THE LUBRICITY PERFORMANCE OF HURA CREPITANS AND ......Plant Oil in Water-Based Mud in Analysing Differential Pipe Sticking

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 364 [email protected]

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)

Volume 10, Issue 03, March 2019, pp. 364–379, Article ID: IJMET_10_03_037

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=3

ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

THE LUBRICITY PERFORMANCE OF HURA

CREPITANS AND CALOPHYLLUM INOPHYLLUM

PLANT OIL IN WATER-BASED MUD IN

ANALYSING DIFFERENTIAL PIPE STICKING

Onuh, C. Y., Dosunmu, A., Anawe, P. A. L., Agbator, S.

Department of Petroleum Engineering, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria

Ojonimi, I. T. Seteyeobot, I.

Department of Mining Engineering, University of Jos, Nigeria.

ABSTRACT

This study applied diesel oil, and oil from two non-edible plant seeds which are

Hura crepitans and Calophyllum inophyllum. These non-edible oils were extracted

from their seeds using the soxhlet extractor and used in the oil-in-water emulsion mud.

Mud lubricity tester was used to determine the torque, coefficient of friction, and mud

lubricity coefficients were calculated at different revolutions per minute and

concentrations of the oil. The rheological properties of the mud were also tested. The

results obtained from the experiment showed that Hura crepitans in water-based mud

have the highest mud lubricity coefficient, and next is oil from Calophyllum

inophyllum. It was also discovered that diesel oil in the water-based mud has a

negative effect on the coefficient of friction, the mud formulated with the plant oils has

the lowest volume of fluid loss when compared to ordinary water-based mud and that

of the diesel oil. The mud formulated with oil from Hura crepitans has relatively

higher plastic viscosity most especially at concentrations above 15 ml, and the

addition of Calophyllum inophyllum has the highest yield point values and gel

strength. The plant oils most especially Calophyllum inophyllum used in mud

formulation reveals lower pullout force and greater potential for minimizing

differential pipe sticking.

Key words: Coefficient of friction, Fluid loss, Calophyllum inophyllum, Hura

crepitans, differential pipe sticking

Cite this Article: Onuh, C. Y., Dosunmu, A., Anawe, P. A. L., Agbator, S., Ojonimi,

I. T. Seteyeobot, I., The Lubricity Performance of Hura Crepitans and Calophyllum

Inophyllum Plant Oil in Water-Based Mud in Analysing Differential Pipe Sticking,

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 10(3), 2019, pp.

525–540.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=3

Onuh, C. Y., Dosunmu, A., Anawe, P. A. L., Agbator, S., Ojonimi, I. T. Seteyeobot, I.


1. INTRODUCTION

In drilling engineering, high torque and drag, friction and wearing of downhole equipment or

drilling tools are common problems. The high torque values are caused by friction triggered

by dog-legs, key seats, bit balling and hole unsteadiness. The friction and high torque values

are as a result of the increase in the area of contact between the wellbore and the drill

pipe/casing, which sometimes leads to differential pipe sticking and even lose out of well [7].

Differential pipe sticking (DPS) is a major challenging cost to the drilling industry associated

with negative impact of unproductive rig days, this occurs due to downtime caused by

termination of drilling operation or freeing of the drill pipe when it gets stuck [9]. This

technical challenge in wells result to high well budget cost accumulated from when pipe get

stuck, freeing the pipe, and further impact of the stuck pipe problems in the well.

Several authors have come up with some statistics that show the severity of substantial

losses due to stuck pipe. In 1991, research conducted discovered that British Petroleum (BP)

had spent more than $30 million per year for stuck pipe issues. Between 1985 and 1988, an

average of $170,000 was spent per well due to stuck pipe [4]. On the other hand, a survey

within Sedco Forex in 1992 showed that stuck pipe accounts for 36% of total drilling

problems [11]. stuck pipe incidents cost the oil industry $200-$500 million per year [15].

Micro emulsion was used in the removal of mud cake which is a mud parameter that facilitate

the occurrence of stuck pipe [5]. Stuck pipe constitutes negative consequences on drilling

efficiency and well costs. It can be caused by inaccurate mud properties, well trajectory,

formation characteristics, and improper drilling parameters. accurate analysis and

understanding of mud parameters is key to managing, preventing, and significantly reducing

stuck pipe stuck pipe tendencies [14].

One of the special functions of drilling mud is in lubricating the drill string thereby

reducing stuck pipe. Plant Oil from Jatropha, Moringa, and Canola seed have been used in

improving the lubricating effect thereby preventing corrosion [6]. Oil-based mud (OBM) are

known to have better lubricity than the water based mud (WBM). However, improving water

based mud and its application are preferred in areas where OBM have previously been used

due to their low toxicity and cost [10]. OBM are in varying degree of toxicity and it is quite

costly to dispose in an environmentally cordial way [13]. The occurrence of wearing and

friction in water based drilling mud is as a result of the inherent higher coefficient of friction

(CoF), this can be reduced via increasing the lubricity of the mud through lubricant

application [12].

Biobased lubricant have excellent lubricity, and are environmentally friendly in

comparison to the petrobased lubricant. These advantages enhance their application in water-

based mud. The lubricity effect is due the bonding ability of the lubricant to the metal surface

thereby increasing the thin film strength. The adhering ability of plant oils acting as lubricant

in water-based mud reduces torque, drag, and frictional forces between the pipe and formation

[16]. By this, energy is saved from 5 to 15% of the equipment operation [2]. The word

“lubricity” alludes to the slipperiness of the films of lubricants formed in boundary

lubrication. The effect of spotting oil, lubricants, and several additives in increasing the

lubricity of drilling mud have been studied by several authors and the positive effect have

been discovered in freeing stuck pipe [3;8;17].

This research work is aimed at comparing the impact of diesel oil and oil from two non-

edible plant seeds called Hura crepitans and Calophyllum inophyllum in water-based and

their effect on the lubricity and differential pipe sticking. A diagrammatic representation of

DPS is shown in Figure 1.

The Lubricity Performance of Hura Crepitans and Calophyllum Inophyllum Plant Oil in Water-

Based Mud in Analysing Differential Pipe Sticking


Figure 1 Differential pressure sticking

2. EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP AND PROCEDURE

2.1. Sample Preparation

Laboratory conditions were used in the preparation of the samples for analysis.

2.1.1. Mud additives

The materials and equipment used in carrying out this research work include de-ionized water

(350 ml), bentonite (20 g), CMC (2 g), and potassium hydroxide (0.2 g) to formulate the

water-based mud. Diesel oil, oil extracted from seeds of Hura crepitans and Calophyllum

inophyllum acting as lubricating agent, Soxhlet apparatus, oven, n-hexane solvent, and filter

papers.

2.1.1.1. Preparation of mud samples

350 ml of water was measured using a measuring cylinder. Then poured into the mixer and

agitated with the correct mixture of each additives in intervals of 15 minutes for homogeneity.

The lubricants were then added to the water-based mud at different concentrations of 5 ml, 10

ml, 15 ml, 20 ml, and 25 ml.

2.1.1.2. Mud properties

The physical properties analysed in this study are the pH, mud density, viscosity, gel strength,

yield point, and fluid loss 2.1.2. Oil extraction from their seeds

The seeds of Calophyllum inophyllum and Hura crepitans were collected from Canaan

land, Ogun state. It was further pilled, oven dried in the oven at 103 °C for 17+-1hr. 60 g of

the individual pulverized seed sample was packed into a thimble, and then to the extraction

chamber of the Soxhlet extractor, mounted on the round buttom flask containing 250 ml N-

Hexane Fig. 2.1. The Soxhlet was then mounted on a heating mantle at 69 °C and allowed to

reflux for about two hours. The extract was then filtered to remove dirt’s that may be present

and distilled using a distillation evaporator set up to isolate the solvent (Fig. 2.1). The

percentage of the oil yield was evaluated by measuring the weight of the oil recovered per 60

g of the seed sample.



2.1.2.1. Physical properties of oil

The viscosity index, flash and fire point, oil density/specific gravity, and pH were measured

for the plant oils using the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) method. The

properties are as shown in as shown in Table 3.1.

2.2. Lubricity

Two different non-edible plant oils from the seeds of Calophyllum inophyllum and Hura

crepitans, and diesel oil was used as lubricant in the drilling mud in different concentrations

of 5 to 25 ml to determine their effect on the lubricity efficiency of the mud.

2.2.1. Lubricity test

The lubricity test is designed at laboratory conditions to determine the performance of the

lubricant at different revolution per minute and pressure which the drill pipe bears against

wellbore wall or the casing. In this study, the lubricity tester was used to determine the

lubricating qualities of the drilling mud. The torque, mud lubricity coefficient and coefficient

of friction analysis was done at different speeds (rpm) or rotation and concentrations of the

lubricants. The lubricity tester is as shown in Fig. 2.2.

Figure 2.1. Overview of soxhlet extractor (left) and distillation apparatus set-up (right)

Figure 2.2. Overview of a lubricity tester




2.3. Differential pipe sticking Analysis

The force required to pull out a drill pipe when it gets stuck is a function of the differential

pressure that acts on the contact area of the drill pipe in an embedded mud cake ( ), the

contact area itself ( ), and the friction occurring between the cake and the pipe ( ).

The contact area is a function of the arc length and length of the pipe body portion

The arc length ( )as given by [1] is stated below

√( )

(

)

The arc length equation applies under the following conditions

( )

Where

( ) ( )

( )

The coefficient of friction, mud cake thickness, mud weight, and data from table 2.1 were

imputed into the pullout force equation for the DPS calculation.

Table 2.1. Parameters used for calculating the pullout force for all the mud samples

( ) 9

( ) 6

TVD (ft) 10000

( ) 4000

( ) 20, 30, 40

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The experiment carried out according to the procedure of the lubricity tester, the physical

properties of the mud, and the rheological properties as discussed below.

3.1. Lubricity performance analysis

The name and characteristic of the plant oil used are as shown in Table 3.1., diesel oil was

also used for comparison with the plant oil.



3.1.1. The performance analysis of the lubricant added to the water-based mud

Fig 3.1 shows the analysis of all the lubricants added to the mud at different concentrations of

the lubricant and at 600 revolutions per minute (rpm), detail analysis is shown in the appendix

A (Table A.2-A.5). It can be seen that the oil from Hura crepitans (HCO) has the best

lubricant performance with diesel oil having the poorest. It is also observed that the lubricant

performance increases with the concentration of the various lubricants. Fig 3.2, Fig 3.3, and

Fig 3.4 shows the plot the lubricity efficiency of diesel oil, Hura crepitans oil, and

Calophyllum inophyllum oil respectively. It can be seen that the lubricity performance for all

the lubricants increases with the concentration of the lubricants, this implies that the lubricity

efficiency of the mud is at its best as the concentration of the oil increases within the range of

study. The lubricity performance, as can be seen in Fig 3.2, Fig 3.3, and Fig 3.4., decreases

with increase in the speed of rotation (rpm). This implies lower friction, torque and drag are

expected with increase in concentration and most especially in the presence of the oil from

Hura crepitans (HCO). The reduction of the coefficient of friction is as a result of the

adsorption of the oil or the formation of thin film between surfaces. The lubricity efficiency

was found to be inversely proportional to the coefficient of friction.

Table 3.1. Characteristic of the plant oils

Properties CIO HCO Oil API

Flash point ( ) 154 204 ≥66

Fire point ( ) 162 260 ≥93

Density ( ) 923 908 805-820

Kin. Viscosity at 40 ( ) 18.57 14.70 -

Kin. Viscosity at 100 ( ) 8.84 7.55 -

Viscosity Index 197 207 -

Figure 3.1. Performance analysis of the diesel, Calophyllum inophyllum, and Hura crepitans oil in the

WBM at 600 rpm




Figure 3.2. Performance analysis of the Diesel oil in the WBM at varying rpm

Figure 3.3. Performance analysis of the Hura crepitans oil in the WBM at varying rpm



Figure 3.4. Performance analysis of the Calophyllum inophyllum oil in the WBM at varying rpm

3.2. Effect of lubricant on mud properties of the water-based mud

The physical analyses conducted for water based mud with and without the different lubricant

oil consist of the rheological analysis, fluid loss analysis, pH, mud density.

3.2.1. Rheological analysis

The rheological properties of the mud are important in determining the performance of the

drilling mud. The properties analysed in this section are the plastic viscosity (pv), the gel

strength at 10 sec and 10 min, and the yield point values using the FANN model 35SA

viscometer. The plastic viscosity values are as shown in Fig 3.5. It can be observed that the

plastic viscosity for the mud formulated with oil from Calophyllum inophyllum is much more

stable than that of the other mud. It should be noted that mud with unnecessary higher plastic

viscosity are not desirable as they can negatively impact on the equivalent circulating density,

the plastic viscosity values for mud formulated with Hura crepitans oil increases from 15 ml

oil concentration. However, the plastic viscosity for all the mud with the different lubricant oil

are still within the API range as shown in the appendix Table (A-1).

The yield point values are as shown in Fig 3.6, it can be seen that the yield point values

for HCO is more stable than that of the other lubricant oil, the yield point values for CIO is

higher than that from HCO and DIO. The yield point values for WBM with diesel oil

increased from oil concentration of 10 ml. it should be noted that the increase in yield point

values as a result of the application of lubricant oil in WBM is not advisable as they have

tendency to reduce the transportation efficiency of drilling mud.

Analysing the gel strength values from Table (A-1), the gel strength at 10 sec and 10 min

for oil from Hura crepitans is more stable than that of the other lubricant oil and are within

the API acceptable range. The 10 sec gel strength for oil from Calophyllum inophyllum is not

within the acceptable API range.

Figure 3.5. Plastic viscosity values of the WBM with the lubricant oils




Figure 3.6. Yield point values of the WBM with the lubricant oils

3.2.2. Fluid loss analysis

Fig 3.7 shows a plot of the volume of the fluid loss observed when the lubricant oil was

added, it can be seen that the volume of the fluid loss reduces with increase in the

concentration of the lubricant oils. The WBM formulated with the oil from HCO have a lower

fluid loss than oil from diesel and Calophyllum inophyllum, and this is evident in all the

concentrations from 5-25 ml. The properties of the ordinary WBM formulated without any

lubricant oil as shown in Table 3.2 produces a higher volume of fluid loss than the API

acceptable range. Drilling mud with moderate fluid loss have greater potential to prevent

drilling challenges such as differential pipe stuck and formation damage etc. The cake

thickness is considered acceptable since it’s not greater than 2/32”. The rheological property

values are still within the API standard. Drilling mud with lower API fluid loss is

recommended.

Table 3.2: The Properties of Water-Based Mud

Properties Value API

pH 9.58 8.5-10

Mud density (ppg) 8.6 7.5-22

Specific gravity 1.02 -

Filtrate loss after 30 mins (ml) 26 10-25

Gel strength @ 10 secs ( ) 16 3-20

Gel strength @ 10 min ( ) 17 8-30

Cake thickness (1/32’’) ≈ 2/32” 2/32”

Plastic viscosity ( ) 2 < 65

Apparent viscosity ( ) 21 -

Yield point ( ) 38 15-45



Figure 3.7. Fluid loss analysis of the WBM with the lubricant oils

3.2.3. Mud density, electrical stability and pH analysis

There is a little change on the mud density and pH value as concentration of the different

lubricant oil was added and this can be seen in Table A.1. WBM formulated with diesel oil

shows increase in the density and pH values as the oil concentration increases, WBM

formulated with Calophyllum inophyllum (CIO) showed increase too but decreased at 15 ml

concentration of the oil, WBM with addition of oil from Hura crepitans (HCO) showed a

decrease and increased from 15 ml oil concentration. The electrical stability (ES) values

increases with the concentration of the oil samples.

3.3. Differential pipe sticking analysis

The analysis of the differential pipe sticking or the pullout force required to free pipe is based

on the laboratory mud data used in measuring the effect of the mud cake thickness, area of

contact between the mud and the pipe which comprises of the length of the pipe section sunk

in the cake, and the differential pressure. Figure 3.8 is the plot showing the effect of the

contact area on the pullout force as the length of the pipe embedded in the cake thickness

increases, the pullout force increases with increase in the length of the embedded pipe and the

contact area. This effect is due to the adhesive forces acting over the larger contact area

between the pipe and the mud cake. It is also seen that the lubricity of the Calophyllum

inophyllum and Hura crepitans plant oil reduces the pullout force required than the ordinary

WBM and diesel oil. Diesel oil impacts negatively on the lubricity and pullout force required

and this is validated by the work of [18].




Figure 3.8. Effect of contact area on the pullout force at varying length of embedded pipe body

Figure 3.9 reveals the effect of cake thickness on the pullout force in the presence of

diesel and the plant oil in the WBM, the pullout force required to free pipe when stock

increases when the cake thickness increases in increasing percentage. The plant oils

performed better than the diesel oil and ordinary WBM.

Figure 3.9. Effect of cake thickness on the pullout force

Figure 3.10 shows a plot revealing the effect of the differential pressure on the pullout

force, the pullout force increases as the differential pressure increases, and increase in the

pullout force is possibly due to the fact that a higher differential pressure induces a higher

cake strength which impacts on the adhesive forces between the pipe and cake. The lubricity

of the plant oils particularly performs better than the diesel oil and also the ordinary WBM



Figure 3.10. Effect of the differential pressure on the pullout force

4. CONCLUSIONS

From the result analysed, the following conclusions was made:

The mud with high lubricant performance is obtained from the plant oils, with Hura crepitans

revealing the highest and then Calophyllum inophyllum, and lastly the diesel oil.

The lubricity efficiency of the mud when the various oil was added increases with the

concentration of the lubricant and this is evident in the mud formulated with the plant oils.

The addition of diesel oil to water based mud reveals a negative influence on the mud as this

increases the CoF and pullout force when compared to conditions of ordinary WBM.

The plant oils reduce the volume of the fluid loss compared to the diesel oil, the oil from Hura

crepitans performed better than that from Calophyllum inophyllum,

Mud with high lubricity have greater tendency to reduce the volume of fluid loss, the mud

with Hura crepitans reveals better lubricity performance and so volume of fluid loss is low

compared to other lubricating oil used. Hence, the lubricity coefficient is inversely

proportional to the volume of fluid loss

The lubricating oil has influence on the rheological properties. The mud formulated with oil

from Hura crepitans has relatively higher plastic viscosity most especially at concentrations

above 15 ml, and the addition of Calophyllum inophyllum has the highest yield point values

and gel strength.

The plant oils have good potential of minimizing the tendency of stuck pipe as they reduce the

pullout force required to pull out the pipe when compared to diesel and ordinary water based

mud.




APPENDIX A

Table A.1: Properties of the Various Oil-In-Water Emulsion Mud

properties 5 ml 10 ml 15 ml 20 ml 25 ml API

C

I

O

H

CO

D

I

O

C

I

O

H

C

O

D

I

O

C

I

O

H

C

O

D

I

O

C

I

O

H

C

O

D

I

O

C

I

O

H

C

O

D

I

O

pH 9.25 9.14 9.35 9.54 8.92 9.42 8.50 8.83 9.56 8.48 8.87 9.68 8.77 8.86 9.87 8.5-10

MDens

(ppg)

8.20 7.80 8.20 8.50 8.35 8.50 8.10 8.40 8.50 8.10 8.60 8.55 8.40 8.60 8.60 7.5-22

FL(ml) 22 21 20 21 20 19 21 18 19 18 16 19 17 15 18 10-25

ES 87 58 94 106 95 99 108 95 105 177 109 107 223 112 112 > 400

GS10s

(

))

12 13 8 23 11 6 24 19 15 23 18 21 25 14 21 3-20

GS10m

(

))

13 15 9 24 12 9 23 20 15 23 18 21 25 12 22 8-30

CT (1/32”) ≈

2/32”

≈

2/32”

≈

2/32”

>

2/32”

≈

2/32”

≈

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

>

2/32”

2/32”

PV ( ) 8 15 7 11 11 15 11 8 8 8 21 10 12 21 11 < 65

AV ( ) 21 28 15 26 20 18 29 23 20 29 28 27 30 28 28 -

YP

( ) 25 26 16 30 18 15 35 30 24 42 14 34 36 14 34 15-45

Table A.2: Test result of water-based mud formulated with lubricant oil

SAMPLE

Value Ordinary WBM without lubricant oil

Viscosity, 600 reading (cp) 42

Viscosity, 300 reading (cp) 40

PV (cp) 2

Apparent Viscosity (cp) 21

YP (lb/100ft2) 38

Gel strength, 10 secs 16

Gel strength, 10 mins 17

pH 9.58

Specific gravity 1.02

Mud density (ppg) 8.6

Emulsion stability 55

Fluid loss (ml) at 30 mins 26

Torque (measured) at 60RPM at 5 mins 21

Mud Lubricity coeffecient at 60RPM 0.155

Coefficient of friction (COF) at 60RPM 0.157

Table A.3: Test result of water-based mud formulated with diesel oil

DIO in WBM

Oil concentration

5ml 10ml 15ml 20ml 25ml

Viscosity, 600 reading (cp) 30 35 40 54 56


PV (cp) 7 15 8 10 11

Apparent Viscosity (cp) 15 17.5 20 27 28

YP (lb/100ft2) 16 5 24 34 34

Gel strength, 10 secs 8 6 15 21 21

Gel strength, 10 mins 9 6 15 21 22



pH 9.35 9.42 9.56 9.68 9.87

Specific gravity 0.98 1.2 1.2 1.25 1.3

Mud density (ppg) 8.2 8.5 8.5 8.55 8.6

Emulsion stability 94 99 105 107 112

Fluid loss (ml) at 30 mins 20 19 19 19 18

Torque (measured) at 60RPM at 5 mins 42.6 40.4 40.2 40.2 39.4

Mud Lubricity coefficient at 60RPM 0.421 0.399 0.397 0.397 0.389

Table A.4: Test result of water-based mud formulated with Calophyllum inophyllum oil

CIO in WBM

Oil concentration




PV (cp) 8 11 11 8 12

Apparent Viscosity (cp) 20.5 26 28.5 29 30

YP (lb/100ft2) 25 30 35 42 36



pH 9.25 9.54 8.03 8.48 8.77


Mud density (ppg) 8.2 8.5 8.1 8.1 8.4





Table A.5: Test result of water-based mud formulated with Hura crepitans oil

HCO in WBM

Oil concentration




PV (cp) 15 11 8 21 21

Apparent Viscosity (cp) 28 20 23 28 28

YP (lb/100ft2) 26 18 30 14 14



pH 9.14 8.92 8.83 8.87 8.86


Mud density (ppg) 7.8 8.35 8.4 8.6 8.6





ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I write to thank covenant university for their financial support towards to publication




REFERENCES

[1] Azar, J., & Samuel, R. (2007). Drilling Engineering. Tulsa, oklahoma: PennWell

Corporatio.

[2] Bilal, S. (2013). Production of biolubricant from Jatropha curcas seed oil. Journal of

Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, 4(6), 72–79.

[3] Bland, R. G., Micho, W. T., Fluids, M. D., Howard, H. J., Murphy, E., & Co, P. (1992).

Application of New Glycol/Resin Differential Sticking Preventative. In 87th Annual

Conference and Exhibition (pp. 467–480). Washington, DC: Society of Petroleum

Engineers.

[4] Bradley, W. B., Jarman, D., Plott, R. S., Wood, R. D., & Schofield, T. R. (1991). A Task

Force to Reducing Stuck Pipe Costs. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference (pp. 841–846).

Amsterdam: Society of Petroleum Engineers.

[5] Emmanuel Emeka Okoro, Deinpribo Kio-Lawson, Kevin C. Igwilo, Evelyn Bose Ekeinde.

(2018). One Stage Process Removal of Filter Cake using MIcro Emulsion. International

Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(4), 2890-2894

[6] Fadairo, A., Falode, O., Ako, C., Adeyemi, A., and Ameloko, A. (2012). Novel

formulation of environmentally friendly oil based drilling mud. In New Technologies in

the Oil and Gas Industry (pp. 49–80). INTECH.

[7] Foxenberg, W. E., Ali, S. A., Long, T. P., & Vian, J. (2008). Field experience shows the

new lubricants reduces friction and improves formation compactibility and environmental

impact. In SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control

(pp. 13–15). Louisiana: Society of Petroleum Engineers.

[8] Heitmann, N., & Burgos, E. C. (2015). Freeing Differential Stuck-Pipe with Nitrogen

Reduces Significantly Lost-In-Hole Drill Strings. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and

Exhibitions (pp. 1–6). London: Society of Petroleum Engineers.

[9] Isambourg, P., Elf, E. P., Ottesen, S., Company, M. T., Benaissa, S., Inteq, B. H., &

Tarbes, E. N. I. (1999). Down-Hole Simulation Cell for Measurement of Lubricity and

Differential Pressure Sticking. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference (pp. 1–7). Amsterdam:

Society of Petroleum Engineers.

[10] Ismail, A. R., Hadi, A., Rosli, W., Sulaiman, W., & Zaidi, M. (2017). Drilling Fluid Waste

Management in Drilling for Oil and Gas Wells. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56,

1351–1356.

[11] Jardine, S. I., & Barber, S. S. (1992). An Advanced System for the Early Detection of

Sticking Pipe. In IADC/SPE Drilling Conference (pp. 659–667). 1992: Society of

Petroleum Engineers.

[12] Johnson, P., Coragliotti, A., Dicicco, c. d, & Nagatani, R. A. (2014). Field Results for

Encapsulated Oil as an Additive to Water-Based Drilling Fluids : Operational

Improvements in the Alliance / Northern Denver-Julesburg and Heath Basins. In

American Association of Drilling Engineers (pp. 1–6). Houston, Texas: AADE.

[13] Kanna, A. R., Mohiuddin, S. S., Khan, U. A., Reddy, C. H. G. N., & Kumar, M. (2017).

Determination of Oil , Water , Solid and Clay Content in Various Concentrations of

Bentonite & Sodium Silicate. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Engineering and Technology, 6(4), 6929–6937.

[14] Marbun, B., Somawijaya, A., Novrianto, A. R., Hasna, H., & Anshari, M. R. (2016).

Study of Prevention and Mitigation of Stuck Pipe in Geothermal Drilling. In 41st

Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering (pp. 1–12). California: Stanford

University.



[15] Okwu, A. E., Dosunmu, P. A., & Studies, P. (2013). A Risk Based Model to Quantify

Differential Sticking Risk in Drilling Depleted Reservoir Formations. In Nigeria Annual

International Confeence and Exhibition (pp. 1–24). Lagos: Society of Petroleum

Engineers.

[16] Onuh, C.Y., Dosunmu, A., Anawe, P. A. L., Efeovbokhan, V., Adebisi, A. (2017).

Transesterification of Non-Edible OIl for Lubricant Applications in Water-Based Mud: A

Review. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 12(18), 7397-7401.

[17] Simon, K., Gaurina-Međimurec, N., & Pašić, B. (2005). Drilling Fluids Differential

Sticking Tendency Determination. Rudarsko-Geološko-Naftni Zbornik, 17(1), 31–35.

[18] Sönmez, A., Verşan Kök, M., & Özel, R. (2013). Performance analysis of drilling fluid

liquid lubricants. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 108, 64–73.

Documents

THE LUBRICITY PERFORMANCE OF HURA CREPITANS AND ......Plant Oil in Water-Based Mud in Analysing Differential Pipe Sticking