International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Submitted: 2017-03-23

ISSN: 1663-4144, Vol. 38, pp 9-16 Revised: 2018-06-08

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/JERA.38.9 Accepted: 2018-06-08
© 2018 Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland Online: 2018-09-03

Experimental Study of Temperature Effect on Drilling Mud

with Local Additives
Ikponwosa Ohenhen1,a, Shadrach Olise Ogiriki2,b,
Igbinohodua Imuetiyan1,c, Okechukwu Ezeja1,d
1
Department of Petroleum Engineering, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria.
2
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria.
a
ik.ohenhen@uniben.edu, bshadrachogiriki@abuad.edu.ng, cigbinoghodua.imuetiyan@uniben.edu,
d
john.charvy@gmail.com

Keywords: Drilling mud, CMC, Cassava, Water yam, Temperature

Abstract. Drilling mud is an essential component in well drilling processes. The high temperature
at the bottom of wells tend to reduce the mud viscosity and density, thereby affects the ability of the
mud to perform its useful purpose in the drilling operation. Additives are usually added to the mud
to enhance its properties to meet desired specifications. Carboxylmethyl Cellulose (CMC) is added
to increase the mud viscosity and barite is added to increase the mud density. This work presents an
investigation on possible substitutes for these additives. Locally sourced materials, Cassava
(Manihot manifera) and Water yam (Dioscoria alata) were compared to barite and CMC. The
properties measured are the rheological properties of the mud slurry which are plastic viscosity,
apparent viscosity, yield point and gel strength, mud density, filtration properties at varying high
temperatures (120 – 150 oF), and hydrogen-ion (pH value). The results revealed that both local
additives can serve as weighting materials as they increased mud density more than barite. Filtration
properties of water yam were better than CMC and Fresh mud both at room temperature and high
temperatures. The results futher indicated that water yam and cassava additives were non acidic,
therefore are less corrosive as compared to CMC which was acidic. It was concluded that cassava
and water yam are potential substitutes of CMC.

1.0 Introduction
Drilling fluids were once only regarded as means of bringing rock cuttings to the surface, but
today drilling fluids are recognized as one of the major factors leading to the success or failure of
any drilling operation. Not only does it lift cuttings out of the wellbore, it also performs other
important functions that are essential to the efficient, economic and safe completion of a drilling
operation [1]. Some of the major functions of drilling mud for a rotary drilling process are as
follows:
1. Transport drill cuttings to the surface.
2. Suspend drill cuttings when circulation is suspended.
3. Lubricat and cool drill bit.
4. Control of subsurface pressure
5. Support the walls of the drilled hole.
6. Seal permeable formation.

To be able to achieve most of the functions listed above, the drilling fluid must attain desired
viscosity, density and other rheological properties. In today’s drilling operations, great emphasis is
always laid on the rheological properties of the drilling fluid to be used. This is because these
properties greatly influence drilling fluid performance in terms of hole cleaning, static and dynamic
carrying capacity, rate of penetration, etc. Inadequate drilling fluid design or negative changes in
rheology may lead to drilling problems [1].

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.scientific.net. (#113448947, Linköpings Universitet, Linköping, Sweden-18/03/19,19:56:06)
10 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38

Rheological changes in drilling fluids have many effects on the degree of efficiency with which a
drilling fluid performs its primary functions. With this in mind and the fact that the rheological
properties of drilling muds under down-hole conditions are usually different from those at ambient
conditions, mainly due to temperature variation especially in case of drilling geothermal wells and
deep wells, great emphasis is being laid on the effect of temperature on these properties of drilling
fluids, and also their corresponding effects on drilling fluid performance [2].
The relationship between the rheological properties (effective and plastic viscosities, yield point
and gel strengths) and temperature has been established by numerous authors, that the rheological
properties of a drilling mud is inversely proportional to temperature. [3 – 5]. This implies that the
rheological properties of a drilling mudwould increase with decrease in temperature, and vice versa.
Water-based drilling mud is reputed to underperform in high temperature conditions [5], hence
there is need to enhance its performance for applications in high temperature wells. Oil-based mud
is usually recommended for High Temperature, High Pressure (HPHT) formations [5], but the
challenge lies on its high cost. On the other hand, Ogiriki et al [6] reported that drilling mud funnel
viscosity and sand content increased with increment in temperature while aging occurred. The
impact of temperature on the rheological properties can not be over emphasized, as the neglect of
this sole parameter can complicate drilling operation [7].
Drilling mud represent 5% to 15% drilling cost but may cause 100% of drilling problems [8].
Hence, the need to properly design mud to meet sesired specifications and purpose is very important
for a drilling operation. Conducting experimental studies will help simulate more closely, the
downhole conditions and help to predict the downhole mud properties from surface laboratory tests.
Nigeria is said to have a proven reserve of 37.07 billion barrels of crude oil [9]. From 2010 to
2014, Nigeria was recorded to have completed a total number of 580 wells, with 141 wells
completed in 2014 alone [9]. It is believed that drilling operations would increase in Nigeria as
some producing fields are still being developed with more producing and injection wells being
drilled, while appraisal wells might also be on the increase. This implies that the use of drilling fluid
additives would be on the rise. Carboxylmethyl Cellulose (CMC) is mostly used for fluid loss
control as this is very vital in drilling operations. Most cases, the drilling fluid additives used
(including CMC) are imported, there by icreasing the cost of making a drilling mud, which in turn
increases the general cost of the drilling operations.
This paper considers Cassava (Manihot manifera) and Water yam (Dioscoria alata), which are
readily available and affordable, and its possible used as substitutes for CMC as fluid loss control
additives for drilling fluids. According to Udensi et al [10] the mineral content of water yam
(Dioscoria alata) were found to be Potasium (240-400mg/100g), Sodium (190-380mg/100g),
Phosphorus (180-340mg/100g), Carbon (20.2-80.2mg/100g) and Magnesium (24.3-97.2mg/100g).
The effect of temperature on cassava (Manihot manifera) and water yam (Dioscoria alata) wa
studied and reported in this paper. This research was an experimental work and materials used
where locally sourced in Nigeria.

2.0 Materials and Methods

The materials used for this study are as follows:
• Bentonite
• Barite
• Water
• Carboxylmethyl Cellulose (CMC)
• Cassava (Manihot manifera)
• Water yam (Dioscora alata)
• Bariod sand content of a 200 mesh
• Sieve funnel
• Measuiring Cylinder
 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38 11

• Mud balance
• Fann V-G Viscometer
• Marsh funnel viscometer
• Standard filter press
The water based mud was prepared in accordance with the American Institute of Petroleum
(API) Standard [10].
The mud formulation was done at room temperature of 77 oF (25 oC) atmospheric pressure of
14.7 psia. Some rheological properties of the mud, fresh/standard and mixed with either cassava
and/or water yam, were tested (dial readings) at temperatures ranging from 120 – 150 oF, as shown
in tables 5 - 13.

3.0 Results and Discussion

All results obtained in experiments conducted in this work were carefully recorded. This section
focuses on these results and their respective analysis.
3.1 Sand Content
Sand are classified as particles larger than 74 microns, and will not go through a 200 mesh
screen. Excessive sand may cause the deposition of a thick filter cake in the hole wall or may settle
in the hole. Sand is highly abrasive and will increase wear and subsequent damage of mud pumps,
valves, tubing and other equipment. Table 1 shows the sand content and mud slurry values as
measured.
Table 1. Sand content for mud slurry
Sample Sand content (%)
Bentonite 0.2
Water yam 0.3
Cassava 0.4

From table 1 above it was observed that the percentage bulk volume of sand in the mud is 0.2%
for fresh mud, 0.3% for water yam and 0.4% for cassava. This means that despite the fact that the
sand content of water yam and cassava is more than that of fresh mud, the sand content of these
samples is very low and can thus be tolerated.
3.2 Mud Density and Viscosity
The density of a mud sample is the single property of the mud that determines the ability of that
mud to help in control and balance of reservoir pressure. A mud sample with a high density is best
in the control of a well with high bottomhole pressure, to prevent kicks and/or fluid invation into
the well being drilled.
Table 2. Mud Density

Parameter/Sample Fresh Mud 30g Mud Slurry with Mud Slurry with Mud Slurry with
10g Barite 10g Cassava 10g Water Yam
Density (ppg) 8.45 8.55 8.60 8.65
Specific gravity 1.03 1.04 1.03 1.04

Weight 445 450 449 450

(Ib/ft3 )

Weight 62 65 65 65
(Ib/m2 )
12 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38

From the results shown in table 2, it was observed that 10g of barite increased the fresh mud
density from 8.45ppg to 8.55ppg, and 10g of cassava increased it to 8.6ppg, but water yam is best as
10g of it increased it to 8.65ppg.
On the other hand, the viscosity reading obtained using marsh funnel for fresh mud was 35
seconds as shown in table 3. Adding 1.5g of CMC, the viscosity became 33 seconds. The same
viscosity was obtained for 1.5g cassava, 1.5g and 2.5g water yam, while 3.5g water yam reduced
the viscosity to 32 seconds. From these results it can be seen that the additives can be used to alter
the viscosity of fresh mud during drilling.
Table 3. Marsh Funnel readings

Sample Fresh mud 1.5 g CMC 1.5g 1.5gWater 2.5gWater 3.5gWater

Cassava yam yam yam
Reading 35 33 33 33 33 32
(sec)
The Fann V-G viscometer for each of the samples is shown in Table 4. The dial reading for
various speed were recorded as well as the 10 seconds gel strength, and the 10 minutes gel strength
which represents the initial and final gel strength of the tested samples.
Table 4. Dial readings of samples
Speed Fresh Mud 1.5grams 1.5grams 1.5grams 2.5grams 3.5grams
(Rpm) CMC cassava Water Yam Water Yam Water Yam
600 6.5 7.5 13.0 8.0 9.0 9.0
300 4.5 5.0 9.0 5.0 6.0 6.5
200 4.0 4.5 7.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
100 2.5 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.5 4.0
10 Sec 5.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
10 Min 7.0 8.0 12.0 9.0 10.0 10.0
3.3 Rheological Properties
Table 5 below shows how the initial gel strength, final gel strength, plastic viscosity, apparent
viscosity and the yield point of the fresh mud were affected by the addictives.
Note the initial and final gel strengths were obtained from the 10 seconds and 10 minutes gel
strengths of the Fann V-G viscometer dial reading.
Table 5. Rheological properties of samples
Parameter/Sample Fresh Mud 1.5grams 1.5grams 1.5grams 2.5grams 3.5grams
30g CMC Cassava Water yam Water yam Water yam
Initial.Gel 5.0 6.0 8.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
2
strength lb/100ft
Final Gel strength 7.0 8.0 12.0 9.0 10.0 10.0
lb/100ft2
Plastic Viscosity 2.0 2.5 4.0 3.0 3.0 2.5
(µp) cp
Apparent 3.25 3.75 6.5 4.0 4.5 4.5
Viscosity (µa) cp
Yield Point (ϒp) 2.5 2.5 5.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
lb/100ft2
From table 5, it was observed that these local additives also increased the yield point of the fresh
mud.
 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38 13

The rheological properties of the mud samples at higher temperatures were measured, and the
results of the dial readings are shown below.
Table 6. Dial readings of fresh mud at higher temperatures
RPM 120⁰F 130⁰F 140⁰F 150⁰F
600 8.0 8.5 9.0 10.0
300 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.5
200 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
100 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
10sec 6.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
10min 9.0 11.0 12.0 13.0
From table 6, it was observed that both yield point and gel strength of fresh mud increased with
temperature increase.
Table 7. Dial readings of 1.5g CMC at higher temperatures
RPM 120⁰F 130⁰F 140⁰F 150⁰F
600 8.5 9.0 10.5 11.0
300 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5
200 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
100 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
10sec 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
10min 12.0 14.0 15.0 17.0

Similarly, the yield point and gel strength of 1.5g CMC at increased temperatures was observed
to have increased as shown in table 7.
Table 8. Dial readings of 1.5g cassava at higher temperatures
RPM 120⁰F 130⁰F 140⁰F 150⁰F
600 9.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
300 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
200 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
100 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
10sec 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.0
10min 10.0 10.0 11.0 12.0
For 1.5g cassava mud it was observed from table 8, that the yield point 600 RPM (Revolution
Per Minute) increased from 9 lb/100ft2 to 10 lb/100ft2 when temperature was increased from 120 –
130 oF, while remaining constant from 130 – 150 oF. At 300 RPM, 200 RPM and 100 RPM, the
yield point remained constant, even as temperature was increased from 120 – 150 oF. The initial gel
strength (10 seconds dial) remained constant at 8 lb/100ft2 from 120 – 140 oF, but only increased to
10 lb/100ft2 when temperatures was increased to 150 oF. The final gel strength (10 minutes dial)
was constant at 10lb/100ft2 from 120 – 130 oF, but increased to 11 lb/100ft2 at 140 oF and then
increased to 12 lb/100ft2 when temperature was further increased to 150 oF.
Table 9. Dial readings of 3.5g of water yam at higher temperatures
RPM 120⁰F 130⁰F 140⁰F 150⁰F
600 8.5 8.5 8.5 10.0
300 6.0 65 6.5 7.0
200 5.5 5.0 5.5 6.5
100 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5
10sec 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0
10min 10.0 10.0 11.0 14.0
14 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38

On the other hand, for 3.5g water yam mud it was observed from table 9 that at 600 RPM, the
yield points remained constant at 8.5 lb/100ft2 from 120 – 140 oF only to increase to 10 lb/100ft2 at
150 oF. At 300 and 200 RPM, the yield points were observed to have increased accordingly with
temperature increase. At 100 RPM, the yield point was constant at 4 10 lb/100ft2 for both 120 oF
and 130 oF respectively, but increased to 4.5 10 lb/100ft2 at 140 oF and 150 oF respectively.

Tables 10 – 13 below shows the rheological properties of fresh mud, CMC, cassava and water yam
at higher temperatures.
Note:
Initial Gel strength = 10 seconds Gel strength
Final Gel strength = 10 minutes Gel strength
Table 10. Rheological properties of fresh mud @ higher temperatures
Temperature 120oF 130oF 140oF 150oF
Initial Gel strength lb/100ft2 6.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
Final Gel strength lb/100ft2 9.0 11.0 12.0 13.0
Plastic Viscosity (µp) cp 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Apparent Viscosity (µa) cp 4.0 4.25 4.5 5.0
Yield Point (ϒp) lb/100ft2 3.0 3.5 4.0 5.0
Table 11. Rheological properties of CMC @ higher temperatures
Temperature 120oF 130oF 140oF 150oF
Initial Gel strength lb/100ft2 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Final Gel strength lb/100ft2 12.0 14.0 15.0 17.0
Plastic Viscosity (µp) cp 2.5 2.5 3.5 3.5
Apparent Viscosity (µa) cp 4.25 4.5 5.25 5.5
Yield Point (ϒp) lb/100ft2 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0
Table 12. Rheological properties of cassava @ higher temperatures
Temperature 120oF 130oF 140oF 150oF
Initial Gel strength lb/100ft2 8.0 8.0 8.0 10.0
Final Gel strength lb/100ft2 10.0 10.0 11.0 12.0
Plastic Viscosity (µp) cp 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Apparent Viscosity (µa) cp 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0
Yield Point (ϒp) lb/100ft2 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Table 13. Rheological properties of water yam @ higher temperatures
o o o o
Temperature 120 F 130 F 140 F 150 F
Initial Gel strength lb/100ft2 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0
Final Gel strength lb/100ft2 10.0 10.0 11.0 14.0
Plastic Viscosity (µp) cp 2.5 2.0 2.0 3.0
Apparent Viscosity (µa) cp 4.25 4.25 4.25 5.0
Yield Point (ϒp) lb/100ft2 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.0

The rheological properties of the local additives tend to reduce as the temperature increases; it
can be seen from table 10 to table 13 that as the temperature increase the initial gel strength, final
gel strength, plastic viscosity, apparent viscosity and yield point of the cassava and water yam
reduce more than that of fresh mud and CMC. This indicates that cassava and water yam do not do
so well in improving the rheological property of a mud sample at higher temperatures. In
 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38 15

accordance with API standard on drilling fluid, the viscosity dial reading at 600 RPM of any locally
sourced starch should not exceed 40 [11]. As can been seen above, the dial reading of the 600 RPM
did not exceed the benchmark for either cassava and water yam as required by API.
3.4 Filtration Loss
The knowledge of filtration loss property of a drilling mud is very essential in drilling operations
because it tells the drilling engineer how easily and quickly his drilling mud will lose its liquid
content to the formation.
Table 14 shows the liquid lost by each sample at a time interval of five minutes at room
temperature. From the tables it can be seen that CMC can reduce the water lost by the fresh mud in
30 minutes from 20.8ml lost to 16.2ml lost, which is better than water yam. Cassava is much better
as it reduces fluid lost to 15ml. The filter cake formed by the mud sample when the local additives
were added was smaller than that formed by the fresh mud.
Table 14. Filtration loss of mud samples @ room temperature
Time (Min) Fresh mud CMC water yam Cassava
0 0 0 0 0
5 8.6 7.2 8.0 7.0
10 11.4 9.6 10.0 8.2
15 14.8 11.0 11.7 10.0
20 17.0 12.4 13.1 11.8
25 19.0 14.0 16.0 13.6
30 20.8 16.2 18.2 15.0
Filtercake (inch) 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2

As temperature increases, drilling mud tend to lose its liquid more quickly, from table 15 it is
observed that when samples were tested for filtration loss at 120⁰F temperature, the water lost by
the fresh mud increased remarkably. When the additives were added the liquid lost after 30 minutes
was 18ml for cassava, which is 10ml less than that lost by the fresh mud compared.
Table 15. Filtration loss of mud samples @ 120⁰F temperature
Time (Min) Fresh Mud CMC Water yam Cassava
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5.0 11.0 7.8 8.0 7.6
10.0 15.1 11.0 11.6 10.4
15.0 17.8 13.0 13.8 12.8
20.0 23.0 15.0 15.8 14.8
25.0 26.8 17.0 17.2 16.6
30.0 28.3 19.0 18.6 18.0
Filter cake(inch) 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2
3.5 Mud pH
The PH for fresh mud was 7.5 which is alkaline, when our additives where added the PH was 9.0
and 8.0 for water yam and cassava respectively which is also alkaline. Drilling mud that is alkaline
in nature is ideal because acidic drilling mud can corrode drilling equipment and also pollute the
environment.
16 International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa Vol. 38

Table 16. Hydrogen-ion determination of mud sample

Sample PH
Bentonite 7.5
Water yam 9.0
Cassava 8.0

4.0 Conclusion
From the experiments carried out and the results obtained and analyzed in this work, the
following conclusions were made.
1. Addition of local additives to fresh mud showed an increase in mud viscosity
2. The local additives can serve as weighting materials as they increase mud density more than
barite.
3. At room temperature, both local additives performed better than CMC but 1.5g of cassava
seemed the best additive.
4. At high temperature (simulated reservoir condition) CMC had higher final gel strength, plastic
viscosity, apparent viscosity and yield point.
5. Water yam filtration properties were better than CMC and Fresh mud both at room temperature
and high temperature.
6. The water yam and cassava additive were non acidic, therefore less corrosive.

References
[1] M.R Annis and M. V. Smith, Drilling fluids technology - Exxon manual Exxon company,
Houston, USA., (1974) 3-11
[2] I. E. Bartlett, Effect of temperature on the flow properties of Drilling fluids, paper SPE 1861
presented at the SPE 42nd annual fall meeting, Houston, October. 1- 4 (1967).
[3] Suhascary Nur, Nawansigi Dody and Handayani Sri Rejeki. Laboratory study of high
temperature additive to rheology properties of drilling mud under dynamic conditions. Proceeding
World Geothermal Congress, Antalya, Turkey (2005), 24-29
[4] F.A. Makinde, A.D. Adejumo, C.T. Ako and V.E Efeovbokan. Modelling the Efect of
Temperature and Aging Time on the Rheological Properties of Drilling Fluid. Petroleum and Coal
(2011), 53 (3), 167-182.
[5] P. Yunita, S. Irawan and D. Kania. Optimization of Water-Based Drilling Fluid Using Non-ionic
and Anionic Surfactant Additive. Procedia Engineering 148 (2010), 1184-1190.
[6] S. O. Ogiriki, E. Ndienye and W. Okologume. Effect of aging on Water Based Drilling Mud.
IJEMT (2017), Vol. 3, No. 3, 26-38.
[7] B. Bloys, N. Davis, B. Smolen, L. Bailey, O. Houwen, P. Reid, M. Hodder, Designing and
managing drilling fluid, Schlumberger Oilfield Rev. 6 (1994) 33–43.
[8] OPEC Annual Statistical Bullent, Organization of Oil Exporting Countries (2014) 10 - 85
[9] E.A. Udensi, H.O. Oselebe, O.O. Iweala, Investigation of Chemical Composition and Functional
Properties of Water Yam (Dioscoria alata): Effect of Varietal Differences. Parkistan Journal of
Nutrition, (2008) 7 (2): 342-344
[10] API, Recommended Practice for Field Testing Water-based Drilling Fluids. ANSI/API
RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 13B-1; Fifth Edition. American Petroleum Institute, U.S.A.,
(2017).