Parametric Study of Gas Entry Into
Cemented Wellbores
Fred Sabins, SPE, Westport Technology Center Intl., and M.L. Wiggins, SPE, U. of Oklahoma
Summary
A cement slurry is placed in a wellbore to harden into an imperme-
able mass that seals the annulus from fluid flow and protects the cas-
ing from corrosion for the life of the well. If fluid flow does occur
in the form of gas migration, expensive remedial squeeze-cement-
ing techniques are generally required.
The objective of the work covered in this paper was to study the
parameters that affect entry of gas into a cemented annulus. This re-
search incorporated a detailed study of the factors that contribute to
gas influx from the time of initial placement of the slurry, through
the gelation or transition state of the slurry, to the set condition. On
the basis of the understanding of the processes involved in gas entry,
a simulator was developed that predicts the amount of gas that enters
a cemented wellbore, and identifies the critical parameters that af-
fect the gas entry.
This study concerns itself with a portion of the gas flow problem:
the entry of gas into a cemented annulusand not with the flow of
the gas up through the cement and the formation of a gas channel.
This study will provide insight to the following questions.
What cement properties are important to minimize gas entry?
What role does fluid loss play in minimizing gas influx?
What well parameters affect gas entry?
Introduction
A computer simulator was developed for establishing detailed pa-
rameters that affect gas entry. Specifically, this simulator used math-
ematical relationships to describe the chemical and physical proc-
esses involved in the gelling and setting of the cement column.
When the cement is placed into the annular space, the cement will
lose hydrostatic pressure until the pressure in the annular column
equals the formation pressure. At that time, fluid will enter the annu-
lus based upon the volume losses in the wellbore. This research ap-
proached the problem by mathematically modeling the gelling and
setting of the cement, as well as the hydrostatic-pressure loss and
gas entry in the cement column.
The hydrostatic-pressure loss and ultimate gas entry in a cement
column were studied by investigation of three cement-slurry prop-
erties and three well parameters. The cement-slurry properties ad-
dressed were static gel strength, volume losses, and permeability of
the gelling cement. The static gel strength, or shear resistance, sets
the maximum limit on the pressure decrease that can occur in a ce-
ment column; the volume losses in the slurry permit the potential
pressure loss. Volume losses can occur as a result of two mecha-
nisms: fluid loss from the cement slurry and hydration volume loss.
The permeability of the cement enables volume losses from the
wellbore to be transmitted through the entire cement column. The
interstitial water in the matrix of the gelling cement can experience
Darcy flow when a differential pressure is applied. The relationship
between static gel strength, volume losses, and permeability are ad-
dressed in detail. The well parameters studied are geometries, length
of cement column, and overbalance pressure. A parametric study
was performed to determine which parameters are important in
dealing with gas entry.
Copyright 1997 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 13 February 1995. Paper peer approved 13 May
1997. Paper (SPE 28472) first presented at the 1994 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in New Orleans, 2528 September.
SPE 39494, Supplement to SPE 28472, Parametric Study of Gas Entry Into Cemented Well-
bores, is available from the SPE Customer Services Dept.
180
This parametric study involved developing detailed equations for
three principal aspects of the gas-flow process: the physical properties
of the cement during the gelation-and-set period; the pressure loss in
a column of cement, taking into account the slurry properties and the
well parameters; and the influx of gas into the cement column.
Physical Properties of Cement
The loss of hydrostatic pressure within the annular column must oc-
cur before gas can enter. In this study, it was assumed that the hydro-
static pressure within the annular column exceeded the reservoir
pressure immediately after placement. Once the cement started to
gel, volume changes occurred; the hydrostatic pressure in the annu-
lar column decreased as a function of the basic characteristics of the
cement slurry as it gelled and sets. Equations were developed for
four key physical properties that affect the hydrostatic-pressure loss
in the column of cement: static-gel-strength development, hydra-
tion volume reduction, fluid loss to permeable formations, and
permeability of the gelling cement.
Slurry designs that try to address the issue of gas migration gener-
ally focus on one or more of the above properties. Some additives
used in slurries modifiy the static gel strength by using delayed gel-
ling or thixotropic characteristics. Most all of the gas migration ma-
terials effect the fluid loss of the cement. In addition, some latex ce-
ments are sold as low-permeability cements. Each of these
parameters will be described individually by mathematical equa-
tions; however, they are related to each other in the wellbore and
must be studied collectively.
Static Gel Strength. Static gel strength is a resistant force applied to
the wetted perimeter of the surface of the borehole and the pipe. Static
gel strength is the result of a small amount of hydration products be-
ing formed in the early stages of hydration. The values of importance
are those up to the initial set of the cement slurry. This initial set of
a cement slurry is the point at which the cement has some solid char-
acter and is generally defined as 50-psi compressive strength.
Compressive strength refers to the capability of the cement to sup-
port a compressive load (measured in force per unit area). Compres-
sive strength is the most common property used to describe the solid
characteristics of a hydrating cement. At some point in the cement-
hydration process, the cement slurry will have enough solid character
that the gas will not percolate up through the cement column. At what
gel strength this solidification will happen is unknown. It is assumed
that a cement slurry obtaining an initial set would prevent any addi-
tional gas from forming a channel in the matrix of the cement.
The only data available that relates static gel strength and com-
pressive strength for two cement slurries are shown in Table 1. This
table shows two different cement slurries having a compressive
strength of 250 and 200 psi, respectively, at the equivalent static gel
strength of 2,400 lbf/100 ft2 gel strength. Although this work con-
tains only two data points, a reasonable estimation of the initial set
value of static gel strength can be made for the purpose of this study.
From an extrapolation of the data in Table 1, it was assumed that a
static gel strength of 2,000 lbf/100 ft2 would be required to achieve
the 50-psi compressive-strength/initial-set value. This value was
used as the upper limit on the time for the analysis of the gas influx
into a cement column.
Figs. 1 and 2 show two types of static-gel-strength curves for two
typical cement slurries. The slurry in Fig. 1 has no inactive period
and a long, slow-developing static-gel-strength curve, while the
slurry in Fig. 2 has an extended inactive period and a very fast gela-
tion time. In this work, these slurries will be identified as slow-gel-
ling and delayed-gelling slurries, respectively. Both of the static gel
SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997


TABLE 1STATIC GEL STRENGTH VS. COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH

Static Gel Strength Compressive Strength

Slurry (lbf/100 ft) (psi)

A 2,400 250
B 2,400 200

strengths presented are typical of the slurries used in field operations

to cement gas wells.1,2
The data in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively can be described with equa-
tions in the form of
SSG +A)B(t))(t)3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
Fig. 1Static-gel development for slow-gelling slurry.
and SSG +[D)(F/t)]2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
where SSG is static gel strength (lbf/100 ft2), t is time (min), and A,
B, D, and F are constants for each slurry type.

Hydration Volume Reduction. Another important cement-slurry

property is hydration volume reduction. As cement gels, sets, and
develops compressive strength, hydration volume reduction occurs
when the hydration products formed by the chemical reaction
occupy less volume than the reactants. Although this volume reduc-
tion occurs in the cement, most of the reduction is manifested by in-
ternal reduction, not bulk volume reduction.3 When coupled with
static gel strength, this internal volume reduction can cause a drop
in the pressure in the cement column.
Five slurries were presented in Ref. 3 with the absolute volume
losses measured by some customized equipment. This volume re- Fig. 2Static-gel development for delayed-gelling slurry.
duction is very small during gelation times, with the average of the
five slurries being 0.08% at 200 lbf/100 ft2 gel strength to 0.5% at
initial set (2,000 lbf/100 ft2). Fig. 3 shows the hydration value re-
duction from Ref. 3 vs. static gel strength. From the data, an equa-
tion relating the hydration volume reduction to static gel strength
was developed as
VHR +A)B(SSG ) 0.5)C(SSG )3, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
where VHR is hydration volume reduction (vol%) and A, B, and C
are constants.

Fluid Loss to Permeable Formations. The estimation of downhole

fluid loss of cement slurry is critical in determining gas-entry volume.
Downhole fluid loss was estimated by use of a relationship
derived by Sutton and Ravi.4 This method takes into account the
static fluid loss of a cement slurry on top of a predeposited drilling
Fig. 3Hydration volume reduction.
fluid filter cake of a given thickness. Their fluid-loss estimates were
based on the equation
where kcs is the permeability of the cement slurry (md) and A and

V + 2 A fl C 2 C 22 t 1C 21 ) t t
0.5
* C 22 t 1C 21
0.5
, . . . . . . . . (4)
where V is the volume of filtrate (ft3), Af l is the area of fluid loss
(ft2), t t is the total time of fluid loss for cement (min), t1 is the time
of fluid loss for mud (min), and C1 and C2 are fluid-loss coefficients
for the drilling fluid and cement slurry, respectively.
Permeability of the Gelling Cement. As the cement starts to hy-
drate, not only does it start to develop static gel strength and undergo
hydration volume reduction, it also develops permeability. Sutton
and Sabins3 indicated that cement permeability can vary in light-
weight cement from 1,000 to 10 md as the SGS ranges from 200
lbf/100 ft2 to initial set while normal-density, low-fluid-loss ce-
ments can vary from 100 md at an SSG of 200 lbf/100 ft2 to less than
1 md at initial set.3
An equation that calculates the permeability vs. static gel strength
data was developed to be
kcs +A)B(SSG )2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
B are constants for different slurries.
The permeability of cement slurries can change dramatically de-
pending on the type of cement and additives used in the slurry. The
slurry permeability vs. static gel strength using the above equations
with Ref. 3 is provided in Figs. 4 and 5.
Permeability and Fluid-Loss Synergy. Even though the fluid loss
and the permeability of the cement slurry are discussed in separate
sections, the two properties are synergistic in nature. The lower the
permeability, typically the lower the fluid-loss value will be. Poly-
mers that are used in the cement slurries as fluid-loss control will
also have an effect on the permeability of the cement. The fluid loss
of the cement, however, is not just dependent on the cement slurry
itself. The mudcake that is already present on the formation can dra-
matically effect the cement-slurry fluid loss.
Pressure Loss in Gas Entry. The pressure loss in a column of ce-
ment is a function of several phenomena occurring simultaneously.
As described earlier, the cement undergoes static-gel-strength de-
velopment, experiences volume losses including both hydration

SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997 181

Fig. 4Permeability vs. static gel strength and time for high-
permeability slurry.
ZZvolume and fluid-loss volume, and develops permeability. The
pressure drop in the cement slurry during this time can be calculated
directly by relating the permeability and the flow of interstitial water
through the permeability to compensate for the hydration and fluid-
loss volume reductions and the static gel strength. If a permeable
system is present, the flow of fluids through a linear matrix is gov-
erned by Darcys equation. Darcys equation can be rearranged to
calculate the pressure drop that corresponds to the volumetric flow
of fluids with constant media and fluid properties, as shown in
DP+0.55 QmDL/k Acs , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6)
where DP is the differential pressure for flow (psi), Q is the volu-
metric flow rate (ft3/min), m is the viscosity of fluid flowing (cp), DL
is the length between flowing zones (ft), k is the permeability (md),
and Acs is the flowing cross-sectional area (ft2). The pressure differ-
ential across the length of the cement column can be calculated from
DP+(4 SSG DLc )/De , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
where DP is the pressure drop (psi), DLc is the length of cement (ft),
and De is the effective diameter (in.). Eq. 7 is the basic relationship
for calculating the pressure drop resulting from static gel strength.
During the gelation period of the cement slurry, the volume losses
occurring from both hydration and fluid loss to the permeable
formations produce a flow system in the matrix of the cement. The
total amount of flow of the interstitial water in the cement column
will be governed by the permeability and limited to a total pressure
drop allowed by the static gel strength. The static gel strength will
limit the pressure drop for the flow of interstitial water in the matrix
of the cement.
Any volume change occurring downhole that could produce a
larger pressure loss than that given by Eq. 7 will produce a move-
ment in the whole column of cement (a drop in the column of cement
slurry as well as in the fluid column above the cement column). This
equation assumes that the fluid on top of the cement slurry in the
well will not provide any resistance to water flow through the matrix
of the cement and will supply a source of interstitial fluid above the
cement column. If volume losses occurring in the cement produce
a potential pressure loss less than that allowed by the static gel
strength, the actual pressure drop in the cement will only be a func-
tion of Eq. 6. Thus, Eqs. 6 and 7 must be considered before the actual
pressure drop can be calculated.
For calculation of the actual pressure drop throughout a column of
cement with time under realistic downhole conditions, the physical
relationships between the fluid-loss zones and the gas-entry zone
must also be considered. The total volume of fluid lost to the forma-
tion as filtrate and the hydration volume reduction must be compen-
sated for by interstitial fluid flow through the matrix of the cement.
The volumetric flow of the interstitial water through the matrix of the
cement will change at different locations in the annulus. The top por-
tion of the cement will require a rate of water through the cement
permeability equal to all the volume losses in the well below that
point. All portions of the cement column lower in the well will have
all the volume losses, minus any losses occurring above that point.
When the cement slurry is first placed in the annular space, it will
transmit all of its hydrostatic pressure. The hydrostatic pressure
182
Fig. 5Permeablility vs. static gel strength and time for low-
permeability slurry.
should be greater than the high-pressure gas zone. At this time, an
overbalance exists on the fluid-loss zones and the gas zones. As a
result, filtrate will be lost to each zone as a function of the thickness
of the mudcake deposited on each zone (before cementing) and the
differential pressure. During the inactive gelation period of the ce-
ment (when the slurry has no static gel strength), no pressure is lost
in the column. During this time, a cement filter cake is being depos-
ited on top of an already existing mudcake and the downhole fluid-
loss rate will decrease with time. This decrease is caused by the in-
creasing thickness of the highly impermeable filter cake.
During the active-gel-strength period, the cement column begins
to lose hydrostatic pressure according to the limits of the static-gel-
strength equation and the permeability equation. This rate of inter-
stitial water flow can be used to calculate the pressure drop from Eq.
6. If this pressure drop is larger than that calculated by Eq. 7, the
pressure drop from Eq. 7 is used to calculate the volume of intersti-
tial water flow at the new pressure differential in Eq. 6. Any excess
volume above this calculated volume will be compensated for by the
whole cement column moving. If the pressure drop calculated from
the total interstitial water flow is less than the pressure drop allowed
by Eq. 7, the interstitial flow occurs at the calculated pressure drop
and the bulk cement does not move.
Once the hydrostatic pressure of the cement column across from
the gas zone decreases to the gas-zone pressure, gas can enter the
annulus. At constant pressure, we can assume that the total volume
in the annulus across from the gas zone divided by the total moles
in the annulus is a constant. If it is assumed that the moles of gas en-
tering are very small compared to the existing water and cement,
then the volume of gas entering into the cement column can be
approximated by the volume of fluid lost in the cement column
across from it.
Simulator Structure and Operation
Once the equations were developed to describe not only the physical
properties of the cement slurry, but also the interaction of the various
well parameters as to the gas entry, a study was undertaken to deter-
mine the sensitivity of different variables on the ultimate gas entry
into the cemented wellbore.
All of the parameters were studied by a simulator that used the
previously developed equations to predict the quantity of gas that
enters a cemented wellbore. This was accomplished by a Fortran-
language computer program capable of simulating any cementing
scenario. Fig. 6 shows a well schematic indicating the approach
used for the simulator. A drilling-fluid column of any length in con-
junction with a cement column of any length can be studied. Two
fluid-loss zones of any length can be placed above and below a gas
zone of any length. The physical location of the fluid-loss zone to
the gas zone and to the top of cement and total depth can be varied.
It is very important to be able to simulate a fluid-loss zone above and
below the gas zone so that volume loss in these zones can be re-
flected by gas volume entering the annulus. The proximity of the
fluid-loss zone could have a dramatic effect on the gas entry. The
fluid loss in each zone can be varied with the fluid-loss properties
of the drilling fluid and cement and the pore pressure of the forma-
SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997



TABLE 2SAMPLE WELL DATA

Drilling-fluid density 75.55 lbm/ft3
Cement density 118.18 lbm/ft3

Time for the mudcake 60 minutes

Length of the cement column 2,500 ft
Concentration of solids in the mud 32.0 lb/ft3

Concentration of solids in the cement 121.3 lb/ft3

Viscosity of the filtrate 0.0239 lbm/(ft-s)

Mudcake resistance factor 5.0 E+13
Cement-cake resistance factor 5.0 E+13

Pressure factor for mud 0.600

Pressure factor for cement 0.8
Mudcake density 122.9 lbm/ft3

Cement-cake density 140.0 lbm/ft3

Mud-solids density 263.6 lbm/ft3
Cement-solids density 195.6 lbm/ft3

Hydrostatic pressure of mud above cement 3,407 psi

Top of cement 6,500 ft
Top of Fluid-Loss Zone1 7,000 ft

Bottom of Fluid-Loss Zone 1 7,300 ft

Top of gas zone 8,000 ft

Bottom of gas zone 8,300 ft
Fig. 6Well schematic for calculations. Well temperature 180F

Top of Fluid-Loss Zone 2 8,500 ft

tion. The pressure of the gas zone can be set to simulate any overbal- Bottom of Fluid-Loss Zone 2 8,700 ft
ance pressure desired. Pressure of Fluid-Loss Zone 1 3,100 psi

Pressure of the gas zone 4,519 psi

Example of Simulator Results Pressure of Fluid-Loss Zone 2 3,767 psi
Total depth of well 9,000 ft

Input data and results for all the simulations showed a summary of Hole size 7.5 in.
the various parameters studied vs. the total volume of gas that en-

Pipe size 5.5 in.
tered.6 The various parameters were studied in two types of situa-
Gelling characteristics slow-gelling

tions. The maximum and minimum values for seven different pa-
rameters were studied in Runs 1 through 128. These were used so Permeability characteristics low-permeability

equation
that a wide range of values could be studied. In Runs 129 through
Overbalance pressure 200 psi

155, the various parameters other than maximums and minimums
were investigated, as well as slurry permeabilities of fixed values.
Parameters that were studied are fluid loss of the cement slurry,
static gel strength, slurry permeability, size of the fluid-loss zone be-
low the gas migration zone, geometries, cement-column length, and
overbalance pressure.
The downhole cement-slurry fluid loss values ranged from 0.014
and 0.32 cm3/min per API area with 400 psi applied pressure. The
slurries used for the static-gel-strength development were the two
slurries described in the static-gel-strength section, the slow-gelling
slurry and the delayed-gelling slurry.
Two different slurries having different permeability vs. static gel
strength were used. The size of the fluid-loss zones below the gas
zone were 100 to 400 ft, while the annular clearances were tested
from 1.5 in to 4 in. The pipe size was kept the same and the hole size
was changed to adjust the annular clearance. The cement column
length above the gas zone was tested from 600 to 2,000 ft while the
overbalance pressure was 100 to 900 psi.
Fluid loss of cement 0.101 cm3/API
area (400 psi)
A detail of Computer Run 129 will be provided as an example of
the data that was obtained on all the runs. The input data used in this
simulation is shown in Table 2.
The first portion of Table 2 shows the input data needed to calcu-
late the fluid loss under downhole conditions. The second section
shows the well parameters used, and the third section provides the
hole and pipe sizes used in the simulation. Additional data, like the
gelling and permeability characteristics and the overbalance pres-
sure, are listed. All the information in this table is input data with the
exception of the downhole fluid-loss rate of the cement, which is
calculated in the program.
The pressure profiles of the example well as a function of time are
shown in Fig 7. These profiles are for points at Fluid-Loss Zone 1,
which is above the gas zone; the gas zone itself; and Fluid-Loss

Fig. 7Pressure loss vs. time for all zones. Fig. 8Fluid-loss rate at each zone vs. time.

SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997 183

 Fig. 9Drop of column vs. time.
Zone 2, which is below the gas zone. The pressure loss shown is the
hydrostatic-pressure loss in the column of cement accross from the
fluid-loss zone.
In this example, the Fluid-Loss Zone 1 was located at 7,000 ft, and
had a 500-ft cement coulmn above it, while Fluid-Loss Zone 2 was
located at 8,500 ft, and had a 2,000-ft cement column above it. Each
fluid-loss zone had a pore pressure equivalent to that of water, while
the gas zone had a pressure slightly below the hydrostatic pressure of
the drilling fluid (in this case, the density of the drilling fluid was 10.1
lbm/gal). In the slurry across from each fluid-loss zone, the pressure
fell to the pore pressure of the formation at different times. After
placement, the slurry across from the gas zone had a pressure greater
than the formation pressure (200 psi). The cement slurry across from
the gas zone decreased fairly rapidly because the gelation and the vol-
ume reductions (both from fluid loss) and the hydration of the cement
were ongoing. Once the slurry across from the gas zone decreased to
the formation pressure, the gas began to enter the cemented annulus.
The fluid-loss rates at each zone are shown in Fig. 8. The fluid-
loss rate for Zone 2 starts higher, but quickly becomes lower because
of the significant drop in the hydrostatic pressure as shown in Fig.7.
When the cement-slurry pressure falls to the formation pressure
and fluid loss is continuing, any volume losses below the gas zone
above that required to reach the pressure restriction caused by static
gel strength will result in a substantial amount of gas entering the
cement. Zone 1 continued to have fluid loss up to about 130 minutes,
while Zone 2 and the gas zone equalized pressure in 90 and 30 min-
utes, respectively.
Figs. 9 and 10 show the drop in the cement column and the total
amount of gas that entered the wellbore. The combination of gela-
tion, volume reduction, and slurry permeability works collectively
to allow the hydrostatic pressure to drop and gas to enter the cement
column. Any volume above those losses needed to decrease the po-
tential pressure drop resulting from static gel strength will manifest
itself in a drop in the cement column immediately after the cement
slurry is placed, and continues throughout the gelation of the cement
slurry. The behavior of the column drop slows down with time. The
gas volume increases very rapidly as soon as the hydrostatic pres-
sure decreases to the formation pressure. This rapid gas-influx rate
decreases when the volume losses in the fluid-loss zone decrease.
Fig. 10 indicates that the gas-entry rate was rapid, between 30 to
90 minutes, and then slowed significantly. These results correspond
to the downhole fluid-loss rate of Zone 2 shown in Fig. 8. The down-
hole fluid-loss rate at 30 minutes was about 0.135 cm3/min and con-
tinued to decrease until 90 minutes. At 90 minutes, the pressure in the
cement column across from the gas zone was equal to the formation
pressure. After this time, additional volume losses and resulting gas-
entry volumes were caused by hydration volume reductions only.
Parametric Study
The development of the numerical simulator yielded a convenient
method to analyze gas influx into a cement column by studying the
important variables in the process. The parameters studied during
the analysis were: fluid loss of the drilling fluid and the cement
slurry under downhole conditions, static gel strength of the cement
184
Fig. 10Gas volume vs. time.
slurry, permeability of the gelling cement, geometries of the hole
and pipe size, overbalance pressure, and length of the cement col-
umn above the gas-entry zone. The results of the parametric study
are detailed in the following sections.
Downhole Fluid Loss. The fluid loss of the cement slurry is a key
parameter in the gas migration process that can be adjusted and con-
trolled by fluid-loss additives in the slurry. The fluid loss in this in-
vestigation was studied at several different levels, from a low down-
hole fluid-loss rate of 0.03 cm3/min per API area to a high downhole
fluid-loss rate of 1.0 cm3/min per API area. All the fluid-loss values
are reported in cubic centimeters per minute (the average of the first
10 minutes) on the test area of the API test cell with 400-psi pressure
applied even though the downhole fluid loss was not at 400 psi. This
representation was used so that relative fluid-loss values could be
compared even though the downhole fluid-loss changed continually
with pressure and time as the cake built up.
Fig. 11 shows how the downhole fluid-loss rate of the cement
slurry affects the total amount of gas that enters the annulus. In this
case, all the parameters were maintained constant with only the
downhole fluid-loss rates varying. The size of the fluid-loss zones
were all the same, so the comparison of the fluid-loss rates was the
same as comparing the downhole volumes. The variation in the gas-
entry volume was very significant, ranging from less than l ft3 at
0.032 cm3/min to more than 9 ft3 at a downhole fluid-loss rate of
1.01 cm3/min. This graph indicates that the amount of gas that enters
the annulus is related to the fluid loss of the cement.
Estimating the downhole fluid-loss volume of the cement slurry
with laboratory fluid-loss values without considering the effects of
the mudcake interaction can be deceiving. The mudcake permeabil-
ity (related to the fluid loss of the drilling fluid) and the thickness of
the cake deposited on the formations plays a significant role in the
downhole fluid-loss volume of the cement. It is also important to
realize that the total downhole fluid-loss volume is also a function
of the amount of permeable formation available to accept the fluid
lost from the cement slurry. All the simulation runs shown in Fig. 11
had 800 ft of permeable open hole. The fluid-loss-zone thickness
above the gas zone was 300 ft, the gas-zone thickness was 300 ft,
Fig. 11Gas volume vs. fluid loss.
SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997

TABLE 3FLUID-LOSS COMPARISON
Gas Volume for Low Gas Volume for High
Fluid-Loss Rate* Fluid-Loss Rate**
Set/Run (ft3) (ft3)
A/9, 10 0.49 7.12
B/17, 18 0.59 2.42
C/25, 26 0.85 8.21
D/33, 34 0.27 1.97
E/49, 50 0.7 3.72
F/57, 58 1.14 13.4
*0.014 cm3/min
**0.32 cm3/min
and the fluid-loss-zone thickness below the gas zone was 200 ft. As
the borehole changed size, the downhole fluid-loss volume also
changed, even with the same laboratory fluid-loss values.
Table 3 summarizes representative results from the study focus-
ing on the downhole fluid-loss rates. For each data set, the only vari-
able that changed between the runs was the fluid-loss rate, as all the
other parameters were held constant. The downhole fluid-loss rates
used were 0.014 cm3/min for the low fluid loss and 0.32 cm3/min
for the high fluid-loss data. It is obvious that the downhole fluid-loss
rates of the drilling fluid-cement slurry combination is very signifi-
cant, and in some cases, it dramatically increases the gas volumes.
Although fluid loss of the cement is typically considered an im-
portant property of the cement slurry, no one has quantified how sig-
nificant the downhole fluid loss is. Because of the extreme changes
of the gas volumes with changes in the fluid loss, the downhole
fluid-loss rate should be considered a major driving force for gas
entry and gas migration. Any technique to determine gas-flow se-
verity that does not include a fluid-loss factor may not accurately
represent field conditions.
Permeability of the Gelling Cement. The effect of cement slurry
permeability was studied in two ways. First, computer simulations
were conducted where the permeability changed with respect to the
static gel strength. Two different permeability/static-gel-strength
relationships were used. In these simulations, the permeability of
the cement slurry changed continually from the highest value at
small static gel strengths to low values at high static gel strengths.
Next, computer simulations using a constant permeability through-
out the gelation time from l to 5,000 md were conducted.
Fig. 12 shows the effect of the slurry permeability in the ranges
just described in relation to the gas volume that enters the cement
column. Three different series of tests with constant slurry and well
parameters (except for slurry permeability) are shown. Series l tests
were Computer Runs 62, 147, 148, and 149. Series 2 tests were
Computer Runs 46, 150, 151, and 152. Series 3 tests were Computer
Runs 38, 153, 154, and 155.
In each series, all the parameters used in the simulations were the
same except for the permeability. As the results indicate, the perme-
ability had little or no effect on the ultimate gas-volume amount that
entered into the cement column except in Series 1. In Series 1, the
well and the cement-slurry parameters were very severe and indi-
cated a very high gas-volume influx. Series 1 results combined the
parameters of downhole fluid-loss volume, cement-column length,
Fig. 12Gas volume vs. permeability.
SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997
TABLE 4EFFECT OF STATIC-GEL-STRENGTH
DEVELOPMENT ON GAS ENTRY
Gas Volume for Gas Volume for
Slow-Gelling Slurry Delayed-Gelling Slurry
(ft3) (ft3)
Set/Run
A/2, 4 1.98 0.28
B/10, 12 7.1 0.526
C/26, 28 8.21 1.13
D/34, 36 1.97 0.22
E/58, 60 13.4 1.48
F/106, 108 2.68 0.175
and annular clearance to create a situation that would not be encoun-
tered in any but a few gas-migration situations. In Series 2 and 3, the
gas volumes only changed a minor amount as the permeability var-
ied from 1 to 5,000 md.
Permeability of the gelling cement is one of the factors that many
in the industry believe is a major contributor to the influx of gas. It
is true that the cement slurry can have a substantially different
permeability depending on the slurry makeup. This permeability in
the cement is necessary for the cement slurry to lose hydrostatic
pressure; however, in the range of values tested here (1 to 5,000 md),
it does appear not to change the gas volume that enters a cement an-
nulus in most cases. Lowering the permeability does not appear to
alter the cement slurrys capability to control gas migration.
Static Gel Strength of the Cement Slurry. The static-gel-strength
development of a cement slurry should be an important parameter
in gas entry because many of the cement-slurry properties depend
on it. Slurries with two types of static gel strength were tested in this
study. These were a slow-gelling slurry and a delayed-gelling slurry.
Table 4 shows a comparison of several computer runs when all the
other parameters were the same for each data set. The slow-gelling
slurry indicated a significant increase in the gas volume when
compared to the delayed-gelling cement slurry. The delayed-gelling
cement slurry generally had a lower gas-volume influx as a result of
a long, inactive gelling time. This long, delayed-gelling time allows
the cement to lose filtrate, but does not allow any drop in pressure
or gas influx. During this time, the cement filter cake builds up,
which lowers the downhole fluid-loss rate when the volume losses
in the well are contributing to the gas flow.
Although the gel-strength development of a cement slurry has
been considered significant to the gas-migration process, no one has
investigated which specific gelation characteristics help prevent gas
invasion. It is clear from the results shown here that the preferred
gelation profile for a cement slurry to limit gas entry is one that has
a delayed gelation time.
Overbalance Pressure on the Gas Formation. The well parame-
ters associated with gas influx in a well are important because they
can have a great effect on the gas influx. The overbalance pressure
is defined as the original hydrostatic pressure in the cement column,
minus the gas-formation pressure. The technique of increasing
overbalance pressure in the cement column has been used to prevent
the gas-migration problem. In theory, the higher the overbalance
pressure, the more pressure drop will be needed to reach the gas res-
ervoir pressure, and the longer the time for the cement slurry to de-
velop the solid characteristics to prevent entry and flow. In this
study, overbalance pressures of 100 to 900 psi were used to investi-
gate this effect. These values were chosen as representative high and
low values typically observed in gas wells. The overbalance pres-
sure was changed only by changing the gas reservoir pressure,
which allowed other parameters like cement density and hydrostatic
pressure to be the same.
Fig. 13 shows the effect of the overbalance pressure vs. gas volume
for two different situations. Series 1 combines the results from Com-
puter Runs 129, 139, 140, 141, and 142. Series 2 used data from Com-
puter Runs 30, 143, 144, 145, and 146. In each series, the well and
slurry parameters are the same except for the overbalance pressure.
185
 Fig. 13Gas volume vs. overbalance pressure.
From the results shown in Fig. 13, it is evident that the overbal-
ance pressure is a critical parameter that significantly affects the gas
volume. In Series 2, the overbalance pressures of 100 and 200 psi
provided a substantial gas volume, while any overbalance pressure
of 400 psi and greater showed about the same amount of gas influx.
Apparently a critical overbalance pressure must be achieved to limit
the gas-entry volume. In this case, the critical overbalance pressure
was 400 psi. In wells with different parameters, this value would
probably change. In Series 1 the overbalance-pressure change did
not affect the gas volumes as much as in Series 2. This result is not
surprising because the well conditions in Series 1 did not allow large
volumes to enter the wellbore.
Overbalance pressure has been used by some in the industry5 to
analyze the potential for gas entry. Those authors suggest that in-
creasing the overbalance pressure would decrease the gas-entry vol-
ume. This work appears to confirm that observation.
Length of the Cement Coulmn. For the study, 600-ft, 1,500-ft, and
2,000-ft cement columns were used. These lengths represent only
the length of the cement column above the gas formation. Table 5
shows a comparison of some representative results generated from
computer runs using 600-ft and 2,000-ft cement-column lengths.
The simulator results used in each set have all the same parameters.
This condition was accomplished by changing the formation pres-
sures to compensate for the cement-column-length changes, keep-
ing the overbalance pressure the same. In most cases, the gas vol-
ume associated with the 2,000-ft column results were higher than
the 600-ft results. In Sets A and B, the gas volumes were not very
large, and the resulting changes in gas volumes with cement column
length were small. In Data Set C, the gas volume from the 2,000-ft
column was almost the same as the 600-ft-column gas volume. In
Data Sets D and E, the gas volume for the 2,000-ft column was sub-
stantially more than the 600-ft-column gas volumes.
The data in Table 5 indicate that the cement column does have
some effect on the gas-entry volume in most well scenarios. The
longer the cement column, the larger the gas-volume influx. The
higher the magnitude of gas volumes entering the cement column,
the more the cement-column length affects the gas volume.
Downhole Geometry. The hole and pipe size should be a major fac-
tor in the loss of hydrostatic pressure and ultimate gas-volume in-
flux into a cement column. In this study, the pipe diameter was kept
TABLE 5EFFECT OF CEMENT-COLUMN LENGTH
ON GAS ENTRY
Gas Volume for 600-ft Gas Volume for 2,000-ft
Cement Column Cement Column
Set/Run (ft3) (ft3)
A/74, 98 0.14 0.22
B/90, 120 0.30 0.53
C/2, 34 1.98 1.97
D/18, 50 2.42 3.72
E/26, 58 8.21 13.40
186
Fig. 14Gas volume vs. annular clearance.
at 5.5 in. and the hole size was varied to achieve the annular clear-
ance. When the hole size was changed, the total fluid-loss volume
also changed because of the increased formation surface area. The
additional volume loss resulted in increased gas influx.
Fig. 14 shows a representative plot of gas volume vs. annular
clearance for several of the simulator runs. The data points used had
the same well and slurry parameters, so the effect of the annular
clearance could be studied. The annular clearances tested varied
from 1 to 6 in. The data clearly show that as the annular clearance
increased, the gas volume also increased. This observation is con-
trary to the observations of Sutton et al.,5 who predicted that the in-
crease in annular clearance should decrease the gas-flow severity.
The authors only took into account the gelation of the cement and
overbalance pressure in the system. This work included the effect
of the total downhole fluid-loss volume. The increase in the hole
size and subsequent increase in fluid-loss volume when the annular
clearance increased was more significant than the small drop in hy-
drostatic pressure caused by cement gelation. This result may ex-
plain why some of the worst gas-flow situations have been encoun-
tered in shallow-surface pipe cementing, where the hole size is large
and the drilling fluid typically has a high downhole fluid-loss value.
Conclusions
This study involved determining cement-slurry properties and
downhole properties that affect the pressure drop and gas entry into
a cemented wellbore.
The following conclusions and observations were made.
1. Downhole fluid-loss volume is an important slurry parameter
that affects the gas influx into the cement column.
2. The static gel strength of the cement slurry is a critical property
that greatly affects the gas entry into a cemented annulus. The ce-
ment slurry that has a delayed-gelling profile is much preferred over
the slow-gelling cement slurry.
3. The geometries of the well in question do affect the amount of
gas that enters the annulus. The larger the hole size, and thus the
larger the annular clearance, the greater the gas influx will be.
4. The overbalance pressure is also a very significant factor in the
volume of gas that enters the wellbore. The larger the overbalance,
the smaller the amount of gas that will enter.
5. The length of the cement column usually does affect the gas
volumes that enter the annulus. The longer the cement column, the
larger the quantity of gas that will enter the cement column.
6. The cement-slurry permeability is not a significant factor for
gas entry into the cement, except in severe gas-migration situations.
Field Recommendations. To apply the conclusions to a real gas-
migration senario, one must optimize which parameters can be realis-
tically changed. All of the above parameters can affect the amount of
gas that enters the wellbore, but some can be altered more easily than
others. With the well parameters, for example, the length of the ce-
ment column can be easier to adjust than the hole and pipe size. The
overbalance pressure can be adjusted with heavier cement slurries or
by applying back pressure at the surface. The cement-coulmn length
can be shortened by use of a multistage cementing tool, as long as the
SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997
hydrostatic pressure is not significatly altered. With the slurry proper-
ties in mind the permeability of the cement slurries are not routinely
measured, so that parameter may also be difficult. Typically, the
slurry properties like fluid loss and static gel strength are the easist to
optimize, although static gel strength is not routinely measured.
References
1. Sabins, F.L., Tinsley, J.M., and Sutton, D.L.: Transition Time of Cement
Slurries between the Fluid and Set State, paper SPE 9285, presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 2124 Sep-
tember 1980.
2. Sykes, R.L. and Logan, J.L.: New Technology in Gas Migration Con-
trol, paper SPE 16653 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Confer-
ence and Exhibition, Dallas, 2730 September 1987.
3. Sutton, D.L. and Sabins, F.L.: Interrelationship Between Critical Cement
Properties and Volume Changes During Cement Setting, paper SPE
20451 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
New Orleans, 2326 September 1990.
4. Sutton, D.L. and Ravi, K.M.: New Method for Determining Downhole
Properties that Affect Gas Migration and Annular Sealing, paper SPE
19520 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, 811 October 1989.
5. Sutton, D.L., Sabins, F.L., and Faul, R.: Preventing Annular Gas Flow,
Oil & Gas J., Part 1 (10 December 1984), Part 2 (17 December 1984).
6. Sabins, F.L., and Wiggins, M.L.: Supplement to SPE 28472, Parametric
Study of Gas Entry Into Cemented Wellbores, paper SPE 39494 avail-
able from SPE, Richardson, Texas.
Fred Sabins has 18 years of experience in the petroleum service
industry with worldwide field and laboratory experience in ce
menting and engineering applications. He worked for 16 years in
cementing research with Halliburton Energy Services, where he
was manager of the cementing materials research. He is current
ly a cementing technology manager with Westport Technology
Center Intl. He has authored more than 30 papers and has nine
patents on a variety of cementing topics. His areas of expertise
include hightemperature/highpressure applications, gas
migration through cement, largescale mud displacement proj
ects, bulk bending and sampling, acoustic and ultrasonic evalu
ation tools, computer modeling, and special additive develop
ment. His education includes an MS degree in petroleum
engineering from the U. of Oklahoma (1992) and a BS degree in
chemical engineering from New Mexico State U. (1978). Michael
L. Wiggins is an assistant professor of petroleum and geological
engineering at the U. of Oklahoma, where he specializes in the
areas of production operations, reservoir management, and en
vironmental issues. He holds BS, ME, and PhD degrees in petro
leum engineering from Texas A&M U. He is a member of the Engi
neering Registration Committee, and was the U. of Oklahoma
SPE Student Chapter faculty adviser from 1991 to 1996.

SI Metric Conversion Factors

Sabins Wiggins
ft 3.048* E*01 +m
ft2 9.290 304* E*02 +m2
ft3 2.831 685 E*02 +m3
F (F*32)/1.8 +C
gal 3.785 412 E*03 +m3
in. 2.54* E)00 +cm
lbf 4.448 222 E)00 +N
lbf/ft2 4.788 026 E*02 +KPa
lbm 4.535 924 E*01 +kg
md 9.869 233 E*04 +mm2
psi 6.894 757 E)00 +kPa
*Conversion factor is exact. SPEDC

SPE Drilling & Completion, September 1997 187