Basra University of Oil and Gas

College of Oil and Gas Engineering

Department of Oil and Gas Engineering

DRILLING FLUID LOSSES CIRCULATION

INVESTIGATION MECHANISM AND
SOLUTION IN BASRA OIL FIELD

FIRST SEMESTER

BY
Naeem Mashkour
Hassan hadi anad
Falah Hassan Othman
Chapter one

INTRODUCTION
Chapter one Introduction

Chapter One

Introduction

1.1 Mud Losses in Naturally Fractured layers

Introduction

Lost Circulation
Lost circulation is one of the most fundamental problems encountered in
drilling. It results in wastage of costly mud and time involved in rig
operations. It also requires the use of materials and techniques in order to
prevent them and the resultant loss of petroleum reserves.

Lost circulation is a phenomenon in which the drilling fluid flows into

one or more geological formations instead of returning to the annulus. As
a result of this, the oil industry suffers a loss of over one billion dollars
annually in rig time, materials and other financial resources (1).

Lost circulation normally occurs when the mud flows into the natural
fractures and caverns as shown in Figure 1.It may be caused if there is an
overbalance of pressure applied on the drilling mud, as a result of which
fractures are created inside the formation, allowing mud losses through
them.

1
Chapter one Introduction

Figure (1): Lost circulation inside a formation.

1-Effects
There are two basic consequences of lost circulation:
1- If the level of fluid in the well bore is lost due to losing mud inside the
formation, lower hydrostatic pressure is created which results in the flow of
fluids inside the formation into the well bore. This process is commonly
called kick.
2-if the drilling is continued to a point where there is no fluid left inside the
well bore; it can result in damage to the well bore, including the destruction
of the bit. This phenomenon is called dry drilling (2).

2- Categories of Losses
The nature of losses as a result of lost circulation can be categorized in terms
of degree and the time needed to control them. The two types of losses are:

2
Chapter one Introduction

 Minor losses: These are losses in the range of 6–470 barrels that are
stopped within 48 hours.
 Major losses: These are losses greater than 470 barrels that take more
than 48 hours to stop.
3 - There are four basic types of formations that lead to losses and these
are described as follows:
1. Natural Fractures
2. Cavernous Formations
3. Induced Fractures
4. Unconsolidated Formations

In this research, the natural fractures will be explained only:

3.1Natural Fractures:
These can occur in any type of rock. The mud level decreases slowly in the
pit and if the drilling is continued, more fractures become exposed to the
drilling mud, which can lead to a complete loss.
Formations that have cracks, faults or other discontinuities in rocks and
stresses exceeding their rock strength result in mud losses. These formations
are called naturally fractured formations (1).

Figure (2): Natural fractures

3
Chapter one Introduction

A. Models Based on Naturally Fractured Formations

While drilling in fractured formations, drilling fluid losses are common.
By monitoring fluid losses the formations that are fractured are
identified. In order to differentiate between the types of mud losses, the
mud losses at the mud tank can be observed closely.

For mud loss through pores, the amount of loss occurring increases
slowly as the flow of drilling mud increases; whereas for natural
fractures there is a rapid initial loss of mud that declines with time. This
is shown in the Figure (3).

Figure (3): Mud losses into natural fractures

4
Chapter one Introduction

B. Identifying Conductive Fractures (Sanfillipo’s Model)

Naturally fractured formations have fractures that provide a path for
the flow of oil, gas and other fluids. Knowing the location and
permeability of fractures intersecting the well bore is very important.
These fractures can be identified by checking the mud losses at the
rig because the drill bit intercepts these while drilling the well bore.
Flow meters are used to precisely locate the fractures.
i. Use of Sensors in Identifying Fractures
Floating sensors or ultrasonic reflectors are commonly placed in mud
pits in order to measure cumulative mud volume lost over a period.
These measurements cannot provide the exact contributions (in terms
of volume of mud lost) of every fracture so the conductive fractures
(fractures that are inter-connected and provide a channel for mud loss
to take place) inside the well bore are separated.
Every time there is a fracture in the formation, there will be a
subsequent decrease in the mudflow rate measured by the flow meters
inside the mud pit (2).

ii. Sanfillipo’s Model for Estimating Aperture of Fractures

A model was developed for estimating the aperture of fractures. This model
developed by Sanfillipo describes how the mud fills each of these fractures
as the drilling bit intersects the well bore.
 The following assumptions have been considered in this model:
1. When a decrease in mud volume is seen, it is considered that the drill
bit has struck a fracture.
2. The fracture is plain (forming a circular profile as it is perpendicular
with the well axis) and of uniform aperture.
3. The mud enters the formation radially.
4. Fracture is more conductive than the formation.

5
Chapter one Introduction

5. In the first stages of loss, the plugging of fractures by mud filtrate can
be considered negligible.
6. The fluid is Newtonian.
7. The flow of mud into the fracture is laminar.
8. Poiseuille’s law is valid. According to Poiseuille’s law “The pressure
drop in a laminar fluid flowing through a long smooth pipe is directly
proportional to the length and viscosity of the fluid times the volume
flow rate while inversely proportional to the fourth power of radius.
9. The fracture aperture (h) is linked with fracture permeability (k) by
Equation 1-1.

Eq.1-1

iii. Fracture Plugging Process

Observations were made on the events that occurred during the mud loss
and the fracture plugging process. Once the aperture of the fractures was
determined, the size of the particles needed to plug the fracture was also
known.

No specific lost circulation material (cedar bark, shredded cane stalks,

mineral fiber, hair, mica flakes, pieces of plastic, cellophane sheeting,
ground limestone, marble, wood, nut hulls, and Formica, corncobs and
cotton hulls) was used for plugging fractures.

The standard weighting solids used in the mud (to increase the density of
the mud, weighting solids such as barite, hematite or calcium carbonate
are added to increase wellbore stability) helped in preventing mud losses
and it took one day for the losses to stop completely (2).

The invasion radius (the distance from the borehole wall that the mud
filtrate has penetrated) started to increase because of plugging of the

6
Chapter one Introduction

fracture (as the mud filtrate volume increased with time) and mud was
blocked from penetrating the formation. This is because of the yield
stress of the mud.

The mud losses reduced rather than increasing even when the drill bit
moved forward, because the plugged zone was far from the well bore and
thus not affected by the action of the bit.

The initial fracture plugging process follows the static filtration principle
based on which “Filter cake continues to grow thick as filtration
continues. The filtrate volume increases as the square root of elapsed
time

C.Lietard’s Model
Reservoirs where fracture permeability (the permeability of the reservoir
due to the opening of natural fractures) exceeds 50 md. (MilliDarcy) and
is much higher than the formation permeability were considered by
Lietard.

Type curves are used to estimate the width of the fracture by curve
matching. These type curves are a graphical representation of the
responses of change in production rate or pressure in the petroleum
reservoir being tested. Logging while drilling (LWD) helps in using the
appropriate.

D. Majidi’s Model
Most drilling fluids exhibit shear-thinning behaviour, so it is appropriate
to consider the Yield-Power Law model for the drilling fluid as this
model characterizes water-based and oil-based drilling muds across the
entire shear rate range.

7
Chapter one Introduction

i. Assumptions for Modeling

1. Fracture is non-deformable and of constant width and infinite
length.
2. Mud follows Yield-Power Law behaviour.
3. Drilling mud is incompressible.
4. Fracture is not plugged by drilling mud particles.
5. There is no mud leak-off through the walls of the fracture.

6.There is a continuous drilling over-pressure.

E. Remedial Measures
1. Shut down the pump.
2. Observe the annulus and monitor the fluid level if it is in sight.
3. If the fluid level is out of sight fill, the hole with water and monitor
the number of barrels required. If the hole will not stand full, mix
10-15 lb. /bbl. LCM in the remaining mud in the pits and spot
across weak zone if the location of the loss zone is known, or spot
a concentrated LCM pill.
4. Pull the pipe into the casing and rebuild mud volume while
waiting for the hole to heal.

8
Chapter one Introduction

1.2 Formation Integrity Test, Leak off Test, Equivalent Circulating

Density
LOT and FIT in principle the same, by pumping mud without circulation to
the surface. (BOP closed, the choke closed). LOT is usually done on
exploration wells, and FIT is usually done on the well development (because
the value of fracture pressure be expected from well data neighbors who've done a
LOT).
In the drilling, Formation Integrity Test (FIT) and Leak off Test (LOT) are
two methods to determine:
1. Strength of cement around the casing shoe after setting.
2. Approximate the fracture gradient, later will be used to create mud
programs.
3. To determine the current Maximum Allowable Annular Surface Pressure
(MAASP) well control event (3).

Leak off test:

Leak off Test is conducted in order to find the fracture gradient of certain
formation. The results of the leak off test also dictate the maximum
equivalent mud weight that should be applied to the well during drilling
operations.
The leak off test procedures are:
1. Drill out new formation few feet, circulate bottom up, collect sample
to confirm that new formation is drilled to, and then pull string into
the casing.
2. Close annular preventer or pipe rams, line up a pump, normally a
cement pump, and circulate through an open choke line to ensure that
surface line is fully filled with drilling fluid (4).

9
Chapter one Introduction

3. Gradually pump small amount of drilling fluid into well with constant
pump stroke. Record total pump strokes, drill pipe pressure and casing
pressure. Drill pipe pressure and casing pressure will increase
continually
While pumping mud in hole. When plot a graph between strokes pumped
and pressure, if formation is not broken, agraph will demonstrate straight-
line relationship. When pressure exceeds formation strength, formation will
be broken and let drilling fluid permeate into formation, therefore a trend of
drill pipe/casing pressure will deviate from straight line that mean formation
is broken and is injected by drilling fluid (3).
We may call pressure when deviated from straight line as leak off test
pressure Leak off test pressure can be calculated into equivalent mud weight
in ppg as formula below:
Leak off test in equivalent mud weight (ppg) = (Leak off test pressure in psi)
÷ 0.052 ÷ (Casing Shoe TVD in ft) + (current mud weight in ppg)
Pressure gradient in psi/ft = (Leak off test pressure in psi) ÷ (Casing Shoe
TVD in ft)
4. Bleed off pressure and open up the well. Then proceed drilling
operation.
Formation Integrity Test:
Formation Integrity Test is the method to test strength of formation and
shoe by increasing Bottom Hole Pressure (BHP) to designed pressure. FIT is
normally conducted to ensure that formation below show will not be broken
while drilling the next section with higher BHP. Normally, engineers in
town will design how much formation integrity test pressure required mostly
in ppg.
Before forming formation integrity test, you should know pressure
required for Formation Integrity Test. The formula showed below
demonstrates you how to calculate required FIT pressure (4).

11
Chapter one Introduction

Pressure required for FIT (psi) = (Required FIT in ppg–Current Mud Weight
in ppg) x 0.052 x True Vertical Depth of shoe in ft.

The procedure in order to perform formation integrity test:

1. Drill out new formation few feet, circulate bottom up, collect sample
to confirm that new formation is drilled to, and then pull string into
the casing.
2. Close annular preventer or pipe rams, line up a pump, normally a
cement pump, and circulate through an open choke line to ensure that
surface line is fully filled with drilling fluid.
3. Gradually pump small amount of drilling fluid into well with constant
pump stroke. Record total pump strokes, drill pipe pressure and casing
pressure. Pump until casing pressure reaches the pressure required for
formation integrity test. Hold pressure for few minutes to confirm
pressure.
4. Bleed off pressure and open up the well. Then proceed drilling
operation.
Equivalent Circulating Density:
Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD) is the effective density that combines
current mud density and annular pressure drop.
ECD is critical for drilling operations because it can caused losses due to
high-pressure loss in annulus.
Moreover, ECD is very critical in both well control and losses aspects in the
areas where have narrow room between pore pressure and fracture gradient
For Equivalent Circulating Density formula itself:
Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD) in ppg = ((annular pressure loss in
psi) × 19.25 ÷ true vertical depth (TVD) inft) + (current mud weight in ppg)
(4)
.

11
Chapter one Introduction

1. 3 loss circulation in highly permeable zone

Loss Circulation
Loss of circulation is the uncontrolled flow of whole mud into a formation,
sometimes referred to as a “thief zone.” This article discusses causes,
prevention, and remedial measures for lost circulation.
When the hydrostatic pressure of the fluid exceeds the invasion, resistance
fluid will be lost to the formation. When the permeability channels exceed a
size that the normal drilling fluid cake or particles cannot bridge then whole
fluid will be lost into the formation.
This is lost circulation. The severity of the loss will dictate the criticality of
the situation and the response required. Figure shows partial and total lost-
circulation zones. In partial lost circulation, mud continues to flow to surface
with some loss to the formation. Total lost circulation, however, occurs
when all the mud flows into a formation with no return to surface (5).
If drilling continues during total lost circulation, it is referred to as blind
drilling. This is not a common practice in the field, unless all of the
following criteria are met:

Figure (4) show total and partial losses

12
Chapter one Introduction

Condition: when mud hydrostatic pressure Greater than formation Pressure.

There are three levels of mud loss

 Partial mud loss (5-20) m3/hr.
 Sever mud loss (20-30) m3/hr.
 Complete mud loss ( no return)

Figure (5) show hydrostatic pressure & fracture pressure.

Treatment:
Generally include reduce mud density to reduce hydrostatic pressure

13
Chapter one Introduction

Pressure Buildup Testing

Figure (6) explain pressure build up testing

From Horner plot

Figure (7) show calculate pws and k from Horner plot.

14
Chapter one Introduction

Form the drawing we find the slope and of through the slope finding the
permeability and on the basic the permeability we determine the loss ,if the
high permeability will be the loss is high and if permeability little loss will
be few and can be treatment by stress caging
Causes of lost-circulation zones
Several situations can result in lost circulation:
 Formations that are inherently fractured, cavernous, or have high
permeability
 Improper drilling conditions
 Induced fractures caused by excessive downhole pressures and setting
intermediate casing too high
Prevention of lost circulation
The complete prevention of lost circulation is impossible, because some
formations, such as inherently fractured, cavernous, or high-permeability
zones, are not avoidable if the target zone is to be reached.
However, limiting circulation loss is possible if certain precautions are
taken, especially those related to induce fractures. These precautions
include:
 Maintaining proper mud weight
 Minimizing annular-friction pressure losses during drilling and
tripping in
 Adequate hole cleaning
 Avoiding restrictions in the annular space
 Setting casing to protect upper weaker formations within a transition
zone
 Updating formation pore pressure and fracture gradients for better
accuracy with log and drilling data.

15
Chapter one Introduction

Preventive tests
• Leakoff test (LOT):
Test to determine the strength or fracture pressure of the open
formation, usually conducted immediately after drilling below a new
casing shoe. During the test, the well is shut in and fluid is pumped
into the wellbore to gradually increase the pressure that the formation
experiences. At some pressure, fluid will enter the formation, or leak
off, either moving through permeable paths in the rock or by creating
a space by fracturing the rock (6).
• Formation integrity test (FIT):
Is a test of the strength and integrity of a new formation and it is the
first step after drilling a casing shoe track
Remedial measures
When lost circulation occurs, sealing the zone is necessary unless the
geological conditions allow blind drilling, which is unlikely in most cases.
The common LCMs that generally are mixed with the mud to seal loss zones
may be grouped as:
 Fibrous
 Flaked
 Granular
 A combination of fibrous, flaked, and granular materials
Various types of plugs used throughout the industry include:
 Bentonite/diesel-oil squeeze
 Cement/bentonite/diesel-oil squeeze
 Cement
 Barite
Stress Caging
Stress cage artificially increases the fracture gradient by changing the
physical properties of the near wellbore. A stress cage is often formed by the

16
Chapter one Introduction

effect of filling micro fractures with a material such as calcium carbonate or

graphite in order to artificially induce micro fractures around the borehole
wall and bridge those fractures soth at they form a "stress hoop" around the
borehole. Graphite and calcium carbonate are used as aproppant, preventing
the fractures from re-closing
What is hoop stress?
Hoop stress is a stress in a pipe wall. It is represented by the forces inside
the cylinder acting towards the circumference perpendicular to the length of
the pipe.
Advantages
In stress caging, solids are deposited near the mouth of the fracture. These
solids act as a aproppant and also act as a seal between the fluid inside the
well bore and the majority of the fracture. The fracture has no effect on the
fluid pressure acting on the well bore.
If the formation is permeable, it will leak off the mud filtrate behind the
bridge formed and the mud filtrate will not re-enter the well bore.
Consequently, the fracture will start closing.
Because of compressive buildup of stress near the blockage, the hoop stress
will increase to a point such that the fracture will be forced to close, as
shown in

Figure (8) show comparession at bridge.

17
Chapter one Introduction

Model
To understand the process of developing a stress cage, a model has been
developed to link the formation to a blockage of the fracture. The blockage
in the fracture depends on the size of fracture aperture and particle size of
the solids within the mud. The extent of stress increase inside the fracture
depends on the location of the blockage, the isolated fracture (7).

1.4 Loss of Circulation

Lost circulation is oldest common problems in drilling well that cause’s

increase in drilling wells cost so it’s occur in formation that high porous
,caves and induced.
Types of loss:
1. Partial mud losses
2. Total mud losses
3. Severe mud losses
Induced Losses
Induce loss circulation is result increase surge pressure and most common
cause is increase density of mud drilling as well as increase viscosity and
download pipes is very fast.
How to know this induce fracture:
Propagation resistivity tools are sensitive to oil filled fractures extending as
away from the borehole. The propagation tool causes currents to flow in the
formation in a circular path around the borehole. When a fracture extends
away from the borehole, these currents cause voltage in the tool’s receivers.
The sensitivity of this technique increases as the formation becomes more
conductive. The shallow resistivity reads high compared to the deep
resistivity (8). The gamma ray indicates a shaly Interval as show in fig.

18
Chapter one Introduction

Figure (9) explain the gamma ray indicates a shaly Interval

There are different models used in the field to account for drilling induced
fractured formations (Lavrov’s model):

Figure (10) is shows induce losses circulation.

19
Chapter one Introduction

Lavrov’s Model
This model assumes that the drilling mud behaves as a non-Newtonian fluid.
It models mud losses resulting from a horizontal.
Fracture that opens or closes when the drilling mud inter into the fracture
and returns.
W=WO+P/Kn
Where
W = local fracture opening
WO = fracture opening when fluid pressure is zero
P = local fluid pressure inside the fracture
Kn= It is called fracture normal stiffness.

Treatment methods:
1. Well bore strength
2. Stress cage
3. Control drilling parameters
4. Materials selection
Wellbore Strengthening Theory:
Various wellbore strengthening concepts have been developed for stabilizing
wellbores to control mud losses, especially in sections with narrow mud
weight windows between the wellbore collapse and fracture gradients.
These include physical methods, such as plastering or otherwise minimizing
fluid interaction with the wellbore; chemical methods
Such as osmotic mechanisms for controlling pore fluid dynamics; thermal
methods, such as heating the wellbore to tighten the rock and impart to it
additional tangential stress (9).

21
Chapter one Introduction

Mathematical modeling
Semi-analytical mode:
The model can be decomposed into two fundamental models .The first
model corresponds to a medium without fractures. It has prescribed loading
at infinity with far-field stresses and at the circular boundary with wellbore
pressure. The second model corresponds to a medium with fractures
modeling of near-wellbore fracturing for wellbore strengthening. It has net
fracture loading along the fracture surfaces.
Note that this superposition is suitable for short fractures (near-
wellboreregion), which is of interest of wellbore strengthening applications
modeling of near-wellbore fracturing for wellbore strengthening. The near-
wellbore region is considered as when the fracture length has the same order
of magnitude as the wellbore radius (10).
The simulation is set to stop when the fracture length is three times longer
than the wellbore radius as it shows good accuracy modeling of near-
wellbore fracturing for wellbore strengthening.
Using the dislocation-based approach and Gauss-Chebyshev integration
formulas, the fracture width distribution and stress intensity factor can be
obtained as Modeling of near-wellbore fracturing for wellbore strengthening

21
Chapter one Introduction

Figure (11) schematic of wellbore with two symmetrical edge fractures.

(11)
Details of the semi-analytical model can be found in Appendix A . The
criterion for fracture propagation is that the stress in-density factor is larger
than the fracture toughness

Prevention:
There are many types to prevent loss circulation:
 Waiting Method
 Decrease Pump Pressure
 Decrease Mud Weight
 Increase viscosity of drilling mud for sand & gravel formation
 Download pipes is slowly

22
Chapter one Introduction

Preventive Tests:
 Leakoff test (LOT):
Test to determine the strength or fracture pressure of the open
formation, usually conducted immediately after drilling below a new
casing shoe. During the test, the well is shut in and fluid is pumped
into the wellbore to gradually increase the pressure that the formation
experiences. At some pressure, fluid will enter the formation, or leak
off, either moving through permeable paths in the rock or by creating
a space by fracturing the rock.
 Formation Integrity Test (FIT):
Is a test of the strength and integrity of a new formation and it is the
first step after drilling a casing shoe track. An accurate evaluation of a
casing cement job and of the formation is extremely important during
the drilling of a well and for subsequent work. The Information
resulting from Formation Integrity Tests (FIT) is used throughout the
life of the well and for nearby wells. Casing depths, well control
options, formation fracture pressures, and limiting fluid weights may
be based on this information (12).
The main reasons for performing a formation integrity test (FIT) are:
 Investigate the strength of the cement bond around the casing
shoe and to ensure that no communication is established with
higher formations.
 Determine the fracture gradient around the casing shoe and
therefore establish the upper limit of the primary well control
for the open hole section below the current casing.
 Investigate well bore capability to withstand pressure below the
casing shoe in order to validate or invalidate the well
engineering plan regarding the casing shoe setting depth

23
Chapter one Introduction

Methods of adding materials

 LMC added to the entire system
 Spotting Slurries
Ways to identify areas of loss
 Spinner Survey.
 Survey Radiation.
 Thermal Survey.
 Pressure Difference Survey.

24