| MFE与APR测试工具在高温高压井的应用对比 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 荀忠义,张容,刘宏,吴国洲.MFE与APR测试工具在高温高压井的应用对比[J].油气井测试,2005,14(1):57-59. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 荀忠义 张容 刘宏 吴国洲 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 江苏油田井下作业处,江苏,江都,225265 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 介绍了Johnston公司的MFE和Halliburton公司的APR两种测试工具在同一口高温高压井中的应用情况。MFE测试3次全部失败,测试阀以下管柱出现漏失现象;APR使用3次均获成功。对MFE测试失败原因进行分析认为,超高压地层应用APR测试工具更为可靠。
|
| 关 键 词： | 测试工具 压力系数 高温高压井 对比 效果 |
Applied Comparison of MFE and APR Testing Tool in HP- HT Well |
| |
| Xun Zhongyi,Zhang Rong,Liu Hong,Wu Guozhou.Applied Comparison of MFE and APR Testing Tool in HP- HT Well[J].Well Testing,2005,14(1):57-59. |
| |
| Authors: | Xun Zhongyi Zhang Rong Liu Hong Wu Guozhou |
| |
| Abstract: | The paper introduces a applied situation in the same HP-HT well of MFE testing manufactured from Johnston company and APR testing tool from Halliburton. Because of leakage phenomena for string down test valve, three times of operations by MFE were failed. On the contrary,that of APR was success. To analyze the causes for that,it is thought that using APR tool in HP-HT well is much reliable. |
| |
| Keywords: | testing tool pressure coefficient HP-HT well comparison |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
