1

SLIMHOLE CEMENTING
Frank Kettl and Dan Bour, Halliburton ERC

The execution of slimhole cementing jobs should not be much more difficult than jobs using the larger hole
geometries. However, the design and quality control of the slurries will require the use of the latest technology
and materials if an effective annulus seal is to be obtained.

Since slimhole geometry is much less forgiving than standard sizes, more preplanning, more attention to slurry
properties, more attention to prejob computer simulation, and more precise job execution are demanded (Figure 1). Because of
these extra efforts, more laboratory lead time and better well data are required to define the critical properties of
the fluids to be pumped.

Parameters that must be examined include these:

1. Condition of the hole

2. Condition of the drilling fluid
3. Pipe/hole geometry
4. Drilling fluid/Spacer fluids
5. Mechanical aspects of slurry placement
6. Slurry properties
7. Job simulation

CONDITION OF THE HOLE

The purpose of this section is not to tell the drilling people how to do their job but to inform all parties concerned
of the factors that influence the success or failure of a cement job. The cooperation of drilling company personnel
must be solicited to take full advantage of their expertise.

The quality of a cement job is important because the success or failure of a well can rest on the cement job.

To achieve a good cement job, the hole must be in as perfect condition as possible. Coordination with the drilling
personnel will be necessary to emphasize the need for the well to be as straight as in-gauge as is possible with
state-of-the-art techniques.

When directional drilling is part of the well plan, the same care must be taken to assure smooth transitions to the
new direction, that key-seating will be minimized to the extent controllable, and that the deviated portion will be
drilled with equal care to control wellbore drift. Caliper logs are necessary to describe the well geometry correctly
and to model the annulus more accurately.

Recommendations for stopping lost circulation can be found in SIPM's Drilling Fluid Manual. Halliburton
suggests preventive measures be initiated immediately upon detection of losses.

Low-viscosity, reactive chemicals are available for use in preventing drilling fluid losses. These are easy to
prepare quickly and can be pumped with a minimum of rig-up time. The dangers of using granular or flake lost
circulation materials (LCMs) in tight geometry are eliminated, and in most cases these treatments can be pumped
through the bit, thus eliminating trip time.

Ensure the hole is in the best possible condition prior to pulling out to run casing. Factors which can be addressed
during conditioning time include obtaining complete cuttings removal and double checking any deviated portion
of the well for cleanliness.

Settled solids may accumulate on the bottom of deviated sections while the well is static, and it is very difficult to
1
resuspend settled solids with simple circulation. Bit agitation can help remove these particles. The rheological
 2

properties of the drilling fluid can be adjusted prior to pull-out, but these parameters will be addressed in the next
section.

CONDITION OF THE DRILLING FLUID

Just as the drilling of the best possible hole was asked of the drilling group, the use of the best possible drilling
fluid is asked of the drilling fluid group. Efficient drilling fluid removal during the cementing operation is
probably the most critical factor in achieving a good cement job and specific parameters have been defined for
2-4
this purpose. As mentioned in the previous section, displacement from highly deviated and horizontal wellbores
can be complicated by the formation of a low-side channel of compacted solids (weighting material and formation
5
drill solids), which can settle during circulation of drilling fluid in a laminar flow region.

TABLE 1

Recommended Yield Points For Various Well Deviations

Well Deviation Drilling Fluid Yield Point

2
(Degrees) (lb/100 ft )
0 <10
45 15
60 20
85 28
90 30

KSEPL recognizes the importance of high fluid velocities to obtain good hole cleaning and to avoid a cuttings bed
on the lower side of the hole. Shut-downs must be minimized or deposition of weighting solids.

As mentioned in the previous section, in order to decrease the negative effects of gelled drilling fluid with reduced
mobility, circulation should be established every 300 m or 1,000 ft while running casing. This practice is
1,6
beneficial in maintaining drilling fluid mobility, thus contributing to removal efficiency. Pipe rotation or
reciprocation are also recommended when running casing.

Drilling fluid should be conditioned for several hours or until the drilling fluid has reached an equilibrium. This
will require a minimum of three hole volumes. Use circulating rates greater than or equal to those planned for the
cementing job.

SPACERS
The importance of spacers as a part of successful cementing programs has been known for many years and cannot
be over-emphasized in slimhole cementing. Studies have shown that spacer rheology and contact time are
4,7-11
particularly important in assuring effective drilling fluid displacement. The drilling fluid/spacer/cement
density differential should be considered in designing a proper system.

Spacer recommendations are usually made by the service company that does the cement job. These
recommendations include (1) the use of fresh water or water containing various concentrations of salt or
potassium chloride, (2) dilute scavenger cement volumes, to (3) highly sophisticated combinations of materials
especially designed for the purpose.

Special reactive spacers are also available to provide protection against cement losses to weak zones and yet
provide excellent cleanout and enhanced cement bonding properties. These systems also aid in filter-cake removal
and some materials can actually reduce downhole fluid loss from the cement.

Floppy Plug System

Just as two bottom plugs have been used on conventional cementing jobs, multiple floppy plugs can be used
during slimhole cementing to prevent mud/spacer/cement contamination while these fluids are in the drill pipe,
 3

tubing or casing. They may also aid in removal of mud in the tool joint upsets. The plugs allow full utilization of
minimally contaminated spacers and cements in the annulus. They are particularly valuable when used to separate
reactive spacer systems. The preferred sequence would be: mud, water spacer, plug, reactive spacer, water spacer,
plug, cement.

Compatibility
Most spacer systems are designed to be more or less compatible with most cement slurries, so the majority of
concern must be focused on compatibility with the specific drilling fluid system encountered during any particular
cement job. Please note, however, that it is still recommended to test the compatibility of the spacer and the
cement. During testing, follow the procedures published by the API for determining compatibilities. Tests should
be conducted at room temperature and at the circulating temperature expected during the job, or at 190°F if the
12
circulating temperature is above 190°F.

These testing procedures do not set definitive guidelines for determining what does or does not constitute
incompatibility. The tests, however, should provide these insights: (1) individual rheology profiles for each base
fluid, (2) whether the drilling fluid rheology is higher or lower than the spacer rheology, and (3) whether the
2
spacer rheology is higher or lower than that of the cement.

During the testing of the mixed systems (drilling fluid/spacer or spacer/cement), rheologies of the mixtures should
(at all percentages) fall within the range of rheologies of the components; when this occurs, then the mixture is
compatible. When rheologies of mixtures are grossly higher than those of the components, then the systems are
not compatible. While small rheological anomalies for one fluid mixture might be ignored in "normal" well
geometry, slimhole conditions necessitate complete compatibility, and spacer selection must be made accordingly
(Tables 2A and 2B).

TABLE 2A

COMPATIBLE FLUIDS EXAMPLE

Viscometer Dial Reading

Mud Spacer
(%) (%) 600 300 200 100 6 3
100 0 249 142 104 63 13 10
95 5 241 133 97 57 13 10
75 25 219 125 92 56 12 10
50 50 191 110 81 50 11 9
25 75 159 91 68 44 11 9
5 95 141 83 62 39 10 9
0 100 132 76 57 37 9 8

TABLE 2B

NON-COMPATIBLE FLUIDS EXAMPLE

Viscometer Dial Reading

Mud Spacer
(%) (%) 600 300 200 100 6 3
100 0 249 142 104 63 13 10
95 5 244 137 102 61 13 11
75 25 274 156 114 71 18 18
50 50 211 121 89 58 15 13
25 75 159 91 68 44 11 9
5 95 141 83 62 39 10 9
0 100 132 76 57 37 9 8
 4

Volume
The recommended volume of spacer required for effective wall cleaning is commonly indicated to be 1000
3,8
annular ft or 10 minutes contact time. This means that the actual volume used will vary with pipe and hole
geometry: The larger the annulus, the more spacer will be required, and in smaller annuli, less spacer is required.
Every precaution must be taken to ensure that the final mix meets design criteria for weight and rheological
properties.

Thin Spacers
Thin spacers containing mud dispersing chemicals and/or surfactants are often effective spacers when well control
conditions do not require a weighted spacer. High annular velocities provide turbulent flow in the spacer fluid
which minimizes the mud-spacer interface contamination. Reactive chemical spacers are thin systems and
turbulence is easily contained.

Weighted Spacers
When weighted spacers are required for well control, the difference in density between the drilling fluid and the
spacer should be at least 0.5 lb per gal (0.06 kg per liter) to minimize mixing and to take advantage of any
2,10
buoyancy effects. This differential is also recommended between the spacer and the cement. In many instances
the density difference between the drilling fluid and cement will be greater than 1.0 lb per gal (0.12 kg per liter);
however, there is little advantage in having the spacer/drilling fluid differential much greater than 0.5 lb (0.06 kg)
unless required by the hydrostatic pressure. When well conditions allow only very small differences in drilling
fluid/cement densities, the recommended differentials cannot be used. Larger spacer volumes should be pumped
in these cases.

Fluid Loss Control

In normal situations, fluid loss control is not required for spacers; however, in special situations, such as setting
plugs in hydrocarbon-based media, fluid loss control can become important.

Rheological Considerations
Turbulent flow has been clearly demonstrated to be superior to other flow regimes for drilling fluid removal
purposes. Designing for turbulent flow without compromising the solids suspending properties of the spacer
system should be a prime consideration.

Wetting Properties
The spacer must have water-wetting properties. Several studies have been made that show that better bonds are
13
achieved when the pipe and formation are in a water-wet condition. Surfactants are readily available to
incorporate water-wetting properties into the spacer. Using these surfactants is very important, especially when
oil-based drilling fluids have been used or if oil-wetting surfactants have been a part of a water-based drilling fluid
system.

MECHANICAL ASPECTS OF CEMENTING SLIM HOLES

All the mechanical methods associated with obtaining a good cement seal in typical operations also apply to
slimhole operations. As mentioned before, slimhole geometry is less forgiving, so increased care must be
exercised to ensure the best possible job. Increased attention to slurry density accuracy and mixing consistency are
imperative.

Pipe Movement, Centralization, and Scratchers

Pipe movement and proper centralization contribute significantly toward obtaining a complete annular sealing.
2-5
These methods should be high-priority aspects of good job planning. Using pipe movement is of paramount
importance. In slimhole applications, rotation is the method of choice.

Complete centralization may not be possible on every job because of hole restrictions. Scratcher use may also be
very limited, but they should be used in the field during the cementing job if possible. When used with pipe
movement, scratchers aid in breaking up pockets of gelled fluid, help remove solids that may have settled from
 5

the drilling fluid, and aid in interrupting the flow pattern of the spacer and cementing slurry for short distances
after passing the scratchers.

Mixing Systems
The mixing systems used for preparation of slimhole slurries must be capable of providing the highest quality
slurries. Slurry density is the most commonly used quality parameter, and equipment is available to provide
14
density control to +-0.1 pound per gallon (+-0.01 specific gravity). Obtaining this degree of control requires
recirculating mixers with computerized density control systems or batch mixers. When using batch mixers,
accurate scales must be available so that small amounts of additives can be carefully measured. Since slurry
volumes normally associated with slimhole cementing are smaller, large tub recirculating mixers or batch mixers
are particularly suitable as reliable systems for remote locations.

In addition to density as a slurry quality check parameter, the rheological data can be used and is obtainable in a
few minutes with little inconvenience. Rotational viscometers can be used on-site to compare the field slurry with
laboratory slurries. Data will rarely compare exactly, but the rheological profile should be similar in shape and
magnitude.

Most slurries are easily mixed within 30 minutes. Stop the centrifugal pump after the cement has been added;
15,16
subsequent agitation should be done using the paddle mechanism. The slurry should be prepared immediately
prior to pumping downhole. If delays create a holding time in excess of one hour, then consider dumping the
slurry and mixing a new batch unless the delay has been specifically addressed during design testing or shown to
have an insignificant effect on slurry behavior.

SLURRY DESIGN
Slimhole slurry volumes will be smaller than those used in conventional cementing. The smaller volumes allow
flexibility with the type and concentrations of additives without incurring excessive expense, but they demand
more stringent design and quality factors. While design parameters will require longer laboratory lead and test
time, field operations should not be appreciably affected. Placement times may also decrease, allowing possible
savings in rig time.

Materials
API Classes G or H Cements are usually the primary component of the cement slurry. Cement-pozzolan mixtures
are expected to have wide application in helping to meet the demanding requirements of slimhole cementing and
a wide range of additives are available to tailor slurries to meet specific requirements. These additives are
applicable to both regular cement and the pozzolan systems.

Materials Isolation
Laboratory stock materials are to be used only when test information is required for preliminary studies. When
testing is done for specific jobs on individual wells, the test materials must be identical to those that will be used
at the wellsite. This requires the sampling, marking, and isolation of these materials for the specific jobs.

All tests conducted should model placement procedures as closely as possible. Tests should include surface
retention times and perceived startup and shutdown.

Thickening Time
Accurate well temperatures are necessary for proper slurry design because temperature and temperature-increase
rate are the critical factors that influence thickening time behavior. Extra caution should be taken in using
standard API BHCT temperatures because tighter annular geometries may cause significantly deviations for API
values. Extensive data must be gathered to provide a basis from BHCT calculations. Several tool systems are
available to measure temperatures accurately under dynamic conditions, and these must be applied to the greatest
advantage possible.

Temperature information can be sent to the laboratory for refinement of fluid designs. Final data should be
measured during drilling fluid and hole conditioning before pulling out to run pipe. The final fluid adjustments
 6

can be determined during pull out, running pipe, and circulating. The job can then proceed without delay. The
reliance on last-minute logging temperatures should be discouraged because accurate data is required to get
accurate circulating temperatures.

Temperature data and the expected time for the first sack of cement to reach bottom should be compared to the
published API Schedules.

The designer may find that the published casing schedules do not apply because of longer times to reach
temperature. Indeed, the liner or squeeze schedules may not provide a reasonable "fit" with the well data. In those
cases, individual schedules should be calculated and used in the laboratory tests. The basis for these schedules is
to be included on the lab reports.
12
Slurry preparations for each test are to be conducted according to the procedures in API Spec 10. Where API
Operating Procedures are used for rheology, free fluid, and fluid loss tests, the temperature schedule should be the
same as used in the thickening time test. When batch mixing is planned for field operations, the time the slurry is
held in the batch mixer must be simulated in the laboratory. This is done by filling the slurry container and
placing it in the high pressure consistometer. Stirring is begun, the chamber is filled with oil, and the clock is
started. Pressure need not be applied during the batch mix time. The temperature will remain at ambient
conditions. Initial viscosities can be recorded and variations during the batch mixing time observed. The
appropriate heating rate schedule begins at the end of the batch holding time. The surface holding time is to be
noted separately and included in the total thickening time.

Significant variations between pilot and blend sample thickening time tests can be tolerated without
compromising operational success. The following thickening time acceptance windows present a reasonable set of
17
constraints that can make quality assurance testing more efficient and maintain adequate job safety margins.

Thickening Time Acceptance Windows

Pilot Tests: TTT ± 15%

Blend Sample Tests: TTT ± 40%

where:

TTT =Target Thickening Time, AJT x DSF

AJT = Anticipated Job Time (possibly including contingencies)
DSF = Design Safety Factor (1.7 to 2.3)

In general, this safety factor is applicable to slimhole cementing providing other factors are considered. During
thickening time tests, viscosity often builds up at various time intervals prior to reaching 70 or 100 Bc. This time
can range from as little as 10 minutes to more than an hour depending on the particular slurry and test conditions
(Figure 2).

Some slurries exhibit a viscosity increase or gelling tendency during the course of the thickening time test. Since
changes in viscosity severely affect annulus friction pressures, the slurry should be in place before viscosity
buildup begins (Figure 3).

The MACs Analyzer is a useful instrument to determine static gel strength buildup and can be an integral part of
slurry design for preventing gas migration.

Fluid Loss.
Fluid loss control during slurry placement is critical to the success of the job. In essence, the smaller the annulus,
the lower the fluid loss must be. Loss of fluid from the slurry results in increased filter-cake deposition and
annular friction due to the reduced diameter (Figure 4). Slurry density may increase and thickening time decrease.
10,18
Fluid loss control is vital to prevent gas migration. The importance of fluid loss control is multiplied several
 7

fold in slim holes. Loss values below 50 will be the norm; however, fluid loss values may be necessarily lower as
determined by well conditions.

In the past, most of the fluid loss control additives have increased the slurry viscosity or required additional water.
Non-viscosifying systems are now available; their use should be expected as an integral part of slimhole slurry
design.

Free Fluid
"Free fluid" is now the accepted terminology for what we have known as "free water." No measurable free fluid is
the only acceptable design for deviated wells while trace amounts may be acceptable in vertical systems when gas
migration is not a problem. Since temperature often has an effect on the amount of free fluid in a slurry, the API
12
Operating Free Fluid test procedure must be used in design testing.

Rheological Properties
The rheology of the cement is a major factor in slimhole slurry design since these numbers define the flow regime,
pipe and annulus frictions, and dictate pumping rates that will not cause formation fracturing and slurry loss. The
tight geometry requires the use of thin fluids in order to obtain the best possible job.
2,3,19
High displacement rates have been a factor in successful cementing for many years. Every effort should be
made to design slimhole slurries for turbulent flow and minimum friction, but this is often not possible since well
conditions vary from area to area and cement slurries tend to be viscous. The primary requirement is that the
integrity of the well is protected. Protecting well integrity may require flexibility in the density, rheology, or
volume of the spacer and the density and rheology of the cement slurry to arrive at a sensible approach to difficult
cementing conditions. Job simulation with the most accurate models is essential.

While turbulence is preferable, high laminar rates are acceptable. The recommended minimum pump rate for
cementing and displacement is 80 annular m/min (260 ft/min). Plug flow is not recommended. The goal is the
maximum allowable pump rate without breaking down the formation.

Lost Circulation Materials

The larger particle-sized LCM additives are expected to have very limited application as a result of the danger of
annular bridging. Fine-sized materials, such as some of the micas or fibers, may be useable in low concentrations.
Lost circulation problems should be solved to the greatest extent possible during the drilling operations. Since this
cannot always be accomplished, reactive-type spacer fluids should be considered to use their properties to the best
advantage.

Slurry Stability
Slurry stability is a term that has evolved through efforts to control particle settling under static conditions.
20
Stratification of slurries before setting has been a source of various problems, and the necessity to maintain the
proper distribution of hydrostatic pressures during gas well cementing is well known. While a precise definition of
a stable slurry has not been agreed upon and stability test procedures vary from company to company, designing
for minimum settling under static slurry conditions is recommended. Perfect suspension of all components may
not always be possible, but additives are available to help control settling (Figure 5).

Strength Development
Strength development in any cementing slurry is a function of time, temperature, and slurry composition. The
increased length of the cemented interval, which may be necessary in slimhole operations, may result in the first
portion of slurry ending up at a significantly lower temperature. The retarder concentration necessary to get the
cement in place may result in excessively reduced strength development in short time intervals. In such cases, use
multiple-stage cementing or tapered retarder systems if the slurry volumes are sufficiently large to make use of
this technique. Multiple stage cementing may not be possible if tool or hole restrictions are present; it is,
therefore, necessary to rely on the most accurate temperature data and correct slurry design for optimum strength
development.
 8

GAS MIGRATION
The flow of gas in the annulus of a cemented well can cause problems ranging from a simple irritation to
21-23
catastrophic blowout. Migration has been found to occur through two different mechanisms. One occurs before
the cement sets, and the other is a long-term process that occurs after the cement has gelled and begins to set. A
discussion of both and related problems to slim hole cementing is given below.

Short-Term Gas Migration

Short-term gas migration occurs shortly after the cement is placed in the annulus and occurs before the cement
sets. It begins when overbalance pressure is lost across a gas zone as a result of the combined affects of fluid loss
23,24
and static gel strength. After the overbalance pressure is lost, gas begins to enter the annulus at a rate equal to
the fluid loss rate that is occurring across another lower pressure zone. If sufficient rate is achieved, the gas
bubbles will percolate up the annulus and can eventually lead to the formation of a permanent channel. This type
of problem occurs shortly after a well is cemented.

Since all cements will have some fluid loss and eventually develop static gel strength (SGS) before setting, one
must deal with the amount of fluid loss rate and SGS development and the timing of the SGS development to
prevent this problem. Fluid loss additives have been used for many years to help prevent migration by reducing
the rate of loss, hence slowing the rate of gas influx into the annulus. Other materials modify the rate of static gel
24,25
strength development by accelerating or delaying its occurrence. Another applicable system is the use of a gas-
generating material, which increases the compressibility of the cement. The increased compressibility reduces the
23,26
actual downhole pressure loss for a given volume of fluid lost from the cement.
27
Other solutions proposed for controlling gas problems use micro-sized silica particles or incorporate foaming
surfactants or latex systems into the cement slurry. These materials act as fillers or pore-blockers between the
cement particles to reduce the possibility of gas percolation.

The problem of preventing short-term gas migration is magnified when trying to cement a slimhole annulus. This
21,22
can be understood when looking at the relationship between SGS and pressure loss in an annulus:

SGS L
P= x
300 D
P = Pressure drop in an annulus in psi
2
SGS = Static Gel Strength in cement as pounds per 100 ft
L = Length of a cement column (ft)
D = Mean diameter of a cemented annulus (in.)

In this relationship we can see that pressure drop “P” is increased as the mean diameter (D hole - D pipe)
decreases (Figure 5). The increase in pressure drop will result in higher Flow Potential Factors, a relative
measurement of the potential of a well experiencing gas migration.

Therefore, to deal with the problem of gas migration, the first step is to evaluate the Flow Potential Factor of a
21,22
well and then choose the appropriate methods to eliminate the problem. These methods always include some
type of fluid loss control additive.

Long-Term Gas Migration.

The problem of long-term gas migration occurs after the cement has begun to set in the annulus. As the cement
sets, it can experience small amounts of shrinkage from hydration volume reduction. If this occurs, gas may be
able to migrate between the formation wall and set cement or between the set cement and casing string. If a thick,
 9

water-based drilling fluid filter cake is present, the cake can shrink as water is lost to the dry gas. The shrinkage in
the filter cake can lead to greater and greater gas flow. This type of gas problem may occur or be detected weeks
or months after the well is cemented.

The two ways to prevent long-term gas migration problems are (1) the use of good drilling fluid displacement
practices and (2) the use of expanding additives in the slurry, which compensate for cement shrinkage.

PRE-JOB SIMULATION
Simulation of the cementing job is one of the most important factors in proper job planning. Simulation requires a
minimum of time but demands the most accurate data available. Inaccurate data results in predictions which have
little value. Models now in use are available to predict flow regimes, frictions in the pipe and annulus, formation
breakdown caused by excessive pressure, wellhead pressures, and a host of other information that is vital not only
to get the cement safely on bottom but also to ensure the fluid properties are used to the best advantage for an
effective seal.

While it cannot be assumed any of the models is exact in all cases, correlation of job data with predictions has
been favorable. The importance of using these models in the planning and design stages cannot be over-
emphasized. Computer packages are available for use at wellsites and in the laboratories for quick assistance in
examining job and slurry design options. These should be required and used to the maximum advantage.
Examples of simulations are shown in Figure 6, 7, and 8.

OBTAINING A GOOD ANNULAR SEAL

Slurry design and proper placement techniques are the main factors in obtaining good cement jobs. Although the
importance of a well-designed slurry cannot be disregarded, good placement techniques will forgive some slurry
deficiencies. Poor placement techniques nearly always result in poor cement jobs. Poor primary jobs necessitate
remedial work at extra cost and can result in additional expense from production delays.

Operations that are known to help get good results are as follows:

• Complete preplanning with the aid of accurate job models

• Proper well cleanout and drilling fluid preparation

• Proper centralization of the pipe

• Proper volumes of a well-designed water wetting spacer

• Effectively designed slurries for specific well conditions

• Pipe movement during hole conditioning

• Pipe movement during the cementing job

• Continuous pumping while releasing plugs

• Use of the highest flow rates obtainable during the job without causing formation breakdown.

• Pipe movement after the cement is in place although this will not be practical on liner jobs.

• Zero closed in pressure during WOC time

• Eliminating reverse-out of cement above liner tops

 10

• Where gas migration control is imperative, the use of expansion additives is advisable because the expansion
21,22,28
properties can compensate for cement volume shrinkage and bond release caused by hydration reactions.

• In specific instances it may be more desirable to use the "puddle job" cementing technique. This involves
placement of the slurry in the well through drillpipe, then running the casing or liner into the cement. Special
delayed gel strength additives can be used to obtain the long-term viscosity control required for these jobs yet
still allow effective strength development in reasonable times.

REFERENCES

1. Keller, S.R. et al.: "Problems Associated with Deviated-Wellbore Cementing," paper SPE 11979 presented at
the 1983 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco, Oct. 5-8.

2. Clark, C.R. and Carter, L.G.: "Mud Displacement with Cementing Slurries," paper SPE 4090 prepared for the
1972 SPE-AIME Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Oct. 8-11.

3. Haut, R.C. and Crook, R.J.: "Primary Cementing: The Mud Displacement Process," paper SPE 8253 presented
at the 1979 SPE-AIME Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 23-26.

4. Sauer, C. W.: "Mud Displacement During the Cementing Operation: A State of the Art," paper SPE 14197
presented at the 1985 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25.

5. Wilson, M.A.: "Cementing Horizontal Wells in Preparation for Stimulation," World Oil (October 1989) 72-
84.

6. Crook, R.J., Keller, S. R., and Wilson, M.A.: "Solutions to Problems Associated with Deviated-Wellbore
Cementing," paper SPE 14198 presented at the 1985 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las
Vegas, Sept. 22-25.

7. Crook, R.J., Darden, W.A., and Watson, J.L.: "Spacers and their Applications in Primary Cementing," paper
presented at the 1979 Southwest Petroleum Short Course.

8. Haut, R.C. and Crook, R.J.: "Laboratory Investigation of Lightweight, Low-Viscosity Cementing Spacer
Fluids," paper SPE-10305 presented at the 1981 SPE-AIME Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San
Antonio, Oct. 5-7.

9. Smith, T.T. and Crook, R.J.: "Investigation of Cement Preflushes for a KCl-Polymer Mud," preprint paper
#82-33-71 for petroleum society of CIM presented at the 1982 Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum
Society of CIM held jointly with the 6th Symposium of Engineering Applications of Mechanics in Calgary,
June 6-9.

10. Hartog, J.J., Davies, D. R., and Stewart, R.B.: "An Integrated Approach for Successful Primary Cementations,"
JPT, (Sept 1983).

11. Smith, Robert C.: "Checklist Aids Successful Primary Cementing," Oil & Gas J. (Nov. 1, 1982).

12. API Specification for materials and Testing for Well Cements, Spec 10, 5th Edition (July 1, 1990).

13. Wilson, M.A. and Sabins, F.L.: "A Laboratory Investigation of Cementing Horizontal Wells," paper SPE
16928 presented at the 1987 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 27-30.
 11

14. Stegemoeller, C., Allen, T., and Pitts, A.J.: "Automatic Density Control and High Specific Mixing Energy
Deliver Consistent High-Quality Cement Slurries," paper OTC 7068 presented at the 1992 Annual Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, May 4-7.

15. Vidick, B., Nash, F.D., and Hartley, I.: "Cementing Through Coiled Tubing and its Influence on Slurry
Properties," paper SPE 20959 presented at Europec '90, The Hague, The Netherlands, Oct 22-24.

16. Vidick, B., Hibbert, A.P., and Kellingray, D.S.: "Cement Slurry Batch Mixing: A Critical Step for Slurry
Quality Control," paper OTC 7067 presented at the 1992 Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
May 4-7.

17. Gerke, R.R. et al.: "A Study of Bulk Cement Handling and Testing Procedures," paper SPE 14196 presented
at the 1985 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25.

18. Strange, A.F., and Brothers, L.E.: "Synthetic Polymer Developed for Cement Fluid-Loss Control," paper SPE
20043 presented at the 1990 Permian Basin Oil & Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, TX, March 8, 9.

19. Brice, J.W. Jr, and Holmes, B.C.: "Engineered Casing Cementing Programs Utilizing Turbulent Flow
Techniques," paper SPE 742 presented at the 1963 SPE-AIME Annual Fall Meeting, New Orleans, Oct. 6-9.

20. Greaves, C. and Hibbert, A.: "Test Improves Measurement of Cement-Slurry Stability," Oil & Gas J. (Feb. 12,
1990) 35-40.

21. Sutton, D.L., Sabins, F., and Faul, R.: "Preventing Annular Gas Flow-Part 1: Annular Gas Flow Theory and
Prevention Methods Described," Oil & Gas J. (Dec. 10, 1984) 84-92.

22. Sutton, D.L., Sabins, F., and Faul, R.: "Preventing Annular Gas Flow-Part 2: New Evaluation for Annular
Gas-Flow Potential," Oil & Gas J. (Dec. 17, 1984) 109-112.

23. Tinsley, J.M., et al.: "Study of Factors Causing Annular Gas Flow Following Primary Cementing," paper SPE
8257 presented at the 1979 SPE-AIME Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept.
23-26.

24. Sabins, F.L., Tinsley, J.M., and Sutton, D.L.: "Transition Time of Cement Slurries Between the Fluid and Set
State," paper SPE 9285 presented at the 1980 SPE-AIME Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Dallas, Sept. 21-24.

25. Sabins, F.L. and Sutton, D.L.: "The Relationship of Thickening Time, Gel Strength, and Compressive
Strengths of Oilwell Cements," paper SPE 11205 presented at the 1982 SPE-AIME Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Sept. 26-29.

26. Watters, L.T. and Sabins, F.L.: "Field Evaluation of Method to Control Gas Flow Following Cementing,"
paper SPE 9287 presented at the 1980 SPE-AIME Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept.
21-24.

27. Grinrod, M., Vassoy, B., and Dingsoyr, E.O.: "Development and Use of a Gas-Tight Cement," paper
IADC/SPE 17258 presented at the 1988 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Feb. 28-Mar. 2.

28. Seidel, F.A. and Greene, T.G.: "Use of Expanding Cement Improves Bonding and Aids in Eliminating
Annular Gas Migration in Hobbs Grayburg-San Andres Wells," paper SPE 14434 presented at the 1985
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25.
 12

FIGURE 1

"SLIMHOLE" ANNULAR GEOMETRIES

 13

JOB SLURRY VISCOSITY EXAMPLE

Bc VISCOSITY Bc VISCOSITY

2
 14

FIGURE 4

3
 15

SLURRY SETTLING PROFILE

DESIRABLE NOT RECOMMENDED

FIGURE 5
 16

Example 1 (Figure 6)

140 mm pipe

180.6 mm hole

Normal job

RHEOLOGY USED

Temp RPM: 300 200 100 60

27° C 60 44 24 17
82° C 46 33 18 12

Example 2 (Figure 7)

Same conditioning as Example 1 but using a more viscous slurry.

Temp RPM: 300 200 100 60

27° C 180 132 72 51
82° C 138 99 54 36

Example 3 (Figure 8)

Same conditioning as example 1 but using 8 mm filter cake.

Rheology used is the same as in Example 1.
 17

Figure 6A

Figure 6B
 18

Figure 6C

Figure 6D
 19

Figure 7A

Figure 7B
 20

Figure 7C

Figure 7D
 21

Figure 8A

Figure 8B
 22

Figure 8C

Figure 8D
 23

Casing Job Calculation Example

Problem: Set 3,280 feet of 3-1/2 inch 10.20 lb casing in 5-7/8 inch hole. Fill to the surface with a slurry
weighing 15.8 lb per gallon with a slurry volume of 1.18 cubic feet per sack. Assume the float collar is placed 80
feet off bottom.

How many sacks of cement are required? What is the mud volume required to displace the slurry?

3
0.519 ft 3
3,280 ft x = 170.23 ft of annulus
1 ft

3
0.0466 ft 3
80 ft x = 3.73 ft of shoe joint
1 ft

Total slurry + desired excess = 173.96

3 1 sack
173.96 ft slurry x 3
= 147.4 sacks of cement
1.18 ft

0.0083 Bbl
(3280 ft - 80 ft) X = 25.56 barrels of displacement
1 ft

Note: No allowance was made for couplings or upsets

 24

Liner Job Example

Problem: Set 1850 feet of 3-1/2 inch 10.20 lb liner in 4-1/4 inch open hole. TD is 9650 feet. The liner top
will be in 5 inch 15.0 lb casing set to 8100 feet. Eastman 2-7/8 HWDP will be used and the slurry will have
3
volume of 1.53 ft /sk.

3
0.0317 ft 3
3.5 X 4.25 Annulus (9650 ft - 8100 ft) X = 49.135 ft
1 ft

3
0.0392 ft 3
3.5 X 5.0 Annulus (1850 ft - 1550 ft) X = 11.76 ft
1 ft

3 3 1 sack
Cement required: (49.135 ft + 11.76 ft ) X = 39.3 (40 sacks)
3
1.55 ft

No excess was included in this example

No allowance was made for liner couplings

Displacement Volumes

0.0083 bbl
Liner 1850 ft X = 15.36 bbl
1 ft

0.00413 bbl
Drill Pipe 7800 ft X = 32.21 bbl
1 ft
 25

Drill Pipe Upset Allowance

1 joint
7800 ft x = ± 261 joints
29.89 ft

0.007169 bbl
261 joints x = 1.87 bbl
1 joint

Displacement = 15.36 + 32.21 - 1.87 = ± 45.7 bbl

Balanced Plug Equalization Point Formula

Balance Cement Plug Job

It is desired to place a 110 Cu. ft. cement plug in the bottom of 8.000 ft of 7", 26# casing, using 2.875" tubing. The
operator wants the cement column equalized. He also wants a balanced column of water (the same height of water
in the space between the tubing and casing as exists within the tubing.

Equalization Point Formula

N
h = - where
C+T
N = Cu. ft. of Cement slurry used.
h = height of balanced cement column.
C = Cu. ft. per linear foot of space between tubing (or drill pipe), and casing (or hole).
T = Cu. ft. per linear foot inside tubing (or drill pipe, or casing).
N = 110 Cu. ft. Cem. slurry: C = .1697 Cu. ft./ft.
T = .0325 Cu. ft./ft.

110 110
h = = = 544 ft
.1697 + .0325 0.2022
 26

8000 ft - 544 ft = 7456 ft X .00579 bbl/ft. = 43.17 bbl. displacement required to equalize the cement column.

To balance the water that is to be placed ahead of the cement with the water that is to follow the cement, one must
obtain (from the Handbook) the height that one bbl. of water will fill in the space between the casing and the
tubing, and the height that the one bbl. of water will fill inside the tubing.

Height between tubing and casing = 33.11 ft/bbl.

Height inside tubing = 172.7 ft/bbl.

 172.7 ft / bbl 
A ratio of 5.22 bbl,  
 33.11 ft / bbl 

of water ahead of the cement to one bbl of water behind will give a balanced column of 172.7 ft of water. This
ratio may be used to balance any desired amount of water the operator wants to use. 2 bbl. of water behind the
cement: 2 X 5.22 = 10.44 bbl of water ahead of the cement. This gives a balanced water column of 345.4 ft.

In slimhole designs, the internal and external upsets as well as wear rings must be included in the calculations.

Two Plug Method For Setting Cement Plugs

Balanced plugging is not recommended. The use of the two-plug method is preferred and pipe rotation is
advisable. Placement of a reactive fluid system in the wellbore to prevent downward cement plug movement is
recommended. This procedure is described in SPE Paper 15008.

Two plug cementing allows the use of spacer of any desired type or volume ahead of the cement simplifies the
calculations by eliminating the necessity to balance the annulus with the drillpipe, and reduces contamination of
the cement upon pull-out.
 27

METRIC ANNULUS VOLUMES

Pipe Hole
Size Size
3 3
(mm) (mm) Liters/M Meters/Liter Meters /M Meters/M

88.90 104.775 2.4148 0.4141 0.002415 414.1

88.90 107.95 2.9453 0.3395 0.002945 339.5

88.90 120.65 5.2254 0.1914 0.005225 191.4

127.00 149.225 4.8217 0.2074 0.004822 207.4

ANNULUS VOLUMES

Pipe Hole
Size Size
3
(in) (in) ft /ft ft/ft3 gal/ft ft/gal bbl/ft ft/bbl

3.5 4.125 0.02599 38.4763 0.1944 5.1440 0.004629 216.049

3.5 4.25 0.0317 31.5457 0.2371 4.2176 0.005645 177.148

3.5 4.75 0.0563 17.7620 0.4211 2.3747 0.010026 99.741

5.0 5.875 0.0519 19.2678 0.3882 2.5760 0.009243 108.190

PIPE CAPACITY VOLUMES

3
Pipe Size -- Weight ft /ft gal/ft ft/gal bbl/ft ft/bbl

3.50 10.2 lb per ft 0.0466 0.349 2.871 0.0083 120.57

4.50 13.5 lb per ft 0.0837 0.626 1.595 0.0149 66.99

5.00 15.0 lb per ft 0.106 0.794 1.261 0.0189 52.98

 28

PIPE METRIC CAPACITY VOLUMES

3 3
Pipe Size --Weight M /Meter Meters/M

88.90 mm 15.18 kg/m 0.0043 231.05

114.30 mm 20.09 kg/m 0.0078 128.38

127.00 mm 22.32 kg/m 0.0098 101.53

CAPACITY OF EASTMAN TELECO HWDP: 2-7/8 INCH OD DRILL PIPE - 10.4 LB/FT 2-1/16 INCH ID

0.0232 ft3/foot 43.10 feet/ft3 2.1557 liters/meter 0.464 meter/liter

0.174 gal/foot 5.74 feet/gallon 0.00216 m3/meter 462.96 meter/m3

0.00413 bbl/foot 242.13 feet/bbl

Note: No allowance has been made for tool joints or upsets

DRILL PIPE TOOL JOINT ALLOWANCE - ID

0.04026 cubic feet per joint 24.84 joints per cubic foot

0.3011 gallons per joint 3.32 joints per gallon

0.007169 barrels per joint 139.49 joints per barrel

0.00114 cubic meters per joint 877.19 joints per cubic meter
 29

ANNULAR VELOCITIES

METRIC

88.90 mm 88.90 mm 88.90 mm 127.00 mm

in in in in
104.775 mm 107.95 mm 120.65 mm 149.225 mm

Rate
3
M /min M/min M/sec M/min M/sec M/min M/sec M/min M/sec

0.1 41.41 0.690 33.95 0.566 19.14 0.319 20.74 0.346

0.2 82.82 1.380 67.90 1.312 38.28 0.638 41.48 0.691

0.25 103.53 1.725 84.88 1.415 47.85 0.798 51.85 0.864

0.3 124.23 2.071 101.85 1.698 57.42 0.957 62.22 1.037

0.4 165.64 2.761 135.80 2.263 76.56 1.276 82.96 1.383

0.5 207.05 3.451 169.75 2.829 95.70 1.595 103.70 1.728

0.6 248.46 4.141 203.70 3.395 114.84 1.914 124.44 2.074

0.7 289.87 4.831 237.95 3.961 133.98 2.233 145.18 2.42

 30

ANNULAR VELOCITIES

3.5" 3.5" 3.5" 5.0"

in in in in
4.125" 4.25" 4.75" 5.875"

(BPM) ft/min ft/sec ft/min ft/sec ft/min ft/sec ft/min ft/sec

0.25 54.01 0.90 44.29 0.738 24.94 0.416 27.05 0.451

0.50 108.01 1.80 88.57 1.476 49.87 0.831 24.10 0.902

0.75 162.02 2.70 132.66 2.214 74.81 1.247 81.14 1.352

1.00 216.03 3.60 177.15 2.952 99.74 1.662 108.19 1.803

1.50 324.04 5.40 265.72 4.429 149.61 2.494 162.29 2.705

2.00 432.06 7.20 354.30 5.905 199.48 3.325 216.38 3.606

2.50 540.07 9.00 442.87 7.381 249.35 4.156 270.48 4.508

3.00 648.09 10.80 531.44 8.857 299.22 4.987 324.57 5.41

3.50 756.10 12.60 620.02 10.33 349.09 5.818 378.67 6.311

 31

CEMENTING ADDITIVES
Accelerators:

Calcium chloride
Sodium chloride in concentrations of less than 8% by weight of mix water
Potassium chloride. Usually used at 3% by weight of water

Retarders:

HR- 4 Retarder for moderate temperatures

HR- 5 Retarder for moderate temperatures
HR- 6L Liquid retarder for moderate temperatures
HR- 7 Retarder for moderate temperatures. Usually used with high bentonite concentrations.
Provides some dispersing properties.
HR-12 Retarder for high temperatures. Usually provides some dispersing properties.
HR-15 Retarder for high temperatures
HR-20 Retarder for extreme temperatures
SCR-100 Retarder intensifier
HR-25 Retarder intensifier
Component R Retarder intensifier

Light Weight Additives/Systems:

Halliburton Light Cement Light weight cement formulation

HTLD Cement Light weight cement formulation for high temperatures
Bentonite Filler cements
ECONOLITE Filler cements
ECONOLITE Liquid Liquid additive for filler cements
Gilsonite Low density additive for lost circulation conditions
Diacel D Filler cements
Perlite Low density additive. Applicable for use in lost circulation conditions
SPHERELITE For densities to 8.5 lb/gal. Applicable for lost circulation conditions.
Provides insulation properties when required.
Nitrogen Foam For slurry densities to 6.5 lb/gal. Provides insulation properties
Silicalite Micro-size silica extender
Silicalite 97L Liquid version of Silicalite
Microblok Micro-size silica extender

Heavy Weight Additives:

HI-DENSE NO. 3 For slurry weights to 22 lb/gal

Sand For slurry weights to 18 lb/gal
Barite For slurry weights to 19 lb/gal
CFR-2, CFR-3 Low water ratio slurries to 18 lb/gal
Micromax For slurry weights to 22 lb/gal. Can be added to mixing water
 32

Lost Circulation Systems/Additives:

Flocele
Gilsonite
Perlites
Cal-Seal Cement
Bentonite-Diesel Oil (gunk)
Thixotropic Cement
SPHERELITE
NITROGEN FOAM CEMENTS
FLO-CHEK PROCESS
HALAD- 9 Moderate temperature fluid loss control

Fluid Loss Control Additives:

HALAD-14 Medium temperatures. Retarding. May exhibit some dispersing properties

HALAD-22A Wide temperature range application
HALAD-24 Wide temperature range. Salt compatible.
HALAD-100A High temperature fluid loss control. Salt compatible.
HALAD-322 Temperatures to 180 F. Non-viscosifying.
HALAD-344 Wide temperature application. Non-retarding.
HALAD-361A Liquid additive. Wide temperature application
HALAD-374 Temperatures above 270 F. For high salt concentrations.
HALAD-413 High temperature fluid loss control.
HALAD-413 L Liquid version of HALAD-413
LATEX-2000 High temperature LATEX system
Dispersants:

CFR-1 High temperature use. Retards.

CFR-2 Wide temperature range
CFR-2L Liquid version of CFR-2
CFR-3 Wide temperature range. Can be used with salt saturated slurries
CFR-3L Liqud version of CFR-3
HR-7 Dispersion in high bentonite slurries. Retards
HR-12 Some dispersing properties. Retards.
 33

Special Additives/Systems:

Salt (NaCl) Accelerates in low concentrations. Retards in high concentrations. Aids in bonding
to shales, clay formations, salt zones
FLO-CHEK Lost circulation control system. Water flow control.
Thixotropic Cement Lost circulation control
Potassium Chloride (KCl) Improved bonding to shales and clay formations. Clay swelling control in producing
zone
TUF-CEMENT Contains reinforcing fibres to reduce damage to cement when perforating and stimulating

Permafrost Cement Special system for cold and subfreezing formations. Bonds well to frozen formations
or ice
Silica Flour (SSA-1) Reduces strength retrogression at high temperatures
SSA-2 "Coarse" silica strength retrogression control additive
Silica for Micromatrix Micro-sized silica for strength retrogression control in Matrix or Micromatrix
Cements
DOC -3 Surfactant for preparing Diesel Oil Cement
DOC-10 Surfactant for preparing Diesel Oil Cement
MOC- A Surfactant for preparing Diesel Oil Cement
using Matrix or Micromatrix Cements
D-Air 1 Defoamer, dry blended
D-Air 2 Liquid defoamer
NF-2E Liquid defoamer
NF-3 Liquid defoamer
NF-4E Liquid defoamer
EA-1 Expansion additive
EA-2 Expansion additive
MicroBond E Expansion additive, European source
MicroBond M Expansion additive, temperature to 175 F
MicroBond HT Expansion additive, temperature above 170 F
SUPER CBL Plastic state expansion additive
FWCA Free water control additive
FDP-C440R Anti-settling additive

Annular Gas Flow Control Additives:

GasBan Fluid loss control, delayed gel strength

GasStop Fluid loss control, delayed gel strength
Gas-Chek Compressible cement
GasCon 469 Micro-sized silica additive