The Effect of Sulphur on Low-Carbon Steel (6d4ae10c-4fb3-4c4b-8672-6a38f664b34a)

THE CHAIRMAN (ALBERT SAUVEUR, Boston, Mass.).-I am sure we are indebted to Prof: Hayward for his addition to our knowledge of the influence of sulphur on steel. As he has said in this paper, sulphur has had many defenders in recent years. It seems to me, however, that, while it may be old school to believe in the detrimental action of sulphur, it is not yet old school to believe in segregation; that while it may be that 0.1 per cent. of sulphur has no very great effect on the physical properties of steel, a ladle analysis of 0.1 per cent. of sulphur may readily result in 0.2 or 0.3 per cent. sulphur being present in the segregated portion of the ingot, and that, it seems to me, might be a rather serious matter. J. S. UNGER, Pittsburgh, Pa.-Prof. Hayward has presented the results of an investigation along a line to which I have devoted considerable time and attention, and I am particularly pleased to note that his results are in accord with my own and further tend to prove the fact that the old, established prejudice against sulphur is based more on belief than actual facts. I have felt for years that tooo much stress was placed on the harmful influence of certain elements in steel such as sulphur, phosphorus, copper, etc., but it has only been within recent years that efforts have been made to, establish the truth. Practically all the investigations made to date have proven that these elements within reasonable limits are harmless and, in fact, that for certain purposes the addition of these elements is beneficial. In referring to copper, J. E. Stead, Vice-President of the British Iron and Steel Institute, said at their last meeting: "Even today one comes across steel specifications in which copper is barred, which can only be regarded as ail indication of ignorance, if not stupidity, of those who prescribe the composition of steel, for it has been long ago proved that copper in steel, instead of being an evil, is quite harmless, and is sometimes distinctly beneficial." Sulphur owes its evil name to the early days of the manufacture of steel. Chemical analyses were crude, and failure due to either poor raw materials or metallurgical treatment were many. Sulphur being a comparatively easy element to determine with reasonable accuracy, particular attention was called to the amount of sulphur, and the failure was attributed to it, without giving any consideration to other causes. A pre-