SPE-173681-MS

Is Well Clean Enough? A Fast Approach to Estimate Hole Cleaning for

Directional Drilling
Feifei Zhang, Stefan Miska, Mengjiao Yu, Evren Ozbayoglu, Nicholas Takach, and Reza Ettehadi Osgouei, The
University of Tulsa

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing & Well Intervention Conference & Exhibition held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24 25
March 2015.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
In spite of many recent technology improvements in drilling, hole cleaning remains a significant
challenge, especially in deviated and horizontal wells. Inadequate hole cleaning can lead to a series of
problems such as stuck pipe, fractured formation, high drag and torque, premature bit wear, decreased
ROP, logging, and casing and cementing difficulties.
Hole cleaning is a complex issue that is affected by many drilling parameters. The major approaches
of hole cleaning evaluations include experimental correlations and mechanistic models. But these
techniques frequently require complex computations or numerical iterations to get the solutions.
In this paper, a set of charts is developed to allow the drilling engineer to quickly estimate the cuttings
volumetric concentration in the wellbore. From previous cuttings transport studies, we know that well
inclination angle, drilling fluid velocity, fluid rheology, fluid density and drill pipe rotation have the most
important effects on hole cleaning. These parameters are divided into several ranges based on their
sensitivity to cuttings concentration in the wellbore. The charts are obtained by running a hole cleaning
simulator, which is based on a large number of experimental and modeling studies of cuttings transport.
The results of the charts are verified by experimental data. The difference between the charts
prediction results and experimental data are within 20%. Instead of solving complex equations in cuttings
transport models, drilling engineers are able to quickly estimate the cuttings volumetric concentration by
looking up the charts and conducting very simple calculations. This paper is also helpful in guiding the
driller to quickly choose proper operational parameters during drilling operations.

Introduction
Hole cleaning is one of the major concerns in oil and gas well drilling. In well planning or drilling
operations, one of the key parameters to determine is the minimum required flow rate to transport cuttings
to surface. A study conducted by Amoco shows that 70% of lost time for unscheduled events is caused
by stuck drillpipe (Massie, Smith, and Lee, et al, 1995), and about a third of all stuck pipe problems are
due to insufficient cuttings transport (Hopkins and Leicksenring, 1995).

SPE-173681-MS

For vertical wells or nearly vertical (inclination angle less than 30) wells, cuttings are fully fluidized.
The criteria for hole cleaning is that the cuttings volume concentration should be less than 5% (Larsen,
1990). Cuttings settling velocity is used to access transport efficiency and local cuttings concentration in
these wells. Since the 1940s, a number of researchers (Piggot, 1941; William and Bruce, 1951; Chien,
1971; Sifferman, Meyers, et al., 1973; Thomas, et al., 1978, Kulkarni, et al., 2014, ect) have investigated
the cuttings settling velocity (slip velocity) in different drilling fluids. Results show that cuttings settling
velocity is affected by fluid properties (density, rheology), flow properties (local velocity, conduit
geometry), and cuttings properties (density, shape, size) (Li and Luft, 2014,). The commonly used method
to obtain cuttings settling velocity is to calculate the drag coefficient for cuttings in a specific fluid, which
depends on the cuttings settling velocity itself. Numerical iteration is required in this approach.
When the well inclination angle is larger than 30, cuttings tend to settle at the lower side of the annulus
and form cuttings beds or dunes (Iyoho, 1980). At the early stages of drilling, the goal is to prevent
cuttings bed formation in the wellbore. The minimum flow rate required to keep cuttings bed from
forming is called the critical flow rate (CFR) (Larsen, 1990). Later, researchers found that CFR is too high
for practical drilling applications. During drilling of highly deviated wells, a certain amount of cuttings
bed or dunes can be tolerated. The bed or dunes need to be removed out of the wellbore before tripping
operations. In this scenario, the amount of cuttings in the wellbore needs to be accurately estimated and
monitored during drilling to prevent problems caused by excessive cuttings accumulation.
For cuttings transport from 30~60, cuttings dunes or an irregular cuttings bed form in the wellbore.
These cuttings dunes or beds are not stable; i.e., they break into pieces with considerable particle
recycling (cuttings fall to the lower side of the annulus and are then swept upward by flow) (Iyoho,
1980). Because of the complexity of the cuttings motion configurations, there was no cuttings transport
model for this part of the wellbore for a long period of time. The two-layer model and three-layer model
were used in some practical applications. However, the pattern of the cuttings motion in this inclination
range is not consistent with one of the most important assumptions in these models: the cuttings bed height
is constant and the bed is stable. A segment model (Zhang, et al., 2014) was proposed to fill this gap, and
was specially developed to simulate the unstable cuttings beds or dunes in the intermediate inclination
angles.
For cuttings transport from 60~90, stable cuttings beds form in the wellbore in most drilling
applications. Layer models (two-layer model and three-layer model) are widely used to predict the
cuttings concentration in this part of the wellbore. The layered models were initially developed for slurry
transport (Wilson, 1970, Doron, 1986). Later, these models were applied to cuttings transport in drilling
(Gavignet and Sobey, 1989, Nguyen and Rahman, 1996). A number of models have been developed since
then for different drilling situations. Based on mass balance and momentum balance of each layer, these
models consist of six to eight equations and several closure relationships.
All the mechanistic models for both intermediate inclined wells and highly inclined wells require to
solve a number of equations simultaneously. Thus, computer programs are essential to conduct the
cuttings concentration predictions. Furthermore, during the process of solving these equations, the
numerical method may not converge. In addition, multiple solutions can be obtained. These two issues add
more difficulties to the application of these models.
Cuttings transport is affected by a number of parameters. The mechanistic models are able to cover
most of these parameters and give reasonable predictions. However, applying mechanistic models is
complicated and it is impractical to run the models for the purpose of selecting operational parameters
during drilling. The effects of the parameters on cuttings transport are not equally important. Figure 1
(Adari, et al., 2000) shows the key parameters in this process and their influence on hole cleaning.
Cuttings size is also important in highly deviated and horizontal wells. Small cuttings tend to be more
difficult to remove (Duan, 2005). Flow rate, annulus size, drillpipe eccentricity, inclination angle, fluid

SPE-173681-MS

rheology, mud weight, cuttings density, ROP, cuttings size, and drill pipe rotation are found to be the most
important parameters in hole cleaning.

Figure 1Key parameters in cuttings transport process (Adari et al., 2000)

By choosing some key parameters, Guo, et al, (1994) developed a set of simple charts to determine the
flow rates required for hole cleaning in deviated wells for rig-site applications. Flow rate, ROP, mud
rheology, flow regime, inclination angle and hole size are considered in the chart development. However,
these charts do not include the effects of drillpipe size and drillpipe rotation. Studies (Bassal, 1996, Erge,
2013) show that drillpipe rotation plays significant role in cuttings bed erosion and annular pressure loss.
Therefore, drillpipe rotation should be included in cuttings concentration predictions. Furthermore, hole
sizes are limited to 8.5-in., 12.25in. and 17.5in. Another issue is that the charts given by Guo, et al. are
only able to predict the CFR, which restricts their application in highly deviated wells. Thus, the
application of these charts is restricted.
In this paper, a set of new charts are proposed for rig-site applications by running a hole cleaning
simulator (Zhang, et al, 2014) developed in The University of Tulsa Drilling Research Projects (TUDRP).
Flow rate, hole size, and drillpipe size are combined together by using the mean annulus fluid velocity.
Fluid density and cuttings density are combined by using the difference between these two densities.
Inclination angle, fluid rheology, ROP, drillpipe rotation are also included in the chart development. The
charts are verified by using cuttings transport experimental data for five different drilling fluids. The
uncertainty of the charts is within 20%.

Development of the Charts

The purpose of this study is to develop a series of charts for drilling engineers to quickly estimate cuttings
concentration inside the wellbore with an uncertainty of less than 20%. Based on previous studies, well
inclination angle, ROP, fluid and cuttings densities, fluid rheology, fluid velocity and drillpipe rotation are
chosen as control parameters to develop the charts. The charts are generated for the common ranges
encountered in drilling operations for each parameter.
Well Inclination Angle
Studies (Iyoho, 1980, Larsen, 1990, etc.) have shown that the relationship between well inclination angle
and cuttings concentration are not linear. Below inclinations of 15, the cuttings concentration is slightly
higher than in vertical cases; from 15 to 30, the cuttings concentration changes gradually as inclination
angle increases; the 30 to 60 range is critical for cuttings transport because cuttings concentration

SPE-173681-MS

increases significantly; at 60~90, bed formation is unavoidable and cuttings concentration decreases
slightly as inclination angle increases (Iyoho, 1980). During the development of the charts, the inclination
range for each chart is adjusted according to the sensitivity of cuttings concentration to the inclination
angle. The 0~90 inclination range is divided into the following divisions: 0~15, 15~25, 25~35,
35~40, 40~45, 45~50, 50~55 and 55~90.
Density Difference
Gravity is the major reason for cuttings to settle. Therefore, the difference between cuttings density and
fluid density plays a major role on cuttings settling and the settling can be reduced if this gap decreases.
The density of cuttings observed during oil and gas drilling varies from 2.4 SG to 2.8 SG, meanwhile the
density of the drilling fluids varies from 0.9 SG to 1.8 SG. Therefore, the range of the density difference
is between 0.6 to 1.9 SG. The charts in this paper are plotted based on 2.6 SG cuttings and 1.0 SG drilling
fluid, and the density difference is 1.6 SG. A weight effect factor (WEF) is used to predict the cuttings
concentration for different cuttings densities or fluid densities. The WEF can be obtained through the
following equation (Eq 1):
Eq (1)
The cuttings density and drilling fluid density in Eq (1) are in specific gravity units (density
comparison with respect to water). When the cuttings density equals the fluid density, cuttings slip
velocity becomes 0 and there is no cuttings settling in the wellbore. Since the mass of cuttings generated
is significantly less than the mass of drilling fluid flowing per unit time, it is reasonable to conclude that
the cuttings concentration is close to zero in this extreme situation.
Fluid Rheology
The effect of fluid rheology on hole cleaning varies with different inclinations. Cuttings transport is in a
combination of suspension and entrainment (entrainment of the cuttings bed by fluid flow) in the wellbore.
High viscosity fluids have a tendency to gelation inside the cuttings bed, which results in difficulties in
lifting the settled cuttings, causing high cuttings concentration. Low viscosity leads to insufficient shear
applied on the particles, which also results in high cuttings concentration in the wellbore (Saasen and
Loklingholm, 2002). In sections with low inclination angles, suspension dominates the cuttings transport
process, and high viscosity fluids perform slightly better (Sifferman, et al., 1974). In highly inclined
sections, cuttings tend to settle at the lower side of the annulus. High viscosity reduces the fluid velocity
in the near-wall region and increases the cuttings bed strength (Saasen and Lklingholm, 2002; Hashemian, 2014). In summary, gel strength, consistentsy index and fluid behavior index all affect cuttings
concentration. In this study, for the seek of simplicity, the 100-rpm dial reading of Fan 35 viscometer
(R1B1) is used as the representative fluid rheological parameter because the shear rate at this rotational
speed is similar to the shear rate observed in the annulus during drilling. Based on this criteria, drilling
fluids are divided into three categories: i) thin fluids (100 10), ii) moderate thickness fluids (10 100
20), and iii) thick fluids (100 20).
The charts presented in Appendix C are developed for moderately thick fluids (10 100 20). A
rheology effect factor (REF) is proposed to predict the cuttings concentration for thin fluids and thick
fluids. The values of REF are shown in Table 1.

SPE-173681-MS

Table 1Rheology effect factor (REF)

Rate of Penetration (ROP)

There is a nearly linear relationship between ROP and cuttings concentration in the wellbore (Larsen,
1990). The commonly used ROP range (30 ft/hr~150 ft/hr) is plotted in the charts for practical
applications.
Drillpipe Rotation
The influence of drillpipe rotation on cuttings concentration depends on wellbore inclination angle. In
highly inclined wells, rotation of drill pipe sways cuttings bed tangentially and shakes cuttings out of
lower side of the annulus, which is helpful for cuttings to be carried away by high speed fluid flow in the
upper region of the annulus. At intermediate inclined angles, the cuttings also tend to settle to the lower
side of the annulus. Since the inclination angle in this position is less than in the highly inclined part, the
settling force (which is mainly caused by gravity) is smaller at this position. Cuttings can be carried back
to the upside easily, so the effect of drill pipe rotation is not significant in this region. In nearly vertical
wells, the effect of drillpipe rotation on cuttings concentration is negligible.
In this paper, the effect of drill pipe rotation is considered by using a Drillpipe Effect Factor (DEF),
as shown in Figure 2, which is a function of drill pipe rotation speed and well inclination angle (Adel Ali
Bassal, 1996).

Figure 2Drillpipe rotation effect chart

SPE-173681-MS

Summary
The charts in this paper are developed for 3mm cuttings size, which is a common size observed during
directional drilling. All the cuttings are considered as spheres in the simulator. The drillpipe is considered
to lie at the lower side of the annulus, which is the worst scenario for cuttings transport.
For each cuttings concentration estimation chart, the horizontal axis is the drilling fluid velocity and
the vertical axis is the cuttings concentration (Appendix C). Different lines in the chart represent different
ROPs. Results of these charts are cuttings concentration without drillpipe rotation for light-moderately
thick fluids. The drillpipe rotation effect factor (DEF) chart is shown in Figure 2. The horizontal axis is
the well inclination angle and the vertical axis is the DEF. Different lines in the chart represent different
drillpipe rotation speeds. The effect of fluid density and cuttings density is covered by WEF, which is from
Eq (1). The effect of fluid rheology is covered by REF, which can be obtained from Table 1. The final
cuttings concentration, Cfinal, is obtained through Eq 2.
Eq (2)
where Cchart is the cuttings concentration obtained from the charts in Appendix C.

Examples
The following two examples illustrate how to use the charts to estimate the cuttings concentration for a
given operational condition in one part of the wellbore and in the whole wellbore.
Single Part Example
A 12-1/4 inch well is drilled with a 6-5/8 inch drillpipe. The well inclination angle is 65, the mud density
is 1.3 SG, and the cuttings density is 2.6 SG. The 100 reading of the mud is 12. The pumping flow rate
is 600 gpm, the drillpipe rotation speed is 50 rpm, and ROP is 50 ft/hr.
Mean mud velocity in the annulus can be calculated as 2.32 ft/s. The density difference between mud
and cuttings is 1.3 SG. The weight effect factor, WEF0.9, is obtained by using Eq 1. Based on
inclination angle, Figure 17 is chosen to estimate the initial cuttings concentration and the result is 28%.
The DEF, 0.68, can be obtained from Figure 2. The rheology effect factor is 1.0 since this fluid falls into
the range of moderately thick fluids. The final cuttings concentration can be determined by multiplying
the initial cuttings concentration by DEF, WEF and REF, and is found to be 17%.
Whole Well Example
The schematic view of a horizontal well is presented in Figure 3. The well is opened with a 26-inch bit
and cemented at 1000 ft MD. The second section of the well is drilled with a 17-1/2in. bit to 5000 ft and
cased with a 13-3/8 in. casing. The well kicks-off at the beginning of the third section, which is drilled
with a rotary steerable system that has a 12-1/4 in. bit. The build rate is 3/100 ft until the well inclination
angle reaches 90 (horizontal). This part of the wellbore is cased with a 9-5/8 in. casing and then
cemented. Another 5000 ft horizontal section is drilled with an 8-3/4 in. bit to reach the target.

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 3Schematic of the well

A 4-1/2in. drillpipe is used to drill the last section of the well. The operational parameters are same
as the parameters in the previous example except that the flow rate is 500 gpm. Based on inclination angle
and annulus size, this well is divided into 9 parts and the annulus fluid velocity for each part is calculated,
as shown in Table 2.

Table 2Wellbore divisions for the example

NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Inclination angle

MD (ft)

Fluid velocity (ft/s)

0~15
15 ~25
25 ~35
35 ~40
40 ~45
45 ~50
50 ~55
55 ~90
90

0~5500
5500~5833
5833~6167
6167~6333
6333~6500
6500~6667
6667~6833
6833~8000
8000~13000

2.8

3.6

Cuttings concentrations are estimated for each part of the well, and the comprehensive cuttings
concentration profile along the well is presented in Figure 4. In vertical and near vertical parts of the well
(MD5833 ft), the cuttings concentrations are less than 5%. As the well inclination angle goes beyound
35, the cuttings concentration increases significantly and reaches the maximum value at 6800 ft, which
is in the 50~55 inclination angle range. As the inclination angle goes to 90, the cuttings concentration
decreases slightly, and decreases even further in the last part of the well because of the reduction in hole
size.

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 4 Cuttings concentration profile in the wellbore

Reliability Analysis
Larsens experimental data (Larsen, 1990) is used to verify the reliability of these charts, because the test
matrix in Larsens study covers a wide range of fluid properties for drilling applications. The comparisons
between experimental data and charts estimation results are shown in Figure 5 through Figure 9. The
cuttings density is 2.6 SG in all of these figures.

Figure 5Verification results for light-thin fluid

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 6 Verification results for light-moderately thick fluid

Figure 7Verification results for light-thick fluid

10

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 8 Verification results for moderately heavy-moderate thick fluid

Figure 9 Verification results for heavy-thick fluids

Figure 5 is the verification for light-thin fluids. The 100 of the fluid is between 7~9 and the density
of the fluid is 1.02 SG. Figure 6 is the verification for light-moderately thick fluids. The 100 of the fluid
is between 14~17 and the density of the fluid is 1.02 SG. Figure 7 is the verification for light-thick fluids.
The 100 of the fluid is between 27~29 and the density of the fluid is 1.02 SG. Figure 8 is the verification
for moderately heavy-moderately thick fluids. The 100 of the fluid is between 14~16 and the density of
the fluid is 1.3 SG. Figure 9 is the verification for heavy-thick fluids. The 100 of the fluid is between
20~22 and the density of the fluid is 1.8 SG.
From the comparisons, it is found that most of the charts predictions and the experimental data are
within 20% difference range. Thus, it can be concluded that these charts are reasonably accurate for
rig-site applications as well as design purposes.

SPE-173681-MS

11

Conclusions
A series of charts have been developed to quickly estimate cuttings concentration. The charts consider the
majority of drilling parameters that have significant effects on cuttings transport. These charts can be used
for rig-site applications and as a quick reference during well planning.
Experimental data is used to verify the reliability of the charts. Results show that the charts are within
a reasonable accuracy range for drilling applications.
The worst part for hole cleaning in an ERD well is between 45~55. If the hole cleaning requirement
is satisfied for this part, it should not be a problem for other parts of the well. Because cuttings slide
downward upon decreasing flow rate in this section, the pump should not be stopped before all the cuttings
in this part are removed to prevent wellbore pack-off.
Nomenclature
CFR
:
DEF
:
ERD
:
REF
:
WEF
:
:
Cfinal
:
Cchart
cuttings
:
fluid
:

critical flow rate

drillpipe rotation effect factor
enhanced reached drilling
rheology effect factor
weight effect factor
final cuttings concentration
cuttings concentration estimated by charts
cuttings density
drilling fluid density

References
Adari, R.B., Miska S., Kuru E., Bern P., Saasen A.: Selecting Drilling Fluid Properties and Flow
Rates For Effective Hole Cleaning in High-Angle and Horizontal Wells, paper SPE 63050
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 1-4 October, Dallas, Texas,
2000.
Adel Ali Bassal, The Effect of Drillpipe Rotation on Cuttings Transport in Inclined Wellbores, M.S.
thesis, University of Tulsa, 1996
Bassal, A.A.: The Effect of Drillpipe Rotation on Cuttings Transport in Inclined Wellbores,
University of Tulsa, 1996
Chien, S.F. 1971. Annular Velocity for Rotary Drilling Operations. Proc., SPE Fifth Conference on
Drilling and Rock Mechanics, Austin, Texas, USA, 516.
Doron, P., Hydraulic transport of solid particles in horizontal pipes - modeling pressure drop and
flow patterns, M.Sc. thesis, Tel-Aviv University (1986)
Duan, Q.: An Experimental Study of Small Sand-Sized Cuttings Transport in Horizontal and High
Angle Boreholes, The University of Tulsa, 1995
Erge, O., Ozbayoglu, E. M., Miska, S. Z., Yu, M., Takach, N., Saasen, A., May, R., Effect of
Drillstring Deflection and Rotary Speed on Annular Frictional Pressure Losses, Journal of
Energy Resources Technology, 136, 042909, (2014); doi: 10.1115/1.4027565
Gavignet, A., S. Forex and I. Sobey: Model Aids Cuttings Transport Prediction, SPE 15417, Journal
of Petroleum Technology, Volume 41, Number 9, 916 921, September 1989.
Guo, Y., Bern, P.A., Chambers, B.D. and Kellingray, D.S. Simple Charts to Determine Hole
Cleaning Requirements in Deviated Wells, SPE 27486, 1994
Kulkarni, S., Jamison, D., Teke, K., Managing Suspension Characteristics of Lost-Circulation
Materials in a Drilling Fluid, SPE 170217, SPE Deepwater Drilling and Completions Conference
held in Galveston, Texas, USA, 10 11 September 2014.

12

SPE-173681-MS

Kulkarni, S., Jamison, D., Teke, K., Savari, S., Whitfull, D. Modelling Suspension of Lost Circulation Materials in a Drilling Fluid, 2014 AADE Fluids Technical Conference and Exhibition held
at the Hilton Houston North Hotel, Houston, Texas, April 15-16
Larsen, T.: A Study of the Critical Fluid Velocity in Cuttings Transport for Inclined Wellbores,
M.Sc. thesis, University of Tulsa, 1990.
Li, J. and Luft, B. Overview of Solids Transport Studies and Applications in Oil and Gas IndustryExperimental Work, SPE 171285, 2014.
Hashemian, Y., Yu, M., Miska, S., Shirazi, S. and Ahmed, R. Accurate Predictions of Velocity
Profiles and Frictional Pressure Losses in Annular YPL-Fluid Flow, SPE 173181, Journal of
Canadian Petroleum Technology, 2014
Hopkins, C.J. and Leicksenring, R.A. Reducing the Risk of Stuck Pipe in The Netherlands, SPE
29422, SPE IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, Feb 29-Mar 2, 1995
Iyoho, A. W: Drilled-Cuttings Transport by Non-Newtonian Drilling Fluids Through Inclined,
Eccentric Annuli, Ph. D. dissertation, University of Tulsa, 1980.
Massie, G.W., Castle-Smith, J., Lee, J.W., and Ramsey, M.S.: Amocos Training Initiative Reduces
Wellsite Drilling Problems, Petroleum Engineer International (March 1995) 48.
Nguyen, D., and Rahman, S. S., A Three-Layer Hydraulic Program for Effective Cuttings Transport
and Hole Cleaning in Highly Deviated and Horizontal Wells, IADC/SPE 36383, Presented at the
1996 Asia Pacific Drilling Technology, Kuala Lumpur-Malaysia (September 9-11, 1996)
Pigott, R.: Mud Flow in Drilling, Drilling and Production Practice, 1941.
Saasen, A. and Lklingholm, G., The Effect of Drilling Fluid Rheological Properties on Hole
Cleaning, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Dallas, Texas, 26 28 February 2002
Sifferman, T.R., Myers, G.M., Haden, E.L., and Wall, H.A., Drill-Cutting Transport in Full Scale
Vertical Annuli, J. Petrol Technol. Nov, 1974, pp.12951302
Thomas, R. P., Drilled Pipe Eccentricity Effect on Drilled Cutting Behavior, Master Thesis,
University of Tulsa, 1978.
Williams, C.E. and Bruce, G.H. 1951. Carrying Capacity of Drilling Muds. Trans., AIME, 192:
111120.
Wilson, K.C, A unified physically - based analysis of solid-liquid pipeline flow, Proc. of the 4th Int.
Conf. on the Hydraulic Transport of Solids in Pipes, Banff, Alberta, Canada, Paper A1, 116
(1976)
Zhang, F., S. Miska, M. Yu, E. Ozbayoglu and N. Takach: Pressure profile in annulus: Solids play
a significant role, paper OMAE2014-23088 presented at the 33rd International Conference on
Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, June 8-13, San Francisco, California, USA, 2014.
Zhang, F., S. Miska, M. Yu, E. Ozbayoglu and N. Takach: Application Of Real-Time Solids
Monitoring in Well Design, Annulus Pressure Control And Managed Pressure Drilling, AADE14-FTCE-14, presentation at the 2014 AADE Fluids Technical Conference and Exhibition, April
15-16, Houston, Texas, USA, 2014.

SPE-173681-MS

13

Appendix C

Cuttings Concentration Estimation Charts for Moderately Thick fluids (1.0 SG, 10< 100 <20)

Figure 10 Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 0~15

Figure 11Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 15~25

14

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 12Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 25~35

Figure 13Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 35~40

SPE-173681-MS

15

Figure 14 Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 40~45

Figure 15Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 45~50

16

SPE-173681-MS

Figure 16 Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 50~55

Figure 17Cuttings concentration estimation chart for 55~90