Fluid Flow in Coiled Tubing: A Literature

Review and Experimental Investigation

Y. ZHOU, S.N. SHAH
University of Oklahoma

Abstract Newtonian Fluid

This paper presents a comprehensive review of the theoretical
and experimental studies of steady, fully-developed flow of
Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids in coiled tubing. The flow
mechanisms and characteristics of secondary flow and its effect
on the flow resistance have been discussed. Available friction
factor correlations have been analyzed and evaluated for accura-
cy and applicability. Compared with its counterpart of
Newtonian fluid, the flow of non-Newtonian fluid in coiled
pipes has remained much less studied. The paper also briefly
describes the recent development of full-scale experimental
investigations on the frictional pressure losses of various fluids
in coiled tubing.
Governing Equations
Figure 1 shows the toroidal coordinate system that has been
used in studying fluid flow in coiled pipes. We denote the radius
of the pipe by a, and the radius of the coil as R. C is the centre of
the pipe cross section, and θ is the angle that the cross-section
makes with a fixed axial plane. OZ is the axis of the coil. Assume
the flow is in the direction of increasing θ under a driving pres-
sure gradient. The velocity components u, v, and w are in the
directions of r, α, and θ, respectively.
The equations of momentum and continuity(2, 3) are:

∂u v ∂v v 2 w 2 sin α ∂ ⎛ p⎞
u + − − = − ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
∂r r ∂α r R + r sin α ∂r ⎝ ρ ⎠
Introduction ⎛1 ∂ cos α ⎞⎛ ∂v v 1 ∂u ⎞
−υ⎜ + ⎟⎜ + − ⎟
Coiled tubing (CT) has been used in well drilling, completion, ⎝ r ∂α R + r sin α ⎠⎝ ∂r r r ∂α ⎠ ........................................................(1)
stimulation, wellbore cleanout, and other operations in the petrole-
um industry(1). Accurate prediction of frictional pressure losses
when pumping fluids through coiled tubing has remained a chal-
∂v v ∂v uv w 2 cos α 1 ∂ ⎛ p⎞
lenge in hydraulics design, mainly due to the lack of adequate u + + − =− ⎜ ⎟
∂r r ∂α r R + r sin α r ∂α ⎝ ρ ⎠
friction loss correlations and proper understanding of the complex
flow phenomena of fluids (especially non-Newtonian fluids) in ⎛∂ sin α ⎞⎛ ∂v v 1 ∂u ⎞
+υ⎜ + ⎟⎜ + − ⎟
coiled tubing. Because of the effect of centrifugal forces, sec- ⎝ ∂r R + r sin α ⎠⎝ ∂r r r ∂α ⎠ ..............................................................(2)
ondary flow occurs when a fluid flows through a coiled tubing. It
is a known fact that flow in coiled tubing encounters more pres-
sure losses than in straight tubing. It is believed that secondary
flow causes the excessive friction losses. Since the classic work of
Dean(2, 3), the flow of Newtonian fluids in coiled pipes has been
extensively studied; in contrast, the flow of non-Newtonian fluid
in coiled pipes has remained relatively unstudied.
The objective of this paper is to review both theoretical and
experimental studies on the flow of Newtonian and non-
Newtonian fluids in coiled pipes. The mathematical formulation
and the general characteristics of the secondary flow are first
introduced in order to prepare for discussion of various theoretical
studies. The available friction factor correlations will be compared
and evaluated for their accuracy and applicability.
A recent increase of coiled tubing applications has been driving
the research activities of coiled tubing hydraulics using full-scale
experimental facilities. This paper will also present recent devel-
opments in those experimental investigations.
It is hoped that this comprehensive review and the experimen-
tal results will provide valuable information for those interested in
FIGURE 1: Toroidal coordinate system.
the application and research of coiled tubing hydraulics.
PEER REVIEWED PAPER (“REVIEW AND PUBLICATION PROCESS” CAN BE FOUND ON OUR WEB SITE)

52 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

∂w v ∂w uw sin α vw cos α 1 ∂ ⎛ p⎞
+ + + =− ⎜ ⎟
∂r r ∂α R + r sin α R + r sin α R + r sin α ∂θ ⎝ ρ ⎠

⎡⎛ ∂ 1 ⎞⎛ ∂w w sin α ⎞ 1 ∂ ⎛ 1 ∂w w cos α ⎞⎤
+ υ⎢⎜ + ⎟⎜ + ⎟+ ⎜ + ⎟⎥
⎣⎝ ∂r r ⎠⎝ ∂r R + r sin α ⎠ r ∂α ⎝ r ∂α R + r sin α ⎠⎦
.......................(3)

∂u u u sin α 1 ∂v v cos α
+ + + + =0
∂r r R + r sin α r ∂α R + r sin α ..............................................(4)

The above equations, plus adequate boundary conditions,

define a steady flow problem in a coiled tube. If the flow is
assumed to be fully-developed, then u, v, and w will be indepen-
dent of θ and the pressure gradient in the axial direction (θ) will
be constant:

1 ∂p
− = G (constant)
R ∂θ ...........................................................................(5)

Obviously, Equations (1) to (4) form a coupled, non-linear

problem and are difficult to solve analytically without invoking
simplifying assumptions.

FIGURE 2: Streamlines of secondary flow(2).

Dean’s Work and Dean Number
The pioneering work of Dean(2, 3) on the theoretical aspect of
the coiled tube flow problem has been of significant importance in
Characteristics of Secondary Flow
most recent developments. By assuming that the curvature of the The unique feature of the flow structure in coiled pipes is the
pipe is small, that is a/R is small, and that the flow is slow motion, secondary flow that is superimposed on the primary flow in the
Dean simplified the governing equations [Equations (1) to (5)]. axial direction. Mathematically, the cause of the secondary flow is
Then, using a successive approximation method, Dean obtained due to the two centrifugal force terms in the momentum equations
an analytical solution, which is essentially an approximate solu- for the r and α directions. Since the centrifugal force is perpendic-
tion obtained through perturbation over the Poiseuille flow of ular to the axial direction, there is no such term in the θ momen-
straight pipe. tum equation.
As for the effect of pipe curvature on the flux, Dean’s first Figure 2 illustrates the flow lines in the cross-section of a
paper(2) failed to show that the relation between pressure gradient coiled pipe from Dean’s solution which indicate that, in the cross-
and the flow rate is dependent of the curvature. In his second section, the secondary flow streamlines form a pair of symmetri-
paper(3), he derived the following flux expression: cal vortices, which have been called Dean vortices by later
researchers. Dean(2) pointed out that the secondary flows of the
⎛ K ⎞
2 4 spiral form are superimposed on the axial primary flow.
(0.03058) + ⎛⎝ ⎞⎠ (0.01195)
Qc K
= 1− Experimental observations of the secondary flow phenomena
Qs ⎝ 576 ⎠ 576 ....................................(6) date back to 1910 when Eustice(7, 8) did experiments of water flow
in curved pipes. Eustice(7, 8) used filaments of six different colours
where K is a dynamic similarity parameter and will be discussed
to trace the paths of secondary flow streamlines and observed “the
below. Equation (6) is valid only for very small K values.
extremely beautiful effects due to the interacting of the coloured
One important contribution of Dean’s work is the introduction bands.”
of non-dimensional parameter K, which is called Dean number. Figures 3a and 3b show the axial velocity profiles and contours
According to Dean’s original definition, in a cross-section of a coiled pipe obtained by Adler(9). The curva-
ture ratio was a/R = 1/100, and Reynolds number NRe = 2050. It
2W02 a 3 can be seen that the maximum axial velocity was shifted to the
K=
υ2 R ............................................................................................(7) outer side of the coil and the velocity profile is very different from
the parabolic profile for straight pipe.
where W0 is the maximum axial velocity in the cross-section. Figures 4 and 5 show the theoretical results of McConalogue
There have been several versions of definition of Dean number(4, and Srivastava(6), and Collins and Dennis(10), for Dean number D
5), but most researchers prefer the following definition:
= 96, 481, 2,000, and 5,000. These results show that as Dean
number increases, the secondary flow becomes more confined to a
1
⎛ a ⎞2 thin area near the pipe wall. This characteristic supports the basic
N De = N Re ⎜ ⎟ assumption of the boundary layer approximation methods.
⎝ R ⎠ ......................................................................................(8)

It can be shown that K and NDe are related by K = 2(NDe)2. Theoretical Methods
Another definition of Dean number(6) is: The complexity of the flow geometries and the equations of
fluid flow in coiled pipes attracted the attention of theoreticians as
⎛ 2 a 3 ⎞ Ga 2 well as engineers. Various theoretical methods have been devel-
D= ⎜ 2 ⎟
⎝ν R⎠ µ oped, which can be roughly grouped as analytical solutions for
.......................................................................................(9)
small Dean number, numerical methods, and boundary layer
methods for large Dean number.
Here, D and K are related by D = 4 K .
The Dean number provides a fundamental parameter in devel-
Analytical Solutions
oping flow resistance correlations for flow in curved pipes. It has
been found that at low Dean number, the law of resistance can be For loosely coiled tubes (a/R is small) and small Dean number,
correlated with NDe only. For high Dean number, both NDe and the governing equations can be simplified and reduced to equa-
curvature ratio (a/R) will be required. tions about a stream-function (ψ) and the axial velocity (w). Since

June 2004, Volume 43, No. 6 53

 FIGURE 3a: Axial velocity profile, a/R = 0.01, NRe = 2,050(9).
FIGURE 4a: Secondary flow streamlines and axial velocity
contours (D = 96)(6).
FIGURE 5a: Contours of axial velocity (D = 2,000)(10).
the Dean number is small (therefore the deviation from the
straight pipe flow is expected to be slight), it is appropriate to
expand the solutions of the stream function and axial velocity
component in a power series of the Dean number.
w = w0 + Kw1 + K 2 w2 + K ...............................................................(10)
54
FIGURE 3b: Contours of axial velocity, a/R = 0.01, NRe = 2,050(9).
FIGURE 4b: Secondary flow streamlines and axial velocity
contours (D = 481)(6).
FIGURE 5b: Contours of axial velocity (D = 5,000)(10).
ψ = Kψ 1 + K 2 ψ 2 + K .......................................................................(11)
where w0, w1, ψ1, ψ2, w2,… are functions of r and α. By substitut-
ing these expressions into the ψ and w equations and equating
coefficients of the powers of K, Dean obtained the series solution
by successively solving for w0, w1, ψ1, w2, ψ2, … Note that w0 is
the solution for Poiseuille flow in straight pipe.
Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
 The similar approach was followed by Jones (11) for the
Rivlin-Reiner fluid model, and Thomas and Walters(12, 13) for elas-
tico-viscous liquids in a curved pipe of circular and elliptic cross-
sections. The power series was also used by Larrain and
Bonilla(14), Topakoglu(15), and Robertson and Muller(16).
Van Dyke(4) extended the Dean series by computer to 24 terms.
But, his result has caused controversies due to the fact that his
friction factor ratio correlation is not in agreement with other
studies(17).
In addition to the power series, Fourier series development has
also been used for series solutions. McConalogue and
Srivastava’s(6) results cover a range of Dean number of D from 96
to over 600. Dennis and Ng’s(18) Fourier series solution covers the
range of Dean number D = 96 – 5,000. It is found that for D <
956, the secondary flow consists of a symmetrical pair of counter-
rotating vortices. For D > 956, the secondary flow has a four-vor-
tex pattern consisting of two symmetrical pairs. Daskopoulos and
Lenhoff(19) expressed their solution using Fourier series in the
angular direction (α) and Chebychev polynominals in radius r.
Most studies of series solutions assumed a small-pitch pipe coil
and neglected the effect of torsion. But, Germano(20, 21) and Kao(22)
studied the effect of torsion as well as curvature ratio.
Numerical Methods
If the curvature ratio (a/R) is small, the flow in curved pipe
depends on a single parameter—the Dean number. This is not the
case if (a/R) is not very small. The Navier-Stokes equations for
fluid flow in coiled pipes can be solved numerically. Generally, a
finite difference scheme has been adopted. These studies include
Truesdell and Adler(23), Greenspan(24), Patankar et al.(25), Collins
and Dennis (10) , Joseph et al. (26) , Dennis (27) , and Hsu and
Patankar(28). In these studies, the Navier-Stokes equations were
simplified as stream-function/axial velocity or stream-
function/vorticity forms. Soh and Berger(29) used a finite-differ-
ence scheme and the value of curvature ratio can be arbitrary.
Austin and Seader (30) solved the Navier-Stokes equation in
the stream-function/vorticity form, numerically using finite
difference.
A few studies have been reported for simulation of turbulent
flows, such as Patankar et al.(31) and Lai et al.(32)
The challenges of numerical studies include determining accu-
rate and efficient numerical schemes, grid systems, and computa-
tional algorithms.
Boundary Layer Approximation Methods
The thickness of the boundary layer will become thinner with
increasing Dean number. This feature has been shown by experi-
ments(9) and numerical simulations(10, 18, 27). According to the theo-
ry of the boundary layer approximation, the tube cross-section can
be divided into two regions: the central inviscous core region and
the thin boundary layer where the viscous effect is significant.
Studies of this category include: Adler(9), Ito(33, 34), Barua(35), Mori
and Nakayama(36), Mashelkar and Devarajan(37-39), and Riley(40).
To use the boundary layer method, order of magnitude analysis
is carried out with the boundary layer and the forms of velocity
distributions are assumed. The potential difficulty with this
method is the boundary layer separation at the inner side of the
coil(34). Fortunately, for the purpose of correlating flow resistance,
the boundary layer models are probably sufficient and their accu-
racy has been verified by the experimental data(33, 34). This is prob-
ably because the contribution of the shear stress from the area at
the inner bend is not significant to the circumferential averaged
shear stress.
Experimental Studies
Experimental investigation of fluid flow in coiled pipes began
as early as the 1910s. Eustice(7, 8) used coloured filaments to
observe the streamline flow of water in curved glass tubes and
described the secondary flow streamlines. White(41) used the Dean
number to correlate his experimental data on pressure drop
through coiled pipes. He observed that the flow in curved pipe
June 2004, Volume 43, No. 6
could be maintained laminar for a much higher Reynolds number
than in straight pipes. This claim was verified by Taylor(42) in his
experiments on the criterion of turbulence in curved pipes.
Adler(9) closely examined the velocity distributions by experi-
ments, and found that a velocity profile of laminar flow differs
greatly from the parabolic distribution, and a thin boundary layer
was assumed. Ito(33) measured the frictional pressure losses of tur-
bulent flow in smooth curved pipes using water and drawn copper
tubing at various curvature ratios. Mori and Nakayama(36) mea-
sured velocity and temperature profiles in a curved pipe.
Srinivasan et al.(43) measured pressure drops of water and fuel
oil in both helical tubes (with constant curvature) and spiral tubes
(with variable curvature). Experimental values were used to
develop equations to predict friction factors for laminar, transi-
tion, and turbulent regions. Equations were also given to predict
critical Reynolds number for regime changes.
Mishra and Gupta(44) investigated pressure drop of coils of vari-
ous diameters and pitches. Their data covered laminar flow and
turbulent flows, and corresponding empirical correlations were
proposed.
In addition to the gross flow experiments of measuring the flow
resistance and rate, experiments were also made to understand the
instability and flow regime transition which will be discussed
below.
Flow Regime Transition
It is a known fact that the transition from laminar to turbulent
flow in coiled pipes occurs at a higher Reynolds number than that
in straight pipe. White(41) found that plots of flow resistance coef-
ficient vs. Dean number fall on a single line predicted by the Dean
correlation. But, at high Dean numbers, data points of different
curvature ratios deviated from the Dean correlation, which was
based on the streamline motion assumption. It was concluded that
a flow state that was different than streamline occurred with
curved pipes and the onset of turbulence was delayed with
increase of curvature. These claims were confirmed experimental-
ly by Taylor(42) whose test result with a curved pipe of curvature
ratio of 1/18 indicated that streamline motion persisted up to a
Reynolds number of 5,830, i.e., 2.8 times Reynolds’ criterion for a
straight pipe.
Ito(33) proposed the following empirical correlation for the criti-
cal Reynolds number:
0.32
⎛ a⎞
NRec = 20,000
⎝ R⎠ .........................................................................(12)
This equation provided good agreement with experimental
results in the range 15 < R/a < 8.6 × 102. For R/a > 8.6 × 102, the
critical Reynolds number for a curved pipe practically coincides
with that for a straight pipe. Mishra and Gupta(44) reported that
Equation (12) is in good agreement with their experiments. But, as
pointed out by Srinivasan et al.(43), Ito’s(33) correlation will not
give NRec = 2100 for a straight tube where a/R = 0. Therefore, a
new correlation was proposed based on the experiments by
Srinivasan et al.:(43)
⎡ ⎛ a⎞ ⎤
0.5
NRec = 2100 ⎢1 +12 ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ R⎠ ⎥
⎦ .................................................................(13)
The previous observations and correlations were based on mea-
surements of global parameters, such as friction factor. Due to the
secondary flow effect, the transition behaviour on the plots of fric-
tion factor vs. Reynolds number is very gradual. Actually, it is
very difficult to accurately identify when the onset of the turbu-
lence occurs. If the fluid is non-Newtonian fluid, this transition
would be even more gradual(45).
Sreenivasan and Strykowski(46) found that the characteristics of
the transition regime was dependent on the location in the pipe
cross-section. Using hot wire aneometers placed one quarter of the
radius from the inner and outer walls, they found that turbulence
55
near the inner wall emerged by the gradual superposition of higher
order frequencies on the fundamental frequency. In contrast, near
the outer wall, turbulence emerged by high frequency “bursts.”
The sinusoidal oscillations at the inner wall always preceded the
turbulent bursts at the outer wall. Recently, Webster and
Humphrey(47) provided quantitative time-dependent point mea-
surements of velocity with a non-intrusive laser-Doppler
velocimeter (LDV) and indicated that the pipe curvature tends to
dampen high frequency turbulent fluctuations, hence the manner
of “transition to turbulence” in a coiled pipe is ambiguous.
All the above experimental observations indicate that a much
higher Reynolds number is needed to maintain turbulence in
coiled pipes than in straight pipes.
Friction Factor Correlations
Based on the literature survey, the available correlations for
laminar Newtonian fluids in curved pipes are summarized in
Table 1. To evaluate these correlations, we first compared the
correlations of White(41), Srinivasan et al.(43), Hasson(48), Mishra
and Gupta(44), and Majuwar and Rao(49) that were developed from
experimental data. It was found that, except for the Mujawar and
Rao(49) correlation, the other four correlations are in excellent
agreement. Therefore, it is appropriate to believe that the four of
them are more realistic. Since the Mishra and Gupta(44) correlation
covers the widest range of NDe, it is therefore used to further eval-
uate the other theoretical correlations.
Generally, all the boundary layer approximation methods are
very close to the Mishra and Gupta(44) correlations for a large
Dean number, such as NDe > 100, except the Adler(9) correlation
which is significantly lower for NDe < 2,000. The friction factor
predicted by the Mori and Nakayama(36) correlation is slightly
higher than the others.
The Dean(3) correlation is only valid for very small Dean num-
ber. The Topakoglu(15) correlation fails to be close to any correla-
tion. Figure 6 shows that the van Dyke(4) correlation deviates from
the rest when NDe > 200. The Ito correlation is slightly lower

TABLE 1: Friction factor correlations of laminar Newtonian flow.

No. Authors Correlations Notes
⎡ ⎛ ⎤−1
K ⎞ ⎛ K ⎞4
2
fCL ⎢
⎢ ⎝ 576 ⎟⎠ (
= 1−⎜ 0.03058) + ⎜ ⎟ (0.01195)⎥⎥
fSL ⎣ ⎝ 576 ⎠ ⎦
1 Dean K < 576
−1
⎧ ⎡ 1 0.45 ⎫
fCL ⎪ ⎢ ⎛ 11.6 ⎞0.45 ⎤⎥ ⎪
= ⎨1 − ⎢1 − ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎬
fSL ⎪ ⎢⎣ ⎝ N De ⎠ ⎥⎥⎦ ⎪
⎪⎩ ⎪⎭
2 White 12 < NDe < 2,000
fCL
= 0.1064[ N De ]
12

3 Adler fSL Large NDe, say, NDe > 102

3⎧
⎤1 2 ⎫⎪
3
fCL (1.122 ) ⎪ ⎡ 2 N
= ⎨1.181 + ⎢(1.181) + De ⎥ ⎬
fSL 4 N De ⎪ ⎢⎣ 6 ⎥⎦ ⎪⎭
4 Barua ⎩ Large NDe, say,
102 < NDe < 104
fCL
= 0.0969 N 1De/ 2 + 0.556
5 Hasson fSL 30 < NDe < 2,000
12
fCL 0.108 N De
= −1 2
6 Mori and Nakayama
fSL 1 − 3.253 N De Lagre Dean number, say,
NDe > 100
⎧ 2⎡ ⎫ −1
fCL ⎪ 1 ⎛ a ⎞ 1.541 ⎛ N Re ⎞
4
⎛ N ⎞2 ⎤⎪
= ⎨1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ ⎟ + 1.1⎜ Re ⎟ − 1⎥⎬
fSL ⎪ 48 ⎝ R ⎠ ⎢⎣ 67.2 ⎝ 6 ⎠ ⎝ 6 ⎠ ⎥⎪
⎦⎭
7 Topakoglu ⎩ Small NDe
−3
⎡⎛ ⎤
1.729 ⎞
12
= 0.1033 N De ⎢⎢⎜⎜1 +
fCL 12 1.315 ⎥
⎟⎟ − ⎥
1 2
⎣⎢⎝
fSL N De ⎠ N De ⎥⎦
8 Ito Large NDe, say, NDe > 100
fCL
= 0.41875N0De
.275

9 Srinivasan et al. fSL 30 < NDe < 300,

0.0097 < a/R < 0.135

10 Collins and Dennis

fCL
fSL
12
{ −1 2
= 0.1028 N De 1 + 3.7 N De } 17 < NDe < 370
fCL 14
= 0.47136 N De
11 Van Dyke fSL Large NDe, say, NDe > 30
fCL
= 1 + 0.033(log N De )
4.0

12 Mishra and Gupta fSL 1 < NDe < 3,000

fCL
= 0.26( N De )
0.36

13 Mujawar and Rao fSL 35 < NDe < 2,200,

0.01 < a/R < 0.0695
⎡ 1 2⎤
⎢0.0908 + 0.0233⎛⎜ a ⎞⎟ ⎥N 1 2 − 0.132⎛⎜ a ⎞⎟ + 0.37⎛⎜ a ⎞⎟ − 0.2
12

⎢ ⎝ R ⎠ ⎥ De ⎝ R ⎠ ⎝R⎠
fCL ⎣ ⎦
= 1+
14 Liu and Masliyah fSL 1 + 49 N De 0 < a/R < 1, NDe < 5,000

56 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

 FIGURE 6: Comparison of friction factor correlations of laminar
Newtonian flow.
TABLE 2: Friction factor correlations of turbulent Newtonian flow.
No. Authors Correlations
1⎧
1⎛a ⎞2 ⎪
fCT = ⎜ ⎟ ⎨0.029 + 0.304 N Re ⎜ ⎟
4⎝R⎠ ⎪
⎩ ⎣
1 Ito
fCT
2 Srinivasan et al.
fCT = fST + 0.0075⎜ ⎟
3 Mishra and Gupta
when NDe < 100. Interestingly, all four correlations—Ito (for NDe
> 100), Collins and Dennis(10), Liu and Masliyah(50), and Mishra
and Gupta(44)—are in close agreement over a large range of Dean
number.
A few turbulent correlations are listed in Table 2. There is close
agreement between them.
Non-Newtonian Fluid
The complex rheological behaviour of non-Newtonian fluids
adds another dimension of complexity to the flow phenomena in
coiled pipes. The flow of non-Newtonian fluids in coiled pipes
has remained much less studied than Newtonian fluids.
Jones(11) considered the theoretical problem of the flow of a
non-Newtonian, visco-inelastic Reiner-Rivlin fluid in a coiled
tube. A number of investigators(12, 13, 51-53) have reported studies
on the effect of elasticity on fluid flow in coiled pipes. Jones and
Davies’s(52) experiments showed that minute amounts of polymer
could significantly delay departure of flow rate from Poiseuille
flow, a phenomenon called “drag reduction in the laminar region.”
Tsang and James(53) noted that polymer additives caused a reduc-
tion of the secondary motion and tried to explain the drag reduc-
tion by estimating the cross-sectional stresses, based on Dean’s
solution and several molecular models.
Among the various studies of non-Newtonian flow in coiled
pipes, those by Mashelkar and Devarajan(37-39) deserve special
attention. Following Ito’s (34) boundary layer approximation
approach for Newtonian fluids, Mashelkar and Devarajan(37-39)
theoretically analyzed and numerically solved the flow equations
for a power-law fluid for the conditions of both laminar and turbu-
lent flows. An empirical correlation for laminar flow was devel-
oped based on the numerical solutions and another correlation for
visco-elastic fluids in terms of the Weissenberg number based on
data of flow tests.
Mishra and Gupta(44) have also measured friction factors of
non-Newtonian fluids in coiled pipes and empirical correlations
have been obtained.
June 2004, Volume 43, No. 6
FIGURE 7: Result of water in 60.3 mm (23/8 in.) coiled tubing.
Notes
−0.25 ⎫
⎡ ⎛ a ⎞2 ⎤⎥
⎢ ⎪ ⎛ a ⎞2
⎬ 300 > N Re ⎜ ⎟ > 0.034
⎢ ⎝ R ⎠ ⎥ ⎪ ⎝R⎠
⎦ ⎭
⎛ a ⎞0.2
0.084⎜ ⎟
⎝R⎠
= 0.2
N De NDec < NDe < 14,000
⎛a⎞ 12
0.079
, fst =
⎝R⎠ 0.25
N Re 4,500 < NRe < 105
In recent years, the rapid increase of coiled tubing applications
in the oil and gas industry has driven the research activities of
coiled tubing hydraulics using full-scale facilities. Azouz et al.(54)
measured frictional pressure losses of linear guar gum, hydroxy-
propyl guar (HPG), and borate-crosslinked guar gum in 38.1 mm
(11/2 in.) coiled tubing reels. Willingham and Shah(55) reported an
empirical friction factor correlation based on a series of flow tests
with polymer solutions through 25.4, 38.1, and 60.3 mm (1, 11/2,
and 23/8 in.) coiled tubing reels. Their correlation constants are
functions of apparent viscosity and tubing ID.
McCann and Islas(56) generalized the Srinivasan et al.(43) corre-
lation for turbulent flow to non-Newtonian fluids and compared
the generalized correlation with the full-scale tests of six fluids
prepared using bentonite and lime.
Shah and Zhou(45) discussed the characteristics of drag reduc-
tion of polymer solutions in coiled tubing and affecting parame-
ters such as curvature, tubing ID, and polymer concentration.
More recently, Shah et al.(57) experimentally investigated the flow
behaviour of hydraulic fracturing slurries in coiled tubing. An
empirical correlation of slurry friction factor as affected by sand
concentration was developed. The possible mechanisms of tubing
erosion in typical fracturing operations have been addressed.
The present review shows that, compared with its counterpart
of Newtonian fluids, the flow of non-Newtonian fluids has
remained very much unstudied, either theoretically or experimen-
tally. Yet, most fluids used with coiled tubing operations in the oil
and gas industry are non-Newtonian, for example, polymer-based
solutions, and surfactant-based solutions for drilling, completion,
or wellbore cleanout. Slurries and foam fluids are also used with
coiled tubing. The available correlations are not appropriate for
predicting friction pressure losses in these applications. Further
systematic research is required.
As with the case of Newtonian fluids, we have summarized the
available friction factor correlations of non-Newtonian fluids in
coiled tubing in Table 3.
57
TABLE 3: Friction factor correlations of non-Newtonian fluid (laminar and turbulent).

No. Authors Correlations Notes

0.5
⎛a⎞ (−0.768+0.122 n)
( )
fCL = 9.069 − 9.438n + 4.374 n2 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ R⎠
N 'De
1 Mashelkar and Devarajan 70 < NDe’ < 400,
0.01 < a/R < 0.135

⎡
( )
4.0 ⎤ 16
fCL = fSL ⎢1 + 0.033 log N De2 fSL =
⎣ ⎥⎦ N Re 2
2 Mishra and Gupta
12
⎛a⎞ 0.079
fCT = fST + 0.0075⎜ ⎟ fST =
3
⎝ R⎠ 0.25
N Re d

0.1
1.06a ⎛ a ⎞
fCT = 0.8 b ⎜ R ⎟
()
log10 n + 3.93
g ⎝ ⎠
N Re a=
4 McCann and Islas 50

b=
1.75 − log10 n ()
7

) ( )
B d, µ
(
fC = A d , µ @511 +
@ 511

N Re g
5 Willingham and Shah Expressions for A and B are given
in Reference (59)

TABLE 4: Dimension of coiled tubing reels.

CT OD CT ID Length Reel Diameter Curvature Ratio

Reel No. mm (in.) (mm) (m) (m) (a/R)

1 25.40 (1) 20.57 152.40 1.22 0.0169

2 25.40 (1) 20.57 304.80 1.83 0.0113
3 38.1 0 (1-1/2) 30.18 304.80 1.83 0.0165
4 38.1 0 (1-1/2) 30.18 609.60 1.83 0.0165
5 38.1 0 (1-1/2) 30.18 609.60 1.83 0.0165
6 60.33 (2-3/8) 52.40 304.80 2.82 0.0185
7 60.33 (2-3/8) 52.40 621.49 2.82 0.0185

Experimental Investigation Results and Discussion

Experimental Setup and Procedure
The full-scale coiled tubing flow loop used in the recent experi-
mental study consists of seven reels of coiled tubing, fluid mixing
and pumping equipment, and a data acquisition system. Two 7.95
m 3 (50 bbl) tanks are used for fluid mixing and storage. A
Galigher centrifugal pump is used to feed the triplex plunger
pump. The dimensions of the coiled tubing reels are shown in
Table 4. The combinations of three coiled tubing diameters, i.e.,
25.4, 38.1, and 60.3 mm (1, 11/2, and 23/8 in.), and three reel drum
diameters, result in curvature ratio (a/R) values of 0.0113, 0.0165,
0.0169, and 0.0185.
The primary measured data include the gross flow variables
such as frictional pressure drop at various flow rates. Rheological
properties of fluids were evaluated using a Bohlin rheometer and a
model 35 Fann viscometer. More detailed descriptions of the
experimental facility and procedures can be found elsewhere(45, 55).
Fluids tested are typical drilling, completion, and stimulation
fluids currently used in the industry, including polymeric solu-
tions such as guar gum, xanthan gum, partially hydrolyzed poly-
acrylamide (PHPA), and hydroxyethylcellulose (HEC), and sur-
factant-based fluids, as well as an oil-based drilling mud. These
fluids are typically non-Newtonian and exhibit various degrees of
drag-reducing properties. More recently, fracturing slurries pre-
pared with guar-based gels and 20/40 mesh frac sands were tested
through the 60.3 mm (23/8 in.) coiled tubing. The effect of sand
concentration on the frictional pressure losses in coiled tubing was
investigated.
Water Test
For any coiled tubing reel, water tests were always first con-
ducted to establish the baseline for comparison with other test flu-
ids. Water tests were also required for a system calibration check.
Figure 7 shows the result of water in 60.3 mm (23/8 in). The flow
regime is well within the turbulent region. Friction factor correla-
tions of turbulent flow by Ito(33), Srinivasan et al.(43), and Mishra
and Gupta(44) were compared with the data. It is found that these
correlations underestimated the test data. The pipe roughness is
believed to cause the differences since these correlations were
developed from smooth pipe data. If the Chen(58) correlation for
friction factor of rough pipe was incorporated into these correla-
tions with an assumed roughness of 0.046 mm, much closer agree-
ment with the data was obtained.
Non-Newtonian Fluids
Two examples are used to show the characteristics of non-
Newtonian fluid flow through coiled tubing. Figure 8 shows the
result of 4.8 kg/m3 (40 lbm/Mgal) PHPA in 60.3 mm (23/8 in.)
coiled tubing. Ito(33, 34) correlations for both laminar and turbulent
flow, Mashelkar and Devarajan(37) correlation for non-Newtonian
laminar flow, and the 16/NReg relation are plotted to help the
analysis. It is obvious that the data points are lower than Ito corre-
lations in both turbulent and laminar regions, indicating that this
fluid exhibits significant drag reduction under these flow condi-
tions. The drag reduction in laminar flow for coiled tubing is

58 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology

 FIGURE 8: 4.8 kg/m3 (40 lbm/Mgal) PHPA in 60.3 mm (23/8 in.) FIGURE 9: 2.4 kg/m3 (20 lbm/Mgal) guar in 25.4 mm (1 in.) coiled
coiled tubing. tubing.

believed to be due to the reduction of the secondary flow by the NOMENCLATURE

polymer additives(53). Nevertheless, in the range of Reynolds num-
ber NReg = 700 – 2,000, the measured friction factor is higher than a = radius of pipe
16/NReg due to the extra resistance by the secondary flow. It is a/R = curvature ratio
found that the Mashelkar and Devarajan(37) correlation failed to A = correlation parameter(55)
predict the friction factor. The Willingham and Shah(55) correla- B = correlation parameter(55)
tion is in close agreement with the measured data. Another feature d = diameter of pipe
shown by Figure 8 is that there is no obvious indication of the D = Dean number, Equation (9)
onset of turbulence (if any) from the friction factor vs. Reynolds f = Fanning friction factor
number plot. As discussed before, the transition from laminar to G = pressure gradient, Equation (5)
turbulent in coiled tubing is very gradual, especially for drag K = Dean number, Equation (7)
reducing, non-Newtonian fluids.
K′ = consistency index
Figure 9 shows the result of 2.4 kg/m3 (20 lbm/Mgal) guar solu-
tion in 25.4 mm (1 in.) coiled tubing. This represents a typical n = flow behaviour index
flow condition of a less concentrated polymer solution in a small NDe = Dean number, Equation (8)
coiled tubing. The flow regime encountered is dominantly turbu- (2a )n vm2−nρ
lent for the flow rates tested. In this case, the measured friction NDe′ =
K'
( a R)0.5
factor is significantly lower than predicted by correlations of tur-
bulent Newtonian flow, such as the Ito(33) correlation. Again, NDe2 = NRe2(a/R)0.5
among the few turbulent, non-Newtonian flow correlations, only NRe = Reynolds number
the Willingham and Shah(55) correlation gives a close match with NRe2 = Reynolds number based on pseudoshear vis-
the experimental data. cosity(44)
NRec = critical Reynolds number
NRed = Reynolds number based on differential viscos-
ity(44)
Conclusions NReg = generalized Reynolds number
1. The fluid flow in coiled pipes is featured by the secondary p = pressure
flow structure caused by the centrifugal forces in curved Qc = flow rate in coiled pipe
flow geometry. Qs = flow rate in straight pipe
2. Dean number and curvature ratio are two important parame- R = radius of coil
ters affecting the flow behaviour in coiled pipes. They have
u = velocity in r direction
been widely used for theoretical analysis and correlation
v = velocity in α direction
development.
3. Previous theoretical studies can be categorized as analytical vm = mean velocity
solutions for small Dean number, numerical methods for w = velocity in θ direction
intermediate Dean number, and boundary layer methods for w0, w1, w2, … = series coefficients, Equation (10)
large Dean number. W0 = maximum axial velocity in cross-section
4. Various friction factor correlations have been analyzed and ψ1, ψ2, … = series coefficients, Equation (11)
evaluated for their applicabilities. α = angle, Figure 1
5. Experimental studies have shown that the transition from µ @511 = apparent viscosity at 511 s-1
laminar to turbulent flow is gradual in coiled pipes. The θ = angle of cross-section from a fixed plane
Reynolds number at the onset of turbulence in coiled pipes is ρ = density
much higher than in straight pipes. ν = kinematic viscosity
6. Compared with its counterpart of Newtonian fluid, the flow
of non-Newtonian fluid in coiled pipes has been much less Subscripts
studied.
c = coiled pipe
CL = coiled laminar
Acknowledgements CT = coiled turbulent
s = straight
The authors appreciate the continued support of the members
SL = straight laminar
of the Coiled Tubing Consortium and the assistance of the
research team at the Well Construction Technology Centre. ST = straight turbulent

June 2004, Volume 43, No. 6 59

REFERENCES
1. WRIGHT, T.R., Jr. and SAS-JAWORSKY II, A., World Oil’s
Coiled Tubing Handbook; 3rd edition, Gulf Publishing Company,
Houston, TX, 1998.
2. DEAN, W.R., Note on the Motion of Fluid in a Curved Pipe;
Philosophical Magazine, Vol. 20, pp. 208-23, July 1927.
3. DEAN, W.R., The Streamline Motion of Fluid in a Curved Pipe;
Philosophical Magazine, Vol. 30, pp. 673-93, April 1928.
4. VAN DYKE, M., Extended Stokes Series: Laminar Flow Through a
Loosely Coiled Pipe; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, part 1, Vol. 86,
pp. 129-145, 1978.
5. BERGER, S.A., TALBOT, L., and YAO, L.S., Flow in Curved
Pipes; Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 15, pp. 461-512,
1983.
6. MCCONALOGUE, D.J. and SRIVASTAVA, R.S., Motion of a
Fluid in a Curved Tube; Proceedings of Royal Society of London,
Series A, Vol. 307, pp. 37-53, 1968.
7. EUSTICE, J., Flow of Water in Curved Pipes; Proceedings of Royal
Society of London, Series A, Vol. 84, pp. 107-18, June 1910.
8. EUSTICE, J., Experiments of Streamline Motion in Curved Pipes;
Proceedings of Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 85, pp. 119-
31, February 1911.
9. ADLER, M., Flow in Curved Pipes; Zeitschrift für Angewandte
Mathematik und Mechanik (Journal of Applied Mathematics and
Mechanics), Vol. 14, pp. 257-75, October 1934.
10. COLLINS, W.M. and DENNIS, S.C.R., The Steady Motion of a
Viscous Fluid in a Curved Tube; The Quarterly Journal of
Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 28, pp. 133-56, 1975.
11. JONES, J.R., Flow of a Non-Newtonian Liquid in a Curved Pipe;
The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, Vol.
XIII, pp. 428-43, 1960.
12. THOMAS, R.H. and WALTERS, K., On the Flow of an Elastico-
Viscous Liquid in a Curved Pipe Under a Pressure Gradient; Journal
of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 16, pp. 228-42, 1963.
13. THOMAS, R.H. and WALTERS, K., On the Flow of an Elastico-
Viscous Fluid in a Curved Pipe of Elliptic Cross-Section under a
Pressure Gradient; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 21, pp. 173-82,
1965.
14. LARRAIN, J. and BONILLA, C.F., Theoretical Analysis of Pressure
Drop in the Laminar Flow of Fluid in a Coiled Pipe; Transactions of
the Society of Rheology, Vol. 14, pp. 135-47, 1970.
15. TOPAKOGLU, H.C., Steady Laminar Flows of an Incompressible
Viscous Fluid in Curved Pipes; Journal of Mathematics and
Mechanics, Vol. 16, No. 12, pp. 1321-1337, 1967.
16. ROBERTSON, A.M. and MULLER, S.J., Flow of Oldroyd-B Fluids
in Curved Pipes of Circular and Annular Cross-Section;
International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp.
1-20, 1996.
17. JAYANTI, S. and HEWITT, G.F., On the Paradox Concerning
Friction Factor Ratio in Laminar Flow in Coils; Proceedings of the
Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 432, pp. 291-99, 1991.
18. DENNIS, S.C.R. and NG, M., Dual Solutions for Steady Laminar
Flow Through a Curved Tube; The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics
and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 35, pp. 305-324, 1982.
19. DASKOPOULOS, P. and LENHOFF, A.M., Flow in Curved Ducts:
Bifurcation Structure for Stationary Ducts; Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, Vol. 203, pp. 125-148, 1989.
20. GERMANO, M., On the Effect of Torsion on a Helical Pipe;
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 125, pp. 1-8, 1982.
21. GERMANO, M., The Dean Equations Extended to a Helical Pipe
Flow; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 203, pp. 289-305, 1989.
22. KAO, H.C., Torsion Effect on Fully Developed Flow in a Helical
Pipe; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 184, pp. 335-356, 1987.
23. TRUSEDELL, L.C., Jr. and ADLER, R.J., Numerical Treatment of
Fully Developed Laminar Flow in Helically Coiled Tubes; American
Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, pp. 1010-1015, November
1970.
24. GREENSPAN, D., Secondary Flow in a Curved Tube; Journal of
Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 57, pp. 167-76, 1973.
25. PATANKAR, S.V., PRATAP, V.S., and SPALDING, D.B.,
Prediction of Laminar Flow and Heat Transfer in Helically Coiled
Pipes; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 62, pp. 539-551, part 3,
1974.
26. JOSEPH, B., SMITH, E.P., and ADLER, R.J., Numerical Treatment
of Laminar Flow in Helically Coiled Tubes of Square Cross Section.
Part I. Stationary Helically Coiled Tubes; American Institute of
Chemical Engineers Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 965-74, September 1975.
60
27. DENNIS, S.C.R., Calculation of the Steady Flow Through a Curved
Tube Using a New Finite-Difference Method; Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, Vol. 99, pp. 449-467, 1980.
28. HSU, C.F. and PATANKAR, S.V., Analysis of Laminar Non-
Newtonian Flow and Heat Transfer in Curved Tubes; American
Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 610-616, July
1982.
29. SOH, W.Y. and BERGER, S.A., Fully Developed Flow in a Curved
Pipe of Arbitrary Curvature Ratio; International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol. 7, pp. 733-755, 1987.
30. AUSTIN, L.R. and SEADER, J.D., Fully Developed Viscous Flow
in Coiled Circular Pipes; American Institute of Chemical Engineers
Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 85-94, January 1973.
31. PATANKAR, S.V., PRATAP, V.S., and SPALDING, D.B.,
Prediction of Turbulent Flow in Helically Coiled Pipes; Journal of
Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 67, part 3, pp. 583-595, 1975
32. LAI, Y.G., SO, R.M.C., and ZHANG, H.S., Turbulence-Driven
Secondary Flows in a Curved Pipe; Theoretical and Computational
Fluid Dynamics, Vol. 3, pp. 163-180, 1991.
33. ITO, H., Friction Factors for Turbulent Flow in Curved Pipes;
Journal of Basic Engineering, pp. 123-134, June 1959.
34. ITO, H., Laminar Flow in Curved Pipes; Zeitschrift für Angewandte
Mathematik und Mechanik (Journal of Applied Mathematics and
Mechanics), Vol. 49, pp. 653-63, 1969.
35. BARUA, S.N., On Secondary Flow in Stationary Curved Pipes; The
Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, Vol. XVI,
pp. 61-77, 1963.
36. MORI, Y. and NAKAYAMA, W., Study on Forced Convective Heat
Transfer in Curved Pipes (1st Report); International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer, Vol. 8, pp. 67-82, 1965.
37. MASHELKAR, R.A. and DEVARAJAN, G.V., Secondary Flows of
Non-Newtonian Fluids: Part I—Laminar Boundary Layer Flow of a
Generalized Non-Newtonian Fluid in a Coiled Tube; Transactions of
the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Vol. 54, pp. 100-107, 1976.
38. MASHELKAR, R.A. and DEVARAJAN, G.V., Secondary Flows of
Non-Newtonian Fluids: Part II Frictional Losses in Laminar Flow of
Purely Viscous and Viscoelastic Fluids Through Coiled Tubes;
Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Vol. 54, pp.
108-114, 1976.
39. MASHELKAR, R.A. and DEVARAJAN, G.V., Secondary Flows of
Non-Newtonian Fluids: Part III—Turbulent Flow of Viscoinelastic
Fluids in Coiled Tubes: A Theoretical Analysis and Experimental
Verification; Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers,
Vol. 55, pp. 29-37, 1977.
40. RILEY, N., Unsteady Fully-Developed Flow in a Curved Pipe;
Journal of Engineering Mathematics, Vol. 34, pp. 131-141, 1998.
41. WHITE, C.M., Streamline Flow Through Curved Pipes; Proceedings
of Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 123, pp. 645-63, February
1929.
42. TAYLOR, G.I., The Criterion for Turbulence in Curved Pipes;
Proceedings of Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 124, pp. 243-
49, 1929.
43. SRINIVASAN, P.S., NANDAPURKAR, S.S., and HOLLAND,
F.A., Friction Factors for Coils; Transactions of the Institution of
Chemical Engineers, Vol. 48, pp. T156-T161, 1970.
44. MISHRA, P. and GUPTA, S.N., Momentum Transfer in Curved
Pipes. I. Newtonian Fluids, II. Non-Newtonian Fluids; Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Process Design and Development, Vol. 18,
pp. 130-42, 1979.
45. SHAH, S.N. and ZHOU, Y., An Experimental Study of Drag
Reduction of Polymer Solutions in Coiled Tubing; paper SPE
68419, first presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable,
Houston, TX, March 7 – 8, 2001, published in Production and
Facilities Journal, pp. 280-287, November 2003.
46. SREENIVASAN, K.R. and STRYKOWSKI, P.J., Stabilization
Effects in Flow Through Helically Coiled Pipes; Experiments in
Fluids, Vol. 471, pp. 31-36, 1983.
47. WEBSTER, D.R. and HUMPHREY, J.A.C., Experimental
Observations of Flow Instability in a Helical Coil; Transactions of
the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 115, pp. 436-
443, September 1993.
48. HASSON, D., Streamline Flow in Coils; Research Correspondence,
Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. S1, 1955.
49. MUJAWAR, B.A. and RAO, M.R., Flow of Non-Newtonian Fluids
Through Helical Coils; Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Process Design and Development, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 22-27, 1978.
50. LIU, S. and MASLIYAH, J.H., Axially Invariant Laminar Flow in
Helical Pipes with a Finite Pitch; Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.
251, pp. 315-353, 1993.
Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
 51. BARNES, H.A. and WALTERS, K., On the Flow of Viscous and
Elastico-Viscous Liquids Through Straight and Curved Pipes;
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 314, pp.
85-109, 1969.
52. JONES, W.M. and DAVIES, O.H., The Flow of Dilute Aqueous
Solutions of Macromolecules in Various Geometries: III. Bent Pipes
and Porous Materials; Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, Vol. 9,
pp. 753-770, 1976.
53. TSANG, H.Y. and JAMES, D.F., Reduction of Secondary Motion in
Curved Tubes by Polymer Additives; Journal of Rheology, Vol. 24,
pp. 589-601, 1980.
54. AZOUZ, I., SHAH, S.N., VINOD, P.S., and LORD, D.L.,
Experimental Investigation of Frictional Pressure Losses in Coiled
Tubing; paper SPE 37328, presented at the Eastern Regional
Meeting, Columbus, OH, October 23 – 25, 1996.
55. WILLINGHAM, J.D. and SHAH, S.N., Friction Pressures of
Newtonian and Non-Newtonian Fluids in Straight and Reeled Coiled
Tubing; paper SPE 60719, presented at the 2000 SPE/ICoTA Coiled
Tubing Roundtable, Houston, TX, April 5 – 6, 2000.
56. MCCANN, R.C. and ISLAS, C.G., Frictional Pressure Loss During
Turbulent Flow in Coiled Tubing; paper SPE 36345, presented at
the SPE/ICoTA North American Coiled Tubing Roundtable,
Montgomery, TX, February 26 – 28, 1996.
57. SHAH, S.N., ZHOU, Y., and GOEL, N., Flow Behaviour of
Fracturing Slurries in Coiled Tubing; paper SPE 74811, presented at
the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference, Houston, TX, April 9 –
10, 2002.
58. CHEN, N.H., An Explicit Equation for Friction Factor in Pipe;
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, Vol. 18, No. 3,
pp. 296-297, 1979.
59. Technical Report; prepared by the Well Construction Technology
Centre, University of Oklahoma, for the Annual Meeting of the
Coiled Tubing Consortium, Houston, TX, May 1999.
Provenance—Original Petroleum Society manuscript, Fluid Flow in
Coiled Tubing: A Critical Review and Experimental Investigation
(2002-225), first presented at the 3rd Canadian International Petroleum
Conference (the 53 rd Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum
Society), June 11-13, 2002, in Calgary, Alberta. Abstract submitted for
review December 14, 2001; editorial comments sent to the author(s)
January 23, 2003; revised manuscript received February 27, 2003; paper
approved for pre-press March 5, 2003, final approval May 7, 2004.

June 2004, Volume 43, No. 6
Authors’ Biographies
Yunxu Zhou received his B.S. and M.S.
degrees from the University of Petroleum,
China, both in petroleum engineering. He
then worked at the Jianghan Petroleum
Institute doing petroleum engineering
teaching and research. He is currently a
Ph.D. candidate at the University of
Oklahoma. His research area includes theo-
retical and experimental studies of fluid
flow in coiled tubing. He is a member of
SPE and the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers.
Subhash Shah is Stephenson Chair
Professor in the Mewbourne School of
Petroleum and Geological Engineering at
the University of Oklahoma (OU). He is
also the director of OU’s Well Construction
Technology Centre. Previously, he served
as an interim director of the Mewbourne
School of Petroleum and Geological
Engineering at OU. Prior to joining OU ten
years ago, Dr. Shah worked for almost 20
years in the oil and gas industry. He holds a
B.S. from the University of Baroda, India, and M.S. and Ph.D.
degrees from the University of New Mexico, all in chemical engi-
neering. His work has resulted in more than 140 technical papers
and two chapters in technical books. Dr. Shah’s research focuses
on developing new procedures and methods to characterize and
understand the behaviour of fluids under reservoir conditions and
other related issues in drilling, well completion, and stimulation.
His research interests also include coiled tubing technology and
applications. He is a member of the Petroleum Society, SPE, the
International Coiled Tubing Association, the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers, National Society of Professional Engineers,
and the Society of Rheology. Dr. Shah is a registered professional
engineer in the State of Oklahoma.
61