【单选题】
质和事物的存在是___
A. 相互对立的
B. 相互包含的
C. 直接同一的
D. 相互转化的
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题
答案
C
解析
暂无解析
相关试题
【单选题】
在实际工作中,要注意掌握分寸,防止“过”或“不及”,其关键在于___
A. 抓住事物的主要矛盾
B. 确定事物的质
C. 认识事物的量
D. 把握事物的度
【单选题】
区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___
A. 事物的变化是否显著
B. 事物的变化是否迅速
C. 事物的某些属性是否发生了变化
D. 事物的变化是否超出度的范围
【单选题】
量变的复杂性是指___
A. 量变的程度发展不同
B. 量变形式的多样性和总的量变过程中有部分质变
C. 质变中有量的扩张
D. 量变有在度的范围内的变化和突破度的范围的变化
【单选题】
量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___
A. 事物内部各部分之间变化的不平衡性
B. 事物整体与某些构成部分之间变化的不平衡性
C. 事物与事物之间变化的不平衡性
D. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化的不平衡性
【单选题】
量变中的局部性部分质变是___
A. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化不平衡性的表现
B. 事物的各个部分之间变化不平衡性的表现
C. 事物的内部矛盾和外部条件变化不平衡性的表现
D. 事物的量和质变化不平衡性的表现
【单选题】
揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展规律
【单选题】
“肯定和否定相互渗透,在一定意义上,肯定就是否定。”这是一种___
A. 相对主义诡辩论的观点
B. 唯物辩证法的观点
C. 主观唯心主义的观点
D. 形而上学的观点
【单选题】
事物的否定方面是指___
A. 事物的积极方面
B. 事物的消极方面
C. 事物中维持其存在的方面
D. 事物中促使其灭亡的方面
【单选题】
作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___
A. 既保留又继承
B. 彻底抛弃
C. 既克服又保留
D. 矛盾的调和
【单选题】
辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___
A. 把旧事物完全抛弃
B. 使旧事物发生量变
C. 是新事物产生、旧事物灭亡
D. 是从外部强加给事物的
【单选题】
否定之否定规律___
A. 在事物完成一个发展周期时才能完整地表现出来
B. 在事物发展过程中任何一点上都可以表现出来
C. 在事物经过量变和质变两种状态后表现出来
D. 在事物发展过程中经过肯定和否定两个阶段表现出来
【单选题】
事物发展的周期性体现了___
A. 事物发展的直线性与曲折性的统一
B. 事物发展是一个不断地回到出发点的运动
C. 事物发展的周而复始的循环性
D. 事物发展的前进性和曲折性的统一
【单选题】
直线论的错误在于只看到___
A. 事物发展的周期性而否认了前进性
B. 事物发展的前进性而否认了曲折性
C. 事物发展的间接性而否认了连续性
D. 事物发展的曲折性而否认了周期性
【单选题】
循环论的错误在于___
A. 只看到事物发展的普遍性,没有看到事物发展过程的特殊性
B. 只看到事物的绝对运动,没有看到事物的相对静止
C. 只看到事物发展道路的曲折性,没有看到事物发展趋势的前进性
D. 只看到新旧事物之间的连续性,没有看到新旧事物之间的间断性
【单选题】
对立统一规律揭示了___
A. 事物发展的动力和源泉
B. 事物发展的状态和过程
C. 事物发展的方向和道路
D. 事物发展的两种趋向
【单选题】
唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展的规律
【单选题】
辩证法所说的矛盾是指___
A. 人们思维中的前后不一的自相矛盾
B. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的对立统一
C. 对立面之间的相互排斥
D. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的相互依赖
【单选题】
矛盾的基本属性是___
A. 普遍性和特殊性
B. 绝对性和相对性
C. 变动性和稳定性
D. 斗争性和同一性
【单选题】
依据是___
A. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性辩证关系的原理
B. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性辩证关系的原理
C. 事物发展的量变和质变辩证关系的原理
D. 事物发展的内因和外因辩证关系的原理
【单选题】
矛盾问题的精髓是___
A. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性关系的问题
B. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性关系的问题
C. 主要矛盾和次要矛盾关系的问题
D. 矛盾的主要方面和次要方面关系的问题
【单选题】
题的方法都是___
A. 重点论
B. 均衡论
C. 一点论
D. 两点论
【单选题】
“任何个别(无论怎样)都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___
A. 特殊性就是普遍性
B. 特殊性存在于普遍性之中
C. 普遍性是特殊性的总和
D. 特殊性中包含普遍性
【单选题】
在唯物辩证法看来,水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___
A. 共性和个性的关系
B. 整体和部分的关系
C. 本质和现象的关系
D. 内容和形式的关系
【单选题】
“是就是是,不是就是不是,除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___
A. 形而上学的观点
B. 相对主义的观点
C. 唯心主义的观点
D. 辩证法的观点
【单选题】
真象和假象的区别在于___
A. 真象是客观的,假象是主观的
B. 真象表现本质,假象不表现本质
C. 真象深藏于事物内部,假象外露于事物外部
D. 真象从正面直接地表现本质,假象从反面歪曲地表现本质
【单选题】
有的哲学家说,在大风扬起的尘土中,每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___
A. 辩证唯物主义决定论的观点
B. 形而上学的机械决定论的观点
C. 唯心主义非决定论的观点
D. 庸俗唯物主义的观点
【单选题】
“或然率”是指___
A. 可能性在质上的一种科学说明和测定
B. 可能性在量上的一种科学说明和测定
C. 必然性的一种科学说明和判定
D. 偶然性的一种科学说明和测定
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___
A. It is based on questionable statistics.
B. It reflects the economic changes.
C. It evidences the improved welfare.
D. It provides much food for thought.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It is widely used to compare the economic growth across countries.
B. It revolutionizes the way of measuring ordinary people’s livelihood.
C. It focuses on people’s consumption rather that their average income.
D. It is a more comprehensive measure of people’s economic well-being.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___
A. It reflected the existing big gap between the two economies.
B. It neglected many important indicators of people’s welfare.
C. It covered up the differences between individual citizens.
D. It failed to count in their difference in natural resources.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It can accurately pinpoint a country’s current economic problems.
B. It can help to raise people’s awareness of their economic well-being.
C. It can diagnose the causes of a country’s slowing pace of economic improvement.
D. It can compare a country’s economic conditions between different periods of time.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___
A. It is much better than that of their European counterparts.
B. It has been on the decline ever since the turn of the century.
C. It has not improved as much as reported by the Census Bureau.
D. It has not been accurately assessed and reported since mid-2000s.
【单选题】
大学生的成才目标是___。
A. 培养德智体美全面发展的人才
B. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者
C. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者和接班人
D. 培养专业化、创新化的人才
【单选题】
现代人才素质的灵魂是___。
A. 德
B. 智
C. 体
D. 美
【单选题】
___是人才素质的基础.
A. 德
B. 智
C. 体
D. 美
【单选题】
世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。
A. “多极化”
B. 单边主义
C. 两极格局形成
D. 一超独霸
【单选题】
在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可,统一存在的,其中处于主导地位的是___。
A. 德育
B. 智育
C. 体育
D. 美育
【单选题】
时代精神的内涵十分丰富,其中___居于核心地位。
A. 艰苦奋斗
B. 自强不息
C. 团结统一
D. 改革创新
【单选题】
民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。
A. 爱国主义
B. 人道主义
C. 科学主义
D. 革命英雄主义
【单选题】
下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。
A. 艰难困苦,玉汝于成
B. 先天下之忧而忧
C. 生于忧患,死于安乐
D. 民无信不立
推荐试题
【单选题】
一般情况下,钻时比正常钻时快___时,即为钻速突快。
A. 1/2
B. 2/3
C. 1/3
D. 任意情况
【单选题】
对溢流显示的监测应在钻井的___中。
A. 空井状态
B. 起下钻
C. 正常钻进
D. 整个施工过程
【单选题】
地层的油气流体通常会使钻井液密度减小,因而悬重___。
A. 不变
B. 升高
C. 降低
D. 升高或降低
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,___坐岗观察记录钻井液出口流量变化、钻井液循环罐液面变化及钻井液性能变化,及时发现是否有溢流和井漏发生。
A. 值班干部
B. 司钻
C. 泥浆工
D. 录井联机员
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,录井队联机员从___之日起坐岗。
A. 开钻
B. 开始录井
C. 安装防喷器开钻
D. 钻入油气层
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,坚持“发现溢流立即关井,怀疑溢流关井检查”的原则,发现溢流、井漏、钻井液性能变化及油气显示等异常情况,应立即报告___实施关井。
A. 平台经理
B. 钻井监督
C. 钻井工程师
D. 司钻
【单选题】
钻进中出现钻速突然加快、放空、井漏、气测、油气水显示、钻井液性能变化等异常情况,应立即___。
A. 关井
B. 循环观察
C. 停钻观察
D. 继续钻进
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,钻井队值班干部非目的层作业每___检查一次泥浆坐岗情况。
A. 15~30分钟
B. 30~60分钟
C. 2小时
D. 6小时
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,从___之日起泥浆工开始坐岗。
A. 开钻
B. 开始录井
C. 安装防喷器开钻
D. 钻入油气层
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,起钻或下钻中___核对一次钻井液灌入或返出量。
A. 每3~5柱钻杆和1钻铤和11柱加重钻杆
B. 每1柱钻杆和1钻铤
C. 每3~5柱钻杆或1柱钻铤或1柱加重钻杆
D. 每1柱钻杆和3~5柱钻铤
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,钻井队值班干部进入目的层作业每___检查一次泥浆工的坐岗情况并签字。
A. 15~30分钟
B. 30~60分钟
C. 2小时
D. 6小时
【单选题】
塔里木油田坐岗要求,非目的层作业录井队联机员每___内应到钻井液灌上核对一次泥浆量。
A. 15~30分钟
B. 30~60分钟
C. 2小时
D. 6小时
【单选题】
发生溢流后要求及时关井的目的是___。
A. 防止井塌
B. 防止卡钻
C. 防止井漏
D. 保持井内有尽可能多的液柱压力
【单选题】
软关井是在___开启条件下关井。
A. 压井管汇
B. 4号平板阀
C. 放喷管汇
D. 井口防喷设备
【单选题】
硬关井的主要特点是溢流量___。
A. 大
B. 小
C. 中等
D. 不确定
【单选题】
硬关井时,由于关井程序比软关井___,所以关井( )。
A. 少、慢
B. 多、慢
C. 少、快
D. 少、慢
【单选题】
硬关井是在___关闭的条件下关井。
A. 压井管汇
B. 4号平板阀
C. 放喷管汇
D. 井口防喷设备
【单选题】
发生溢流采取软关井的优点是___。
A. 容易产生水击现象
B. 关井时间比较长
C. 对井口设备冲击比较小
D. 关井时间比较短
【单选题】
软关井,指发现溢流关井时( )操作程序。 1.关防喷器 2.打开节流阀一侧的通道 3.关闭节流阀
A. 123
B. 321
C. 213
D. 231
【单选题】
发现溢流或井涌,立即关闭防喷器的操作程序是___。
A. 软关井
B. 硬关井
C. 半软半硬关井
D. 复合关井
【单选题】
软关井,指发现溢流关井时,先打开___一侧的流动通道,再关防喷器,最后关闭节2a的操作程序。
A. 压井管汇
B. 节流管汇
C. 放喷管汇
D. 液控管线
【单选题】
发生溢流硬关井时,容易产生___现象。
A. 坍塌
B. 卡钻
C. 憋泵
D. 水击
【单选题】
硬关井是指一旦发现溢流或井涌,关井前不给井内流体提供流动通道,直接关闭___的操作程序。
A. 节流阀
B. 防喷器
C. 内防喷工具
D. 环形防喷器
【单选题】
含硫化氢油气井,如果井口设备和井身结构具备条件,可以考虑使用___关井。
A. 软
B. 硬
C. 半软半硬
D. 复合
【单选题】
发现溢流后应立即停止一切作业尽快___。
A. 按关井程序关井
B. 开泵循环
C. 将钻头下到井底
D. 加重钻井液
【单选题】
发生溢流后有___关井方法。
A. 一种
B. 两种
C. 三种
D. 四种
【单选题】
我国行业标准目前推荐用___关井方式。
A. 软
B. 硬
C. 半软半硬
D. 复合
【单选题】
关井后,如果立管压力大于零,套管压力大于零,这时应___。
A. 压井
B. 开井
C. 循环观察
D. 恢复钻进
【单选题】
___压井时间短,井口装置承压小,对地层施加的压力小。在压井时,要求现场加重材料必须充足,具备快速加重能力,从关井到恢复井内循环时间长。
A. 司钻法
B. 边循环边加重
C. 工程师法
D. 压回法
【单选题】
压回法是将溢流压回储层,在确保井筒干净(或减少溢流量)的条件下,再采用___方式进行压井,达到恢复和重建井内压力平衡的目的的压井方法。
A. 正循环
B. 反循环
C. 大于漏失压力
D. 大于地破压力
【单选题】
___是发生溢流关井后,将配置的压井钻井液直接泵入井内,在一个循环周内将溢流排出井口并压住井的方法。
A. 司钻法
B. 工程师法
C. 边循环边加重
D. 压回法
【单选题】
溢流量越大,压井过程中___越高。
A. 立管压力
B. 套管压力
C. 泵压
D. 地层压力
【单选题】
司钻法压第二循环周是用___ 压井,重建井内压力平衡。
A. 原钻井液
B. 重钻井液
C. 压井钻井液
D. 低密度钻井液
【单选题】
根据塔里木油田溢流的特点,目前工程实践中常用的压井方法主要有___种。
A. 一
B. 二
C. 三
D. 四
【单选题】
正循环压井法就是在保持井底压力___的条件下,采用正循环方式进行排污和压井,达到恢复和重建井内压力平衡的目的的压井方法。
A. 大于储层压力
B. 小于储层压力
C. 大于漏失压力
D. 大于地破压力
【单选题】
___往往在边远井及加重剂供应不及时的情况下采用,此方法从关井到恢复循环的时间短,容易掌握。
A. 司钻法
B. 工程师法
C. 边循环边加重
D. 压回
【单选题】
压井是向失去压力平衡的井内泵入高密度钻井液,并始终控制井底压力___地层压力,以重建和恢复压力平衡作业。(按塔里木教材答)
A. 大于
B. 略大于
C. 小于
D. 略小于
【单选题】
司钻法是发生溢流关井后,先用___钻井液循环排出溢流,再用加重钻井液压井的方法,一般用两个循环周期完成。
A. 原密度
B. 清水
C. 盐水
D. 加重钻井液
【单选题】
压回法适用于高含硫、溢流量大的条件,但缺点是___。
A. 有毒有害气体对装备和人员的伤害
B. 压井成功率低
C. 所需要压井装备也比较简单
D. 必须井筒具备能够实施有效压回的地层条件
【单选题】
在整个压井施工过程中,要求作用于井底的压力等于或略大于___。
A. 上覆岩层压力
B. 基岩应力
C. 地层压力
D. 地层破裂压力