Displacement Mechanics in Primary Cementing
R. H. MclEAN
MEMBER AIME
C. W. MANRY
JUNIOR MEMBER AIME
W. W. WHITAKER
MEMBER AIME
ABSTRACT
In an eccentric annulus, cement may favor the widest
side and bypass slower-moving mud in the narrowest side.
Tendency of the cement to bypass mud is a function of
the geometry of the annulus, the density and flow pro-
perties of the mud and cement and the rate of flow.
Bypassing can be prevented if the pressure gradient pro-
duced from circulation of the cement and buoyant forces
exceeds the pressure gradient necessary to drive the mud
through the narrowest side of the annulus at the same ve-
locity as the cement. In the absence of buoyant forces,
one requirement for this balance is maintenance of the
yield strength of the cement greater than the yield strength
of the mud multiplied by the maximum distance from the
casing to the wall of the borehole and divided by the
minimum distance. If the yield strength of the cement is
below this value, bypassing of mud cannot be prevented
unless buoyant forces or motion of the casing signifi-
cantly aid the displacement.
INTRODUCTION
Successful primary cementing leaves no continuous
channels of mud capable of flow during well treatment
and production. Prevention of channels requires care. Tep-
litz and Hassebroek provide evidence of channels of mud
after primary cementing in the field. 1 Channeling of ce-
ment through mud in laboratory experiments has also
been reported. 2- 4 Recommendations for improving the
displacement of mud include (1) centralizing the casing
in the borehole,'-s (2) attaching centralizers and scratchers
to the casing and moving it during displacement,',5 (3) thin-
ning the mud,S"," (4) isolating the cement by plugs while it
is circulated down the casing," (5) establishing turbulence
in the cement: and (6) holding the cement slurry at least
2 lb"j gal heavier than the mud and circulating the cement
slurry at a very low rate of flow.' Although much has
been written about the above parameters, the relative im-
portance of each has not been well defined.
In this investigation, the mechanics of mud displace-
ment are described through results from analytical models
and experiments. The model chosen - a single string of
casing eccentric in a round, smooth-walled, impermeable
borehole - is analagous to casing centralized in a bore-
hole which is not round and to placing more than one
string of casing in a borehole. In each, some paths for flow
are more restricted than others. A fluid flowing in the
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers
olnee Aug. 25 1966. Revis~d manuscript received Dec. 8. 1966. Paper
(SPE 1488) ~HS presented at SPE California Regional Meeting held in
Santa Barbara. Calif.• Nov. 17-18, 1966. ©CoPYrIght 1967 AmeI'lcan
Institute of Mining, MetallurgIcal, and Petroleum Engmeers. Inc.
lReferences given at end of paper.
FElIIIUAIIY, ]<)(.7
ESSO PRODUCTION RESEARCH CO.
HOUSTON, TEX.
borehole may seek (he least restricted, or most open, path.
This tendency for uneven flow can lead to channeling of
cement through mud unless preventive measures are
taken. The analytical models describe channeling and give
means of balancing the flow. Experimental data test the
analytical models and illustrate effects of motion of the
casing, differences in density and mud's tendency to gel.
Results are encouraging. Piston-like displacement of
mud by an equal density cement slurry is possible through
proper balance of the flow properties of the mud and
cement slurries to the eccentricity of the annulus. The
more eccentric the annulus, the thicker must be the ce-
ment relative to the mud. If proper balance is not achieved,
bypassing of mud by cement cannot be prevented without
assistance from motion of the casing or buoyant forces.
Increasing the rate of flow can help to start all mud flow-
ing but cannot prevent channeling of cement through
slower moving mud in an eccentric annulus. Thinning
the cement slurry tends to increase channeling although
the extent of turbulence in the annulus may be increased.
Description of flow in an eccentric annulus begins in
the next section. It is assumed that (1) the casing is eccen-
tric and is stationary, (2) the mud and cement slurries
have the same density and (3) the gel structure of the
mud has been broken and the mud and cement follow the
Bingham flow model. Effects related to these restrictions
will be discussed.
FLOW PATTERNS
SINGLE FLUID IN ANNULUS
Flow of a single fluid through an eccentric annulus is
illustrated in Fig. 1. Part A shows laminar flow of a New-
tonian fluid. This distribution of flow was calculated by
Piercy, Hooper and Winney.' In fully developed turbulent
flow, the velocity distribution around the annulus is less
distorted, but the flow still favors the widest part of the
annulus. s - lO
Parts B, C and D of Fig. 1 are a qualitative representa-
tion of the flow of a Bingham fluid. The yield strength
of the fluid increases the severity of bypassing compared
to Newtonian flow. At a very low rate of flow, all flow
is confined to that portion of the annulus which has the
minimum perimeter-to-area ratio. The fluid shears on the
perimeter of that area when the pressure gradient multi-
plied by the area just exceeds the yield stress of the fluid
multiplied by the perimeter. Whether or not the minimum
perimeter-to-area region encompasses all of the annulus
or only a part (as shown in Part B) depends on the geo-
metry of the annulus. If only a part begins to flow, in- _
creasing the rate of flow increases the area flowing until
finally there is flow throughout the annulus.
25)
-I
NEWTONIAN
A B
BINGHAM PLASTIC
C
,
D I

! HIGHEST VELOCITY REGION

AfTER PIERCY, t-OOPER, AND WINNEY 7

LAMINAR FLOW lOW RATE OF flOW MODERATE itA TE OF flOW HIGH RATE OF FLOW

;-~ 'PlUG'

STATlONAItY flUID

l- JSHEAR REGION
FIG. I-TYPICAL FLOW PATTERNS IN ECCENTRIC ANNULI.

Fluids described by the power-law model also have a
more uneven flow in eccentric annuli than Newtonian flu-
ids." However, there will be no stationary fluid if there
is any flow in the annulus.
Bingham flow was chosen as most representative in this
investigation. The mud and cement slurries used did not
follow the Bingham model exactly, but they did form static
channels. For example, J Vz bbljmin circulation of the
slurry with the flow behavior illustrated in Fig. 2 left a
channel of stationary mud which contacted 56 percent of
the outer perimeter of a 9-in. ID model. The 6-in. OD
inner pipe was IfVIn in. off the wall of the model (Appen-
dix). In another experiment with a similar mud but
with the standoff set at 17 percent of the maximum pos-
sible, circulation at 3.2 bbljmin left a static channel which
contacted 67 percent of the outer perimeter.
ONE FLUID DISPLACING ANOTHER
The iso-velocity lines in Fig. 1 can be used to illustrate
displacement of one fluid by another with identical flow
properties. In this context, the contour lines show the po-
sition of the interface between the fluids at successive time
intervals as the displacement takes place. Breakthrough of
the displacing fluid first occurs close to the center of the
widest part of the annulus for Newtonian flow or in the
plug region for Bingham flow. The displacing fluid then
spreads toward the walls and any limit set by a static chan-
nel.
Two types of bypassing can be recognized in Fig. 1.
First, the fluid away from the walls in any part of the an-
nulus moves faster than that near the boundaries. Thus,
fluid in midstream (or in the plug) is always bypassing
that near the boundaries. Secondly, the fluid in the wide
part of the annulus has a higher average velocity than
fluid in the narrower areas. Only bypassing of the latter
type is discussed hereafter. It is the more important in
Bingham flow in eccentric annuli.
If the flow properties of the displacing fluid differ from
those of the resident fluid, the flow pattern will be more
complex than those illustrated in Fig. J. A very simplified
example is shown in Fig. 3. In the cross-section shown,
there is flow throughout the annulus. The average veloc-
ities in several areas of the annulus are denoted by vectors.
Fig. 3 shows two driving forces on the mud. One is a
drag force from the faster-flowing cement close to the

i--i----,---I ~ VELOCITY VECTORS

1
120 /.,R-;;r---
I /
CEMENT
100 I
I
II I : /
/1
I
I MUD
N~ I V
u_ I /
8
::::. 80
I
, , 1/ / ,
I -t- RESISTANCE TO
FLOW OF MUD
DItIVING FORCE
ON MUD"
!:9 I I / ""'+- BINGHAM PLASTIC MODEL SOME FUNCTION OF DRAG STRESS, T f' ON
60
: /f 1_ EVALUATED BY 300 AND PROXIMITY OF CASING TO INTERFACE BETWEEN MUD
C)
z I/,· ! 600-RPM READINGS ON
WAll OF BOREHOLE AND AND CEMENT
15 ~/ , I FANN VISCOMETER
< /' I FLOW PROPERTIES OF MUD +
w
"" /1 - '1
I
: PRESSURE GRADIENT,

~~~dL.
dp/dx, IN ANNULUS

I J
" CASING HELD STATIONARY
AND NO DIFFERENCE IN
OL---~----~-----L----~----~----~ __~ DENSITY BETWEEN MUD
o . 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 AND CEMENT
ROTATIONAL SPEED OF FANN VISCOMETER - RPM
FIG. 3-DIUVING FOl\cES MUST EXCEED RESISTING FORCE TO
FIG. 2-Funv PROPF.RTlES OF TYPICAL BEi\TONITE-WATER Sl.URRY. SUSTAIN FLOW IN MUD CHANNEL.

252 JOURNAl. OF PETROLEUM TECHNOI.OGY

mud. This stress is called Tf. The other is the pressure
gradient in the annulus dP / dx. These are the only driving
forces on the mud if the casing is not moving and there
is no difference in density between the mud and cement.
Resistance to flow of the mud comes from the proximity
of the walls and the mud's flow properties. For the mud
to move, the sum of the driving forces must exceed the
resisting force.
The displacement illustrated is not efficient: the mud is
moving slower than the cement. In an efficient displace-
ment, the velocity of the mud in the narrowest part of the
annulus should equal the average velocity of the cement.
The analytical model described in the following section
illustrates how to achieve this condition.
ANALYTICAL MODEL
The analytical model is based on division of the annu-
lus into sectors. Each sector is treated as an equivalent sec-
tor of a concentric annulus adjusted to have approximately
the same separation between the walls of the borehole and
the casing. An identical pressure gradient is applied to each
sector. The flow regime and rate of flow in each are cal-
culated independently using equations applicable to con-
centric annuli. 12- 14 The flow in the sectors is summed for
the total rate of flow. This summation and subsequent
division by the area of the annulus gives the average ve-
locity or rate of flow in the annulus for comparison with
the average velocity in each sector. One sector can con-
tain turbulent fluid while the fluid in another is in laminar
flow or even static. Also, one can contain mud while others
have cement. The basic assumption is that flow in one
sector is not influenced by the adjacent sectors. The only
common factors are the pressure gradient in the annulus
and the diameter of the borehole.
Fig. 4 illustrates typical sectoring of an annulus. The
sector designated C serves as an example. The inner radius
of the concentric annulus fitted to Sector C makes the
areas of the two shaded sections equal. The radius of the
borehole R. remains as the outer radius. All flow in Sec-
tor C is assumed to be identical with flow in a concentric
annulus formed by R. and R,..
lf the narrowest sector is assumed to be filled with mud
and the remaining sectors filled with cement, characteris-
tics of displacements can be investigated with the ana-
lytical model. Calculations give the ratio of the velocity
SIMULATED WALL ~ Fig. 5 describes one particular system. Variation in the
~
OF BOREHOLE
:: SECTOR
A
B
/
////
I
,\ C ~ i5'
"
--\'
~------:
\
SlMUlATED~
X
'\
D
;
! « ....
)- I
OF INNER PIPE
OR CASING A RATE OF flOW - SSL/MIN
FIG. 4-SECTORING OF ECCDTRIC AXXCI.CS.
FEHIILAUY. 1967
of the mud to the average velocity in the annulus. This
ratio is important; if it is less than 1.0, cement will be by-
passing mud.
In all calculations, an upper limit of 1.0 is placed on the
velocity ratio. If the mud is very thin and the cement very
thick, the mud can flow at a pressure gradient less than
required to flow the cement. At a pressure gradient just
adequate to make the cement flow, the velocity of the mud
will be higher than the velocity of the cement. This condi-
tion is not realistic. The thick cement could not channel
ahead of the mud to form the assumed starting condi-
tion for the calculation. If the mud flows with a higher
velocity than the cement at the applied pressure gradient,
channeling cannot occur.
There are two easily identified errors in this analytical
model. One is neglect of Tf as a driving force on the mud.
If the cement is flowing faster than the mud, Tf will con-
tribute to movement of the mud. This error is not import-
ant because there will be no difference in velocity if the
displacement is efficient. Effective removal of the mud
should be accomplished without assistance from Tf. The
other error is neglect of the effect of a possible interface
between flowing and static fluid. If an interface exists
(B and C, Fig. 1) the pressure gradient will be greater
than the calculated value. For example, the minimum
perimeter-to-area ratio in an eccentric annulus is greater
than that for the concentric annulus fitted to the widest
sector alone. Consequently, the pressure gradient neces-
sary to start flow of cement in the annulus is higher than
that calculated. The magnitude of this error is estimated
to be less than 30 percent in the displacements discussed
here. Because other errors in practical applications can far
exceed 30 percent, this pressure-gradient error is left to
serve as a safety factor.
DISPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS
The first example is for the special case in which the
flow properties of the mud and cement are identical. These
calculations also illustrate flow of a single Bingham fluid
through an annulus. Fig. 5 shows that increasing the yield
strength of the fluid increases the rate of flow needed to
start flow in the narrowest sector. Increases in the rate
of flow beyond that needed to start flow in the narrow
sector tend to balance the flow distribution. Finally, turbu-
lence is established throughout the annulus, and the rela-
tive velocity distribution is unchanged by further increases
in the rate of flow.
~ 1.2,-----,--~---_,___--___,_-,---,~_;_:_:_---_,_______,
@ if! PRO~~RTlES OF FLUID 16 IN.' CASING 3/4 IN. OFF
Qz
~~
I WALL OF 9 IN. BOREHOLE
l.0 DENSITY - 10 LBm / G A L ' (50 PERCENT STANDOFF)
'" z PLASTIC VISCOSITY - 10 CP I: I, I:
I, ii' i
o ~ 08 YIELD STRENGTH - ., , --L-
AS SHOWN LIMIT WITH TURBULENT flOW
, '" . ' THROUGHOUT ANNULUS
~ 06~~IH;I~'----~~~~~~
~ §. ,I ! ~
",0 ' ' ,
z ~ 0.4
ZW
-<.!)
OL-~~LL
0.5
i i
~ ~ 0.2 f-:-!"'i'1'"'f"=Ff~----'------t-/-+-hA-Hl'--
Ow
~~
> i!
1.0
_ _ _~~--'--~LL~~~UL_ _~~
2 4 6 8 10 20 30
FI( .. ,'>-hCREASI,\;G YIELD STRE'\;GTll OF BJ:-.IGHAM PLASTIC FLCID
hCHEASI,~ AVERAGE VELOCITY REQUIRED TO INITIATE FLOW
L\ "iAHROWI:ST PART OF ECCEXTRIC ANNULCS.
253
 plastic viscosity or eccentnclty will change the results. If the mud. The change is not rapid, however.
- the plastic viscosity is increased, flow in the narrowest The effect of the yield strength of the cement is mOlt
sector begins sooner, and the limiting condition of turbu· striking. In the example shown in Fig. 8, the plastic vis-
lence throughout the annulus occurs at a higher rate of cosity of the cement is held equal to that of the mud, and
flow. Variation in the eccentricity is shown in Fig. 6. Here, the yield strength of the cement is varied. Mud velocity
the velocity in the narrow sector relative to the average rises rapidly with increases in the yield strength of the ce-
velocity in the annulus is shown for four different posi- ment above that needed to initiate flow of the mud. The
tions of the casing: 33%. 50. 75 and 100 percent standoff. change in relative velocity occurs quickest at the lowest
rates of flow.
Percent standoff is defined by R. ~ Rp X 100 percent,
This behavior can be explained through the limiting
where Wn is the minimum separation of the wall of the condition illustrated by the dashed line in Fig. 8 (a rate
casing and the wall of the borehole. Flow starts in the of flow of 0 bbljmin). It is coincident with a yield
narrow sector at lower rates of flow as the standoff is in- strength of the cement called the critical yield strength.
creased. Also, the upper limit on the velocity in the nar- The critical yield strength is the yield strength of the ce-
rowest sector relative to the average velocity is increased ment which makes the pressure gradient needed to initiate
by an increase in standoff. flow of the cement in the widest sector identical with that
required to initiate flow of the mud in the narrowest sec-
Two important conclusions can be drawn from the re-
tor. If the yield strength of the cement equals or exceeds
sults in Figs. 5 and 6. It may be impossible to condition this critical value, creeping flow (:::::; 0 bbIl min) of the ce-
all of the mud unless the string of pipe or casing is either ment forces the mud to flow. The velocity ratio will be 1.0.
well centered in the hole or moved during circulation. Further increases in the pressure gradient, which increase
Similarly, if mud is displaced with cement which has the the average rate of flow in the annulus, can have a great-
same flow properties as the mud, poor displacement can be er effect on the velocity of the cement than on the velocity
expected in an eccentric annulus. Help from motion of the of the mud. The cement is in a wider sector. Consequently,
casing or buoyant forces will be necessary to prevent by-
passing.
1.6r----------~-----------
Fortunately, the velocity distribution of the mud·cement MUD
interface can be balanced in the more general case where ~~ 10 lBI/l00 FT2L_-+_~_
~::l 1.4 TO "
the flow properties of the cement differ from those of the wZ J.LP" 10 cp
mud. In this investigation, the properties of the mud are ~~ 1.2 P ~ 10 lBm/GAl--+-·+~·
held constant and properties of the cement are varied. The >-Z
COW
flow properties of the mud could have been varied with o ~ 1.0 CEMENT
WO 2
similar results. An increase in the yield strength of the 9 , TO ~ 10 LBI/l00 FT
cement is equivalent to a decrease in the yield strength of ~ Z 0.8 J.Lp" AS SHOWN -+-.
the mud. Relative values rather than absolute values con· O:E P "10 LBm/GAl
trol the tendency of cement to bypass mud. ~ eJ 0.6 -
u..
- Fig. 7 illustrates how variation in the plastic viscosity of 0>- 0~ 0.4
the cement affects the ratio of the velocity of the mud to
the average velocity of the cement in an example annulus. !::O
The yield strength of the cement is held constant. At a
gg
-'w
0.2

constant rate of flow, the mud begins to flow when the ~>
plastic viscosity of the cement is high enough to generate 100
a pressure gradient which overcomes the resistance of the
yield strength of the mud. Further increases in the plastic
FIG. 7-EFFECT OF PLASTIC VISCOSITY OF CEMENT ON DISPLACE-
viscosity of the cement gradually increase the velocity of ~IE'\r OF MUD FROM AN ECCENTRIC AN:"IULUS.

1.2,--------------------,
>-
co",
0'" J-_______l~O~O~%~S~T~A~N~D~O~FF~(P~IP~E~C~E~N~TE~R~ED~)~______~
Qz
WW

~ 0
1.0
PROPERTIES OF flUID
o Vi 75% STANDOFF
"" Z DENSITY - 10 LBm /GAl
~:E 0.8 PLASTIC VISCOSITY - 10 CP
MUD
~ 15 YiElD STRENGTH -
'" , 10 LBdl00 FT2 50% To = 10 LBI/IOO H2 ,
~ ~ 0.6 fLp= 10 cp
~O
~~ 6 IN. CASING IN 33-1/3% P = 10 LBm/GAL
Z > 0.4
~Ci
>-«
9 IN. BOREHOLE.
,
I
CEMENT
= AS SHOWN
o ""~
TO
.....
0.2 I fLp = 10 cp
g«
w I P = 10 LBm/GAl
> I
OL---~----L--~---------~
3 4 6810 W ~ W W °1~5--;..2...0:::;;....-c..25--..1;'CRITIC~~ VALUE 40 45
RATE OF flOW - BBl/MIN
YiElD STRENGTH OF CEMENT - LBI/IOO H2
FIG. 6-DECREASING STA"iDOFF bCREASES AVERAGE VELOCITY
REQt;IRED TO INITIATE FLOW OF BINGHAM PLASTIC FLUID FIG. 8-EFFECT OF YIELD STRENGTH OF CEME,\T ON DISPLACDIENT
L\ NARROWEST PART OF ECCENTRIC ANNULUS. OF MUD FROM AN ECCENTRIC ANNCLUS.

254 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 (he velocitv ratio of the mud to the cement can fall below
1.0 as the ~ate of flow is increased. If the yield strength of
the cement is below the critical value, the mud will not
flow during creeping flow of the cement. The pressure
gradient must be increased by increasing the rate of flow
of the cement before the mud will flow.
An approximate value for the critical yield strength of
the cement is easily calculated with the analytical model
if the geometry of the annulus and the yield strength of
the mud are known. In a concentric annulus the pressure
gradient needed to initiate flow of a Bingham fluid is just
greater than the wetted perimeter-to-area ratio of the an-
nulus multiplied by the yield strength of the fluid. The
perimeter-to-area ratio is equal to 2/w where W is the
separation of the wall of the casing and the wall of the
borehole, or Rb - Rp. Thus, in an eccentric annulus model,
the pressure gradient needed to start flow of the cement
is equal to 2 Tjw,e, where Toc is the yield strength of the
cement, and Ww is the maximum separation of the wall of
the casing and the wall of the borehole. The pressure
gradient needed to start flow of the mud is equal to 2 Te •.!
Wn where Tom is the yield strength of the mud, and Wn is the
minimum separation of the wall of the casing and the
wall of the borehole. Hence, the critical yield strength of
the cement is equal to (ww/Wn)(Tem).
Fig. 9 shows how the ratio of the critical yield strength
of the cement to the yield strength of the mud (w",/w n )
varies with the percent standoff of the casing. If the stand-
off is less than 40 percent, a small decrease in standoff
gives a large increase in the critical yield strength.
This critical yield strength concept is similar to the
mobility ratio concept in displacements in porous media.
The width of the widest sector reflects the permeability
to cement; the width of the narrowest sector reflects the
permeability to mud. The yield strength is used for the
viscosity because it is most important at low rates of
shear. A mobility ratio for primary cementing could be
defined by (w,e Tem)/(W" Tee). The lower the mobility ra-
tio, the less chance of bypassing mud. Obviously, the com-
plexity of Bingham flow makes the critical yield strength,
or the mobility ratio, only an approximate guide.
DISPLACEMENT EXPERIMENTS
Results of several displacements of mud by cement slur-
ries were compared with calculations. The calculations em-
ployed the Bingham plastic flow model fitted to 300- and
600-rpm viscometer readings on the mud and cement slur-
20,--.--~-----------------------,
I
r·· t-+
I I
[.--1'~
I
.
t-
II
---L..--~c-------i--- +---
oL-____ ____ ______
~ ~ L __ _ _ _J -_ _ _ _~
o 20 40 60 80 100
STANDOFF OF CASING - % OF MAX. POSSIBLE
FIG. 9-CRITICAL YIELD STRENGTH OF CEMENT IS STRONGLY
DEPENDENT OX STANDOFF OF CASING.
FEBRUARY. 1967
ries. The model used 9-in. ID pipe as a simulated borehole
and 6-in. OD pipe as the simulated casing. The simulated
casing was held stationary and buoyant forces were pre-
vented by holding the density of the cement equal to the
density of the mud.
Only displacements in which circulation of the cement
broke the gel all around the annulus and sustained flow
of the mud were evaluated. This insured that the flow
properties and not the gel strengths of the fluids governed
the displacement. Table 1 summarizes the experimental
and calculated data for these displacements.
Comparisons in Table I show that the analytical model
predicted less efficiency than observed when the yield
strength of the cement was below the calculated critical
value. This was true in Displacements A through E. In
four of these displacements (A through D) the yield
strength of the cement was far below the critical yield
strength. The yield strengths varied from approximately
~20 to % of the critical value.
Even though the mud was flowing sooner than expected
in these four displacements, the removal of mud was not
efficient. For example, in Displacement A the velocity
of the mud in the narrow sector was less than 0.03 times
the average velocity of the cement. Even in Displace-
ments C and D in which the standoff was 50 percent and
the respective rates of flow were 10 and 11 bbl/min, the
velocity of the mud was no more than ~7 the velocity of
the cement. The better response of the mud than predict-
ed by the analytical model is attributed to the neglected
drag from the faster flowing cement.
In Displacements E and F, the yield strength of the ce- .
ment was approximately % and 1liz times the critical value.
These displacements were strikingly efficient. The cement
removed the mud in a piston-like manner. A relatively
constant interface similar to that illustrated in Fig. 10 pro-
gressed up the model at a velocity equal to the average
velocity of the displacement. Below the interface, the ve-
locity of the cement was greatest in the widest part of the
annulus and essentially zero in the narrowest. The mud
BOREHOLE
CASING ----1'=4'
.A --A
FIG. 1000DISPLACEMENT UNDER FAVORABLE CO"DITIO;\'S: !\It'D
FLOWS IN NARROWEST SECTOR OF ANNULl'S WITH LESS
PRESSURE GRADIENT THAN IS REQUIRED TO FLO\\, CDIENT
IN WIDEST SECTOR OF A""VLUS.
255
 TABLE I-COMPARISON OF CALCULATED AND OIISERVED flOW DISTRIBUTION DURING SIMULATED PRIMARY CEMENTING
IN AN ECCENTRIC ANNULUS FORMED BY 6·IN. 00 CASING IN A 9·IN. SIMULATED BOREHOlE

Calculated Values
Velocity Observed Velocity
of Mud in of Mud in Narrow
Standoff Rote Flow Properties of Mud" flow Properties of Cement* Criticol Narrow Sector Sector Divided by
of casing 01 Plastic Yield Gel Strength Plastic Yield Yield Strength Divided by Averoge Velocity,
Experiment (percent of Flow Viscosity Strength of Mud*'" Viscosity Strength of Cement Averoge Velocity Vm/Va
Number maximum) (bbl/min) (cp) (lbl/lOO sq It) (lbJlIOO sq It) ~ (lbl/IOO sq It) (lbl/IOO sq It) ~mensionle_~:L (dimensionless)

A 33 10 30 122 283 33 610 0 0.03>V",/V o>0

B 33 8 .018 5.01 190 18 49 270 0 0.01 >V m/Vo>O
C 50 10 .010 88 276 13 29 264 0 0.14>V",/Vo>0.11
0 50 11 .012 110 215 10 3.01 330 0 0.14>Vm/Vo>0.ll
E 33 3 60 36 12 86 108 Q Vm/Vo~1.0

50 2 60 36 111 14 15.01 108 1.0 Vm/V. = 1.0

*Density of mud was eQual to density of cement in all displacements. lime muds and a Gyp Q-Broxin mud were used.
"'''Gel strength was measured in viscometer after some period of quiescence as mud in model.

was driven from the narrow area by flow of cement from
the wide to the narrow side. Replacing the mud in the
narrow side was easier for the cement than progressing
up the annulus on the wide side.
Good displacement in E is attributed to the pressure
gradient error. It also may be due to the deviation of these
fluids from true Bingham flow. The margin for error is
substantial. However. the analytical model appears to pro-
vide a useful means for estimating the efficiency of a dis·
placement.
One feature of the results of the analytical model is the
absence of distinct changes in efficiency related solely to
changes in the flow regime. In recent years, considerable
attention has been focused on effects related to transition
from laminar to turbulent flow. For this reason, transi-
tion is discussed further although the analytical model
shows that transition is just one of the many factors which
govern the mechanics of displacement.
TURBULENCE
The presence of either laminar or turbulent flow does
not by itself suggest good or poor efficiency. For example,
if a single fluid is flowing in the annulus (Fig. 5), thinning
the fluid· to increase turbulence can flatten the velocity
distribution around the annulus and improve displacement
efficiency. But Fig. 8 shows a considerably different trend
when cement is displacing mud which has flow properties
held constant. In that situation, thinning the cement re-
duces the efficiency regardless of the effect on the flow re-
gime. A very thin cement slurry may be completely turbu-
lent but unable to move the mud as well as a much thick-
"-I
er fluid in laminar flow.
"tl"tl
transition is markedly different in eccentric annuli. Tran·
sition takes longer and is smoother. This characteristic of
the analytical model is a direct consequence of the inde·
pendence of each sector.
In the analytical model, turbulence first appears in the
sector with the maximum separation between the wall of
the casing and the wall of the borehole. This sector car-
ries the highest velocity. Increases in the rate of flow (or
decreases in the viscosity) spread the turbulence around
the annulus. The greater the eccentricity, the longer the
transition from laminar flow throughout the annulus to
completely turbulent flow.
The criterion for determining the flow regime in each
sector for Newtonian flow was the Reynolds number com-
puted for each sector. If the Reynolds number exceeded
2.000, equations applicable to turbulent flow were used.
For Bingham flow, the criteria discussed by Melrose et al.
and Hedstrom were used. ".1.
Circulation of glycerol solutions through a model veri-
fied that increases in the eccentricity of an annulus alter
the form of transition from laminar to turbulent flow.
Fig. 11 shows a friction factor· Reynolds number correla-
tion through the transition region. Three conditions of ec·
centricity are shown: 0, 36 and 86 percent standoff. The
Reynolds number is for the complete annulus as if it
were concentric. In the almost concentric annulus, transi-
STANDOFF -1- : . ---t-t-t---l
i~c-l--·L-'--l··-·- -~'.. . • ' • I [ j-
r 36% STANDOFF ..L __ ! t-+i'·1
I .
r I !I· ' '
, 1,1 i i I
x
r------,--1l:+~'---H'\".--h._;_1 ii,
, I , ' I

TRANSITION "+-""'+~:+.r - i : II I
Walker et al. describe the transition interval from lami-
nar to turbulent flow in a concentric annUlus." Use of a 0%
. - i ~--~+~'
friction factor-Reynolds number correlation indicates i : I' [ \.

0.65'=EEgg~~~~~~;i~
2
that transition for Newtonian fluids begins at a Reynolds
2 PV(Rb - Rp))
'"
;2
v
10- - -= EQUAL
RADIUSTO
RATIO
number ( close to 2,000. When the Reyn-
~ _------~~I-L~-------,-j~.·· I--.--+4-~
ft

olds number exceeds 3,000, transition appears complete. Z - - CALCULATED WITH

.. f actor ( g(R. - Rp) dP)

g ANALYTICAL MODEL
S e f ore tranSitIOn, th ··'
e tnctlOn - - ~
pV' dx
is proportional to the reciprocal of the Reynolds number.
'"u... ~. ~_M~:E-;'r, ~_
.. 0_.

I . I, 1'[
I ,1 : I I
During transition, the friction factor increases with in-
I I \ I
creases in the Reynolds number. After transition, the fric- 10-3~_ _ _ _~~1_'_'~_',--_____~~-J
4
tion factor is proportional to the reciprocal of the Rey- 10 2 10 3 10
nolds number raised to the one-fourth power. The prin· REYNOLDS NUMBER _ 2pV(Rb - Rp)
cipal point is this: transition occurs over a short interval, fJ-
and functions on different sides of the interval are distinct-
Flc. ll-L.nIJ;'AR·TLRBULENT TRA~SITIO'" REGION IS LDIGTHENED
ly different. Results from the analytical model show that llY I'iCREASIC'iG ECCENTRICITY OF ANNuu;s.

256 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECH;\,OLOGY

tion starts at a Reynolds number close to 2,000. The tran-
sition interval is short and well defined, although the
slight eccentricity did change the characteristics of tran-
sition from those expected for a concentric annulus." Tran-
sition began in the eccentric systems at a Reynolds number
far below 2,000. Some form of instability or turbulence is
detectable at a Reynolds number of only 1,000. Further-
more, transition IS gradual; there is no rapid, distinct
change in slope.
The crossover of data between the 36 and 86 percent
standoff systems was not predicted by the analytical model.
Flow through the 36 percent standoff annulus must have
been more turbulent at a Reynolds number of 3,000 than
the flow through the more concentric annulus. Consequent-
ly, the friction factor was also higher in the eccentric an-
nulus. Increasing the eccentricity reduces the friction fac-
tor in both completely laminar and fully developed turbu-
lent flow. In the transition region, the variation in friction
factor with changes in the eccentricity appears more com-
plex.
Transition cannot occur exactly as predicted by the ana-
lytical model. The flow in each sector cannot be complete-
ly independent of adjacent sectors. Exactly how transition
occurs is not important to this investigation. The important
factor is that guidelines for concentric annuli do not apply
to eccentric annuli.
Force on a mud channel from flowing cement comes
from the pressure gradient in the annulus and drag. Both
increase with an increase in the rate of flow. In fully de-
veloped turbulent flow, this increase is greater than it is in
completely laminar flow; consequently, there apears to be
an incentive to induce turbulence to boost the force on
the mud. In an eccentric annulus, however, any func-
used to displace the gelled mud. Circulation was continued
until essentially no more mud was being removed. Fig. 12
shows a mud channel left in the model after a displacement
with mock cement. A section of the glass pipe has been
removed and the mud and cement cleaned away to show
the channel. Normally, the model was not broken down
after a displacement; the width of the mud channel was
observed through the glass pipe.
Data from two displacements using sucrose solutions
are shown in Fig. 13. The viscosity of the displacing fluid
was 5 cp in one and 25 cp in the other. Decreases in the
width of the mud channel with increases in the rate of flow
show no significant Reynolds number dependence. As ex-
pected, the lower viscosity fluid with its inherent greater
turbulence displaced less mud than the thicker fluid. Fig.
14 shows representative data when the displacing fluid was
non- Newtonian. The solid lines indicate laminar flow
based on the assumption of concentricity. The dashed line
indicates turbulence under the same assumption. No
change in the rate of clean out can be associated with a
change in the flow regime. Data again illustrate more com-
plete mud removal at each rate of flow with the thicker
fluid. Obviously, the force on the mud channel was greater
with the thicker displacing fluids than with the thinner
fluids although the latter induced more turbulence.
These data do not conflict with data published by How-
ard and Clark." Their principal conclusion that volumetric
w 2 IN. CASING AGAINST WALL OF '
V
Z 3 IN. BOREHOLE
~ 50 --- = 30 LB f /l00 FT2
...:E
w GEL STRENGTH OF MUD
NO DENSITY DIFFERENCE, I
::> : ! I : •

tional change which occurs with transition will be gradual. ~ 40 - - . !

The ability of the flow to remove mud from confined areas ...U
of an eccentric annulus cannot be expected to change ~ 30-
rapidly. In fact, any benefit from an increase in turbulence
brought on by thinning the cement slurry will be more than -'
w
offset by the reduction in drag and pressure gradient from z 20
z
the drop in viscosity. This trend is indicated by the resuts -=:
:t: 1480
in Fig. 8, and is confirmed by the experiments discussed. v 10 5 CP SUCROSE SOLUTION
o - 0
:J
DISPLACEMENT EXPERIMENTS IN
TRANSITION REGION
:a: OL-____________
A 25 CP SUCROSE SOLUTION
__ ~ _ L_ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _J

The model consisted of 2-in. OD pipe placed against o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

the wall of 3-in. ID glass pipe. Mud was circulated into the RATE OF FLOW OF SUCROSE SOLUTION - GAL/MIN
annulus and left quiescent to develop a gel strength. Su-
FIG 13-DlSPLACEi\IENT OF G£LU:D MUD FRO:\I ECCENTHlC
crose solutions and mock cement slurries (a non-New-
AN'iuLCS BY A NEWTO'iJAN FLUJ[) SHOWS No EFFECT
tonian slurry mixed to resemble a cement slurry) were OF LAMDIAR·TuRBCLENT TRA:-iSlTIO\.

60r---,---~---,--------------------------
2 IN. 0 D CASING w I 2 IN. CASING AGAINST WAll OF
~ ~3 IN. BOREHOlE
ffi 50 L. - - GEL STRENGTH OF MUD 30 lBf/1OO FT2 =
3 IN. I 0 BOREHOLE :E I NO DIFFERENCE IN DENSITY
::>
~ 401---\+-- ; - -
u ,
',0,
"
....
w "' '- ''9
GELLED z 20
z<{ A

::t: °
THIN MOCK CEMENT (JLp 5 CP, To 6 lBf/1OO FT2) = =
~ 10 THICK MOCK CEMENT (JLp 97 CP, To
A 17 lBfilOO FT2) = =
::> - - lAMINAR FLOW (CONCENTRIC ANNULUS ASSUMED)
:E
o c..._-_-_-__TU_R_B_U_lE_N_T_F_lO_W--.-:(_CO_N_C_E..:,N_T_RI_C..:,A..:,N.::,N.:.:U-=lU.=.S:...:...:A.=.SS:.:U:.:..M-=E=D..'..)-..-J
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
RATE OF FLOW OF MOCK CEMENT - GAL/MIN
FIG. l'I-DISPLACDIEYf OF GELLED MCD FROM ECCEYl'RIC
FIG. 12-CHA:-iNEL OF GELLED MUD RnIAINI:-iG IN LABORATORY A:\:\cLLS BY MOCK CUI£:--IT SHOWS No EFFECT
MODF.L AFTER DISPLACDIF.'IT WITH MOCK CEME'>;T. OF LA:\II:\AR·TuRBCLE:\T TRA:\sITlO:-i.

FEBRUARY. 1967 257

 displacement efficiency is increased by establishing turbu-
lence is based on particular conditions: a moderately con-
- centric annulus and generation of turbulence not by thin-
ning the cement but by increasing the rate of flow. If the
flow properties of the mud and cement are reasonably sim-
ilar, the analytical model predicts a similar result. Results
shown in Fig. 5 are one example. Results of the analytical
model and data in Figs. 7 and 8 are in direct conflict with
the generalization that turbulence, however it is created,
reduces channeling.
The preceding calculations and displacements have not
involved motion of the casing or buoyant forces. Also,
the gel strength of the mud has been omitted; it was as-
sumed that the gel structure was broken by the displace-
ment, and the flow of mud and cement could be described
by the Bingham model. These factors are discussed in the
following sections.
MOVING THE CASING
When the inner pipe was very close to the wall, a chan-
nel of gelled mud similar to that illustrated in Fig. 12 al-
most always remained in the model. Interactions between
the mud and cement which formed extremely viscous plugs
were ineffective; reasonable differences in density between
the mud and the cement failed; and high rates of flow
removed more mud than low rates of flow but did not re-
move all mud. The critical yield strength of the cement
was beyond reach.
In these very eccentric annuli, rotation of the casing
easily removed the mud channel. Rotation appeared to
exert a drag force on the cement and pull it around to
displace the mud (Fig. 15). Rotation may provide a means
of removing mud in even the most difficult circumstances.
Reciprocation of the casing was not effective in a very ec-
centric annulus. The mud channel was reduced but not
completely removed. Reciprocation experiments may not
have been a good representation of field operations, h(Jw-
ever. The casing stayed in the same position in the bore-
hole; there was no lateral motion. In the field, collars or
centralizers can conceivably induce some lateral motion.
ties are equal. Figs. 16 and 17 illustrate this effect. These
data were recorded in an annulus with the casing against
the wall to provide a good reference for comparisons.
Best cleanout of the mud occurred when the mock cement
was heavier than the mud.
When the mud is heavier than the cement, negative
buoyancy tends to make the mud settle toward the bottom.
The gravity forces oppose the flow forces. Displacement
of mud by a less dense mock cement proved less effective
than when the densities were equal. Figs. 16 and 17 show
a wider mud channel than was observed for the equal
density systems for both thin and thick mock cements at
all rates of flow.
BREAKDOWN OF GEL STRUCTURE
Not only do many clay muds not follow the Bingham
model exactly, but they are also thixotropic. They tend to
form a gel structure if left quiescent. If the muds are
sheared at a constant rate after a gel structure has devel-
oped, the apparent viscosity decreases with time toward
some lower limit. The natural question is, can the gel
structure of a mud prevent flow although the yield strength
6o.---,----,----,----.----~--_,----,___:
w , I
U 2 IN. PIPE AGAINST WALL OF 3 IN. BOREHOlE
~ 50[---\+---
ffi GEL STRENGTH OF MUD = 30 lBf/lOO FT2
~ I i i I
a 40~--~~~-+----~----+_----r_--~----_T-----
'"
iJ
u..
o~30~---+~--~~~~~~~-+----~--~-----
i
. I
10 i - - - - - j - - - - PMUD < PCEMENT ~----+-----+-- ---+------1
(2.0 LBm /GAL) ! I
!
0L----L--~----~---L--~----L---~--~

Such motion might change the results from those observed o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 eo

RATE OF FLOW - GAL/MIN
in these laboratory displacements. But until more evidence
is available, rotation appears to be the preferred means of FIG. 16-DISPLACEMENT OF GELLED MUD BY THICK MOCK CEMENTS
moving the casing. (PLASTIC VISCOSITY OF 97 TO 100 CP, YIELD OF 16 TO 17
LB,ISQ FT) HAVING DENSITIES EQUAL To, LESS THAN
AND GREATER THAN THE MUD DENSITY.
BUOYANT FORCES
60 r - - - - - - - - - -
Pressure gradients arising from differences in density be-
,oMUD > PCEMENT (1.2 LBm/GAL)
tween mud and cement can easily exceed normal flowing e:: 0
pressure gradients. It is reasonable to expect that gravity ~ 50 ·-1--0 ~.---, ------.----;-_..

forces can affect the removal of mud, and they do. If the '"w
~
mud is lighter than the cement, buoyancy of the mud con-
tributes to its removal. The buoyant force adds to the
a 40-
flow forces, and cIeanout is easier than when the densi-
'"iJ
u..
o
~ 30
CASING ROTATION MUD ALMOST
STATIONARY STARTED REMOVED -1-

FLOWING
CEMENT
2 IN. PIPE AGAINST WALL OF 3 IN. BOREHOLE
GEl STRENGTH OF MUD =30 LBf/lOO FT2
. !
OL-----------------~--~--~,_~~~
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
RATE OF FLOW - GAL/MIN

FIG. 17-DISPLACEMENT OF GELLED MUD BY THIN MOCK CEMENTS

(PLASTIC VISCOSITY OF 4 CP, YIELD OF 13 LB,/IOO SQ FT)
HAVING DENSITIES EQUAL To, LESS THAN AND
FIG. IS-ROTATION REMOVES MUD CHANNELS. GREATER THAN THE MUD DENSITY.

258 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 TABLE 2-CORRELATION OF BREAKDOWN OF GEL STRUCTURE WITH STANDOFF OF CASING

Calculated Ratio of
Standol! Driving Driving
of Casing Density of Average Calculated Pressure Pressure
(percent Cement minus Plastic Velocity Condition of Resistance Gradientl Gradient
of 10 of
Model
Gel Strength Density of Viscosity Yield Strength in Mud in to Flow of ~+!!.P to
Displacement maxim'urn of Mud Mud of Cement of Cement Annulus Narrow part Mud,2G/wn d" Resistance
possible) (in.) (lb,/100 sq It) (Ibm/gal) (lb,/eu ft) (Ibr/eu It) (dimensionless)
Number
~ (Ib, /100 sq It) (ft/sec) of Annulus

1 17 9 222 0 13 37 3.0 static 209 4.6 0.02

2 17 9 156 0 16 51 1.1 static 147 5.6 0.04
3 19 9 155 0 20 40 2.3 static 131 5.0 0.04
4 19 3 30 +2.2 4 13 2.5 static 76 22.1 0.29
5 25 3 30 0 4 13 3.7 static 58 9.6 0.17
6 25 3 30 0 44 13 3.7 static 58 22.6 0.39
7 25 3 30 0 97 17 2.4 static 58 31.8 0.55
3.7 flowing 58 44.0 0.76
8 25 3 30 -1.2 4 13 3.7 static 58 -0.2 -0.00
9 25 3 30 -1.2 41 21 3.7 static 58 16.6 0.29
10 25 3 30 -1.0 100 16 2.5 static 58 24.9 0.43
3.7 flowing 58 36.5 0.63
11 25 30 +2.0 5 10 3.7 static 58 22.9 0.39
3.8 flowing 58 23.1 0.40
12 25 30 +2.1 4 13 3.7 static 58 24.5 0.42
13 25 32 +2.2 4 14 1.8 static 61 23.4 0.38
14 25 30 +2.0 47 14 3.7 flowing 58 39.4 0.68
15 25 30 +2.0 97 16 0.6 static 58 29.3 0.51
1.2 flowing 58 35.3 0.61
16 33 9 283 0 8 33 3.9 flowing 136 5.1 0.04
17 33 9 190 0 18 49 3.0 flowing 91 7.1 0.08
18 33 9 244 0 15 55 0.8 static 117 6.6 0.06
1.5 flowing 117 7.0 0.06
19 38 3 31 +2.2 5 13 1.2 flowing 39 21.7 0.56
20 50 9 276 0 13 29 3.9 flowing 88 5.4 0.06
21 50 9 111 0 14 154 0.7 flowing 36 18.9 0.53
22 50 3 31 +2.2 5 13 0.6 flowing 30 22.3 0.74

of the cement exceeds the critical value? This possibility ing is the dominant factor. If the standoff does not exceed
seems likely, but it was not encountered. For example, the 25 percent of the maximum possible, initiation of flow
gel strength substantially exceeded the yield strength of may be difficult. Motion of the casing may be the only re-
the mud in the displacements listed in Table 1. Neverthe- liable means of breaking the gel of the mud.
less, flow began sooner than expected from consideration
of the yield strength alone. CONCLUSIONS
Data in Table 2 also show a lack of correlation between
1. The cement slurry must be thicker than the mud to
the resistance to flow and the measured gel strength. Table
prevent bypassing in an eccentric annulus unless displace-
2 displays the results of displacements in two models, one ment of mud is aided by motion of the casing or buoyant
with a 3-in. ID and the other with a 9-in. 10. In each, forces. The greater the eccentricity, the greater must be
the OD of the inner pipe was two-thirds of the 10 of the the difference in viscosity. One aproximate guide is main-
model. Several calculated parameters are included in Table tenance of the yield strength of the cement greater than
2. One is the resistance to flow of the mud in the narrow- the yield strength of the mud multiplied by the maximum
est part of the annulus 2G /wn in lbt!cu ft. It is based distance from the casing to the wall of the borehole and
on the gel strength G of the mud. Another is the driving divided by the minimum distance.
pressure gradient on the mud. It is the sum of the pressure
gradient from the flow of cement and the pressure gradi- 2. Thinning a cement slurry can increase the extent of
ent from any difference in density. Finally, the dimension- turbulent flow in an eccentric annulus but will reduce the
less ratio of the driving gradient to the resistance is given. efficiency of the displacement. The tendency of the cement
slurry to bypass mud will be increased.
With only one exception, a static mud channel remained
in the smaller model unless the driving gradient was at NOMENCLATURE
least 0.56 of the resistance. But in the larger model the
mud sometimes flowed with the driving gradient less than ·· f g(Rb - Rp) dP
0.1 0 of the calculated resisting gradient. Obviously, the
F fIctIOn actor = 2 --
pV dx
factor 2G /Wn was not a valid measure of the resistance
to flow. Reynolds number == 2pV(Rb - Rp)
fL
No explanation of the lack of correlation with the gel
strength is ofl'en:d. Possibilities include a lack of correla-
g = gravitational constant
tion between the gel structure of the mud in the models G = gel strength of mud
and in the viscometer, and a breakdown of the gel struc- dP
dx = pressure gradient from flow in annulus
ture in the larger model from pulses in the rate of circula-
tion. These pulses, which are characteristic of piston Rb = radius of borehole
pumps, were not present in the smaller model. Rc = radius of Sector C
In Table 2, the occurrence of flow does correlate reas-
Rp = radius of casing or inner pipe
onably well with the standoff of the casing. An increase in
standoff increases the likelihood of flow. If the standoff was V = average velocity in annulus
25 percent or less, flow seldom occurred. If the standoff W = distance separating wall of casing and wall of
exceeded 25 percent, flow occurred frequently, Until the borehole in concentric annulus
cause of the lack of correlation with the gel strength can Wn = minimum distance separating wall of casing and
be identified, it is concluded that the standoff of the cas- wall of borehole in eccentric annulus

FEBRUARY, 1967 259

 -FLOW OUT
~·-31 __'__ -- ----lO'--------~~31_____j
, I
-FLOW OUT T I
I ..
..1 / ' PRESSURE TAPS \1
CLEAR PLASTIC

'--------.~... ~ .?:------"
3" 10 GLASS TUBING
OBSERVATION SECTION
USED TO SIMULATE
BOREHOLE

/FLANGE

2" 00 METAL PIPE USED 9" 10 PIPE USED TO

TO SIMULATE CASING
(ADJUSTABLE STANDOFF)
SIMULATE BOREHOLE 3.07" 10 PIPE j
--'-..\~~l/4"
\ /
ROD SUPPORTS
2.00" 0 0 PIPE
6" 00 PIPE USED TO FOR INNER PIPE
SIMULATE CASING
(ADJUSTABLE STANDOFF)
FJG. 19-LAllORATORY MODEL USED FOR bVESTIGATIO='l OF LA,TI'iAR-
TURBULENT TRANSITlOS IN ECCENTRIC AN~ULI.

12. Fredrickson, A. G. and Bird. R. B.: "Non-Newtonian Flow in

-FLOW IN
-FLOW IN
FIt;. 18---LABORATORY MODELS USED FOR DISPLACBIDITS.
Ww = maximum distance separating wall of casing and
wall of borehole in eccentric annulus
JL = viscosity
fl.. = plastic viscosity
p = density
Tf = drag stress on interface between flowing and static
fluid
Toe = yield strength of cement
Tom = yield strength of mud
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors express their appreciation to these individ-
uals and to others who assisted with the displacement
experiments: M. F. Hawkins, Jr. of Louisiana State 0.,
who provided the basic concept for the analytical model;
.1. T. Dabney, Jr., who contributed substantially to the
calculations and experiments; and R. S. Schecter of The
U. of Texas and W. E. Holland, who furnished guidance
for the program in its early stages.
REFERENCES
1. Teplitz, A. J. and Hassebroek, \Ii. E.: "An Imestigation of
Oil-Well Cementing", Drill. & Prod. Prac., API (19J6) 76.
2. Jones, P. H. and Berdine, D.: "Oil-Well Cementing-Factor,
Influencing Bond Between Cement lind Formation", Drill. &
Prod. Prac .. API (1940) 45.
3. Howard, G. C. and Clark, 1. B.: "Factors to be Comidered in
Obtaining Proper Cementing of Casing", Drill & Prod. Prac ..
API (1948) 257.
4. Ross, \V. M.: "Low Rate Di8plncenwnt Solves Tough Cement·
ing Jobs", Pet. Eng. (Nov., 1965) 37,74.
5. Cannon, George E.: "Improvements In Cementing Practices",
Pet. Eng. (May, 1949) 21, B-42.
6. Wilde, H. D., Jr.: "Cementing Problems on the Gulf Coast",
Trans., AIME (1930) 371-381.
7. Piercy, N. A. V., Hooper, M. S. and Winney, H. F.: "Viscous
Flow Through Pipes with Cores", Phil. Mag. (1933) 15, No.
99,674.
8. Yu, Wen-Shi and Dwyer. O. E.: "Heat Transfer to Liquid
Metals Flowing Turbulently in Eecentric Annuli -1", Nuclear
Science and Engineering (1966) 24, 105.
9. Diskind, T., Lee, D., Lummns. R. and Vohr . .I.: "Basic Studies
in Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow". NYO·9646. Columbia U.
Quarterly Progress Report to the AEC, IX-QPR-l·61 (1961).
10. Deissler, Robert G. and Taylor, Maynard F.: "Analysis of
Fully Developed Turbulent Heat Transfer and Flow in an
Annulus with Various Eccentricities", Nat. Ad\,. Comm. Aero.
Technical Note 3451 (1955).
11. Vaughn, Robert D.: "Axial Laminar Flow of Non-Newtonian
Fluids in Narrow Eccentric Annuli", Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec.,
1965) 277-280.
260
Annuli", Ind. and Eng. Chern. (1958) 50, No.3, 347.
13. Melrose, 1. c., Sa\'ins, 1. G., Foster, W. R. and Parish, E. R.:
"A Practical Utilization of tbe Theory of Bingham Plastic
Flow in Stationary Pipes and Annuli", Trans., AIME (1958)
213, 316·324.
U. Brighton. J. A. and Jones, J. B. :"Fully Developed Turbulent
Flow in Annuli", J. of Basic Engineering (Dec., 1964); Trans.,
ASME, 86, Series D, No.4, 8.35.
15. \\alker . .J. E., Whan, G. A. and Rothfll", R. R.: "Fluid Fric-
tion in Noncircular Ducb", AIChE J. (1957) 3, 485.
16. Hed4rom, Bengt O. A.: "Flow of Plastic Materials in Pipes",
Ind. and Eng. Chon. (1952) 44,651.
APPENDIX
LABORATORY MODELS AND
EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES
Schematic drawings of the models used for displace-
ments appear in Fig. 18. In each, the pattern of displace-
ment could be observed. Pumping equipment varied from
small centrifugal pumps for the smaller model to pump
trucks for the larger model. The models were vertical in
all displacements .
A displacement was begun by filling the model with
mud. The mud was usually left quiescent to develop a gel
structure. The gel strength of the mud in the model was
estimated by measuring the gel strength of a sample of
mud left quiescent in a viscometer for the same period of
time as the mud in the model. When the desired gel
strength of the mud was reached, the fluid chosen to dis-
place the mud was circulated through the model. Sucrose
solutions, mock cements and gel cements were used.
Muds varied from simple bentonite-water slurries to
more complex formulations which duplicated treated field
muds. Mock cements used in the smaller model were
aqueous dispersions of bentonite with selected concentra-
tions of barite, Baymal colloidal alumina and Diacel D.
Displacements lil the larger model used modified cements
with various bentonite concentrations. These cement slur-
ries contained additives to retard the cement and give
reasonably uniform flow properties for several hours.
Flow of the cement was always in the upward direc-
tion and usually initiated with a low rate of flow. The
rate of circulation was increased in steps until the limita-
tions of the system were reached or all of the mud re-
moved. Each rate of flow was held constant until the width
of the mud channel became constant or all of the mud re-
moved. Occasionally, circulation in the large model began
and was continued at a high rate. The model used to eval-
uate the transition of Newtonian fluids from laminar to
turbulent flow is shown in Fig. 19. The rate of flow was
measured with a magnetic flow meter; the pressure gra-
dient was measured with a variable reluctance pressure
transducer. ***
JOURNAL OF PETROLEEM TECHNOLOGY