0% found this document useful (0 votes)

244 views104 pages

API Spec 19tt

The document is the API Specification 19TT for downhole well test tools and related equipment, developed for the petroleum and natural gas industry. It outlines requirements for the selection, manufacture, testing, and use of these tools, emphasizing that additional requirements may be necessary for specific applications. The specification includes various normative annexes and provides guidelines for manufacturers and users to ensure compliance and performance of the tools.

Uploaded by

Tuấn Dương

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

244 views104 pages

API Spec 19tt

Uploaded by

Tuấn Dương

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 104

Specification for Downhole Well

Test Tools and Related Equipment

API SPECIFICATION 19TT

FIRST EDITION, OCTOBER 2016

REAFFIRMED, JANUARY 2022

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
Special Notes

API publications necessarily address problems of a general nature. With respect to particular circumstances, local,
state, and federal laws and regulations should be reviewed.

Neither API nor any of API’s employees, subcontractors, consultants, committees, or other assignees make any
warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the
information contained herein, or assume any liability or responsibility for any use, or the results of such use, of any
information or process disclosed in this publication. Neither API nor any of API's employees, subcontractors,
consultants, or other assignees represent that use of this publication would not infringe upon privately owned rights.

API publications may be used by anyone desiring to do so. Every effort has been made by the Institute to ensure the
accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or
guarantee in connection with this publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or
damage resulting from its use or for the violation of any authorities having jurisdiction with which this publication may
conflict.

API publications are published to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operating
practices. These publications are not intended to obviate the need for applying sound engineering judgment
regarding when and where these publications should be utilized. The formulation and publication of API publications
is not intended in any way to inhibit anyone from using any other practices.

Classified areas may vary depending on the location, conditions, equipment, and substances involved in any given
situation. Users of this specification should consult with the appropriate authorities having jurisdiction.

Users of this specification should not rely exclusively on the information contained in this document. Sound business,
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

scientific, engineering, and safety judgment should be used in employing the information contained herein.

Any manufacturer marking equipment or materials in conformance with the marking requirements of an API standard
is solely responsible for complying with all the applicable requirements of that standard. API does not represent,
warrant, or guarantee that such products do in fact conform to the applicable API standard.

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Contact the
Publisher, API Publishing Services, 200 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20001.

Copyright © 2016 American Petroleum Institute

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

This specification has been developed by users/purchasers and suppliers/manufacturers of downhole well test tools
intended for use in the petroleum and natural gas industry worldwide. This specification is intended to give
requirements and information to both parties in the selection, manufacture, testing, and use of the tools named within
the scope. Furthermore, this specification addresses the minimum requirements with which the supplier/manufacturer
is to comply so as to claim conformity with this specification.

Users of this specification should be aware that requirements above those outlined in this specification may be
needed for individual applications. This specification is not intended to inhibit a supplier/manufacturer from offering, or
the user/purchaser from accepting, alternative equipment or engineering solutions. This may be particularly
applicable where there is innovative or developing technology. Where an alternative is offered, the supplier/
manufacturer should identify any variations from this specification and provide details.

This first edition of the specification has been authored in an effort to cover the prominent range of well test tools.
Additionally included are requirements for service centers to ensure these products perform as designed when
maintained as defined therein. It is recognized that these requirements may merit some refinement following their
utilization.

Included in this specification are nine annexes (Annexes A through I), all of which are normative except Annexes H
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

and I. Where referenced, these annexes provide mandatory requirements for conformance to this specification.

Nothing contained in any API publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for the
manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters patent. Neither should anything
contained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent.

Shall: As used in a standard, “shall” denotes a minimum requirement in order to conform to the standard.

Should: As used in a standard, “should” denotes a recommendation or that which is advised but not required in order
to conform to the standard.

May: As used in a standard, “may” denotes a course of action permissible within the limits of a standard.

Can: As used in a standard, “can” denotes a statement of possibility or capability.

This document was produced under API standardization procedures that ensure appropriate notification and
participation in the developmental process and is designated as an API standard. Questions concerning the
interpretation of the content of this publication or comments and questions concerning the procedures under which
this publication was developed should be directed in writing to the Director of Standards, American
Petroleum Institute, 200 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20001. Requests for permission
to reproduce or translate all or any part of the material published herein should also be addressed to the director.

Generally, API standards are reviewed and revised, reaffirmed, or withdrawn at least every five years. A one-time
extension of up to two years may be added to this review cycle. Status of the publication can be ascertained from the
API Standards Department, telephone (202) 682-8000. A catalog of API publications and materials is
published annually by API, 200 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20001.

Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the Standards Department, API, 200 Massachusetts
Avenue, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20001, standards@api.org.

iii

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3 Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4 Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5 Functional Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2 Functional Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3 Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4 Design Validation Grade Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5 Quality Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6 Technical Specification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.2 Technical Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.3 Design Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.4 Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.5 Design Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.6 Design Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.7 Design Validation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.8 Performance Envelope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.9 Special Feature Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.10 Design Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7 Supplier/Manufacturer Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.2 Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.3 Product Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.4 Quality Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.5 Quality Controls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.6 Shear Device Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.7 Rupture Disc Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.8 Traceability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.9 Materials Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.10 Subsupplier Qualifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.11 Heat Treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.12 Additional Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.13 Assembly and Functional Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.14 Disposition of Manufacturing Nonconformities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.15 Correction of Manufacturing Nonconformities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

7.16 Test Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

8 Handling, Storage, and Preparation for Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Annex A (normative) Validation Requirements for Downhole Well Test Tools and Related Equipment . . . . . . 34
Annex B (normative) Factory Acceptance Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Annex C (normative) Service Center Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Annex D (normative) Performance Rating Envelopes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Annex E (normative) Well Testing Packer Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Annex F (normative) Electronic and Electrical Components, Subcomponents, and Systems Requirements 74

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Annex G (normative) Testing Surface Safety Valve Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Annex H (informative) Applications Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Annex I (informative) Operational Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Figures
A.1 General Representation of Validation Profile Test Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
D.1 Example Performance Envelope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
E.1 General Representation of Validation Profile Test Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
I.1 Example of a Decision Tree for Selection of Work String Connection Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
I.2 Example Valve Status Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Tables
1 Design Validation Grade Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Quality Requirement Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
A.1 Validation Testing Coverage by Tool Type and Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
E.1 Packer Validation Testing Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

This specification applies to downhole well test tools that prior to this publication were not addressed by standards or
specifications. Additionally, this specification defines requirements for service centers from which these tools are
typically provided and maintained.

This specification has been developed by users/purchasers and suppliers/manufacturers of downhole well test tools
and related equipment as defined herein and intended for use in the petroleum and natural gas industry worldwide to
give requirements and information to both parties in the selection, manufacture, testing, and use of these tools.
Furthermore, this specification addresses the minimum requirements with which the supplier/manufacturer is to
comply so as to claim conformity with this specification.

This specification has been structured with a single grade of quality control requirements and three grades of design
validation. These validation grades provide the user/purchaser the choice of requirements to meet their preference or
application. Design validation grades V3 (well test tools) and V3-TP (well test packers) are the minimum grades, and
V1 (well test tools) and V1-TP (well test packers) are the most stringent grades.

Annexes A, B, C, D, E, F, and G are normative requirements, whereas Annexes H and I are informative.

Annexes are as follows:

— Annex A—Validation Requirements for Downhole Well Test Tools and Related Equipment;

— Annex B—Factory Acceptance Testing;

— Annex C—Service Center Requirements;

— Annex D—Performance Rating Envelopes;

— Annex E—Well Testing Packer Requirements;

— Annex F—Electronic and Electrical Components, Subcomponents, and Systems Requirements;

— Annex G—Testing Surface Safety Valve Requirements;

— Annex H—Applications Overview;

— Annex I—Operational Recommendations.

The international system of units (SI) is used in this specification; however, U.S. customary units are also shown for
reference.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

1 Scope

This specification provides the requirements for downhole well test tools and related equipment as they are
defined herein for use in the petroleum and natural gas industries. Included are the requirements for design,
design validation, manufacturing, functional evaluation, quality, handling, storage, and service centers. Tools
utilized in downhole well test operations include tester valves, circulating valves, well testing packers,
safety joints, well testing safety valves, testing surface safety valves (TSSVs), slip joints, jars, work string
tester valves, sampler carriers, gauge carriers, drain valves, related equipment, and tool end connections.

This specification does not cover open hole well test tools, downhole gauges, samplers, surface equipment,
subsea safety equipment, perforating equipment and accessories, pup joints external to well test tool
assemblies, work string and its connections, conveyance or intervention systems, installation, control and
monitoring conduits, and surface control systems.

A downhole well test is an operation deploying a temporary completion in a well to safely acquire dynamic
rates, formation pressure/temperature, and formation fluid data. Downhole well test tools are also used in
operations of well perforating, well shut-ins, circulation control of fluids, and stimulation activities. This
document covers the downhole tools used to perform these operations; however, the operational
requirements of performing these operations are not included.

2 Normative References

The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
document (including any amendments) applies.

API Specification 5CT, Specification for Casing and Tubing

1
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) , Section IX: Welding and Brazing Qualifications
2
ASNT SNT-TC-1A , Recommended Practice for Personnel Qualification and Certification in Non-destructive
Testing
3
ASTM E10 , Standard Test Methods for Brinell Hardness Testing of Metallic Materials

ASTM E18, Standard Test Methods for Rockwell Hardness of Metallic Materials

ASTM E165/E165M, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Examination for General Industry
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ASTM E384, Standard Test Method for Microindentation Hardness of Materials

4
ISO 3601-1 , Fluid power systems—O-rings—Part 1: Inside diameters, cross-sections, tolerances and
designation codes

ISO 3601-3, Fluid power systems—O-rings—Part 3: Quality acceptance criteria

ISO 6506 (all parts), Metallic materials—Hardness test—Brinell test

1
ASME International, 2 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016-5990, www.asme.org.
2
American Society for Nondestructive Testing, 1711 Arlingate Lane, P.O. Box 28518, Columbus, Ohio 43228,
www.asnt.org.
3
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428, www.astm.org.
4
International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. de la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland, www.iso.org.
1
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
2 API SPECIFICATION 19TT

ISO 6507 (all parts), Metallic materials—Vickers hardness test

ISO 6508 (all parts), Metallic materials—Rockwell hardness test

ISO 9712, Non-destructive testing—Qualification and certification of NDT personnel

ISO 18265, Metallic materials—Conversion of hardness values

5
NACE MR0175 /ISO 15156 (all parts), Petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas industries—Materials for
use in H2S-containing environments in oil and gas production

3 Terms and Definitions

For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.

3.1
absolute pressure
Hydrostatic pressure plus applied pressure.

3.2
absolute pressure dependency
A condition in which a tool has an atmospheric or nonpressure balanced chamber, or seals having multiple
sealing elements in a common seal gland, or seal systems having multiple seal glands where an atmospheric
space can exist between glands.

3.3
ambient temperature
Prevailing temperature at test site.

3.4
assembly
Product made up of more than one component.

3.5
barrier
Obstacle to prevent flow whose performance can be verified.

3.6
base design
Design of a specified size, type, and model of a downhole well test tool that meets the requirements of this
specification.

3.7
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

batch lot
Material or components that have undergone the same process or series of processes and are traceable to
one batch of material.

3.8
bill of materials
Controlled list of components of an assembly.

5
NACE International (formerly the National Association of Corrosion Engineers), 1440 South Creek Drive, Houston,
Texas 77084-4906, www.nace.org.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.9
brazing
Process of joining metal using a nonferrous filler, the filler having a melting point below that of the metal being
joined.

3.10
circulating valve
Downhole device to provide communication/isolation between annulus and work string.

3.11
closure mechanism
A system of parts that operate to close the tool, such as to close the inside diameter (ID), or to close on
opening to/from the ID to the outside diameter (OD).

3.12
coating
Permanent deposition of a material onto the surface of a part to enhance its surface properties such as
improving corrosion protection, wear resistance, or reducing friction.

3.13
common hardware

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Nontraceable items such as nuts, bolts, set screws, and spacers.

3.14
crossover
Tubular element with two different threaded connections.

3.15
design validation
Process of proving a design by testing to demonstrate conformity of the product to design requirements.

3.16
design verification
Process of examining the result of a given design or development activity to determine conformity with
specified requirements. (See 6.6.)

3.17
differential pressure
Difference between internal and external pressure or the difference in pressure across a closure mechanism
or a packer element.

3.18
downhole well test tool
A device used in combination with other devices to perform a downhole well test.

3.19
drain valve
Downhole device that manually relieves internally trapped pressure at surface.

3.20
drawdown
Reduction in borehole pressure below formation pressure.

3.21
drift
Bar utilized to verify the passage of a specified diameter and length through a well test tool.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.22
environment
Set of conditions to which the product is exposed.

3.23
external pressure
Pressure acting on the outer diameter of a tool.

3.24
fit
Geometric relationship between parts including the tolerance criteria used during the design of a part and its
mating parts.

3.25
functional specification
Features, characteristics, process conditions, boundaries, and exclusions defining the performance of the tools.

3.26
functional test
Test process performed to confirm proper operation of a tool.

3.27
gauge carrier
Tool used to convey gauges downhole.

3.28
gauge, downhole
A device designed to measure downhole parameters such as pressure and/or temperature.

3.29
hardness
Material surface property as determined from a test such as Rockwell, Brinell, Vickers, etc.

3.30
heat lot
Material or components that are traceable to one heat of metallic material.

3.31
heat treatment
Controlled heating and cooling of materials for the purpose of changing mechanical properties.

3.32

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
indication
An identified discontinuity or flaw in a material determined by a nondestructive material inspection technique.

3.33
informative
Information that is meant to enlighten the user/purchaser or supplier/manufacturer, without containing
requirements.

3.34
interchangeability
Ability to replace one component/subassembly with another component/subassembly without affecting
operation or function.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.35
internal pressure
Pressure acting on the internal diameter of a tool.

3.36
jar
A tool used to deliver an axial impact load to the downhole string.

3.37
job
One deployment of downhole tools to planned depth and retrieval through the rotary table.

3.38
job lot
Batch of material or components that have undergone the same process or series of processes; this may
include more than one heat of metallic components.

3.39
legacy design
A tool design that was developed and manufactured prior to the publication of this specification.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

3.40
load bearing
Device and/or part that supports or transmits a load.

3.41
manufacturing
Processes and actions performed that are necessary to provide finished component(s), assembly(ies), and
related documentation.

3.42
model
Tool design with unique components and operating characteristics, which differentiate it from other tool
designs of the same type.

3.43
nondestructive examination
NDE
An inspection technique used to evaluate a part without causing permanent damage. Common techniques
include magnetic particle inspection (MPI), dye penetrant inspection (DPI), or X-ray.

3.44
normative
Information or procedures that shall be used by the user/purchaser or supplier/manufacturer to comply with
this specification.

3.45
operating manual
Publication issued by the supplier/manufacturer, which contains detailed data and instructions related to the
design, installation, operation, and maintenance of a particular tool.

3.46
operating temperature range
Range defined by the minimum and maximum operating temperatures for tools as specified by the
supplier/manufacturer.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.47
operational cycle
A single complete execution of a tool’s operating mechanism, starting and finishing at the same tool state.

3.48
overlay
Deposition of new material over an existing material.

3.49
packer element sealing system
Components consisting of elastomeric elements and anti-extrusion devices comprising a sealing system.

3.50
perforating equipment and accessories
Devices used to create holes in the casing to connect the formation to the casing ID and accessories such as
circulating subs, tubing releases, shock absorbers, Y block assemblies, blast joints, gun hanger systems, and
swivel subs.

3.51
plating
Deposition of a thin layer of metal onto a surface by techniques such as electroless or electroplating, vapor
deposition, and sputter deposition.

3.52
pressure retaining
Device or part that is stressed due to the effects of a differential pressure acting on its boundary.

3.53
pressure reversal
Change from predominant pressure in the annulus to predominant pressure in the work string bore or vice
versa.

3.54
pump-through
Capability of a device/tool with a closure mechanism to be partially opened by the application of differential
pressure in the opposite direction of sealing, thus allowing fluid to be pumped through the tool.

3.55
pup joint
Short tubular element used to join two threaded connections.

3.56
qualified person
An individual or individuals with competencies gained through training and experience as measured against
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

established requirements, such as standards or tests that enable the individual to perform a required function.

3.57
rated pressure
Maximum supplier/manufacturer-defined pressure limit; for absolute, external, internal, and barrier differential
pressures.

3.58
related equipment
Any other downhole tool or equipment that would be included or necessary for downhole well test tools
operations not included in another standard or specification.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.59
room temperature
Temperature typically between 15 °C (60 °F) and 26 °C (80 °F).

3.60
run
Act of deploying downhole tools below the rotary table after connection to the work string.

3.61
safety joint
A device to allow an intentional controlled separation of the work string or bottomhole assembly (BHA).

3.62
sampler carriers
Tool used to convey fluid samplers downhole.

3.63
sealing element
Device preventing passage (i.e. communication) of liquid and/or gas across the interface in which it is placed.

3.64
service center
A location where equipment is inspected, repaired, and tested to maintain supplier/manufacturer’s
specifications.

3.65
shear device
Component designed to part under a predetermined load.

3.66
slip joint
A tool having a sealed telescoping joint designed to accommodate tubing expansion and contraction.

3.67
special feature
Specific additional functional capability not specifically described in the validation profile test sequences in
Annex A.

3.68
stick-up
Distance between the rotary table and the lower most part of the surface test tree.

3.69
stress relieving
Controlled heating of material to a predetermined temperature for the purpose of reducing any residual
stresses.

3.70
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

subassembly
Subordinate unit consisting of two or more components assembled for incorporation as an integral portion of a
tool, which may be independently performance tested before its integration.

3.71
substantive change
Change that potentially affects the performance or rating of the tool in the intended service as evaluated by a
qualified person at the supplier/manufacturer.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.72
surface treatment
Process designed to alter the surface of a material to achieve a desired property such as hardness or
corrosion resistance.

3.73
tester valve
Downhole device having open and closed positions providing communication/isolation with the formation.

3.74
testing surface safety valve
TSSV
Fail-closed surface-controlled safety valve placed near surface below the rotary (typically on land and jack-up
operations) that performs a barrier function with pump-through and chemical injection capability.

3.75
tool
Device that is designed to perform specific function(s) within the well testing BHA.

3.76
tool end connection
Uppermost and lowermost interface/connection of the downhole well test tool.

3.77
type
A product with unique characteristics or functionality, which differentiates it from other equipment.

3.78
visual inspection
Visually examining for a variety of surface flaws, such as corrosion, contamination, surface finish, and surface
discontinuities.

3.79
welding
Process of joining metal by bringing abutting surfaces to a molten state with or without the use of a filler
material.

3.80
well barrier
An envelope of one or more well barrier elements that prevents fluids from flowing unintentionally from the
formation or well into another formation or to the surface.

3.81
well barrier element
A pressure and flow containing component that relies on other component(s) to create a well barrier.

3.82
well testing packer
A sealing and load-bearing device that isolates the formation from annulus fluids and conforms to Annex E.

3.83
well testing safety valve
A downhole device that is designed to close, typically with annulus overpressure, to isolate the formation from
the work string.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3.84
work string
Tubular conduit used to convey well test tools downhole and provide a flow path for reservoir fluids to surface.

3.85
work string tester valve
A downhole device that is designed to integrity test the BHA and work string.

4 Abbreviations

AWS American Welding Society

BHA bottomhole assembly

BOP blowout preventer

COC certificate of compliance (or conformance)

DST drill stem test

ESD emergency shutdown

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
FAT factory acceptance testing

HPHT high pressure, high temperature

HPU hydraulic power unit

HSE health, safety, and environment

ID inside diameter

LCM lost control material

MPI magnetic particle inspection

MTR material test report

NDE nondestructive examination

NORM naturally occurring radioactive material

NORSOK Norsk Sokkels Konkuranseposisjon (Norwegian Standards Organization)

NRV nonreturn valve

OD outside diameter

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PED Pressure Equipment Directive

POOH pulling of out hole

RIH running in hole

TCP tubing conveyed perforating

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

TSSV testing surface safety valve

TMD total measured depth

TVD true vertical depth

WPS welding procedure specification

5 Functional Specification

5.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish the functional requirements for tools that conform to this
specification. The functional requirements are typically derived from input provided by potential
user/purchasers and shall be documented to conform to the applicable requirements of Section 5 herein.

5.2 Functional Characteristics

The functions and characteristics shall include, but not be limited to the following, as applicable (some tools
may have multiple functions and characteristics) for each required tool (F = function, C = characteristics).

a) Circulating Valve—(F) Provides communication between annulus and tubing. (C) Number of cycles, flow
area, control means and limits, isolation below circulating ports.

b) Drain Valve—(F) Relieves trapped pressure from within the work string at surface. (C) None.

c) Gauge Carrier—(F) Device used to convey downhole gauges. (C) Eccentric/concentric flow bore, porting
options, gauge model compatibility/quantity and mounting configuration.

d) Jar—(F) Applies an impact load to the test string. (C) Actuation means, number of cycles.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
e) Related Equipment—Other tools that are part of the test tool BHA.

f) Safety Joint—(F) Allows intentional, controlled separation within the test string. (C) Actuation and recovery
method.

g) Sampler Carrier—(F) Device used to convey downhole fluid samplers. (C) Actuation means,
eccentric/concentric flow bore, sampler model compatibility/quantity and mounting configuration.

h) Work String Safety Valve—(F) Device used to shut in the well should there be a leak in the work string
above the safety valve. (C) Actuation means, closure mechanism.

i) Testing Surface Safety Valve—(F) A near-surface emergency safety device that provides isolation in the
direction of flow. (C) Chemical injection, pump-through capability, control means, number of cycles, cutting
capability.

j) Slip Joint—(F) Telescoping device that allows for axial expansion and contraction of the test string. (C)
Pressure balance.

k) Tester Valve—(F) Controls flow (open or closed) and provides downhole communication/isolation with the
formation. (C) Number of cycles, option of lock open feature, control means and limits.

l) Well Testing Packer—(F) Isolates the annulus from above and formation from below. (C) Setting,
anchoring and retrieval means (including fishing), flow bypass.

m) Work String Tester Valve—(F) Provides a means to pressure test the work string above. (C) Isolation
means, control means, number of cycles, filling capability.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

5.3 Design Considerations

5.3.1 Well Parameters

The following well parameters shall be considered when establishing the functional characteristics of a tool:

a) well location and rig type (land, platform, subsea);

b) air gap, water depth, true vertical depth (TVD), total measured depth (TMD);

c) blowout preventer (BOP) size, type, configuration;

d) size, mass (weight), grade, material, connection type of the casing and work string;

e) casing and/or work string architecture, trajectory, deviations, restrictions, maximum dog leg severity;

f) casing pressure capability;

g) general wellbore fluid types and composition.

5.3.2 Operational Parameters

The following anticipated operational parameters shall be considered when establishing the functional
characteristics of a tool:

a) formation fluid composition;

b) pressure range—for formation and external, internal, and differential pressures of tools;

c) temperature range;

d) flow rate and solids content;

e) underbalance/overbalance annulus;

f) drawdown;

g) test duration;

h) loading conditions for planned test including pressures, temperatures, tension/compression, torque,
bending, and intermittent conditions such as pressure testing;

i) well pumping operations—acid composition, sand/proppant description, fluid flow rate, proppant/fluid ratio
or sand/fluid ratio, pressure, temperature and exposure time, and any other chemicals.

5.3.3 Environmental Compatibility

The following parameters shall be considered when establishing the functional characteristics of a tool:

a) production/injection/annular fluid chemical and physical composition that may affect tool performance such
as sand production, scale, water, H2S, CO2, waxes, asphaltenes, pH, amines, and others that may be
provided by user/purchaser(s);
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

b) environmental conditions/changes during transportation, storage, and at surface prior to and during
deployment;

c) applicable regulations and restrictions.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

It is the equipment user/purchaser’s responsibility to ensure that selected materials in a tool design are suitable
for job-specific service environments.

NOTE In the event that the user/purchaser believes a specific well environment requires conformance to NACE
MR0175/ISO 15156, the user/purchaser can include that requirement in the individual job contract.

5.3.4 Compatibility with Related Well Equipment

The following information, as applicable, shall be specified to ensure the compatibility of the downhole well
test tools with the related well equipment:

a) downhole well test tool sizes and connections to the work string;

b) requirement(s) for continuity of flow path and/or through bore access (size, length, etc.), passage of
conduits (electrical/hydraulic, etc.) between tool’s OD and casing ID, and/or open hole ID restrictions;

c) details of any devices to be run through the downhole well test tools; provide details such as size, type,
configuration, and means of conveyance;

d) drifting requirements;

e) internal receptacle profile(s) required in the downhole well test tools for receiving related well equipment,
such as sealing bore, dimension(s), eccentricity, and respective locations.

5.4 Design Validation Grade Selection

Three design validation grades are designated for well test tools (V3, V2, V1), and three corresponding
grades are designated for well testing packers (V3-TP, V2-TP, V1-TP). The validation grades for packers are
uniquely designated with the suffix -TP to differentiate them from packer validation grades in other API
specifications that may differ in their definition and requirements.

The design validation grade shall be selected from Table 1 for each design to be provided. These validation
grades are proof of design evaluations that are performed on the base design. The detailed requirements for
each validation grade are contained in Annex A (well test tools) and Annex E (well test packers). A summary
of the validation testing coverage required by tool type and grade is presented in Table1. For more details on
validation grade requirements, see Table A.1 and Table E.1.

Table 1—Design Validation Grade Summary

V1 and V1-TP Each design conforms to the validation requirements of V2 as defined in Annex A for well
Design validation with gas test tools or V2-TP as defined in Annex E for well test packers, in addition to the V1/V1-TP
test medium specific requirements, utilizing a gas test media as defined in those annexes.

V2 and V2-TP Each design conforms to the validation requirements, including pressure testing using a
Design validation with liquid liquid test media as defined in Annex A for well test tools (V2) or Annex E for well test
test medium packers (V2-TP).

V3 and V3-TP To address legacy designs, design verifications are required and are comprised of design
Legacy design validation calculations and a combination of documented field history performance in an environment
similar to that of the functional requirements and/or testing demonstrating that all design
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

limits are verified.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

5.5 Quality Grade

A single, common quality grade shall apply to all tools provided under this specification. The detailed quality
requirements are contained in Section 7 and summarized in Table 2.

6 Technical Specification

6.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish a technical specification that conforms to the functional
requirements.

6.2 Technical Characteristics

Downhole well test tools and related equipment shall perform in accordance with the functional requirements
as stated in Section 5 and within the limitations defined in the product-specific operating manual.

6.3 Design Criteria

6.3.1 General

Downhole well test tools and related tool designs shall perform in a predictable and repeatable manner in
accordance with their respective technical specification and meet the design validation requirements of
Annex A, Annex E, Annex F, or Annex G, as applicable (see 6.7). Approval of the design shall be performed
and documented by a qualified person(s) other than the person(s) who created the design.

6.3.2 Design Requirements

6.3.2.1 General

Design requirements shall include the functional specification and other pertinent requirements upon which
the design is based. The following ratings shall be established for each downhole well test tool:

a) absolute internal (bore) pressure;

b) absolute external pressure;

c) maximum differential pressure(s);

d) other pressure restrictions applicable to the tool, such as differential pressure across a closure mechanism
(from below, above, inside, outside);

e) operational temperature range(s), including temperature drop;

f) operational cycles per job;

g) targeted casing size (packers);

h) nominal tool size, such as OD, ID, and length;

i) pressure drop at a defined flow rate(s) at ambient temperature with water on ported tools;

j) tensile rating, including tool end connections;

k) compressive rating, including tool end connections (straight compression without bending/buckling);

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

l) other operational/environmental capabilities and limitations, including storage and transport temperature
ranges, as applicable.

Items a) through g) shall be established by validation testing in accordance with the applicable annexes. Items
h) through l) shall be established by validation testing and/or verification.

When establishing the rated pressures and load capabilities, material selections shall consider temperature
and environment. Where applicable, specialized and/or intermittent conditions, such as pressure testing with
temporary test caps, shall also be considered in the design.

Downhole well test tools and components shall be manufactured in accordance with the process, drawings,
and specifications of the product that passed the applicable validation test. Any changes shall conform to
6.10.

Electronic and electrical components, subcomponents, and systems shall conform to Annex F.

TSSVs shall conform to Annex G.

If applicable, a table shall be supplied that establishes ratings with the validated design and material
variations. The tool’s capabilities within those variations shall be stated. A table such as this may contain
information on packer element options, gauge ring ODs, and sealing system options.

6.3.2.2 Design Considerations

Downhole well test tool designs shall take into consideration the effects of temperature (range and duration)

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
on all components. The upper temperature limit shall be the lowest high-temperature rating of any component
of the downhole test tool. The lower temperature limit shall be the highest low-temperature rating of any
component. Derating of metal mechanical properties as a function of temperature shall be accounted for in
the design in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented practice and based upon documented
material testing.

Downhole well test tools shall be designed to avoid unintended trapped pressure being brought back to
surface. Individual downhole well test tools shall be designed with the ability to safely relieve inadvertently
trapped pressure during disassembly of the tool.

Downhole well test tool design shall consider the effects of exposure to fluid(s) identified in the functional
requirements on all components. These designs shall consider the effects of substances routinely
encountered in well testing operations, such as debris, H2S, CO2, acids/alkalines, chlorides, and corrosion
inhibitors.

The entire operational mission profile of the tool, such as storage, transportation, serviceability, environmental
exposure, downhole operation, bending, and transitional environmental conditions (such as low subsea
temperature), shall be used to develop design requirements for new tools.

A failure modes risk assessment shall be conducted for each new tool design.

Welding on tension-loaded components is not a preferred joining method. Welding should generally be
avoided. When welding is performed, it shall comply with 6.4.2.3.

6.3.2.3 Design Margins

The supplier/manufacturer shall apply a design margin to the design of each component or assembly using a
documented methodology and practice that where appropriate has its origins within a national or international
standard that is directly applicable to the component or system that is evaluated. The design margin shall
consider maximum combined stresses resulting from operational loads and conditions prescribed by the
functional requirements.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Design margins establish a level of performance capability to compensate for the rated loading and the
intrinsic variations in the mechanical properties such as yield strength, ultimate strength, endurance strength,
and modulus of elasticity. The ability to quantify stresses in components and assemblies with complex
geometries shall be considered in establishing a design margin. The documented design margins shall be
utilized in the creation of component or assembly capabilities or ratings.

The design of the component or tool shall be based upon the minimum material thickness, minimum allowable
yield strength at the maximum rated temperatures (including temperature cycles), and operational loads.

The rating of an assembled design shall be determined by the lowest capability or performance potential of
any component of the assembly after the application of the design margin. Design extensions, replacement
components, and design revisions shall conform to the design margin, design assumptions, and design
analysis methods that were applied to the base component or assembly.

The design shall be validated in accordance with Annex A, Annex E, Annex F, and Annex G, as applicable. All
design validation results and tool identifications shall be recorded in the tool’s design documentation and
approved by a qualified person(s). When a sufficient design margin is not verified by calculation, it is
acceptable that it be confirmed by validation.

6.3.2.4 Interchangeability of Components

The design, act of tolerancing, and manufacturing of downhole well test tool components shall be conducted
so that interchangeability of components and/or subassemblies of separately manufactured tools is possible
without affecting the performance of the assembled tool that has met the requirements of design validation.

6.4 Materials

6.4.1 General

Materials for each component shall be stated by the supplier/manufacturer and shall be suitable for the
environmental conditions defined in the functional specification. The supplier/manufacturer shall have
documented specifications for all materials and materials shall comply with these requirements. Material
specification properties shall be reported at room temperature unless specified otherwise.

Nonsubstantive material substitutions from those materials used in the validation of tested tools may be
allowed without validation testing, providing the supplier/manufacturer’s selection criteria for these
substitutions shall be verified and the substituted material shall conform to the validated design, functional
specifications, technical specifications, and ratings. Material substitutions require approval by a qualified
person(s) and the supporting information incorporated into the design documentation. Substantive material
changes (metallic and nonmetallic) shall conform to the provisions of 6.3 and 6.10 and the supporting
information shall be incorporated into the design documentation.

Seal materials can be substituted after having passed the requirements of validation testing as specified in
A.3.6.6 or E.7 as applicable.

6.4.2 Metals

6.4.2.1 General

The final condition of metallic materials used in the manufacture of downhole well test tools shall comply with
the material specifications, which shall include the following items:

a) chemical composition limits;

b) heat treatment/conditions;

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

c) mechanical property limits, including as a minimum:

1) tensile strength;

2) yield strength (transverse and longitudinal as applicable);

3) elongation;

4) hardness;

5) toughness, where applicable and as defined by the supplier/manufacturer.

For each item, an applicable industry-accepted test standard/method shall be specified.

This provision does not apply to common hardware, nor does it apply to engineered components that are
validated independently, such as rupture discs and shearable devices.

6.4.2.2 Cast and Forged Component Requirements

The production of castings and forgings shall conform to the same practices and controls as were applied to
the successfully validation tested component and the first article produced. The following shall be completed.

a) Each cast or forged component shall be surface nondestructive examination (NDE) inspected on 100 % of
its visually accessible surfaces after final processing such as final machining or heat treatment.

b) Each cast or forged component shall be hardness tested at the supplier/manufacturer’s defined location(s)
on the part conforming to a standard such as ASTM E10, ASTM E18, ASTM E384, or equivalent
internationally recognized standard applicable to the material and component. Representative material
samples may be utilized if required by the product design.

c) All castings and forgings require a first article qualification, which shall as a minimum include mechanical
properties, heat treat condition and chemistry, volumetric NDE, surface NDE, and 100 % dimensional
inspections.

For the requirements of 6.4.2.2, bar and tube stock are not considered to be cast or forged components.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6.4.2.3 Welding and Brazing

Welding and brazing procedures, activities, and personnel qualifications are required in accordance with
ASME BPVC Section IX. Materials and practices not listed in the ASME BPVC Section IX shall be qualified in
accordance with the methods of ASME BPVC Section IX and approved by a qualified person(s).

Welding shall be governed by a qualified welding procedure specification (WPS). The WPS shall be qualified
per Section IX of the ASME BPVC or other equivalent industry standard. Weldments for sour service
applications shall meet all the requirements of NACE MR0175/ISO 15156. The welding specification shall
include requirements for:

a) postweld heat treatment and/or stress relief;

b) welding process;

c) defined nondestructive testing method(s), acceptance criteria, and documentation.

Welding consumables shall conform to American Welding Society (AWS) or supplier/manufacturer’s written
specifications as specified in the WPS. The supplier/manufacturer shall have a written procedure for selection,
storage, control, and use of welding consumables.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

6.4.3 Nonmetals

6.4.3.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer’s documented specifications for nonmetallic materials shall include handling,
storage, and labeling requirements and define the quality control limits of characteristics necessary for the
performance of the material.

This section does not cover electronic or electrical components. These components are covered in Annex F.

6.4.3.2 Elastomers

The material specifications for elastomers shall include the following, unless not appropriate for the material:

a) compound identification;

b) mechanical properties, as a minimum:

1) tensile strength (at break),

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2) elongation (at break),

3) durometer hardness;

c) compression set as applicable and as required;

d) tensile modulus (as applicable);

e) documentation of cure date, batch number, and shelf life appropriate to each elastomeric component;

f) storage, handling, and packaging requirements as required by the material and component;

g) other requirements necessary for the specific material and application.

6.4.3.3 Plastics

The material specifications for plastics shall include the following:

a) material identification with sufficient substantive detail to ensure repetitive tool performance within
specified limits;

b) mechanical properties as required such as ultimate tensile strength, flexural modulus and hardness, and
glass transition temperature;

c) requirements for documentation appropriate to each plastic component.

6.4.3.4 Ceramics

The material specifications for ceramics shall include the following:

a) material identification with sufficient detail to ensure repetitive tool performance within specified limits;

b) mechanical properties as required;

c) requirements for documentation appropriate to each ceramic component.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

6.4.3.5 Other Materials

The material specifications for other materials such as fluids and lubricants shall include the following:

a) material identification;

b) properties as required;

c) requirements for documentation appropriate to each material.

6.4.4 Coatings, Platings, and Overlays

The suitability of the coatings, plating, and overlays identified for the functional requirements and component
materials shall be verified and documented by a qualified person. The coating material and application
process shall have a documented specification. The application process shall contain the parameters
required to ensure the desired performance of the coating. Coatings, platings, and overlays shall be
applied in accordance with documented procedures by qualified personnel. Acceptance tests to ensure
repeated quality shall be specified and the results of each batch documented.

6.4.5 Surface Treatments

Surface treatment processes shall have a documented and approved specification by a supplier/
manufacturer qualified person, containing the parameters required to ensure the desired surface
properties. Surface treatments shall be applied in accordance with documented procedures by a qualified
person with acceptance criteria.

Suitability of surface treatments used to achieve the functional requirements shall be verified and documented
by a qualified person. The following shall be considered when selecting an appropriate surface treatment
process:

a) effect of the process on the properties of the base metal;

b) resulting surface finish and the requirements for any post-hardening processes such as grinding, polishing,
honing;

c) case depth;

d) case hardness;

e) base metal preparation;

f) masking (to limit the area treated);

g) change in corrosion properties.

6.5 Design Documentation

Documentation of designs for each size, type, and model shall include:

a) functional requirements;
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

b) technical specifications;

c) design verifications, including methods and assumptions;

d) comparison with previous designs (where applicable);

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

e) design calculations;

f) design reviews;

g) factory acceptance and validation testing procedures.

Design documentation and validation results shall be retained per 7.2.1 and include the materials as defined
in 7.2.2.

6.6 Design Verification

Design verification shall be performed to ensure that each design meets the technical specifications. Design
verification shall include design reviews that are approved by a qualified person and may include design
calculations, physical tests, comparison with similar designs, and historical records of defined operating
conditions of similar tools.

6.7 Design Validation

6.7.1 General

The downhole well test tool designs produced in accordance with this specification shall have passed the
validation test at the tool’s rating as required in the technical specification and specified in Annex A to qualify
each size, type, and model. Successful completion of the validation test and approval by a qualified person
shall qualify the design for manufacture of additional tools of the same size, type, and model as the tested
design.

Fluids used for pressure testing to validation level V2/V2-TP shall be water, with or without additives, or
hydraulic oil/heat transfer fluid. The test fluid shall be visibly free from particulate matter and/or other material
that have the potential of plugging small leaks. V1/V1-TP testing is performed with nitrogen or other inert gas.
All fluids used in the testing shall be defined and documented in the test report.

Electronic and electrical components, subcomponents, and systems shall conform to Annex F.

Well test packers shall conform to Annex E.

TSSVs shall conform to Annex G.

NOTE The design validation requirements in this specification may not be representative of well conditions.

6.7.2 Supplier/Manufacturer Requirements

The downhole well test tool shall be function/pressure tested prior to validation testing. The
supplier/manufacturer shall provide a tool of each size, type, and model to the validation test facility. A
detailed validation test procedure that conforms to the requirements of this specification shall also be provided
for each tool.

Pre-validation and post-validation testing dimensional inspections of critical dimensions defined by the
supplier/manufacturer shall be conducted and documented. For a successful test, all results shall be within
the established acceptance criteria, approved by a qualified person(s), and maintained in the design
documentation.

6.8 Performance Envelope

A performance rating envelope as defined in Annex D shall be prepared for each validated design.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

6.9 Special Feature Validation

Special features shall be validated by testing to their rated limits. Special feature validation testing shall be the
responsibility of the supplier/manufacturer.

For a successful test, all results shall be within the established acceptance criteria, approved by a qualified
person(s), and maintained in the design documentation.

6.10 Design Changes

6.10.1 General

Design changes shall be documented, reviewed, and approved by a qualified person(s) before
implementation. Design changes and changes to design documents shall require the same controls as those
applied to the design that has passed the applicable verification and validation requirements of this
specification.

Design changes shall be reviewed by a qualified person of the supplier/manufacturer against the design
verification and validation documents to determine if the change is a substantive change. Evaluation of design
changes may include activities such as subassembly testing, analysis, and design reviews.

A design that undergoes a substantive change becomes a new design requiring design verification and
design validation; however, derating is allowed per 6.10.2. All tools containing a substantive change(s) shall
continue to meet applicable verification and validation test requirements.

The use of alternate seal compounds and their validation requirements shall conform to A.3.6.6 and E.7, as
applicable.

The supplier/manufacturer shall, as a minimum, consider the following for each design change:

a) stress levels of the modified or changed components compared to those of the base design;

b) possible functional or operational changes introduced by the design change;

c) interchangeability with existing components or previously manufactured assemblies.

Design changes shall be communicated to the service center as applicable.

6.10.2 Derating Requirements

6.10.2.1 General

Derating of a successfully validated downhole well test tool (base design) of the same nominal size, type, and
model is permitted when the requirements of this subsection and this specification are satisfied. Any
increases in validated ratings shall require validation testing in accordance with 6.7.

Tool design or other changes associated with derating are limited to changes in material that result in a
decrease in load, pressure, or temperature rating. Any design changes shall conform to 6.10.1.

Derated loads, pressures, or temperatures shall remain within the applicable validated range of the base
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

design.

Each derated tool requires design verification, justification, and design documentation of the changes from the
base design. Derated designs shall be approved by a qualified person, other than the person who performed
the derating of the design. The documentation shall be maintained per 6.5 and included in the new tool's
design records.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

6.10.2.2 Derating Process

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish the maximum stresses in the derated design. The same method of
calculation(s) and verification(s) shall be applied to the identified components of the base design and the
derated design. For each component, the ratio of maximum stress to the yield stress shall not exceed the ratio
of maximum stress to yield stress of the base design. The supplier/manufacturer shall ensure that the derated

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
design conforms to the applicable technical specifications.

7 Supplier/Manufacturer Requirements
7.1 General

This section contains the detailed supplier/manufacturer requirements for each tool manufactured under this
specification to conform to the technical specifications. These include requirements for documentation, tool
identification, quality requirements, traceability, materials, additional processes, assembly and factory
acceptance testing (FAT), manufacturing nonconformities, and subsupplier quality controls.

Annex B provides requirements on post-manufacture FAT.

Annex C provides the requirements for the post-manufacture processing of these tools at service centers.

7.2 Documentation
7.2.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish and maintain documented procedures to control all documents and
data that relate to the requirements of this specification. These documents and data shall be legible and
maintained to demonstrate conformance to specified requirements. All documents and data shall be retained
in facilities that provide an environment that is designed to prevent damage, deterioration, and loss.
Documents and data may be in the form of any type of media, such as hard copy or electronic media. All
documents and data shall be available for review and/or audit by a user/purchaser within 30 days of the
request.

Documentation shall be retained for a minimum of 3 years after a tool has been obsoleted.

Service center documentation requirements are included in Annex C.

7.2.2 Retained Documentation

7.2.2.1 Documentation Requirements for a V1/V1-TP and V2/V2-TP Validated Design

The supplier/manufacturer shall have the following information available to support each design validated for
level V1/V1-TP and V2/V2-TP:

a) technical specifications and design requirements, which include pressures, operational loads, materials,
environmental and other pertinent requirements upon which the design is based;

b) engineering drawings/bills of material/manufacturing specifications/revision history;

c) material specifications;

d) assembly drawings;

e) nonconformance documentation;

f) design verifications, including methods and assumptions;

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

g) comparison with previous designs (where applicable);

h) design calculations;

i) design reviews;

j) validation testing procedures and acceptance criteria;

k) validation results/report;

l) performance envelope;

m) certificates of conformance;

n) material test reports (MTRs);

o) heat treat certificates;

p) material traceability records;

q) dimensional inspection records;

r) NDE records;

s) FAT procedures and records;

t) shear/burst device testing records (where applicable);

u) welding procedures/NDE inspections (where applicable);

v) special feature validation results (where applicable).

7.2.2.2 Documentation Requirements for a V3/V3-TP Validated Design

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The documentation requirements for V3/V3-TP validated designs are included in A.3.5 and E.4.

7.2.2.3 Documentation Requirements for Manufactured Tools

The supplier/manufacturer shall have the following information (as of the date of manufacture) available to
support each manufactured tool:

a) engineering drawings/bills of material (as built);

b) assembly drawings;

c) nonconformance documentation;

d) operating/maintenance manual;

e) performance envelope;

f) certificates of conformance (where applicable);

g) subcomponent test reports (where applicable);

h) MTRs;

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

i) heat treat certificates;

j) material traceability records;

k) dimensional inspection records;

l) NDE records;

m) FAT records;

n) shear/burst device testing records (where applicable);

o) welding procedures and associated NDE inspections (where applicable).

7.2.2.4 Documentation Requirements for Service Center

The supplier/manufacturer shall have the following information available to support each tool supplied to the
service center:

a) datasheet, technical specifications;

b) bills of material;

c) assembly drawings;

d) operating and maintenance manual;

e) performance envelope;

f) certificates of conformance;

g) MTRs;

h) heat treat certificates (where applicable);

i) material traceability records;

j) NDE records;

k) supplier/manufacturer’s functional testing records;

l) summary design validation report(s);

m) shear device testing records (where applicable).

7.2.2.5 Operating and Maintenance Manual(s)

For each manufactured downhole well test tool, the following information, as applicable, shall be available in
the appropriate manual(s):
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

a) methods for safe assembly and disassembly;

b) recommended field use and operating instructions for the tool;

c) tool hazard(s)/safety identifications;

d) contact information of supplier/manufacturer;

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

e) supplier/manufacturer assembly number and tool name;

f) size, type, and model;

g) design validation grade;

h) operational ratings and limits, including:

1) differential pressure (internal and external) at minimum and maximum rated temperatures;

2) absolute pressures (internal and external) at minimum and maximum rated temperatures;

3) other pressure restrictions, static/dynamic;

4) operating temperature range, including any known temperature exposure limitations;

5) tensile and compressive capacity at minimum and maximum rated temperatures (as applicable and
including tool end connections);

6) operational cycle limits;

7) rated operating envelope as applicable by validation grade;

8) where applicable, a table shall be supplied that establishes ratings with the validated design and
material variations and the tool’s capabilities within those variations—examples of contents of these
tables include packer element durometer/compound, gauge ring OD, and sealing system variations;

i) type, size, and weight of tool end connections, where applicable;

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

j) tool dimensions, including minimum ID, maximum OD, makeup length, and dimensional data needed for
inspection/operations;

k) operational information, such as pre-charge pressures, activation pressures, shear pressures, and
activation loads;

l) requirements for related tool(s);

m) drawings and illustrations of the fully assembled tool, including a dimensional drawing for fishing purposes;

n) bill of material and any special tool requirements;

o) special feature operational procedures;

p) troubleshooting procedures;

q) repair procedures/limitations for Levels 1, 2, and 3 (see C.6.2, C.6.3, and C.6.4);

r) redress procedures/limitations;

s) preparations for shipment requirements;

t) storage requirements.

7.2.2.6 Datasheet Requirements

7.2.2.6.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall have available, at the time of tool delivery to the service center, a datasheet
that details the tool’s operating capabilities. Multiple sizes of the same tool type can be included on the same
datasheet. Each rating shall be identified as either validated or verified as required in this specification.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

The well test tool’s datasheet shall include:

a) validation grade (V3, V2, V1);

b) nominal tool size, such as OD, ID, and length;

c) tensile rating including tool end connections;

d) compressive rating including tool end connections (straight compression without bending or buckling);

e) maximum absolute internal (bore) pressure;

f) maximum absolute external pressure;

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

g) maximum differential pressure(s) inside to outside and outside to inside;

h) other pressure restrictions applicable to the tool such as differential pressure across a closure mechanism
(from below, above, inside, outside);

i) operational temperature range(s), including temperature drop from rated maximum temperature or sets of
temperature drops from specific temperatures;

j) operational cycles per job;

k) minimum operational temperature rating;

l) minimum exposure temperature (ability to maintain integrity at low subsea temperatures);

m) pressure testing limits at low temperature (rated pressures at low temperature);

n) low temperature limit at which function testing can be performed;

o) pressure drop at a defined flow rate(s) at ambient temperature with water on ported tools;

p) service rating for H2S and CO2;

q) other operational/environmental capabilities and limitations as applicable.

The test tool’s datasheet shall clearly distinguish between validated and verified absolute pressure ratings.

A performance rating envelope is a separate document (per 6.8).

7.2.2.6.2 Packer Datasheets

The supplier/manufacturer shall have available, at the time of tool delivery to the service center, a datasheet
that details the well testing packer operating capabilities. Any associated tool operational restrictions shall be
fully documented in the tool’s datasheet and documentation.

The packer’s datasheet shall include the following data and ratings:

a) validation grade (V3-TP, V2-TP, V1-TP);

b) nominal tool size, such as OD, ID, and length;

c) applicable casing size and weight(s);

d) tensile rating, including packer end connections;

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

e) compressive rating, including packer end connections (straight compression without bending or buckling);

f) tensile/compressive ratings of slip/anchoring systems in the hardest rated casing grade;

g) absolute internal (bore) pressure;

h) absolute external (annulus) pressure;

i) differential pressure (bore to annulus);

j) differential pressure across packer body (plugged condition);

k) differential pressure across element from above and below (with minimum setting load/pressure);

l) other pressure restrictions applicable to the packer;

m) operational temperature range(s), including a temperature drop from rated maximum temperature or sets
of temperature drops from specific temperatures;

n) number of operational sets per job;

o) minimum operating temperature of the packer;

p) minimum exposure temperature (ability to maintain integrity at low subsea temperatures);

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
q) pressure testing limits at low temperature;

r) service rating for H2S and CO2;

s) other operational/environmental capabilities and limitations as applicable.

The test tool’s datasheet shall clearly distinguish between validated and verified absolute pressure ratings.

A performance rating envelope is a separate document (per 6.8).

7.2.2.6.3 TSSV Datasheets

The supplier/manufacturer shall have datasheets that detail the TSSV operating capabilities. Any associated
tool operational restrictions shall be fully documented in the tool’s datasheet and documentation.

The tool’s datasheet shall include:

a) maximum operating temperature;

b) minimum temperature (if rated to less than ambient);

c) internal rated working pressure at maximum rated temperature (burst direction);

d) external rated working pressure at maximum rated temperature (collapse direction);

e) differential across the closure from below at maximum rated temperature;

f) pressure rating of operating chamber at maximum rated temperature (if less than the internal rated working
pressure);

g) integrity test pressure (1.5 times working pressure at ambient temperature);

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

h) pump-through rate (with valve closed);

i) chemical injection rate;

j) rated collapse/external pressure during closure function;

k) ported slick joint collapse rating;

l) valve closure time;

m) cutting capabilities;

n) other operational/environmental capabilities and limitations as applicable.

The following capabilities shall be validated or verified:

a) tensile rating at 0 psi;

b) tensile rating at rated working pressure and ambient temperature (calculated);

c) tensile rating at rated working pressure and maximum rated temperature (calculated);

d) service rating for H2S and CO2.

The test tool’s datasheet shall clearly distinguish between validated and verified absolute pressure ratings.

A performance rating envelope is a separate document (per 6.8).

7.3 Product Identification

Tools furnished to this specification shall be permanently identified in accordance with the
supplier/manufacturer's documented specifications. The supplier/manufacturer’s specifications shall define
the type, method of application, and location of the identifications. The identifications shall include the
following:

a) manufacturer's part number, including revision level;

b) unique identifying serial number and/or trace number.

7.4 Quality Level

A single level of quality control requirements is specified for all tools and components manufactured under this
specification. These requirements are summarized in Table 2 and detailed in referenced Section 7.5
through Section 8.

7.5 Quality Controls

7.5.1 Measuring/Testing Equipment Calibration

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish and implement requirements for all quality processes used on
measuring/testing equipment conforming to this specification and shall be approved by a qualified person(s).

Inspection, measuring, and testing equipment used for acceptance shall be used only within its calibrated
range and shall be identified, controlled, calibrated, and adjusted at specific intervals in accordance with the
supplier/manufacturer requirements, not to exceed 1 year.

All measuring and test equipment shall be calibrated to an approved standard, which shall ultimately be
calibrated and certified to national or international standard(s) at least once every 3 years.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Table 2—Quality Requirement Summary

Topic Requirements

Documentation As per 7.2

Product identification As per 7.3

Nonmetals As per 6.4.3 and 7.9

Heat treatment As per 7.11

Coatings, plating, and overlays As per 7.5.2.11

Surface treatments As per 7.5.2.12

Component traceability As per 7.8

Welding and brazing NDE as per 7.5.2.3

Assembly serialization As per 7.8.2

Hardness As per 7.5.2.6

Component NDE As per 7.5.2

Component dimensions and threads As per 7.5.2.13 and 7.5.2.14

Visual inspection As per 7.5.2.15

Shear and rupture devices Lot validation per 7.6 and 7.7

Assembly verification Functional test per 7.13

NOTE 7.2 applies to all parts of Section 7 listed.

7.5.2 NDEs

7.5.2.1 General Requirements

As appropriate, NDE per 7.5.2.7, 7.5.2.8, 7.5.2.9, and 7.5.2.10 shall be conducted on
load-bearing/pressure-retaining metallic components and threads according to the manufacturer’s
documented specifications that include acceptance criteria and the requirements of this section.

All NDE instructions shall be approved by a qualified NDE Level III examiner as per a national or international
standard such as ISO 9712 or ASNT SNT-TC-1A. Visual examination requirements do not require Level III
approval. Acceptance of all materials/documents shall be permanently indicated either on the
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

materials/documents or in records traceable to them.

7.5.2.2 NDE Personnel Qualifications

All personnel performing inspections for acceptance shall be qualified in accordance with the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented requirements.

Personnel performing visual examinations shall also have an annual eye examination, as applicable to the
discipline to be performed, in accordance with standards such as ISO 9712 or ASNT SNT-TC-1A.

Personnel performing NDE evaluation/interpretation shall be qualified in accordance with ISO 9712 to a
minimum of Level II or equivalent such as defined in ASNT SNT-TC-1A.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

7.5.2.3 Welding and Brazing

Welds, brazes, and adjacent heat-affected zones shall be nondestructively examined by one or more of the
following methods: radiography, magnetic particle, ultrasonic, or liquid penetrant as designated in the
supplier/manufacturer’s specifications. This section does not apply to nonstructural components as
determined by a supplier/manufacturer’s qualified person.

7.5.2.4 Castings and Forgings

Load-bearing and/or pressure-retaining castings and forgings shall be magnetic particle or liquid penetrant
inspected for surface defects and shall be volumetrically inspected by radiographic or ultrasonic techniques to
verify conformance with the supplier/manufacturer’s specifications.

7.5.2.5 Indications

Any unacceptable indications shall be removed or repaired according to the supplier/manufacturer’s

procedures and reexamined using the original NDE method and acceptance criteria.

7.5.2.6 Hardness Testing

All load-bearing/pressure-retaining metallic components shall be hardness tested as per supplier/manufacturer

approved procedures.

Hardness testing on metallic components shall, as a minimum, be in accordance with ISO 6506, Parts 1
through 4 (Brinell) or ISO 6508, Parts 1 through 3 (Rockwell). ISO 6507, Parts 1 through 4 (Vickers) may be
used when ISO 6506-1 or 6508-1 cannot be applied due to size, accessibility, or other limitation.

NOTE For the purposes of this standard, ASTM E10 is equivalent to ISO 6506, ASTM E18 is equivalent to ISO 6508,
and ASTM E92 is equivalent to ISO 6507.

Hardness conversion to other measurement units can be in accordance with ISO 18265 or a
supplier/manufacturer’s documented hardness conversion based on actual measurements for a particular alloy.

NOTE For the purposes of this standard, ASTM E140 is equivalent to ISO 18265.

The durometer hardness of O-rings or other elastomeric seals shall be determined in accordance with a
national or international standard, such as ASTM D2240 or ASTM D1415. A minimum of one seal
manufactured from each batch shall be hardness tested.

7.5.2.7 Liquid Penetrant Inspections

When required by the supplier/manufacturer or this specification, liquid penetrant inspection shall be
conducted in accordance with a national or international standard such as ASTM E165/E165M to the following
acceptance criteria:

a) no relevant linear indications;

3
b) no relevant rounded indications greater than 5 mm ( /16 in.);
1
c) no more than four or more relevant rounded indications in a line separated by 1.5 mm ( /16 in.) or less
(edge to edge).

7.5.2.8 Wet Magnetic Particle Inspections

When required by the supplier/manufacturer or this specification, wet magnetic particle inspections shall be in
accordance with a national or international standard such as ISO 13665 or ASTM E709. The minimum
acceptance criteria are defined in 7.5.2.7.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

7.5.2.9 Ultrasonic Inspection

When required by the supplier/manufacturer or this specification, ultrasonic inspections shall meet the
requirements of an international or national standard such as ASTM E428 and ASTM A388//A388M.
Acceptance criteria shall be per an international or national standard such as ASTM A609 or alternatively per
documented criteria specified by the supplier/manufacturer.

7.5.2.10 Radiographic Inspection

When required by the supplier/manufacturer or this specification, radiographic NDE inspections shall meet the
requirements of a national or international standard such as ASTM E94. Acceptance criteria shall be per an
international or national standard or alternatively per documented criteria specified by the
supplier/manufacturer.

7.5.2.11 Coatings, Platings, and Overlays

Coatings, platings, and overlays shall be inspected in accordance with documented instructions that include
acceptance criteria approved by a qualified person(s). A certificate of conformance (COC) stating that the
process meets the manufacturer’s requirements for the applicable components shall be provided.

7.5.2.12 Surface Treatments

Surface treatments shall be inspected in accordance with documented instructions that include acceptance
criteria approved by a qualified person(s). A COC stating that the process meets the manufacturer’s
requirements for the applicable components shall be provided.

7.5.2.13 Component Dimensional Inspection

Components except common hardware shall be dimensionally inspected according to the

supplier/manufacturer’s procedures by a qualified person(s) to ensure proper function and compliance with
the design criteria and specifications. Inspection shall be performed during or after the manufacture of the
components but prior to assembly, unless assembly is required for proper measurement.

Dimensional tolerances of O-rings shall be in accordance with standards such as ISO 3601-1 or as per
manufacturer/supplier’s specifications if not covered by any industry standard. Other sealing elements shall
meet dimensional tolerances of the supplier/manufacturer’s documented specifications.

7.5.2.14 Thread Inspections

Threads, except those of common hardware, shall be inspected to the tolerances, inspection requirements,
gauges, gauging practices, gauge calibration, and gauge certification to conform to the specified thread
design owner’s specifications.

7.5.2.15 Visual Inspection

Components shall be visually inspected according to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures,

including acceptance criteria, by a qualified person(s) to ensure all accessible surfaces are free from defects,
debris, and damage prior to assembly.

Visual inspection of O-rings shall be in accordance with ISO 3601-3 or equivalent. Other sealing elements
shall be visually inspected in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented specifications.

7.6 Shear Device Validation

A shear device validation shall be performed per manufactured batch by a qualified person(s) to meet the
specified shearing load range(s) in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedure and
acceptance criteria.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

7.7 Rupture Disc Validation

A rupture disc validation shall be performed per manufactured batch by a qualified person(s) to establish the
specified pressure rating in its intended direction in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented
procedure and acceptance criteria. General guidance on rupture disc processing controls can be found in
ISO 4126-2.

7.8 Traceability
7.8.1 General

All load-bearing/pressure-retaining components and other components designated by the

manufacturer/supplier shall be traceable in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented
procedures to an MTR from the heat lot, batch lot, or component-specific testing and evaluation of raw
material.

Traceability for tools and components manufactured to this standard shall be provided to service centers in
accordance with C.8.2 and retained in accordance with 7.2.

7.8.2 Serialization and Traceable Component Recording

Tools shall be serialized with a permanently applied unique identifier. All load-bearing/pressure-retaining
components and other components designated by the manufacturer/supplier shall be traceable.

Components within an assembly may be serialized; however, at a minimum they shall be traceable to the
manufactured batch and revision level. Traceable components without serialization or batch marking due to
dimensional or technical limitations shall be recorded in the unique manufacturing documentation for that tool
at the time of assembly.

Common hardware and other nontraceable parts are exempted from this requirement.

7.9 Materials Documentation

Each heat and/or job lot or batch of material used in the manufacture of load-bearing/pressure-retaining
components and other components designated by the manufacturer/supplier shall require the following
documents:

a) COC stating that the material meets the manufacturer’s documented specifications (see 6.4.1);

b) MTR that the manufacturer shall use to verify that the material conforms to the manufacturer’s material
specifications (see 6.4.1).

7.10 Subsupplier Qualifications

The supplier/manufacturer shall purchase components and services integral to the downhole test tools only
from approved subsuppliers that are included within a documented approved supplier’s quality monitoring
program. A documented evaluation procedure and acceptance criteria shall be implemented on a repeatable
basis to ensure that each subsupplier’s products/services conform to the supplier/manufacturer’s
specifications. Exceptions to this requirement include common hardware and other nontraceable
components.

7.11 Heat Treatment

Heat treatment of raw material and production parts shall be performed according to documented procedures,
utilizing heat treating equipment that has been calibrated and surveyed by qualified person(s).

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

If heat treatment is performed by a subcontractor, the subcontractor shall provide a COC to the
supplier/manufacturer stating that the heat treatment meets the supplier/manufacturer’s documented
specifications. If heat treatment is performed by the supplier/manufacturer, heat treatment shall comply with
the supplier/manufacturer’s documented specifications.

Each heat in a batch of material that is heat treated shall be tested for conformance to each of the mechanical
properties specified by the supplier/manufacturer.

7.12 Additional Processes

When processes are used on tools or components that are not defined and not validated by subsequent
monitoring or measurement defined elsewhere in this standard, the supplier/manufacturer shall establish
applicable specifications. These specifications shall include topics such as physical and chemical properties,
procedures, inspection methods and acceptance criteria. These specifications shall be prepared and
approved by a qualified person(s). The supplier/manufacturer shall validate conformance to these additional
process specifications.

7.13 Assembly and Functional Test

The following are necessary for proper assembly and functional testing.

a) The supplier/manufacturer shall have procedures for correct assembly of each tool. The procedures shall
be approved by a qualified person other than the person who created the procedure.

b) Each tool shall be assembled by a qualified person(s). The assembly processes and activities shall
conform to the defined procedures.

c) Each tool shall be functionally tested to the requirements and acceptance criteria as defined in Annex B.
Testing shall be discontinued if the tool fails to perform within the limits specified for any step, except when
such failures are determined to be a result of a failure within the test facility that does not affect the validity
of the test as determined and approved by a qualified person(s).

7.14 Disposition of Manufacturing Nonconformities

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish and maintain documented procedures to ensure that an assembly
or component that does not conform to specified requirements is prevented from unintended use or
installation. This control shall provide for the identification, documentation, evaluation, segregation (when
applicable), and disposition of nonconforming components or assemblies. Responsibility for review and

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
authority for disposition of nonconforming assemblies or components shall be defined in procedures
established by the supplier/manufacturer and carried out by a qualified person(s).

7.15 Correction of Manufacturing Nonconformities

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish and maintain documented procedures to facilitate correction and
acceptance of nonconforming assemblies or components. A corrected component or assembly shall conform
to the original design requirements. An accepted component shall conform to the supplier/manufacturer
criteria, evaluated by a qualified person in conformance to a quality management system. Responsibility for
review and authority for correction of nonconforming assemblies or components shall be defined in
procedures established by the supplier/manufacturer and carried out by a qualified person(s).

7.16 Test Facility

Test facilities shall provide all the equipment required to achieve the testing parameters and to measure the
stated acceptance parameters to an accuracy that meets or exceeds the defined requirements.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Testing shall be discontinued if the test facility fails to perform within the limits specified for any step, except
when such failures or test facility anomalies do not affect the validity of the test as determined and approved
by a qualified person(s).

8 Handling, Storage, and Preparation for Transport

Prior to transport, tools and components shall be handled and stored according to the documented
specifications of the supplier/manufacturer to prevent deterioration/damage. Tools and components shall be
packaged for transport according to the documented specifications of the supplier/manufacturer to prevent
deterioration/damage during shipping. All material provided as protection for transport shall be clearly
identified for removal prior to use of the tool.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Validation Requirements for Downhole Well Test Tools

and Related Equipment

A.1 General

A.1.1 General Information

Each well test tool design provided in accordance with this specification shall conform to the requirements of
this annex with the exception of well testing packers, which are covered in Annex E, and TSSVs, which are
covered in Annex G. Each well test tool design shall pass all requirements within the limits specified and
conform to the acceptance criteria defined, with suitable documentation of the applicable processes,
acceptance criteria, and evaluation results required for design validation. The defined evaluations and testing
parameters shall validate the stated performance and capabilities of the tool. All tests and tool-related data for
a valid, successful test shall be recorded in a legible and retrievable manner and retained as a portion of the
tool’s validation records following approval by a qualified person(s).

Design validation grades V1 and V2 require specified testing (see Table A.1). Design validation grade V3
requires supplier/manufacturer-defined requirements (see A.3.5).

Each design validation grade requires one or more individual validation procedure(s), process(s), or test(s).
All tested tools shall be uniquely identified and shall conform to the requirements of Sections 5, 6, and 7. The
test procedures and detailed testing results shall be included in the record of that tool design documentation.
The validation records shall contain test results and/or calculations that validate the design. The validation
records shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified person other than the originator. This review shall
verify that, as a minimum, all of the requirements of this annex of this specification have been met.

Test facility anomalies occurring during testing that have no effect on tool testing performance may be
accepted when documented and approved by a qualified person(s). Each design validation report shall be
signed and dated by the qualified person(s) conducting and approving the test results. The design validation
report content is specified in A.3.6.5. Any associated tool operational restrictions shall be fully documented in
the tool’s datasheet and documentation.

A.1.2 Test Facility

Validation test facilities shall provide all the equipment required to achieve the defined testing parameters and
to measure the stated acceptance parameters to an accuracy that meets or exceeds the defined requirements.
All fluids used in the assembly and testing shall be defined and documented in the test report.

Pressure and temperature testing hardware, facilities, procedures, and practices shall conform to all
applicable regulations and requirements, including a quality management system. All validation testing
procedures shall be documented and shall contain the approval of a qualified person. Testing shall be
performed by qualified persons. Test facilities and tools shall have current records of calibration within the
specified range of use.

A.2 Assembly Evaluation Requirements

The assembly processing shall follow the supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures, including fluids,
lubricants, and methods. Any variance from the requirements shall be documented and corrected prior to
initiating the testing process.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,````

34
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 35

Components of the tested tool shall be traceable to their unique materials and processing and visually
inspected per 7.5.2.13 and 7.5.2.15 by a qualified person(s) prior to tool assembly. Pre-validation and
post-validation testing dimensional inspections of critical dimensions defined by the supplier/manufacturer
shall be conducted and documented to allow comparative inspection after validation testing. For a successful
test, all results shall be within the established acceptance criteria, approved by a qualified person(s), and
maintained in the design documentation.

A.3 Design Validation

A.3.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall document all parameters and results of the evaluations to demonstrate
conformance to the validation grade. The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented testing procedures

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
for performance of the defined testing steps. A single tool assembly (as shown in Table A.1) shall successfully
perform all of the defined test steps of each set of validation tests for the appropriate validation grade level.
The tool assembly may be redressed for any special feature testing; however, repair or redress during a
contiguous testing sequence requires the testing to restart at the beginning.

For test tools containing a unique combination of features not shown in Table A.1, validation testing described
in this annex shall be utilized and conformed to as much as practical by the tool design. The base validation
shall be selected from the testing procedures shown in Table A.1 and the applicable additions or subtractions
necessary to facilitate effective testing of that product design. The procedure changes shall be justified and
approved by a qualified person other than the preparer and approved by a person qualified to perform the
testing. All acceptance criteria, recordkeeping, and record retention requirements also apply.

The testing parameters shall include the following.

a) The tool shall be assembled and installed into the test facility, utilizing supplier/manufacturer documented
procedures.

b) All testing shall be performed in the order prescribed, to the limits defined, on calibrated equipment per
7.5.1, by qualified personnel, and all testing results and commentary shall become a portion of the tool’s
design documentation.

c) The testing steps represented in A.3.6 shall be conducted over a minimum of 5 days at the specified
elevated temperature, exclusive of initial heating and final cooldown.

d) The supplier/manufacturer shall have a procedure to establish when pressure and temperature are
sufficiently stabilized. This variation of stabilized pressure, as prescribed by these criteria, shall conform to
the pressure integrity acceptance criteria in A.3.2.2.

e) All applied temperatures, pressures, loads, and actions shall be measured and recorded on time-based
equipment.

f) The tool shall be operated to the number of operational cycles claimed by the supplier/manufacturer during
the validation profile test sequence. Additional time may be added to the validation profile test sequence to
accomplish tool validation as specified in A.3.6.

g) During temperature transitions, pressure shall be managed in accordance with supplier/manufacturer

facility capabilities. Prescribed pressure and temperature conditions shall be stabilized before prescribed
hold periods. Prescribed conditions (pressure and/or temperature) shall continue until a change in those
conditions is specified by a subsequent test step.

h) For tools using a rupture disc or shear device to function the tool, and where it is not possible to achieve
maximum test pressures required for validation testing without exceeding the rupture or shear device value,
it is permissible to perform a separate test to validate the maximum pressure ratings with activation method
disabled.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

i) Alternative test methods may include using a control line or installing a blank rupture disc to validate the
maximum rated pressure of the tool. This additional test shall be performed at the tool’s maximum rated
temperature, but the test does not require repeating the full validation profile test sequence. A qualified
person shall document the justification for utilizing the alternate test method, procedures, and acceptance
criteria.

j) The design validation of nonmetallic element(s) at higher absolute pressure shall include subassembly or
laboratory testing or be supported by successful V2 validation of the same nonmetallic compound at the
higher absolute pressure on other tool assemblies having the same seal design. For subassembly testing
of seals, the provisions of A.3.6.6 shall apply.

k) Any low temperature performance rating not tested during the validation profile test sequence in A.3.4 shall
be established through separate testing. Such testing and results shall conform to the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures and acceptance criteria. Such rating limits may include,
but are not limited to, pressure testing limits at low temperature, function testing at low temperature, or the
ability to maintain integrity at low subsea temperatures while running in hole (RIH).

l) For special features, see A.3.2.4.

Annex A design validation testing is divided into the following three categories: nonclosure tools, single-cycle
tools, and multi-cycle tools.

A.3.2 Design Validation Testing Acceptance Criteria

A.3.2.1 General

The acceptance criteria in this section shall apply to all pressure integrity testing, including closure
mechanism. Each tool design shall conform to the requirements and acceptance criteria at each numbered
test step. Failure to conform to the requirements is cause to stop the testing and restart from the beginning of
the validation testing process.

A.3.2.2 Pressure Integrity Tests

A.3.2.2.1 General

Pressure integrity tests are to be performed with liquid for V2 validation followed by gas for V1. Any visible
leakage, internally or externally, is cause for test failure.

A.3.2.2.2 Pressure Tests with Liquid

For V2 validation, testing is performed with a liquid. Each tool shall be pressure tested at the defined
pressure(s) and associated defined temperature(s) using supplier/manufacturer’s procedures. Test medium
shall be water, with or without additives, hydraulic oil, or heat transfer fluid. Liquid shall be visibly free from
particulate matter and/or other material that have the potential of plugging small leaks.

In this specification, leakage is considered to be a measureable change in pressure over time. The pressure
test acceptance criteria is a maximum of 1 % change in the applied pressure, with a decreasing rate of
change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization.

A.3.2.2.3 Pressure Tests with Gas

For V1 validation, testing is performed with nitrogen or other inert gas. Testing can be performed as a
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

continuation of the V2 test profile with the tool still at maximum rated temperature in the test fixture or as a
standalone test performed on a newly redressed tool at its maximum rated temperature. Filler bars may be
used to minimize gas volume. As an alternative to testing at the tool assembly level, a seal design may be
tested in gas at the maximum rated temperature at a subassembly level, provided that the test fixture
replicates the tool design, loading, and functionality.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3
Gas leak rate acceptance criteria is less than 20 cm of gas at atmospheric pressure over a 15-minute hold
period after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization after applying the rated differential pressure.
1
Additionally, the volume accumulated during the second 7 /2 minutes of the hold period shall not exceed the
1
volume accumulated in the first 7 /2 minutes of the hold period. The leak rate and total leakage shall be
recorded in the test report.

A.3.2.2.4 Pressure-retaining Chamber Tests

Each tool that includes a pressure-retaining chamber (such as a hydraulic or gas chamber used in the
operation of the tool and/or other similar pressure-retaining chamber) that is not tested during the validation or
functional tests shall be pressure tested by a qualified person(s). If this chamber is not tested during the
validation or functional tests, it must be tested at the maximum rated internal pressure of the chamber at room
temperature using the supplier/manufacturer’s procedures and acceptance criteria.

A.3.2.3 Function Test(s)

Each tool shall be tested to open/close or function through its operational cycle(s) at specified temperature(s)
in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s procedures. This shall include the number of cycles, required
signals (including its parameters) and loads applied shall conform to the number of cycles claimed for
operational durability. Acceptance criteria requires conformance to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented
requirements.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

A.3.2.4 Special Features Test(s)

Special feature and/or claimed capability(s) shall be tested in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer's
documented test procedures. These tests may be inserted into the validation test profile provided the special
feature tests do not interfere with the performance of the prescribed profile steps. Any special feature testing
that may interfere with the performance of the prescribed profile steps shall be performed in a separate test.
Results shall conform to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented acceptance criteria.

A.3.2.5 Drifting Requirements and Acceptance Criteria

After all functional testing steps are complete, perform a drift test using a drift bar having a minimum length of
42 in. (±0.5 in.) at the specified diameter. The drift bar shall have a diameter no less than the nominal tool
inner diameter minus 0.125 in. inclusive of diametral and straightness tolerances. The drift bar shall pass
completely through the tool in both directions where feasible, and it shall not require a force greater than the
weight of the bar. Each drift bar shall be permanently marked with a unique identifier and the measured drift
bar dimensions. The drift bar unique identifier shall be recorded in the validation test report.

A.3.3 Overview of Design Validation

Table A.1 presents a summary of the testing to be performed for each validation grade and tool type. For V1
and V2 validation grades, the tests are performed in the order outlined in the validation profile test sequence
(see A.3.6). The performance of the entire sequence is required for an acceptable test.

A.3.4 Overview of Validation Profile Test Sequence

Figure A.1 is a graphical illustration of common well test conditions that are typically expected during well test
operations. The specific validation profile test sequence requirements are defined in A.3.6 for each tool type.

The validation profile test sequence includes temperature, pressure, and time. Tools used in a specific well
test may not be subjected to each of the maximum conditions indicated in a single well test; however, this
specification requires the tool design to be validated to that tool’s rated capability. Key pressure points are
illustrated by labels 1 to 12 in Figure A.1.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Table A.1—Validation Testing Coverage by Tool Type and Grade

Summary of the Testing for Each Validation Grade and Tool Type

Tests A.3.6.2 procedures A.3.6.3 procedures A.3.6.4 procedures

Type Nonclosure tools Single-cycle tools Multi-cycle tools

— Safety joint — Tester valve—single cycle — Tester valve—multi-cycle
— Slip joint — Circulating valve—single cycle — Circulating valve—multi-cycle
Tools — Jar — Safety valve—pump-through
to be
— Sampler carrier — Safety valve—non-pump-through
validated
— Gauge carrier — Work string tester valve
— Drain valve

V3 Supplier/manufacturer-defined requirements (A.3.5)

Tool is subjected to a prescribed pressure/temperature event sequence lasting a minimum of 5 days at

elevated temperature to validate the following with liquid.

Internal Pressure—Validation of internal to external differential pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of rated
pressure at rated max temperature.

External Pressure—Validation of external to internal differential pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of rated
pressure at rated max temperature.

Absolute Pressure—Validation of tool’s absolute pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of rated pressure at rated
max temperature.

Closure Mechanism Static Pressure—Validation of the differential pressure(s) and

direction(s) at which the tool’s closure mechanism is rated to seal. Tested to 105 % of
the rated differential pressure at rated max temperature. A closure mechanism may
have different ratings, depending on the direction of applied pressure (i.e. a tester
valve or circulating valve) or the closure mechanism may only be rated in a single
V2 Not applicable to direction (i.e. a flapper valve).
nonclosure tools
Closure Mechanism Dynamic Opening Pressure—Validation of the differential
pressure(s) and direction(s) at which the tool’s closure device is rated to function
open (not the pressure required to operate the valve). Tested to 105 % of the rated
differential pressure at rated max temperature. A closure mechanism may have
different dynamic opening ratings, depending on the direction of applied pressure.

Cooldown Temperature (Temperature Drop)—Validation of a tool’s pressure integrity and functionality after
being cooled down from its maximum rated temperature such as that which would occur as the result of
stimulation pumping. The maximum cooldown from max temp and the associated pressure reversal are to be
included in the tool’s specification.

Operational Cycles—Validation of the

Not applicable to nonclosure and single-cycle tools
tool’s rated number of operational cycles.

Drift Test—Confirmation that the ID of the tool can pass a drift bar of a prescribed diameter.

Validation of tool‘s ability to seal with gas at the internal to external pressure rating (tested to 105 % of rated
pressure at rated max temperature with ends capped and no OD pressure).
V1 Static Closure Mechanism Pressure with Gas—Validation of the differential
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Not applicable pressure(s) and direction(s) the tool’s closure mechanism is rated to seal with gas as
the test medium (tested to 105 % of rated pressure at rated temperature).

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

The baseline hydrostatic pressure L0 shown in Figure A.1 is a minimum hydrostatic pressure during the
validation test, and it shall be no less than 50 % of the tool’s absolute pressure rating. A different baseline
hydrostatic pressure can be established at any point in the test provided it is never less than 50 % of the
absolute rating.

Labels 1 and 2 simulate the tool’s preparation and running into the well.

Label 3 is a validation of the tool’s absolute pressure rating. It is very typical that the work string will be
pressure tested while RIH, hence label 4 is a validation of the tool’s absolute and differential ratings (internal
and external) at temperature, performed two times.

Labels 5 and 6 simulate drawdown and buildup events where the annulus pressure is greater than the tool’s
internal pressure.

Label 7 simulates an injection event, where the tool experiences a decrease in temperature with a
corresponding pressure reversal.

Label 8 simulates a screen-out, where internal tool pressure further increases. This is intended to validate the
tool’s capabilities to continue to function with a temperature excursion.

Labels 9 and 10 represent the final flow period.

Labels 11 and 12 indicate a simulation of end of job conditions where well kill operations could again require
full differential and/or absolute pressure capabilities and valve operations in addition to the effects of pulling
out of hole.

A.3.5 Supplier/Manufacturer Requirements V3

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
To address legacy designs, results from separate tests and/or documented field history performance may be
combined to validate the tool’s ratings. The supplier/manufacturer shall demonstrate and document that the
validation testing results and/or documented field history meet the requirements of the tool’s ratings. Ratings
shall be documented and approved by a qualified person other than the qualified person who performed the
testing.

Test(s) results and/or documented field history performance shall be compiled into a report that establishes
the tool’s performance capabilities and ratings. Test results and procedures shall be documented with an
adequate amount of detail to allow the testing process to be replicated.

Design changes to V3 tools shall conform to the requirements of 6.10.

Following the effective date of this specification, new tool designs that conform to this specification shall meet
the requirements of V2 or V1. Legacy designs that comply with V3 requirements of this specification may be
validated to comply with V2 or V1 provided all requirements of A.3.5 are performed.

A.3.6 Supplier/Manufacturer Requirements V2 and V1

A.3.6.1 General

An absolute pressure rating shall be validated as prescribed in the validation profile test sequences in A.3.6.1
through A.3.6.4. If a separate verified absolute pressure rating (as opposed to the validated rating) is
established, the verified absolute pressure rating shall conform to the requirements of 6.6. The tool’s
datasheet shall clearly distinguish between validated and verified absolute pressure ratings.

Prior to installation of tools into the test vessel, perform—as a minimum—drift, visual inspection, pressure
integrity, and function tests per supplier/manufacturer procedures.

NOTE An example of a verified absolute pressure rating is given by a tool containing no atmospheric chambers and
supplementary laboratory test data that indicate the properties of the elastomers are not adversely affected by hydrostatic
pressure in the range between the validated and verified pressure.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Labels
L-1 Differential pressure test prior to RIH
L-2 Heating and pressurization of tools while RIH
L-3 Absolute pressure test at temperature
L-4 Absolute/differential pressure testing at temperature
L-5 Flowing the well
L-6 Shut in well for pressure buildup
L-7 Start injection for stimulation job, temperature drop due to cold injection fluid
L-8 Screen-out during injection
L-9 Flowing the well while temperature returns to maximum
L-10 Shut in well for pressure buildup
L-11 Final differential pressure test after temperature cycle
L-12 Pulling out of hole, pressure and temperature decreasing

Figure A.1—General Representation of Validation Profile Test Sequence

A.3.6.2 Nonclosure Tools Validation Procedures

A.3.6.2.1 V2 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Nonclosure Tools

The following testing steps shall be performed in the order shown per the acceptance criteria defined in A.3.2.
Jars and safety joints are required to also conform to the requirements of A.3.6.2.2.

1) Perform internal and external pressure testing with liquid to a minimum of 105 % of maximum rated
differential pressure at ambient temperature or a minimum temperature specified by the
supplier/manufacturer at which the tool can withstand 105 % of rated differential pressure. No other
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

external loading is to be applied. (The intent of this step is to expose the tool to its maximum rated
pressure before the test vessel is heated to maximum test temperature.)

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

2) Increase and stabilize the tool at or above its maximum rated temperature and increase the bore and
external pressures to a minimum of 105 % of the rated absolute pressure (labels 3, 4, and 11 in
Figure A.1) for a minimum of 1 hour. Maintain the tool at its maximum rated temperature through
Step 12.

3) Reduce and stabilize both internal and external tool pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the
to-be-validated absolute pressure rating.

4) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure rating.
While maintaining bore pressure, adjust and stabilize external pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in A.3.2.

5) Increase and stabilize the external pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure
rating. While maintaining external pressure, adjust and stabilize bore pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in A.3.2. Step 5 may be performed
before Step 4.

6) Adjust and stabilize the bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute pressure rating.

7) Repeat Steps 4 to 6 one additional time.

8) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve.)

9) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 50 % of the rated differential pressure
(annulus high), and hold for a minimum of 24 hours. (Simulating drawdown period.)

10) Reduce and stabilize the external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum absolute
pressure rating. Increase bore pressure and stabilize to achieve a minimum of 20 % of the differential
pressure rating (annulus high), and hold the pressures for a minimum of 12 hours. (Simulating buildup
period.)

11) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve as a

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
prelude to stimulation.)

12) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 20 % of the maximum differential
pressure rating (tubing high), and hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Pressure reversal from stimulation
pumping.)

13) Reduce and stabilize the tool to a temperature that is equal to the maximum rated temperature minus
the rated temperature drop. The input of heat to extend the cooldown period shall not be allowed. Hold
for a minimum of 30 minutes. (Temperature drop due to stimulation pumping.)

14) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a differential pressure of a minimum of 50 % of the
maximum differential rating (tubing high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Represents screen-out.)

15) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a differential pressure of a minimum of 50 % of the
rated differential pressure (annulus high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Representing final flow
period after stimulation.)

16) Increase the tool’s temperature to at or above its maximum temperature rating. Once temperature and
pressure have stabilized, hold for a minimum of 12 hours. (Representing temperature rise and final
flow period.)

17) Adjust and stabilize the bore pressure and external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the
maximum absolute pressure rating. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

18) Repeat Steps 4 through 6 one time. These steps shall occur after a minimum of 4.5 days in the test
facility, exclusive of the initial heat-up period.

19) Cool down the test tool and vessel and remove tool from the fixtures.

20) Drain valves only; after performing the above steps, drain valves shall be pressure integrity tested and
functioned in accordance with supplier/manufacturer functional test procedure and acceptance criteria
before the drain valve’s disassembly and inspection. Prior to this testing, redress activities to the drain
valve are not permissible.

21) Perform a drift test as per A.3.2.5.

22) Disassemble and inspect the tested tool(s) according to the supplier/manufacturer’s procedures and
acceptance criteria.

A.3.6.2.2 V2 Validation Requirements for Jar and Safety Joints

In addition to A.3.6.2.1 or A.3.2.4 as applicable, other functionalities of jars and safety joint designs shall be
validated independently, conforming to the documented procedures and acceptance criteria of the
supplier/manufacturer. The design validation testing shall replicate the physical conditions to the limits defined
in the procedure. Where applicable, the acceptance criteria in A.3.2 shall be utilized.

Jar assemblies and safety joints shall be validated to the profile test sequence as defined in A.3.6.2.1 to
assess pressure integrity and seal performance. In addition, for jar assemblies, hydraulic metering/timing
characteristics shall be validated at maximum rated temperature. Hydraulic metering/timing characteristics
can be validated in a separate test independent of the profile test sequence. Jarring performance and/or
impact testing is currently beyond the scope of this standard.

A.3.6.2.3 V1 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Nonclosure Tools

V1 validation level shall include successful completion of the V2 test profile A.3.6.2.1 and a supplemental gas
test to validate the integrity of the tool with gas pressure applied from the bore. The inability to complete any
portion of the V1 testing within the defined limits shall be considered a test failure. A successful completion of
a complete V1 test is required to achieve a V1 rating.

Testing shall consist of the following.

1) Install tool in the test facility and increase test vessel temperature up to the maximum rated

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
temperature of the tool.

2) At rated temperature, increase internal pressure to maximum differential pressure rating. After
stabilization, confirm pressure integrity per the gas testing acceptance criteria in A.3.2.2.3.

3) Terminate test. Cool down test vessel and remove tool from test setup.

4) Disassemble and inspect per supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures and prepare a test
report as defined in A.3.6.5.

A.3.6.3 Single-cycle Tool Validation Procedures

A.3.6.3.1 General

Differential pressure tests shall be performed at a minimum of 105 % of the supplier/manufacturer rated
maximum differential pressure of the closure mechanism from above and below (as applicable), for tools that
function as closure devices. Single-cycle tools shall be operated in accordance with the
supplier/manufacturer’s procedures at the indicated times per the profile test sequence of A.3.6.3.2.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

A.3.6.3.2 V2 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Single-cycle Tools

The following testing steps shall be performed in the order shown per the acceptance criteria defined in A.3.2.

1) For tools having a closure mechanism in an initially closed position, apply 105 % of the rated pressure
against the closure mechanism in the appropriate direction(s) at ambient temperature or a minimum
temperature specified by the supplier manufacturer at which the closure mechanism can withstand
105 % of maximum rated differential pressure. (The intent of this step is to expose the closure
mechanism to its maximum rated pressure before the test vessel is heated to maximum test
temperature.)

2) Perform both an internal and external pressure test with liquid to a minimum of 105 % of maximum
rated differential pressure at ambient temperature or a minimum temperature specified by the
supplier/manufacturer at which the tool can withstand 105 % of maximum rated differential pressure.
No other external loading is to be applied. (The intent of this step is to expose the tool to its maximum
rated pressure before the test vessel is heated to maximum test temperature.)

3) Increase and stabilize the tool at or above its maximum rated temperature and increase the bore and
external pressures to a minimum of the tool’s maximum rated absolute pressure for a minimum of
1 hour. Maintain the tool at its maximum rated temperature through Step 15.

4) Reduce and stabilize bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute pressure rating.

5) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure rating
(labels 3, 4, and 11 in Figure A.1). While maintaining bore pressure, adjust and stabilize external
pressure to achieve 105 % of the differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance
criteria in A.3.2.

6) Increase and stabilize the external pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure rating
(if applicable). While maintaining external pressure, adjust and stabilize bore pressure to achieve
105 % of the differential rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in A.3.2. Step 6 may be
performed before Step 5.

7) Adjust and stabilize the bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute rating.

8) Repeat Steps 5 to 7.

9) Pressure test the work string tester valve to a minimum of 105 % of the rated differential pressure of
the closure mechanism from above. Equalize the pressure across the closure device. Repeat this
pressure cycle a minimum of 10 times or the supplier/manufacturer’s rated number of pressure cycles
1
if greater than 10. Pressure leakage criteria per A.3.2 shall be checked after /2 of the number of
pressure cycles and after the final pressure cycle. If the tool being tested is not a tubing string tester
valve, proceed to Step 11.

10) Activate work string tester valve to disable further operation.

11) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve.)

12) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve 50 % of the rated differential pressure (annulus
high), and hold for a minimum of 24 hours. (Simulating drawdown.)

13) Reduce and stabilize the external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum absolute
rating. Increase bore pressure and stabilize to achieve a minimum of 20 % of maximum differential
pressure rating (annulus high). Hold the pressures for a minimum of 12 hours. (Simulating buildup
period.)

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

14) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve as a
prelude to stimulation.)

15) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 20 % of the maximum differential
pressure rating (tubing high), and hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Pressure reversal from stimulation
pumping.)

16) Reduce and stabilize the tool to a temperature that is equal to the maximum rated temperature minus
the rated temperature drop. The input of heat to extend the cooldown period shall not be allowed. Hold
for a minimum of 30 minutes. (Temperature drop due to stimulation pumping.)

17) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a differential pressure of a minimum of 50 % of the
maximum differential rating (tubing high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Represents screen-out.)

18) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a differential pressure of a minimum of 50 % of the
rated differential pressure (annulus high). Hold and record for a minimum of 1 hour. (Representing final
flow period after stimulation.)

19) Increase the tool’s temperature to at or above its maximum temperature rating. Once temperature and

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
pressure have stabilized, hold for a minimum of 12 hours. (Representing temperature rise and final
flow period.)

20) Adjust and stabilize the bore pressure and external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the
maximum absolute rating. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes.

21) Repeat Steps 5 through 7 one time. These steps shall occur after a minimum of 4.5 days in the test
facility, exclusive of the initial heat-up period.

22) Activate single-cycle tool with 105 % of the rated differential pressure across the valve (except for the
tubing tester valves that were cycled at Step 10). For tools with tubing closure devices, perform a
minimum of 105 % of the maximum differential pressure across closure device(s) with acceptance
criteria as defined in A.3.2 for each applicable pressure differential direction.

23) Cool down the test tool and vessel and remove tool from the fixtures.

24) Perform a drift test as per A.3.2.5.

25) Disassemble and inspect the tested tool(s) according to the supplier/manufacturer’s procedures and
acceptance criteria.

A.3.6.3.3 V1 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Single-cycle Tools

V1 validation level shall include successful completion of the V2 test profile A.3.6.3.2 and a supplemental gas
test to validate the integrity of the tool with gas pressure applied from the bore or across the closure device
where applicable. The inability to complete any portion of the V1 testing within the defined limits shall be
considered a test failure. A successful completion of a complete V1 test is required to achieve a V1 rating.

Testing shall consist of the following.

1) Install tool in the test facility and increase test vessel temperature up to the maximum rated
temperature of the tool.

2) At rated temperature, increase bore pressure to 105 % of the rated differential pressure (tubing high).
Confirm pressure integrity per the gas testing acceptance criteria A.3.2.2.3.

3) For a safety valve, activate the tool and apply 105 % of the rated differential pressure across the
closure mechanism in the direction for which the device is rated. Confirm pressure integrity per the gas
testing acceptance criteria A.3.2.2.3.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

4) Terminate test. Cool down the test vessel and remove tool from test setup.

5) Disassemble and inspect per supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures and prepare a test
report as defined in A.3.6.5.

A.3.6.4 Multi-cycle Tool Validation Procedures

A.3.6.4.1 General

Multi-cycle tools must be activated at the appropriate time as shown in the test procedure such that the
validation profile is satisfied. In the case where the tool functions as a closure device, perform pressure test(s)
from above and below as applicable at 105 % of the differential rating of the closure device. In order to
accommodate the total number of valve cycles during the test, it is permissible to perform additional valve
cycles outside of the required hold periods; the represented drawdown and buildup periods are to be
maintained as prescribed in A.3.6.4.2.

Multi-cycle tools shall be functioned at the prescribed points in the testing sequence in A.3.6.4.2. Two or more
valve cycles are performed at each of these points with pressure integrity testing performed after the last cycle
at each of the designated points in the testing profile. The performance of more than two cycles at each point
in the testing profile are at the discretion of the supplier/manufacturer; however, acceptance criteria shall be
met. The supplier/manufacturer may perform valve cycles in addition to those required. Additional cycles may
be performed at the end of the test to establish the total number of validated cycles. These additional cycles
shall conform to the leak acceptance criteria to be included in the total number of validated valve cycles.

For multi-cycle tools having an insufficient number of rated valve cycles necessary to complete all prescribed
open and close operations in A.3.6.4.2, one valve cycle may be eliminated from Steps 9, 19, and 23, as
required, to complete the testing sequence A.3.6.4.2. If the prescribed sequence A.3.6.4.2 is not able to be
achieved after the foregoing reduction in valve cycles because of an insufficient number of rated cycles, then
Steps 9 and 19 of A.3.6.4.2 may be eliminated (in order), as required, to complete the testing sequence
A.3.6.4.2. If the tool’s rated number of valve cycles remains insufficient to complete sequence A.3.6.4.2, the
tool may be alternatively tested following sequence A.3.6.3.2 (single-cycle tools), but with all open-close
cycles executed at Step 22 of A.3.6.3.2. In this case, one open-close cycle shall be used to test the valve(s)
rated opening differential pressure in both directions. A final pressure integrity test shall be conducted in
applicable direction(s) after the final cycle.

A.3.6.4.2 V2 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Multi-cycle Tools

The following testing steps shall be performed in the order shown per the acceptance criteria defined in A.3.2.

1) If the closure mechanism(s) is initially open, function it closed (if applicable) and apply a minimum of
105 % of the rated differential pressure of the closure device at ambient temperature or at a
temperature specified by the supplier/manufacturer against the closure mechanism(s) in the
appropriate direction(s) and confirm pressure integrity per A.3.2.2.

2) Perform internal and external pressure testing with liquid to a minimum of 105 % of maximum rated
differential pressure at ambient temperature or a minimum temperature specified by the
supplier/manufacturer at which the tool can withstand 105 % of maximum rated differential pressure.
No other external loading is to be applied. (The intent of this step is to expose the tool to its maximum
rated pressure before the test vessel is heated to maximum test temperature.)

3) Increase and stabilize the tool at or above its maximum rated temperature and increase the bore and
external pressures to a minimum of 105 % of the tool’s maximum rated absolute pressure for a
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

minimum of 1 hour. Maintain the tool at its maximum rated temperature through Step 15.

4) Reduce and stabilize bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute pressure rating.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

6) Increase and stabilize the external pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure
rating. While maintaining external pressure, adjust and stabilize bore pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in A.3.2. Step 6 may be performed prior
to Step 5.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
7) Adjust and stabilize the bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute rating.

8) Repeat Steps 5 to 7 one time.

9) Perform a minimum of two valve cycles. Verify pressure integrity of the closure mechanism(s) per
A.3.2 after the last cycle.

10) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize (simulating opening tester valve) and
open the tester valve (if applicable).

11) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 50 % of the rated differential pressure
(annulus high), and hold for a minimum of 24 hours. (Simulating drawdown period.)

12) Close the tester valve (if applicable). Reduce and stabilize the external pressure to a value not less
than 50 % of the maximum absolute rating. Increase bore pressure and stabilize to achieve a minimum
of 20 % of the differential pressure rating (annulus high), and hold the pressures for a minimum of
2 hours. (Simulating buildup period.)

13) Steps 13a to 13d (closure mechanism tests against rated opening differential pressure) may be
performed in an alternative order when technically appropriate. The pressure integrity test shall be
performed after each valve closure in the direction of applied differential.

a) Open the tester valve against the rated opening differential pressure from below followed by
closure and pressure integrity testing per A.3.2.

b) Open the tester valve against the rated opening differential pressure from above followed by
closure and pressure integrity testing per A.3.2.

c) Open the circulating valve against the rated internal to external opening differential pressure
followed by closure and pressure integrity testing per A.3.2.

d) Open the circulating valve against the rated external to internal opening differential pressure
followed by closure and pressure integrity testing per A.3.2.

e) Return the test conditions to those defined in Step 12 after a minimum total time of 10 hours, which
includes the time required to perform Steps 13a to 13d. During this time, or with additional time as
selected by the supplier/manufacturer, additional valve cycles may be performed.

14) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Open tester valve as a prelude to
stimulation.) If the tool operates by the application of external pressure, apply the pressure required to
function the tool.

15) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to a minimum of 20 % of the differential pressure rating
(tubing high), and hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Pressure reversal from stimulation pumping.)

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

16) Reduce and stabilize the tool to a temperature that is equal to the maximum rated temperature minus
the rated temperature drop. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes. (Temperature drop due to stimulation
pumping.)

19) Perform a minimum of two valve cycles per closure mechanism. Verify pressure integrity of the closure
mechanism(s) per A.3.2 after the last cycle.

20) Increase the tool’s temperature to at or above its maximum temperature rating, and adjust the bore
pressure to a minimum of 50 % of the rated differential pressure (annulus high). The pressure is
allowed to fluctuate during the temperature increase. Once temperature and pressure have stabilized,
hold for a minimum of 12 hours. (Representing temperature rise during final flow period.) During the
last 2 hours, additional valve cycles may be performed if prescribed by the supplier/manufacturer.

21) Adjust and stabilize the bore pressure and external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the
maximum hydrostatic rating. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes.

22) Repeat Steps 5 through 7 one time. These steps shall occur after a minimum of 4.5 days in the test
facility, exclusive of the initial heat-up period.

23) Perform a minimum of two valve cycles per closure mechanism. Verify pressure integrity of the closure
mechanism(s) per A.3.2 after the last cycle.

Additional cycles may be performed at the supplier/manufacturer’s discretion to establish the total number of
validated cycles. Verify pressure integrity of the closure mechanism(s) per A.3.2 after the last cycle.

1) Cool down the test tool and vessel and remove tool from the fixtures.

2) Perform a drift test as per A.3.2.5.

3) Disassemble and inspect the tested tool(s) according to the supplier/manufacturer’s procedures and
acceptance criteria.

A.3.6.4.3 V1 Validation Profile Test Sequence for Multi-cycle Tools

V1 validation level shall include successful completion of the V2 test profile A.3.6.4.2 and a supplemental gas
test to validate the integrity of the tool with internal gas pressure applied and across the closure device. For
the case of a tester valve, the pressure test need only be applied from below the ball. The test of both the
tester valve and circulating valve shall be conducted both before and after the valves have been shifted. The
valves may be shifted by a documented procedure, and it is not necessary to have pressure applied to the
valve when it is shifted. The inability to complete any portion of the V1 testing within the defined limits shall be
considered a test failure. A successful completion of a complete V1 test is required to achieve a V1 rating.

Testing shall consist of the following.

1) For a tester valve and/or circulating valve, place the closure mechanisms in the closed position and
install tool in the test facility.

2) Increase test vessel temperature up to the maximum rated temperature of the tool.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

3) At rated temperature, increase internal pressure of the tool to establish maximum differential pressure
rating. For a tester valve, equalize pressures on both sides of the closure mechanism. Confirm
pressure integrity per the gas testing acceptance criteria A.3.2.2.3.

4) For a tester valve, bleed pressure from above the closure mechanism and establish the rated
differential pressure from below. Confirm pressure integrity per the gas testing acceptance criteria
A.3.2.2.3.

5) Terminate test. Cool down test vessel and remove tool from test setup.

6) Remove tool from test vessel. Perform drift test. Disassemble and inspect.

A.3.6.5 Test Reporting

A final report of the design validations shall be prepared by a qualified person and approved by a qualified
person other than the person who prepared the report. The test report becomes a portion of the tool design
documentation. The report shall as a minimum include:

a) testing location(s), date, and person performing the testing;

b) the tool’s unique identification, such as part number and serial number;

c) procedures used and records required by those procedures;

d) detailed results and discussion of results including whether or not the test was successful;

e) approval indications such as signatures.

A.3.6.6 Validation of Alternative Seal Compounds

A.3.6.6.1 Validation of Alternative O-ring Compounds or Change of Supplier

This section allows validation of alternate seal compounds or a change of supplier by fixture testing of the
largest and smallest sealing diameters of the same cross section (typically referred to as series). This section
applies only to O-ring sealing systems, having the same gland width, depth, extrusion gap, backup system
configuration, static/dynamic conditions, and justifiably equivalent metal displacement due to applied
pressure/loading.

In lieu of a fixture test, alternate seal compounds that have been validated in an assembled tool may be
considered to be validated for other tools when the requirements of this section have been met.

For V1, V2, and V3 validated tools, alternative seal compounds can be utilized when all requirements of this
section are met. A change in supplier of the same compound or a change in compound composition can be
substituted and validated by utilizing a test fixture instead of performing a complete tool validation test.

Alternative validation of seal compounds shall be performed within the following limits.

a) The seal compound is to be rated for a temperature and/or pressure that is not outside of the previously
validated tool assembly. If outside the validated tool’s ratings, a tool validation test is required.

b) The test fixture shall be at or beyond minimum material condition seal gland dimensions (squeeze and
extrusion gap) for a given cross-section (series) per ISO 3601-1 and shall have the same or roughest
surface finish specified in the validated design(s).

c) Dynamic sealing systems shall be tested under dynamic conditions.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,``

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

d) A test, composed of two different O-ring sizes for a given cross-section (series) per ISO 3601-1
representing the smallest and largest diameters in the validated assembly, that is performed to validate the
same series of O-rings/seal configurations used in the validated assembly and shall be exposed to the
same pressure, temperature, operational cycles, and time duration as A.3.6.3.2 and A.3.6.3.3.

e) Acceptance criteria per A.3.6.3.2 and A.3.6.3.3, as applicable.

The seal validation procedure and acceptance criteria shall be prepared by a qualified person and approved
by a second qualified person. The procedures and validation results shall be included in the tool’s design
records. Reporting requirements shall comply with A.3.6.5 with the exception that the tool part number shall
be replaced by the compound identifier.

A.3.6.6.2 Validation of Alternative Compounds for Sealing Systems Other Than O-rings

For sealing systems other than O-rings, the supplier/manufacturer shall have documented procedures for
testing and validating alternate seal compounds or a change of suppliers. The test procedure shall adequately
replicate the seal application. The procedures, acceptance criteria, and testing results shall be approved by a
qualified person.

A.3.6.6.3 Alternate Validation of Upper Temperature Rating and Associated Temperature Drop

For tools that have successfully completed validation testing, seal compounds can be validated to a new
upper temperature and corresponding temperature drop by fixture testing performed to the requirements of
A.3.6.6.1 and A.3.6.6.2. The new upper temperature and corresponding temperature drop must not be
outside of the previously validated tool assembly validated ratings.

Validation of the new temperature ratings may be established for either a previously validated compound or
after a change in compound composition or supplier, provided that all requirements of this section are met.

The paired upper temperature and corresponding temperature drop provide validated values for a tool’s
performance. The tool is validated to operate in well conditions as high as the upper temperature rating and
with an associated temperature drop that typically occurs during fluid injection/stimulation operations.

A.3.6.6.4 Establishment of Minimum Temperature at Which Tool Can Withstand 105 % of Rated
Differential Pressure Rating

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
This section provides a method of establishing a new minimum temperature at which a tool can withstand
105 % of its rated differential pressure rating after a previous validation of a full tool assembly. Such a
validation is required after a change in supplier of the same seal compound or a change in compound
composition.

a) The validation shall be established by performing an internal pressure test on a fully assembled tool.

b) Heat or cool the tool to the intended test temperature.

c) Perform an internal pressure test to 105 % of the tool’s rated differential pressure.

After stabilizing, verify pressure integrity of the tool per A.3.2.2.2.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Factory Acceptance Testing

B.1 General Requirements

To conform to the requirements of this annex, each production tool manufactured shall pass all requirements
within the limits specified, per the acceptance criteria defined, and the results required for functional validation.
All tests and tool-related data for a valid, successful test shall be recorded in detail and retained after approval
by a qualified person.

FAT shall conform to the provisions of Section 7 as applicable.

Verify that the model and serial numbers appearing on the tested tool are in agreement with and included on
the test report. The testing shall be conducted on a complete assembly. All required tests shall be passed in
all aspects within the defined acceptance criteria and in the order presented (as applicable) without rebuild or
redress of the test assembly during the processing.

For completion of a successful test, the tool shall be tested and perform within the limits specified for all
required steps. Each evaluation report shall be signed and dated by the qualified person(s) conducting and
approving the test results.

B.2 Testing Requirements

B.2.1 General

A factory acceptance test shall be performed to a documented factory acceptance test procedure, which shall
comply with the requirements of this section. The factory acceptance test procedures shall include
acceptance criteria for each assembly, as applicable, to the tool design.

Fluids used for pressure testing shall be water, with or without additives, or hydraulic oil/heat transfer fluid.
The test fluid shall be visibly free from particulate matter and/or other material that have the potential of
plugging small leaks. All fluids used in the testing shall be defined and documented in the test report.

B.2.2 Body Pressure Integrity Test(s)

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Each tool shall be pressure tested with liquid at the room temperature rated internal pressure using
supplier/manufacturer procedures by a qualified person(s). Any visible leakage from the tool is cause for test
failure. The pressure test acceptance criteria is no more than 1 % reduction in the maximum rated differential
pressure, with a decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed
for stabilization. The time period for stabilization is at the discretion of the supplier/manufacturer.

Each tool that includes pressure-retaining chamber(s) not tested in the body or integrity functional tests shall
have the pressure-retaining chamber(s) hydrostatically pressure tested (as applicable) at no less than its
maximum rated internal pressure at room temperature, using supplier/manufacturer procedures by a qualified
person(s). Included are hydraulic or gas chambers used in the operation of the tool and/or other similar
pressure-retaining chambers. Any measured and/or visible leakage from the tool is cause for test failure. The
pressure test acceptance criteria is no more than 1 % reduction in the maximum rated differential pressure,
with a decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for
stabilization at the end of a pressure hold. The time period for stabilization is at the discretion of the
supplier/manufacturer.

50
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 51

B.2.3 Closure Mechanism Integrity Test

A pressure test shall be performed across the closure mechanism in its direction(s) of sealing, where a
closure mechanism is present. For closure mechanisms communicating to the annulus, external pressure
testing is not required. Testing shall be performed at the test pressure associated with ambient temperature
as described in the factory acceptance test procedure.

For test pressures greater than 500 psi, follow the acceptance criteria in B.2.2. For test pressures of 500 psi or
less, the acceptance criteria shall be no more than 5 % reduction in the tested differential pressure, with a
decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization
at the end of a pressure hold.

B.2.4 Operational Test

Each tool shall be tested to open/close or functioned through its operational cycle(s) at ambient temperature
where applicable, in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s defined procedures as described in the factory
acceptance test procedure. The test results shall conform to documented acceptance criteria and limits.

B.2.5 Special Features Test

Special features shall be tested in accordance with the supplier/manufacturer’s documented test procedures,
including acceptance criteria. These tests may be incorporated into the existing sequence of factory
acceptance tests, providing they do not cause operational limitations to the tool. Results shall conform to the
documented acceptance criteria.

B.2.6 Drift Test

After all functional testing steps are complete, perform a drift test per A.3.2.5. The drift bar unique identifier
shall be recorded in the FAT report.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Service Center Requirements

C.1 General
This annex provides the requirements for post-manufacturing activities of downhole test tools and related
equipment such as maintenance, repair, and servicing at service centers. Included are the requirements for
downhole test tool service centers, including capabilities, records retention, tool identifications, receiving
inspections, traceability, functional testing, pre-job evaluations, post-use evaluations, periodic tool inspections,
tool repairs, and quality requirements. All testing and inspection procedures and results shall be documented
and retained as specified in 7.2.

The requirements for the original manufacture of these tools are covered in Section 7.

C.2 Service Center Requirements

A service center is a physical location apart from the well site. Personnel performing inspection, testing,
redress, and repair operations described in this annex shall be trained and qualified in compliance with the
supplier/manufacturer procedures. Additionally, personnel approving the interpretation of nondestructive
testing (NDE) shall be qualified per ASNT SNT-TC-1A Level II or equivalent.

Each service center shall provide the qualified staff and calibrated tools and systems necessary to perform
the defined evaluations within the acceptance criteria defined in the procedures. All tools and equipment used
for measurement of acceptance criteria shall be calibrated per 7.5.1. The traceability and tracking of each
assembly and component shall be controlled throughout the processing and shall conform to a documented
procedure. Qualified personnel shall have immediate access to all necessary records, such as diagrams and
technical data and instructions necessary to complete the designated work according to the requirements of
the procedures.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The service center shall provide replacement components that conform to the documented design and
manufacturer requirements, including testing and retained documentation.

The service center shall have documented procedures for storage of tools and components to prevent
deterioration/damage. Tools and components shall be appropriately packaged for transport to prevent
deterioration/damage during shipping. All material provided as protection for transport, with the exception of
thread protectors, shall be clearly identified for removal prior to use of the tool.

C.3 Documentation
C.3.1 General

Each service center shall be supplied with the documentation by the supplier/manufacturer according to
7.2.2.4. The following documentation shall be available for review by a user/purchaser upon request.

C.3.2 Serial Number Specific Documentation

The following requirements shall apply to this section:

— Shear/burst device testing records (where applicable).

— Maintenance records.

— Approved modification records.

52
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 53

— Service completion certificate.

C.3.3 Generic Documentation

The following requirements shall apply to this section:

— Datasheet/technical specifications.

— Performance envelope.

— Summary validation records.

— Job history (by tool model).

C.3.4 Records Retention

Records of each tool’s status, use, repair, redress testing, and evaluations shall be retained in a records
retention system that is accessible by the service center, conforming to the requirements of 7.2.1. The service
center shall be able to provide, as a minimum, access to the most recent repair, redress testing, and
evaluation records to operational personnel. For tools containing electronics that record temperature-time
statistics, such data shall be retained for each electronic assembly and accessible to rig-site personnel.

Job history records shall be available in addition to the traceability records. These records are to be retained
for at least 3 years after a tool has been removed from service.

C.4 Anticipated Tool Usable Life Limits Defined

The anticipated life of a tool assembly is set by the supplier/manufacturer, and it may vary according to tool
design. Generally, mechanical tools are evaluated by the condition and inspection of their components and
have an unspecified lifetime when all components meet the supplier/manufacturer’s specifications.

Generally, electrical/electronic components or subassemblies will have a prescribed lifetime based upon
hours and temperature, with replacement performed once its qualified lifetime has been achieved.
Replacement of these electrical/electronic components or subassemblies may cause the tool to be retested to
ensure its full operation as prescribed by the supplier/manufacturer.

When the tool assembly is serviced, the tool records will be updated and unique identification numbers for
each replaced component shall be logged for traceability. Each tool shall be tracked and associated with the
original unique serial number until the time the tool serial number is retired and the tool is scrapped, which is
also duly recorded.

C.5 Receiving Inspections for Newly Received Tools

When tools are received at a service center, either new or transferred, they shall be disassembled/evaluated
according to documented Level 2 redress procedures (see C.6.3) by qualified personnel and the component
parts evaluated as required by the supplier/manufacturer. Each tool’s identification and the component’s
unique identification shall be recorded on an inspection report. This report shall be archived and included in
each tool’s use history.

C.6 Tool Inspection/Test Levels

C.6.1 General

Inspections and testing shall be performed to ensure the tool performance remains as originally designed and
the safety is not compromised. Inspections are categorized in the following three levels.

— Level 1—Pre-run inspection/test.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

— Level 2—Post-job inspection, service, and function test (commonly known as redress).

— Level 3—Periodic (and post severe service) inspection, service, and function test.

Inspection, service, and functional testing shall be performed per the manufacturer’s maintenance instructions,
with the minimum compliance as per the following.

C.6.2 Level 1 Inspection/Test (Pre-run and Well Site)

If tools have been stored at the service center for a defined length of time after a Level 2 redress (see C.6.3),
a Level 1 inspection/test shall be performed prior to mobilization to confirm functionality.

Level 1 inspection/test procedure and associated acceptance criteria shall be provided by the
supplier/manufacturer and be included in the tool’s operating/maintenance manual(s). At a minimum, tests
shall include drift, visual inspection, pressure integrity, and function tests.

Some tool designs may require customized settings for specific applications such as selection of rupture discs
and appropriate nitrogen charging values. These steps shall be performed according to documented
procedures and in comparison with the applications requirements and the tool’s capabilities by qualified
personnel. Setup parameters and methods shall be defined in the user/supplier’s documentation.

Local customer requirements, regulatory requirements and supplier/manufacturer management requirements

shall also be implemented in the documented pre-use evaluations.

A Level 1 inspection/test is also routinely performed at the well site prior to a run to confirm that the tool is
functioning properly after transport.

C.6.3 Level 2 Service (Redress)

A Level 2 service (redress) is performed after a tool is received by the service center to ensure that the safety,
integrity, and capability of the tool remain as per the supplier/manufacture’s design. The tool may have been
received by the service center as a newly manufactured tool, as a used asset from another service center, or
after performing a job in the field. The service center should have a process in place for receiving tools from a
well site, including washing/flushing to remove corrosive fluids and checking for potential hazardous
conditions such as trapped pressure, H2S, and naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM). Appropriate
health, safety, and environment (HSE) precautions should be taken at the service center.

The Level 2 service procedure shall be provided by the supplier/manufacturer for each tool design. The
procedure shall be included in the tool’s operating/maintenance manual(s). Replacement components shall
conform to the requirements applied to the original component parts.

Prior to performing a Level 2 service, a tool’s maintenance records shall be reviewed to determine if periodic
Level 3 maintenance is required (see C.6.4).

The following topics shall be addressed in the Level 2 service process per supplier/manufacturer
requirements:

a) disassembly and cleaning;

b) visual inspection of parts, including all sealing surfaces;

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

c) replacement of elastomeric sealing elements;

d) inspection and/or replacement of sealing components;

e) battery replacement (if applicable);

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

f) logging and reporting of replaced components in the equipment data files;

g) reassembly;

h) drifting;

i) for nitrogen charged tools, nonhydrocarbon based greases and oils having a sufficiently high flash point
shall be used on the chamber areas, and nitrogen purity shall not exceed 1 % oxygen;

j) functional testing;

k) after completion of functional testing, install thread protectors and seal all open connections to prevent
damage.

Additional application-specific testing is permissible when agreed to by the user/purchaser and

supplier/manufacturer. Following reassembly, each tool shall be internally pressure and function tested per
C.6.2. Tools acceptable for use shall have successfully completed the required testing acceptance criteria
and shall be marked/tagged as such.

For tools that have been placed in storage for a defined period of time, refer to C.6.2.

C.6.4 Level 3 Service (Periodic Evaluation)

This service ensures that the safety, integrity, and capability of the tool remain as per the design requirements.
Level 3 service shall be performed in the event of any of the following:

a) every 20 jobs or 3 years, whichever comes first;

b) before any job with expected temperatures above 85 % of its temperature rating or pressures exceeding
85 % of the tool’s pressure ratings;

c) following any job in which the above conditions were exceeded;

d) following any job with H2S concentrations exceeding 0.05 psia partial pressure for tools that are not
compliant with NACE MR0175/ISO 15156;

e) following any job in which the tensile load exceeded 85 % of the tool’s tensile rating or after jarring;

f) following use in any harsh environments as determined by supplier/manufacturer’s qualified personnel,

such as high concentrations of CO2, H2S, acids, and solids.

Level 3 service shall include all Level 1 and Level 2 service and shall include the following as prescribed by
the supplier/manufacturer:

a) NDE testing of axial load-bearing threads,

b) testing and verification of mechanical springs,

c) function and pressure integrity test in accordance with Annex B.

Level 3 service may include the following as prescribed by the supplier/manufacturer:

a) NDE on load-bearing and pressure-retaining components;

b) wall thickness measurement of all internal diameter components—components with wall thickness below
the manufacturer’s acceptable corrosion/erosion allowance require replacement;

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

c) gauging of threaded load-bearing connections;

d) radiography on welds.

All criteria shall conform to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented acceptance requirements, before the tool
is returned to service.

C.7 Repair

Repair of tools and related equipment shall be conducted according to procedures established by the
supplier/manufacturer and shall return the tool to a condition meeting all requirements stated in this
specification.

C.8 Quality Requirements

C.8.1 General

The service center shall have a quality management system implemented that ensures that the requirements
defined within this annex are conformed to. As a minimum, the following are required for the service center
quality records.

— Utilize current maintenance and operating manuals and datasheets.

— Calibration of test equipment and tools shall conform to 7.5.1.

— Training and competency certification of personnel is maintained and auditable.

— Pressure test facilities comply to all applicable regulations [i.e. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Pressure Equipment Directive (PED), Norsk Sokkels Konkuranseposisjon
(NORSOK)].

— Equipment databook/equipment dossier is maintained and updated when a traceable component is

replaced.

— Inspection and maintenance checklists/reports and test reports shall be signed by a qualified person other
than the person performing the functions.

— Inspection and maintenance checklists/reports and test reports shall be archived in accordance with the
document retention policy in 7.2.

— Replacement components shall conform to the requirements applied to the original component parts.

C.8.2 Unique Identification of Tools and Components

All load-bearing/pressure-retaining components and any other components designated by the

manufacturer/supplier shall maintain traceability from beginning to end of the tool/component’s life cycle. A
record system shall be maintained that contains the lifetime service records for each serialized tool assembly.

The location, use, and environmental exposure shall be recorded by tool serial number. Parts within a tool
shall be traceable to the tool serial number in which they are installed. Traceable parts without serialization or
batch marking on the part shall have traceability information recorded in the service center documentation for
that tool at the time of reassembly.

Common hardware and other nontraceable parts are exempted from this requirement.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

C.8.3 Design Revision Updates and Limitations

The service center shall implement mandatory design revisions as provided by the supplier/manufacturer.
Service center modifications are not allowed unless expressly authorized and approved by the
supplier/manufacturer. Service center modifications shall be documented in accordance with C.3.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Performance Rating Envelopes

D.1 General

Downhole test tools shall be supplied with a performance rating envelope. The supplier/manufacturer shall
state the differential pressure, temperature, and axial performance ratings, as applicable for the tool design,
and illustrate those capabilities in static performance envelopes. These envelopes are graphic illustrations of
the downhole test tool performance limits derived from the combined effects of differential pressure and axial
loads. An example envelope is illustrated in Figure D.1.

The performance envelope shall define the supplier/manufacturer’s specified ratings of the tool design
corresponding to a specific tool state, for example, the closure mechanism open, or ends closed. The
performance envelopes can be presented as a series of curves differentiated by color or line type, or the
envelopes may be presented as separate curves. The curves shall be clearly identified with an appropriate
legend. The boundary of the envelope defines the design’s maximum performance as rated by the
supplier/manufacturer.

D.2 Performance Envelope Required Data

For V1/V1-TP and V2/V2-TP tools, the envelopes are based upon testing results in conformance with
Annex A and may include calculated data. For V3/V3-TP tools, the envelopes are based upon justification as
described in A.3.5 and E.4 and calculated data and may include existing test data on full tool assemblies. The
envelope documentation shall as a minimum include the following criteria.

a) The boundary lines of the envelope represent the manufacturer’s rated performance. Temperature
limitations shall be clearly indicated on the envelope.

b) The ratings of the tool shall include the tool end connections. Any dependency of the rating on the tool end
connection design shall be indicated on the envelope.

c) Bending- and buckling-induced curvature is not accounted for in the envelope.

d) Any absolute pressure limitations of the tool shall be identified with the operating envelope.

e) The axial load shall be on the X axis.

f) Pressure shall be on the Y axis.

g) Axes shall be clearly labeled with numerical values, and the associated engineering units shall be
indicated.

h) More than one curve may be displayed on the envelope if a legend is included for explanation.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

i) The tool(s) covered by the envelope shall be specified on the envelope.

j) The envelope shall be prepared and approved by a qualified person(s).

58
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 59
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Figure D.1—Example Performance Envelope

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Well Testing Packer Requirements

E.1 General

Each well test packer design provided in accordance with this specification shall conform to the requirements
of this annex. Each well testing packer shall pass all requirements within the limits specified and per the
acceptance criteria defined, with suitable documentation of the applicable processes, acceptance criteria,
testing, and evaluation results. The defined evaluations and testing results shall validate the stated
performance and capabilities of the packer following approval of the testing results by a qualified person(s).

The required procedures for each design validation test shall be documented by the supplier/manufacturer
and conform to the requirements of Sections 5, 6, and 7. All tests and packer related data for a valid,
successful test shall be recorded and retained as a portion of the packer’s design records following approval
by a qualified person(s).

Validation test facilities shall conform to the requirements of A.1.2. Test facility anomalies occurring during
testing that have no effect on packer testing performance may be accepted when documented and approved
by a qualified person(s).

External packer accessories that are separable, such as hold-down devices, fluid bypass systems, indexing
mechanisms, etc., can be validated separately in accordance with Annex A as related equipment, as
determined and documented by a qualified person. Alternatively, the external packer accessories can be
tested as part of the well testing packer assembly in accordance with Annex E.

The design validation grade shall be selected from Table E.1 for each design to be provided. These validation
grades are proof of design evaluations that are performed on the base design. Packers qualified to higher
grades of design validation may be considered qualified for the lower grades of design validation. Table E.1
presents a summary of the testing to be performed for each validation grade.

E.2 Packer Rating Requirements

Packer ratings shall be established using the supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures, based on
material properties at rated temperatures, and approved by a qualified person(s). Tensile/compressive load
ratings shall be established by design verification or validation. Pressure performance and defined operational
capabilities shall be established by validation.

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish the following ratings either through documented field history and/or
verification (V3-TP) or by validation testing (V2-TP, V1-TP):

a) performance rating envelope per Annex D;

b) absolute internal (bore) pressure (if applicable);

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

c) absolute external (annulus) pressure (if applicable);

d) maximum differential pressure(s) across element from above and below (with minimum setting
load/pressure);

e) maximum differential pressure(s) across packer body (plugged condition);

f) other pressure restrictions applicable to the packer;

60
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 61

Table E.1—Packer Validation Testing Coverage

Summary of Packer Design Validation Grade Testing Requirements

— Well testing packers

Tools to be
— Separate hold-down devices (if applicable)
validated
— Separate bypass devices (if applicable)

V3-TP Packer designs shall comply with the requirements of E.4 (supplier/manufacturer-defined requirements).

Packer shall comply with the requirements of E.5. Prescribed pressure/temperature event sequence
lasting a minimum of 5 days at elevated temperature to validate the following.

Internal Pressure—Validation of internal differential pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of the rated
pressure at the rated maximum temperature.

External Pressure—Validation of external differential pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of the rated
pressure at the rated maximum temperature.
V2-TP
Absolute Pressure—Validation of absolute pressure rating. Tested to 105 % of rated pressure at rated
maximum temperature.

Temperature Drop—Validation of a packer’s pressure integrity and functionality after a drop from its
maximum rated temperature such as that which would occur as the result of stimulation pumping. The
temperature drop from the maximum rated temperature and the associated pressure reversal are to be
included in the packer’s specification.

Drift Test—Validation that the ID of the packer can pass a drift bar of a prescribed diameter.

Packer shall comply with the V2 validation testing requirements of E.5 and an internal (tubing-side)
pressure test with gas per E.8 to validate the packer’s ability to seal with gas up to the internal pressure
V1-TP
rating. (Tested at rated maximum temperature and 105 % of rated differential pressure applied to tubing
and lower side of the packer element and no OD pressure above the element.)

g) maximum rated temperature;

h) temperature drop from maximum rated temperature;

i) minimum operating temperature of the packer;

j) tensile/compressive ratings of slip/anchoring systems in the hardest rated casing grade;

k) applicable casing size and weight(s);

l) tensile/compressive load ratings of the packer body (may be established by verification);

m) other operational/pressure/environmental limitations applicable to the packer (such as pressure testing

limits at low temperature, function testing at low temperature, or the ability to maintain integrity at low
subsea temperatures while RIH).

NOTE Loading on packers due to transient pressure and structural waves initiated by perforating is a known
phenomenon. There are no currently known practical validation techniques that can effectively replicate this loading.
Numerical analysis techniques may be used to assess packer performance under specific environmental conditions and
are not included in this annex.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

E.3 Design Validation Overview

The supplier/manufacturer shall document all parameters and results of the evaluations to demonstrate
conformance to the selected validation grade. The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented testing
procedures for performance of the defined testing steps. A packer assembly shall successfully perform all of
the defined test steps of each set of validation tests for the selected validation grade level. The packer
assembly may be redressed for any special feature testing; however, repair or redress during a contiguous
testing sequence requires a restart of the complete testing sequence.

The base validation shall be selected from the testing procedures shown in Table E.1. When forces and/or
movements applied to the packer from push/pull actuators inside of the test vessel are affected by applied test
pressure(s) in a way not representative of test step requirements, corrective adjustments may be made to the
testing criteria. Procedure changes shall be justified, documented, and approved by a qualified person other
than the preparer of the procedure.

The supplier/manufacturer shall validate the minimum operating temperature with either a subassembly test
or a complete packer system validation.

The validation of nonmetallic seals in a packer system, excluding the packer element, shall conform to the
requirements of Annex A. Validation requirements for alternate packer elements are included in E.7. Design
changes to validated packer designs shall conform to the requirements of 6.10.

Changes to the packer element sealing system (consisting of elastomeric elements and anti-extrusion
devices) shall require revalidation testing. If new ratings for the packer element sealing system exceed the
validated pressure-temperature envelope, a full system validation shall be performed. If new ratings for the
packer element sealing system remain within the validated pressure-temperature envelope, the sealing
system may be revalidated to the packer qualification profile by a subassembly test, providing the test setup
represents the behavior of the complete packer system as determined by a qualified person, as per E.7.
Alternately, a full packer validation shall be performed.

E.4 V3-TP Validation Level Requirements

To address legacy designs, results from separate tests and/or documented field history performance may be
combined to validate the packer’s ratings. The supplier/manufacturer shall demonstrate and document that
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

the validation testing results and/or documented field history meet the requirements of the packer’s ratings.
Ratings shall be documented and approved by a qualified person other than the qualified person who
performed the testing.

Test(s) results and/or documented field history performance shall be compiled into a report that establishes
the packer’s performance capabilities and ratings. Test results and procedures shall be documented to an
adequate amount of detail to allow the testing process to be replicated.

Design changes to V3-TP packers shall conform to the requirements of 6.10.

Following the effective date of this specification, new packer designs that conform to this specification shall
meet the requirements of V2-TP or V1-TP. Legacy designs that comply with V3-TP requirements of this
specification may be validated to comply with V2-TP or V1-TP, provided all requirements of E.5 and/or E.8 are
performed as applicable.

E.5 V2-TP Validation Level Overview

E.5.1 General

V2-TP validation requires that a packer be exposed to a standard set of pressure/temperature events that
represent an environment commonly experienced during well testing with liquid as the test medium. This

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

sequence of events is expressed in a validation profile test sequence. Figure E.1 is a graphical illustration of
these conditions.

The overview of the validation profile test sequence described in E.5 includes temperatures, pressures, and
times. Key pressure points are illustrated by labels 1 to 12 in Figure E.1.

The baseline hydrostatic pressure L0 shown in Figure E.1 is a minimum hydrostatic pressure during the
validation test, and it shall be no less than 50 % of the packer’s absolute pressure rating. A different baseline
hydrostatic pressure can be established at any point in the test, provided it is never less than 50 % of the
absolute rating.

— Labels 1 and 2 simulate the packer’s preparation and running into the well.

— Label 3 is a validation of the packer’s absolute pressure rating.

— Label 4 is a validation of the packer’s absolute and differential ratings (internal and external) at
temperature, performed two times.

— Labels 5 and 6 simulate drawdown and buildup events where the annulus pressure is greater than the
packer’s internal pressure.

— Label 7 simulates an injection event, where the packer experiences a decrease in temperature with a
corresponding pressure reversal.

— Label 8 simulates a screen-out, where internal pressure further increases. This is intended to validate the
packer’s capabilities to continue to function with a temperature excursion.

— Labels 9 and 10 represent the final flow period.

— Labels 11 and 12 indicate a simulation of end of job conditions where well kill operations could again
require full differential pressure and/or absolute pressure capabilities and valve operations in addition to
the effects of pulling out of hole.

An absolute pressure rating shall be validated as prescribed in the validation profile test sequences in E.5.3
and E.6.2 as applicable. If a separate verified absolute pressure rating (as opposed to the validated rating) is
established, the verified absolute pressure rating shall conform to the requirements of 6.6. The packer’s
datasheet shall clearly distinguish between validated and verified absolute pressure ratings.

NOTE An example of a verified absolute pressure rating is given by a packer containing no atmospheric chambers and
supplementary laboratory test data indicating that the properties of the elastomers (including packer elements) are not
adversely affected by hydrostatic pressure in the range between the validated and verified pressure.

The design verification of nonmetallic element(s) at higher absolute pressure shall include subassembly
testing or be supported by successful V2-TP validation of the same nonmetallic compound at the higher
absolute pressure on other packer assemblies having the same seal design. For subassembly testing, the
reporting provisions of A.3.6.6 shall apply.

Any low temperature performance rating not tested during the validation profile test sequence in E.5.3 and
E.6.2 as applicable may be established through separate testing. Such testing and results shall conform to the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures and acceptance criteria. Such rating limits may include, but
are not limited to, pressure testing limits at low temperature, function testing at low temperature, or the ability
to maintain integrity at low subsea temperatures while RIH.

The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented procedures to perform all testing. The results shall be
approved, and applicable ratings shall be established, by a qualified person.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Figure E.1—General Representation of Validation Profile Test Sequence

E.5.2 V2-TP Validation Level Requirements

V2-TP validation of a packer for a single casing weight is accomplished by performing a minimum 5-day test
at the maximum rated temperature on a full packer assembly in accordance with E.5.3.

When a packer design is designated for a single casing ID (not a range), a single validation test may be
performed at the nominal casing ID plus the maximum tolerance per API Specification 5CT.

V2-TP validation of a packer over a range of casing weights for a nominal casing size is accomplished by
performing a minimum 5-day test on a full packer assembly in accordance with E.5.3 to simulate the lightest
weight casing for a nominal casing size (largest ID). To extend the casing weight coverage, it is also required
to perform an abbreviated 2-day test simulating the heaviest weight casing for a nominal casing size (smallest
ID) per E.6.2. This abbreviated test may be performed in a fixture, rather than on a full packer assembly, in
accordance with the provisions of E.6.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

The test fixture material shall correspond to the highest casing grade for which the packer is rated. The test
fixture OD is not required to be representative of the actual casing OD, nor does it necessarily represent the
presence of, or lack of, external support from a cement sheath.

The supplier/manufacturer shall adhere to the following test parameters and criteria for conformance to
validation level V2-TP when testing a complete packer assembly.

a) All testing shall be performed in the order prescribed as per E.5.3 and E.6.2, as applicable to the limits
defined, on calibrated equipment per 7.5.1, by qualified personnel, and all testing results and commentary
shall become a portion of the packer’s design records.

b) The testing steps represented in the validation profile test sequence in E.5.3 and E.6.2 as applicable shall
be conducted over the minimum number of days prescribed at the specified elevated temperature,
exclusive of initial heating and final cooldown.

c) All applied temperatures, pressures, loads, and actions shall be measured and recorded on time-based
equipment.

d) During temperature transitions, pressure shall be managed in accordance with supplier/manufacturer

facility capabilities. Previously prescribed conditions shall be reestablished before the next prescribed hold
period.

e) Prescribed conditions (pressure and/or temperature) shall continue until a change in those conditions is
specified by a subsequent test step.

f) For packers using a rupture disc or shear device, and where it is not possible to achieve maximum test
pressures required for validation testing without exceeding the rupture or shear device value, it is
permissible to perform a separate test to validate the maximum pressure ratings with activation method
disabled. This separate test shall be performed at the packer’s maximum rated temperature, but the test
does not require repeating the full validation profile test sequence. A qualified person shall document the
justification for utilizing the alternate test method, procedures, and acceptance criteria.

g) The packer shall be assembled and installed into the test fixture, utilizing supplier/manufacturer
documented procedures.

h) Setting force shall be the minimum recommended (±10 %).

i) Packers without an integral anchoring device(s) may be restrained by the test fixture to prevent movement
in the unanchored direction(s).

j) Test to a minimum of 5 % above the maximum rated differential pressure and to a minimum of 5 % above
the maximum validated absolute pressure rating.

k) Validation of packer axial load capability of slip/anchoring systems can be performed independently of
pressure tests. If axial loads are applied in an independent test, the applied axial loads shall include the
effective contribution from any pressure effects. A qualified person shall establish the validity of conducting
such tests separately and their combination into an effective operating envelope. Other axial load
capabilities not related to the slip/anchoring system may be established by design verification in
accordance with 6.3.2.1.

l) Packers having shear-release features shall be tested to a minimum of 5 % above their maximum rated
shear load. For safety, a shear device shall be utilized that can adequately withstand the maximum applied
test load.

m) Each packer that includes a pressure-retaining chamber (such as a hydraulic or gas chamber used in the
operation of the packer and/or other similar pressure-retaining chamber) that is not tested to its maximum
rating during the validation or functional tests shall be pressure tested by a qualified person(s) at its
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

maximum rated pressure at room temperature using supplier/manufacturer documented procedures and
acceptance criteria.

n) Following each successful validation test, the packer shall be disassembled and inspected to the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented requirements. Observations shall be documented in the respective
test results report.

E.5.3 V2-TP Validation Profile Test Sequence Using Full Packer Assembly (5-day Minimum)

Validation testing to conform to V2-TP shall include the following.

1) Perform internal and external pressure test with liquid to a minimum of 105 % of maximum rated
differential pressure at ambient temperature or a minimum temperature specified by the
supplier/manufacturer at which the packer can withstand 105 % of rated differential pressure. Relieve
pressure after each pressure test.

2) Increase test vessel temperature up to the maximum rated temperature of the packer while managing
bore and external pressure increase up to 50 % of the absolute pressure rating. Maintain the packer at
its maximum rated temperature through Step 14.

3) Set the packer using supplier/manufacturer’s defined procedure using the minimum setting load. Set
the packer at a pressure not less than 50 % of the absolute pressure rating.

4) Increase bore and external pressure to 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure rating. Hold until the
vessel pressure is stable for a minimum of 1 hour.

5) Reduce and stabilize bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the maximum
absolute pressure rating.

6) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure rating.
While maintaining bore pressure, adjust and stabilize external pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in E.9.2.2. (Simulating
pressure test from below packer.)

7) Increase and stabilize the external pressure to at least 105 % of the maximum absolute pressure
rating. While maintaining external pressure, adjust and stabilize bore pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in E.9.2.2. (Simulating
pressure test from above packer.) Step 7 may be performed before Step 6.

8) Adjust and stabilize the bore and external pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the absolute
pressure rating.

9) Repeat Steps 6 to 8 one additional time.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

10) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve.)

11) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve 50 % of the rated differential pressure (annulus
high), and hold for a minimum of 24 hours. (Simulating drawdown period.)

12) Reduce and stabilize the external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the absolute pressure
rating. Increase bore pressure and stabilize to achieve a minimum of 20 % of differential pressure
rating (annulus high), and hold the pressures for a minimum of 12 hours. (Simulating buildup period.)

13) Increase external pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester valve as a
prelude to stimulation.)

14) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 20 % of the differential pressure
rating (tubing high), and hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Pressure reversal from stimulation pumping.)

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

15) Reduce and stabilize the temperature that is equal to the maximum rated temperature minus the rated
temperature drop. The input of heat to extend the cooldown period shall not be allowed. Hold for a
minimum of 30 minutes. (Temperature drop due to stimulation pumping.)

16) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of a 50 % of the differential rating
(tubing high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Representing screen-out.)

17) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 50 % of the rated differential pressure
(annulus high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Representing final flow period after stimulation.)

18) Increase the temperature to at or above the packer’s maximum temperature rating. Once temperature
and pressure have stabilized, hold for a minimum of 12 hours. (Representing temperature rise during
final flow period.)

19) Adjust and stabilize the bore pressure and external pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the
absolute pressure rating. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes.

20) Repeat Steps 6 through 8 one time. These steps shall occur after a minimum of 4.5 days in the test
facility, exclusive of the initial heat-up period.

21) Cool down the test packer and vessel (or start V1-TP validation test).

22) Remove packer from test vessel and perform drift test per E.9.4.

23) Disassemble and inspect the tested packer according to the supplier/manufacturer’s procedure and
acceptance criteria.

The inability to complete any portion of the testing within the defined limits shall be considered a test failure,
and a complete retest is required.

E.6 Casing Range Extension Validation Requirements

E.6.1 General

Packers shall be validated within a casing internal diameter corresponding to both the maximum and
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

minimum ID over the intended nominal casing size and weight range. A rating for a range of casing weights
can be validated by the combination of full packer assembly validation profile test in an ID representing the
lightest casing weight for the intended nominal casing range per E.5.3 plus an additional validation test
conducted in a fixture having an ID representing a defined heavier casing weight per E.6.2.

Different nominal casing sizes having an ID that falls within the validated range can be considered as
validated. When validating over a nominal casing size and weight range, changes in packer designs shall be
limited to the packer element diameter and/or gauge rings only, while a documented and justifiably equivalent
radial casing extrusion gap shall be maintained. Any other changes in design require a full packer assembly
validation test.

The validation for the packer design in the minimum ID of the casing size and weight range (heaviest casing
weight) may be performed with an abbreviated validation profile test (2-day minimum) using a packer element
test fixture representing the packer element sealing system in the smallest nominal casing ID minus the
maximum tolerance per API Specification 5CT.

In addition, slip load testing shall be performed in the largest and smallest casing IDs corresponding to the
intended casing size and weight range and may be performed with a subassembly of the full packer
assembly.

The test sequence to extend the packer’s rating range in conformance to validation level V2-TP is defined in
E.6.2. The test sequence to extend the packer’s rating range in conformance to validation level V1-TP is
specified in E.8.3.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

The packer element test fixture shall represent all pertinent aspects of the previously validated packer
assembly, associated fits/finishes, tolerances, and setting/loading forces.

a) The procedure for element validation in a fixture with the new casing weight shall expose the packer
element subassembly to the same pressure, temperature, and operational cycles as the original tool
V2-TP validation procedure but with a reduced time duration of 2 days (minimum) exclusive of initial
heating and final cooldown per E.6.2.

b) Changes in packer element diameter and/or gauge rings may be made to adjust to the heavier casing
weight provided that the resulting radial extrusion gap (radial distance gauge ring OD to nominal casing ID)
remains less than or equal to (within supplier/manufacturer’s tolerances) the extrusion gap of the fully
validated packer design that the casing extension validation is based on.

c) The packer element system in the validated casing weight is to be rated for a maximum temperature and/or
pressure that is not greater than that of the fully validated packer assembly.

d) When a new lower temperature limit after a temperature drop is to be established, this value shall not be
less than the minimum temperature at which the packer assembly can withstand 105 % of its differential
pressure rating.

e) The packer validation procedure for the new casing weight shall be prepared by a qualified person and
approved by a second qualified person. The procedures and validation results shall be included in the
tool’s design documentation.

f) All testing shall be performed in the order prescribed, to the limits defined, on calibrated equipment, by
qualified personnel and all testing results, and commentary shall become a portion of the packer’s design
records.

g) All applied temperatures, pressures, loads, and actions shall be measured and recorded on time-based
equipment.

E.6.2 Abbreviated V2-TP Validation Profile Test for Range Extension to Heaviest Weight
Casing Using a Fixture (2-day Minimum)

When a packer is to be V2-TP validated over a range of casing weights corresponding to a nominal casing
size, a full packer assembly shall be used to validate the heaviest weight casing (largest ID) per C.5.2. V2-TP
validation of the packer in the heaviest weight casing of the same nominal casing size (smallest ID) can be
performed in a test fixture as follows.

1) Assemble packer element sealing system and gauge rings into test fixture.

2) Increase test fixture temperature up to the maximum rated temperature of the packer, while managing
bore and external (annulus) pressure and while increasing both up to 50 % of the absolute pressure
rating. Maintain the packer elements at maximum rated temperature through Step 14.

3) Set packer elements using supplier/manufacturer’s defined procedure using the minimum setting load.
Set the packer elements at a pressure not less than 50 % of the absolute pressure rating.

4) Increase bore and external (annulus) pressure to 105 % of the absolute pressure rating. Hold until the
fixture pressure is stable for a minimum of 1 hour.

5) Reduce and stabilize bore and external (annulus) pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the
absolute pressure rating.

6) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to at least 105 % of the absolute pressure rating. While
maintaining bore pressure, adjust and stabilize external (annulus) pressure to achieve 105 % of the
differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in E.9.2.2. (Simulating a
pressure test from below the packer element.)
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

7) Increase and stabilize the external (annulus) pressure to at least 105 % of the absolute pressure
rating. While maintaining external (annulus) pressure, adjust and stabilize bore pressure to achieve
105 % of the differential pressure rating. Hold and record per the acceptance criteria in E.9.2.2.
(Simulating pressure test from above packer elements.)

8) Adjust and stabilize the bore and external (annulus) pressures to a value not less than 50 % of the
absolute pressure rating.

9) Repeat Steps 6 to 8 one additional time.

10) Increase external (annulus) pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening tester
valve.)

11) Reduce and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of 50 % of the rated differential pressure
(annulus high), and hold for a minimum of 6 hours. (Simulating abbreviated drawdown.)

12) Reduce and stabilize the external (annulus) pressure to a value not less than 50 % of the absolute
pressure rating. Increase bore pressure and stabilize to achieve a minimum of 20 % of differential
pressure rating (annulus high), and hold the pressures for a minimum of 3 hours. (Simulating
abbreviated buildup.)

13) Increase external (annulus) pressure by at least 1500 psi and stabilize. (Simulating opening the tester
valve as a prelude to stimulation.)

15) Reduce and stabilize the temperature to a value that is equal to the maximum rated temperature minus
the rated temperature drop. The input of heat to extend the cooldown period shall not be allowed. Hold
for a minimum of 30 minutes. (Temperature drop due to stimulation pumping.)

16) Increase and stabilize the bore pressure to achieve a minimum of a 50 % of the differential rating
(tubing high). Hold for a minimum of 1 hour. (Representing screen-out.)

18) Increase the temperature to at or above the packer’s maximum temperature rating. Once temperature
and pressure have stabilized, hold for a minimum of 3 hours. (Representing temperature rise during
final flow period.)

19) Adjust and stabilize the bore pressure and external (annulus) pressure to a value not less than 50 % of
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

the absolute pressure rating. Hold for a minimum of 30 minutes.

20) Repeat Steps 6 through 8 one time. These steps shall occur after a minimum of 1.5 days in the test
fixture, exclusive of the initial heat-up period.

21) Cool down the test fixture.

22) Remove packer elements from test fixture.

23) Disassemble and record condition of the elements and test fixture according to the
supplier/manufacturer’s procedure.

24) Successful completion of this process is documented conformance to the pressure integrity leakage
criteria in E.9.2.2.

The inability to complete any portion of the testing within the defined limits shall be considered a test failure,
and a complete retest is required.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

E.7 Alternative Packer Element Compound Validation Requirements

E.7.1 General

For packer assemblies that have successfully completed V1-TP or V2-TP validation testing, alternative packer
element compounds can be utilized when all requirements of this section are met. A change in supplier of the
same compound or a change in compound or durometer can be substituted and validated by utilizing a test
fixture instead of performing a complete packer validation test.

Alternative validation of seal compounds shall be performed within the following limits.

a) The test fixture must represent all pertinent aspects of the packer element sealing system (consisting of
elastomeric elements and anti-extrusion devices), associated fits/finishes, tolerances, previously validated
casing size, and setting/loading forces.

b) The packer element is to be rated for a temperature and/or pressure that is not greater than that of the
previously validated packer assembly.

c) If the new intended minimum temperature at which the packer can withstand 105 % of its differential
pressure rating is less than the value determined from a validation test on a full packer assembly, this value
shall be validated on a fully assembled packer using the procedure in A.3.6.2.1. If this value is greater than
or equal to that determined from a prior validation test on a full tool assembly, the value shall be validated
using either the procedure in A.3.6.2.1 or by using a test fixture that represents the technical requirements
of the packer design and installation.

d) When a new lower temperature limit is to be established after a temperature drop, this value shall not be less
than the minimum temperature at which the packer can withstand 105 % of its differential pressure rating.

e) The procedure for packer element testing in the fixture shall expose the seal configuration to the same
pressure, temperature, operational cycles, and time duration as the minimum 5-day full packer assembly
validation profile test procedure, as per E.5.3 for V2-TP validation. V1-TP validation of alternative packer
element compounds shall be allowed per E.8 following successful V2-TP validation per this paragraph.

f) The potential effect of any movement on packer element performance such as speed or sequence shall be

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
accurately represented in the test fixture.

g) The packer element validation procedure and acceptance criteria shall be prepared by a qualified person
and approved by a second qualified person. The procedures and validation results shall be included in the
packer’s design records.

E.7.2 Alternative Packer Element Compound Validation Test Sequence in a Fixture

Testing shall consist of the following.

1) Testing shall conform to the requirements of E.1.

2) Perform all steps defined in E.5.3 (liquid test medium).

3) For V1-TP packers, also perform seal compound validation test in a fixture as per G.8.2, with gas as
the test medium.

4) The acceptance criteria shall be per E.9.

E.8 V1-TP Validation Level Requirements

E.8.1 General

V1-TP validation requires that a packer first pass all the tests associated with V2-TP validation per E.5 (and
E.6 for a casing weight range, if applicable). Additionally, the packer shall pass V1-TP gas testing as follows.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

V1-TP validation of a packer for a single casing weight is accomplished by performing a bore pressure test on
a full packer assembly with gas as the test medium per E.8.2.

V1-TP validation for over a range of casing weights that correspond to a nominal casing size is accomplished
by performing a bore pressure test on a full packer assembly with gas as the test medium per E.8.2,
simulating the lightest weight casing for a nominal casing size (largest ID) plus an additional validation test
conducted in a fixture simulating the heaviest weight casing for a nominal casing size (smallest ID) per E.8.3.

Test fixtures shall have an ID that is not less than the maximum casing ID, accounting for tolerance per
API Specification 5CT. The test fixture material shall correspond to the highest casing grade for which the
packer is specified. The test fixture OD is not required to be representative of the actual casing OD, nor does
it necessarily represent external support from a cement sheath.

Testing can be performed independently on a newly redressed packer or as a continuation of the V2-TP
validation profile test with the packer remaining set in the V2-TP fixture and at temperature.

The packer can be initially set in either liquid or in pressurized gas. If the packer is initially set in liquid, or as a
continuation of a V2-TP test, a means must be available to remove all liquid from the bore side prior to
performing the gas test.

Following each successful validation test, the packer shall be disassembled and inspected to the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented requirements. Observations shall be documented in the respective test
results report.

E.8.2 V1-TP Validation Profile Test Sequence Using Full Packer Assembly

Following the successful completion of the V2-TP validation level requirements, the V1-TP testing shall
consist of the following steps, if not performed as a continuation of the V2-TP validation profile test. If V1-TP
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

testing is continuing from a V2-TP test, begin at Step 4.

1) Perform FAT of packer assembly per supplier/manufacturer procedures prior to heating the test
vessel.

2) Increase test vessel temperature up to the maximum rated temperature of the packer.

3) Set packer using supplier/manufacturer’s defined procedure in liquid or gas using the minimum rated
setting load. Set the packer at 50 % of the maximum hydrostatic rating.

4) If the packer was set in liquid, drain all liquid from anchored packer-casing assembly before
introducing the gas testing medium. This may require temporary removal of the anchored
packer-casing assembly from the test vessel and an inadvertent additional temperature cycle. If the
packer is set in gas, proceed to Step 5.

5) At rated temperature, adjust bore and external (annulus) pressures (now with gas test medium) to the
maximum differential pressure rating with external (annulus) bled to zero. Continue to hold until the
pressure is stable per the gas testing acceptance criteria in E.9.2.3.

6) Terminate test. Cool down test packer and vessel.

7) Remove packer from test vessel and perform drift test per E.9.4.

8) Disassemble and inspect the tested packer according to the supplier/manufacturer’s procedure and
acceptance criteria.

The inability to complete any portion of the testing within the defined limits shall be considered a test failure
and a complete V1-TP retest is required.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

E.8.3 V1-TP Validation Using an Element Fixture (Heaviest Casing Weight in a Range)

When validating a packer over a range of casing weights corresponding to a nominal casing size, the heaviest
casing weight (smallest diameter casing) may be performed in an element fixture using gas as the test
medium as follows.

1) Install packer element into fixture.

2) Increase fixture temperature up to the maximum rated temperature of the packer.

3) Increase fixture gas pressure to 50 % of the maximum hydrostatic rating.

4) Compress element to the minimum rated setting load using supplier/manufacturer’s defined procedure
for the fixture.

5) At rated temperature, adjust bore and external (annulus) pressures to maximum differential pressure
rating with external (annulus) bled to zero. Continue to hold until the pressure is stable per the gas
testing acceptance criteria in E.9.2.3.

6) Repeat Step 5.

7) Terminate test. Cool down test fixture and vessel.

8) Remove element from the fixture, inspect, and record condition.

The inability to complete any portion of the testing within the defined limits shall be considered a test failure,
and a complete retest is required.

E.9 Design Validation Testing Acceptance Criteria

E.9.1 General

The acceptance criteria in this section shall apply to all pressure integrity testing, including special feature
tests. Each packer design shall conform to the requirements and acceptance criteria of this section at each
numbered test step where acceptance criteria are required. Failure to conform to the requirements is cause to
stop the testing and restart from the beginning of the validation testing process.

E.9.2 Pressure Integrity Tests

E.9.2.1 General

In this specification, leakage is considered to be a measureable change in pressure over a 15-minute hold
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

period, as defined in E.9.2.2 and E.9.2.3. Any visible leakage, internally or externally, is cause for failure.

E.9.2.2 Pressure Integrity Tests with Liquid

For V2-TP testing, testing is performed with a liquid. Each tool shall be hydrostatically pressure tested at the
defined pressure(s) and associated defined temperature(s) using supplier/manufacturer procedures. Test
medium shall be water, with or without additives, or hydraulic oil. Liquid shall be free from particulate matter
and/or other material that have the potential of plugging small leaks. All fluids used shall be defined and
documented in the test report.

The pressure test acceptance criteria is a maximum of 1 % change in the applied pressure, with a decreasing
rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

E.9.2.3 Pressure Tests with Gas

For V1-TP testing, testing is performed with nitrogen or other inert gas. Gas leak rate acceptance criteria is
3
less than 20 cm of gas at atmospheric pressure over a 15-minute hold period after sufficient time has been
allowed for stabilization after applying the rated differential pressure. Additionally, the volume accumulated
1 1
during the second 7 /2 minutes of the hold period shall not exceed the volume accumulated in the first 7 /2
minutes of the hold period. The leak rate and total leakage shall be recorded in the test report.

E.9.3 Special Features Test(s)

Special feature and/or claimed capability(s) shall be validated to its rated limits in accordance with the
supplier/manufacturer’s documented test procedures. These validation tests may be incorporated into the
existing sequence of design validation, providing they do not cause operational limitations to the packer.
Pressure integrity tests results shall conform to the acceptance criteria herein; all other test results shall
conform to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented acceptance criteria.

E.9.4 Drifting Requirements and Acceptance Criteria

After all functional testing steps are complete, perform a drift test using a drift bar having a minimum length of
42 in. (±0.5 in.) at the specified diameter. The drift bar shall have a diameter no less than the nominal packer
inner diameter minus 0.125 in. inclusive of diametral and straightness tolerances. The drift bar shall pass
completely through the packer in both directions where feasible, and it shall not require a force greater than
the weight of the bar. Each drift bar shall be permanently marked with a unique identifier and the measured
drift bar dimensions. The drift bar unique identifier shall be recorded in the validation test report.

E.9.5 Test Reporting

A final report of the design validations shall be prepared by a qualified person and approved by a qualified
person other than the person who prepared the report. The test report becomes a portion of the packer’s
design documentation. The report shall as a minimum include:

a) testing location(s), date, and person performing the testing;

b) the packer’s unique identification, such as part number and serial number;

c) testing procedures used and records required by those procedures;

d) detailed results, discussion of conformance to acceptance criteria, and post-test recommendations if

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
applicable;

e) approval indications such as signatures.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Electronic and Electrical Components, Subcomponents,

and Systems Requirements

F.1 General

This annex covers the requirements for electronic and electrical components, subcomponents, and systems
that provide electronic monitoring, electrical power sources, measuring, or signal processing capabilities
(hereafter called products). Each product shall have documented process(es) that validate the design.
Thereafter each copy of the design that is manufactured is considered validated throughout the specified
operating range. The performance of each product or system shall conform to the requirements defined by the
supplier/manufacturer. This coverage also includes all connectors and cabling to internal and external
conduits. However, this coverage is limited to the physical constraints of the downhole tool, and external
conduit(s) are not included.

Ratings for each of the claimed parameters of the product’s operation, including life cycle, shall be explicitly
defined and supported by technical documentation that includes successful validation testing and/or
verification to defined acceptance criteria. All testing and test results shall be evaluated and approved by a
qualified person other than the qualified person who created or tested the design.

The mechanical hardware and body sealing components are covered by other portions of this standard.

F.2 Design Controls and Rated Limits

The supplier/manufacturer shall establish geometrical dimensions, localized and overall temperature
limitations, vibration/shock resistance, and the operational capabilities/limitations necessary to meet the
product’s stated operational capabilities in the specified environment and conform to the requirements of this
standard. The effects of temperature, environment, material properties, and combined loading on all materials
and subcomponents shall be considered in establishing the rated capabilities and durability of the final
product.

The mechanical and electronic/electrical design shall take into account the effects of externally and internally
induced loading. Designs shall take into consideration the effects of temperature, pressure, environmental
chemistry, and vibration/shock on all components. The upper and lower temperature limits shall be
established by system level validation testing. The design shall take into account the effects of exposure to
and/or retained fluid(s) supplied in the functional specification and any other chemicals routinely encountered
in oil and gas production. Specialized and/or intermittent conditions such as transport and surface testing shall
be considered in the design verifications and validations of each product. Products conforming to this
standard shall be manufactured to drawings, requirements, and specifications that contain no substantive
changes from those of the product that passed the applicable validation testing. A new validation test
conforming to manufacturer/supplier’s procedure(s) is required for new components.

The rated limits of the design shall be stated for all operational parameters and can include the cumulative
effects of time and temperature based upon industry-accepted or other demonstrated
temperature-dependence relationships. All rated limits shall be supported with approved validation and
verification successful testing results.

F.3 Material Controls

Materials for each subcomponent and component shall be stated by the supplier/manufacturer and shall be
suitable for the operational needs and environmental conditions defined in the functional specification. The
supplier/manufacturer shall have documented specifications for all materials, and materials shall comply with
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

74
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 75

these specifications. The change in a component specification shall require a new validation test to prove the
performance of that component design.

The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented procedures that verify the material used is suitable in the
configuration, environment, and application of the functional specification. These procedures shall, as a
minimum, consider the combination of electrical capacity, insulation qualities, pressure, temperature,
geometric design, operational properties, application, and environment.

Material substitutions or processes that differ from those used in the validation of tested products will require
revalidation since material and/or process changes can subtly and critically affect high-temperature
electronics. The manufacturer’s selection criteria for these substitutions shall be documented, and the

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
substituted material shall conform to the design, functional, and technical requirements of this standard.
Material substitutions require approval by a qualified person, and the supporting documentation and validation
testing shall be incorporated into the design documentation.

F.4 Design Validation

Design validation testing shall be performed on each size, type, and model of the product to the rated limits
defined by the supplier/manufacturer, including life cycle. Validation testing shall be performed by a qualified
person on calibrated equipment and the testing results approved by a second qualified person. Successful
completion of the documented validation testing process within the defined acceptance criteria shall qualify
that design for use.

F.5 Design Documentation

Documentation of designs for each size, type, and model of product shall include design requirements,
functional and technical specifications, methods, assumptions, comparison with previous designs (where
directly applicable), design calculations, design reviews, and validation evaluation/testing
procedures/acceptance criteria and their approved results. Design requirements shall include those
operational loads, materials, environmental, and other pertinent requirements upon which the design is based.
Documentation used for final acceptance shall be available for audit by the user/purchaser.

F.6 Functional Testing

Each product manufactured shall be tested by a qualified person to a documented procedure that
corresponds to the stated functionality of the product. This testing shall have defined acceptance criteria and
shall be completed acceptably and the documented results approved by a qualified person prior to the product
being put into service.

F.7 Repair/Rebuild Requirements

Product life cycle capabilities/limitations, repair controls, and limitations shall be stated by the
supplier/manufacturer and include documented procedures for periodic evaluation, repair, and maintenance
of all products covered by this standard. At the conclusion of each process, the product shall be validated as
performing to the limits defined in the functional requirements and to the supplier/manufacturer’s
requirements.

Replacement components and subassemblies shall be evaluated and perform to the requirements of the
component they replace. Repaired, rebuilt, or redressed systems shall pass a functional test no less stringent
than that used at the time of the original manufacture. The supplier/manufacturer shall conform to a
documented testing program for each of the electronic/electrical capabilities and features to ensure the
product performs as designed. The quality controls and restrictions applied to the repaired/redressed product
shall be no less stringent than those in place at the time of the original manufacture. Each new or replaced
product shall be marked with a traceable unique identifier that is recorded as part of the product’s
maintenance documentation.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Testing Surface Safety Valve Requirements

G.1 General

This annex provides the requirements for the design, materials, validation testing, and functional testing of
each TSSV design and manufactured product.

The TSSV is designed to serve as a surface closure device during a well test or well intervention. The TSSV is
deployed in the well testing string and is positioned inside the surface BOP with the pipe rams closed across
its ported slick joint (see G.4). These valves shall have a single or dual normally closed closure mechanism
with positive pressure pump-through capability at all times. The TSSV is operated by a hydraulic control line
from the surface. Positive control line pressure is needed to keep the valve open, while any loss of control
pressure will result in the valve closing. The closure mechanism may have enhanced cutting capabilities for
coiled tubing and/or wireline. Depending on the valve’s design, applied boost pressure may be required to cut
coiled tubing or wireline if it is present in the bore.

The valve design shall have chemical injection capability below the closure mechanism and/or between
closure mechanisms if the design has a dual closure system. The chemical injection circuit shall include dual
nonreturn valves (NRVs) integral to the body of the valve. The NRV may be housed integral to the ported slick
joint only if directly connected to the valve body.

Sections 5, 6, and 7 shall apply to this equipment. In addition to the requirements of 6.3.2.3, the design margin
shall be established such that:
2
1) the stress at internal rated working pressure shall not exceed /3 of the minimum material yield strength
and

2) the valve design shall withstand a test pressure of 1.5 times the internal rated working pressure with
the closure mechanism mechanically held open and the product at ambient temperature. The valve
mechanism that maintains the normally closed position may be removed for this test to enable the
valve to remain open fully without pressure assist.

A single validation grade (V1) as defined herein is applied to TSSVs.

FAT shall conform to the requirements of Annex B with the exception of performing the internal (ID) integrity
test to 1.5 times the rated working pressure with ends capped, the entire ID of the valve exposed to the same
pressure, no pressure on the piston/actuation chamber, and the product at ambient temperature.

Post-manufacturing servicing of TSSVs shall conform to the requirements of Annex C with the exception of
Level 3 service, which shall conform to the requirements of G.6.

G.2 Design Parameters

Tool designs produced in accordance with this specification shall have passed the supplier/manufacturer
documented verification and validation procedures at the tool’s rated limits for each size, type, and model.

All of the tool’s capabilities shall be defined. The following capabilities and ratings shall be validated:

a) maximum temperature,

b) minimum temperature (if rated to less than ambient),

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

76
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
SPECIFICATION FOR DOWNHOLE WELL TEST TOOLS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT 77

c) internal rated working pressure at maximum rated temperature (burst direction),

d) external rated working pressure at maximum rated temperature (collapse direction),

e) differential across the closure from below at maximum rated temperature,

f) pressure rating of operating chamber at maximum rated temperature (if less than the internal rated working
pressure),

g) integrity test pressure (1.5 times working pressure at ambient temperature),

h) pump-through rate (with valve closed),

i) chemical injection rate,

j) rated collapse/external pressure during closure function,

k) ported slick joint collapse rating,

l) valve closure time,

m) cutting capabilities.

The following capabilities shall be validated or verified:

a) tensile rating at 0 psi,

b) tensile rating at rated working pressure and ambient temperature (calculated),

c) tensile rating at rated working pressure and maximum rated temperature (calculated),

d) service rating for H2S and CO2.

Additional ratings may include, but are not limited to, shear sub cutting requirements, erosion, or accumulation
of particulates.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Successful completion of the validation test and approval by a qualified person shall qualify the design for
manufacture of additional tools of the same size, type, and model as the tested design. The
supplier/manufacturer shall have documented specifications for all materials, and materials shall comply with
these requirements and the requirements of Section 6.

G.3 Design Validation

G.3.1 General

The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented procedures to validate the stated operational performance
ratings of these tools. Each tool design, design variation, and material configuration shall be supported by
successful testing or verification at the rated limits of the stated capabilities. All validation/verification results
and procedures shall be documented to an adequate amount of detail to allow the process to be replicated. All
measured parameters shall be recorded on systems calibrated within the range of use. Verifications and
validations shall be compiled or referenced into a report of the tool’s performance capabilities that is approved
by a qualified person other than the qualified person who performed the testing. Tool ratings shall be within
the successfully tested/verified parameters. Test facility and evaluation requirements shall conform to 7.5.1,
A.1.2, and A.2.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

G.3.2 Internal Pressure Integrity Test

The valve shall be validated to an internal (ID) integrity test of 1.5 times the rated working pressure at ambient
temperature with ends capped, the entire ID of the valve exposed to the same pressure, and no pressure on
the piston/actuation chamber. The test shall be performed with liquid. The pressure test acceptance criteria is
a maximum of 1 % change in the applied pressure, with a decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15
minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization.

G.3.3 Valve Performance Test

The supplier/manufacturer shall have documented procedures with acceptance criteria for the valve design
that permits prediction and repeatability of rates, pressures, activation signals, and the other conditions
required for closure. Closure mechanisms shall open and close to a prescribed set of parameters that include
time to close and acceptance criteria when closed. The closure mechanism shall be validated to contain the
rated differential pressure across the closure mechanism at maximum rated temperature for a minimum of 20
open/closure cycles and 250 psi (±5 %) at ambient temperature for a minimum of 5 cycles.

If the minimum rated temperature is less than ambient, the minimum rated temperature shall be validated by
applying the rated differential pressure across the closure mechanism (from an initially closed position) at the
minimum rated temperature one time, followed by a pressure bleed-down, and confirming that the closure
mechanism can be opened.

The closure mechanism shall be validated to open and close with rated external pressure applied at maximum
rated temperature.

The external rated working pressure (collapse direction) shall be validated at maximum rated temperature.

The liquid pressure test acceptance criteria is no more than 1 % change in the applied pressure, with a
decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization.

A separate gas test shall be conducted at the rated pressure and at ambient temperature on either an

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
assembled valve or a subassembly of the closure mechanism. Nitrogen or other inert gas may be used for the
gas test.
3
The gas leak rate acceptance criteria is less than 20 cm of gas at atmospheric pressure over a 15-minute
hold period after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization after applying the rated differential pressure.
The leak rate shall not increase during the hold period.

If the closure mechanism is rated to cut wireline/slickline, a cutting test that validates the specific size and
grade of wire shall be performed. The pressure required to perform the cut shall be recorded. If a post-cut
leakage rate is specified, the rate shall be derived from the average of three cutting test, each of which may
be performed with a new closure mechanism.

If the closure mechanism is rated to cut coiled tubing, a cutting test that validates the specific OD, wall
thickness, and grade of tubing shall be performed. The pressure required to perform the cut shall be recorded.
If a post-cut leakage rate is specified by the supplier/manufacturer, the rate shall be derived from the average
of three cutting tests, each of which may be performed with a new closure mechanism.

If the closure mechanism is rated to cut any combination of the above, a cutting test that validates the specific
combination shall be performed. The pressure required to perform the cut shall be recorded. If a post-cut
leakage rate is specified by the supplier/manufacturer, the rate shall be derived from the average of three
cutting tests, each of which may be performed with a new closure mechanism.

Successful completion of any of the above cutting tests shall include verification that the closure mechanism
can be functioned to a supplier/manufacturer-defined open position after the cut.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

G.3.4 Actuation Chamber Rating

The control line and actuation chamber (typically piston chamber) shall be validated to 1.5 times the maximum
rated pressure of the actuation chamber and maximum rated temperature with no internal bore pressure. The
test shall be performed with liquid. The liquid pressure test acceptance criteria is a maximum of 1 % change in
the applied pressure, with a decreasing rate of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has
been allowed for stabilization.

G.3.5 Pump-through Opening Pressure

The valve shall be tested in accordance with supplier/manufacturer procedures to establish the pressure
below the closure mechanism at which the closure mechanism opens when the pressure above is at the
maximum rated pressure.

G.3.6 Pump-through Performance

The valve shall be tested in accordance with supplier/manufacturer procedures to establish the flow rate vs
pressure drop across the closure mechanism with the open control line depressurized.

G.3.7 Shear Sub

The shear sub shall conform to API Specification 5CT.

G.4 Ported Slick Joint

The ported slick joint is typically an integral component the TSSV and will therefore be validated with the valve.
The purpose of the ported slick joint is to allow for isolation of the BOP from the casing by closure of the pipe
rams and routing of control lines through the BOP. The ported slick joint shall allow sealing between a
designated portion of its OD and the BOP pipe rams. It shall be designed to withstand the combined loading of
the closed pipe rams, internal/external pressure, and applicable external loading conditions. It shall provide
longitudinal through-porting (e.g. hydraulic and/or electrical) for actuation of the TSSV, and chemical injection.
It shall include a pump-out shoulder to limit axial movement of the valve within the BOP.

If the ported slick joint is not an integral part of the TSSV, it shall be validated to 1.5 times its maximum rated
pressure either when assembled to the valve or in a separate test. Integrity of the through-porting shall be
validated to 1.5 times the maximum rated pressure. The tests shall be performed with liquid. The liquid
pressure test acceptance criteria is a maximum of 1 % change in the applied pressure, with a decreasing rate
of change, over a period of 15 minutes after sufficient time has been allowed for stabilization.

G.5 Auxiliary Equipment

Auxiliary equipment such as hydraulic control panel, hydraulic power unit (HPU), hydraulic hoses and fitting,
and emergency shutdown (ESD) interfaces are not covered by this specification.

G.6 Level 3 Service (Periodic Evaluation)

This service ensures that the safety, integrity, and the capability of the tool remains as per the design
requirements. Level 3 service shall be performed in the event of any of the following:

a) every 40 jobs or 5 years, whichever comes first;

b) following any job in which the tensile load exceeded 95 % of its rating or after jarring;

c) following any job in which the tool was exposed to conditions that exceeded the supplier/manufacturer’s
recommendation for CO2, acid, H2S, or solids.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Level 3 service shall include all Level 1 and Level 2 service and shall include the following in accordance with
supplier/manufacturer’s documented procedures.

a) Test and verification of mechanical springs.

b) Perform factory acceptance test in accordance with G.1.

c) NDE on load-bearing and pressure-retaining components including threads.

d) Wall thickness measurement of all internal diameter components. Components with wall thickness below
the manufacturer’s acceptable corrosion/erosion allowance require replacement.

e) Gauging of threaded load-bearing connections.

f) Radiography on welds.

All criteria shall conform to the supplier/manufacturer’s documented acceptance requirements, before the tool
is returned to service.

G.7 Test Reporting

a) testing location(s), date, and person performing the testing;

b) the tool’s unique identification, such as part number and serial number;

c) procedures used and records required by those procedures;

d) detailed results and discussion of results, including whether or not the test was successful;

e) approval indications such as signatures.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Applications Overview

H.1 General
This annex provides general information for user/purchasers of downhole well test tools to help familiarize
them with the purpose of these tools. Included is a general description of the function of key tools and the tool
categories as described in this standard. The rationale for conducting a well test is presented along with a

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
description of the typical information that can be gained from the test.

H.2 Downhole Well Test Tool Descriptions

For the purpose of this specification, well test tools are defined as a collection of tools that are part of a
temporary completion, placed into the well to allow and control the flow of hydrocarbons (fluids) from the
reservoir. Reservoir characteristics can be interpreted from the data recorded during the well test in
combination with measured properties of the hydrocarbon fluids obtained from samples captured during the
test. Downhole well test tools include tester valves, circulating valves, well testing packers, safety joints, well
testing safety valves, slip joints, jars, work string tester valves, sampler carriers, gauge carriers, drain valves,
and other related equipment. Considerations shall be provided to ensure that the tools are fully compatible
with each other and that they can be deployed into the well, safely control the well during the test, and be
safely retrieved after the test.

H.3 Applications of Downhole Well Test Tools

During a well test, alternatively known as a drill stem test (DST), a BHA consisting of several tools, which
typically include tester and circulating valves, pressure recorders, and a packer, is conveyed downhole on a
work string in a cased wellbore. This downhole tool string is part of a temporary completion that allows fluids
to safely flow from a reservoir into the work string and up to the surface where they are separated into
constituent phases and measured and then either exported, stored, or flared.

The purpose of the DST is to obtain valuable knowledge of the reservoir while flowing on a scale
commensurate with what will occur during production. The objective of a DST is to create a sufficient
disturbance in the reservoir that will cause a substantial movement of reservoir fluid through the formation to
take place. By making key measurements during this transient event, such as fluid movement into the
wellbore (flow rate) and the resulting near-sandface pressure change (bottomhole pressure), it is possible to
match the observed measurements with the solution to the differential equation that describes the flow of
fluids through porous media. Therefore, by inversion of the remaining unknown parameters in the flow
equation with the measurements made during the well test, key formation parameters may be inferred. These
parameters include the permeability-thickness product (kh) and formation damage skin (s). Other parameters
that are present in the flow equations, such as fluid and formation properties, are determined from the
analysis of other geophysical data and captured samples.

A well test is usually conducted by first flowing the well for a period of time (drawdown period) followed by
ideally closing the well downhole and allowing the reservoir pressure to build back up (buildup period). This
sequence can be repeated as necessary. If the well is allowed to flow for a sufficient amount of time, contact
of the pressure disturbance with the reservoir boundary can be detected from the downhole pressure
measurement, which leads to a determination of the reservoir extent, a key assessment of the hydrocarbon
reserves in place.

A major value of a DST is that dynamic test results are obtained on a large reservoir scale, and large volumes
of uncontaminated fluid samples can be captured. Thus, derived parameters such as permeability represent
values that are averaged from deep within the reservoir as opposed to near-wellbore measurements obtained
from logging tools.
81
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
82 API SPECIFICATION 19TT

Downhole well test tools may also be used during operations such as stimulation, production flow back, and
perforating.

H.4 Downhole Well Test Tool Types

H.4.1 General

Well test tools are offered in a wide variety of designs and configurations to match the needs of the
user/purchaser. Therefore, the requirements of this standard are authored in a general and
performance-based manner. Detailed operational capabilities and limitations are included in the
supplier/manufacturer’s tool documentation.

H.4.2 Circulating Valves

A circulating valve allows a fluid path to be opened between the annulus and the ID of the work string. The
circulating valve provides a means to circulate, or reverse, fluids to or from the ID of the work string. Fluids
can be pumped from the surface into the work string (circulation) and allowed to enter into the annulus at the
position of the circulating valve. Circulation can be used to displace the original fluid in the annulus and work
string with another fluid having a different density or characteristics. Alternatively, fluid can be pumped from
the surface into the annulus (reversing), causing the annulus fluid to enter into the work string at the position
of the circulating valve and displace the existing tubing contents to the surface. Reversing is typically used to
flush volatile hydrocarbons from the work string before removing the well test tools after a test.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Circulating valves are designated as being either multi-cycle or single-cycle type. A multi-cycle valve can be
opened and closed multiple times, while a single-cycle valve is typically initially closed and it is functioned
once to open it. If left open, the circulating valve will drain the work string of fluid while POOH to avoid pulling
a wet string.

H.4.3 Tester Valves

The tester valve is typically a ball type valve having only open or closed states (i.e. the tester valve is not used
to choke or regulate the flow). Shutting in the flow downhole close to the formation with the use of a tester
valve (as opposed to simply using a surface valve to shut in the well) minimizes the effects of wellbore storage
and fluid segregation when interpreting the pressure buildup. The tester valve can also isolate an initial
cushion fluid from the formation before the well test begins and it stops the formation fluid flow during the
buildup portion of the well test.

H.4.4 Well Testing Packers

Well testing packers seal between the OD of the well test BHA and the casing ID to isolate the annulus fluid
from the formation and serve as a mechanical anchor to the casing. Common methods of setting a well test
packer include applying string weight and/or by the application of hydraulic pressure. Well testing packers are
typically run and retrieved with the testing string. A well test can also be performed with a completions type
packer.

H.4.5 Safety Joints

A safety joint is a device typically installed above the packer that allows an intentional controlled separation of
the string or BHA. In the event a packer or the tubing conveyed perforating (TCP) guns below become stuck,
a jar (H.4.6) that is typically placed above the safety joint can be activated in an attempt to free the string. If
this is unsuccessful, the safety joint above the packer can be disengaged and all tools above can be retrieved
from the hole.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

H.4.6 Jars

A jar is routinely run within the DST BHA to assist in freeing the packer should it not release, or in the event of
sanding. The jar is typically placed above a safety joint (H.4.5), which is in turn placed just above the packer.
Internally, a jar consists of a hammer and anvil that are linked to opposite ends of the tool and that are free to
move independently of one another. The hammer and anvil are initially maintained apart by the so-called jar
stroke.

Elastic energy is initially stored in the work string by applying an overpull at the surface. The resulting tensile
force in the jar results in the hammer releasing so that it accelerates and strikes the anvil, creating an impact
force to help free the string. Because the potential energy stored in the string is suddenly converted to kinetic
energy followed by a sudden impact, the dynamic force delivered is greater than the static overpull. When
weight is set back down on the jar, it is reset so that another overpull can be applied and the process
repeated.

If sticking is severe (i.e. due to excessive sand production or hole collapse) and multiple blows with the jar are
unable to free the string, the safety joint below the jar can be disengaged and all DST tools and gauges above
the packer can be pulled out of the hole. A more powerful jar can then be run and more aggressive jarring
performed in an attempt to free the packer and any equipment below.

H.4.7 Work String Safety Valves

A work string safety valve placed within the well testing BHA is used to shut in the well should there be a leak
in the work string above the safety valve. It can also be used as a backup valve in case of a tester valve failure.
When triggered, usually using a rupture disc exposed to annulus pressure, the normally open, single-cycle
valve will close. Some safety valve designs allow pump-through capability from above to allow fluid to be
bullheaded into the formation. Valve mechanisms are usually of a ball or flapper type. Some safety valves
also allow circulating capability when activated.

H.4.8 TSSVs

A TSSV is sometimes deployed in the string (see Annex G). This pump-through type valve may have
chemical injection capability, and it is placed nearer to the surface as another means of closing in the well
should an emergency occur. Such valves are operated by a hydraulic control line from the surface in a
fail-closed manner; positive control line pressure is needed to keep the valve open while any loss of control
pressure will result in the valve closing. These valves are typically used on jack-up or land-based operations.

H.4.9 Slip Joints

A slip joint is a telescoping expansion/contraction tool that accommodates changes in string length caused by
temperature and pressure changes during the well test. Multiple slip joints can be deployed in a well test string
to handle the amount of expansion/contraction predicted by calculations performed prior to the well test.

H.4.10 Sampler Carriers

A sampler carrier is a tubular component designed to hold and convey multiple smaller-diameter sampler
tools into the well. Fluid samplers are used to capture a downhole fluid sample during a well test for retrieval
at the surface when the test is completed. The individual sampler tools generally range from 25 mm to 44 mm
(1 in. to 1.75 in.) in diameter, and multiple tools are typically installed around the circumference of the sample
carrier, either on the OD or within the ID of the carrier. While the fluid samplers are outside the scope of this
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

standard, the carrier is an integral part of the testing string that must provide tensile load and differential
pressure integrity that is consistent with the other well test tools.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

H.4.11 Gauge Carriers

Similar to a sampler carrier, a gauge carrier conveys pressure/temperature recorder(s) downhole. It consists
of a tubular component upon which the recorder(s) are mounted. The recorders can typically be ported to
measure tubing or annulus pressure. Gauges, also referred to as recorders, continuously measure and store
downhole pressure and temperature during a well test. This data is retrieved from the gauge’s internal
memory when the test string is brought to the surface at the end of the well test. Retrieval of the data during
the well test is also possible with wireline intervention and newer wireless telemetry technologies. Downhole
gauges and their associated metrology are outside the scope of this standard.

H.4.12 Drain Valve

A drain valve is designed to safely vent any trapped pressure between or within tools before breaking out
threaded connections in the string or disassembling a tool. A drain valve may be incorporated into a tool
assembly, or it may be a standalone tool.

H.4.13 Work String Tester Valves

These are valves designed to close the work string near or within the BHA to test the work string by the
application of surface pressure. The valve allows multiple pressure tests of the work string to be performed
when RIH. A variety of designs exist for these valves such as the following.

— Ball valve types that remain closed while RIH until the valve is permanently opened by pressurizing the
annulus to rupture a disc. These valves may have to be manually filled, depending on the design.

— Flapper valve types that allow the string to automatically fill from below while RIH. As the string is
deployed, fluid lifts the flapper and allows the string to fill. Applying pressure from the surface pushes the
flapper down against its seat to allow the production string to be tested. When the test string is at final
depth and the tubing tests have been completed, the flapper can be permanently locked open.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Operational Recommendations

I.1 General

This annex provides recommendations to help ensure that a downhole well test tools can be deployed safely
and effectively so that operational objectives are achieved and the string safely recovered. This annex shall
be used for guidance only and may not contain all aspects that require consideration.

All information requested in this annex such as calculations, analyses, procedures, and testing results shall be
recorded and retained for reference.

I.2 Safety Considerations

Conducting operations in a safe manner shall be the priority when designing, planning, and executing
downhole testing operations. A full review of the system shall be conducted and any concerns addressed. The
operator and service supplier shall analyze and document the planned operations to understand the potential
risks and mitigations in each part of the operational sequence and ensure familiarization of the operational
personnel.

I.3 Communication of Job Objectives

The operator shall provide clear objectives for the job to the service provider(s). Refer to 5.3 and 5.4 for a
partial list of well and operational parameters that may be considered when planning a job.

I.4 Job Design Considerations to Meet Operational (Job) Objectives

The following considerations are to be applied in the job design process. This is not intended to be a fully
inclusive list.

1) Early involvement in design of the well construction details is imperative to ensure that operations can
be performed safely and effectively.

2) Consider all load cases in the job design such as tensile forces, anticipated temperature changes, and
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

absolute and differential pressures acting on the downhole well test tools and well system. Absolute
and differential pressure exposure is a function of hydrostatic pressure, formation pressure, thermal
effects, and applied pump pressures. With different hydrostatic fluid densities in the system, these
pressure sources will generate a range of surface and differential pressures that need to be effectively
managed.

3) The operator and service provider should communicate as early as possible regarding the expected
fluid exposure, well conditions, their impact on well test tool operation, and materials including
elastomer compatibility. Any additional material(s) evaluations/tests deemed necessary to ensure tool
compatibility with a specific well environment may be performed as agreed upon by the user/purchaser
and supplier/manufacturer.

4) If reservoir pressure and fluid composition/densities have not been assessed with sufficient accuracy,
then a maximum potential pressure and lowest possible hydrostatic fluid gradient should be defined
during the planning phase to provide worst-case conditions for the design.

5) Review of the effectiveness and independence of identified well barrier elements within the downhole
testing string are to be performed to protect against string failure and any subsequent impact on the
well system. Reviews of failure case scenarios are to be addressed for each phase of the operations,
from deployment to safe recovery.
85
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
86 API SPECIFICATION 19TT

6) The fluid flow paths and drainage arrangements are to be considered in the design of the DST string to
ensure reservoir access and to effectively and safely be able to kill the well, especially in the event of
tool failures. For example, ball valves in the string may fail closed and restrict the ability to kill the well,
the potential for testing string elements to trap hydrocarbons when long tail pipe systems are run. Such
cases may introduce additional safety and operational restrictions that are to be addressed in the
planning phase.

7) Consideration is to be given for valves within downhole and landing testing strings that may require
increased applied pressure to achieve effective pump-through for bull heading operations.

8) Detonation of perforating systems may create pressure shock waves that need to be effectively
modelled and considered.

9) Careful review of potential unplanned detonation events shall be considered, especially if there is a
need to shear the string or if the guns are dropped inadvertently. Inherently safe detonation systems
should be considered. Contingency plans for string retrieval should be in place in the event of a
perforating system misfire or low-order detonation.

10) Adequate risk assessment and pressure test management procedures are required to minimize the
potential risks. Pressure/volume relationships during pressure tests and the impact of leakage shall be
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

considered, for example, pressure leakage causing the detonation of perforating guns.

11) When solids control devices are used, such as screens used with gravel packing, care must be taken
to ensure these devices do not affect the test objectives.

12) The potential to trap pressure and/or hydrocarbons between valves or elements within the DST string
after it is brought to surface are to be considered.

13) Give consideration to ensure that adequate set-down weight is available for all operational scenarios,
including hydraulic effects on the set-down force.

14) Give consideration to accommodate inflow pressure testing.

15) The effect of any solids content on the operation of downhole tools are also to be considered. Fluid
type, chemical composition, and the presence of any solids content on the operation of downhole tools
are also to be considered.

16) Preparation and planning for unexpected H2S or other hazardous well fluids escaping at surface are to
be considered.

17) Give consideration to the deployment and retrieval of intervention tools through the DST string.

I.5 Well Kill Considerations

Items to be considered for a proper kill operation to minimize formation damage and maintain control of the
well are:

1) formation pressure;

2) fracture pressure;

3) kill method such as bull head kill or reverse kill;

4) pressure safety margin, including valve pump-through, for well kill;

5) kill fluid properties, including tendency for formation lock-up;

6) proper lost control material (LCM) or device (e.g. fluid loss control valve) for the formation that is being
tested;

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

7) equipment operating envelope;

8) handling/disposal of hydrocarbons at surface;

9) swabbing effects;

10) flow monitoring/trip tank level;

11) tail pipe design (flow path at top of tail pipe);

12) tubing space out to allow BOP rams to properly close on string;

13) adequate kill fluid volume and weight;

14) adequate pumping equipment/capacity;

15) maximum pressure limitations that have an adverse effect on downhole well test tools in the string
such as inadvertent rupture disc activation;

16) casing/tubing pressure limitations.

I.6 Well Barrier Considerations

In the design of the downhole testing string, it is good practice to have at least two independent pressure
barrier envelopes during all stages of the operations.

Any well barrier within the well and downhole test system will need to be physically tested (in the direction of
flow, if possible) and verified as part of the programmed activities for the operation.

Well barrier and closure diagrams should be created for each step in the operation.

I.7 Considerations for Contingency Operations/Intervention

I.7.1 General

Planning should be performed to accommodate contingency operations such as, but not limited to:

— coiled tubing,

— electric/slick line,

— stimulation,

— fishing.

Job design and tool string configuration shall consider and, where possible, facilitate the requirements for
contingency operations.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

I.7.2 Tool/String Parameters

I.7.2.1 Pressure Integrity (Equipment Operational Assurance)

Downhole testing and landing string (or subsea/subsurface) tools can be configured in many different ways.
Consideration given to equipment functionality and pressure integrity at all stages in the operations can
prevent possible operating errors that can lead to potential delays or failures.

Where applicable, tool charging, setup, and operating pressures need to be calculated before the equipment
is mobilized to the location of use. Once on location, the charging and operating pressures shall be verified

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

and may require adjustment due to current wellbore information. Included within the scope of charge
pressures are:

— calculate and record tool nitrogen charging/operating pressures, considering ambient and downhole
temperature effects;

— verify bottomhole pressure and temperature for calculations;

— verify rupture disc and shear device calculations;

— establish surface temperature for calculations;

— verify fluid properties/densities.

To ensure pressure integrity, all tools and connections shall be pressure tested prior to flowing hydrocarbons.

Downhole testing tools should, where appropriate, be individually function and pressure tested, both in the
service center and at the well site, before RIH. These tests should address body, valve integrity, and
operational testing where appropriate. Testing the tools individually will enable small leaks to be more
effectively discovered due to smaller fluid volumes. Care should be taken to avoid the influence of thermal
effects such as solar heating when surface pressure testing, as this may mask potential leaks.

Not all surface tests can adequately prove integrity and functionality of the BHA. During deployment and
makeup when performing pressure tests, all opportunities should be taken to confirm functionality of the well
test tools. Any such tests shall have clearly defined objectives that may verify correct tool functioning.

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Fluid volumes to be pumped for pressure testing and/or tool functioning should be estimated beforehand
using expected pressure/volume or displacement relationships to help identify any abnormal conditions and
manage potential system anomalies. An example is monitoring of the trip tank with an open annulus for
expected level changes. All testing results and relevant observations shall be documented.

I.7.2.2 Tool Compatibility

Job design should take into account items such as, but not limited to:

— operational compatibility among tools and equipment within the downhole testing string;

— interfaces, such as compatible threaded connections, rig handling equipment, and dependency on rig
control/pumping systems;

— materials, such as compatibility of seals and other materials with wellbore and reservoir fluids;

— qualification of tools and seals for job duration, time-temperature limits of electronics, and battery
autonomy.

I.7.2.3 Stress and Thermal Analyses/Compliance with Rated Tool Envelopes

An analysis accounting for all potential load and thermal conditions shall be performed to verify that the
downhole test string and associated elements are within the required operating limits. The results of this
analysis shall be used to confirm the downhole testing tools and equipment remain within their operational
envelopes for all potential load cases.

I.7.2.4 Casing Pressure Limits

Verification shall be performed to ensure that allowable casing pressures are not exceeded as a result of the
application of annulus pressure or changes in annulus fluid. This analysis shall also consider failure cases
such as tubing leaks close to the wellhead and kill and/or stimulation pressures required.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

I.7.2.5 Selection of Work String Connection Type

Past practice was to use the same pipe to perform a downhole well test as was used to drill the well. As higher
pressures were encountered and the need arose for improved gas tight performance, many companies
advocate the use of proprietary gas tight connections.

The decision tree in Figure I.1 provides guidance on the use of API threaded connections for well test
operations. This process will vary according to company policy and regional requirements, but Figure I.1
illustrates an example of the decision process designed to minimize risk.

Due to the uncertain conditions that might be encountered in well testing, it is recommended that the chosen
tubing connections be either an industry-accepted proprietary connection or one tested to the requirements of
API Recommended Practice 5C5. Proprietary gas tight connections and material grades suitable for sour
service are recommended, especially in exploration operations.

I.7.2.6 Tool End Connections

Tool end connections facilitate the interconnection of the various tools within the BHA. Tool end connections
are specified by the supplier/manufacturer and are integral to the tool. Tool end connections must withstand
the tool’s rated tensile, compression, and bending loads while maintaining pressure integrity.

I.7.2.7 Work String Crossovers

Standalone connectors or crossovers that utilize tubing threads are explicitly covered by either API
Specification 5CT or other supplier/manufacturer’s standards. When one or both ends of the crossover
include a proprietary thread form, it may be designed and manufactured to the requirements of Sections 5, 6,
and 7 of this specification. Proprietary thread forms shall conform to the requirements and specifications of
the licensed thread provider.

I.7.2.8 Space-out

Positioning downhole testing strings requires careful and accurate planning and verification. This planning
includes, but is not limited to, achieving on-depth perforation, managing string contraction/expansion, and
accurate positioning at the BOP and stick-up at surface.

On deep water tests, it is recommended that a dummy run be performed to establish the exact hangoff
position of the string in relation to the BOP and/or to facilitate correlation of perforating guns on-depth. On
floating vessels, stick-up is subjected to tidal and wave effects (heave), and this distance should be sufficient
so as to allow the safe movement of the rig relative to the test string without risking a collision of the master
valve against the rotary table and to prevent damage to the flexible hoses/connections.

I.7.3 Well Considerations (Operational Considerations)

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

I.7.3.1 Heating Effects

Temperature limitations within the downhole testing tool string, and where appropriate the landing string, shall
be considered during the design phase. For example, heating of a closed annulus can result in increased
pressure, which may cause inadvertent tool operation. Alternatively, when multiple annuli exist, heating during
production can cause increased pressure in intermediate casing strings, which could result in casing collapse.
Therefore, fluid expansion factors need to be considered during job planning, and annulus pressures should
be monitored during operations. During production, temperature of BOP elastomeric sealing elements and
surface equipment can approach their rated operating limits. Heating effects can sometimes be managed by
controlling flow rates.

Mud and brine systems can behave differently from heating due to their very different thermal properties.
Consideration should be given to mud stability over long periods of time.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Figure I.1—Example of a Decision Tree for Selection of Work String Connection Type

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

I.7.3.2 Annulus Pressure Operations

Most downhole testing tools are controlled by the application of annular pressure. Annular pressures are most
often managed using the rig pumps and standpipe manifold; however, there are some cases where greater
pressure control is needed, in which case the cement pump system may be recommended.

Verification shall be performed to ensure that allowable casing pressures are not exceeded as a result of the
application of annulus pressure or changes in annulus fluid. This analysis shall also consider the potential
failure cases such as tubing leaks close to the wellhead, kill, and/or stimulation pressures.

Prior to the actual well test operation, casing integrity shall be verified via both positive and negative pressure
testing procedures, considering the maximum expected overbalance and underbalance that the casing may
be exposed to. Failure to comply with the testing criteria requires corrective operations before testing the well.

Before performing integrity tests, the expected volumes needed to achieve the desired pressure changes
should be calculated. Procedures should be available to address any unexpected variations. During these
operations, monitoring of all potential systems that could be influenced by the operation should be conducted.
The use of near real-time downhole pressure monitoring systems for verification of annular and string
pressures can be beneficial for confirmation of tool operations and diagnostics.

The service specialist is responsible for advising the driller of the annular pressures required for proper tool
function during well testing operations. Detailed emergency procedures shall be established to address fault

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
conditions.

During flow periods, annulus pressure should be recorded along with the volume of fluid recovered during
bleed-off operations to assess fluid expansion trends and confirm pressure integrity. Monitoring and recording
of annular pressure through the well testing data acquisition system and mud logging systems can be carried
out and the relevant alarms established.

Pressure transmissibility should be considered when heavy mud fluid systems are utilized, potentially
resulting in applied pressure not reaching the downhole well test tools.

During buildup periods, thermal cooling and fluid contraction will result in loss of hydrostatic head in the
annulus as the liquid level falls. The annulus fluid level should be closely monitored and maintained to ensure
well integrity.

I.7.3.3 Valve Status Diagram

It is recommended to have valve status diagrams present on the rig floor so valve statuses will be known to all.
Figure I.2 is an example of a valve status diagram (for a floating vessel).

I.8 Additional Considerations

I.8.1 String Deployment with Underbalanced Cushion Fluids

A simple way of introducing underbalanced cushion fluids into the string without the need for activating
circulating valves is running the downhole testing strings using the top-fill method. The top-fill method may
utilize either a single shot isolation valve, or the downhole tester valve, and the method provides a simple way
to introduce a lighter cushion into the tubing. Using this technique creates an additional risk associated with
unbalanced hydrostatic pressures between tubing and annulus and the potential for uncontrolled u-tube flow
should the isolating valve in the string prematurely activate.

Other methods of string deployment with an underbalanced cushion may include using the circulating valve to
place the cushion, using various types of auto fill valves, or nitrogen displacement.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Figure I.2—Example Valve Status Diagram

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

I.8.2 High Pressure, High Temperature Well Considerations

Downhole testing strings for high pressure, high temperature (HPHT) wells may require tools such as
additional downhole valves to serve as extra safeguards. For example, when testing with an underbalanced
fluid in the annulus, the additional safety valve can automatically isolate the formation in the event of tubing
leak into the annulus.

The following is recommended in HPHT wells.

1) If the well is tested in an underbalance situation, it is recommended to add extra safety to the tool string
by including an extra safety and circulating valve. At predetermined pressure, the tubing valve can be
closed, isolating the tubing from the reservoir. Circulating ports can be sequentially opened at a point
above the safety valve, providing communication between tubing and annulus and enabling reverse
circulation of kill weight fluids to secure the well.

2) On land or offshore jack-up wells, it is strongly recommended to use a TSSV with pump-through
capability (Annex G), preferably with chemical injection capability installed within or below the BOP, to
be able to isolate the tubing from the rig floor.

3) Consideration shall be given to the choice of annulus fluids and their compatibility with the reservoir
and influence on the operation of downhole tools.

I.8.3 Gun Activation Timing Considerations

TCP firing systems often utilize delay mechanisms that allow some level of flexibility on the delay timing. A
standard pressure-activated TCP firing system time delay may be several minutes. This relatively short time
period may not provide sufficient time to resolve potential operational issues while bleeding off to a required
underbalance. Under such circumstances there is a strong chance that perforation will occur overbalanced.
The general recommendation is to use an appropriate firing delay to permit adequate time to handle
operational requirements.

I.8.4 Wellsite Confirmation of Well Parameters

Exploration and appraisal wells may not always have clear indications of the formation fluid type. Downhole
test string designs need to consider the possibility of encountering H 2S or CO2 concentrations. Where
possible, it is recommended to use existing static data such as that from wireline formation test tools to make
an initial assessment of the reservoir fluid composition. If the presence of H 2S or CO2 in the fluid is expected,
the string and downhole testing tools must be properly designed and configured for that environment. During
the clean-up period, analysis of the produced gas using both a multi-gas portable analyzer and stain tube
systems is recommended.
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

[2] API Recommended Practice 5C5, Recommended Practice on Procedures for Testing Casing and
Tubing Connections
8
[3] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) , Section VIII: Rules for Construction of Pressure
Vessels; Division 1: Pressure Vessels; Paragraph UW-51, Radiographic Examination of Welded Joints

[4] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC), Section VIII: Rules for Construction of Pressure
Vessels; Division 1: Pressure Vessels; Appendix 12, Ultrasonic Inspection of Welds (UT)
9
[5] ASTM A370 , Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products

[6] ASTM A388/A388M, Standard Practice for Ultrasonic Examination of Heavy Steel Forgings

[7] ASTM A609/A609M, Standard Practice for Castings, Carbon, Low-Alloy, and Martensitic Stainless Steel,
Ultrasonic Examination Thereof

[8] ASTM D395, Standard Test Methods for Rubber Property—Compression Set

[9] ASTM D412, Standard Test Methods for Vulcanized Rubber and Thermoplastic Elastomers—Tension
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

[10] ASTM D638, Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics

[11] ASTM D1414, Standard Test Methods for Rubber O-Rings

[12] ASTM D1415, Standard Test Methods for Rubber Property—International Hardness

[13] ASTM D2240, Standard Test Methods for Rubber Property—Durometer Hardness

[14] ASTM E92, Standard Test Method for Vickers Hardness and Knoop Hardness of Metallic Materials

[15] ASTM E94, Standard Guide for Radiographic Examination

[16] ASTM E140, Standard Hardness Conversion Tables for Metals Relationship Among Brinell Hardness,
Vickers Hardness, Rockwell Hardness, Superficial Hardness, Knoop Hardness, and Scleroscope
Hardness

[17] ASTM E428, Standard Practice for Fabrication and Control of Metal, Other than Aluminum Reference,
Blocks Used in Ultrasonic Testing

[18] ASTM E709, Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Testing

10
[19] ISO 6892 , Metallic materials—Tensile testing at ambient temperature

[20] ISO 13665, Seamless and welded steel tubes for pressure purposes—Magnetic particle inspection of the
tube body for the detection of surface imperfections

[21] ISO TS 29001, Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries—Sector-specific quality
management systems—Requirements for product and service supply organizations

[22] ISO 4126-2:2003, Safety devices for protection against excessive pressure—Part 2: Bursting disc safety
devices, First Edition

6
American National Standards Institute, 25 West 43rd Street, 4th Floor, New York, New York 10036, www.ansi.org.
7
NCSL International, 2995 Wilderness Place, Suite 107, Boulder, Colorado 80301-5404, www.ncsli.org.
8
ASME International, 2 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016-5990, www.asme.org.
9
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428, www.astm.org.
10
International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. de la Voie-Creuse, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland, www.iso.org.
94
Copyright American Petroleum Institute
Provided by IHS Markit under license with API Licensee=PetroVietnam Drilling & Well Services Corp/8237730001, User=Nguyen Van,
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Markit Not for Resale, 02/09/2022 22:45:35 MST
--`,,`````,,,`,,,,`````,,,`````,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Product No. G19TT01

Copyright American Petroleum Institute

Electric Submersible Pump Testing: Api Recommended Practice 11S2 Third Edition, May 2025
No ratings yet
Electric Submersible Pump Testing: Api Recommended Practice 11S2 Third Edition, May 2025
22 pages
Api RP 8FV1-2024
No ratings yet
Api RP 8FV1-2024
50 pages
Purchasing Guide For Wellhead & Christmas Tree Equipment: Worldwide Expertise
No ratings yet
Purchasing Guide For Wellhead & Christmas Tree Equipment: Worldwide Expertise
20 pages
Gate Valves For Wellhead: Inspection Data Sheet (I D S)
No ratings yet
Gate Valves For Wellhead: Inspection Data Sheet (I D S)
5 pages
Hydril 523™ PDF
100% (1)
Hydril 523™ PDF
4 pages
Quality and Inspection Requirements For New and Refurbished Drilling and Well Completion Equipment Once Printed This Specification Becomes An Uncontrolled Copy of The Online Version
No ratings yet
Quality and Inspection Requirements For New and Refurbished Drilling and Well Completion Equipment Once Printed This Specification Becomes An Uncontrolled Copy of The Online Version
6 pages
3 - Drilling String Equipment - en
No ratings yet
3 - Drilling String Equipment - en
21 pages
Drain Valve - Bussines Catalog
No ratings yet
Drain Valve - Bussines Catalog
2 pages
Api RP 53 SPE 23900 de La IADC - SPE (BOP) Español
No ratings yet
Api RP 53 SPE 23900 de La IADC - SPE (BOP) Español
16 pages
GF
No ratings yet
GF
211 pages
TCPC Running Manual 2019 Rev B
No ratings yet
TCPC Running Manual 2019 Rev B
10 pages
Tubing Gauge Paraffin Cutter.
No ratings yet
Tubing Gauge Paraffin Cutter.
1 page
Expanding Gate Valve Specs
No ratings yet
Expanding Gate Valve Specs
6 pages
Allowable Drilling Torque: Calculations 30,577 4.855 21.733 4.154 0.362 0.2
No ratings yet
Allowable Drilling Torque: Calculations 30,577 4.855 21.733 4.154 0.362 0.2
1 page
Clusters Wellhead Valves Leak Off Test Procedure S
No ratings yet
Clusters Wellhead Valves Leak Off Test Procedure S
6 pages
Standards and Guidelines For Well Integrity and Well Control
No ratings yet
Standards and Guidelines For Well Integrity and Well Control
4 pages
API6A Trim Material Ratings
No ratings yet
API6A Trim Material Ratings
5 pages
API Spec 10D - E7
No ratings yet
API Spec 10D - E7
29 pages
TSH-IP-00.0081 - 02 First and LST Article Inspection
No ratings yet
TSH-IP-00.0081 - 02 First and LST Article Inspection
4 pages
Well Head 2M Single
No ratings yet
Well Head 2M Single
1 page
TSH-IP-00.0073 - 01 Minimum & Maximum Average Wall Inspection
No ratings yet
TSH-IP-00.0073 - 01 Minimum & Maximum Average Wall Inspection
4 pages
Oil and Gas Manifolds: Description Applications
100% (1)
Oil and Gas Manifolds: Description Applications
2 pages
Api 7K & Astme 165/e709
No ratings yet
Api 7K & Astme 165/e709
2 pages
Mud Gas Separator Sizing and Evaluation
100% (1)
Mud Gas Separator Sizing and Evaluation
6 pages
5-Drill String Failure
No ratings yet
5-Drill String Failure
113 pages
Challenges in Testing and Completion of An HP/HT Reservoir in Kuwait
No ratings yet
Challenges in Testing and Completion of An HP/HT Reservoir in Kuwait
3 pages
OMM50000665 Rev.B - Dart Check Valve
No ratings yet
OMM50000665 Rev.B - Dart Check Valve
12 pages
Stem Reports - Site 20
100% (1)
Stem Reports - Site 20
4 pages
لوله مغزی سیار COILED TUBING
No ratings yet
لوله مغزی سیار COILED TUBING
90 pages
#VIP 100218 Pressure Testing
No ratings yet
#VIP 100218 Pressure Testing
20 pages
Spe 128129 MS
100% (1)
Spe 128129 MS
13 pages
API RP 13C: An Explanation and Answers To Frequently Asked Questions
No ratings yet
API RP 13C: An Explanation and Answers To Frequently Asked Questions
8 pages
Barriers With Equipment
No ratings yet
Barriers With Equipment
27 pages
API 14A 12th Ed: HPHT SSSV Updates
100% (1)
API 14A 12th Ed: HPHT SSSV Updates
13 pages
Strength of Casing and Tubing - PetroWiki PDF
100% (1)
Strength of Casing and Tubing - PetroWiki PDF
15 pages
Iso TS 16530 2 2014
100% (1)
Iso TS 16530 2 2014
15 pages
CAPS - ISE - PPS Combined Union Wear Flyer - ENG - v03 PDF
No ratings yet
CAPS - ISE - PPS Combined Union Wear Flyer - ENG - v03 PDF
1 page
API 16cr Winter 2021
No ratings yet
API 16cr Winter 2021
4 pages
Cameron Back Pressure Valve
No ratings yet
Cameron Back Pressure Valve
1 page
006 IWC de Production Engineering
No ratings yet
006 IWC de Production Engineering
48 pages
Tenaris LIDS User Guide & Login Instructions
No ratings yet
Tenaris LIDS User Guide & Login Instructions
45 pages
Practical Well Planning and Drilling: Manua
No ratings yet
Practical Well Planning and Drilling: Manua
6 pages
Inspection Procedures WDAL OCTG 103
No ratings yet
Inspection Procedures WDAL OCTG 103
7 pages
Standards and Guidelines For Well Integrity and Well Control
No ratings yet
Standards and Guidelines For Well Integrity and Well Control
6 pages
RM Makeup Acceptance Criteria For Shouldered Connections
No ratings yet
RM Makeup Acceptance Criteria For Shouldered Connections
27 pages
Pumps+Valves4 MudGateValves 081129
No ratings yet
Pumps+Valves4 MudGateValves 081129
6 pages
3.5 Drill Pipe W Nc38 Connections
No ratings yet
3.5 Drill Pipe W Nc38 Connections
1 page
WSI Wellhead Systems Casing and Tubing Heads
No ratings yet
WSI Wellhead Systems Casing and Tubing Heads
32 pages
Defining HPHT PDF
100% (1)
Defining HPHT PDF
2 pages
Dokumen - Tips New Iwcf Chapter
No ratings yet
Dokumen - Tips New Iwcf Chapter
23 pages
Casing & Liner Design for Deviated Wells
No ratings yet
Casing & Liner Design for Deviated Wells
39 pages
API Spec 7-2 Threading Ang Gauging of Rotary Shouldered Connections
100% (2)
API Spec 7-2 Threading Ang Gauging of Rotary Shouldered Connections
124 pages
API 692 1st 2018 Dry Gas Sealing Systems For Axial, Centrifugal, Rotary Screw Compressor and Expanders
No ratings yet
API 692 1st 2018 Dry Gas Sealing Systems For Axial, Centrifugal, Rotary Screw Compressor and Expanders
258 pages
MPMS 19.3 F - Evaporative Loss Factor For Storage Tanks Certification Program
No ratings yet
MPMS 19.3 F - Evaporative Loss Factor For Storage Tanks Certification Program
12 pages
Api Spec 5L 2020
100% (3)
Api Spec 5L 2020
205 pages
MPMS 19.3 G Certified Loss Factor Testing Laboratory Registration
No ratings yet
MPMS 19.3 G Certified Loss Factor Testing Laboratory Registration
13 pages
Api RP 934-A-2025
No ratings yet
Api RP 934-A-2025
61 pages
API 5ct Español
No ratings yet
API 5ct Español
11 pages
API - COLM - TR 25XX - Produced Water Quantity Measurement - Ballot Draft
No ratings yet
API - COLM - TR 25XX - Produced Water Quantity Measurement - Ballot Draft
20 pages
Post-Combustion Nox Control For Fired Equipment in General Refinery and Petrochemical Services
No ratings yet
Post-Combustion Nox Control For Fired Equipment in General Refinery and Petrochemical Services
117 pages
Acme Galvanizing v. Fireman's Fund
No ratings yet
Acme Galvanizing v. Fireman's Fund
9 pages
Testing Valve and NDT
100% (1)
Testing Valve and NDT
5 pages
Daily Lrut Report: Lrut Instrument Lrut Probe Technique
No ratings yet
Daily Lrut Report: Lrut Instrument Lrut Probe Technique
1 page
EIAC-RQ-IB-002 I1 Rev 2 1aWaExO
No ratings yet
EIAC-RQ-IB-002 I1 Rev 2 1aWaExO
15 pages
Heat Exchangers Inspection
100% (4)
Heat Exchangers Inspection
31 pages
Materials System Specification
100% (1)
Materials System Specification
14 pages
Concrete Inspection Master Kit
No ratings yet
Concrete Inspection Master Kit
1 page
DE-119885 - Procedure For Quality Assurance and Quality Control
No ratings yet
DE-119885 - Procedure For Quality Assurance and Quality Control
27 pages
Welding Quality Control Plan (WQCP) Requirements: Organization
No ratings yet
Welding Quality Control Plan (WQCP) Requirements: Organization
2 pages
ATTAR Course Enrolment Form PVI
No ratings yet
ATTAR Course Enrolment Form PVI
3 pages
Lifting Equipment Inspection Report
No ratings yet
Lifting Equipment Inspection Report
4 pages
Hari Final
No ratings yet
Hari Final
15 pages
BS En12079-1 PDF
No ratings yet
BS En12079-1 PDF
38 pages
G9 - Non Dest
No ratings yet
G9 - Non Dest
36 pages
Ultrasonic Testing: NDT Training & Certification
100% (4)
Ultrasonic Testing: NDT Training & Certification
29 pages
Geotechnical Testing with Needle Penetration
No ratings yet
Geotechnical Testing with Needle Penetration
6 pages
50 Ways To Boost Your Career
No ratings yet
50 Ways To Boost Your Career
63 pages
Amatconrep PPT 8 DT and NDT
No ratings yet
Amatconrep PPT 8 DT and NDT
30 pages
Gujarat Technological University
No ratings yet
Gujarat Technological University
2 pages
Abo Sennan GPC T Main Area
No ratings yet
Abo Sennan GPC T Main Area
5 pages
Air Assisted Smokeless Flare Specs
No ratings yet
Air Assisted Smokeless Flare Specs
10 pages
Astm E2104-15
No ratings yet
Astm E2104-15
11 pages
NDTM 2 LPT 200818082453 PDF
No ratings yet
NDTM 2 LPT 200818082453 PDF
21 pages
Pipe Instalation Checklist
No ratings yet
Pipe Instalation Checklist
4 pages
Welding Inspection for Students
No ratings yet
Welding Inspection for Students
25 pages
ASTM 03.03: Nondestructive Testing Standards
0% (1)
ASTM 03.03: Nondestructive Testing Standards
5 pages
EN 10213 (2007) - Steel Castings For Pressure Purposes
No ratings yet
EN 10213 (2007) - Steel Castings For Pressure Purposes
27 pages
Shamsher QA-QC Engineer Mechanical - Docx NEW
No ratings yet
Shamsher QA-QC Engineer Mechanical - Docx NEW
4 pages
NDE NDT Inspection Brochure
No ratings yet
NDE NDT Inspection Brochure
16 pages
Magnetic Particle Inspection
100% (2)
Magnetic Particle Inspection
6 pages