Papers - Some Things We Don't Know about the Creep of Metals (T. P. 1087)

Unlike most previous Howe lecturers, I had not the good fortune to be associated with Henry Marion Howe, nor to be directly one of his students. Yet, through his writings, he has been my teacher, as he has of all American metallurgists. Instructive as his writings are—I use the present tense because Howe thought so keenly and reasoned so surely, seeing clearly, as if by intuition, what was hazy to lesser minds, that his writings are still vital—it is not those books and papers, nor even the minds he trained in his classes, that were his most outstanding service. It was the spirit of Howe in his approach to the problems of metallurgy, his broad-mindedness and fairness, his recognition of the need for theories and hypotheses to explain metallurgical phenomena, his willingness to use them as servants, as well as his questioning attitude—his refusal to accept them as masters—that comprise his greatest service. This most thoroughly warrants the honor the Institute pays each year to his memory. These traits I so respect and honor in any man that I glory in this opportunity to do reverence to him in whom they were so notably united. Howe's Discussion of a Creep Problem I have often wished that Howe were still with us to turn his keen insight upon the problems of the use of metals at high temperatures, a field much studied but still very hazy. Indeed, 53 years ago, in a paper1 before this Institute, Howe stated a problem closely allied to some that still perplex metallurgists and engineers dealing with the high-temperature field. Howe was intrigued by a report2 from another old master, Robert Henry Thurston, on the behavior of annealed vs. cold-drawn iron wire, and in order to broaden the foundation for metallurgical generalization, Howe made experiments of his own on copper and silver. In these tests by Thurston and by Howe, the wires were rapidly loaded to determine the