Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Fluid experiments on the dump bailing method in the plug and

abandonment of oil and gas wells
S. Akbari, S.M. Taghavi *
Department of Chemical Engineering, Université Laval, Québec, QC, G1V 0A6, Canada

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Plug and abandonment (P&A) operations prevent oil and gas leakages from hydrocarbon zones to different
Plug and abandonment (P&A) formations, freshwater underground resources, and the surface. Cement plugs that are used in P&A operations
Dump bailing method play a crucial role in impeding reservoir fluid migrations. The dump bailing method is one of the common
Cement plug placement
methods of the cement plug placement in which a determined volume of cement is dumped by a bailer on a
Fluid flow analysis
Fluid experiments
bridge plug in the wellbore, to replace the in-situ fluid while filling the wellbore and the annular region outside
the bailer. In this paper, we experimentally investigate the placement of a heavy fluid to remove and replace an
in-situ light fluid in an inclined closed-end pipe, representing the dump bailing method from a fluid mechanics
perspective. The two fluids are Newtonian and miscible, and they have a density difference. We examine the
effects of the injection fluid properties and flow parameters, on the fluid placement efficiency, the degree of
mixing and quality of the placement. We use high-speed imaging and non-intrusive measurement techniques to
provide ample placement flow characterizations. Our results show that the most efficient heavy fluid placement
ensues from smaller dumping heights. Also, increasing the density and viscosity differences strengthens the ef­
ficiency of the in-situ fluid removal. In addition, the influence of a higher rate of injection is more discernible in
smaller dumping heights, where it results in the removal of the light fluid promptly from the flow domain, with
minimum mixing and placement time. The results are in general helpful for improving the quality of the cement
plug placement in P&A operations.

1. Introduction
The leakage from oil and gas wells during their life cycles poses
major environmental challenges that influence the quality of air, water,
soil, and ultimately the life on earth. The leakage may cause the
contamination of groundwater as well as gas (methane) emission into
the atmosphere, increasing global warming (Tveit et al., 2020). In the
case of offshore wells, the leakage affects marine ecosystems (Rice et al.,
2018; Schout et al., 2019). In this context, we are entering an era where
the plug and abandonment (P&A) of oil and gas wells are conducted to
avoid underground fluids leakage to the surrounding environment. P&A
operations are typically performed via a cementing process. This process
aims to place a cement slurry, which subsequently dehydrates and so­
lidifies, as a barrier to seal the wellbore.
In Canada, the number of wells considered for P&A at any given time
has been growing over the past two decades; this shows that there is a
significant wave of abandonments coming to Canada in the next decade
(Trudel et al., 2019). In the U.S., thousands of drilled wells before the
1950s were not properly plugged (Achang et al., 2020); for instance, the
gas emission prediction for 2019 only in Pennsylvania yielded an
average methane emission of 55600 tonnes (Ingraffea et al., 2020). The
US Environmental Protection Agency estimates that six million tons of
methane gas leaks from natural gas systems to the environment annually
(Riddick et al., 2020). On the other hand, the operational costs of P&A
operations are high, while there is no return on the investment for the
operating companies (Vrålstad et al., 2019). In addition, improper P&A
of wellbores causes potential pathways for leakage that needs costly
re-plugging processes. Therefore, several efforts have been made to
improve the quality and durability of the cement plug for sealing the
well (Abdelal et al., 2015; Alvi et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Kamali et al.,
2020; da Silva Araujo et al., 2020; van Oort et al., 2020). For example, to
investigate the sealing ability of the cement in the annulus, Aas et al.
(2016) have conducted a series of full scale tests. They have found that
the cement can be placed properly in the annulus when the tubing is left
in the hole, although some relatively small and non-uniform micro-­
annuli can be detected. Also, some studies have been done on the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Seyed-Mohammad.Taghavi@gch.ulaval.ca (S.M. Taghavi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2021.108920
Received 3 January 2021; Received in revised form 9 March 2021; Accepted 3 May 2021
Available online 11 May 2021
0920-4105/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
placement of the cement slurry and mixing between the cement slurry
and the in-place fluid in the well (Ghazal and Karimfazli, 2020; Aranha
et al., 2011; Katende et al., 2020; Akbari and Taghavi, 2020b, a; Bizhani
et al., 2020; Etrati et al., 2020; Durmaz et al., 2016). In addition, there
are valuable review studies on this topic (Achang et al., 2020; Maagi
et al., 2020; Liu and Ott, 2020; Vrålstad et al., 2019).
The cement plug placement in P&A operations is carried out using
several techniques, such as the dump bailing method, the squeeze
cementing method and the balanced plug method (Nelson, 1990; Kha­
lifeh and Saasen, 2020). The focus of this study is on the dump bailing
method, in which a bailer containing cement slurry is lowered down in a
well, and the slurry is then released on a mechanical bridge plug, as
depicted in Fig. 1. During this process, the in-situ drilling fluid in the
well is replaced by the cement slurry, ideally with minimum mixing. In
this method, the injected cement slurry has physical properties different
from those of the in-situ fluid; mainly, the cement has a higher density
and a higher viscosity. The dump bailing method fails when the cement
slurry is significantly contaminated by and mixed with the in-situ fluid.
Using this method, the plug depth is controlled easily, and the opera­
tional time is remarkably less compared to that in other methods. The
dump bailing operation is inexpensive and the drilling rig is not neces­
sary (Khalifeh and Saasen, 2020).
There are not many studies available in the open literature on
analyzing the fluid placement in the dump bailing method. White et al.
(1992) have constructed an experimental setup to study the cement
slurry placement using several dump bailers. They have observed that
this method is a highly dispersive process and a remarkable dispersion
happens when a small annular gap exists between the casing and the
bailer. Also, they have found that only a portion of the cement slurry
contributes to the formation of a qualified plug; even this portion is
diluted from its original density, and the dilution leads to a greater fill up
height to be attained than calculated. They have concluded that, to
reduce dilution and contamination, the cement should be dumped as
close to the bridge plug as possible.
From a fluid mechanics perspective, the dump bailing method deals
with the replacement of one fluid by another one, in a confined flow
geometry. In particular, the flow can be viewed as the displacement
between two miscible fluids, for which there would be an interest to
quantify the efficiency of the removal process while analyzing the level
of mixing between the fluids. In this context, the flow is governed by
several parameters, such as the physical properties of the fluids (den­
sities and viscosities), the flow geometry (pipe or annulus), and the
operational conditions (fluid injection rate and geometry inclination)
(Taghavi, 2011). The displacement of heavy and light fluids have been
investigated extensively, both experimentally and numerically, in
Fig. 1. Schematic view of the dump bailing method. The cement slurry is
injected through the bailer into the wellbore near bridge plug to replace the in-
situ fluid (illustrated by the blue color). The shape of the fluids’ interface is
illustrative only. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
2
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
confined pipes that are vertical (Amiri et al., 2016; Debacq et al., 2001,
2003), tilted (Séon et al., 2005; Varges et al., 2018; Martin et al., 2019),
and near-horizontal. (Séon et al., 2007; Taghavi et al., 2009, 2010, 2011,
2012a, 2012b; Hogg et al., 2016; Eslami et al., 2019; Sher and Woods,
2017; Yuan and Horner-Devine, 2013, 2017; Longo et al., 2016). In most
of these works, the fluid placement efficiency or the removal efficiency
of the in-place fluid has been determined via investigating the pene­
tration velocity (named front velocity) of the placement fluid; these
works have shown that, by increasing the density difference between the
fluids in a downward displacement, the front velocity increases.
In general, the fluid placement process can be affected by the
boundary of the flow, especially the injection inlet. For example, the
displacing fluid can be injected through an inlet boundary with a depth
equal to that of the in-place fluid (full inlet) (Etrati, 2018; Taghavi et al.,
2011, 2012b) or less than that of in-place fluid (partial inlet) (Akbari and
Taghavi, 2020b; Sher and Woods, 2017). An increase in the heavy fluid’s
injection flow rate leads to strengthening the mixing between the fluids,
near the injection point of the partial inlet boundary (Akbari and
Taghavi, 2020b; Sher and Woods, 2017), while in the full inlet boundary
the buoyant flow can become stabilized with increasing the injection
rate (Taghavi et al., 2010). Also, as the buoyancy force increases, the
current downstream of the injection point becomes more mixed. Some
relevant buoyant flow studies (Xue et al, 2017, 2019; Akbari and
Taghavi, 2020b) have also revealed that initially a jet flow is created in
the placement flow, which is known as a buoyant jet (Barnett, 1992).
The hydrodynamics of this jet on the cleaning of the surrounding envi­
ronment is a known fluid mechanics problem (Fernandes and Wilson,
2020). After the creation of the jet, mixing occurs immediately down­
stream of the inlet and also near the head of the heavy fluid (Sher and
Woods, 2017).
In the early stages of the flow in the dump bailing method, the heavy
fluid moves along the casing at the bottom of the bailer, eventually
reaches a solid wall (bridge plug), and turns back toward the bailer (i.e.
the inlet). When the heavy fluid front reaches the bailer area, it enters an
annular region that surrounds the bailer. On the other hand, a portion of
the injected heavy fluid simultaneously flows in the annular region and
partially goes toward the bridge plug. Thus, the overall placement flow
occurs in a flow geometry that is a combination of the annular and
circular sections. To ensure a high quality plug placement, the in-situ
fluid must be removed completely from the entire region (i.e. from the
casing circular section under the bailer and from the annular gap be­
tween the bailer and the casing). Relevant to this, annular (concentric
and eccentric) displacement flows have also been studied extensively
both experimentally and numerically (Ytrehus et al., 2017; Skadsem
et al., 2019; Frigaard and Ngwa, 2010; Bizhani et al., 2020; Etrati et al.,
2020), mainly for analyzing primary cementing operations. The first
detailed work has been perhaps conducted by Tehrani et al. (1992)
(experimental and theoretical) in an inclined narrow annulus with a
length of 3 (m) and an aspect ratio of 0.035. They have evaluated several
flow rates and eccentricities. They have also used non-Newtonian fluids
and observed reasonable qualitative agreement between experimental
and modeling results. Malekmohammadi et al. (2010a) have investi­
gated experimentally the laminar displacement flow of two miscible
fluids in a vertical narrow eccentric annulus. They have shown that
increasing the flow rate leads to promoting the amount of azimuthal
dispersion, and the azimuthal secondary flow leads to pushing the dis­
placing fluid towards the wide side of the eccentric annulus. They have
concluded that small eccentricities, large viscosity and density ratios,
and low flow rates are favorable to create a steady displacement. Finally,
note that, to analyze the flow along a narrow eccentric annulus, the
averaging of the parameters across the narrow annular gap can be
typically used to derive a Hele-Shaw type (2D) model, frequently used
for various displacement scenarios (Eslami and Taghavi, 2017, 2019;
Walling et al., 2018; Pelipenko and Frigaard, 2004; Moyers-Gonzalez
and Frigaard, 2008; Mehr et al., 2020; Daneshi et al., 2020; Foroushan
et al., 2020).
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Let us briefly mention the release mechanisms of two types of com­

mon dump bailers (White et al., 1992) in P&A operations. The first type,
i.e. the gravity bailer, has a glass disk at its end. During the process, as
soon as the disk touches the bridge plug, it is broken and the cement
slurry is released due to gravity. Simultaneously, the wellbore fluid fills
the bailer. Thus, the bailer moves up due to buoyancy, and therefore, the
dumping height varies during the release process. The second type, i.e.
the positive displacement bailer, is run into the wellbore by means of a
wireline, and when the bailer reaches near the bridge plug, the cement is
released from injection ports by means of internal springs that are
controlled remotely. At the same time, the wellbore fluid fills the bailer
from the top, while the bailer remains stationary. Hence, in this method,
the dumping height is fixed and can be controlled from the surface. Our
current work is more focused on the positive displacement bailer, in
which the bailer is stationary and the dumping height is a fixed non-zero
value. Considering the flow geometry, this case represents a flow
domain with one closed-end (i.e. the bridge plug), one injection inlet
placed at a fixed dumping height with respect to the bridge plug, and
one outlet boundary above the injection inlet.
In this work, we study the dump bailing process from a fluid me­
chanics point of view, using experimental techniques. Based on the
aforementioned works briefly reviewed, our study is novel, at least in
terms of two aspects. First, from a fundamental perspective, the flow
geometry considered in this study is a combination of circular and
annular domains where the inlet and outlet boundaries are positioned Fig. 2. Schematic view of the experimental setup. The domain of study is
within the flow domain and in one side of the flow domain, respectively. marked by red dotted lines. Q ̂ represents the injected flow rate of the heavy
This means that one side of the flow domain is closed and the other side
fluid, and V
̂ 0 is injected velocity of the fluid. The shape of the fluids’ interface is
is open; this flow configuration has been rarely considered before. illustrative. The gate valve is located at the end of the inner pipe, marked by the
Second, the constructed experimental setup for this study is capable of yellow symbol. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
having different lengths of the circular section, i.e. different aspect ratios legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
of the flow domain, implying that the dumping height of the cement is a
variable parameter. Also, the annular section has a large gap, i.e. rele­
vant to the dump bailing method; this gap is much larger than the Table 1
supposed gaps in most of the previous annular flow studies, which Typical dimensions of the dump bailer and the corresponding well casing.
typically concern the primary cementing applications where the annular Inner diameter (cm) Outer diameter (cm) Length (m)
gaps are relatively smaller. Taking into account these novelties, the Dump bailer 6 − 12 7 − 13 3− 6
replacement of a light fluid by the injection of a heavy fluid at different Well casing 10 − 33 11 − 34 6 − 12
conditions is investigated via analyzing the penetration front velocities,
the mixing between the fluids, the concentration distributions, and the
annular velocity profiles. The effects of the flow geometry on the dump bailer and the corresponding well casing, prevalent in P&A op­
placement flow behavior are identified through varying the dumping erations. In our work, on average, the real dimensions of the dump bailer
height. Also, the effects of the flow geometry inclination, the injection and the well casing are scaled down by a factor of ∼ 1/5. This implies
rate, and the density and viscosity ratios on this flow system are studied. that the released fluid volume must be scaled down by a factor of
Together, these results can provide a better understanding of the fluid ∼ 1/53 . The conventional dump bailers have a typical capacity of 2.4 −
mechanics of the dump bailing method in P&A operations. 35 (ℓ3 ) or more, depending on the bailer diameter (Wu et al., 2018)
The outline of our paper is as follows. In Section II, we describe the (additional bailers can be also attached to the bailer string; however, the
experimental setup and procedure, and the fluids used. In Section III, we total length of the bailer string is limited due to the finite weight pro­
elucidate the scope of the study and also the governing dimensionless vided by hoisting and lifting equipment). Therefore, for our experiments
numbers in our work. Then, in Section IV, we illustrate and discuss the
to remain representative of the dump bailing process, up to 0.28 (ℓ3 ) of
experimental results, and finally conclude with conclusions in Section V.
the heavy fluid can be released, which is slightly larger than the volume
2. Experimental setup and procedure of the fluid supported by the inner pipe, i.e. 0.25 (ℓ3 ). Note that, to avoid
pressure variations during the process, the inner pipe is connected to a
Our experiments have been carried out using two transparent pipes large elevated reservoir filled with the heavy fluid. In this way, the flow
to physically model the well casing and the dump bailer; an outer pipe is driven by gravity, ensuring a smooth steady injection.
The supporting structure of the setup is capable of being inclined via
with a length of 2.46 (m) and the inner diameter ( D)
̂ of 3.81 (cm), and an
a pivot at any inclination angle between horizontal and vertical. A
inner pipe with a length of 2 (m) and the inner diameter ( D
̂ in,1 ) and outer
movable piston is situated at the end of the outer pipe to adjust the
diameter ( D
̂ in,2 ) of 1.27 and 2.54 (cm), respectively; see Fig. 2 for a dumping height. As we mentioned in Section I, the dumping height can
schematic representation. In this figure, the area of interest (appropriate vary, depending on the releasing method and the other operational
for analyzing the dump bailing method) is marked by red dotted lines, conditions. In our experiments, a range of 0.05 − 0.46 (m) is used for the
covering the heights ̂ h and H ̂ below and above the gate valve, dumping height. In our scaled down experimental apparatus, the height
respectively. of interest in the annulus ( H)
̂ is also accordingly chosen as H ̂ = 0.3 (m).
Let us mention how our experimental setup and dimensions are This height is sufficiently long to enable us to investigate the influence of
scaled down with respect to the real system, to properly represent the the variable parameters on the flow dynamics in the annulus.
dump bailing method. Table 1 gives the typical dimension ranges of the All experiments reported here are buoyant miscible flows, i.e. the

3
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
fluids are miscible and they have different densities. For iso-viscous
experiments, the placement (heavy) fluid is a solution of water and
salt, and the replaced (light) fluid is pure water. For our viscosity dif­
ference experiments, we use glycerol-water mixtures as the heavy fluid,
and in viscosifying with glycerol, we also change the density of the so­
lution. So, by densifying the replaced fluid, we compensate for the
increased density of the heavy fluid to reach a desirable density differ­
ence. For visualization purposes, black dye (Fountain Pen India black
ink) with the concentration of 800 (mg/L) is added to the heavy fluid,
which serves to quantify the concentration distribution via the optical
absorption. This low concentration of the dye used does not alter the
properties of the heavy fluid. The densities of the fluids are measured
using a high-accuracy density meter (Anton Paar DMA 35), and their
viscosities are quantified using a rheometer (Discovery HR-3, TA
Instruments).
In all experimental tests, the outer pipe is initially filled with the
lighter fluid. At the start of each experiment, the gate valve is opened
and the heavier fluid is injected into the pipe through the inner pipe to
remove the lighter fluid. The replaced light fluid is directed toward
another container which is positioned lower than the heavy fluid
container, as illustrated in Fig. 2. The height of fluids in both containers
is nearly constant in each experiment, in order to keep a nearly constant
hydrostatic pressure. The injection flow rate of the heavy fluid is regu­
lated by adjusting a needle valve located before the gate valve and it is
measured using a turbine flowmeter (FTB-421, Omega), with an accu­
racy of ±3%. The flow rates data are transferred to a computer through
an acquisition card (model USB-6002, National Instruments).
The outer pipe is back-lit using light-emitting diode (LED) strips. A
diffusive layer is placed between the LED strips and the outer pipe to
improve the light homogeneity. Light absorption calibrations are per­
formed. In these calibrations, before each experiment, an image of the
pipe containing the transparent, lighter solution and an image of the
pipe containing the darker, heavier solution are recorded, which are
subsequently used as references of light intensities for the Beer-Lambert
law (Séon, 2006). The optical measurement method consists of
acquiring images of the flow domain (which is marked by the red dotted
lines in Fig. 2) using a high-speed black-and-white digital camera (Basler
acA 2040), with 4096 grey scale levels. This allows us to analyze a
reasonably broad range of concentrations. In each experiment, as soon
as the flow meter detects the flow rate, the flow images are automati­
cally taken by the camera at a specified frame rate (typically 20 frames
per second) and they are transmitted to the computer. The grey scale
images obtained from the camera are processed using in-house image
processing MATLAB codes for analyzing the results. For instance, to
analyze mixing, the qualitative concentration field of the heavy fluid,
C( ̂
x, ̂
y , ̂t), is determined based on converting the recorded light in­
tensities via the camera, using the Beer-Lambert law.
In addition to the flow visualization via coloring the fluid phases, a
two-dimensional planar Laser Induced Fluorescence (LIF) measurement
technique is used, in order to analyze the degree of mixing along the
depth of the pipe, providing additional insight into the dynamics of the
flow. To execute this non-intrusive technique, the outer pipe is enclosed
in a transparent rectangular box, and the space between the pipe and the
internal walls of the box is filled with deionized water that has a
refractive index similar to the experimental fluids inside the pipe. The
LIF measurements are made along the circular section, downstream of
the gate valve. To seed the heavy fluid, Rhodamine-B with a concen­
tration of 50 (mg/L) (Séon et al., 2006) is used as the fluorescent dye.
For illumination, a laser sheet from a DPSS laser system (Laserglow
technologies) is utilized with an excitation wavelength at 532 (nm). The
sheet optics arrangement is capable of producing a thin sheet of light.
The scattered light is recorded by another camera which is situated
perpendicular to the laser light sheet, as shown in Fig. 2. Separate from
the ink experiments, the LIF measurements are conducted in a dark
condition, to avoid the intrusion of light on the concentration intensity
4
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
of the fluorescent dye.
To achieve additional insight into the dynamics of the flow within
the annular section of the flow domain, an Ultrasonic Doppler Velo­
cimeter (UDV) measurement technique is used to obtain the local axial
velocity profiles. The measurements are all acquired at 5 (cm) above the
gate valve in the annular section. A 0.2 (g/L) volumetric concentration
of copolyamide seeding particle with the size distribution of 60 (μm) is
used in both fluids. The UDV probe (DOP4000, Signal Processing S.A.) is
mounted at an angle ≈ 75∘ relative to the axis of the pipe, to have a good
signal-to-noise ratio (Nowak, 2002). See Fig. 2 for the schematic posi­
tioning of the UDV probe.
The experiments are carried out for a range of fluid and geometry
parameters. Table 2 shows the main dimensional parameters of the flow.
The hydrostatic pressure is kept constant in all experiments. Some ex­
periments are repeated in order to assure the short and long term
reproducibility of the results.
3. Scope of experiments
In this section, let us explain the scope of our experiments, based on
the dimensionless groups of the flow. According to the objectives of this
study, we conduct sets of experiments to gain information about the
flow, from both within the circular section (suitable for exploring the
early stages of the replacement of the fluids) and within the annular
section (suitable for understanding the longer time dynamics). The main
flow parameters chosen are relevant to the dump bailing method in the
industrial application. The main simplification that we pursue here, with
respect to conditions of the industrial application, is considering only a
completely eccentric annulus configuration (which is typical). As given
in Table 2, assuming Newtonian fluids, at least 12 dimensional param­
eters govern the fluid flow in this study. Therefore, based on the Buck­
ingham’s Pi theorem, 9 dimensionless parameters control the flow
behaviors, which are given in Table 3. The pipe inclination angle (β), is
an additional dimensionless number associated with the geometry. The
estimated ranges of the dimensionless parameters of the real industrial
application are also given in Table 3, showing that our experiments
cover reasonable experimental ranges within the industrial ones.
Some of the dimensionless numbers in Table 3, such as δ2 , DR1 and
DR2 , are kept constant in this work (note that their chosen values are
also relevant to the industrial application). Also, some others are not
relevant as they are so large or so small. For example, in this study, we
consider the limit of large Peclet numbers, Pe≫1, which is appropriate
industrially. We also assume that the Atwood number is small, and it is
therefore irrelevant in terms of our analysis; however, note that the
density difference appears in the densimetric Froude number, repre­
senting the variation in the buoyancy force. Thus, there are five
Table 2
Dimensional parameters in our experiments (for convenience, we use the hat
symbol for dimensional quantities throughout the text).
Parameter Name Range
V
̂0 Inflow velocity (m/s) 0.080 − 0.32
ρH
̂ Heavy fluid’s density (kg/m3) 1008, 1018
ρL
̂ Light fluid’s density (kg/m3) 998
μH
̂ Heavy fluid’s viscosity (Pa.s) 0.001 − 0.022
μL
̂ Light fluid’s viscosity (Pa.s) 0.001
Inner diameter of outer pipe (cm) 3.81
D
̂
D
̂ in,1 Bailer inner diameter (cm) 1.27
D Bailer outer diameter (cm) 2.54
̂ in,2
h
̂ Dumping height (m) 0.05 − 0.46
H
̂ Annulus height of interest (m) 0.3
D
̂m Molecular diffusivity (m2/s) ∼ 10− 9
̂g Gravitational acceleration (m/s2) 9.81
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Table 3 ( ) 3
Dimensionless parameters in our experiments and real dump bailing method. ( )2 ρ 2H − ̂ρ 2L ̂g D
̂ ̂
Re
The varying and fixed parameters in this work are marked with an asterisk and Ar = 2 = , (2)
Fr μH μL
2̂ ̂
without, respectively.
Parameter Name Definition Experimental Industrial which covers the range of 3.3 × 105 − 11 × 106 in our study. Note that
range range the square root of the Archimedes number is proportional to the Galileo
* Re Reynolds ρ H + ̂ρ L ) V
(̂ ̂ D ̂ 870 − 12000 400 − 20000 number (Jenny et al., 2004) frequently used to study buoyant flows
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅0
number 2 ̂ μH ̂μL (Mougin and Magnaudet, 2001).
* At Atwood 0.005, 0.01 0.001 − 0.5
ρ H − ̂ρ L
̂
Let us also briefly describe the range chosen for δ1 , m and β. The
number ρ H + ̂ρ L
̂
* Fr Froude V
̂0 1.9 − 7.2 0.1 − 30 value of δ1 is used to identify the dumping height ( ̂
h), for which several
number √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
At̂g D̂ aspect ratios (δ1 = ̂
h/ H
̂ < 1) are mainly considered in this study.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
*m Viscosity 0.21 − 1 0.05 − 1
μL
̂ Exceptionally, for some cases, we have used a longer value for ̂
h (δ1 =
ratio μH
̂
1.53), to investigate the long time flow behavior in the circular section
Pe Peclet V
̂0 D̂ ∼ 3 × 106 106 − 108
number of the flow domain. The viscosity ratio of the in-place fluid to the
D̂m √̅̅̅̅̅
DR1 Diameter D
̂ in,1 / D
̂ 0.34 0.18 − 0.60 ̂
ratio injected fluid is denoted by m = μ L , for which our experiments cover a
̂μ H
DR2 Diameter D
̂ in,2 / D 0.67 0.21 − 0.70
reasonable range from the industrial perspective. Finally, in terms of the
̂
ratio
* δ1 Aspect ratio 0.17 − 1.53 inclination angle (β), moderate to high inclinations angles from hori­
h/ H
̂ ̂ −
zontal are used, as they represent the most applicable cases in the dump
δ2 Aspect ratio D/
̂ Ĥ 0.13 0− 1
bailing method. The ranges of the dimensionless parameters shown in
*β Inclination From 45 − 80∘ 45 − 90∘
Table 3 are covered in our 90 different experiments.
horizontal
Let us admit that our experiments are run at relatively small density
differences, implying that our experimental approach neglects the ef­
dimensionless numbers that are considered in this work, i.e. Re, Fr, δ1 , m, fects of the different densities. This is partly convenience (using trans­
and β. parent fluids) and partly to reduce the parametric complexity. The
The Reynolds number can have a very broad range in the industrial significance of considering the small density difference limit is that the
application, ranging from weakly laminar flows to tremendously tur­ Boussinesq approximation becomes valid. This means that the density
bulent flows; this dimensionless number quantifies the strength of the difference significantly affects the buoyancy force through the densi­
inertial forces (depending on the injection velocity) to the viscous forces metric Froude number, Fr, but not through the difference between the
(depending on the fluids’ viscosities). To evaluate the Reynolds number accelerations of the individual fluids, the effects of which are much
in the dump bailing method, it is necessary to estimate the releasing smaller compared to those of buoyancy. In fact, as shown in Table 3, our
velocity of the heavy fluid (i.e. the inflow velocity). This can be done, experiments cover a reasonable and wide range of significant buoyancy
albeit very crudely, via writing the Bernoulli equation over the heavy (quantified via Fr), comparable with that of the industrial application.
fluid’s height in the dump bailer ( ̂
h H ): Before we proceed, it must be also noted that it would not be feasible
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ to reasonably analyze all the critical flow parameters of the dump
√ ( )
√2 ̂ ρ H − ̂ρ L ̂g ̂h H bailing method in this work. For instance, although most of the cement
1 √
slurries used in the dump bailing method exhibit non-Newtonian be­
2
ρ H ̂g ̂h H − ̂ρ H V
̂ ρ L ̂g ̂h H ⇒ V
̂0 ≈ ̂ ̂0 ≈ , (1)
2 ρH
̂
haviors, here, we only consider Newtonian fluids. This simplification is
due to the presence of the large number of the dimensionless parameters
where ̂ h H is not constant during the releasing of the cement slurry. Thus, involved, all of which cannot be studied in a single work; this persuades
in reality, the releasing velocity of the cement slurry is time-dependent, us to ignore the non-Newtonian effects, such as the yield stress and shear
and it can vary in the range of ∼ 0 − 3 (m/s), depending on ̂ ρ and ̂ hH . H thinning properties, and instead focus on the effects of the other flow
The upper velocity limit may be even lower if, among many other fac­ and geometry parameters, such as the injection rate, the buoyancy force,
tors, the large effective viscosity of the cement slurry is considered. the inclination angle and the dumping height, as well as the viscosity
Therefore, it can be said, perhaps with certainty, that the Reynolds ratio between the fluids. This, in return, allows us to deliver a general
number in a real application case is always less than 20000. In this work, picture of buoyant flows in the dump bailing method and build a sys­
for simplicity, we neglect the variation of the Reynolds number during tematic study to understand some of its key features in this work,
the process, while considering a wide range of Re in different experi­ making it possible to systematically move forward to explore non-
ments, as reported in Table 3. Comparing the experimental and indus­ Newtonian effects in future studies.
trial ranges, it is clear that our Re covers a reasonable experimental
range within the industrial one. 4. Results
In this paper, we mainly focus on laminar to moderately turbulent
flows in the Reynolds number range of 870 − 12000, defined based on Our main experimental findings are presented and discussed in this
the injection velocity, V ̂ 0 , the outer pipe inner diameter D,
̂ the mean section. We first give a general description of the main flow features
density (̂ρ H + ̂ρ L )/2, and the geometric mean viscosity ̂
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
μH ̂μ L (Etrati, observed in our experiments. Then, we study the influences of the aspect
2018). Other than the Reynolds number, the main flow-controlling ratio, the fluid properties (buoyancy and viscosity ratio), the inclination
parameter is the dimensionless Froude number, representing the angle, and the injection rate, which are important in terms of the
strength of the inertial to buoyant forces (the latter depends on density placement behavior and the degree of mixing. In presenting our results,
difference, ̂ρ H − ̂ρ L ); the Froude number can vary in the range 1.9− 7.2 as mentioned before, we attempt to use the dimensionless parameters of
in this work. the problem, to generalize our results. In addition to the dimensionless
To identify the competition between the buoyant and viscous forces, numbers of the flow (e.g. Re, Fr, etc.), the dimensionless forms of the
i.e. the ratio Re/Fr, written in the form of the Archimedes number, is lengths, times, and velocities are achieved by dividing them by D,̂ D/
̂ V̂0 ,
sometimes preferred: and V
̂ 0 , respectively, unless otherwise stated.

5
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

4.1. General flow behaviors and observations
Let us first present a typical experiment of the placement flow that
we consider. Fig. 3 shows snapshots of a typical experiment, with time
increasing from left to right. The fluids are initially separated by a gate
valve. Upon opening the gate valve, the heavy fluid enters the flow
domain below the gate valve and penetrates into the in-situ light fluid.
To simplify our understanding of how the flow develops, we have
identified the following phases during advancement of the heavy fluid
under the injection inlet, into the light fluid within the circular section of
the flow domain, as well as within the annular section above the in­
jection inlet:
• The mixed heavy fluid is placed in the flow domain entirely
(including both the circular pipe and eccentric annular sections).
To illustrate the level of mixing throughout the flow domain during
the heavy fluid injection, Fig. 4 shows the depth-averaged concentration
field of the heavy fluid in the flow domain, in the plane of x and t,
covering the flow from injection point (x − y view), in the circular (pipe)
section of the flow domain (positive x-axis), and in the annular section of
the flow domain (negative x-axis), defined respectively as
∫1
Cy ,pipe (x, t) = C(x, y, t) dy, x ≥ 0, (3)
0

∫ 1
1
• First, a jet flow is created by the heavy fluid entering into the flow Cy ,annulus (x, t) = C(x, y, t) dy, x < 0. (4)
domain filled with the light fluid; the flow resembles a buoyant jet. 1 − Din,2 Din,2

• As the heavy fluid is injected progressively, the initial jet is eventu­ The heavy fluid fronts are recognizable on the spatiotemporal dia­
ally overwhelmed and replaced by a mixing region that is developed gram of Fig. 4 via a sharp boundary between different comparative
simultaneously. Up to this flow stage, the flow is dominated by the concentrations of the two fluids. In fact, there are two fluid fronts: one
injection (i.e. an injection dominated regime). front moving downward (in the positive x direction) and another front
• After the development of the mixing region in the circular section of moves upward inside the annular section (in the negative x direction).
the flow domain, the heavy fluid starts to slump on the lower wall of The average velocities of these fronts, over the circular and annular
the pipe, due to the combination of buoyancy and inclination, and sections, are marked on the figure by V f ,pipe and V f ,annulus , respectively.
the light fluid occupies the upper region. The flow within the pipe at
The values of these front velocities are inversely proportional to the
this stage is governed by buoyancy and inertia (i.e. a buoyant-inertial
slope of the dashed lines marked on the spatiotemporal diagram (Fig. 4)
regime). Meanwhile, the advancement of the heavy fluid in the
and they are simply calculated by the following equations:
annular region of the flow domain also evolves.
• Afterwards, the heavy fluid front arrives at the pipe end, hits the end ̂ ,
V ̂
h
(5)
f pipe
wall, and then turns back towards the annulus. V f ,pipe =
̂0
V
=
̂0
̂t e ,pipe × V
,
• The returning heavy fluid pushes the light one towards the annular
region and out of the flow domain, while the injected heavy fluid ̂ ,
V Ĥ
continues to enter the flow domain, concomitantly. V f ,annulus =
f annulus
=( ) , (6)
̂0
V ̂0
̂t e ,annulus − ̂t i ,annulus × V

where ̂t e ,pipe and ̂t e ,annulus correspond to the time when the heavy fluid
fronts reach the pipe and annulus ends, respectively. Also, ̂t i ,annulus
corresponds to the time when the heavy fluid front enters the annulus.
Below the inlet, the advancement of the heavy fluid front can be
considered as a critical parameter for quantifying the placement/
removal efficiency. Fig. 5 presents the time-dependent position of the
front along the circular section below the inlet. As seen, the front ve­
locity is time-dependent, with the highest value immediately after the

Fig. 3. Time-evolution of the fluid placement in a typical experiment. The flow

parameters are Re = 11900, Fr = 5.00, m = 1, δ1 = 0.67, and β = 45∘ . From
left to right, t = [2.03, 5.70, 24.82, 35.80, 50.45, 94.79]. The green and red
dashed lines, respectively, show the circular and annular sections of the flow
domain. The dimensionless field of view for the circular and annular sections
are 1 × 5.25 and 0.33 × 7.87, respectively. The inclination angle is illustrated
on this and the other figures. (For interpretation of the references to color in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 4. Spatiotemporal diagram of the depth-averaged concentration field,
Cy (x, t), for Re = 1720, Fr = 4.17, m = 0.21, δ1 = 1, and β = 70∘ . The dashed
lines indicate the average front velocities of the heavy fluid in the entire pipe
and annular sections. The slope of the lines in the spatiotemporal diagram
represent 1/V f ,pipe and 1/V f ,annulus , in the circular and annular regions of the
flow domain, respectively. The colorbar represents the concentration value,
here and everywhere else.

6
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
Fig. 5. An example of time-dependent position of the front along the circular
section below the bailer, for m = 1, Fr = 5.11, β = 45∘ , Re = 7490 and δ1 =
1.53. The red line indicates the constant front velocity of the heavy fluid, with
the slope representing 1/Vf . (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
injection point due to the imposed inertia. In this region (x < 3), the
front travels a considerable distance over a short time. Then, a mixing
region is developed, where the front propagation slows down over a
short distance (3 < x < 4). Eventually, after the mixing region (x > 5),
the front slumps on the lower wall of the pipe with a constant velocity.
The slumping stage along with the constant front velocity is valid for
long dumping heights. However, for shorter heights, the front can reach
the pipe end before the heavy fluid slumps on the pipe wall. Note that
considering an extremely long dumping height may not be relevant to
the industrial application of our interest, i.e. the dump bailing method;
see Section IV B. This implies that, in general, the average front velocity
defined further above, which implicitly combines short and long time
front velocities into a single value, may better describe the flow reality
and the overall placement/removal efficiency.
Let us clarify another aspect with respect to the front velocity. Note
that, at any time during the process (t > 0), the placement efficiency can
be defined as the fraction of circular (or annulus) section volume
occupied by the heavy fluid; this is directly connected to the front ve­
locity of the heavy fluid. In the interest of understanding the long time
placement efficiency, let us crudely/qualitatively consider the average
front velocity as a way to quantify the overall placement efficiency, as a
measure of a successful or unsuccessful placement flow. Therefore, we
are not interested in investigating the flow behvaiors at very short times,
immediately after opening the gate valve; this is when the released fluid
flow (in other words, the applied pressure gradient) is added to the flow
system. At very short times, the flow has strong inertial effects, accel­
erates in different directions, and has unsteady and detailed time-
dependent features. Practically, these would be of less interest
compared with the long time flow behavior and the overall placement
efficiency.
To present a general view of the concentration field and the level of
mixing between the two fluids in the perpendicular direction, i.e. the
plane perpendicular to the field of view, Fig. 6 shows the concentration
field of the heavy fluid along the circular section of the flow domain. The
LIF method is used to provide measurements for two different laser
sheets of different depths: Fig. 6a coincides with the axis of the injection
pipe, and Fig. 6b is on the upper region of the circular (pipe) section of
the flow geometry. The images in each subfigure, from left to right, show
the concentration field at three instances of time: (1) when the heavy
fluid enters the flow domain, (2) reaches the middle of the pipe, and (3)
arrives at the pipe end. The corresponding images in both subfigures are
7
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
Fig. 6. Concentration field of the heavy fluid, Cz (x, t), measured by the LIF
method (top view of the pipe), for Re = 9800, Fr = 5.90, m = 1, δ1 = 1.53, and
β = 45∘ . (a) The horizontal laser sheet coincides with the axis of the injection
pipe, y = ̂y /D
̂ = 0.33; (b) The horizontal laser sheet is in the upper region of
the circular (pipe) section of the flow geometry, y = 0.83. From left to right t ≈
[3.45, 68.30, 108.15]. The colorbar represents the concentration value.
captured more or less at the same flow time. As can be observed, the
spreading of the heavy fluid concentration along the depth of the pipe
observed in the lower laser sheet is more than that in the upper laser
sheet, particularly near the pipe end. This implies the occurrence of the
slumping of the heavy fluid on the lower wall of the pipe. Interestingly,
during the propagation of the heavy fluid along the pipe, its concen­
tration along the depth of the pipe spreads differently from what is seen
on the side view (e.g. compare Figs. 6 and 3).
In sections that will follow, we will show/analyze the effects of the
flow parameters (quantified via the dimensionless numbers) on the
mixing, the front velocities, the velocity field, and the placement effi­
ciency, mainly using spatiotemporal diagrams, graphs of time-
dependent position of the front, and UDV measurements.
4.2. Effects of the dumping height (evaluated via δ1 )
For the configuration of our interest, the removal of the light fluid
during the continuous heavy fluid injection for different aspect ratios
has not been previously studied. Here, the effect of four aspect ratios of
0.17, 0.33, 0.67, and 1.0 on the fluid placement is investigated, via
varying the axial length of the circular (pipe) section of the flow domain,
which represents the dumping height.
To illustrate the level of mixing between the two fluids by changing
the aspect ratio, Fig. 7 presents the spatiotemporal of the flow for two
different aspect ratios, from the early stage of the heavy fluid injection
until the time when the light fluid is replaced almost entirely by the
heavy fluid. The two subfigures can be compared. As can be seen, the
dynamics of the placement flow completely changes by varying the
aspect ratio. For the longer dumping height (Fig. 7a), some amount of
the heavy fluid starts to enter the annulus even before the heavy fluid
front reaches the pipe end; even when the annulus is filled by the heavy
fluid, some amount of the lighter fluid still remains at the bottom in the
circular (pipe) section and it takes a relatively long time to completely
remove the light fluid from that region. For the short dumping height
(Fig. 7b), however, the heavy fluid entering the flow domain quickly
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
Fig. 7. Spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration field, Cy (x, t), for Re = 3030, Fr = 3.75, m = 0.45, β = 70∘ , and (a) δ1 = 1; (b) δ1 = 0.17.
The colorbar shown in subfigure b represents the concentration value and it applies to both subfigures, here and everywhere else.
touches the pipe end and it turns back toward the annulus. Moreover, a
sharp boundary can be observed on the spatiotemporal diagram for the
shorter dumping height, implying a small amount of mixing in the flow
domain.
Before we proceed, let us note that the fluid placement in the circular
(pipe) section of the flow domain is generally “density-unstable” (i.e. the
heavy fluid atop the light fluid), implying that the mixing between the
heavy and light fluids is expected to be more efficient in comparison to
that in the annular region, where the fluid placement is “density-stable”
(i.e. the light fluid atop the heavy fluid). This can help explain the reason
behind the difference in the mixing in the circular and annular sections
at longer dumping heights (e.g. see Fig. 7a). Let us note that density-
unstable and density-stable flows have been studied in-depth in the
displacement flow context (Taghavi et al, 2010, 2011, 2012c), indi­
cating that density-stable displacement flows lead to less mixing and
more structured flows than density-unstable ones.
In Fig. 8, for different dumping heights, we have shown, versus time,
the position of the front between heavy and light fluids in the circular
section of the flow domain. This helps to analyze the front dynamics. To
have a better comparison between different cases (which have different
dumping heights), we have rescaled the axial position of the front in the
dimensionless form of ̂ x /̂
h. It can be seen in this figure that, at smaller
aspect ratios, the filling of the circular (pipe) section by the heavy fluid
occurs more rapidly, even when the dumping height is scaled via ̂ x/ ̂h.
Fig. 8. Time-dependent position of the front along the circular section of the
flow domain below the inlet for Re ≈ 10900, Fr ≈ 6.55, m = 1, and β = 70∘ .
Different dashed lines represent δ1 = 1 (black), δ1 = 0.67 (green), δ1 = 0.33
(blue), and δ1 = 0.17 (red). (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
8
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
This implies that, at smaller aspect ratios, the circular section is filled
with the heavy fluid at a higher rate. Interestingly, Fig. 8 also reveals
that, below δ1 = 0.33, the results are not much affected by further
decreasing the dumping height. It is useful to confirm this result for a
large set of data, through finding the threshold of the dumping height for
which the placement flow has a reasonable efficiency, and beyond
which the flow is not much affected by a further decrease in the dumping
height. To do so, we have measured the filling time of the circular pipe
(tpipe ) and annular (tannulus ) sections of the flow domain, i.e. defined in
our work as the time when the concentration of the heavy fluid surpasses
0.9 (out of the value of 1). Fig. 9 plots the filling time corresponding to
the circular pipe section of the flow geometry, tpipe , versus the filling
time of the annular section, tannulus , for all experiments; the red symbols
represent the filling time for the shortest dumping height and the black
ones show that for the longest dumping height. As can be seen, for
δ1 > 0.33, tpipe becomes greater than tannulus , i.e. the annular section is
filled faster than the circular section (which would be undesired in an
efficient placement flow). When tpipe > tannulus , some light fluid still re­
mains in the circular pipe section, after the annular section has been
already filled by the heavy fluid. Of course, continuing the injection
eventually removes this remaining part at longer times (at the expense of
further mixing and contamination), during which the light fluid mixes
with the heavy one throughout the flow domain. For δ1 ≲0.33, tannulus
becomes greater than tpipe , i.e. the circular section is filled faster than the
annular section (which would be desired in an efficient placement flow).
Fig. 9. The comparison between filling time of annulus and pipe sections for all
experimental data. Different symbols represent δ1 = 0.17 (•), δ1 = 0.33 (▸),
δ1 = 0.67 (◆), and δ1 = 1 (◂). The solid line shows tpipe = tannulus . The data
points below the solid line exhibit a reasonable placement efficiency.
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Therefore, δ1 ≈ 0.33 and consequently the critical dumping height of are higher than those in the regions close to the walls, as it is intuitive.
can be considered as the threshold value. The comparison between Figs. 10b and c shows that, overall, there is not
much difference between the velocities in the annulus at different
̂
hc =
h δ1 0.33
≡ = ≈ 2.5, (7) dumping heights, although one may notice that the velocities at the
̂ δ2 0.13
D smaller aspect ratio vary slightly more with time than those at the larger
To shed light on the effect of the flow parameters on the axial aspect ratio.
component of the velocity profiles within the annulus region, the UDV Before we proceed, let us note that our analysis of a wide range of
technique is used, with measurements taken at 5 (cm) above from the UDV results while varying the flow parameters, such as δ1 , Fr, m, β and
gate valve in the annulus (i.e. equivalent to x = − 1.31 in dimensionless Re, reveals that the axial component of the velocity in the annular sec­
form), as depicted in Fig. 10a. The dimensionless velocity contours, U = tion right above the gate valve is not very significantly affected by the
U/
̂ V̂ 0 , measured by the UDV probe, are illustrated in Fig. 10b and c. The aforementioned flow parameters. Therefore, let us be content with the
results are shown for two different aspect ratios, as a function of the presentation of the UDV results for different δ1 (Fig. 10b and c) and omit
the presentation of such results for the other flow parameters.
dimensionless time, t = ̂t V
̂ 0 / D,
̂ and the normalized dimensionless
transverse position in the annulus, defined as ya = (̂ y− D ̂ in,2 )/ ( D
̂ −
D in,2 ). As can be seen, the fluid velocity is negative as the fluid moves
̂ 4.3. Effects of the density difference (buoyancy force, evaluated via Fr)
along the annulus. To identify the annulus center, a dashed line is used
in these contours. Note that, due to the nature of the UDV measure­ The physical properties of the cement slurry and drilling fluid vary
ments, the UDV measurements become erroneous near the walls, espe­ from well to well. Significant mixing between these fluids and an
cially away from the UDV probe position (Takeda, 2012); thus, these incomplete replacement of the drilling fluid by the cement slurry can
near wall velocities have been removed from the presented data. Fig. 10 greatly affect the sealing effectiveness of the cement plug. Thus, it is
shows that fluid velocities gradually start to increase with time in the necessary to develop our knowledge about the effects of the fluid
annular section. Also, the velocity values in the middle of the annulus properties on the fluid placement dynamics. In this section, we investi­
gate the effects of the density difference of the fluids on the behaviors of

Fig. 10. (A) Schematic of UDV probe position in the annulus, i.e. 5 (cm) above from the gate valve. (b&c) Velocity contours in the plane of time and the annulus
transverse direction, measured at (b) δ1 = 0.17 and (c) δ1 = 1. The other flow parameters are Re ≈ 9800, Fr = 4.20, m = 1, and β = 70∘ . The horizontal dashed lines
represent the centerline of the annulus. Note that we have removed the velocities close to the upper and lower walls of the annulus due to UDV instrumental errors.

9
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

the placement flow. Typically, densities of the cement slurry and the in-
situ fluids (drilling fluids or residual reservoir fluids such as oil and
water) are around 1900 (kg/m3) and 1000 − 1700 (kg/m3) (Mal­
ekmohammadi et al., 2010b), respectively. The main feature caused by
the presence of this large density difference is the creation of a large
buoyancy force in the flow, characterized by the Froude number, Fr, the
effect of which we attempt to analyze here.
To study the effect of buoyancy on the flow behaviors, Fig. 11 shows
the spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration fields
of the heavy fluid. It can be seen in Fig. 11 that, by increasing the
buoyancy force (via decreasing Fr), the front velocities in the circular
and annular sections (V f ,pipe and V f ,annulus ) increase. In addition, the
injection of a higher buoyant flow (Fig. 11b) leads to expediting the
removal of the light fluid from the flow domain. An interesting obser­
vation for the case considered in Fig. 11 (δ1 = 1, i.e. equal lengths of the
circular and annular sections) is that the heavy fluid advancement in the
annular section is faster than that of the circular part, particularly for
lower Fr (Fig. 11b).
Our previous study on the iso-viscous heavy fluid injection into the Fig. 12. Time-dependent position of the front along the circular section of the
closed-end pipe (at a large fixed dumping height δ1 = 1.53) (Akbari and flow domain below the inlet for Re ≈ 4500, m = 1, δ1 = 1.53, and β = 70∘ .
Taghavi, 2020b) has shown that decreasing the buoyancy force can Different dashed lines represent Fr = 6.38 (green), Fr = 3.07 (red), and Fr =
reduce the transverse mixing, and that the heavy fluid front velocity, 2.09 (blue). The solid black lines indicate the heavy fluid front velocity along
Vf ,pipe , is mainly linked to the strength of the buoyancy force, quantified the buoyant-inertial region, with the slope representing 1/Vf . (For interpreta­
via Fr. The same conclusion can be also drawn from Fig. 11. As can be tion of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the
observed in Fig. 11, the boundary between two fluids is slightly sharper Web version of this article.)
when the buoyancy is lower, i.e. higher Fr, representing less mixing in
the flow domain. Fig. 11b also shows that, by increasing buoyancy, the values of m, reflecting the variation of the heavy fluid’s viscosity, at a
mixing between the fluids inside the annular section increases at early fixed density difference. Note that the injection velocity in the sub­
times; this is due to the initial mixing between the fluids in the pipe figures of Fig. 13 are equal and the change in Re in these subfigures is
section entering the annular section. At longer times, however, we due to the viscosity difference between the two cases. As can be
observe that more “pure” heavy fluid enters the annulus and that, due to observed, decreasing m (i.e. increasing the heavy fluid’s viscosity) re­
the density stable configuration, the heavy fluid effectively pushes the sults in the heavy fluid front reaching the pipe end much faster. The
light one out of the flow domain, with less mixing and at higher decrease in m also slightly increases the heavy fluid front velocity in the
efficiency. annulus region.
Fig. 12 is plotted to investigate the dependency of the front position More detailed information on the dependency of the front velocity on
and velocity on Fr. First of all, it can be seen that the front positions the viscosity ratio can be found in Fig. 14, where the time-dependent
almost superimpose in the injection dominated region (i.e. small t and front positions (within the circular section of the flow domain) are
x), implying the front behaves similarly at different Fr in this region. It plotted at different viscosity ratios. As illustrated, the early stage of the
can be observed, however, that the front velocities in the buoyant- flow for different m is nearly the same, as all the lines almost superim­
inertial region increase by increasing buoyancy (i.e. decreasing Fr). pose at small x and t. Let us justify this observation (i.e. the viscosity
variation not being relevant in the early flow stage) using a simple
analysis. Note that, in this flow stage, a strong mixing region is devel­
4.4. Effects of the viscosity difference (evaluated via m) oped, for which the following inertial (̂t i ) and viscous (̂t v ) time scales
can be defined:
The viscosities of the fluids involved affect the dynamics of our flows.
Here, we explore the effects of the viscosity difference between the two ̂
D
̂t i = , (8)
fluids on the dynamics of the fluid placement, via the viscosity ratio ̂0
V
parameter, i.e. m (defined in Table 3). Fig. 13 shows the spatiotemporal
of the heavy fluid’s depth-averaged concentration field. The experi­
ments are conducted at β = 45∘ , Fr = 4.40, δ1 = 0.67, and different

Fig. 11. Spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration field, Cy (x, t), at Re ≈ 11000, m = 1, δ1 = 1, and β = 45∘ , for (a) Fr = 6.67, and (b) Fr =
4.67.

10
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Fig. 13. Spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration field, Cy (x, t), at Fr = 4.40, δ1 = 0.67, and β = 45∘ for (a) m = 1 and Re = 7160, and (b) m =
0.21 and Re = 1840.

Fig. 14. Time-dependent position of the front along the circular section below
the inlet for Fr ≈ 4.25, δ1 = 0.67, and β = 45∘ . Different dashed lines represent
m = 1 and Re ≈ 7170 (red), m = 0.45 and Re ≈ 3200 (blue), and m = 0.21 and
Re ≈ 1840 (green). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
Fig. 15. Snapshots of the flow at different times, providing a comparison of the
legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
front height, instability of the fluid interface, and mixing between the fluids, for
different values of m at Fr = 6.15, δ1 = 1, and β = 45∘ : (a) m = 1 and Re =
̂2
D 11000, and (b) m = 0.45 and Re = 4700. In each sub-figure, from left to right,
̂t v = , (9) t ≈ [3.60, 46.10, te ,pipe ]: (a) te ,pipe = 70.01; (b) te ,pipe = 53.03.
ν
̂

where ̂ν is the mean kinematic viscosity defined as In fact, decreasing m also reduces the mixing at the interface of the two
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ fluids in the later stages of the flow, as the instabilities on the interface
2 ̂ μH ̂μL
ν=
̂ , (10) are reduced. This, in return, results in increasing the front velocity.
ρ H + ̂ρ L
̂
Our observations in terms of the effects of m on the initial jet be­
haviors are qualitatively in agreement with those of previous studies.
which is in the range of 1.00 − 4.70 (mm2/s). Therefore, ̂t i and ̂t v are in
For example, Chhabra et al. (2005) have conducted an experimental
the range of 0.1 − 0.5 (s) and 308 − 1451 (s), respectively. This com­
investigation on the horizontal injection of a low viscosity fluid into a
parison reveals that the inertial stresses are much more effective than
density matched fluid of higher viscosity. They have found that the
the viscous stresses to control the flow behavior at early times.
width of the jet is significantly reduced when the viscosity ratio exists,
Accordingly, the viscosity variation does not play a significant role in
compared to the iso-viscous case. Although in their work the in-place
this flow stage.
fluid appears to penetrate into the bulk of the jet, the mixing is not as
Fig. 14 also shows that, as the front advances further away from the
severe as the one in the iso-viscous case, and the injected fluid seems to
injection inlet, after the mixing region (in the absence of a fully turbu­
maintain a greater degree of coherence. A similar observation has also
lent flow), its local velocity increases by decreasing m. This apparently
been seen in the downward injection of a dense fluid of low viscosity
counter-intuitive finding is consistent with our observation in Fig. 13.
into a light fluid of higher viscosity Mathur and Sreenivas (2006).
To give a better understanding of the viscosity ratio effects, now let
Another qualitative observation in Fig. 15 is that the thickness of the
us have a qualitative look at some experiments. Fig. 15 presents snap­
penetrating heavy fluid layer is reduced by decreasing m. For example,
shots of the flow, illustrating the placement behavior of the heavy fluid
one can note that the interface height at the later stages of the flow is
along the circular section of the flow domain, for two different m. It can
smaller when m decreases. Thus, to fulfill the mass conservation, the
be seen that viscosifying the heavy fluid (i.e. decreasing m) results in a
velocity of the front velocity has to rise to some extent.
narrower jet profile (at the early stage of the flow) and a less mixed flow.
To throw light on the influence of the viscosity ratio on the flow

11
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
behavior in the annular region, Fig. 16 plots the depth-averaged con­
centration profiles of the injected heavy fluid along the annular region, i.
e. Cy ,annulus (x,t). The time interval between the concentration profiles is
t = 10 and the results are shown for two values of m. It can be observed
that, at m = 0.21 (Fig. 16b), the concentration of the heavy fluid reaches
the maximum value (≈ 1) rapidly while at m = 1 (Fig. 16a), the con­
centration increases more gradually. The first concentration profile in
Fig. 16a is higher than that in Fig. 16b, implying that the heavy fluid for
m = 0.21 enters the annulus slightly later, as it also can be seen in
Fig. 13. At longer times, the concentration in m = 0.21 is much higher
than that in m = 1 at the same flow time. Also, while the concentration
profiles for m = 1 are smooth, they have axial variations and fluctua­
tions for m = 0.21, implying a more unsteady fluid displacement within
the annulus at smaller m.
The comparison shown in Fig. 16a versus Fig. 16b reveals that, for a
smaller m, the light fluid is removed from the flow domain more rapidly.
Achieving a maximum concentration value (i.e. near unity) demon­
strates that the in-place fluid is removed from the annulus by the
injected fluid more efficiently as there is not much residual of the in-
place fluid in the annulus. This finding is important in terms of the
application of our research: in the operation of setting abandonment
cement plugs within the casing, using higher viscosity fluids (decreasing
m) may be advantageous, to more efficiently remove the in-place fluid
and clean the interior of the casing from residual fluids, which would
eventually result in the placed cement having a better bond to the
casing.
We have so far found that for our flows involving significant buoy­
ancy, inertia, different inclinations, and viscous effects, increasing the
viscosity of the injected fluid results in increasing the placement effi­
ciency. This is in agreement with the previous studies showing that
increasing viscosity of the displacing fluid in similar flows increases the
placement efficiency in the pipe and annulus (Etrati, 2018; Mal­
ekmohammadi et al., 2010a; Taghavi et al., 2012a). Note that this
finding would not be in contradiction with the general belief that
operating in turbulent flows is effective in increasing the removal effi­
ciency, in relation to which the followings are worth mentioning. (i)
Fully turbulent flows only occur near the inlet in our flows, for which we
have already established that the viscosity variation does not play a
significant role. (ii) The flow behaviors after the mixing region become
independent of the injection flow rate and its strong turbulent nature. In
fact, our interfacial flow at later stages of the flow is governed by
buoyancy, inertia, and some contributions from the viscosity ratio, as
discussed above.
Fig. 16. Depth-averaged concentration profiles of the injected fluid Cy ,annulus (x, t), along the annular region for Fr = 4.00, δ1 = 1, and β = 70∘ : (a) m = 1 and Re =
6800, and (b) m = 0.21 and Re = 1600. The solid lines show the evolution of injected fluid concentration with a time of step of t = 10. The solid arrow shows the
time advancement as an eye guide.
12
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
4.4.1. Effects of the inclination angle (evaluated via β)
The real oil and gas wells are not quite vertical, particularly in re­
gions where a high production rate is demanded; a greater oil and gas
production can be achieved by orienting the well with respect to the
reservoir. This needs the drilling of inclined wells. Thus, analyzing
placement flows with the application in P&A operations should natu­
rally include exploring the effects of the inclination angle on the flow
dynamics.
Fig. 17 depicts the spatiotemporal diagrams of the heavy fluid con­
centration over the whole flow domain, for two inclination angles, i.e.
45◦ and 80◦ . The first thing to realize is that, for β = 45∘ (Fig. 17a), the
heavy fluid reaches the pipe end slightly faster in comparison with the
case of β = 80∘ (Fig. 17b). On the other hand, the velocity of the heavy
fluid front in the annular section for both cases is approximately the
same.
Another interesting observation in Fig. 17 is the degree of mixing
between the fluids, which seems to be less for the case of β = 45∘ . In
addition, the boundary between the two fluids for the case of β = 45∘ is
sharper than that of β = 80∘ . This may be due to the fact that increasing
the inclination angle with respect to horizontal directly promotes the
longitudinal buoyant stresses, i.e. of order (̂ ρ H − ̂ρ L )̂g Dsinβ,
̂ thus,
enhancing the flow driving force along the pipe longitudinal direction.
In addition for β = 45∘ , after entering the flow domain, the heavy fluid
slumps on the lower wall of the circular (pipe) section under the light
fluid layer, resulting in a countercurrent flow of the light fluid. This
leads to less mixing between the two fluids and more segregation be­
tween them. On the other hand for β = 80∘ (Fig. 17b), as the longitudinal
buoyant stresses are enhanced, the slumping of the heavy fluid on the
lower wall of the pipe diminishes or occurs poorly; meanwhile, the
injected heavy fluid mixes with the countercurrent flow of the in-place
light fluid, leading to decrease the placement efficiency. Also, for the
case of β = 80∘ , filling the circular section of the flow domain by heavy
fluid takes a much longer time than that for the case of β = 45∘ . Note
these observations are more relevant and valid when δ1 is large, while
for smaller δ1 the effect of the inclination is more or less negligible
(results not shown here for brevity).
In order to better evaluate the effect of the inclination angle on the
dynamics of the front, Fig. 18 shows the front position versus time for
different β. We observe that the heavy fluid front evolution is not
significantly affected by the variation in β. Thus, although tending the
inclination toward the vertical direction affects the degree of mixing
significantly (see Fig. 17), the front motion and dynamics remain rela­
tively unchanged.
In connection to our work, the problem of a miscible fluid injection
in an inclined channel has been investigated by Sahu et al. (2009), using
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920

Fig. 17. Spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration field, Cy (x, t), at Re ≈ 4890, Fr = 6.05, m = 0.45, and δ1 = 1, for (a) β = 45∘ , and (b) β =
80∘ .

4.4.2. Effects of the injection flow rate (evaluated via Re)

In order to analyze the effect of the injection flow rate on the dy­
namics of the placement flow, Fig. 19 depicts the spatiotemporal dia­
grams of the depth-averaged concentration, for two different injection
rates characterized via the change in Re. In order to have a reasonable
comparison between the two cases (i.e. at different injection rates), here
we have exceptionally used the characteristic inertial-buoyant velocity
̂ ib ) and the characteristic inertial-buoyant time (̂t ib ) in order to render
(V
the time and velocity dimensionless. Here, V ̂ ib can be simply found
through balancing the characteristic buoyant stresses (of order (̂ ρH −
ρ L )̂g D)
̂ ρ H + ̂ρ L )V2 ) (Akbari
̂ and the resulting inertial stresses (of order (̂
i
and Taghavi, 2020b):
( ) ( ) 2 √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
̂∼ ̂
ρ H − ̂ρ L ̂g D
̂ ̂ i ⇒V
ρ H + ̂ρ L V ̂ i = At̂ gD ̂, (11)

the form of which can be subsequently used to obtain the characteristic

inertial-buoyant time, i.e.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
D̂ ̂
D
Fig. 18. Time-dependent position of the front along the circular section of the ̂t ib = = . (12)
flow domain below the inlet for Re ≈ 3000, Fr ≈ 3.75, m = 0.45, and δ1 = 1. ̂
V ib At̂ g
Different dashed lines represent β = 45∘ (blue), β = 70∘ (green), and β = 80∘
In other words, the aforementioned forms are used to make the front
(red). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the Web version of this article.) velocity and time dimensionless (instead of V
̂ 0 and D/
̂ V̂ 0 ) as

̂f
V
numerical simulations. They have observed that, for near-horizontal Vf ,ib = , (13)
̂ ib
V
inclinations, the fluids are segregated distinctly, even at considerable
buoyant and inertial forces. In addition, by increasing the inclination ̂t
angle, inertial effects become stronger, and interfacial instabilities tib = . (14)
̂t ib
(Kelvin-Helmholtz type) may grow. These findings have been also re­
ported by Akbari and Taghavi (2020b) for the iso-viscous placement Using the new scaling introduced above, Fig. 19 plots the spatio­
flow in a closed-end pipe, from moderate to near-horizontal inclinations. temporal diagrams, within both the circular and annular regions, for
large δ1 . The first observation in this figure is that the concentration of

Fig. 19. Spatiotemporal diagrams of the depth-averaged concentration field, Cy (x, t), at Ar = 1.3 × 106 , m = 0.45, δ1 = 1, and β = 70∘ for (a) Re = 3000, and (b)
Re = 5000.

13
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
the heavy fluid in the early stages of the flow is much greater for the high
Re case (see the dark region right below the gate value, i.e. small positive
x in Fig. 19b). The dark region on the spatiotemporal diagram in Fig. 19b
is an indicator of a strong transverse mixing in the early stages of the
flow. As time grows, however, the longitudinal buoyant force starts to
take over the imposed inertia in governing the mixing, away from the
inlet down the pipe.
These behaviors mentioned have been also observed by Hogg et al.
(2016), who have investigated theoretically and numerically the injec­
tion of a dense fluid into a horizontal channel filled with a fluid of lower
density. They have found that, for the higher injection rates, the dense
fluid completely fills the channel depth in an expanding region near the
inlet boundary, while far from the inlet the mixing between the two
fluids decreases and a two-layer flow is established.
Comparing the average front velocities in the circular (pipe) section
shows that increasing the injection rate (i.e. increasing Re) does not
affect these velocities. The results also show that the light fluid in the
annulus is removed slightly more efficiently at the higher injection rate
(Fig. 19b).
To further illustrate the dynamics of the front along the circular
section of the flow domain, Fig. 20 shows the front position versus the
dimensionless inertial-buoyant time (tib ) in different Re. Interestingly,
the behaviors of the front in the early stages of the flow are the same for
different Re. In addition, in the buoyant-inertial region, the local front
velocity is only slightly affected when Re is very large. Due to the
smallness of this front velocity increase (at very large Re), it may be
possible to claim that Re does not have much effect on the front
dynamics.
4.5. Placement efficiency
In this section, we intend to provide an overall view of the fluid
placement efficiency, by compactly presenting the effects of the gov­
erning flow parameters, on the average front velocities in the circular
and annular sections of the flow domain, i.e. V f ,pipe and V f ,annulus ,
respectively.
To have a global view and make a comparison among the front ve­
locities (in the circular section of the flow domain) with different flow
parameters, let us use an appropriate reference case for the front velocity
in the form of
Fig. 20. Time-dependent position of the front along the circular section of the
flow domain below the inlet for Ar = 1.1 × 106 , m = 1, δ1 = 1.53, and β =
45∘ . Different dashed lines represent Re = 10780 (green), Re = 7760 (red), and
Re = 4730 (blue). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
14
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
0.68
Vf ≈ , (15)
Fr
which is the long-time front velocity of a heavy fluid penetrating into a
light one, obtained in our previous work (Akbari and Taghavi, 2020b)
for a corresponding iso-viscous case (m = 1) and a large aspect ratio
flow domain (i.e. δ1 = 1.53), for small β. The form of the front velocity
̂0 ̅
in Equation (15), which includes Fr = √V̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ , can be obtained by a
ĝ
At̂D
balance between a characteristic buoyant-inertial velocity, of order
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
At̂gD ̂ 0 ; then, the coefficient
̂ , and the mean imposed velocity, i.e. V
0.68 can be obtained using fitting onto experimental data, as carried out
in Akbari and Taghavi (2020b).
Since we have already observed that Re and β do not much affect the
front velocity, here let us only focus on the effects of Fr, m and δ1 on the
front velocity, for all the experimental results. Fig. 21 plots the average
front velocity in the circular section of the flow domain (V f ,pipe ) versus
Fr. The result of Equation (15) is shown as the thick line. In this figure,
the symbol size and symbol color represent the values of δ1 and m,
respectively (here m = 1 (red), m = 0.45 (blue), and m = 0.21 (black)).
As can be seen, at large values of m and δ1 , the front velocities more or
less match the result of Equation (15), regardless of the value of Fr. As δ1
decreases, however, the front velocities significantly deviate from the
line (the relation of Equation (15)) and present much larger values, as
expected. This is because, in small aspect ratios (i.e. short dumping
heights), the injection dominated region is the only region present in the
flow below the inlet, while the local front velocity is the highest in this
region. It can also be seen that by decreasing the viscosity ratio (m < 1),
the difference between the measured front velocities and the results of
Equation (15) increases, which may be expected since Equation (15)
represents the heavy fluid front velocity penetrating into an iso-viscous
light fluid (m = 1). For a fixed Fr, among the data with the same size (i.e.
the same aspect ratio), the black and blue data points (lower m values)
have higher front velocities. Finally, the largest values of the front ve­
locities are observed at smallest values of Fr, δ1 and m.
Fig. 22 presents the front velocity in the annular section of the flow
domain, V f ,annulus . In this figure, the effects of all the flow parameters are
illustrated; the size, shape, edge color, and face color of the symbols
show the values of δ1 , β, m, and Fr, respectively. As can be seen, the
Fig. 21. Average front velocity along the circular section of the flow domain,
V f ,pipe , versus Fr for all experimental data. The size of data points indicates δ1 .
The color of symbols shows m = 0.21 (black), m = 0.45 (blue), and m = 1 (red).
The line marks the results of Equation (15). (For interpretation of the references
to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of
this article.)
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
Fig. 22. Average front velocity along the annular section, V f ,annulus , for all
experimental data versus Re. The colorbar shows the value of Fr. The edge color
of the symbols marks m = 0.21 (blue), m = 0.45 (cyan), and m = 1 (red). The
size of the data points indicates the value of δ1 . Different symbol shapes
represent β = 45∘ (•), β = 70∘ (◂), and β = 80∘ (◆). The horizontal dashed and
dotted lines show Vf ,annulus = − 1/5 and V f ,annulus ≈ − 1/4, respectively. The
former represents the bulk velocity of the fluid based on the conservation of
mass while the latter is the value of the front velocity in the annulus averaged
over all the experimental data. (For interpretation of the references to color in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
variations in the flow parameters only slightly modify the front velocity
in the annulus; in fact for engineering purposes and on average, one may
assume that all data points coincide roughly on the horizontal dotted
line of V f ,annulus ≈ − 1/4.
The obtained value of V f ,annulus ≈ − 1/4 shows that the fluid front, on
average, may move slightly faster than the average bulk fluid velocity in
the annulus ( V
̂ annulus ), which can be obtained based on a simple mass
conversation over a control volume around the flow domain, following
⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒
⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒ address certain challenges involved in the dump bailing method, e.g.
⃒V
⃒
̂ 0⃒ = ⃒V
̂0 A
⃒ ⃒
̂ annulus ⃒,
̂ annulus A
⃒ (16)
which based on the coordination and dimensions of our flow geometry
becomes:
1
Vannulus ≈ − . (17)
5
In Equation (16), A ̂ 0 and A ̂ annulus represent the areas of the inlet
boundary and the annulus, respectively. As seen in Fig. 22, the average
front velocity of the heavy fluid in the annulus, V f ,annulus marked by the
dotted line, is slightly higher than the calculated bulk velocity of the
fluid in that region, Vannulus , illustrated by the dashed line. In addition,
our UDV measurements in the annular section confirm that the fluid
velocity in the annulus can be as large as 0.4 (see e.g. Fig. 10), which
would be an upper limit for the fluid front velocity.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, a laboratory experimental work is conducted to analyze
the fluid mechanics of placement flows occurring in the dump bailing
method, as a common technique for cement plug placement in P&A
operations. The experimental setup involves two sections (as the flow
domain), i.e. a circular region below the fluid injection inlet, and an
annular region above it. In our experiments, the injected fluid is always
heavier than the in-situ fluid, the fluids are Newtonian, and the two
experimental fluids are miscible. A range of governing parameters is
considered in the experiments to cover the industrial scopes. The aim is
15
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
to investigate the effects of the key parameters, such as the dumping
height, the density and viscosity of the fluids, the injection flow rate, and
the inclination angle. To generalize our results, these effects are studied
in terms of the flow dimensionless numbers.
In general, the results show that the most efficient heavy fluid
placement occurs for the case in which the dumping height is minimum.
Also, increasing the density and viscosity of the injection fluid enhances
the removal of the in-situ fluid, via increasing the heavy fluid front ve­
locity in the circular section of the flow domain. On the other hand, the
fluid front velocity in the annulus region is almost constant and more or
less independent of the flow parameters. The results also indicate that
inclining the flow geometry toward the vertical direction may increase
the mixing between the two fluids as well as the filling time of the flow
domain by the heavy fluid. The investigation of the heavy fluid injection
rate reveals that higher injection rates cause further mixing between the
fluids in the early stage of the flow in the circular section of the flow
domain, but do not much affect the overall fluid front velocity.
From an industrial perspective, our findings can be applied to
enhance the cement plug placement processes in P&A operations.
Generally, this study has revealed the overall picture of a simple heavy
fluid placement in the dump bailing method, and it can be extended to
more complex forms to understand the effects of other influencing pa­
rameters; since the placement flow is affected by the viscosity and
buoyancy, it is to be expected that the flow becomes more complicated
at higher density and viscosity differences, the in-depth study of which
we leave to future works. Finally, our fluid mechanics research approach
has been based on a systematic, fundamental analysis of the heavy fluid
released into the light one, in a simple flow configuration. Therefore, the
understanding of the flow developed in our work is not only relevant/
useful to the dump bailing method, but also to the ordinary balanced
plug cementing method, for which the flow physics and its early dy­
namics may be better understood using our research results.
Let us end this paper by presenting two areas of industrial impor­
tance where our systematic analysis of the flow must be extended in
future works. (i) The exploration of releasing the cement slurry with
non-Newtonian rheology features, such as shear-thinning and yield
stress effects, is a logical next step for future research. Such research can
incomplete removal of the in-situ fluid, contamination of the cement
slurry, poor quality of cement placement, gelation, and thickening of the
stagnant cement in the bailer (Webb et al., 2013; Wu et al., 2018), etc.
(ii) As discussed in the paper, the releasing velocity of the cement slurry
in the real dump bailing process is time-dependent as the volume of the
cement slurry inside the bailer decreases. In our experiments, we
neglected this time-dependent nature of the inflow, which can be
considered in future studies.
Author contribution
S. Akbari: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Formal
analysis, Writing – original draft; S.M. Taghavi: Conceptualization,
Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Supervision
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This research has been carried out at the Univerité Laval. We
gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by PTAC- AUPRF
via Grant No. PTAC-17-WARI-02 and from NSERC via CRDPJ
516022–17 (“Plug and Abandon Strategies for Canada’s Oil & Gas
Wells”). We also gratefully acknowledge the support of the Natural
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Canada
Research Chair on Modeling Complex Flows, and the Canada Founda­
tion for Innovation (the John R. Evans Leaders Fund). We also greatly
thank J. Noël, J. N. Ouellet and M. Lavoie (department technicians) for
their participation in the construction of the experimental apparatus and
useful technical advises, and J. Ireland from Canadian Natural Resources
Limited for valuable discussions.
References
Aas, B., Sørbø, J., Stokka, S., Saasen, A., Lunde, Ø., Phillips, C., Vrålstad, T., 2016.
Cement placement with tubing left in hole during plug and abandonment operations.
In: IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Abdelal, G.F., Robotham, A., Carragher, P., 2015. Numerical simulation of a patent
technology for sealing of deep-sea oil wells using nonlinear finite element method.
J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 133, 192–200.
Achang, M., Yanyao, L., Radonjic, M., 2020. A review of past, present, and future
technologies for permanent plugging and abandonment of wellbores and restoration
of subsurface geologic barriers. Environ. Eng. Sci. 37 (6), 395–408.
Akbari, S., Taghavi, S.M., 2020a. Experiments on fluid placement in a confined pipe:
fluid mechanics analysis for plug and abandonment applications. In: ASME 2020
39th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering. American
Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Akbari, S., Taghavi, S.M., 2020b. Injection of a heavy fluid into a light fluid in a closed-
end pipe. Phys. Fluids 32 (6), 063302.
Alvi, M.A.A., Khalifeh, M., Agonafir, M.B., 2020. Effect of nanoparticles on properties of
geopolymers designed for well cementing applications. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 191,
107128.
Amiri, A., Larachi, F., Taghavi, S.M., 2016. Buoyant miscible displacement flows in
vertical pipe. Phys. Fluids 28 (10), 102105.
Aranha, P.E., Miranda, C.R., Magalhaes, J.V., Campos, G., Martins, A.L., Braghini, A.,
Naccache, M.F., 2011. Dynamic aspects governing cement plug placement in
deepwater wells. In: SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition. Society of
Petroleum Engineers.
Barnett, S.J., 1992. The Dynamics of Buoyant Releases in Confined Spaces. PhD thesis.
University of Cambridge.
Bizhani, M., Foolad, Y., Frigaard, I.A., 2020. Turbulent displacement flow of viscoplastic
fluids in eccentric annulus: Experiments. Phys. Fluids 32 (4), 045117.
Chhabra, S., Shipman, T.N., Prasad, A.K., 2005. The entrainment behavior of a turbulent
axisymmetric jet in a viscous host fluid. Exp. Fluid 38 (1), 70–79.
da Silva Araujo, R.G., da Silva, F.P.F., de Sena Costa, B.L., Moreira, P.H.S.S.,
Rodrigues, M.A.F., de Oliveira Freitas, J.C., 2020. Study of cement blend containing
rice husk ash for oil well plug and abandonment operations. Construct. Build. Mater.
254, 119217.
Daneshi, M., MacKenzie, J., Balmforth, N.J., Martinez, D.M., Hewitt, D.R., 2020.
Obstructed viscoplastic flow in a Hele-Shaw cell. Phys. Rev. Fluids 5 (1), 013301.
Debacq, M., Fanguet, V., Hulin, J.P., Salin, D., Perrin, B., 2001. Self-similar concentration
profiles in buoyant mixing of miscible fluids in a vertical tube. Phys. Fluids 13 (11),
3097–3100.
Debacq, M., Hulin, J.P., Salin, D., Perrin, B., Hinch, E.J., 2003. Buoyant mixing of
miscible fluids of varying viscosities in vertical tubes. Phys. Fluids 15 (12),
3846–3855.
Durmaz, S., Karbasforoushan, H., Ozbayoglu, E.M., Miska, S.Z., Yu, M., Takach, N., 2016.
Mixing of cement slurries during cement plug setting. In: SPE Deepwater Drilling and
Completions Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Eslami, A., Mollaabbasi, R., Roustaei, A., Taghavi, S.M., 2019. Pressure driven
displacement flows of yield stress fluids: viscosity ratio effects. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 97
(11), 2804–2817.
Eslami, A., Taghavi, S.M., 2017. Viscous fingering regimes in elasto-visco-plastic fluids.
J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 243, 79–94.
Eslami, A., Taghavi, S.M., 2019. Viscous fingering of yield stress fluids: the effects of
wettability. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 264, 25–47.
Etrati, A., 2018. Displacement Flow of Miscible Fluids with Density and Viscosity
Contrast. PhD thesis. University of British Columbia.
Etrati, A., Roustaei, A., Frigaard, I.A., 2020. Strategies for mud-removal from washouts
during cementing of vertical surface casing. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 195, 107454.
Fernandes, R., Wilson, D., 2020. Modelling the cleaning of viscoplastic layers by
impinging coherent turbulent water jets. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 282,
104314.
Foroushan, H.K., Ozbayoglu, E.M., Gomes, P.J., Yu, M., 2020. Mud/cement displacement
in vertical eccentric annuli. SPE Drill. Complet.
Frigaard, I.A., Ngwa, G.A., 2010. Slumping flows in narrow eccentric annuli: design of
chemical packers and cementing of subsurface gas pipelines. Transport Porous Media
83 (1), 29–53.
Ghazal, A., Karimfazli, I., 2020. Off-bottom plug placement: how it works?. In:
International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. American
Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Hogg, A.J., Nasr-Azadani, M.M., Ungarish, M., Meiburg, E., 2016. Sustained gravity
currents in a channel. J. Fluid Mech. 798, 853–888.
Ingraffea, A.R., Wawrzynek, P.A., Santoro, R., Wells, M., 2020. Reported methane
emissions from active oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania, 2014–2018. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 54 (9), 5783–5789.
16
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
Jenny, M., Dusek, J., Bouchet, G., 2004. Instabilities and transition of a sphere falling or
ascending freely in a Newtonian fluid. J. Fluid Mech. 508, 201.
Kamali, M., Khalifeh, M., Saasen, A., Delabroy, L., 2020. Materials for well
integrity–short-term mechanical properties of cement systems. In: SPE Norway
Subsurface Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineering.
Katende, A., Lu, Y., Bunger, A., Radonjic, M., 2020. Experimental quantification of the
effect of oil based drilling fluid contamination on properties of wellbore cement.
J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 79, 103328.
Khalifeh, M., Saasen, A., 2020. Introduction to Permanent Plug and Abandonment of
Wells. Springer Nature.
Liu, S., Ott, W.K., 2020. Sodium silicate applications in oil, gas & geothermal well
operations. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 195, 107693.
Liu, X., Nair, S.D., Aughenbaugh, K., Juenger, M., van Oort, E., 2020. Improving the
rheological properties of alkali-activated geopolymers using non-aqueous fluids for
well cementing and lost circulation control purposes. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 195,
107555.
Longo, S., Ungarish, M., Di Federico, V., Chiapponi, L., Addona, F., 2016. Gravity
currents produced by constant and time varying inflow in a circular cross-section
channel: experiments and theory. Adv. Water Resour. 90, 10–23.
Maagi, M.T., Lupyana, S.D., Jun, G., 2020. Nanotechnology in the petroleum industry:
focus on the use of nanosilica in oil-well cementing applications - a review. J. Petrol.
Sci. Eng. 193, 107397.
Malekmohammadi, S., Carrasco-Teja, M., Storey, S., Frigaard, I.A., Martinez, D.M.,
2010a. An experimental study of laminar displacement flows in narrow vertical
eccentric annuli. J. Fluid Mech. 649, 371.
Malekmohammadi, S., Naccache, M.F., Frigaard, I.A., Martinez, D.M., 2010b. Buoyancy
driven slump flows of non-Newtonian fluids in pipes. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 72 (3–4),
236–243.
Martin, A., Negretti, M.E., Hopfinger, E.J., 2019. Development of gravity currents on
slopes under different interfacial instability conditions. J. Fluid Mech. 880, 180–208.
Mathur, M., Sreenivas, K., 2006. Effects of ambient viscosity on the entrainment and
dynamics of a buoyant jet. In: IUTAM Symposium on Laminar-Turbulent Transition.
Springer, pp. 219–224.
Mehr, N., Roques, C., Méheust, Y., Rochefort, S., Selker, J.S., 2020. Mixing and finger
morphologies in miscible non-Newtonian solution displacement. Exp. Fluid 61 (4),
1–19.
Mougin, G., Magnaudet, J., 2001. Path instability of a rising bubble. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88
(1), 014502.
Moyers-Gonzalez, M.A., Frigaard, I.A., 2008. Kinematic instabilities in two-layer
eccentric annular flows, part 1: Newtonian fluids. J. Eng. Math. 62 (2), 103–131.
Nelson, E.B., 1990. Well Cementing, vol. 28. Newnes.
Nowak, M., 2002. Wall shear stress measurement in a turbulent pipe flow using
ultrasound Doppler velocimetry. Exp. Fluid 33 (2), 249–255.
Pelipenko, S., Frigaard, I.A., 2004. Two-dimensional computational simulation of
eccentric annular cementing displacements. IMA J. Appl. Math. 69 (6), 557–583.
Rice, A.K., Lackey, G., Proctor, J., Singha, K., 2018. Groundwater-quality hazards of
methane leakage from hydrocarbon wells: a review of observational and numerical
studies and four testable hypotheses. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Water 5 (4), e1283.
Riddick, S.N., Mauzerall, D.L., Celia, M.A., Kang, M., Bandilla, K., 2020. Variability
observed over time in methane emissions from abandoned oil and gas wells. Int. J.
Greenh. Gas Con. 100, 103116.
Sahu, K., Ding, H., Valluri, P., Matar, O., 2009. Pressure-driven miscible two-fluid
channel flow with density gradients. Phys. Fluids 21, 043603.
Schout, G., Griffioen, J., Hassanizadeh, S.M., de Lichtbuer, G.C., Hartog, N., 2019.
Occurrence and fate of methane leakage from cut and buried abandoned gas wells in
The Netherlands. Sci. Total Environ. 659, 773–782.
Séon, T., 2006. From Turbulent Mixing to Gravity Currents in Confined Geometry. PhD
thesis. Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris.
Séon, T., Hulin, J.P., Salin, D., Perrin, B., Hinch, E., 2006. Laser-induced fluorescence
measurements of buoyancy driven mixing in tilted tubes. Phys. Fluids 18, 041701.
Séon, T., Hulin, J.P., Salin, D., Perrin, B., Hinch, E.J., 2005. Buoyancy driven miscible
front dynamics in tilted tubes. Phys. Fluids 17 (3), 031702.
Séon, T., Znaien, J., Salin, D., Hulin, J.P., Hinch, E.J., Perrin, B., 2007. Transient
buoyancy-driven front dynamics in nearly horizontal tubes. Phys. Fluids 19 (12),
123603.
Sher, D., Woods, A.W., 2017. Mixing in continuous gravity currents. J. Fluid Mech. 818,
R4.
Skadsem, H.J., Kragset, S., Lund, B., Ytrehus, J.D., Taghipour, A., 2019. Annular
displacement in a highly inclined irregular wellbore: experimental and three
dimensional numerical simulations. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 172, 998–1013.
Taghavi, S.M., 2011. From Displacement to Mixing in a Slightly Inclined Duct. PhD
thesis. University of British Columbia.
Taghavi, S.M., Alba, K., Frigaard, I.A., 2012a. Buoyant miscible displacement flows at
moderate viscosity ratios and low Atwood numbers in near-horizontal ducts. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 69 (1), 404–418.
Taghavi, S.M., Alba, K., Moyers-Gonzalez, M., Frigaard, I.A., 2012b. Incomplete
fluid–fluid displacement of yield stress fluids in near-horizontal pipes: experiments
and theory. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 167, 59–74.
Taghavi, S.M., Alba, K., Séon, T., Wielage-Burchard, K., Martinez, D.M., Frigaard, I.A.,
2012c. Miscible displacement flows in near-horizontal ducts at low Atwood number.
J. Fluid Mech. 696, 175–214.
Taghavi, S.M., Séon, T., Martinez, D.M., Frigaard, I.A., 2009. Buoyancy-dominated
displacement flows in near-horizontal channels: the viscous limit. J. Fluid Mech.
639, 1–35.
S. Akbari and S.M. Taghavi
Taghavi, S.M., Séon, T., Martinez, D.M., Frigaard, I.A., 2010. Influence of an imposed
flow on the stability of a gravity current in a near horizontal duct. Phys. Fluids 22,
031702.
Taghavi, S.M., Séon, T., Wielage-Burchard, K., Martinez, D.M., Frigaard, I.A., 2011.
Stationary residual layers in buoyant Newtonian displacement flows. Phys. Fluids 23
(4), 044105.
Takeda, Y., 2012. Ultrasonic Doppler Velocity Profiler for Fluid Flow, vol. 101. Springer
Science & Business Media.
Tehrani, A., Ferguson, J., Bittleston, S., 1992. Laminar displacement in annuli: a
combined experimental and theoretical study. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Trudel, E., Bizhani, M., Zare, M., Frigaard, I.A., 2019. Plug and abandonment practices
and trends: a british columbia perspective. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 183, 106417.
Tveit, M.R., Khalifeh, M., Nordam, T., Saasen, A., 2020. The fate of hydrocarbon leaks
from plugged and abandoned wells by means of natural seepages. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng.
196, 108004.
van Oort, E., Juenger, M., Aldin, M., Thombare, A., McDonald, M., Lucas, A.,
Ditlevsen, F., 2020. Simplifying well abandonments using shale as a barrier. In:
IADC/SPE International Drilling Conference and Exhibition, SPE, USA.
Varges, P.R., Fonseca, B.S., Costa, C.M., Naccache, M.F., de Souza Mendes, P.R.,
Pinho, H.A., 2018. Exchange flows between yield stress materials and Newtonian
oils. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 261, 123–135.
Vrålstad, T., Saasen, A., Fjær, E., Øia, T., Ytrehus, J.D., Khalifeh, M., 2019. Plug &
abandonment of offshore wells: ensuring long-term well integrity and cost-
efficiency. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 173, 478–491.
17
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 205 (2021) 108920
Walling, E., Mollaabbasi, R., Taghavi, S.M., 2018. Buoyant miscible displacement flows
in a nonuniform Hele-Shaw cell. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3 (3), 034003.
Webb, B., Rudnik, A., Bonin, B., Lefort, L., 2013. Plug and abandonment of a deep high-
pressure and high-temperature gulf of Mexico well using coiled tubing: a case
history. In: SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing and Well Intervention Conference and
Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
White, W., Calvert, D., Barker, J., Bour, D., 1992. A laboratory study of cement and resin
plugs placed with thru-tubing dump bailers. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Washington, DC.
Wu, Q., Chamarthy, P., Lindsey, A., Thompson, J., 2018. Methods and processes to help
improve the operational efficiency and reliability of wireline-run cement plugs. In:
SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing and Well Intervention Conference and Exhibition. Society
of Petroleum Engineers.
Xue, N., Khodaparast, S., Stone, H.A., 2019. Fountain mixing in a filling box at low
Reynolds numbers. Phys. Rev. Fluids 4 (2), 024501.
Xue, N., Khodaparast, S., Zhu, L., Nunes, J.K., Kim, H., Stone, H.A., 2017. Laboratory
layered latte. Nat. Commun. 8 (1), 1960.
Ytrehus, J.D., Lund, B., Taghipour, A., Divyankar, S., Saasen, A., 2017. Experimental
investigation of wellbore fluid displacement in concentric and eccentric annulus. In:
ASME 2017 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection.
Yuan, Y., Horner-Devine, A.R., 2013. Laboratory investigation of the impact of lateral
spreading on buoyancy flux in a river plume. J. Phys. Oceanogr. 43 (12), 2588–2610.
Yuan, Y., Horner-Devine, A.R., 2017. Experimental investigation of large-scale vortices in
a freely spreading gravity current. Phys. Fluids 29 (10), 106603.