SPE 9375

SPE
SocIety ofPetroletm~of "IME

COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS

by James A. Sampey and Richard Cottingham,

Dresser/Magcobar

©Copyright 1980, American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was presented althe 55th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, held in Dallas, Texas, September 21-24,1980.
The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expwy., Dallas, Texas 75206.

ABSTRACT Several problem areas were apparent from the beginning

A computer program has been developed which analyzes
drilling fluids by using the information given on the
standard API Drilling Mud Report. The program incor-
porates the latest drilling fluid engineering technology,
coupled with years of field experience.
straightforward style of input, combined with the use of
portable terminals linked to a central c<;>mputer, allows
the program to be used by anyone wherever telephone
communications exist. It has proved effective in the
onsite analysis and treatment of drilling fluids, as well as
in simultaneous monitoring of a number of different
operations from a central office.
INTRODUCTION
The accurate analysis and interpretation of a drilling
fluid's physical and chemical properties has become
increasingly important today. Deeper, hotter wells
require more precise control of a drilling fluid's properties
in order to maximize drilling performance while mini-
mizing hole problems and costs. These conditions require
a higher level of drilling fluid engineering technology at
the rig than ever before.
This paper describes a computer prograr:n designed pri-
marily to help the engineer in the field fulfill these
requirements. Originally written in Basic, it has since
been translated into Fortran V, and extensively rewritten.
The program continues to be modified and updated.
References and illustrations at end of paper.
of the program's development. One was the need to be
able to apply this technology at the rig site. This was
overcome by planning from the start to use portable
terminals which connect to the computer via telephone.
These terminals are marketed by several companies. This
A simple,
in turn dictated that input and output be separated and as
compact as possible to avoid wasting time and paper.
To make the program usable by inexperienced operators, a
question-and-answer style of input, with only one or two
numbers, or a "yes" or "no" answer, is used throughout.
Data values are asked for in the same order, and the same
terms are used as on a mud check sheet. To reduce
"garbage-in-garbage-out" problems, out-of-bounds
answers are screened at the input stage and questions
repeated when necessary. The various routines which do
calculations regarding solids and chemistry also check for
impossible or unlikely conditions, and ask for repeats or
corrected information.
The suspended solids are analyzed and concentrations of
low- and high-gravity solids calculated. Low-gravity
solids are separated into bentonite and drilled solids
concentrations. If the drilled solids concentration is
excessive for the given conditions, various solutions are
offered and compared.
At present the program has the capability of analyzing
several water-base mud types including lignosulfonate,
gyp, lime, polymer, complex lignite, and lignosulfonate/
2 COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS
lignite combinations. The calculations on chemical
equilibria are based on ionization constants and solubi-
lities derived from empirical data. After ionic composi-
tion has been determined, comparisons of actual versus
optimum concentrations for the particular fluid type are
made. Material additions required to produce optimum
fluid chemistry for the particular fluid type are then
recommended from these comparisons.
OPERATIONS
Program operation is initiated by dialing the given WATS
line and connecting the telephone receiver to the acoustiC:
coupler. Once communication is established with the
computer, a request for user identification is printed.
When user validity is established, program selection may
be made.
At the beginning of the program, the computer advises
that all calculations be predicated on chemical measure-
ments made at 75 0 F, rheological measurements made at
1150 F, and pH checked with a meter. It then offers a
choice (with a "yes" or "no" answer) of a complete
analysis of both chemistry and suspended solids, or only a
solids analysis. If only a solids analysis is requested it
asks exclusively for those items necessary, not an entire
mud check. Next it asks the engineer/operator to select a
number from a table of fluid types, which will later tell
the program which chemical subroutine to use.
INPUT
The data input segment begins by asking for mud pro-
perties, starting with mud weight. If a number greater
than 7.0 and less than 23.0 is given, the computer accepts
the number and goes on. If not, it asks if pounds-per-
cubic-foot was used instead of pounds-per-gallon. If a
mistake was made it repeats the original-question.
Plastic viscosity input is compared to the results from
curve fits on data representing "normal" field muds
(Figure 1). I If the plastic viscosity is outside this
"normal" range it advises the operator of this fact and
notes it internally for later investigation. Yield point
values are not limited. In this manner the operator is free
to design the fluid's rheological properties as needed for
hole cleaning, stability or rate of penetration.
Initial gel strength and the IO-min. gel strength are
SPE 9375
examined, and if either measures 15 or greater, it prints
out the comment that one or the other (or both) is rather
high. If the 10-min. gel strength is less than 4 with a mud
weight over 11 ppg it advises that one should check for
possible barite settling.
The pH must be checked with a pH meter for any degree
of accuracy to be obtained in the chemical analyses. The
machine will not accept values less than 7 or more than
14. At a pH of less than 9, it notes that with certain mud
types this is too low for most thinners to be effective.
Volumes for API and high-temp fluid losses are screened
so that the program will not accept more than the
capacity of the cups used. If the high-temp is greater
than 4.5 times the API fluid loss, the computer warns that
the stability of the fluid is low.
The Pf and Pm are then compared to the pH to see if they
are acceptable. If the pH is 8.3 or less and any Pf is
reported, or if the Pf is less than 50 X 1O(pH-14), the
computer will remind the operator that this is impossible
and ask which one is correct. It will then request a new
value for the incorrect one. If legal values cannot be
supplied at this point, the program will allow only a solids
analysis. If a Pf greater than the Pm is given, it will not
be acceptable either. Chlorides over 200,000 mg/l will
not be accepted, and a calcium reading of over 1500 mg! 1
will also be flagged for investigation.
When reading percent solids and percent oil in the fluid,
the program converts whole number entries to decimals
for internal use. Later on it will ask whether these solids
were measured or calculated. If there is any oil present
and more than 240 mg/l calcium, it warns that oil-
wetting of barites is possible when using certain types of
lubricants in the fluid. The Cation Exchange Capacity
(CEC) in equivalent pounds-per-barrel of bentonite is an
optional imput which is not checked until the solids
analysis routine.
If a letter is accidently entered at any point where a
number is expected, or vice versa, the program will
merely re-ask the question. Every effort has been made
to make the program "worm-proof" and the system itself
"crash-proof."
SPE 9375 COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS
SOLIDS ANALYSIS
At the start of the solids analysis subroutine the machine
must first determine if it is to solve for low- and high-
gravity solids, or only lows. It makes a rough assumption
that if mud weight corrected for chlorides is over 10 ppg,
then there is weight material in the mud. If the mud
weight corrected for chlorides is below 10 ppg, it will ask
if there is weight material in the mud.
It then proceeds to determine the volume attributable to
chlorides by first calculating the specific gravity of the
water phase. This is found by using constants derived
from a computer generated curve fit of chemical hand-
book tables 2,3, and the general equation:
sg = Kl + K2Chi + K Chl 2 + K4Chl 3 • • • • • (1)
3
where ChI is the chloride concentration. The volume is
found using:
Vol = 1 - sg + 1.65138 X 10-6 X ChI • . • • • (2)
and then correcting for percent water.
Next the volume percent of low-gravity solids is found
using a material balance calculation. Specific gravity of
low-gravity solids is assumed to be 2.6 and that of weight
material 4.2. In a fluid with no weight material the low-
gravity volume percent plus the salt volume percent is
compared to the percent solids which was input (they
should be equal), allowing a tolerance of .5 percent.
Anything outside this range generates a message to the
effect that the solids reported are too high or too low for
the density input.
In the case of a fluid which does contain weight material,
the percent of low-gravity solids plus salt volume percent
is subtracted from the reported solids percent to arrive at
the volume percent of weight material. If this is not
positive the program gives a message indicating the
problem.
If the low- and high-gravity solids are within correct
ranges, the program next calculates a breakdown of low
gravity solids into drilled solids and bentonite. Of course,
if no CEC was entered then it cannot make the calcu-
lation; therefore it goes on to display the solids concen-
trations which it has been able to calculate. When a CEC
has been entered the bentonite concentration is calcu-
lated using:
3
GEL = 1.1248 CEC - (101 X LGVOL» (3)
where LGVOL is low-gravity volume percent.
If this turns out negative the program once again notes
something is wrong.
In all these instances where the computer has determined
that some incorrect value had to have been input, the
program transfers to another subroutine after displaying
the appropriate message. This next subroutine uses
material balance calculations to determine acceptable
ranges for all variables in order to advise the operator
which one(s) may be incorrect. For instance, in deter-
mining minimum and maximum weights it first assumes
all the solids reported were low gravity, and then that all
were high gravity, while holding all the other variables
constant. The computer then allows a choice of terminat-
ing the run, inputting correct data, or proceeding on the
chemical analysis knowing that it will be somewhat incor-
rect due to an incorrect number for water fraction.
However, assuming all solids concentrations are in
acceptable ranges, display of all calculated solids con-
centrations in pounds-per-barrel is carried out listing only
those applicable. Provision is made for the listing of all
logical combinations of low-gravity solids, bentonite,
drilled solids, dissolved salt, and weight material concen-
trations.
The next step is to determine the acceptability of the
drilled solids concentrations. This is done by comparison
to a curve fit (Figure 2)1. If they are not acceptable the
reduction to an acceptable level is calculated using both
dilution and displacement. These are then compared to
show what percent of the present fluid must be either
added, or thrown away and replaced, respectively.
Naturally if no check has been made on CEC this routine
cannot be followed since drilled solids could not be
isolated. However, if the total low-gravity solids are less
than the dr illed solids limit they are obviously acceptable.
If not, it is possible that drilled solids might be excessive
and the program recommends that a CEC should be run.
Then a check is made on plastic viscosity and CEC. If the
plastic is above normal and CEC is over 20, the program
advises that it is probable the fluid contains a high
colloidal content such as bentonite, or other active fine
4 COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS
solids. H the CEC is under 20, a high plastic with solids
and CEC in an acceptable range may indicate the pre-
sence of excess polymers or fine inert solids. H no CEC
has been run, the program will advise that this be done
since one of these conditions is present but it cannot
identify which one.
At this point control returns to the main program for
chemical analysis if required.
CHEMISTRY
The program requires that a proper balance be maintained
between carbonate/bicarbonate concentrations and cal-
cium and hydroxyl ions. The limits for these concentra-
tions vary with fluid types and are based on an empirically
derived ionization constant for bicarbonates. This con-
stant was obtained by reviewing water and drilling fluid
samples analyzed over several years and comparing indivi-
dual ion concentrations to each other:
• • • • • • • • (4)
or
pk = Log (2 X 10-10) = 9.7 • • • • • • •. (5)
which differs from that of deionized water. The pk 2
value for carbonic acid in deionized water is generally
2 advises that this combination would normally be impos-
accepted to be approximately 10.33 • However, the
addition of salts and soluble treating agents lowers this to
an average value of 9.7.
The sequence of calculations involved begins with the
approximation of hydroxyl alkalinity:
P
OH
= 50 (1O PH- 14) • • • • • • • • . (6)
With this known, Equation 7 is used to calculate carbonate
concentrations.
(CO;) = 20 (Pf - POH) • • • • • • • • (7)
Finally the bicarbonate concentrations are estimated by
using the equilibrium constant:
(HC0j> = (CO;) (l09.7-pH) • • • • • • • . (8)
With all alkalinity constituents known, carbonate and
bicarbonate ion concentrations may be compared to
desired levels for possible treatment.
Since most components of a drilling fluid are affected by
SPE 9375
changes in pH, fluid stability can be improved by some
buffering. This prevents drastic pH changes and any
corresponding changes in fluid properties. The program
recommends treatment to retain a total of 25 mm/l of
carbonate and bicarbonate ions for buffering purposes.
This also decreases the possibility of overtreatment.
In the case of calcium, Rogers has shown that very little
cation exchange occurs below 200 mg/l and that most
4
clays are converted to calcium base above 600 mg/I •
Therefore, calcium levels should be kept below 200 mg! I
in all types except gyp fluids, where it should be main-
tained at over 600 mg/I.
ANALYSIS AND TREATMENT
The analysis of bentonite/water, lignosulfonate/modified
lignite, and lignosulfonate/lignite fluid types begins with a
check on excess lime. If this is more than I ppb the
program advises that this is excessive if temperature is
significant and recommends treatment to eliminate it.
Then carbonates and bicarbonates are calculated using
Equations 6, 7, and 8. If the carbonate/bicarbonate total
is less than 25 mm/l, the individual values are printed out
and no treatment is recommended.
At more than 25 mm/l the program begins looking for
problems. If more than 200 mg! 1 of calcium is present, it
sible. However, Green has shown that various lignites will
tie up calcium in such a way that it will still show up on a
calcium check but is not actually available as free cal-
dum which would react with the carbonates 5• For this
reason the program asks if significant amounts of lignites
are present, and if so, it proceeds on the assumption that
the calcium reading is erroneous. If this is not the case,
then the program requests a recheck of pH, Pf, and
calcium.
Then a crosscheck is made involving carbonates/bicar-
bonates, excess lime, and pH. If total carbonates!
bicarbonates is over 25 mm/l, and excess lime is over 1
ppb with pH less than 12, the computer advises these
conditions are impossible since the pH is too low to have
so much excess lime present with the carbonates!
bicarbonates. It then asks for a recheck of pH, Pf, and
Pm. If the pH is ~ than 12, a printout of carbonate!
bicarbonate concentrations is made, and the program
SPE 9375 COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS
notes that a reduction in pH is required to allow the
excess lime to react them out.
When all other variables are in appropriate ranges and the
carbonate/bicarbonate concentration is excessive,
warning is printed, and required lime and/or gyp additions
calculated using Equations 9 and 10 for holding near
constant pH.
Lime(ppb) ::: .01298 (HC0"j}(1 - solids - oil) •• (9)
Gyp(ppb) ::: .0602«HCO; + C0"j}-25)(1-solids-oU) (10)
-,2-
Note that correction must be made for actual water
fraction of the fluid.
When pH values are not critical or are above the solubility
of lime, lime alone may be used as the calcium source. In
this circumstance Equation 11 is used to calculate treat-
ment with lime only, correcting once again for water
fraction.
Lime(ppb) ::: .0259 (HCO; + CO;-25)(1-solids-oil). .(11)
The chemical analysis of low-solids/polymer drilling fluids
basically checks total hardness and pH. An excess pH
brings a warning, but an excessive calcium reading leads
to further calculations.
In this case, carbonate and bicarbonate concentrations are
calculated using Equations 6, 7, and 8. If these total more
than 25 mm/l and if the pH is over 10, the program
indicates an impossible condition and requests correct pH,
Pf, and calcium readings. If these concentrations total
less than 25 mm/l, then the program simply signals that
total hardness is too high, and calculates treatment to
reduce the calcium using either soda ash (Equation 12) or
bicarbonate (Equation 13).
Soda Ash(ppb) .00l(calcium-120)(1-solids-oil). (12)
Bicarb(ppb) ::: .0008(calcium-120)(l-solids-oil) • (13)
With Significant calcium present, the program recom-
mends keeping the pH below 10.5.
The chemical analyses on gyp, low-lime, and high-lime
fluids are relatively simple. In a gyp fluid the calcium
level is maintained above 600 mg/l and pH less than 11.5.
When insufficient calcium is present, the amount of gyp in
pounds-per-barrel required to raise it to an acceptable
level is calculated using the following equation:
Gyp =(800 - calcium)f666 • • • • • • • •• (14)
5
Too high a pH level triggers the message that a reduction
is needed in order to allow more free calcium on solution.
In the lime muds, pounds-per-barrel of excess lime is
a calculated using the equation:
Lime::: .26 (Pm - (Pf (1 - solids - oil»). (15)
The lower limit on a "low lime" fluid is set at 1.5 ppb,
while the upper is set at 2.5 ppb. In a "high lime" fluid
the lower and upper limits are set at 2.5 ppb and 6 ppb,
respectively. Too low an excess lime concentration in
either type causes the printout of the lime requirements
(in ppb) needed to bring the concentration into range. Too
high a level receives a warning to allow lime concen-
tration to decrease naturally until within limits. A pH
limit is set at 13; anything higher than 13 provokes a
warning that the pH is too high. A calcium level of over
200 mg/l sets off a warning that total hardness is too high
and that caustic should be added to suppress the calcium
level.
After the chemical analysis is finished, and the recom-
mended treatments printed out, the program returns to
. the main routine, where it doses by reminding the oper-
ator to add fluid loss agents and thinners as needed. (See
Appendices I, II, and III.)
TESTING AND FIELD USE
Prior to field use the program was extensively tested in
the lab and was subject to a panel of experts with various
areas of expertise. During this period it was torn apart
and rebuilt several times.
After this phase, it was used in a limited number of field
tests. After some initial caution it achieved enthusiastic
acceptance from those using it. Since that time it has
gained equal acceptance in several areas and is in daily
use, both by engineers at the rig and by supervisory
engineers in the office.
CONCLUSIONS
Modern computer technology can be successfully applied
to drilling fluid engineering at the rig. A carefully
written computer program constructed to retain the
necessary complexity internally while providing simplicity
of input, output, and operation can increase the efficiency
of the engineer and thus contribute to increased drilling
efficiency and lower cost per foot.
6 COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF DRILLING FLUIDS SPE 9375

NOMENCLATURE

ppb pounds per barrel

mg/l milligrams per liter

mm/l millimoles per liter

CEC cation exchange capacity

REFERENCES
1. "Magcobar Drilling Fluids Engineering Manual," Mag-
cobar Division, Dresser Industries, Inc.

2. Fairbridge, R. W., Editor, "Encyclopedia of Geo-

chemistry and Environmental Sciences", Academic
Press, New York City (1972).

3. Glasstone, S., "Testbook of Physical Chemistry",

Second Edition, D. Van Nostrand Company, New York
City (1948).

4. Rogers, W. F., "Composition and Properties of Oil Well

Drilling Fluids," Third Edition, Gulf Publishing Com-
pany, Houston (1963).

5. Green, B. Q., "Facts and Problems Relative to Alka-

linity Imbalance," non-published research report, Mag-
cobar Division, Dresser Industries, Inc., Houston.
 60

50

~ '"-
v
0
I
LL 40 ./
V
!!!
I-
...,; V
<I:
>- 30
I-
./ V /
.... J......--' V V
ei)
0
~
:;; ~ V
......... !,.....- .... V
0

~
...J
a.
20

10
100"'" - ~
~
~
1..,..- j....- ~

o
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
MUD DENSITY - Ib/gal

Fig 0 1 - RECOMMENDED RANGE OF PLASTIC VISCOSITY

IN VARIOUS WEIGHT MUDS

v
50

~V
..-;.--
40

~V
I-
Z
w
~~

.--
0
cr: ~
.~~ iIl-- IIt-" jIlt--
w
a.
w
:E 30
II./
11.",'" ._-' -"""""
~ _,It-"" 1---V
:::l
...J
0
> o,~.. _, - 1~\~~,\I!'l'ij. V
I
V":P~ ..it..... \) -~p.~'f- ,0.

k-'V
iii' .-"
I-
Z
w
I- 20
Z
0
,,, /
~""
- --
lllil--
v.:i?:~~ \Na¢(-
E.~~~-
E. ~.~.,.....

--...--
u
(f) / ..., , , - - il,e(\\.- ~
c cof'
::i
0
(f) £, ..
~
~~V .....-soW~· o.
10

V ...". V
~

V
o
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
MUD WEIGHT - Ib/gsl

Fig 0 2 TYPE SOLIDS vs MUD WEIGHT

 APPENDIX I
DRILLING FLUID TYPES AS FOLLOWS
( WEIGHTED OR UNWEIGHTED )
1- BENTONITE AND WATER
2- SPERSENE/XP-20 (LIGNOSULFONATE/MOD. LIGNITE)
3- SPERSENE/XP-20/GYP
4- SPERSENE/XP-20/LOW LIME
5- SPERSENE/XP-20/HIGH LIME
6- LOW SOLIDS/POLYMER
7- SPERSENE/TANNATHIN (LIGNOSULFONATE/LIGNITE)

FLUID TYPE? 3
MUD DENSITY? 14
PLASTIC VISCOSITY? 39
++ PLASTIC VIS OUT OF NORMAL RANGE FOR DENSITY ++
YIELD POINT? 18
INITIAL GEL? 3
10 MIN GEL? 18
++ TEN MIN GEL STRENGTH HIGHER THAN NORMAL++
PH? 10
API FLUID LOSS? 4
HT-HP FLUID LOSS? 26
+++STABILITY OF FLUID IS LOW +++
PF? .6
PM? 2
CHLORIDES (IN MG/L) ? 1000
CALCIUM (1M MG/L) ? 400
PERCENT SOLIDS? 29
PERCENT OIL? 0
C.E.C. IN PPB (ENTER ZERO IF NO CHECK) ? 20

******************************************************************************
** BENTONITE CONCENTRATION 5. PPB **
** DRILLED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION 136. PPB **
** BARITE CONCENTRATION 198. PPB **

+++ DRILLED SOLIDS ARE EXCESSIVE +++

•••• YOU SHOULD DUMP OR MOVE 50.5 PERCENT OF YOUR TOTAL SYSTEM
AND REPLACE IT WITH NEW 14.0 PPG FLUID .
•••• IF YOU WERE TO MERELY DILUTE IT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO
ADD 102.1 PERCENT NEW FLUID •••••

!! THE PROPER USE OF PROPERLY MAINTAINED SOLIDS CONTROL EQUIPMENT

CAN REDUCE THIS NECESSITY ( AND THE COSTS ) SUBSTANTIALLY
****************************************************************************
++++ INSUFFICIENT CALCIUM IN SOLUTION !l! +++
•••• THE ADDITION OF .60 PPB OF GYP IS NEEDED •••
=================:==============================================================
FLUID LOSS AGENTS AND THINNERS SHOULD BE ADDEO AS
REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE DESIRED FLUID LOSS AND STABILITY
=====================~===============================; ==========================
 APPENOIX II
DRILLING FLUID TYPES AS FOLLOWS
( WEIGHTED OR UNWEIGHTED )

1- BENTONITE AND WATER

2- SPERSENE/XP-20 (LIGNOSULFONATE/MOD. LIGNITE)
3- SPERSENE/XP-20/GYP
4- SPERSENE/XP-20/LOW LIME
5- SPERSENE/XP-20/HIGH LIME
6- LOW SOLIDS/POLYMER
7- SPERSENE/TANNATHIN (LIGNOSULFONATE/LIGNITE)

FLUID TYPE? 4
MUD DENSITY? 12
PLASTIC VISCOSITY? 28
++ PLASTIC VIS OUT OF NORMAL RANGE FOR DENSITY ++
YIELD POINT? 17
INITIAL GEL? 3
10 MIN GEL? 10
PH? 12.6
API FLUID LOSS? 7
HT-HP FLUID LOSS? 20
PF? 2.8
PM? 4
CHLORIDES (IN MG/L) ? 1000
CALCIUM (1M MG/L) ? 400
PERCENT SOLIDS? 22
PERCENT OIL? 0
C.E.C. IN PPB (ENTER ZERO IF NO CHECK) ? 30

******************************************************************************
** BENTONITE CONCENTRATION 15. PPB **
** DRILLED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION 135. PPB **
** BARITE CONCENTRATION 80. PPB **

+++ DRILLED SOLIDS ARE EXCESSIVE +++

•••• YOU SHOULD DUMP OR MOVE 42.1 PERCENT OF YOUR TOTAL SYSTEM
AND REPLACE IT WITH NEW 12.0 PPG FLUID •
•••• IF YOU WERE TO MERELY DILUTE IT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO
ADD 72.6 PERCENT NEW FLUID •••••

!! THE PROPER USE OF PROPERLY MAINTAINED SOLIDS CONTROL EQUIPMENT

CAN REDUCE THIS NECESSITY ( AND THE COSTS ) SUBSTANTIALLY
****************************************************************************
••••• EXCESS LIME = .4722 PPB •••.
++++ INSUFFICIENT EXCESS LIME FOR A LOW LIME FLUID +++
++++ YOU SHOULD ADD 1.03 PPB OF LIME +++
++++ TOTAL HARDNESS IS TOO HIGH I!! ++++
++++ ADD CAUSTIC TO SUPRESS CALCIUM BELOW 200 MG/L ++++
=========----===================================================================
FLUID LOSS AGENTS AND THINNERS SHOULD BE ADDED AS
REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE DESIRED FLUID LOSS AND STABILITY
================================================================================
 APPENDIX III
DRILLING FLUID TYPES AS FOLLOWS
( WEIGHTED OR L~WEIGHTED )
1- BENTONITE AND WATER
2- SPERSENE/xP-20 (LIGNOSULFONATE/MOD. LIGNITE)
3- SPERSENE/XP-20/GYP
4- SPERSENE/xP-20/LOW LIME
5- SPERSENE/XP-20/HIGH LIME
6- LOW SOLIDS/pOLYMER
7- SPERSENE/TANNATHIN (LIGNOSULFONATE/LIGNITE)

FLUID TYPE? 2
MUD DENSITY? 16
PLASTIC VISCOSITY? 60
++ PLAS1'IC VIS OUT OF NORMAL RANGE FOR DENSITY ++
YIELD POINT? 20
INITIAL GEL? 5
10 MIN GEL? 30
++ TEN MIN GEL STRENGTH HIGHER THAN NORMAL++
PH? 10
API FLUID LOSS? 6
HT-HP FLUID LOSS? 22
PF? 2.6
PM? 3
CHLORIDES (IN MG/L) ? 1000
CALCIUM (1M MG/L) ? 0
PERCENT SOLIDS? 32
PERCENT OIL? 1
C.E.C. IN PPB (ENTER ZERO IF NO CHECK) ? 35

******************************************************************************
** BENTONITE CONCENTRATION 32. PPB **
** DRILLED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION 26. PPB **
** BARITE CONCENTRATION 376. PPB **

••• DRILLED SOLIDS ARE IN AN ACCEPTABLE RANGE •••

HIGH PLASTIC VIS WITH SOLIDS IN PROPER RANGE BUT WITH A HIGH C.E.C. INDICATES
A HIGH COLLOIDAL CONTENT SUCH AS BENTONITE, ACTIVE FINES, ETC. +++
********************************************************************************
CARBONATE CONCENTRATION 51.90MM/L
BICARBONATE CONCENTRATION 26.01MM!L
******************************************************************************
+++ !! CARBONATE!BICAFBONA1E CONCENTRATIONS ~RE EXCESSIVE I! +++
.... IF CONS'l'AN'I PH IS W'T 11 PROPLEfv', lIDO l.UO PPP C'F' LT.'IF ••••
. .. [lOv,EVER, IF pq IS CRI'lICAL OR ,l\,LREADY EXCEc;~~TV8, 'l'HFN YOC
SHOULD ADD .23 PPS OF LIME AND I.HI PPB OF GYP

•.• TO AVOID FCTURE PROBLEMS YOU MAY WANT TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

1. INSURE THAT THE THERMAL STABILITIES OF PRODUCTS ADDED TO THE MUD
ARE ABOVE THE BOTTOM-HOLE TEMPERATURES.
2. CHECK MAKE-OP WATER FOR CONTAMINATION.
3. BE CAREFUL & ACCURATE WITH ADDITIONS OF SODA ASH & BICARB.
4. CLOSE ALL HOPPERS WHEN NOT IN USE .
..•.•• THESE STEPS MAY HELP TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE PROBLEM .••
•••••• IS ORIGIN~TTNG ON THE SURFACE OR DOWNHOLE •...••
============~=:==========~=====;===========:====;===== ======:==========:========

FLUID LOSS AGENTS AND THINNERS SHOULD BE ADDED AS

REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE DESIRED FLUID LOSS AND STABILITY
===============================================================================: