Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Modeling and simulation of barite deposition in an annulus space of a well

using CFD
Hamed Movahedi a, Saeed Shad a, *, Zahra B. Mokhtari-Hosseini b
a
Chemical and Petroleum Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
b
Chemical and Petroleum Engineering Department, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In drilling industry, barite particles settling and barite sag as a major problem can potentially impose significant
Barite settling operational issues. Static conditions, in which well undergoes an extended shut-in period, could occur during
Eulerian-eulerian model different drilling and completion operations such fishing operation, tripping, and logging. Despite its importance,
Single particle model such phenomenon is not well understood yet. To avoid issues related to barite settlement and barite sag, a good
CFD simulation understanding of the impact of different drilling parameters on barite settlement and sag phenomenon is required.
Recently, the mathematical formulation and modeling of settlement and sag processes have gained more atten-
tion. In order to better design the drilling fluids and to optimize the operational conditions such as flow rate and
drill pipe rotation speed, as well as drilling well trajectory design to avoid barite settlement, the mathematical
formulation and modeling of such physical phenomena is required. This study is aimed at mathematically
describing and analyzing the settling of barite particles in annular concentric space without axial flow by the
means of computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulation. The modeling approach consists of two main steps: a)
simple vertical annular domain and b) complex three dimensional barite settlement process in a deviated well
with rotational drill pipe. The current work is based on Eulerian two phase model. The settling of the single
particle and the hindering effect of other particles on settling velocity have been investigated. Based on single
particle model, the rate of barite settlement and fluid pressure reduction have been modeled. However, the single
particle model cannot describe the particle to particle interactions and their impacts on settlement such as particle
shearing viscosity, kinetic particle viscosity, and collisional effects. In this study, the accurate and comprehensive
modeling of barite settlement has been done by applying the Eulerian-Eulerian approach. The models have been
validated against available published experimental data in the literature. In addition, in order to further validate
the model presented here, drill pipe rotation, fluid rheology, and inclination angle impacts have been experi-
mental investigation and compared with results of the proposed model. The results indicate that the model based
on using Eulerian-Eulerian approach accurately predicts the experimental data results. Afterward, the sensitivity
analyses were carried out to show the impact of inclination angle, inner pipe rotation, fluid rheology, and barite
content on the rate of settlement. This study showed that drag forces induced resuspension plays a vital role in
barite settlement inside a deviated well. The results reveal that the settling rate is decreased with increasing the
inner pipe rotation and the vortex effect created by inner pipe rotational, play a major role in the reduction of
barite settlement. The results also show that the maximum settlement rate accrues at the deviation angles between
of 45–60
.

1. Introduction such as barite and Hematite play a significant role providing the required
hydrostatic pressure. Barite settling can be defined as a phenomenon in
In petroleum industry, drilling fluids are used to not only remove which weighing materials settle due to the impact of gravitational forces
drilling cuttings but also to lubricate and cool the drilling bit and drill applied on barite particles. Well trajectories as well as properties of mud
string. The other functionality of drilling fluids is to control the formation and operational conditions are among factors that influence the degree of
pressure by providing enough hydrostatics pressure. Weighting agents barite settling occurrence. For instant, in directional wells, addition of

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (S. Shad).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2017.12.014
Received 19 March 2017; Received in revised form 24 November 2017; Accepted 5 December 2017
Available online 7 December 2017
0920-4105/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

drag reducing material to the oil based mud could potentially lead to involved in this process.
significant barite settlement. Operational issues and challenges such as Drilling management and optimization requires an accurate modeling
tripping, logging, waiting on materials, reaming and fishing increases the and simulation of settlement process. Despite its importance, modeling
chance and magnitude barite settlement inside a well. This is due to the and CFD based simulation of barite settlement has not received much
fact that under such conditions the drilling process will stop and well will attention. Kaushal et al. (2012) studied and modeled the flow of
be shut down for days or weeks allowing barite particles to settle. Due to mono-dispersed fine particles slurry in a pipe at high concentration.
the settlement of barite particles, well will experience a reduction of Recently, Hashemian et al. (2014) conducted a simulation study on barite
density with depth. The density of the fluids is directly related to barite sag phenomenon. However, the impact of vortex created by rotational
concentration. Non-uniform density and barite concentration could lead shaft and spiral boundary layer on particle velocity and settlement has
to the hydrostatic pressures smaller than that required at the zone of not been fully analyzed.
interest. The higher reservoir pressure could then lead to well blow out Lately, the application of CFD methods in two phase flow and
and loss of well control. The settlement of barite can lead to creation of determination of velocity distribution in annular space during drilling
different barite concentration profile. Fig. 1 shows the different segments has gained more attention. Hajidavalloo et al. (2013) have conducted
of separated fluids at the heel of a well including slump, sag, and sus- simulation study on gas solid transport in annular space using CFD
pension and clarified zones (Omland, 2009). Despite the differences methods that are applicable in air drilling process. Their simulation study
between barite sag and settlement, the barite sag terminology has often is based on a Euler-Euler two phase model. They studied the drill pipe
been used to explain settlement process. rotation and well direction effects on volume fraction of particle in the
Despite its importance, barite settlement is not well understood yet. gas stream. Mme and Skalle (2012) conducted a simulation study on
Most of the researchers have focused on experimental analysis of such cutting transport phenomenon in concentric annular space using CFD
process and the modeling and simulation of this phenomenon has method. This study is focused on cuttings which are much larger than
received rather less attention. In order to achieve a good understanding barite particles. The impacts of particle size distribution, different
of barite settling process, it is vital to study the dynamics of fluid flow in annular velocity and angle of well on transport of drilling cuttings have
pipes under stationary and dynamic conditions. been investigated in their work. Akhshik et al. (2016) have performed
Hanson et al. (1990) and Saasen et al. (1995) are among pioneers who simulation on hole cleaning process in a deviated well using CFD-DEM
experimentally evaluated the barite sag or settlement in inclined tubes. simulation. They applied a two-way coupled CFD–DEM model to simu-
Their study suggested that barite sag is similar to that introduced by late cutting transport including fluidparticle interactions. The parti-
Boycott (1920) for blood corpuscles settlement. Later, in 1998, Bern et al. cleparticle, particlewall, and particledrill pipe interactions were
(1998) introduced an experimental model to predict barite settlement. modeled using the HertzMindlin model. The effects of particle shape on
Even though that their model predicts the barite settlement for stationary the deposition phenomenon also have been investigated at different inlet
pipe system, it fails to provide an accurate estimate of such process for velocities and drill pipe inclination angles. Other studies in the field of
conditions in which the pipe is rotating. cutting transport including experimental-modeling and simulation has
Skalle et al. (1999) experiments have shown that barite sag occurs been well documented (Dritselis, 2017; Elgaddafi et al., 2012; Kamyab
under both static and dynamics conditions. Skalle et al. (1999) also and Rasouli, 2016; Mishra and Ein-Mozaffari, 2017; Mondal et al., 2016;
showed that settling process will increase during laminar flow condition. Movahedi et al., 2017; Shahi and Kuru, 2016; Wang and Long, 2010).
Nguyen et al. (2009) conducted several experiments inside an annular Understanding the behavior of flow through the annulus gap in a
flow loop and showed that the particle settling can be mitigated at lower vertical or deviated position is important in modeling of fine size barite
rotation speeds. Nguyen et al. (2014) applied Taguchi and ANOVA particle settlement. In static conditions with no axial flow with an inner
methods to design the experiments and to study the effects of drilling shaft rotation, particles tend to follow a circular path due to the lift force
parameters on barite settlement under dynamic conditions. They showed that exerted on such particles. This force is resulted from rotation of the
that, in comparison with different drilling parameters, the fluid velocity inner shaft or drill pipe. The pipe rotation will change the particle settling
had the most dominant effect on preventing settlement. Parvizinia et al. regime such that a simple gravity dominated settlement will change into
(2011) conducted an experimental study on barite sag behaviors of a complex process. Barite particles are significantly smaller than drilling
oil-based fluids. The results indicated that fluids subjected to high shear cuttings and therefore vortices created by pipe rotation will have a
rates and elevated temperature experience significant barite sag. Amighi greater impact on them.
and Shahbazi (2010) suggested that using a cesium formate based dril- The complexity involved in barite settlement in an inclined annulus
ling fluid or polymer-coated ultra-fine barite for drilling HPHT wells will under the impact of a rotating inner pipe, motivated this study. This work
prevent barite particles from sagging. Zamora (2009) investigated the is aimed at modeling and simulation of barite settlement in the annulus
mechanisms, measurement methods used, and barite sag mitigation space. The effects of inner pipe rotation and pipe inclination on the barite
under static and dynamic conditions showing the degree of complexity settling, particle volume fraction and pressure profile of the fluid have
been studied. The model presented in this work enables us to better
describe barite settlement. Inaddition, particle settlement in annular
space with rotational inner shaft has been modeled and simulated. To
achieve this, a Eulerian two phase model for different pipe angle as well
as different rotational speeds has been used.

2. Theory of barite settlement and barite concentration variation

This section provides a brief review of the theoretical modeling of

barite sag inside pipe annulus. Such system is depicted in Fig. 2.

2.1. Barite settlement in a vertical well with stationary inner shaft and fluid
at rest condition

As explained before, barite settlement may occur during shut-in time

Fig. 1. Initial weighting material settling creates a pressure imbalance resulting in a of a drilling process. In order to better understand this phenomenon in a
further enhanced settling rate (Omland, 2009). vertical well, a one meter long vertical concentric annulus has been used

477
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 2. Pipe geometry and coordinate system.

to represent the well and the drill pipe (see Fig. 2). The outer cylinder in which
representing the well has an inner diameter (ID) equal to 0.1 m. The inner
cylinder with an outer diameter (OD) equal to 0.05 m has been consid- ΣF ¼ Fbody þ Fsurface (5)
ered to represent the drill pipe. It is assumed that during shut-in period, In here the body force is gravitational force and surface forces consist
both the drill pipe and fluid are at stationary condition. of normal and shear forces.
By applying mass conservation to a control volume of an annulus The body force can simply be shown by the Buoyant force:
system, we will have
!
πdp3  
_ z  mΔt
mΔt _ zþΔz ¼ MtþΔt  Mt (1) FBuoyant ¼ ρp  ρf (6a)
6
h       
Δt: ρp vset A z  ρp vset A zþdz ¼ ρp Adz tþΔt  ρp Adz t (1a) The normal force acting on a particle is equal to the magnitude of
forced caused by pressure and can be determined using the
following equation:
∂ðCvset AÞ ∂ðCAÞ
¼ (2)
∂Z ∂t Fp ¼ ∫ ps !
n dS (6b)
cs
∂C ∂C ∂vset
¼ vset þ C (3) The shear stress force is resulted from fluid acting on a settling par-
∂t ∂Z ∂z
ticle and is equal to:

Fτ ¼ ∫ τ:!
where C is the volumetric concentration.
n dS (6c)
As it is shown in Eq. (3), to find the barite concentration profile, it is cs
critical to find the isovelocity of the particles. To simplify the problem,
first we have analyzed only a single particle system. The forces applied on Under the assumption of the stationary condition and by assuming a
such particle include gravitational, buoyancy and drag forces (see Fig. 3). constant settlement velocity, the Stokes drag force FD will represents the
Therefore, the settling velocity can be found by considering a simple magnitude of the shear force applied on the particle surface. The Stokes
force balance and their impact on particle velocity. Such force balance drag force cab be found using the following equation:
can be written as follows: 1
FD ¼ ρf CD Ap u2 (7)
dv 2
ΣF ¼ m (4)
dt where vset is the particle settling velocity, CD is drag force coefficient, Ap is
the particle project area, ρf is the particle density, dp is the particle
diameter and (u) is slip velocity of particle influid.
Assuming constant settling velocity dv
dt ¼ 0 and by combining
the buoyant force and shear force equations, the terminal velocity can be
determined using the following equation:
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u4 ðρ ρ Þ
u3 s f gd
t ρf p
vt ¼ (8)
CD
Due to the impact of flow regime on drag coefficient, the solid particle
drag coefficient or CD will be a function of particle Reynolds number such
that for low Reynolds number the CD can be estimated by using the
following equation:
Fig. 3. Force balance on a solid particle submerged in a quiescent liquid.

478
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

24 Using the same argument, the Reynolds number for Bingham model is
CD ¼ (9)
Rep generated as follows:

In this equation the particle Reynolds number defined as: ρf dp vt

Rep ¼ τ0 (16)
þ μ∞
ρf dp vt γ_
Rep ¼ (10)
£ The settlement of a population of particles is much more complex
than a simple particle settlement process. Let's assume that a cloud of
where £ is the apparent viscosity and for Newtonian fluid its equal to solid particles is settling in a liquid which is at rest. In such case, the
fluid viscosity(μ). Drag coefficient of rigid sphere particle for the wide additional hindering effects caused by interaction between particles will
range of Particle Reynolds number is shown in Fig. 4 (Duan et al., 2015). influence the settling velocity which appears as an additional drag force.
Unlike laminar flow condition, in turbulent regime the viscous force The hindering effects are strongly dependent on the volumetric concen-
is dominant. Therefore, a simple relation as shown in Eq. (9) cannot be tration of solids ðCv Þ in the particle cloud. Richardson and Zaki (1954)
applied to turbulent flow condition. For spherical particles in turbulent developed an equation that describes the hindering effect based on Cv .
regime, the value of CD ¼ 0.445 is commonly used in fluid mechanics.
In the transition flow regime the CD could be correlated as a function vth ¼ vt ð1  Cv Þm (17)
of particle Reynolds number by using empirically obtained equations. For
this section only, the Turton and Levenspiel (1986) correlation for drag In this equation, vth is the hindered settling velocity of solid particle, vt
force coefficient determination has been used: is the terminal settling velocity of the solid particle and m is the empirical
exponent related to the particle Reynolds number (Rep ) (Table 1).
24   0:413
CD ¼ 1 þ 0:173Re0:657 þ (11)
Rep p
1 þ 1:63  104 Re1:09
p
2.2. Modeling of the population of particles settling based on Eulerian two
In most cases, the drilling fluids do not exhibit a Newtonian behavior. phase model
Therefore the above equations should be developed for a non-Newtonian
fluid as well. In order to better describe the viscosity characteristics, the In computational fluid mechanics the dynamics of multiphase flow
following equation introduced by Madlener and Ciezki (2005) is used. has been modeled using either the Euler-Lagrange approach or the Euler-
Euler method. The first approach is based on the assumption of a con-
τ0 tinuum medium for the flowing fluid while the discontinuous phase is
£¼ þ K γ_ n1 þ μ∞ (12)
γ_ modeled by considering a body of particles. In this approach each phase
In which K is fluid consistency index and n is fluid behavior index. An is treated as an interacting continua in combination with phasic vol-
additional term μ∞ is a constant viscosity term. The term γ_ is defined as ume fraction.
fluid shear rate (dv/dx) and under near wall condition it's approximated Here, the Euler-Euler approach is used to model the multiphase flow
to v/dp. Based on apparent viscosity definition the following formula of solid barite particles and drilling fluid. In this approach energy or
was generated: momentum lost between phases has been taken into account by means of
For power low model, μ∞ and τ0 are equal to zero. particle-particle and particle-fluid exchange coefficients. One main
advantage of Eulerian-granular multiphase model is that such model is
 n1
v applicable to all particle relaxation time scales and is able to model in-
£ ¼ K γ_ n1 ¼ K (13) cludes heat and mass exchange between phases. In the Eulerian two
dp
phase model for solid –liquid systems, the forces acting on a single par-
The Reynolds number for power low fluid is generated as follow: ticle are classified as: static pressure gradient, solid pressure gradient, lift
and drag forces, virtual mass force, viscous force and body force. In this
ρf dpn v2n
t study this model has been used to describe barite particle motion in
Rep ¼ (14)
K different states including static and dynamic conditions. Nguyen et al.
For Bingham plastic model, n and K are equal to zero: (2009) experimentally studied the barite beds characteristics under dy-
namic condition (Fig. 5). As shown in Fig. 5, there are three layers with
τ0 different motion mechanism in each layer. For static condition, the so-
£¼ þ μ∞ (15)
γ_ lidified bed is forming at the heal of the well which is referred to as
barite sag.
In this study a fixed coordinate system is applied and the discontin-
uous phase or particles pass through numbers of fixed control volumes.
The governing equations for Eulerian two phase model used here are
as follows:

Conservation equations
In order to model a complex flow of solid particles in side an annular
domain, volume fraction, conservation of mass and momentum have
been applied.

Table 1
Values for the Richardson and Zaki index m.

Rep ¼ Vμtfd m Index

Rep  0:2 4.6
0:2  Rep  1 4.4Re0.03
p
1 < Rep < 500 4.4Re0.01
p

Fig. 4. Drag coefficient as a function of particle Reynolds number (Duan et al., 2015). Rep  500 2.4

479
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

 
dq vq dp vp
Fvm ¼ 0:5ρq Cp  (22)
dt dt
The interphase force for a mixture with n phases is shown below:

X
n
! X
n
 
R pq ¼ Kpq !vp!
vq (23)
p¼1 p¼1

where Kpq (¼ Kqp) is the interphase momentum exchange coefficient.

The fluid-solid exchange coefficient Ksl can be written in the
following equation

Cs ρs f
Ksl ¼ (24)
τs
Fig. 5. Barite bed characteristics (Nguyen et al., 2009).

where friction or f is defined differently for the different exchange-

coefficient models and τs is particulate relaxation time that is defined as:
Volume fraction ρs ds2
Volume fraction is defined by the local instantaneous mass balance of τs ¼ (25)
18£
each phase flowing through annulus. The volume of phase q, Vq , and it's
effective density ρ is defined by: All definitions of f include a drag function (CD) that is based on the
relative Reynolds number (Res ). In this study and considering the
Vq ¼ ∫ Cq and ρ ¼ Cq ρq (18) importance of solid particle size and thermal equilibrium condition and
V to determine this term, Syamlal and O'Brien (1989) model has
Pn been applied:
Where. q¼1 Cq ¼1
CD Res Cl
f ¼ (26)
Conservation of mass 24v2r;s
The continuity equation for each phase (q) is defined as:
Where the CD is
∂    X n
Cq ρq þ ∇: Cq ρq !
vq ¼ m_ pq (19) 0 12
∂t
vs!
ρ ds j!
p¼1
B 4:8 C v lj
CD ¼ @0:63 þ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffi A ; Res ¼ l (27)
where ! v q is the velocity of phase q and m_ pq characterizes the mass Res £
vrs
transfer from phase p to phase q . Based on mass conservation, it is
obvious that m_ pq is equal to m_ qp and. m_ pp ¼ m_ qq ¼ 0: The vrs is the terminal velocity of single particle in fluidized bed and
defined by the following correlation (Kaushal et al., 2012; Fluent
Conservation of momentum Inc, 2006.
The momentum balance for each phase ðqÞ is defined as follows:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
∂    X n
!  vr;s ¼ 0:5 A  0:06Res þ ð0:06Res Þ2 þ 0:12Res ð2B  AÞ þ A2 (28)
Cq ρq !
v q þ ∇: Cq ρq ! R pq þ m_ pq !
¼
v q ¼ Cq ∇p þ ∇:τ þ v pq
∂t p¼1
! ! ! 
þ Cq ρq F q þ F lift;q þ F vm;q A ¼ Cq4:14
(20)
When Cq < 0:85
! ¼
here F q is an external body force, τ is the stress-strain tensor for each
! ! ! B ¼ 0:8Cq1:28
phase, F lift;q represents the lift force, F vm;q is a virtual mass force, R pq
stands for the interaction force between phases, p is the pressure shared And when Cq > 0:85
by all phases and ! v pq represents the inter-phase velocity.
B ¼ Cq2:65
In this section, the terms in the conservation of momentum equation
is discussed in further detail.
The lift force acting on a secondary phase p, which in our case consists Where the subscript q is for the qth fluid phase, s is for the sth solid phase,
of the solid barite particles, in a primary phase q in which carries the solid and ds is the diameter of the sth solid phase particles.
particles, is defined as follows: The stress strain tensor for liquid phase q is defined as:

   
τq ¼ Cq μq ∇!
vqþ!
¼
Flift ¼ 0:5ρq Cp !vp!
T
v q  ∇v_q (21) vq (29)

In multiphase flow systems, when the discontinuous phase (particles) For the solid phase we have:
is accelerated through a continuous phase (fluid), the fluid experiences  
 T  2 ¼
τ s ¼ Cs μs ∇! v s þ Cs λs  μs ∇:!
vsþ!
acceleration due to the work that is done on particles. In another word, ¼
vs I (30)
the difference in the acceleration of continuous and discontinues phases 3
leads to a virtual mass force. For further detail on this subject, please refer ¼
to Crowe et al. (2011) and Kolev (2007). Such force is defined by the where superscript T indicates the transpose and I is the identity tensor. λs
following equation: is the bulk viscosity of the solids phase that can be obtained by
the following:

480
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

 12 The volume fraction equation

4 θs
λs ¼ Cs ρs ds g0;ss ð1 þ ess Þ (31) The volume fraction equation of each phase is calculated by using the
3 π
continuity equation as shown below:
where g0 is radial distribution function that is a correction factor that !
∂    1 X
n
dq ρq
modifies the probability of collisions between particles: Cq þ ∇: Cq !
vq ¼ m_ pq  Cp (38)
∂t ρq dt
"  13 #1
p¼1

Cs
g0 ¼ 1  (32)
CsMax Fluid-fluid momentum equations
The conservation of momentum for a continuous fluid phase l can be
In this study CsMax is equal to 0.67. In addition, ess is the restitution written as follows:
coefficient and is equal to 0.9.
∂
θs is the granular temperature and it is proportional to kinetic energy ðCl ρl !
v l Þ þ ∇:ðCl ρl !
v l Þ ¼ Cl ∇p þ ∇:τl þ Cl ρl ! g þ ðKsl ð! vs!
¼
v lÞ
of the fluctuating particle motion. ∂t
! ! ! 
μq is the viscosity of liquid phase and μs is the shear viscosity of solids þ m_ sl v sl Þ þ Cl ρl F lift;l þ F vm;l
phase that contains collisional, kinetic and the optional fric-
(39)
tional elements:
where ! g is the gravitational acceleration.
μs ¼ μskin þ μsfr þ μscol (33)
Similar to the approach followed for the continuous phase, the con-
Fig. 6 shows the three terms of solid shear viscosity including colli- servation of momentum for the discontinuous solid phases can be
sional, kinetic, and frictional in the inclined bed such as inclined pipe determined by:
or well.
∂
ðCs ρs !
v s Þ þ ∇:ðCs ρs !
v s!
v s Þ ¼ Cs ∇p  ∇ps þ ∇:τs þ Cs ρs !
¼
The collisional viscosity is modeled as: g
∂t
 12 ! ! !
þ ðKls ð v l  v s Þ þ m_ ls v ls Þ
4 θs
μs;col ¼ Cs ρs ds g0 ð1 þ ess Þ (34) ! ! 
5 π þ Cs ρs F lift;s þ F vm;s (40)
Following Syamlal et al. (1993) kinetic viscosity term can be
where Ps is the Sth solids pressure, Kls ¼ Ksl is the momentum exchange
modeled by:
coefficient between phases and n is the total number of phases.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 Coupling the above partial differential equations leads to a nonlinear
Cs ds ρs θs π 2
μs;kin ¼ 1 þ ð1 þ ess Þð3ess  1ÞCs g0 (35) system of equations. Such system can only be solved by means of nu-
6ð3  ess Þ 5
merical methods.
In addition, 1987 In additionthe frictional viscosity term is modeled
using model proposed by Schaeffer (1987) 3. Numerical solution

ps sin∅ 3.1. Mesh design

μs;fr ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi (36)
2 I2D
To simulate barite settling phenomenon based on Eulerian two phase
where ∅ is the angle of internal friction. I2D is the second invariant of the model, the Fluent (6.3.26) software is used. The equations described
deviatoric stress tensor and ps is the solid pressure that is modeled by Lun above has been applied to a three dimensional system. The computa-
et al. (1984): tional grid were created for geometry which indicates in Fig. 2. Struc-
tured grid is used in all of the simulations and the computational domain
ps ¼ Cs ρs θs þ 2ρs ð1 þ ess ÞCs2 g0 θs (37)
consists of 61 952 nodes. The grid was generated using GAMBIT 2.4.6,
Combining all the equations listed above, one may rewrite the system which is compatible with FLUENT 6.3.26 (see Fig. 7).
of equations as follows:

Fig. 6. Schematic of frictional, collisional and kinetic terms of solid viscosity.

481
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

to a large value (2000). However, the maximum iteration required to

converge was smaller than50 iterations. The iteration number strongly
depends on the complexity of the system such as well angle, and drill
pipe rotation.

4. Model validation approach

Model validation is conducted under both static condition and a

system with inner shaft rotation.

Fig. 7. Cell distribution in the concentric annulus.

4.1. Model validation against published data

The static condition validation is done by using the experimental data

3.2. Boundary conditions
that published by Skalle et al. (1999). They studied the barite sag phe-
nomenon using conventional flow loop without inner pipe rotation at
The boundary consists of four surfaces in form of inner, outer, bottom
statics condition and pipe angle of 45
as a Sag tester (Fig. 8a). Properties
and top walls. The no slip condition is applied on these walls. The domain
of fluid and particle used in Pål Skalle experimental work is listed in
is bounded between the outer surface of the rotating shaft representing
Table 2. The Sag tester consists of a 1.5 m long inclined pipe with
the drill pipe and the inner surface of the static pipe which represents the
ID ¼ 45.2 mm and a collector pipe. The pipe inclination angle is 45
. In
well. It is important to note that for cases in which the shaft is not rotating
this set up, a vertical collector pipe is attached (ID ¼ 27.2 mm) at a
the inner boundary is a static boundary. For cases with inner shaft
distance of 0.5 m from the bottom of the inclined pipe. The tests are
rotation, the rotational motion relative to adjacent cell has been applied
designed based on the idea that changes in the fluid density as a result of
to the inner boundary.
particles settling will cause pressure changes in the fluid column.
Therefore, the measured pressures at the bottom of the pipe will
3.3. Solution and convergence
decrease. If the solid particles accumulated on the lower side, they will
fall into the collector pipe due to gravity. In order to numerically model
The first order upwind discretization scheme has been used for the
the Sag tester designed by Skalle et al. (1999) pipe geometry similar to
momentum and volume fraction equations. The convergence criterion is
that of their experiment was created. Fig. 8b shows the contours of barite
based on the residual value of the calculated variables, i.e., volume
volume fraction along deviated pipe based on result of CFD modeling.
fraction, continuity, x-barite velocity, y-barite velocity, z-barite velocity,
The properties of fluid and particle used for this simulation are given
x-fluid velocity, y-fluid velocity and z-fluid velocity. In this study, the
in Table 5.
threshold values were set to a 0.000001 times the initial residual value of
each variable. At the initial condition (t ¼ 0), a constant initial barite
Table 2
concentration has been applied to all the cells. Inaddition the initial ve- Properties of fluid and particle used in Pål Skalle experimental work.
locity of zero has been considered. In order to couple pressure and ve-
Plastic viscosity 0.011 (Pa.s)
locity terms, the phase coupled Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure-
Yield stress threshold 1 (Pa)
Linked Equations(SIMPLE) algorithm was used. Such algorithm is an Mixture density 1 400 (kg/m3)
extension of the SIMPLE algorithm multiphase flows. The time step size Particle diameter 60 μm
varies for different cases with minimum and maximum of 0.01s–0.1s, Initial barite volume concentration 0.1
accordingly. The maximum iteration number per time step has been set

Fig. 8. The Pål Skalle experimental set up (a) and model developed by CFD (b). Figure b shows the volume concentration profile along new pipe test.

482
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 9 shows a comparison between numerical results and experi-

mental data for pressure changes at the bottom of the long deviated pipe.
As it is shown, there is a good agreement between the results. Both results
show a fast pressure decline at the beginning, which is resulted from fast
settling of particles at initial time.

4.2. Model validation against experimental results

In order to further validate the CFD model, the effects of pipe rotation,
inclination angle, and rheological properties of base fluid have been
experimentally examined and compared with the results of the numerical
model. The experimental approach and validation process is presented in
next section.

4.3. Experimental investigation

Fig. 10. Rheological behavior of the base fluid.
Experimental evaluation and analysis of barite settlement is a vital
step in achieving a better understanding of such complex process in a
wellbore and validation of numerical results. The following sections It must also be noted that the fluid used in this study slightly has a
provide a brief review of the base fluid preparation and properties, Bingham rheological behavior with low yield stress. Experimental ana-
experimental apparatus and test procedures used to investigate the barite lyses were carried out by using a drilling fluid with low gelation point as a
settlement. base fluid because of the most oil base drilling fluid has a low yield point
under high-temperature conditions. Rheology of such fluid is differ from
4.3.1. Fluid rheology fluid used by Skalle et al. (1999).
The oil-water invert emulsion fluid was prepared as the base fluid or
continuous phase. This type of drilling fluid is common in drilling of 4.3.2. Apparatus design and test procedure
production zones. Rheological behavior of the base fluid was experi- In order to experimentally investigate the barite settlement phe-
mentally studied using a rotational viscometer at standard pressure and nomenon, a 2.3-m annular pipe flow loop equipped with an inner shaft
32
C temperature conditions. The rheological properties of the base fluid capable of rotating at the speed of 70 rpm was built. The inner and outer
were analyzed by measuring the shear stress in different shearing rates as diameters of the annulus are 0.05 m and 0.025, respectably. Such system
can be observed in Fig. 10. The results indicated that the rheological is similar to drilling wells annulus space. Fig. 11a shows the schematics of
behavior of the base fluid is similar to the Bingham plastic model with a the flow loop and description of every parts and Fig. 11b shows the flow
low yield stress threshold. The base fluid contents and specifications have loop system in the lab. Fig. 12 shows the breakdown structure of the
been summarized in Table 3. The test fluid was prepared after adding the annulus pipe section in the present system. Furthermore, to investigate
barite particles into the base fluid. In this study, the volume concentra- the barite particles settlement process in deviated beds, the annular
tion of barite particles in the test fluid was equal to 0.12. The fluids and section can be inclined at different degrees. The following section briefly
particles properties in this study have been summarized in Table 4. describes the test procedure: Fluid preparation step is followed by mixing
It should be pointed out that the base fluid rheology represents the process. During mixing, base fluid is mixed with certain concentration of
rheology of the base fluid which is different from that of the drilling fluid barite solids (12%) in the storage tank. The fluid mixing was performed
which is a mixture of base fluid with the barite particles. The rheological by a rotating agitator and jet flow. The flow rate supported by pump is
model of such drilling fluid has a higher yield stress threshold value and always set at a rate higher than the inlet flow rate. Therefore the extra
differs from the base fluid rheology. In practice, the rheological model pump flow rate was bypassed into the fluid tank through a narrow jet
used to model the drilling fluid rheology is using the base fluid rheology nozzle in order to create high turbulence flow in the fluid tank. One of the
and the solid content as well as solid particle properties to determine the main reasons for using jet flow system in the designed flow loop was to
rheology of the mixed fluid at each stage. This approach is used due to the avoid temperature change in the fluid tank due to the agitating system in
fact that the solid content of the drilling fluid is subjected to change due long times. The tank temperature is monitored during the tests. After-
to sagging and as a result the rheological model should be updated ward, a high-speed flow rate was established through the annular section
dynamically. and fluid flow returns into the fluid tank from the top of the annular
section and through the return line. The high fluid flow rate avoids any
settlement of solid barite particles in the annular section of the flow loop.
After establishing of fluid flow, the annular section inlet valve was closed
and fluid was taken on the rest conditions. Under these conditions, barite
particles started to settle in the annular section. The barite settlement
occurred continuously until the settlement was complete. In order to
measure the rate of barite settlement, the pressure change of fluid column

Table 3
The base fluid contents.

Contents Volume
Weight ,%
Water 40%vol.
Oil 45%vol.
Primary emulsifier 5%vol.
Secondary emulsifier 10%vol.
Lime 3%wt.
Fig. 9. The comparison of between result of Pål Skalle experiment and CFD model. CMC 5%wt.

483
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Table 4
The fluids and barite particles properties.

Base fluid viscosity 0.01 Pa.s

Base fluid yield stress threshold 0.2 Pa
Base fluid density 980 kg/m3
Barite particle mean diameter(d50) 75 μm
Initial barite volume concentration(C0) in the test fluid 0.12
Barite particles specific gravity (SG) 4.2
Test fluid density 1360 kg/m3

Table 5
Properties of fluid and particle used in simulation.

Fluid consistency (k) 0.01 kg.sn2/m

Fluid behavior index (n) 0.61
Particle diameter 60 μm
Initial barite volume concentration 0.3
Base Fluid density 1200 kg/m3
Barite SG 4.2 Fig. 12. Break down structure of designed annular flow loop.
Angle of internal friction 37 deg

Fig. 11. a. Schematic of designed annular flow loop. b. Laboratory apparatus used to create the flow loop system.

484
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 13. Comparison of the results of simulation with experiments on the fluid pressure change at the bottom of annular section during static test.

in the annulus section was recorded continuously with time passes by and then changed to linear trend. This behavior is based on this fact that
using multiple pressure transducers. This practice is based on this idea the particles settling velocity at early time is an accelerated movement,
that changes in the fluid density as a result of particles settling will cause and it is not possible to reach the constant velocity at the initial times.
pressure changes in the fluid column. Using the pressure transducers at However as shown, there is generally good agreement between experi-
the different segments of the annular section, it was possible to monitor mental data and CFD results for different inclination angles Fig. 15 shows
the fluid density and rate of barite settlement with time passes. A high the effects of rotational speed on barite settlement rate in the annular
accuracy pressure transducer was used in different segments of the section under no axial flow conditions and the inclination angle of
annular section of the flow loop in order to record the fluid pressure 30
and 45
. This figure obviously shows that the low rotational speed of
change. Moreover, as indicated in Fig. 11a it was possible to get the 70 rpm has not significant impact on barite settlement rate.
sample from the fluid in different segments of the annular section using
the sample cap. Therefore, it was possible to analyze the fluid density or 5. Modeling results and sensitivity analyses
particles concentration in the fluid sample.
As stated before, the fluid rheology of tests conducted in this work This section provides the results of sensitivity analyses conducted on
differ from fluid used by Skalle et al. (1999). Fig. 13 shows the experi- settlement in both vertical and inclined wells. The tests conducted on a
mental results of pressure reduction percent for different inclination single particle assume a static drill pipe (shut-in period only). However,
angle. Comparison between Figs. 9 and 13 indicate that the rate of barite under multi-particle system, both static and dynamic drill pipes were
settlement decreases as fluid yield point increases. Under no axial flow modeled numerically. All simulations were performed by using a model
conditions, the barite settlement was analyzed through measuring the geometry indicated in Fig. 2.
pressure reduction in the different segment of annular section. Fig. 14
shows the results of CFD simulation and experimental data on pressure 5.1. Single particle in a vertical well during shut-in period
reduction at the location of bottom pressure transducer port. As shown, at
early times, the rate of pressure change was similar to exponential trend Governing Eq. (3) in combination with Eq. (17) is used to model a

Fig. 14. Experimental data for pressure reduction percent under static condition.

485
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 15. Pressure reduction vs. time in annular section with rotational speed of 70 rpm, a: inclination angle ¼ 30
and b: inclination angle ¼ 45
.

simple vertical well. In order to numerically model the barite settling where ρavg is the average density of fluid in at each time step and Cb;v is
phenomenon, finite deference method is used. An element of a well is the average barite volume concentration:
simulated with a length of 1 m. The simulation domain has been divided PN t
into ten equal size grids (see Fig. 16). i¼k Cb;i
C b;v ¼ (42)
The simulation results depicted in Fig. 17 shows the variation of N  ðk  1Þ
concentration profile in each grid at different time. The results suggest
that concentration variation with respect to time follows an S-shape In this equation, N is total number of grids and k is the grid number in
profile. This simply means that rate of concentration variation with time which pressure is measured at. The pressure at each grid can be calcu-
for each cell is a function of neighboring cells above and below. Fig. 18 lated using the following formula:
shows the variation of barite concentration along pipe for different time   
1
durations. As shown the barite concentration at the bottom increases Pti ¼ ρavg  g  N  i   dL ði ¼ 1; 2; … NÞ (43)
2
with time due to barite settlement.
For each grid in the model and at each time step, the average fluid
density can be calculated by determining the average concentration: P0i
PN ¼ (44)
  Pti
ρavg ¼ ρfluid 1  C b;v þ Cb;v ρbarite (41)
here Pti is pressure in the grid i at time t > t0 , PN and P0i are the normalized
pressure and initial pressure in the grid i, respectively.
Figs. 19 and 20 show the pressure and normalized pressure variations
at the different levels of fluid column in the pipe. As shown, the base fluid
hydrostatic pressure has been observed at the top of the column sooner
than that experienced in the bottom of the column. This is due to the fact
that the top element is acting just as a source and therefore barite con-
centration in such element reduces with time. However, other elements
experience a balance between particles entering such elements and
particles that leave them.
An example of such calculation is provided for grid 2 of the vertical
pipe model:

a) Average concentration determination:

Initially, the model obeys the initial condition. Therefore:

if t ¼ t0 ⇒C b;v ¼ C0
Similar to the initial condition, the model is bounded by the following
boundary condition:

if x ¼ L⇒ C b;v ¼ 0
For any other grid and at time t > t0 , the average concentration can be
determined as follows:

Fig. 16. Vertical pipe sachem.

486
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 20. Normalized pressure vs. time.

Fig. 17. Variation of concentration profile in each grid (after complete settling).

  
1
P12 ¼ ρavg  g  10  2   0:1 ¼ ρavg  g  0:85
2

P02
PN ¼
P12

5.2. Eulerian two phase model on an inclined pipe with rotational inner
shaft

The result of simulation based on Eulerian two phase model shows

that the settlement of barite particles can be significantly reduced by
increasing the inner pipe rotation. The result also reveals that the
maximum settlement occurs at pipe inclination angle of 45
. However,
increasing the inclination angle beyond this point will decrease the set-
tlement such that the minimum settlement has been observed at incli-
nation angle of 90
.
Fig. 18. Variation of concentration profile in pipe test for different times. The impact of shaft rotation on settlement has been studied as well.
Fig. 21 shows the contours of barite volume fraction at the end section of
the inclined pipe (θ ¼ 45o ) for different inner pipe rotations after one
hour. It can be seen that with increasing rotation speed the settlement
will decrease due to vortexes which is created by rotating shaft.
Furthermore, the risk of pipe sticking at the heal of wellbore is reduced.
The impact of settlement time on barite profile at the end of the pipe
has been studied as well. To achieve a better understanding of the impact
of such parameter on barite profile at the end of an inclined pipe, barite
sag inside an annulus with inclination angle of 75
and inner pipe rota-
tion of 50 rpm has been simulated. Simulation results show that mo-
mentum transferred from rotating shaft will push the solid particles
towards the inner shaft such that after certain concentration at the bot-
tom of the annulus, particles show the tendency to settle around the
moving shaft (Fig. 22). In addition the results reveal that the barite sag is
a continuous phenomenon. Fig. 23 shows the simulation results of barite
concentration variation at the heal of inclined (θ ¼ 45o ) annular section
for Bingham plastic fluid with low threshold stress and different inner
Fig. 19. Measured pressure vs. time at different level of fluid column. pipe rotations after 10 min. As shown, although the initial barite content
in this case is equal to 0.1, the barite bed at the end of annular section
reaches to maximum bed packing limit which arises from low threshold
C2t þ C3t þ ⋯ þ C10
t of fluids types. It can also be seen that with increasing rotation speed, the
C b;v ¼ slumped barite decreased. Fig. 24 shows the growth rate of slumped
9
barite at the end of annulus with inclination angle of 45
under no axial
b) Pressure determination and calculation flow and inner pipe rotation of 70 rpm for Bingham plastic fluid model
during 60 min. It can been seen that the maximum packing limit of barite
Since pressure is measured at the center of this grid, at time t ¼ t1 ; particles reaches to constant state under inner pipe rotation condition
we have which can avoided the pipe sticking situation.
In order to better visualize the front of constant barite concentration,

487
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 21. Effect of inner pipe rotation on the particle volume fraction at the bottom of the pipe (z ¼ 0), Pipe angle ¼ 45
and t ¼ 600sec.

Fig. 25 has been generated for an annulus with inclination angle of 45
in magnitude and direction. The force exerted by vortex flow on settled
with stationary inner shaft. Since pipe angle is considered as an influ- particles will push them away from the settlement bed and will lead to
ential parameter, contours of barite volume fraction along annulus for an resuspension of such fine particles. As a result, the thickness of particle
inclination angle of 60
with static inner shaft has been analyzed as well. bed on the lower side of the annulus will reduce. Fig. 29 shows the
Such results are shown in Fig. 26. vectors of velocity and the created vortices due to inner pipe rotation. As
Considering the importance of inner shaft rotation speed on barite sag shown, there is an upward-down ward motion of fluids element due to
settlement, contours of barite concentration along inclined annulus, the impact of barite settlement. When the barite particles starts to settling in
results of for two different rotation speeds under similar inclination angle a same direction, the elements will move in opposite direction and
have been compared in Fig. 27. In this figure, barite concentration pro- upward-downward motion is occurred.
files for a case with inner shaft rotation of 100 RPM have been compared To better understand how influential the vortex flow is, velocity of the
with those of a pipe with stationary inner shaft. As shown by increasing particles in the settlement layer next to the annulus wall has been stud-
the inner pipe rotation to 100 rpm the particle settlement rate is reduced. ied. Fig. 30 depicts the axial velocity of particles of such layer at two
The contours of barite axial velocity (called z velocity here) are also different inner shaft rotation speeds. In other words, this figure shows
shown in Fig. 28. As it is shown in this figure and due to the rotation of that the volume of particles settled on the lower wall of the pipe can be
the inner shaft, a counter current flow of particles inside the pipe can be reduced by increasing the pipe rotation speed.
observed. Considering the size of barite particles, the vortexes created by In order to characterize the barite settling under different conditions
the rotating central pipe significantly impacts their settling velocity both such as different inner pipe rotations and different pipe angles, a barite

488
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 22. The contours of barite volume fraction at the bottom of the pipe for different time duration. Pipe angle ¼ 75
and inner pipe rotation ¼ 50 rpm.

sag coefficient needs to be introduced to better understand the settlement from the upper elements and quantity of barite left such elements to the
phenomenon inside the annulus of a well under no axial flow condition. lower elements and therefore have not been used to define this index.
The “top” and “bottom” sections are used as reference locations due to One may use this concept to define a dynamic index for the whole length
the fact that maximum difference in barite concentration can be found of the pipe by slightly adjusting the sag coefficient defined above. In
between such locations. In another word these locations are used as petroleum industry both approaches have been used.
reference locations to define a. The dimensionless index sag coefficient is The top and bottom sections in simulation study are defined by using
defined as is follows: the cells in such locations. This means that the first set of cells represent
the “top” reference location and same applies for “bottom” reference
Cb;bottom  Cb;top Cb;top location. Let's look at the top as an example, the top section is consisted of
Sag Coefficient ¼ ¼ 1 (45)
Cb;bottom Cb;bottom number of cells with known specific volume and barite concentrations.
Using such information the average barite concentration for this section
where Cb is volume fraction of barite in the fluid. has been calculated. The top and bottom sets of cells are illustrate
The index will result in a value between 0 and 1 in which represents in Fig. 31.
the degree of sagging. If the system is homogeneous with regards to the Therefore, by increasing the settlement of particles and because the
barite concentration, the index will be equal to zero and under extreme barite concentration at the top of the inclined bed approaches to zero, the
case in which there is no barite left in the top section, the index will be Sag coefficient will approach to 1. Similarly, when particles are well
equal to one. In addition it should be noted that barite concentration in suspended and settling does not occur, Ctop is equal to Cbottom and sag
other locations depends on the amount of barite entered such elements coefficient becomes zero.

489
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 23. Effect of rotational speed on particle volume fraction at the bottom of annular section under no axial flow conditions.

Fig. 24. The contours of barite volume fraction at the bottom of inclined annular section under no axial flow condition and rotation speed of 70 rpm.

Fig. 32 shows the variation of sag coefficient with time for different pronounced. At certain time, the cohesive force becomes the dominant
pipe rotation. As shown by increasing the pipe rotation, sag coefficient is factor and the settlement occurs at a reduced and constant rate. The time
decreased which means the settling rate is decreased. Also, the results span in which the first settlement pattern can be observed strongly de-
reveal that settlement rate will decrease as inner shaft rotation increases. pends on the inner shaft's speed. At higher rotations, the vortex flow will
However, at high rotation speeds (higher than 60 rpm), the difference in not allow the particles to create a bed. Therefore the particles will be
sag coefficient and rate of settlement is negligible. In addition, this figure resuspended, leading to lower settlement rates.
shows that two major settlement regimes can be observed. At early time Fig. 33 shows the volumetric concentration profile along pipe test at
the drag force and gravity force are dominant forces which control the pipe angle of 45
at two different rotations (stationary inner shaft and
magnitude of settlement and its rate. However, by time the impact of inner pipe rotation of 100 rpm). As shown the volumetric concentration
rolling mechanism and as a result the cohesive force becomes more is measured at the both side of pipe test in two different locations above

490
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 25. The front of constant barite concentration along pipe test with angle of 45
and no inner rotation shaft.

Fig. 26. The contours of barite volume fraction along the 1 m concentric annuli for pipe angle ¼ 60
and inner pipe rotation speed ¼ 0 rpm.

and below the pipe center line (y ¼ 0.049 and y ¼ 0.049 m). The results Fig. 34 shows the volumetric concentration along a vertical pipe after one
show that for each rotation speed, the volumetric barite concentration hour. It can be seen that in a system with stationary inner pipe, only a
below the centerline is more than its concentration above the centerline. small change in concentration has been observed. However, at high

491
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 27. The contours of barite volume fraction along the 1 m concentric annuli during 1 h with Pipe angle ¼ 45
. Case a with inner pipe rotation ¼ 100 rpm and case b without inner pipe
rotation.

Fig. 28. Contours of barite axial (z) velocity (m/s), t ¼ 600sec, pipe angle ¼ 45
and inner pipe rotation ¼ 100 rpm indicating counter current particle flow.

rotation speed particle settlement did not occur. 6. Summary and conclusion
Figs. 35 and 36 show the variation of sag coefficient with time for
different pipe angles at inner pipe rotations of 0 rpm and 50 rpm. As In this paper, static barite particle settling phenomenon in an annular
shown the maximum sag coefficient was observed at pipe angle of 45
. By space similar to drilling well was studied using single particle settling
decreasing or increasing the inclination angle the sag coefficient will modeling approach and Eulerian two-phase flow model. The results of
reduce. This result is consistent with other researcher's experimental theoretical modeling and CFD simulation of barite settling phenomenon
works (Dye et al., 1999, 2003, 2006; Skalle et al., 1999). is presented here. The impact of different forces and mechanisms on
Figs. 37 and 38 show the effect of base fluid viscosity on barite set- settling process have been investigated in detail. The particle-particle and
tlement phenomenon for a Newtonian fluid. As shown, the rate of barite particle-fluid interactions have been taken into account while modeling
settlement decreases by increasing the fluid viscosity. Figs. 39 and 40 this process based on three-dimensional Eulerian modeling. In order to
show the effect of initial barite content on rate of settlement for a base validate the numerical model, the experimental analyses have been
fluid with viscosity of 15 cp. As shown by increasing the barite content in conducted. The numerical model predictions indicated a good agreement
the base fluid, the sag coefficient slightly decreases due to the hindering with both available data in the literature and experimental results. Next,
effect of particles (eq. (17)). the sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of inner

492
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 29. Particle velocity vectors. Effect of pipe rotation on particle velocity direction.

1.2
30 rpm 0 rpm
1

0.8
Pipe length(m)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 -0.005 -0.01 -0.015 -0.02 -0.025 -0.03
Particle Axial Velocity (m/s)

Fig. 30. Effect of pipe rotation on axial velocity of particles in first settlement layer on the lower pipe wall (at y ¼ 0.04994 m). Pipe angle ¼ 45
.

Fig. 31. Reference locations on numerical grids: a) The upper section cells b) location of both top and bottom reference locations.

pipe rotation, deviation angle, barite content, and base fluid rheology on study showed that barite settlement phenomenon strongly depends on
the rate of barite settlement. operational parameters such as drill string rotation speed, well inclina-
In this study a dimensionless sag coefficient has been defined to tion angle as well as fluid rheology. The results showed that the settling
characterize the degree of sagging under different conditions with time. rate of particles decreases by increasing the inner pipe rotation. However,
Combination of such parameter with detailed numerical and experi- after a critical rotation speed the rate of settlement is constant and
mental analysis enable us to better characterize and predict the barite increasing the rotation speed has minimal impact on settlement. The
settlement behavior under various situations during drilling process. This critical rotation speed depends on fluid viscosity and rheology type and

493
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 34. Volume concentration profile along pipe test at pipe angle ¼ 90
during 1 h.
Fig. 32. Variation of sag coefficient with time for different inner pipe rotation. Pipe
angle ¼ 45
.

fluid properties. The simulation results also showed that the vortices
created by inner pipe rotation along the well significantly impact the
sagging process through resuspension of particles. In addition, the effect
of well orientation and inclination on barite settlement has been
analyzed and investigated. The results showed that the barite particles
settling rate maximizes at the pipe angle range of 45
–60
and then
decreased with increasing pipe angle to 90
. In vertical orientation (90

pipe) and under no axial flow condition settlement of multiple particles
affected by the amount of the drag force caused by a microflow between
particles as well as collision between them which have a hindering effect,
gravitational forces and buoyancy force. This hindering effect increases
by increasing particles or increasing the concentration of particles. In
addition, in order for these particles to settle, they have to displace same
volume of water. In vertical orientation, combination of these effects
reduces the settling velocity in comparison with that of a deviated well.
Fig. 35. The comparison of Sag coefficient variations for different pipe angles and no
When it comes to deviated pipes, the resultant force applied to each
inner pipe rotation condition.
particle leads to a vertical settlement of particles on the side of the pipe.
Unlike the settlement of particles in vertical pipe, the resistance faced by
water placed between particle and pipe body is reduced. The particles
settled on the side of the pipe is simply “rolling down” on the pipe body decreases as the barite content increases which indicate the hindering
and therefore the hindering effect due to presence of other particles will effect on the rate of settlement. The effect of fluid rheology on barite
significantly reduce. Such movement mechanism is known as rolling settlement was also investigated. The results show that the rate of barite
mechanism. The mechanism of settling in a deviated pipe is referred to as settlement decreases as fluid yield point increases. The results also show
boycott settling. that increasing the base fluid viscosity decrease the rate of barite
Analysis of sag coefficient showed that the sag coefficient slightly settlement.

y=-0.049,0 rpm y=0.049,0 rpm

0.7
y=-0.049,100 rpm y=0.049,100 rpm
0.6
Volume Concentration

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Length(m)

Fig. 33. Volumetric concentration profile along pipe test at pipe angle ¼ 45
.

494
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

Fig. 39. The effect of initial barite content on barite concentration distribution along the
pipe test during 30 min.
Fig. 36. The comparison of Sag coefficient variations for different pipe angles and inner
pipe rotation ¼ 50 rpm.

Fig. 40. The comparison of Sag coefficient variations with initial barite content during
30 min.

Fig. 37. The effect of base fluid viscosity on barite concentration distribution along the
pipe test during 30 min.

Nomenclature

A: Cross section area (m2)

Ap : Particle project area (m2)
Cs : Solid (Barite) volumetric concentration
Cb;v Average barite volume concentration
Cq : Fluid volumetric concentration
CD : Drag force coefficient
Clift : Lift force Coefficient
dp : Particle diameter (m)
FBuoyant : Buoyant force (N)
Fp : Pressure force (N)
Fτ : Shear force (N)
FD : Drag force (N)
Flift : Lift force (N)
Fvm : Virtual mass force(N)
g: Gravitational acceleration (m/sec2)
Fig. 38. The comparison of Sag coefficient variations for different base fluid viscosity. K: Consistency index (kg.sn2/m)

495
H. Movahedi et al. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 161 (2018) 476–496

L: Pipe length (m)

M: Total mass (kg)
m_ : Mass flow rate (kg/sec)
n: Fluid behavior index
Rep : Particle Reynolds number
Vq : Volume of fluid q
vset : settling velocity (m/s)
!vq : Velocity of phase q (m/sec)
vt : Particle terminal velocity (m/sec)
!v pq : Interphase velocity (m/sec)
Δt : Time step size (sec)
ρp : Particle density (kg/m3)
ρf : Fluid density (kg/m3)
μ: Viscosity (pa.sec)
τy : Fluid yield strength (Pa)
¼
τs Solid stress tensor
¼
τq Fluid stress tensor
∅ Angle of internal friction
θs Granular temperature (m2/s2)
ps Solid pressure (Pa)
£: Apparent viscosity(pa.s)

References Madlener, K., Ciezki, H., 2005. Theoretical Investigation of the Flow Behavior of Gelled
Fuels of the Extended Herschel Bulkley Type.
Mishra, P., Ein-Mozaffari, F., 2017. Using computational fluid dynamics to analyze the
Akhshik, S., Behzad, M., Rajabi, M., 2016. CFD-DEM simulation of the hole cleaning
performance of the Maxblend impeller in solid-liquid mixing operations. Int. J.
process in a deviated well drilling: the effects of particle shape. Particuology 25,
Multiph. Flow 91, 194–207.
72–82.
Mme, U., Skalle, P., 2012. CFD calculations of cuttings transport through drilling annuli at
Amighi, M., Shahbazi, K., 2010. Effective Ways to Avoid Barite Sag and Technologies to
various angles. Int. J. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 6 (2), 129–141.
Predict Sag in HPHT and Deviated Wells, SPE Deep Gas Conference and Exhibition.
Mondal, S., Wu, C.-H., Sharma, M.M., 2016. Coupled CFD-DEM simulation of
Society of Petroleum Engineers.
hydrodynamic bridging at constrictions. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 84, 245–263.
Bern, P., et al., 1998. Barite Sag: Measurement, Modelling and Management, IADC/SPE
Movahedi, H., Farahani, M.V., Jamshidi, S., 2017. Application of Hydrated Basil Seeds
Asia Pacific Drilling Technology. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
(HBS) as the herbal fiber on hole cleaning and filtration control. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng.
Boycott, A., 1920. Sedimentation of blood corpuscles. Nature 104, 532.
152, 212–228.
Crowe, C.T., Schwarzkopf, J.D., Sommerfeld, M., Tsuji, Y., 2011. Multiphase Flows with
Nguyen, T.C., Yu, M., Takach, N., 2009. Predicting Dynamic Barite Sag in Newtonian Oil-
Droplets and Particles. CRC press.
based Drilling Fluids, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of
Dritselis, C., 2017. Numerical study of particle deposition in a turbulent channel flow
Petroleum Engineers.
with transverse roughness elements on one wall. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 91, 1–18.
Nguyen, T.C., Miska, S., Saasen, A., Maxey, J., 2014. Using Taguchi and ANOVA methods
Duan, Z., He, B., Duan, Y., 2015. Sphere drag and heat transfer. Scientific reports 5.
to study the combined effects of drilling parameters on dynamic barite sag. J. Petrol.
Dye, W., Hemphill, T., Gusler, W., Mullen, G., 1999. Correlation of Ultra-low Shear Rate
Sci. Eng. 121, 126–133 .
Viscosity and Dynamic Barite Sag in Invert-emulsion Drilling Fluids, SPE Annual
Omland, T.H., 2009. Particle Settling in Non-newtonian Drilling Fluids.
Technical Conference, pp. 543–553.
Parvizinia, A., Ahmed, R.M., Osisanya, S.O., 2011. Experimental study on the
Dye, W., Mullen, G., Gusler, W., 2003. Drilling Processes: the Other Half of the Barite Sag
phenomenon of barite sag. In: International Petroleum Technology Conference.
Equation, SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition. Society of
International Petroleum Technology Conference.
Petroleum Engineers.
Richardson, J.F., Zaki, W.N., 1954. Sedimentation and fluidisation: Part I. Trans. Inst.
Dye, W.M., Mullen, G.A., Gusler, W.J., 2006. Field-proven Technology to Manage
Chem. Eng. 32, 35–53.
Dynamic Barite Sag, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Saasen, A., Liu, D., Marken, C., 1995. Prediction of Barite Sag Potential of Drilling Fluids
Elgaddafi, R., Ahmed, R., George, M., Growcock, F., 2012. Settling behavior of spherical
from Rheological Measurements, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. Society of
particles in fiber-containing drilling fluids. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 84, 20–28.
Petroleum Engineers.
Hajidavalloo, E., Sadeghi-Behbahani-Zadeh, M., Shekari, Y., 2013. Simulation of
Schaeffer, D.G., 1987. Instability in the evolution equations describing incompressible
gas–solid two-phase flow in the annulus of drilling well. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 91 (3),
granular flow. J. Differ. Equ. 66 (1), 19–50.
477–484.
Shahi, S., Kuru, E., 2016 Aug 10. Experimental Investigation of the settling velocity of
Hanson, P., Trigg Jr., T., Rachal, G., Zamora, M., 1990. Investigation of Barite" Sag" in
spherical particles in Power-law fluids using particle image shadowgraph technique.
Weighted Drilling Fluids in Highly Deviated Wells, SPE Annual Technical Conference
Int. J. Miner. Process. 153, 60–65.
and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Skalle, P., Backe, K., Lyomov, S., Sveen, J., 1999. Barite segregation in inclined boreholes.
Hashemian, Y., et al., 2014. Experimental study and modelling of barite sag in annular
J. Can. Petrol. Technol. 38 (13).
flow. J. Can. Petrol. Technol. 53 (06), 365–374.
Syamlal, M., O'Brien, T.J., 1989. Computer simulation of bubbles in a fluidized bed. In:
Fluent Inc, 2006. Fluent User's Guide. Fluent Inc., Lebanon, NH, USA, Version 6.3.26. .
AIChE Symp. Ser, pp. 22–31.
Kamyab, M., Rasouli, V., 2016. Experimental and numerical simulation of cuttings
Syamlal, M., Rogers, W., O'Brien, T.J., 1993. MFIX Documentation: Theory Guide.
transportation in coiled tubing drilling. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 29, 284–302.
Technical Note DOE/METC-95/1013 and NTIS/DE95000031. National Energy
Kaushal, D., Thinglas, T., Tomita, Y., Kuchii, S., Tsukamoto, H., 2012. CFD modeling for
Technology Laboratory, Department of Energy.
pipeline flow of fine particles at high concentration. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 43, 85–100.
Turton, R., Levenspiel, O., 1986. A short note on the drag correlation for spheres. Powder
Kolev, N.I., 2007. Multiphase Flow Dynamics 3: Turbulence, Gas Absorption and Release,
Technol. 47 (1), 83–86.
Diesel Fuel Properties, v. 3. .
Wang, Z.-m., Long, Z.-h., 2010. Study on three-layer unsteady model of cuttings transport
Lun, C., Savage, S.B., Jeffrey, D., Chepurniy, N., 1984. Kinetic theories for granular flow:
for extended-reach well. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 73 (1), 171–180.
inelastic particles in Couette flow and slightly inelastic particles in a general flow
Zamora, M., 2009. Mechanisms, measurement and mitigation of barite sag. In: Offshore
field. J. fluid Mech. 140, 223–256.
Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition. Offshore Mediterranean Conference.

496