SPE 112455

Smart Mud Filtrate: An Engineered Solution To Minimize Near-Wellbore

Formation Damage Due to Kaolinite Mobilization Laboratory and Field
Experience–Oseberg Sør
R.B.Watson, SPE, P. Viste, SPE, and N. Kaageson-Loe, SPE, M-I Swaco, and N.Fleming, SPE, A.M. Mathisen,
SPE, and K. Ramstad, SPE, StatoilHydro

Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control held in Lafayette, Louisiana, U.S.A., 13–15 February 2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Numerous papers have been published on the influence that kaolinite mobilization has on well productivity. However, less
attention has been directed toward identifying methods to minimize the detrimental impact of this mobilization. This paper
will detail the pro-active approach that the authors took in engineering solutions to enhance oil productivity by reducing
kaolinite mobilization. Specifically the paper will focus on the experiences from Oseberg Sør (North Sea). Significant
formation damage has been attributed to kaolinite mobilization in this field. This damage can occur at any stage within the
well lifetime from initial drilling and through the production lifecycle. SPE 107758 provided details of a unique chemical that
can be incorporated into scale inhibitor squeeze treatments to reduce kaolinite mobilization while a well is in production. This
paper will focus on the development of smart mud filtrate technology that incorporates kaolinite fixation agents that minimize
clay mobilization within the near wellbore during drilling.

Introduction
There are countless ways to cause formation damage; however the most difficult mechanisms to prevent are those which are
caused by a combination of the nature of the reservoir and production from that reservoir. These mechanisms can be
considered “natural” and affect productivity whether the drilling and completion fluids are present or not. Examples of
“natural formation damage” are organic and inorganic precipitation resulting from a reduction of pressure in the near-wellbore
region1 or the migration of native fines towards the wellbore and subsequent plugging of pores. Fines migration and in
particular the issue of kaolinite fines migration, causing formation damage, is described extensively in the literature.2,3,4 In
answer to the problem highlighted here and in the 2007 paper by Fleming et al.,5 we have extensively researched the issue of
formation damage created by kaolinite fines and have designed an advanced drilling fluid filtrate to combat this problem. The
filtrate is designed to treat the near-wellbore area even before and during the penetration of the specific depth by the drill bit.
This early treatment of the formation is intended to stabilize the fines in the near-wellbore area before they have a chance to
migrate. The treatments are designed to prevent the migration of kaolinite during production. A significant development in the
study of treating kaolinite migration in the Oseberg Sør formations was the realisation that it is oil flow causing the most
significant migration in these formations. The reason for this is that the fines range from mixed wettability to oil-wet.

Theory
A number of return-permeability tests have previously been performed on Oseberg Sør core material from the Ness, Middle &
Upper Tarbert and Upper Jurassic formations in a number of different laboratories. A common damage mechanism was noted
throughout the core floods. The mechanism was migration and plugging of pores by kaolinite clay particles even at very low
flow rates. Evidence for fines migration was observed both in the increasing differential pressure during steady state dead
crude oil flooding of the core plugs @ Swi and in post-test geological analysis (SEM, Cryogenic SEM and thin section). An
indication of the mechanism was also highlighted in SPE 107758 where a squeeze treatment provides a marked increase in
production which then declines with continued oil production. Semi-quantitative mineral analysis in the form of X-Ray
Diffraction (XRD) was performed on the core material and displayed approximately 15% kaolinite. Muecke15 explained that
fine particles tend to remain in phases that wet them. This was taken into account when the cores were found not to display
fines migration during water flooding, as the flowing water could not migrate the oil coated fines, but crude oil did during oil
flooding.
2 SPE 112455

Kaolinite
Kaolinite is described by Deer, Howie and Zussman6 as hydrous aluminium silicate clay with an extended sheet structure
which can be regarded as having two constituents a layer of tetrahedral SiO4 in a hexagonal array, with their vertices all
pointing in one direction. The apical oxygen plus some (OH)- over the centre of the hexagons, form the base of the gibbsite-
type layer ((OH)6-Al4-(OH)2O4. These form pseudo-hexagonal plates forming aggregates of booklets and vermiforms. The
chemical composition of kaolinite is subject to little variation, with the exception of Halloysite, and has a low cation exchange
capacity when compared with other clays. The kaolinite in the Oseberg Sør formations has a patchy distribution within the
sandstone pore network, which is a result of feldspar dissolution.

Wettability
Using cryogenic scanning electron microscopy (SEM) it is possible to observe the distribution of fluid phases within a core
sample.7,8,9 This tool has allowed the authors and numerous other authors to conclude that the distribution of kaolinite within a
formation strongly influences the distribution of oil.10 This relationship is due to the partial or total oil wetness of kaolinite in
many formations, which has been demonstrated to be influenced by deposited compounds on the clay surface.11,12 Minssieux13
reported that reservoir formations containing clays of large specific surfaces, such as kaolinite, can initially adsorb and retain
polar asphaltenes rapidly. The surface area alone fails to explain why illite is predominantly water-wet in formations and
kaolinite oil-wet. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy was used by Bantignes et al14 to characterize the adsorption or
physisorption phenomenon of asphaltenes onto clays in the presence of water at the microscopic level and discovered that only
the OH surface of the kaolinite is sensitive to the contact with asphaltenes and that the Si environment of the kaolinite remains
un-sensitive to the contact. For Illite the Si and Al environments are in each case not sensitive to the adsorption rendering
them water-wet. This means that the OH surface of kaolininte is prone to becoming oil wet where as Si and Al environments
of both kaolininte and illite are not.

Migration of Kaolinite with Oil Flow

As discussed above, kaolinite can display oil-wet behavior; Muecke15 observed that particles tend to remain in the phase that
can wet them. Kaolinite has a very high surface area relative to its volume and because of this it is easily migrated through the
pore network by flowing in the phase that wets it. These observations explain why kaolinite clay is seen to migrate to oil flow
in Oseberg Sør core material.

Smart filtrate
As the near-wellbore area sees the highest interstitial rates during production, this is the area which is most sensitive to
velocity-induced kaolinite formation damage. The first thing to affect the formation is the invasion of drilling mud filtrate
from the newly drilled wellbore. The filtrate loss from a drilling fluid is dependant on the characteristics of the fluid, the
temperature and the shear force eroding the filter cake during drilling16. To combat the natural damage observed through the
migration of kaolinite fines, the authors have developed a “smart filtrate” which controls the potential for kaolinite fines
migration in the near-wellbore area.
As kaolinite can have an unusual wettability distribution due to the two wettability environments on the mineral surface, it
makes preventing its migration more complex. Therefore, two “smart filtrate” fluids were developed. One is designed to alter
the wettability of the kaolinite from oil-wet to water-wet, and the other is designed to treat the water-wet areas of the mineral
and fix the plates together.
The alteration from oil-wet to water-wet, before mass fines migration has been initiated, causes a protection from the oil
flow and leaves the kaolinite in the water phase which is initially not flowing to the same extent as the oil. As Muecke15
stated, “Particles will move only if the phase that wets them is moving”. Control of this fines migration was approached by
adding a surface active component to the drilling fluid to make a more water-wet surface on the kaolinite. A number of
different approaches to achieve a water-wet state without having a negative effect on the drilling fluid were investigated; for
the purpose of the paper the final treatment, to achieve a water-wet state, is called “T1”.
The fixation of water-wet sites on the kaolinite mineral uses a fixation agent similar to that described by Fleming et al5.
The challenge was to develop an advanced drilling fluid which was not negatively affected by the addition of a kaolinite
fixation agent and that would allow the agent to treat the near-wellbore region. For the purpose of the paper, the final
treatment using a fixation agent is called “T2”.

Methodology
After selection of the treatment to be delivered by the smart filtrate, based on extensive research on kaolinite migration
mechanisms, 20 different formulations of drilling fluid were designed and tested. The first phase of testing was to see if the
treatment chemicals affected the drilling fluid properties in any negative way. The second phase of testing was to determine
the effectiveness of the treatment on Blaxters outcrop core. The third phase was to determine the effectiveness of the
treatment on reservoir core material from Oseberg Sør.
SPE 112455 3

Drilling Fluid Tests (Phase One)

Each fluid was mixed using a Silverson mixer for optimal shear. The initial fluid properties were measured before the
samples were dynamically aged (hot rolling to simulate downhole conditions) in a pressurized cell (to avoid boiling). Fluid
properties were also measured after the aging process to monitor the effect of temperature during time on the samples. Aging
temperature was the same as the maximum reservoir temperature.
Rheology was measured on the freshly made fluids and on aged fluids. The rheology was measured at 50ºC using a
calibrated Fann 35 rheometer. The pH was also checked on each sample.
Filtration properties for the fluids were determined after aging. Filtration was performed using an API HTHP (High
Temperature/High Pressure) cell. A total differential pressure of 500 psi (34.5 bar) and 230ºF (110ºC) was applied during the
test. The initial fluid loss (spurt) was recorded along with total fluid loss after 30 min.16
Any fluid formulation which did not perform in these tests according to standard drilling fluid requirements was removed
from the remaining test matrix.

Core flood tests

Blaxters Core (Phase Two). Blaxters17 outcrop core material was selected for the initial formation damage return-
permeability tests to avoid using excessive amounts of reservoir core during the fluid development. Blaxters was selected due
to its similarity with the Oseberg Sør formations, particularly the volume and distribution of kaolinite clay. To verify that the
Blaxters core material was sensitive to kaolinite migration, rate-dependency tests were performed on the core which had been
prepared to Swi and aged with filtered Oseberg Sør crude oil. The result was that Blaxters core displayed similar characteristic
fines migration to the Oseberg Sør formations; however the flow rate needed to be slightly higher. A point to consider is that
with increased aging times the flow rate required to cause formation damage dropped considerably (from 6 to 3 mL/min).
The cores were labelled with a wellbore end (drilling fluid application end) and a formation end. For each core flood test
the cores were loaded into the formation damage test apparatus at pressure and temperature 230ºF (110ºC) (Oseberg Sør
reservoir temperature) and prepared to irreducible water saturation at increasing rates until the differential pressure was seen to
increase significantly, indicating migration. The drilling fluid was then applied followed by backflood at increasing rates with
return permeability measurements recorded after each rate increase. The filtrate loss observed in each case was approximately
1 pore volume.
Middle Tarbert Core (Phase three). Middle Tarbert core material from Oseberg Sør was tested at a number of laboratories
and each laboratory reported a significant decrease in permeability while flooding oil, even at low rates. For testing the smart
filtrate drilling fluid on reservoir core it was decided to prepare the core to representative irreducible water saturation. The
Middle Tarbert cores were prepared to Swi in an ultracentrifuge in pressure steps so as to avoid shocking the core. The
ultracentrifuge ultimately created a 5-bar differential pressure across the core until no more water was produced out of the
samples. The samples were then aged with Oseberg Sør crude oil at temperature and pressure before recording a base
permeability measurement in the formation to wellbore direction. The maximum rate achievable before the onset of fines
migration was noted from previous tests on the same core material and was not exceeded during the permeability
measurements. The smart filtrate drilling fluid was then applied at overbalance to the core plug and the filtrate loss recorded.
After the drilling fluid application the core underwent a backflood where the Oseberg Sør crude oil was flooded at constant
rates which were increased in increments and the change in differential pressure recorded. After each change in rate a
permeability measurement was recorded at low rates.
As linear core floods were performed, the interstitial velocity was similar along the length of the core and there was no
reduction in interstitial velocity further away from the wellbore end. Considering this fact it was decided that the treatment
needed to invade a minimum of one pore volume to have a noticeable effect on the migration potential further from the
wellbore.

Results
Kaolinite Distribution. Scanning electron microscopy was used to determine the distribution of kaolinite within the Oseberg
Sør core samples (Figs. 1 and 2) and within the Blaxters core samples. It was found that the kaolinite had a patchy distribution
resulting from alteration of feldspar grains within the sandstone matrix. XRD (X-ray Diffraction) showed that the percentage
of kaolinite in the Oseberg Sør formations ranged from 7 to 15% with 3 to 6% less than 2 µm. The Blaxters core material had
a kaolinite content of approximately 20%,17 with approximately 5% less then 2 µm.
4 SPE 112455

Figs. 1 and 2: Scanning Electron Microscope images of Middle Tarbert core material displaying the abundance of kaolinite clay
plates. Figure 1 (left) shows the formation end of a core plug sample that has undergone testing. Considerably less fine (1-4 µm)
5
kaolinite was observed in the formation end when compared to the before-test sample (Fig. 2) or the wellbore end of the core plug.

Kaolinite Wettability. Cryogenic SEM, where the sample is frozen before mounting in the vacuum chamber of the
microscope, was used to observe the native distribution of oil and water within a core sample from Oseberg Sør. The analysis
showed crude oil consistently coating the flat surfaces of the kaolinite, however the edges were often water-wet (Fig. 3). This
information is significant when designing the smart filtrate treatment, primarily because there is little area left for water-based
treatments to bond the kaolinite plates together.

Fig 3: A Cryogenic SEM image of Middle Tarbert core
material, showing crude oil wetting the flat surfaces of the
kaolinite.
Fig. 4: A thin section image of Middle Tarbert core material
which has undergone mild solvent cleaning. The blue in the
image is the pore space, the white is the sand grains (quartz,
feldspar etc.) and the black patches are oil-stained kaolinite
which has replaced feldspar.

A slice of the rock sample, which had been impregnated with blue died resin, was cut and ground until it was one
thousandth of an inch (0.03mm) thick. This was then used for thin section analysis in a petrographic microscope. Thin-section
analysis of the core after cleaning with solvents displayed the extent of the oil-wet kaolinite after testing; the kaolinite patches
identified in SEM were observed to be completely oil stained (Fig. 4). The thin sections taken from the cores which displayed
increasing damage after increased flow rates showed oil-stained fines plugging pore throats.
SPE 112455 5

Figs. 5 and 6: The black areas in Fig. 5 (left) show patches of kaolinite clay in Blaxters outcrop core that was aged in Oseberg Sør
crude oil and then underwent mild solvent cleaning; the clay has remained oil-wet. Fig. 6 shows oil-wet kaolinite fines plugging pore
throats after a rate dependency test with aged Blaxters core (within the three circles).

Treatment and Drilling Fluid Compatibility. During the investigative phase 20 candidate drilling fluids were tested for
suitability; of these fluids particular attention was paid to anything that caused the fluid to differ from the normal base drilling
fluid. Of the drilling fluids tested, the fluid which displayed the most compatibility with the additional treatment chemicals
was K-Formate. Also noted was the addition of surface active components in a water-based drilling fluid with regard to
foaming; some of the surface active components caused minor amounts of foam during the mixing period. However, the fluid
which passed all four phases displayed no foaming characteristics. Other considerations were any change in pH and any
change in HTHP fluid loss. The pH did not change significantly when comparing the base fluids and the fluids with
treatments added. Additive T2 did not affect the HTHP results significantly and the K-Formate results were reasonably
consistent with only a minor increase in filtrate loss with increasing percentage of T2. Additive T1, however, did affect the
HTHP fluid loss results and more than doubled the result after 30 min (Table 1). Although such increases in filtrate loss
would normally be seen as a negative aspect, in this case it will allow a deeper penetration of the treatment and therefore
provide a deeper protection from the migration of kaolinite fines.

Table 1 – K-Formate smart filtrate drilling fluids HTHP fluid loss results and pH
Base Base
fluid 1% T1 3% T1 5% T1 fluid 1% T2 3% T2 5% T2
HTHP:
60 micron Spurt, ml 4,0 3,0 8 8 4,0 4,8 5,5 6,4
o
50 C and
500 psi
DP. 30 min,
6,5 3,2 13 13,5 7,6 8,1 8,5 9,3
ml
pH 8,8 8,8 8,7 8,8 8,8 8,8 8,8 8,8

Rheology. To ensure that the additives did not negatively affect the rheology of the drilling fluids, the base fluid and the
drilling fluid with the additives had rheology measured in a Fann 35 rheometer. The results were then plotted to determine any
anomalies (Figs. 7 and 8). All eight K-Formate formulations displayed very little alteration in rheology and were therefore
qualified to go further in the testing.
6 SPE 112455

K-Formate + T1 K-Formate + T2

Base fluid Base fluid

lb/100 ft2
lb/100 ft2

1% T1 1% T2
3% T1 3% T2
5% T1 5% T2

rpm rpm

Figs. 7 and 8: Rheology of the base fluids and the fluids with additives.

Return Permeability. The return permeability tests that were performed on K-formate drilling fluid formulations are
presented in table 2 and Fig 9. Return permeability results for the base-line fluid, K-formate without additives display a clear
trend of increasing damage (declining return permeability) after each back-flood stage thus demonstrating the effect of
kaolinite fines migration. The average return permeability with no additive is approximately 50%, this is in line with flooding
results obtained from many laboratories testing Oseberg Sør core material with Oseberg Sør crude oil and no drilling fluid. It is
also the same result that was obtained for the Blaxters core material aged in Oseberg Sør crude oil and flooded at the same
rates.

Table 2 – Average return-permeability results for the K-Formate fluid with and without “smart filtrate additives”
Analysis Formation Ko 1 % Ko 2 % Ko 3 % Ko 4 %
Program @Swi, Res Return 2 ml/min Return 4 ml/min Return 7 ml/min Return
Con Backflow Backflow Backflow
K-Formate Blaxter 61 100 % 43 71 % 50 83 % 58 96 %
+T1
K-Formate Blaxter 14,7 100 % 9,5 65 % 10,8 74 % 11,9 81 %
+T2
K-Formate Blaxter 15,6 100 % 9,1 58 % 7,7 50 % 7,9 51 %

The samples with the T2 additive displayed an increase in permeability after each stage, indicating much less fines migration
and a significant filter-cake cleanup. The samples that displayed the most significant return permeability were the ones which
had the T1 additive with an average return-permeability above 95%.

100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
60 %
50 %
40 %
30 %
20 %
10 %
0%
Ko 1 K
Ko 2 Formate +
K Formate K
Ko 3 T1
Formate +
K Formate + T2
Ko 4 K T2
K Formate + T1 Formate

Fig 9. Chart showing the average alteration in return-permeability after each stage in testing Ko1 is the initial crude oil permeability
@Swi, Ko2, Ko3 and Ko4 are after the backflood rates of 2,4 and 7ml/min, respectively.
SPE 112455 7

Conclusions
A significant development in the control of a natural formation damage mechanism has been presented. Although the
treatment only affects the very near-wellbore region, this area experiences the highest rate and is in most desperate need of
protection during the early stages of production. We have shown clearly that near-wellbore kaolinite fines migration can be
controlled with a specifically-designed drilling fluid filtrate. The filtrate can be in the form of a wettability-altering treatment
or a bonding agent which will act on specific sites on the kaolinite surface. The addition of such additives does not negatively
affect the drilling fluid properties.
Additive T1 is designed to alter the wettability of the kaolinite to water-wet, therefore preventing it from migrating in the
oil flow. This may only be temporary improvement however as increasing water-cut will again promote fines migration and
thus formation damage through plugging of pores and pore-throats.
Treatment T2 was very effective and is more permanent as it bonds the clay platelets in place. However, to strengthen the
T2 treatment, further investigations will be performed on combining treatment T1 and T2. This combination will alter the
wettability to water-wet and allow more access to the kaolinite clay by the water-based T2 treatment. After combining the T1
and T2 treatments steady state relative permeability core floods, with increasing water cut, will be performed to test for any
negative effects from massive water breakthrough.
Early treatment of “natural” formation damage is critical as it is extremely expensive to solve remedially with post-
production chemical floods. The development of a “smart-filtrate” drilling fluid has now made it possible to treat “natural”
formation damage in the near-wellbore area ahead of any other treatment and before the damage mechanism initiates.
Core flood tests which are being used to observe fines migration when both oil and water are present should consider the
potential for wettability alteration caused by certain oil and rock components. Aging of the core before flooding in these
instances is critical, especially if solvent cleaning has been performed to render a water-wet state.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank StatoilHydro (Bergen) and M-I Swaco for their permission and support in writing this paper.
We would also like to thank Siv Elisabeth Vik, Anne-Marie Friestad and Hans Christian Rohde for their valuable input.

Nomenclature
@ At
HTHP High Temperature/High Pressure
Ko Oil Permeability
SEM Scanning Electron Microscope
Swi Irreducible Water Saturation
T1 Treatment 1, a surface active component to create a water-wet state
T2 Treatment 2, a fines fixing agent designed to bond the edges of the kaolinite
XRD X-ray Diffraction

References
1. Leontaritis, K.J., Amaefule, J.O. and Charles, R.E. “A Systematic Approach for the Prevention and Treatment of Formation Damage
Caused by Asphaltene Deposition.” SPE 23810, SPE Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, February 26 – 27,
1992 and SPE Production & Facilities (August 1994) 157.
2. Miranda, R.M. and Underwood, D.R. “Laboratory Measurement of Critical Rate: A Novel Approach for Quantifying Fines Migration
Problems.” SPE 25432, SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, March 21-23, 1993.
3. Bishop, S.R. “The Experimental Investigation of Formation Damage Due to Induced Flocculation of Clays Within a Sandstone Pore
Structure by a High Salinity Brine.” SPE 38156, SPE European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, June 2-3, 1997.
4. Sharma, M.M. and Yortsos, Y.C. “Permeability Impairment Due to Fines Migration in Sandstones.” SPE 14819, SPE Formation
Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, February 26 – 27, 1986.
5. Fleming, N., Mathisen, A.-M., Eriksen, S.H., Moldrheim, E. and Johansen, T.R. “Productivity Impairment due to Kaolinite
Mobilization: Laboratory and Field Experience, Oseberg Sør.” SPE 107758, SPE European Formation Damage Conference,
Scheveningen, The Netherlands, May 30 – June 1, 2007.
6. Deer, W.A., Howie, R.A. and Zussman, J. An Introduction to the Rock Forming Minerals. 2nd edition, Longman (1992).
7. Watson, R.B., et al. “Optimising Gravel Pack Performance in a High Rate Gas Development.” SPE 68969, SPE European Formation
Damage Conference, The Hague, May 21-22, 2001.
8. Rueslåtten, H., Øren, P-E., Robin, M., Rosenberg, E. and Cuiec, L. “A Combined Use of CRYO-SEM and NMR-Spectroscopy for
Studying the Distribution of Oil and Brine in Sandstones.” SPE 27804, SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa,
Oklahoma, April 17-20, 1994.
9. Valvatne, P.H. and Blunt, M.J. “Predictive Pore-Scale Network Modeling.” SPE 84550, SPE Annual Technical Conference, Denver,
October 5-8, 1999.
10. Robin, M., Combes, R., and Rosenberg, E. “Cryo-SEM and ESEM: New Techniques to Investigate Phase Interactions Within Reservoir
Rocks.” SPE 56829, SPE Annual Technical Conference, Houston, October 3-6, 1999.
11. Rueslåtten, H.G., et al., “Wettability of Reservoir Rocks and the Influence of Organo-Mettallic Compounds.” North Sea Oil and Gas
Reservoirs – III, Kluwer Academic Publishers (1994) 317.
8 SPE 112455

12. Lager, A., Webb, K.J., Black, C.J.J., Singleton, M. and Sorbie, K.S. “Low Salinity Oil Recovery – An Experimental Investigation.”
SCA2006-36, International Symposium of the Society of Core Analysts, Trondheim, Norway, September 12-16, 2006.
13. Minssieux, L., “Core Damage From Crude Asphaltene Deposition.” SPE 37250, SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry,
Houston, February 18 – 21, 1997.
14. Bantignies, J-L, et al. ”Wettability contrasts in Kaolinite and Illite Clays: Characterisation by Infrared and X-ray Absorption
Spectroscopies” Clays and Clay Minerals, Vol. 45 No. 2, 184 – 193. 1997.
15. Muecke, T.W., “Formation Fines and Factors Controlling their Movement in Porous Media.” SPE 7007, Journal of Petroleum
Technology (February 1979) 147.
16. API RP 13I – Recommended Practice for Laboratory Testing of Drilling Fluids, 7th ed; API (February 2004).
17. Watson, R.B. and Nelson A.C. “Representative Laboratory Testing Procedures for Selecting Drilling Fluids.” SPE 82300, SPE
European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, May 13-14, 2003.