SodDty of PofrofeunEnghoUB

SPE 29543

Drilling Mud Rheology and the API Recommended Measurements

Peter E. Clark, The Universityof Alabama
Marnber
SPE

~ lW. SOC4@Y
ofPeIrobum Enginawainc.
lhbpapr vmspmpwdfc+~bn atthePmdumbn hdtilnOkMonMCSy,OK,U.S.A.,
OpmtkmBSympaium 2-4 AIMI19SS.

nbcbdlorr)raanwkmbyaJISPEPrq8mcommsInMow&Qfwbw
ThiDPsPuwao orwofmmbnamrdfmd lnMabsrr&u 8ubmmodbyrrm
umla(8).cmwmdti Pwf,
aOPfaOfSMkfOndti~bytbKd FWmbum Englnous
udu’eakjoct mCOfruWM byrhoalrhof(s).lhc
nwuld,m
pmonmd.dmfml ~-
@VrmdSOnoftiSocktYd%um EXilMef8,hX, a~. PwomwaonraI atSPEmnUw-$@i-w ~* W~ti~dh~
dPwubumEn@uus.Purm&bn Inqfnotbocopbd.
loalpybms&braitokna9hactdnc4mciwIhm2oowordRlwumrkms nm4NtractsllaMalINdn
wmPbuow~
c4whaomdbywhom Sm~b~. WfllaUbfUM,SPE,P.O.SOXM, Rkhm-II, TX~, U.S.A.
Tolox, 162246
SPEUT.

advent of low-solids drilling fluids, the models cov-

Drilling fluids are, among other things, expected to
transport cuttings and control fluid loss. The rheology
----- ,
of drilling fluids piays an important roii in ‘bothof
these aspects of drilling fluid performance. A number
Gf pi-s
. S- ●k- A a~dams LDd.~ln,,m
Ugu LUG mllGllb4ul
Tnet;tmta actah.
GUUL-UAU Aumubww
lished a set of standards for evaluating the rheology of
drilling fluids. While drilling fluid technology has
evolved and drilling fluids have become more theo-
logically complex, the standards have not changed
sufficiently to adequately characterize the new genera-
tion of drilling fluids.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) has estab-
lished a set of standards for the theological character-
ization of drilling fluids, API BUL 13D1. A second
edition was published in 1985 and the third edition is
currently in the last stages of the publication process.
API 13D covers everything from basic theological
concepts to data acquisition and anaiysis. it has a good
ered in API 13D were adequate. Environmental and
operational considerations-have encouraged a gradual
shift from traditional drilling fluids to low-solids muds
that contain polymers to provide the desirable proper-
ties. Changing to polymer-based fluids has brought
WUw”
about changes in the mechanisms for viscosity dW~i-
opment and fluid-loss control. These fluids are not
adequately characterized by the tests outlined in API
13D.
When sheared, atypical non-Newtonian fluid will
exhibit flow behavior similar to that shown in Figure
12.The fluid first gives a Newtonian response (lower
Newtonian region) to the shear rate and then transi-
tions into a power law region. When the shear rate
gets high enough a second transition occurs to Newto-
nian behavior (upper Newtonian region). Traditionaiiy
in the oilfield, measurements are made in what is
thought to be the power law region. As we will see,
measurements made with the standard six speed
:-.+....- .-* UUnUt
~l~u~GUL An -+ -way=
-1-r *W-
-Un.?;An
pW V1- -:
pdb
●C=X?:*W
W W& ‘UhA~

discussion of non-Newtonian fluid models but this dis- power-law region. Both the upper and lower Newto-
M...S-S UUG3
WSSXJU
~~~e UUL
-A+hIM,WG
“a~l..d~ ~A.mm,..+
Uuquube
~~.,awm~ ,4 41.,:A
a~= w
w v Gi WAAU-
nian refrimc-, tyD~~~j~7
——. -.=--- - r bVe been i~9d, MMSIM12-
models that describe fluids which exhibit Newtonian ments in these two regions are difficult and requk
behavior at low shear rates. For many years, before the special equipment and, until recently, there has been

Referencesand illustrationsat end of paper

933
 .

2 Drilling Fluid Rheology and the API Recommended Measurements SPE 29543

little appreciation of the importance of these data. In ment. If rev dust and/or bentonite was used as an addi-
.:..- s- .~- -~1..-~~ ~..;~. ;*
u Vc tu ulu ~Uly lllG1 UUIU~,
tn the .xmc Add

1985, Roodhart7 published a study of particle settling lb w 6LIJ c4w-”- .“ M.”

in non-Newtonian fluids and reported that the lower premixed solutions immediately before making the
Newtonian viscosity was important in understanding theological measurements.
.,– —–... . u —1.——-:——
mL—_-:=— .-_:-. _ce a..:~ :- ●l.a
me semmg oenavlor. 1ne vlsmwy UI d IIUKI m LUG
lower Newtonian region is also important in determini- Results and Discussion
ng fluid loss in porous media. In radial flow in porous The theological behavior of drilling muds over a nar-
-.sA:-
Ulewa,
4%.:A .,-lfifi:fir
Mulu v WUULy
% thn rnnlr
111 Ulw 1--
ic n fmrwtinn
s- - .~a-u-=.
nf
~-
~,/r
= 3 --., ..~,- fig.h~.. ..*-c frill intn twn hrnd clsxses.
1u w 1au~G U1 i)llual Labwc3AbbJAALA.U . . . “ “. “-- “.-.-”.

+hmrnffim thn ehaar rate Aemwxec mwl the. vi wmsitv

UIWAWAULW, UAW ULIWCU s a~” u-a w-”” -- --- . .“-.. J..J

-----—--
increases
.-y-.--,
ranidlv
.... . radial
with
_______ This
.—— distance. is not ade-
_________ ~ingharn- plastic

quately addressed by the standard API fluid loss test. It T = TO+ pp?

is not clear what the importance of the upper Newto-

nian viscosity is.
and power law
Non-Newtonian fluids in many instances exhibit vis-
~ = JQn .
Coelasticity. There has been some speculation that vis-
coelasticity is an important property, but there is little
or no proof that it is. The equipment needed to mea- where t is the shear stress, Z. is the yield stresss 1$
sure viscoelastic properties is expensive and not well
is the plastic viscosity, K is the power law consistency
suited for use in the field. Vkcoelastic effects will not
be discussed in this paper. index, and n is the power law flow behavior index. An
excellent case can be made for generalizing the Bing-
ham plastic model to a Herschel-BuUdey6
Data collected for this study were acquired using a
Carri-Med controlled stress rheometer (CS 100), a ‘r = to+ Kyn.
Brooldleld DV-2, and a Farm 35 viscometer. Xanvis
was provided by the Kelco Oil Field Group and the All of the variables have been previously defined. In
hydroxyethyl cellulose was NATROSOLW. Bentonite the Herschel Bulkley fluid model, when n is equal to
and rev dust were used as active and inactive solids. one, K becomes the plastic viscosity and the model
The sodium and potassium chloride were reagent rt=rhln-ctfi the Rin uhiam nl ~ctic. mdel nr when TO ~S
AWuuvw. w ● .SAW M .S.6----- y--- -- ---.0 --- -- ., ----
grade materials (Fisher Chemicals or equivalent).
Mixing was accomplished in a Warring Blendorm zero the model reduces to the power law. Practically, it
using the polymer manufacture’s recommended prac- is difficult to fit data consistently to obtain good values
tice. Xanvis was added to tap water that contained a for the constants.
small amount of citric acid to lower the pH. After the
cnl;A
“-..” Aicnercd
-“ y-. --9 tht= nU
UAW y..
WSJC rdced
.7- .--w
tn 5/ f) Ilchto
.W v.- -.-e
rnnre.n-
w-..--..
When a plot of the log of the shear stress versus the
trated sodium
–-———- hvdroxide.
--, _______ The resuk.imz
---- --- ——_. viscous
_______SOlu- log of the shear rate is made, it is easy to seethe dif-
tion was mixed for 20 minutes and then salt was added ference between the two models. The power law
if the experimental protocol required it. Mixing con- yields a straight line while, after the linear region, the
tinued for another 20 minutes. Hydroxyethyl cellulose Herschel-BuUdey model line begins to turn up toward
was dispersed in water and then the pH was adjusted the y-axis (@igure2). Tinedasiied iines line in Figure 2
until the polymer hydrated. All solutions were aged represent the behavior shown by atypical non-Newto-
for 24 hours to insure hydration. Bentonite based nian fluid (no yield stress) that exhibits power law
muds were made by adding the required amount of behavior over part of the shear rate range and a limit-
bentonite to fresh water. The resulting slurry was ing Newtonian viscosity at low shear rates. Both the
miyd
—-- in e
-* a hlant-br
“.”AAW”* fnr
.“. aavarnl
.“ , “. - hmwc u
al”- bfnm
“WA”*. mancltw-
u.”--” lower and the upper Newtonian regions are character-

934
SPE29543
~e~ ~Y ~ ~~newith ~ slope that approaches one. When
either or both regions are present in the da~ the
power law parameters must be calculated from the lin-
ear region of the plot and care must be taken to avoid
picking data points that extend into either region.
The apparent viscosity ( yJ of a non-Newtonian
fluid is defined as
P=(Y) = ;.
This is essentially the same as the effective viscosity
defined in API 13D as
P.=:.
‘r
When shear stress is plotted versus shear rate (Figure
3), the resulting curve has a slope that varies over the
entire range. Apparent viscosity is the slope of a line
drawn from the origin to the shear rate of interest. The
slope of the tangent line at any point along the shear
stress - shear rate curve is termed the consistency.
Drilling muds prepared from bentonite have fairly
well defined behavior. Afresh water mud will tend to
produce power law behavior while a salt water mud
will be an almost ideal example of a Bingham plastic
fluid. In both cases, the recommendations put forth in
API 13D are adequate for characterizing the fluid over
a wide range of shear rates. Newer muds am far more
complex. The various additives currently in use can
modify the theological behavior of a mud to the extent
that the procedures presented in API 13D are not ade-
quate.
T nw.efilhk AAllh’1 g rn@
~Q@nin
- w —Owaaw w.- — Polymer additives
that mod.i~ the theological behavior the mud. Figure
4 is a plot of xanthan and hydroxyethyl cellulose solu-
tions over a range of shear rates. Note that the hydrox-
yethyl cellulose exhibits a lower Newtonian region but
no upper Newtonian in the shear rate range. The added
lines show the Farm 35 shear rates. On the other hand,
the xanthan solution data has an upper Newtonian
region, but it shows no indication of a lower Newto-
935
3
nian region. When hydroxyethyl cellulose data are
plotted as the shear stress versus shear rate ~@igure5),
it is easy to pick the linear region from the hydroxy-
ethyl cellulose data and four of the six Farm 35 data
.~:- .-.-:-- T+ “. ~1.m PlaW that the c~ear
points ftil ti[o uus I=WWU. It ~. -.v .1.-- . . . .. . ..
rates recommended in API 13D do not completely
characterize the fluid. None of the shear rates are com-
pletely in the lower Newtonian region. However, the
three and six rpm data are in the transition region and
using them in the computation of the power law
parameters will introduce a small amount of error.
In the plot, shown in Figure 6, the dotted line was gen-
erated with the Carri-Med controlled stress rheometer
over a shear rate range of 0.01 to 2000 S-l. Over most
of this range the line is linear, however, at a fairly low
shear rate (when compared to other common water
soluble polymer solutions), the upper Newtonian
region begins to appear. The points included on the
plot were obtained with a Farm 35 viscometer. These
points agree quite well with the Carri-Med data. It is
clear that both the 300 and 600 rpm data points are not
in the linear part of the curve. Using the analysis sug-
gested by API 13D, the values calculated for ~ and K
are 0.303 and 30.5 respectively. Redoing the calcula-
tion using the linear section of the curve the values for
n and K are 0.147 and 61.5. Recalling that the power
law parameters are derived from the linear part of the
curve, the API 13D analysis clearly yields incorrect
values.
If the 3 and 100 rpm data are used, the answers are
much closer to the result obtained using the slope of
the log-log plot. The real problem with using the 3
rpm data from a Farm 35 viscometer or its equivalent
lies in the fact that the 3 and 6 rpm data are probably
the most error prone. It is almost impossible to keep
the mechanical system for measuring torque in good
enough shape to mess-um torqitie ....&l. . . . . A --- UL
A6
WU.11tUIY .d251=
accuracy at low rpm. This is not as much of a problem
with the higher rprns because bearing drag is a much
smaller component of the total signal than it is at low
rotational rates.
Tabulating the apparent viscosity for the two different
sets of power law parameters (Table 1) it is clear that
there is a great deal of difference at the lower shear
 .

4 Drilling Fluid Rheology and the API Recommended Measurements SPE 29543

rate in the predicted values. Use of the API 13D analy- predict a yield stress. Clar~ has discussed yield points
sis under predicts the viscosity and wo~d yield a poor ~_d the measurement of yield points in 10W-SOlidS
fluid design optimization for both particle transport drilling fluids using a controlled stress rheometer. He
and fluid loss. concluded that these measurements are difficult, even
with research grade equipment, and fraught with error.
When active and/or inactive solids are added to a xan- There are two different “yield points” labeled in Fig-
than solution the underlying rheology of the xanthan ure 8. The dynamic yield point is the one measured
solution still dominates the rheology of the mixture. using the recommended procedure while the static
The data shown in Figure 7 indicates that the transi- yield point may be closer to the value obtained using a
tion to an upper Newtonian region is still prominent. gel point measurement. It is the static yield point that
~~w
* u“- dsit~
-- wen= amwmtd
.. “.- ~w..”.-.”- udnu —- Cmri-Med
..”-= the -— -- ----- vi+
--= :. ;_mfiAnn*;n
10 u+w~ u
mwt;-11=
b ML p-
trsmcnnri
UW.. M-.-y .- -.
cometer with a solution made from xanvis solution
with 3% bentonite and 3% rev dust as the inactive ‘!’he MI13D publication mentions briefly the use of a
solid (see Clark4 for other examples). Interestingly, in Marsh funnel for field characterization of drilling flu-
the data shown in Figure 7 only the two lowest stan- ids. In the discussion, the limitations of the Marsh fun-
dard shear rates fall into the power-law region of the nel are presented. This discussion does not go far
curve. If the API 13 D procedures are used to compute enough in warning of the pitfalls of using the Marsh
n and K, there is not a set of recommended points funnel. Clark3 has shown that the variation in shear
that will produce correct values for the power-law rate in the funnel orifice makes the data useless for
parameters. comparing two difi”erentfluids. it is even questionalie
whether the data should be used for comparing two
““--1-” AS●ha “m-a A&ll:m- m.;rl tab-m O*A:#nmn*
~-~lG~ (JL UIG O-G &U ULUl~ UULU CQWU CLL USALWA WAAL

‘Jhble 1: Calculated Apparent Viscosities.

times. When the power-law parameters, especially n,
change, the shear rate that the fluid experiences in the
funnel orifice changes. This means that the compari-
son of the two different fluids is taking place under
~ different conditions. It would probably be best to drop
I I K==30.5 I K==&.5 I the Marsh fimnel from use, especially for polymer-
Apparent Apparent
based fluids.
Shear Rate (S-l) Viscosity(cp) Vkcosity (cp)

The API Bul 13D provides a set of specifications for

theologically characterizing drilling fluids. While
these specifications work for bentonite-based muds,
new polymer-based fluids present new challenges that
I 340 I 52 I 42 I are not addressed. Until changes are made, the API
511 39 30 13D specifications must be used with care, realizing
f 1 tk.+ -—w.-... ~.+n ..- -...1+ k-- +ha -.---.-A-A
L.lMtb GALVllGUUi$ UCSU4 WCLU lGSLUC ALUlll LUG lGWUllllllGllUCU
I 1021 1241171
tests and methods of data analysis. The advent of por-
Yield stress is another fluid property thought to be table computers and calculators has antiquated the use
of the simplified analysis techniques set forth in the
important in drilling fluids. The yield stress, if it
-..:,.*A:-
sms~, - ----1-. .-—>---.--> —_—-—-.-–T—l?--- r-–
ISu ptnmy unaersmoa p aramcter. m ract ror
specifications.
some fluids, the estimate of the yield stress using the
API 13D recommendations maybe an experimental
artifact because extrapolating power law data will also 1.’’APIBulletin on The Rheology of Oil-Well

936
SPE 29543 Peter E. Cl&k

Drilling Fluids 1985, American Petroleum Institute:

Washington, D.C.
2.Bird, R.B., Stewart, W.E. and Lightfoot, E.N.:
Transport Phenomena. 1960, New York John Wiley &
Sons.
3.Clark, P.E.:, “Unpublished results
--1----- -cl -. . Q-1:.l. Wll:-” nx.. A”
4.chlrk, P.E.: “RlhG”l”gy“, M* OU,mm lAllWlg Nluua
I. Theological Modelingt” Mukiphase Flow in Wells
and P@elines (1992). FED-VO1,14463-69.
S.Clark P.E.: “A Study of Yield Points in Slurries
Made From I~teracti~g nnd Non-InteractingSolids
~uapenckdb %mnb SohatkmsYDeV@l~XltS ill
Non-Newtonian Plows (1993). AMD-Vol. 17S 109-
114.
6.Hemphill, T., Carnpose, W. and Pilehvari, A.:
“Yield-Power Law Model More Accurately Predicts

7.Roodhart, L.P.: “Proppant Settling in Non-Newto-

nian Fracturing Fluids:’ paper SPE/DOE 13905 pre-
sented at the 1985 SPE/DOE Low Permeability Gas
Reservoirs, Denver, CO, May 19-22.

937
 Drilling Fluid Rheology and the API Recommended Measurements SPE 29543

‘OOO 5
4

I
Lower Newtonian Region
3
tart of the power law region

.. 2

%00
?!
>6
5
4 End of the power law region

2-

Upper Newtonian Regiorl

10-
1 i I 1 1111 I 1 I I 11111 I I 1 I 1111 1 I I I 11111 I I 8 1 11111 1 I I 1 1111] i

10-2 10-’ 10° 10’ 102 103 104

Shear Rate
Fig. 1. ~ical non-Newtonian fluid viscosity versus shear rate Mhavior

7
.’””
// 0’
— Fluid with a yield point H/
## 4
-- Fluid with a lower Newtonian
region #@.“
## .0
##
.“
.“
@##
.
@#0
#@
00

/ /
0#
00
0#
# #&
# e#
#
\ 1 I 1 1I rltl i I I I 1 1111 I I 1 I I 111[ 1 I # i I 1111 I I 1 I 1 1 11 t

Shear Rate
F@ ~ cl....... . ..*- -La -- ------ L–
.. OUCiU U.UG - SIKar stress oenavlor ror a Herschei-IMkiey iiuici and a power iaw fiuid.
‘L- ..!-.. P–

938
 7
Peter E. Cltik
SPE 29543

0.16-

0.14-

0.12-
Cn
m
~a 0.10-
Cn
~ 0.08 -
Shear stress curve
3 Apparent viscosity, the slope
~ 0.06 - mm=

of the dashed line is equal

0.04- ●
●e to the apparent viscosity
4*
0.02- ●e
A&●*
O.00* I I I I

o 200 400 600 800

shear Rate

Fig. 3. Apparent viscosity.

,
#
,,
II
000- ,,
,, a

,
,,
,1
,1
,! ,

,
,
,1
01
,!
,1
I

s 0$ 9
,!

100 ,* ,0
,1
,!
,

,1
,1 t

8 It
01
, ,1
,,
,,
‘

,, ,1
II
,

..................................................... ,*
0$ !

10 “..-
........ 1
,
,1

*“......
...... ,a
,1
It
,,
,

+.......
!
%~~.
,1
‘1
,,
,!
,,
4!
Xanthan \ \ ‘%--””%””-+””.......+.
~ ,1

““%....%.
.. ,,.... , ,
,1
,!
,,
4

““”””.HEC ,

1\ ~ s

~
* i~
,t
,1
0.1 =,,,,,,,
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Shear Rate (s-l )

Fig. 4. Xanthan and hydroxyethyl cellulose rheology.

939
 .,,

8 Drilling Fluid Rheology and the API Recommended Measurements SPE 29543

1 ooo~ ,

e-
5-
4-
,
3-
t ,
2- t
, ,
1

100=
, ,

, , ,

6-
s- I , ,
4- , ,
0 , , ,
, ,
3- I

0 , ,
2- , , ,
,

, , ,
, i, ,,
10-1 , ,,
),
1“~ 11111
r I 1 1 11I 11[ 1 : 1 I I 1111 1 I 1 I I 111[ I I 1 t

0.1 1 10 100 1000

Shear Rate (s-l )
Fig. 5. Hydroxyethyl cellulose data plotted as shear stress versus shear rate.

3 /
1

,./&q”’”-
2

10 0
(*., .. “
7 * * $+%.-”
- #.... 0“
6
-. -#5.+” 0“
5 ~- -...-*...- /“
4 ** --- # ....
**” /
..*.”
... .. Carri-Med Data
...... .....
8 3
/ ,* m“*” ~=
..... @ FarmData
#.ti.-”
2
m 2
I ..-
-.....”” -. n = ().l~7; K ~ RI G #4.#m-n/a-2
V o.W Uylmm / GFII

n = 0.303; K = 30.5 dyneWn/cm2

1
— n = 0.149; K = 69.97 cJynmn/cm2
10 -1 P
1 I 8 1 11111
I I r r
1 I 11111 I I I 1111 I I I I 11111 I I I 1 1111] I 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Shear Rate(s-l )
Fig. 6. Xanthan solution with data from a separate study on a solution of the same concentration.
.,.

SPE 29543 Peter E. Clark

1 000 O*
,,
,110
,Itl

I
,, ,111
04 ,111
,( ,’, ,
,11

!4
,1
0, ,1*
6 ,, l,t
,:1
n 5
It
,, ,18 h

Iti
“’ 4
n = 0.1693

1
3 K = 83.93
m
a) 2

!3
‘w ,,11
,,, ,
100+ ,111

-1
4
~#a=-- ; ;
,
,111
,,,
,*
,111
II
,

:, ,,, !
,, ,811
11 ,,11
,1 ,,, ,
. . . ,

,,, , ,
,,,
;; I
,
0, ,111

3 ::
,, ,
,4 , ,,
,,
,,
,8 ,t ,,
,,
2 ,4
,,
,, ,, ,,
:, , ,,
,,
,, ,
1
,,, !

10 ,8 ,,,1

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Shear Rate (s-l )

Fig.7. Xanthan solution withadded bentonite andrev dust.

2000

0
50 100 150 200

Shear Stress (dyne/cm* )

Fig. 8. Yield points in a xanthan solution.

941