SPE 24571 Erodability of Partially Dehydrated Gelled Drilling Fluid and Filter Cake KM, Ravi, Halliburton Services; RLM. Beirute, Amoco Production Co,; and R.L. Covington, Hallipurion Services Partially dehydrated-gelled driling fluid and fiter 1d from the wellbore annulue ‘successful primary cement job. A term 'Erodabilty of driling fluid’ is defined in this paper and was calculated from measured parameters in a large-scale test model. Differential pressures were measured in the annular space between the casing and a man-made, permeable formation and also inside the casing. Three different deiling fluids used in typical field ‘operations were tested. Each driling fluid was tested over a period of four days. Experimental data on erodabilty of driling fluid fiter cake 1s presented as a function of time, flow rate, and aging. A mechanism is proposed for the erosion of partially dehydrated.gelled driling fluid and Fil ‘cake. Recommendations are given to improve the removal of partially dehydrated-gelled diling fluid and filter cake and thus achieve a successful primary cement job in field operations INTRODUCTION The main purpose of a primary cement job is to se: the annulus and thereby provide zonal isolation from formation fluids. The potential outcome of a primary cement job is mainly affected by the the cement is. downhole. Figure 1 shows the condition of | wellbore at the end of drilling and after a shutdown period to log and run the casing. The figure shows filter cake next to the formation wall, followed by partially dehydrated-gelled driling fluid ‘and moderately-gelled driling fluid. We define ‘moderately-gelled driling fluid as the fluid that has developed gel strength in the absence of shear and rafer to it as MG driling fluid. Partially dehydrated- elled driling fluid is the fluid which, in addition to 219 A developing gel strength in the absence ot snear, nas also lost a portion of its water (tid); we refer to it ‘as PDG driling fluid. If cement is pumped into a wellbore ae chown in Figure 1, chanrae are that it will channel through the MG and PDG driling fluid and produce a poor cement job. To obtain a successtul primary cement joo, tne wellbore must be properly conditioned by breaking the gel strength of the MG and the POG drilling fluid and by removing as much as possible of the filter ccake before pumping the cement.'9 Beirute et al.> have discussed the effect of mechanical scrapers and flushes to improve the circulatable hole. Smith et al. have reported that under simuar operating conditions, the degree of hole conditioning achieved isa function of the driling fluid used. From the tunel done hy thaes authors it can he concluded that to obtain a successful primary cement job, the job must be designed specifically for the particular ‘wellbore and driling fluid. This can only be done if ‘the erosion mechanism of FUG aruing Mua ang. filter cake is understood. Deposition and arosion of PDG fluid and filter cake has been a subject of study in the areas of ultra filtration of proteins and juices*? through membranes. Porters proposed convective ‘ransport of tld toward the memoran deposition, and concentration induced diffusive transport of particles away from POG fluid and fiter cake for arneinn Mavis af al 6 and Laighton at a.” have discussed a shear induced hydrodynamic diffusion mechanism for migration of particles away from the filter cake and PDG fluid as the fluid is sheared, Fordham et al."? studied the fitration of bentonite drilng fluids and could not verity the convection-diffusion mechanism for bentonite Michaels et al.,* Outmans,® Potanin et al."° andFirth et al." have proposed theoretical models for flow of suspensions aa the fluid ia sheared. Erosion of filter cake and PDG fluid is attributed to the shear stresses exerted by the flowing fluid. To describe erasion of PDG drilling fluid and filter caka, Outmans proposed a coefficient of friction between the particles. When it comes to drilling fide, there is no dota available in the literature to clearly support one ‘mechanism over the other for erosion of POG drilling fluid and filter cake. There is a need to understand the mechanism that controls erosion of PDG dling fluid and filter cake under downhole conditions. ‘Once this mechanism is understood, then a primary ‘comont job could be dacigned specifically for the. particular wellbore and driling fluid OBJECTIVE The objectives of this study are: 1. Build an experimental setup to investigate the ‘mechanism controling the erosion of POG driling fluid and iter cake. 2. Develop a mathematical model for the ‘erosion of POG drilling fluid and filter cake. 3. Define erodability of POG driling fluid and filter cake. 4, Recommend procedures to improve the removal of PDG drilling fluid and fiter cake from the wellbore to increase the success of primary comont jobs. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP. A schematic of the experimental setup used is shown in Fig. 2. It consisted of a pipe assembly inside a simulated formation. The pipe assembly 26 in, OD outer pipe. The formation was inside a containment casing and the entire assembly was inside a water bath. The water bath was surrounded by a jacket ‘through which heating or cooling fluid could be circulated to maintain a desired temperature. from one end and 4 ft from the other. As shown in Fig. 2, fluid was pumped through the 2 in. pipe. ‘The space between the 2 in. and 5 in. pipe was ‘sealed so that no fluid could flow through the 5 in. The fluid had a minimum of 8 ft length of zu straight section in both the 2 in. pipe and the ‘ennulus before reaching the first pressure port. This, ‘gave an entrance length of 8 ft and an exit length of 4 ft in both the pipe and the annulus. Holes were drilled in the containment casing so that filtrate could be collected. The filtrate was collected in a filtrate tank as shown in Fig. 2. When needed, the filtrate velve could be closed te stop the collection of fitrate. Flow rate was measured using a magnetic flow meter, pressure drops were measured using pressure transducers, temperatures, ‘wore measured with thermocouples, and volume of filtrate collected was measured by monitoring the level of the fluid in the fitrate tank. These aramatere were monitored continuously using & computer. The fluid loss, rheology, and density of the fluids were monitored periodically. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE ‘The tests were conducted at a temperature of 1109F, and each toet laeted for four daye. On Day 1 the wellbore was calibrated by pumping water in turbulent flow. After calibration, driing fluid was. circulated through the wellbore at 2 and 4 bbl/min for about 10 minutes. The fitrate valve shown in Fig. 2 was closed during calibration with water and also during the first drilling fluid circulation at 2 and ‘The driling fluid circulation rate was then decreased to 1 bblimin and the filtrate valve was opened. After about 1 hour of circulation at 1 bbl/min the driling fluid was circulated for another 1 hour each at 3 and 5 bbl/min. The wellbore was then shut off with a preceure differential of 100 pei into the formation. Fitrate was collected during this shutdown period and was monitored on the computer, (On Day 2, after a shutdown of 18 hours, driling fluid circulation through the wellbore was started at 1 bbl/min. When the pressure drop in the annulus reached a near steady-state value, the flow rate was then increased to 2 bbl/min, followed by 3 and 5 bbbi/min. At the end of circulation the wellbore ‘was again shut off with a pressure differential of 100 psi. Filtrate was collected and recorded again. On Days 3 and 4 the same procedure outlined for Day 2 was followed. At the end of drilling fluid Circulation on Day 4, a spacer fluid was pumped. ‘Then a cement slurry was pumped and left to cure for about 48 hours. The model was then cut into different sections along a line perpendicular to the vertical axis of the model and photographed.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Results from Tests 1, 2, and 3 ate presented in this section. Data from Test 1 are discussed in detail needed. The calculation procedure discussed for Test 1 applies to al the other tests Test 4.17.0 Ibigal ws 1d bentonite driling fluid was used during this tost. Barite accounted for about 95% of the solids in the drilling fluid. As discussed before, the test was conducted for four days, Results from each day are discussed below. oulating driling fluid the wellbore wi calibrated by pumping fresh water in turbulent flow at various flow rates. Flow rates and pressure drops inside the pi ‘continuously recorded. The pressure drops ‘measured over a distance of 6 ft inside the pipe and in the annulus are given in Tables 1 and 2 with the corresponding flow r ‘The measured pressure drops were then compared with calculated values. Pressure drop, Ap, was Calculated from the equation: Ap = (24LV2p\/lacDey ” Where fis the friction factor, Lis the length, V is the velocity,» is the density of the fluid, Dy is the equivalent diameter and gc isthe gravitational constant. ‘When the fluid is flowing through a pipe then Dg in Equation 1 ie: Dy =D (2) Where D} is the inside diame of the pipe ‘When the fluid is flowing through a concentric annulue thon Dy in Equation 1 Dg = Dy- Dy 3 ‘Where Dp is the inside diameter of the hole and Do, is the outside diameter of the pip Under turbulent flow conditions, the friction factor for water was ealoulated from the equation: f= 0.0014 + 0.125 (Nag 0-32 (4) Where Npg is the Reynolds number given by Npe = (DgVelie co) ‘and y is the viscosity of the fluid. ‘The manufacturer had specified an inner diameter of 1.92 in. for the inner pipe. Using this ID value, the calculated pressure drops tabulated in Table 1 are ‘900d agreement with the measured values. The pipe inner diameter was calculated from the ‘measured pressure drops, and was recalculated to be 1.925 in ‘The manufacturer had specified an outer diameter of 5 in. for the outer pipe and the ID of the man made formation was to be 6.5 in. Prassure drops coloulated in the 6.6 in. x 6.0 in. ennuh tabulated in Table 2 along with the measured flow rates and pressure drops. There is good agreement between the measured and the calculated pressure drops. There was no correction made to the specified annulus size of 6.5 in. x 5. Once the calibration wae done, driling fluid wae circulated through the simulated wellbore. The properties of the drilling fluid are given in Table 3. ing fluid was circulated for about 10 minutes each at 2.08 and 4.12 bbl/min and for about one hour each at 1, 2.9 and § bbi/min. Flow rates and the measured and calculated pressure drops inside the pipo ond annulue aro givon in Table 4. Flow rates are given in the order at which they were pumped. The filtrate collection valve shown in Fig. 2 was closed during the 2.05 and 4.12 bbl/min Circulation periods and was opened during the 1, 2.9, and 5 bbl/min circulation periods. Proseure drops for the drilling fluid flowing through 2 1.925 in. pipe and through a 6.5 in. x 5.0 in. annulus were calculated from Eqs. 1 to 3. in Eq. 1 the friction factor, f, for the driling fluid was calculated from the correlations developed by Shah fet al. These correlations assume a Bingham plastic model for the rheology of the dling fluid. From Table 4 it io aoen that there io 9 satiofactory agreement between the measured and calculated pressure drops inside the pipe. For flow through the annulus there is good agreement between calculated and measured pressure drops at 2.05 and 4.12 bblimin. Tho presaure drop calculated at 1 bbi/min waa higher ‘than the measured value. This could be because this was when fluid started to leak to the formationas the filtrate valve was opened for the first time in the process, Prassuca drops measured at 2.9 and 5 bbi/min were slightly greater than the calculated values. The reason for this is discussed below. tne measurea pressure arop in tne annulus ana ne volume of fitrate collected at 2.9 and § bollmin as a function of time are shown in Figure 3. The figure shawe that a maacirahla amount af fil wae Inet to the formation at these flow rates. The slope of the filtrate curve is almost constant and the pressure drop in the annulus becomes almost ‘constant after a short period. This suggests that a thin filter cake was deposited and beyond that the fresh filter cake was eroded away at almost the ‘same rate as it was deposited at 2.9 and 5 bbl/min. We propose that in Table 4, the measured pressure drop in the annulus is slightly higher than the calculated pressure drop at 2.9 and 5 bbi/min because of the deposition of iis mnin titer cake, Following 3 hours of circulation, the wellbore was left static for about 18 hours with a nressure differential of 100 psi. Filtrate was collected during this time. The purpose of the shutdown was to allow the driling fluid to lose fluid to the formation fang ulso develop gel strength in the absence of shear. Dav 2 The objective on Day 2 was to determine how the wellbore responded to driling fluid circulation after 2 stutduwn of 18 hours. Ayal, pressure urops tn ‘the annulus and inside the pipe, the volume of filtrate collected and flow rates were continuously monitored. Circulation was started by oumaina the diiling fluid through the wellbore at 1 bblimin, The measured pressure drop in the annulus and side Ue pipe, and the volume of fitrare collected as a function of time are shown in Fig. 4. The figure shows that the pressure drop in the pipe Started at a hiah value of 2.5 osi. then dacreased linearly to 0.8 psi in about 25 seconds. The pressure drop then decreased to about 0.44 psi and remained constant at this value. The pressure drop in the annulus show what appears to be three distinct phases which we refer, to as Phases 1. 2. and 3. In Phase 1 the pressure drop started at a high value of 4.75 psi and decreased linearly to 3.0 psi in about 36 seconds. ‘This phase was similar to the initial 25 seconds of pressure drop for the flow inside the pipe. In Phase 2 the pressure drop decreased from 3.0 psi to about 2.0 psi in a quadratic fashion in about 350 seconds, During Phase 3 the rate of decrease in pressure drop was slow as it decreased linearly from 2.0 psi to 1.4 psi in about 1600 seconds. A detailed analysis of this pressure drop behavior is given below. After a shutdown of 18 hours we envision the wellbore fluid condition to be as shown in Figure 1 The driling flid incida the pina has devaloned gat strength in the absence of shear. This is what we refer to as MG (moderately-gelled) driling fluid Drilling fluid inside the annulus that is close to the ‘ormation has lost fluid to the formation and nas deposited filter cake on the wall. Driling fluid in the ‘annulus that is close to the pipe has also developed ‘00 strength in the absence of shear which we again refer to as MG driling fluid. Drilling fluid in the annulus that is in between the pipe and formation hhas lost some fluid to the formation and has also ‘aevelopea gel strengtn in ine apsence or snear. This is what we refer to as POG (partially dehydrated-gelled) drilling fluid Fresh driling fluid circulating through the pipe at 1 bbbl/min first came in contact with the MG drilling fluid and started to displace it. In comparison with the MG driling fluid, the driling fluld that was circulated had a lower pressure drop per unit length, Hence the pressure drop in the pipe started to decrease as the MG drilina fluid was disnlaced from the inside of the pipe. The first 25 seconds during which the pressure drop in the pipe decreased from 2.5 psi to 0.5 psi was the time taken for the MG ‘ormng slulg wo be dlsplaced through the pipe. The caloulated pressure drop for the driling fluid lowing through a 1.925 in. pipe was 0.43 psi for 6 feet of lenoth. This was in close aoreement with the measured steady state value of 0.44 psi inside the pipe. These values are tabulated in Table 5. In Figure 4, Phase 1 In the annulus was similar 10 the initial 25 seconds of pressure drop inside the pipe. The first 36 seconds during which the pressure droo in the annulus decreased linearly from 4.75 to 3.0 psi could be attributed to the time required to displace the MG driling fluid through the annulus. In Figure 4, the decrease in pressure drop in the annulus in Phase 2 and Phase 3 could be attributed to the erosion of POG drilling fluid and/or filter cake. ‘As the PDG driling fluid and fiter cake eroded, the net area available for flow increased and as @ consequence the shear stress on the wall decreased. We attribute the slow rate of erosion in Phase 3 to the decrease in shear stress on the POGtiling fluid and filter cake wall. A proposed ‘mechanism for erosion is discussed late. Figure 4 also shows that at 1 bbl/min no measurable ‘amount of fluid was lost to the formation. This is ‘due te the combination of 2 high recietance and 9 low driving force for fluid loss. The resistance is. ‘due to the filter cake and the driving force is due to the pressure difference across the formation. A ‘quantitative analysis of tuia loss 1s outsice the ‘scope of this paper. ‘When the prasura drop in the annulus reached a near constant value at 1 bbl/min the driling fluid circulation rate was increased to 2 bbl/min. The ‘objective was to see the effect of increased she ‘stress on the erosion of PUG driling flu and fitter cake. fad peaceuia denn in the annulus and inside the pipe and the volume of fitrate collected {as a function of time are shown in Figure 5 for 2 bblimin. Figure 5 shows that the pressure drop in 6 remainea constant. nis is expectea because the MG drilling fluid inside the pipe was removed during the first 25 seconds of circulation at 1 bblimin! As shown in Table 5, there is a satisfactory agreement between the measured and ‘the calculated pressure drops inside the pip Figure © cleany snows tnat in tne annulus tne rnase 1 type behavior was nonexistent at 2 bbi/min. This is because the MG driling fluid in the annulus was ramaved during the first 38 seconds of circulation at 1 bblimin! Phase 2 type behavior was observed as the annulus pressure drop decreased quadratically for the first 500 seconds. As discussed earlier, the PUG oning miuia ana Titer cake this phase. The increase in erosion could be attributed {to the increase in shear stress on the wall as the flow rate was increased from 1 ta 2 bbl/min, Phase 3 type behavior was observed after about 500 seconds since the rate of decrease in pressure drop is slow. There was no measurable amount of fuid loss at Z bpm due to the same reasons aiscussec for 1 boli “The deiling Mid cierulatinn rata was than inceaaead 10.3 bbi/min. The measured pressure drop in the annulus and inside the pipe, and the volume of filtrate collected as a function of time at 3 bbl/min are shown in Fig. 6. The behavior at 3 bbl/min was similar to the one shown in Fig. 5 for 2 bbl/min, ‘The maasurad pressure drop in the annulus and inside the pipe and the volume of filtrate collected as a function of time at 5 bbl/min are shown in Fig. 223 7. This again shows that the pressure drop inside ‘the pipe was basically constant. As shown in Table 5 there is a satisfactory agreement between the measured and calculated pressure drops. Fig. 7 shows that at § bbl/min the pressure drop in the annulus decreased with time and at the same time a measurable amount of fluid was lost to the Tormation. this is ortrerent trom wnat we observed at 1, 2, and 3 bbl/min. At § bbl/min the driving force for fluid loss, pressure differential across the formation, was obviously higher than for the other flow rates, Fluid last to the formation was possibly caused by partial deposition of fresh filter ‘cake and/or partial dehydration of the flowing oriting tia Equivalent sizes of the annulus through which the Jriling fluid was flowing at the above flow rates wore calculated from measured steady state pressure drops and are given in Table 6. The correlations from Shah et al.!® were again used to Calculate tne pressure crops. From Table 6 itis saen that the steady state area available for flow increased as the flow rate increased from 1 to 3 bblimin. At 5 bbl/min there was a negligible increase in the net area available for flow and as seen in Fig. 7, there was measuraoie amount oF MulG 10s at Uns how 1. We propose that at this flow rate, the filter cake was deposited and/or driling fluid was dehydrated at about the same rate as it was eroded. AS a result there was litte increase in the net area lable for flow. For tne reasons alscussed above, 11s highly recommended that a lower fluid loss drilling fluid be used at least during the conditioning of the wellbore. Smith et al.2 have reported that switching 10 a lower fluid loss driling fluid during conditioning ‘reatly improves the cement displacement efficiency. After circulating the driling fluid for about 3 hours ‘on Day 2, the wellbore was left static for about 18 hours with a pressure differential of 100 ost Filtrate was collected and recorded during this time. Day 3 are shown in Fig. 8. The qualitative nature of the pressure drops as a function of time at 1bbbi/min on Day 3,was the same as that on Day 2, Fig. 4. Thie hold true for all the flow ratoe but the actual numerical values of the pressure drops were different. Measured steady state pressure drops inside the pipe at various flow rates are given in Table 7. Pressure drops inside a 1.928 in. pipe were ‘sloulated and from Table ? it ie €00n that thore ie 2 satisfactory agreement between the calculated and ‘measured values, The measured pressure drops on ay 3 did not change much from Day 2, as shown Table 5. ‘An equivalent size of the annulus through which the riling fluid was flowing at different flow rates was calculated from measured steady state pressure ‘drops and is given in Table 8. A comparison with the data shown in Table 6 for Day 2 shows a decrease in the circulatable hole from Day Z to Day 3 due to the effect of filter cake/PDG driling fluid aging. Dey 4 ‘On Day 4 the qualitative nature of the pressure drop 4m the annulus as a tunction of time was the same ‘a8 on Days 2 and 3. An equivalent size of the ‘annulus calculated is shown in Table 9. The effect, PROPOSED EROSION MECHANISM Results from Tests 1 to 3 were qualitatively similar in nature. Hence Test 1 is referred to in discussing ‘2 mechaniem for erosion af POG dling fluid and filter cake, From the experimental data shown in Figs. 4 to 9 ‘and lables 6, 8, and 9, rt can be seen that tne PU: ‘The PDG driling fluid and filter cake are packed with particles. Both from our experience and others, "=. ‘the nature of the packed structure will depend on the shear history. We propose adhesion as the ‘mechanism for resistance to erosion and shear forces on tha wall as tha mechanism far arosion of POG drilling fluid and fiter cake. In the PDG driling fluid and filter cake, particles adhere to one another and resist the forces attempting to displace them from the wellbore. The adherence of particies is. due to surface forces® and displacement is due to hydrodynamic forces.®'° Adherence is defined as 224 aggregation of particles and displacement is defined 136 dicaggrogation of particles by Potanin et al.1© During the experiments, the pressure drop acting on the walls of PDG drilling fluid and fiter cake were measured. Pressure drop is related to shear stress ‘at the wall, +, by the equation: roy — (Dye ae 6 Where p is the pressure drop over the length Land. a is the equivalent diameter through which the {id is flowing, ‘Surface forces causing the particles to adhere to fone another can be expressed as the yield stracs of the particles packed in the PDG driling fluid and filter cake.'° We propose that erosion takes place as th WLithe wall wean the tid ani the PDG deiling fluid/fiter cake), ry, exceeds the eld stress, ro, of the PDG dilin approach where they consider the gel strength of the driling fluid. a cient 1H APppe is the pressure drop measured in the ‘annulus Below which no aporeciabl place, then from our definition of yield stress and Tom = Tw,bne = (Oe4Ppne)/4L a wmere 79 my 18 the measured yield stress oF tne FUG diiling fluid and filter cake and Tw png is the shear Stress at the wall below which no appreciable From Table 6, on Day 2, the pressure drop below which no erosion took place, Pine, Was 2.02 psi per 6 tt at 3 bblimin. Un ay 3, Table 8, this Pressure was 2.67 psi per 6 ft. “The yield ctracs nf the PNG drilling fluid and filter ccake was estimated from these measured values. From Table 6, for the measured pressure drop, 4 Pope, of 2.02 psi, Dy = 0.823 in., and L = 6 ft (72%... ‘Substituting these values into Equation / vields: mien SO #2 1/100 #2 From Table 3, the measured yield point of the ring thuid was 11.4 Ibt/100 £12 and the 10 minute ‘gel strength was 17 Ibf/100 ft2. The yield stress of the POG driling fluid and filter cake was therefore‘much greater than the yield point and the 10 minute {901 strangth of the driling fluid! Potanin et a.'° have proposed an equation to ~ ‘ettimate the yield etrece of a eveter of cloeely packed particles from theoretical considerations. They assume that the particles are connected by van der Waals forces of molecular attraction. AS discussed above, from our observation, PDG driling ‘uid and fiter cake are packed with particles. Using their approach, Toe = (da2Aa/12h2) * 1.991 x 1024 (8) Where zo,¢ is the calculated yield stress of the POG dit Ha and iter cake inthe units of 1/100 ‘82, "isthe avorage particle ragus in ym, "Ais Hamaker coefficient, = 3 x 10°20 Joules (closest Value known for pelymersie), and ‘h distance between particle surfaces. Barite was the principal solid used in preparing the ailing fluid sed in our experiments. Ine particle size distribution of the barite added to the driling fluid is given in Fig. 10. From this figure, the mean diamatee, do, of the narticlas ig about 10ym. Using a separation distance, h, of 2 nm between the particles'® and for 2a = 10um, from Ea. 8, = (anaes4p9*10°2945)012°24 © 1,991 x 102% = 62.2.61/100 #2 The yiald etrace of narkad particlae danande on the packing structure of the particles and the structure depends on the shear history'®.- In addition, theoretical Eq. 8 does not include any aging effects. the wellbore the PUG driling tluid and titer cake ‘are subject to aging effects. However, the ‘calculated and measured values are of the same ‘order of magnitude. This seems to support our proposed adhesion-shear stress mechanism for ‘erosion of PDG driling fluid and fiter cake. Due to the limitations of the theoretical equations, itis highly recommended that the yield stress of the POG drilling fluid and filter cake be determined by ‘experiments. Work is in progress to develop a small ecale experimental device to determine the yield ‘stress of PDG driling fluid and filter cake under down hole condition. EHODABILITY OF DRILLING FLUID In this section we define a term "Erodabilty of ing uid’ tor practical applications, and denot 25 Eg. This is defined on the basis that the higher ‘the value of Eg. the easier it must be to erode the zo DG driling fluid and fier cake. Hence Egy must bbe inversely proportional to the shear stress at the wall below which no erosion takes place, i.e., Sar Ve one or Fat = Clrw,bne @ Where Cis» constant of proportionality The most commonly used solid in driling fluid is barite. As indicated before, barite has a mean particle diameter of 10 um. It is assumed that the mean particle diameter of solids that make the driling fluid will not be below Tum. The constant C is then set equal to the yield stress calculated for a mn parila iametor af nm, From Eq, 8 for 7 Za % 600 100 t2, ‘Substituting this in to a. 9, gt = 80UTw,bne oo From Eqs. 7 and 10 the erodabilty of the driling fluid used ia Tast 1, an Day 2, was 7.3, APPLICATION {ne objective ot a primary cement job 1s to aispiace the PDG driling fluid and filter cake from the annulus and fil it with cement. To accomplish this, tha chear frrcae arting an tha wall met ha oraatar than the yield stress of the PDG driling fluid and filter cake. If the erodability of a driling fluid is known, then the shear stress needed at the wall to displace the POG dniling thud and titer cake can De caloulated. If the wellbore size is known, then the theology and flow rate of the fluid could be designed to meet the required shear strass at tha wall ‘As shown before, from Test 1, the erodabilty, Eg, ff the 17 Ib/gal driling tluid on Day Z was /.3. From Equation 10 the shear stress at the wall below ‘which no appreciable erosion takes place is twibne = 600/7.3 = 82 Ibt/100 2 ‘This means that to erode the PDG drilling fluid and titer cake trom a 6.5 in. x 5.0 in annulus, the shear strass at the wal due tothe flowing fluid must be 82 Iot/100 #2. During our experiments we decided to use a spacer to clean the hole, The most economical spacer was.water. The flow rate at which we could pump was limitad to 5 hblmin. Howavar at this water flow rata we calculated that tho shear stress onthe wall would be 82 Ibf/100 ft2 in an equivalent annulus of 5.64 in. x 5.0 in. We also designed a weighted Spacer to nave a shear stress of 82 Ibt/TUUIt@ at bbl/min in an equivalent annulus of 6.0 in. x 5.0 in We nrimped water and the decignad eparer in twin different tests and then cemented the wellbore. We kept the flow rate and contact time the same both tests. A cross section of the cemented core in which water was pumped is shown in Fig. 11, and in which the designed spacer was used is shown in Fig. 12. A comparison of Figs. 11 and 12 clearly show that better hole cleaning was abtained by pumping the designed spacer instead of the water. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FIELD USE 1. Conduct cleaning conditioning trips periodically to remove the PDG drilling fluid and fiter cake. This is soecially imoortant prior to running anen hole logs and casing. This will reduce the aging affects of PDG driling fluid and fiker cake. 2. For the driling fluid in the hole, estimate the shear stress , Tw png: below which no erosion takes olace. This can be dona by one of the following two methods. 2. If the erodability of the driling fluid is Kriown ten 7yy,bne ©2M be estimated from Eq. 10. b. If the eradability is nat known then itis highly recommended that 7w,bng be obtained from experiments. A preliminary estimate for 3. Design circulation rate and a spacer so that the shear stress in the narrow side af the annulus least equal to 7w,pne- Care must be taken 0 that the ECD (equivalent circulating density) is not exceeded and fluid loss is kept low. 4. If the shear stress ty, bne can not be attained by a combination of ‘érculation rate and spacer, then check to see whether pipe can be moved. In most cases it would be preferable 10 circulate the driling fluid/spacer in conjunction with pipe movement. zo 5. If the pipe can not be moved then consider mechanical means such as scratchers to erode the PDG driling fluid and filter cake. ‘SAMPLE CALCULATION Problem 4.15.0 thigal driling fluid hae 9 arndahility of 10 The hole size is 7.5 in. and the casing is 8.0 in, OD. The length of the wellbore is 1500 ft and the fracture gradient is 18.2 Ib/gal. Depending on the ‘equipment available, the upper limit on the pumping flow rate could be 4, 8 or 12.5 bbl/min. If a spacer is designed its plastic viscosity should not be areatar than 50 cp and the yin point should not be ‘greater than 30 Ibf/100 ft2, Design a displacement procedure for the above set of conditions. ‘soutien 1. Erodability Far = 10 2. Shear Stress From Eq. 10 tw,bne = 600/10 = 60 Ibf/100 12 3. Pressure Dron From Eq. 7 Apone = 4L7w,bne!De Px 11300018) 2 eon 00x 48002.9 120 psi This is the nrassura drop nandad in the annulus to erode the POG driling fluid and filter cake 4. Spacers ‘Water: From Eqs. 1 t0 5 the pressure drop due to water will be only 16 psi even at 13 bbi/min. Hence water is not the recommended spacer. b, Spacer for 12.6 bblimin: Eqs. 1 to 3 were used to calculate the pressure drops of spacers. The friction factor in Eq. 1 was estimated from the correlations deveiopea by Snan et al.19_@ 19.0 Ioal spacer with a plastic viscosity of 30 ep and a ild point of 20 Ibf/100 ft2 would have a pressure drop of 120 psi in the annulus. In this case the equivalent circulating density would be 18.07 Ib/gal which is under the fracture gradient of 18.2 Ib/gal. c: Spacer for 8 bbi/min: A 1.0 lb/gal spacer with a blastic visgosity of 50 cp and a yield point of 30 Tbf/100 ft2 would have a pressure drop of 120 psiin the annulus. The equivalent circulating density would be 17.3 Ib/gal 4: Spacer for 4 bbi/min: With the constraints on the Pranertiae af enacer, no spacer could be designed that would have a pressure drop of 120 psi in the annulus. In this case pipe movement should be considered. tis preferable to circulate the diling ‘muiarspacer atong with pipe movement. If pipe ‘movement is not an option then mechanical means should be considered 5. Pine Movemen pe should be moved so that the total shear stress fon the wall is at least equal to Ty, tyne: Care must 'be taken so that the maximum recommended torque fr tension is not exceeded." 6. Mechanical Means It the required shear stress can not be attained by pipe movement ana jor ruia circulation, then use ot Scratchers or turbulators must be considered. The effectiveness of turbulators can be estimated from a detailed analysis of the turbulence created by these devices'6 and is outside the scope of this paper. CONCLUSIONS 1. An experimental setup has been built and successfully tested to study the erosion of POG drilina fluid and filter cake. Yield stress of PG driling fluid and filter cake was calculated from the parameters measured in this setup, 2. We have proposea a aanesion-snear stress mechanism for erosion. The POG drilling fluid and filter cake will erode as long as the shear stress on the walls in excess of the yield stress of the PDG drilling fluid and filter cake. 3. Yield stress of PG drilling fluid and filter cake ‘was calculatea 1rom a. theoretical equation. This equation estimates yield stress for closely packed particles connected by van der Waals forces. The equation cons ant consider the effect of aging and shear history, but the calculated and measured values are of the same order of magnitude. This supports our proposed mechanism for the erosion of POG driling fluid and fiter cake. 4. Recommendations are given to imprave tha removal of PDG drilling fluid and filter cake and thus improve the cement displacement officiency. 5. A step-by-step algorithm is outlined to apply jone in the field, ‘The ‘computer program. 6. Cement displacement efficiency was improved in a laboratory environment by following the recommended procedures. ‘NOMENCLATURE a Average radius of the particles in deiling tid A Hamaker coefficient in Dn Inside diameter of hole Dj Inside diameter of pipe Ege Erodabilty of deiling fluid 1 Friction factor 9% Gravitational constant h Separation distance between particle surfaces L Length Ne Reynolds number 4p Pressure drop APbne —_Fressure drop, below which no erosion takes pla v Velocity Grook Letters . Viscosity ° Density Toe Yield stress of POG dtiling fluid and fiter cake, calculated rom Yield stress of POG drilling tid and filter cake, measured tw Shear stress at the wall Shear stress at the wall, ‘below which no erosion takes place ACKNOWLET ‘ne authors wish to thank the management of Halliburton Services and Amoco Production ‘Company for permission to publish and present this, paper, and express appreciation to all technical personnel for their assistance in gathering experimental data.REFERENCES 1. Smith, T.R.: *Cementing Displacement Practices: Applications in the Field," paper SPENADC 18617 presented at the 1989 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, mith, TAR. and Ravi, K.M.: Navostigation of Driling Fluid Properties to Maximize Cement Displacement Efficiency,” SPE 22775 presented at the 1991 SPE annual meeting. 3. Beirute, PLM., Sabins, FL, and Ravi, K.M.: {cale Experiments Show Proper Hole Conditioning-A Critieal Requirement foe Successful Cementing Operations,” SPE 22774 presented at the 1991 SPE annual meeting 4, Porter, M.C.: "Concentration Polanzation with ‘Membrane Ultrafiltration,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev., Vol. 11, No. 3, 1972. 5. Davis, RH., and Leighton, D.T.: "Shear Induced Transport of a Particle Layer Along A Porous Wall,” Chem. Eng. Sc., Vol. 42, No. 2, pp.275-281, 1987. 6. Alena, F.W., and Belfort, G.: * Lateral inal Partclae In Prenuis Flow Channels: Application To Membrane Filtration," Chem. Eng. Sei., Vol. 39, No. 2, PP. 343-355, 1984, 7. Leighton, D. and Acrivos, A.: *The Shear induced Migration Of Particles In Concentrated Suspensions," J. Fluid Mach, Val 181. nn 415-439, 1987. 8, Michaels, A.S., and Bolger, J.C.: “Setting Rates and Sediment Volumes of Hocculated Kaolin Suspensions,” Ind. Eng. Chem., Fund., Vol. 1, No.1, pp. 24-33, 1962, 9, Outmans, H.D.: "Mechanics Of Static And Dynamic Filtration In The Bore Hole,” SPE 491, 1963. 10. Potanin, A.A., and Uriev, N.B., “Microrheological Models of Aggregated Suspensions In Shear Flaw," Coll. Int. Sci., Vol. 142, No.2, pp. 385-395, 1991 11, Firth, B.A., and R.J. Hunter: "Flow Properties Of Coaguiatea Suspensions, il, The Elastic Model,” J. Coll. Int. Sci., Vol. 57, No. 2, pp. 266-275, 1976. 220 12. Fordham, F.., Ladva, H.K.J.. and C. Hall: “Dynamic Filtration Of Bentonite Muds Under Different Flow Conditions,” SPE 18038 presented at the 1988 annual meeting. 13. Shah, S.N. and Sutton, D.L.:"New Friction Correlation For Cements From Pipe And Rantatinnal vieenmatar Data." SPE 19539 presented at the 1989 annual meeting, F., Ryan, DF, and Gunnis : ‘Channeling: How To Predict, ‘And Prevent," SPE 19865 presented at the 1989 annual meeting. 15 API Bulletin RP5C1, "Recommended Practice For Care And Use Of Casing, Tubing And Drill Pipe," 12th Edition, March 1981. 16. Wells, M.R. and Smith, R.C., "Analysis Of Cementing Turbulators,” SPE 19542 prasantad at the 1989 annual meeting. 1 Mi VERS STOR! ‘Given In | _Mulply By 0.479 0.159 6.896 1.0 0.0254 9.3080 TABLE 1: Pressure Drops in the Pipe, in Teet 1, for Water. Flow Measured Calculated Rate | Pressure Drop | Pressure Drop wbi/min) | __tpsi6 {psi/6 ft) 2.97 0.756, 0.750 4.06 1,295. 1.321 5.06 1.916 1.960TABLE 2: Pressure Drops in the Annulus, in Test 1, ‘TABLE 6: Equivalent Size of the Annulus for Test 1 ‘for Water ‘on Day 2. Fiow Tascwred Faicniated Faw | Measured | Equivalent Rate | Pressure Drop | Pressure Drop Rate | Pressure | Annulus Size (oblimin) | __(psi/6te) (psi/6te) (bblimin) | Drop 2.97 0.063 0.065 (osiv6te) 4.08 O18 O18 07 Tat 5.06 (0.183 0.168 2.03 1.81 2.94 | 2.02 5.05 [3.12 TABLE 3: Properties of 17.0 Ib/gal Drilling Fluid at 10°F for Test 1 TABLE 7: Pressure Drops in the Pipe for Test 1 Type Water Based Drilling Fluid on Day 3. Major Solids ‘95 % by Weight barne Fiow Rate] Measured] carcuiatea Plastic Viscosity (ep) 54.4 (bbi/min) | Pressure | Pressure Drop Yield Point (Ibf/100 #12) 11.4 Drop (psi/6Fo 10 eee Gol Strength 4 nsi/6fe) (Wbf/100 ft2) 1.07 0.49 0.43 70 min Gel Strength 7 2.08 1.56 1.47 {bf/100 #2) 3.08 2.72 277 ‘API Fluid Loss (cc/30 min) a 5.07 6.70 6.22 TABLE 4: Pressure Drops in the Pipe and Annulus TABLE 8: Equivalent Size of the Annulus for Test 1 for Test 1 Drilling Fluid On Day 1 ‘on Day 3. Flow] Meas. | Calc. | Meas. | Calc. Measured Equivalent Rate | Pressure | Pressure | Pressure | Pressure Pressure Drop | Annulus Size (ob) | Drop in | Drop in | Drop in min | ripe | ripe | annuus hor 305m x50 ipsi6t | ipsivetv | (psil6tey 2.08 5.695 in. x 5.0 in. Zo} 138 | 143 | 0.33 3.08 5.754 in. x 6.0 in. 412] 4e1 | a4a_| 057 5.07 5.78 in. x 8.0 in 1 [oar [041 [0.23 29 [273 | 253 | 051 5 1629 | 608 | 0.74 TABLE 9: Equivalent Size of the Annulus for Test 1 TABLE 5: Pressure Drop in the Pipe for Test 1 (on Day 4. Driling Fluid on Day 2. Tow Raw | Measured Equivarent Flow Measured Calculated (obliminy | Pressure Drop | Annulus Size Rate | Pressure Drop | Pressure Drop (psil6tt) (oblimin) {psi/6) (psiv6te 7.06 1.59 5.67 in. x 6.010, 1.07, 0.44 0.43 2.08 2.55 5.68 in. x 5.0 in. 2.03 1.51 1.41 2.97 321 5.697 in. x 5.0 in. 2.94 2.89 2.57 5.05. 6.68 6.18Cn EN + — rae “6 =f * Y 2 ee “3 D FRG rs Petintssete ang Psd A oe “s yn OM smo on ree 0 wan rt ph LY FIGURE 2: A schematic of Experimental Setup.\nnulus Differential Pressure and Filtrate Vol. for Test 1 0n Day 1 2 1.00; 0.20 : 0.70 on ] g 0.80 9.60 ee | E = 0.60 0.50 3— | AP, 5 bom st 040 23 3 0.40 0.30 B~ | 6 Fit, Spm | E 020 | i B70 = | ort. abem | 0.00 ‘Test 1 on Day 2. 0.50 O88 883 $23 Eire 030 oe alee 0.20 = ine Time (ee) Figure 5: Differential Pressures and Filtrate Vol. at 2 bom for Test 1 on Day 2 3.50 s 0.50 3 via oo 0.40 3 -—— g 250 0.35 © | ohn. pe Sq 2.00 0.25 & | Lar, Ann = 1.50 0.20 = E100 820 S| amv & oo 808 oo iia ieioiaiel a esis oe Time (sec)Figure 6: Differential Pressures and Fitrate Vol. at 3 bpm for Test 1 on Day 2, 3.50 0.50 0.45 3.00 cae 2.50 | Phose 2 Phase 3 A Diferentil Pressure ( 8 Figure 7: Differential Pressures and Fitrate Vol. at § bpm in Test 1 on Day 2. vine “| 6.00 0.60 ieee seas _ i = Baw ores le Volme (gal) 2 Fit Vo Time (sec) 2a2Figure 8: Differential Pressures and Fitrate Vol. at 1 bpm for Test 1 on Day 3. Ditfeentol Pressure Cumulative Percentage 4505 0.50 4.00 k 0.45 3.50 baie 0.40 3.00 0.36 « tre Vole gal) | Pressures and Fitrate Vol. at 2 bpm for Test 1 on Day 3. eooccosegee BRSsSRSSs5S Filo Volume (a var, pe. Ae, Ann. 100 90 + — a CT 70 +— ~ ~ 60 50 | 40 d =e 30 off 20 - | 10} ° 1 10 Particle Size Um) 233 100POG Drilling Fluid/Filter Cake Figure 11: A cross section of cemented core after pumping water as spacer. x PG Drilling Fluid/Fiter Cake Figure 12: Across section of cemented core after pumping the designed spacer. sa