FSHORE
OF
OTC 11977
Next-Generation Cementing Systems to Control Shallow Water Flow
Ronnie Faul, SPE, B.R. Reddy, SPE, James Griffith, SPE, Rocky Fitzgerald, and Bryan Waugh, Halliburton Energy
Services, Inc.
Copyright 2000, Offshore Technology Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in
Houston, Texas, 1-4 May 2000.
This paper was selected for presentation by the OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject
to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference or its officers. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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 where and by whom the paper was
presented.
Abstract
As documented in industry literature, shallow hazards, espe-
cially shallow water flows (SWF’s), pose a challenge in deepwater
Gulf of Mexico operations.1,2 Cement systems that successfully
solved SWF’s were first used in 1992. The first of these special
systems was a lightweight nonfoamed system. In 1994, special
foamed lightweight systems were implemented and were proven
superior both in large-scale laboratory models and in field use.
Several special foamed-cement blends have been used to
cement over 300 conductor casings where SWF’s were a threat.
These formulations consisted of highly activated cements that
required special blending at the shore base before being trans-
ported to the offshore rig. Because dry additives were used, the
cement slurry could not be redesigned or modified, so any
unused blend had to be discarded. To address these challenges,
the industry developed a lightweight foamed-cement (LFC)
slurry system. This system uses only liquid additives in conjunc-
tion with the dry Portland cement on board the rig. The LFC
system provides a low-density slurry with short transition times
to help prevent SWF’s while maintaining zonal isolation, ad-
equate placement time, and shorter waiting-on-cement (WOC)
time.
Introduction
Well construction in deep water (>1,000 ft) requires special
techniques for installing conductor casings. Formations where
conductor pipe will be cemented are unconsolidated and rela-
tively young geologically (Fig. 1, Page 5). Consequently, these
shallow formations have the potential for abnormally pressured
saltwater sands, also known as SWF zones. Weak formations
and pressured sands present very narrow margins between the
References at the end of the paper.
E N CE
TE C H N O
ER
LO F
G Y C ON
pore pressure and the fracture gradient, which can cause a loss of
cement returns.
The presence of SWF’s in the Gulf of Mexico was first
observed in 1985.1 The economic impact of lost wells, rig time,
and remedial actions has amounted to millions of dollars. An
economic analysis of SWF’s, presented by an operator at the
1999 International Forum, revealed that the industry has spent
approximately $1.6 million per well on this problem. This
analysis also revealed that about one-third of the money has been
spent on prevention and two-thirds on remediation. Some ex-
perts believe that more money spent on preventative measures
would result in fewer remedial events. Research money has also
been spent developing new technology that may provide better,
more economical solutions. Specifically, the industry has been
investigating better methods to identify the hazard and avoid or
minimize the risk. Other investigations have been made regard-
ing the use of better drilling techniques, pressure-while-drilling
(PWD), remote-operated vehicle (ROV) monitoring, and foam
cementing. While SWF’s are most prevalent in the Gulf of
Mexico, they have also been seen in other areas where deepwater
drilling is increasing.
Staying within tight drilling margins (as low as 0.2 to 0.5
lbm/gal) has proven difficult, because of challenges such as
managing weighted mud, controlling equivalent circulating den-
sities (ECD’s), and drilling shallow overpressured formations
with a riser. If pore pressures are not controlled, the zone may
flow large volumes of salt water, which can carry pieces of the
unconsolidated formation. This flow can lead to sand washouts,
ineffective cementing, sand compaction, damaged casing, and
hole re-entry problems.
Excessive ECD’s can fracture the formations, and excessive
pressures can communicate through the fractures to shallower
zones, adjacent wells, or to the seafloor. This problem can cause
large craters, mounds, or cracks to form, resulting in loss of the
well and well site.
Using a variety of fluids, operators have successfully drilled
through SWF sands without a riser. The drilling philosophy has
evolved since the first wells were drilled with only seawater. The
sand was allowed to flow freely during drilling, and a kill fluid
was placed before the drill bit was removed from the hole. The
current philosophy regarding riserless drilling is to drill to the
SWF sand with seawater until the sand begins to flow. Then flow
2 NEXT-GENERATION CEMENTING SYSTEMS TO CONTROL SHALLOW WATER FLOW
evaluations are made, risks are assessed, and decisions are made
as to how to proceed. If the flow is considered minor, drilling can
continue with seawater. However, if the flow is considered
moderate to severe, usually a change is made to weighted drilling
fluids. When the well is not allowed to flow, washouts are
minimized. These washouts have been known to cause structural
problems, especially when drilling must be performed in closely
spaced areas.1
Zonal Isolation
Zonal isolation and the cementing process continue to be impor-
tant elements in dealing with SWF’s. Deepwater environments
are challenging for cement companies because the sea floor
temperatures are low (approximately 40°F), and the weak forma-
tions require lightweight cement slurries (Fig. 2, Page 5). A
special cement blend was first used with success in 1992. This
blend of Portland cement, ultra-fine cement, and microspheres3
exhibited special performance properties at the downhole condi-
tions found in deepwater. It was lightweight, exhibited short
transition time, and rapidly developed compressive strength at
bottomhole temperatures (BHT’s).
In 1994, a special foamed-cement blend with ultra-fine
cement4 was implemented as a solution to SWF’s in the Gulf of
Mexico. The first well later became the model for 19 additional
wells in a batch operation where foamed cement was used on a
total of 39 primary jobs.5 In 1997, large-scale model studies were
presented that compared water-extended slurries, special
nonfoamed slurries, and special foamed slurries. The results
clearly indicated that the foamed slurries were superior to the
nonfoamed slurries.6 These special foamed cements quickly
became the cement of choice for SWF’s.
Also in 1997, a paper presented the use of proper mud
management techniques in conjunction with foamed cement to
solve SWF’s.6 More recently, the use of foamed cement for
controlling SWF’s was reported on another large batch set
operation.1 Operators began to use another special foamed
cement that incorporated a blend of Portland cement and calcium
sulfate cement.7 Several hundred jobs have been performed in
the Gulf of Mexico since foamed-cement systems were first used
to control SWF’s.
The foamed cement system offered operators many advan-
tages over nonfoamed systems. It allowed for more flexible
design so that operators could make last-minute density changes
based on the well conditions. Operators could even vary slurry
density during the job by changing the amount of nitrogen
injected into the base slurry. The foamed slurry exhibited many
of the same performance characteristics as the nonfoamed slurry,
such as short transition times and rapid compressive-strength
development. The most significant characteristic was that an
energized fluid was placed, minimizing the effects of volume and
pressure losses in the wellbore that can allow the influx of fluid
during the slurry transition phase.2,8 The advantages of the
foamed system far outweighed the logistical problems associ-
OTC 11977
ated with the additional equipment and personnel required to
perform these jobs. Many of the equipment problems were
minimized with the use of a fully automated cementing system,
which was built to improve performance and reliability.9
New Generation System
The special blends, while successful, tended to be expensive.
They also required blending at the onshore facility before they
were transported to the offshore rig. A high-performance, foamed-
cement system was needed that could be used with the cement
normally on the rig. To address this challenge, the industry has
developed an LFC system that uses only liquid additives in
conjunction with dry Portland cement and the appropriate foam-
ing surfactant packages. This system can provide a low-density
slurry with short transition times, helping prevent SWF’s while
maintaining zonal isolation, adequate placement time, and shorter
WOC time.
Generally acknowledged requirements for SWF-preventa-
tive cement compositions include thickening times of 3 to 5
hours at 65°F (18° C), and 24-hour compressive strengths of 400
to 500 psi at 45° to 55°F (7° to 13°C). If dry additives are used
to help achieve these slurry requirements, the additives are
blended with Portland cement onshore and then transported to
the rig at least 1 week before the planned job. This scenario does
not provide much flexibility for designing or modifying the
cement slurry after the supplies have been delivered, so any
unused blend must be discarded. Additionally, rig space is
usually unavailable for storing several different dry blends.
The LFC system uses liquid additives instead of dry-addi-
tive components. This system simplifies the cementing process
by enabling operators to limit bulk-cement inventory to a single
dry cement, and to modify the cement blend for a specific job by
adjusting the slurry formulation onsite.
Development and Testing of the LFC System
The LFC system was developed to help improve the success rate
for cementing conductor casings in deepwater conditions. It has
the following benefits:
• It allows operators to adjust slurry properties to help prevent
water or gas influx.
• It improves mud-management techniques to help maximize
displacement efficiency.
• It helps ensure that mud and cement densities are compatible
with formation pressures and fracture gradients.
The LFC system can be formulated with any Class A, H, or
G Portland cement. Table 1 (Page 4) provides clinker-analysis
data for the cements tested in this study. Table 2 (Page 4)
provides compressive-strength and thickening-time test results.
The Class A-1 and A-2 cements were obtained from different
suppliers, and all slurries were foamed to a 12-lbm/gal density.
One requirement for minimizing SWF’s is to design a slurry
with a short transition time.6 Transition time refers to the amount
OTC 11977 R. FAUL, B.R. REDDY, J. GRIFFITH, R. FITZGERALD, B. WAUGH 3

of time needed for a slurry to thicken from liquid to cement and LFC system can provide the same preventative characteristics
prevent the migration of fluid through the cement column. Table for water and gas influx as blended ultra-fine or calcium sulfate
2 compares transition-time development by measuring the static slurries.
gel-strength and development time for slurry consistency from
70 to 100 Bc. Results indicate a comparable or shorter transition References
time for the LFC systems than for the dry-blended component 1. Eaton, L.F.: “Drilling Through Deepwater Shallow Water Flow
systems. The dry component systems presented are a Portland Zone at URSA,” paper SPE 52780 presented at the 1999 SPE/
cement and calcium sulfate system,7 and a Portland and ultra- IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, Holland, Mar. 9-11.
fine Portland cement system.3 2. Sutton, D.L., Sabins, F.L., Faul, R.R.: “New Evaluation for
Please note that the authors do not endorse the use of Annular Gas-Flow Potential,” Oil and Gas J. (Dec. 17, 1984) 82,
determining transition time by measuring the time between 70 No. 51, 109-112.
3. Griffith, J.: “Method for Cementing in a Formation Subject to
and 100 Bc. This measurement occurs while the slurry is still in
Water Influx,” U.S. Patent No. 5,484,019 (1996).
a dynamic mode in conjunction with an API thickening-time 4. Griffith, J., et al.: “Well Cementing Methods and Compositions
test. Gas and fluid migration occur after the slurry is placed in for Use in Cold Environments,” U.S. Patent No. 5,571,318
a well, and the slurry is in a static condition. While static, the (1996).
crystal development of cement occurs differently than if the 5. Young, W.S., May, B.C., and Varnado, B.R.: “Genesis Develop-
cement slurry is dynamically sheared.8 The authors recommend ment Project Overview,” paper OTC 10796, 31st Annual Offshore
determining transition time by measuring the slurry’s gel-strength Technology Conference, May 1999.
development after simulating the slurry’s placement time and 6. Griffith, J., Faul, R.: “Cementing the Conductor Casing Annulus
placement conditions. The slurry’s gel strength is measured at in an Overpressured Water Formation,” paper OTC 8304, 29th
Annual Offshore Technology Conference, May 1997.
downhole pressure and temperature. With this test, the transition
7. Stiles, D.A., de Rozieres, J.M.G.: “Compositions and Methods for
time is the period in which the slurry develops gel-strength from Cementing a Well,” U.S. Patent No. 5,806,594 (1998).
100 to 500 lbf/100 ft2. Studies have shown that the migration of 8. Sutton, D.L., Sabins, F.L., Faul, R.R.: “Annual Gas Flow Theory
gas and water through a setting cement column is prevented and Prevention Methods Described,” Oil and Gas J. (Dec. 10,
above 500 lbf/100 ft2 of gel-strength.6,8 The data in Table 2 that 1984) 82, No. 50, 84-92.
lists the times between 70 and 100 Bc is presented to better 9. Padgett, P., Brown, P.: “Integrated Controls Ease Precision Ce-
compare state-of-the-art slurries to this next-generation LFC menting,” Drilling Contractor (September/October 1999) 50-51.
system.
Large-scale testing was performed for Class H cement
(Table 2). The slurry foamed to 12.5 lbm/gal without difficulty
and developed the consistency of shaving cream. Samples of
unfoamed and foamed slurries were submitted for thickening-
time, compressive-strength, and transition-time testing within 1
hour of being collected. The thickening time at 65°F was 4 hours
and 10 minutes. Compressive strength was 360 psi at 45°F and
600 psi at 55°F. Zero-gel time (static gel strength < 100 lbm/
100ft2) was 16 minutes, and transition time (100 to 500 lbm/100
ft2) was 20 minutes.
Heat-of-hydration studies on LFC slurries were performed
under adiabatic conditions. Selected formulations from these
developmental studies were compared with the currently prac-
ticed technology. Test results (Fig. 3, Page 6) show that exother-
mic hydration reactions occur more slowly in the LFC formula-
tions than the currently used formulation. Even though the heat
generated is less in the LFC slurries than in the currently used
blends, the heat did not decrease as rapidly with time.

Summary
The LFC system can simplify offshore oilwell cementing by
allowing operators to use a single dry cement for all casing types
and well temperatures. Because the LFC consists of liquid
additives rather than dry-additive components, it can reduce
waste and allow the slurry to be modified for a specific job. The
4 NEXT-GENERATION CEMENTING SYSTEMS TO CONTROL SHALLOW WATER FLOW OTC 11977

a
Table 1—Clinker Analysis of Cements Used in the Study
Class H Class A-1 Class A-2 Class G
Phase
Cement Cement Cement Cement
Tricalcium silicate (C3S) 57.09 58.79 56.28 58.01
Dicalcium silicate (C2S) 22.46 19.84 20.46 23.13
Tetracalcium aluminoferrite (C4AF) 13.36 14.18 7.69 14.65
Tricalcium alimunate (C3A) (cubic) 0.32 0.43 7.29 0.45
C3A (ortho) 0.09 0.60 1.61 0.09
Total C3A 0.41 1.03 8.90 0.54
Total C2S + C3Sb 79.55 — 76.74 81.14
Total C4AF + C3A 15.52 — 16.94 15.38
Gypsum 1.71 1.62 3.51 1.69
Bassanite 0.76 0.64 0.72 0.76
Anhydrite 2.16 1.76 0.00 1.99
Syngenite 0.29 0.36 2.09 0.61
Quartz 0.03 0.06 0.17 0.05
Periclase 1.72 1.63 0.19 1.67
Dolomite 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
c
Free lime 0.19 0.08 0.80 0.14
d
Sulfates 4.93 — 6.32 5.10
Average particle-size distribution (µ) 16.60 15.57 26.20 14.20
a
All numbers represent weight (%).
b
Total C2S + C3S content was determined on the basis of maleic acid extraction.
c
Free lime was analyzed on the basis of extraction followed by titration.
d
Sulfate weight (%) was analyzed on the basis of ammonium chloride extraction.

a
Table 2—Slurry Formulations Using Single Liquid Additive Mixture (SLAM) and API Cements
Transition
Thickening Compr. Str. Compr. Str.
Cement, Mix Water SLAM CaCl2 (aq) ∆100 to 70 Time by
Time at at 45°F in at 55°F in
API Class % bwoc % bwoc % bwoc Bc (min) Measuring
65°F (min) 24 hr (psi) 24 hr (psi)
Gel-Strength
Comparison 1
- - - - 14 - -
(US 5,806,594)
Comparison 2
- - - 4:05 - 19 270 465
(US 5,484,019)
Class A (2) 34 10 - 4:25 9 - 420 800
Class A (2) 35 8 - 4:10 3 - 400 720
Class A (2) 37 6 - 3:30 8 - 390 630
Class A (1) 38 4 - 5:00 15 32 430 540
Class G 38.5 2 2 4:10 10 - 290 380
Class G 37 3 3 3:40 18 - 300 520
Class H 34 3 3 4:55 20 22 454 520
a
Base slurry density=16.4 lbm/gal; Foamed slurry density=12.0 lbm/gal
OTC 11977 R. FAUL, B.R. REDDY, J. GRIFFITH, R. FITZGERALD, B. WAUGH 5

Continental
shelf

Sloughing and
mud slides

Mudline (ML)

Geologically

om001937
young formations

Fig. 1—Unconsolidated formations off the continental shelf.

om001936

Fig. 2—Water migration through the annulus.

6 NEXT-GENERATION CEMENTING SYSTEMS TO CONTROL SHALLOW WATER FLOW OTC 11977

230
Foamed Slurry
210
Current technology
190 (U.S. Patent 5,571,318)
Slurry No. 3
Temperature (°F)

170
Slurry No. 5
150

130

110

90

70

om001935
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (hr)
Fig. 3—Results from evolution and heat of hydration experiments.