Proceedings of the ASME 2022 41st International

Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2022
June 5-10, 2022, Hamburg, Germany

OMAE2022-79290

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022

PLUG CEMENTING STABILITY

Anastasia Vogl 1 , Nile Waldal 2 , Parisa Sarmadi 3 , Adam Fershtman 2 , Rodrigo S. Mitishita 2 , and Ian A. Frigaard 2,3 ∗

1 UBC Engineering Physics, University of British Columbia, 6224 Agricultural Road, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1, Canada
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, 2324 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada
3 Department of Mathematics, University of British Columbia, 1984 Mathematics Road, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z2, Canada

ABSTRACT
Off bottom plugs are set in both well drilling (kick-off plugs)
and in well decommissioning (abandonment plugs). In both
cases a dense fluid (cement slurry) is placed over less dense well-
bore fluids. In the case of kick-off plugs, viscous pills are com-
monly used, which can help stabilize this mechanically unstable
situation. Abandonment plugs however are often set on top of
the freshwater that is used to clean the well prior to abandon-
ment. This is the current practice for many wells in Northwest-
ern Canada. It is a mystery how such cement plugs are able to
stay in place for a time sufficient for the cement to thicken and
hydrate, but field evidence suggests they do.
In this paper we explore the mechanically unstable scenario
of a heavy yield-stress fluid placed on top of a less dense New-
tonian fluid in a cylindrical pipe, dimensionally scaled to repre-
sent an off-bottom plug. We present details of the experimental
setup and its calibration. We then explore the buoyancy-driven
exchange flows that occur in transitional parametric regimes be-
tween flow and no-flow states, by using both computer modelling
and physical experimentation. 3D numerical simulation, using a
Volume of fluid method, is carried out to capture the interface
between the fluids. The 3D model provides us with a more de-
tailed analysis of the concentration and velocity profiles, along
with comparisons to snapshots of the experimental results. The
aim is to explore the phenomenology of these unstable flows and
be able to estimate timescales of the destabilization. Preliminary
results are presented.
∗ Corresponding
Author. Email: frigaard@math.ubc.ca
1 Introduction
In plug cementing one pumps a dense cement slurry over
less dense fluids, expecting that this gravity-defying configura-
tion will be maintained long enough for the cement to hydrate
and thicken. Since the 1970’s flow-related instabilities have been
identified as a potential operational failure mode [1–4]. In this
early era, many plugs were kick-off plugs, designed to aid devi-
ated well drilling, which meant that the plugs were set in wells
filled with drilling mud and viscous pills were often used to pro-
vide more support underneath. Studies such as [5, 6] report sig-
nificant failure rates in offshore settings. The study of rheolog-
ical means to avoid buoyancy driven instability emerged in this
period [7, 8]. It was observed that plug failure often was accom-
panied by slumping-type shear flows (exchange flows). Study
of such flows, resulting in identification of the relevant dimen-
sionless groups that govern static stability of the flow, and their
critical limits [9]. The static stability limits derived are neces-
sarily conservative, in that they concern unmixed interfaces and
many different possible interfaces. More recent studies have em-
ployed computational and experimental techniques to study both
miscible and immiscible flows of this type [10–14], without be-
ing concerned directly with the stability conditions. However,
plug failure problems persist to the present day [15, 16].
The emergence of improved directional drilling techniques
in the late 1990’s lessened the use of kick-off plugs. Interest
has recently shifted to abandonment plugs, which are generally
longer than kick-off plugs, but which require hydraulic integrity
(a seal) as well as structural. Cementing practices in British
Columbia, Canada [17], reveal that it is common for abandon-

V010T11A038-1 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

ment plugs to be set on top of the freshwater used to clean the
well prior to abandonment. Hence these scenarios involve the
slurry and a fully miscible lower fluid, with very large density
difference. The pumping and placement phases here may result
in various mixing processes which are partly understood [18–22].

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022

After placement, the tubing is removed from the cement slurry
(balanced plug method), and the quiescent mixture is left to set.
With no means to measure/visualize the downhole interfaces, the
likely post-placement scenario is of intact slurry resting on top
of a mixed layer of cement/water. The industry perception is that
this process works. The top of the set plugs are later tagged in
position and sometimes pressure tested. In those cases where the
plugs are much later drilled out for reentry, anecdotal evidence is
that the bit breaks through a clean interface into the water. Given
that abandonment plugs may be 50-150m long, this suggests that
instabilities at the bottom of the set cement plug are not catas-
trophic, when they arise.
This motivates this preliminary study in which we study on- (a) (c)
set of flows in a vertical pipe. In what may be considered an
extreme setting, we consider placement of a dense fluid with a
yield stress above a less dense fluid, in the absence of any initial
mixing. Mixing may be expected to stabilize the motion by re-
ducing the adverse buoyancy gradient. According to [9], the no
(b)
flow limit for this setup occurs when the ratio of yield stress to
buoyancy stress (Y = τ̂Y /(∆ρ̂ ĝD̂)), drops below a critical value
of Yc = 0.3043. We have developed an experimental apparatus FIGURE 1. (a) Image of experimental apparatus in vertical position
that allows us to explore flows around this critical limit, and do (b) Schematic of pipe network attached to experimental section (c)
so here. While our apparatus is geometrically scaled and the fluid Schematic of heavy fluid over light fluid in a pipe with initial shaped
property selection is to cover ranges Y ≤ Yc , we cannot comment interface.
regarding the flow timescales, as these are not well known. The
experiments are supplemented by a computational study cover-
ing similar parameters. The objectives are mostly phenomeno- camera from FLIR Industries fitted with a 12mm, f/1.8 Edmund
logical at present, i.e. to identify the principle flow types and Optics lens.
failure modes. To obtain the correct rheology for the heavy yield stress
fluid, we use Carbopol® polymer and sugar. Carbopol® pro-
duces a simple yield-stress fluid which is commonly modelled
2 Methodology using the Herschel-Bulkley equation: τ̂ = τˆ0 + κ̂ γ̇ˆn [23]. Sugar
2.1 Experimental methodology is used to vary the fluid density. To create the solution, we first
The experimental section consists of two plexiglass pipes, mix the sugar and water together with red food colouring using a
each with inner diameter 19.05mm, and length approximately three-bladed impeller at a high enough RPM to produce a stable
1.575m. The pipes are enclosed in rectangular plexiglass aquar- vortex. We then disperse the Carbopol® into the solution using
iums filled with glycerine to reduce refractive visualization er- a sieve, reduce the RPM to 150, and let the solution mix for one
rors. The pipes are backlit, mounted end-to-end and separated hour. We neutralize the solution with sodium hydroxide, and let
by a pneumatically-actuated gate valve. They are mounted to an it mix for another hour. We also add 50ppm of formaldehyde to
apparatus that can rotate from horizontal to vertical, see Fig. 1a. ensure that there is no microbial growth in the solution. After
This investigation focuses on varying the rheology, and therefore the final mixing is complete, we let the solution rest for one day
the section was kept vertical for all trials. Various pipes/valves before usage.
are connected to each section, see Fig. 1b, allowing the exper- To fill the section, we first pump the light fluid into the pipes
imenters to fill the apparatus with the desired fluids. To image with the gate valve open. We then wait for any bubbles to rise out
the experiments, two cameras are mounted level to the gate valve of the liquid, and take additional measures to ensure no bubbles
and approximately 1.5m away from the section. The cameras are stuck around the gate valve. We close the gate valve and fill
used are a Nikon Z5, and an Oryx 10-Gigabit machine vision the top pipe with the heavy fluid. We again wait for bubbles to

V010T11A038-2 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

rise out of the solution. To run the experiment we start the cam-
eras, open the gate valve, and then image the resulting exchange

(m/s)
for fifteen minutes.
An Anton Paar DMA 35 density meter was used to measure
the density of the heavy fluid. To obtain the yield stress, three

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022

shear rate controlled ramp up/ramp down tests were done on
each sample of the fluid used in the experiments, using a Malvern
Kinexus Ultra+ rheometer. To avoid wall slip, we glued 40 µm
roughness sandpaper to smooth, 40mm parallel plates. Addition-
ally, we performed a pre-shear at γ̇ˆ = 100s−1 for 30s followed (b)

y(m)
by a 30s controlled stress rest at 0Pa. The results from the three
tests were averaged and then the averages from the ramp-down

(m/s)
curve were fitted to the Herschel-Bulkley equation.

2.2 Computational model

To calculate the flow, the Navier-Stokes equations are solved
numerically. We model the two fluids with a volumetric con-
centration C of the displacing fluid and resolve the flow using a
volume-of-fluid (VoF) method. The field equations are:
(c)

∂ û
 (a)
ρ̂ ˆ û = −∇
+ û · ∇ ˆ p̂ + ∇
ˆ · τ̂ + ρ̂ ĝ, (1)
∂ tˆ
∇ˆ · û = 0, (2)
∂C FIGURE 2. The mesh size study of a heavy over light fluids flow in a
ˆ = 0.
+ û · ∇C (3) pipe. Properties of the fluids are the same as C1 in Tab. 1. (a) Vertical
∂ tˆ
centre-plane of the flow domain. The solid lines show the interface of
The density and stress tensor (τ̂) are defined using the proper- C = 0.5 at tˆ = 2 s, as the finger begins to form. (b) Velocity magnitude
ties of each fluid and linear interpolation with respect to C. For (m/s) variations across the pipe at ẑ = 0.4 m at tˆ = 2 s for different mesh
boundary conditions we use no-slip on the walls. Initially, the sizes, mesh 1: 60000 cells, mesh 2: 247500 cells, mesh 3: 800000 cells,
top half of the domain is filled with the yield stress heavy fluid and mesh 4: 1837500 cells . (c) Norm of velocity difference (m/s) of
(cement) and the bottom half is filled with light Newtonian fluid the case with mesh 3 from the velocity field of the case with mesh 3 and
(wellbore fluid). The interface is initially shaped, see Fig. 1c, γ̇ˆε = 10−6 s−1 for different regularization parameters.
which ensures that the initial configuration creates shear stresses
and hence flows. The diameter of the pipe is that of the ex-
periment but we limit the length to L̂ = 0.762m, which is long
enough to ensure negligible effects of boundaries for the times
over which we compute.
We have used RheoTool [24] to discretize and solve for the
displacement flow. This software is a fork of the standard, val- dicative of the transition to unyielded fluid, which is represented
idated and widely used OpenFOAM 1 software, used by both as a very viscous fluid in this model. Table 1 shows the cases that
industry and academia. RheoTool includes solvers improved we investigate computationally in the current study.
specifically for non-Newtonian fluids. To model the viscoplas-
tic fluid we use the Papanastasiou regularization model: To study convergence we have computed the flow of case C1
in Table 1 in a 3D pipe using different mesh sizes and regulariza-
τ̂y  tion parameters. Figure 2a & b show the interface and velocity
µ̂e,r = κ̂ γ̇ˆn−1 + 1 − exp(−γ̇ˆ/γ̇ˆε ) ,

(4)
γ̇ˆ magnitude at ẑ = 0.4 m after tˆ = 2 s. We can see that results show
good agreement for fine enough mesh (mesh 3). Figure 2c shows
where γ̇ˆ and γ̇ˆε are the rate of strain and the regularization param- the norm of the velocity difference of the case with mesh 3 from
eter, respectively. The latter represents a small rate of strain, in- the velocity field of the case with mesh 3 and γ̇ˆε = 10−6 s−1 . The
figure shows that all the examined regularization parameters give
reasonable results and we have used γ̇ˆε = 10−4 s−1 in this study.
1 http://www.openfoam.com

V010T11A038-3 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 TABLE 1. Computational map, including fluid properties.

Case number Y = τ̂y /∆ρ̂ ĝD̂ Heavy fluid τ̂y [Pa] κ̂h [Pa.snh ] nh ρ̂h [kg/m3 ] Light fluid ρ̂l [kg/m3 ] µ̂l [Pa.s]

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022

C1 0.03 Carbopol 0.1 4.4 3.7 0.41 1783.8 Water 998.2 0.001
C2 0.03 Carbopol 0.1 4.4 3.7 0.41 1935.0 Glycerol 80% 1150 0.04
C3 0.03 Carbopol 0.1 4.4 3.7 0.41 1995.6 Glycerol 100% 1210 0.81

3 Results
3.1 Experimental results
Approximately 20 experiments were performed covering a
range of Y ∈ [0, 0.4] for various fluid combinations. These in-
cluded some that did not destabilize noticeably during the 15
minute time interval. A subsequent study will report the quan-
titative results in detail. Here we just give an overview of the
main qualitative features of those experiments that were unsta-
ble. There were two main flow features observed during the ex-
periments: a rising finger and falling droplets.
The rising finger was seen in the top half of the pipe, as the
lighter fluid flowed up the center of the pipe, leaving a film of
the heavy fluid around the inner surface, see Fig. 3. In one ex-
periment we observed a slumping flow, but most experiment dis-
played the finger flow, approximately axisymmetric. There were
variations in the speed of the finger and its thickness. As the fin-
ger elongated upwards a draining wall layer grew behind it. The
wall layers directly behind the finger tip appeared uniform (for
5-10 diameters), but lower down in the draining film a variety of
convective instabilities became visible. Some exhibited helical
patterns and symmetry breaking. Lower down, the wave ampli-
tudes grew and parts of the draining film broke off into droplets
of different size
Falling droplets were seen in the bottom half of the section,
and resulted from pieces of the yield stress fluid breaking off of
the main volume of fluid and travelling downwards in the section,
see Fig. 4 for the formation of the droplet, and Fig. 5 for the final
shape of the droplet. During the early stages of flow, the droplets
appear to form in the center of the pipe. In the late stages of the FIGURE 3. Example of a finger of the lighter fluid flowing axisym-
flow they appear to form from wave growth and break-off in the metrically into the heavy fluid. Image from trial 8
draining wall film, as described above.
The largest droplets were clearly limited by the size of the
pipe, perhaps also in terms of wavelength selection in the drain- speeds, sometimes catching the larger droplets and sometimes
ing film instability. These adopted the form of a short “slug” or moving slowly and oscillating in the flow. A final noteworthy
“jellyfish” moving downwards in the pipe e.g. Fig. 5, in steady observation is the time to destabilization. In some cases the flow
motion with some instability in the wake. Smaller droplets were would begin almost immediately, in others it took a long time for
also shed. These could take a variety of shapes, but the most the interface to destabilize.
common had a more ellipsoidal front and longer tail. The small Some trials had an initial finger and droplet form, only to
droplet diameter varied between a few millimetres and slightly collapse and stabilize. Our understanding of this is that the initial
smaller than the pipe diameter. They descended at a range of interface configuration plus motion of the gate valve may induce

V010T11A038-4 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022
FIGURE 4. Example of droplet development. Image from trial 18

stresses that allow initial flow/droplet breakup, but this in itself

relieves some of the stress allowing the yield stress to dominate.
Unfortunately, observations of the initial interface were obscured
by the flanges and gate-valve setup in the middle of our appara-
tus.
In general, the terminal velocity of the droplets increased
with the density difference, but as the size and shape varied, the
dominant balance was not universal. More experiments and data
would be needed to analyze this. Similarly, for the steady finger
velocity the experimental results are only preliminary. Finally,
the time to flow onset appears to increase with increasing yield
number, however, further data is required to fully analyze this.
To give a broad assessment of the various velocities present
in the experiment, we have constructed a spatiotemporal image
by averaging the cross-section of the experimental pipe at differ- FIGURE 5. Example of final droplet shape. Image from trial 18
ent heights. Figure 6 gives an example that is illustrative of many
of our observed flows. The bright colour represents the heavy
yield stress fluid (Carbopol), and the dark colour the light New- locity. There is significant variation in the initial trajectories of
tonian fluid (water). Initially the top half is completely bright, the droplets due to varying shapes and sizes of the initial wave-
with the bottom completely dark. The very dark horizontal bands fronts which form into droplets upon breaking off.
mark positions where there is e.g. a flange or supporting bracket The central finger front also typically travels at constant
for the apparatus. When the gate valve is opened, droplets of the speed. However, in this particular experiment after about 150
heavy fluid begin to fall and a central finger of the light fluid be- seconds there was an abrupt shift to a slower front speed for
gins to ascend into the heavy fluid. Droplets can be seen in the several minutes before the front reverted back to its original
spatiotemporal plot profile by the streaks of yellow in the lower speed. The flow in this interval also qualitatively changed, shift-
part of the plot. These droplets follow approximately hyperbolic ing from a central steady finger to an undulating helical flow.
trajectories in the space time plot, accelerating to a terminal ve- The finger began shifting around the pipe, releasing droplets as

V010T11A038-5 Copyright © 2022 by ASME


FIGURE 6. Spatiotemporal profile for experiment 16, with densified
Carbopol over water: τy = 1.59Pa, ∆ρ = 214.9kg/m3 , κ = 4.416Pa sn ,
n = 0.5394
it did so. Eventually the finger front appears to have reverted
to something like its initial slope. Figure 6 illustrates well the
varied wavespeeds found in the wall film, moving downwards
against the upwards moving finger. Although quite stochastic,
the wavespeeds seem to fall in a range. As these develop in time,
some develop into the streak-like droplet trajectories. The height
of the pipe over which wave-like motions are found extends as
the experiment progresses.
In the spatiotemporal profile for experiment 11, we observed
a slumping behaviour, i.e. the heavy fluid moved primarily down-
wards along one side of the pipe with the finger moving asym-
metrically upwards. Comparatively, this mode is characterized
by a rapid front motion with very frequent droplets; see Fig. 7.
We see that the diffuse layer behind the ascending front is nar-
rower than for the central mode and does not spread. The tran-
sition from wave to droplet in this layer is relatively fast and
droplets appear at high frequency.
This slumping side-by-side mode was less frequently ob-
served than the central mode. A repeat experiment with approx-
imately the same Y , gave a central finger with speed 2.57mm/s,
compared to 4.05mm/s for the slump propagation in Fig. 7. Com-
paring with Fig. 6, the density difference is similar and the Car-
bopol more viscous, so we would intuitively expect a slower
wavespeed, i.e. if the interface followed a central finger evolu-
tion. Instead the wavespeed is 2-3 times faster. What determines
the propagation mode is not clear and it may depend on the ini-
tial conditions as the gate valve is opened. However, the slump-
ing mode does not seem to persist stably. In experiment 11, later
the flow switched modes to a central finger, causing it to slow
down. It continued in central mode until the whole test section
V010T11A038-6
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022
FIGURE 7. Spatiotemporal profile for experiment 11, with densified
Carbopol over water: τy = 2.98Pa, ∆ρ = 210.0kg/m3 , κ = 5.592Pa sn ,
n = 0.5199
was cleared.
Finally, Fig. 8 shows an experiment with a higher viscosity
ratio, here using a Xanthan gum solution instead of water as the
lower light fluid. The qualitative behaviour here was quite similar
to other trials, which is reflected in the spatiotemporal profile.
One thing which is of note is a slight shifting of the finger front
speed before particularly significant droplet is created, i.e. note
the lighter orange downward streaks. This can be seen in other
trials as well, but the sudden increase in finger speed before a
large orange streak is very noticeable in this experiment. Also of
note, was a rather unusual first droplet at the onset of flow. The
first droplet exhibited a long, winding tail before taking on the
usual ”jellyfish” shape.
3.2 Computational results
We now show examples of computational results from cases
C1-C3 in Table 1. Here, we vary the density of both fluids, keep-
ing constant density difference, and we vary the viscosity of the
lower fluid. The upper fluid rheology is representative of a Car-
bopol solution the lower fluid ranges from pure water to a fairly
viscous Newtonian fluid. The yield stress is larger than we mea-
sured in our densified experimental solutions. It has often been
observed that sugar can reduce the yield stress. This is compen-
sated by the larger density differences in Table 1, which are more
representative of field values. In cases C1-C3 we keep the dimen-
sionless yield number, Y = τ̂y /∆ρ̂ ĝD̂, fixed at Y = 0.03 which is
below what we expect is required to stop the flow.
Figure 9 shows the flow development of the heavy over light
fluid in case C1. The concentration is shown in the mid-plane of
Copyright © 2022 by ASME

FIGURE 8. Spatiotemporal profile for experiment 20, with densified
Carbopol over Xanthan gum with τy = 1.07Pa, ∆ρ = 212.9kg/m3 , κC =
3.555Pa sCn , nC = 0.5490, κx = 0.0197Pa snx , nx = 0.6929
the pipe (x = 0) with view of the x+ plane in Fig. 9a and the view
of the x− plane in Fig. 9b. The grey body shows the iso-surface
C = 0.5. This case has a low yield number, Y = 0.03, and a very
high viscosity ratio, the light fluid is water. The initially sheared
interface changes rapidly and the flow is asymmetric, as was the
initial interface configuration. The light fluid fingers upwards
in the heavy fluid along one side of the pipe. The correspond-
ing layer of heavy fluid moves down, the layer thickness ampli-
fies into a droplet that breaks off. The terminal velocity of the
droplet is higher than that of the water finger moving upwards.
The droplet becomes more symmetric in shape and position as it
falls.
In Fig. 10, the shear rate of the flow is shown for the same
flow of Fig. 9a. A logarithmic scale is used to show the shear rate
for better visualization. The grey region shows the unyielded
heavy fluid which is identified by τ̂ = τ̂y . The solid black line
represents the iso-line C = 0.5. We can see that the droplet is
fully yielded as it falls through the light fluid, i.e. γ̇ˆ ≫ γ̇ˆε , but the
shear rates are still orders of magnitude less than that in the sur-
rounding fluid. This “jellyfish” shape is similar to those observed
with very viscous Newtonian droplets falling in water, and to
those in our experiments. Further up the finger progresses much
slower than the droplet due to the yield stress of the heavy fluid
above.
Figure 11 shows the flow development of case C2 from Ta-
ble 1. The concentration is shown in the mid-plane of the pipe
(x = 0) with the side view of x+ plane. Both earlier times
(Fig. 11a) and later times (Fig. 11b) are shown. This case has
a smaller viscosity ratio in comparison to C1. Although the ini-
V010T11A038-7
(a) (b)
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022
FIGURE 9. Flow development of C1 from Tab. 1 at tˆ =
0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 s: (a) side view of vertical centre-plane along the
pipe, units in m (x+ plane) and (b) side view of vertical centre-plane
along the pipe, units in m (x− plane). The colormap shows the concen-
tration field. The grey region shows the iso-surface of C = 0.5.
tial development from the asymmetric initial condition is similar,
we observe that the upwardly moving finger orients centrally in
the pipe (as it also did eventually in C1). As the finger moves
slowly upwards, displaced upper fluid flows downwards in wall
layers. Although there appears to be a preference for the cen-
tral mode (for the parameters that we have computed), these wall
layers are evidently convectively unstable. Wave growth locally
arises in droplet break-off. The droplets are then unhindered by
the viscous film and fall rapidly (Fig. 11b). This constant shed-
ding of droplets and unstable wave-like motions disperses the
region where the 2 fluids are present, in a chaotic manner. In this
particular simulation, we observe some of the droplets oscillate
from side to side as they fall: also observed in our experiments.
Figure 12 shows the flow from case C3 in Table 1. The con-
centration is again shown in the middle plane of the pipe (x = 0)
with the side view of x+ plane for earlier time (Fig. 12a) and later
time of the flow (Fig. 12b). The grey body shows the iso-surface
C = 0.5. This case has a smaller viscosity ratio in comparison to
both C1 & C2. The main difference is that the upwardly mov-
ing finger meanders helically upwards, which has the effect of
breaking off chunks of heavy fluid. These shed from the wall
into the light fluid. The earliest chunk has a tail which elongates
as it sinks: the droplet feeds the tail which mixes with the lighter
fluid. Later in the flow, the shedding volumes get smaller and we
can see a series of smaller droplet forming. The terminal veloc-
ity of the droplets vary: some can catch those in front and form a
bigger droplet. The finger progresses upwards in a helical shape
and its progress is slower in comparison to Fig. 11
In Fig. 13, the shear rate of the flow is shown for the same
Copyright © 2022 by ASME

(a)
log 10 γ̇^
FIGURE 10. Flow development of C1 from Tab. 1 at tˆ =
0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 s with side view of vertical centre-plane along the
pipe, units in m. The colormap shows log10 γ̇ˆ. The grey region shows the
unyielded heavy fluid. The black line shows the interface with C = 0.5.
flow of Fig. 12a. We can see that the descending droplet is
fully yielded and its flow through the light fluid is a Newtonian-
Newtonian flow The finger progresses slower than the droplet
due to the yield stress of the heavy fluid, i.e. the unyielded heavy
fluid is persistent on top of the light fluid finger. The unyielded
region ahead of the finger moves upwards as a plug, but there
is a narrow yielded region close to the wall. Presumably this is
where the upper fluid flows from to enter the wall layers. Since
this entire propagation phenomenon occurs at low strain rates
in the upper fluid, it may be advisable to use a non-regularised
model in order to study the process.
V010T11A038-8
(a) (b)
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022
FIGURE 11. Flow development of C2 from Tab. 1 with side view
of vertical centre-plane along the pipe, units in m: (a) at tˆ =
0, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 s and (b) at tˆ = 120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270 s. The
colormap shows the concentration field. The grey region shows the iso-
surface of C = 0.5.
(a) (b)
FIGURE 12. Flow development of C3 from Tab. 1 with side view
of vertical centre-plane along the pipe, units in m: (a) at tˆ =
0, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 s and (b) at tˆ = 120, 150, 180, 210, 240, 270 s. The
colormap shows the concentration field. The grey region shows the iso-
surface of C = 0.5.
4 Conclusions
In this paper we have presented preliminary results of an
experimental and computational study into the stability of off-
bottom cement plug placement. Here we have focused on the
perplexing question of how the cement slurry can remain sus-
Copyright © 2022 by ASME

log 10 γ̇^
FIGURE 13. Flow development of C3 from Tab. 1 at tˆ =
0, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 s with side view of vertical centre-plane along the
pipe, units in m. The colormap shows log10 γ̇ˆ. The grey region shows the
unyielded heavy fluid. The black line shows the interface with C = 0.5.
pended in a mechanically unstable state. Although we have not
found the answer to this, there are some promising advances.
In terms of industry practices and recommendations. The
importance of rheology in stabilizing the flow has been recog-
nised since the 1980’s [2]. Somewhat bizarrely, recommended
practices still prescribe absolute targets either for density differ-
ences between fluids [5], or for fluid yield stress. For example,
recently [15] conclude that “The recommended yield point of 70
lbs/100ft2 appeared to be inadequate for reliable use”. To be re-
liable, static stability must depend on the balance of stabilizing
to destabilizing forces. In other words this should be expressed
in dimensionless form, as with the critical Y [9]. This has been
the basis of our study.
In operating over similar ranges of Y < Yc , we have gen-
V010T11A038-9
erally found unstable flows and these have shown very similar
phenomenology between experimental and computational meth-
ods. For example, both methods give a range of droplet sizes
and shapes, shed from unstable wall layer evolution. Secondly,
both methods seem to show that the central mode of finger prop-
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022
agation is preferred: side-by-side propagation is found some-
times but seems to revert back to the central mode. This prefer-
ence is found also when both experiment and simulations started
with strongly asymmetric initial conditions; due to either the
gate valve opening (experiments), or the initial interface (sim-
ulations).
This latter observation may mark the way forward in under-
standing: the slow finger propagation may give sufficient time
for cement further up in the plug to thicken, arresting the flow
before the finger can reach it. At present this is speculative, as it
is unclear how the timescales should translate from the scaled ap-
paratus to full-size field situations. Our apparatus was designed
for use with easily available transparent fluids, to give Y cover-
ing the range of stable/unstable configurations. However, these
same fluids will not give scalable times. On the other hand, the
computational studies may be extended with ease to full size and
will give relevant timescales. Reduction of the thickening time
and job time to has long been recognised as best practice for plug
cementing [2]. This implicitly accepts that the fluids will move
and mix, but aims to reduce the time until rheology can dominate
the flow instability.
Finally, we emphasize that our results are preliminary and
pertain to typical onshore practices in Western Canada for aban-
donment plugs. With any notable well deviation, we are likely to
see prevalence of the side-to-side slumping failure mode, which
is much faster. Note that the significant failure rates reported in
the 1990’s [5, 6] concerned deviated wells.
Acknowledgements
This research has been carried out at the University of
British Columbia (UBC). Financial support for the study was
provided by NSERC via CRD Project No. 516022-17 and PTAC-
AUPRF through grant PTAC-17-WARI-02. The computational
research was enabled in part by infrastructure from UBC Ad-
vanced Research Computing (ARC) (https://arc.ubc.ca). The au-
thors also acknowledge the infrastructure provided from Com-
pute Canada/Calcul Canada (http://www.computecanada.ca).
AV and NW acknowledge financial support from the NSERC
USRA program and the ECO Canada internship program.
REFERENCES
[1] R.M. Beirute, Flow behavior of an unset cement plug in
place. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 7589 (1978).
[2] R. Smith, R. Beirute & G. Holman, Improved method
Copyright © 2022 by ASME
 of setting cement plugs. J. Petr., Tech., September 1984,
pp. 1897-1904.
[3] D.L. Bour, D.L. Sutton & P.G. Creel, Development of effec-
tive methods for placing competent cement plugs. Society
of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 15008 (1986).
spective, J. Pet. Sci. Eng., 183, 106417, 2019.
[18] S. Akbari, S.M. Taghavi, Injection of a heavy fluid into
a light fluid in a closed-end pipe, Phys. Fluids, 32(6),
063302, 2020.
[19] S. Akbari, S.M. Taghavi, From breakup to coiling and

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85956/V010T11A038/6930074/v010t11a038-omae2022-79290.pdf by Universite Laval user on 25 October 2022

[4] D.G. Calvert, J.F. Heathman & J.E. Griffith, Plug cement- buckling regimes in buoyant viscoplastic injections, J.
ing: Horizontal to vertical conditions. Society of Petroleum Fluid Mech., submitted and under revision, 2021.
Engineers, SPE 30514 (1995). [20] A. Ghazal, I. Karimfazli, Off-Bottom Plug Placement: How
[5] J. Heathman, R. Carpenter, K. Marcel, C. Rimer & It Works?, ASME 2021 40th International Conference on
A. Badalamenti, Quality management alliance eliminates Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, USA, 2021.
plug failures. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 28321 [21] A. Ghazal, I. Karimfazli, Placing Off-Bottom Cement
(1994). Plugs: Effects of Domain Geometry, ASME 2021 40th In-
[6] K. Harestad, T. Herigstad, A. Torsvoll, N. Nodland & ternational Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic En-
A. Saasen, Optimization of Balanced Plug Cementing. So- gineering, USA, 2021.
ciety of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 28321 (1994). [22] A. Ghazal, I. Karimfazli, On the hydrodynamics of off-
[7] I.A. Frigaard & O. Scherzer, Uniaxial exchange flows of bottom plug placement: A 2D model problem, J. Pet. Sci.
two Bingham fluids in a cylindrical ducts, IMA J. Appl. Eng., 203, 108613, 2021.
Math., 61(3), 237-266, 1998. [23] M. Dinkgreve, M. Fazilati, M. M. Denn & D. Bonn, Car-
[8] I.A. Frigaard & O. Scherzer, The effects of yield stress vari- bopol: From a simple to a thixotropic yield stress fluid,
ation on uniaxial exchange flows of two Bingham fluids in Journal of Rheology, 62, 773-780, 2018.
a pipe, SIAM J. on Appl. Math., 60(6), 1950-1976, 2000 [24] F. Pimenta & M. Alves, Stabilization of an open-source
[9] J.P. Crawshaw & I.A. Frigaard, Cement plugs: stabil- finite-volume solver for viscoelastic fluid flows, J. Non-
ity and failure by buoyancy driven mechanism. Society of Newton. Fluid Mech., 239, 85-104, 2017.
Petroleum Engineers, SPE 56959 (1999).
[10] S. Malekmohammadi , M.F. Naccache , I.A. Frigaard &
D.M. Martinez, Buoyancy driven slump flows of non-
Newtonian fluids in pipes, J. Pet. Sci. Eng., 72, 236–243,
2010.
[11] P.R. Varges, B.S. Fonseca, C.M. Costa, M.F. Naccache,
P.R. de Souza Mendes, H.A. Pinho, Exchange flows be-
tween yield stress materials and Newtonian oils, Phys. Flu-
ids, 29(6), 067105, 2017.
[12] P.R. Varges, Plugging oil wells: an investigation of
exchange flows, Ph.D. thesis, Pontifı́cia Universidade
Cat´ólica do Rio de Janeiro, 2017.
[13] P.R. Varges, B.S. Fonseca, M.F. Naccache, P.R. de Souza
Mendes, Exchange flows of two immiscible newtonian liq-
uids in a vertical tube: from falling drops to falling slugs,
J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 261, 123–135, 2018.
[14] B. Taghiloo, P. Sadeghi, P. Sarmadi, M. Saffaripour,
K. Sadeghy, Buoyancy-driven exchange flow of immisci-
ble yield-stress fluids in a vertical closed-ended container,
J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 265, 79–91, 2019.
[15] C. Webber & J. Turner, A New Fluid-Based Isolation
Spacer Increases Success When Spotting Off-Bottom Ce-
ment Plugs. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 195879
(2019).
[16] P. Prabhu & J. Abad,No Tag to Hard Tag - Case History
About Effective Cement Plug Placement Techniques. Soci-
ety of Petroleum Engineers, SPE/IADC 202158 (2021).
[17] E. Trudel, M. Bizhani, M. Zare, I.A. Frigaard, Plug and
abandonment practices and trends: a British Columbia per-

V010T11A038-10 Copyright © 2022 by ASME