Subcommittee 10 General Session *Revised Minutes (July 6, 2010)* Chairman: David Stiles Intercontinental Hotel, New Orleans, Louisiana

Transcription

1 Subcommittee 10 General Session *Revised Minutes (July 6, 2010)* Chairman: David Stiles Intercontinental Hotel, New Orleans, Louisiana David Stiles called the meeting to order at 1:30 PM on Wednesday, January 27, Approval of Minutes from Westminster The first order of business was to approve the minutes from the 2009 Summer Meeting at Westminster, CO. Robert Darbe read the minutes. Rick Lukay made a motion to approve the minutes with a small typo correction. The motion was seconded by Craig Gardner and passed unanimously. Review of Task Groups and Work Groups David gave an overview of the charges for the task groups and work groups. He noted that the TG on Mechanical Behavior of Cements had a change in charge to include testing procedures as of the summer meeting held in Denver. Reports of Task Groups and Work Groups Task Group and Work Group chairpersons read the minutes from their respective teams. David Stiles read minutes on Tom Griffin s behalf and Craig Gardner did the same for Hank Rogers. These minutes are available as attachments at the end of this document. Charge Chairperson(s) Link to Attachment TG on Cooperative Testing Bill Carruthers Minutes Presentation WG on Compressive Strength Scott Saville Minutes TG on Performance Testing of Well Cementing Composites Bill Carruthers TG on Mechanical Plugs Used in Hank Rogers Minutes Casing, Tubing, and Drill Pipe RG for ISO Liaison Deryck Williams Presentation WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal Tom Griffin Minutes and Water Wetting by Spacers TG on Mechanical Behavior of Robert Darbe Minutes Cements WG on HTHP Rheology Deryck Williams Minutes WG on Slurry Mixing Procedures Jim Davison Minutes Presentation WG on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling Robert Beirute Minutes Presentation Presentation ISO Meeting Presentation - ISO Meeting Minutes Presentation

2 After no discussion during the discussion period, David Stiles tendered a motion to accept the reports. The motion was moved by Jerry Calvert, seconded by Robert Beirute, and passed unanimously. Old Business There was no Old Business was to discuss. New Business Proposed NWI for HPHT Rheology Bill Carruthers spoke highly of Jerold Kennedy who recently passed away. Jerold was a contributing member to API s cooperative testing program representing California Portland Cement. Review of Updated Membership Rosters David Stiles reviewed the roster of voting members and alternates for SC-10. Small changes were made to correct the document. David Stiles will contact Joe Garcia to ascertain if Capital Cement is going to stay involved with SC-10 while not manufacturing well cement. David will also contact Cal Port to see if they will have a replacement member for Jerold. Chrome (VI) Reducing Agents The date limit set in ISO to address Directive 2003/53/ED of the European Parliament has expired. A corrigendum, or addendum, to is needed to change the wording to correct the wording to allow for the directive to continue. This document won t be adopted back as API Spec 10A until this issue is resolved. Auditor Checklist Recent changes to ISO that passed FDIS voting and will soon be adopted back as API Spec 10A will require updates to the auditor checklist. The TG on Cement Monogram Program, chaired by Bill Caruthers, will review and present updates to the checklist during the summer meeting. Heat of Hydration of Cement (Link to attachment: Presentation) Brian Koons voiced a concern that high-dollar decisions are being based on temperature simulators that use default values and methods for handling heat of hydration. He reviewed some testing equipment and procedures currently available to use as a foundation for the WG. Brian proposed forming a WG to develop a RP for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration using ASTM C as a Guide. Discussion focused on the need to investigate at downhole conditions which would require additions to the existing ASTM method. This topic was tabled and will be brought up again in the summer meeting were Lee Dillenbeck was nominated to put together and present more information.

3 Patent Issue for WG on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling Robert Beirute paraphrased a patent that interfered with one method currently being investigated in the TG. Discussions centered on eliminating this method from the current investigation or approaching the patent holders about releasing the patent. Ron Crook mentioned that patented methods can be included in a TR. Upcoming meetings: Upcoming API meeting were presented: Exploration & Production Standards Conference: Washington DC Exploration & Production Standards Winter Meeting: Fort Worth Exploration & Production Standards Conference: San Francisco Exploration & Production Standards Winter Meeting:?? Adjournment After no additional business was proposed, Rick Lukay moved that the meeting be adjourned. After the motion was seconded by Tom Dealy, David Stiles adjourned the meeting at 2:55 PM.

4 Attachment #1 Minutes from TG on Cooperative Testing.

5 Subcommittee 10 Task Group on Cooperative Testing Chairman: Bill Carruthers InterContinental New Orleans New Orleans, Louisiana The meeting began at 8:00 a.m. Bill asked Gerry Calvert to give prayer. Bill went over the Cooperative Testing Program format (presentation attached). There will be about 300 samples going out this year. Samples will be Class H supplied by Holcim Apasco All test results should be submitted by the middle of May so that report can be done and presented at the summer meeting. Bill went over the testing protocol. Concerns from 2008 cooperative testing were discussed. Some of these issues were not enough samples were sent out, confusion over gel strength testing, the amount of pressure to apply to the UCA tests, conditioning temperatures and crush apparatus. The amount of sample that will be sent out this year will be approximately 10,000 grams. In 2008 it was about 6000 grams. It will be noted to the testing labs that fresh lab mixes will be done for each test. There was indication that more than one test was done with the same lab mix. Particle size testing should be done if the lab has the capability. It was noted that there were different units to test particle size and results may not have good correlation. Particle size test should note

6 what equipment was used for testing. The test instructions will include certain numbers to report for the practical size test but full report should be submitted. Bill stressed that if labs want to be included in this years cooperative testing they need to sign up or get with Bill this week. Meeting adjourned at 8:25 am.

7 Attachment #2 Presentation from TG on Cooperative Testing.

8 API Cooperative Testing Program Intercontinental Hotel New Orleans, LA Jan 26, 2010 Program Format December Solicitation Letter mailed to Committee members, monogram holders, past participants January 15, 2010 Deadline for subscribing to the program 57 cement plants, oil companies, consulting labs February 2010 Samples distributed by Holcim Apasco February 2010 Electronic reporting forms and testing protocol distributed by when samples shipped May 15, 2010 Deadline for returning results by to Scott Saville and Bill Carruthers June 2010 Preliminary i report made at tapi summer meeting 1

9 Current Business Sample Supplier for Holcim Apasco S.A. de C.V. Review Test Protocol for TESTING PROTOCOL Schedule e 5 neat Free Fluid Strength at 100 (8 & 24 Hr) and 140 (8 hr), UCA (8 Hr & 24 Hr) Chemistry Fineness Gl Gel Additional Testing for strength work group Additional other testing? 2

10 2008 CONCERNS Inadequate amount of sample Gel Strength Testing Pressure for UCA Testing (1000 psi) Conditioning Temperatures Crush htester t loading rate Sample Weight Requirements Schedule grams Free Fluid 860 grams Strengths th (4 sets) 3440 grams Gel Strength 860 grams Rheology 860 grams Blaine, Chemistry, etc. 25 grams Additional Testing???? TOTAL 6905 grams 3

11 Attachment #3 Minutes from WG on Compressive Strength.

12 Subcommittee 10 Work Group on Compressive Strength Chairman: Scott Saville InterContinental New Orleans New Orleans, Louisiana Scott reviewed the past work that this Work Group on Compressive Strengths has done (presentation attached). This included known trends from past testing. From this work there has been test that have been added and deleted based on analyzed data. Scott then went over the 2010 compressive strength protocol. He asked for other testing ideas. There were none. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 am.

13 Attachment #4 Minutes from TG on Performance Testing of Well Cementing composites.

14 Subcommittee 10 Task Group on Composite Cement Chairman: Bill Carruthers InterContinental New Orleans New Orleans, Louisiana Bill gave a brief explanation of why this Task Group was formed. The CO 2 footprint of Portland cement production needs to be reduced. Soon cement manufactures will be taxed on the amount of CO 2 produced from making cement. Substituting Portland cement with other products will reduce the amount of Portland cement production. Composite cements may be combinations of Portland cement and slag, fly ash, silica etc. There will be different specs. for each cement substitute. Fly ash is a good substitute but may not be readily available in the future. ASTM has specs. on cement blends but are not as specific as the charge of this Task Group. Bill went over the test data for the composite cement/slag blend. Data indicates composite blends will work based on compressive strength and other cement test. Density measurement was variable but acceptable. Blaine was rather erratic. Manufacturers are currently blending cements. Question was asked if there blending process was acceptable. Current blended cement from manufacturers are well accepted by the industry. Bill asked where does this Task Group go from here. Possibly test with local slags. There will be enough cement in the cooperative test

15 samples to test about three composite cement tests. These test will be 100, 140 F compressive strengths and rheology. A schedule 5 thickening time test will also be included in case there is enough sample left to do this test. It was agreed at this point more data is needed before doing performance testing. Other testing will probably include composite cement with silica. Special instructions will be needed for this testing. Current testing will concentrate on slag. Once performance testing begins small lab groups will be chosen to do this testing. The majority of these labs will probably be service company labs. The performance testing will using selected additives to meet specified specifications. Meeting adjourned at 9:50 am.

16 Attachment #5 Presentation from TG on Performance Testing of Well Cementing composites.

17 1/26/2010 API COMMITTEE ON COMPOSITES Intercontinental Hotel New Orleans, LA January 26, 2010 API Committee on Composites Review of past data Path Forward Additional testing on current blend Additional testing on other composites Fly Ash Silica Flour or Fume Others 1

18 1/26/2010 SCHEDULE 5 Series 1 PARTICIPANT Dyckerhoff G - 60% / Lafarge Slag - 40% Init. Bc Max minute, Bc 30Bc 70 Bc 100Bc CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik, Norway CTG - Italcementi CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB 117 Texas Lehigh Cement Co Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge, Joppa, IL Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron Drilling Specialties, Bartlesville, OK PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE 115 Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 108 PARTICIPANT Cement Used Lafarge Slag SCHEDULE 5 Series 2 Local Cement / Lafarge Slag Init. Bc Max. 30 minute 30Bc 70 Bc 100Bc CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) XX Halliburton, Duncan, OK Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Cal Portland, Mojave, CA CalPort G (MSR) XX Halliburton, Aberdeen UK LAF Lehavre G (HSR) XX PCR PCR G XX Norcem A.S Brevik, Norway Norcem, Brevik G XX CTG - Italcementi Tourah G XX CSI Technologies CalPort G (MSR) XX SAUDI ARAMCO Saudi Cmt G XX Halliburton, Broussard, LA Laf Jpa H, HSR XX Lehigh, Edmonton, AB XX 116 Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge, Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H, HSR XX Schlumberger, Clamart, France CCB G (HSR) XX Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H XX PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G XX AVERAGE 111 Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 108 2

19 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT SCHEDULE 5 Series 3 Local Cement / Local Slag Cement Used Slag Used Max. 30 Init. Bc Minute 30Bc 70 Bc 100Bc CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik, Norway Norcem, Brevik G Merox (Slite) CTG - Italcementi Tourah G Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) Lehigh Lafarge, Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H (HSR) Laf Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France CCB G (HSR) Holcim USA Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G IBEC AVERAGE 107 Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 108 PARTICIPANT SCHEDULE 5 Series 4 Dyckerhoff G / Local Slag Dyck G Slag used Max. 30 Init. Bc Minute 30Bc 70 Bc 100Bc CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium XX CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik, Norway CTG - Italcementi XX Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co XX Lehigh Lafarge, Joppa, IL XX Lafarge Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft XX Thyssen Krupp AG (Furnace Schwelgern) Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron XX Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil XX IBEC AVERAGE 118 Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 108 3

20 1/26/2010 FREE FLUID PARTICIPANT Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 4 Dyck G/ Laf Slag Local Cmt / Laf Slag Local Cmt / Local Slag Dyck G / Local Slag CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CTG - Italcementi CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co Lafarge Joppa, IL Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron Drilling Specialties, Bartlesville, OK 0.85 PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE 0.73% 1.96% 2.16% 1.20% Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 2.30% 2.30% 2.30% 2.30% RHEOLOGY AND GEL STRENGTHS PARTICIPANT DYCKERHOFF G / LAFARGE SLAG (series 1) Rheology, rpms Gel Strength seconds 10 minutes CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lafarge, Joppa, IL ` Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron Drilling Specialties, Bartlesville, OK PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE

21 1/26/2010 RHEOLOGY AND GEL STRENGTHS LOCAL CEMENT / LAFARGE SLAG (series 2) PARTICIPANT Rheology, rpms Gel Strength seconds 10 minutes CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lafarge Joppa, IL Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE RHEOLOGY AND GEL STRENGTHS PARTICIPANT LOCAL CEMENT / LOCAL SLAG (series 3) Rheology, rpms Gel Strength seconds 10 minutes CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Lafarge, Joppa, IL Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE

22 1/26/2010 RHEOLOGY AND GEL STRENGTHS PARTICIPANT DYCKERHOFF G / LOCAL SLAG (series 4) Rheology, rpms Gel Strength seconds 10 minutes Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge, Joppa, IL Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 100 F Dyckerhoff G / Lafarge Slag (Series 1) Dyck G Lafarge Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium XX XX Halliburton, Duncan, OK XX XX Cal Portland, Mojave, CA XX XX Halliburton, Aberdeen UK XX XX PCR XX XX Norcem A.S Brevik XX XX CTG - Italcementi XX XX CSI Technologies XX XX SAUDI ARAMCO XX XX Halliburton, Broussard, LA XX XX Lehigh, Edmonton, AB XX XX Texas Lehigh Cement Co XX XX Lafarge, Joppa, IL XX XX Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft XX XX Schlumberger, Clamart, France XX XX Chevron XX XX Drilling Specialties, Bartlesville, OK XX XX PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil XX XX AVERAGE 427 Dyckerhoff (neat, unblended cement) 815 6

23 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 100 F Local Cement / Lafarge Slag (Series 2) Local Cement Lafarge Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) XX Halliburton, Duncan, OK Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Cal Portland, Mojave, CA CalPort G (MSR) XX Halliburton, Aberdeen UK LAF Leh G (HSR) XX PCR PCR G XX Norcem A.S Brevik Norcem, Brevik G XX CTG - Italcementi Tourah G XX CSI Technologies CalPort G (MSR) XX SAUDI ARAMCO Saudi Cmt G XX Halliburton, Broussard, LA Laf Jpa H (HSR) XX Lehigh, Edmonton, AB XX Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Lafarge, Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H (HSR) XX Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France CCB G (HSR) XX Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H XX PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G XX AVERAGE 386 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 100 F PARTICIPANT Local Cement / Local Slag (Series 3) Local Cement Local Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik Norcem, Brevik G Merox (Slite) CTG - Italcementi Tourah G Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) Lehigh Lafarge, Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H (HSR) Lafarge Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, ge,clamart, a France CCB G (HSR) Holcim USA Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G IBEC AVERAGE 384 7

24 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 100 F Dyck G / Local Slag (Series 4) Dyck G Local Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium XX CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CTG - Italcementi XX Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co XX Lehigh Lafarge Joppa, IL XX Lafarge Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft XX Thyssen Krupp AG (Furnace Schwelgern) Schlumberger, Clamart, France XX Holcim USA Chevron XX Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil XX IBEC AVERAGE 269 PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 140 F Dyckerhoff G / Lafarge Slag (Series 1) Dyck G Lafarge Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium XX XX Halliburton, Duncan, OK XX XX Halliburton, Pune, INDIA XX XX Cal Portland, Mojave, CA XX XX Halliburton, Aberdeen UK XX XX PCR XX XX Norcem A.S Brevik XX XX CTG - Italcementi XX XX CSI Technologies XX XX SAUDI ARAMCO XX XX Halliburton, Broussard, LA XX XX Lehigh, Edmonton, AB XX XX Texas Lehigh Cement Co XX XX Lafarge Joppa, IL XX XX Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft XX XX Schlumberger, Clamart, France XX XX Chevron XX XX Drilling Specialties, Bartlesville, OK XX XX PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil XX XX AVERAGE

25 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 140 F Local Cement / Lafarge Slag (Series 2) Local Cement Lafarge Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) XX Halliburton, Duncan, OK Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Halliburton, Pune, India Laf Jpa H (HSR) XX Cal Portland, Mojave, CA CalPort G (MSR) XX Halliburton, Aberdeen UK LAF Leh G (HSR) XX PCR PCR G XX Norcem A.S Brevik Norcem, Brevik G XX CTG - Italcementi Tourah G XX CSI Technologies CalPort G (MSR) XX SAUDI ARAMCO Saudi Cmt G XX Halliburton, Broussard, LA Laf Jpa H (HSR) XX Lehigh, Edmonton, AB XX Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) XX Lafarge Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H (HSR) XX Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France CCB G (HSR) XX Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H XX PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G XX AVERAGE 1701 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 140 F PARTICIPANT Local Cement / Local Slag (Series 3) Local Cement Local Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium CCB G (HSR) CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik Norcem, Brevik G Merox (Slite) CTG - Italcementi Tourah G Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co Tx Lehigh H (HSR) Lehigh Lafarge Joppa, IL Laf Jpa H (HSR) Lafarge Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Shl Schlumberger, Clamart, tfrance CCB G (HSR) Holcim USA Chevron Buzzi Unicem USA H Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Holcim G IBEC AVERAGE

26 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS, 8 HOUR, 140 F Dyck G / Local Slag (Series 4) Dyck G Local Slag cube 1 cube 2 cube 3 average CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium XX CCB Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CTG - Italcementi XX Atlàntica de Graneles CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Lehigh, Edmonton, AB Texas Lehigh Cement Co XX Lehigh Lafarge Joppa, IL XX Lafarge Joppa Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft XX Thyssen Krupp AG (Furnace Schwelgern) Schlumberger, Clamart, France XX Holcim USA Chevron XX Buzzi Unicem USA Slag PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil XX IBEC AVERAGE 1433 PARTICIPANT Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Series 4 CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CTG - Italcementi CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Texas Lehigh Cement Co Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge, Joppa, IL USA Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE

27 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT SPECIFIC GRAVITY Dyckerhoff Cement Local Cement Lafarge Slag Local Slag CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium Halliburton, Duncan, OK Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik CTG - Italcementi CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Texas Lehigh Cement Co Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Schlumberger, Clamart, France Lafarge, Joppa, IL, USA Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil AVERAGE BLAINE STUDY PARTICIPANT Blaine for Test Series 1 Blaine for Test Series 2 Blend Dyck G Laf Slag Blend Local Cement Laf Slag CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium (CCB G) Halliburton, Duncan, OK (TxLeh H) Cal Portland, Mojave, CA (CalPort G) Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR (PCR G) Norcem A.S Brevik (Norcem Brk G) CTG - Italcementi (Tourah G) CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Saudi Cmt G) Halliburton, Broussard, LA Texas Lehigh Cement Co (Tx Leh H) Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge Joppa, IL, USA (Joppa H) Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Holcim G) AVERAGE

28 1/26/2010 PARTICIPANT BLAINE STUDY Blaine for Test Series 3 Blaine for Test Series 4 Blend Local Cement Local Slag Blend Dyck G Local Slag CCB, Gaurain Ramecroix, Belgium (CCB) 5240 (CCB) Halliburton, Duncan, OK Halliburton, Pune, India Cal Portland, Mojave, CA Halliburton, Aberdeen UK PCR Norcem A.S Brevik 3390 (Norcem Brk G) 5340 (Merox) CTG - Italcementi (Tourah G) 4280 (AG) (AG) CSI Technologies SAUDI ARAMCO Halliburton, Broussard, LA Texas Lehigh Cement Co (Tx Leh H) 4680 (Lehigh) (Lehigh) Dyckerhoff Aktiengesellschaft Lafarge Joppa, IL, USA (Laf Jop H) 7041 (Laf-Chi) (Laf-Chi) Schlumberger, Clamart, France Chevron PETROBRAS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Holcim G) 4190 (IBEC) (IBEC) 12

29 Attachment #6 Presentation on Composite Cement Reviewed During ISO Meeting. By: Simon James

30

31

32

33

34 Attachment #7 Minutes from TG on Mechanical Plugs Used in Casing, Tubing, and Drill Pipe.

35 Minutes Task Group on Mechanical Cement Plugs Using in Casing, Tubing and Drill Pipe API Subcommittee 10 New Orleans, USA January 26, 2010 Hank Rogers, Chairman Hank Rogers called the meeting to order at 10:30AM on Tuesday 26 th The business consisted of review and revision of Section 6 of the draft document dealing with evaluation of cementing plugs. It was then agreed that one or more virtual meeting will be held prior to the June meeting. The chairman commended the group for progress made by the small manufacturer s group which met previously in Houston as well as the progress and discussion at this meeting. The meeting was adjourned as scheduled at noon.

36 Attachment #8 Presentation from RG for ISO Liaison.

37 1/26/2010 Valencia, Spain Nov Deryck Williams Introduction & agenda (Gerard) New rules for writing definitions (Gerard) Final document & hopefully idea of votes (Gerard) Curing water issue (Bill) Cr VI reduction agents (Thierry) Balance & calibration issue (Gerard) Last chance for comments/edits (Gerard) List of issues, procedures, tests, etc.. to include (Dan) Any issues left? (Nevio, Bernard) French title (Bernard) Procedures for sample collection for co-operative testing (Jack) Status 2009 co-operative test programme (Bill & Jack) Large scale mixing (Bernard, Cristiane) Current API TG s, WG s and activities (David) Programme New Orleans, January 2010 (David) Cement setting (SPE ) (Gerard, tentative) Composites Co-operative testing: status (Bill) Slag tests (Bill) Silica tests (Derijck) Additional comments (Heiko) Way forward (Gerard, David) 1

38 1/26/ Approved for Publication (3 rd ed) date 15 December out for DIS voting Aim to drop and incorporate in IS, reconfirmed 18/06/ IS, reconfirmed 17/03/ IS, re-balloted and passed will be adopted. French title still an issue. 2

39 Attachment #9 Minutes from WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water Wetting by Spacers.

40 Minutes WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water-wetting by Spacers January 26, 2010 Minutes Work Group on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water-Wetting by Spacers API Subcommittee 10 New Orleans, Louisiana January 26, 2010 Tom Griffin, Chairman The meeting was called to order at 2:00 PM. The chairman opened the meeting and read the list of members. Jack Maberry, Cristiane de Miranda, Nevio Moroni, and Emmanuel Therond were not present. Bob Carpenter was represented by Deryck Williams, The minutes from the June '09 meeting in Westminster were read, amended and approved by the members. The chairman reviewed the agenda and it was accepted. The chairman reviewed the team assignments. Discussion Coupon finish and specification Rick Lukay, team leader for coupon finish led discussion of coupon finish and specification. Rick reported that he has found no method for improving the finish to improve contact angle measurement. The issue of steel vs. glass coupons was discussed. Issues for steel coupons are cost, availability, natural oil-wet condition, and finish. For glass coupons, cost and availability are less an issue, natural water-wet condition and cutting microscope slide to fit in the goniometer are issues. Lirio Quintero has identified a source for the microscope slides and for cutting and drilling the hole in the slides. Glass slides must be handled more carefully when attaching to the holder to avoid breakage. Members of the group have tested steel coupons in 32 and 8 finish. The 32 finish tends to cause the droplet to spread in the direction of the grain or surface features of the finish. The 8 finish tends to be so reflective that the goniometer is unable to distinguish the droplet shape and doesn t give a reading. These are standard finishes and an intermediate finish would have to be specially made, making that finish more costly. The group decided to focus on the glass slides and steel coupons with a 32 finish. Users of the steel coupons will be asked to make observations of the shape of the droplet. Coupon cleaning and preparation Lirio Quintero has tested cleaning of coupons. After discussion, the group decided to standardize on an acetone wash, water rinse and drying with compressed gas (either nitrogen, CO2, or canned air). The procedure should contain a warning not to use shop air. Atmospheric pressure exposure The atmospheric pressure exposure procedure has had previous discussion and was not discussed further at this meeting. HPHT exposure Marshal Bishop discussed the issues of the HPHT procedure. The main issue is the inability to prevent exposure to spacer containing the surfactants at temperatures below the cloud point of the surfactant when heating to test temperatures above the cloud point and cooling to safe handling temperature. As a result of this issue, the group decided to abandon further efforts to develop the HPHT consistometer exposure. Stirred fluid loss apparatus exposure Jim Davison discussed the procedure for exposure using a stirred fluid loss apparatus. With this method, the spacer and the coupon that had previously been exposed to the NAF are heated to test temperature with the coupon not exposed to the spacer. This will eliminate the issue of exposure to the spacer at temperatures below the surfactants cloud points. After the temperature of the spacer has reached the test temperature, the cell containing the coupon and surfactant is inverted to expose the coupon to the spacer. After the desired exposure time, the cell is then inverted to the original position for cooling to safe handling temperature before the coupon is removed for contact angle measurement. The stirred fluid loss team was asked to ensure that the procedure is written is such generic form that any readily available stirred fluid loss apparatus can be used. 1 of 2

41 Minutes WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water-wetting by Spacers January 26, 2010 Rheometer exposure The exposure using the rheometer and evaluation of the wet condition of the rotor was discussed. Members of the group recalled that similar methods have been evaluated in the past and the method was too indiscriminate to pursue. The rheometer method is eliminated from further consideration. Post exposure coupon treatment Lirio Quintero has submitted a procedure for treatment of coupons after exposure and before contact angles are measured. If the contact angles are to be measured on coupons exposed to NAF without exposure to spacer in order to get an oil-wet baseline, the coupon should be rinsed with mineral oil to remove mud solids. There are still issues with the method of cleaning the coupons after exposure to the spacer. Several methods are proposed: rinsing with water, wiping with a towel without rinsing and dripping dry. There are many materials used to make towels and this will likely introduce variability. Chevron is investigating all these methods and will notify the group of their results. Contact angle measurement Several groups are continuing to work on contact angle measurements using goniometers. Droplet diameter as contact angle The determination of contact angles using droplet diameter was discussed. The group decided to eliminate this method from further consideration. Other issues The composition of the water used for the droplet when measuring the contact angle was raised as an issue. Possible compositions include deionized water and cement slurry filtrate. This may receive some further attention during the cooperative testing. A protocol to determine contact time with the spacer during the exposure is needed. Plan to test several exposure times during the cooperative test program. The group agreed that the teams should continue to refine the procedures they are working on and submit the teams draft to the chairman by May 1. The chairman will then review and clarify where necessary before distributing to the entire membership prior to the June meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 PM. 2 of 2

42 Attachment #10 Minutes from TG on Mechanical Behavior of Cements.

43 Minutes Task Group on Mechanical Behavior of Cement API Subcommittee 10 New Orleans, USA January 27, 2010 Robert Darbe, Chairman The meeting was called to order at 8:00 AM. Task group members present at the meeting included: Robert Darbe, Gerard Bol, Deryck Williams, Simon James, Bernard Fraboulet, Jim Davidson, and John St. Clergy. The charge was read and the minutes from the summer meeting were reviewed and approved. An updated charge which was presenting at the summer meeting in Westminster was reviewed by David Stiles. A proposed content list for the TR was presented and discussed. It was decided that a section on the interpretation and application of the mechanical results would not be drafted and the focus of the TR would be on testing procedures. Previous work performed by Dr. Gray needs to be collected and added as introductory material. The idea of performing a preliminary round of cooperative testing was discussed extensively. Deryck Williams, Jim Davison, Bernard Fraboulet, Simon James, and Robert Darbe agreed to perform testing for comparative purposes. It was decided to perform unconfined compressive, splitting, and ultrasonic testing with the goal of presenting results at the summer meeting. Cement and a known non-cementitious test specimen are to be analyzed. Simon James agreed to identify a source for a non-cementitious material which would be testing by the labs using their specific testing protocols. Robert Darbe will investigate using the same cement that is to be used by the TG on Cooperative Testing, as well as, draft up the details for this testing series and share with Scott Saville and the rest of this TG. It was decided to upload the working document detailing the testing procedures to the API sharepoint website for the group to download, add comment, and upload to. Two or three internet/phone meetings will be arranged between this meeting and the summer meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 AM.

44 Attachment #11 Minutes from WG on HTHP Rheology.

45 Work Group Members: API Sub-Committee 10 WG on HTHP Rheology Winter 2010 Minutes Version 3 January 27, 2010 Deryck Williams Jim Davidson John St. Clergy Robert Darbe Rageb Dajani Rick Lukay Steve Cicchese Mel Schmidt Schlumberger drrw@chevron.com Jim.Davison@ametek.com jstclergy@bjservices.com Robert.Darbe@Halliburton.com rdajani@hess.com rlukay@ofite.com s_cicchese@brookfieldengineering.com mschmidt@graceinstrument.com Replacement for Eric Charge: Develop a technical report on recommended testing protocols for measuring HTHP rheology of cement slurry (temperatures greater than 190F and/or pressures greater than atmospheric pressure) with the intention of the report serving as the basis for an ISO NWI. Discussions: Deryck Williams Chairman, started the 9:00am, introduced the WG members and read the charge as discussed at the June 2009 meeting in Denver. Discussions around the wording of the charge were held with changes made from suggestions put forth by Simon James (include rheology of cement slurry) and Brian Koons (include and/or pressures ). The charge was then accepted as revised. The chairman has already solicited and received the technical brochures from Brookfield, Chandler-Ametek and Grace Instruments for their respective equipments capabilities. Action Items: Review current work done on RP-39 as it pertains to the charge of the WG. Solicit equipment manuals from the respective manufacturers. The Chairman will send out first draft of testing protocols for WG s feedback prior to the June 2010 meeting in Washington DC. Rick Lukay made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Jim Davidson and the meeting was 9:25am.

46 Attachment #12 Minutes from WG on Slurry Mixing Procedures.

47 Minutes WG Large Scale Mixing January 27, 2010 Minutes Work Group on Large Scale Mixing API Subcommittee 10 New Orleans, LA USA January 26-28, 2010 Jim Davison Chairman The meeting was called to order at 10:15 AM by Chairman Jim Davison. No charge has yet been drafted for this WG. The WG is being formed to address currently written large scale mixing procedures due to large [One (1) gallon] mixer motors inability to reach the currently stated high shear mixing speed of 14,000 RPM. This information was brought to the committee s attention during the summer meeting at Westminster, CO by Bernard Fraboulet. Bernard s report is included with these minutes. Jim Davison presented data showing maximum speed achieved by the large mixer motors with different supply voltages of 208VAC and 220VAC. The data showed the mixer motors while able to achieve the 14,000 RPM high speed under load with water could not achieve the 14,000 RPM high speed under load of 16.4 ppg slurry. Jim Davison also presented data displaying the rheological properties of the 16.4 ppg slurry sample taken from top, middle and bottom portions of a one (1) gallon slurry mix. The rheology data was shown using two (2) different addition times, 20 seconds and 45 seconds. It was noted that the rheological properties improved with the extended addition time even though the 14,000 RPM was not achieved. 12,000 RPM was the maximum speed achieved for the data presented. Jim Davison s report is included with these minutes. The floor was opened for suggestions on a cooperative testing program to collect data with the intent of making procedural change recommendations to the committee. WC Jones suggested that rheology was the best indicator. Bernard Fraboulet affirmed WC s suggestion. Simon James stated the typical use for large scale mixes was UCA testing and perhaps this should be included in the testing program. Jerry Calvert stated that the mixing speeds for both the large scale and standard (1) quart mixers were derived using thickening times as the primary metric. Rick Lukay affirmed Jerry Calvert s comments and suggested the WG must include thickening time as a metric. UCA testing was excluded due to time constraints for the testing program. A decision was made to draft a testing protocol using rheology and thickening time as the metrics for comparison testing of slurry mixes using the one (1) quart mixer as the base standard with which to compare data. A goal of changing the

48 high speed specification for the large scale mixer to 10,000 RPM was set. Jim Davison will draft a testing protocol for the large scale mixing cooperative testing. The cooperative testing will be completed before the summer 2010 API meeting. The time frame was established to take quick action on the testing and be able to make recommendations for a procedural change to the committee at the summer 2010 meeting. WG members were solicited. Deryck Williams Bernard Frabolet Deepak Khatri Cristiane Richard not present Robert Darbe All volunteered to participate in the WG and perform the cooperative testing. A charge for the committee was drafted by Jim Davison and agreed by the WG members. Charge: Investigate the effects of reduced high speed mixing speed vs. add time when using the one (1) gallon (four [4] liter) mixer assembly The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 AM Attachments: Bernard Fraboulet presentation from Summer 2009 API Conference Westminster, CO. Jim Davison presentation from Winter 2010 API Meeting New Orleans, LA.

49 Attachment #13 Presentation from WG on Slurry Mixing Procedures.

50 1/27/2010 Large Scale Mixing Speed vs Voltage Motor motor 6,000 RPM 14,000 RPM Max RPM Water No X-former 208VAC Water X-former 220VAC ,4ppg No X-former 208VAC 6,000 11,800 11,800 16,4ppg X-former 220VAC 6,000 13,300 13,300 1

51 1/27/2010 Speed vs Voltage Motor motor 6,000 RPM 14,000 RPM Max RPM Water No X-former 208VAC Water X-former 220VAC ,4ppg No X-former 208VAC 6, ,4ppg X-former 220VAC 6, ppg slurry rheologies Top 1/3 20 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 20 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Top 1 Down Top 2 Up Top 2 Down Top

52 1/27/ ppg slurry rheologies Middle 1/3 20 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 20 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Mid 1 Down Mid 2 Up Mid 2 Down Mid ppg slurry rheologies Bottom 1/3 20 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 20 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Bot 1 Down Bot 2 Up Bot 2 Down Bot

53 1/27/ ppg slurry rheologies Top 1/3 45 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 45 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Top 1 Down Top 2 Up Top 2 Down Top ppg slurry rheologies Middle 1/3 45 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 45 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Mid 1 Down Mid 2 Up Mid 2 Down Mid

54 1/27/ ppg slurry rheologies Bottom 1/3 45 Seconds 6000 RPM Add Time 55 Seconds RPM Mix Time 45 Sec Add 55 Sec Mix Up Bot 1 Down Bot 2 Up Bot 2 Down Bot Conclusions Large Motor No Longer meets the required 14,000 RPM specification Increasing time to add dry cement improves performance Not enough data to make specification change recommendations Cooperative Testing Needed 5

55 1/27/2010 Volunteers Large Mixer Slurry Design(s) Suggested High Speed 10,000 RPM Extended Mix Time relative to reduced shear 6

56 Attachment #14 Presentation on Slurry Mixing from Westminster meeting.

57 ISO Annex A Procedure for preparation of large slurry volume : A revised procedure Bernard Fraboulet TOTAL Technology Specialists Gregory GALDIOLO TOTAL EP/TDO/EC /Fluids & Cements API Exploration & Production Standards Conference Westminster ISO TC67/SC3/WG2 June 25 th, 09 Actual procedure mix water and any liquid additives at slow speed r/min Add the cement/dry additive blend to the mixing container at a uniform rate, in not more than 15 s if possible When all of the dry materials have been added : Put the cap on continue mixing at high speed r/min Slurry volume ml High-speed mixing time s Chandler model A 220V 50/60 Hz In comparison to slurries mixed as per clause 5 SN :1336 (15/04/07) (600 ml standard mixer) different consistencies & properties are observed 1

58 Main identified problems Same addition time whatever the slurry volume to prepare Difficulties to respect cement addition in 15 s Splashing : need to put the cap before to add cement Need to Clamp the cap Need to Clamp the cap 2 inch hole to add cement Weight of the cement /blend High speed mixing (14000 r/min) is not provided under load: Rate is dropping to r/min or lower (blend, high viscosity slurry) Mixed slurry is not homogeneous Fast settling in the cup with free water development ( neat 1.90 kg/l slurry) Non homogeneous slurry: high consistency at bottom of the cup ( blend, heavy weight slurry) Slurry identifed as non mixable, but mixable with standard 600 ml mixer Different rheologies between large volume s and 600ml s procedures 3 Neat cement kg/l ml CCB Cemoil G Water 44%BWOC Poor mixing and homogeneity Free water in blender within less 2 min Settling in Fann cup Rheologies Mixing procedure YV ( lbf/100ft²) PV (cp) ISO 600 ml ( s) ml ( s)

59 Cement 2.04 kg/l 3000 ml Dyckerhoff G + 35 % silica + defoamer Top Middle Bottom Rheologies Shear rate (rpm) '' gel 10'gel PV YV ISO 600 ml mean Top mix 3000 ml mean Revised procedure : Cement/blend addition Addition rate impact 1.95 kg/l slurry with Silica flour and FL additives 3000 ml Addition in 15 s NOT Mixable Addition in 45 s Mixable 600 ml cement addition rate 792 g in 15 s 52.8 g/s Large volume addition rate In 15 s = rate are multiplied by 3 to 7 For 3000 ml at 52.8 g/s it would require 75 s Taking in account mixing area (21 cm²/12cm²) 42 s And higher low speed rate (6000/4000 r/min) 19 s 6 Recommended addition time To take in account feasibility, cement and blend, handling, Slurry volume Addition time 2000 ml 25 s 3000 ml 35 s 4000 ml 45 s 3

60 Revised Mixing time (1/3) Constant speed during High Rate mixing r/min Same order of mixing energy provided than ISO clause 5 Orban (SPE 15578) : 5.9 kj/kg Instrumented large volume mixer Electrical power ( U / I ) Mixing Blade speed (r/min) Slurry temperature ( C) Measurements and results (3 L tests) Frictions empty mixer at 6000 r/min :84 W at r/min :242 W Mixing i power calculated l from water temperature t increase estimated frictions under load Speed/time ΔT ( C) Total HP (W) Mixing HP (W) Frictions (W) 6000 r/min 35 s r/min 60 s Revised Mixing time (2/3) Working with a pseudo cement powder (barite + silica flour+ antisettling) Dry blend density similar to cement density (3.18 kg/l) 1.90 kg/l slurry mixed with 44 % water Evaluation of mixing procedure for 3 L Addition in 45 or 35 s Mixing at and rpm for 60 s Pseudo cement mixing 3L Ajdding blend 45 sec mixage = température Fluid fluide x10 courant Intensity ma U MOTEUR motor V 0 12:00:00 AM 12:00:10 AM 12:00:20 AM 12:00:30 AM 12:00:40 AM 12:00:50 AM 12:01:00 AM 12:01:10 AM 12:01:20 AM 12:01:30 AM 12:01:40 AM 12:01:50 AM 12:02:00 AM 12:02:10 AM 12:02:20 AM 12:02:30 AM 12:02:40 AM 12:02:50 AM 12:03:00 AM 12:03:10 AM 12:03:20 AM 12:03:30 AM 12:03:40 AM 12:03:50 AM 12:04:00 AM 12:04:10 AM 12:04:20 AM 12:04:30 AM 12:04:40 AM 12:04:50 AM 12:05:00 AM 12:05:10 AM 0 vitesse Speed r/min 8 4

61 Revised mixing procedure (3/3) Results ISO 600mL mixing Small mixing container on large volume mixer motor Total Power 178 W Mixing power (54 W frictions) 125 W Mixing energy during 35 s : 4375 J or 3,85 kj/kg Higher frictions than mixing with a standard mixer Power during addition not taken in account Temperature increase 2 C Results at high speed r/min Total Power (average) 1095 W ±25 W Mixing power (less frictions) 1010 W ± 25 W Conclusions 3000 ml mixing Temperature increase is a good indicator for 2 C minimum mixing time : 31 s Mixing time to provide about 5.7 kj/kg (32500 J) = 32 s Application to a neat cement 9 New procedure : Evaluation with neat cement CCB Cemoil G ISO clause 5 mixing (600ml) Temperature increase 5.3 C Slurry rheology YV: 39 lbf/100ft² PV 30 cp Shear rate r/min up After down mixing mean Large volume mixing 3000 ml Addition 35 s at 6000 r/min Mixing time at r/min 45 s temperature increase 6.8 C Results 40 s mixing temperature increase 5.5 C Rheology YV: 31 lbf/100ft² PV 32 cp Shear rate r/min up After down mixing mean

62 New procedure : Evaluation with neat cement CCB Cemoil G Mixing 3000 ml Neat addition time 35 s High Speed 45 s High Speed 40 s U Motor (V) Speed (r/min *100) I Current (A) Fluid Temp. ( C) :00 0:10 0:20 0:30 0:40 0:50 1:00 1:10 1:20 1:30 1:40 1:50 1:60 0:00 0:10 0:20 0:30 0:40 0:50 1:00 11 New procedure : Evaluation with neat cement CCB Cemoil G 12 Large volume mixing 2000 ml Addition 35s at 6000 r/min Mixing time at r/min 30 s temperature increase 5.2 C Rheology YV: 40 lbf/100ft² PV 27 cp Shear rate up After down mixing mean Large volume mixing 4000 ml Addition 45 s at 6000 r/min Mixing time at r/min 55 s temperature increase 5.8 C Rheology YV: 37.5 lbf/100ft² PV 32.5 cp Shear rate up After down mixing mean Remark : high speed mixing for longer time is always providing a high YV 6

63 Large volume mixing Temperature Rheology Readings L L API ISO 2L - 30 s 3L - 40 s 4L - 55 s Temp C temp initial temp final Delta temp RPM 5 0 5,3 5,2 5,5 5,8 0.6L API 2L - 30 s 3L - 40 s 4L - 55 s Slurry Volume & Mixing time 13 Application : Reduced water slurry 2.04 kg/l Dyckerhoff G Water 34.5% BWOC Mixing conditions Need longer time to add cement and to wet the cement 600 ml cement added in 40s (clause 5 : 15 s) 3000 ml cement added into 50 s (plan 35 s) easier to handle large cement blend volume Rheology : Shear rate up down mean ml Shear rate up down ml mean Rheology Temperature increase 600mL : 4.3 C 3000 ml : 5.2 C Readings ml-35sec 3L-40sec RPM 7

64 Proposed procedure : Large volume mixing Put the cap on Mix water and any liquid additives at slow speed r/min ± 200 r/min Add the cement/dry additive blend to the mixing container at a uniform rate, in not more than the specified time if possible When all of the dry materials have been added, :close the cork and continue mixing at high speed r/min ± 500 r/min for the specified time at ±1s Slurry volume Cement/dry additive blend High speed (ml) Addition time (s) mixing time (s) Remarks For 4000 ml compared to standard 600 ml ISO slurry mixing, some higher viscosities are observed whatever the mixing time. This does not seems to be linked to the energy provided by the mixer but by a lower global mixing linked to blade assy and homogenized slurry. A double blade assy design should provide a better homogenization during the process. 8

65 Attachment #15 Minutes from WG on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling.

66 TG Members in Attendance Robert Beirute - Chairman Craig Gardner Deryck Williams Dave Stiles Jim Davison Gunnar DeBrujin / Deepak?? Minutes of the TG on Dynamic Settling 2010 Winter Meeting New Oleans 27 January 2010 Robert Beirute - TG Chairman opened the meeting at 11:00 hrs by reviewing the charge as stated in the Calgary 2008 meeting. The minutes of the meeting held in Denver June 2009 were also reviewed. These minutes were approved by Craig Gardner and seconded by Jim Davison and all accepted with a change to the minutes noting There were no engineering drawings for the Hellical Screw. The charge Prepare a technical report defining test methods and procedures applicable for determining the dynamic settling characteristics of cement slurries, spacers and drilling fluids under simulated well conditions. Technical report will serve as the basis of an ISO NWI Discussions The Chairman covered the communications since the Denver meeting and reviewed the three test methods currently being considered: Amoco Test SLB Test Helical Screw Test Updates since the June meeting in Denver are as follows: Nevio sent procedures, drawings and testing data. Tom Griffin supplied comments (via ) to this procedure. The Chairman reviewed some previous examples using the Amoco test method.

67 Deryck Williams presented the current data generated by the Chevron Lab using only the Amoco test method. Currently there are a couple of slurries designed with good dynamic settling properties. The other design with poor dynamic settling properties is still being worked. Deryck also presented a fourth test method to be considered using the MACS II or its paddle configuration. Action Items The chairman will forward Tom s comments to Nevio in order to proceed with the Hellical Screw method. Jim Davison Chandler will incorporate the drawings and make the helical screw. Schlumberger will revise their procedures and make them more specific. Deryck will finish testing on the poor dynamic settling slurry design and also run the other test methods being considered. Dave Stiles proposed the motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Deryck all accepted and the meeting was adjourned at 12 PM.

68 Attachment #16 Presentation from WG on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling.

69 1/27/2010 Project S09139 Dynamic Settling Analysis Interpretation and Report Donald Davis, Chevron Cement Laboratory - Houston Chevron 2005 DOC ID Test# Dynamic Settling Analysis Slurry : Joppa H, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.1% SCR-100, 35% Coarse Silica, 0.25% DAir-3000, 47.59% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 16.4 ppg Yield : 1.07 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Separation, Settling (Chevron Test Failed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 10 Bc at start of test. 6 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 6 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 6 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured thin from cup. Top portion poured thin. 9/16 cone observed. No second cone in the center observed. Solids settling observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID 1

70 1/27/2010 Test# Dynamic Settling Analysis Slurry : Joppa H, 0.5% CFR-2, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.2% SCR-100, 24.1% Hidense 3, 38.69% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 18.0 ppg Yield : 1.14 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Settling (Chevron Test Failed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 14 Bc at start of test. 10 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 10 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 5 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured slightly streaky from cup. Top portion poured thin. 1/2 cone observed. No second cone in the center observed. Solids settling observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID Dynamic Settling Analysis Test # Slurry : Joppa H, 0.5% CFR-2, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.2% SCR-100, 24.1% Hidense 3, 0.2% Biozan, 38.69% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 18.0 ppg Yield : 1.15 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Zero (Chevron Test Passed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 42 Bc at start of test. 27 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 27 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 11 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured thick from cup. Very uniform. Top portion poured thick and uniform. 6/16 cone observed. No second cone in the center observed. Mushy, no settling solids observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID 2

71 1/27/2010 Test # Dynamic Settling Analysis Slurry : Joppa H, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.1% SCR-100, 35% Coarse Silica, 0.25% DAir-3000, 0.1% Biozan, 47.61% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 16.4 ppg Yield : 1.07 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Trace (Chevron test passed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 22 Bc at start of test. 20 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 19 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 14 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured uniformly from cup. Top portion poured uniformly. 5/8 cone observed. Mushy, no solids settling observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID Dynamic Settling Analysis Test # Slurry : Joppa H, 0.5% CFR-2, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.2% SCR-100, 24.1% Hidense 3, 0.05% Biozan, 38.69% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 18.0 ppg Yield : 1.14 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Mottled, 0.64% (Chevron Test Failed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 18 Bc at start of test. 17 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 16 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 7 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured uniform from cup. Top portion poured uniform. 1/4 cone observed. No second cone in the center observed. Mushy, minimal amount of settling solids observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID 3

72 1/27/2010 Test# Dynamic Settling Analysis Slurry : Joppa H, 0.4% Halad-344, 0.1% SCR-100, 0.25% Dair-3000, 0.1% Biozan, 38.48% Total Fluid (Fresh Water) Density : 16.4 ppg Yield : 1.07 Cu. Ft. /Sk. Free Water : Zero (Chevron Test Passed) Rheology : Slurry Viscosity : 18 Bc at start of test. 15 Bc after reading scheduled temperature and pressure. 14 Bc after 10 minutes conditioning. 8 Bc when rpms are changed from 150 to Bc after 30 minutes at 25 rpms. Slurry condition after running Dynamic Settling : Slurry initially poured uniform from cup. Top portion poured uniform. 1/2 cone observed. No second cone in the center observed. Mushy, no settling solids observed. Chevron 2005 DOC ID 4

73 Attachment #17 Presentation on Heat of Hydration of Cement.

74 1/27/2010 Proposed Work Group Recommended Practice for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration $$$ Decisions Being Made with Simulator Results Existing Temperature Simulators: May Use Default Values May Use Default Application of Heat Schedule Independent of Thickening Time Independent d of Slurry Type Specialized Blends (Low Cement Content) Foam Source of Defaults not Known Proposed Work Group Recommended Practice for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration No Existing Standard/RP Measurement tapparatus not Readily Available Current Industry Applications Low Heat of Hydration Arctic Cementing Gas Hydrates High Heat of Hydration Deepwater Dual Activity Rig Fast drill out Drill in Drive Pipe/Conductors Early release 1

75 1/27/2010 Proposed Work Group Recommended Practice for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration Construction Cement Industry has Existing Standards C (Standard Test Method for Heat of Hydration of Hydraulic Cement) Uses Solution Calorimeter (Dry Cement) C (Std test Method for HoH of Hydraulic Cementitious Materials) Uses Isothermal Conduction Calorimetry (Constant Temp Heat Sink Isothermal Calorimeters used for measurements in SPE and SPE Adiabatic and Semi Adiabatic Test Devices Exist SPE and reported use of adiabatic devices (Vacuum Insulation) Proposed Work Group Recommended Practice for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration 2

76 1/27/2010 Proposed Work Group Recommended Practice for Determination of Cement Heat of Hydration Propose formation of work group to establish RP for determination of Cement Slurry Heat of Hydration using ASTM C as a guide Use Isothermal Calorimetry and provides direct measure of the heat released Controlled curing temperature for the cement slurry More accurate with fewer calculations Method for quantitative and repeatable results Provide representative data for simulator input. 3

77 Attachment #18 Presentation for General Session.

78 2010 Exploration & Production Winter Standards Meeting January 25-29, 2010 InterContinental New Orleans New Orleans, Louisiana Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Agenda Tuesday, Jan : :15 Opening and Introductions ti 8:15 8:45 TG on Cooperative Testing/WG on Compressive Strength 8:45 10:15 WG on Performance Testing of Well Cementing Composites 10:15 10:30 Break 10:30 12:00 TG on Mechanical Plugs Used in Casing, Tubing and Drill Pipe 12:00 1:30 Lunch 1:30 2:00 ISO Update 2:00 3:00 WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal & Water Wetting by Spacers 3:00 3:15 Break 3:15 4:30 WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal & Water Wetting by Spacers 1

79 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Agenda Wednesday, Jan 27 8:00 9:00 TG on Mechanical Behavior of Cement 9:00 9:45 WG on HTHP Rheology 9:45 10:15 Break 10:15 11:00 WG on Slurry Mixing Procedures 11:00 12:00 WG on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling 12:00 1:30 Lunch 1:30 3:00 SC10 General Meeting Thursday, Jan 28 8:30-12:00 ISO TC67/SC3/WG2 Special Work Session Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting SC-10 General Meeting Agenda: Approval of Minutes from Westminster Reports of the Task/Work Groups Old Business New Business Adjourn 2

80 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday June 24, 2009: General Meeting Minutes from Westminster Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday June 24, 2009: General Meeting Motion to Accept the Minutes? 3

81 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday June 24, 2009: General Meeting 2010 SC10 Charges Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Task Group on Cooperative Testing Coordinate efforts of the cooperative e testing program. Coordinate efforts of the work group on compressive strength. Work Group on Compressive Strength Continue to evaluate the current specification test method by examining elements including mixing time, curing temperatures, curing time duration, curing baths (static vs. circulating) and cement block breaking procedures. Develop and propose a modified test method to yield improved repeatability. 4

82 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Work Group on Procedures for Sample Collection and Preparation for API Cooperative Testing Develop a technical report which defines the procedures used for collecting and preparing cement samples used for API Cooperative Testing. Task Group on Cement Monogram Program Monitor the program for improving the API monogramming and auditing process for well cements. Monitor onsite surveyor training, evaluation and selection process. Evaluate additional means of bringing value to the monogram program. Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Task Group on Publications The function of this task group is strictly editorial. The function is defined as one of active interaction with Subcommittee 10 and Subcommittee 10 Task and Work Groups. The task group will critically review technical documents under Subcommittee 10 jurisdiction, suggesting editorial changes to the appropriate chairman. The task group will ascertain uniformity of wording, units, abbreviations, adequacy of references and other editorial matters such as rewriting. Provide editorial assistance to Task and Work Group Chairmen, if requested by these chairmen, during the preparation of technical documents. To work closely with the Task and Work Group Chairmen to make sure changes suggested by the Publications Task Group are kept strictly editorial in nature, being careful to refer technical changes back to the Task and Work Groups. Return "final" documents to the Task and Work Groups if the documents, in the opinion of the Publications Task Group, require changes that are outside the editorial realm (e.g. documents with technical inconsistencies, with technical incompatibilities with other Subcommittee 10 documents, etc.). After completing the editorial review and other consultation with the appropriate chairman, assist as needed in submitting final documentation to Subcommittee 10 for appropriate action. Assist API staff with editorial tasks as needed. 5

83 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Resource Group - ISO Liaison Assist in coordination of API Subcommittee 10 and ISO activities at the subcommittee level. Attend ISO meetings as required and report actions or minutes of the meeting to API Subcommittee 10. Act as the representative of API Subcommittee 10 and express consensus of Subcommittee 10 verbally or in writing at all ISO meetings. Presence at ISO meetings and authority to represent API Subcommittee 10 lies with the chairman or his designee. Task Group on Mechanical Behavior of Cement Develop a technical report on the characterization of mechanical behavior of cement and test methods to measure the mechanical parameters of cement in the laboratory. This TR is intended to serve as the basis of an ISO NWI. Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Work Group on Compositional Analysis of Cement Monitor and report on analytical methods of compositional analysis of cement. Task Group on Mechanical Cementing Plugs Used in Casing, Tubing and Drill Pipe Develop a technical report on recommended testing, evaluation and performance requirements for mechanical cementing plugs with the intention of the report serving as the basis for an ISO NWI. Work Group on Test Methods for Determination of Dynamic Settling Prepare a technical report defining test methods and procedures applicable for determining the dynamic settling characteristics of cement slurries, spacers and drilling fluids under simulated well conditions. Technical report will serve as the basis of an ISO NWI for possible inclusion into ISO

84 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Work Group on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water-Wetting Wetting by Spacers To evaluate methods of determining the ability of spacer systems to remove a film of non-aqueous fluid from a surface and leave the surface water-wet. The product of the work should be a procedure to be incorporated into ISO /API RP10B-2 for use by field labs in evaluating this ability. Work Group on Performance Testing of Well Cementing Composites Feasibility and scope of work determination for characterizing well cementing composites for standardization purposes. Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting WG on HTHP Rheology Develop a technical report on recommended testing protocols for measuring HTHP rheology (temperatures greater than 190 F and/or pressures greater than atmospheric) with the intention of the report serving as the basis for an ISO NWI. WG on Large Volume Slurry Mixing Procedures TBD 7

85 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Reports of the Task/Work Groups Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Reports of the Task/Work Groups: TG on Cooperative Testing - Carruthers TG on Performance & Testing of Composite Well Cements - Carruthers WG on Dynamic Settling - Beirute TG on Mechanical Behavior of Cement - Darbe WG on Evaluation of NAF Removal and Water Wetting by Spacers - Griffin TG on Mechanical Cementing Plugs used in Casing, Tubing and Drill Pipe Rogers Resource Group - ISO Liaison Williams WG on HTHP Rheology Williams WG on Large Volume Slurry Mixing Procedures - Davison Motion to accept reports 8

86 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Old Business Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting 9

87 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting New Business 10

88 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Passing of Jerold Kennedy with California Portland Cement Review of updated membership rosters Chrome (VI) reducing agents Auditor checklist Heat of hydration of cement Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting New Business: Future Meetings Exploration & Production Standards Conference: Washington DC Exploration & Production Standards Winter Meeting: Fort Worth Exploration & Production Standards Conference: San Francisco Exploration & Production Standards Winter Meeting:??? Exploration & Production Standards Conference??? 11

89 Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Any Other New Business? Subcommittee on Oil Well Cements (SC-10) Wednesday January 27, 2010: General Meeting Motion to Adjourn 12

90 2010 Exploration & Production Winter Standards Meeting January 25-29, 2010 InterContinental New Orleans New Orleans, Louisiana 13