MFE与APR测试工具在高温高压井的应用对比  

Applied Comparison of MFE and APR Testing Tool in HP-HT Well.

作　　者：荀忠义[1] 张容[1] 刘宏[1] 吴国洲[1] 

机构地区：[1]江苏油田井下作业处,江苏江都225265

出　　处：《油气井测试》2005年第1期57-59,共3页Well Testing

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。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.

关 键 词：MFE 高温高压井 管柱 漏失 测试工具 地层 超高压 公司 成功 失败 

分 类 号：TE353[石油与天然气工程—油气田开发工程] TE935