Philadelphia Paper - Discussion on Steel Rails. Philadelphia Meeting

William Kent, Pi.~t~bIJrQh, Pa.: The steel rnanufac.tnret of this country nlust ever he grateful to Dr. Dudley for his painstaking and conscientious endeavor to estaldish the relation between the chemical analysis and the wearing capcity of steel rails. They tnust thank him for the vast array of $acts he presents, and for having given them sixty-four analyses with which to combat his own conclusions and to establish their own, which are entirely opposite to his. In Dr. Duclley" discussion of his former investigation, at the Pittsburgh meeting, he said, "If you do not like my conclusions, draw your own conclusions." I have studied his last paper as thoroughly as the limited time since I received it would adruit, and have drawn some concluvions which I will first state, and then attempt to demonstrate. Briefly stated, my conclusions are: lst, That as far as these 64 analyses reveal anything of service to railmakers and cotsumera, it is that within the following chemical and physical limits, viz., Carbon,..0.20 to 0.60 Pisovphorue ,..0.026 to 0.146 Silicon,.. 0015 to 0.480 BInnganese.......0.262 to 0 880 Phosl~horus un~ts,..20.3 to 6.72 Bending weight,. 2270 lbs. to 4260 Ibs. Drfl~ctinn,.. 13O to 190° or in other words within the limits of rienrly the whole range of the chenlical and bending testa of these 6-2 mils: the wearing capacity bears no relation at all to mrbon, to phosphorus, to silicon, to mnnganese, to phosphorus units, to bending weight or to deflection or if there is any relation between the wearing capacity and thest! six or sr!ven variables, it is so obscured by the action of other cause or variat~les not yet known, that such relation cannot be expressed by any practical formula. 2d. That the difference in wearing capacity of these 64 rails was not due to unrbon, to phosphorus, to silicou, to manganese, or to anj combinntion of these four elements, but that it was due to some other cause or cornbination of causes, of which Dr. Dudley's whole iuvestigtion furnishes 11s no clue whatever. A few of the nlarry possible causes I lnay name : sulphur, copper, oxide of iron inclossl air or other gases, orerblowing, underblowing, oyrhaiting, undcrIreatinp, too hot-finishing, too cold-finishing, cold-straightening, toc great or too litkle rductiun hlu the rail to the ingot, or the portion