SPE
SocletuorPetroieumEngineera
SPE 14135
Successful Primary Cementing: Fact or Fiction
by R.C. Smith, Amoco Production Co.
SPE Member
Copyright 1988, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was presented at the SPE 1986 International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing, China March 17-20, 1988. The material is
subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Write SPE. P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, Texas
75083-3836. Telex: 730989 SPE DAL.
ABSTRACT
The producing performance of a well depends in
great parz on a good primary cementing job. In a
high-quality cement job, all mud and gas channels
have been permanently prevented and there is a com-
plete hydraulic seal between the casing and the for-
mation throughout the zones of interest. If the
cementing operation is not carried out correctly,
the well will never reach optimum performance.
successful primary cementing operation requires a
positive attitude and commitment, proper supervision and
quality control, detailed planning, and careful
preparation. This paper discusses the application
and interaction of these aspects of the job, as well
as other factors that contribute to successful
cementing. Examples of unique quality control
procedures are included, The actual mechanics of
performing a cementing job are not covered; they can
be obtained from references included in the paper.
DISCUSSION
A recent editorial contained this comment:
"There is no excuse for a bad cement job but there
is no such thing as a good cement job." In my
opinion, only the first half of this statement is
true. My feeling is that successful primary
cementing can be a reality.2 It does not come cheap or
without effort, but it can be achieved.
The primary cementing job on the production
string is perhaps the most important operation per-
formed on a well, yet it remains one of the most
neglected of all operations. It is also subject to
severe cost-cutting through bidding and turn-
keying.3'4 But, as always, you get what you pay
for. Successful cementing requires the application
of technology, and technology is not free.
References and illustrations at end of paper.
The Cementable Wellbore
The planning of the cement job begins long
before the well is drilled. Uppermost in all plan-
ning and drilling decisions is the the objective of
obtaining complete zonal isolation in the wellbore
(see Fig. 1). A hydraulic seal must be obtained
between the cement and the casing and between the
cement and the formation; at the same time, mud and
gas channels within the cement sheath must be elimi-
A nated. If these goals are to be accomplished, the
wellbore must be designed and drilled to be cemen-
table. The ideal cementable wellbore (see Fig. 2)
is one that is (1) 3 in. (7.62 cm) larger than the
outside diameter of the casing - the absolute min-
imum is 1-1/2 in. (3.81 cm) larger2'5, (2) as nearly
gauge as possible (without washouts), (3) as
straight as possible (without severe dog-legs), and
(4) stabilized and properly conditioned (without
sloughing or flowing or losing circulation). The
drillers must keep these requirements foremost in
all plans. It is imperative that the cementable
wellbore not be sacrificed in the efforts to reduce
drilling days and mud costs. The cost of repairing
the cement job can far exceed savings in drilling
costs. Lost production and lost reserves must also
be included in any analysis of costs.
The Positive Approach
A positive cementing philosophy must be devel-
oped and followed. It is the very foundation of the
successful cementing block pyramid, as shown in
Rig. 3. One must believe that a successful
cementing job is possible. Such an attitude carries
a real commitment to a successful job and involves a
dedication of people, time, and money.
Priorities must be set, and the top priority is
to obtain a successful cementing job on the first
attempt.
169
 2 SUCCESSFUL PRIMARY CEMENTING - FACT OR FICTION
The Team Effort
The team effort - the next tier in the block
pyramid - is essential to a successful job. The
team consists of employees of the the service com-
pany, the operating company and the drilling con-
tractor. Communication and cooperation must be
established early among all parties, but particu-
larly between the drilling engineers and the service
company engineers. The engineered design of the
cementing job to fit the well requirements takes
time. All personnel must apply the total engineered
concept which starts with planning and design, con-
tinues through blending and mixing the cement, and
culminates in pumping the cement. The operation is
too big for one or two people. A team effort is
required to handle the many and varied quality con-
trol measures necessary for a successful job. Usu-
ally, the operator should dedicate one drilling
foreman and at least one drilling engineer to
quality control.
The Application of Technology
The third tier of blocks in Fig. 3 involves
application of cementing technology. This tech-
nology includes procedures, techniques, materials,
and job execution. We must link technical know-how
to field execution. To accomplish this task, field
personnel must have access to the best technology.
Therefore, a program to transfer technology across
company boundaries and from research and the
industry to field personnel is mandatory. Such a
continuing-education program includes seminars,
classroom courses, job experiences, and on-site
expert assistance. Then to assure success, a con-
scientious effort must be made to apply the proven
technology.
Cement Job Planning: The major areas of con-
sideration in any cementing operation are job plan-
ning, slurry design, blending of bulk materials,
slurry mixing, well preparation, and slurry
pumping.8'7 Each area requires special attention and
offers many challenges. A properly engineered
slurry design satisfies all well requirements and is
affected by well depth, downhole temperature, down-
hole fracture pressure gradient, slurry density, gas
migration, fluid loss, pumping time, strength devel-
opment, type and quality of mix water, type and den-
sity of drilling mud, displacement flow regime, and
brand and kind of cement. The design proceeds in a
logical manner from one property to the next until
all well requirements are fulfilled. The Literature
contains procedures for determining most of these
properties.8'7'10 The steps that offer the most
challenge are (1) determining the downhole tempera-
ture, (2) determining the downhole fracture pressure
gradient, (3) controlling gas migration,
(4) conditioning the mud and hole, and (5) blending
the bulk cement.
Well Temperature: Well temperature is impor-
tant because it affects all properties of cement,
particularly pumping time and strength develop-
ment.6'9 Pumping time is the length of time the
slurry remains pumpable. Downhole cementing temper-
ature can vary widely, depending on the type and
weight of drilling mud, well depth, circulation
time, geographic location, and many other factors.8
The effect of temperature on pumping time (or thick-
14135
•
ening time) is illustrated in Fig. 4. Note that
with only a small increase in downhole circulating
temperature there is a pronounced decrease in
pumping time; therefore, temperature must be deter-
mined fairly accurately. One source of information
on downhole temperature is primary logs run on the
well at the casing setting depth. The maximum
recorded log temperature often is considered psue-
dostatic, provided it is obtained about 24 hours
after the last circulation ceased. If less than
24 hours has elapsed, another temperature log or
bottomhole circulation survey should be run. Once
a static temperature is determined, the appropriate
temperature schedule for slurry design purposes can
be obtained from API tables." If a circulation
survey has been made, the temperature from that
survey should be used in developing a temperature
schedule.
Fracture Pressure Gradient: During the plan-
ning stage for drilling a well, tentative decisions
must be made about casing seats, mud weights, and
cementing requirements. The decisions become firmer
the
as more information becomes available during
drilling. Sufficient knowledge of formation frac-
ture pressure, pore pressure, and lithology is
required not only to optimize the casing and
drilling plan, but also to provide for a successful
cementing job. Casing setting depths must be
selected to prevent lost circulation problems and to
permit proper control of the well at all times. It
becomes imperative, therefore, to know the total
hydrostatic pressure at which the exposed formations
will fracture.
For safe operations, formation fracture pres-
sure is defined for cementing purposes as the frac-
ture extension pressure. It should not be confused
with fracture initiation pressure, which is usually
higher because of the tensile strength of the
exposed rocks. However, since rock strength cannot
be accurately measured in situ, fracture initiation
pressure cannot be predicted very accurately.
Fig. 5 presents two formation control capability
tests that show the difference between fracture ini-
tiation pressure and fracture extension pressure.
one hour apart on an
The tests were conducted about
8,000-ft (2438-m) well. Note on Test 2 the absence
of a breakdown or fracture initiation pressure, yet
fracture extension pressure on the two tests
remained essentially unchanged. In Test 1, fracture
initiation pressure was about 450 psi (3.1 mPa) or
1 lb/gal (120 kg/m8) higher than fracture extension
pressure. It appears that once the formation has
been broken, this extra pressure due to rock
strength can no longer be counted on for control of
the well. It seems possible that during normal
drilling operations the formation could be broken
unintentionally without its being indicated at the
surface. Designing for maximum slurry density on
the basis of initiation pressure could easily lead
to lost circulation during the cementing job.
Therefore, the fracture extension pressure should be
considered the maximum safe pressure for cementing.
Formation fracture pressure is affected by the
interrelationship of overburden stress, pore pres-
sure and matrix stress coefficient as given by the
following expression:" 14
170
 14135 R. C. SMITH
like that of Fig. 7, the maximum slurry density to
Pf x Pp + K (Sov Pp)' (1)
where
Pf = formation fracture pressure, psi,
pp = formation pore pressure, psi,
Sov = overburden stress, psi,
K = matrix stress coefficient, dimension-
less,
To obtain a reasonable prediction'of formation
fracture pressure using Eq. 1, one must have repre-
sentative estimates for overburden stress, formation
pore pressure, and matrix stress coefficient. Over-
burden stress is obtained from formation density
logs, and pore pressure usually is obtained from
empirical correlations using wireline log parameters
and measured pore pressures for the drilling
area.27 However, matrix stress coefficient, K, must
be determined from actual destructive testing of the
formation--i.e., hydraulic fracturing, or formation
control capability testing at the casing shoe where
the formation was fractured--or from leakoff test
data. Care must be exercised in developing empir-
ical correlations for stress coefficient. Usually
it is back calculated from Eq. 1 when the other par-
ameters are known. The value of formation fracture
pressure, pf, must be the value of fracture exten-
sion pressure determined in the destructive test.
For some active drilling areas, a correlation has
been developed by Matthews and Matthews."
Sometimes Poison's ratio14 is used in place of
the stress coefficient; however, reliable values for
Poison's ratio are not always available.
Ref. 13 provides an updated procedure for det-
ermining downhole fracture pressure from which max-
imum slurry density can be obtained.
An example of a curve of calculated onshore
fracture pressure gradient in relation to curves of
overburden stress and pore pressure is presented in
Fig. 6. Notice that the overburden stress, which is
calculated from density logs, is not constant. For
offshore application, the fracture pressure gradient
must be adjusted for depth of water and height of
mud line above water level."
Casing Setting Depths: The casing setting
depths must be selected such that the well can be
controlled and lost circulation can be prevented
during drilling And cementing. Assuming an overba-
lanced drilling oituation, a mud weight curve is
established as shown on Fig. 7. From this curve and
the fracture pressure curve casing seats can be
selected (see Fig. 7). The Regulatory Body having
jurisdiction over the drilling area and established
field rules often dictate maximum and minimum set-
ting depths for surface casing. Also, guidelines
are often given for pressure gradients for the other
casing strings; therefore, these requirements, field
rules and guidelines must be followed in selecting
the final casing string setting depth and size pro-
gram.
171
3
Cement Slurry Density: For a casing program
prevent losing circulation would be: (1) about
17.5 lb/gal (2096 kg/m3) for the production liner,
(2) nearly 15 lb/gal (1797 kg/m3) for the drilling
liner, and (3) 11.5 to 12.5 lb/gal (1378 to
1498 kg/m3) filler slurry followed by 15.8 lb/gal
(1893 kg/m3) tail-in slurry for the intermediate
string.
To determine optimum slurry density involves
considerable effort but the extra effort pays diii-
dends in successfully cementing the well.
A wide range of slurry densities can be
obtained using the nine API classes of cement, other
non-API cements, and various additives. Fig. 8
shows slurry density vs a generalized grouping of
cements ranging from neat (with no additives) to
cements variously weighted with density-altering
additives. Each group has distinct advantages and
properties. Laboratory testing will determine the
upper and lower limits for application.
Gas Migration: Natural gas is often present in
formations exposed to the wellbore at the time of
cementing. This gas must be prevented from
migrating through the cement column during WOC
(waiting on cement) time. Failure to prevent gas
migration can cause such problems as high annular
pressures at the surface, blowouts, poor zonal iso-
lation, loss of gas to nonproductive zones, poor
stimulation, low producing rates, etc., (see
Fig. 9). All of these are costly to correct.
Before it begins to hydrate, a cementing slurry
in the annulus can transmit hydrostatic head and
thus prevent gas invasion into the slurry. However,
during the early stages of hydration, the slurry
develops gel strength and tends to become load-
beering," which causes it to lose its ability to
transmit hydrostatic head. In this condition, gas
invasion can occur.
There are several successful methods to control
gas migration, each with its advantages. Early
methods included controlling fluid loss," pres-
suring the annulus, increasing slurry density, and
eliminating free water.17 Those techniques, which
still are used, solve some gas migration problems,
but not all. Another method uses a cement slurry
that interacts with the incoming gas to form an
impermeable barrier in the cement pore spaces.18
Still another technique uses an impermeable cement
system for controlling gas migration." Other
approaches involve cements containing gas" or other
additives" to cause expansion of the cement during
hydration. In selecting the optimum mechanism or
combination of mechanisms for controlling gas inva-
sion and migration many well conditions must be con-
sidered. For example, formation pressure,
permeability, gas flow rate, bottomhole temperature,
wellbore geometry, well deviation, height of the
cement column, formation fracture pressure.
Some of the techniques for preventing gas
migration involve the use of an external casing
packer,7 which provides a positive seal in the
annulus (see Fig. 10). It eliminates all three
avenues of communication: the formation/cement
interface, the microannulus between casing and
cement, and channels within the cement sheath.
 4 SUCCESSFUL PRIMARY CEMENTING
Mud and Hole Conditioning: To enhance mud dis-
placement efficiency during a primary cementing job,
the hole and the mud must be properly condi-
era-
tioned.21'22 This is one phase of the entire op
tion that should not be rushed-- up to 24 hrs may be
required to properly condition the mud and wellbore
nt
after the casing is on bottom. At best, a ceme
ud
slurry can only follow the path of the drilling m
circulating ahead of it in the annulus. Therefore,
the time required to properly condition the mud and
the hole will be very well spent. Some of the
important procedures that have proven successful are
summarized here.
The mud and the hole are initially conditioned
with drillpipe in the hole before the casing is run.
Wiper trips are made to check for caving, hole inst-
ability, and tight spots. The casing should not be
run until the hole is free of cavings and all tight
spots are eliminated. Then the running speed of the
casing is controlled carefully to prevent fracturing
and lost circulation. Once the casing is on bottom,
pipe movement and mud conditioning are begun and are
continued throughout the entire cementing opera-
tion.8'7'21 Cement pumping should not begin until
at least 95% of the hole volume is being circu-
lated.2 Generally this can be determined with fluid
calipers. The drilling mud should be conditioned to
as low a plastic viscosity and yield point as the
(In
system permits without dropping out solids.7
some highly deviated holes, this may not be advi-
sable.2') The hole should be conditioned with good
surface conditioned mud at rates as high as the
expected cementing pump rates. Such high circula-
tion rates are necessary to remove the gelled mud
that has developed during the static period as a
result of temperature rise and filtrate Loss. In
addition, improved displacement efficiency is
obtained by following these guidelines: (1) the
properties of the mud returned should be close to
those of the mud being pumped. into the well, (2) the
funnel viscosity nf the mud returned should be less
than SO seconds ;:tlial be within 5 seconds of the vis-
cosity of the mud being pumped into the well, and
(3) the gas content of the returning mud should be
within 10 units of normal background-gas. Following
those guidelines has resulted in more successful
cementing.
The Importance of Bulk Blending: It is appro-
priate to single out bulk blending, or dry blending,
for additional discussion. Blending of bulk mater-
ials often is taken for granted, yet it is a process
in which serious errors can occur undetected, and if
not corrected, can lead to a cementing failure.
After the cementing system has been carefully
designed in the laboratory, the composition or
recipe must be correctly blended to ensure proper
slurry performance in the wellbore. The two major
factors affecting this performance are the concen-
tration and the distribution of the additives in the
cement Liend.24 Small variations in concentrations
of additive can significantly alter the performance
properties of the cement slurry. Therefore, quality
control during this phase is extremely important."
Following are steps that should be carefully fn% -
lowed.24'25
1. Visually inspect all bulk tanks before trans-
ferring any bulk material. Any cement
remaining in tanks from previous jobs can con-
172
- FACT OR FICTION 14135
taminate a cement slurry to the point that it
will not perform downhole. A tank should be
cleaned if it contains excess cement.
2. Verify the calculations of additive weights.
3. Verify the weights of all additives put in the
batch tank for each blend. In addition, count
and stack the sacks of each additive placed in
the cement blend.
4. Limit the batch size to 50 % of the total
capacity of the tank.
5. Verify the air valve positions made by the
operator.
6. Blend materials with air and then transfer them
between tanks a minimum of three times.
7. Collect representative samples of the blend for
analysis.
Close attention should be paid to the proper
collection of samples. Although investigations into
proper sampling techniques have been limited, the
industry consensus is that three transfers of the
blend should be made before sampling. With a con-
tinuous in-line sampling device, a representative
sample can be taken of each blend. A minimum of two
1-gal samples of bulk material should be collected
and identified for every weigh tank batch.
After the blending, laboratory tests should be
conducted to determine the chemical composition28 or
the pumping timel° at the expected temperature and
pressure.
Job Execution and Monitoring
Proper job execution includes monitoring and
controlling several factors. Certain data must be
collected and analyzed to ensure timely decisions
affecting the overall operation. Recorded data
should include pump rate in, annulus rate out, well-
head pressure (at the cementing head), density of
fluids pumped in and those returning (using radioac-
tivity devices or equivalent), cumulative displace-
ment volume, cumulative return volume, hook load
during pipe reciprocation. To enable the job super-
visor to make timely decisions, he should have a
central monitoring point such as a monitoring van or
portable electronic data recorder from which he can
observe the entire operation.
It is especially important to measure the mud
return rate. Because of free-fall" of cement in
the casing, the mud return rate can exceed displace-
ment rates while a well is on a vacuum. However,
later in the job, as the free-fall rate slows down,
the return rate can be significantly less than the
displacement rate. This lowering of return rate is
often mistaken for losing circulation. Therefore,
it is important to calculate job performance using a
downhole simulator with which to compare real-time
data during the job. Full-opening magnetic flow
meters are available for measuring return rate for
water-based systems. These are much more accurate
than trip tanks which are o:casionally used.
 14135 R. C. SMITH 5

rate
Another reason to measure the mud return 12. Pilkington, P. E.: "Fracture Gradient
n-
is so the downhole displacement rate can be co Estimates in Tertiary Basins," Pet. Eng. -
ring dis-
trolled to ensure the proper flow regime du Intl. (May 1978).
is
placement. For example, if turbulent flow
s return 13. Matthews, J. C. and Matthews, W. R.: "Program
required throughout the job, then the annulu
his min- Calculates Frac Gradients for Many Basins," Oil
rate should not be allowed to drop below t
g flow and Gas Journal (July 8, 1985) 39-43.
imum return rate. On the other hand, if plu
n rate
displacement is desired, the aluutlus retur
must not exceed the maximum calculated rate. 14. Eaton, B. A.: "Fracture Gradient Prediction
and Its Application in Oilfield Operations," J.
CONCLUSIONS Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1969), 1353.

1. Successful primary cementing can be a reality. 15. Cheung, P. R. and Beirute, R. M.: "Gas Flow in
Cements," J. Pet. Tech. (June 1985), 1041-1048.
2. Successful primary cementing requires intense
16. Garcia, J. A. and Clark, C. R.: "An Investiga-
quality control.
tion of Annular Gas Flow Following Cementing
cementing requires a proper Operations," Paper SPE 5701 presented at the
3. Successful primary 1976 SPE Symposium on Formation Damage Control,
positive attitude, commitment, and dedication. Houston, Jan. 20-30.

SI METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS 17. Webster, W. W. and Eikerts, J. V.: "Flow After
Cementing - A Field Study and Laboratory
bbl x 1.589873 E-01 = m3 Model," Paper SPE 8259 presented at the 54th
ft x 3.048 E-01 =m SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
°F (°F-32)/1.8 c Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26, 1979.
gal x 3.785412 E-03 m m3
a kg
lbm x 4.535924 E-01 18. Bannister, C. E., Shuster, G. E., Wooldridge,
psi x 6.894757 E-03 mPa L. A., Jones, M. J. and Birch, A. C.: "Critical
lb/gal x 1.198 E+02 a kg/m3 Design Parameters to Prevent Gas Invasion
in. x 2.54 E+00 = cm During Cementing Operations," Paper SPE 11982,
presented at the SPE 58th Annual Technical Con-
REFERENCES ference and Exhibition, San Francisco,
Oct. 5-8, 1983.
1. "Cogent Comment," World Oil (Jan. 1985).
19. Tinsley, J. M., Miller, E. C., and Sutton, D.
2. Smith, R. C.: "Successful Primary Cementing L.: "Study of Factors Causing Annular Gas Flow
Can be a Reality," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1984), Following Primary Cementing," J. Pet. Tech.
1851-1858. (Aug. 1980) 1427-1437.

3. "Dialog", J. Pet. Tech. (Mar. 1985). 20. Griffin, T. J., Spangle, L. B., and Nelson, E.
B.: "New Expanding Cement Promotes Better
4. Jenkins, Dean: "President's Outlook," Well Bonding," Oil and Gas Journal (June 25, 1979),
Servicing (Mar./Apr. 1985), 9. 143-151.

5. Shryock, S. H. and Smith, D. K.: "Geothermal 21. Haut, R. C. and Crook, R. J. Jr.: "Primary
Cementing - The State-of-the-Art," Halliburton Cementing: Optimized for Maximum Mud Displace-
Services Brochure C-1274. ment," World Oil (Nov. 1980).

6. Smith, D. K.: c!Eisnias, Monograph Series, 22. Clark, C. R. and Carter, L. C.: "Mud Displace-
SPE, Dallas (1970 ment with Cement Slurries," J. Pet. Tech. (July
1973), 775-783.
7. Suman, G. 0., Jr., and Ellis, R. C.: Cementing
Handbook, World Oil (1977). 23. Keller, S. R., Crook, R. J., Haut, R. C., and
Kulakofsky, D. S.: "Problems Associated with
8. API Task Group: "Better Temperature Readings Deviated Wellbore Cementing," Paper SPE 11979
Promise Better Cement Jobs," Drilling-DCW (Aug. presented at the SPE 58th Annual Technical Con-
1917). ference and Exhibition, San Francisco,
Oct. 5-8, 1983.
9. Venditto, J. J. and George, C. R.: "Better
Wellbore Temperature Data Equal Better Cement 24. Pace, R. S., McElfresh, P. M., Cobb, J. A.,
Job," World Oil (Feb. 1984). Smith, C. L., and Olsberg, M. A.: "Improved
Bulk Blending Techniques for Accurate and Uni-
10. API Specifications for Materials and Testing form Cement Blends," Paper SPE 13041 presented
for Well Cements, API Spec. 10, 2nd Ed., API at the SPE 59th Annual Technical Conference and
Production Dept., Dallas (1984). Exhibition, Houston, Sept. 16-19, 1984.

11. Matthews, W. R. and Kelly, J.: "How to Predict

25. Smith, R. C.: "Successful Primary Cementing
Formation Fracture Pressure and Fracture Gra- Checklist," Oil and Gas Journal (Nov. 1, 1982).
dient," Oil and Gas Journal (Feb. 20, 1967),
92.

173
 SUCCESSFUL PRIMARY CEMENTING - FACT OR FICTIC3 14135

26. Christman, S. A.: "Offshore Fracture Gradi-

ents," J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1973).

27. Hottman, C. E. and Johnson, R. K.: "Estimation

of Formation Fracture Pressures from Log-
Derived Shale Properties," J. Pet. Tech. (June
1965), 717.

28. McElfresh, P. M.: "Chemical Thickening-Time

Test for Cements," J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1983).

29. Beirute, R. M.: "The Phenomenon of Free Fall

During Primary Cementing," Paper SPE 13045 pre-
sented at the SPE 59th Annual Technical Confer-
ence and Exhibition, Houston, Sept. 16-19,
1984.

1-74
 SPE 14135

Complete Cement Sheath

without Mud or Gas Channels

+ 3" (7.62 cm)

Properly Conditioned Hole & Mud

No Sloughing

Cement Bonded
To Formations
Gauge Diameter
Cement Bonded
To Casing Straight As Possible

Pay Zone No Flow

No Lost Circulation

Figure 1 Figure 2
Job The Cementable Wellbore
Objectives of a Primary Cementing

I
successful

Cementing
Job

Duality
Control
Procedures Training
and Transfer
Techniques of Program
Cementing
Technology
Knowledge

Service
Company Operato Rig Drilling Drilling
Contactor Foreman Engineers
r
Team Concept

Attitude Commitment Dedication Proper

Priorities

Cementing Philosophy

Figure 3
Structure of a Successful Primary Cementing Job

175
•

sp 14135

2500
(17.24)
Fracture Initiation Pressure

2000 Test 1

200
E (13.79)
Fracture
Extension
(93.3) API Class E 2 Pressure
Cement Test 2
a.
Class D 1500
Cement (10.34)
160 cn
c.7s (71.1) Class G Shut-In
cc
LL Cement a 1000
0 (6.89)
ui
cc u.
120 cr
(48.9) cn
500
a_ (3.45)
2
I
80
(26.7) Class G I I I I
Cement + 2% Caa 2 0 2 4 6 2 4
(.22) i-;3) ShUT-IN TIME, MINUTES
VOLUMED PUMPED, bbl (m3)
40
(4.4) 2 4 6 8 10

PUMPING TIME, HOURS Figure 5

Figure 4
Effect of Temperature on Pumping Time of Formation Control Capability Tests
Various API Cements at Atmospheric Pressure.

Surface
Overburden
Casing
Stress
2000 Fracture Gradient 2000 -
Pressure . Intermediate
Gradient Fracture Casing
4000 4000
I Pressure

6000 6000 Mud Weight g-

Pore Pressure
141' Drilling
Gradient
fp 8000 La' moo Liner

10000 10000
Pore Pressure
\.Production
12000 12000 -
Liner

I I 1 I
14000 r I 14000 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
04 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
PRESSURE GRADIENT, PSI/ft EQUIVALENT MUD WEIGHT, lb/GAL

Figure 6 Figure 7
Formation Fracture Pressure Onshore Casing Setting Depths

_ -176 _ -
 SPE 14135

25

Figure 8
Density Range of Cement Slurries 2

Channels Mud
Gas
Leakage mpermeable or Expanding Cement
Low Fluid Loss
Zero Free Water

External Inflatable
Casing Packer
U
Gas
Zone

Figure 9 Figure 10
Gas Migration in a Cemented Annulus. 6 Use of a Casing Packer To Prevent
Gas Migration in a Cemented Annulus
(Modified from Ref. 6)

177