L IFTING C APACITY
INTRODUCTION
Some experts have maintained that failure to properly clean the hole is responsible, directly or
indirectly, for up to 70 percent of all the drilling problems encountered. On a worldwide basis,
poor drilling performance, extraordinarily high costs and extended levels of frustration for drilling
personnel result from the use of mud with inadequate lifting capacities.
( )
Figure 5-1 relates the drag function (C d ) to particle Reynolds number R p for various particle
shapes. No simple mathematical model can be used to predict terminal settling or slip velocity
(Vs ) ; many solutions are trial and error. Familiarization with both the math and the mechanics
of predicting settling rates, however, is needed to remove the mystery of hole cleaning
problems.
Figure 5-1. Relationship Between Drag Coefficient and Particle Reynolds No.
5-1
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
HISTORY
For perfectly spherical bodies, settling velocity is given by Equation 5-1. The nomenclature for
all equations is shown at the end of the chapter.
) 1/ 2
d p p f
Vs =113.4
Cd f
Equation 5-1
Equation 5-1 is written for spheres but is adequate for most practical drilling situations. Use of
this equation is complicated by the need of the drag coefficient (C d ) . The drag term can be
taken off the graph in Figure 5-1; however, the Reynolds number in the vicinity of a particle is
needed:
Rp =
15.46 d p f Vs
Equation 5-2
As can be seen, drag coefficient (C d ) cannot be determined until Reynolds number is known.
Calculation of Reynolds number requires slip velocity (Vs ) . Trial and error solutions are clearly
indicated unless Equation 5-1 can be simplified. For a particle Reynolds number less than or
equal to one (Stoke's region), a straight line exists as approximated by C d = 24 / R p . This can
be seen in Figure 5-1. Substitution into Equation 5-1 yields:
2
Vs = 8,289
d p p f
Equation 5-3
Stoke's Law holds limited application for lifting capacity problems related to oil field drilling.
Therefore, Equation 5-3 is given for information only and should not be used to calculate slip
velocity for oil field applications.
For spherical particles at particle Reynolds number between approximately 500 and 200,000
(Newton's Law), C d is almost constant at 0.44. This substitution yields:
) 1/ 2
d p p f
Vs =171
Equation 5-4
Equation 5-4 is somewhat useful in solving oil field problems but, predictably, tends to mask the
effects of viscosity on lifting capacity. Viscosity effects often diminish rapidly at high Reynolds
numbers throughout all phases of study of fluid dynamics. Equation 5-4 is representative of
turbulent flow around the particle.
If an idealized curve is constructed for known values of spheres on a plot of C d versus R p ,
then for a Reynolds numbers between 1.0 and 500, the approximate equation for the drag
coefficient is:
5-2
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
Cd =
18.5
Rp
Equation 5-5
0.6
Vs = 346.6
e 0.6 f 0.4
0.71
Equation 5-6
HOLE CLEANING
The primary objective of drilling mud is to "get the dirt out". From Figure 5-2, it can be seen
that:
Vp =Vf Vs
Equation 5-7
( )
If hole cleaning is equated to the value of the particle velocity Vp then clearly, lifting capacity
can be enhanced by increasing the annular velocity of the fluid (Vf ) . The only other way to
increase the particle velocity is to decrease the slip velocity (Vs ) by some reasonable means.
In most good drilling operations, the annular velocity has been selected by bit cleaning or
hydraulics parameters. Therefore, manipulation of slip velocity is the preferred method of
controlling hole cleaning. Unfortunately, many operators reduce the slip velocity by increasing
mud weight when hole cleaning problems arise. Example 5-1 shows how hole cleaning can be
affected by a change in mud weight.
Example 5-1
Given:
Determine:
Solution:
Use Equation 5-6 to calculate the slip velocity for both cases.
Case I:
5-3
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
0.6
0.4
50 10
0.71
= 85.01 fpm
Case II:
(0.5 )1.6 (21 12 )
Vs = 346.6
0.6
0.4
50 12
0.71
= 70.00 fpm
Check the particle Reynolds number to make sure the use of Equation 5-6 is
appropriate, i.e. 1.0 R P 500 .
Rp =
15.46 d p f Vs
Rp =
(15.46)(0.5)(10)(85.01) =131
Rp =
(15.46)(0.5)(12)(70.00) =130
50
50
5-4
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
Basin, Wyoming, it is necessary to penetrate approximately 3,000 feet of Waltman shale. The
Waltman is reported to be both water sensitive and abnormally pressured.
Example 5-2
Given:
The typical drilling parameters while drilling the Waltman shale are:
MW = 14.0 ppg
12 inch hole with 5 inch drill pipe
Flow rate = 500 GPM (annular velocity = 98 fpm)
Viscometer reading 600 = 100
Viscometer reading 300 = 60
Determine:
Solution:
d p 1 .6 p f
Vf = Vs = 346.6
e 0 . 6 f 0 .4
0.71
V 1.4
s e 0.6 f 0.4
346.6
d p =
p f
0.63
First, one must calculate the equivalent thickness (viscosity) of the drilling
mud at an annular velocity of 98 fpm. In the chapter on drilling fluids,
Equation 5-14 is used to determine the viscosity of drilling fluids at a
given shear rate (annular velocity).
2.4
e =
Dh D p
2n + 1 200 k Dh D p
3n
v
Calculate n and k .
5-5
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
n = 3 . 32 log 600
300
k=
300
n
511
100
= 3 . 32 log
= 0 . 7365
60
60
5110.7365
= 0.6072
12
.
25
5
3
0
.
7365
0.7365
e =
2000.6072(12.25 5 )
=127cp
98
0. 6
0. 4
x127 x14
346.6
d p =
(
2114 )
0.63
=1.16 inch
15.46 d p f Vs
1. 6
p f
dp
e =
1. 4
Vs 0.4
f
346.6
1.67
1.161.6 (219 )
1. 4
98 9 0.4
346.6
1.67
= 417 cp
Rp =
(15.45)(1.16)(9)(98) = 38
417
Since the Reynolds number is greater than 1 and less than 500,
Equation 5-6 is valid.
Therefore, for the given situation, if mud weight is reduced from 14.0 ppg to 9.0 ppg, then
viscosity must be increased from 127 to 417 cp in order to maintain the same hole cleaning or
5-6
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
lifting capacity. The 14 ppg mud had a plastic viscosity of 40 and a yield point of 20. To get the
increased lifting capacity required for the 9 ppg mud, the plastic viscosity would have to be
approximately 10, with a yield point of 40.
The changes introduced in Example 5-2 resulted in dramatic cost savings. The lighter mud
weight allowed the well to be drilled much quicker and the cost of the mud was substantially
reduced. Hole instability, which is largely a function of time, was essentially eliminated.
Virtually scores of similar drilling problems have been reduced or eradicated by focusing
attention upon the hole cleaning characteristics of various mud systems.
The effects of viscosity and particle diameter on hole cleaning can be seen by observing the
equations used for calculating the lifting capacity of a drilling fluid. The viscosity of the drilling
fluid is not reported in equivalent thickness; rather it is reported as plastic viscosity and yield
point. Figure 5-3 shows how the equivalent thickness of a drilling fluid is affected by changes in
the plastic viscosity and yield point. To construct the graph, plastic viscosity was varied while
keeping the yield point constant at 10 lbf/100ft2. Notice that the equivalent thickness of the
drilling fluid changes very little while the plastic viscosity changes from 5 to 40 cp. When the
plastic viscosity is kept constant at 10 cp and the yield point is allowed to vary from 5 to 40
lbf/100ft2, there is a considerable change in the equivalent thickness of the drilling fluid. It
should be obvious from Figure 5-3 that plastic viscosity has little effect on hole cleaning. On the
other hand, the yield point is the parameter to change if hole cleaning capacity is to be
increased.
Figure 5-3. Graph Shows the Effect of Plastic Viscosity and Yield Point on Equivalent Thickness
5-7
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
Figure 5-4 is a plot of slip velocity versus particle diameter. For very small diameter particles
(less than 0.1 inches) the slip velocity is small. As the particle diameter increases, the slip
velocity of the particle increases correspondingly. Note that at a particle diameter of 0.8 inches,
the Reynolds number exceeds 500 and the slope of the line changes.
Figure 5-4. Slip Velocity vs Particle Diameter for a 10 ppg Mud with a Plastic Viscosity of 10 and Yield Point of 7
Removing drill cuttings from the hole is seldom a problem because the particle diameter is
relatively small. However, pieces of a formation that have sloughed into the well bore can be
much more difficult to carry out of the well. If the sloughed pieces of formation are too large to
be carried out of the well, they will stay in the well bore until they are small enough to be carried
by the drilling fluid. The pieces of formation will get smaller by mechanical grinding between the
particle and the drill string or by colliding with the drill string, hole wall and other particles.
Particles with large quantities of reactive clays can essentially dissolve in the mud system. In
any case, the breakup of particles in the annulus is detrimental to the mud system. It will
increase the quantity of very small diameter particles within the mud system making it more
difficult to remove the solids at the surface.
Figure 5-5 shows how the stagnation particle size changes with yield point. As the yield point
increases, larger diameter particles can be lifted out of the well bore. Adjusting the yield point
and annular velocity of the drilling fluid is the preferred method of increasing the lifting capacity.
Increasing mud weight slows penetration rate and increases mud costs.
5-8
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
Figure 5-5. Plot of Stagnation Particle Diameter vs Yield Point. The Plastic Viscosity was Constant at 10 cP and the
mud weight was 10 ppg.
EMPIRICAL CORRELATION
There is one problem with calculating slip velocities. There are too many unknowns in the
annulus. How does one determine the maximum particle size to be removed from the hole? If
the cutting size is observed at the shaker, the largest diameter particles are only the particles
that are being removed from the hole. Larger particles remain in the hole until mechanical
grinding makes them smaller. Additionally, how large is the hole? Caliper logs show that very
few wells are in gage. Most holes are washed out, at least in some intervals. A larger hole
reduces the annular velocity. With higher viscosity muds, channeling may occur in washouts.
As explained in the chapter on drilling fluids, the viscosity of a drilling fluid does not remain
constant while being circulated around the well. Drilling fluid can thin or thicken with increased
temperature. In laminar flow, the velocity profile in the annulus is not constant. The fluid near
the edges moves at a slower velocity than the fluid in the center of the flow stream. Cuttings of
different densities and shapes also move at different velocities in the annulus.
For the above reasons, an empirical correlation was developed to predict hole cleaning.1 There
are only three hole cleaning variables that can be controlled at the rig. They are mud weight,
annular velocity and drilling fluid viscosity. As stated earlier, mud weight is kept to a minimum in
order to improve penetration rate or minimize lost circulation. Annular velocity is most often
5-9
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
predetermined by a hydraulics program. The viscosity of the mud can be changed to enhance
hole cleaning.
Field experience has shown that if the mud weight, viscosity and annular velocity of a drilling
fluid are multiplied together, the result would be approximately 400,000 when hole cleaning was
observed to be adequate. The empirical correlation is termed the CCI or carrying capacity
index, which can be calculated from Equation 5-8. Good hole cleaning is expected when the
CCI is equal to or greater than one. On some wells, hole cleaning can be adequate if the CCI is
less than one while hole cleaning may not be adequate in some wells if the CCI is greater than
one. It depends upon the conditions in the well. The CCI is just a good starting point.
CCI =
( f )(K )(v )
Equation 5-8
400,000
The K value is determined from the power-law model for drilling fluids.
effective centipoise viscosity and can be determined from Equation 5-9.
K has a value of
K = 511(1n ) (PV + YP )
Equation 5-9
Figure 5-6 can be used to determine the value of K based on the plastic viscosity and yield
point of the drilling fluid. As the yield point increases, the viscosity or K value increases.
Example 5-3 illustrates the use of the carrying capacity index.
2000
PV
5 cp
10 cp
15 cp
20 cp
25 cp
30 cp
35 cp
40 cp
1800
1600
K Viscosity, equivalent cp
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
5-10
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
Example 5-3
Given:
Determine:
Solution:
Calculate the K value for the carrying capacity index or get it from Figure
5-6.
K = 511(1n ) (PV + YP )
K = 511(10.7365 ) ( 40 + 20 ) = 310 cp
( f )(K )(v )
CCI =
(14)(310)(98) = 1.1
400,000
400,000
The CCI is 1.1 so the 14 ppg mud should be able to clean the hole, which it did. If the equation
is used in reverse for the 9.0 ppg mud, the K value would have to be around 482 cp. From
Figure 5-6, the yield point of a 9.0 ppg mud with a plastic viscosity of 10 cp would have to be
approximate 13 lbf/100ft2. The CCI would calculate that the drilling fluid does not have to be as
viscous as the fluid calculated in Example 5-2. It must be remembered that a CCI value of 1 or
greater does not guarantee adequate hole cleaning. It also does not work well in directional
wells above 30 degrees.
NOMENCLATURE
Cd
CCI
Dh
Dp
=
=
=
5-11
Drilling Practices
Chapter 5
dp
PV
Rp
=
=
v
Vf
Vp
=
=
=
Vs
YP
e
=
=
=
300
600
SI UNITS
The equations given in the chapter are given below in SI units
Equation 5-1:
Equation 5-2:
) 1/ 2
d p p f
Vs =6.86
Cd f
Rp =
d p f Vs
Equation 5-11
60 e
d p 2 ( P f )
Equation 5-3:
Vs =
Equation 5-4:
d p p f
Vs =10.3
Equation 5-6:
d p 1 .6 ( P f
Vs = 0.349
e 0 .6 f 0 . 4
5-12
Equation 5-10
Equation 5-12
30.6
) 1/ 2
Equation 5-13
0.71
Equation 5-14
Drilling Practices
Lifting Capacity
( f )(K )(v )
Equation 5-8
CCI =
Equation 5-9:
K = 511(1n ) (PV +
Equation 5-15
14,000,000
YP
)
0.479
Equation 5-16
CCI
Dh
Dp
=
=
=
dp
PV
Rp
=
=
v
Vf
Vp
=
=
=
Vs
YP
e
=
=
=
300
600
REFERENCE
1
Robinson, L.; Empirical Correlation for Borehole Cleaning Developed, World Oil, September,
1993, pp 37-42.
5-13