Pet E 367

Lab Report #1
 Yield of Bentonite and Attapulgite Clays
 Rheological Characterization of Water-Base Drilling Fluids
Experiment Date: January 31 2007

Prepared by: Jackie Chee (1103396)

Group #7
Beattie L.
Branch T.
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

NREF 2-052
Markin/CNRL Natural Resources Engineering Facility
116street 91st ave

February 13, 2007

Barkim Demirdal
PhD Candidate at Petroleum Engineering Department
7-134 Markim CNRL Natural Resources Engineering Facility
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada T6G 2W2

Dear Mr. Demirdal,

Drilling mud is important in the petroleum industry. Drilling mud can be composed of various
types of clay. All the clays have their unique properties and when prepared with water, they will exhibit
different viscosity, gel strength, and most importantly, the rheological characteristic of the drilling mud.
We are required to observe the difference between Bentonite, and Attapulgite clay in both salt water
and fresh water. It was also required to differentiate the few non-Newtonian fluid models, and
determine the model associated with Bentonite, and Xanthan Gum.

It is clear that Bentonite and Attapulgite give different characteristic to the drilling mud.
Bentonite has a low yield of clay and it is highly ineffective in salt water. Attapulgite have a high yield of
clay and it does not shown any significant signs of swelling. Bentonite encountered severe swelling when
mixed with fresh water. Overall, Attapulgite would be a better choice when making drilling mud.

Bentonite with fresh water exhibits Bingham Plastic properties while the Xanthan Gum with
fresh water showed a fluid with a Power Law model.

I hope these observations will be of good use to you.

Thank you for your time

Sincerely,

……………………………..
(Jackie Chee)

Enclosure

Page 2 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

 Objective
This lab is primarily divided into 2 parts. Part 1 of this lab is to determine how bentonite and attapulgite
clay affects viscosity in both water and salt water. Part 2 is to determine the rheological model
describing the relation between shear stress and shear rate in a water based drilling fluid.

 Theory and concept

Properties of water based drilling mud are controlled mainly by the type of clay added to the drilling
fluid to change its properties for better wellbore efficiency. The first part of the lab will produce twelve
samples. There will be bentonite or attapulgite added to either salt water or water. The amount of clay
added will be 3, 6 and 9% of the weight of water. The density and viscosity will be determined. Density
will be determined using the mud balance; and viscosity will be determined using the Fann VG meter
(rotational viscometer). There will also be a marsh funnel used to determine relative viscosity to water.
Water will only be used for this part of the experiment.

Mud Density

Density is the weight per given volume. Measuring the density of the drilling fluid is important to
determine the buoyancy force induced when drilling and the hydrostatic pressure the drilling fluid acts
at the bottom-hole pressure. A higher density will prevent formation fluid from entering the well bore.
In this lab, the density is determined using the mud balance shown in Figure 1. The mud cup takes a
fixed volume of fluid sample and by adjusting the rider until balanced, a reading can be taken. This
apparatus has to be calibrated using fresh water.

Figure 1
Mud Balance
Source: http://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/Publikationer/2001/87-7944-820-8/html/kap01.htm

Page 3 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

Thixotropy

Thixotropy or the Gel strength is measured at a low shear stress after allowing it to thicken/sit for a
given amount of time (10 seconds and 10 minutes by API standards). The strength of the mud cake
formed will help in preventing water from entering the wellbore, as well as the drilling fluid circulating in
the wellbore to leak out into a fracture.

Viscosity

Part 1

Viscosity is the fluid’s resistance to flow. The viscosity of the mud determines the efficiency and even
ability to lift cuttings out of the well bore. Addition of different types of clay will affect the viscosity as
well as the use of salt water as oppose to plain water. Using an API standard Fann VG meter, the
apparent viscosity is defined as:

[600 rpm dial reading]

μ App =
2

Part 2

The Fann VG meter also has various rotation speeds, all of

which is useful to determine the drilling fluid rheological
model for shear stress to shear rate. The main components
will be two cylinders; one will be referred as the Rotor, and
the other the Bob. The Rotor is the external cylinder that is
connected to the motor giving it a constant angular velocity.
The inner cylinder, the Bob is connected to a spring that
gives a dial read out. Both cylinders are submerged into the
fluid and there is a small annular space in between the
Rotor and Bob; when the Rotor is rotating, the fluid will
cause a torque on the Bob. Depending on the dimensions,
the Fann VG meter used had this relation to shear stress:

τ =θ

Where: τ = shear stress [lbf/100 ft2]

Figure 2 θ =Dial reading
Schematic diagram of a concentric
cylindrical viscometer The shear rate is determined by:

γ =1.7∗rpm

Where: γ= shear rate [sec-1]

Page 4 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

rpm = revolutions per minute

Most Drilling fluids are non-Newtonian fluids, either viscosity

changes with shear rate (ie. Power Law Model or Herschel-
Bulkley Model), or a plastic yield must be overcome (ie.
Bingham Plastic Model).

A Newtonian model is the simplest. The shear stress is directly

proportional to the shear rate as shown in figure 2. Common
day liquids are Newtonian like water, honey and oil. The
Figure 3
Newtonian Model constant proportionality relating the two is called viscosity.

A Bingham Plastic Model is similar to a Newtonian model;

however it requires a plastic yield to be overcome before any
shearing in the fluid will occur. The relation between shear
stress and shear rate is shown in figure 3 and can be expressed
as:

τ =τ y + μ p∗γ
Figure 4
Bingham Plastic Model

μ p=θ600 −θ300

τ y =θ300 −μ p

Where: τ = Shear stress [lbf/100 ft2]

τy = yield point [lbf/100 ft2]
μ p = Plastic Viscosity [cp]
γ = Shear Rate [sec-1]
θ600 = dial reading at 600rpm
θ300 = dial reading at 300rpm

A Power Law Model is similar to a Newtonian model, however

it has no linearity as shown in figure 4. The shear rate and shear
stress are related through an exponential term, ‘n’ which is the
flow behavior index. A power law model can be expressed as:

Figure 5
Power Law Model

Page 5 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

τ =K∗(γ )n

θ 600
n=3.322∗log ⁡( )
θ300

510∗θ300
K= n
(511)

Where: τ = Shear stress [lbf/100 ft2]

K= Consistency index [lbf/100 ft2]
γ = Shear Rate [sec-1]
n = flow behavior index
θ x = dial reading at x rpm
Flow behavior Type of fluid
index ‘n’
Pseudoplastic, or shear thinning; an increase in shear rate results in a decrease in
<1
viscosity

1 Newtonian; shear rate and shear stress are directly proportional

Dilatants, or shear thickening; an increase in shear rate results in an increase in

>1
viscosity

A Herschel-Bulkley Model is basically a Power Law model with a

Bingham plastic model combined together. A plastic yield is
required to initiate flow, and once the fluid is viscous, the relation
between shear stress and shear rate is similar to one of the Power
Law Model. This can be shown in figure 5. This can be express as:

τ =τ y + K∗( γ )n
Figure 6
Herschel-Bulkley Model Where: τ = Shear stress [lbf/100 ft2]
K= Consistency index [lbf/100 ft2]
γ = Shear Rate [sec-1]
n = flow behavior index
τ y = Yield Stress [lbf/100 ft2]

With four different models in mind, the selection of the appropriate model is done by plotting shear
stress as a function of shear rate will give one of the 4 curves. Linear regression is used to determine the
line of best fit. The two lowest rpm reading, usually 3rpm and 6rpm can be neglected from the plotting.
The low rpm give an inaccurate reading because the fluid is almost at a stand still and gel strengthening
is occurring.

Page 6 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

 Experimental Procedure
Part 1

1. Calibrate mud balance using fresh water. (Fresh Water Density at 21 ̊C): 8.3 lb/gal
2. Measure the funnel viscosity of water at room temperature. (Water: 26 seconds)
3. Twelve samples will be prepared in this lab section. Six of these will be mixed using fresh water, and
the other six with salt water. Half of those six samples, three samples, will be mixed using 3%, 6% or
9% of Bentonite or Attapulgite by weight of water.

Fresh Water Salt Water (20,000 ppm NaCl)

Bentonite Attapulgite Bentonite Attapulgite
Each sample will be mixed with 3%, 6% or 9% of clay by weight of water.
4. Obtain 350cc of either fresh or salt water in the mixing cup and start blender.
5. Obtain right amount of clay from bulk container.
6. Using a spatula, slowly and carefully, add reasonable amounts of clay into the mixing cup while
blender is on. Be careful with spatula hitting the mixer and clay dust puffing into the air. Avoid
inhaling clay dust.
7. Mix sample for a minimum of 10 minutes or when sample is well mixed.
8. Place sample into Fann VG viscometer and measure apparent viscosity of sample at 600 rpm.
Apparent viscosity can be calculated using formula from theory.
9. Measure density of sample using mud balance.
10. Dispose of sample properly, clean equipment and repeat with the other samples until done.

Part 2

1. Calibrate mud balance using fresh water. (Fresh Water Density at 21 ̊C): 8.3 lb/gal
2. Measure the funnel viscosity of water at room temperature. (Water: 26 seconds)
3. Two samples will be prepared in this lab section. Both will use fresh water. One sample will have 35
grams of bentonite, and the either will have 4 grams of Xanthan Gum.
4. Obtain 350cc of either fresh or salt water in the mixing cup and start blender.
5. Obtain right amount of clay from bulk container.
6. Using a spatula, slowly and carefully, add reasonable amounts of clay into the mixing cup while
blender is on. Be careful with spatula hitting the mixer and clay dust puffing into the air. Avoid
inhaling clay dust.
7. Mix sample for a minimum of 10 minutes or when sample is well mixed.
8. Record mud temperature using digital thermometer. Place thermometer well in the center of the
mud, avoiding contact with the mixing cup.
9. Measure density of sample using mud balance.
10. Place sample into Fann VG viscometer and record dial readings at 600, 300, 200, 100, 6 and 3 rpms.
11. Determine 10 sec and 10 minute gel strength.
12. Dispose of sample properly, clean equipment and repeat with the other samples until done.

Page 7 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

 Results and Calculations

Recorded Data

Part 1

Water Properties
Density: 8.3 ppg
Funnel Viscosity: 28.54 sec/qt

Mud Apparent Viscosity, µApp

  Fresh Water Salt Water
Clay Content Bentonite Attapulgite Bentonite Attapulgite
3% 6.5 cp 4.5 cp 3.5 cp 5.5 cp
6% 16.6 cp 33.9 cp 3.4 cp 30.2 cp
9% 37.0 cp 51.0 cp 6.0 cp 79.0 cp

Mud Density, ρmud

Fresh Water
Clay Content Bentonite Attapulgite
3% 8.82 lbs/gal 1.06 g/cc 8.58 lbs/gal 1.03 g/cc
6% 8.62 lbs/gal 1.03 g/cc 8.58 lbs/gal 1.03 g/cc
9% 8.60 lbs/gal 1.03 g/cc 8.60 lbs/gal 1.03 g/cc

Salt Water
Clay Content Bentonite Attapulgite
3% 8.72 lbs/gal 1.04 g/cc 8.64 lbs/gal 1.04 g/cc
6% 8.72 lbs/gal 1.04 g/cc 8.51 lbs/gal 1.02 g/cc
9% 8.78 lbs/gal 1.05 g/cc 8.70 lbs/gal 1.04 g/cc

Part 2

Bentonite
rpm dial reading
Added: 35.02g
600 114.9
Density: 8.7lbs/gal
300 98.8
Temperature: 28.4 ̊C
200 92.1
Viscometer

Page 8 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

100 84.4

6 68.1

3 68.5
Gel Strength
10 sec (average) 57.5 cp
Run 1 58.0 cp
Run 2 58.4 cp
Run 3 56.2 cp
10 min: 63.0 cp

Xanthan Gum

Page 9 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

Added: 4.01g

Page 10 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

Density: 7.5lbs/gal

Temperature: 35.2 ̊C

Viscometer
Apparent
Bentonite Fresh Water
rpm Viscosity
Attapulgite
dial reading for all Bentonite
Fresh Water 12 Mud Samples
Salt Water Attapulgite Salt Water

90.0 600 104.5

80.0 300 90

70.0 200 81.5

100 70
Apparent Viscosity (cp)

60.0

50.0 6 43.5

40.0 3 38.5
Gel Strength
30.0
10 sec (average) 37.1 cp
Run 1 37.1 cp
20.0
Run 2 37.0 cp
10
10.0min: 43.5 cp

0.0
1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%
Clay Content (% Weight)

Figure 7
Apparent Viscosity vs. Clay Content for 4 different Mud Compositions

Data Analysis and Discussion

Part 1

All samples had the same viscosity with 3% clay content added. The samples with Attapulgite present
gave a high yield of clay compared to Bentonite. With an addition of 3% more, the viscosity of
Attapulgite Fresh water and saltwater gave similar results. However, when more attapulgite was added,
the salt water mixture continued to become more viscous than the fresh water. The bentonite clay does
not build up viscosity in salt water. It will just absorb the water and not change the viscosity at all. The
bentonite in fresh water has some affects but it does not increase the viscosity as much as the
attapulgite.

Attapulgite is clay that provides a high yield in salt water and reasonable yield in fresh water. Attapulgite
in salt water does not provide filtration control though. Bentonite should not be used in salt water at all

Page 11 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

because has no affects on the viscosity and use in fresh water is recommended, however the amount of
bentonite clay required to increase the apparent viscosity will be a large amount compared to
Attapulgite. Similar to Figure 2 in the lab manual, Bentonite in Salt water increases viscosity so slightly
showing a low yield drilling clay. All the other three samples seem to resemble a premium drilling clay.
The biggest difference is the affect on viscosity with the amount of clay added.

If salt water is being used in a drilling operation, the use of bentonite clay will have no affect on the
drilling fluid. However, the use of attapulgite is suitable for all both salt water and fresh water. Bentonite

Bentonite Fresh Water Density for

Attapulgite Freshall 12 Mud
Water Samples
Bentonite Salt Water Attapulgite Salt Water

1.06

1.05

1.04
Density (g/cc)

1.03

1.02

1.01

1.00
1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%
Clay Content (% Weight)

Figure 8
Density vs. Clay Content for 4 different Mud Compositions

maybe suitable in fresh water if the viscosity increase desired is low, otherwise to get a high viscosity for
the drilling fluid may require a lot of Bentonite to be added which is not cost effective.

The Bentonite and Fresh Water sample had the highest density at the beginning, but as more clay was
added, the density was similar with the other Fresh Water sample of Attapulgite. This is due to the fact
that bentonite is swelling. Rather, the Bentonite and Salt water sample hardly changed in density. The
Attapulgite in Fresh Water shows a small density increase as more clay is added. The Attapulgite in Salt
Water shows a dip at 6% clay content. This may just be bad data since the density shows a concavity in
the curve. It should be expected the Attapulgite in Salt Water to have a higher density when compared

Page 12 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

with Attapulgite in Fresh Water because of the salt crystals present in the water. The density of Salt
Water with 20,000 ppm NaCl is 20,250 mg/L, equivalent to 0.02025 g/cc. The difference between
Attapulgite in Salt Water and Fresh Water, as seen in Figure 8, is about 0.02 g/cc difference. It can be
concluded that the Attapulgite does not swell disproportionally in Salt Water nor Fresh Water.

Yield of Bentonite Fresh Water: 85 bbl per ton

Clay Content % of Bentonite Fresh Water at 15 cp =5.5%

Yield of Attapulgite Fresh Water: 130 bbl per ton

Clay Content % of Attapulgite Fresh Water at 15 cp =4.0%

Part 2

Bentonite
Density = 8.70 lbs/gal
μ p = Plastic Viscosity = 16.1 cp
τy = yield point = 82.7 lbf/100 ft2
τ =τ y + μ p∗γ
τ =82.7+16.1∗γ

Viscometer Shear Rate Shear Stress

rpm dial reading γ [sec-1] τ [lbf/100 ft2]
600 114.9 1020.0 114.9
300 98.8 510.0 98.8
200 92.1 340.0 92.1
100 84.4 170.0 84.4
6 68.1 10.2 68.1
3 68.5 5.1 68.5

Page 13 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

*reading at 6 and 3 rpm excluded from graph.

Shear Rate vs. Shear Stress for Bentonite

120

115
R² = 0.99
R² = 0.98
110
Shear Stress [lbf/100 ft2]

105

100

95

90

85

80
150.0 250.0 350.0 450.0 550.0 650.0 750.0 850.0 950.0 1050.0
Shear Rate [sec-1]

bentonite Linear (bentonite) Power (bentonite)

Figure 9
Shear Rate vs. Shear Stress for Bentonite Mud

According to the R2 values, the best fit line for Bentonite is a linear line. It can be concluded that this
bentonite mud is not of the Power Law Model but of the Bingham Plastic Model.

Xanthan Gum
Density = 7.50 lbs/gal
n = flow behavior index = 0.21551
K= Consistency index = 11970.68 lbf/100 ft2
τ =11970.68∗(γ )0.21551

Viscometer Shear Rate Shear Stress

rpm dial reading γ [sec-1] τ [lbf/100 ft2]
600 104.5 1020.0 104.5
300 90.0 510.0 90
200 81.5 340.0 81.5
100 70.0 170.0 70
6 43.5 10.2 43.5
3 38.5 5.1 38.5

Page 14 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

*reading at 6 and 3 rpm excluded from graph.

Shear Rate vs. Shear Stress for Xanthan Gum

105
R² = 0.95
1
100

95
Shear Stress [lbf/100 ft2]

90

85

80

75

70

65
150.0 250.0 350.0 450.0 550.0 650.0 750.0 850.0 950.0 1050.0
Shear Rate [sec-1]

Xanthan Gum
Linear (Xanthan Gum) Power (Xanthan Gum)
Figure 10
Shear Rate vs. Shear Stress for Xanthan Gum Mud

According to the R2 values, the best fit line for Xanthan Gum is a power line. It can be concluded that this
Xanthan Gum mud is not of the Bingham Plastic Model but of the Power Law Model.

 Sample Calculations
Part 1

Apparent Viscosity:

[600 rpm dial reading]

μ App =
2
[600rpm dial reading] for 3% Bentonite Fresh Water = 13
13
μ App = =6.5 cp
2

Unit Conversion:

Page 15 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

1 lbs/gal = 0.119826427 g/cc

Density for 3% Bentonite Fresh Water = 8.82 lbs/gal
Density for 3% Bentonite Fresh Water = 8.82 * 0.119826427
Density for 3% Bentonite Fresh Water = 1.06 g/cc

Part 2

Bentonite:

μ p=θ600 −θ300

μ p=114.9−98.8=16.1 cp

τ y =θ300 −μ p

τ y =98.8−16.1=82.7 lbf/100 ft2

Xanthan Gum:

θ 600
n=3.322∗log ⁡( )
θ300

n=3.322∗log ( 104.5
90.0 )
=0.21551

510∗θ300
K=
(511)n

510∗90.0
K= 0.21551
=11970.68 lbf/100 ft2
(511)

Shear Rate:

γ =1.7∗rp m
Where: γ= shear rate [sec-1]
rpm = revolutions per minute
rpm of 600
γ =1.7∗600
γ =1020 sec-1

Sources of Errors:

The use of Bentonite was not pure. When preparing the mud, dark lines appeared on Bentonite mud
showing impurities in Bentonite clay. These impurities may not be homogenous throughout the entire

Page 16 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

Bentonite bulk container. If research is done on drilling fluid, pure Bentonite should be use, however to
stimulate real field mixing, it is not significant.

When using the mixer in preparing the mud, there was a lot of powder from the clay that was not mixed
in the mixing cup and even some that blew away onto the table. The actual amount of clay added may
be less than prepared. An alternative way of adding the exact amount of clay is by having the clay in
tabulate forms or pill forms so that the clay cannot be blown away.

 Conclusions
Bentonite works well in Fresh Water; however it does swell a few times its own size. Bentonite should
not be used with Salt Water as has a low yield of clay.. Attapulgite on the other hand has a high yield of
clay in both Fresh Water and Salt Water, and it does not swell too much.

Drilling mud is a non-Newtonian fluid. To determine which type of model the fluid follows cannot be
approximated using eye judgment. A graph must be constructed and linear regression or power law
regression must be performed to determine the rheological character of the drilling mud. Bentonite
mixed with fresh water will give a Bingham Plastic fluid and Xanthan Gum gives a Power Law fluid.

References:

http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/Display.cfm?Term=gel%20strength, February 10 2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_fluid, February 10 2007
http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/DisplayImage.cfm?ID=373, February 10 2007

Page 17 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

Assignment

Apparent Viscosity using Power Law Laminar Flow Equations

Approach 1

1 n
1−n 2+
K∗( Dh−D p ) n
μ App = ∗( )
144∗v a1−n 0.0208

Where: μ App= apparent mud viscosity, cp

v a= average annular mud velocity, ft/sec
Dh= hole diameter, inch
D p= pipe outer diameter, inch
K = consistency index, equivalent cp

Pipe Rheological Parameters

θ 600
n p =3.322∗log ⁡( )
θ300

n p =3.322∗log ( 100
65 )
=0.62150

510∗θ300
K p=
(511)n p

510∗65
K p= .62150
=687.376
(511)

For v a= 150 ft/min

.62150
1
1−.62150 2+
687.376∗(8.5−4.5) .62150
μ App = ∗( )
144∗2.51−.62150 0.0208

μ App =140.551 cp

Annular rheological Parameters

θ100
n Ann =0.657∗log ⁡( )
θ3

Page 18 of 19
Jackie Chee (1103396) February 13 2007
Lab Report #1

n Ann =.657∗log ( 3.032 )=0.67541

511∗θ3
K Ann =
(5.11)n Ann

511∗3.0
K Ann = .67541
=509.406
(5.11)

For v a= 150 ft/min

.6 7541
1
1−.67541 2+
509.406∗(8.5−4.5) .6 7541
μ App = ∗( )
144∗2.51−. 67541 0.0208

μ App =130.857 cp

ft/min ft/sec Pipe Rheological Annular Rheological

va U (cp) n k U (cp) n k % error of u
131.179 0.62150
180 3 4 2 687.377 123.3385 0.675415 509.4061 6.357202
140.551 0.62150
150 2.5 6 2 687.377 130.8579 0.675415 509.4061 7.407796
152.938 0.62150
120 2 2 2 687.377 140.6875 0.675415 509.4061 8.707753
170.531 0.62150
90 1.5 6 2 687.377 154.4574 0.675415 509.4061 10.40693
The pipe rheological viscosity is higher than the annular rheological viscosity. The % error of
viscosity is small when the annular velocity is highest. As the velocity decrease, the error increases.

Page 19 of 19