Effect of Mud Properties on Drilling Rate

ABSTRACT
Fleld observations Indicate that the dri l l ~ng rates
obtainable wlth muds may vary from 30 t o 70 percent
of those obtainable with water under the same con-
dltions. The causes of this reduction based on lab-
oratory and field experiences are di scussed. Fluid
viscosity appears to be the s~gnificant factor afTect-
ing drilling rate through cleamng actlon. In the field,
011 in emulslon muds nlay Improve drdling rate
through thelr lubricating qualities.
INTRODUCTION
In any engineering study of rotary drilling it i s
convenient to divlde the Factors which affect the
rate of penetration of rotary bits into the folloHing
five groups:
1. F'ormation.
2. Bit.
3. h'lechanical.
4. Hydraulic.
5. fi luld properties.
E orniation, although nearly an independent or un-
controllable variable, is influenced to a certain ex-
tent by hydrostatic pressure. Fayne and Chippendale'
have reported resul t s of some llnilted laboratory ex-
periments which indicate that, In some formations,
increased hydrostatic pressure Increases the fornia-
tion hardness or reduces ~ t s drillablllty. The blt
type selected, i.e., whether a drag bit, diamond bit,
or roller cutter bit, and the var ~ous tooth structures
which are available in t hi s latter type, aftects to
some extent the drllling rate obtainable in a glven
formation. The niechanical factors of Height on the
bit and rotary speed are then linearly related to drill-
Ing rate, provided the hydraulic factors are in proper
balance to lnsure proper cleaning of the hole.' The
hydraulic factor^'^^,"^ affect drilling rate only a s
they influence the rate or efficiency with which the
~nechanical factors can be applied. l ' he manner In
uhlch the fifth factor aflects drilling rate IS the sub-
ject of t hi s paper.
* Humble Oil & Refinlng Company, Houston.
t pres ent ed at the spring meeting of the Southwestern Distrrct,
Di vi si on of Production, Houston, March 1954.
' Ref erences are at the end of the paper.
DISCUSSlON
F~ e l d Measurements and Observations
For several years, particularly in the hard-rock
areas such a s hes t Texas, field personnel have ob-
served the reduction in drilling rate ~ h l c h BCCO!II-
panies a change from Hater to mud. Although t hl s
phenonlenon has been observed, ~ t s order of nlagnl-
tude had not been the subject of detalled Investlga-
tion and no fundamental infornlation a s to ~ t s cause
was available. Humble's investigation of this prob-
lem began with a measuren~ent or the relative drill-
ing rate, i.e., the drilling rate ~ i t h mud as a per-
centage of the drllling rate obtained with Hater on
several different Hells drilling both I ~me and shale
formations with roller-type b ~ t s . l ' hese d d a were ob-
talned by drilling alternate short sectlons using first
nlud then Hater a s the drllling fluid. All other recog-
n ~z e d variables were held constant during these t est s.
L)ata such a s those shown I n Fig. 1 \\ere obtained.
S HALE
WELL A WELL B WELL C
Fig. 1-Field Data Showtng Effect of Mud-weight on
Drilling Rate
West Texas Area
120 JOHN R. ECKEL
ROTATING TIME - HOURS
Fig. 2- Fi el d Dat a Showing Effect of Mud Weight on
Dri l l i ng Rat e
South Mi ssi ssi ppi
Helatlve drilling rat es varied from approximately 30
to 70 percent. bat a from routlne field drllling where
the pr~nci pal variable was mud weight were obtain-
ed a s in the example shown in F'ig. 2. Drilling rate
appeared to vary inversely w~t h mud weight. The
0
''moo tm rm xe +m wa soo m l oo l oo
HOURS ROTATED BELOW 10, 000FEET
Fi g. 3- Fi el d Dat a Showing Effect of Mud Weight and
Hydraul i c Factors on Dri l l i ng Rot e
South Loui si ana
same varl at ~on nray be seen i n b lg. 3 although I n
thls case the hydraulic factors also varied sonle-
what, as IS shown.
Increases I n rate of penetration i%ere obtalned
uhere 011-er~~ul s~on muds were conlpared n ~ t h con-
ventlonal muds under sln.llar drllllnp cond~t ~ons . An
example of t h l s conlparlson lrlay be seen I n k lg. 4.
I n addition, ~t u a s observed that the use of 011-
emulslon nruds reduced torque by a s nluch 'is SI X
turns on 5-111. OU drill plpe and reduced drag fronr
80,000 to 40,000 Ib.
k'urther difference I n drllllng rate nhlch could be
attributed only to a diRerence I n the fluid properties
were obtalned on hel l s uhlch had used alr or natu-
ral gas as the drllllng fluld. A recently obtalned
F i g . 4- Fi el d Dat a Comparing Effect of Oil-emulsion
and Cmvent i onal Mud on Dri l l i ng Rote
South Loui si ana
conlparison betueen air and nlud i s shown I n k ~ g . 5.
Not only was the average rate of penetration obt d~n-
ed w~t h alr greater, but only 2 b ~ t s were used com-
pared with 11 bl t s requlred to dr ~l l a comparable
sectlon in an offset well.
Fleld Tests
A s a result of these field o b s e ~ a t l o n s and meas-
urements of the ellect of mud on dr i l l ~ng rate, a se-
ri es of field t est s uere conducted I n the Nest l e x a s
area In an ellort to determine the mud property or
properties responsible for t h ~ s reduction. 1 hese t es t s
were conducteduhile dr ~l l i ng a un~form 11nre sectlon
by punlping alternate sl ugs of t est mud and water
past the b ~ t , hold~np '111 other recognized var ~abl es
constant. bat a obtained from these t est s are shohn
I n ig. 6 and 7.
l- lg. 6 shows the eHect of mud we~ght on r el at ~ve
dr i l l ~ng rate and lndlcates that drllllng rate IS re-
duced a s mud uelght or some property proportional
! .. .. -0 !m b e 0 8- t- 8-
I I I I I I I I
ROI LTI N6 TI ME - HOURS
Fig. 5-Fi el d Data Comparing Air and Mud as
Drilling Fluids
New Mexico
to mud height is increased. 1 he muds used on t hese
t est s were mixed from bentonite, drilling clay, and
barites with various chemical treatments to vary the
physical properties. Cecause the composition of the
Fig. 6-Field Test Data Showing Effect of Mud Weight
on Drilling Rate
West Texas Area
muds used h a s thus essentially the same, any prop-
erty which is a funct ~on of the sol i ds content such
a s density, viscosity, and, to a certain extent, gel
and water l oss hould all be proportional.
k'ig. 7 shows the eflect of oil-emulsion concen-
tration on drilling rate. These t est s indicated that
while oil-emulsion muds also caused a reduction in
drilling rate conrpared with water drilling rates, there
was an optimunl oil concentration for which the re-
ductions in drilling rate would be a minimum. The
diflerence shown betheen the mechanical and soap-
type en~ulsion i s not considered significant.
The difFlculty in obtaining the unifornl formation .
in which to conduct the field t es t s and the difficulty
0 MECHANICAL EMULSION
SOAP TYPE EMULSION
ae
OIL CONCENTRATION 46 BY VOLUME
Fig. 7-Field Data Showing Effect of Oil-in-Emulsion
Concentration on Drilling Rate
West Texas Area
and expense involved in mixing d~fferent muds in
sufficient quantities for 5 to 10 nlin pumping time
led to a dec~s i on to determine whether or not thls
problem niight not best be solved in the laboratory.
Laboratory Tests*
1'0 conduct the laboratory t est s a large dr ~l l press
was modified by the additlon of a swivel arrange-
nient to provide circulation and a drum and cable
arrangement to provide uniform loading to serve as
the dr ~l l i ng unit. A Moyno pump provided circulation
at rat es up to about 12 gal per nun at pressures u p
* In cooperation wl t h Hamy W. Brown, Production Research DI-
vl sl on, Humbl e 011 & Refinlng Company.
122 JOHN R. ECKEL
I
to 500 psl. l ' he roller blt used in the experimental
~ o r k was of a two-cone de s ~gn n~anufactured for this
purpose by one of the major bit-nlanufactur~ng con)-
pan~es . 1 he forn~ation drilled cons ~s t ed of 8-in.
cubes of Lueders limestone available from a local
stone company.
It Mas first necessary to detern~ine ~shet her or not
laboratory drilling ) \ as at l east i n qualitative agree-
n~ent hith the field results. b lg. 8 shows the eNect
of height and rotary speed at constant rat es of cir-
culation on the drilling rate obt a~ned in the labora-
tory. lnasn~uch a s these data are qualltatlvely s i n l l -
la1 to t l ~os e obt a~net l Iron1 field experln~ents, ~t nlay
be assumed that the n~echan~cal factors allect rlrllling
rate sin~ilarly I n both the laboratory .ind the field.
1 o determine whether the ellect of nlud w'hlch has
been found i n the field could also be measured I n the
WEIGHT ON BIT WUNE
Fi g. 8-Laboratory Data Showing Rel at ~on of Dri l l i ng
Rate and Welaht on Bi t at Constant Rat e of
Circulation and Rotary Speed
laboratory, data such a s that shown in F ~ g . 9 were
obtained. It will be noted that, at l east In the region
below a ci rcul at ~ng rate of 4 gal per nlin in the lab-
oratory. a reduct ~on ~ ' n drilling rate was obtalned wlth
mud. l ' he question of s c a l ~n g the resul t s was post-
poned by a declslon to work with trends and nltnl-
mu m reductions and then to field t est the resul t s of
the laboratory study.
Us ~n g a w~ d e varlety of muds and solutions, re-
sul t s such a s are shown in E ~ g . 9 were obtained.
Because the nlaximum reduction I n drilling rate with
nlud was obt a~ned generally in the region of 3 gal
per n ~ i n crrculatlng rate, this volume was a r b ~t r a r i l ~
sel ect ed for comparing the effect s of varlous fluids
and propertles. A standard b ~ t weight of 500 Ib and
a rotary speed of 55 rpnl were al so arbitrarily se-
Fi g. 9-Laboratory Data Showing Relation of Dri l l i ng
Rat e and Circulation Rat e for Three Different Muds
w
>
F 'KI
J
W e
20
OO
I n additlon to the drilling-rate data, the followlnp
mud propertles were measured where pertinent:
1. Lenslty.
2. Viscosity (Stormer and Marsh funnel).
3. F'lltratlon (30 mln i\Pl).
4. Gel (inltial and 3-min).
5. Percent sol i ds by weight (obtalned by drylng
1 a mud sample).
CIRCULITION R I T E GALLONS PER MI NUTE
------i
2 + 6
6. I'ercent sol l ds by volunle (obtdlned by centri-
fuging a n~ud sample).
The amount of cuttlngs whlch were retained on l1.5.
Standard 3ieve Ro. 40 was al so measured. l ' he cut-
ting-recovery dat a nhich are shown in b ~ g . 10 mere
Fi g. 10-Laboratory Dat a Showing Effect of
Circulation Rat e on Cutting Recovery for
Three Muds and Water
I 10
lected.
2
found to be qu~t e si rn~l ar In form to the dr~lling-rate
data shown I n E'lg. 9. This s l nl ~l ar ~t y 1 s bel ~eved I n-
dicative of the manner In which the drilling fluid re-
tards drllllng rate, I.e., by d direct ellect on the
amount of r egr ~nd~ng which t akes place at the bit.
Laboratory Results
'I he relative drilling rate obtained under the ar-
b~t rary condi t ~ons of 3 gal per nlin circulating rate,
500 Ib b ~ t we~ght , and 55 rpm rotary speed were then
plotted a s a functlon of the varrous fluid properties.
t. ~ g . 11 shows such a plot a s the funct ~on of Stornrer
v ~s c o s ~t y . It will be noted that the maxlmurn reduc-
tlon I n drilling rate i s obt a~ned at a vi s cos ~t y of ap-
pr ox~n~at el y 40 cent i po~ses. t. urther increases in
vl s cos ~t y appear to have no eHect on d r ~ l l ~ n g rate.
There IS some scatter In the datd wh~ch 1s the
result, at l east In a large measure, of the varylng
dr ~l l abi l ~t y in the most uniforni rock which could be
obt a~ned for laboratory study. T h ~ s var ~at l on was
obt a~ned even though the rocks used her e selected
for un~fornl ~t y and a drilling pattern hhlch hould
average out any l ~ne a r vari at ~on I n drlllabilrty of the
saniple was utilized. Graph~cal e l ~ n l ~ n a t ~ o n of the
apparent effect of all of the other var ~abl es meas-
ured does not a p p r e c ~a b l ~ reduce t hi s scatter. An-
other poss~bl l l t y is the influence of some factor
w111ch has not been recogn~zed or wh~ch could not
be measured.
~ g . 12 shows a plot of d r ~ l l ~ n p rate a s funct ~on
of the standard Al'I 30-nl1n filtration rate. The ap-
parent trend of Increased dr ~l l i ng rate n ~t l i Increased
f i l t r d~on rate I S found to be due to the extreniely lom
v ~ s c o s ~ t y of the h ~g h filtrat~on-rate fluids \vhich were
used. Uhen these data are corrected uslng the VIS-
cosity ellect shot\n I n 1 . 1 ~ . 1l . t h1s trend d~s appear s
Fi g. 11-Laboratory Dat a Showing Effect of Vi scosi t y
on Dri l l i ng Rat e
Fi g. 12-Laboratory Dat a Showing Effect of Fi l t r ot ~on
Rat e on Dri l l i ng Rat e
~ n d ~ c a t ~ n g that any concl ~~s i ons based on filtration
rate must at l east also cons ~der the ellect of v ~ s -
cos ~t y. I he resul t s shown I n E 1g. 12 are t y p ~ c ~ ~ l of
those for the other l l u~d propert ~es.
'I he separate ellect hhlch had been noted in the
lield caused by oi l - ~n- en~ul s ~on concentrat~on \ \ as
not Independently apparent I n the laboratory. 1.e..
011-~n-emulsion concentrat~on Mas not a s ~gn~f i c a nt
var ~abl e Independent of v~s cos i t y. It must also be
kept In mind that In the IaLoratory t est s. wall f r ~c -
t ~ o n h a s not a factor afi ect ~ng dr l l l ~ng rate.
COhCLUSlONS
Based on field and laboratory observat ~on and ex-
periments, ~t 1s believed that the effect of niud prop-
ertles on drllllng rate must be separated a s Follot\s
1. lnasnluch a s hydrost at ~c pressure affects forn1'1-
tlon d r ~ l l a b ~ l ~ t ~ . dens ~t y i s a flu~d property M ~ I C ~
atlects drlllinp rate. The research reported by 1'<lyne
and Ch~ppendal e and observation of large increases
In drilllng rate brought about by the use of alr or
gas support thls concl us~on.
2. Because Increased rat es of penetratlon, to-
gether w~t h r educt ~ons In torque and drag, a e ob-
served In the field when 011-en~uls~on muds are used.
and because the laboratory s t u d ~e s do not support
t hi s a s an ~ndependent effect. ~t IS bel ~eved that the
Increases obtalned h ~ t h t h ~ s niud .Ire due to ~ t s lu-
brl cat ~ng properties.
3. b' l u~ds atlect drllllng rate ~ndl rect l y throug11 the
~nlluence of both density 'ind v ~ s c o s ~ t y on the hy-
dr aul ~c quant l t ~es ~nvol ved I n rotary d r ~l l ~n g . In t h ~ s
connection they are s~gnrbcant p r ~ n c ~ p d l l ~ because
a dr ~l l l ng rlp 1 s essentially a constant or nr' urnlrrnr
hydraul~c horsepomer dev~ce. and Incre~t ses I n these
t ho quant ~t i es lncrease systenl losses.
124 JOHN R. ECKEL
4. In addi t ~on to the foregoing eflects, the fluid
influences drilling rate by i t s cl ean~ng eBect. In thls
connection the si gn~fi cant variable wh~ch has been
measured appears to be viscosity.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author sincerely appreciates the help and
fine cooperation on the part of members of the Pet-
roleuni Lngneeri ng Division who assi st ed in gather-
ing some of the field data referred to. The laboratory
work presented in t hl s paper was a joint project of
the Petroleum Lngineering and ProductionHesearch
Ui v~s ~ons . Appreciation i s also extended to the man-
agement of Rumble Oil & Hefining Company Ior p e r
mission to publish t hl s paper.
REFERENCES
' Payne, L. L. and Ch~ppendale, W: Hard-rock Drllllng,
Sect N, Proc. Am. Pet Znst (Prod Bul 239) 62 (1953).
Brantly, J. E. and Clayton, Edgar E. A Prellmlnary Eval-
uatlon of Factors Controlling Rate of Penetratlon In
Rotary Drllllng, Drrlltng and Productton Practtce, 8
(1939).
' B~elsteln, W. J. and Cannon, George E. Factors Affectlng
the Rate of Penetratlon of Rock B~t s , Drtlltng and Pro-
ductton Practrce, 61 (1950).
Nolley, J. P, Cannon, George E, and Ragland, Douglas.
The Relatlon of Nozzle Fluld Velocity t o Rate of Pene-
tratlon w~t h Drag-type Rotary Bits, Drrlllng and Pro-
ductron Practtce, 23 (1948).
'Eckel, John R. and Nolley, J. P. An Analysls of Hy-
draul~c Factors Affectlng the Rate of Penetratlon of
Drag-type Rotary B~t s , Drrllrng and Production Practtce,
9 (1949).
6Eckel, John R. and Bielsteln, W. J: Nozzle Deslgn and
Its Effect on Dr~lllng Rate and Pump Operation, Drtllrng
and Productton Practtce, 28 (1951).
DISCUSSION
U. E'. Iiieschnick, Jr. (The Atlantic Hefining Co.,
bal l as) (written): h e are pleased to s ee another pa-
per from the Humble Company concerned with the
problem of increasing drilling rate. Thi s particular
paper presents some very interesting dat a and makes
some useful generalizations for application to field
- . .
problems and for stimulating further detailed exami-
nat ~on of some of the variables.
I should like to make some specific comments on
several of the variables discussed.
1. Mud Denszt y. The author has added more weight
-
to the argument that bottom-hole pressure or hydro-
st at i c head affects dr ~l l i ng rate. Insofar a s density
contributes to t hi s effect and Insofar a s it affects
system l os s es in a constant hydraulic horsepower
system, density should probably be an influential
variable a s the author points out.
It should be emphasized, a s the paper suggests,
that Fig. 2, 3, and 6 do not show directly the effect
of density per s e upon rate. Lven though the drilllng
rate correlates with the dens ~t y property, a number
of factors-includ~ng some funct ~on of s o l ~ d s content,
viscosity, and other propert ~es proport~onal to den-
sity-are probably Influencing drilling rate.
h e have some dat a from a laboratory setup which
Indicates that dr ~l l i ng rate fal l s ofl sharply a s bot-
tom-hole fluid pressure i ncreases from e s s e n t ~ a l l ~
atn~ospheric pressure up to 300 psi. Thi s niight t i e
in to the author's observations, or possibly a pheno-
menon of temporary "chip restraint" by fluid pres-
sure leading to regr~ndi ng of cuttings might be the
answer. If the latter i s a real effect, it might be an
additional way in which hydrostatic head affect s
rate.
2. Ebect of 0 2 1 Lmulszon. Ae have believed that
the most significant eAect of emul s~on muds on rate
has been observed in drilling Gulf Coast hydratable
shale where it l eads to increased drilling rate main-
ly by nlinimizing the balling-up problem rather than
the effect of educing fri ct ~onal drag up the hole. I
recall a well In Llve Oak County where we added
5 Ib per bbl of graphite to the lime-base mud In an
experiment. There was some up-hole l ubr~cat i on from
the graphite a s evidenced by reduced torque and
drag. PIhlle drilling a thick hydratable shal e section
the bit balled up and drilling rate was very low. The
mud was emulsified with about 12 percent d ~ e s e l oil
and the rate increased significantly and balling was
reduced considerably.
3. Vzscosi t y. Using non-slurry type fluids of var-
i ous vi scosi t i es in the laboratory, we have discov-
ered about the same direct effect of viscosity which
the author's data indicate. The scat t er in these dat a
quite possibly reflects the inability of the Stormer
viscorneter to measure the mud's v~s cos l t l es a s they
actually e x ~ s t in turbulent flow in the vicinity of the
bit during drilling.
4. Water Lo s s . The dat a in the paper suggest that
the wat er l oss property does not affect drllllng rate.
It i s reasonable that the actual flow of filtrate itself
into the porous rock ~ 1 1 1 not affect rate. However,
the thickness and properties of whatever filter cake
might be deposited on bottom in permeable forma-
tions could conceivably afl'ect rate. If the experi-
mental setup did not allow inipos~tion of fluid pres-
sure t o create a filter cake on bottom, then I believe
t hi s poss~bi l i t y must be examined before we can
pas s final judgment on the filtration variable in drill-
ing rate.
EFFECT OF MUD PROPERTIES ON DRILLING RATE 125
Looking ahead, I believe that in additlon to the
-
effect s of viscosity and density which are mentioned
in t hi s paper, we will discover some further eflect
of the sol i ds content in the mud. Further research
Into the mechanrsm of drilling is needed to clarify
t hi s and other questions about effect s of the pertl-
nent variables.
Roy A. Bobo (Phillips Petroleum Co., Houston)
(written):' Mr. Eckel has presented an excellent pa-
per, and one which i s most tlmely in view of the
current interest in his subject. The questions posed
by the paper should stimulate further work based on
. ~
the conclusive dat a presented.
The dat a indicating that rate of filtration i s not
independently a valid factor in penetration rate i s of
such significance that it deserves recognition a s a
conclusion; notwithstanding, or perhaps because of,
the fact that t hl s has been suspected, theorized, and
argued bitterly-but never a s conclusively shown-by
many lndivlduals In the field.
Regarding the discussion of Fig. 5, the possibility
exi st s that the tremendous difference in hydrostatic
pressure on the formation between drilling with mud
and with gas may be a penetration rate factor over-
riding all others.
Conclusion No. 2 can be qualified somewhat. hhen
friction i s overcome in one plane, friction between
the same, surfaces in any other plane i s virtually
eliminated. In other words, when torque i s constant-
* Not presented.
ly exerted on drill pipe in sufficient force to over-
come rotational friction, or drag, the vertical drag
becomes negligible. Thl s i s a well-known principle
in certain industries and i s the basi s for the success
of the el ast i c stop nut. Thls does not exclude the
possibility that weight a s indicated on the surface
may not reach the bit when drill pipe i s rotated in
a so-called ' ' s t r a ~~ht hole" wherein allowable devia-
tions may result in a spiraled bole. Actual weight
on the bit could conceivably be more or l es s than
that indicated, according to the direction of the
-
spiral, and would in t hi s case be affected by any
lubricating effects of the drilling fluid between the
wall of the hole and the drill pipe.
. .
It i s unfortunate that field instruments for more
absolute measurement of fluid properties were not
available at the time these t es t s were made. Such
measurements might have permitted better segrega-
tion of mud welght a s an independent factor and
should have afforded some information as to the ex-
tent that each of the two plastic-flow properties,
pl ast i c viscosity and yield point, affect penetration
rate. Since Mr. Eckel' s paper, !graphs have been pre-
sent edt showing some typical variations of flow
properties with mud weight. These variations, a s
well as the general trend to higher properties with
heavier weight, may offer some explanation for part
of the spread In the resul t s presented by Mr. Lckel.
t Ormsby. George S Calculation and Control of Mud Pres s ures
In Drl l l i ng and Completion Operat ~ons , 44, Drzllrng and Pro-
ductzon Pract rce (1954).