Talk:Drilling fluid

This page should at least be reverted to its previous version. The current version removes bulleted text but adds a littany of grammatical errors.68.110.203.201 (talk) 02:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article should be merged with the "drilling mud" article, the entry remaining "drilling mud". 81.57.36.71 (talk) 09:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, does anyone have a reason the two should remain separate articles? TastyCakes (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk merged from Drilling mud article

WP:AFC submission

This text was submitted to AFC last year. Now that the backlogs are finally getting cleared out, it's been discovered again. Someone had suggested the text be merged into this article - perhaps someone better acquainted with the topic should do this. Thanks. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 19:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drilling fluids are important to lubricate and cool the drill head, prevent unwanted inflow of fluids into the well bore and to prevent collapse of the openhole and casing. It is important to balance the weight of the mud against the anticipated pressures down the well. Unexpected sudden jumps in the pressure regime can cause the inflow of fluids into the well which can lead to a dangerous blowout. Having to high a mud weight can cause loss of circulation of drilling fluids, infilling pores and damaging the drilled stratigraphy. http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/Display.cfm?Term=mud%20weight
Submitted by 193.130.130.100 (talk · contribs)

link not working

The link to Baroid Drilling Fluids Handbook existing under the references does not work.--Bramfab 10:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

merge

I think merging drilling fluid and drilling mud makes a lot of sense. I'm not totally convinced which should be merged into which, however, drilling mud is the much more often used term, but drilling fluid includes non liquid fluids sometimes used in drilling, like air or flu gas. Any opinions? TastyCakes (talk) 15:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i think it should be merged. But i think the title should be drilling fluid, which is the proper technical name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.25.129.2 (talk) 01:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree they should be merged, is there any way to have a "drilling mud" search send the user or recommend to the user that they link to "drilling fluids" such as a "key word" list?--Yesterdaysfuture (talk) 22:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes a (numbersign)redirect page would redirect the defunct page to the active one. TastyCakes (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

drilling fluid not necesarily the same

Care should be taken not to confuse what is clearly an oilfield or geo-drilling technology with the use of "drilling fluid" as a subset of "metalworking fluid" - i.e., specialised lubricant/ coolants used in machining operations. The requirements and chemistries used are quite different...

Bjtheprof (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm perhaps a note at the top referring to Cutting fluids should be inserted. TastyCakes (talk) 16:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

End of talk merged from drilling mud article

numbers

the article dont give some numbers for typical mud density --Itu (talk) 00:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

I think it's interesting that thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of Wikipedia articles say things like "please add inline references" or some other criticism. This article had a request to add inline citations two years ago.

If a subject matter expert sits down and writes an article like this, without lots of citations (and no original research), is it good enough for Wikipedia? The article is certainly good enough for me as a layman to learn from.