Document 0qkvvg27Zx68egYn7KYQLO8zk

I; . ? Kr* Clegorn Ur. Those* Bovesiber 8t 1944 ,, ^43'lSc7*\*x '% * , - -a - * Pr* Jenkins i. ^ ^SM^h'es-r'tt, * oj U.2.-VA ,,< * AHAGONDA GRAPE ABOCLOR 4465 ^;V ;jf^ SVW '*- "'J-*' >> ./,'>.* V -vf You Will notice that one method is recommended and the other Is not* Shla distinction docs not moan that the aooond method in not reliable* Both methods hare given the same results with only two exceptions* , .. ,, ' - % - " * *. ^ * TZ * She recommended procedure receives the nod because it requires less tine and also because it more nearly simulates the system In which the Aroclor is to be used* / / The instances when the two methods have differed were in eases where no crystals appeared in the five-day stirred test but would show some on tits eighth or ninth day of the static test. In both cases the softening point of the Aroclor in question was between 61 and 62*0* This means that we can be safe on the five day. test if we keep the softening point away from the upper limit of 62*0, /; .......... Thie write-up should be explanatory enough to allow the routine laboratory to take over the final testing and inspection of the Anaconda Grade Aroclor* ' s .. - - '. Q, 7H. A* U* Sllenburg ITU /-fr * ?*.*V'KJ -A ' *t' i tVn-r*kS* Js,f**-c*v's5 v e > >r' '} F*S'* -5* ^- y ^v j^. 'fb * i A V * ( * # ft y 16 - >r" < '&*:+**3** i -v^p x %>% MS V A3*i^ 4r?J^ /t 'rS*.,;4 -.7;c frv, . .s,,- ,, 'I'yV-K 1 ^ < r. ixf V ** ** Ttf:1 J #*< > ^V / `X. * *A f si*- A S. *3f -; ;>-v * *V / >fc^ > , 1 'P 'TTr'%'1 fi1 er >Slv ^30520 \ STLCOPCB4077164