检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]河北华北石油荣盛机械制造有限公司
出 处:《钻采工艺》2015年第4期68-69,9-10,共2页Drilling & Production Technology
基 金:国家863计划"深水防喷器组及其控制系统工程化研制"(编号2013AA09A220);国家科技重大专项"深水半潜式钻井平台及配套技术"(编号2011ZX05027-001)
摘 要:针对用户在选择闸板防喷器结构型式方面的迷茫性,对钻井现场常用的Cameron和NOV Shaffer两种类型的闸板防喷器结构固有特性进行分析研究,总结优缺点,为用户依据钻井作业现场各种工况和维修能力自主选择防喷器结构型式提供了理论依据。分析得出Cameron型壳体承载能力比Shaffer型高,但维修困难,其闸板体承载时应力较高,容易变形,手动关闭较难;Cameron型防喷器更换闸板时开启空间比Shaffer型小且省力;Cameron型变径胶芯变径范围大,但高温下密封可靠性低。The natural characteristics of Cameron and NOV Shaffer ram BOP were analyzed,and their advantages and defects were summarized. Through analyzing,the shell bearing capacity of Cameron was higher than NOV Shaffer's,but its maintenance was more difficult,and the Cameron ram close was more difficult for bearing stress was higher than Shaffer's. As changing rams,the side door open and close of Cameron BOP adopted linear motion,Shaffer BOP adopted rotary motion,the opening space of Cameron BOP was smaller than Shaffer BOP and save labour. The range of Cameron's VBR was larger than Shaffer's,but its sealing reliability was low under high temperature.
分 类 号:TE927.9[石油与天然气工程—石油机械设备]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.222