sealing”. SPE NO 19520
8. Sabins, F.L., Sutton, D. L.:“The Relationship of Thickening Time, Gel Strength, and Compressive Strength of Oilwell Cement”.
SPE NO 11205
9. Sabins, F. L., Timley, J.M. and Sutton, D. L.:“Transition Time of Cement Slurries between the Fluid and the Set State”. SPE
NO 9285
10. Rogers, M.J., Dillenbeck, R.L. and Eid, R.N.:“Transition Time of Cement Slurries, Definitions and Misconceptions, Related to
Annular Fluid Migration”. SPE NO 90829, 2004
11. Moon, J.J., Surjaatmadja, J.B. and Ehlert, M.C. :“Consistency and Static Gel Strength Measuring Device and Method”. U.S.
Patent#4,622,846, 1986
12. Jeff Moon, P.E., Steven Wang:“Acoustic Method for Determining the Static Gel Strength of Slurries”. SPE NO 55650
13. Beirute, R.M., Cheung, P.R.:“A Scale-Down Laboratory Test Procedure for Tailoring to Specific Well Conditions: The
Selection of Cement Recipes To Control Formation Fluids Migration After Cementing”. SPE NO 19522
14. Sutton, L.D., Sbins, F.L.:“New Evaluation for Annular Gas Flow Potential”. Oil and Gas Journal, 109-112 p, December,1984
Author Introduction: Zhu Haijin (Master), received his Master’s degree in polymer materials from the Tianjin University in
2002. Now he is mainly engaged in the research on cementing technology. Add: No.40, Jintang Road, Tanggu District, Tianjin
(300451), China. E-mail Add: zhuhaij@cnpc.com.cn