Evaluating the Performance of Class F Fly Ash Compared to Class G Cement for Hydrocarbon Wells Cementing: An Experimental Investigation

Abstract

The following study presents the results of research in the field of the performance of geopolymers consisting of Class F fly ash with an alkaline activator solution consisting only of sodium metasilicate (Na2SiO3) and water. The performances of this geopolymer are compared to the those of American Petroleum Institute (API) Class G cement. This comparison is to evaluate the potential of the geopolymer as an alternative to cement in cementing hydrocarbon wells in the oil and gas industry. The gap in the research is determining the performance properties that restrict the use of fly ash in the oil and gas industry. Using only sodium metasilicate as an activator with water, the solution creates a strong binding gel for the geopolymer and activates the aluminosilicate properties of the fly ash. This geopolymer is compared with Class G cement without additives to determine their base performances in high pressure and high temperature conditions, as well as note any properties that are affected in the process. This commences by formulating recipes of these two materials from workable ratios and concentrations. The ratios are narrowed down to the best working models to proceed to comparative performance testing. The tests included exploring their vital performances in fluid loss and thickening time. The results produced suggest that Class G cement generally has less fluid loss at low temperature than the geopolymer but could not maintain its integrity and structure as temperatures increased. Class G cement exhibited stability, consistencies of 100 Bcs (Bearden Consistency Units), and a faster thickening time of 1 h and 48 min when placed under high temperature and high-pressure conditions, respectively. However, the geopolymer showed more consistency regarding fluid loss with respect to rising pressure and temperature, and smoother, less fractured samples emerging from both tests. Though the geopolymer showed stronger performances in thickening and water retention, the experiments showed that it is not a uniform and consistent material like Class G cement. Through the use of different additives and intricate design, the sample may show success, but may prove more difficult and complex to apply than the industry standard and uniform content of Class G cement.