SPE 95921

Cement Mechanical Property Measurements Under Wellbore Conditions

B.R. Reddy, SPE, A. Santra, SPE, D. McMechan, SPE, D. Gray, SPE, C. Brenneis, and R. Dunn, Halliburton

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers

Introduction
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference and The stresses exerted on the cement sheath from wellbore
Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9 – 12 October 2005.
operations during construction/production could be severe and
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
could damage the cement sheath. Examples of well operations
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to that could exert stress on the cement sheath are:
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at • Cementing at multiple depths
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper • Cement hydration
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
• Cement shrinkage
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
• Pressure testing
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. • Changeover from displacement fluid to completion
fluid
Abstract • Hydraulic stimulation
Cement integrity preservation during completion, stimulation, • Hydrocarbon production
production, and even, during well abandonment is of critical • Fluid injection
importance for an operator from long-term economic, • Gas lift
productivity, and safety perspectives. Traditionally, • Continued drilling operations after cementing
compressive strengths have been considered indicators of • Thermal cycling due to production, steam flood, fire
cement integrity. However, numerous squeeze cementing jobs flood, water injection, etc.
regularly performed on completed wells are testament to the
poor correlation between compressive strengths and cement These types of operations could change the pressure and
integrity. Additional mechanical properties such as tensile and temperature of the cement sheath after the slurry is placed in
flexural strengths, elastic modulus, and Poisson’s ratio are the annulus. The cement sheath could be damaged if the
being taken into account with increasing frequency for magnitude of pressure or temperature change is large and the
maximizing the cement sheath performance during the life of stresses in the cement sheath exceed key values of the cement
the well. Unfortunately, all such measurements are performed sheath. The key values are measured values and vary
on samples that have been cured, either under wellbore depending on cement slurry formulation.
conditions (for example, pressure and temperature), or Some major consequences of damage to the cement sheath,
laboratory conditions (for example, atmospheric pressure) but such as sustained pressure on the annulus side or damage to
tested at atmospheric pressure and temperature. Such the casing, could force well shutdown or result in high
properties may at best be useful for comparing different remedial costs.
formulations in the selection process but do not provide Other consequences of damage to the cement sheath, such
information about the cement properties under downhole as loss of hydrocarbon production, production of unwanted
conditions. fluids (e.g. water), and growth of wellhead, could negatively
Using ultrasonic shear wave and compression wave affect the safety and economics of oil and gas assets because
combination measurements, dynamic mechanical properties, the remedial jobs are expensive to impossible in some cases.
such as elastic modulus, bulk modulus, and Poisson’s ratio and Hence, the integrity of the cement sheath should be considered
compressive strength, are measured under pressure and during the early stages of well construction and designed for
temperature. These measurements are compared with uninterrupted, safe, and economic production of hydrocarbons.
mechanical properties obtained from load vs. displacement A detailed engineering analysis should be conducted to
under static conditions and acoustic compression and shear evaluate how the different well operations affect the integrity
wave measurements at atmospheric pressure and temperature. of the cement sheath. This has become increasingly important
Correlations are made for several slurries. The results are because of a combination of increased risk to cement-sheath
presented. The results also will present cases where the integrity in expensive wells operating in extreme operating
measurements made using this method demonstrated unique environments, and increased safety standards.1-7
advantages over the conventional load vs. displacement A three-step approach, outlined in Fig. 1, should help
techniques. operators construct a well that can produce hydrocarbons
safely and economically. Step 1 is the engineering analysis.
2 SPE 95921

The outcome of the engineering analysis is to help provide the Shear waves do not propagate in liquids and gases and thus
optimum cement sheath properties needed to withstand the shear wave velocities in a fluid medium are zero.
well operations. Step 1 is discussed and presented by Bosma et
al., Ravi et al., and other authors.8-12 G = Vs 2 ρ ..........................................................................(1)
Step 2 is cement slurry design and testing for providing a
cement system that can match or exceed the cement-sheath B = Vp2 ρ – 4/3 G ..............................................................(2)
properties evaluated in Step 1. Examples of the cement-sheath
properties that should be tested in Step 2 are: ⎡ ⎛V 2
⎤
• Tensile strength ⎞
⎢ ⎜⎜ p
⎟⎟ − 2 ⎥
• Young’s modulus 1⎢ Vs ⎠ ⎥
• Poisson’s ratio ν = ⎢⎝ 2 ⎥ ..............................................(3)
2 ⎛V ⎞
• Friction angle ⎢ ⎜ p ⎟ − 1⎥
• Plasticity parameters ⎢⎣ ⎜⎝ Vs ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦
To help achieve effective zonal isolation, Steps 1 and 2
should be followed by Step 3, effective cement slurry E = 2Vs2 ρ (1+ ν) ...............................................................(4)
placement and monitoring during the life of the well. Step 3 is
discussed by Ravi et al., Biezen et al., and others.13,14 Where:
The laboratory-measured values from Step 2 become a part G = Shear modulus
of the input variables for the engineering analysis (Step 1) to B = Bulk modulus
evaluate the cement-sheath integrity. It is a common practice Vs = Velocity of shear wave
to cure cement formulations under downhole conditions, Vp = Velocity of compressional wave
particularly at downhole temperatures, either under pressure or E = Young’s modulus
at atmospheric pressure, and at the end of the cure period, ρ = Density of the sample
allow the samples to come to ambient conditions prior to ν = Poisson’s ratio
testing for mechanical properties. However, the mechanical
properties tested on such samples do not reflect the properties The mechanical properties namely, elastic modulus, shear
of the cement formulations at wellbore conditions. Moreover, modulus, and Poisson’s ratio from ultrasonic wave velocity
the depressurization and cooling to ambient conditions before measurements represent dynamic mechanical properties;
performing cement property measurements may have the whereas, those obtained by the standard load displacement
following unavoidable consequences: (a) introduction of measurement methods provide static mechanical properties.
micro-defects in the system and (b) elimination of any effects, Recently, a commercial instrument (Chandler Model 6265
which are likely to be significant, of curing conditions MPro) that uses shear and compression ultrasonic waves to
(namely elevated pressure and temperature) on the measured measure mechanical properties of cement samples cured in
mechanical properties. As a result, the engineering analysis situ at elevated temperatures and pressures has become
based on mechanical properties measured at ambient available from Chandler Engineering Corporation. The present
conditions will not be a true representation of cement paper presents results from testing the equipment for oilfield
performance in a wellbore. cement mechanical property evaluation at elevated
Measurement of mechanical properties under downhole temperatures and pressures, prevalent in oil wells. Tandom
conditions is not trivial due to the lack of suitable tests were also performed on same samples to identify
instrumentation that can cure and maintain the cement under correlation constants between static mechanical properties
downhole conditions while testing for mechanical properties. obtained by load displacement measurements and dynamic
The UCA ultrasonic cement analyzer has been the only mechanical properties obtained by acoustic methods.
commercial instrument that measures compressive strengths at
least at downhole temperatures and pressures that are Experimental Program
prevalent in a wellbore.15 This method has been based on The Equipment
correlating the transit time of compression waves through The cell design of the Chandler MPro analyzer is similar to
cement and correlating the wave velocity to compressive that of the UCA equipment, except that the cell was placed
strengths by crushing, using a mechanical load, on identically inside the equipment horizontally. The transducers that
cured samples at ambient conditions. Ultrasonic shear waves generate and receive both shear and compressional waves are
have been used for many years to measure dynamic different from the standard transducers used in the UCA
mechanical properties, as well as to detect voids and cracks in analyzer to measure strength. The alignment of these
concrete and rock samples under nondestructive transducers is critical for the Chandler MPro analyzer. The
conditions.16,17 They have also been used for studying early- new system also requires closer pressure control than does the
stage cement paste properties.18,19 In oil field applications, standard UCA system. The cell was filled with cement slurry
they have been used as part of acoustic logging tools for many and heat and pressure ramps were programmed. Water was
years. The relationships between the velocities of used to apply pressure on the cement sample. The data output
compressional and shear waves and the material properties of to a computer includes compressional and shear wave
a homogeneous, isotropic, elastic solid are shown in Eqs. 1–4. velocities, and pressure and temperature readings. The elastic
modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and bulk modulus are calculated
SPE 95921 3

from the compressional and shear wave velocities The upper temperature with slow depressurization. The samples were
limit on temperature is 400°F and the upper limit on pressure tested under unconfined and confined conditions. Identical
is 10,000 psi. A schematic block diagram of the new machine slurries were used for testing with the Chandler MPro analyzer
based on the supplier’s brochure is shown in Fig. 2. A under similar conditions. These measurements were
representative results chart from a completed test is shown in continuous from the slurry through the set phase of cement
Fig. 3. while being held at test temperature and pressure. The static
mechanical properties measured at room temperature under
Cement Systems, Curing, and Sample Preparation unconfined conditions, and the dynamic properties measured
All the slurries were prepared according to API procedures. at test temperature are presented in Table 1. The dependence
Cylindrical samples (2-in. × 4-in.) for load vs. displacement of modulus values on the cement slurry density is shown in
measurements were typically cured under a pressure of 3,000 Fig. 5. The relationship between the two sets of modulus
psi for 72 hr at 190°F unless noted otherwise. In the case of values is shown graphically in Fig. 6.
unfoamed samples, the pressure and temperature of the The trends in density vs. modulus value correlations by
autoclave were decreased gradually over a period of four hr both methods were as expected. The excellent correlation fit in
after the cure time. Foam cement samples were prepared either Fig. 6 shows that the dynamic modulus values are about 1.6
by foaming at a pressure of 1,000 psi and transferred to the times higher than the static values. It has been shown in
Chandler MPro analyzer cell under pressure or by foaming at literature that modulus values for concrete and rocks are either
atmospheric pressure. equal or higher than the static values with an infrequent
Stress-Strain Testing. Uni-axial and tri-axial stress-strain deviation.20 In the reported literature, the ultrasonic tests are
tests were performed on cylindrical samples to determine normally done at room temperature, whereas the modulus
Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, friction angle, and values reported here using ultrasonic waves are those
plasticity parameters. Tests were performed according to measured at 190°F. Cooling the Chandler MPro analyzer to
ASTM D 3148 – 02 (Standard Test Method for Elastic Moduli room temperature to measure the effect of temperature on
of Intact Rock Core Specimens in Uniaxial Compression) and modulus value frequently failed, possibly due to loss of
D 2664 – 95a (Standard Test Method for Triaxial Compressive contact with the probe during the cooling process. Further
Strength of Undrained Rock Core Specimens without Pore improvement to the equipment design could include the ability
Pressure Measurements). Dual-axial extensometers and a to measure the mechanical properties of samples cured at one
circumferential chain extensometer were used to measure temperature but tested at different temperatures, for example,
strains on samples. at higher or lower than the cure temperatures to simulate
Acoustic testing on stress-strain test samples was wellbore operations. Poisson’s ratio values did not change
performed on unconfined cylindrical samples prepared under significantly in either of the methods. The dynamic Poisson’s
pressure and temperature prior to the load displacement ratio values are about 1.5 times higher than the static values.
testing. Samples were mounted between platens containing Foamed cement slurries. Foam cement slurries with
piezo-electric transducers to generate and receive P and S varying amounts of gas phase were prepared under a pressure
waves. Lead foil was placed between the platens and the of 1,000 psi starting from a 19.0-lb/gal base slurry containing
samples to provide acoustic coupling and the samples were a mixture of Portland cement and cementiceous admixtures.
loaded to 30- to 100-psi axial stress prior to making the The foamed slurries were transferred into the Chandler MPro
acoustic measurements. analyzer cell under pressure slightly below 1,000 psi and the
sample was cured at 350°F for 72 hr. The variation of the
Discussion modulus values as a function of % gas phase is graphically
Tandem Static and Dynamic Mechanical Property presented in Fig. 7 and Table 2. The results show excellent
Measurements on Samples with Identical Thermal History correlation between the two parameters demonstrating the
Results from tandem dynamic and static mechanical properties usefulness of the equipment for measuring mechanical
measurements on samples that included Portland and non- properties of foam under conditions closer to downhole
Portland based cement formulations containing a variety of conditions. It should be noted that, currently, foam cement
admixtures and foamed-cement samples cured under a range samples for static measurements can only be prepared at
of temperatures and pressures are presented graphically in atmospheric pressure. For comparison, results from testing
Fig. 4. The results show that a good correlation (R2 = 0.95) under static conditions of 17.64-lb/gal base slurry density,
exists between dynamic and static measurements irrespective foamed under atmospheric conditions and cured at 190°F in a
of sample composition or cure conditions. In contrast, the water bath, are also presented in Fig. 7 and Table 2. The trends
correlation between the Poisson’s ratio values was not so are similar as in the case of dynamic values. The intercept
good. The dynamic PR values are typically higher than 0.3, values represent the modulus values of unfoamed slurry.
whereas the static values are typically lower than 0.23. Cement Slurries Containing Additives that Exist in a
Different Phase at Elevated Temperatures. Special slurries
Static and Dynamic (MPro) Mechanical Property containing additives that undergo phase transition between
Correlations on Samples with Different Thermal History ambient and wellbore temperatures present special challenges
Cement slurries with a range of densities were prepared from in the measurement of mechanical properties. Traditional
cement and water and cured at 190°F under a pressure of stress-strain measurement methods require that the test sample
3,000 psi. The samples for stress-strain experiments were be at room temperature. The effect of a phase change of an
cured for 72 hr in an autoclave, and cooled to room
4 SPE 95921

additive on cement mechanical properties is expected to be presented at the 1984 Annual California Regional Meeting,
substantial. Long Beach, California, 11-13 April.
A special slurry containing such an additive with a melting 3. Benge, O.G. et al.: “Foamed Cement Job Successful in Deep
temperature above 220°F was tested using the Chandler MPro HTHP Offshore Well,” Oil & Gas J. (March 1996) 58.
4. Goodwin, K.J. and Crook, R.J.: “Cement Sheath Stress Failure,”
analyzer as well as the UCA analyzer at temperatures below paper SPE 20453 presented at the 1990 Annual Technical
and above the melting point of the additive as well as without Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 23-26
the special additive. The transit time chart from the higher September.
temeparture UCA analyzer chart is shown in Fig. 8. 5. Deeg, W.F. et al.: “How Foamed Cement Advantages Extend to
Interestingly, long-term curing at temperatures higher than the Hydraulic Fracturing Operations,” World Oil (November 1999)
melting temperature of the additive show interesting changes 51-53.
to the modulus values with time. The change in transit time 6. Bourgoyne, A. Jr. et al.: “A Review of Sustained Casing
observed at higher tempearature was not present when the test Pressure Occurring on the OCS,” study for U.S. Department of
was performed either without the elastomer, or with it but at the Interior, Washington, D.C., contract number 14-35-001-
30749.
the lower temperature. This observation is important in 7. Kopp, K. et al.: “Foamed Cement vs. Conventional Cement for
identifying the time period that the sample should be cured to Zonal Isolation—Case Histories,” paper SPE 62895 presented at
obtain long-term mechanical properties that can be used in the 2000 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
engineering analysis. For this application, measurements using Texas, 1-4 October.
the Chandler MPro analyzer proved uniquely useful compared 8. Ravi, K., Bosma, M., and Gastebled, O.: “Safe and Economic
to values obtained by standard cure method for preparation of Gas Wells through Cement Design for Life of the Well,” paper
samples to be tested by stress-strain measurements. SPE 75700 presented at the 2002 Gas Technology Symposium,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 April-2 May.
9. Thiercelin, M.J. et al.: “Cement Design Based on Cement
Conclusions
Mechanical Response,” SPEDC (December 1998) 266-273.
• Acoustic methods offer a simpler, nondestructive way of 10. Bosma, M. et al.: “Design Approach to Sealant Selection for the
measuring selected dynamic mechanical properties, Life of the Well,” paper SPE 56536 presented at the 1999 SPE
namely, Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas,
independent of sample shape when compared to stress- 3-6 October.
strain methods. 11. Ravi, K. et al.: “Improve the Economics of Oil and Gas Wells
• Excellent correlations between static and dynamic by Reducing the Risk of Cement Failure,” paper SPE 74497
mechanical properties on samples with identical cure presented at the 2002 IADC/SPE Meeting, Dallas, Texas, 26-28
February.
histories irrespective of sample compositions. The
12. di Lullo, G. and Rae, P.: “Cements for Long Term–Design
dynamic values are significantly higher than static values. Optimization by Computer Modelling and Prediction,” paper
• Acoustic measurements made on in-situ cured cement presented at the 2000 IADC/SPE Meeting, Kuala Lumpur,
pastes under downhole temperatures and pressures Malaysia, 11-13 September.
provide a continuous measurement of mechanical 13. Biezen, E., van der Werff, N., and Ravi, K.: “Experimental and
properties over a long period of time in contrast to one- Numerical Study of Drilling Fluid from a Horizontal Wellbore,”
time stress-strain measurements at ambient conditions on paper SPE 62887 presented at the 2000 SPE Annual Technical
samples cured under downhole conditions. Such values Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas.
are expected to be useful in engineering analysis of 14. Al Khayyat, B. et al.: “Successes in Production-Liner
Cementing in Oil-Based Mud: A Case Study,” paper SPE/IADC
cement sheath performance under downhole conditions. 57560 presented at the 1999 SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling
• Acoustic measurements do not provide mechanical Technology Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
properties such as friction angles and yield stresses. 15. Rao, P.P., Sutton, D.L., Childs, J.D., and Cunningham, W.C.,
• In-situ measurement of cement mechanical properties “An Ultrasonic Device for Nondestructive Testing of Oilwell
under downhole conditions is particularly helpful for Cements at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures.” J. Petroleum
characterizing cement formulations containing special Technology, Vol. 34, pp 2611-2616, November 198?.
admixtures that undergo phase changes under downhole 16. Krautkramer, J., and Krautkramer, H.. Ultrasonic Testing of
Materials, Second Edition, Springer Verlag publishers, 1977.
conditions.
17. Leslie, J.R., and Cheesman, W.J. “An Ultrasonic Method of
• Measurement of mechanical properties under downhole Studying Deterioration and Cracking in Concrete Structures,” J.
conditions is expected to offer a practical and easier Amer. Concr. Inst., 46, 17-36 (1949).
laboratory method in field locations for optimizing slurry 18. Voigt, T., and Shah, P.S. “Properties of Early-Age Portland
designs with suitable mechanical properties. Cement Mortar Monitored with Shear Wave Reflection
Method”, ACI Materials Journal, 101(6), 473 (2004).
References 19. Fam, M.A., and Santamarina, J.C. “Study of Clay-Cement
1. Harlan, T.D. et al.: “Foamed Cement Selection for Horizontal Slurries with Mechanical and Electromagnetic Waves,” J.
Liners Proves Effective for Zonal Isolation—Case History,” Geotechnical Engg., 122 (5), 365(1996).
paper SPE 71055 presented at the 2001 Rocky Mountain 20. Christaras, B., Auger, F., Mosse, E., “Determination of the
Petroleum Technology Conference, Keystone, Colorado, 21-23 moduli of elasticity of rocks. Comparison of ultrasonic velocity
May. and mechanical resonance frequency methods with direct static
2. Harms, W.M. and Febus, J.: “Cementing of Fragile Formations methods”. Materials and Structures, 27, 222-228 (1994).
Wells with Foamed Cement Slurries,” paper SPE 12755
SPE 95921 5

Table 1—Static Mechanical Properties Measured at Room Temperature under

Unconfined Conditions/Dynamic Properties Measured at Test Temperature
Slurry density Water Young’s Modulus x 106 psi Poisson’s Ratio
(lb/gal)
Static Dynamic Static Dynamic
17.64 3.39 2.50 3.80 0.20 0.25
17.18 3.74 2.00 3.00 0.20 0.30
16.64 4.21 1.79 2.67 0.20 0.31
16.40 4.45 1.60 2.39 0.20 0.32

Table 2—Variation of the Modulus Values as a Function of % Gas Phase

Base Slurry Density % Foam Young’s Modulus × 106 psi Poisson’s Ratio
(lb/gal)
Static Dynamic at Static Dynamic
345°F at 345°F
19.0 0.0 — 2.90 0.23
Same 14.0 — 2.22 0.17
Same 25.0 — 1.80 0.17
17.6 0.0 2.500 — 0.20 —
Same 10.0 1.600 — 0.19 —
Same 20.0 1.330 — 0.19 —
Same 31.7 0.995 — 0.19 —

Fig. 1—Steps for cementing for the life of the well.

6 SPE 95921

Shear Wave Velocity

Measurement Calculations
-Poisson’s Ratio
Acoustic
-Young’s Modulus
Measurement
-Bulk Modulus
Calculations
Compressional Wave
Velocity Measurement

Transducer
Pulsing Main Unit
Electronics -Temperature Control
-Data input/output
Computer
-Data presentation

Cement
Slurry Cell
Pressure
Control unit

Fig. 2—Schematic block diagram of the new machine based on the supplier’s brochure.

30 40 400 10 0.5 5000 3000

27 36 360 9 0.45 4500 2700

24 32 320 8 0.4 4000 2400

21 28 280 7 0.35 3500 2100

Transit Time (microsec/in)

Shear Time (microsec/in)

Young's Modulus (kpsi)

18 24 240 6 0.3 3000 1800

Bulk Modulus (kpsi)
Temperature (°F)

Pressure (kpsi)

Poisson's Ratio

15 20 200 5 0.25 2500 1500

12 16 160 4 0.2 2000 1200

9 12 120 3 0.15 1500 900

6 8 80 2 0.1 1000 600

3 4 40 1 0.05 500 300

0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0:00 5:00 10:00 15:00 20:00 25:00 30:00
Time (HH:MM)

Fig. 3—Representative results chart from a completed test.

SPE 95921 7

5.20E+06
4.60E+06
4.00E+06

Dynamic 3.40E+06
2.80E+06
2.20E+06 y = 2.8227x + 384646
R2 = 0.9557
1.60E+06
1.00E+06
2.00E+05 5.00E+05 8.00E+05 1.10E+06 1.40E+06 1.70E+06
Static

Fig. 4—Portland and non-Portland based cement formulations containing a variety of

admixtures and foamed-cement samples cured under a range of temperatures and pressures.

3.60E+06 y = 0.1314x 5.9762

R2 = 0.967
3.00E+06
Young's modulus, psi

2.40E+06

1.80E+06
y = 0.1725x 5.7363
1.20E+06
R2 = 0.9682
6.00E+05

0.00E+00
16 16.5 17 17.5 18
Slurry Density (ppg)

Dynamic Static Power (Dynamic) Power (Static)

Fig. 5—Dependence of modulus values on the cement slurry density.

4.50E+06
y = 1.5728x - 137345
Dynamic modulus, psi

3.60E+06 R2 = 0.9998

2.70E+06

1.80E+06

9.00E+05

0.00E+00
0.00E+00 7.50E+05 1.50E+06 2.25E+06 3.00E+06
Static modulus, psi

Fig. 6—Relationship between the two sets of modulus values.

8 SPE 95921

3.50E+06

3.00E+06 y = -44204x + 3E+06

Young's modulus, psi

R2 = 0.9956
2.50E+06

2.00E+06
1.50E+06

1.00E+06
y = -27901x + 2E+06
5.00E+05 R2 = 0.9997
0.00E+00
0 10 20 30 40
% foam

17.64 ppg slurry - static properties 19 ppg slurry - Dynamic properties

Fig. 7—Variation of the modulus values as a function of % gas phase.

Fig. 8—Tansit time chart from the higher temeparture UCA chart.