Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287 – 296

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Annular flow analysis by tracers in drilling operations

H.H. Rodrı́guez a,*, J.B. Ramı́rez a, D.C. Velázquez a, A.N. Conejo b, J.A. Martı́nez c
a
Mexican Petroleum Institute (IMP), Division of Exploration and Production,
Research Program in Drilling and Maintenance of Oil Wells, Mexico
b
Graduate Program in Materials, Instituto Tecnológico de Morelia, Morelia, Michoacán, Mexico
c
PEMEX, Marine region, Mexico
Received 14 December 2001; accepted 26 August 2003

Abstract

A study of drilling fluid flow in the annular space and drill pipe by residence time distribution analysis using a tracer is
presented. This is a new method which can be used to assess the rate of removal of cuttings during the drilling process.
Two field trials were conducted to evaluate the technical feasibility and potential application. The results are analyzed using
the flow behavior, carrying capacity of the drilling fluid, and hole cleaning conditions. Analysis of tracer response indicates the
presence of anomalous flow in both trials, characterized by two fluid volume fractions traveling with different velocities. The
magnitude of these volume fractions is related directly to the carrying capacity of the drilling fluid (hence, the hole cleaning
conditions) which is explained. The dispersion coefficient, as well as other distribution functions, is suggested to measure the
overall behavior of fluid in a drill-hole.
This method is compared with empirical correlations employed in the industrial practice and potential advantages are
demonstrated using tracers.
D 2003 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Keywords: Cuttings; Transport ratio; Hole cleanliness; Tracers; Drilling rate

1. Introduction Southwest marine region (f 30%); (3) South region

The average daily production of the Mexican oil
industry in the year 2001 was 3.127 million of barrels
per day (PEMEX, 1998; PEMEX). Mexico has four
major oil regions: (1) Northeast marine region, with
an output close to 52% of the entire Mexican oil
production, Cantarell is its most important field; (2)
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jhrodri@imp.mx (H.H. Rodrı́guez),
aconejo@itmorelia.edu.mx (A.N. Conejo).
(f 16%); and (4) North region (f 3%). To achieve
the production levels indicated, the number of wells
drilled annually ranges from 120 to 140, with an
average depth of 3500 m.
Fig. 1 illustrates the drilling process; a bit at the
bottom of the drill pipe breaks and cuts pieces of the
rock matrix, whose sizes and shapes depend on the
mechanical characteristics of the formation, operation
conditions, wear and type of bit. The swivel (kelly)
and a rotary table are the major components of the
rotary system since they control rotation and travel of
the bit and its drill pipe. One of the most important

0920-4105/$ - see front matter D 2003 Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2003.08.001
288 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296

Fig. 1. Scheme of drilling process.

functions of the drilling fluid circulating in the system
is the removal of cuttings from the bottom of the well
as drilling progresses. The capacity of the drilling
fluid to transport cuttings from the bottom of the well
to the surface is known as the carrying capacity of a
drilling mud. A high carrying capacity implies good
cleaning conditions within the annulus. Hole cleaning
is directly related to the residence time of the cuttings
within the annulus. The rate of penetration is also a
function of hole cleaning, among other variables. The
efficiency of the drilling process depends on the rate
of removal of cuttings.
Cutting transport is affected by multiple factors
such as density and viscosity of drilling muds, size
and shape of cuttings, mud gel strength, gravity
forces, size and geometry of the hole, pump capacity,
mud flow rate, etc. Many investigations of cutting
removal have been conducted. Williams and Bruce
(1951) concluded that using low viscosity –low gel
muds enhances cutting removal and when the pipe is
rotated. They also found that turbulent flow in the
well annulus has a positive effect in cutting removal,
however, this finding was in contradiction with the
results obtained by Hall et al. (1950). Hopkin (1967)
found a relationship between the slip velocity of
particles and mud viscosity, he concluded that the
slip velocity increases in low viscosity muds and that
mud velocities up to 1.0162 m/s (200 ft/min) in excess
of the maximum slip velocity of the particles are
required to keep the hole clean. Hopkin also indicated
that good drilling conditions can be achieved if the
concentration of cuttings in the annulus remains at
 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296
less than 5% (to prevent balled up drill collars and
stuck drill pipe).
A mathematical approach to predict the extent of
cleanliness during drilling operations has been used in
a limited number of investigations. Walker and
Mayers (1975) obtained a relationship between the
type of mud and its flow rate with the extent of
cleanliness. Iyoho et al. (1988) developed a compu-
tational method to analyze hole cleanliness based on
mass balances which requires one to measure the
amount of cuttings generated. Saeed (1988) developed
a mechanistic model for cuttings transport based on
the critical velocity of the drilling fluid. Ramadan et
al. (2001) also developed a mechanistic-erosion model
and found that there is an optimum particle size that
has the highest rate of removal of cuttings for a given
set of conditions in the well (such as viscosity of the
fluid, angle of the hole, etc.).
The previous methods (based either on mass bal-
ances or mechanistic models) lead to corrective meas-
ures rather than preventive ones; furthermore, the
method related to the measurement of drilling cuts
requires continuous monitoring since the concentra-
tion of cuttings changes during the drilling process.
The method related to the measurement of mud veloc-
ity posses some practical limitations because the outlet
velocity is the one which can be measured rather than
the velocity within the annulus. In addition, due to
turbulence, the velocity profile changes along the hole.
Hall and Hughes (1993) conducted experiments
with tracers for monitoring drilling muds. Their work
was primarily focused to develop a technique to
analyze tracer concentration by ion chromatography.
Tracer salts such as lithium bromide or sodium chloride
were selected because of their suitability for chemical
analysis with this analytical method. It was found that
the recovery of anions is larger than 87% however there
was also evidence of strong interactions between the
cations and clay solids yielding small recoveries, in the
order of 60%. Their results provided experimental
evidence of ideal flow, circulation is well mixed and
close to plug flow. The Peclet number computed was
rather high, equal to 2034, therefore and for practical
purposes their work gives no indication of any hydro-
dynamic dispersion during well-bore circulation.
In the present work a new method to asses hole
cleaning is proposed and data taken from field trials
are used to demonstrate its practical applications. The
289
concept involves the introduction of tracers in the
drilling mud and analysis of the residence time
distribution (RTD) of the tracer. The RTD leads to a
physical explanation of the phenomena observed.
2. Application of RTD theory to annular flow
study and hole cleaning evaluation
Cutting transport is conducted with the aid of a
liquid mud. An oil well is a system with one fluid
input and one fluid output (see Fig. 1). Danckwerts
(1953) using tracing chemical compounds developed
the fundamental aspects describing the residence-time
distributions of particles in a fluid. Since the early
1950s, this theory has been applied to the analysis of
the behavior of the annular flow and cuttings during
the drilling process. A tracer can be any material that
can be detected by chemical analysis and the flow
pattern in which it is introduced should not be
disturbed.
Experimentally, two techniques are used for tracer
injection: (1) injection at a pre-determined time and
maintain the injection throughout the process (this
technique is called ‘‘step input’’), and (2) the injection
of a specific amount of tracer in a short period of time
(this technique is called ‘‘impulse input’’ or Dirac’s
delta function).
Using the step-input technique a larger amount of
tracer is required and affects the rheological properties
of the fluid; therefore the ‘‘impulse-input’’ technique
was used. The output – response, where no dispersion
occurs, should be a single signal representing the full
concentration of the inlet tracer. In a real flow disper-
sion occurs due to different trajectories and velocities
of each particle, resulting in an output – response
represented by a Gauss distribution curve.
Levenspiel and Smith (1957) defined some equa-
tions to represent the case of non-ideal flow in a plug-
flow reactor. The equation that defines the process of
dispersion is the non-steady state equation of diffusion
(Fick’s second law):
BC B2 C
¼D 2 ð1Þ
Bt Bx
where, D is the longitudinal or axial coefficient of
diffusion and C is the tracer concentration. This
290 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296
Z l
equation is generalized by introducing dimensionless
t 2 Cdt
quantities: 2
r ¼ Z0 l  t̄ 2 ð7Þ
x
z¼ ð2aÞ Cdt
L 0

t tu where C is the tracer concentration (in mass units).

h¼ ¼
t̄ L


BC D B2 C BC
¼ 
Bh uL Bz2 Bz
where t̄ is the mean residence time (equal to the ratio
between the volume and the flow rate) and u is the
velocity. The term (D/uL) is defined as a ‘‘reactor
dispersion number (RDN)’’ (a quantity used to mea-
sure the extent of axial dispersion) and the equation
itself represents the ‘‘Dispersion Model’’. A value of
RDN equal to 0 indicates the absence of dispersion
(ideal flow), and when RDN is large it indicates a large
amount of dispersion. The reciprocal of the reactor
dispersion number is the Peclet number (Pe). The
dispersion model represents satisfactorily flow in sys-
tems with one fluid input and one output like oil wells.
The curve produced with the signal of the tracer at
the outlet of the well is characterized by the first
particle that leaves the system at an initial time t0 and
by the last particle at a time tf. When a particle takes
too long to leave the system it is considered to be part
of a sluggish volume; this volume must be eliminated
or reduced to decrease the extent of dispersion.
Furthermore, if possible, the active volume (volume
whose particles leave the system in a short time with
respect to the magnitude of the residence time), will
be increased.
The reactor dispersion number can be computed
with the following relationship (Levenspiel, 1972)
which involve the mean residence time (t̄ ) and the
variance (r2):


D 1 r2 1
RDN ¼ ¼ 2
¼ ð5Þ
uL 2 t̄ Pe
where
Z l
tC dt
t̄ ¼ Zo l ð6Þ
Cdt
o which conduct fluid but at a rate much slower than the
ð2bÞ
Normalization and dimensionless variables allows
comparisons of different tracer experimental res-
ponses. To normalize the experimental data such that
ð3Þ the area under the curve is equal to unity, the follow-
ing relationship is employed:
CðtÞ
EðtÞ ¼ Z l ð8Þ
CðtÞdt
0
where E(t) represents the external residence time
distribution defined as the normalized mass-fraction
of particles in the exit stream with residence time
between t and t + tdt. Additionally, the cumulative
response can be described with the following
relationship:
Z l
FðtÞ ¼ EðtÞdt ð9Þ
0
where F(t) represent the external accumulated res-
idence time distribution, defined as the fraction of
particles in the exit stream of residence time t or
less. This function provides the identification of the
amount of tracer recovered after a certain period of
time. The amount of tracer remaining in the hole is
given by the following equation:
W ðtÞ ¼ 1  FðtÞ ð10Þ
where W(t) is called the washout function.
The primary objective in RTD experiments is the
identification of active and inactive flow. Robinson
and Tester (1986) reviewed the concepts involved in
the analysis of distribution functions, defining: (1) a
‘‘dead zone’’ as that which is completely outside the
boundaries of the flow system, inaccessible to flow of
fluid or any chemical species, (2) ‘‘stagnant zones’’
are zones where mass transfer can occur by molecular
diffusion between the stagnant zones and the active
flow region, and (3) ‘‘sluggish-flow’’ zones, those
 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296 291

mean (also referred as ‘‘relative stagnancy’’). In his

work, propose a new distribution function called U(t)
to represent the internal cumulative residence time
volume-fluid distribution.

X
i Z t
Vj 1
UðtÞ ¼ ¼ tEðtÞdt ð11Þ
j¼1
Vi t̄ 0

U(t) is defined as the volume-fraction of particles in

the system of residence time t or less. This function is
a cumulative property based on volumes rather than
mass. In practice, U(t) together with F(t) [or W(t)] can
be used to quantify a fluid volume fraction inside or
outside the system. Volume fractions are referred to
the system volume.

3. Laboratory trials

To select the type and amount of tracer, a labo-

ratory investigation was undertaken. Four tracers and
two types of drilling muds were tested. The purpose
of the analysis is to evaluate the feasibility to detect
and measure the concentration of the tracer and also
to measure the changes in both physical and rheo-
logical properties of the mud. Tracer concentration
was measured with a mass absorption spectrometer,
and the rheological properties were measured with a Fig. 2. (a) Influence of the addition of tracer A to an oil-based
rotational viscometer at two temperatures, 25 and drilling mud on its rheological properties. (b) Influence of the
50 jC. The first two tracers were discarded because addition of tracer A to an aqueous-based drilling mud on its
rheological properties.
their high degree of miscibility affected their detec-
tion. The other two tracers were labeled A and B for
convenience. negative effect, consequently it was reduced to
Fig. 2a and b shows the effects on viscosity with 50 ppm.
and without tracer (type A) at two temperatures for
two types of muds (oil and water-based muds).
These results were obtained for samples previously 4. Results of field trials
subjected to rolling in accordance with the standard
API-RP-13B in order to simulate mud movement at Two field trials were conducted using one oil well,
the bottom of the well. The tracer concentration limit located in the Mexican northeast marine region.
was determined by trial and error, starting at a Tracer A was injected at a drilling depth of 559 m
concentration of 100 ppm for both types of tracers. for the first trial and at 1151 m for the second trial
This concentration was found adequate in oil-base using tracer B, as shown in Fig. 3. This arrangement
muds for both tracers, A and B, since no significant was necessary in order to avoid interference from the
changes in viscosity were detected in the temperature first tracer. The drilling depth associated with the
range investigated (Fig. 2a). In aqueous-base muds, injection of each tracer as well as other important
however, that level of concentration exhibited a operational variables are listed in Table 1.
292 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296

5. Discussion

Figs. 4 and 5 show the tracer concentration profiles

Fig. 3. Scheme of well geometry during field trials.
Once the tracer impulse was injected and the
response received at the exit stream, drilling mud
sampling was made approximately every minute, at
the exit of the well. The drilling mud also contained
some of the primary elements of the tracers, therefore
the mud was chemically analyzed and its tracer
components were subtracted from the analysis of the
effluent mud and determine the actual amount of
tracer appearing in the mud.
The tracer concentrations in mud samples were
determined with a mass absorption spectrometer at
laboratory conditions. In addition, mud rheology,
salinity, solids content, and filtrates were also obtained
for each sample in order to ascertain the inert behavior
of the tracer.
as a function of the residence-time for the two field
trials. There are four major features to evaluate for an
RTD curve: (1) the minimum residence time, (2) the
average residence time, (3) the reactor dispersion
number and (4) the amount of tracer recovered based
on the cumulative residence time-distribution. In an
ideal flow the minimum residence time and the
average residence time are the same; in addition, the
reactor dispersion number (RDN) is zero, and in this
case the system yields the optimum conditions for
cutting transport. In such ideal flow conditions, both
the cuttings and drilling mud velocities are the same,
however, if the tracer response produces a flat curve
with a large dispersion number is an indication of
sluggish-flow in which the cuttings are retarded and
log behind the mud flow.
The results shown in both trials indicate the pres-
ence of flow channeling in which one portion of the
particles move at a higher velocity than the others,
consequently the total concentration of tracer in the
exit stream produces two curves (bimodal tracer
response). The first region may be defined as an
active volume where particles move at the normal
rate of flow, while the second region represents the
sluggish flow volume where the particles move at a
slower than normal rate of flow and hence have a
larger residence time. Himmelblau and Bischoff
(1987) arbitrarily defined active volume as the area

Table 1
Conditions prevailing in the well during field trials
Variable Trial 1 Trial 2
Initial depth 658 m 1150 m
Drilling depth 20 m 20 m
Rock structure Shale Shale
Mud flow rate 710 gpm 815 gpm
(2.68 m3/min) (3.08 m3/min)
Average drilling rate 0.25 m/min 0.143 m/min
(4 min/m) (7 min/m)
Mud density 1.2 g/cm3 1.2 g/cm3
Bit diameter (Db) 0.4699 m (18.5 in.) Fig. 4. C-curve for the first trial.
 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296
Fig. 5. C-curve for the second trial.
under the curve from t̄ = 0 to t̄ = 2 and the rest of the
area corresponds to dead volume. This criterion is
being employed in the drainage from several metal-
lurgical vessels. In a similar way, in drilling opera-
tions, the relative rate of flow must be evaluated with
respect to the dimensionless mean residence time,
shown in Figs. 6 and 7. At approximately the value
of the mean residence time, there is a separation
between the two regions. The first peak indicates the
normal or average flow rate of the mud. The second
peak, at approximately 1.5 times the mean residence
time in Fig. 6, represents arrival of the retarded
Fig. 6. Normalized mass-fraction of tracer in the exit stream for the
first trial.
293
Fig. 7. Normalized mass-fraction of tracer in the exit stream for the
second trial.
sluggish-flow volume of particles. In Figs. 8 and 9
the cumulative mass-fraction of tracer leaving the well
and the volume-fraction of fluid associated with it, are
shown. These fractions are expressed with respect to
the total mass of tracer injected and the volume of the
well. The mass-fraction of drilling fluid outside the
system corresponding to the mean residence time in
the first trial is 60% and 35% in the second one. These
values can be considered, in principle, as a measure of
the active volume, therefore, dead volume for the
second trial is estimated to be larger than for the first
trial. In addition to this, the calculation of the reactor
dispersion number (RDN) using Eq. (5) indicates a
lower value for the first trial (0.058 vs. 0.067),
Fig. 8. Cumulative residence time distributions for the first trial.
294 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296
Fig. 9. Cumulative residence time distributions for the second trial.
consequently, the active volume and the Peclet num-
ber are larger. The Peclet number corresponding to an
RDN value of 0.058 is 17.11. The dispersion number
is smaller for the second trail, equal to 14.76. Because
of a lower dispersion number and a larger active
volume, the first trial is expected to exhibit a faster
transport of cuttings from the well. In practice, the
average drilling rate for the first trial was 0.25 mm/
min as compared to 0.143 mm/min for the second
trial, therefore the prediction is correct. Table 2 is a
summary of the calculations used for both trials.
It is also observed that the magnitude of the
inactive or dead flow is rather large and some method
should be developed to either decrease its intensity or
eliminate its influence. The origin of this type of flow
is evident in the flow behavior and cuttings concen-
tration profile at the bottom of the well, but, additional
physical modeling is necessary in order to clarify this
phenomena. One conclusion of the previous findings
is that fluid flow during drilling operations is far from
being an ideal flow, this type of flow is characterized
by laminar-plug flow where each particle travels at the
same speed, however in a real situation during dril-
ling, the formation of stagnant zones and flow chan-
Table 2
RTD results for field trials
F(t), r2 t̄, min RDN
% (t = t̄)
Trial 1 60 380 57 0.0584
Trial 2 35 1550 106 0.0678
neling promote deviations from ideality. Clearly this
work is in complete disagreement with the findings
reported by Hall and Hughes described previously.
In practice, two empirical correlations are com-
monly used to assess the drilling capacity of drilling
muds which involve the computation of a transport
ratio; the correlations are used for comparison to
assess the previous results based on RTD analysis.
The conventional form used to evaluate the carry-
ing capacity of drilling fluid is the transport ratio,
which is defined as the ratio between transport veloc-
ity or cuttings velocity (mT) and average velocity in the
annulus or mud velocity (mf). Cuttings are transported
to the surface as a result of the difference in velocities
between the average drilling mud velocity and the slip
velocity of the particles (msl) and it is maximum when
the slip velocity approaches 0:
mT ¼ mf  msl ð12Þ
the transport ratio (T) is defined, as follows:
msl
T ¼1 ð13Þ
mf
Eqs. (12) and (13) require values of the mean
particle size and average velocity of the fluid. Gener-
ally, to compute the slip velocity, empirical correla-
tions such as Moore (1974) and Chien (1969)
correlations are used. For this work, commercial soft-
ware (Maurer Engineering, 1996), involving the cor-
relations mentioned above, was applied. The transport
ratio as well as the carrying capacity of drilling mud
was thus computed. The data required to compute the
carrying capacity of cutting are presented in Table 1.
The formula employed to compute the concentra-
tion of cuttings transported by the mud is:
ROPpD2b
Ca ¼ ð14Þ
4QT
where Ca is the cuttings concentration in the annular
space and ROP is the penetration rate. Table 3 shows
the results of the final values of carrying capacity and
transport ratio. The particle size used for these calcu-
lations was 6.35  10 3 m.
Peclet The results predicted, based on the Chien model,
number should be disregarded since values for a concentra-
17.11 tion of cuttings higher than 10% would have col-
14.76 lapsed the well and this certainly was not observed
 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296 295

Table 3 6. Conclusions
Cutting’s transport ratio and cutting’s concentration based on Chien
and Moore empirical correlations
The application of RTD curves for description of
Trial Slip velocity Transport ratio Cuttings’s concentration
drilling fluid flow and its effect on the transport of
Chien Moore Chien Moore Chien Moore cuttings from the bottom of the well to the surface is an
1 42.71 22.5 0.0797 0.515 20.24 3.13 efficient technique for evaluation of carrying capacity
2 42.98 22.9 0.1932 0.57 4.15 1.40 of the drilling mud and a valuable tool for prediction of
cleanliness during drilling operations. It can be used
for making decisions to improve to improve the
in the trials. In any case, based on these results, the process. The principal results are listed below:
transport ratio is higher in both correlations for the
second trial. This result is in agreement with the 1. The smaller the well dispersion number (RDN) is,
basis of computation of both models, from the the better drilling fluid carrying capacity and
volumetric rate and the flow area, the mean fluid conditions of cleanliness.
velocity is higher in the second trial (0.3021 m/s) 2. The cumulative residence time distributions [ F(t)
compared to the first one (0.2632 m/s). In these and U(t)] in conjunction with the dimensionless
calculations, however, factors such as rotational time can be used to define active flow in the hole.
movement of the drill pipe, centrifugal effects of 3. This criteria based on the injection of tracers was
this movement on cuttings, changes in radial viscos- shown to be reliable and another option for
ity and the momentum transfer from the fluid to the analysis of annular fluid flow during drilling
cuttings are not taken into account. Moreover, cut- operations.
ting transport rates are strongly dependent on particle 4. Current results suggest that fluid flow in the
size and shape, which, in a field situation are both annular space involves the formation of stagnant
irregular and variable. The results obtained in this zones and strong hydrodynamic dispersion, char-
work indicate the presence of a distribution of fluid acterized by a bimodal tracer response.
velocities in the annulus rather than one velocity
profile as predicted using the conventional models. Nomenclature
The physical meaning of the distributions shown in Ca cuttings concentration in the annular space
Figs. 6 and 7 is that there are fluid volumes traveling (%V)
faster than others. The volume fraction of fluid with C tracer concentration (ppm)
low velocity will yield a smaller carrying capacity and D dispersion coefficient (m2/s2)
will affect the overall hole cleaning conditions. With Db bit diameter (m)
respect to relative velocities between drilling fluid and E(t) external residence time distribution ( –)
cuttings it is possible to conclude that the larger the F(t) external cumulative residence time distribu-
sluggish-volume fraction of fluid, the lower is the tion (– )
carrying capacity of a drilling mud. The last statement L length (m)
explains the conclusion obtained previously with Pe Peclet number
regard with to better performance of the first trial, Q mud flow rate (m3/s)
which are contrary to the predictions obtained from RDN reactor dispersion number (– )
Eq. (13) using the Moore and Chien correlations. ROP rate of penetration in a drilling operation
The principal advantage of the RTD methodology is (m/min)
that RTD curves represent the sum of all factors T transport ratio (– )
affecting the fluid flow and therefore, a more realistic t time (s)
explanation of macroscopic phenomena occurring in t̄ mean residence time (s)
drilling fluid flow. From this, it is possible to explain u mean fluid velocity (m/s)
the fact that the criteria based on the RDN provides a V volume
strong basis for prediction of possible disturbances due W(t) washout function ( –)
to drilling fluid performance during drilling operations. x length in the axial direction x (m)
296 H.H. Rodrı́guez et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 41 (2004) 287–296

z dimensionless length (– ) Hall, C.A, Hughes, T.L., 1993. Ion chromatography tracer experi-
u dimensionless time (– ) ments during drilling. Proc. SPE 25178, 281 – 289.
Hall, H.N., Thomson, H., Nuss, F., 1950. The ability of drilling
mf average velocity in the annulus mud to lift bit cuttings. Trans. AIME 189, 35 – 46.
mT transport velocity Himmelblau, D., Bischoff, K., 1987. Process Analysis and Simu-
msl slip velocity of the particles lation: Deterministic System. Wiley, pp. 59 – 88.
j2 variance Hopkin, E.A., 1967. Factors affecting cuttings removal during ro-
tary drilling. J. Pet. Technol., 807 – 814.
U(t) internal cumulative residence time distribu-
Iyoho, A.W., Horeth, J.M., Veenkant, R.L., 1988. A computer mod-
tion el for hole cleaning analysis. J. Pet. Technol., 1183 – 1192.
Levenspiel, O., 1972. Chemical Reaction Engineering, 2nd ed.
Wiley, New York, USA.
Levenspiel, O., Smith, W.K., 1957. Notes on the diffusion type
Acknowledgements model for the longitudinal mixing of fluids in flow. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 6, 227 – 233.
PEMEX. http://www.pemex.com/informes.
The authors acknowledge the support of the PEMEX, 1998. Statistical yearbook.
technicians of the drilling fluids laboratory at Instituto Maurer Engineering, 1996. Hidraulics Model, Version 3.1.
Mexicano del Petroleo (IMP). We appreciate the Moore, P.I., 1974. Drilling Practices Manual. Petroleum Publishing,
continued support for collection of industrial data Tulsa.
Ramadan, A., Skalle, P., Johansen, S.T., Svein, J., Saasen, A., 2001.
from Pemex Exploration and Production (PEP) –
Mechanistic model for cuttings removal from solid bed in in-
Drilling Engineering Division, especially to manager clined channels. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 30, 129 – 141 (Sep.).
Humberto Castro. Robinson, B.A., Tester, J.W., 1986. Characterization of flow mal-
distribution using inlet – outlet tracer techniques: an application
of internal residence time distributions. Chem. Eng. Sci. 41,
469 – 483.
References Saeed, B.A., 1988. Development of models for drilling cuttings
transport in inclined wells based on deposition critical velocity
Chien, Sze Foo, 1969. Annular velocity for rotary drilling operations. concept. MS thesis. University of Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Rock Mechanics. Proc. SPE, vol. 2786. January, Austin, TX, Walker, R.E., Mayers, T.M., 1975. Design of muds for carrying
USA. capacity. J. Pet. Technol., 893 – 900.
Danckwerts, D.V., 1953. Continuous flow systems. Chem. Eng. Sci. Williams, C.E., Bruce, G.H., 1951. Carrying capacity of drilling
2, 1 – 13. muds. Trans. AIME 192, 111 – 120.