benchmarking potassium chloride as a shale inhibitor using … elango... · 2018-01-17 · cuttings...

Curtin University is a trademark of Curtin University of Technology

CRICOS Provider Code 00301J

Prabhu Elango

Impact of Drilling Fluid composition on Cuttings Integrity



Introduction

2

www.geology.com

• Shale is a fine-grained sedimentary rock that forms

from the compaction of silt and clay-size mineral

particles

• Shales make up over 75% of the drilled formations –Manohar Lal, 1999

• Challenges with clay

1. Swelling and Borehole Instability

2. Erosion

3. Change of Drilling fluid rheology

4. Drilling fluid cleaning



Significance

3

Centrifuge

Hydro-cyclone

www.slb.comwww.slb.comCuttings getting

transported to the

surface get

disintegrated due

to mechanical and

chemical

degradation

100𝜇𝑚

1 𝜇𝑚

Hydrocyclone Performance Curve-The Effect of Fluid Viscosity on

Hydrocyclone Performance -Svein-Arne Marthinussen

Clay

ParticleComes in

contact with

water

-Swelling

-Dispersion

Without Encapsulation

Drill pipe



Methodology

4

Known Size (25 𝜇𝑚)

Cuttings:

-Synthetic (API Bentonite)



Outline

5

ProcedureCuttings

Disintegration Effect of KCl Future Work

“If we knew what it was we

were doing, it would not be

called research, would it?”

-Albert Einstein



Procedure

6

Part I: FBRM Tests

FBRM

Probe

Window

Clamp

Stand



Procedure

7

Part I: FBRM Tests

1000 ml of

water

(x) Percent KCl

concentration

At 1 Minute

ALS Stirrer

running at

900 RPM



Procedure

8

50 g of

Bentonite

At 3 minutes

Part I: FBRM Tests



Procedure

9

Part II: Mastersizer Tests

Collected

Sample

from

FBRM

Test



Procedure

10

Part I: FBRM Tests Part II: Mastersizer 3000 Tests



Characterising Clay Distribution

11



Characterising Clay Distribution

12



Effect of KCl

• Concentrations of KCl

Tested:

1. 0%

2. 1%

3. 2.5%

4. 4%

5. 8%

6. 16%

7. 26%

• Volume of water: 1000

ml

• Bentonite: 5% API

Bentonite

One I

nd

ivid

ua

l Test Step 1. FBRM

Step 2. Collect sample into test containers

Step 3. Mastersizer 3000

Step 4. Export and Save Data

“If we knew what it was

we were doing, it would

not be called research,

would it?”

-Albert Einstein



Experimental Results

14

0% KCl




15

1% KCl




16

2.5% KCl




17

4% KCl




18

8% KCl




19

16% KCl




20

26% KCl




21




22

Concluding remarks / Future work

23

✓ Introduced the significance of cuttings disintegration

✓ Documented cuttings disintegration

✓ Developed procedure to analyse the effect of Potassium Chloride as an additive

1. Research paper


24




2. Testing different types of additives and comparing results

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

24000

26000

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

PA

RT

ICL

E C

OU

NT

(N

O W

T.)

RELATIVE TIME

5% Bentonite, 8% KCl 5% Bentonite, 4% KCl 5% Bentonite, 0.5 ppb Spectracap

5% Bentonite, 5% Xtrahib 5% Bentonite, 5% Kla-stop 5% Bentonite, NO ADDITIVE




25




2. Dynamic Testing incorporating flow loop



References

26

[1] P. Chee, G. Brian, S. Sheik, et al., “Effects of swelling and hydration stress in

shale on wellbore stability,” SPE38057, 1997.

[2] D. YAAtON, “Mineral composition of the average shale,” 1961.

[3] A. W. S. Team, “State of the art in wellbore stability,” Amoco. Chicago, US,

1994.

[4] W. Aldred, D. Plumb, I. Bradford, J. Cook, V. Gholkar, L. Cousins, R. Minton,

J. Fuller, S. Goraya, and D. Tucker, “Managing drilling risk,” Oilfield review,

vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 2–19, 1999.

[5] J. Simpson, H. Dearing, et al., “Diffusion osmosis-an unrecognized cause of

shale instability,” in IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineers,

2000.

[6] M. Lal et al., “Shale stability: drilling fluid interaction and shale strength,” in

SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum

Engineers, 1999.

[7] L. Ledgerwood III, D. Salisbury, et al., “Bit balling and wellbore instability of

downhole shales,” in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society

of Petroleum Engineers, 1991.

[8] E. Van Oort, “On the physical and chemical stability of shales,” Journal of

Petroleum Science and Engineering, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 213–235, 2003.

[9] G. Løklingholm et al., “The drilling fluid inhibition properties effect on hole

quality-a well survey,” in IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Society of Petroleum

Engineers, 2002.

[10] P. J. Boul, B. Reddy, M. Hillfiger, T. P. O’Connell, et al., “Functionalized nanosilicas

as shale inhibitors in water-based drilling fluids,” in Offshore Technology

Conference, Offshore Technology Conference, 2016.

[11] S. Young, J. Friedheim, et al., “Environmentally friendly drilling fluids for unconventional

shale,” in Offshore Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition, Offshore

Mediterranean Conference, 2013.

[12] T. Geehan and A. McKee, “Drilling mud: Monitoring and managing it,” Oilf.

Rev, pp. 41–52, 1989

[13] www.geology.com

[14] www.slb.com



Experimental Program

27

FBRM M500

• Composed of a laser that is focused

in some focal plane outside the

sapphire window

• Laser rotates at a fixed speed of 2

m/s and as the particles pass by the

focal plane, the focussed beam

intersects the edge of a particle and

begins to backscatter the laser light

• The backscatter continues until the

focussed beam reaches the particle’s

opposite edge. The backscatter is

collected by the FBRM optics and

converted into an electronic signal

• The result is the chord length which

is a fundamental measurement of the

particle related to the particle size

How it works




28

Malvern Mastersizer 3000

• A laser beam passes through a

dispersed particulate sample and the

angular variation in intensity of the

scattered light is measured

• Large particles scatter light at small

angles relative to the laser beam and

small particles scatter light at large

angles

• The angular scattering intensity data

is then analysed to calculate the size

of the particles that created the

scattering pattern

• The particle size is reported as a

volume equivalent sphere diameter

How it works




29

Comparison

Lasentec FBRM M500 Malvern Mastersizer 3000

Measurement Technique FBRM Laser light scattering

Size Range 0.5 – 2000 μm 0.01 - 3500 μm

Measured Particle Size Chord Length Equivalent Spherical Diameter

PSD Weighting Count Weighted converted to volume

weighted

Volume Weighted

Wet or Dry Dispersion Wet Dispersion only Wet or Dry Dispersion

Typical Measurement time Live – Instant <5 minutes

Method of testing Particles submersed in wetting agent Suspensions, emulsions, dry powders

Undiluted Measurement Yes No

Real-time, continuous

measurement

Yes No

benchmarking potassium chloride as a shale inhibitor using … elango... · 2018-01-17 · cuttings...

Documents