07/07/2012 The use and misuse of centrifuges

The use and misuse of centrifuges

Eugene E. Bouse
May4, 2003
Understanding what centrifuges really do with drilling fluids and solids can prevent coiilliJJn mistakes and
improve mud quality.
Having been involved with drilling fluid technology fur more than 40 years, I have long been concerned about our
misuse of centrifuges. Properly used, they permit us to nm better fluids at lower cost while generating less waste.
UnfOrtunately, misuse bas become more coiilliJJn, and many of the costly present-day practices are so ill-
conceived that they are actually detrin:ental to both mud quality and waste minilnization effurts.
Centrifuging splits the processed fluid into two stream;: the overflow ( centrate, effiuent or light phase), containing
most of the liquid and the finest solids, and the underflow (cake or heavy phase), consisting of the coarser solids
and the liquid wetting them 'Traditional centrifuging'' removes the damaging ultrafine and colloidal particles -
both barite and low-gravity solids (WS) - and most of the liquid when the overflow is discarded, while keeping
the larger solids particles (desirable barite and larger LGS) and retwning them to the drilling fluid.
Ahhough solids content, typically measured with a retort, is a useful parameter, the adverse efrects of solids on
rheology and fihration are a function of their total surfuce area, not the solids content itself: The smaller the
average particle size, the greater the surfuce area. UnfOrtunately, the retort tells us nothing about particle size.
Solids in drilling fluids are subjected to conditions that cause a progressive reduction in particle size, with a
corresponding increase in surfuce area (see table). This bas serious adverse efrects on mud quality even though
solids content remains constant. We have all observed how hole conditions deteriorate with time. Much of the
deterioration can be attributed to the increasing surfuce area of the mud solids as the mud "ages" and its solids
become finer.
In addition to reducing the plastic viscosity and dilution requirements, removing the colloidal and ultrafine solids
will improve both the penetration rate and the fiher cake quality, thereby reducing torque and drag. This
improves hole conditions and reduces the risk of sticking.
Economic justification fur using centrifuges with weighted muds traditionally bas been based on the savings
realized by recycling the larger barite particles. However, this is not the most important benefit. When centrifuges
are not used, the concentration of fines tends to be higher and the mud quality lower. This often leads to an
increase in costly hole problem;, which can be a much larger economic fuctor than the savings from the ''barite
recovery'' process. In actuality, the finer barite particles are discarded with the overflow, and this can be a
significant part of the total barite present. Using the "quick and dirty'' barite recovery concept to justifY centrifuge
rental is a simple, though flawed, calculation that bas impeded the understanding of the real benefits of using
centrifuges with drilling fluids.
Modem centrifuge use
Much current centrifuge use with drilling fluids is not only unproductive, it is counterproductive. One example of
www.epmag.com/item/prinUEP-Magazine/archive!The-and-misuse-centrifuges_2886 1/4
07/07/2012 The use and misuse of centrifuges
misuse is the practice of nmning two centrifuges in series to ''recover the barite" with the first and "discard the
drilled solids" with the second. The first stage is traditional centrifuging, retwning the undedlow to the active mud
system Rather than discarding the overflow, it is routed to the second centrifuge nmning at a higher speed,
where the low-gravity solids supposedly are discarded and the "clean" liquid is returned to the mud.
This process cannot, does not, and will not work! It is based on two erroneous assmnptions:
o the first centrifuge is capable of separating barite from low gravity solids; and
o the second centrifuge is capable of producing a solids-free liquid fur return to the mud.
Both of these assmnptions are incorrect and ignore the physics of sedimentation. Further, the process assumes
that the objective of centrifuging weighted fluids is the reimval oflow-gravity solids. It is not. The objective is the
rem.JVal of the colloidal and near-colloidal solids that are so detrirrental to drilling fluid perfunmnce; their
specific gravity is barely relevant.
Centrifugation is accelerated sedimentation using increased gravitational furces and is described by Stokes' Law.
It states that the sedimentation rate is directly proportional to the d:iffi:rence in density between the settling
particle and the surrounding liquid, and inversely proportional to the viscosity of the liquid. It is a mathematical
means of expressing what we intuitively know to be true: heavier particles settle quicker in lighter, less viscous
liquids.
Used drilling muds weighted with barite contain both barite and drilled solids ranging from less than 1 micron to
m>re than 20 microns. Assuming that the average specific gravity ofbarite and low-gravity solids particles are
4.2 and 2.6, respectively, the mass of a barite particle is equal to that ofanLGS particle about 50% larger. For
example, ifm>st of the barite particles finer than 6 J.llllremain in the ovedlow, then m>st of the low-gravity solids
particles finer than 9 J.llll will also remain in the ovedlow. The larger particles - both barite and drilled solids - will
be fuund in the undedlow. Thus, we don't separate barite from low-gravity solids; we separate heavier (larger)
particles from lighter (smaller) ones.
Let's consider what happens in the series centrifuging process. Assuming that the ''barite recovery'' unit makes an
8 micron cut on barite, and that the second unit makes a 4 micron cut, m>st of the barite larger than 8 J.llll and the
low-gravity solids larger than 12 J.llll are returned to the mud at the first stage. At the second stage, the remaining
barite larger than 4 J.llll and the low-gravity solids larger than 6 J.llll are discarded, and the :finest- m>st damaging
-material is returned to the mud!
No matter what the two cut points are, the material that is rem>ved fulls between them This fraction includes
barite in a perfectly acceptable size range and low-gravity solids that are too large to increase viscosity, and too
:fine to be very abrasive. All of the :finest solids, both barite and cuttings, are returned to the mud system, assuring
a progressive decrease in average particle size and decline in mud quality. The decreasing particle size increases
the viscosity and the need fur dilution, while diminishing wall cake quality and prom>ting the deterioration ofhole
conditions.
Worse yet, the desirably sized barite that is discarded n:wst be replaced by fresh barite, 30% of which can be
particles finer than 6 J.llll, and 10%-15% of which can be expected to be colloidal(< 2 J.llll). This further reduces
average particle size and accelerates the decline of mud quality.
www.epmag.com/item/prinUEP-Magazine/archive!The-and-misuse-centrifuges_2886 214
07/07/2012 The use and misuse of centrifuges
The two-stage centrifugation process is expensive and harmful By increasing the need fur dilution, it increases
rrrud cost and drilling waste vohnne. Even worse, it actually reduces rrrud quality. This industry wastes millions of
dollars each year rwming centrifuges in series in the belief that we are ''recovering the barite at the first stage, and
discarding the drilled solids at the second."
Centrifuging expensive rrruds
When centrifuging costly oil-based or synthetic-based fluids, the overflow is often returned to the rrrud system
while the underllow, containing the larger solids and the desirable barite, is discarded and replaced with fresh
barite that increases the viscosity because it contains colloidal and near-colloidal particles. If we gave some
thought to what it is that we hope to accomplish with the centrifuge, fuolish practices like this wouldn't be
tolerated.
While some believe the liquid phase is too costly to diicard and that any solids removal is helpful, remember that
the problem solids are the finest particles, which create viscosity problems. Discarding the desirable solids
needed to maintain the rrrud weight, while retaining the fine particles does not alleviate the problem; it exacerbates
it. Traditional centrifuging is prererred, but is bard to swallow when it requires the discarding of costly liquid. This
may not be necessary when the fluid is not used long enough fur the colloidal concentration to increase to
problem levels. However, when colloids do present problems (and they often do), traditional centrifuging is the
best way to restore nul quality.
With extremely costly fluids, investigating the economics of cleaning the centrate of!Site using sophisticated
filtration units would be interesting, but the centrate cannot be "cleaned" with centrifuges. There is no practical
field method to remove colloids from the fluids in which they are suspended.
With viscous oil-based and synthetic fluids, solids that behave like colloids and do not settle can be nruch larger
(1 0-15 fJ!Il). Their concentration must be controlled by dilution or by traditional centrifuging where the centrate is
discarded. The latter comse is preferred fur waste minimization reasons. Provision must be made fur storage of
the discarded liquid until it can be either disposed of properly or reconditioned fur reuse as packer fluid or in
another weD.
Centrifuging hydrocyclone diicbarges
This is an increasingly connnon practice with lUlWeighted drilling fluids to reduce drilling waste vohnne. It is often
but can be harmful if the quality of the returned liquid is inappropriate, as it often is. It works as long as
the solids concentration in the returned liquid is less than twice the desired solids content in the rrrud. If it is
higher, the practice resuhs in an increase, rather than a decrease, in waste vohnne. Therefure, the solids content
ofliquid returned to a rrrud system must be nDnitored.
Justification fur centrifuging lUlWeighted nul
The relationship between the vohnne of new rrrud that must be prepared to of!Set the incorporation of a barrel of
drilled solids at any given drilled solids concentration is given by the fullowing: bbl = (1 00 - %) I %; where % =
the desired drilled solids concentration
In the interest of providing a stable weTibore and maximizing penetration rates, many operators limit drilled solids
www.epmag.com/item/prinUEP-Magazine/archive!The-and-misuse-centrifuges_2886 3/4
07/07/2012 The use and misuse of centrifuges
concentration to 5% by vohnne, so each barrel of incorporated solids would require the preparation of 19 bbl of
new rrrud. At 7% drilled solids, the dilution requirement would be 13.3 bbl fur each barrel of incorporated solids.
Knowing the composition and cost per bbl of the rrrud, as wen as the cost per bbl to dispose of excess rrrud, we
can easily calculate the cost benefit of drilled solids rem.wal If rrrud preparation and disposal costs are $1 0/bbl
and $ 5 / b b ~ respectively, the total cost of each barrel of dilution is $15. If we are controlling the drilled solids
content at 5% by vohnne, each barrel of solids removed would reduce our costs by $285 ($15/bbl x 19 bbls ).
With this figure in hand, it is easy to determine whether the use of a centrifuge is economically beneficial
Therefure, the use of multiple centrifuges can often be justified even with liDWeighted rrruds.
Justification fur centrifuging weighted rrrud
The Slllll': m:thod can be used to calculate the economic benefits of removing solids from weighted rrruds if
certain assumptions are rmde concerning the Imximum tolerable concentration of colloids. If we assurre that 5%
is the maximum desirable concentration in water-based fluids and that we can tolerate 8% in oil-based and
synthetic fluids, then removal of 1 bbl of solids eliminates the need fur 19 bbl of dilution with water-based fluid
and 11.5 bbl of dilution with oil-based and synthetic fluids. Knowing the cost per bbl of new rrrud, we can
calculate the economic benefit of rermving these solids and can easily determine whether or not centrifuge use is
economical
Conclusions
The objective of centrifuging weighted drilling fluids is the rermval of colloidal and near-colloidal particles, not
the removal of low-gravity solids. Colloids are particles that are so fine that they will not settle in pure water;
therefure, they cannot be separated by centrifuging. The return of centrifuge ovedlow to a rrrud system always
involves the return of colloids; thus, this practice is always potentially darmging. Using the cost justification
m:thod presented above shows that drilling operations with both weighted and liDWeighted rrruds alrmst always
derive significant benefit from the correct use of one or rmre centrifuges.
www.epmag.com/item/prinUEP-Magazine/archive!The-and-misuse-centrifuges_2886 414