Document pBgxXjxVwxMD0OozMJ5wXaX4B

REVIEW or TRANSFORMER ASKAREL July 1962 ' r July, when most of our customer* ere down for vacation*, give* u* time to review our *tatu* and further consider future requirement*. To get thing* in proper perpectlve, history how that transformer askarel enjoyed a peak in 1956 when 23.5 million pound*, of ready to uae fluid, were employed. Indeed, 1956 and 1957 were the lu*h sale* year* for all electrical apparatu* In thl* country. Sale*, price* and profit* were historically high and the big complaint was that Swl**, British and other foreigners were starting Invasion of the American electrical apparatus boom, by offering much lower price*. This created intense price war* to be followed by the "price fixing era" which in turn got "fixed" by our Government'* action*. Along thi* rocky way, thing* in the transformer Industry, and especially power transformers, worsened rapidly during 1959, 60 and 61. Few If any of the "experts", and especially not those who In planning ahead had greatly over-sold management on constructing larger production facilities, predicted this decline nor cared to acknowledge It -- until it became obvious that the over-all trans former business had become as bad as In the early 1930 depression days. During these 1930 depression days, transformer aekarel was introduced as a new specialty which owed Its existence solely to safe ty features. Fortunately, transformer askarel, being strictly a specialty, has been relatively free from the strong economic fluctuation* prevalent In the over-zil transformer markets. Accordingly, while 1956 was also a peak for transformer askarel, Its subsequent fall was less severe, as Indicated by consumption of 20.6, 14.5, 15.6, 17. 3 and 14. 4 million pounds In the subsequent years. As it Is Indicated that 1962 Is running along at an annual rate close to 15 million pounds, our sales have held steady over the past 5 years. It has not appeared entirely logical to make a direct comparison of askarel against the general transformer market happenings, when askarel Is not likely to ever command over 3 to 4% of the power and distribution transformer business. Tet, as askarel Is used for power distribution. It seems reasonable to feel that the recent strong depression In the electrical apparatus Industry probably had at least some adverse effect on the demand for our material. COMPAMv to-H-g.2- | STLCOPCB4025254 -2- What we don't know La how much thia general economic factor accounta for the drop from the 1956 to 1957 peak or win t portion la due to "other reaeona"? While we can't change the general economy, we have achooled ouraelve* Ln the area of the "other poaaible reaeona" and have been taking active atepa to Improve our poaltlon. We believe that algnlficant thlnga In thla area of "poaaible reaeona" include the following apeclfic factora, other than Juat to aay that transformer aakarel la not the moat sought after item: 1. Since expiration of C. E. 'a use patents and royalties in 1954 - 55, we feel that C.E. has not pushed their Pyranol transformers as strongly. 2. However, all transformer makers prefer to manufacture mineral oil or dry type units rather than aakarel. 3. Also there is tendency on the part of transformer users to avoid a liquid and prefer a dry transformer,especially when the liquid involves the toxicology of askarel. There la fear about Us maintenance and handling. The odor is strong, the vapors irritate, the man who got askarel In his eye felt its sting and some who dipped their bare arms into It got a rash. 4. Notwithstanding the excellent promotional job done by C. E. or the capability of Westinghousa and others to remove the mystery of askarel behavior, as compared with the familiar properties of mineral oil, - - these people really never explained these facts to gain maximum user confidence and understanding of askarel, over the 30 years since its Introduction. 5. Tied to this we know that often the simplicity of askarel transformer maintenance has not been presented adequately by especially the smaller manufacturers. 6. Consequently there Is much confusion and alarm about the high power factor and relatively low resistivity of askarel transformers. While this Is typical of askarel - - yet in absence of adequate explanation, users who observe it wonder if it will cause the transformer to explode 1 The foregoing are Included in the list of "reasons" about which we are taking active steps. But these are all incidentals, objections COivir/-n>iY CONFIDENTIAL 0*"* STLCOPCB4025255 - 3- that could promptly dry on the vine and we would have Lndeed a bonanza on hand Inatead of a specialty except for the following primary problem: It has not been poaalble to guarantee askarel againat primary exploalonl While askarel guarantee* againat fire and secondary explosion (combustion of arc formed gaa). primary explosion can and has occurred. Thla leaves open the thinking by some experts that If one can have a primary explosion - - why worry about a secondary boom -- and after all most mineral oil explosions have not resulted In serious fire s. Although askarel failure thru the years is less than 0. 5% (a better record than mineral oil), the few explosions with It cost us heavily, because askarel has safety as Its prime reason for being. The few explosions have lead to directives at Consolidated Edison and elsewhere, including Monsanto, "that askarel shall be used only when essential", or "that mineral oil construction shall be used except where Its cost becomes excessive", (l. e. , the cost of fire protecting devices for oil - as after all mineral oil costs only 40^/gal. v8 over $2.00 for askarel). It would be nonsense and wishful thinking on our part to quarrel with these sound proclamations. They do not rule out use of askarel where our product properly belongs 1 For example, la our own yard, mineral oil Is not replacing askarel (although this was considered) for the two large units that blew recently. Moreover askarel, right now, is replacing three mineral oil units at the Queeny Plant because safe use of mineral oil would lead to higher cost. Also, sound judgement dictates that about 12 askarel units are going In at Chocolate Bayou for safety reasons, although at spots where this Is not essential, over twice as many mineral units are going la. Likewise, the over one hundred thousand askarel units in over-all nss are employed because thorough thinking dictated their selection -- notwithstanding the fore mentioned proclamations which sound so favorable for mineral oil. The first step In solving a problem Is to recognise it and we clearly state that transformer askarel's fundamental problem is the possibility for primary explosion. We have probed the past for the reason for each of the few askarel explosions that occurred under what was considered normal operation - COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL STLCOPCB4025256 - 4- obvlously not the failures due to lightening or accidental high Impulse, back aurge due to a system fault, or when undergoing experimental Impulae testing. This study convinces us that most of the (few) explosions could have been avoided I Just to pick one example and because It Is right here at home, the blow that occurred In our yard at Queeny Plant could have been prevented. The only excuse for It is that the transformer technology of the given vintage did not offer the modern approach now available for keeping water out. The amount of water that entered would have failed mineral oil or most any electrical apparatus. Over the past few years, decided Improvement has come about for aakarel construction and the word "modernized" carries significant meaning vs. the early practices! On looking back on the earlier technology of askarel transformer construction, one can find reason to feel that Us automatic guarantees against fire and explosion of arc formed gas, which are provided by even the poorest construction, tended toward laxnesa in striving for the optimum design, essential to minimise primary e^nlosion! The design Improvements in recent years have been accomplished mainly by C. E. , Westlnghouae, AC, 1. e. , the larger manufacturers. The smaller people tend to follow and often not too wall. A good recent example Is smaller manufacturer in Canada who underbid G. E. and Westlnghouse to gat eight askarel transformer orders from the steel Industry in Canada. This transformer maker was not properly versed on askarel technology, nor adequately equipped to make these transformers. The steel people noted the discrepancies and ordered askarel taken out and replaced with mineral oil unless Monsanto sent someone to Canada to rectify this situation, which was done. Such effort In the area of askarel transformer technology Is the only meaningful approach to handling Its fundamental problems. Merely to advertise that our askarel Is guaranteed to meet exacting specifications (which everyone expects to begin with) does little good toward Increasing our market. If this guaranteed fluid Is allowed la apparatus not capable of using It properly. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL Tll*N 05`'*55 STLCOPCB4025257 -5- About year ago, both C. E. and WeatLngbouae turned over to Monsanto, full responsibility for all commercial handling of traaa* former askarel. Tbla doea not mean that they expect ua to atlck our noae Into their aakarel tranaformera, but it does tell everyone that they will no longer hold the umbrella over their competltora. Theae folk then have turned to ua for help. Thla has opened the door for ua to do many more thinga than prevloualy. Along theae lines, our objectives have been Ln the area of proper aakarel tranaformer design, Including proper construction, proper selection of materials of construction and of great importance, proper sealing out moisture which is the worst enemy of any electrical apparatus. An equally important phase is to provide simple and understandable maintenance guidance so that the uaer la able to carry it out and that his results will be capable of detecting trends to serve as warning of possible trouble ahead. Even when given this, many will want someone else to do it. Therefore. Monsanto needs to offer such service testing and charge fully In line with similar arrangements at C. E. and Westinghouse, as we are not interested ln putting their service out of business. Our objective Is to take care of the needs of the smaller transformer makers and all their customers, who sit out on a limb, as C. E. no longer helps them since C. E. 's Pyranol use patents and royalties expired. In addition to supplying the maintenance guide, and doing the other above things, the time has now arrived for Monsanto's need to actively advertise transformer aakarel. Several such ads are being considered. Also, lam publishing a technical paper In Insulation Magazine (the best trade journal for this purpose) to clarify mystery about aakarel. We have also intensified our direct contacts with askarel transformer users. A prime reason why 1 am active at ASTM, ASE, The National Research Countll's Insulation Conference, The Electro Chemical Society and The Insulation Conference, Is that at these various meetings, It Is easy to live several days each year with the head electrical engineers of leading utilities, as well as othars, to learn their latest thinking about transformer askarel. I know of none, using askarel, who claim dissatisfaction with Its parformanca. Nor can I find anyoaa who has a general policy about "throwing It out". As this seems to disagree with a survey by John Harris ln 195b, we ask ths resdsr to study the attached tabulation which gives the facts as voluntarily reported to EEI by the utilities. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL IRAN OS**56 STLCOPCB4025258 -6- UtLllty network* account for only about 10 to 15% of a*karel traa*. former lntallatlon. The re*t and by far the greateat number of aakarel transformer* are located outside of these network*, scattered thru Industry, commercial buildings, shopping centers, hospitals, school*, Institution*, etc., usually privately owned although served by the utility'* line*. As the utility people often advise these trans former user*, we are Interred Ln knowing the utilities'attitude toward askarel, even though they may not feel need for It Ln their own network. The last report issued by Edison Electric Institute was Ln July 1961 and covers the 1 956 - 1958 accounting. I have tabulated and compared as attached, this period against the previou* period, namely 1953 to 1 955, a* thl* clearly how* the popularity of askarel versus mineral oil and Indicates all changes and trends, at the utilities. Out of the 61 leading utilities reporting to EEI, 22 have not felt need to avail themselves of the safety features of askarel and instead employ, collectively, a total of 5,850 mineral transformers In their networks. Of more Interest and encouragement to us Is that 39 of these large utilities having networks of at least 20,000 KYA capacity, reported using both askarel and mineral oil. In the 1953 - 55 period, the askarel units totaled 3,785 and mineral oil totaled 14,819. In the following period, namely 1956 - 1958, the askarel units totaled 4, 543 and the mineral oil 20, 444. This reflects an askarel percentage of 20. 3% and 18. 2% respectively for the two periods. However, If one cares to take Consolidated Edison out of the picture, eventhough they have indeed favored us with increasing the askarel units from 796 to 879, one finds that the askarel popularity in the utility networks is 32.9 and 32.6% respectively for the two periods. This seems a good percentage for a specialty and It Is encouraging to note that a number of the utilities are extremely strong (60, 70, 80, 90 and even 100%) on askarel. Also, It seems significant and encouraging to us that 36 of the 39 utilities using askarel increased their askarel percentage in the lattar period. A.11 these favorable signs help to underwrite the reason why our transformer askarel business continues to be healthy. The results have been far different than the gloomy picture forecast by John Harris, some years ago. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL TRAN 054857 STLCOPCB4025259 -7- However, let'a not forget the prime problem that keep* aekarel a specialty Instead of & bonanza. Indeed the effect of thi can be gathered out of thla lame list of utilities, whether or not they uae aekarel In their networke. All are Informed and mindful of each of the (few) aekarel exploelona. TM la the reaeon why Union Electric who have 222 aekarel unite have not added more (in their network) although they lncreaeed mineral oil unite from 48 to 102 over the period, reported. While I know that U. E. hae been getting excellent performance from their aekarel unite and have no Intention of "throwing any out", (ae confirmed by their report to EED -- yet U.E. juet can't forget the aekarel tranaformer that exploded yeara ago In Vandervoort'e department etore. There waa no fire and the arc formed gaa being HC1, precluded a eecondary explosion, but the primary exploeion and emoke created waa enough to cauae maee hyeterla by the ehoppere. It waa a poor place for an aekarel unit to explode, and all utilitlea learned about It from their EEI reporta. I know that my friend Earl Thomaa, the chief at Consolidated Edison and an international authority on utility apparatus, will never forget the aekarel unit that tore thlnga apart In hla network. This lead Earl to employ mineral oil, under a blanket of nitrogen In completely welded (hermetically aealed) units. It can be argued that these are potential bombs and If one ever lets go, NYC will be shaken. But let's not mlsa the point. By employing the proper tranaformer design technology to accomplish everything possible to eliminate explosion, Earl Thomas has successfully put his International reputation on the line by using even mineral oil to do the job safely over the past good number of years. We are having a very long wait for one of hla mineral oil network jobs to blow and obviously Earl la convinced that none will fall. His confidence stems from the fact that he knows exactly what goes on In the Con. Ed. network and none of the many engineers under Earl would care to violate any suggestion or directive handed down from Earl Thomas. There Is no difference between Mr. Thomas and ourselves regards knowing what is required to provide explosion free operation of liquid filled transformers. But there la a tremendous difference between his position of being able to see to It that this Is done In his own network vs our position of little control over many other people, dealing with askarel, who Inadvertantly fall to fully realise these requirements. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL TRAN 054859 STLCOPCB4025260 -8- There la no use of my threading thru other examples that I could extract out of this Hat of utllltlea Involving failure of aakarel - the leaaon la that the few blowa that occurred have hurt ue badly. It thould be clear that the only fundamental problem regarda tranaformer aakarel la thla poaalblllty of primary exploalon. Thla can be greatly minimized and In fact eliminated, but only by emphasizing the proper design technology for the aakarel unite. To clarify thla aophieticated Bounding term - - we are not aaylng that faulta have been found In the geometry and atreaa deelgna employed for aakarel tranaformera, within the llmlta of their normal voltage ratlnga. Thla la to aay that the electrical dealgn la excellent. The reaeone for aakarel fallurea are due to Improper aelection of conatructlon materlala, and eapeclally to inadequate aeallng to keep out molature, which la Ita worat enemy. There la nothing complex about thla. It Ilea well within our capability to emphasize and publicize the Importance of avoiding Inexcusable mlatakea In theae areas and to offer Monsanto assistance where needed. We already pointed out that even the poorest aakarel design guarantees against fire and secondary exploalon. We now wish to add to this by aaylng that with frequent use of lesa than the optimum and even with use of Inadequate construction components and sealing arrangements, there have been very few aakarel explosions. But these few primary explosions have held back the wider possible uae of aakarel. And it does no good to feel that the effect la way out of proportion as after all aakarel owes Its existence solely to safety. Our step* to correct this problem have been developed with full collaboration from O. Z., Westlnghouae and most all of our customers. It Is gratifying to know that froaa all angles, the feeling Is that what we are doing and especially our approach to maintenance guidance is In great need, notwithstanding that C. t and others have had the responsibility for 30 years sow for promoting use of their patented transformer askarel. While G. E. more than others, did a tremendous job promoting aakarel, today all graciously agree that our steps should CC'a'.Is ANY CONFIDENTIAL TRAN 054860 STLCOPCB4025261 -9- lead to better understanding and wider use of improved Askarel technology. This as mentioned before, Is the only realistic approach to building maximum confidence needed to Increase the use of Askarel transformers. PCB: pb P. C. Benlgnus xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Not that we are In need of further conviction, as we have said clearly what the problem is -- the actions of fate had to enter, as though there were need to emphasize the problem Just as I was writing the last paragraph. It was a phone call from one of the smaller (relatively new) askarel transformer makers. He. had sold eight units to a c .stomer and all are coming back - - the one that exploded is coming in pieces I Neither the customer nor the maker have facilities to test for parts per million of moisture. They don't need such at this stage - the water can be seen In globules on top of the aakarel - - and as we have emphasized, water Is Its worst enemy. The maker used nitrile rubber gaskets (recommended In G. E. 'a askarel maintenance guide). We know that this rubber will deteriorate In the presence of askarel - * It did and the amount of water that entered was enough to break down any electrical insulation system. Although It took an explosion for these people to reeognlae the problem. It will not be difficult for them to correct the discrepancy. Before this firm began making askarel transformers, they were given our comprehensive book on proper handling, earth refining, analytical techniques, construction materials, askarel transformer characteristics, etc. Mow I find that they do not even have earth ... COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL TRAN 054861 STLCOPCB4025262 - 10- refining end filtering facilities. They simply take our guaranteed epeclflcatlon quality aakaral and dump It Lnto the tranaformera and ahlp the unite. Who know a to what extent the fluid may hare been contaminated from conatructlon component!, etc. ? However, now theae people will have to get equipment to rework the water contaminated fluid, and thla can be done very eaelly. Then aa theae folka have no analytical facllltlee, of courae, we will have to determine whether they aecompllehed adequate refinement of the fluid. Thla la not difficult for ue to do. However, aa we will need do a good deal more of thla kind of teatlng, (than wae done Ln the paat), we have aet up to charge for It. Thia allow* the much broader offering of our aervlcea, aa being announced In our promotional campaign. In the paat, our cuatomer aervice laboratory workload haa been 1 /20 th of a man. Our new program la elated for 1/4 th of a man! (I mention thla not to Imply that 1 underatand exactly what 1/20 th or 1/4 th of a man la, but to aay that we try to do a hell of a lot with very little.) While we will never accompllah the control that Earl Thomaa haa over hla network, our campaign will help ua get the meaaage acroaa to the many othera who need better underatandlng and control of tranaformer aakarel. Especially our maintenance guide will accompllah more user confidence and each facet of our over-all program will help atimulate aakarel aalea, aa we continue to move more atrongly out of the box that Monsanto haa been kept In ao long (by requeat) - that we merely guarantee that the aakarel we eupply me eta all the atrlet property specification! established by the tranaformer Industry. P.C. B. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL 0S4&62 STLCOPCB4025263