State-of-the-Art Cuttings Transport
in Horizontal Wellbores
A.A. Pilehvari, SPE, Texas A&M U. at Kingsville, and J.J. Azar, SPE, and S.A. Shirazi, SPE, U. of Tulsa
Summary
In the ever-growing use of, directional and horizontal drilling,
hole cleaning is a common and costly problem. It can become
particularly critical in the case of extended reach drilling where
larger and longer wellbores are drilled. During the past two de-
cades, especially in recent years, many laboratory studies as well
as field observations have been directed towards addressing the
cuttings transport problem. This has resulted in better understand-
ing of the subject and some remedies to the problems. Several
correlation/models have also been developed that give the field
engineer a tool to better specify the hydraulic requirements in
cleaning the hole. However, because of the complexity of the
subject, a comprehensive and proven model, which does not exist
at this time, requires much more laboratory research and field
studies.
Introduction
Inadequate hole cleaning in drilling horizontal wells may cause a
number of costly problems, such as premature bit wear, a slow
drilling rate, formation fracture, high torque and drag, and a stuck
pipe. If the situation is not handled properly, the problem can lead
to sidetracking or loss of the well. Several field studies have docu-
mented that hole cleaning is a frequently occurring problem that
has to be watched carefully, otherwise it can and does develop
into the serious problems mentioned.1-3 Persisting cuttings trans-
port difficulties in the field and many studies with large-scale
wellbore simulators have proven that cuttings transport in highly
inclined wellbores is a complex problem. Over the last 20 years,
many papers have been published that address the subject.
The majority of these publications provided qualitative studies
and/or practical field guidelines, while some have presented mod-
eling schemes that can be used to help the field engineer in opti-
mization of drilling operations.
In this article, developments in cuttings transport over the
years, the shortcomings of its present status, and future research
needs are addressed.
Pioneering Experimental Studies
Large-scale cuttings transport studies in inclined wellbores were
initiated at the Tulsa University Drilling Research Projects
共TUDRP兲 about two decades ago with the support of a few major
oil and service companies. A flow loop was built that consisted of
a 40-ft length of 5-in. transparent annular test section and the
means to vary and control the 共1兲 angles of inclination between
vertical and horizontal, 共2兲 mud pumping flow rate, 共3兲 drilling
rate, and 共4兲 drill-pipe rotation and eccentricity. Past results have
revealed the marked difference between the cuttings transport in
inclined wellbores and that of vertical wellbores. A cuttings bed
was observed to form at inclination angles of more than 35° from
vertical, and this bed could slide back down for angles up to 50°.
Tomren, Iyoho, and Azar4 published the results of these studies.
Copyright © 1999 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 57716) was revised for publication from SPE 37079, first presented at the
1996 SPE International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology held in Calgary, 18–20
November. Original manuscript received for review 18 November 1996. Revised manu-
script received 11 January 1999. Paper peer approved 15 March 1999.
196 SPE Drill. & Completion 14 共3兲, September 1999
Mud velocities in the range of 3 to 4 ft/s were found necessary for
high angles with no pipe rotation compared with the 1 to 2 ft/s
normally used for vertical drilling. Eccentricity, created by the
drillpipe lying on the low side of the annulus, was found to
worsen the situation. Analysis of annular fluid flow showed that
eccentricity diverts most of the mud flow away from the low side
of the annulus, where the cuttings tend to settle, to the more open
area above the drillpipe.
The above study at TUDRP was followed by another landmark
work in cuttings transport by Okrajni and Azar,5 in which they
investigated the effect of mud rheology on hole cleaning. Their
work confirmed the earlier findings and established that the cut-
tings transport mechanism and flow behavior in high angle well-
bores are quite different than those of vertical wellbores. It was
observed that removing a cuttings bed with a high viscosity mud,
a remedy for the hole cleaning problem in vertical wells, may in
fact be detrimental in high angle wellbores 共assuming a zero to
low drill-pipe rotation兲, and that a low viscosity mud that can
promote turbulence is more helpful. On the basis of this finding
and on the previous study, hole cleaning was found to depend on
the angle of inclination, hydraulics, mud rheological properties,
drill-pipe eccentricity, and rate of penetration. Qualitative rela-
tionships for the effect of these parameters on cuttings transport
were presented in Ref. 5.
Further analysis of Okrajni and Azar’s rheological data by
Becker, Azar, and Okrajni6 showed that the cuttings transport per-
formance of the muds tested correlated best with the low end
shear rate viscosity, particularly the 6 rpm Fann V-G viscometer
dial readings.
The Awakening Years—Building Flow Loops
By the mid-1980’s, a general qualitative understanding of the hole
cleaning problem in highly inclined wellbores had been gained.
However, the subject proved to be fairly complex and did not lend
itself to a comprehensive analysis. Meanwhile, more directional
and horizontal wells with longer lateral reaches were being drilled
and they met with frequent difficulties in hole cleaning. The field
problems were caused by lack of predictive models, slow transfer
of the research results to the field, inadequate field experience, and
limitations of the drilling equipment.
In light of the recurring hole cleaning problems, the oil industry
felt the urgency for more research and development in cuttings
transport. This led most of the major oil companies to form their
own internal hole cleaning teams. The need for more and new
experimental data created a high demand for additional flow
loops. In partnership with Chevron, Conoco, Elf Aquitaine, and
Philips, TUDRP built a new and larger flow loop, with 100-ft long
test section of 8-in. annulus.7 By the end of the 1980’s a few flow
loops of various sizes and different levels of capability were built.
The construction and commissioning of new flow loops were re-
ported by TUDRP,7,8 Heriot-Watt University,9 BP,10 Southwest
Research,11 M.I. Drilling Fluids,12 and the Institute Français du
Petrole.13 All the flow loops had a transparent part of the annular
test section that allowed observation of the cuttings transport
mechanism. These flow loops provided the necessary tools for
collecting the badly needed experimental data.
1064-6671/99/14共3兲/196/5/$3.50⫹0.15
Recent Studies—Correlations/Models
On the commissioning of various flow loops, a significant amount
of experimental data was collected on the effect of different pa-
rameters on cuttings transport under various conditions. The ob-
servations made and subsequent analysis of the data collected pro-
vided the basis for work towards formulating correlations/models.
Meanwhile, field experiences and drilling data of inclined and
horizontal wells provided practical operational guidelines1-3 and
the necessary basis for evaluation and/or improvement of the
laboratory/theory based models.14
Larsen15 conducted extensive studies on cuttings transport, to-
taling over 700 tests with the TUDRP’s 5-in. flow loop.5 Tests
were performed for angles from vertical to horizontal under criti-
cal as well as subcritical flow conditions. Critical flow corre-
sponds to the minimum annular average fluid velocity that would
prevent stationary accumulation of cuttings bed. Subcritical flow
refers to the condition where a stationary cuttings bed forms.
Analysis of the experimental data shows that when the fluid ve-
locity is below that of the critical value a cuttings bed starts to
form and grows in thickness until the fluid velocity above the bed
reaches that of the critical value. The critical velocity was re-
ported in the range of 3 to 4 ft/s depending on the value of various
parameters, such as the mud rheology, drilling rate, pipe eccen-
tricity, and rotational speed.
Larsen’s data confirmed earlier findings that, at high angles,
muds that flow in the turbulent regime perform better than those
flowing in laminar flow 共drill-pipe rotation 0 to 50 rpm兲. How-
ever, there were several new findings that are worth mentioning.
共1兲 Under subcritical flow conditions a medium rheology mud
关plastic viscosity (PV)⫽14, yield point (YP)⫽14] consistently
resulted in slightly smaller cuttings beds than those obtained with
the low rheology 共PV⫽7, YP⫽7兲 or the high rheology
(PV⫽21, YP⫽21) muds. Calculation of the Reynolds number for
the tests suggests that the flow regime for this mud is neither
turbulent nor laminar, but in the transition range. 共2兲 The small
cuttings size used 共0.1-in.兲 in the study was more difficult to clean
than the medium 共0.175-in.兲 and the large 共0.275-in.兲 sizes 共drill-
pipe rpm 0 to 50兲. The small cuttings formed a more packed and
smooth bed. 共3兲 The height of the cuttings bed between 55° and
90° remained about the same, but there was a slight increase at
about 65° to 70°. 共4兲 Significant backsliding of the cuttings bed
was observed for angles between 35° to 55°.
On the basis of this, Larsen, Pilehvari, and Azar16 developed a
model for highly inclined 50° to 90° angle wellbores. The model
predicts the critical velocity as well as the cuttings bed thickness
when the flow rate is below that of the critical flow. Even though
Larsen et al.’s data were with water-base muds, a subsequent
study by Hemphill and Larsen17 showed that oil-base muds with
comparable rheological properties performed about the same.
Larsen et al.’s model, which had been developed based on the
5-in. flow loop data, was later modified with a scaleup factor to
correlate with the data obtained with the 8-in. TUDRP flow loop.8
Jalukar et al.18 recently published an improved model.
Gavignet and Sobey19 presented a cuttings transport model,
similar to that published by Wilson,20 for slurry flow in pipelines
that is known as the double layer model. The model has many
interrelated equations and a substantial number of parameters, a
few of which are difficult to determine. However, the model is
based on physical phenomena and there are certain advantages to
it.
Martin et al.13 published a numerical correlation based on the
cuttings transport data that they had collected in the laboratory
and in the field.
Seeberger, Matlock, and Hanson21 studied the use of oil muds
in highly deviated wells with a laboratory flow loop. They re-
Pilehvari, Azar, and Shirazi: Horizontal Wellbores
ported that elevating the low shear rate viscosities enhances the
cuttings transport performance of oil muds, and it can match that
normally observed with the water-base muds. This was later con-
firmed by another study.17
Zamora and Hanson,22,23 on the basis of laboratory observa-
tions and field experience, compiled 28 rules of thumb to improve
high-angle hole cleaning.
Sifferman and Becker11 conducted a series of hole cleaning
experiments in an 8-in. flow loop. They examined the effect of
different parameters on cuttings transport. Statistical analysis of
the data showed that interaction among various parameters, thus
simple relationships could not be derived. For example, the effect
of drillpipe rotation on cuttings transport depended also on the
size of the cuttings and the mud rheology. The effect of rotation
was more pronounced for smaller particles and for more viscous
muds.
Luo and Bern24 presented charts to determine hole cleaning
requirements in deviated wells. These empirical charts were de-
veloped based on the data collected with the BP 8-in. flow loop
and they predicted the critical flow rates required for prevention of
cuttings bed accumulation. The predictions have also been com-
pared with some field data.
Ford et al.25 published a model for the prediction of minimum
transport velocity for two modes: 共1兲 cuttings suspension and 共2兲
cuttings rolling. The predictions were compared with laboratory
data.
Rasi14 developed ‘‘a hole cleaning tool’’ for large, high-angle
wellbores. As part of his work, a series of pull-out-of-the-hole
laboratory experiments were conducted. It was observed that the
presence of the cuttings bed did not lead to very high overpull as
long as the open area above the cuttings bed was larger than the
cross-sectional area of the bit. It was also observed that the use of
stabilizers with smaller cross-sectional areas, bottom hole assem-
bly 共BHA兲 elements with smaller outside diameters, and larger
drillpipes results in lower overpull. Predictions of hole cleaning
problem or the lack of it were also compared with several field
data. Clark and Bickham26 presented a cuttings transport model
based on fluid mechanics relationships, in which they assumed
three cuttings transport modes: 共1兲 settling, 共2兲 lifting, and 共3兲
rolling, each dominant within a certain range of wellbore angles.
Predictions of the model were compared with critical and subcriti-
cal flow data they had collected with the TUDRP’s 5- and 8-in.
flow loops. A prediction of the model was also used to examine
several situations where poor cuttings transport had been respon-
sible for drilling problems.
Campos et al.27 developed a mechanistic model for predicting
the critical velocity as well as the cuttings bed height for subcriti-
cal flow conditions. Their work was based on earlier work by
Oroskar and Whitmore28 for slurry transport in pipes. The model’s
predictions are good for thin muds, but the model needs to be
further refined to account for thick muds and pipe rotation.
Kenny, Sunde, and Hemphill29 defined a lift factor that they
used as an indicator of cuttings transport performance. The lift
factor is a combination of the fluid velocity in the lower part of
the annulus and the mud settling velocity determined by Chien’s
correlation.30 Bassal31 completed a study of the effect of drillpipe
rotation on cuttings transport in inclined wellbores. The TUDRP’s
8-in. wellbore simulator, 100-ft long, with a 4-in. drillpipe, was
used for the study. The variables considered in this work were
drillpipe rotary speed, hole inclination, mud rheology, cuttings
size, and mud flow rate. Results have shown that drillpipe rotation
has a significant effect on hole cleaning in directional well drill-
ing. The level of enhancement in cuttings removal as a result of
rotary speed is a function of a combination of mud rheology,
cuttings size, mud flow rate, and the manner in which the drill
SPE Drill. & Completion, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 1999 197
string behaves dynamically. Generally, smaller cuttings are more
difficult to transport. However, with high rotary speed and high
viscosity mud, small cuttings become easier to transport. Low
viscosity mud in the hole cleans better than high viscosity mud
with no drill-pipe rotation.
Large-scale laboratory studies by different researchers have
consistently shown that for steady hole cleaning, a critical flow
condition, fluid velocities of about 4 to 6 ft/s, is required, while
field experiences have proved that large holes are cleaned at much
lower velocities, 2 to 3 ft/s. Bassal’s study explains that the dif-
ference is caused by underestimation of the effect of drillpipe
rotation at high speeds. All previous experimental studies had
limitations in simulating the real dynamics of the drillpipe, until
this study.
Drillpipe rotation can explain another controversial point: it is
the cuttings transport performance of a thin mud vs. that of a mud
with good suspension property, i.e., a mud with high dial readings
at low shear rates. Again, drillpipe rotation may be the answer.
Laboratory observations by the authors have shown that, with no
or with low pipe rotation, cuttings quickly fall to the low side of
the annulus, are easier to be picked up or rolled by a thin mud, and
can thus be transported by a thin mud at a lower fluid velocity.
However, with high pipe rotation, cuttings from the low side are
entrained by the dynamics of the drillpipe and settle more slowly
in thicker mud than in thinner mud, thus are better transported by
the mud with high readings at low shear rates.
When the results of cuttings transport research and field expe-
rience are integrated into a drilling program, hole cleaning prob-
lems are avoided and excellent drilling performance follows. This
has certainly been the case when engineers2,3 achieved two new
world records in extended reach drilling.
Guild and Hill32 presented another excellent example of inte-
gration of hole cleaning research into field practice. They reported
trouble-free drilling in two extended reach wells after they had
lost one well because of poor hole cleaning. Their program was
designed to maximize the footage drilled between wiper trips, and
eliminate hole cleaning backreaming trips before reaching the cas-
ing point. They devised a creative way to avoid significant cut-
tings accumulation by carefully monitoring the pick-up weight,
rotating weight, and slack-off weight as drilling continued. They
observed that cuttings accumulation in the hole caused the differ-
ence between the pick-up weight and the slack-off weight to keep
increasing, while cleaning the hole decreased the difference. By
observing the changes in these parameters and by the use of other
readily available information they were able to closely monitor
hole cleaning and be in control of the situation.
Future Research and Technology Needs
Even though hole cleaning is much less of a problem today than it
was 10 or 20 years ago, i.e., today there is a lower percentage of
stuck pipes and lost wells, the way that it is currently handled is
still very costly. Frequent wiper trips, reaming and/or washing to
the bottom, maximum pumping rates, etc., although prudent at
this time, are in fact lost time and money caused by the inad-
equacy of current technology in cuttings transport. Considering
that the need for directional and horizontal drilling, both in num-
bers and extent, grows constantly, research into the hole cleaning
problem would be a prudent investment. Many aspects of hole
cleaning need to be carefully studied and researched. A discussion
of several of the basic areas with great impact potential on the
problem follows.
Fluid Flow Simulation. Basic information needed for under-
standing cuttings transport and modeling is the fluid flow model-
ing of drilling fluids under in-situ conditions. Predictions of any
198 Pilehvari, Azar, and Shirazi: Horizontal Wellbores
fluid flow model, i.e., annular velocity and viscosity profiles,
would be highly dependent on the fluid model assumed. Hemphill,
Pilehvari, and Campos33 have shown that drilling muds are much
better represented by the yield-power-law model, as opposed to
the power law and Bingham plastic models.
Hacjislamoglu and Langlinais34 have numerically simulated
laminar flow of yield-power-law fluids in eccentric annuli. Azouz
et al.35 conducted a similar study. The authors later extended the
computational model to turbulent flow of Newtonian fluids in ec-
centric annuli,36,37 and turbulent flow of non-Newtonian drag re-
ducing fluids.38 However, turbulent flow of non-Newtonian fluids
needs much more work and should be extended to include drill-
pipe rotation and dynamics. Experimental data would be needed
to validate the fluid models.
Drillpipe Rotation and Dynamics. A major shortcoming of the
existing laboratory data, correlations, and models is the inad-
equacy of the drillpipe role representation. The recent study by
Bassal31 and ample field data2,3 reflect the vital role of high speed
rotation. More laboratory data as well as field studies, are needed
for the quantitative evaluation and modeling of drillpipe rotation
and the dynamics effects.
Mechanistic Modeling. The existing cuttings transport correla-
tions and/or models have a few empirical coefficients determined
based on laboratory and/or field data. There is a need for devel-
oping comprehensive cuttings transport mechanistic models that
can be verified with experimental data. Different levels of the
mechanistic approach are possible and can be gradually built on.
Ideally, a fluid-solids interaction model which would be coupled
and integrated with a fluid flow model to simulate the whole cut-
tings transport process is needed. Campos39 recently made such an
attempt, but much more work is needed to develop a comprehen-
sive solids-liquid flow model.
Hole Cleaning Monitoring System and Field Data. As complex
as the subject of cuttings transport is, with more than a dozen
interacting variables, and as rough, variable, and unpredictable
downhole parameters are, it would be prudent not to rely only on
the prediction of models, but to also take advantage of downhole
data. The status of the cuttings transport downhole can be related
to parameters that can be monitored at the surface. One such
example was discussed earlier,32 where pick-up weight, slack-off
weight, and rotating weight were correlated with the hole cleaning
status. Another technique which has recently been tried in several
wells uses a pressure while drilling tool. Information about the
tool and its degree of success in monitoring hole cleaning is
scarce at this time. However, it is obvious that real time pressure
and temperature data from several points of the well while drilling
can be very useful.
A hole cleaning monitoring system that receives all the avail-
able and relevant data in real time for quick analysis and for
determining the hole status needs to be developed. That informa-
tion would include data from various parts and aspects of the
rotary system, inflow, downhole, and outflow data of the circulat-
ing system, solids retrieval rate, etc. If one such system can be
built, it can be used to collect complete field cuttings transport
data that are badly needed for evaluation of present and future
hole cleaning models.
SPE Drill. & Completion, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 1999
Summary Guidelines for Efficient Hole Cleaning
Based on the results of many laboratories research and various
field experiences and observations the following general guide-
lines can be recommended.
1. Design the well path14 so that it avoids critical angles5 if
possible.
2. Use top drive rigs, if possible, to allow pipe rotation while
tripping.
3. Maximize fluid velocity, while avoiding hole erosion, by
increasing pumping power and/or using large diameter drill pipes
and drill collars.
4. Design the mud rheology so that it enhances turbulence in
the inclined/horizontal sections while maintaining sufficient sus-
pension properties in the vertical section.
5. In large diameter horizontal wellbores, where turbulent flow
is not practical, use muds with high suspension properties and
muds with high meter dial readings at low shear rates.
6. Select bits, stabilizers, and BHAs with minimum cross-
sectional areas to minimize plowing of cuttings while tripping.
7. Use various hole cleaning monitoring techniques including a
drilled cuttings retrieval rate, a drilled cuttings physical appear-
ance, pressure while drilling, and a comparison of pick-up weight,
slack-off weight, and rotating weight.32
8. Perform wiper trips as the hole condition dictates.
References
1. Nance, W.B. et al.: ‘‘A Comparative Analysis of Drilling Results
Obtained With Oil Mud vs. Water-Base Mud at High Island Block
A-270,’’ paper IADC/SPE 11357 presented at the 1983 IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 20–23 February.
2. Njaerheim, A. and Tjoetta, H.: ‘‘New World Record in Extended-
Reach Drilling From Platform Statfjord ‘C,’ ’’ paper IADC/SPE
23849 presented at the 1992 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, 18–21 February.
3. Alfsen, T.E. et al.: ‘‘Pushing the Limits for Extended Reach Drilling:
New World Record From Platform Statfjord C. Well C2,’’ SPEDC
共June 1995兲 71; Trans., AIME, 299.
4. Tomren, P.H., Iyoho, A.W., and Azar, J.J.: ‘‘Experimental Study of
Cuttings Transport in Directional Wells,’’ SPEDE 共Feb. 1986兲 43.
5. Okrajni, S.S. and Azar, J.J.: ‘‘The Effects of Mud Rheology on An-
nular Hole Cleaning in Directional Wells,’’ SPEDE 共Aug. 1986兲 297;
Trans. AIME, 285.
6. Becker, T.E., Azar, J.J., and Okrajni, S.S.: ‘‘Correlations of Mud
Rheological Properties Wit Cuttings-Transport Performance in Direc-
tional Drilling,’’ SPEDE 共March 1991兲 16; Trans., AIME, 291.
7. Stevenic, B.C.: ‘‘Design and Construction of a Large-Scale Wellbore
Simulator and Investigation of Hole Size Effects on Critical Cuttings
Transport Velocity in Highly Inclined Wells,’’ MS thesis, U. of
Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 共1991兲.
8. Jalukar, L.S.: ‘‘Study of Hole Size Effect on Critical and Subcritical
Drilling Fluid Velocities in Cuttings Transport for Inclined Well-
bores,’’ MS thesis, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 共1993兲.
9. Ford, J.T. et al.: ‘‘Experimental Investigation of Drilled Cuttings
Transport in Inclined Boreholes,’’ paper SPE 20421 presented at the
1990 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Or-
leans, 23–26 September.
10. Brown, N.P. and Bern, P.A.: ‘‘Cleaning Deviated Holes: New Experi-
mental and Theoretical Studies,’’ paper SPE/IADC 18636 presented
at the 1989 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 28
February–3 March.
11. Sifferman, T.R. and Becker, T.E.: ‘‘Hole Cleaning in Full-Scale In-
clined Wellbores,’’ SPEDE 共June 1992兲 115; Trans., AIME, 293.
12. Seeberger, M.H., Matlock, R.W., and Hanson, P.M.: ‘‘Oil Muds in
Large-Diameter, Highly Deviated Wells: Solving the Cuttings Re-
moval Problem,’’ paper SPE/IADC 18635 presented at the 1989 SPE/
IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 28 February–3 March.
Pilehvari, Azar, and Shirazi: Horizontal Wellbores
13. Martin, M. et al.: ‘‘Transport of Cuttings in Directional Wells,’’ pa-
per SPE/IADC 16083 presented at the 1987 SPE/IADC Drilling Con-
ference, New Orleans, 15–18 March.
14. Rasi, M.: ‘‘Hole Cleaning in Large, High-Angle Wellbores,’’ paper
IADC/SPE 27464 presented at the 1994 IADC/SPE Drilling Confer-
ence, Dallas, 15–18 February.
15. Larsen, T.I.: ‘‘A Study of the Critical Fluid Velocity in Cuttings
Transport,’’ MS thesis, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 共1990兲.
16. Larsen, T.I., Pilehvari, A.A., and Azar, J.J.: ‘‘Development of a New
Cuttings Transport Model for High-Angle Wellbores Including Hori-
zontal Wells,’’ paper SPE 25872 presented at the 1993 SPE Rocky
Mountain Regional/Low Permeability Reservoir Symposium, Denver,
12–14 April.
17. Hemphill, T. and Larsen, T.I.: ‘‘Hole-Cleaning Capabilities of Oil-
Based and Water-Based Drilling Fluids: A Comparative Experimental
Study,’’ paper SPE 26328 presented at the 1993 SPE Annual Tech-
nical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 3–6 October.
18. Jalukar, L.S. et al.: ‘‘Extensive Experimental Investigation of Hole
Size Effect on Cuttings Transport in Directional Well Drilling,’’ pa-
per presented at the ASME Fluids Engineering Division Annual Sum-
mer Meeting, San Diego, California, 7–12 July.
19. Gavignet, A. and Sobey, I.: ‘‘Model Aids Cuttings Transport Predic-
tion,’’ JPT 共September 1989兲 916; Trans., AIME, 287.
20. Wilson, K.C., ‘‘Slip Point of Beds in Solid-Liquid Pipeline Flow,’’ J.
Hydrol. Division of ASCE, 1970, 96, HY1, 1–12.
21. Seeberger, M.H., Matlock, R.W., and Hanson, P.M.: ‘‘Oil Muds in
Large: Diameter, Highly Deviated Wells: Solving the Cuttings Re-
moval Problem,’’ paper SPE/IADC 18635 presented at the 1989 SPE/
IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 28 February–3 March.
22. Zamora, M. and Hanson, P.: ‘‘Rules of Thumb to Improve High-
Angle Hole Cleaning,’’ Pet. Eng. Intl. 共January 1991兲 44, 48, 51.
23. Zamora, M. and Hanson, P.: ‘‘More Rules of Thumb to Improve
High-Angle Hole Cleaning,’’ Pet. Eng. Intl. 共February 1991兲 22, 24,
26.
24. Luo, Y. and Bern, P.A.: ‘‘Flow-Rate Predictions for Cleaning Devi-
ated Wells,’’ paper IADC/SPE 23884 presented at the 1992 IADC/
SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 18–21 February.
25. Ford, J. et al.: ‘‘Development of Mathematical Models Describing
Drilled Cuttings Transport in Deviated Wells,’’ paper 93-1102 pre-
sented at the 1993 CADE/CAODC Spring Drilling Conference, Cal-
gary, 14–16 April.
26. Clark, R.K. and Bickham, K.L.: ‘‘A Mechanistic Model for Cuttings
Transport,’’ paper SPE 28306 presented at the 1994 SPE 69th Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 25–28 Septem-
ber.
27. Campos, W. et al.: ‘‘A Mechanistic Modeling of Cuttings Transport
in Highly Inclined Wells,’’ Liquid-Solid Flows, ASME FED Vol.
189, M.C. Roco, et al. 共eds.兲, June 1994, 145–155.
28. Oroskar, A.D. and Whitmore, R.L., ‘‘The Critical Velocity in Pipe-
line Flow of Slurries,’’ AIChE. J. 共1980兲 26共4兲, 550.
29. Kenny, P., Sunde, E., and Hemphill, T.: ‘‘Hole Cleaning Modeling:
What’s ’n’ Got to Do with It?’’ paper IADC/SPE 35099 presented at
the 1996 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New Orleans, 12–15
March.
30. Chien, S.F.: ‘‘Settling Velocity of Irregularly Shaped Particles,’’
SPEDC 共December 1994兲 281.
31. Bassal, A.A.: ‘‘A Study of the Effect of Drill Pipe Rotation on Cut-
tings Transport in Inclined Wellbores,’’ MS thesis, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa,
OK 共1995兲.
32. Guild, G.J. and Hill, T.H.: ‘‘Hole Cleaning Program for Extended
Reach Wells,’’ paper SPE/IADC 29381 presented at the 1995 SPE/
IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam 28 February–2 March.
33. Hemphil, T., Pilehvari, A., and Campos, W.: ‘‘Yield Power Law
Model More Accurately Predicts Mud Rheology,’’ Oil & Gas J. 共Au-
gust 1993兲 45.
34. Hacjislamoglo, M. and Langliais, J.: ‘‘Non-Newtonian Flow in Ec-
centric Annuli,’’ paper presented at the 13th Annual Energy-Sources
Technology Conference and Exhibition, ASME Drilling Technology
Synposium, New Orleans, 14–18, January 1989.
35. Azouz, I. et al.: ‘‘Numerical Simulation of Laminar Flow of Yield-
Power Law Fluids in Conduits of Arbitrary Cross-Section Trans.,
ASME 共December 1993兲 15, 710.
SPE Drill. & Completion, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 1999 199
36. Azouz, I. et al.: ‘‘Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Flow in Con-
centric and Eccentric Annuli,’’ AIAA paper 93-3106 presented at the
24th Fluid Dynamics Conference, Los Angeles, 21–26 June 1992.
37. Shirazi, S.A., Azouz, I., and Pilehvari, A.A.: ‘‘Numerical Simulation
of Turbulent Flow in Annular Conduits,’’paper presented at the
ASME Fluids Engineering Conference, Los Angeles, 21–26 June
1992.
38. Azouz, I. and Shirazi, S.A.: ‘‘Turbulent Flow of Drag Reducing Flu-
ids in Annular Passages,’’ Numerical Methods for Non-Newtonian
Fluid Dynamics, ASME FED 179, G.C. Vradias and D.A. Siginer,
eds, June 1994, 71–81.
39. Campos, W.: ‘‘Mechanistic Modeling of Cuttings Transport in Direc-
tional Wells,’’ PhD dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 共1995兲.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
ft ⫻ 3.048* E⫺01 ⫽ m
in ⫻ 2.54* E⫹00 ⫽ cm
*Conversion factors are exact. SPEDC
200 Pilehvari, Azar, and Shirazi: Horizontal Wellbores
Ali Pilehvari is an associate professor of chemical and natural
gas engineering at Texas A&M U. at Kingsville. e-mail:
A-Pilehvari@taisun1.tamuk.edu. He teaches and conducts re-
search on the rheology of complex fluids, oil field chemicals
development, and natural gas and crude oil processing. Pile-
hvari holds a BS degree in chemical engineering from Tehran
Polytechnic and MS and PhD degrees from the U. of Tulsa.
J.J. Azar is a professor of petroleum engineering at the U. of
Tulsa. He previously was Director of the Tulsa U. Drilling Re-
search Projects. Azar holds BS, MS, and PhD degrees in me-
chanical engineering from the U. of Oklahoma. He is the re-
cipient of the 1997 SPE Distinguished Achievement Award for
Petroleum Engineering Faculty and the 1998 SPE Drilling Engi-
neering Award. Siamack A. Shirazi is an associate professor
of mechanical engineering at the U. of Tulsa. e-mail: siamack-
shirazi@utulsa.edu. He teaches and conducts research in
computational fluid dynamics of multiphase flow, specializing
in multiphase separation technology and erosion/corrosion.
Shirazi holds BS, MS, and PhD degrees in mechanical engi-
neering from the U. of New Mexico.
SPE Drill. & Completion, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 1999