SPE

-ml~~ En@mrscfAIME

SPE8253 *

PRIMARY
CEMENT
N(2:
THEMUDDISPLACEMENT
PR(EESS

by Richard C. Haut, MemberSPE-AIME,Exxon Production

Research Co.; and Ronald J. Crook, Halliburton Services

m Cupynght 1079, &wrkw Iwtilub of Mmmg. Mcldlurgal. anti Petrolwn Enulwers. IIW

Thm p+perw preacntedat me S4thAnnwl FallTeclmIwl Oanlwww WJ Exhibitionot ths $wielvof Petfolwm Erqinws 0! AIME. held m Las Vqaa, Nevada. S+plember 22.26.1979. Tht makml IS aublul to mrwcbon bythd
author. Pwmlw!w 10 WPY la matrmtd to m aba!rad of nut mom than 2@Jwords. WIilo MM N. Cwtral Wpy.. (lallaa, Texaa 75KS

ABSTRACT An experimental
“ approach was adopted to
determine the importance of various displacement
Various displacement factors which influence the factors in the primary cementing of a vertical
primary cementinb displacement process, other” than wellbore, This paper identifies the importance’of
pipe movement, were investigated using a large-scale various factors uader actual field conditions in the
apparatus that simulates actual field conditions. absence of pipe movement. Optimization of the
Results show that.the condition of the drilling fluid displacement factors may then be realized to improve
is dire~tly related to primary cementing success. probability of obtaining a satisfactory primary
Characteristics of the mud filter cake are dominant cement job.
parameters affecting removal of the mud. Simply
stated, if mud loses its fluidity, it becomes very PRIOR INVESTIGATIONS
difficult to displace. Res~lts indicate that annular
velocity is an important factor affecting B.esearch in displacement mechanics was first
displacer~ent. High flow rates, whet er or not the done by Jones and BerJine in 19401. From their work,
cement is in turbulent .f:ow, .I rovid+ better and subsequent research*8, six basic factors which
displacement than plug flow rates. Additional influence displacement in a vertical weilbore have
conclusions are stated governing cement rheology, been recognized,namely:
density, centralization, and other displacement
parameters. The relative importance of displacement -- condition of the drilling fluid
factors may be realized by considering the mud
immobility factor defined in this report and the -- pipe movement ,
total flow energy of the cement. There appear to be
two major opposing forces in cement/mud displacement, -- pipe centralization
namely: a resisting force (the immobility of &he
drilling fluid) and a displacing force (the flow -- flowrate rp
energy of the displacing fluid). Displacement may be
improved by either decreasing the immobility of the -- amount of fluids flowed past a particular
drilling fluid by improving the mud properties, or by interval
increasing the flow energy of the cement.
-- difference in density between the two fluids.
INTRODUCTION
Howard and Clark2 firat recognized the
Effective displacement of drilling fluid by importance of the condittin of drilling fluid. They
cement is a critical factor in successful completion concluded that a decrease in viscosity ‘of the
of oil and gas wells. Prima~ cementing failures are drilling fluid will increase displacement efficiency.
predominantly created by channels of drilling fluid McLean; Manry, and Whitakers also studied mud
by-passed by the cement in the annulus. This paper condition effects. They concluded that increasing
will demonstrate that channels are highly dependent gel strength increased the difficulty of displacing
up”onhow the drilling fluid deposits a filter ‘cake the drilling fluid. McLean, et al., went on to
upon the permeai>lewellbore wall. A theoretical define a ‘fcnitical.yield strength” aa a function of
study cou~d not adequately simulate the removal of or drilling fluid yield point and wellbore geometry.
the thixotropic characteristics of the mud filter “’Minimizingthis critical value, by lowering the yield
cake. Because of this, any theoretical study of the point of the drilling fluid, would greatly improve
actual displacement process requires great care in the probability. of successfully displacing the
interpretingresults. drilling fluid.

McLean, Manry, and Whitaker3 performed an

References and illustrationsatendof papep. extensive study on how pipe movement affects the
displacement process. There are two types of pipe
2 PRIMARY CEMENTING -- THE MUD DISPLACE~NT PROCESS
movement, namely rotation and reciprocation. McLean,
et al., concluded that when casiag is severely off
center, rotation appears to be more beneficial than
reciprocation. During rotation, cementjcasing drag
forces tend to “pull” the cement into bypassed mud.
However, rotation will not “pull” water into the mud
column, and reciprocation appears to be most
desirable. Since simultaneous motion is not usually
feasible, either type of movement would be
beneficial. The authors also claim that if the pipe
is well centralized, reciprocation appeara to be a
better choice. Reciprocation also causes lateral
pipe movement as the centralizers move across
wellbore irregularities. This lateral movement
alters the flow area and may encourage mud
displacement.
Pipe centralization createa a uniform annular
flow area perpendicular to the flow direction and has
been encouraged since the firat cem~i,tingstudies
were done by Jones and B&dinel, Since drilling
fluids and cement slurries are non-Newtonian fluids,
they require a certain pressure drop to establish a
significant flow rate. If the pipe ia not
centralized, fluid will tend to flow at a higher rate
on the wide side of the annulus, where resistance to
flow is least, bypassing any fluid on the narrow side
of the annulus.
McLean, et al.3, studied the effect of flow rate
on removing circulatable drilling fluid. They
concluded that channels of gelled mud lodged in
narrow crevices are reduced in size by increasing the
rate of flow. However, they go on to state that
thinning a cement slurry can increase extent of
turbulent flow in an eccentric annulua but may reduce
the efficiency of dia~lacement by increasing the
tendency of a cement slurry to bypaas the drilling
fluid.
Howard and Clark* also studied the effect of
flow regime on removal of circulat”abledrilling
fluid. Sinc~ their work was performed before the
invention of dispersant, the effect of thinning the
cement slurry could not be investigated. Howard and
Clark gave the same conclusions that were later
verified by McLean, et al.3, that is, displacement of
circulatable drilling fluid is improved by increasing
the rate of flow.
Field studies, reported by Brice arid Holmes4
indicate that the total amount of fluid which flows
past the critical annular region is a contributing
factor in obtaining a successful primary cement job.
Brice and Holmes concluded that if fluids are pumped
in turbulent flow past the zone of interest for 10
minutes or longer, a successful primary cement job
may be the result.
Gravity forces, produced by a density difference
between the two fluids, does influence the breakdown
of gel structure of the drilling fluid and,
therefore, may enhance displacement efficiency.
McLean Manry, and Whitaker3, along with Clark and
Carteri, report that if mud is lighter than the
displacing fluid, buoyancy contributes to the
displacement process. The buoyant force is additive
to the flow forces and displacement is easier than
when densities are equal.
When the mud is heavier than the displacing
fluid, gravity forces oppose +.he flow forces.
Consequences of this depend on th~ displacing fluid
composition. Heavier mud nay slough and fall into
.— —
SPE 8253
—. —
leas dense flowing fluid provided the sheai stress of
the displacing fluid is low enough to prevent any
support to the mud.
Although these six displacement fectors have
long been recognized, the relative importance of each
under actual field conditions haa not been clearly
defined. The purpose of this work is to determine
the relative importance of each displacement factor
based ontiexperimentsperformed under simulated field
conditions. Optimization of displacement factors may
then be realized to obtain a satisfactory primary
cement job.
EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE
The apparatus used in conducting the
investigation was designed and operated to simulate
as nearly as possible the actual conditions
experienced during cementing of an oil well. Figure
1 shows surface equipment used and Figure 2 showa the
wellhead used to circulate the various fluids.
A schematic of the simulated well if shown in
Figure 3. The test section consists o! permeable
consolidated sand, 3.05m (10 ft.) long wi’.ha 165.lmm
(6 l/2-in.) inner diameter, reinforced externally by
perforated pipe. Three types of test sections were
employed having either high, low, or nr permeability.
Two 0.9m (3 ft.) sections of casing, with a 165.lmm
(6 l/2-in.) inner diameter, were attached to the
bottom .and top of the test section. A 127mm (5-in.)
casing was installed inside the test section so that
the bottom of the 127mm (5-in.) casing was inside the
lower sectionof casing attached to the test section.
The test section was lowered into the filtrate
jaclet and was allowed to become saturated with
water. The filtrate jacket has an outlet so that the
fluid loss maybe monitored throughout the test.
The filtrate jacket waa enclosed in a heating
jacket containing heating oil. Temperature during
the testing was maintained as follows:
Circulating- 82°C (180”F) .
Mud gelation period -93°C (200”F)
Cement curing period - llO°C (230°F)
-These temperatures simulate as realistically as
possible actual field conditions.
Drilling fluids used were water base laboratory
prepared muds having a density between 1677 and 2037
kg/m3 (14 a~;lu}: lb/gal). All of the varioua
properties loss, density, theological
properties, etc.) of the drilling fluid were measured
for each” test at room temperature. Theological
properties were also measured at circulating
temperature.
Cement slurr!.esused had a density in the range
of 1917 to 2037 kg/m3 (16 to 17 lb/gal). Three
different slurries were designed having a yield point
of o, 1.6 x 103 and 5.6 x 103 Pa (O, 33, and 116
lb/100 ft2). During the displacement tests, the
cement slurry waa batched mixed, the temperaturewas
raised to 82*C (180°F), and various cement additives
were used to adjust the rheoiogy to the specified
value. Prior to displacement tests, theological data
were taken on three different slurries at 82°C
(180°F) using a pipe viscometer. These data
presented in Figure 4 were then used to determine
SPE 8253 R. C. HAUT and R. J. CROOK’
whether cement would be in turbulent flow as
indicatedby an abrupt change in slope of the curve.
The displacement test.began by circulating the
drilling fluid at 8 dm9/s (3 Bbl/min) for one hour at
82°C (180°F) and recording the amount of filtrate
loss through the synthetic formation. The temp-
erature of the heating oil was then raised to 93°C
(200°F) and mud was allowed to gel for a periodof at
least 24 hours. A differential pressure of 0.7 MPa
(100 psi) was maintained into the synthetic formation
during which time the amount of filtrate was
recorded.
After the gelation period, drilling fluid was
again circulated at 8 dm3/s (3 Bbl/min) for a period
of one hour at 82°C (180°F) and the filtrate loss
through the synthetic formation was measured.
occasionally the amount of circulatable hole was
measured by injecting a slug of room temperature mud
and measuring the time lag for it to move through the
annulus.
Drilling fluid was then displaced with the
specified 82°C (J.80°F)cement slurry at required
weight, volume, and flow rate. Once again, filtrate
loss was measured. Usually 3.18m3 (840 gal.), enough
to cement 366m (1200 ft.) of a 127mm (5-in.) by
165.lmm (6 l/2-in.) annulus, was used. On occasion
the volume of the cement slurry was reduced to 0.16m3
(42 gal,), enough to cement 18.3m (60 ft.) of a 127mm
(5-in.) by 165.lmm (6 l/2-in.) annulus, to study the
effects of varying slurry volume.
After displacing mud with cement slurry, the
temperature was raised to llO°C. (230°F) and the
cement was allowed to cure for a period of at least
24 hours. The test sample was then allowed to cool
and was disassembled. The sample was cut into wafers
allowing the casing stand-off and mud displacement
efficiencyto be measured.
Casing stand-off, equal to minimum radial
clearance, and mud displacement efficiency, equal to
cemented annular area divided by total annular area,
are defined in Figure 5.
Figure 6 shows the cross section of one of the
wafers Laken from a typical test sample. Here cement
has formed two small channels. The majority of the
annulus contains drill,ingfluid which the cement was
unable to displace. This picture identifies the
problem encountered in primary cementing; that is the
inability of cement to completely occupy the entire
annulus.
Figure 7 shows another example ofa bypassed mud
channel. Notice how the channel is not parallel to
the axis of flow. This is caused by the wellbore not
being perfectly circular.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTS
The purpose of this project was to identify the
importance of ‘various displacement factors under
actual field conditions when casing cannot be moved.
Therefore, the main thrust of the investigation
centered around how displacement efficiency is
affected by:
-- the.conditionof the drilling fluid
.. formationpermeability
3
,
-- centralization
-- rbeologicaldifferences
-- flow rate
-- fluid volume
-- density differences
The displacementtests are summarized in Table I.
THE CONDITION OF THE DRILLING FLUID
As previously discussed, prior research
concluded that a decrease in viscosity of the
drilling fluid will increase the displacement
“efficiency. However, they fail to mention the effect
that gelled mud filter cake has on the displacement
process.
One of the primary functions of a drilling fluid
is to seal permeable formations. This iS
accomplished by mud solids which will deposit on the
wall of permeable formations as filtrate flows “into
the formation, thereby retarding flow of the fluid.
As the solids cake grows thicker, the rate of flow
into the formation decreases. A degree of sealing
occurs as a result of this process. Maintaining a
thin impermeable filter cake is esseztial for the
prevention of several possible problems, namely,
differential pressure sticking, logging difficulties,
lost circulation problems, and primary cementing
problems.
Table II lists static, filter cake thic;.asses
built up in 30 minutes on cores of Nbcious
permeabilities for one of the drilling fluids used in
the displacement tests. Static filter cake thickness
does not vary with formation permeability. Under
dynamic conditions it will be shown that amount of
filtrate loss to the formation was proportional to
core permeability. The composition of the drilling
fluid has greater influence on’filter cake build-up
than does formationpermeability.
Drilling fluids, particulwly those of
water-clay type possess thixotropic properties which
must also be considered along with flow properties.
A thixotropic material will exhibit a reduction of
gel strength upon shear action and will reform gel
structurewhen quiescent.
Table 111 illustrates the thixotropic nature of
a drilling fluidsas a function of time, temperature,
and filtrate loss. The data shown were obtained
usin~ a Model 50 Farm viscometer. The drilling fluid
was pre-mixed and placed in the viscoaeter. After
remaining static for 5 minutes the viscometer was
started at a low shear rate. ?he shear rate was
increased at a constant rate until a rate of 1000
see-1 was obtained. Then the shear rate was reduced
to the low point. The mud was heated to the next
tes~ltemperaturewhile the viscometer was run at 1000
sec . Upon reaching temperature, the viscometer was
turned off and-the mud was allowed to remain static
for 5 minutes before the rate was increased and
decreased.
Table III shows how at elevated temperatures, a
drilling fluid develops increased viscosity after
remaining static for a short period of time. Loss of
filtrate from the mud is also shown to increase the
viscosityof the drilling fluid.
..
4 PRIMARY CEMENTING -- THE MUD DISPLACEMENT PROCESS -. —-—--
SPE 8253

Maximum gel streng;h may be determined by using where V = total volume of drilling fluid
m
a method discussed by Garrisong. Formation of gel undergoing filtration
structureproceeds at a diminishing rate describedby
H= filter cake thickness”
GmKt
G = (1) A= area undergoing filtration
m
= filtrate volume
t = time ‘f
where
y = volume of solids deposited
G=gel strength at time t s
cc = volume fraction of solids in the
Gm= maximum gel strength filter cake.

K= rate constant
Equations 5 and 6 may be combined to solve for H:
Equation (1) maybe rearrangedto
i (7)
‘f
1 1“1 (2) H=
Irv
‘=
G GmKt + ‘Gm
#cc-l
() s
multiplyingby t yields

t~+t
‘=
G GmK ‘Gm (3) Since the assumption is made that the total
volume of mud undergoes filtration, the volume
fraction of solids in the mud, Cm, may be defined as
When t/G is plotted as a function of t, Equation
(3) represents a straight line with a slope of l/G ‘ v
and an intercept of l/G K, From the slope valu~ cm+ (8)
final gel strength of themfidmaybe calculated. m

Data for some of the “various drilling fluids

used in the displacement tesi.sare plotted in Figure Substituting into Equation (7)
8. Equation (3) when combined with Figure 8,
indicates that the maximum gel strength may ,be
approximatedby the 10 minute gel strength.
‘f 1
H (9)
‘FCC
Figure 9 illustrates how thixotropic properties
of the drilling fluid, as indicated by lJ minute gel “() q-l
strength, influence the displacement process ‘for
constant filtrate loss and equal mud and cement
densities. For the displacement tests, A, C and C,nwere
held constant, so that the important filter cake
Assuming that filter cake characteristics and building characteristic was the volume of filtrate,
maximu% gel strength are the two most important mud
‘f”
properties affecting the mud/cement displacement
process, a mud immobility factor, M.I.F., may be Since maximum gel strength may be approximated
defined as by the 10 minute gel strength, Glo M.n, the mud
immobility factor for the displacement tests may be
M.I.F. = (filtes cake characteristic) given as:
x (maximum gel strength) (4)

Mud filter cake thickness is related to the
amount of filtrate loss through the formation and the
type and volume of mud solids present in the drilling
fluid. If type and volume of mud solids are held
constant, then the important factor becomes the
amount of filtrate loss through the formation. Such
waa the situation for this investigation, Drilling
fluids used in the investigation had similar mud
solids concentrations. Thus Che important factor
related to filter cake thickness was amount of
filtrate.
Important parameters of the filter cake
characteristics may be analyzed by considering the
following volumetric balance equations, assumin;,that
total volume of drilling fluid undergoes filtration:
“m =
‘+”f.
v = HAc
M.I.F. = “f x Glo Min (lo)
.
Another important parameter, which will be
discussed later is fluid flow ener~] of the cement,
If the cement and drilling fluid have equal
densities, then the important parameter of fluid flow
energy is annular velocity.
Figure 10 plots percent of mud removed as a
function of cement annular velocity squared divided
by mud immobility factor. Data plotted are for two
different muds and for the cementslurry with a yield
- point of around 1.6 x 103 Pa (33 lb/100 ft2). The
line in Figure 10 will be shown ’tobe typical of all
displacement data for the case of zero density
difference.
(5)
Figure 10 shows that a minimum of 25 to 30
percent of the mud was always displaced. Then, the
(6)
SPE 8253 R. C. HAUTand R. J. CROOK
percent of removed mud increases with a decrease in
mud izuaobilityfactor. That is to say, the percent
of mud displaced ❑ay be increased by improving filter
cake characteristics of the mud (decreasing the
filtrate loss) or by decreasing the maximum gel
strength (decreasing10 minute gel strength).
If the plot in Figure 10 was correct, then if
the ❑ud immobility factor was equal to zero (letting
the amount of filtrate be zero), 100 percent of mud
should be removed. The observation was made that for
the entrance region to the annular test section, that
is the.bottom 0.9sI(3 ft.) of impermeable pipe, 100
percent displacementwas achieved for every test.
To determine if this waa indeed a result of zero
filtrate loss or if it was due to entrance effects, a
displacement test, test 28, was performed
substituting one-half of the permeable test section
with an impermeable caaing of the same dimensions.
100 percent displacement was achieved across the
impermeable interval. However, as shown in
Figure 11, only 40 percent of drilling fluid was
removed in the permeable zone.
Two of the parameters investigated were actual
mud filtrate loss and formation permeability. Test 1
had a core permeability of 300 md and 27% of the mud
was removed. Test 27 had a core permeability of 20.7
md and a displacement efficiency of 78% Test 29 had
a nonpermeable test section and 92% of the mud was
removed. Results indicate that core permeability has
an effect on the displacement process when using a
low fluid loss mud. For the three .testa discussed
above, amount.of filtrate loss to the formation was
proportional to core permeability. The lower the
permeability, the lower the filtrate loss, resulting
in higher mud removal.
Otlier---eststswere perfcmsed in which the
permeable test. section was replaced with a solid
casing, sirnulatiugan impermeable formation. Except
for times whe~ standoff was extremely small as in
test 29, 100 percent displacementwas achieved.
In summary, this investigation haa shown that
the primary parameter concerning the condition of
drilling fluid with respect to primary cementingare
-- mud filter cake characteristics
-- thixotropicproperties of the mud
CEFIXALIZATION
As previously stated pipe centralizationcreates
a uniform annular flow area perpendicular to flow
direction. Uniform annular flow area equalizes
pressure distribution, and thereby flow resistance,
uniformly around the pipe.
From a theoretical standpoint, the importance of
centralization may be understood by considering
Figure 12. Illustrated here are theological curves
for a Newtonian fluid, such as water, and a
non-Newtonian fluid, such as a cement slurry. Also
shown is the Bingham plastic model of a non-Newtonian
fluid. Since shear stress is proportional to
pressure drop and shear rate is proportional to flow
rate, Figure 12 shows that for a non-Newtonian fluid
a substantialpressure drop is required to initiate a
reasonable flaw rate as compared to the Newtonian
fluid. Because of this, the cement slurry will
5
prefer to flow on the wide side of an eccentric
annulus, where flow resistanceis least.
Three attempts weze made to perfectly centralize
the casing during displacement tests 5, 6, and 11.
Results from the most successful attempt is
illustrated in Figure 13. As can be seen here,
however, even the sligb.test decmtralization was
enough to allow a channel of ❑ud to be bypassed.
THEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES
One major objective of the displacement study
was to determine what effect theological properties
of cement and drilling fluid have on’the displacement
process. Because of this, close attention was paid
to ❑aintaining the cement yield point as close as
possible to one of three values: O 1.6 x 103, and
5.6x 103 Pa(0, 33, and1161b/100ft3).
Figure 14 plots the same parameters as.Figure 10
adding data for the other two cement. slurries.
Repeatability of the data indicates that cement
rheology does not play a significant role as far as
the displacement process is concerned. However,
besides the mud immobility factor, tk~ other major
parameter which has an effect on the displacement
process is the annular velocity of the cement. A
fluid having a low viscosity will have a lower
pressure requirement for the same velocity as a high
viscosity fluid. Therefore, a low viscosity fluid
may be pumped at a higher flow rate with the same
pressure requirements as a high viscosity fluid at a
low flow rate. This will be discussed in more detail
in the following section.
FLOW RATE
Another major objective of the displacement
study was to determine what effect flow rate has on
the displacement process. This is one cf the reasons
the theological study, which was mentioned earlier
and illustratedin Figure 4, was performed.
As illustrated in Figure 15, &here are three
possible flow regimes in which a non-Newtonian fluid,
such as a drilling fluid or a cfment slurry, may
exist. In this f!gure, dashed lines represent the
bulk annular velocity and solid iines represent the
actual velocity profile iu the annulus. The axial
velocity in the laminar flow is not as uniform across
the annulus as it is in the plug flow or turbulent
flow. Because of the velocity distribution, fluid
near the center of the amulus will have a higher
axial velocity component than the fluid near the
boundaries.
However, velocity profiles for single fluids are
very misleading if an attempt is made to use them to
visualize displacement of one fluid by another. The
Iaminar velocity profile would suggest that the
displacing fluid could “channel” through the center
of the displaced fluid when the.displacing fluid is
in laminar flow. But, because of the several
instabilitieswhich may develop, this does not always
occur. That is to say in the neighborhood of the
interface between two fluids, velocity is not
strictly axial; nonlixear coupling of changes in
shear rate and shear stress leads to the formation of
instabilities and mixing at the interface. The
effects of the various physical properties of fluids
upon the dynamics of the interface must be
considered.
—.
Figure 4 indicates pump rates required for
turbulent flow for three cement slurries used during
the displacement study. This figure also shows the
relative pressure requirements to obi.cinturbulent
flow for the three cement slurries and the geometry
used in the displacement study. The high yieldpoint
cement required a flow rate in excess of 22,8 dm3/a
(8.5 Bbl/min.), a rate which was unachievable. The
moderate yield point cement required a rate of
15.9 dm3/s (6 Bbl/min.) while the low yield point
cement required a flow rate of around 13.0 dm3/s
(5 Bbl/min.) Once turbulent flow is achieved for the
moderate yield point cement slurry, the pressure
requirement ia essentially equal to that for the low
yield point slurry.
Figure 16 illustrates how the displacement
process is-influenced by flow rate for the geometry
used during the displacement study. Mud displacement
is improved at high annular velocities, therefore,
high flow ratea art beneficial in primary cementing
operations.
,
FLUID VOLUMS
Field studies, reported by Brice and Holmes4
indicate that the total amount of fluid which flows
past the critical annular region in turbulent flow is
a contributing factcr in obtaining a successful
primary cement job across this zone. Brice and
Holmes go on to state that contact time, defined as
the period of time that a particular point in the
annular space remains in contact with a ceaent slurry
being displaced in turbulent flow, should be greater
than 10 minutes to improve probability of a
successfulprimary cement job.
Aa discussed in the previous section, flow
regime was not a dominant parameter affecting the
displacement process for the given flow geometry.
However, the concept of contact time for turbulent
flow could not be investigated because of volume
limitations imposed by the size of the cement holding
tank.
The volume of cement was altered for a flow r-ate
of 2.6 dm3/s (1 Bbl/min.) in tests 6 and 11. These
results m~y be compared directly to teats 5 and 10,
respectively. Doing so, no change in displacement
efficiency is noticed. Therefore, at low flow rates,
the displacement process apparently is not affected
by cement volume. This is in agreement with field
studies reportedby Brice and=Holmes.
DENSITY DIFFERENCES
Several theoretical studies have investigated
effect of density on displacement.698 $10 All of
these theoretical studies atate that density is of
importance, ho~ever, the analytical models used
neglect the radial vaxiation of the ❑ud properties
created by the presence of filter cake.
Clark and Carter investigated the effect of
density under simulated well conditions.5 They
concluded that for density to be effective the mud
must be mobile. Jones and Berdine,l using a model
with alternating impermeable and permeable intervals,
reported excellent displacement in impermeable zones
and ineffective displacement of thick mud filter cake
opposite the permeable intervals when density
differences 6f 600-720 kg/m3 (5-6 lb/gal) were used.
However, Haut, Collins, and Graves state that the
difference in densities .~nt=:.,enthe cement and-the
..-..
drilling fluid leads to the instability of the
interracial profile.l” The flatness of the resulting
interface may ❑inimize the contact between the two
fluids and decrease contaminationof the leading edge
of the cement slurry with drilling fluid.
The curve on Figure 17 presents the displacement
test results with equal densities. Test results for
density differences of 72 and 360 kglms (0.6 and 3
lb/gal) are also shown on this figure. These results
show that an increase in density difference did not
improve displacement. The fact that density
differences did not improve displacement could come
from the fact that mud immobility factor and fluid
velocity override any effect that density has on
displacement.
The lack of influence of the density difference
maybe understood by considering Table IV. Here is
listed several different drilling fluids along with
the average density of the noncirculatable fluid
which they develop after undergoing 30 minutes of
filtration. As illustrated here,-the density of the
immobile mud may he as high as 4.1 x 10s kg/m3 (34.2
lb/gal). The high density of the immovable mud is
caused by loss of filtrate from the fltiid.
CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of the experimental investigation
was to determine the relative importance of the
displacement factors, neglectin~ ~ movement, in
the mud removal process. The experimental studies,
simulating realistic field conditions, led to the
following conclusions:
-. In the test sections simulating realistic
permeability, 100 percent displacement was never
achieved. The noncirculatable drilling fluid,
that ia the mud that lost its fluidity, was
never displaced.
-- The downhole condition of the drilling fluid, irl
terms of its thixotropic properties and filte-
cake deposition characteristics, was a major
factor towards better ❑ud removal. The
formation,permeability, as it affects these mud
properties, was also a dominant parameter
influencing the removal of mud. Simply stated,
when mud lost its fluidity, it became very
difficult to displ~ce.
-- In a narrow annulus, slightest decentralization
was enough to allow a channel @ mud to be
bypassed. This was caused by the loss of ❑ud
fluidity and the resulting nonuniform pressure
distribution in the annulua.
.- High cement flow rates appeared to favorably
influence the mud displacement process. In the
laboratory investigation of mud removal, total
fluid flow energy appeared to be more important
than turbulent energy transfer, particularly in
a narrow annulus.
-- Within the realistic range of cement and mud
theological properties studied, given in terms
of yield point and plastic viscosity, the
theological differences did not have a
measurable effect on the displacement process.
However, for equivalent flow pressures, a cement
with a low yield point may,be pumped at a higher
flow rate than one with a high yield point.
Therefore, when a low yield point cement was
SPE 8253 R. C. HAUT andR. J. CROOK 7
$

used, the displacement process was favorably Vs volume of solids deposited

influencedby employing a higher flow rate.
Pc cement density
.- Throughout the experimental studies, pumping a
high yield point cement at iow flow rates was Pm drilling fluid density
not an effective method of mud displacement.

-. To maximize mud displacement in the laboratory

investigation, the cement had to be pumped as
fast as possible. Even when turbulent flow
could not be achieved, displacing at a maximum
flow rate was more effective than plug flow
displacement.
-- In the experimental studies, displacement was
not appreciably affected by the amount of fluids
pumped at low.flow rates. Apparently, once the
cement determined a flow path, it continued to
follow the path with little or no deviation.
The chemical reaction between the cement and mud
may have created a contact region which could
not be eroded away.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to exp--esstheir appreciation
to the managment of Exxon Production Research Company
and Halliburton Services for permission to publish
this paper. Appreciation is also extended to those
Halliburton personnel who helped to build the models
and record the data. A special thanks is also given
to those in both organizations who contributed
valuable suggestions.
t
REFERENCES

-- The laboratory investigation showed that 1. Jones, P. H. and Berdine, D.: “Oil-Well
increasing the density difference between the Cementing,’’
Oiland ——
—— GasJ. March 21, 1940).
fluid mud and cement by as much as 360 kg/m3 (3
lb/gal) did not improve the overa11 2. Howard, G. C., and Clark, J. B.: “Factors to be
displacement. The buoyancy force did not aid in Considered in Obtaining Proper Cementing of
removing the noncirculatable mud because the Casing,” Drill. ~ Prod.
. Prac., API (1948)
—
fluid that had lost its mobility had a greater 257-272,
density than the cement, even when the fluid mud
was lighter than the cement. 3. McLean, R. H., Manry, C. W., and Whitaker; W.
w .: “Displacement Mechanics in Primary
-- The relative importance of the displacement Cementing,” J, Pet. Tech. (1967) 215.
factors may be realized by considering the mud
immobility factor defined in this paper and the 4. Brice, J. W. Jr., and Holmes, R. C.: Turbulent
fluid velocity of cement. There appeared to be Flow Techniques,” ——
J. Pet. Tech.
— (May 1964).
two major opposing factors in the cement/mud
displacement process identified in the 5. Clark, C. R., and Carter, L. G.: “Mud
laboratory investigation,namely: immobility of Displacement with Cement Slurries,” J..=
—
the drilling fluid (being resisting force) and” Tech. (July, 1973).
flow energy of the displacing fluid.
Displacement was improved by either decreasing 6. Martin, M., Latil, M., and Vetter, P.: “Mud
the former (the more effective method) or Displacement by Slurry During Primary,Cementing
increasingthe latter. Jobs - Predicting Optimum Conditions,”paper SPE
7590 presented at SPE-AIME 53rd Annual Fall
NOMENCLATURE Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
Oct. 1-3, 1978.
A area undergoing filtration
7. Tiplitz, A. J., and Hassenbroek, W. E.: “An
cc volume fraction of solids in filter Investigation of Oil-Well Cementing,” Drilling
cake and Production Practice, API (1946),pp. 76-103.

c volume fraction of solids in drilling 8. Be.rute, R. M., and Flumerfelt, R. W.:

m
fluid “Mechanics of the Displacement Process of
Drilling Muds by Cement Slurries Using an
G gel strength ~’.time t Accurate Theological Model,” paper SPE 6801
presented at SPE-AIME 52nd Annual Fall Technical
Gm maximum gel strength Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Oct. 9-12>
1977.
G 10 minute gel strength
li)min
9. Garrison, A. D.: “Surface Chemistry of Clays
H filter cake thickness and Shales,” Trans.
—— AIMS,V. 132, (1939) 191.

K rate constant defined in equation (1) 10. liaut,R. C., Collins, R. E., and Graves, W. G.:
“Applications of a Computer Simulator to Primary
M.1.F. mud immobilityfactor Cementing,” paper SPE 7588 presented at SPE-AIME
53rd tinual Fall Technical Conference and
t time Exhibition,Houston, Oct. 1-3, 1978.

filtratevolume
‘f
Vm total volume of drilling fluid
undergoing filtration
 .

TABLE1
DISPLACEMENT
SWDY DATA

Hud Pt’ooarties Cement Properties Ffltrate Vol.. CC

O mtn. F1 id Flow Cfrc. Disp. Stand- 1
Denstty Po!nt ViXs~ Gel Lo:s Dansfty Po;nt Vi%! Vol. Rate Hole Efftc. off M;: 4: Cement
m3 ~m3,s ~ ~ ~
lost kglm3 Pa Pa-s Pa cc130 mfn kg/m3 Pa Pa’s Clrc. Cfrc. ‘Clrc.

1 2.OOX1O3 95.8 0.016 383 3.8 2.01XI03 1440 0.027 3.18 2.65 N.R.* 27 58.4 4900 1200 600
2 1.97X103 95.8 0.014 383 3.2 2.01XI03 1390 0.034 3.18 18.5 N.R. 63 28.5 3340 360 0
3 2. 00s103 0 0.015 95.8 2.6 2, O1X1O3 5600 0.030 3.18 2.65 89 53 39.7 320 200 80
4 2. C4X103 1390 0.027 1240 9.0 2,OOX1O3 0 0.032 3.18 2.65 N.R. 29 48.7 4800 0 0
5 2.03x103 670 0.037 766 9.4 2.03x103 95.8 0.027 3.18 2.65 87 33 57.0 4740 1220 340
6 2.00x103 670 0.034 670 8.5 2.OOX1O3 0 0.934 0,16 2.65 N.R: 32 47.0 4500 S580 60
7 1.98x103 383 0.02E 335 9.6 2.03x103 0 0.029 3.18 13.2 79 54 63.6 6600 2540 60
e 2.OOX1O3 47.9 0.020 192 7.6 2.00XI03 144 0.027 3.18 23.3 N.R. 70 73.6 2010 1610 105
9 2.03s103 766 0.039 718 8.0 1.98x103 144 0.029 3.18 18.5 N.R. 56 25.1 4800 240
10 2. OOX1O3 192 0.021 575 8.4 2.01XI03 1530 0.025 3.18 2.65 89 33 46.0 4300 175 0
11 2.00XI03 622 0.036 670 8.4 2. OOX1O3 1480 0.021 0.16 2.65 86 40 59.7 3100 2600 240
12 2.OOX1O3 144 0, 01s 192 8.4 2.00s103 1680 0.022 3.18 18.5 80 72 74.3 1000 2200 0
13 2. OOX1O3 239 0.021 239 B.o 2.01x.io3 5600 0.024 3.18 2.55 72 34 68.5 5620 1260 1350
14 2.03x103 766 0.039 670 10.0 2.O1X1O3 5410 00015 3.18 15,9 78 45 42.7 5040 2220 600
15 2.00s103 431 0.025 1820 12.0 2,01XI03 1630 0.021 3.18 14.3 N.R. 66 35.1 820 50 150
16 2.01x103 383 0.032 431 4.8 2.O1X1O3 1480 0.025 3.18 10.6 KR. 77 63.5 150Q 520 100
17 2.00XI03 110 0.046 1870 8.0 2.OOX1O3 1440 0.025 3.18 10.6 N.R. 41 21.2 2900 2000 400
18 2.04x103 670 0.036 814 10.0 2.00XI03 5550 0.036 3.18 15.9 N.R. 66 29.0 660 680 0
19 2. OOX1O3 622 0.024 1870 11.6 2.00XI03 1580 0.023 3.18 1C,6 N.R. 33 24.9 5300 2000 340
20 2.03x103 2110 0.056 2870 8.0 2.03x103 1440 0.023 3,18 2.65 68 30 41.5 3000 1420 52@
21 2.03x103 177C 0.055 2250 8.1 2.03x103 5550 0,041 3,18 2.65 64 30 41.7 4400 2700 1300
22 2. OOX1O3 1680 0,040 1870 8.2 2. OOX1O3 47.9 0.028 3.18 10.6 60 39 34.1 3440 460 0
23 2,03x103 0 0.032 144 5.2 2.03x103 1440 0.023 3,18 10.6 M 72 53.3 2720 2400 200
24 2.01x103 47.9 “o.033 287 4.6 2.04x103 1630 0.023 3.18 18.5 N-’:. 91 35,5 1760 75 0
25 2,01x103 958 0.047 2970 4.4 2.03x103 1580 0.022 3,18 2.65 75 30 26.3 1650 350 495
26 1.98x103 383 0.028 862 4.6 2.03x103 0.022 3.18 10.6 79 43 61.8 2300 1300 250
27 2.03x103 95.8 0.022 239 6.2 2.’03xlti3 1630 0.022 3.18 2.65 84 78 54.5 1640 350 680
28+ 2.00x103 1720 00052 814 10.0 2. OIX1O3 144 0.033 3.18 18.5 83 41/100 44.0 2180 280 0
29’ 2.03x103 144 0.029 383 6.2 2.03x103 1580 0.015 3.18. 2.65 N.R. 92 14.4 0 0 0
30~ 2. 01XI03 95.8 0.017 192 5.0 2.04x103 1440 0.025 3.18 10.6 N.R. 100 50.8 0 0 0
Slt 1.98X103 95.8 0.022 431 so 2.03x103 1390 0.030 3.18 10.6 N.R. 100 81.1 0 0 0
32 1.94x103 0 O.ow 47.9 3.8 2.01XI03 0 0.027 3.18 10.6 84 72 30.9 7200 3020 0
33 1.94xlo~ 95.8 0.014 239 2.8 2.O1X1O3 0 0.029 3.18 18.5 85 95 73.7 1850 700 0
34 1,94XI03 47.9 0.015 383 3.4 2, O1X1O3 5460 0.036 3.18 15.9 69 66 36.5 875 0
35 1068X103 335 0,031 383 13.0 2.03x103 1530 0.044 3.18 2.65 N.R. 34 39.9 6450 950 0
36 1.68x103 527 0.037 479 12.2 2.03x103 1680 0.026 3,18 10.6 74 53 73.7 2100 2600 350
37 1.67x103 28? 0.029 383 13.0 2.03x103 1580 0.021 3.18 18.5 74 56 36.5 4260 1960 400
_.__.,

●N.R. -- Not Re!corded

‘Bottcm half of testsection replaced with fmpamaable pipe.
#Entfra test sectfon replaced with fspameable ptpe.
 &

TABLE 2

TYPICilL FILTER CAXE CHARACTERISTICS OF A DRILLING FLUID L

Filter Cake Thickness,mm, built uP in

id 30 minutes at 83eC/6.8NPa (180°F/1000
psi) on core with permeabilityof:
Pa Pa*s cc/3TJmin lmd 15 md 200 md

96 .022 605 4.0 3.2 3.2

0 .032 5.2 4.8 5.6 3.2

48 .033 4.6 4.8 4.8 4.8

144 .029 6.2 3.2 5.6 3.2,

96 .017 5.0 3.2 3.2 3.2

AVERAGE 4.0 4.8 3.2

TABLE 3

THIXOTROPIC PROPERTIES OF A DRILLING FLUID

Apparent Viscosity, Pa*s, at

10 s-l o at~~D S-l o ate:oo s-l 1000 s-l

Tempe:;ture, Ro Hater 5% Uater No lkite~”~-;ater Water Water NO Water Water
Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed Removed

17 0.048 -- 0.08 1.0 0.080 0.70 0.065 0.36 0.070 0.27

66 0.500 -- 0.08 1.6 0.034 0.73 0.021 0.20 0.027 0.16
93 1.500 -- 0.29 2.0 0.130 0.90 0.027 0.18 0.025 0.14
121 2.100 ~ 0.78 3.5 0.300 1.70 0.048 0.27 0.039 0.IY
149 7.300 -- 4.00 10.0 0.900 7.00 0.120 1.50 0.060 0.62

TABLE 4

RESULTING DENSITIES OF NONCIRCULATA8LE DRILLING FLUID

API Filter Cake Filter Cake

Mud ~n;;ty, Fluid LOSS, Thickness, D~si#
9/ cc130min nsn 91

1.68x 103 20.6 9.5 3.06x 103

1.68X 103 16.’6 9.5 3.04X 103
1.67x103 “ 19.3 10.3 3.03 x 103
1.79X 103 21.0 9.5 3.47 x 103
1.78X 103 19.2 11.1 3.52 X 103
. 21.2 8.7 3.39X 103
1.78 X 103

2.04 X 10s 3.6 1.6 4.05X 103

2.04x 103 - 28.0 14.3 4.11X103 ‘
2.04X 103 3.4 6.4 3.91x 103
.’.,

Ftg. 1 - Mud/cement displacement testing apparatus.

.Y .
TE

ON

OIL

Fig. 2 - Displacement test head.

Fig. 3- Schematicof displacementtestfng

apparatus.
 \
----
1
PRESSURE
‘RAD’ENT’
4.50
.
kPa
7ii- t 1.6x 103Pa
,2.25

t c
o~ 7CF
o 5 10 15 20 CEMENTEDAREA
FLOW RATE,dm3/s ANNULARAREA
Fig, 4- Pheolog of the caants for a 1279 (W.) by 165-lR Fig. 5- Mfinltion
of atambff and displacement efftotancy.
(6M&in,)annu fus.

MUD SNABNEL
I

‘lam?.. Fig. 7- Photcqraph illustrating how

a bypassad mudchannel uandsra.
Fig. 6- TwA md/cemnt displacamnt result.

0.10

0.00 TEST3 801-

&
Si, o.o~ 60
/ PERCENT -L 18.5dm3/s
MINUTES
MUD
T
REMOVED
0,04 10.6dm3/s
40 A
L A ~2.6dms/s
A .
0.02 20
I
t
0 n I 1 I I I
-o 2 4 6 8 10 12
o 3x 103
t,MINUTES ‘ TEh%TE GELSTREN:;H1!:
Fig, 6- Datsminfng the mximm gal sirangth of a drill tng fluid. Fig. 9- lbn the displacamant process is influenced by the gel etrangth
of tha drilling fluf d for con!tant filtrate loss.

’00r
A
ao
A

Fo:ti&*~
A

60
PERCENT
Muo
REMOVEO
40 A

Fig. 11 -’ffeaults frcm tlw top permeable aactfon of test 26,

20
‘1 .

-100 101 @ @ f@4

(VELOCITY)
z/MUOIMMOBILITY
FACTOR
Fig. 10- tbw the conditfon of the drilling fluid influancea the
diaplacemnt efficiency.
 SHEAR
STRESS /
PSEWOPLASTIC
I
I

SHEAR MTE
Fig. 12- Rksol ical cursas for a lkutonfan fhJid and a -ton@% Fig. 13- Slight@at decentraliutfon craatos channalling.
Bin@aplaatfc ? Iuid.

100
REllA:#E
A
CEMENTYIELDPOINT FLOW
RE61ME RATE
80 o oPa
A
A 1.8x10aPa
n 5.8xlo$.Pa TURBULENT HIGH
60
PERCENT D
MUD
REMOVED
40 A LAMINAR MODERATE
.

20

0
I PLUG LOW

lVELRCiTY)2/MU0
IMMOBILITY
FACTOR
f Fig. 15- hnuia: ,~1.ocity pmfil.w for a ~*Mtonian fiuid.
Fi , 1* - Ibm tlm =nt rhaology influancaa tla displammt
af ! iciaimy.

100

A A PC-PIII = 12 kg/m3 A

Iz
O LAMINAR
FLOW
A TURBULE#T
FLOW 00 0 Pc-Pm = 360 k/m~
o
A
PC=Pm
60 so
PERCENT PERCEIIT o
MUO MUD
REMOVED REMOVEO
40 .0 M

20

t
. *11111
i , t , , ,, ,11 , , , 1 11111 t , ‘ ,11,1 # 1 , , ,~
n # 1 I 111111 1 I 1 t,lmtl I 1 1 1 1 t 1~

i IQ 1 @ 10S !04 ‘l@ 101 101 10a 1

iViiOCITYlhUO
lMklOBILITY
FACTOR (VELOCllW2/MU0
lMMOBILiTY
FACTOR
. Fig.16: ?’ha.effect
of flow ragina on the displacaaant efficiency. Ft .17- Tlm effact of density differme on the diriplacaxant
‘ efhamy.