College of Science and Technology

School of Computing, Science and Engineering

Petroleum and Gas Engineering

LABORATORY REPORT
MODULE: Petroleum Exploration and Production
LABORATORY TITLE: Laboratory Preparation of Drilling Mud
MODULE LECTURER: Dr. Lateef Akanji

REPORTED BY
FULL NAME: Dakeipirim Wokoma
ROLL NUMBER: @00361272

SUBMISSION DATE: 11/04/2014

ACADEMIC SESSION: 2013/2014

Abstract
Drilling fluid is a very crucial composite of the drilling operation. Performance and quality of fluid must
be constantly monitored if the drilling process is expected to run smoothly. This experiment discusses the
steps required to prepare a drilling fluid and how to test for certain quality indicators such as mud density
and other rheological properties.

Table of Contents
Abstract.............................................................................................................................................i
List of Figures.................................................................................................................................iv
List of Tables..................................................................................................................................iv
Drilling Fluid Preparation................................................................................................................1
1.1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................1

1.2

Theory..............................................................................................................................2

1.3

Materials/Apparatus for Water Base Mud (WBM) Preparation...............................3

1.4

Experimental Procedure for WBM Preparation..........................................................3

Experiment 1....................................................................................................................................4
2.1

Objective..........................................................................................................................4

2.2

Mud Weight or Density Theory..................................................................................4

2.3

Test equipment Mud balance......................................................................................4

Calibration of Mud Balance...................................................................................................5

2.4

Test Procedure.................................................................................................................5

2.5

Marsh Funnel Viscosity Theory..................................................................................5

Calibration..............................................................................................................................6
2.6

Test Procedure.................................................................................................................6

2.7

Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH) Theory................................................................6

The pH Paper:.........................................................................................................................7
The pH Meter.........................................................................................................................7
2.8

Data Analysis and Results..............................................................................................8

2.9

Discussion of Results.......................................................................................................8

Sources of Error......................................................................................................................8

Questions................................................................................................................................8
Solution..................................................................................................................................9
2.10

Conclusion....................................................................................................................9

EXPERIMENT 2...........................................................................................................................10
3.1

Objectives.......................................................................................................................10

Introduction..........................................................................................................................10
3.2

Theory............................................................................................................................10

Mud Rheology......................................................................................................................10
3.3

Determination of Mud Viscosity Theory..................................................................11

Fluid Characterization..........................................................................................................11
3.4

Test Equipment..............................................................................................................12

3.5

Procedure.......................................................................................................................12

3.6

Determination of Gel Strength Theory....................................................................12

3.7

Procedure.......................................................................................................................13

3.8

Data and Analysis of Results........................................................................................13

3.9

Discussion of Results.....................................................................................................14

Sources of Error....................................................................................................................15
Questions..............................................................................................................................15
Solutions...............................................................................................................................15
Conclusion................................................................................................................................18
References......................................................................................................................................19

List of Figures
FIGURE 1 - MUD BALANCE..............................................................................................................4
FIGURE 2 - MARSH FUNNEL.............................................................................................................5
FIGURE 3 - PH PAPER.......................................................................................................................7
FIGURE 4 - PH METER......................................................................................................................7
FIGURE 5 - SCHEMATIC OF FLUIDS.................................................................................................11
FIGURE 6 - OFITE MODEL 800 VISCOMETER.................................................................................12
FIGURE 7 - GRAPH OF SHEAR STRESS VS RATE SHOWING CLASS OF FLUID AND YIELD POINT.....14
FIGURE 8 - VISCOSITY VS TEMPERATURE RELATIONSHIP FOR NAPHTHALENE..............................17
FIGURE 9 - VISCOSITY-TEMPERATURE RELATIONSHIP FOR WATER...............................................17

List of Tables
TABLE 1 - TABLE OF RESULTS FOR DENSITY, MARSH FUNNEL AND PH READINGS........................8
TABLE 2 - TABLE OF RESULTS FOR VISCOMETER READING..........................................................13
TABLE 3 - DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GEL STRENGTH AND YIELD POINT..........................................17

Drilling Fluid Preparation

1.1

Introduction

Drilling fluids are an essential part of any drilling process with its primary function to remove the drilled
cuttings from the borehole whilst drilling and to prevent fluids from the formations being drilled into the
bored hole.

Types of Drilling Fluids

Water Based Mud

Oil Based Mud

Gaseous Drilling Fluids

Water Based Mud: These are drilling fluids composed of water as the continuous phase of the system
and could be fresh water or salt water.
Oil Based Mud: The continuous phase in this system is oil and they are mostly used for troublesome
formations.
Gaseous Drilling Fluids: This involves the use of pure gas or gas-liquid mixtures for drilling operation.
The use of this drilling fluid is not common and they are used for areas where formations are
impermeable

Functions of Drilling Fluids

Remove cuttings from wellbore

Prevent formation fluids flowing into the wellbore
Maintain wellbore stability
Cool and lubricate the bit

Transmit hydraulic horsepower to bit

The ability of drilling mud to carry cuttings from the borehole to the surface and also avoid influx of
formation fluid into the borehole is determined by its density and viscosity. Hence the expected range for
these properties must be met in order to design a good drilling fluid.

1.2

Theory

This report discusses the preparation of water based mud (water being the continuous phase) with a
volume ratio of (80% water + 20% oil) liquids 370ml + 22.5g bentonite giving values as follows:
Precise volume of water:
Precise volume of oil:

0.8 x 370=296 ml

0.2 x 370=74 ml

Where two substances having different densities are mixed then the density of the mixture is a function of
the volume and density (weight) of the components of the mixture. Mathematically this relationship can
be expressed as follows:

V 1 D 1+ V 2 D 2=( V 1+ V 2 ) ( DR )=M 1+ M 2
Where V1
V2
D1
D2
DR
M1
M2
From

Volume of the 1st substance

=
=
=
=
=
=

Volume of the 2nd substance

Density of the 1st substance
Density of the 2nd substance
Density of the resulting mixture
Mass of 1st Substance
Mass of 2nd Substance

Density=

Mass
Volume

In the case of a drilling mud, increasing the weight with a material such as barite can also be related in the
same manner.

V 1 W 1+V 2W B=(V 1+ W 2)(W 2) whereW B=Weight of barite

1.3

Materials/Apparatus for Water Base Mud (WBM) Preparation

Water
Bentonite
Oil
Emusifying agent
Flocculant
Stirrer
Mud Balance
pH meter
pH strips
Marsh Funnel
Weighing scale
Mud mixer

Thermometer

1.4

Experimental Procedure for WBM Preparation

74ml of oil was added to 296ml of distill water in a conical flask or the cup of the stirrer to make
370ml of liquid, after which 22.5g of bentonite was added to the mixture.

The final mixture was stirred with the standard stirrer for 30mins. After 25mins stirring, the
lumped material adhering to the spindle of the stirrer or inside of the cup/container was scraped
down into the cup, then the stirring continued for another 5mins to make up 30mins.

After mixing the pH of the mud was checked and recorded as 8.6.
4ml of emulsifying agent (Vasaclean VB) and 4g of flocculant (NaCl) was added to the mixture
and stirred for about 2mins and recorded pH again as 7.1.

0.1 using phosphoric acid to reduce or caustic

The pH of the mud was then adjusted to 9.5

soda to increase the pH and the mud sample was weighed in the mud balance.
At the end of the stirring time we transferred the samples to a sealed jar and aged the mixture for

16hrs at room temperature in the laboratory

After aging, the pH of mud was readjusted to 9.5, stirred for 5 minutes and the tests done.

Experiment 1
2.1

Objective

The purpose of this laboratory work is to determine certain properties of a laboratory prepared drilling
mud such as;

2.2

Mud Weight or Density

Marsh funnel viscosity

Hydrogen ion concentration(pH)

Mud Weight or Density Theory

The density of the drilling fluid must be controlled to provide adequate hydrostatic head to prevent influx
of formation fluids, but not so high in order not to cause loss of circulation or adversely affect the drilling
rate and damaging or fracturing the formation. Normal pressure gradient by water is equal to 0.433psi/ft,
which is equivalent to 433psi/1000ft.
A mud balance can be used to determine the density of a drilling mud and is usually reported in pounds
per gallon (ppg), Ib/ft3, psi/1000ft and specific gravity (s.g). The density of a drilling mud must be
controlled to provide the necessary hydrostatic pressure to prevent influx of formation fluids.

2.3

Test equipment Mud balance

The mud balance is used to measure the weight of a drilling fluid and consists of a constant volume cup
with a lever arm and rider calibrated to directly read the density of the fluid in ppg, specific gravity, and
pressure gradient (psi/1000ft).

Figure 1 - Mud Balance

(Source: www.petroleumsupport.com retrieved April 4, 2014 from

http://petroleumsupport.com/drilling-fluid-test-on-field/mud-balance/)

Calibration of Mud Balance

The lid from cup was removed and the cup completely filled with water.
The lid was replaced and wiped dry.
The balance arm was placed on the base with knife-edge resting on the fulcrum.

The level vial was centered when the rider was set on 8.33ppg as should be for water.

2.4

Test Procedure

The lid from the cup was removed and the cup completely filled with the mud to be tested.
The lid was replaced and rotated until it was firmly seated, making sure excess mud was expelled

through the hole in the cup

The mud around the lid and cup was wiped off and the balance arm placed on the base with the

knife-edge resting on the fulcrum

The rider was moved until the graduated arm was level, as indicated by the level vial on the
beam.

At the left-hand edge of the rider read the density on either side of the lever was all desired units
without disturbing the rider

2.5

Marsh Funnel Viscosity Theory

A very simple device for measuring viscosity and apparent viscosity is measured in seconds by allowing
the mud to flow out of the funnel. The time it takes a volume of mud to flow from a cone through the
short tube is recorded.

Figure 2 - Marsh Funnel

(Source: www.petroleumsupport.com retrieved April 4, 2014 from

http://petroleumsupport.com/drilling-fluid-test-on-field/marsh-funnel-and-graduated-cup/)

Calibration
A very simple calibration was done by filling funnel to the bottom of the screen (1500ml) with water at
70F (plus or minus 0.5F) time of outflow of the quart (946ml) was 26seconds plus or minus second.
This consists of a cone 6 inches (152 mm) across and 12 inches in height (305 mm) to the apex of which
is fixed a tube 50.8 mm long and 4.76 mm internal diameter. A 10-mesh screen is fixed near the top across
half the cone. And also there is a calibrated cup to take the fluid flowing from the orifice of the funnel.
The cup is calibrated to take 1-quart of the fluid (946ml).

2.6

Test Procedure

The apparatus was first calibrated with water. The funnel was filled up with water up to the
maximum level (1500ml) with the orifice blocked, at room temperature. Then this was released
and the time of outflow of the quart (946ml) was taken, this was 26 seconds.

A finger was used to cover the orifice while freshly collected mud sample was poured through the

screen into a clean, dry funnel until the fluid reached the bottom of the screen (1500ml).
The finger was immediately removed from the outlet and time the mud used to fill the receiving
vessel to the 1-quart (946ml) level is measured.

The result is reported to the nearest second as marsh funnel viscosity at the temperature of the
measurement in degrees Fahrenheit or centigrade.

2.7

Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH) Theory

The degree of acidity and alkalinity of drilling fluids can be measured by the concentration of the H + ion
or OH- concentration.
The pH of mud seldom is below 7 and in most cases fall between 8 and 12.5 depending upon the type of
mud. The pH is important in determining the solubility of organic thinners and dispersion of clays present
in the mud.

Mathematically, the pH of a solution the logarithm of the reciprocal of the H+ concentration in grams
moles per litre; this is:

H +
1 ] = -log[H+]
pH = log[

To get accurate measurements for pH, a pH paper or a pH meter is required.

The pH Paper:
The pH paper strips have dyes absorbed to display certain colours in certain pH ranges. It is an
inexpensive method of determining pH in fresh water or drilling muds. The main disadvantage is that
high concentration of salts (10, 000 ppm chloride) will alter the colour change and cause inaccuracy.
This indicator can be used to determine the acidity or basicity of a mixture.

Figure 3 - pH Paper
(Source: Picture taken from Drilling Fluid Laboratory)

The pH Meter
This is a more accurate device than the pH paper. It is an electronic device utilizing glass
electrodes to measure a potential difference and indicate directly by dial reading the pH of the
sample.
2.8

Data Analysis and Results

Figure 4 - pH Meter
(Source: www.hg-hydroponics.co.uk retrieved April 4, 2014 from
http://www.hg-hydroponics.co.uk/hm-digital-ph-200-ph-meter-2558-p.asp)

Room Temperature

23C

Mud Temperature

27.5C

Table 1 - Table of Results for Density,

Sample

Marsh Funnel and pH readings

Balance Weight

1. Water
2. WBM

Ppg

Psi/1000

LB/ft3

8.33
8.2

435
400

62.5
57.5

Specific
gravity
1.0
0.92

Marsh Funnel
Viscosity
1500ml
(seconds)
26

Marsh Funnel
Viscosity
700ml
(seconds)
22
27 (350ml mud,

pH
(Hydrogen
Ion
Conc.)
Phydrion pH Meter
7.0
7.0

7.1
9.5

350ml H2O)

2.9

Discussion of Results

The density, marsh funnel viscosity and pH of a normal drilling fluid is between 9 -10ppg, 32 - 36
seconds, 7 9.5 respectively. From results obtained, it can be deduced that the density of 8.2ppg, the mud
prepared does not seem to exhibit properties that a good drilling fluid should. But can only be confirmed
after subjected to further tests like the Mud Rheology and Filtration tests which would shed more light on
additional properties of the mud.

Sources of Error

Error due to improper calibration of mud balance.

An error resulting from not stirring the sediments of the mud very well after it has aged.

Unavailability of a pH meter to confirm the pH reading taken from the pH strips.

Impurities in water used for mixing mud.

Human errors while taking readings.

Questions
Using the mud weights (ppg) obtained, calculate:
1.

The hydrostatic pressures that will be exerted on a formation at a depth of 10,000ft

2.

The mud weight needed to balance a formation pressure equivalent to 10,000ft. Depth with
0.561psi/ft. pressure gradient.

Solution
1. Wellbore Pressure:
Where: P

P=0.052 x MW x TVD

Hydrostatic Pressure

MW

Mud Density or Mud Weight = 8.2ppg

TVD

True Vertical depth of point of interest = 10,000ft

Therefore:

P=0.052 x 8.2 x 10000

4264 psi

2. If a pressure gradient of 0.561psi per ft is given therefore calculating for pressure for 10000ft will
be:

Pressure=Pressure gradient x True Vertical Depth

0.561 x 10000
5610 psi
Therefore the mud weight required will be

MW =

P
0.052 x Tvd

MW =

5610
0.052 x 10000

5610/ 520

10.79 ppg

2.10

Conclusion

This properties of a drilling fluid mentioned in this experiment should be regularly measured by a mud
engineer. The measurements will determine if the mud will fulfill its tasks and perform drilling operation
and also determine if the quality of the mud has deteriorated and requires treatment.

EXPERIMENT 2
3.1

Objectives

The aim of this experiment is to learn how to operate and take reading with an Ofite Viscometer, in order
to:

Investigate the fluid character being Newtonian or Non-Newtonian

Viscosity determination as a function of Temperature

Gel Strength determination of the drilling mud

Introduction
Drilling operations cannot be successful without proper rheology. Rheological measurement of drilling
fluids (such as viscosity, gel strength, yield point) help determine how the fluid will flow under a variety
of conditions. It is an important aspect of drilling fluid properties required to accomplish certain desired
objectives in drilling operations.

3.2

Theory

Mud Rheology
Rheology refers to the deformation of all forms of matter. Rheologic measurement of drilling fluids such
as viscosity, gel strength and yield point helps determine how the fluid will flow under a variety of
conditions. It is imperative to perform certain required tests to confirm if a particular drilling fluid is in

proper condition to perform the functions mentioned above. These tests will be used to determine if the
quality of the mud is intact or requires treatment.
These tests include:

Viscosity
Gel Strength

Fluid Loss

For laboratory experiments the Fann V-G meter, a direct indicating rotational multi-speed instrument, is
used. It allows measurement of: plastic viscosity, yield point, gel strength.

3.3

Determination of Mud Viscosity Theory

Viscosity of a fluid as we know is the measure of the internal resistance of that fluid to flow. The desired
viscosity for a particular drilling operation is affected by several factors such as mud density, hole size,
pumping rate, pressure, etc

The indicated viscosity as obtained by any instrument is valid only for the rate of shear and will
differ to some degree when measured at different shear rate.
Fluid Characterization
Drilling fluids are characterized into:

Newtonian Fluids (True Fluids) where the ratio of the shear stress to shear rate or viscosity is

constant e.g water, lights

Non-Newtonian (Plastic Fluids) where the viscosity is not constant e.g Drilling muds, colloids
etc.

Figure 5 - Schematic of Fluids

(Source: Akanji, 2014 Drilling Engineering Operation)

Calculations
Determination of the viscosity of the mud and related formulas for solutions of readings from the
Fann Viscometer are as follows:

3.4

Plastic Viscosity(PV), cp = 600rpm reading 300rpm reading

Yield Point(YP), ib/100ft2 = 300rpm reading PV
Apparent Viscosity(AV), cp = 600rpm reading/2
Test Equipment

This is a cylindrical rotational viscometer, used to determine single or multi-point viscosities. The OFITE
800 Viscometer determines the flow characteristics of oils and drilling fluids in terms of shear rate and
shear stress over various times and temperature ranges at atmospheric pressure. The eight precisely
regulated test speeds, i.e. shear rates in RPM are: 3(Gel), 6, 3, 60, 100, 200, 300 and 600. A stir speed is
also provided.

Figure 6 - Ofite Model 800 Viscometer

3.5

Procedure

We mixed the mud sample on the STIR setting for 10seconds while cooling the fluid and
monitored the temperature steadily with a thermometer. Continued mixing until the sample
reached the target temperature

We then rotated the knob to a speed sting. When the dial reading stabilized, recorded the reading
and also took the temperature. Repeated this step for 600rpm, 300rpm, 200rpm, 100rpm, and
60rpm with varying temperature.

3.6

Determination of Gel Strength Theory

The gel strength of a drilling mud can be described as the strength of any internal structure formed in the
mud when it is static. An initial 10-sec. gel and a 10-min. gel strength readings gives an indication of the
amount of gel that will occur after circulation ceased and the mud remains static. The more the mud gels
during shutdown periods, the more the pump pressure that will be required to initiate circulation again.

Calculations
Determination of the gel strength of drilling mud is as follows:

Gel Strength, 10 second, ib/100 ft2 = The maximum dial deflection after 10sec

Gel Strength, 10 minute, ib/100 ft2 = The maximum dial deflection after 10min

3.7

Procedure

We mixed the sample on the STIR setting for 10seconds

Rotated the knob to GEL and immediately shut off the power
As soon as the sleeve stopped rotating, we waited 10seconds and turned the power back on while
looking at the dial and recorded the maximum dial deflection before the gel broke. That gave us
the 10sec. gel strength.

We re-stirred the fluid and waited 10minutes before recording the maximum dial deflection for
the 1m minute gel strength.

Estimation of Yield Point

Yield point indicates the ability of the drilling fluid to carry cuttings to the surface. It is as well the
measure of the electro-chemical or attractive forces in the mud under flow (dynamic) conditions. These
forces depend on the following

Surface properties of the mud solids

Volume concentrations of the solids

Electrical environment of the solids

3.8

Data and Analysis of Results

Table 2 - Table of Results for Viscometer Reading

Viscosity
Temperature

600

300

200

100

60

30

YP(Ib/100ft2)

300
28

265
27

250
27.
5

232
28

220
28.
4

215
28.
6

165
29

35

150

230

Calculations
1.

Plastic Viscosity(PV p), cp=600 RPM reading 300 RPM reading

300265=35
2.

Yield Point( YP) , lb/100 ft =300 RPM PV

Initial 10sec. Gel

(Ib/100ft2)
110
25.5

 26535=230

3.

Apparent Viscosity ( AV a ) , cp=

600 RPM READING

2

300
=150
2
Graph of Shear Stress vs Shear Rate
350
300
250

f(x) = 0.15x + 215

200
Shear Stress (Dial Deflection)

150
100
50
0
0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Shear Rate (RPM Settings)

Figure 7 - Graph of Shear Stress vs Rate showing class of fluid and yield point
Percentage Error

Pecentage Error=

Analytical SolutionGraphical Solution

100
Graphical Solution
Error=

3.9

230215
100=6.98
215

Discussion of Results

A normal drilling fluid is Non-Newtonian and when compared with water or diesels which are Newtonian
fluids, it should have a shear stress versus shear rate graphical representation similar to the Bingham
model as shown in Fig 5 above. Non-Newtonian fluids have a yield point not equal to zero, denoted as the
intersection from the shear stress versus shear rate plot.
From the Experiment, the dial readings can be used to generate a plot of shear stress versus shear rate
given a yield point of 215 Ib/ft3 which can be compared with the yield point 230 Ib/ft3 as calculated

directly from the readings. This gives a percentage error of 6.98% which may be as a result of certain
factors as highlighted below and a slope of 0.1481.
The plastic viscosity PV of 35 shows the mud produced exhibits enough property to enable suspend any
solid or cutting during the drilling operation. Notwithstanding as shown in experiment 1, the density of
mud doesnt meet the expectation of a good drilling fluid hence it must be weighted with the appropriate
additive.

Sources of Error
Sources of error for the Fann Viscometer readings may be as a result of:

Not making sure the dial was positioned at zero before experiment began.
Not taking the dial reading as soon as it stabilized for each rpm setting.
Error due to parallax.

Questions
1. How well does the assumption of a Newtonian fluid fit your results?
2. How well do your results fit published data for this drilling fluid sample?
3. What do you predict the viscosity to be at 290 deg. F?
4. What is the difference between Gel Strength and Yield Point of a drilling mud?

Solutions
1. From the graphical representation between Deflection Reading against Rpm Setting below we
could tell that intercept doesnt cut at the origin as Newtonian fluids do. From the knowledge
of fluid viscosity profile using shear stress versus shear-rate relationship, the drilling mud
prepared exhibits the characteristics of a Bingham plastic fluid. Therefore the drilling fluid
prepared is Non-Newtonian as shown by figure 5 and figure 7 above.
2. Results from my prepared water-based mud could not be matched with any reachable published
data. This I believe is as a result of the unique preparation of this water based mud which is done
to meet pressure demands of various formation types.

3. The viscosity at 290F can be predicted from a graphical representation of Plastic Viscosity vs
Temperature in Fahrenheit. Converting all temperatures from Celsius to Fahrenheit using the
formula 9/5C + 32 = F. From a plot of plastic viscosity versus temperature, and extrapolation can
be made for 290oF, but time was insufficient to take several shear stress readings for series of
temperature.
From previous studies and works done by fluid mechanics engineer, it is understood that
temperature and viscosity have an inverse relationship. An increase in temperature would give a
reduction in the viscosity of a substance. Therefore at high temperatures such as 290 oFthere will
be a drastic reduction in the viscosity of fluid. Notwithstanding, this relationship may be nonlinear and is dependent the characteristics of the fluid.
Hence if linearity is assumed, an equation can be deduced to estimate the viscosity of fluid. This
can be given by:

T 1 2
=
T 2 1

Where T1
T2
1
2
Hence:

=
=
=
=

Reference Temperature = 28oC = 82.4oF

Estimate Temperature = 290oF
Apparent viscosity at temperature T1 = 150cp
Apparent Viscosity at Temperature T2

82.4
x
=
290 150

x=

82.4 150
=42.6 cp
290
Below

are

graphs

showing

the

temperature for some substances.

relationship

between

viscosity

and

Figure 8 - Viscosity vs Temperature Relationship for Naphthalene

Figure 9 - Viscosity-Temperature Relationship for Water

4. Difference between Gel Strength and Yield Point of a Drilling Mud

Table 3 - Difference between Gel Strength and Yield Point
Gel Strength
1. Gel Strength of a mud is the shear stress
of drilling mud that is measured at low

Yield Point
Yield Point of a mud is the yield stress
extrapolated to a shear rate of Zero

shear rate after the drilling mud is static for

a certain period of time
2. Gel strength demonstrates the ability of

Yield point is the period at which the

the drilling mud to suspend drill solid and

drilling fluid is too weak to carry cuttings to

weighting material when circulation is

surface

ceased
3. Gel Strength can be increased by over

Low temperature in oil based mud system

treatment with organic gelling material in

will increase the yield point.

oil based mud

Conclusion
In conclusion fluid tests on drilling fluids are inevitable and must be carried out by the drilling engineer to
access fluid qualities for successful drilling operations.

References
1. Akanji, L. (2014). Drilling Fluid Properties. Salford: University of Salford.
2. Akanji, L. (2014). Laboratory Manual on Drilling Fluid Properties. Salford: Petroleum and Gas
Engineering, School of Computing, Science and Engineering.
3. Bourgoyne, A. (1986). Drilling Fluid. In A. Bourgoyne, M. Chinevert, K. Millheim, & Young,
Applied Drilling Engineering (pp. 42-62). Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson
TX.
4. Concept of Viscosity. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2014, from www.columbria.edu.
5. Oil Field Glossary. (n.d.). (Slumberger) Retrieved April 4, 2014, from www.slb.com:
http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/en/Terms.aspx?LookIn=term%20name&filter=yield
%20point