SPE 163023

Effect of Cement Contamination on Some Properties of Drilling Mud

Joel O. F, Ndubuisi, E. C, and Ikeh, L., University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2012 SPE Nigerian Annual International Conference and Exhibition held in Abuja, Nigeria, 6-8 August 2012.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have
not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

ABSTRACT detrimental effect on its performance.

Drilling of oil well is a capital intensive project; (Broughton, 1938).
hence, the importance of selection of proper In general, a contaminant is any material that
mud system that is free from contamination causes undesirable changes in drilling fluid
cannot be overemphasized. A poor design and properties. Solids are by far the most prevalent
contaminated drilling fluid can be very costly in contaminants. Excessive solids, whether
the life of any well. Therefore, during drilling commercial or from the formation, lead to high
operations care must be taken to avoid
rheological properties and slow the drilling rate.
contamination of mud with cement among
others. This project details experimental work While there are specific treatments for each
and findings associated with mud contamination contaminant, it is not always possible to remove
with cement. Also, solutions were proffered on the contaminant from the system.
how to manage contaminated mud systems with Pretreatment can be advantageous as long as it
cement during drilling operations. The result of is not excessive and does not adversely affect
this work will in no small way help not only the mud properties (Medermont, 1973).
operators but Engineers to manage this concern
The instability in the drilling mud properties is
with dispatch when it arises, thereby minimizing
down time and associated costs which affect as a result of various contaminants incorporated
drilling operations negatively. in the mud system(Luminus, 1980).
Generally, a good drilling fluid is simple and
INTRODUCTION contains a minimum number of additives. This
Drilling fluids are usually formulated to meet
allows easier maintenance and control of
certain properties to enable the mud carry out its
properties even at elevated temperature and
basic functions. A properly designed drilling
pressure. It is desirable to have a mud system
fluid should be able to perform some major
that is flexible enough to allow changes to be
functions to meet up with design
made to meet changing requirements as they
objectives.Thus, higher concentration of
occur. Each change in mud should be planned
contaminants in a drilling mud system causes well in advance of the time it is required. This
2 SPE 163023
will allow current treatment of the mud
consistent with future requirements.
Contaminants are encountered on every phase
of the drilling operation. They also exist in
drilled formations, water supply and in materials
used in formulating and maintaining the drilling
fluid properties. They can rapidly alter the
physical and chemical characteristic of the
drilling mud. The severity of the problems
experienced depends on the type of drilling mud
used(Medermonth,1973,BaroidTraining
Manual, 1997).
Though the primary indication of contamination
is the general instability of the drilling fluid
properties which manifest itself in a difficulty in
contolling the fluid loss, alkalinity or rheology
of the mud often in circulation, certain
contamination may be tolerated for an extended
periods. The severity of the problems
experienced depends on type of contaminants,
the degree of the contamination and type of
drilling mud in use (Luminon, 1980)
CONTAMINANTS AND ASSOCIATED
PROBLEMS
Cement contamination has pose serious
challenges in the drilling operation and as a
result of that attracts an additional operational
cost.
When cement contamination reaches where it is
no longer practical to treat it out, we dump the
most contaminated mud, displace the entire
system out or treat system as a calcium base
mud. To maintain a low calcium drilling fluid,
chemical treatment must be used to remove
cement contamination.
The aim of treatment is to control pH while
removing calcium and excess lime from the
system as an inert, insoluble calcium precipitate.
The treatment of choice for cement or lime
contamination is sodium bicarbonate
(NaHCO3). In its reaction with lime, a hydrogen
ion is liberated which reacts with a free
hydroxyl ion to form a water molecule. This
reaction serves to further reduce the pH and
allow more lime to go into solution.
Treatments should be discontinued when excess
lime approaches 0.3 to 0.5 lb/bbl. Materials such
as lignosulphonates and lignite are good
supplementary for pretreating agents because
they buffer the pH and aid in deflocculating the
system.
Consideration should also be given to low-
gravity solids content prior to drilling cement,
because high clay solids concentration is a
primary cause of flocculation when cement
contamination occurs. Reduction of solids
concentration, if too high, is recommended as a
defense against severe flocculation. Because pH
values are high when drilling cement, the
quantity of calcium ion in solution rarely
exceeds 300 to 400 mg/l. For this reason, much
of the cement drilled remains as discrete
particles and is available to dissolve and replace
the calcium ion that has been treated out of
solution. Unless cement particles (excess lime)
are mechanically removed from the system by
efficient solids removal equipment, it will take
several days for the excess lime to solubilize,
react and be chemical precipitated. High
temperature solidification can result from
cement contamination in combination with high
solids. Since tests at ambient temperature will
not reflect this problem, tests which stimulate
downhole conditions should be run.
MATERIALS AND RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
321grams of water was measured and poured
into the Hamilton mixing cup. 9.3grams of
bentonite was added and prehydrated for 30
minutes under stirring condition. After 30
minutes, 0.5grams of Rac-L, 0.5grams of Pac- R
respectively were added into the mixing cup.
These with prehydrated bentonite was stirred for
15 minutes before. 0.2grams of soda ash was
added and stirred for another 10 minutes. 3
 SPE 163023 3

grams of KCl was added for 10 minutes. Then

16 grams of barite was finally added and the
mixture was stirred further for another 15
minutes to homogenize before taking the
rheological reading and 10 seconds/minutes gel
strength using VG meter.
The mixing procedure was repeated using the
sample of the cement. Different weight of the
cement sample(50 grams,100grams and
Figure 1: A graph of RPM against Cement Contamination (g)
150grams) respectively were added to the
formulated mud. Thereafter, the rheological
properties and (10 seconds/minutes)
respectively gel strength values were taken as
well. The plastic viscosity and yield point were
evaluated.

Table 1: Addition and Functions

S/N Drilling Chemicals Functionsc
1 Water Base/continuous phase
2 Soda ash Controls water hardness
3 Bentonite Viscosifier and filtration control
4 Pac-R Fluid loss and viscosifier
5 Pac-L Fluid loss and viscosifier
6 Potassium chloride (KCl) Shale inhibition and increasing
density
7 Density increase Density increase

Figure 2: Plastic Viscosity of Mud with Cement Concentration (g)

Table 2: Rheological Results for Cement Contaminant of different

concentrations Analysis of WBM
Rheologicall unco 50g 100g 150g
Properties ntami
nated

40 cp 46 cp 75 cp 150 cp

28 cp 32 cp 58 cp 115 cp

9 cp 11 cp 36 cp 47 cp

6 cp 10 cp 34 cp 35 cp

Plastic viscosity (PV) 12 cp 14 cp 17 cp 35 cp

Yield Point (YP) 16 18 41 80

(Ib/100ft2)
GelStrength10secs/10 6/7 7/9 19/20 34/40
mins (Ib/100ft2)

Figure 3: Yield Point of Mud with Cement Concentration (g)

4 SPE 163023
Figure 4: Gel Strength of Mud with Shale of Different Concentrations
Table-1 shows the composition of the mud
recipe and various functions of the additives.
Results of the formulated mud recipe is
reflected on table-2.
Table-2 gives results with uncontaminated and
cement contaminations. Looking at table-2 and
figure-1, 50g, 100g, 150g cement contamination
respectively and considering the 600 rpm,
reading, test results indicated that the
rheological values increased progressively
showing a spike as the cement contamination
increased. Uncontaminated rheological value
was 40 cp and then increased to 46 cp when
contaminated with cement of 50grams. 75 cp at
100grams of cement contamination and
increased from 75 to 150 cp when 150grams
was added. It is clear that at every point of the
drilling, the drilling mud ought to be monitored
continuously. This is because of the adverse
effects the contaminants will pose to drilling
operations if not detected early and properly
handled( Lehninger,1997)
Figure 2 shows the plastic viscosity result of the
mud with different contamination of the cement.
The test result indicted that as the concentration
of cement increased, the plastic viscosity
increases, the plastic viscosity is an indication of
the solid particles, but solids such as clay, which
hydrate, will further increase the plastic
viscosity as their volume is increased by
hydration. This makes the hydration of cement
particles particularly detrimental. Consideration
should also be given to low-gravity solids
content prior to drilling cement, because high
clay solids concentration is a primary cause of
flocculation when cement contamination occurs.
Reduction of solids concentration, if too high, is
recommended as a defense against severe
flocculation( Broughton G 1938)
Figure 3 indicated progressive increases in the
yield point value with increase in different
concentrations of cement. The highest cement
concentration gave the highest yield point value.
Though the primary indication of contamination
is the general instability of the drilling fluid
properties which manifest itself in a difficulty in
controlling the fluid loss, alkalinity or rheology
of the mud often in circulation, certain
contamination may be tolerated for an extended
periods with no adverse effects. The severity of
the problems experienced depends on type of
contaminants, the degree of the contamination
and the type of drilling mud in use. (Luminons,
1980)
Figure 4 indicated progressive increase in the 10
seconds and 10 miuntes gel strength reading
respectively due to solid contents. This is an
indication of gelling tendency with cement
contamination. Common failures that occur
from instability using conventional WBMs
SPE 163023
including sloughing, caving, stuck pipe, bit
balling and increased torque and drag that could
be attributed to increase in static gel strength in
the formation. The experimental results of
cement contaminants have shown that
introduction of foreign agents into mud affects
the rheological properties of WBM and in turn
affects the rate of penetration, its performance
and develops serious drilling problems.( Baroid,
N. L. Inc 1985)
RECOMMENDATIONS
To avoid non productive time, continous
monitoring of mud system is imperative to
detect early contamination.
Every drilling mud engineer must have a basic
knowledge of the drilling mud chemistry so as
to effectively manage mud contamination.
control.
Mud when contaminated, should be properly
treated and on time to prevent the detrimental
effect of mud system.
5
REFERENCES
Adams N. J.: “Drilling Engineering, A completion well planning
approach”.
Bairs, J.B (1967): “Petroleum Microbiology”. Elsevier Publishing Co.
Amsterdam, London, New York. pp. 477 – 496.
Baroid, N. L. Inc (1985): “Source of mud problem, Vol. 1 pp. 207-218
Baroid, N. L. Inc: “Drilling Mud Chemistry Handbook”, Vol.1 pp.
260-218.
Bourgoyne, A. T.: Chenevert, M. E.; Millheim K. K. and Young F. S.
(1986) “Applied Drilling Engineering” SPE series, Texas,
10th Ed. pp. 41-42.
Bradfield (1924): “Journal of Physical Chemistry”; Soil Science
(1924) 17, 411, (1927) 24, 365.
Broughton G and Hand R. S. (1938) “Viscosity Characteristics of
Clays in connection with drilling mud”, Transaction AIME
(1938) 1002, 69.
Browning W. C. (1995): Paper 557-G 30th “Annual Fall meeting,
Petroleum” Branch, and AIME.
Buchanan, R. E. and Gibbons N. E (1974): “Bergey’s Manual of
Determinative Bacteriology”, 8th Ed. Williams and Wilkins
Co., Baltimore, MD, pp.1246.
Drilling Fluid Transactions API (1959) w6-41
Frobisher M. et al (1974): “Fundamentals of Microbiology”, 9th Ed.
W. B. Saunders Co., Toronto, London, Philadelphia. pp. 785.
Garrison A. D and Ten Brink K. C.(1939): “A Study of some phase of
chemistry control in clay suspension”, Transactions AIME
No. 1124, pp. 45.
Garrison A.D. (1938):“Surface Chemistry of Clays and Shales”,
Transactions AIME No.1027, pp.74.
Grula, M.M and Huang M.L (1980): “Interactions of Polyacrylamides
with Certain Soil Pseudomonads” “Developments in
Industrial Microbiology” Vol. 22, pp. 451-459.
Grula, N and Sewell, G (1981): “Polyacrylamide