MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068114995 · doi:10.2118/06-06-02

The Effect of Oxidation on Viscosity of Oil-Based Drilling Fluids

2006· article· en· W2068114995 on OpenAlexafffund
Khalil Shahbazi, S. A. Mehta, R.G. Moore, M.G. Ursenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Petroleum Technology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDrilling and Well Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsUnderbalanced drillingDrilling fluidViscosityPetroleum engineeringRheologyPressure dropDrillingMaterials scienceChemistryGeologyComposite materialThermodynamicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract True downhole rheological properties affect equivalent circulating density, hole cleaning, barite sag, surge/swab pressures during tripping, pump pressure, and bit hydraulics. Gelation and excessive viscosity are major concerns at high temperatures. When using oil-based drilling fluids lightened by an injection of de-oxygenated air (containing small amounts of oxygen, usually around five per cent) in underbalanced drilling (UBD) operations, there is a need to be able to predict the effect of oxidation on the viscosity of the oil-based muds as a function of temperature and pressure. This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation that was aimed at establishing the effect of oxidation on the viscosity of an oil-based drilling fluid. The drilling fluid was aged for 2.5 days and for 7 days in the presence of air at temperatures ranging from 100 to 150 °C and at pressures ranging from 14 to 44 MPa. The viscosity of the drilling fluid samples after aging is compared with the corresponding fresh samples (before aging). The results show that oxidation causes an increase in viscosity. The amount of the increase depends on the amount of oxygen reacted, which is a function of temperature, pressure, and time. The higher temperatures of the reactors lead to the higher increases in viscosity. Furthermore, at higher temperatures, solid (mostly coke) formation was observed. Introduction Underbalanced drilling (UBD), in which drilling fluid pressure is lower than reservoir pore pressure, has been studied by many researchers since the late 1980s. This method can improve the financial returns on drilling a well by reducing formation damage (especially in horizontal wells and depleted reservoirs), minimizing lost circulation (especially in fractured reservoirs and depleted reservoirs), increasing the penetration rate of drilling, increasing bit life, minimizing differential sticking, reducing stimulation, and improving formation evaluation(1). The underbalanced condition is created by using different drilling fluids such as dry air, nitrogen, natural gas, mist, stable foam, stiff foam, gasified liquids, glass bubbles, and liquids. In gasified liquids, a gas is injected into the liquid to reduce the density of the drilling fluid. In these mixtures, since the pressure difference between the formation and the wellbore is relatively low (1.72 - 3.45 MPa), these drilling fluids have fewer UBD related problems such as wellbore instability and formation fluid inflows(1). These specifications have made them the most appropriate drilling fluid in UBD. The unique performance of oils makes them preferable to water as the liquid phase in gasified liquids. Oils prevent clay swelling and they are resistant to contaminants. Their rheological properties are stable at high pressures and temperatures. Also, they are highly lubricious and non-corrosive. On the other hand, to prevent downhole fires, de-oxygenated air from membrane units with maximum five per cent oxygen is usually used as the gas phase in gasified liquids(2). The presence of oxygen causes the oil in the gasified liquid to be oxidized. In this paper, the effect of oxidation on the viscosity of the gasified liquids is investigated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.155 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian Petroleum TechnologySame topicDrilling and Well EngineeringFrench-language works237,207