SPE 37821 ‘Society of Peoleum Engineers Well Cements That Reduce ROP: (Rate of Penetration) S.S. Jennings, SPE, Saudi Aramco Cony 197 Sco ot Patoun Engrs Sos Sesh rina street mere Set renter ope gms Ee Shame tentes w mares oat eee easy SEE a nee baie epee Siete cigeteamets peace a {or commarcatpurposeo wiioa we wii conser tte Socey of Paina Engle cep notemimam same maearsaartass Cae Sane gy at" nace Sam acer Rime see See ABSTRACT ‘The use of horizontal drilling to re-enter existing wells has been put into practice. The benefits of horizontal drilling are ‘numerous. 1) improved depletion of reservoir (increased drainage area), 2) reduced water and gas coning, 3) improved production rates. This paper describes an economical labora- {ory drilling apparatus used in the evaluation of rate of pene- tration (ROP) for core and cement drilling. Various cement formulations and materials were tested to reduce ROP in order to obtain a successful short radius side-track. The scope of the ‘work for this project includes: 1) rill press selection, design and modification, 2) drill bit design, 3) drilling fluid selection, 4) study of ROP on cement densification by dispersant, 5) ROP of cores from zone tobe side-tracked, 6) effect of mate- rial composition and concentration on ROP and 7) effect of material size on ROP. During this project, relationships of cement sonic strength measurements verses ROP were made for various cement formulations. Procedures were developed forthe drilling of cements or cores with the ROP simulator. Drilling fluid selection was determined by solubility data from the core samples from the zone in which the side-tack is per- formed, Drili bit efficiency data was applied to define the cor- recied ROP of used dril bits. This data was used to evaluate ROP measurements after the drill bits were partially used, The development of the ROP simulator has given a new under~ standing of what physical parameters control ROP in well cements 513, INTRODUCTION In Seudi Arabia, old wells are being re-entered and completed horizontally to maximize ol recovery. Short radius wells are being planned for these applications. The zone in which the initial sidetracking is taking place is the eap rock (Anhydrite) directly above the Arab-D. (Fig. 1) Plug cementing often does not get the specific atention re- 4uired to perform a more successful job. Generally, lab test on field samples for plugging operations is not done. Heath- rman! etal developed a “Recommended Plug Procedure” to successfully achieve sidetracks in one problem area where 5 to 12 plugs where set for a kickoff. Other cement plugging sue- cesses are also documented.” Most well cement laboratories are equipped wit standard API *testing equipment. These lab equipment and data from these tests are used to help determine physical properties of liquid cements (sluries) and set cements. API testing equipment is good for standard type of testing such as thickening time, uid loss, free fluid, ete. However, more realistic data can be ob- tained when the job procedures, sequences, and operations are more closely simulated. Drilling rate of penetration is one parameter that is used by drilling rig personnel to determine hardness of cement. Inthe lab, the compressive strength (or sonic strength) data are used to estimate the resistance to <ériling (hardness). I is usually assumed that a higher com- pressive strength cement will have a lower ROP. A driling device was constructed to help understand ROP of set cement. This device was constructed from a manually operated core plugging type drill press. (Fig. 2) BACKGROUND Project Outline ‘The major goal for this study was to develop a cement that ‘would have a ROP less than that of the zone tobe sidetracked. The theory we worked on was “the more resistant the cement isto drilling (ROP) the better chance of successfully steering the drill string*, George presents & similar theory stating that[s.S. JENNINGS) [SPE 37821] “Ideally, a high-strength cement is placed in a lower strength formation: The Anhydrite cap rock directly above the pro- ‘ducing zone was the lithologic location where the sidetracking ‘was to occur. This Anhydrite formation was not considered @ Tower strength (high ROP) formation, Goals For This Project Listed below were the major areas of work performed for this study Develop a functional ROP testing device that would more closely simulate actual well happenings. Develop a target ROP from selected core samples ‘Compare ROP deta with cement densification. Evaluate material sources that when added to cement will reduce ROP. Determine a base cement design that would be used es a standard for all material testing Determine guidelines for waiting on cement (WOC) Develop a cement that would have a ROP less than that of the Anhydrite Recommend altematives in the form of cement slurries, for side tracking in Anhydrite ROP Simulator Design Considerations The following parameters were considered prior to building, the ROP simulator: Functional Design Drill Bit Rotational Rate ‘Weight On Bit (Constant) Drill Bit Design (Diamond Type) Functional Design. Laboratory design / simulation of field conditions is never perfect. The functional design requirement ofthe ROP device ‘was for a bench top design. Drilling fluid volumes were re- quired to be lab manageable. There was also a requirement for some similarity of ROP of the lab apparatus and a drilling rig. Ifa 118 PCF (lbs.t?) cement drills at 6.0-8,0 Fuhr then the lab drill press shoutd also perform similarly. The drill bit rotates at 80-100 RPMs while attempting to sidetrack this hole sec- tion. The lab device also should rotate the drill bit at those rates. Weight on bit could not be simulated, due to practical constraints of working in the lab. However, weight on the bit ‘was varied to achieve similar ROPS as compared to field drilling rates The drill bit design requirement was to be simi- Jar toa drill bit used in the fel. Drill Bit Rotational Rate. The standard rotational speed for drilling this Anhycrite see- tion is 80-100 revolutions per minute (RPMs). Initial efforts were made with a standard coring type drill press, fitted with a single phase 110 volt 60 Hz motor rated at 0.50 HP and 1725 514 RPMs. The motor powered the dril bit through a bell-pulley mechanism which allows the rotational drilling speed to be varied between 470 and 1950 RPMs by changing the belt= pulley configuration. However, it was desirable to perform the test at 80-100 RPMS, which was below the rotational speed available with the original dril press. The 110 volt single phase motor was replaced with a three phase 230 volt 60 Hz ‘motor with a variable speed motor controller. This motor was rated at 0.75 HP and 3450 RPMs, The motor controller al- lowed the drilling rotational speed to be reduced to 80-100 RPMs. When the drill bit encountered obstacles or the drilling resistance increased, the larger three phase motor and the vari able speed controller maintained the speed within 11 % or 10 RPMs, Weight On Bit (Constant). id weight on bit values could not easly be simulated in the Jab. Nor could hydrostatic or pump pressure. A simple pulley device was constructed. A 9.0” radius pulley was fabricated and atached tothe dril bit lowering shaft A 8.16 Kg weight ‘was hung over the pulley set to distribute constant weight on the bit Fig. 2) Normal water ratio cement, 118 PCF_ was riled at 6.40 ft/he) comparable to drilling rig ROPs for neat cement. Drill Bit Design (Diamond Type). AA practical yet economical drill bit was designed for use on this project. A cone bit was not feasible due to the small size required. A diamond coring type bit was used forall drilling applications during this stady. (Fig, 3) Circulation through the middle ofthe bit was a requirement for the design ofthe Ari bit. New and used (47.6% efficient) diamond dril bits are shown on Figure 4. Drilling Fluid Selection Previous work by Ezzat and Al-Ammari’ was used to select, the drilling fluid for all ROP testing. Cement with fracturing proppants were tested in the selected water based drilling fluid. Drill bit efficiency tests were performed with neat ce- ment using fresh water as the drilling fuid ‘Numerous Anhyérite samples were taken and cut into 0.25" X 0.25" X 1.00" rectangular prisms, The samples were then ‘weighed. These sample were placed in stainless steel screen ‘cages and put in various mud samples for hot rolling. The samples were hot rolled for 16 hours at 235 °F and 500 psi N;. ‘Then samples were removed and weight loss recorded. The water based drilling fluid recipe that dissolved the least amount of Anhydrite sample during the test period was the selected to drill all cement and core samples. During the drilling of high angle wells, gauge hole should be maintained in order to sustain three point contact for more accurate de- Viation angle measurements. Water based drilling fluid was selected due to environmental consideration,SPE 37821 WELL CEMENTS THAT REDUCE ROP: (Rate of Penetration 3 ROP TARGET DETERMINATION Anhydrite core samples from 5 wells were collected from core storage. The samples were then cut into 2 inch sections. Fif= teen total core sections were drilled for ROP analysis. Com- prehensive ROP data from the drilled cores is displayed on Table 1 ROP & Cement Densification Itis generally thought shat the more dense the cement, the slower the drilling rate. Tis is logical because the heavier the ‘cement, the higher the solids to water ratio, and the higher the ‘compressive / sonic strength. Fig. S shows the effect of dens fying the cement slurries and the final effect on rate of pene- tration. Fig 6 shows the sonic compressive strength of cement ‘without proppants. An approximate reduction in ROP of 20% vwas observed by densifying the cement, Cements were densi fied by the addition of dispersants and the reduction of water up to 136 PCF for this study. For cement slurries with densi- ties greater than 136 PCF, Hematite was added to achieve the higher densities. Cement with only fine ground Hematite re- diuced the cement drilling ROP to approximately 4 fs. (Fig. 5 Evaluation Of Materials That Reduce ROP ‘The theory employed was “harder substances in the cement matrix produce lower ROPs”. We incorporated this theory in cement designs to lower the ROP of cement and help divert the drill string out ofthe original bore hole toward the forma- tion, The set cement had to strongly bond tothe inert material so that drilling the test specimens would cut these materials rather than plucking them. The ideal materials for ths situa- tion was fracturing proppants, as they are generally very hard and readily available to oilfield operations. Fig. 7 shows the effect on ROP of various fracturing proppants in a standard cement composition. These inert materials (Sracturing prop- pants) were mixed into the cement slurries at a concentration ‘of 50% BWOC. The materials that produced the two lowest ROPs were further evaluated and cement sluries optimized. Physical and chemical properties of fracturing proppants that ‘were received for this study are shown on Tables 2 & 3. Another study was conducted to determine the effect of parti- cle size ofthe inert material in the cement matrix on ROP. For this study we used various sizes of fracturing sand. Sand proppants sizes evaluated were 40/60, 20/40, 10/20 and 8/12 ‘mesh, Conventional cementing equipment can not pump large solid particles much greater than 8/12 mesh. Larger particles tend to become lodged in the suction side or pressure side valves holding the valves open . The pumps become ineffec~ tive when this occurs. Fig. 8 shows the effect of increased particle size on ROP, Data generated reveals thatthe larger the particles in the cement, the greater the reduction of ROP when tested in equal concentrations. This data was used to avoid the 515 testing of smaller size proppants. Further work was concen- trated with the larger sized fracturing proppants. (8/12, 10/20, 12,20 mesh proppants). Samples of marble chips and coarse Calcium Carbonate were also tested for ROP Analysis, Further testing of these materi als was subsequently stopped due to the generated ROP data, that ranged from 3.42 ft/hr. to 6.29 fL/hr. No benefit would be gained from the addition of Marble Chips or Calcium Carbon= ate in cement. Further Physical property testing with 12/20 mesh Ceramic C ‘was performed to determine the ROP with respect to increased proppant concentration. Ceramic C was the second hardest proppant found in all the samples tested. (Fig. 7) As proppant concentration increased (ie. density increased) ROP de- creased. However, the ROP values were not below the target ROP of the tested core samples.(Figs. 9 and 10) Ceramic D 12/20 was tested similarly to Ceramic C. ROP re- sults are shown on Fig, 11. Ceramic D was the hardest sub- stance drilled of all the materials submitted.(Fig. 7). ROPs were consistently lower with Ceramic D. Ceramie D was ree- ‘ommended for any high strength proppant material excluding for the purpose of reducing ROP in cement. The first proppant we incorporated in the cement design was 8/12 mesh sliea sand (C812). We initially held the slurry den- sity constant at 142 PCF. (Fig. 12) Comparing the slope ofthe total mixing fluid (TMF) line to the ROP line, lead to our next design approach, We held the TMF constant in anticipation that the ROP would drop at concentrations of 70% BWOC C812 and higher. Figure 13 shows the results of testing hold- ing the TMF constant. The ROP dropped significantly, but not lower than the target ROP of 1.47 ftshr.(Ave. of Anhyérite core samples). ‘Most of the proppants used were of high specific gravity (3.0, r8./em), Setting could possibly occur in an over dispersed cement slurry. Incorporating the gained knowledge of higher density base cement and larger size particles reduces the set cements ROP, we developed a standard cement slurry (shown below) that we could add various concentrations of proppants, without sever settling occurring, Since the larger fracturing. proppants have litle or no water requirement, this standard cement slurry was successfully mixed with concentration of proppants from 10% to 110% BWOC. This base cement de- sign was used in all subsequent tests. Since most cements are chemically different, a cement slurry prior to field use should initially be tested du to higher than normal viscosity. Service company operators mixing these cements should be given flexibility at first in obtaining the slurry densities as the ce- ment slurries are required to be fairly viscous to suspend these4 (S.S. JENNINGS] [SPE 37821) larger high specific gravity particles Class G+ 1.20% friction reducer + 0.15% med, temp retarder +X % proppant + 24% fresh water* * This water requirement should be field confirmed, this could be confirmed by field theology testing when a job is first planned, Guidelines For Waiting On Cement (WOC) A study was conducted to compare the sonic strength devel- ‘opment with the ROP. Samples were prepared and drilled every 2 hours after six hours up to 24 hours and comparison plots were made, Figure 14 shows the plot of drilling ROP vs. sonic strength. for 12/20 mesh Ceramic C. The ROP and the sonic strength development are directly related (Fig. 14) Data in tabular format can be found on Table 4. Drilling of cement plugs for sidetracking should be drilled only after 90 percent of the total sonic strength is obtained to better insure a successful sidetrack. This would be determined after con- firming the field samples physical properties. Recommendations ‘Cements with various propant concentrations were evaluated for ROP. The data obtained is shown on Figures 11 & 13. Based on this study the best two cement proppant concentra- tions were recommendation based on reduced ROP and low cost. ‘The recommend cement slurry designs for side tracking are as follows: 1. Class G + 1.20% friction reducer + 0.15% med, temp retarder + $0.0% 12/20 mesh Ceramic D + 24% fresh water @ISS PCF, 1,06 fvsk 2.ClassG + 1.20% friction reducer + 0,1$9% med. temp retarder + 30.0% 8/12 mesh Sand +240 fresh water @142 PCF, 1.03 f/sk It was suggested that cement formulation no. 2 be attempted first as the cost of the Ceramic D is relatively more expensive, WELL DATA Well parameters used for curing cement specimens is given below: Temperature 200F Pressure 3100 pst TV Depth FF 7000 fe 516 ‘CEMENT SLURRY DESIGN Base cement slurry design criteria was restricted to the limits shown below: Thickening Time 2-35 Hours Free Fluid Til Rheology. YPPO, n’<1.0000, 30-500 psi Time <1 Hour ‘TEST PROCEDURES Samples of slurry were mixed with equipment that is men- tioned in the current API Specifications.’ Samples were then placed in an UCA (Ultrasonic Cement Analyzer) test cell. Test conditions were set as follows: Time to BACT, 30 mins Time to BAST 240 mins Pressure 2100 psi Set cement specimens were removed from the UCA cell ater 24 hours. One hour later (at hour 25) the samples were then placed bottom side up into the mud tank of the ROP simulator. ‘The mud tank was filled withthe recommended drilling uid Weight set on the bit was constant at 8.16 Kg. Drilling depth ‘was Set to 1.50 inches. Timing to the nearest one hundredth of ‘a second. RPM of dril bit 80-100. The samples were drilled at hour 25 andthe driling time recorded, The samples were then ‘washed in fresh water and depth measurements were made. TEST RESULTS ROP Measurements Results of ROP measurements of Anhydrite cores are given in tabular form in Table 1 Results of measurements of ROP vs. sonic strength time are found in tabular form in Table 4 Statistical data (Standard deviation) forthe drilling of two samples of the same formulation is shown on Table $ and 6. ‘The dril bit data was evaluated at startup (first sample drilled) and at the ast sample drilled. The average standard deviation for startup drilling was 0.90 and 0.39 forthe last sample drilled. DATA DISCUSSION Drill Bit Efficiency Drill bt efficiency was monitored in order to more accurately evaluate well cement ROP. The drill bts were evaluated by testing the ROP of two specimens of class G cement mixed at 449% fresh water cured at 200 *F, 2100 psi for 24 hours. The samples were then placed into fresh water and ROP measure~ ‘ments were taken at hour 25. A number of cement or core samples were drilled. After visual inspection or a recorded Tow ROP (long drilling time) the dril bit was tested again with 2 cement specimens cured at the original conditions. The longer drilling times were the basis forthe determination ofSPE 37821 WELL CEMENTS THAT REDUCE ROP: (Rate of Penetration) 5 aril bit efficiency. Drilling bit degradation was assumed to be linear forthe purposes of this project. The following equations were used to determine drill bt efficiency. (Eas - EM Sct) *(Swel)- (Sy-1))* Ey) Eye (ROPY ROP). ROP,, = (ROP,:+ ROP,)/2. ROP, = ROP JE gy snes wl) CONCLUSIONS Results of our findings for this work relate only to our local class G (HSR) cement. Initial ROP data obtained for 70% and 90% CERAMIC D was found to be extremely low and was tested again due to the excessive wear on the bit producing questionable ROP data, The cement slurries were then tested with a new drilling bit and more realistic data was obtained. The following trends stand out in the generated data 1. Densifying cement slurries decreases ROP in set cements. Different material additives produced various ROP rates. 3. Langer sized fracturing proppants tested produced lower ROPs, 4. ROP of cements were improved in the tested drilling {fuid. (6.40 fe/hr. For normal density cement and reduced to 1.85 fi/hr. with inert fracturing proppants) NOMENCLATURE ficiency of drill bit, % ) =1.00 Ey fficiency of drill bit, % (sample) Ew fficiency of drill bit, % (final) ROP, iat ROP, (ft/hr.) ROP, = final ROP, (ft/hr.) Sw = total samples drilled s, hronological sample no. ROP, jeasured ROP, (ft/br.) (sample) ROP, = corrected average ROP, (ft/hr.) ROP,, jerage ROP, (ft/hr.) ‘ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author would like to thank the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources and the Management of Saudi ARAMCO for permission to publish this work. The author would also like to thank Chistensen Saudi Arabia Ltd. and Haliburton Energy Services. Special thanks goes tothe Lab R & D Cen- ter, especially Karim Khafaji & Ahmed Humaidi of Chemical Fluids & Cements Unit who performed many various task in the support of this work REFERENCES 1. Heathman, J. et al: “Quality Management Alliance Eliminates Plug Failures,” paper SPE 28321 presented at 517 the 1994 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi- tion, New Orleans, Sept. 25-28 Smith, R.C., Beirate, RM. and Holman, G.. Improved Method of Setting Successful Whipstock Ce- ment Plugs,” IADC/SPE 11415 presented at the TADCISPE 1983 Drilling Conference in New Orleans, Feb, 20-23. 3. Bour, DL, Sutton, D.L., and Creel, P.G.: “Development of Effective Methods for Placing Competent Cement Plugs.” paper SPE 15008, Presented atthe SPE Permian Basin Oil & Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, March 13-14, 1986. 4. Jordan, TT. etal: “Case Study of Cased-Hole Sidetrack- ing Mechanics: Prudhoe Bay Field Re-Eniry Program,” paper SPE 27462 presented atthe 1994 IADC/SPE Drill ing Conference held in Dallas, Texas, Feb. 15-18, 5. API Specification 10 (SPEC 10), Fifth Edition, Copyright 1990, American Petroleum Institute 6. George, C.R.: "Downhole Plugging,” Chapter 7, World Wide Cementing Practices, API, 1990 7. Ezat AM. Al-Ammari SM., Special Fluids for short “D*, Saudi Aramco Technical Exchange Meeting, 1995. TABLE 1 CORRECTED ROP FOR ANHYDRITE CORE SAMPLES WELL NO, ‘CORRECTED ROP] DEPTHIFT) | (FTIHR.) wera Te 7 eu i ‘eco weit 6 2 we wes io sa Wee is Se TOW VALUE 108 Ine WALGe i AVERAGE FOR ALL 147 cores TABLE 2 VARIOUS SAMPLES TESTED TO REDUCE ROP. [MESH a : oatounon [nn Sean — aay —— SF a cena 293-334 ae a a RAG SANG 20140 CRUVELAGEA asd Fes cence "apt CERAMNE Baa Re cenoune | wap ———3 CERAMIC D 20a" se sence 2) So6 SS. JENNINGS) (SPE 37621] jase oP ANALYSIS CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF TESTED SAMPLES suatistia| Driling bata a ae ae ES saa Deviation CERAMIC 343 Bet a0] tia Taste, sat "CERAMIC 77 ee stared : 327 ‘CERAMIC E ea bts a4 ‘O27 3] TABLE 4 306 J pate Waiting On Cement Data St Tre ED. Sonde Suenath (pa) | ROP TAT ese | 059 700 ° fui coment i) SE 30) TR 3a [Oe 300 T1267 87 Se peas 00, Toa 3 AVE. Standare_| 0.59 7200 14538 37 Denia Fao ae 29 7600 TaaT6 oe SIDETRACK DRILLING IN 7500, Tara 30 ANHYDRITE (short radius) 20.00 Tao 26 ZO TaaIS, 2 24.00 75962 Ba TABLES ROP ANALYSIS Statistical Drilfing Data [Dring Fist Sample] ROP Rime | Standard Devition bi aT 067 55 BZ 301 Tz ‘CEMENT PLUG aa ‘OPENHOLE Fig, 1 Sidetracking off a cement plu BES 68 046 ° oJ roel ei Be Bas [oer Ba BRE aa7_ | 22 a7 Bre 7a | 08d Tar AVE. Standard 0.86 Deviation 518SPE 57021 \WELL CEMENTS THAT REDUCE ROP: (Rate of Penetaton) Drill Press Modifications (WOB) adding dispersants lowered the ROP, however this was far from. the target range. ROP VS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ° - = { 7 — | & 2 Sons a0 53a Fao | ta SONIC STRENGTH (PS!) ‘nop oF cones SIDE VIEW Fig. 2- Weight on bit was achloved by asim rangement ‘cable pulley ar- ), Right - dill Bit was used to dill coment imbedded with fracturing proppants. Fig. 4- Left-(New Diamond CEMENT DENSITY (PCF) a0 cones Fig. §- Increasing the cement density by reducing the water and 519 Fig. 6- Inversely proportional relationship between increasing compressive strength and decreasing ROP. ROP VS VARIOUS CERAMIC PROPPANTS PROPPANT TYPE ux waren EL consTANT @ 28078 7- Various proppants produced diferent ROPs. eR.D ROP OF CORES Fig. ROP VS SAND SIZE ‘SAND SIZE (WICRONS) Fig. 8- Larger particles produced lower ROPs. Taao 3000 6 ROP OF CORES: S00 70ROP & CEMENT DENSITY VS COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 10 ‘SONIC STRENGTH (PSI) Fig. 9- Increasing Density raised sonic strength & produced lower ROPS ROP OF CORES ROP VS CER. C CONCENTRATION 6 a ry © 709 CER.C% BWOC IATA ine serene Fig. 10- Increasing concentration of Cer. ¢ produced lower ROPs ROP VS CER. D CONC. ROP FT) ROP OF CORES Fig. 11- Ceramic D proppant at 30-50% BWWOC produced re- ‘duced ROPS. 520 |S. 8. JENNINGS} [SPE 37821} ROP & TMF VS 8/12 MESH SAND CONC. — sas ing § a8, ot 108 ‘nop oF cones: ROP (ETM) 3 ry oo % 8/12 MESH SAND BWOC event sexs ntupeonetarre Hance Fig. 12- Increasing concentration of 12 mesh sand together with TNF produced increased ROPS ROP & TMF VS &/12 MESH SAND CONC. —- 4 oP TWF a ee) % 8/12 MESH SAND BWOC ex waren constant ROP OF CORES Fig. 13- Holding mix water concentration constant and varying the 8/12 mesh sand concentration produced both Increased & docreased ROPS 100 - — 1 ROP, SONIC STRENGTH | VS TIME ton —____, 9 veo | preeanat gm 7 a | ed f ee |Bgem| fF wé gem) a§ lhe 2000 i 2s a | ten a0 tae | Te (hours) Fig. 14- Sonic Strength time can be used as a guideline for dell ing out cement plugs.