VOL. 15, NO.

13, JULY 2020 ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF COCONUT OIL AS AN ALTERNATIVE

FOR MINERAL OIL IN OIL-BASED MUD
Dinesh Kanesan and Mohd. Fazriq Hafizin Bin Jamaludin
Department of Petroleum Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi ETRONAS, Malaysia
E-Mail: dinesh_16001400@utp.edu.my

ABSTRACT
The study on vegetable oil-based drilling mud has gained much attention due to the detrimental effects of the
conventional oil-based mud (OBM). The conventional OBM contains additives which can endanger the safety of personnel
handling it. The objective of this study is to formulate a new OBM by using coconut oil as a base fluid and analyze
whether coconut oil-based mud would be a viable option as opposed to conventional mineral oil. Coconut oil will be used
as a substitute to the conventional base oil. The compared properties were rheological properties, yield point, gel strength
and filtration loss properties. The mud density for both drilling mud is kept constant at 9.0 ppg for comparison purpose.
Results obtained show that the Coconut OBM exhibited Bingham plastic rheological model with high yield point and gel
strength compared to OBM. Furthermore, the mud filtration test results were 3.8 ml for Coconut OBM and 1.7 ml for
OBM. The thicker mud cake of Coconut OBM would cause pipe to stuck compared to OBM thinner mud cake. In
conclusion, Coconut OBM exhibit poor performance in mud rheology and filtrate loss with the exception of superior gel
strength than OBM but it is not sufficient to replace OBM in any drilling operations.

Keywords: water-based mud, oil-based mud.

1. INTRODUCTION base mud drilling fluid [4].OBM have proven to be

Drilling fluid is an important component in any
drilling operations. The success rate of any drilling
operations depends on the efficiency of drilling fluid. The
main function of drilling fluid is to deliver cuttings to the
surface, maintaining bore hole pressure and reducing drill
bit temperature which are key components for a smooth
drilling procedure. Using the appropriate drilling fluid
types will determine the success rate of drilling operations
[1].
Overall there are two types of drilling fluid which
are water-based mud (WBM) and oil-based mud (OBM)
both having distinct advantages and disadvantages over
one another. OBM demonstrates superior wellbore
stability, low formation damage and temperature stability
when compared to WBM. However due to the destructive
nature of OBM which contains high aromatic components.
Engineers tend to use WBM despite of its performance
drawbacks [2]. WBM does not cause any significant
harmful effect to the environment but its performance is
not up to par with that of OBM [3]. The cost of WBM is
relatively cheap but it has poor rheological properties
causing it to be less effective in high temperature, prone to
corrosion and poor lubricating properties. Such properties
will not be effective to be use as drilling fluid therefore an
alternative solution should be invented which can have the
same performance as OBM but contributes little to none
harmful effect to the environment.
Current approach as to mitigate the
environmental hazard of OBM is the use of vegetable oil
as a replacement for diesel oil in drilling mud formulation.
In 2013, Malaysia is one of top 10 coconut producing
countries in the world and Malaysia is placed at number 4
for industrial crop ranking. These readily available
resources would be beneficial for designing a vegetable oil
superior than WBM in multiple aspects such as better
shale inhibition, lubricity and thermal stability
characteristics. However, using OBM drilling fluid would
cause the carried cuttings at the surface to seep harmful
chemicals through the ground and damaging any living
organism including polluting the groundwater [5]. The
cuttings contain heavy metals with concentration higher
than natural occurring concentrations of sediments causing
phytotoxicity, bioaccumulation and adverse effect to the
environment [6]. Furthermore, the lack of practicing
petroleum waste management in Malaysia and the absence
of proper technology would amplify the hazardous effect
of OBM [7].
Besides that, the cost of OBM is expensive due to
the formulation involve in designing the drilling fluid.
Also, the high gas solubility of OBM would cause
difficulties for kick reading and any lost circulation event
would raise the cost to use OBM in drilling operations [8].
In some instances, accidental spills of OBM could occur
and the high aromatic components of these drilling fluid
would cause adverse effect on human health. [9].
However, previous study has shown that the
viscosity of vegetable oils is 5 times higher than diesel oil.
This exceeds the requirement of API which is around 2.3
to 3.5 cp causing it to be incompatible for the usage of
base fluid for mud formulation. The high viscosity would
affect the mud rheology particularly the Plastic Viscosity
(PV), Yield Point (YP) and Gel Strength which translates
to low penetration rate, differential sticking, high
equivalent circulating density also high pumping pressure
to initiate flow [10].
The basic building block for the vegetable oil-
based OBM is vegetable oil consisting of triglycerides
which are long fatty acid chains with unsaturated bond

1482
 VOL. 15, NO. 13, JULY 2020 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

with most common vegetable oil containing up to 12 fatty
acids [11]. Vegetable oil is non-toxic as burning these
types of oil emits a low amount of carbon dioxide and
carbon monoxide emission, with the added benefit of
being able to degrade in the environment [12].
Vegetable oil-based mud advantage over
conventional OBM would be the superior thermo-physical
properties. The flash and flame points of vegetable oils are
superior relative to minerals oils which translates to a
greater fire resistant. Consequently, the transportation,
storage and handling of Vegetable OBM is safer and
minimum operational issues related to low flash and fire
points [13]. However, there are some drawbacks mainly
due to higher viscosity of vegetable oils in comparison
with diesel oil by 4 to 5 times higher rendering it
unsuitable for mud formulation, multiple problems related
to mud rheological properties [14].
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
For this project virgin coconut oil (VCO) is
chosen which comprises of:
Table-1. Fatty acid composition of VCO.
Fatty Acid Coconut Oil
C6 0.69 %
C12 48%
C14-C16 60.5%-63.6%
C18:1 5%
Having a higher content of oleic acid would have
excellent oxidative stability which affects positively on
thermo-physical properties however the oleic acid content
is about 8% only as compared to Palm oil which has about
50% of oleic acid [10];[15]. Next, the mud is formulated
by the following formulation in Table-2.
Table-2. Mud formulation.
Mixing
No. Product SG Content Time
(min.)
The mud formulation comprises of different
chemicals and additives to ensure the desired mud is
obtained. Among the chemicals or additives used are base
oil, fluid loss controller, viscosifier, emulsifier, brine and
lime. The following chemicals and additives were used to
achieve mud weight of 9.5 ppg for both OBM and
Coconut OBM.
The mud is formulated by following the order
number from 1 until number 9 with respect to each of its
mixing time. All of the formulated should be weight using
mud balance to ensure the correct mud weight is obtained.
2.1 Mud Rheology
Mud rheology is represented by PV, YP and
apparent viscosity with each of them having distinct
characteristics. PV is define as resistance of a mud to flow
in as its resistance is affected by viscosity of fluid phase,
size of solid and viscosity of fluid phase [16]. Next, YP is
used to measure the ability of the mud to transport the
cuttings from the annulus to the surface by adhering to the
concept of electrochemical forces between particles [16].
Last but not least, apparent viscosity is the relationship
between PV and YP either an increase nor decrease in one
or both properties would affect the apparent viscosity as
well [17].
Drilling mud can be group into Newtonian Fluid
and Non-Newtonian Fluid [18]. For Newtonian fluid the
viscosity is independent of shear rate while shear rate is a
function for non-Newtonian fluid. Bingham Plastic theory
is used to measure all the rheological properties of mud
which are PV, YP and Apparent viscosity [19]. The
theory indicates the a straight line when a graph of shear
stress against shear rate is plotted [20]. The following
equations are used in Bingham Plastic model:
𝛾
𝜏 = 𝑃𝑉 ( ) + 𝑌𝑃 (1)
300
𝑃𝑉 = 𝑅600 − 𝑅300 (2)
𝑌𝑃 = 𝑅300 − 𝑃𝑉 (3)
𝑅600
𝜇𝑎 = (4)
2

Saraline 185 0.78 151.6 ml 2

1
Coconut Oil 0.90 200 ml 2
2 CONFI-MUL P 0.87 2.0 ml 2
3 CONFI-MULS 0.88 7.0 ml 2
4 CONFI GEL 1.7 10.0 g 5
5 Lime 1.7 9.0 g 2
6 Water 1.0 87.4 ml 2
Calcium
7 1.22 30.8 15
Chloride Figure-1. Bingham plastic model behaviour.
8 CONFI-TROL 1.22 6.0 g 15
Where τ = shear stress (lb/100 ft2), γ = shear rate (sec−1),
9 Barite 4.28 137.2 g 15
PV = plastic viscosity (cP), YP = yield point where τ =

1483
 VOL. 15, NO. 13, JULY 2020 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

shear stress (lb/100 ft2), γ = shear rate (sec–1), PV =
plastic viscosity (cP), YP = yield point (lb/100ft2), and μ
=Apparent viscosity(cP).
In Figure-1, when shear rate is zero the YP can be
determined indicating the minimum shear stress required
to carry the cuttings back to the surface. A lower YP
would represent the effectiveness of the drilling mud’s
performance.
Gel strength is measured by the inter-particle
forces which develops the gel that will formed once
circulation is stationary [21] or can be defined as the shear
stress at which the gel breaks. The importance of sufficient
gel strength is its ability to suspend drill cuttings
weighting materials during circulation. Both gel strength
and YP both measure the attractive forces but with gel
strength measuring the static attractive forces while YP
measures the dynamic attractive forces. Also, the unit of
measurement for gel strength is the same as YP.
The test was conducted using a viscometer with
speed ranging from 600 RPM (rotation per minute) to 3
RPM. The samples were stirred at 600 RPM for 10
minutes for homogeneity and tested at 120 F. The
readings taken will then be used to calculate for the
Apparent Viscosity, YP and Gel Strength.
2.2 Mud Filtrate
Filtration is a relative measure of any liquid that
for a duration of 16 hours testing period at 300 °F and 100
psi.
Once the samples had successfully completed the
experiment, the mud will undergo similar experiments
previously for comparison purposes. Such experiments are
the mud rheology and mud filtrate tests.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 Mud Rheology
The mud rheology was conducted and results for
both mud were tabulated. Based on the graph in Figures 2
and 3, Coconut OBM exhibits a higher shear rate profile
which translate to it having a higher viscosity than OBM.
Larger value of viscosity would cause several drilling
problems such as the rate of penetration, differential
sticking or high equivalent circulating density. Also, both
OBM exhibit a rheological model similar to the Bingham
plastic model. This plastic model will not flow until the
YP is exceeded after which the changes in shear stress are
proportional to change in shear rate. The constant
proportion is identified as PV.
Shear Rate Profile
300
Sher Stress (lb/100)

250
could invade a permeable formation through deposited of 200
mud solids. This liquid is describe as filtrate and the 150
deposited solids are called mud cake. There are two
100
standard filtration tests that measure the volume of filtrate
50
collected after a 30-min period of time using filter paper
[22]. These tests are the low-temperature low-pressure 0
(LPLT) fluid loss test and the high-temperature high- 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
pressure (HTHP) test which are in coherent with API Dial Speed (RPM)
standards.. Results are reported as the millilitres (ml).
OBM Coconut OBM
Filter cake thickness is measured and reported in units of
1/32 inch [23].
LPLT test is performed at normal room Figure-2. Shear rate profile.
temperature with 100 psi. The more advanced test is the
HTHP filtration test that is performed at a temperature
closer to the bottom hole temperature and at a 500 psi Shear Rate Profile (Hot Rolling)
differential pressure. The test was conducted using API
filter press , the parameters set are 100 psi at room 70
temperature for a duration of 30 minutes. The volume of
Sher Stress (lb/100)

60
filtrate produced from the mud is recorded at an interval of 50
5 minutes. 40
30
2.3 High Temperature Fluid Aging (Hot Rolling) 20
The high temperature fluid aging test consist of 10
two main components which are the high temperature hot 0
roller oven and the high temperature aging cell. The main 0 200 400 600
objective of this experiment is to determine the effect of
temperature on drilling mud as it circulate through a Dial Speed (RPM)
wellbore at reservoir pressure and temperature. This
particular set up is under dynamic conditions where the OBM Coconut OBM
drilling fluid will be constantly moving in the aging cells
Figure.-3. Shear rate profile (Hot Rolling).

1484
 VOL. 15, NO. 13, JULY 2020 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Table-3. Plastic viscosity, apparent viscosity and

yield point. Gel Strength (Hot Rolling)
OBM Coconut OBM 25

Shear Stress (lb/100)

Plastic Viscosity 16 102 20
Apparent Viscosity 19 46 15
Yield Point 25.5 125 10

Table-4. Plastic viscosity, apparent viscosity and yield 5

point (Hot Rolling).
Hot Rolling OBM
Plastic Viscosity 4 18
Apparent Viscosity 7 24
Yield Point 7.5
Based on the Tables 3 and 4, YP for Coconut
OBM is significantly higher than OBM. A high YP value
indicate a non-Newtonian fluid which can carries the
cuttings much better however excessive YP values will
lead to high pressure losses as the drilling mud is being
circulated. Higher pump pressure is required to operate
using Coconut OBM due to the massive YP value. For the
Apparent viscosity which is lower for OBM than Coconut
OBM indicates shear thinning which meant a higher
cutting carrying capacity. Also, pumping pressure would
also decrease as an effect of shear thinning which is poorly
demonstrated in Coconut OBM.
The substantial value of PV for Coconut OBM
will cause the flow of cuttings in the annulus hindered by
the viscosity which will impede drilling’s performance. In
conclusion, the parameters for this experiment signify that
Coconut OBM will not execute its drilling mud function
on par or better than OBM.
Gel Strength
30
Shear Stress (lb/100)
0
10 Sec 10 Min
Coconut OBM
Time
OBM Coconut OBM
30
Figure-5. Gel strength (Hot Rolling).
Gel strength for Coconut OBM based on Figures
6 and 7 manifested a poor result than OBM for both 10
seconds and 10 minutes. The gel strength of Coconut
OBM exhibits a progressive gel structure demonstrated by
the value of shear stress at 10 minutes were much higher
than 10 seconds. This result portrays the gelation of
Coconut OBM has fragile property which is desirable
during drilling operation as the gel can easily be broken
with lower pump pressure. On the other hand, OBM
gelation strength is rapidly recovered with time which will
lead to high circulation breakdown pressure with the
additional requirement of higher pump pressure with the
effect of an increase in cost.
3.2 Mud Filtrate
The filtrate volume collected for Coconut OBM
is 3.8ml higher than 1.7ml of OBM based on Tables 4 and
5. This could be due to the water may not have completely
emulsified in the Coconut OBM resulting in a higher
filtrate volume. The filtrate produce from Coconut OBM
could potentially lead to a differential stuck pipe and
requires workover to rectify the issue.

25
20
Table-5. Mud filtrate properties.

15 OBM Coconut OBM

10 Water Volume (ml) 1.7 3.8
5 Cake Thickness ( mm) 0.29 0.56
0
10 Sec 10 Min Table-6. Mud filtrate properties (Hot Rolling).
Time Hot Rolling OBM Coconut OBM
Water Volume (ml) 0.6 2.2
OBM Coconut OBM
Cake Thickness ( mm) 0.12 0.32
Figure-4. Gel strength.

1485
 VOL. 15, NO. 13, JULY 2020 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

value for OBM is 25.5 while Coconut OBM is 125 which

Filtrate Loss VS Time is excessively high with higher probability of stuck pipes.
4 As for the cake thickness, OBM with 0.29 mm whilst
Filtrate Volume (ml)

Coconut OBM is 0.56 mm. The thicker mud cake would

3 cause several drilling operation problems.
2
The results prove that although using coconut is
an environmentally friendly approach, the performance
1 does not justify to use it in the field. OBM still reigns as
the main choice for drilling mud followed by WBM.
0 Coconut OBM has severe viscosity issue which renders it
0 10 20 30 unsuitable for average reservoir conditions in Malaysia
Time (min) fields. However, the high viscosity issue could be turn
around into beneficial for extreme reservoir conditions but
OBM Coconut OBM further studies must be conducted to prove such claims.
The solution for the viscosity issue would be to
Figure-6. Filtrate loss VS time. apply trans-esterification which converts the vegetable oil
into methyl ester, the can be applied as base fluid for mud
In general, high filtrate volumes are associated formulation [24]. By responding vegetable oil with
with thick filter cake because the cake is formed by alcohol, this method decreases viscosity and aided by a
deposition of clay particles on the walls of the hole during catalyst namely hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide
filtrate loss to the formation. So the higher the filter [25]. Further investigation that could be conducted would
volume, the thicker the filter cake which translate to less be varying the concentration of coconut oil use in the mud
efficient the drilling mud. formulation along with different types of additives. The
Coconut OBM which has thicker mud cake than effect of varying concentration could potentially increase
OBM will reduce the effective diameter of drilled its capability in average reservoir conditions.
wellbore subsequently increasing the surface area of
contact between drill pipe and mud cake eventually REFERENCES
leading to risk of stuck pipe. On the other hand, OBM
which has thinner mud cake and excellent filtration [1] R. Caenn and G. V. Chillingar. 1996. Drilling fluids:
properties will be effective in drilling operation.
State of the art. Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering. 14(3-4): 221-230.
Filtrate Loss VS Time (Hot [2] J. B. Weirich et al. 2001. Drilling systems with
Rolling) sensors for determining properties of drilling fluid
3 downhole. ed: Google Patents.
Filtrate Volume (ml)

2 [3] V. Mahto and V. Sharma. 2004. Rheological study of

1 a water based oil well drilling fluid. Journal of
Petroleum Science and Engineering. 45(1-2): 123-
0 128.
0 10 20 30
Time (min) [4] A. Sivapragasam. 2008. Coconut in Malaysia- current
development and potential for re-vitalization," Rice
and Industrial Crops Center. pp. 1-9.
OBM Coconut OBM
[5] R. Caenn, H. C. Darley and G. R. Gray. 2011.
Figure-7. Filtrate loss VS time (Hot Rolling).
Composition and properties of drilling and completion
4. CONCLUSIONS fluids. Gulf professional publishing.
Coconut Oil Based Mud is not a suitable
replacement for conventional OBM. That being said [6] M. Khodja, M. Khodja-Saber, J. P. Canselier, N.
Coconut OBM does perform better in some areas than Cohaut and F. Bergaya. 2010. Drilling fluid
OBM mainly the gel strength is better than OBM. This technology: performances and environmental
allows for a lower pump pressure operation which considerations. in Products and services; from R&D
ultimately reduces the drilling operation cost. However, to final solutions: IntechOpen.
Coconut OBM’s mud rheology and mud filtrate properties
cause this option unsuitable to replace OBM. The YP

1486
 VOL. 15, NO. 13, JULY 2020
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2020 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.
www.arpnjournals.com
[7] J. Lodungi, D. Alfred, A. Khirulthzam, F. Adnan and
S. Tellichandran. 2016. A Review in Oil Exploration
and Production Waste Discharges According to
Legislative and Waste Management Practices
Perspective in Malaysia. Int J Waste Resour. 7(260):
2.
[8] A. Aboulrous, A. Alsabagh and M. Abdou. 2013.
Polymers for circulation loss inhibition of oil well
drilling fluids. LAP LAMBERT Academic
Publishing.
[9] A. Saasen, M. Berntsen, G. Løklingholm, H. Igeltjørn
and K. Åsnes. 2000. The Effect of Drilling Fluid Base
Oil Properties on the Occupational Hygiene and the
Marine Environment. in SPE International Conference
on Health, Safety and Environment in Oil and Gas
Exploration and Production: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
[10] A. A. Sulaimon, B. J. Adeyemi and M. Rahimi. 2017.
Performance enhancement of selected vegetable oil as
base fluid for drilling HPHT formation. Journal of
Petroleum Science and Engineering. 152: 49-59.
[11] N. Fox and G. Stachowiak. 2007. Vegetable oil-based
lubricants-a review of oxidation. Tribology
international. 40(7): 1035-1046, 2007.
[12] O. E. Agwu, A. N. Okon and F. D. Udoh. 2015. A
comparative study of diesel oil and soybean oil as oil-
based drilling mud. Journal of Petroleum Engineering.
Vol. 2015.
[13] M. Amanullah. 2005. Physio-chemical
characterisation of vegetable oils and preliminary test
results of vegetable oil-based muds. in SPE/IADC
Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and
Exhibition: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
[14] A. Dosunmu. 2010. Development of environmentally
friendly oil based mud using Palm-oil and groundnut-
oil. in Nigeria Annual International Conference and
Exhibition: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
[15] C. C. Akoh. 1994. Oxidative stability of fat substitutes
and vegetable oils by the oxidative stability index
method. Journal of the American Oil Chemists'
Society. 71(2): 211-216, 1994.
[16] S. Lahalih and I. Dairanieh. 1989. Development of
novel polymeric drilling mud dispersants. European
polymer journal. 25(2): 187-192.
ISSN 1819-6608
[17] M. M. Razi, M. Mazidi, F. M. Razi, H. Aligolzadeh
and S. Niazi. 2013. Artificial neural network
modeling of plastic viscosity, yield point, and
apparent viscosity for water-based drilling fluids.
Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology. 34(6):
822-827.
[18] M. T. Balhoff, L. W. Lake, P. M. Bommer, R. E.
Lewis, M. J. Weber and J. M. Calderin. 2011.
Rheological and yield stress measurements of non-
Newtonian fluids using a Marsh Funnel. Journal of
petroleum Science and Engineering. 77(3-4): 393-
402.
[19] J. Pearson. 1968. Non-Newtonian Flow and Heat
Transfer. By AHP S KELLAND. Wiley 1967. 469
pp.£ 7. Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 32(1): 208-208.
[20] J. J. Azar and G. R. Samuel. 2007. Drilling
engineering. PennWell books.
[21] A. Lavrov. 2016. Lost circulation: mechanisms and
solutions. Gulf Professional Publishing.
[22] O. Omole, J. O. Adeleye, O. Falode, S. Malomo and
O. Oyedeji. 2013. Investigation into the rheological
and filtration properties of drilling mud formulated
with clays from Northern Nigeria. Journal of
Petroleum and Gas Engineering. 4(1): 1-7.
[23] M. Williams and G. Cannon. 1938. Evaluation of
Filtration Properties of Drilling Mud. in Drilling and
Production Practice 1938: American Petroleum
Institute.
[24] O. E. Agwu, I. A. Isemin and M. G. Akpabio. 2015.
Cost Benefit Analysis of Vegetable Oils Used As
Alternatives to Diesel in the Formulation of Oil-Based
Drilling Muds. in SPE Nigeria Annual International
Conference and Exhibition: Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
[25] U. Schuchardt, R. Sercheli and R. M. Vargas. 1998.
Transesterification of vegetable oils: a review. Journal
of the Brazilian Chemical Society. 9(3): 199-210.
1487