T.P.

2782

ABILITY OF DRILLING MUD 110

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

H. N. HALL, HOWARD THOMPSON AND FRANK NUSS, MEMBER AIME,

STANOLIND OIL AND GAS COMPANY, TULSA, OKLAHOMA

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION of drilling mud in respect to lifting

cuttings, some method must be known
Removal of bit cuttings is an impor- Drilling muds have many functions, for predicting the rate of fall of cut-
tant function of drilling muds. In an but pm'haps the most important is the tings through mud traveling upwards
effort to obtain better understanding of removal of bit cuttings from the well. in the. annulus.
the facters influencing the removal Qf In a 10,000-ft well, the weight of rock Equations for the rate of fall of par-
cuttings, an extensive series of labora- which is drilled and must be carried to ticles through a true fluid have been
the surface is over 150 tons. In addition satisfactorily determined by several au-
tory tests were made in which slip ve·
to this, the mud must remove any thors."· Since drilling muds are not
locities of various sizes and shapes of
sloughings from the well bore. Failure true fluids, but obey the laws of Bing-
particles were measured in muds of of the mud to pn;Jmptly remove either
different physical properties. Empirical ham: it should not be expected that
bit cuttings or sloughs from the well equations for rate of fall of cuttings in
eq:uations were then derived from these bore causes re-drilling and excessive a true fluid would be applicable to plas-
experimental data. These equations wear on bit teeth, slows down drilling tic fluids such as drilling muds. Several
show that slip velocity is dependent on rate thereby increasing well costs, and authors have attempted to compute cut-
cutting size and shape, mud flow con- greatly increases possibilities for stuck ting slip velocities in muds using a vis-
stants, and flow state of the mud. Ap· drill pipe when circulation is stopped
cosity value obtained with a Stormer
plicability of these equations for field for any length of time. viscosimeter; however, unsatisfactory
use is demonstrated by comparing com-
Drilling muds lift bit cuttings to the results were obtained. Pigott" took cog-
puted slip velocities with slip velocities
surface by means of the upward velocity nizance of the phenomenon of variation
obtained from field tests.
of the drilling mud in the annulus. Be- of viscosity with velocity in laminar
cause a density difference exists be- flow, and calculated lamin.ar slip veloc-
1 References are given at end of paper.
tween the rock being drilled and the ities using a variable viscosity with
Manuscript received at the office of the Pe-
drilling mud, there is a difference be- Stokes law, and turbulent slip velocities
troleum Branch October 28. 1949. Paper llre-
-sen ted at the Petroleum Branch meeting nt tween mud velocity and the rate of bit using Rittingers law.
Columbus. Septembel' 25-28. 1949. and at the cutting travel, called the net rise veloc- Drilling muds obey the laws of plas-
San Antonio meeting of the Petroleum Brancb.
-October 5-7. 1949. ity. To evaluate the ability of any type tic flow which involve factors not affect-

Vol. 189, 1950 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME 35

T.P. 2782 ABILITY OF DRILLING MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

ing the flow of true fluids. Measurement equation for resistance to flow of plas- Presently used equations for slip in
of these plastic flow properties has been tic fluids in the laminar region. In true fluid should therefore be modified
made possible by means of a rotational . place of viscosity, Bingham introduced to take this into account.
viscosimeter: and it has been' found the terms yield value (ty ) and rigidity It has been shown both theoretically
possible to predict the flow performance (n) and the resulting equation is: and experimentally that the resisting
16 L t y 32n VmL force acting on a particle moving in a
of muds under actual drilling condi- ~P =
3Dp
+ gDp"
(1) true fluid depends on the size of the
tions.'o Drawing an anology between
particle, some function of the area, ve-
flow of muds in circular pipes and fall As pointed out before, muds behave locity of the particle relative to the
of particles through drilling muds it like true fluids when in turbulent How fluid, and the density and viscosity of
was thought that cutting slip velocities and therefore Fanning's' equation the fluid. By rearrangement of the Fan-
should be affected by these plastic flow should hold for the turbulent flow ~f ning equation, a group known as the
properties, and the proper approach to mud in circular pipes. Beck· has shown
that Fanning's equation is applicable

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

the prohlem of predicting bit cutting
slip velocities in muds would be to in- to drilling muds it Reynold's number
vestigate the relationships between plas- n
is calculated using - - for the appar-
tic flow properties and slip velocities. 3.2
ent viscosity.
Since flow of fluid through a pipe is
THEORY but a specialized case of the general
law of the resistance between a solid
The main problem to be considered
and a fluid in relative motion, it would
in deriving expressions for rate of fall
seem probable that when particles are
of particles through a fluid is that of
falling in laminar slip in aarilling
the frictional resistance between a solid a
mud, the mud will behave like pliistic
and a fluid in relative motion. If this material and for ·particleg· in turb~ent CUTr//VCF
frictional resistance can be expressed INJECTION
slip, mud will behave like a true fluid
in terms of physical constants of the
n
fluid and particle characteristics, then with an apparent viscosity of
the problem of predicting slip velocities 3.2 FIG: 1 - ARRANGEMENT OF EQUIPMENT.
can be solved. The flow of fluids is a
specialized case of the general case of
frictional resistance between a solid
and a fluid in relative motion, and the
parameters which describe this should
be applicable to cutting slip velocity
relationships. Therefore, some mention
must be made concerning the factors
influencing flow of fluids in pipes.
When a true fluid is in laminar flow
in a closed channel of any cross section,
the parameters involved in predicting
resistance to flow are the dimensions of
the system, fluid velocity, density and
. viscosity. Whether a true fluid is in
laminar or turbulent flow the viscosity
is constant. Drilling muds are plastic
fluids and do not behave as true fluids
do in laminar flow. For a mud, vis-
cosity is not constant in the laminar
region and decreases with increasing
velocity up to the critical velocity.
Above the critical velocity, mud changes
to turbulent flow and apparent viscos-
ity is constant. Due to the phenomenon
of changing viscosity in the laminar
region, the mud properties mnst he de-
scribed by some parameter other than
viscosity in order to obtain an expres-
sion for resistance to flow for muds.
Bingham" was the first to derive an FIG. 2 - Cs VS. R~ FROM WADELL.

36 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Vol. 189, 1950

 H. N. HALL, HOWARD THOMPSON AND FRANK NUSS T.P. 2782

-coefficient of friction, Cn , is obtained to viscosity, area, and relative velocity resistance is largely due to transfer of
and this has been found to be a func- and Stokes law relates particle slip momentum to larger masses of fluid,
tion of the Reynolds number. This gives velocity to particle and fluid properties. and is proportional to area, square of
the general relation for frictional re- Stokes law is: the relative velocity of the particle, and
sistance and the following eqnations are 2gD' (Ps - Pm) density of the fluid. In the turbulent
an expression of this relationship for V . = - - - - - - for spherical region, Rittingers equation shows how
36
laminar and turbulent slip. particles particle slip varies with physical prop-
_For true fluids in viscous flow (2)
erties of the fluid and the particle. Rit-
(Re < .05), resistance is proportionai In the turbulent region (Re > 2000) . tingers equation is:

for spherical
particles
(3)

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

In the transition region, resistance ."
Table I due to both viscous.. and turbulent
forces, and neither Stokes nor Rittin-
Drilling Mud Chamcteristics'
ger's equation applies. Even though
LaboratOl'Y Tests neither one of these equations can' bt.
used, there is the relationship between
Mud No. Type ty n Vo Cn and Re, and with knowledge of this.
1 Bentonite ...................................... O. .00572 64.0 0.27 relationship slip velocities can be cal-
2 Bentonite ...................................... O. .00893 64.5 0.83
3 Bentonite ...................................... .0007 .0131 65.0 1.30 culated.
4 Bentonite ...................................... .0189 .0276 65.4 3.4
5 Bentonite ...................................... .0420 .0409 66.0 5.2
6 Bentonite ...................................... .070 .0470 66.7 6.1
7 Bentonite ...................................... .0084 .0272 65.6 2.9
8 Bentonite ...................................... .0035 .0138 65.1 1.6
9 Bentonite ...................................... O. .00893 63.8 0.8 APPARATUS AND PROCE-
10 Lubrigel.. ...................................... O. .00277 62.4 0.27
11 Lubrigel. ....................................... .0028 .00582 64.3 1.5
12 Lubrigel.. ...................................... .0378 .00631 65.7 2.8 DURE FOR LABORATORY
13 Lubrigel. ....................................... .0756 .00630 66.6 3.8
14
15
Lubrigel. ........................................
Lubrigel.. ................................ _.. _..
.0854
.1827
.00630
.00631
67.0
68.4
3.9
5.4 TESTS
16 Bentonite .. ; .. _.. _............................. O. .00108 62.9 0.3
17 Bentonite ................•...... , .. , ........... O. .00485 64.0 1.4
18 Bentonite and Baroid ............................ O. .0104 74.0 2.7
19 Bentonite and Baroid ............................ .007 .0136 74.7 3.8 Determination of cutting slip >veloci-
20 Bentonite and Baroid .......................... :. .056 .0202 75.5 6.4
21 Lubrigeland Baroid ............................. .434 .0262 77.7 11.4 ties under conditions as nearly like
~~~::t.3n~.B~roi~::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::
22 .309 .0249 76.4 10.5
23 .217 .0182 65.8 9.1 those encountered in oil wells required
24 Aquagel .............................. " . .122 .0150 65.7 7.0
25 Aquagel ........................................ .056 .00875 65.5 4.6 the use of a tall pipe column through
26 Aquagel.. ....................................... .029 .00955 65.6 4.0
27 Aquagel.. ........ .............................. .163 .00448 68.5 5.7 which the mud traveled upwards, a
28 Aquagel.. ...................................... .178 .00465 68.6 5.9
method of injecting cuttings into the
~l!.,:!,.,l;.eb~y::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::
29 .130 .00410 68.1 5.3
30 .240 .00444 68.8 6.7
31 Blanca Clay ............ ...................... .045 .0175 66.8 6.1 mud stream near the lower end of the
32 Blanca Clay .................................... .023 .0139 66.7 4.8
33 Blanca Clay .................................... .015 .0098 66.6 3.5 column, and a screen for removing cut-
tings at tHe top. Two systems with this
type of arrangement were used. One
was a large scale system having a col-
umn of 4 in. ID pipe with 33 ft of pipe
from injection poiut to screen and the
other had a column of 1.25 in. ID pipe,
Table II being 9 ft from injector to screen. Mud
was returned to the reservoir by means
Cutting Dimensions
of another pipe column which' had a
Laboratory Tests swinging spout so arranged that the
discharge could be directed into a cali-
Inehes brated tank for measuring volume rates
No. p Cuttings Arca Volume Rn of flow.- A 500 GPM centrifugal pump
Description 1 2 3 Sq. in. Cu. in.
- 1- 156 Glass Square....... .657 .669 .210 1.436 .0954 .284
driven by a gasoline engine was used
2 156 Glas., Rectangle .... .634 1.27 .210 2.410 .1775 .348 with the large scale apparatus and flow
3 156 Glaso Square....... 1.26 1.26 .210 4.23 .357 .440
4 156 G1aso Sphere....... . GOOD 1.13 .113 .300 rates were varied by nieans of a hand
5 152 Glass Sphere ....... . 1857D .1105 .003~5 .09375
6 169 AI. Square ........ · .250 .250 .125 .250 .00781 .1235 throttle and automobile gear transmis-
.250 .0625 .1875 .003905 .0976
sion.. A 150 GPM centrifugal pump
7 169 Al.Square .......... .250
8 173 AI. Disk ........... . 1875D .0625 .0920 .001722 .0737
9 173 Al. Disk ........... . 1875D .125 .1288 .003444 .0927
10 156 Glass Sphere••..... .592 1.10 .1085 .296 driven by an electric motor was used
11 156 Glass Rectangle .... .458 .419 .215 .762 .0412 .214 with the smaller apparatus and flow
12 156 - Glass Reetaagle .... .570 .524 .130 .881 .0388 .210
rates were varied with a by-pass valve,

Vol.189,1950 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME 37

 T.P. 2782 ABILITY OF DRIlliNG MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

which returned some o,f the pump out- the relationship of the coefficient of This f~ncti()n was constant for a par-
put to the reservoir. A sketch of the friction, C n, to Reynolds number is ticular mud and the correlation of the
apparatus is shown in Fig, 1. shown in Fig. 3. It should be noted that function and yield value, tn is shown
there are two distinct curves, one for in Fig. 5. This relationship enables a
Each mud was constructed to the spheres, and the other for flat or ir- modified form of Stokes law to be used
approximate desired flow properties, regular particles. ' in predicting laminar slip velocities.
mixing being accomplished with a jet In laminar slip, apparent viscosity, From the laboratory data., empirical
mixer. Circulation of the mud was con- is found to be a function of rigidity. equations were derived iil which cutting
tinued long enough to make sure flow
properties would remain constant dur-
ing the test. Mud was then pumped
through the pipe column and the rate
was measured. Single cuttings of one

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

type were injected and time of travel
from injector to screen recorded.
Groups of cuttings were then'injected
and their rate of travel was timed, after
which the, mud flow rate was rechecked.
This procedure was followed through.
mit all tests. Mud flow properties were
'checked during the tests and velocity
rates were selected at randon ~o that
no hysteresis errors would be intro-
duced. All cuttings were artificially con-
structed to the approximate shape of
actual cuttings. Spherical particJes were
also used to check the application of
the equations for laminar and turbulent
slip. Flow properties were determined
with the rotational viscometer."
FIG. 3 - Cit VS. R~ LABORATORY DATA.
RESULTS OF LABORATORY
TESTS
A fact well known among those WllO
have experimented with colloids is the
difficulty encountered in reproducing
test results. For this reason a large
number of tests were made and the av-
erage in each series was used. In tur-
bulent flow ranges where mud acts as
a true fluid the data were accurate to
'within +10 per cent. In laminar flow.
however, results varied fro~ a niea~
value by an average of +15 per cent.
Flow properties and critical velocities
of ,muds used are given in Table I.
These muds cover a greater range of
flow properties than is normally found
in actual drilling practice. Dimensions
of cutti~gs are given in Table II.
Mud rate and cutting slip velocities
for each te$t were separated into two
parts; turbulent flow of drilling muds,
Table III and for laminar flow, Table
IV. Each of the slip velocities in these
tables is an average of several tests.
For cuttings falling in turbul~nt slip,
FIG. 4 - C,,(R e)' VS. Re FOR DRILLING MUDS LABORATORY DATA.

38 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Vol. 189, 1950

 H. N. HALL, HOWARD THOMPSON AND fRANK NUSS T.P. 2782

slip velocity is expressed as a function number for spheres in true fluids have necessary to determine slip velocities
of cutting ch~racteristics and mud flow been accurately deterniined. Wadell1 in mud for both flat and spherical par-
properties. has shown that slip velocities of various ticles.
flat particles require different Cn vs Re The coefficient of friction, Cn, is de-
. values, these relationships being de- fined as:·
DISCUSSION. OF RESULTS pendent on relative flatness of the par-
ticles ( see Fig. 2). Relative flatness (4)
Turbulent Slip termed sphericity, is defined as the APm Va'
Much data has been accumulated by ratio of the surface area of a sphere When the velocity has reached equilib-
various authors concerning slip veloci- of the same volume as a particle to the rium; the retarding force on the par-
ties of spherical particles in true fluids. surface area of that particle. Since the ticle is:
Relations between Cn and Reynolds majority of bit cuttings are flat it was

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

Therefore:
Table III C = 4 g D. (PH - Pm) (7)
n
Turbulent Slip Data 3p~ V:
Laborato~'Y Tests The Reynolds number can be computed
from the following relationship:
Cutting Cutting Cutting Cutting 3.2 D. V. Pm
Mud ill {}2 #3 #4 Re (8)
Mud/f Velocity Vs Vs Vs Va n
ft/see ft/sec ft/see ft/see ft/see
1. ....................... 3.91 .97 1.14 1.25 2.74 Values of Cn and Re were computed
2.93 .99 1.15 1.25 from equations (7) and (8) respec-
2 ..... , .................. 4.35 .98 1.05 1.21 2.81.
2.34 .95 1.08 1.24 . tively and Cn was plotted against Re as
3 .........•.............. 4.50 .96 1.03 1.09 2.70 shown in Fig. 3. As can be seen from
3.17 .93 1.06 1.15 2.66
1.50 .89 1.00 Fig. 3, there is a good correlation be-
4 ........................ 4.12 .84 1.02 1.14 2.60 tween Crt and Re. As it should be, there
7 ........................ 3.76 .84 1.04 1.06 2.41 are two definite curves; one curve for
8 ........................ 4.00 .94 1.03 1.08 2.58 spheres and one for flat particles. It
2.70 .80 1.00 1.23
was impossible to draw separate lines
9 ........................ 3.90 .96 1.05 1.10 2.76
3.13 1.00 1.09 1.19 for' varying sphericities from the data
10 ..................•..... 4.30 1.06 1.15 1.41 2.79 on fiat and irregular particles. Such a
3.18 1.05 1.20 1.33
1.70 1.09 situation as described by Wad ell' prob-
11. ....................... 4.24 1.00 1.12 1.26 2.88 ably exists, but due to the .Jack of re-
3.03 .99 1.17 1.20
2.35 1.02 1.08 1.17 producibility of re3ults in colloidal
12 ........................ 4.43 .96 1.06 1.20 2.80 systems and the amount of error intro-
3.22 .98 1.06 1.25
duced by the method of measuring slip
13 ........................ 4.55 .96 1.05 1.21 2.71
velocities, the one line must suffice from
data obtained.
From this relation between Cn and
Re for drilling muds it should be pos-
sible to calculate turbulent slip velocity.
-- This is possible, but since there are
Cutting Cutting Cutting Cutting Cutting Cutting two unknowns, solution must be made
. Mud #5 16 1/7 {JS fl9
Mud i Velocity Vs Vs Vs Vs Vs by a tedious trial and error method.
ft/sec ft/see ft/see ft/see ft/see ft/see
Multiplying C n by (Re)" gives the fol-
16 ................................ 3.75 1.00 1.00 .54 .47 .64
3.04 1.31 1.01 .52 1.01 .65 lowing expression which contains only
2.54 1.10 .51 .56 .60 1.04
measurable properties:
17 ............................•... 3.79 1.62 .58 .97 .57 .57
3.16 1.40 .89 .71 .20 .49 I3.7gD.' (P.-Pm) Pm (Q\
2.67 1.21 .73 .60 .39 .55
2.37 1.21 .51 .54 .60 .50
n'
18 ................................ 3.65 .98 .91 .43 .32 .54
3.22 1.10 .48 .21 .31 .49
2.91 1.01 .57 .32 .39 .35 Fig. 4 shows a correlation of C n (Re) 2
19 ................................ 4.11 .89 .65 .52 .78 .48 with Re. With this graph it is possible
to compute values of Reynolds number

Vol. 189, 1950 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME 39

T.P. 2782 ABILITY OF DRILLING MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTIINGS

for any situation, and the corresponding rigidity. This function was designated It should be pointed out that certain
,"lip velocity is obtained from: as (x) (n), and with this definition phenomena observed in cutting slip
- n Re slip velocity equations in laminar flow have no counterpart in pipe flow. In
V. = 3.2 D.p",-
(10) are: pipe flow systems, the flow region is
Spherical Particles: selected a~ the one which requires the
The equivalent diameter De u~ed in the larger pressure drop. In bit cutting slip,
Vs= gD·(P.-Pm)-6gDt,. (18)
above equation is the diameter of a . this would be analogous to a bit cutting
18 (x) (n)
sphere whose ~olume is equal to that of falling in whichever type of slip re-
the particle. For a' non-spherical par- Flat Disks:
sults in the least slip velocity. This is
ticle: 3"lr tDg (Po - Pm) - 6"lr gt,. (D+2t)
V.= ----~~-~----~~-~ not a universal statement however. If
64 (x) (n) the mud is in laminar flow, the cutting
6 Volume (19)
(11) will fall in the type of slip giving lower
Actual slip velocities in the laminar slip velocities; hut in ihe turbulently

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

The following general equations can be region of mud flow were .compared with flowing mud the cutting can fall only
used for non-spherical particles: slip velocities calculated by the above in turbulent slip. Thus, in some cases
equations, omitting the factor x. Al-
Cn (Re) 2 = 26.2g Volume (Ps - p;,,) Pm
though actual and calculated slip veloc-
the bit cutting may fall in turbulent
n' slip even though laminar slip would
ities differed widely, it was found that
(12) for any particular mud the actual and be numerically less.
nRe computed slip velocities differed by a
V.=------ (13)
-constant factor. This factor itself va- FIELD TESTS
3.97 Pm'¥ Vol
'ried with the yield value, t,., of the mud
In computing slip velocities care should and therefore a correlation between Having obtained empirical equations
b~ taken to use the proper line on the yield value and the factor x was estab- for bit cuttings slip velocities based 011
plot of Cn (Re) 2 against Re. lished and is shown in Fig. 5. With this laboratory tests, the next problem was
relationship, the equations for slip ve- to see how these equations would hold
Laminar Slip
locities of spherical and non-spherical up when used in the field under actual
Since muds behave like plastic mate- particles in laminar flow were complete. operating conditions.
rials when in the laminar flow region,
a certain amount of force must be ap-
plied to overcome the yield strength of
the mud, any force less than this does
not cause shear of the mud. Muds will
therefore support cuttings completely
until the initial shear is overcome _by
some means. Stokes law for the resist-
ance to slip for particles is:
/3tJ
)(
Spherical Particles
o.
R
o.
= 371" P. D Vs
• • • (14) .~
Thin Disk Shaped Particles /~'
16
R =-p.DV. (15) /4tJ

~
3
The force causing slip in a true fluid is: /&0
F = Volume (Ps - Pm) g . (16)
In a plastic fluid such as mud, how- /00
/V
ever, this force is reduced due to the
yield strength and the resulting force
><
.6'0 Z --I--

causing slip is:

F = Volume (P.-Pm) g - (Sur- ~tJ
Va
Yr
face Area) tyg. (17) 0

When the particle underg!:>ing slip

reaches an equilibrium velocity, the two
forces acting upon it, equation (14) or
~tJ
7f
Rp..5"
(15) and (17), are equal. Since ap-
i
parent viscosity of a mud changes with a
.~ tJ~ .tJ& .tJB ./0 ./2 .A J& ./B • .;>t:) 23
rate of flow it was assumed that ap-
paren.t viscosity would be a function of FIG. 5 - X VS. ty LABORATORY DATA.

40 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Vol. 189, 1950

 H. N. HAll, HOWARD THOMPSON AND FRANK NUSS T.P. 2782

PROCEDURE were introduced on each run through In the first series, cuttings were caught
a' special by-pass arrangement on the at the shale shaker, a Baker retainer
It was decided that without causing standpipe. Times of travel to the outlet being used as a bridging plug in the
excessive operating costs, the most ac- pohit were taken, and corrections were casing to insure return of cuttings from
curate results on cutting slip velocities made for time consumed in traveling
the bottom. A full opening Reed bit
could be obtained by injecting artificial down the flow line ditch in those cases
cutti~gs into the circulating system at (jet nozzles removed) was run in on
where cuttings were timed at the shale
the base of the standpipe and measur- shaker. Pump rates were. adjusted for the 4% in. drill pipe and circulation
ing the time of travel to the shale shak- a series of runs by use of the hydraulic ,established with the bit just barely
er or some other point where they could couplings with en~nes running at a clearing the retainer. Returns were
be caught as they came out of the hole. governed speed. Frequent checks on through 12 in. blowout preventers, a
Artificial, cuttings used in the field pump rate were made to be sure it did ,7 in. flow line angling at about 30 to
0

tests were circular disks made from a not vary during a particular series of the outside of the mast superstructure

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

thermosetting plastic and barytes. A tests. Pump efficiencies were checked at and on down a 13-in. pipe flow ditch to
combination of these two materials gave the same thne. Flow properties of each the shale shaker. Because of the extra
the desired hardness and proper dim- mud were measured frequently and an
restrictions and enlargements, it was
sity, which in all cases was close to 162 average used ~ince variations were
found that cuttings were being slowed
pounds per cu ft or a specific gravity found to be minor. Due to the time and
expense involved in changing mud flow down and possibly settling out in these
of 2.6. These cuttings were developed
properties over a wide range, only two enlargements at the lower pump ra,tes.
as a result of laboratory ~xperimenta­
tion. Circular disk shaped particles muds were used in each series of tests. Also, some were thought to be lost in
were used because they resemble fairly 'One check was run using water instead the recesses of the retainer.
closely in shape the average type of of mud as the drilling fluid. The second' series of tests was made
cuttings delivered, and for the basis of Two series of tests were, run. Equip- with a more convenient way of catching
these checks a definite size and weight ment used varied slightly in the two cuttings as they came out of the aimu-
particle had to be used in order to tests, but in both cases the circulating, Ius, and resulted in a larger percentage
eliminate any errors due to inexact di- system consisted of approxhnately 1000 of return 'of those injected. The blow-
mensions. From ten to twenty cuttings ft of 4% in. drill pipe in 9% in. casing. out preventers were set aside and a
side outlet of 7-m. casing made directly
into the cementing joint of casing. This
7-in. pipe was only 5 ft long and dis-
charged the mud' into a board flume
that was covered with 1A,-in. mesh hard-
ware cloth. Mud was discharged from
this flume into a dug suction pit. A sub
which directed flow back up the annu-
I
lus was installed 'on the open ended·
-
I drill pipe. With this type of arrange-
! ment, the erratic return of cuttings
i noted in the first test was etltirely elim-

---- --~--- -~~---

7"- 0
0
T€ST /VP /
T€,sr H9'c
inated and nearly all the cuttings intro-
duced were recovered.
Results of the field tests as compared

L with computed slip velocity values are

shown in Tables V and VI. Three of
0 o~oo the four muds shown iIi these tables

-au
were in turbulent flow in all parts of
1---- -~--~
--- ---~

- ao the annulus and at all circulating rates.

0
00 0 The fourth was in laminar flow in most
f - - - - -------
I • cases and .sometimes exhibit~d turbu-
o 00 0
lent flow around tool joints and drill
I pipe protectors. There, was, therefore,
0
sufficient data and duplication of re-

1)Y sults to evaluate the applicability of

turbulent slip velocity equations. Lami-
nar slip occurred in only one mud and

V
.< ..? ." .8 /.0 .he
h"f .c
I '
this was run during the first series of
tests. Some errors were introduced in
the first test by the flow ditch and these
were in turn further magnified by. the
FIG. 6 - CALCULATED AND OBSERVED SLIP VELOCITIES FIELD DATA. high viscosity mud used to bring about

Vol. 189, 1950 ' PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME 41

 T.P. 2782 ABILITY OF DRILLING MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

laminar flow. Because of these factors Table IV

it is thought that there were insufficient Laminar Slip D.
data to compare observed laminar slip
Laboratory Tests
velocities with calculated values.
For the muds which were in turbu- Yield Mud Cl C2 C3 C4
Mudfj Velocity
lent flow, turbulent slip therefore oc- ty Vm Vs Vs Vs Vs
curing, the data were more. accurate 5 ................................ .0420 3.85 .20 .34 .37 .22
and a larger number of tests were made 3.03 .23 .30 ,39 .20
.0409 2.95 .19 .27 .41 .25
than in the case of laminar slip. Be-'
6 ..............•• ~ .......••.•..•. .070 4.39 .13 .22 .31 .22
cause of these facts it is possible to get .0470 3.89 .20 .18 .22 .14
2,43 .10 .23 .29 .09
a better comparison between calculated
12 ................................ .0378 1.85 1.55
and observed slip velocities. From Table
V it can be seen that the difference be- 13 ................................ .0756 3.35
3.10
.84
.94
1.01
1.20
1.40
2.00
1.01
.81

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

tween measured and calculated slip ve- 14 ................................ .0854 4.65 .98 1.20
.98 1.02
locities ranges from -0.25 to +0:27 ft 3.20 .99 1,49
1.95 .43
per sec. and from -0.24 to +0.18 ft per 15 ................................ .1827 4.40 .37 .47 .52 .37
sec. in Table VI. Numerical differences 3.55 .28 .41 .68 .31
2.75 .23 .38 .79 .29
between observed and computed slip 1.33 .28 .37 .49 .15
velocities are of the order of +0.15 'ft
per sec. The deviation of calculated
slip velocities from the observed slip Yield Mud CIO Cll C12
Mudf/ Velocity Velocity
velocities is shown for each test as per ty Vm Vs Vs Va
cent of the observed value in Table V 23 ........................ .2i7 .85 .08 .04
.675 .08 .03
and VI. The per cent deviation is ex- .675 .09 .04
1.30 .10 .05 .03
pressed as the ratio of the difference 1.85 .09 .05 .03
2.21 .09 .03
between computed and observed slip 1.78 .08 .05 .03
velocities to the measured slip velocity, 1.10 .08 .045 .02
I
1.12 .09 .04 .OZ
being positive when calculated slip ve- 24 ........................ .122 2.90 .28 .12 .12
locities are higher than observed val- 2.31 .29 .13 .07
1,60 .19 .17 .15
ues. Observed values of slip velocity 2.90 .20 .20
2.53 .24 .30
used in computing ner cent deviation 1.76 .26 .09 .09
are an average of values at the different 25 ........................ .056 .99 .61 .38
~irculating rates. The per cent devia- 1.50
1.31
-.90
.80
.67
.60
.40
.40
tion ranges from +45.5 per cent to 1.20 .77 .55 .54
-17.8 per cent with an average of these 26 ........................ .029 1.71
1.43
1.21
1.12
.70
.79
.63
.57
ranging from + 15 to -10 per cent. 1.25
1.09
.90
. III
.80
.71
.51
.48
Fig. 6 shows a correlation between cal- .90 .49
culated and observed turbulent slip 27 ........................ .163 1.71 .59 .30 .19
1.96 .51 .30 .19
velocities. 2.12 .59 .29 .19
1.50 .55 .25 .21
1.0 .50 .19 .20
.63 .20
DISCUSSION OF FIELD TEST 28 ........................ .178 1.25 .43 .2;; .14
1.78 .45 .27 .18
RESULTS 1.44
1.01
.41
.41
.26
.27
.17
.11
.67 .20 .16
.54 .16
There are a number of the laminar
29 ........................ .130 2.66 .90 .47 .32
cutting slip velocity measurements 2.10 .69 .55 .27
1.69 .65 .51 .32
shown in Table V that are expressed as 1.30 .80 .50 .28·
.97 .40 .30
positive velocities. In these, the cutting
30 ........................ .240 2.34 .35 .11 .06
velocity was measured to be ~gher than 1.96 .33 .12 .06
1.37 .32 •. 14 .05
the average mud velocity. Such a thing 1.20 .31 .11 .055
1.00 .30 .14 .06
can be understood when it is realized .91 .30 .13 .06
.725 .23 .12 .07
that in the laminar flow region there is
31. ....................... .045 1.62 .50 .33 .25
a parabolic velocity distribution in thc 1.82 .35 .38 .20
2.01 .40 .25 .25
annular space with a central unsheared 1.43 .43 .36 .25
1.00 .43 .37 .26
plug moving at the maximum velocity. 2.75 .46 .34 .21
220 .47 .37 .21
A cutting which was trapped in this 1.70 .41 .37 .27
plug would probably have no tendency 32 ........................ .023 1.98 .74 .59 .34
1. 76 .80 .54 .37
to be removed from its position so would 1.51 .71 .55 .38
-1.33 .71 .56 .40
naturally have a velocity greater than 1.08 .50 .43
the average mud velocity. The phenom- .82 .42

42 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AiME Vol.'189, 1950

 H. N. HALL, HOWARD tHOMPSON AND FRANK NU$$ t.P. 2182

enon of a parabolic velocity gradient would tend to move cuttings from one is that some of the cuttings might have
could be a possible explanation of slip part of the stream to another. Because been momentarily trapped in some part
velocities which appear to be greater of this fact, a cutting could start out in of the system. This would tend to give
than their calculated value. Mud in the a portion of the annulus having a veloc- measured slip velocities greater than
laminar flow region flows in a seJ;ies Qf ity less than the average mud velocity calculated values.
conc~ntric shearing layers of mud and and continue in it all the way up the
there is· no turhuience present !\,hich annulus. Another possible explanation Since data from the laboratory tests
did not reveal any such difficulty with
laminar slip measurements, it is thought
that the shorter travel distance did not
allow the plug flow or velocity gradient
phenomena to be so pronounced as they
were in field tests. 1;'he laboratory ap-

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

- . ,-" - ----,--.---,-;-.-r"TT1 paratus had a uniform flow channel
o L.4B';~.<1mA'/TE5"T PI?Ta . while tool joints and in the field tests
o RELD TEST h'~ / 11
drill pipe protectors set up restrictions
LI .F/ELD TEiSr H~.?
which caused eddies and turbulence
which could possibly have caused some
error to be introduced.
Turbulent slip velocities measured
from field data were used to compute
Cit and the Reynolds number for the
average slip velocity for each test. These
values were then plotted on the original
laboratory correlation of CIt and Reyn-
olds number. The new' correlation is-
shown in Fig. 7. Although the points
are more scattered than laboratory val-
ues, they show the same trend and the
wide variation is probably due to the
difference between laboratory and field
methods of determining slip velocities.
As the results were being tabulated,
it seemed that mud velocity had some
FIG. 7 - en VS. R., LABORATORY AND FIELD DATA.
effect _on measured slip velocities. This
was evident in both types of cutting
slip. The more complex circulating sys-
tem used in the field tests allowed in-

- ~ .. ,.~

-
I

-y
L J:-T#R8l/LEAlT 5L/P
troduction of a number of errors, and
prediction of the action of the cutting
was almost impossible due to the
changes of velocity and eddies and tur-.
bulent zones caused by restrictions such
. .~- as tool joints and rubber drill pipe pro-
tectors. It is thought that the higher slip

LI// velocities noted with Jower circulating

71-
~,4M'/N"W SUP
,
rates was an indication of the above·
factors rather than the true slip velocity
being affected by circulating rate.
It has been previously pointed Qut
that the average per cent deviation for
turbulent slip velocity figures was from
+15 per cent to -10 per cent. The

VI
amount of deviation is not distressing
·F/r·i 8 when it is remembered that actual nu-
merical differences between Qbserved
/ 2 3 45& 7 and computed values were on the order
MULl YELOC/TY, ./7
/.sec of +0.15 ft per sec. Roughness of :the
system and methOds of measurement
FIG. 8 - RELATI9N OF NET RISE VELOCITY AND MUD V,ELOCITY. could account for this magnitude' of de-

Vol. 189, 1950 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, -AIME 43

T.P. 2782' ABILITY OF DRIlliNG MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

viation. On the whole the correlation lift bit cuttings, (2) above this mini- Turbulent Slip
between observed and computed turbu- mum velocity what would be the most
lent slip velocities are very satisfactory advantageous pump rate, and· (3) could 835 Vol (Ps-Pm)
for engineering use, and qualitative re-
Cn (Re)' = 3.3xIO·
the mud be further treated so that even n'
sults fall in line with what was pre- From Fig. 4, Re = 380
with the added mud costs, an economic
dicted.' nRe
advantage could be realized due to V. = 0.77 .£t per sec
low.er horsepower requirements needed . ,6.4D.Pm
GENERAL DISCUSSION for cleaning the hole. At a mud velocity of 4.0 ft per sec
With the knowledge that there is a To illustrate a problem such as s~ated the net rise velocity of the cuttiug will
means for determining the How prop- above, the following example is given: be 3.23 ft per sec
erties of drilliug muds, and that these Computation of Optimum Pump Rate Fig. 8 is based on the above data
How properties can be used to predict A well being drilled with mud of and shows the relation:hetween net ri~e

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

laminar and turbulent cutting slip ve- these characteristics: velocity and annular mud velocity in
locities, much greater consideration cau Yield value (ty)-O.110 lb per sq ft both laminar and turbulent How.
be given to intelligent design of muds
Rigidity {ii)-0.006 lb per sec ft From the example it can be seen that
. to achieve best results in drilling. The
Density (Pm)-95 lb per cu ft the! laminar cutting velocity in this. par-
ultimate aim of the mud program is to
supply, as economically as 'possible, a Critical Velocity-3. 7 ft per sec ticular case is very small, and cuttings
mud which will: (1) have the proper The pump is limited to a mud veloc- of this size would be lifted at almost
weight characteristics, (2) be able to ity of 4.0 ft per sec in the annulus. any pump rate used. To properly insure
withstand chemical contamination from To find the most desirable pump rate the removal of cuttings and to remove
a formation being drilled, (3) be pump- for removal of Hat cuttings, t~rbulen:t them as qU:ickly as possible, the next
able at· all times and not cause exces- and laminar slip velocities are com- problem to be confronted is that of ob-
sive horsepower requirements, and (4)
puted. taining the maximum net rise velocity
be able to effectively remove the bit
Cutting Size-J.4 in.x% in.xIjI6 in.- at practical p.ump rates. It can be seen
cuttings, thereby lessening the possibili-
Cutting Weight-l70 lb per cu ft that any mud in turbulent Howat a
ties of such serious problems as stuck
velocity less than 4.40 ft per sec will
drill pipe, excessive re·drilling, etc. Laminar Slip result in a smaller net rise velocity than
In the design of a mud system, assum- 3 7r t D (Ps - Pn.) g- 6 7r g(D+2t ) t y was obtained with mud in laminar How
Vs= ----'--------=:....:...----
ing that all the requireIUents have been 64 (x) (n) at 3.65 ft per sec. In the example given,
fulfilled with the exception of the last From Fig. 5, x = 84 when t y O.ll. = a pump rate greater than 4.0 ft per sec
two mentioned above, three main items Substitution in the above equation was not possible, therefore, maximum
must be considered. These factors are: gives V s '= 0.Oll8 ft per sec cutting lift was obtained at the highest
(1) with the given mud what ~l be Net rise velocity at 3.65 ft per sec = velocity at which the mud would remain
.the minimum mud velocity required to 3.64 ftper sec in laminar How.

Tahle V
SU1ll1llary of Cutting Slip Velocities--=- :rest No.1

Mud 11 Mud 12
Wt=10.9 #/gsl n=0.00506 I/sec ft Wt=10.15 i/gal n=0.02131/secft Water
Cutting Size ty=0.0498 I/sq ft Vc=2.14 ft sec ty=0.1611bs/sq ft Vc=~.5 ft/sec
Calculated
Turbulent Observed Cutting Slip ~ Calculated
Laminar Observed Cutting Slip ~ Observed Cutting Slip
Cutting Velocity-(ft/sec) Cutting Velocity-(ft/sec) Velocity-(ft/sec)
-Diam. Thickness Volume Slip Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Slil! Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel.
(Inch~) (Inc1>es) (Cu. In.) Velocity 4.75-4.77 3.78-3.96 2.84-2.96 VelOCIty 4.68-4.70 4.04-4.15 3.24-3.34 1.72 4.91 3.47-4.40 2.04-2.06
(ft/sec) ft/sec {t/sec ft/sec (ft/sec) ft/.ec ft/sec ft/sec ft/sec ft/sec ft/sec ft/soo
------
I ~ 0.392 1.07 .99 1.20 1.34 - 9.35 0040 0.15 0.625 +12.6 1.,55
1 U!. 0.220 0.97 .93 +4.3 0.20 0.83 -76.0 1.16
2~ :1(. 0.245 0.98 1.02 - 3.92
'% ~ 0.122 0.12 0.62 -80.6 1.07
2%; 'If 0.139 0.87 1.02 1.04 -15.5 0.17 -/-0.04- 0.24 0.20 +30.7 1.36
.~ %,. 0.076 0.80 .55 +45.5 0.91
,%, ~6 0.0865 0.80 .83 - 3.62 0.12 -/-0.385 -/-0.135 Out 1.33
,~ %, 0.0433 0.70 .65 + 7.70 0.870
% %, 0.0288 0.017 -/-0.025 Out
~ 34 0.0491 1.09
~ Va 0.0245 0.63 .56 .49 +17.3 0.88 .90
~ KG 0.0123 0.54 .39 .81 -10.0 0 -/-0.72 ~.13 Out
% Va 0.0138 0.55 .71 .42 - 1.79 0.015 .31 0.29 Out .15 .81 .82

. %*Deviation of Computed Average Value From Observed Value

44 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Vol. 189, 1950

 H. N. HAll, HOWARD THOMPSON AND FRANK NUSS T.P. 2782

To illustrate the balance between case such as this would be to add a would change the path of the cutting or
varying the cutting . lift ability with in- bentonitic clay, which increases both momentarily deposit cuttings in quies-
creased horsepower or adding chemicals yield value and rigidity. and treat with cent pockets of mud.
to change mud properties the above a viscosity reducer such as caustic-que-
example is again cited, assuming that bracho when the mud became too thick CONCLUSIONS
the annular mud velocity is not limited to pump efficiently. The caustic que-
to 4.0 ft per sec. If the net rise velocity bracho would tend to decrease the yield 1. Slip velocity va~ues computed by
of cuttings had to be 4.5 ft per sec, the value greatly and change the high the turbulent slip equations show
mud in its present state would have to rigidity only slightly. For cuttings in deviations within ± 15 per cent of
be pumped at a velocity of 4.5 + 0.77 turbulent slip an increase of rigidity in slip velocity values measured un-
or 5.27 ft per sec. Chemical treatment the mud will decrease slip velocity and der actual field conditions.
of the mud could raise the critical veloc- therefore increase the ability of the mud 2. Laminar slip equations appear to
ity to 4.8 ft per sec. With the modified to lift cuttings. be correct; however, the limited

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

mud, laminar slip veJocity would be Annular dimensions used in the field data obtained from field observa-
about the same as shown in the ex- tests were much more regular than are tions do not warrant any definite
ample and at a mud velocity of 4.6 ft usually found in normal drilling opera- conclusions.
per sec the net rise velocity require- tions, yet it was found that the cutting 3. Turbulence due to restrictions,
ments would be satisfied. A knowledge return was erratic. Given an irregular drill pipe vibration and rotations,
of the relative costs of chemicals neces- shaped open hole, centrifugal forces due etc., may tend to alter the path of
sary for the above treatment and of the to drill string rotation, turbulence or cuttings moving upward in the
horsepower costs of pumping at the eddies caused by drill pipe whip and annular space, causing errors in
increased rate would allow an evalua- variation in mud velocity caused by the prediction of cutting travel
tion of this type problem. the several different outside diameters time. The ability of a mud to ef-
Aside from the design of muds, the of drill string, it is doubtful in normal fectively lift cuttings is not af-
information presented in this paper operations that anywhere near the accu- fected by these factors, however,
could be useful in the event of trouble racy of the field tests presented could and if the annular mud velocity
resulting from improper removal of cut- be obtained in predicting cutting slip is greater than the calculated slip
tings. With empirical equations for cal- velocity. It is felt, however, that if the velocity, cuttings of a desired size
culating bit cutting slip velocities it is lowest mud velocity in the annulus is will all be lifted and none allowed
possible to determine how the mud greater than the calculated slip velocity to settle back down the hole.
should be treated to decrease slip veloc- of a certain size cutting, that cutting 4. Results of field trials show that
ity thereby increasing the net rise and any others smaller than it will be these slip velocity equations will
velocity. As an example take a case lifted out. Time of lifting, however, will be a useful tool in the overall de-
where the mud can only be in laminar probably be longer than calculations sign of mud systems. Use of these
flow and laminar slip prevails. A~ in- will show. All the factors such as re- equations will enable determina-
crease in either rigidity or yield value strictions, enlargements, etc., would not tion of the most efficient pump
would result in an increased lifting alter the true slip which can be pre- speed for maximum cutting carry-
ability. Perhaps the best way to solve a dicted by the empirical equations, but ing capacity, and make it possible

Table VI
Summary of Cutting Slip Velocities - Test No.2

Wt.=10.3Ibs/gal
MudUI
n=0.00128Ibs/sec ft
MudH2
Wt.=10.2Ibs/gal n=0.00141Ibs/sec ft
I
ty=0.00154 Ibs/sq ft Vc=0.508 ft/sec % Deviation ty=0.00767Ibs/sq ft Vc=1.055 ftlsec % Deviation
Diameter Thickness Volume of Computcd of Computed
(Inches) (Inches) (Cu In) Calculated Average Value Calculated Observed Cutting Silp Average Value
Turbulent Observed Cutting Slip From Turbulent Velocity-(ft/sec) From
Cutting Velocity-(ft/sec) Obs.rved Value Cutting Observed Value
Slip Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel. Slip Vel. Mud Vel. Mud Vel.
(ft/sec) 4.94-5.04 3.73 2.75 (ft/sec) 5.04 3.54
1 ~ 0.392 1.11 1.11 1.35 - 9.75 1.13 1.29 -12.40
1 %l 0.220 1.02 0.91
0.92
1.06
1.12
+ 3.56
- 6.80
1.02
0.97
0.98
1.07
+ 4.08
- 9.35
",{, % 0.152 0.96
,~
% 0.076 0.87 0.63 0.70 +30.8 0.88 0.74 0.75 +18.10
'~ ~ 0.0865 0.88 0.85 1.12 1.26 -17.8 0.90 1.06 1.05 -14.7
IJf
~
~
~
~S2
~S2
J4
M
l1G
0.0433
0.0288
0.0491
0.0245
0.0122
0.81
0.73
0.82
0.72
0.63
0.61
0.77
0.76
0.47
0.59
0.70
0.96
0.87
0.62
0.60
0.79

0.72
f
+15.70
-15.60
0.62
32.2
5.9
4.92
0.82
0.74
0.81
0.71
0.62
0.70
0.67
0.817
0.62
0.61
0.69
0.70
:1=17.1 .
10.45
- 0.86
+ 8.40
- 5.35
% M 0.0138 0.64 0.46 0.65
I

Vol. 189,1950 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME 45

T.P. 2782 ABILITY OF DRIlliNG MUD TO LIFT BIT CUTTINGS

to see how changing the mud flow x =empirical slip velocity factor Discussion
properties by chemical treatment for laminar slip, dimensionless. By C. L. Prokop, Production Research
can aid in the removal of bit cut- Division, Humble Oil and Ref. Co.,
tings from the well. REFERENCES H auston, Texas
The authors have presented an inter-
1. Wadell, R., "The Coefficient of Re-
esting paper which should he a definite
ACKNOWLEDGMENT sistance as a Function of Reynolds
contribution toward a more thorough
Number for Solids of Various
understanding of the factors which de-
The authors wish to express their Shapes," Journal of the Franklin
termine the carrying capacity of a
appreciation to the Ma~agement of th~ Institute, 217, (1934), 459-490.
drilling fluid.
Stanolind Oil and Gas Co. for permis-
sion to prepare and publish this paper, 2. Schmiedel, J., "Experimentelle Un- The paper discusses the' velocity dis-
although it is recognized that the grant- tersuchungen uber die Fallbewe- tribution which exists across a mud
ing of such permission does not neces- gung von Kugeln, Und Schieben in stream flowing in laminar flow. In a

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/JPT/article-pdf/2/02/35/2239596/spe-950035-g.pdf/1 by PetroVietnam University user on 28 February 2023

sarily imply that Stanolind has incor- rechenden Flussigkeiten," Physika- low gel strength mud moving in laminar
porated or will incorporate these find- lische Zeitschrift Bd XXIX p. 605 flow the velocity of the mud near the
ings into its operating practice. (1928) . wall of the hole is very low. As one
goes from the well out into the hydrau-
3. Pernolet, V., "A l'etude des prep- lic center of the annulus the upward
arations mechaniques des mineraux,
NOMENCLATURE ou experiences propres a etablir la
mud velocity will increase until it
reaches a maximum of about I1f2 times
A = cross sectional area of cutting theorie des different systemes the average. After passing the center it
(perpendicular to direction of usites ou possibles," Annales des
Mines, 4 MD Series XX, (1851) p.
again decreases to a v.ery low value as
slip), sq ft . one approaches the drill pipe. It is in
390. this region of laminar flow that the cal-
CIt = coefficient of resistance (par-
ticle slip), dimensionless 4. Schulz, P., "Neue Bestiminungen de culated settling velocities showed their
Konstanten de Tallgesetze in der greatest deviation from those observed
o = particle diameter, ft
in the field tests. As Hall points out this
nassen Aufoereitung mit Rilfe der
De = equivalent particle diameter Kinematograph and Betrachtungen should be expected because of the veloc-
(2Rn ),ft uber das Gleichfalligkeitsgeset7.," ity dist~ibution and the irregular flow
Dp = pipe diameter, ft Doktor Ingenieurs Dishertation. channels that the mud may follow.
These discrepancies may ~erit some
= Fanning friction factor, dimen- 5. Sacks, V. K., -'Technischen Hoch- attention as similar experiments have
sionless schule ye Dres~en in Verbindung shown that a mud possessing a low gel
F = force causing slip, mit der k. Sachs," Bergakademic yu strength and moving in turbulent flow
lb ft/sec/sec Treiberg, (1914). often will be more effectiv(l in keeping a
g = acceleration of gravity, hole entirely clear than will the same
6. Richards, -R. R., "Velocity of Ga- mud made somewhat more viscous and
ft/sec/sec
lena and Quartz Falling in Water," flowing in laminar flow. It is true that
L = pipe length, ft particle slip velocities will be lower in
Trans. AIME, 38, (1907), p. 219.
n =rigidity, lb/sec/ft the more viscous mud but the evidence
7. Bingham, E. C., Fluidity and Plas- is that a large number of cuttings may
6P = pressure drop, lb/sq ft
ticity, McGraw-Hill, (1922). lodge in the hole. These particles which
Pm =muo. density, lbs/ cu ft became stuck in the more or less stag-
8. Pigott, R. J. S., Mud Flow in Drill- nant portions of the mud stream near
Ps =bit cutting density, lbs/cu ft
ing, API Drilling and Production the hole wall will have little or no ten-
R =retarding force, lb ft/ sec/sec dency to be thrown back into the mov-
Practice, (1941), 91-103.
R" =nominal radius, equal to ra- ing stream. For this reason erratic cut-
dius of sphere of volume equal 9. Beck, R. W., Nuss, W. F., and ting velocities in laminar flow may be
to that of the particle, ft Dunn, T. R., "The Flow Properties the rule .rather than the exception. In
Re = Reynolds number, dimension- of Drilling Muds," API Drilling contrast a turbulent mud -stream has" a
less and Production Practice, (1941), more constant velocity throughout its
cross-section and probably washes the
t =particle thickness, ft 9-22.
wall fairly clean of debris.
t,. =yield value, lbs/sq ft 10. Thompson, H. M., Taliaferro, S. L. Whether or not these differences be-
Basenburg, C. 0., Nuss, W. F., "Ap- tween laminar and turbulent flow would
p. =viscosity, lbs/ft/sec
plication of Plastic Flow Studies be sufficient to cause a dangerously
Vol. =particle volume, cu ft large number of cuttings to collect in
to Mud Circulating Systems on
Ve =critical velocity, ft/sec the hole would probably depend upon
Drilling Wells", Stanolind West drilling conditions, but acknowledg-
V... =mud velocity, ft/sec Texas Drilling Research Report No. ment should be made of their presence.
V. =particle slip velocity, ft/sec 2, October 15, 1947. * * * * * *
46 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Vol. 189, 1950