Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2021 Feb 9;6(7):4793–4799. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c05699

Effect of Perlite Particles on Barite Cement Properties

Stephen Adjei †, Badr S Bageri †, Salaheldin Elkatatny ‡,*, Abdulrauf Adebayo §,*
PMCID: PMC7905795  PMID: 33644587

Abstract

graphic file with name ao0c05699_0012.jpg

Conventional heavy-weight oil and gas well cement systems formulated with barite exhibit high viscosities. Additionally, the heavy-weight powder tends to settle, causing density variation and disruption in the porosity of the hardened cement cores. Studies have shown that such problems can be mitigated by controlling the particle size distribution of the cement system. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of perlite powder particles on the fluid and hardened properties of barite-based cement systems. Barite heavy-weight cement slurries containing 0, 1, 2, and 3% by weight of dry cement (BWOC) of perlite powder were prepared. The rheological study was performed at a bottomhole circulating temperature (BHCT) of 150 °F and ambient pressure. An ultrasonic cement analyzer (UCA) and a high-temperature–high-pressure (HTHP) curing chamber were used to cure samples for 24 h at a bottomhole static temperature (BHST) of 292 °F and pressure of 3000 psi. Porosity measurements were performed using the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) technique. The results indicate that the incorporation of perlite powder into conventional barite-based heavy-weight cement slurry causes modifications in the properties of the systems. In general, the plastic viscosity decreases, while the yield point and gel strength increase with increasing perlite concentration. The reduction in plastic viscosity also reduces the pump pressure, while the increase in yield point and gel strength reduces particle sedimentation. Additionally, the compressive strength and tensile strength of hardened cement increase, while the wait-on-cement time decreases. NMR studies indicate that perlite reduces the porosity variation that exists in conventional barite-based cement systems due to the formation of stable cement systems.

1. Introduction

Oil-well cementing is a multipurpose operation, where cement slurries prepared by admixing water, cement, and various additives are pumped downhole to isolate producing intervals, protect the casing, carry out remedial operations, control circulation losses, or abandon the well.1−4

Various admixtures are used in the cement slurry to improve its plastic and solid properties.5 Weighting materials are additives with a specific gravity greater than that of cement.6 When the objective is to cement unstable and high-pressure intervals such as those encountered in deep oil and gas wells, weighting materials are used to increase the density of neat cement systems to 17.5 ppg and above.7−10 Commonly used weighting materials include barite, manganese tetroxide, ilmenite, and hematite.6,9−12

Research in the area of heavy-weight cement has been focused on performance assessment of new weighting materials and optimization of conventional heavy-weight systems. Al-Yami et al.13 proposed a new high-density cement formula composed of two weighting materials, iron oxide and manganese tetroxide, and other admixtures for use in gas-bearing wells. The performance of the slurry evaluated as per the standardized procedure improved when these weighting materials were combined than being used individually in formulations.

Saasen and Log12 studied the influence of dust collected from the ilmenite processing plant on cement rheology. The composition of the material suggested that it would have high density and could be an alternative to barite; however, the findings suggested that the effect of the material on the flow behavior of cement is unsatisfactory. Johnston and Senese14 proposed a water-dispersible additive, with a density comparable to that of hematite as a substitute weighting material. The material was obtained as a residue in the production of ferromanganese. Tests showed that the material does not settle out. As indicated by the workers, the reduction in sedimentation, cost-effectiveness, and ease of handling makes this material a better alternative to hematite.

An evaluation of the impact of different weighting additives on the properties of cement composite was performed by Ahmed et al.9 Different heavy-weight cement systems were prepared at 18 ppg with iron oxide (hematite), ilmenite, and barite. The study indicated that the ilmenite-based cement system has less variation in density and, due to its small particle size distribution, produced excellent results. The barite-based cement, on the other hand, showed the most variation in density and lowest strength. Al-Bagoury et al.8 reported that when the particle size of weighting materials is reduced, settling-out is eliminated and the properties of the cement system are enhanced. The authors studied the effect of micronized ilmenite with a median size of 5 μm on slurry behavior. It was observed that the small size of ilmenite prevented settling and allowed for enhancement in rheology and strength.

According to Caritey and Brady,15 in very high temperature and pressure conditions, some heavy-weight additives (hematite, manganese, and titanium oxides) become reactive, adversely affecting the strength and permeability of the hardened cement matrix. However, this phenomenon was not observed with barite. Also, investigations have revealed that the existing heavy-weight cement systems have poor rheology.8 Other challenges encountered in the use of conventional heavy-weight cement systems include high solid volume and high viscosity, making it difficult to blend and pump them.10,14 Additionally, weighting materials disrupt cement homogeneity as a result of settling.9 When settling occurs, the ability of the slurry to control gas migration reduces.13

The above discussions highlight the amount of research work that has been done in search of stable heavy-weight cement systems. The objective of the current study is to investigate the effects of perlite, an aluminosilicate material, on the stability, rheology, and strength of barite-based cement systems.

1.1. Applications of Perlite in Cement and Drilling Fluids

Perlite is a silica-based volcanic glass composed of high moisture content, about 2–5%.16,17 When heated at temperatures in the range of 1650–1832 °F, the water vaporizes and the rock pops, forming white popcorn-like shapes.17−19 Its new form, termed expanded perlite, is a lightweight material with the pozzolanic property.17−21 The incorporation of perlite in cement-based composites improves workability and enhances thermal insulation.22,23 Besides its use in formulating low-density cement systems,24,25 perlite is also used as a bridging agent in both mud and cement systems.26−28 According to a study on the effect of perlite powder on filtration properties of a barite-based mud system performed by Bageri et al.,28 the inclusion of the material increased the yield point and hence the ability to effectively transport cuttings and reduced the mud cake thickness and volume of the filtrate.

According to Al-Bagoury et al.,8 the particle size of cement admixtures is key in formulating a high-performance cement system. This study seeks to study the effect of perlite particles on the properties of a barite-based cement system. It is a recommended practice to undertake preliminary studies to assess the impact of any additive on the plastic and hardened properties of a cement system before field applications. The testing procedure and properties such as rheology, wait-on-cement (WOC) times, density variation, porosity, and strength would be investigated following API standards.29,30

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Effect of Perlite Powder on Rheological Behavior

The rheological parameters plastic viscosity, yield point, and gel strength of cement systems are presented in Figures 1–3, respectively. The fluid viscosity is an essential property that controls the pump pressure.31 As observed in Figure 1, the plastic viscosity of the barite-based system decreased with increasing perlite concentration. The addition of 3% perlite reduced the plastic viscosity by 39%. The addition of 1% perlite had a lower viscosity than the 0% perlite system.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Plastic viscosity for barite-based cement.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Gel strength for barite-based cement.

The yield point is a very important flow parameter. It controls the attractive forces between particles and describes the lowest stress needed to cause fluid deformation.32,33 A high yield point is ideal as it improves the carrying capacity of the slurry.34 However, this results in an increase in the initial pump pressure as the yield point also indicates the force to overcome to start a flow.35 The yield point of the barite-based heavy-weight cement slurries increased with increasing perlite content (Figure 2). The yield point increased by about 242%, 531%, and 958% for 1%, 2%, and 3% additions, respectively.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Yield point for barite-based cement.

The gel strength, on the other hand, represents the ability of the cement system to develop attractive forces under static conditions, and it controls fluid migration up the annulus.36 The plot (Figure 3) shows that the gel strength increased with increasing perlite content. For instance, the cement composite consisting of 3% perlite had an increase of 82% in the 10 s and 69.38% in the 10 min gel strength.

These results show that the addition of perlite powder to barite cement systems results in the modification of rheological behavior. The plastic viscosity decreases, while the yield point and gel strength of the slurries increase with increasing perlite concentration.

2.2. Effect of Perlite Powder on Strength

The UCA helps monitor strength development with time, especially at an early age. The 24 h compressive strength of the slurries is shown in Figure 4. The experiment was conducted at a bottomhole static pressure (BHST) of 292 °F and pressure of 3000 psi. The study showed that the addition of perlite powder improved the compressive strength of set cement. The 24 h sonic strength of the barite-based slurry increased from 48.05 MPa for 0% perlite powder to 59.38 MPa for 3% perlite powder, representing a 23.58% increase in strength.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Uniaxial compressive strength.

Figure 5 compares the tensile strength of the 3% perlite systems to that of the control cement matrix. The incorporation of perlite particles enhanced tensile strength. The tensile strength of the base barite containing 0% perlite was 3.31 MPa and that for the 3% perlite system was 4.75 MPa. The increase in mechanical properties can be attributed to the extra cementitious materials produced through the pozzolanic activity of perlite.21

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Tensile strength.

The time to achieve a compressive strength of 500 psi for the slurries is presented in Table 1. This is the wait-on-cement time, which indicates the time allowed for the cement to set and develop sufficient strength to support the casing before drilling out the casing shoe.37 This time could vary from hours to days depending on various conditions such as field practice and depth of cement placement.38,39 The addition of 3% perlite powder to the barite slurry resulted in a general reduction in WOC time.

Table 1. Wait-on-Cement Time (h/min) to Reach 500 psi.

sample 0% perlite 3% perlite
barite-based slurry 5:22 4:58
Open in a new tab

2.3. Effect of Perlite Powder on Density Variation

Figure 6 shows the contrast in density along with the vertical orientation of cylindrical cement samples formed with the slurries under study. These cores were demolded after curing for 24 h under temperature and pressure conditions of 292 °F and 3000 psi, respectively. Each core is represented by three different sections: top, middle, and bottom. The density of each section was computed after drying the sections to a constant weight. The graph also shows the percentage of density contrast between the top and bottom of each cement core. The degree of density variation correlates with the heterogeneity of the cement system. The lower the density variation (DV) between the top and bottom of the cylindrical cement cores, the more homogeneous the system.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Densities of the top, middle, and bottom sections of cylindrical cement samples.

The results indicate that the conventional barite system has a high settling tendency (25%). This is because of high specific gravity (4.48 g/cm3), which promotes particle sedimentation. However, the percentage variation between the top and bottom samples with 3% perlite powder decreased to 15%. It was obvious that the harsh conditions of high pressure and high temperature could weaken the performance of viscosity additives, which led to a severe reduction in the suspension capacity. Meanwhile, the capability of the perlite particles to adapt and expand in such conditions,28 in addition to their strong dispersion in these conditions, inevitably sustained the viscosity features (yield point) of the cement, thereby raising the sag stability of the cement.

2.4. Effect of Perlite Powder on Porosity

The NMR technique was used to evaluate the impact of the perlite particles on porosity. The test was performed on 4 inch length cylindrical cement cores. The cement cylinder was cut into three sections (top, middle, and bottom) to assess the deviation in the porosity through the cement column. The NMR measurement of the middle section was used as a reference sample for the other two sections.

The NMR pore size distribution function (PDF) and cumulative distribution function (CDF) results of the 4 inch length cement samples, 0% perlite (here tagged 0% PPA) and 3% perlite systems, are shown in Figure 7. Continuous lines represent the PDF, while broken lines represent the CDF. The porosity distribution after adding the perlite particles showed only a slight increment in porosity, with a porosity of 29.7% for the 0% perlite and 30.7% for the 3% perlite systems.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

NMR T2 relaxation for 4 inch length cylindrical samples.

The difference between the PDF and CDF curves for the three sections of the base cement sample (0% PPA) is conspicuous, as shown in Figure 8, which presented the difficulty of formulating the high-density cement with a stable sagging index. This observation confirmed a large density variation between these three sections of the base sample. However, the incorporation of perlite reduced particle sedimentation to a greater extent, Figure 9.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Open in a new tab

NMR T2 relaxation for the cement base sample (0% perlite) at three different sections (top, middle, and bottom).

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Open in a new tab

NMR T2 relaxation for the cement base sample (3% perlite) at three different sections (top, middle, and bottom).

Figure 6 shows that the heavy material accumulated in the lower section and hence had a higher density compared to the middle and top sections. As a result, the porosity of the bottom section was lower than that of the other two sections. For the control sample containing 0% perlite, the increase in the porosity of the upper section with respect to the middle section was 21.5%, while the reduction in the bottom section porosity with respect to the middle section was 25.8%, as shown in Table 2. This extreme difference between the three sections’ porosity was controlled by adding a 3% concentration of perlite particles. The difference in the upper and middle section porosities reduced significantly down to 4.9% as shown in Table 2. Also, the percentage reduction in porosity for the bottom section in comparison to the middle section was even much lower (3.31%). These observations could be attributed to the fact that adding a 3% concentration of perlite particles promoted suspension and carrying capacity of cement as proven earlier.

Table 2. Porosity Measurement Using NMR for the Top, Middle, and Bottom Sections of the Cement Cylinder.

  porosity % difference in porosity with respect to middle section
perlite concentration (%) 0 3 0 3
top section 59.56 35.69 21.57 4.89
middle section 37.99 30.80    
bottom section 12.11 27.49 25.88 3.31
Open in a new tab

3. Conclusions

The effect of perlite powder on heavy-weight barite cement was studied. The following conclusions are drawn.

  • 1

    The plastic viscosity of barite heavy-weight cement decreased with increasing perlite powder concentration, while the yield point and the gel strength increased.

  • 2

    The addition of perlite powder improved the compressive strength of set cement. The 24 h sonic strength of the barite-based slurry increased from 48.05 MPa for 0% perlite powder to 59.38 MPa for 3% perlite powder, representing a 23.58% increase in strength.

  • 3

    The wait-on-cement time decreased with the addition of perlite powder.

  • 4

    Perlite particles reduced the settling tendencies of barite powder due to its improvement in viscosity, yield point, and gel strength.

4. Materials and Method

Heavy-weight cement slurry was prepared with Class G cement, silica flour, barite, and perlite. Table 3 shows the elemental composition of these materials. The key elements in barite are barium, sulfur, and silicon. A small amount of potassium, aluminum, and iron is also present in the barite particles. Class G cement contains about 74 wt % calcium and a substantial amount of silicon and iron. Silicon and aluminum are the major elements in perlite, while silica flour is predominantly silicon.

Table 3. Elemental Composition of Raw Materials (wt %).

samples Na Al Cl Ca Ti Si S K Fe Ba
barite   1.96       5.18 15.84 1.34 0.97 69.36
cement   2.16   74.06 0.31 12.52     9.71  
perlite   10.31   1.74 0.53 58.73     1.95  
silica flour   0.61   0.27 0.14 98.84     0.06  
Open in a new tab

The plots of particle size distributions (PSDs) of the raw materials are shown in Figure 10. The median size values, D50, used to characterize the powders are given in Table 4. The figure and table show that silica flour has the smallest size distribution with a median value of 12.44 μm, while perlite has coarse grains with a median size of 41.9 μm. The D50 values for barite and Class G cement are 15.6 and 25.45 μm, respectively.

Figure 10.

Figure 10

Open in a new tab

Particle size distribution of raw materials.

Table 4. Summary of PSD.

description, μm silica flour barite cement perlite
D50 12.44 15.60 25.45 41.9
Open in a new tab

In this study, barite-based heavy-weight cement systems were prepared with 0, 1, 2, and 3% of perlite powder. The cement, silica flour, and weighting material were dry-mixed and added to the water phase containing a fluid loss additive, retarder, and defoamer. The mix was admixed within 15 s while stirring at 4000 rpm and additionally 35 s at 12 000 rpm.

Table 5 presents the various proportions of admixtures used in formulating the heavy-weight systems. An atmospheric consistometer was used to condition the slurries at a bottomhole circulating temperature (BHCT) of 150 °F for 20 min. Afterward, the rheological behavior of the slurries was determined at 150 °F and ambient pressure conditions using a Grace M3M600 viscometer and M3600DAQ software.

Table 5. Mix Proportions.

component names BWOC (%) weight (gm)
cement class G 100 600
silica flour SSA-1 35 210
weighting material barite 32.87 197.22
fluid loss Halad-413 0.5 3
dispersant CFR-3 0.25 1.5
retarder H-12 1.5 9
water distilled water 44 264
defoamer D-Air 3000L 4.70 × 107 2.82 × 106
new material perlite 0 0
1 6
2 12
3 18
Open in a new tab

An ultrasonic cement analyzer (UCA) and a high-temperature–high-pressure (HTHP) curing chamber were used to cure samples for 24 h at a bottomhole static temperature (BHST) of 292 °F and pressure of 3000 psi for compressive strength analysis. The tensile strength, porosity, and settling of the weighting materials were measured using the hardened cylindrical cement cores.

The porosity and pore size distribution of the cylindrical cement plugs were measured using a low-magnetic-field (2 MHz) NMR relaxometry system “Geospec rock analyzer” from Oxford instruments, United Kingdom. In NMR relaxometry, the surface relaxation time, T2 (ms), of the fluids saturating a porous medium was correlated with the pore size. The NMR signal coming from the saturated medium decreased exponentially with time.

A Laplace inversion of the exponential decay function will give the probability density function (PDF) of the T2 values in the porous medium. Each T2 value has a one-to-one correspondence with the pore sizes in the medium such that the PDF of T2 represents the pore size distribution of the porous medium. The cumulative density function (CDF) plot is a summation of the different pores’ volume (or porosity) and peaking at a value representing the total porosity or pore volume of the rock.40 The pore size distribution function (PDF) and cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the cement sample were measured at three different sections (at the top, middle, and bottom) to compare the porosity homogeneity through the same sample.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM) for employing its resources in conducting this work. An acknowledgment is also due to the BYK company for providing the perlite material, in memorial to Dr. Hisham Nasr-El-Din, Ph.D. advisor of Salaheldin Elkatatny.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed to all aspects of this manuscript and have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Harestad K.; Herigstad T. P.; Torsvoll A.; Nødland N. E.; Saasen A. Optimization of Balanced-Plug Cementing. SPE Drill. Completion 1997, 12, 168–173. 10.2118/35084-PA. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Toor I. A.Problems in Squeeze Cementing, In Middle East Oil Technical Conference and Exhibition Manama, Bahrain, 14–17 March, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1983.
  3. Nelson E.Well Cementing; Newnes: 1990. [Google Scholar]
  4. Atashnezhad A.; Coryell T.; Hareland G.. Barite Nanoparticles Reduce the Cement Fluid Loss. In SPE Oklahoma City Oil and Gas Symposium Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA. 27–31 March, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2017.
  5. Broni-Bediako E. Oil Well Cement Additives: A Review of the Common Types. Oil Gas Res. 2016, 02, 1–7. 10.4172/2472-0518.1000112. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ezzat A. M.; Jennings S. S.; Al-Abdulgader K. A.; Al-Hammad M. A.. Application of Very Heavy Mud and Cement in a Wildcat. In Proceedings of IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference APDT, 2000; pp 511–520.
  7. Wang F.; Tan X.; Wang R.; Sun M.; Wang L.; Liu J. High Temperature and High Pressure Rheological Properties of High-Density Water-Based Drilling Fluids for Deep Wells. Pet. Sci. 2012, 9, 354–362. 10.1007/s12182-012-0219-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Al-Bagoury M.; Urraca M.; Fattah T.; Wang B.; Asa E.. Micronized Weighting Agents for Ultra-High-Density Oil Well Cementing, In AADE National Technical Conference and Exhibition held at the Hilton Denver City Center, Denver, Colorado, April 9–10, 2019.
  9. Ahmed A.; Mahmoud A. A.; Elkatatny S.; Chen W. The Effect of Weighting Materials on Oil-Well Cement Properties While Drilling Deep Wells. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6776 10.3390/su11236776. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Brothers L. E.; DeBlanc F. X. New Cement Formulation Helps Solve Deep Cementing Problems. J. Pet. Technol. 1989, 41, 611–614. 10.2118/17181-PA. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. American Petroleum Institute . Oil-Well Cementing Practices in the United States; Division of Production, 1959. [Google Scholar]
  12. Saasen A.; Log P. A. The Effect of Ilmenite Plant Dusts on Rheological Properties of Class G Oil Well Cement Slurries. Cem. Concr. Res. 1996, 26, 707–715. 10.1016/S0008-8846(96)85008-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Al-Yami A. S.; Nasr-El-Din H. A.; Al-Humaidi A. S.. An Innovative Cement Formula To Prevent Gas-Migration Problems in HT/HP Wells. In SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry The Woodlands,Texas, 20–22 April, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2009.
  14. Johnston N. C.; Senese M.. New Approach to High-Density Cement Slurries for Cementing High- Pressure, High-Temperature Wells. In European Petroleum Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1992.
  15. Caritey J. P.; Brady J.. Performance of Thermal Cements with Different Weighting Materials. In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 5–7 March, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2013; pp 1444–1452.
  16. Sengul O.; Azizi S.; Karaosmanoglu F.; Tasdemir M. A. Effect of Expanded Perlite on the Mechanical Properties and Thermal Conductivity of Lightweight Concrete. Energy Build. 2011, 43, 671–676. 10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.11.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Karakoç M. B. Effect of Cooling Regimes on Compressive Strength of Concrete with Lightweight Aggregate Exposed to High Temperature. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 41, 21–25. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.11.104. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kramar D.; Bindiganavile V. Mechanical Properties and Size Effects in Lightweight Mortars Containing Expanded Perlite Aggregate. Mater. Struct. Constr. 2011, 44, 735–748. 10.1617/s11527-010-9662-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Urhan S. Alkali Silica and Pozzolanic Reactions in Concrete. Part 2: Observations on Expanded Perlite Aggregate Concretes. Cem. Concr. Res. 1987, 17, 465–477. 10.1016/0008-8846(87)90010-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Yu L.-H.; Ou H.; Lee L. L. Investigation on Pozzolanic Effect of Perlite Powder in Concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2003, 33, 73–76. 10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00924-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Erdem T. K.; Meral Ç.; Tokyay M.; Erdoğan T. Y. Use of Perlite as a Pozzolanic Addition in Producing Blended Cements. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2007, 29, 13–21. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2006.07.018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Lanzón M.; García-Ruiz P. A. Lightweight Cement Mortars: Advantages and Inconveniences of Expanded Perlite and Its Influence on Fresh and Hardened State and Durability. Constr. Build. Mater. 2008, 22, 1798–1806. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.05.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Singh M.; Garg M. Perlite-Based Building Materials - A Review of Current Applications. Constr. Build. Mater. 1991, 5, 75–81. 10.1016/0950-0618(91)90004-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Philippacopoulos A. J.; Berndt M. L.. Mechanical Response and Characterization of Well Cements. Paper Presented SPE Annual Technical Conference Exhibition, 29 September–October. SPE-77755-MS, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  25. Pike W. J. New Technology Improves Cement-Slurry Design. J. Pet. Technol. 1997, 49, 844–845. 10.2118/0897-0844-JPT. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Saunders C. D.; Nussbaumer F. W.. Trend in Use of Low-Weight Cement Slurries. In Drilling and Production Practice, 1 January, New York; American Petroleum Institute, 1952. [Google Scholar]
  27. Murphy W. C.; Smith D. K. A Critique of Filler Cements. J. Pet. Technol. 1967, 19, 1011–1016. 10.2118/1753-PA. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Bageri B. S.; Adebayo A. R.; Al Jaberi J.; Patil S. Effect of Perlite Particles on the Filtration Properties of High-Density Barite Weighted Water-Based Drilling Fluid. Powder Technol. 2020, 360, 1157–1166. 10.1016/j.powtec.2019.11.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. API Spec 10 B2 . Recommended Practice for Testing Well Cements; 2nd ed., 2019. [Google Scholar]
  30. API Spec 10A. Specification for Cements and Materials for Well Cementing; American Petroleum Institute, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  31. Abbas G.; Irawan S.; Memon K. R.; Khan J. Application of Cellulose-Based Polymers in Oil Well Cementing. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2020, 10, 319–325. 10.1007/s13202-019-00800-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Defosse C.Cement Slurry Compositions for Cementing Oil Wells, Adapted to Control Free Water and Corresponding Cementing Process, U.S. Patent US4778528A1983.
  33. Clark P. E.; Sundaram L.; Balakrishnan M.. Yield Points in Oilfield Cement Slurries, In SPE Eastern Regional Meeting Columbus, Ohio, 31 October–2 November, Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE): Columbus, Ohio, 1990.
  34. Elkatatny S. Development of a Homogenous Cement Slurry Using Synthetic Modified Phyllosilicate While Cementing HPHT Wells. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1923 10.3390/su11071923. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Murtaza M.; Mahmoud M.; Tariq Z. Experimental Investigation of a Novel, Efficient, and Sustainable Hybrid Silicate System in Oil and Gas Well Cementing. Energy Fuels 2020, 34, 7388. 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c01001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Sabins F. L.; Maki V.. Acoustic Method for Determining the Static Gel Strength of a Cement Slurry. U.S. Patent US5,992,2231999.
  37. Maier L. F. Understanding Surface Casing Waiting-on-Cement Time. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 1965, 4, 140–147. 10.2118/65-03-05. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Ridha S.; Irawan S.; Ariwahjoedi B. Strength Prediction of Class G Oilwell Cement During Early Ages by Electrical Conductivity. J. Pet. Explor. Prod. Technol. 2013, 3, 303–311. 10.1007/s13202-013-0075-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Farris R. F. Method for Determining Minimum Waiting-on-Cement Time. Trans. AIME 1946, 165, 175–188. 10.2118/946175-G. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Adebayo A. R.; Bageri B. S.; Al Jaberi J.; Salin R. B. A Calibration Method for Estimating Mudcake Thickness and Porosity Using NMR Data. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2020, 195, 107582 10.1016/j.petrol.2020.107582. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES