A New Cutting Transport Equation For Drilling With Low Density Drilling

Fluid
S. Chandra, Institut Teknologi Bandung

Abstract
Advances in drilling technology have allowed drilling in harsh and extreme areas using
sophisticated drilling mud such as foam, air drilling, or low density Oil based Mud. These drilling
fluids have density below water density (8.33 ppg) and usually utilized for underbalanced drilling
for unconventional resources or drilling blind. As of the main function of drilling fluid is to
transport cuttings to the surface, it is apparent that accurate calculation of minimum cutting
velocity becomes very crucial in this stage.
Several cutting transport equations that have been developed, did not account for fluid property
change that naturally occurs when cutting is mixed readily with drilling fluid during turbulent flow
in the annulus. This phenomenon is particularly important in low density drilling fluid, ranging
from low density OBM to air drilling fluid that is usually utilized in Coal Bed Methane Drilling.
The changes in drilling fluid property, if it is not properly accounted could result in kicks or
underground blowout.
In this publication, the author will present a new cutting transport equation that accommodates
changes in drilling fluid physical property, such as viscosity, density, etc based on a software
modeling that can predict fluid behavior during transportation. The equation will be based on
previous methods, but incorporating new correction factors that can properly handle low density
drilling fluids for both vertical and deviated holes, including horizontal wells.

Introduction
The utilization of drilling fluid has been developed since the first deep drilling was established in
the 18th century. One of the main functions of drilling fluid is to carry cuttings from wellbore to
the surface. The cutting transport phenomenon is extensively studied under the hydraulics of
drilling expertise. It is important that drilling fluid could maintain its lift capacity despite changes
in fluid property during drilling process. The lift capacity of drilling fluid is associated with proper
borrom hole cleaning, which is an important issue in drilling optimation. Failure in maintaining
proper hole cleaning could result in deposition of cuttings and possible decrease in Rate of
Penetration caused by regrinding process, decreasing bit life and cost per foot economic basis.

Developments of novel drilling methods namely underbalanced drilling and sophisticated drilling
fluid designed for the unconventional reservoirs has encouraged cutting transport modeling into
a new perspective. The utilization of low-density oil based mud, foam mud, and air drilling has
not been properly modeled in cutting transport equation. In this publication, the author would
present a modified equation for low density drilling fluid that accounts property change during
drilling process caused by the presence of cutting suspension in drilling fluid, based on
simulation study and laboratory studies.

Literature Review
Several authors have developed equation governing hydraulics of rotary drilling bits, pioneered
by Kendall and Goins, who introduced the concept of Jet Velocity, Maximum Hydraulic Horse
Power and Maximum Jet Impact. This method was proved useful for vertical wells but did not
point out important parameters that could affect rate of penetration. Feenstra and Van Leeuwen
improved the jet velocity design that could increase rate of penetration instead of increasing
flow rate. Eckel conducted microbit-drilling study and presented a new equation relating bit
parameters and jet velocity that served as a basis for the famous D-exponent equation.

= ( )!

Black and Cholet, also presented a research that shown the impact of properly setting bit
rotation per minute (RPM) can increase penetration rate, using shale drilling study, further
developed by Bizanti and Blick that conducted Buckingham theorem to analyze parameters
that affect penetration parameters. These studies only shown bit optimization but do not focus
on how to transport cutting properly.
It is not before 1988 when Iyoho et al proposed a new model for bottom hole cleaning that
incorporates the thickness of cutting bed. They also proposed new software that model cuttings
in conformance with Stokes Law, treated as spherical solid immersed in viscous fluid. This
method do not account cutting distribution, as it is an ideal model with identical properties.
Difficulties in modeling cutting transport equation including sophisticated experiment that is
required for proper results. Several research center has developed unique apparatus in order to
conduct the experiment , the most famous one is the Tulsa Research Center Drilling Flow Loop.
The sophisticated apparatus has invaluable contribution for modeling cutting transport.
There are three highlighted parameters that should be accounted in modern cutting transport
equation; slip velocity, in which critical velocity when the cuttings start to be deposited; cutting
velocity, and minimum velocity when the cutting starts to be transported to surface, as a sum of
slip velocity and cutting velocity. These parameters are affected by annular fluid velocity, rate of
penetration, rotation per minute, drillpipe eccentricity, average cutting diameter, and inclination.
Larsen et al presented a step-by-step method for cutting transport in deviated wellbores that

can be used for horizontal wells, based on laboratory study and empirical derivation. The
method employs correction factor for cutting concentration, initial fluid viscosity, and inclination.
This method is only effective for highly deviated wellbore above 550, and correction factor
should be utilized for low deviated ones, except for vertical wells that should refer to Moores
Method. Refer to Figure 1 for procedural method of Larsens method.
Peden et al also presented improved Larsens method based on experimental studies of cutting
rolling and cutting suspension for more realistic results. They also presented dimensionless
monograph for various well deviation, but they did not incorporate RPM as a crucial factor for
the cutting transport. Refer to Figure 2 for procedural method of Pedens method.
Rubiandini (1999) presented a new method based on Moores method for vertical wells and
Larsens method for deviated wells that divide the equation into two parts based on well
deviation above 450 and below 450. The author also pinpointed the urgency of corrections for
mud weight and RPM. This equation is simpler and requires less effort in calculation.

Methodology
In this publication, the author would present an improved Rubiandini equation for cutting
trasnsport based on simulation study. The simulation is carried on the HUBS Signa simulator
that is capable of modeling drilling fluid flow in the annulus. The author focuses on low-density
drilling fluid, such as low-density oil based mud (saraline, synthetic oil) that is used for
underbalanced drilling. Foamed mud and air air drilling are not investigated due to technical
issues and requirements for expensive laboratory apparatus.
The author would present correction factor based on universal chart developed from the
software mentioned. The purpose is to show that omission of cutting effect to the property of
drilling fluids does have crucial implications to the modeling. In underbalanced drilling, the lowdensity drilling fluid used tend to have bigger property change compared to the heavier ones.
For the model development, the author used three division of cuttings based on the d50 size as
in conformance with the previous works of Iyoho (1988); the small cutting (d50 of 0.029),
medium sized cutting (1/8 size) and large sized cutting (0.5 size). Cutting concentration would
be varied from 0.1 to 5 % with the steps of 0.5 %, as the omitted scale can be easily
interpolated.
Sensitivity analysis performed on the drilling fluid, based on the decrease of density from 8 ppg
to 5 ppg (lowest non gaseous drilling fluid density for synthetic oil) with the increments of 0.5
ppg. The main parameters tested would be drilling fluid density and viscosity based on the
average cutting size.

The author presents a series of chart in this publication, consisting of correction factors for
Rubiandini equation that can be easily used in field application, as the charts do not require a
lot of calculation and available for wide range of fluid properties.

Results and Discussion

The simulation results are shown below. It has been observed that increase in cutting
concentration would affect the change in fluid properties almost linearly. For small and medium
sized cutting, the trend can be seen as almost linear from ascending concentration of cuttings. It
is worth noting that in larger cutting size, the curve tends to get more hyperbolic, as an effect of
higher cutting concentration and size multiplies the cutting effect to the drilling fluid properties.
It is important to note that for higher cutting concentration, the curve tends to get lower gradient
as the cutting concentration increases. This is mainly caused by drilling fluid lift capacity is
restricted by the gel strength and plastic viscosity itself, causing the drilling fluid to be
saturated by drilling fluid, leaving other cuttings deposited in the wellbore, therefore the
addition of viscosifier is essential.
The correction factor displayed in the charts should be used as multiplying factor for the
Rubiandini Equation, as the change in fluid properties will require more velocity to lift the
cuttings. Should the multiplication results be too high for economical reasons, e.g. higher costs
for pumping units, the viscosity correction factor should be preferred to be included in the new
equation as it directly relates with the drilling fluid lift capacity.
Due to technical difficulties, the author was not able to provide correction charts for foamed mud
drilling as the rheological model would be complicated and lack of available data prevented the
study to be further developed. Therefore, the equation is currently valid for non-gaseous drilling
fluid only for the particular time. In the near future, the author hopes to be able to develop new
equations for foamed and air drilling.
The improved Rubiandini equation is stated below :
For <= 450, the equation becomes = + 1 +

!" !""!!"# ! !!! ! !!"#$%&' ! (!!"#$)

!"!#""

For >= 450, the equation becomes = + 1 +

!" !""!!"# ! !!! ! !!"#$%&' !(!!"#$ )

!"##

Conclusion
A new correction factor has been developed for improving Rubiandini equation base on the
alteration of drilling fluid property that resulted in correction for density and viscosity. Correction
charts have been presented and can be utilized without complicated calculations. The
correction charts have been tested in underbalanced drilling simulator and resulted in better
results for low-density non-gaseous drilling fluid.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes gratitude to Signa Engineering Corp for providing HUBS software licenses
that is crucial in completion of this publication. The author would also thank Prof. Dr-Ing. Ir. Rudi
Rubiandini, who has inspired the author to pursue graduate degree education and whose
expertise has encouraged the author to develop researches in drilling engineering in particular .

Nomenclature
Cdensity
Cvisc
Vcut
Vmin
Vsv
RPM

Density correction factor, dimensionless

Viscosity correction factor, dimensionless
Cutting velocity, ft/s
Minimum velocity, ft/s
Slip velocity, ft/s
Rotation per minute

References
1. Moore, P.L. Drilling Practice Manual. The Petroleum Publishing Co., Tulsa, Oklahoma.
1974.
2. Rubiandini, Rudi. Equation for Estimating Minimum Mud Rate for Cutting Transport in an
Inclined Until Horizontal Well. SPE Paper 57541. 1999
3. Larsen, T.I. et al. Development of a New Cutting Transport Model for High Angle
Wellbores Including Horizontal Wells. SPE Paper 25872, 1997.
4. Peden, J.M. et al. Comprehensive Experimental Investigation of Drilled Cuttings
Transport in Inclined Wells Including the Effect of Rotation and Eccentricity of Drillpipe.
SPE Paper 20592. 1990.

APPENDIX A
Density Correction Chart for Low Density Drilling Drilling Fluid
1.14
1.12

Small Cutting 5 ppg

1.1

Small Cutting 5.5 ppg

Small Cutting 6 ppg

1.08

Small Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.06

Small Cutting 7 ppg

1.04

Small Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.02

Small Cutting 8 ppg

1
0

Cutting Conc.

1.14
1.12

Medium Cutting 5 ppg

1.1

Medium Cutting 5.5 ppg

Medium Cutting 6 ppg

1.08

Medium Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.06

Medium Cutting 7 ppg

1.04

Medium Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.02

Medium Cutting 8 ppg

1
0

Cutting Conc

1.24
1.22
1.2

Large Cutting 5 ppg

1.18

Large Cutting 5.5 ppg

1.16

Large Cutting 6 ppg

1.14

Large Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.12
1.1

Large Cutting 7 ppg

1.08

Large Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.06

Large Cutting 8 ppg

1.04
1.02
0

Cutting Conc

Viscosity Correction Chart for Low Density Drilling Fluid

1.16
1.14
Small Cutting 5 ppg

1.12

Small Cutting 5.5 ppg

1.1

Small Cutting 6 ppg

1.08

Small Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.06

Small Cutting 7 ppg

1.04

Small Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.02

Small Cutting 8 ppg

1
0

Cutting Conc

1.16
1.14

Medium Cutting 5 ppg

1.12

Medium Cutting 5.5 ppg

Medium Cutting 6 ppg

1.1

Medium Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.08

Medium Cutting 7 ppg

1.06

Medium Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.04

Medium Cutting 8 ppg

1.02
0

Cutting Conc

1.22
1.2
1.18

Large Cutting 5 ppg

1.16

Large Cutting 5.5 ppg

1.14

Large Cutting 6 ppg

1.12

Large Cutting 6.5 ppg

1.1

Large Cutting 7 ppg

1.08

Large Cutting 7.5 ppg

1.06

Large Cutting 8 ppg

1.04
1.02
0

Cutting Conc

APPENDIX B

Figure 1. Procedure for Determining Minimum Cutting Transport from Larsens Method

10

Figure 2. Determination of Minimum Cutting Transport Velocity from Pedens Method

11

Figure 3. Determination Minimum Transport Velocity from Rubiandini Method

12

BIOGRAPHY

Steven Chandra is currently an active member of SPE and a final year student in Petroleum
Engineering Department Institut Teknologi Bandung. The author is a full time researcher for
Well Stimulation Laboratory and his research activities including developing smart completions
in unconventional hydrocarbon reservoir, modeling novel technologies for water coning
management and gas deliquification methods. His recent publications including Planning for
Carbon Dioxide Injection in Gundih Area, East Java presented in the Indonesia-Japan CCS
Symposium 2014 in Bali, Indonesia; co-author in A New Perspective in Economical Carbon
Dioxide Sequestration: Injection as Carbonated Water Injection presented in JRMM 2014 in
Akita, Japan; Co-author in Laboratory Study on Comparison of Miscible and Near Miscible
Carbon Dioxide Injection in Field G, to be presented in SIMGRESNAS IATMI 2014 in Jakarta,
Indonesia; and the author of SPE 173930 Application of Tailpipe Water Sink for Wells with
Gas Lift to be presented in SPE Latin America and Carribean Artificial Lift Conference 2015 in
Salvador , Brazil.
The
author
can
be
contacted
via
email
to
[email protected]
or
[email protected].

13

14