APPLICATION OF GREEN SURFACTANT

TO IMPROVE THE RHEOLOGICAL AND

FILTRATION LOSS PROPERTIES OF
WATER BASED DRILLING FLUID

SHIVARAM SUPPIAH
16730704/7E3A1555
Breakdown of topic
1) Introduction
2) Objective
3) Problem Statement
4) Literature Review
5) Methodology
6) Discussion
7) Conclusion and Recommendation
8) Questions
 Introduction Drilling Fluids
Problems - stuck pipe, fishing
and lost circulation.
If the mud properties are
incorrect, safety and economics
may be severely compromised.
Drilling Fluid can be known as
mud.
Four Categories (Fink, 2015) :
A) Water Based Mud
B) Oil Based Mud
C) Synthetic Based Mud
D) Aerated Based Mud
Figure 1 Circulation System
Objective

To conduct experimental test investigating rheological properties of

drilling fluid-green surfactant material mix.

To conduct experimental test investigating fluid loss and mud cake

thickness of drilling fluid-green surfactant material mix.
 Problem Statement
Temperature, pressure and pH of drilling mud is a major factor that
influences the properties of additives (Yixiu et al, 2015) .
Additives Surfactant, Polymer, Bentonite (Clay)
Thick Filter Cake formation Stuck Pipe

Figure 2 : Stuck Pipe

Literature Review Rheology of WBM
Additives Surfactant, Polymer, Clay and Weighting Agent
Base Fluid Deionised Water
Rheology - Study of deformation and flow of matter (Viscosity) (Dahayanake, 2001)
Type of Models
1) Newtonian Model
2) Bingham Plastic Model
3) Power Law Model
4) Herschel- Buckley Model
YP, PV, n, K

Figure 3 Rheological Models

Fluid Loss and Mud Cake Properties of WBM
These parameters influence lost circulation to formation.
In other words, circulating mud fails to return to surface (Kate Van
Dyke, 2000).
May cause fracture in formation if high loss of fluid to surrounding.
(Nayberg, 1987).
Thickness of mud cake an important parameter in drilling fluid
industry.
Rheology and Fluid Loss Properties of
Surfactant in WBM
Surfactants - Double affinity (Polar Head and Non-Polar tail)
Four types Anionic, Cationic, Non-Ionic or Zwitterionic.
Passing critical value in concentration of surfactant known as Critical
Micelle Concentration (CMC), causes micelles. (Tabzar, 2015).
Micelles influences viscoelastic behaviour in aqueous solutions (Lee,
2003).

Figure 4: Micelles
Rheology and Fluid Loss Properties of
Surfactant in WBM
Research done by Yunita et.al (2015), varied the mass of ionic and anionic
surfactant.
Additives used were distilled water, bentonite, soda ash, caustic soda,
potassium chloride and hydrozan which were constant.
Anionic Surfactant showed higher YP, PV and gel strength before aging.
After aging, PV maintained the same and YP and gel strength reduced.
Excellent property as it is capable of carrying cuttings to surface and
environmentally friendly.
Surfactants are capable of blocking pores of a permeable formation and
causing it to be impermeable formation.
Rheology and Fluid Loss properties of
Surfactant and Polymer in WBM
Surfactant and Polymer mix create microbubbles known as aphron
(Milad et al, 2012).
Aphrons are created in the process of mixing the mud where air gets
entrapped in the mixture of surfactants and polymer (Nediljka and
Borivoje, 2009).

Figure 5: Aphron Figure 6: Aphron blocking pores

 Methodology - Equipment's

1) Mud Blender 2) Viscometer 3) LPLT 4) Pressurized Mud Balance

Filter
Press
Rheological Properties
Plastic viscosity (PV), Yield Point (YP), Power Law Index (n),
Consistency Index (k) and Gel Strength at 10 seconds and 10 minutes.

PV is proportional to rate of shear, thus largely reflects the resistance

to flow. (Dial reading at 600 rpm - Dial Reading at 300 rpm)

YP shows amount of stress which mud is capable of withstanding

before permanent deformation occurs. (Dial Reading at 300 rpm- PV)
 Power Law Index shows behaviour of fluid. Less than 1 shows Non-
600
Newtonian fluid flow. ( = 3.32 )
300

Consistency index is an indication of viscosity and hole cleaning

600
abilities of mud. (K = )
1022

Gel strength is measured (10 seconds and 10 minutes) in order to

understand mud ability to suspend cuttings while drilling is shut
down.
Filtration Loss Properties
Fluid loss readings taken for 30 minutes at 100 psi.

Indication of amount of water capable of seeping through formation.

Mud cake thickness measured with FANN ruler. (x/32 inch)

Methodology Additives
Surfactants
1) Methyl Ester Sulfonate Biodegradable/Eco-friendly
2) Anionic Surfactant
3) Surfactants reduces the surface tension of water which
subsequently increases the viscosity
Polymers
Xanthan Gum
.Biopolymer
Can withstand 120 degrees and
anything exceeding that
particular temperature causes
degradation (Fink, 2015)
High viscosity and shows reduce
in loss of fluid.
Polyanionic Cellulose (PAC)
Acts as a viscosifier and fluid loss
control.
Can withstand temperatures as
high as 150 degrees (Fink, 2012).
Improve hole cleaning and core
efficiency or preventing shale
from swelling.
Bentonite Clay
Bentonite is an impure clay that is formed by weathering of volcanic
tuffs.
Capable of suspending fluid cuttings and also act as a fluid loss
control.
A basic bentonite is built up of Montmorillonite (Smectite), Chlorites,
Kaolinites, Attapulgites and Illite.
Disadvantages of bentonite Contamination occurs easily.
pH modifier
NaOH, KOH, Ca(OH)2 and Mg(OH)2
To maintain pH to be 9
Essentially influences the viscosity of drilling fluid and fluid loss
properties.
Welton et al(2007), showed that as the concentration of Sodium
Chloride increased, viscosity of MES increased.
Weighting Agent
To provide an adequate density of the drilling fluid, a weight material
is added.
Barite is the most common weight material used in the industry
because of its low cost and high specific density (Darley and Gray,
1988).
Hematite and ilmenite can be utilized as well.
Sample Mixtures
Sample Mixtures

1 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 50g Barite

2 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 0.5g Xanthan Gum + 50g Barite
3 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 0.5g Xanthan Gum + 0.05g MES + 50g Barite
4 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 0.5g Xanthan Gum + 0.10g MES + 50g Barite
5 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 0.5g Xanthan Gum + 0.25g MES + 50g Barite
6 350ml Deionised Water + 15g Bentonite + 0.5g Xanthan Gum + 0.25g MES + 1g PAC + 50g
Barite
Results and Discussion
Density (ppg or lb/gal)
Sample one and two had a density of 9.4ppg.
Density decreases as Concentration of MES increases.
Density increased by 14% with addition of 1 g PAC.
Density
9.4 9.4
10
Density (lb/gal)

8 7
6.2 6.1 6
6
4
2
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6
Series1 9.4 9.4 6.2 6.1 6 7
SAMPLE
 Plastic Viscosity and Yield Point

PV (cP), YP(lb/100ft2)
40 37
35
30 26 25
cP/lb/100ft2

25 21
20
20 16 17 17
15
15 11
10 7 7
5
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6

PV YP
Power Law Index(n)
Power Law Index,n
0.7

0.6 0.58

0.5 0.49
0.5
0.46
0.43
0.39
0.4
n

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6
Series1 0.58 0.43 0.5 0.46 0.49 0.39
SAMPLE
Consistency Index,K
Consistency Index,K
5 4.76

4.5

3.5

2.5
K

2.23
2.13
1.97
2
1.6
1.5

0.5 0.38

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Sample
Viscosity vs Shear Rate
VISCOSITY VS SHEAR RATE
25

20

15 Sample 1
VISCOSITY(PA.S)

Sample 2
Sample 3

10 Sample 4
Sample 5
Sample 6

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
SHEAR RATE(SEC-1)
Shear Stress Vs Shear Rate
Shear Stress vs Shear Rate
0.6

0.5

0.4

Sample 1
SHEAR STRESS

Sample 2
0.3
Sample 3
Sample 4

0.2 Sample 5
Sample 6

0.1

0
1 10 100 1000 10000
SHEAR RATE(SEC-1)
Gel Strength
Gel Strength at 10s and 10min
20

18

16

14
lbf/ft2

12

10

0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6
"Gel Strength at 10s" 3 13 12 16 15 15
"Gel Strength at 10 min" 6 14 14 18 16 17
Fluid loss (LPLT) for 30 minutes
Graph of Fluid Loss (ml) Versus Time (min)
18

16

14

12

Sample 1
Fluid Loss (ml)

10
Sample 2
Sample 3
8
Sample 4

6 Sample 5
Sample 6
4

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (min)
Total fluid loss (LPLT) at 30 minutes
Total Fluid Loss
18

16
16

14
14

12 12
12
10.5
Fluid Loss (ml)

10

8 7.6

0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6
Total Fluid Loss 16 14 12 12 10.5 7.6
Mud cake Thickness
Mud Cake Thickness
4.5

4
4

3.5
Mud Cake Thickness (per 32 inch)

2.5

2
2

1.5

0.5

0 0 0 0
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6
Mud Cake Thickness 2 4 0 0 0 0
SAMPLE
Conclusion
major applications of analysing rheological properties and filtration
loss properties of drilling mud is to avoid and solve problems such as
drilling fluid suspension, hydraulic calculations, hole erosion or hole
cleaning.
Designing an appropriate drilling mud changes according to many
conditions such as lithology, pressure and temperature of the well.
Each formula of mud is specific and cannot be used in a different
wells due to these conditions.
In general, MES has proven to be a useful additive in improving
rheological and filtration loss properties of water based drilling mud.
Recommendation
Fluid stability analysis
Aid of a defoamer
Oil based mud
Temperature and pressure
Static aging or dynamic aging