Available online at http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq and www.iasj.net 

Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum 
 Engineering  

Vol.20 No.2 (June 2019) 51 – 59 
EISSN: 2618-0707, PISSN: 1997-4884 

 

Corresponding Authors:  Name: Saifalden Y. Alssafar
 
, Email: saifpet@yahoo.com, Name: Faleh H. M. Al-Mahdawi, Email: fhmetr@yahoo.com 

IJCPE is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. 

 

New Study of Mgo Nps in Drilling Fluid to Reduce Stick-Slip 

Vibration in Drilling System 

 
Saifalden Y. Alssafar and Faleh H. M. Al-Mahdawi 

 
Petroleum Engineering Department, University of Baghdad 

 

Abstract 

 
   Stick-slip is kind of vibration which associated with drilling operation in around the bottom hole assembly (BHA) due to the small 

clearance between drill string & the open hole and due to the eccentric rotating of string. This research presents results of specific 

experimental study that was run by using two types of drilling mud (Fresh water Bentonite & Polymer), with/without Nanoparticle 

size materials of MgO in various ratios and computes the rheological properties of mud for each concentration [Yield point, plastic 

viscosity, Av, PH, filter loss (30 min), filter cake, Mud Cake Friction, Friction Factor]. These results then were used to find a clear 

effects of Nanoparticle drilling mud rheology on stick - slip strength by several perspectives through a special “Torque and Drag” 

software which simulate the torque amount expected on BHA during drilling a vertical well in different conditions using real drilling 

string design that usually used in Iraqi oil fields. Thus to mitigate or to prevent stick–slip and cure the sequence events that could 

happen to both of drilling string and the well, i.e. Bit/BHA wear, pipe sticking, borehole instability and low Rate of penetration. Our 

study concluded that there are good reduction in the torque from (2031lb-ft) to (1823lb-ft) using polymer mud and torque reduction 

from (4000lb-ft) to (3450lb-ft) using Fresh Water Bentonite, these results do not include any breaking in the satisfactory range of 

other mud rheology. 
    
Keywords: stick – slip motion, drilling mud, Nano particles, MgO and drill string vibration 
 
Received on 13/01/2019, Accepted on 25/02/2019, published on 30/06/1029 
 

https://doi.org/10.31699/IJCPE.2019.2.7  

 
1- Introduction 
 

   It is a usual routine that problems occur while drilling a 

well, even if we reviewed the well plan carefully. For 

example, in areas in which similar drilling practices are 

used hole problems may have been reported were no such 

problems existed previously in offset wells because 

formations are nonhomogeneous. Therefore, several wells 

near each other may have different geological 

conditions. ‎[1], ‎[2]  

   The failures of a drill string have increased obviously in 

the last 10 to 15 years due to the use of directional drilling 

modeling and complex models with expensive downhole 

tools which make vibration monitoring and controlling is 

a key of drilling optimization, and have become a serious 

issue resulting in substantial cost effective. Therefore, 

detection and control of drill string vibrations have 

become an area of considerable interest. ‎[3]  

   Three main types of vibration frequently occur 

(individually or together) during drilling formation, 

(torsional vibration, axial vibration and lateral vibration). 

Over limited vibration can cause drill string failure, poor 

directional tendency, premature bit failure, stalling of the 

top drive or rotary table, hole enlargement, MWD tool 

failure, and Bit /Stabilizer / tool joint wear‎[4]. 

   Torsional vibrations are often classified as one of the 

most damaging models of vibration when downhole tools 

called stick-slip Phenomenon ‎[5], ‎[6]. 

2- Aim of This Study 
 

   In this Study, anew work is acted to find out the 

relationship between the using of (Nano – MgO) materials 

in drilling mud and stick slip vibration during drilling in 

different concentrations. 

   To achieve real results the test has been ran in two 

major types of drilling mud; freshwater Bentonite (FWB) 

Mud and Polymer Mud, to cover the drilling muds for 

both of shallow and deep wells. 

 

3- Methodology 
 

   MgO is usually manufactured by calcination of 

magnesium carbonates. In contrast to expansive additives, 

the reactivity of MgO is influenced by the manufacturing 

process. In comparison with other materials MgO exhibit 

a considerably higher free enthalpy, thus a higher 

reactivity, even in the dead-burnt state (manufacture at a 

temperature above 1600°C), while MgO nanoparticles are 

prepared by microwave-assisted synthesis using 

magnesium acetate, where MgO Nano-powders is 

synthesized using microwave plasma torch.‎[7]  

   It is clearly noticed that Nano fluids made by Nano 

MgO show specific properties such as a high tendency for 

adsorption, where MgO increases the effect of attraction 

forces in comparison with repulsion forces which results 

in fine fixation ‎[8], ‎[9]. 

https://doi.org/10.31699/IJCPE.2019.2.7


S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

3.1. Sonication System 

 

   Ultrasonic system consists of 3 major components: 

Generator, Converter and probe (Horn).  

   The Generator transforms AC line power to electrical 

energy with high frequency by providing high voltage 

pulses of energy at a frequency of 20 kHz that drives a 

piezoelectric by Converter, the probe’s tip expands and 

contracts longitudinally, this will lead to cavitation in the 

liquid and violent collapse of microscopic bubbles during 

rapid vibration. The collapse of many of cavitation 

bubbles releases a huge energy in the cavitation field.  

This feature is a keypad, which allows the user to adjust 

the sonication parameters as per test requirements ‎[10]. 

 
3.2. Ultrasonic 

 

   Dispersion of nanoscale materials has become 

dependent on ultrasonic methods. Even with chemical 

dispersing agents, were to provide access to these agents 

onto material surfaces, ultrasonic is required.  

   In usual dispersion runs, sonication takes 12-36 hrs. in 

order to ensure a good dispersion in an appropriate 

solvent. 

 

3.3. Ultra-Sonic Device (Elma) 

 

   Ultrasonic device made for multipurpose duties: remove 

chlorine from water, kill Bacterial cells, remove and 

recover ammonia from industrial waste water move and 

recover ammonia from industrial wastewater ‎[10] as 

shown in Fig. 1 below: 

 

 

 
Fig. 1. Elma ultrasonic device 

 

3.4. Mud Lubricity Tester 

 

   In this study, generally use the lubricity meter to 

measure the COF or the coefficient of friction (Baroid 

lubricity coefficient) between the test ring and block ‎[11].  

   The lubricity test represents (simulates) drill pipe 

rotation against downhole surfaces, using a constant load 

of 150 inch-pounds (600psi) is applied using a torque 

arm. 
 

   The lubricity tester is regularly used to evaluate and 

predict the impact made by a drilling fluid additive on 

friction.  

   The following coefficients are recognized as acceptable 

value: 

1- CoF For water-based mud, a coefficient < 0.2 
2- CoF For oil-based mud, a coefficient < 0.1 
3- CoF For ester-based mud, a coefficient < 0.1 

 

 
Fig. 2. Ofite EP and LUBRICITY TESTER 

 

   The OFITE EP and Lubricity tester is used to measure 

and evaluate the lubricating quality of drilling fluids, 

predict wear rates of mechanical parts in known fluid 

systems and provide data to assess the type and quantity 

of lubricating additives that may be required. 
 

   The following Calculations is required: 
Correction Factor= 34 𝑀𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 (32 𝑡𝑜 36)  
 

Lubricity Coefficient =𝑀𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 ×𝐶𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 
𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟100  
 

Percent of Torque Reduction= 𝐴−𝐵𝐴×100  
 

Where: A= Torque reading of untreated mud, B= Torque 

reading of treated mud 

And from viscometer: 

Plastic viscosity 

 

 (PV), cP= θ600 – θ300                                                          (1) 

 

Yeild Point (YP), Ib/100ft2= θ300- PV                                       (2) 

  

Apparent Viscosity (AV), cP= θ600/2                                        (3) 

 



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

   Gel strength, 10 second, Ib/100 ft2= the maximum dial 

deflection after 10 sec 

Gel strength, 10 Minute, Ib/100 ft2= the maximum dial 

deflection after 10 Min. 

 
3.5. Torque and Drag Software 

 

   Using the results of the lab test we took the friction 

factor and put it in a special Torque and drag software 

made by a global company to simulate a drilling job and 

find out Torque on the bit. 

 

a. Torque and Drag Software assumption 

 

   The drilling model was build using parameters of IDC-

56 to drill vertical well, 12 1/4” hole section, WOB=28 -

30 Klb. (WOB =12 Klb. For FWB mud where this mud 

used in shallow depth), RPM= 40 and fixed friction factor 

of 0.25 ft-lb between drilling string and 13 3/8” casing. 

The drilling Bit and BHA designed as follow: 

 

Table 1. BHA Design 

Item                     Description                         OD              ID           Weight      Length      Cum. Lengt 

#                                                                        (in)            (in)             (lbpf)          (m)               (m) 

1                        PDC                                       8.000          3.500         138.52      0.44              0.44 

2             Near-Bit Stabilizer with FV           8.000            3.000         147.22      2.31              2.75 

3             MWD Directional + Gamma         8.000            4.000         128.48      9.90             12.65 

4                  1 x 8" Drill Collar                      8.000           2.750         150.70      9.14            21.79 

5              Integral Blade Stabilizer               8.000             3.000         147.22      2.16             23.95 

6             PBL Circulating Sub                       8.000           3.250         143.03      2.00             25.95 

7                  5 x 8" Drill Collar                      8.000            2.750         150.70      45.70           71.65 

8               8" Sledgehammer Jar                   8.120              2.750         132.58      6.66             78.31 

9                  1 x 8" Drill Collar                      8.000            2.750         150.70      9.14             87.45 

10                    X-Over Sub                            8.000           2.875         149.18      0.78             88.23 

11                2 x 6 3/4" Drill Collar                 6.750            2.750         101.50      18.28          106.51 

12                   15 x 5" HWDP                         5.000           3.000         49.30      140.70           247.21 

13                    5" DP                                      5.000           4.276         21.92       9.00             256.21 

 

4- Experimental Work 

 

   This work aims to improve the rheological properties of 

drilling mud by reducing the friction of the mud with less 

filtration plus thin mud cake. 

   Drilling fluids have prepared with two major types of 

mud (FWB & Polymer mud) using varies Nano MgO 

ratio.  

   All experiments tests conducted under laboratory 

conditions, and then the mud hot rolled by heating for 

four hours in about 250 degree Fahrenheit and retested 

again. 

 

 

 

 

Table 2. Polymer Mud Materials 
Composition Unit Blank Mixing Time 

Drill Water cc 280.4 - 

Sodium Chloride gr 61.3 5 min 

Potassium Chloride gr 11.6 5 min 

Caustic Soda gr 1 5 min 

Soda Ash gr 1.5 5 min 

Starch gr 12 15 min 

PAC LV gr 1 15 min 

Xanthan gr 0.5 15 min 

Limestone (50-75 μ) gr 87.6 20 min 

 

Table 3. FWB Mud Materials 

Composition  Unit  Blank Sample  Mixing Time  

Drill Water  cc  350  -  

Bentonite  gr  22.5  20 in  

 

 

4.1. Sample Preparation 

 

a. Procedure of Nano-MgO dispersion 

 

1- Nano MgO powder was mixed in Distilled water and 
subjected to Ultrasonic Bath. 

2- Surfactant for efficient dispersion of nanoparticles was 
mixed in Distilled water and subjected to Ultrasonic 

Bath too. 

3-  In the end, both solutions were merged and put in the 
Ultrasonic Bath for 7-8 hours. 

4- We made five samples (cups), the first cup without 
MgO (as a blank) then adding 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.5 gm of 

MgO consequently.   

5- Different concentrations of this Nano-colloidal 
solution added to the drilling fluid system as 

following: 

I. 280.4 CC of polymer mud.               II. 350 CC of 
FWB. 

 
b. Prepare polymer mud 
 

   Preparing was made based on the following table and 

mixed them by multimixer Fann 9B: 
 

Table 4. Composition of Polymer Mud 
Composition Unit Blank Mixing Time 

Drill Water Cc 280.4 - 

Sodium Chloride Gr 61.3 5 min 

Potassium Chloride Gr 11.6 5 min 

Caustic Soda Gr 1 5 min 

Soda Ash Gr 1.5 5 min 

Starch Gr 12 15 min 

PAC LV Gr 1 15 min 

Xanthan Gr 0.5 15 min 

Limestone (50-75 μ) Gr 87.6 20 min 

 

 

 



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

1- Adding Nano material (different Concentration) to 
blank of polymer mud and mix for 20 min. 

2- Measure viscosity by Rotational Viscometer Model 
OFITE 800 ( Based on the attached procedure) at 

120
ο
F 

3- Put prepared mud in hot roll for evaluating rheological 
properties in downhole situation at 250

ο
 F during 4 

hrs. 

4- After hot roll, measure viscosity at 120
ο
F by rotational 

viscometer model OFITE 800 

5- Measure filtrate volume by API Filter Press model 
Fan 300series (based on mentioned procedure) at 

room temperature and 100 psi pressure work. 

6- Evaluate lubricity factor by EP/ Lubricity tester (based 

on mentioned procedure) 

 

c. Preparing Bentonite Mud 

 

   The preparing was made based on the following table 
then aged in hot roll: 
 

Table 5. FWB Mud Materials 
Composition  Unit  Blank Sample  Mixing Time  

Drill Water  cc  350  -  

Bentonite  gr  22.5  20 min  

 

1- Aging prepared mud in room temperature for 18 hrs. 
2- Adding Nano material to prepared mud in the required 

concentration and mixing by a multi mixer at 20 min. 

3- Measure viscosity at 120
ο
F by rotational viscometer 

Model OFITE 800 (Based on the mentioned 

procedure) 

4- Measure filtrate volume by API Filter Press model 
Fan 300series (based on the attached procedure) at 

room temperature and 100 psi pressure work. 

5- Evaluate the lubricity factor by EP/ Lubricity tester 

(based on attached procedure). 
 

d. Preparing Nano Material 
 

   Preparing Nano Material for all experimental work can 

be concluded as follow: 

1. Add Nano material to water and disperse it in water by 
ultrasonic for 1 hour. 

2. Add prepared Nano solution to surfactant and disperse 
them for 7 hrs by ultrasonic ( this is final Nano 

solution) 

3. Add final Nano solution to polymer mud in during 
mixing based on required concentration for 20 

minutes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5- Results and discussion 
 

5.1. Polymer mud test with Nano MgO additives 

 

   Mud Rheology changes after adding Nano MgO to 

280.4 cc of polymer Mud by various concentrations as 

shown in Table 6 

 

Table 6. Mud Rheology parameters 

Rheology -------- gm 0.3 gm  0.6 gm 0.9 gm  1.5 gm 

AV  21.5  24  24  35.5  36.5  

RPM 600  43  48  48  71  73  

RPM 300  26  30  28  43  46  

PV  17  18  20  28  27  

YP  9  12  8  15  19  

RPM 200  19  22  21  31  33  

RPM 100  12.5  13.5  13  19  20  

RPM 6  3.5  3.5  3  5  5  

RPM 3  2.5  3  2.5  5  4  

GEL 10 s  3  4  3  4  5  

GEL 10 min  4  5  4  5  6  

pH  12.21  10.87  11.24  11.11  10.98  

API FL, cc  2.2  2.7  2.3  3  2.8  

Settlement  yes  No  No  No  No  

Filter cake  1/32  1/32  1/32  1/32 1/32  

Foam  No  No  No  No  No  

Water 

Torque 

Reading  

33.7  34.4  34.3  36.0  35.0  

Mud Torque 

Reading  
20.1  20.0  19.9  19.6  21.2  

Lubricity 

Factor  
0.2028  0.19767  0.1973  0.1851  0.2059  

Torque 

Reduction  
-  0.5  0.9  2.4  -  

Mud Cake 

Friction (KF)  
0.2046  0.2268  0.16578  0.18323  0.25303  

 

 

 

 

 

 



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

22 
 

 
Fig. 3. Polymer mud with different  MgO NPs concentrations 

 

   In Fig. 3, both Mud cake friction and Lubricity factor 

multiplied by 10 to clarify the change for review because 

their amount is too small. The diagram of Test 7 

illustrated that the MgO concentration of 0.9 gm in 

polymer mud is the most affected with regards to torque 

reduction with the amount “0.1851” of CoF.   At the same 

time the test of 0.9 concentration has no significant 

changes in other mud rheology except PV which recorded 

(26) where its higher than the Pv at blank and (0.3 gm) 

tests, as per Nanomaterials are solid structure so higher 

PV is typical results. 
 

   We can also notice YP 0.9 gm test is higher than the 

previous two tests but still in the allowable range to raise 

cutting with no formation damage.   

   In Table 7 Friction Mud Rheology changes after adding 

Nano MgO to 280.4 cc of polymer Mud by various 

concentrations. 

 

Table 7. CoF, KF with Torque Reduction 

Rheology 
-------- 

gm 
0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm 

Lubricity 

Factor  
0.2028 0.19767 0.1973 0.1851 0.2059 

Torque 

Reduction  
- 0.5 0.9 2.4 - 

Mud Cake 

Friction 

(KF)  

0.2046 0.2268 0.16578 0.18323 0.25303 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Fig. 4. CoF, KF and TORQUE reduction with related to 

MgO NPs additives in polymer 

 

 
Fig. 5. CoF & Torque reduction & KF of five tests in 

polymer 

 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

AV PV YP GEL 10 sGEL 10 min pH API FL, ccMud Torque ReadingLubricity FactorTorque ReductionMud Cake Friction (KF)

NanoMgO in Polymer mud 
 (CoF & KF*10) 

-------- gm 0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

Table 8. magnitude of CoF with MgO concentration 
Rheology -------- 

gm 

0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm 

Lubricity 
Factor  

0.2028 0.19767 0.1973 0.1851 0.2059 

 

 

 
Fig. 6. MgO consentration&CoF in polymer 

 

   In Fig. 4, Fig. 5 & Fig. 6, it was clear that the 0.9 gm of 

Nano MgO had got the best CoF (lowest value) that led to 

decline in torque reading. However, the CoF and 

Lubricity factor had risen dramatically when the Nano 

concentration increased more than 0.9 gm. In addition, 

there is improvement in CoF between 0.6 to 0.9 gm but 

noticed stability in CoF in between 0.3 to 0.6 gm. in 

another hand although there was CoF decreasing when 

0.3 gm added, but not as fall as the test of 0.9 gm MgO.    

   In Table 9 the recorded data of torque software 

regarding Lubricity Factor changes with tests 

 

Table 9. CoF and Torque reading data 

Rheology 
-------- 

gm 
0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm 

Lubricity 

Factor 
0.2028 0.19767 0.1973 0.1851 0.2059 

Torque 

reading 
2031 1963 1950 1823 2050 

 

 

 
Fig. 7. Polymer & MgO Torque software reading 

 

   From Fig. 8 & Fig. 9, general in the blank test the 

software reads 4000 ft-lb and start decreasing by adding 

Nano MgO until getting its best amount in this lab tests, 

then refers back to 4000 in concentration Nano MgO of 

1.5 gm. So using Nano - MgO more than (1) gm per 280.4 

CC of polymer mud should be avoided because of it 

sharply higher the friction factor and mud torque amount. 

 
Fig. 8. Polymer& mgo torque reading on software 

     

  The best result recorded in the test was 0.9 gm MgO, 

however there was a little high AV and Pv (AV =35.5 & 

pv =28). And that due to the loos of other Nano benefits 

and maybe 0.9 gm or above cannot be used when plastic 

viscosity is restricted in certain drilling problems 

expected. Therefore, the same restriction with regards to 

the limitation of pump pressure and/or ECD (Equivalent 

Circulating Density) then lead to using low AV (where, 

AV= shear stress/shear rate),so it will require higher 

pressure. 

 

5.2. Fresh Water Bentonite Mud Test With Nano Mgo 

Additives 

 

   Using five cup tests consist of FWB and Nano MgO in 

different concentrations we got the results in Table 10. 

 

Table 10. Mud Rheology changes after adding Nano MgO 

to 350 cc of FWB Mud by various concentrations 

Rheology@ 120 F Blank 0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm 

AV 19  20  21  33.5  42  

RPM 600  38  40  42  67  84  

RPM 300  35  35  39  62  79  

PV  3  5  3  5  5  

YP  32  30  36  57  74  

RPM 200  33  37  38  62  76  

RPM 100  30  35  37  59  72  

RPM 6  25  33  34  56  66  

RPM 3  24  33  33  55  65  

GEL 10 s  24  35  35  46  61  

GEL 10 min  25  37  38  52  66  

pH  9.18  11.40  11.23  11.26  11.25  

API FL, cc  14 14.3 16.4  17.0 15.2  

Settlement  No  No  No No No 

Filter cake  4/32” 4/32” 5/32” 5/32” 4/32” 

Foam  No  No No No No 

Water Torque 

Reading  
35.5  34.5  34.8  35.9  33.9  

Mud Torque 

Reading  
44.3  36.3  33.4  39.9  37.0  

Lubricity Factor  0.4243  0.3577  0.3266  0.3779  0.3711  

Torque Reduction  -  18.05  24.06  9.93  16.48  

Mud Cake 

Friction (KF)  
0. 69  0.0959  0.1483  0.1919  0.1745  

 



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

 
Fig. 9. Nano MgO in FWB (Lubricity Factor & Mudcake 

Friction*10) 

 

   In Fig. 9 Both Mud cake friction and Lubricity factor 
multiplied by 10 to make it clear for review because their 

amount are too small. 

 

 
Fig. 10. Lubricity Factor (Nano MgO in FWB) 

 

Table 11. CoF & Torque and drag software reading 

Rheology 
-------- 

gm 
0.3 gm 0.6 gm 0.9 gm 1.5 gm 

Lubricity 

Factor 
0.4243 0.3577 0.3266 0.3779 0.3711 

Torque 

reading 
4000 3500 3450 3580 3560 

 

 

 
Fig. 11. Sofy ware torque reading in FWB with MgO 

 

 

   By Fig. 11 we can find that Nano MgO additives 

reduced the expected downhole torque by more than 1500 

ft-lb in the concentration of 0.6 gm. and noticed a clear 

curve retrograded since the first Nano MgO was added to 

explain the perfect acting of that Nanoparticles to FWB, 

then to records its best Torque reduction at concentration 

of 0.6 gm. 

   In MgO concentration between 0.6 – 0.9 Torque goes 

high but still lower than it amount before adding MgO, 

because of the nanoparticles of MgO has good effects on 

that mud lubricity . In the concentration of 1.5 gm there is 

a little drop in torque which may indicate that will 

continue drop with adding MgO proportionally, however 

it will be cost effect and will raise other mud rheology i.e. 

GEL and PV. 

 

6- Conclusion & Recommendations 
 

   The following are concludes the experimental results 

overall: 

1- In polymer mud lubricity factor dropped from 0.2 to 
be 0.185 when we increased Nano MgO from zero to 

0.9 gm gradually by the tests then CoF starts 

increasing again with more Nano MgO. 

2- Even though it was a minimal decrease in CoF with 
Nano additives, but it succeeds to change torque 

reading from 2031lb-ft… to 1823lb-ft….  which lead 

to avoid 12.5% of stick-slip vibration probability. 

3- No changes were noticed in the other mud rheology 
except increasing in plastic viscosity due to Nano 

particles, so we highly recommend using Nano MgO 

as additives in drilling companies working in Iraq, 

especially in forecast projects no more vertical wells 

as much as deviated and horizontal wells which stick 

and slip as commonly occurs. 

4- Nano MgO performs better rheology results with 
FWB mud where CoF dropped (0.42  0.32), 

with a clear drop in Torque reading (4000  

3450). 

5- The other rheology parameters were normal and 

acceptable to be used, therefore we recommend using 

Nano MgO in drilling fluid to mitigate stick-slip 

phenomenon, in Nano ratio of 1.73 kg per one cubic 

meter of mud. 

   Finally some of the important recommendations 

supposed to be in mined by future researchers: 

1- Re-run the experimental work using different MgO 
Nano concentrations of the same Nanomaterials to 

detect any sensitive in mud rheology. 

2-  Choose another type of drilling muds like oil-based 
mud, salt mud, emulsion mud and KCL mud that 

used in oil fields to explore the Nano-particles 

effects. 

3- Making a special device (similar to a drilling rig in 
small scale) consist of a small Bit, BHA and source 

of WOB with rotating advanced by torque sensors, to 

simulate drilling a hole and evaluate the real stick –

slip vibration changes with regards to adding 

different Nanoparticles types & weight ratio. 



S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

Acknowledgment 

 

   Our sincere appreciation goes to Dr. Faleh M. H. AL-

Mahdawi whose contribution and constructive criticism 

has pushed me to expend the kind of efforts to make this 

work as original as it can be. Our grateful to all of those 

with whom we have had the pleasure to work during this 

and other related projects. 
 

Nomenclatures & Abbreviations 

 
AV                  Apparent Viscosity 

CoF                Coefficient of friction 

FF                    Friction factor 

hrs.                 hours 

IDC               
Iraqi drilling company (Rig 

number) 

BHA              Bottom Hole Assembly 

NP                Nano Particle 

NPs                 Nano Particles 

PV                 Plastic Viscosity, cp 

ROP             Rate of Penetration 

FW              Fresh water Bentonite 

YP                  Yield Point, Ib/100ft2 

CP                   cent poise 

γ                    Shear Rate, sec-1 

τ                     Shear Stress, Ib/100ft2 

μp                  Plastic Viscosity, cp 

τ0                  
Shear Stress at Yield Point, 

Ib/100ft2 

𝜏1                  Shear stress at lower shear rate 

𝜏2                  Shear stress at higher shear rate 

 

References 

 

[1] Å. Kyllingstad and G. W. Halsey, “A Study of 
Slip/Stick Motion of the Bit,” SPE Drill. Eng., vol. 3, 

no. 4, pp. 369–373, 1988. 

[2] M. I. Abdulwahab, S. Thahab, and A. H. Dhiaa, 
“Experimental Study of Thermophysical Properties of 

TiO2 Nanofluid”, ijcpe, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 1-6, Jun. 

2016. 

[3]  Y. Q. Lin and Y. H. Wang, “New Mechanism in 
Drillstring Vibration,” Offshore Technol. Conf., 1990. 

[4] B. A. Abdulmajeed and N. S. Majeed, “Study and 
Analysis of Concentric Shell and Double Tube Heat 

Exchanger Using Tio 2 Nanofluid,” Iraqi J. Chem. 

Pet. Eng., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 15–23, 2017. 

[5] T. V Aarrestad and H. Blikra, “Torque and Drag: Key 
Factors in Extended-Reach Drilling,” IADC/SPE 

Drill. Conf., no. SPE 27491, pp. 547–552, 1994. 

[6] N. Majeed and D. Naji, “Synthesis and 
Characterization of Iron Oxide Nanoparticles by Open 

Vessel Ageing Process”, ijcpe, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 27-

31, Jun. 2018. 

 

 

 

[7] F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi and K. Saad, “Enhancement of 
Drilling Fluid Properties Using Nanoparticles”, ijcpe, 

vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 21-26, Jun. 2018. 

[8] B.-Q. Xu, J.-M. Wei, H.-Y. Wang, K.-Q. Sun, and Q.-
M. Zhu, “Nano-MgO: novel preparation and 

application as support of Ni catalyst for CO2 

reforming of methane,” Catal. Today, vol. 68, no. 1–3, 

pp. 217–225, 2001. 

[9] N. Jafariesfad, Y. Gong, M. R. Geiker, and P. Skalle, 
“Nano-Sized MgO with Engineered Expansive 

Property for Oil Well Cement Systems,” SPE Bergen 

One Day Semin., 2016. 

[10] G. T. Caneba, C. Dutta, V. Agrawal, and M. 
Rao, “Novel Ultrasonic Dispersion of Carbon 

Nanotubes,” J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng., vol. 09, 

no. 03, pp. 165–181, 2010. 

[11] K. Slater and A. Amer, “New Automated 
Lubricity Tester Evaluates Fluid Additives, Systems 

and Their Application,” pp. 1–8, 2013. 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

1-%09https:/www.researchgate.net/publication/245548947_A_Study_of_SlipStick_Motion_of_the_Bit
1-%09https:/www.researchgate.net/publication/245548947_A_Study_of_SlipStick_Motion_of_the_Bit
1-%09https:/www.researchgate.net/publication/245548947_A_Study_of_SlipStick_Motion_of_the_Bit
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/76
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/76
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/76
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/76
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/OTC-6225-MS
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/OTC-6225-MS
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/68
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/68
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/68
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/68
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250088572_Torque_and_Drag-Two_Factors_in_Extended-Reach_Drilling
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250088572_Torque_and_Drag-Two_Factors_in_Extended-Reach_Drilling
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250088572_Torque_and_Drag-Two_Factors_in_Extended-Reach_Drilling
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/163
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/163
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/163
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/163
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/162
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/162
http://ijcpe.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/ijcpe/article/view/162
8-%09https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586101003030
8-%09https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586101003030
8-%09https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586101003030
8-%09https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586101003030
8-%09https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586101003030
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-180038-MS
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-180038-MS
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-180038-MS
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-180038-MS
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229043259_Novel_Ultrasonic_Dispersion_of_Carbon_Nanotubes
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229043259_Novel_Ultrasonic_Dispersion_of_Carbon_Nanotubes
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229043259_Novel_Ultrasonic_Dispersion_of_Carbon_Nanotubes
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229043259_Novel_Ultrasonic_Dispersion_of_Carbon_Nanotubes
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/OMC-2013-169
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/OMC-2013-169
https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/OMC-2013-169


S. Y. Alssafar
 
and F. H. M. Al-Mahdawi / Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering 20,2 (2019) 51 - 59 

 

 

25 
 

 
الى طين الحفر لتقليل ظاهرة االلتصاق  MgOدراسة حديثة عن تأثيراضافة مادة النانو 

 ( خالل عملية حفر االبار.stick-slipواالنزالق)
 

 الخالصة
 

 مجموعة رأس البئر ظاهرة االلتصاؽ واالنزالؽ هي احد انواع االهتزازات التي تحدث اثناء عمميات الحفر حوؿ
نتيجة لصغر الفراغ الحمقي بيف التجويؼ المفتوح ومجموعة رأس البئر وكذلؾ بسبب الدوراف الالمركزي لخيط 

 الحفر اثناء الحفر.
في هذا البحث استعراض لنتائج مختبرية باستخداـ نوعيف رئيسييف مف طيف الحفر وذلؾ باضافة النانو    

MgO ى تأثيرها عمى خواص طيف الحفر بشكؿ عاـ ولتحديد قيـ معمؿ االحتكاؾ بتراكيز مختمفة لمعرفة مد
بشكؿ خاص, ثـ ادخاؿ قيـ معامؿ االحتكاؾ المستحصمة مف التجارب في برنامج خاص )سوفتوير( لتحديد قيـ 

المتوقعة حوؿ مجموعة قعر البئرمف خالؿ عمؿ ممارسة فعمية في البرنامج  stick-slipاالحتكاكات مف نوع 
ر بئر عمودي باالستفادة مف بعض التصاميـ الفعمية لخيط الحفر والمستخدمة في الحفر االبار الحد الحقوؿ لحف

 العراقية.
اف الهدؼ مف هذا العمؿ هو لمحصوؿ عمى نماذج طيف حفر تقمؿ او تمنع حدوث ظاهرة االلتصاؽ واالنزالؽ    

التي يؤدي حدوثها الى مشاكؿ حفر عديدة كػ : تمؼ الحافرة وممحفاتها, التصاؽ االنابيب, عدـ استقرار جدار 
 البئر, انخفاض معدؿ االختراؽ.

 ( كاالتي:Torqueحققت انخفاض في جهد االحنكاؾ ) MgOمف النانو نجحت دراستنا في ايجاد تراكيز    
 .polymerفي طيف الحفر نوع  2210 – 1302 -
 .Fresh Water Bentoniteفي طيف حفر نوع  0043 – 0333 -

عمما اف النتائج اعاله كانت متزامنة مع مواصفات طيف الحفر ضمف المدى المقبوؿ لتحقيؽ اهداؼ سائؿ    
 قطع الصخرية المحفورة وتعميقها عند التوقؼ وغيرها مف مهاـ طيف الحفر.الحفر كػرفع ال