IADC/SPE 27450

Physicochemical Properties of Synthetic Drilling Fluids

F.B. Growcock, * S.L. Andrews, and T.P. Frederick, Amoco Production Co.
'SPE Member
lADe Members

Copyright 1994, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1994 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Dallas, Texas, 15-18 February 1994.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper,
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are sUbject to correction by the author(s). The
material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the IADC or SPE, their officers, or members. Papers presented at IADC/SPE meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should
contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A. TeJex,163245 SPEUT.

ABSTRACT the annulus or into another well); or c) cleaning them on

Synthetic-based muds (SBM's) were developed as
environmentally friendly alternatives to conventional
petroleum-derived oil-based muds (OBM's). Although
each synthetic fluid is chemically unique, the physico-
chemical properties of the SBM's exhibit some common
trends. SBM's are safer to work with, more biodegradable
and more dispersible in seawater than conventional
OBM's. On the other hand, SBM's are more viscous at low
temperatures, thin more with increasing temperature,
have lower thermal stability and do not dehydrate shales
as readily as conventional OBM's. By adjusting the emul-
sifier package in each mud, these properties may be
brought more in line with those of conventional OBM's.
INTRODUCTION
As environmental regulations governing the disposal
of drilling fluids become increasingly restrictive, use of
conventional OBM's is rapidly being curtailed. 1 The main
issue is that the base fluids in conventional OBM's are
petroleum products, such as diesel or mineral oil, which
tend to persist for many years in marine environments. In
the past, cuttings generated in offshore drilling operations
were generally discarded into the ocean, where they set-
tled to form a cuttings pile. Seabed surveys found that the
oily residue on cuttings generated from drilling with
OBM's degrades very slowly. Plant and animal life
beneath the cuttings pile suffocates. Perhaps even
worse, ocean life in the vicinity of the pile suffers a similar
fate, because the slow aerobic biodegradation process
that the oil undergoes depletes the surrounding water of
oxygen for many years.
Today, oily cuttings generated offshore are disposed
of by a) shipping them to shore and discarding or treating
them there with other waste; b) downhole injection (down
References and illustrations at end of paper.
181
site via solvent extraction or distillation. All of these
options are expensive. An alternative is to find a drilling
fluid that performs as well as conventional OBM's but
which can be discarded into the ocean without causing
any environmental damage. Synthetic-based muds
(SBM's) may be a solution to that quest.
Operationally, SBM's are thought to perform as well,
in general, as conventional OBM's. Some differences
remain, however, which on the one hand give them desir-
able environmental attributes, but on the other hand may
pose some limitations on handling and use. These physi-
cochemical properties are described below.
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION
Unlike the base oils in OBM's (diesel and mineral oil),
which are refined from crude oil, the base fluids in S8M's
are synthesized organic compounds that act like petro-
leum-derived oils with respect to drilling but biodegrade
readily - it is claimed - in seawater. Like most OBM's,
SBM's are invert emulsions, with the synthetic fluid serv-
ing as the external, or continuous, phase and a brine serv-
ing as the internal phase.
Several synthetic fluids, all in the size range
C 1S-C 24 , have been introduced in the marketplace during
the last few years:
• Ester2·3 - made by the. reaction of a fatty acid with an
alcohol.. .[the ester may be considered a synthetic veg-
etable oiij
• Oi-Ether - made by condensation and partial oxidation
of alcohols; the di-ether was preceded by a mono-ether
...[Iower molecular weight di-ethers are used as sol-
vents, cosmetics, perfumes and flavoring agents]
2 PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SYNTHETIC DRILLING FLUIDS
• Poly-a.-Olefin (PAO)4 - a straight-chain non-aromatic
hydrocarbon made by polymerization of ethylene; there
are at least two versions - one is an olefin (has a dou-
ble bond in the middle) and one is a paraffin ... [PAO's
resemble highly refined low-toxicity mineral oils not
unlike "white mineral oils1
• Detergent Alkylate - also called a linear alkyl benzene
(LAB), it is composed of benzene to which a saturated
hydrocarbon has been attached; this material is evolv-
ing rapidly toward a narrow distribution of long alkyl
chain lengths...[Detergent alkylates are used in the
manufacture of detergents and may be thought of as
hybrids between diesel and low-toxicity mineraloi~
Commercial synthetic fluids currently cost $ 225/bbl
to $ 425/bbl, as compared to $ 70/bbl for a typicallow-tox-
icity mineral oil (LTMO). However, with good solids control
equipment, SBM's can be used repeatedly to such an
extent that the amortized cost of the fluid per well is less
than that of an LTMO-based mud (including the cost of
treating oily cuttings). Of course, any loss of synthetic fluid,
e.g. via lost circulation, can alter the economics consider-
ably, so it is prUdent to avoid using synthetics in regions
where such losses are likely.
PROPERTIES
Notwithstanding the similarities in the performance
of SBM's and OBM's in the field, the distinctly unique
chemical composition of the synthetics might lead one to
expect some differences in their behavior. Indeed, signifi-
cant differences have been observed in the following
properties:
a. Environmental Impact
b. Rheology
c. Thermal Stability
d. Shale Dehydration Potential
e. Materials Compatibility
Environmental Impact
Before discharge permits can be issued by a govern-
ment, a drilling fluid must comply with regulations that gen~
erally include passin~ a series of rigid toxicity and other
environmental tests. SBM's are less toxic than OBM's to
humans and have higher flash points (290-340 OF com-
pared to 135-240 OF for OBM's), so they are safer to work
with.
Comprehensive environmental tests - including the
sheen and Mysid shrimp LC-50 tests for the Gulf of Mex-
ico, brown shrimp LC-50 tests for the U. K. North Sea and
the mussel, barnacle and algae tests for the Norway sec-
tor of the North Sea - have been run on all ofthe synthetic
fluids and representative muds. The ester, di-ether and
PAO have passed virtually all of the tests. The detergent
alkylate is being modified to reduce its toxicity, which is
caused mainly by its diesel-like (aromatic) nature; the
length of the alkyl chain is being increased and the con-
centration of lower-chain-Iength alkyl benzene impurities
is being minimized.
182
SPE27450
Biodegradability
Bioaccumulation and biodegradation ofthese materi-
als - especially the ester, mono-ether and PAO - have
been tested as well, though the test protocols are contro-
versial and the results not universally accepted. For exam-
ple, a recent study 6 was conducted at the Norwegian
Institute for Water Research (NIVA) on the fate of an
ester-based mud on drill cuttings deposited on a simulated
seabed. In contrast to closed bottle and ring tests, which
showed rapid biodegradation within a few days, the simu-
lated seabed tests showed essentially no degradation
within 49 days, some detectable degradation at 93 days
and almost 99% within 184 days. However, microbial deg-
radation appeared to account for only 15% of the loss,
while the rest was probably lost through dissolution of
partly degraded metabolites.
A similar discrepancy between lab tests and seabed
sediment tests was found in another recent study7 con-
ducted at NIVA on the fate of a mono-ether-based mud. In
this environment, the ether was found to have a much
longer half-life (about 230 days) than it had in standard
laboratory closed bottle, shaked flask or ring tests. In addi-
tion, about a third of the ether that had disappeared actu-
ally appeared to have simply moved down to lower levels
in the sediment, and a similar fraction was deduced to
have been lost through dissolution. One result of this test-
ing was replacement of the mono-ether by the di-ether,
which is expected to exhibit higher rates of biodegrada-
tion.
Seabed surveys around drilling platforms have been
underway for the last 2 years to determine the fate and
effects of discharged' cuttings containing SBM's. Prelimi-
nary results for ester- and ether-based muds suggest that
the benthos heals relatively quickly (within months) after
discharges of cuttings cease.
When synthetic fluids were first introduced, it was
claimed that, at least in the case of the oxygen-containing
candidates (the ester and the ethers), anaerobic biodegra-
dation would occur at a rapid rate and serve as a mecha-
nism for the destruction of the fluids in cuttings piles.
Anaerobic biodegradation tests have been con-
ducted with most synthetics, following the most commonly
used protocol, ECETOC No. 28. These tests indicated that
the ester and detergent alkylate can biodegrade relatively
easily, whereas the mono-ether and PAO are more diffi-
cult to break down. Unfortunately I this protocol and others
that have been proposed do not properly simulate the
anoxic conditions of the North Sea benthos, nor do they
call for measurement of all key components.
ECETOC No. 28 employs sludge and methanogenic
bacteria. Hydrolysis and fermentation produce CO 2, H2,
fatty acids and alcohols. The acids and alcohols are con-
verted to acetate, which, in combination with the H2 is con-
verted to CH 4 by bacterial action. However, in marine
environments, sulfate reduction is the dominant anaerobic
respiration process, not methane formation. Thus, both
the substrate and the inoculum are inappropriate. Laake et
al8 propose a short test procedure for screening water-in-
 SPEJIADC 27450 F. B. GROWCOCK, S. L. ANDREWS AND 1. P. FREDERICK
soluble materials under sulfate-reducing conditions, which
is probably more suitable.
The simulated seabed tests suggest that a large frac-
tion of the observed losses of SBM's arises from dissolu-
tion (or dispersion) of the synthetic. As suggested in the
reports, partially degraded synthetic fluid is probably more
polar and, therefore, more dispersible in water. Unde-
graded synthetic fluid itself may also be somewhat dis-
persible, especially in comparison to mineral oil.
Djspersjbility in Seawater
The dispersibility of synthetic fluids in seawater was
tested in simple shaker flasks by mixing 50 mL each ofthe
synthetic and seawater, shaking for 10 seconds and allow-
ing the mixture to rest in a separatory funnel. After 10 min-
utes, 20 mL of the water phase was drawn off and the
amount of synthetic in the oil was determined with a Total
Carbon Analyzer (Astro Model 2001). The dispersibility
tests in seawater gave the following trend:
Ester> Di-Ether» Detergent Alkylate > PAO > LTMO
This trend is qualitatively consistent with the trend in the
OctanollWater Partition Coefficient, Polw , which ranges
from 49.2 (Log Polw = 1.69) for the ester to 2.5 X 10 15 (Log
Po/w = 15.4) for the PAO and the LTMO. Polw represents
the ratio of a material that dissolves or disperses in octanol
(the oil phase) versus water, so that Polw generally
increases as a molecule becomes less polar (more hydro-
carbon-like).
Thus, it is possible for a significant portion ofthe ester
- and perhaps the other synthetics as well - to disperse
in seawater. Judicious selection of emulsifiers may
enhance the dispersibility of SBM's in seawater without
sacrificing emulsion stability and shale dehydration poten-
tial (see below).
Rheology and Thermal Stability
At ambient temperature, synthetic fluids are 2 to 4
times more viscous than LTMO's: 3 to 5 cp versus 1 to 2
cpo Likewise, at ambient temperature, SBM's are several-
fold more viscous than their OBM counterparts. However,
the Viscosity of the synthetics is affected by temperature
more strongly. As shown in Figure 1, SBM's thin with
increasing temperature to a greater extent than does an
LTMO-based mud.
The strong effect that temperature has on the rheol-
ogy of synthetics raises the question of whether it is pos-
sible to formulate high-temperature SBM's that have
satisfactory carrying capacity at elevated temperatures,
yet are pumpable at low temperatures. However, first one
must address the issue of the effect of temperature on
emulsion stability.
SBM's have generally been limited to lower tempera-
tures (250-350 oF) than conventional OBM's (400-500 OF).
The reason(s) for this have not been clear, but apparently
arise from the chemical composition of the SBM. To deter-
mine which constituent are responsible for the low thermal
stability ofthese muds, chemical degradation experiments
were conducted. First, the synthetic fluids themselves
183
3
were tested: these were heated to 425 OF for 16 hr under
ultra-pure argon in a teflon-lined stainless steel rolling cell.
The results are shown in Table 1.
The thermal degradation experiments clearly demon-
strate that the synthetic fluids themselves are stable to at
least 425 OF. Of all the other constituents present in
SBM's, the emulsifiers (surfactants) and low-shear rheol-
ogy modifiers (oligomers of fatty acid emulsifiers) are
probably the most susceptible to thermal degradation.
DSC (Differential Scanning Calorimetry) tests were
conducted on 10 emulsifiers and 2 low-shear rheology
modifiers. The emulsifier list contains 2 or 3 of the most
commonly used emulsifiers for each major type of SBM.
The results are typified by the plots shown in Figures 2-4,
which are for Emulsifiers A, E and G. Threshhold temper-
atures for thermal degradation are listed in Table 2 for all
of the emulsifiers. These results show that almost half of
the standard emulsifiers used in SBM's degrade signifi-
cantly at temperatures of 200-300 of.
Thus, the limiting factor for thermal stability of the
SBM's is probably the emulsifiers. Nevertheless, it has
been possible to formulate lab muds containing the four
major synthetic fluids to a mud weight of at least 16.5
Ib/gal that have acceptable emulsion stability at 350 OF,
though they required 15-20 lblbbl of conventional emulsi-
fiers and 41blbbl of a low-shear rheology modifier (LSRM).
Most likely, a substantial fraction of the emulsifiers is
degraded dUring exposure to elevated temperatures.
One measure of emulsion stability of muds is HTHP
fluid loss. Generally, a mud is considered to have high
emulsion stability if it has low HTHP fluid loss « 15 cc/30
min and little or no free water). HTHP fluid losses at 300
and 350 OF for these four muds are shown in Table 3. All
of the muds were hot-rolled for 16 hours at 300 and 350
OF, respectively. It is evidentthat all four muds have excel-
lent properties at 300 OF, but only the di-ether looks good
at 350 OF. Since the LAB-based mud showed no free
water in the filtrate, it may have relatively high emulsion
stability and simply needs a better fluid loss reducing
agent. The PAO- and ester-based muds appear to need
more stable emulsifiers to have acceptable emulsion sta-
bility at 350 of.
The LSRM's, which aid in emulsion stability, are actu-
ally intended to increase resistance of a mud to dynamic
sag and settling of cuttings. They are most effective at ele-
vated temperatures, so that they tend to flatten the tem-
perature profile of the viscosity curve. As shown in Figures
5 and 6, the low-shear viscosity (at 6 rpm on a Fann 50) of
the emulsifier-laden muds described above, with 4 Iblbbl
LSRM, does not vary much with temperature and is prob-
ably high enough to prevent dynamic sag at both 300 OF
and 350 of. In other work, we have determined that
dynamic sag (settling of weighting material under low-to-
moderate shear) in the field can be prevented if the 6-rpm
viscosity exceeds 500 cp or so. The ester and di-ether are
borderline cases at both 300 OF and 350 OF.
4 PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SYNTHETIC DRILLING FLUIDS
Shale Dehydration Potential
Invert mud is usually formulated with a salt concen-
tration that gives a water activity lower than that of the
drilled shale formation. This dehydrates the shale enough
to increase its strength and stabilize the wellbore. An
added benefit of the dehydration is that it produces a
slightly over-gauge hole, which produces some extra
clearance for the drillstring. Standard formulations of
SBM's have been found to inhibit transfer of water into or
out of shales, as compared to similarly formulated LTMO--
based muds.
In the example shown in Figure 7 (for a PAO-based
mud), the extent of hydration and dehydration of a shale
by the SBM was much lower than for a similarly formulated
LTMO-based mud. However, it appears that this problem
can be remedied by adjusting the emulsifier package. One
way is to simply reduce the concentration of emulsifier,
which, as shown in Figure 8, does enhance water trans-
port properties. But this may not be the best way, since
reducing the emulsifier concentration will also tend to
reduce emulsion stability. New emulsifiers which maintain
the oil-wetting properties of the SBM but whichpermit eas-
ier water transport would be welcome, as they may also
enhance the dispersibility of SBM's in seawater andim-
prove their environmental acceptability.
Materials Compatibility
Compatibility of synthetics with elastomers, e.g.
pump seals, has received some attention. The di-ether
and PAO appear to be similar to LTMO's in that respect.
Conoco found that esters are compatible with a narrower
class of elastomers than are mineral oils;10 the least reac-
tive materials appear to be hydrogenated nitrile rubber
and specialized fluorinated elastomers, such as Viton GF.
Detergent alkylates are expected to be even less compat-
ible, by virtue of their diesel-like character.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Synthetic fluids and SBM's appear to be more biode-
gradable and more dispersible in seawater than min-
erai oils and mineral OBM's.
2. Synthetic fluids and SBM's are more viscous at ambi-
ent temperatures than conventional OBM's, but they
also thin more readily with increasing temperature.
Standard low-shear rheology modifiers flatten the
temperature profile to enable formulation of muds
that provide good suspension characteristics at ele-
vated temperatures, yet are thin enough to pump at
low temperatures.
3. SBM's can be formulated with conventional emulsifi-
ers so as to give acceptable emulsion stability (HTHP
fluid loss and electrical stability) at 300 to 350 F. How-
ever, to keep fluid loss < 10 cc/30 min, high emulsifier
concentrations are needed (as high as 20 Ib/bbl)
along with an asphaltic/coal product and a low-shear
rheology modifier.
4. The temperature limits of SBM's are not imposed by
the synthetic fluids, which are shown to be quite sta-
ble even after long exposure to 425 F. Many of the
184
SPE 27450
emulsifiers, however, show signs of chemical degra-
dation at temperatures as low as 200 F.
5. SBM's do not hydrate or dehydrate shales as well as
conventional OBM's, but water transport can be
increased by decreasing the emulsifier concentration
or using a less efficient emulsifier.
6. Thermal stability and dispersibility in seawater are
affected in opposite ways by most emulsifiers; to for-
mulate SBM's which exhibit optimum thermal stability
and dispersibility in seawater, both W/O- and
OIW-stabilizing emulsifiers may be needed.
NOMENCLATURE
Ib/bbl =Concentration (1 Iblbbl =1 g/350 cc)
Mud Weight = Density, Ib/gal (11b/gal = 0.12 glcc)
LSRM =Low-Shear Rheology Modifier
LTMO =Low-Toxicity Mineral Oil
OBM = Oil-Based Mud
orw = Vol. % OilNol. % Water in liquid phase of mud,
or Oil in Water emulsion
SBM =Synthetic-Based Mud
Vf =Fluid Loss, cc/30 min
WIO =Water in Oil emulsion
J.1 = Viscosity, cp (determined from
[300 x Fann Readingl(Fann rpm))
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Prof. Dale Teeters of the Univer-
sity of Tulsa for carrying out the DSC tests and the man-
agement of Amoco Production Research for permission to
publish this paper.
REFERENCES
1. Candler, J. E., Rushing, J. H. and Leuterman, J. J.:
"Synthetic-Based Mud Systems Offer Environmental
Benefits over Traditional Mud Systems," Paper 25993
presented at the First SPE/EPA Joint Conf., Expl. &
Prod. Env. Conf., San Antonio, March 7-10,1993.
2. Carlson, T.: "Finding a Suitable Replacement for
Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Oil Muds," AADE Drilling
Fluids Technology Conf., Houston, April 22-23, 1992.
3. Peresich, R L., Burrell, B. R and Prentice, G. M.:
"Development and Field Trial of a Biodegradable
Invert Emulsion Drilling Fluid,· Paper 21935 pre-
sented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amster-
dam, March 11-14, 1991.
4. Friedheim, J. E. and Pantermuehl, R: "Superior Per-
formance with Minimal Environmental Impact: A
Novel Non-Aqueous Drilling Fluid,· Paper 25753 pre-
sented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amster-
dam, Feb 23-25, 1993.
5. Vik, E. A. et al : "Assessment of Marine Toxicity of
Offshore Chemicals,· prepared for The Norwegian Oil
Industry Assoc. by Aquateam - Norwegian Water
Technology Center AlS, Oslo, Norway, April, 1992.
SPEIIADC 27450 F. B. GROWCOCK, S. L. ANDREWS AND T. P. FREDERICK 5

6. Bakke, T. and Laake, M.: "Tests on Degradation of a

New Drill Mud Type under Natural Conditions,' Nor-
wegian Institute for Water Research, Report No.
0-90101, ISBN 82-577-1852-1, Jan. 30, 1991.
7. Laake, M., Bakke, T. and Schaanning, M.: "Joint
Study of Environmental Impact of Aquamul Cuttings
& Test on Degradation and Environmental Effects of
Thermal Treated Oily Cuttings under Natural Condi-
tions," Norwegian Institute for Water Research,
Report No. 0-91026, ISBN 82-577-2101-8, 1992.
8. Laake, M., Christensen, B. and Englund, G.: "Design
of Anaerobic Screening Test for Biodegradation of
Chemicals,' presented at a workshop on Anaerobic
Degradation of Xenobiotic Chemicals, Holte, Den-
mark, Nov. 22-23, 1990.
9. Hansch, C. and Leo, A.: Substituent Constants for
Correlation Analysis in Chemistry and Biology, Wiley
Interscience, New York, 1979.
10. Kubena, E., Jr., Ross, K. C., Pugh, T. and Huycke, J.:
·Performance Characteristics of Drilling Equipment
Elastomers Evaluated in Various Drilling Fluids,'
Paper 21960 presented at the SPElIADC Drilling
Conference, Amsterdam, March 11-14, 1991.

Table 1
Synthetic fluids do not show significant degradation
when hot-rolled at 425 F for 16 hours
% Recovery EC-50 (Beforel EC-50 (After)"
Low-Tox Min. 011 99.9 225 150
Ester 99.9 5 5
Ol-Ether 99.9 10 8
PAO 99.9 13 22
Oet. Alkyl. 99.9 1 1

• Microtox test results (ppm). before and after hot-rolling

185
 PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SYNTHETIC DRILLING FLUIDS SPE27450
6

Table 2
Conventional S8M emulsifiers degrade
at low temperatures
Threshold Temp. (deg F)4
Emulsifier A 130.195,390
Emulsifier B 520
Emulsifier C 210.340.350
Emulsifier 0 210,340
Emulsifier E 150,430
Emulsifier F 270,375
Emulsifier G 450
Emulsifier H 140
Emulsifier I 225,410
Emulsifier J 520
LSRM '1 285
260.520
• SignificantLSRM .2
exothermic res p onse at these tem p er atures
inaicates the onset of a chemical reaction.

Table 3
All of the S8M'scan be formulated to have high emulsion
stability (low HTHP fluid loss) at 300 OF, but only the di-ether
S8M has high stability at 350 OF
Synthetic Type Fluid loss, Vr Water FllterCake FllterCake
Fluid of Fllter (cc/30 min) (mL) Thickness (") Texture
Ester, 300 op Paper 14.0 none 10/32 Hard
Ester, 350 OP Metal 40.0 5 mL emulsion 19/32 Hard
Di-Ether,3 OOOP Paper 3.2 none 4/32 Hard
Dj-Ether,350OP Metal 7.6 0.5 mL emulsion 5/32 Hard
PAO, 300 OF Paper 6.4 none 7/32 Med. soft
PAO, 350 OF Metal 44.0 8 mL emulsion 28/32 Hard
LAB, 300 OP Paper 3.0 none 4/32 Hard
LAB, 350 OP Metal 121.0 trace 48/32 Hard

186
 F. B. GROWCOCK, S. L. ANDREWS AND T. P. FREDERICK 7
SPEJIADC 27450
Figure 1
The viscosity of S8M's decreases with
increasing temperature faster than does
the viscosi of LTMO-based muds

Figure 2
esc run for Emulsifier A
,..
I
I
.J
:1(1:
OE
.J.:r
1I.1ll
~ 'I
1-1-
ItO
IllX !
~Ill ~

J
I'J
'-\'"
IllE
Cl.U
.l!I
Z!
(J
0
j
/
/
>- 104
l- ·E Z U
III 0'- III 0
III 0 ,Z~ III
0 Z 0 0 .:r III
Zlil 104 E Z, I- U .:r
III 104 I- .J I- ~ til :::l
Ill'-i% Illl-I- IllZllll!l I-
ItZItOlilOO .J III 1-1004 0 It
U>-I-ZIt.J.J 1040ltW Z It
I' ,--r·
til 0 III III U1 Cl. Cl. u.1-4i%3 III III
Q.
E
III
.... ......
...
....
~
I ,

....... ...
on
l- on OJ

187
 CD

c c
en en
o
SCAN PARAI'IETERS
START TEI'IP. °C
RATE K/I'IIN.
58
....8
o
SCREEN
DYN/ISO .... /2 .... 2::s
END TEI'IP.
Trl'lE rso. I'IIN.
°C a88
8
2
::s
START
END
EASELINE TYPE
PLOT CI'I
58
275
....
.... 5 0' -.c
-n
CD
PLOT
RANGE FS
OFFSET
PAN TYPE
%
CI'I
.101
.... /2
.... 5
28
a8
'1
0'
~
-.
'11
CD
PLOT I'IODE ~ Lrl'lIT .101 C "'0
'1 8 :::r
mi SCREEN m CiJ -<
IDENT. NO. 188
....8 ... DYN/ISO .... / 2 8
3 w oen
-.-
RATE
WEIGHT
K/I'IIN.
.G 29.486 3 IDENT. NO. c o
c ....8 ....
END SCREEN °C 27 ..... 5
_.
ii
::::II
WEJ:GHT

TEI'IPERATURE 0C
.G 22 a f I)
::ft
m
()
:::r
m
s::
TEI'IPERATURE °C HEAT FLOW m HEAT FLOW
EXOTHERMAL--) ~ ~
l
EXOTHERI'IAL--)
~!.... III I
~

G) 51."
j..... .w m
r
"'0
;;0
~of." o"'0
m
;;0
~ ::::!
0) m
0) en
1.... o
1ti.' "~
z
~
15'.' ~
()
o
15'.' ~
r
r
Z
(j)
2....
"
E
o
2.... en

~ ...
250.' -j ~

~ ~ en
"'0
m

~
o
SPEIIADC 27450 F. B. GROWCOCK, S. L. ANDREWS AND T. P. FREDERICK 9

Figure 5
Low Shear Rheology of S8M's
Heat-Treated at 300F

100000 T Mud Wt. 16.5 Ib/gal

OCMA Clay 39 Ib/bbl
• Ester
25 % CaCI2 Brine 0.11 bbllbbl ---+--- PAO
LSRM 4 Ib/bbl
~ 10000.J. Emulsifier 15-20 Ib/bbl
.2 ·-·-LAB
~
., .._...•...... Oi-Ether
..:>8
1000 1 -.....
'" ·e .
. ...

100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Temperature (deg Fl

Figure 6
Low Shear Rheology of S8M's
Heat-Treated at 350F

1000000 I Mud Wt. 16.5 Ib/gal

OCMA Clay 391blbbl
25 % CaCI2 Brine 0.11 bbllbbl
•
---+--- PAO
Ester

100000 .. LSRM 4 Ib/bbl

Emulsifier 15-20 Ib/bbl
-·-LAB
_............ Oi-Ether
10000 -I'

1000 ~I' ::.::::~~~.~.;.~~-~=.~.=-~.~.:~~=.===_._.:-_---.::.:==.~-~--t

.'. ·e·· _ _ __ _ ~

100 -'-----_+_--_--_--t----+-----l
o
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Temperature (deg F)

189
10 PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SYNTHETIC DRILLING FLUIDS SPE27450

Figure 7
PAO-Based Mud does not permit ready
transport of water to shale

--
.-C
0.06
0.04 .. .. .. - .. LTMO Mud
CD
C)
c
C'I
.I:.
0.02
.. ..
... .... . ~
-PAO-Based Mud

(J 0
a-
SCD 10
------...:..:
-0.02 zu..
.... • .. 30
....
E
C'I -0.04 .. .. .. ..
is
-0.06 ".
% Calcium Chloride·

Figure 8
Reducing the concentration of Primary
Emulsifier increases the rate of dehydration
of North Sea shale by PAO-based mud

.Dlam. Change (In.)

11M. Change (g)
10lblbbl emulsifier
121b/gal Mud with 17% CaCI2

-0.75
5 Iblbbl emulsifier

-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 o

Diameter (in.) or Wl Change (g)

190