You are on page 1of 6

SPE 94541

New Technology for the Delivery of Beaded Lightweight Cements


D. Kulakofsky and R. Vargo, Halliburton

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers


This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9 12 October 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
The use of lightweight cements for oilfield applications has
progressed from conventional systems used in the past to some
very specialized blends used currently. Conventional waterextended cement slurries and their minimum densities of 11.5
12 lb/gal were all that were available until the late 70s when
hollow spheres and foam cementing were first introduced.
Technology for both foamed and microsphere slurries has
evolved considerably over the last 10 years. The conventional
water-extended cement slurries were considered adequate for
offshore wells until the late 80s when shallow drilling hazards
found in deepwater, necessitated higher performance
lightweight cements.
The first specialty cements that showed success used
blends of microfine cement and microspheres while the next
generation of specialty cements used nitrogen and a special
blend of base cement to produce high-performance foamed
cements that were very successful. Advanced liquid additives
then developed allowed the same high-performance results
without the requirement of storing specially blended cements
offshore.
Recently the introduction of new, high-strength beads has
provided the advantages presented with beaded slurries under
the higher operating pressures currently encountered in deep
water. However, special blending, transportation, and mixing
issues are still significant. These newer bead technologies
have also enabled effective slurry design at lower and lower
densities. In addition to the usual blending and transportation
issues these new ultra-light designs present additional slurry
mixing issues because maintaining a constant density no
longer ensures a correct cement to water ratio.
In this paper a new technology for bead delivery is
presented to illustrate how the industry can gain all of the

advantages normally presented by these beaded slurries while


avoiding the blending, transport, and mixing issues.
Discussion is included to describe the potential of this new
technology to help reduce cost associated with offshore
cementing operations. By eliminating the need for blended
cement, the rig can minimize the logistical concerns, reduce
waste of excess specialty blends, avoid the need of separate
silos for specialty blends, and provide the capability of
changing slurry density at the time of delivery.
This paper presents (1) the history and evolution from the
first use of lightweight additives through this newly patentpending technology, and (2) the methodology and guidelines
for use of each technology with other lightweight technologies
available.
Background
General
Normally cement is mixed at a density of 15.6 16.4 lb/gal
depending upon the type of cement used. When conditions are
encountered that call for heavier slurry properties, water may
be decreased and/or weighting material added to increase the
cement density, in an attempt to keep the reservoir fluids from
entering the annulus. When cementing past zones with a low
fracture gradient the cement density is reduced to prevent
losses of bulk cement fluid into the formation. Current slurry
design technology allows for this density reduction to be
accomplished through any one of three different mechanisms,
discussed in the following sections.1-3
Water Extended
The addition of any amount of water to a cement slurry will
reduce that slurrys density and can cause slurry-stability
problems. To allow the addition of enough extra water to
significantly reduce the slurry density while maintaining slurry
stability, additional additives are added in conjunction with the
extra water. Typical examples of these water-extending
additives are: bentonite, sodium or potassium silicates, fumed
silica, diatomaceous earth, and pozzolan. Often these materials
are mistakenly referred to as lightweight additives, but in
reality they are water-extending additives. Commonly these
water extending additives are inexpensive. When combined
with the large increases in slurry yield attainable from the
additional water, this class of cement slurries will normally be
the cheapest available. While inexpensive, these slurries will
also have the lowest level of performance of all cementing
systems.

SPE 94541

These designs are limited to a maximum density reduction to


11 or 11.5 lb/gal, below which compressive strength
development is unacceptably slow.
Foam
The second way to decrease the density of cement is with the
introduction of a gaseous phase into the slurry. Nitrogen is the
most common gas to be used to foam cement, but compressed
air and gas-generating solids can also be used. In addition to
decreasing the density, foaming the cement slurry has three
primary benefits: (1) increased slurry compressibility, (2)
increased set cement elasticity,4,5 and (3) easy to change
design density as well conditions change. Increased slurry
compressibility is important when operators are combating
annular gas migration or shallow water flow.6-8 Elasticity is
beneficial in oilwell cementing because it helps the cement
maintain its seal in the presence of outside stresses.9,10 While
having the above engineering benefits, foam cementing
requires additional personnel, equipment, and, normally,
access to nitrogen.
Microspheres
The final method for density reduction in oilwell cementing
fluids is through the addition of low specific-gravity
microspheres. Microspheres are typically: (1) solid plastic
beads ~ 1 sg (surface and downhole), (2) hollow pozzlanic
spheres 0.7 sg (surface), and 3) hollow, engineered glass
bubbles 0.32 0.61 sg (surface and downhole). Properly
designed microsphere slurries will have the highest strength to
weight ratio and lowest permeability of any cement design.
Rapid compressive strength development is beneficial in
oilwell cementing because waiting on cement (WOC) times
can be reduced.
Development of the Technique
During the development of the liquid microsphere additive,
considerations were made for how a slurry could be
successfully designed and then testing performed. The
additives included in the liquid-bead slurry design presented
several challenges.
1. The technique used to mix the beads was reviewed
and assurances made that field execution was not too
labor-intensive.
2. Additives considered needed to be readily available
to prevent the requirement of stocking additional new
additives for proper execution.
3. Quality assurance procedures also needed to be put in
place to help ensure that lab testing followed certain
criteria already established as a best practice for
application of beaded slurries.
Service-company management required that the technique
used to build the new liquid additive would use existing or
readily available equipment for field mixing. Two different
techniques were developed for the mixing process.
1. A typical cement blender can be used as a means of
slurrying the microspheres before injection. In this case, a
cement blender would be inspected before departure for
location. Once on location a portion of the mix-water
would be added to the blender as needed based on the

2.

amount of microspheres required for the upcoming


cement job. Mixing the liquid microsphere slurry on
location allows the job-design process to continue until
the well section is completed. Once the design has been
finalized, this proper portion of the mix-water could be
added to the blender. Other applicable additives for the
microsphere slurry can also be added to this portion of the
mix-water once the job has been finalized. Additives not
related to the microsphere slurry that will be part of the
cement slurry design can also be added, provided the
appropriate stability testing has been performed, to
minimize the number of additives requiring liquid
additive injection. Fluid-loss additives along with cement
friction reducers, retarders, or accelerators are examples.
These additives can cause viscosification or dispersion.
The final step is the addition of the dry microspheres,
which can be done through bulk transfer on land locations
or the cutting of bags to a shear hopper. Sufficient
agitation and/or recirculation will allow for the beads to
remain suspended in the mix-water before use on the job.
Settling that occurs during static periods is not the same
problem as with other liquid additives, since this material
floats as opposed to sinking. Anyone who has tried to resuspend material that has caked or clumped at the bottom
of any vessel or container knows that the result may be
less than satisfactory. If glass bubbles are used, resuspending the microspheres is trivial. The mixture is
then either added through the use of a continuous
metering system into the mix-water feeding the cement
head or through continuous metering of the material
directly into the suction side of the down hole pumps. In
either case, the additional water not used to slurry the
microspheres and any remaining additives are also then
introduced to the mix head along with cement. The final
design then is weighted to density and delivered to the
well. This technique is only limited by the capability of
the mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) to support the
necessary equipment and materials. Typical blenders used
in the field measure up to 100 bbl.
Another technique used to deliver this new slurry into the
cement slurry uses tanks with the capability to recirculate.
If the need is to transport only, a small portion of the
microsphere mix-water for a small volume of slurry,
another technique can be used to introduce the beads to
the slurry. There is equipment available in the rental
industry to allow for the building of beaded mix-water;
these tanks also have the capability to recirculate. The
recirculation method is a self-contained pump which can
roll the tank. In this way, slurried microspheres can be
built at the shore base. Other additives can be sent to
location to allow for adjustment of the design as needed,
or the additives can be introduced into the tank being
transported. The microsphere slurry can then be used as
previously discussed.
During development of this beaded liquid-additive
concept, it was realized that the slurry design still needed
to incorporate all of the additives required for the slurry
for it to provide the needed zonal isolation. The blend of
water and microspheres needs to remain suspended during
the cement slurry mixing process. Many concentrations of

SPE 94541

water and beads were used to determine a saturation level


of beads in a base fluid. The system that was derived also
needed to display the capability to be mixed and allowed
to settle up. Since the beads are lighter than water they
rise. Then the blend needed to be easily reassociated and
assurances made that the properties did not change, but
stable enough so the additive delivered from the full tank
would be practically the same as the concentration from a
nearly empty tank. One final design criteria came about
when various concentrations of additives were attempted
in the design. It was found that some additives caused the
slurry to stick to the walls of the cup used to mix the
blend. Other additives and concentrations of additives
showed to be of a less adhesive design. The final design
does not show any apparent tendency to stick to the wall
of the mixing vessels used. Both steel and plastic cups
were used to simulate those same types of containers on
location. A test was performed on a final design. The
blend of beads, water, and additives was mixed together.
Tests were run to show total thickening time and
compressive strengths. The slurried microspheres were
then allowed to remain static for 22 days. With minimal
agitation the beaded mix-water was reassociated and tests
were run. The tests indicated that both total thickening
time and compressive strength were within lab testing
limits for confirmation testing.
Quality assurance procedures for job execution with
liquid microspheres have been put in place. Since the
slurry uses water as a part of the base fluid this base water
should be used in the lab testing performed for the job.
Typical practices for MODUs require that when cement
is delivered to the rig, a sample of the blend along with
mix-water from the location, accompany the blend sample
to the lab. In this way the location water is used to build
the mix-water blend of microspheres and additives. In a
situation where tanks of beads may be sent to location
with water used at the bulk blending facility, water
samples are sent to the lab when the liquid microsphere
solution is built. In this way confirmation testing with the
base water can be performed. In addition to lab testing,
assurances should be in place to help ensure that the
beaded mix-water contains the accurate amount of beads.
A quick quality assurance test used on location is to take a
sample of the beaded mix-water and weigh it with a
triple-beam or electronic-balance scale. If the density of
the mix-water is within acceptable limits the mix-water
can be used. If the sample is out of specification the tank
should allow for further agitation and the new sample
should be tested.
Microsphere Handling
While microsphere cements are becoming increasingly
popular and have some distinct advantages over foam, they
have limitations as well. Of all blended cements, microsphere
blends require the highest standards of homogeneity. If the
lightweight material is not equally distributed, achieving
uniform density or slurry stability may not be possible. If the
correct amounts of all materials are present in the blend and a
portion of blend is low on microspheres, additional water
(above the recommended design concentration) will be

required to get down to the design density. If the design


contained the correct amount of water to make the slurry both
thin enough to mix easily and thick enough to ensure slurry
stability, this extra water, to get down to the density, may
cause slurry instability or settling. Again if all of the material
was correctly loaded and a portion of the blend was low on
microspheres another portion of the blend will have extra. To
mix at the correct density less water would then be required.
Before much water reduction can be accomplished the slurry
will get too thick. This means either mixing problems will
exist or the slurry will be delivered to the wellbore at an
excessive density. Densities higher than planned may result in
lost-circulation problems. To help ensure homogeneity,
special blending, transport, and delivery guidelines have been
established. While high levels of success have been achieved
when following these guidelines, following them requires
extra effort. Problems can arise when requesting marine vessel
operators or drilling rig marine departments to change the
processes that govern offshore rig bulk management. If the
beads are used as a liquid additive, many of the risks that exist
with bulk management can be mitigated.
Besides blending issues, microsphere slurries should be
mixed at their design density. Variations in density as little as
0.3 to 0.6 lb/gal from the planned design can cause viscosity
problems when mixed heavy, and settling problems when
mixed light. As the design slurry density decreases this tight
density-control issue becomes increasingly problematic since
standard oilfield mixing equipment is only designed to control
down to +/- 0.3 lb/gal. The issue is not that microsphere
slurries cannot be mixed at a constant density. The problem is
that even when mixed at a constant density (+/- 0.3 lb/gal),
unlike conventional cements, controlling density in
microsphere cements might not ensure a proper cement-towater ratio. As the design density decreases, the microsphere
concentration typically increases. As the microsphere
concentration in the bulk blend increases, the blend density or
specific gravity (sg) decreases. It is this similarity between the
blend sg and the mix fluid density that is responsible for the
situation where the mix density is nearly correct, but the
cement water ratio is unacceptable. An example of this can be
seen in Table 1. Here the effect of +/- 0.3 lb/gal is shown on a
9.0 lb/gal slurry. It should be readily apparent from these data
that the 9.3 lb/gal slurry would be immiscible with only 2.52
gal/sk of water and the 8.7 lb/gal slurry would be so thin with
severe settling problems with an extra 14 gal/sk of mix fluid
that neither of these could be an option for use in an oil well.
To further this example, please refer to Figs. 1-3. In Fig. 1 we
see an ideally miscible slurry. In Fig. 2 we can see that after
only 10 minutes this slurry has completely fallen apart. Since
slurry 1b was so thick, a slurry 1c was created, Fig. 3 that was
mixed at just 0.15 lb/gal heavy. While this slurry is now fluid,
it was still too thick to use easily. We can see that using the
normally accepted +/- 0.3 lb/gal density range it would be
impossible to mix this slurry at the wrong density, but easy to
deliver at the wrong cement-to-water ratio.
The point here is not to prove that microsphere slurries
cannot be used safely in the field; non-conventional mixing
equipment may be required as the density decreases. Liquid
beads have been tested under two different injection strategies.
In the first method, the liquid microspheres are injected into

the mixing water pump similar to other standard liquid


additives. With this method the slurry will still be mixed at the
low design density. The difference is we now have a
substantial density difference between the blend and the mix
fluid. In the second method, the liquid additive is injected
directly into the suction side of the downhole pump. With this
method conventional cement is mixed as a normal or nearnormal density slurry.
In exploration wells last minute changes in mud weight are
not unusual. In addition to avoiding the typical blending and
mixing issues, subject papers new liquid microsphere system
provides the operator the flexibility to change the density at
the last minute, provided the proper lab tests were completed
before the job. In this next example we examine the situation
where the job was loaded out based on a 10 lb/gal slurry
design. In this example we will consider two options. In the
first, during pre-job conditioning the well started (1) suffering
mud losses, (2) the mud weight was decreased, (3) losses
stopped, and (4) the requested is made to decrease the cement
density by 0.5 lb/gal. In the second, during pre-job
conditioning the well started (1) producing gas, (2) the mud
weight was increased, (3) gas production stopped, and (4) the
requested is made to increase the cement density by 0.5 lb/gal.
With proper contingency planning and access to liquid beads
one could effectively and safely cement for either of these
options.
Table 2 contains the design results from this contingency
planning. If instead of bulk blending the microspheres they
were slurried with a portion of the mix-water the remaining
mix would be a slurry that is much easier to blend and then
mix with standard equipment. The ease with which a portion
of the slurry can be mixed is shown with the new water
requirement and density. At a downhole rate of 4 bbl/min the
liquid additive rates to yield 9.5-, 10-, and 10.5-lb/gal slurries
are listed along with the resulting yields if the base blend had
been designed for 10 lb/gal. Table 3 shows the unusable
results if one tried to change the weight by simply adding or
subtracting water.
Liquid Bead Preparation
Any beaded material can be added to the slugging pit and used
as part of the mix-water, but there are two primary
shortcomings to this solution. First, the rig site is not usually
ideally equipped to deal with bulk beads. Second, there is the
issue of ensuring proper injection rate. Since microspheres are
lighter than water, there is a tendency for this material to float.
Since the suction to the pits is from the bottom the initial mixwater could be delivered at a lower bead ratio. If this happens,
the final portion of the mix-water will contain excessive
beads. In this case, the lead slurry is mixed heavy and the tail
light, exactly the opposite from ideal. Subject liquid bead
methodology eliminates both of these problems as well.
Since the beads can be prepared ahead of time at the bulk
plant, the ideal site for microsphere blending thus bringing
bulk material to location will not be required if the rig is not
properly equipped. In the current procedure used to create the
liquid microsphere solution, the material is slurried with just
enough fluid to create a pumpable solution that eliminates the
opportunity for slurry segregation, helping ensure the ideal
bead delivery rate. Not only does the subject methodology

SPE 94541

help ensure a consistent delivery rate, but opens up the


possible to ramp the delivery rate. With a ramped delivery
rate, we can bring a single blend to location and place heavier,
high-strength slurry near the shoe.
To properly prepare a material at the bulk plant and deliver
it to the rig site ready to use requires stricter material control
than for common microsphere cementing. When slurrying the
microspheres, it is recommended that this process only be
attempted with engineered microspheres that are completely
uniform in size with less than 5% shards. Any agitator tank
will work for bead preparation, storage, and/or delivery. After
extended static periods, the microspheres will float and may
even form what appears to be a hard crust. Upon resumption
of agitation, the microspheres rapidly re-suspend forming a
homogeneous mix. Fig. 4 shows the very fluid nature of the
material after an 18-hour static period.
Opportunities for Field Execution
There exist many opportunities for applying a beaded slurry in
the field.
Many MODUs have limited bulk storage
capabilities. Varying the number of cement blends on location
can limit the capabilities of the operator. Using a single blend
design on a MODU can reduce logistical costs associated with
well construction. The beaded slurry design will require space
for location tanks that have the capability to be rolled or
agitated. With this space, however, the operator will be given
the opportunity to vary cement slurry densities easily with a
high level of quality assurance. This technique will help
reduce the waste associated with bulk transport to offshore
locations. Typical losses can exceed 15% of bulk material.
When the blend contains costly additives, such as hollow
microspheres, the impact to the operator can increase.
Conclusions
1. Microspheres can be easily slurried into a long-term,
stable mix.
2. The use of slurried microspheres can help eliminate
the problems associated with blending and
transporting ultra-light blends.
3. The use of slurried microspheres can help eliminate
the problems associated with trying to mix cement
containing microspheres at the correct cement to
water ratio.
4. The use of slurried microspheres can help eliminate
the problems associated with bringing specialty
blends to offshore locations.
5. The use of slurried microspheres can save money by
eliminating most of the losses associated with the
bulk-transfer process for expensive bulk blends.
6. Microsphere-slurried mix-water can be effectively
delivered to standard oilfield cementing equipment.
7. The lab properties of the cement slurries perform
similarly whether the microspheres are added with
the bulk material or as part of the mix-water.
References
1. Kulakofsky, D. et al.: Lightweight Cementing Solutions:
A Novel Concept Utilizes Field Case Histories,
presented at SUBSEA HOUSTON 2003, 18 September.

SPE 94541

2.
3.

4.

5.

6.

Kulakofsky, D.: New Technology Provides Cementing


Solutions in Problem Areas, Presented at Petrotech 2005,
Delhi, 15-19 January.
Kulakofsky, D. et al.: New Ultra-lightweight Cementing
Technology Proven with Case Studies, Combines
Benefits of Current Leading Technologies, paper SPE
92970 presented at the 2005 SPE Middle East Oil and Gas
Show and Conference, Bahrain, 12-15 March.
McCulloch, J. et al.: Life Cycle Modeling of Wellbore
Cement Systems Used for Enhanced Geothermal System
Development, presented at the 2003 Geothermal
Resource Council, Morelia, Mexico, 12-15 October.
Ravi, K. et al.: A Comparative Study of Mechanical
Properties of Density-Reduced Cement Compositions,
paper SPE 90068 presented at the 2004 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 26
-29 September.
Pine et al.: Selection of Foamed Cement for HPHT Gas
Well Proves Effective for Zonal Isolation Case
History, paper SPE 79909 presented at the 2003

SPE/AIDC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The


Netherlands, February 19-21
7. Binge, G. et al. : Foamed Cement: Solving Old Problems
with a new Technique, paper SPE 11204 presented at the
1982 SPE AIME Fall Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, September 26-29
8. Sweatman, R. Well Design, Drilling, and Cementing
Practices to help prevent Annular Flows, 2003 DEA
Workshop Deepwater Drilling Where Are We
Headed June 17-18
9. Tahmourpour, F. et al.: Use of Finite Element Analysis
to Engineer the Cement Sheath for Production
Operations, presented at the 2004 Canadian International
Petroleum Conference, 8-10 June.
10. Ravi, K. et al.: Safe and Economic Gas Wells through
Cement Design for Life of the Well, paper SPE 75700
presented at the 2002 SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, April 30-May 2.

Table 1Effect of minor density differences on cement-to-water ratio.


Slurry No.
Density, lb/gal
Water, gal/sk
Yield, ft/sk
1a
8.7
22.9
4.4
1
9
8.2
2.43
1b
9.3
2.52
1.67

Density,
lb/gal
9.5
10
10.5

Water,
gal/sk
10.05
8.2
7.25

Density lb/gal
9.5
10
10.5

Table 2Liquid bead slurry modifications.


Yield,
Mix-water,
Density WOB,
Rate,
ft/sk
gal/sk
lb/gal
bpm
2.59
7.94
13.3
4
2.25
6.35
14.2
4
2.04
5.64
14.75
4

Table 3Effect of last minute density alteration.


Water, gal/sk Yield, ft/sk Adjusted Water
10.05
2.59
15.43
8.2
2.25
8.2
7.25
2.04
4.34

Liq Add,
gal/min
81.32
71.16
61.92

Yield, ft/sk
3.22
2.25
1.73

Yield,
ft/sk
2.6
2.25
2.03

Fig. 1Slurry 1ideal consistency.

SPE 94541

Fig. 3Slurry 1cstill too thick.

Fig. 4Surface of liquefied microspheres under agitation.

Fig. 2Slurry 1asevere settling.

You might also like