Search Documents

By J. L. Gregg, J. L.

RECENTLY there has been considerable interest in the production and use of extra hard alloys composed primarily of tungsten and carbon. Dr. Hoyt's recent paper1 gives a good description of these alloys and describes their performance when used as tools. There are a number of these alloys on the market sold under various trade names, and it is the purpose of this paper to describe the results of an investigation of the structure of five of these alloys by means of microscopic and X-ray methods. The samples studied were in the form of small tools or wire-drawing dies, which were either purchased or supplied as samples. They were in some cases not supplied by the original makers but were furnished by the agents in this country, and we wish to call attention to the fact that they may not be truly representative of the materials supplied under the various trade names. No performance data are given and no inference as to the inferiority of one alloy as against any other is made. K. Schröter2 recently described methods for polishing alloys of this type for microscopic examination and has presented photomicrographs of several alloys. However, he did not identify their constituents or describe methods for their identification.

Jan 1, 1929

By N. A. D. Parlee, M. M. A. El-Naggar, G. 8. Horsley

The apparatus was of a modified Sieverts type1&apos;2 with a reaction tube designed to function also as the cell component of an oxygen pressure gage. The reaction tube assembly is shown in Fig. 1 and described in Table I. The main body is a 1-in.-OD 15 mol pct calcia-stabilized zirconia tube. The ground-glass joint, g, the male part of which carried a prism for optical pyrometer use, was connected to the remainder of the Sieverts apparatus. The calibration of the cell (at its 1000°K operating temperature) for internal oxygen pressures (PO2in) in the range 0.2 to 10 9 atm was made against internal air pressures measured by mercury manometer and McLeod gage. At very low po2in values down to l<Tn atm the performance was checked by comparing pQ calculated from electromotive force measurement when the apparatus was filled with a) pure CO gas and b) a CO-CO2 mixture of the ratio CO-CO2 = 1:0.398, with Po, values calculated from the equilibrium constants of the following reactions at 1000°K:

Jan 1, 1968

By A. V. Deforest, C. W. Macgregor, A. R. Anderson

One of the important problems in the design of structures and machine parts subjected to rapidly applied loads is the determination of the strength and ductility of the material itself under such conditions. Realizing the need for such information, many investigations have been carried out in the past. Most of these experiments have been made using notched bars in bending either with the Charpy or Izod impact machine. While yielding valuable data on the effect of notches in the energy absorption of the material and on the condition of heat-treatment, this form of test does not lend itself readily to a determination of fundamental stress-strain relations. For this and other reasons, more attention has been paid recently to the tension impact test. An extensive literature already exists on the subject and only those investigations somewhat closely related to the present paper will be mentioned. For a more comprehensive list, the reader is referred to the Symposium on Impact Testing or the A.S.T.M., 1938. The work of Mann.&apos; Clark and Dätwyler,2 Nádai and Manjoine,3 Winlock and Leiter,4 Deutler,5 and Brinkmann,6 however, deserves especial mention. In most of the previous investigations on the subject, when stress-strain relations were obtained under high rates of loading, it was the common procedure to determine stresses based on the original area and strains based on the original length. Stress-strain curves were then constructed by P ALo plotting So = 1/A0 as a function of eo = ALr,o where A0 and Lo refer to the original area and gauge length, respectively. At present there exists a paucity of true stress-strain data in the impact problem. The advantages of constructing so-called true stress-strain curves in order to reveal the fundamental physical properties of the material for the tension test were discussed recently by one of the authors.7&apos;8 It was shown that the true physical behavior of the material in the tension test could best be represented P by plotting the average true stress, S = 2P as a function of 6 = q&apos; = log —r = log ~9L where P, A, L, S, E, and q&apos; refer to the load, the cross-sectioned area while the load P is applied, the actual gauge length, the average true stress, the true strain and true reduction in area, respectively. Besides giving a better physical representation, the method has certain additional advantages in that the stress-strain curve so plotted becomes a straight line from the maximin load point to fracture. The construction of such curves, however, while comparatively simple for the slow rates of loading customarily used in the tension test, presents certain dificulties for tensile impact in that both loads and diameters are required throughout the test. The continuous measurement of test-piece diameters to fracture under impact conditions offers considerable experimental difficulty. In order to make it feasible to

Jan 1, 1942

By A. V. Deforest, A. R. Anderson, C. W. MacGregor

One of the important problems in the design of structures and machine parts subjected to rapidly applied loads is the determination of the strength and ductility of the material itself under such conditions. Realizing the need for such information, many investigations have been carried out in the past. Most of these experiments have been made using notched bars in bending either with the Charpy or Izod impact machine. While yielding valuable data on the effect of notches in the energy absorption of the material and on the condition of heat-treatment, this form of test does not lend itself readily to a determination of fundamental stress-strain relations. For this and other reasons, more attention has been paid recently to the tension impact test. An extensive literature already exists on the subject and only those investigations somewhat closely related to the present paper will be mentioned. For a more comprehensive list, the reader is referred to the Symposium on Impact Testing or the A.S.T.M., 1938. The work of Mann.&apos; Clark and Dätwyler,2 Nádai and Manjoine,3 Winlock and Leiter,4 Deutler,5 and Brinkmann,6 however, deserves especial mention. In most of the previous investigations on the subject, when stress-strain relations were obtained under high rates of loading, it was the common procedure to determine stresses based on the original area and strains based on the original length. Stress-strain curves were then constructed by P ALo plotting So = 1/A0 as a function of eo = ALr,o where A0 and Lo refer to the original area and gauge length, respectively. At present there exists a paucity of true stress-strain data in the impact problem. The advantages of constructing so-called true stress-strain curves in order to reveal the fundamental physical properties of the material for the tension test were discussed recently by one of the authors.7&apos;8 It was shown that the true physical behavior of the material in the tension test could best be represented P by plotting the average true stress, S = 2P as a function of 6 = q&apos; = log —r = log ~9L where P, A, L, S, E, and q&apos; refer to the load, the cross-sectioned area while the load P is applied, the actual gauge length, the average true stress, the true strain and true reduction in area, respectively. Besides giving a better physical representation, the method has certain additional advantages in that the stress-strain curve so plotted becomes a straight line from the maximin load point to fracture. The construction of such curves, however, while comparatively simple for the slow rates of loading customarily used in the tension test, presents certain dificulties for tensile impact in that both loads and diameters are required throughout the test. The continuous measurement of test-piece diameters to fracture under impact conditions offers considerable experimental difficulty. In order to make it feasible to

Jan 1, 1942

Trans. No. Place Date Vol. Page 1. Wilkes-Barre Pa......May.71 1 3 2. Bethlehem, Pa.........Aug., &apos;71 I 10 3. Troy, N.Y............Nov..: 71 1 13 4. Philadelphia, Pa........Feb., 72.. 1 17 5. New York. N. Y.*......May, &apos;72.. 1 20 6. Pittsburgh. Pa.........Oct..&apos; 72.. 1 25 7. Boston, Mesa..........Feb., &apos;73.. 1 28 8. Philadelhia, Pa.*......May, &apos;73.. 2 3 9. Easton, is............Oct..&apos; 73.. 2 7 10. New York, N. Y.......Feb..&apos; 74 . . 2 11 11. St. Louie. Mo.*........May,&apos; 74 . . 3 3 12. Hazleton, Pa...........Oct., &apos;74.. 3 8 13. New Haven Conn......Feb., &apos;75.. 3 15 14. Dover,N.J.*..........May, 75.. 4 3 15. Cleveland,O...........Oct. 75. 4 0 16. Washington D. C......Feb.&apos;&apos; 76.: 4 18 17. philadelphia, Pa.......June,: 76.. 5 3 18. Philadelphia Pa........Oct 76.. 5 19 19. New York, N. Y.......Feb: &apos;77.. 5 27 20. Wilkes-Barre. Pa.*.....Mag :77.. 0 3 21. Amenia N. Y..........Oct. 77.. 6 10 22. Philadeiphia Pa........Feb.;&apos; 78. . 6 18 23. Chattanooga&apos; Term.*. . . May&apos; 78. . 7 3 24. Lake George: N. Y....: Oct. 78. . 7 103 25. Baltimore, Md.*.......Feb:&apos; 79.. 7 217 26. ~ittsburgi, Pa.........~a;&apos; 79.. 6 3 27. Montreal, Canada......~ept.;&apos; 79.. 8 121 28. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;80.. 8 275 29. Lake Superior, Mich....Aug., &apos;80. . 9 1 30. Philadelphia, Pa.*......Feb., &apos;81. 9 275 31. Staunton, Va..........May, &apos;81. .10 1 32. Harrisburg, Pa.........Oct.. &apos;81..10 119 33. Washington, I). C.*....Feb., &apos;82. . 10 226 34. Denver. Colo..........Aug.. &apos;82. . ll 1 35. Boston. Mass.*.........Feb.. &apos;83..11 217 38. Roanoke, Va...........June, &apos;83.. 12 3 37. Troy, N. Y...........Oct.. &apos;83. .12 175 38. Cincinnati. O.*.... Feb, &apos;84..12 4 39. Chicago Ill............May, &apos;84. . 13 1 40. philadelphia, Pa........Sept., &apos;84. . 13 285 41. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;85. . 13 586 42. Chattanooga, Tenn.....May, &apos;85..14 1 43. Halifax, N. S..........Sept., &apos;85.. 14 307 44. Pittsburgh, Pa.*........Feb.. &apos;86 . . 14 587 45. Bethlehem. Pa.........May, &apos;86 .. 15 Ixiii. 46. St. Louis, Mo..........Oct, 86.. 15 Ixx. 47. Scranton, Pa.*.........Feb.&apos;, &apos;87. . 15 lxxvi 48. Utah and Montana.....July &apos;87.. 16 xvii. 49. Duluth, Minn...........July&apos; &apos;87. -16 xxiv. 50. Boston. Mass.*.........Feb.: &apos;88. . 16 xxviii. 51. Birmingham, Ala.......May, &apos;88. .17 xix. 52. Buffalo N. Y..........Oct. &apos;88.. 17 xxiv. 53. New york, N.Y........feb.&apos; ;89 . . 17 xxxi. 54. Colorado..............June&apos; 89 . . 18 xvii. 55. Ottawa, Canada........Oct., 89. . 18 xxiv. 56. Washington, I). C.*. . . Feb. 90. .18 xxx. 57. New York, N. Y........sept:, &apos;93. .19 vii. 58. New York, N. Y.*......Feb. &apos;91. . 19 xxv. 59. Cleveland, O.......... June, :91 . .a xvi. 60. Glen Summit, Pa.......Oct, 111. . 20 lxi. 61. Baltimore, Md.*.......Feb.: &apos;92. .21 xix. 62. Plattsburg, N. Y.......June, &apos;02. . 21 xxxiii. 03. Reading. Pa...........Oct., :92. .21 xliv. 64. Montreal. Canada*.....Feb. 93..21 65. Chicago, Ill............aug.: &apos;93..22 XI. 66. Virginia Reach. Va.*. ...Feb., &apos;04. .24 xwl. 67. Bridgeport Coon.......Oct., &apos;94..24 xxx?. 08. Florida ...&apos;............Mar., &apos;95. .25 xix 69 Atlanta. Ga......... Oct 95. 25 xi 70. Pittsburgh. Pa.*........Feb., &apos;96.. 26 xvii. Trans. No. Place Date Vol. Page 71. Colorado..............Sept. &apos;96. .26 xxix. 72. Chicago, Ill............Feb.. "97.. 27 xvii. 73. Lake Superior..........July &apos;97. .27 xxx. 74. Atlantic City, N. J.*. ..Feb.: :98. .28 xvii. 75. Buffalo N. Y..........Oct. 08. .28 XXXVI. 76. New York,N. Y.*......Feb.: &apos;99. .29 xvii. 77. California.............Sept., ;99. . 29 xlix. 78. Washington, D. C.*.....Feb., 00. .30 xix. 79. Canada...............Aug.. &apos;00. .30 xlv. 80. Richmond. Va.*........Feb.. &apos;01. . 31 xix. 81. Mexico................Nov..&apos;01.. 32 cxviii. 82. Philadelphia Pa. $......May, :02. . 33 xxxv. 83. New Haven, Conn......Oct.. 02.. 33 xlvii. 84. Albany N. Y.*........Feb &apos;03. .34 xxiii. 85. New York, N. Y........Oct.&apos;: &apos;03. .34 xi. 86. Atlantic City. N. J.*....Feb., &apos;04. .35 XXIII. 87. Lake Superior..........Sept.&apos;04. .35 dii. 88. Washington. D. C......May&apos; &apos;05. .36 xlii. 89. British Columbia.......July, &apos;05. . 36 90. Bethlehem. Pa.........Feb. &apos;06. .37 xli. 91. London, England.......July: &apos;06. .37 xlviii. 92. New York, N. Y........April, &apos;07. . 38 lii. 93. Toronto, Canada.......July. &apos;07. .38 lix. 94. New York, N. Y........Feb., :08. .39 xli. 95. Chattanooga, Tenn.....Oct.. 08..39 xlviii. 06. New Haven Conn......Feb. &apos;09. .40 xli. 97. Spokane,Wash.........Sept:.&apos;09. .40 xlviii. 98. Pittsburgh, Pa.........Mar.,&apos;10. .41 xxxviii. 99. Canal Zone............Nov.,&apos;10. .41 dv. 100. Wilkes-Barre, Pa.......June. &apos; 11. . 42 xxxiv. 101. San Francisco, Cal......Oct.. &apos;11..42 xliv. 102. New York. N. Y.*......Feb 12. .43 Ixxvii. 103. Cleveland, Ohio........0ct;&apos; &apos;12.. 44 wii. 104. New York, N. Y.*......Feb.. &apos;13. .45 xv. 105. Butte, Mont...........Aug., &apos;13. .46 ?&apos; 108. New York, N. Y........Oct., 13..47 vii 107. New York. N. Y.*......Feb.. &apos;14..48 xv. 108 Salt Lake City. Otah Aug. :l. 49 5: 109. Pittsburgh, Pa.........Oct., 14. .50 vii. 110. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;15. .51 xvi. 111. San Francisco, Cal......Sept., &apos;15. .52 xii. 112. New York,N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;16..54 xvi. 1 Arizona...............Sept.,&apos;l6. .55 VII 114. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;17: .56 vii. 115. St. Louis, Mo..........Oct.. &apos;17..57 vii. 116. NewYork,N. Y.*......Feb.. &apos;18..59 xvii 117. Colorado.....:........Sept.,&apos;18. .60 vii. 118. Milwaukee, Wis........Oct.. &apos;18. .60 x:!: 119. NewYork,N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;19..61 xi. 120. Chicago...............Sept.,&apos; l9.. 62 VII. 121. New York, N. T.*......Feb., &apos;20..63 ix. 122. Lake Superior District. .Aug., &apos;20.. 66 ix. 123. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;21. .66 xiii. 124. Wilkes-Barre, Pa...... Sept.. : 21.. 66 xix. 125. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., 22. .67 ix. 126. San Francisco. Cal......Sept.,:22. .68 xxix. 127. New York, N.Y.*.....Feb., 23. .69 xxix 128. Canada...............Aug., &apos;23. .69 xxxv! 128.129. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., ;24. .70 xxxi. 130. Birmingham, Ala.......Oct. 24. .71 xxxiii 131. NewYork.N Y.*......Feb.: &apos;25.. 71 xxxviii. 132. 131.Salt Lake City, Utah .. .Sept., &apos;25. .73 xvi 133. New York, N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;26. .73 xxii. 134. Pittsburgh Pa ....... Oct.. &apos;26. .74 xv. 135. New York,&apos; N. Y.*............Feb., &apos;27. .75 x::: 135.136. NewYork,N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;28..76 104 137 NewYork.N. Y.*......Feb., &apos;29. .291 116 138.San FranciscoYork,N.Y. Cal..........Oct. 29..308 406 139. New York, N. Y.*...Feb., &apos;30..30H 1321

Jan 1, 1930

By J. C. McKinnell

The appraisal of an oil lease may often be mad,? through production decline analysis, which requires description of the functional relationship between the oil production rate and either cumulative production or time. Heretofore, attempts to define the function appropriate to a given set of production data have depended to some extent on subjective procedures. The purpose here is to introduce an objective solution, obtained by combining the principle of least squares with the theory of equations. MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS The fundamental differential equation appropriate to a general class of decline curves may be written. Solution of Eq. 1 for general boundary conditions may be written in terms of either the cumulative oil production or time: These equations constitute the mathematical expression of the so-called hyperbolic decline. Their complete description for a given set of production data requires the numerical evaluation of the three parameters1.&apos;, n, D, and (go),. For the special case of n = 0, Eq. 2 becomes q. = (q.), - DiN with the corresponding expression in terms of time being q. = (qa),e...........(5) Similarly, for the special case of n = 1, Eq. 3 becomes with the corresponding expression in terms of cumula- tive oil production being q. = (q.),e " &apos;.......(7) Eqs. 4 and 5 constitute the mathematical description of the so-called exponential decline; Eqs. 6 and 7 are the mathematical description of the harmonic decline.&apos;,&apos; Returning to the hyperbolic expressions, Eqs. 2 and 3 may also be written, q: = sNp + b........ (8) and where a = 1 - n; s = (n— 1)D,(q0);"; b = (go):-"; a&apos;=-n;s/= nD,(qo);"; and b&apos; = (go);-. Note that both Eqs. 8 and 9 are linear in either time or cumulative production with respect to an exponential function of the production rate. In other words, a straight line relationship results for both variables when associated with the appropriate power of q,. This fact is of prime importance in the application of statistical analysis. . STATISTICAL ANALYSIS For a given oil lease, the time, production rate and cumulative production are recorded records. To establish predictive formulas from Eqs. 2 and 3, it remains to determine numerical values for the three parameters [n, D, and (q,) .] through an investigation of the past history. Upon interpreting a, s and b as parameters, Eq. 8 may be expressed for every time interval of interest, i, over the past history as follows. (q,): = s(Np), + b........(10) In general, Eq. 10 will not be satisfied exactly, because of the assumptions in the expression of Eq. 1, and the errors and anomalies universally associated with production data. It will instead define the residual, s(Np), + b- CO=d......(11) Squaring both sides and summing over all the data points, m, under consideration yields

[Trans. No. Place Date Vol. Page 1. Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, &apos;71.. 1 3 2. Bethlehem, I&apos;s Aug., &apos;71.. 110 3. Troy, N. Y Nov., &apos;71.. 113 4. Philadelphia, PaFeb., &apos;72.. 117 5. New York, N. YMay, &apos;72120 6. Pittsburgh, Pa Oct., &apos;72.. 125 7. Boston, MassFeb., &apos;73.. 128 8. Philadelphia, Pa.*May, &apos;73.. 23 9. Easton, PaOct., &apos;73.. 27 10. New York, N. Y Feb., &apos;74211] [ ]

Jan 1, 1925

Aamot, Olav Crone, Chem. Engr., Elektrokemisk Raadhusgt..23, Oslo. Norway. &apos;29 Abadilla, Quirico A., Dir., Bureau of Mines Manila, P. I. &apos;3S Abbott, Clarence E., V.P., Charge of Raw Materials, Tennessee Coal, Iron & R.R. Co., 1242 Brown-Marx Bldg., Birmingham, Ala. &apos;04 Abel, Raymond L.. Prof., Dept. of Pet. Refin., Univ. of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, Pa. &apos;2S Abel, Walter D., Div. of Corporations Los Angeles, Calif. &apos;32 Abele, Louis T., U. S. Corps of Engrs 7211 Glen Oak Ave., Baltimore. Md. &apos;31 Abel], Leo M., Research Met., Mount Morgan Ltd Mount Morgan, Queens.. Australia. &apos;31 Abenius, Hakan V c/o Falu Gruva, Falun, Sweden. &apos;37 Abernathy, G. E., Geol., Kansas State Geol. Survey Pittsburg, Kan. 3S Aborn. Robert H., Asst. Met., Research Lab., U. S. Steel Corp., Lincoln Highway, Kearny, N. J. &apos;19 Abrams, Charles Jackson 1624 17th St., Denver, Colo. &apos;3 t. Abstein. Henry T., Engr. & Mgr., Profile-Tamarack Mines CoYellow Pine, Idaho. &apos;27 Acker, E. O&apos;C., Met L28 East Washington Lane, Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. &apos;86 Ackerman, D. E., Met., Assoc. Prof. of Met., Purdue Univ Lafayette, Ind. &apos;35 Ackerman, E. Dumont, Sub-Surface Geol., Temblador Camp, Standard Oil Co. of Venezuela, Caripito, Venezuela. &apos;3S Ackerman, George F.,. Div. Foreman. The Fresnillo Co Fresnillo, Zac., Mexico. &apos;36 Adami, A. F., V.P. & Prof. of Min. Engrg., Montana School of Mines Butte, Mont. &apos;19 Adami, Charles J., Min. Engr 99 S. Downing St., Denver. Colo. &apos;12 Adams, Army, Cons. Engr 714 W. Main St., Grass Valley, Calif. .&apos;37 Adams, Clyde B.. Geol.. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc 26 Broadway, New York, N. Y. &apos;39 Adams, Ernest C., 6th Engrs Fort MacIntosh, Laredo, Tex. &apos;35 Adams, F. J., Gen&apos;l Agent, Gulf Production & Pipe Line Cos Fort Worth, &apos;lox. &apos;29 Adams, F. S., Supt., Power Dept., Anaconda Copper Min. CoAnaconda, Mont. &apos;37 ADAMS. FRANK DAWSON, Hon. Mbr., 1913; Logan Prof. of Geology and Dean, Faculty of Applied Science. McGill Univ., Montreal, Que., Canada. &apos;13 Adams, Gale L., Supervisor, Process & Dev. Lab., General Pet. Corp. of California, Higgins Bldg., Los Angeles, Calif. &apos;18

Jan 1, 1939

Question 1—1s Structural Deformation of Some Character Always Necessary for the Migration of Mineralizing Solutions. Especially in Limestone or Other Dense Rocks Discussion by: A. M. Bateman.........120 S. F. Kelly........... 125 C. H. Behre. Jr........118.123 G. B. Langford......... 123 T. M. Broderick.........121 H. E. McKinstry......... 116 R. H. Clarke.......... 123 D. H. McLaughlin........ 118 J. D. Forrester for M. H. Gidel . . 11.4 W. H. Newhouse......... 123 G. M. Fowler......112. 116. 121 R. H. Sales.......... 116 L. C. Graton..........121 Edward Sampson......... 122 R. D. Hoffman.........120 J. 8. Stevenson.......... 117 I. B. Joralemon.........121 L.B.Wright........... 112 Question 2—What Are Some of the Chemical and Physical Characteristics in Certain Beds within a Limestone Formation that Determine Their Favorable or Unfavorable Aspects as Reservoirs for Ore and Other Introduced Minerals? Drscussion by: G. W. Bain....... 127 G. M. Fowler....... 131 C. H. Behre, Jr. ..... 131 L. C. Graton....... 128 J. S. Brown. ...... 126 G.. F. Loughlin...... 128 E. L. Bruce ....... 129 R. H. Sales........ 129 R. H. Clarke...... 130 A. K. Snelgrove....... 130 Question 3—Are There Any Criteria by Which One Can Determine When Mining Operations Have Reached the Roots of an Ore Deposit? Discussion by: J. M. Boutwell...... 139 G. B. Langford..... 139 T. M. Broderick..... 138 . G. F. Loughlin...... 135 E. Y. Dougherty..... 137 R. H. Sales...... . 134 G. M. Fowler....... 132 F. A. Thomson..... 136 I. B. Joralcmon...... 132 Edward Wisser:..... 140 General s. F. Kelly................. . ...........145 References...............................146

Jan 1, 1941

Question 1—1s Structural Deformation of Some Character Always Necessary for the Migration of Mineralizing Solutions. Especially in Limestone or Other Dense Rocks Discussion by: A. M. Bateman.........120 S. F. Kelly........... 125 C. H. Behre. Jr........118.123 G. B. Langford......... 123 T. M. Broderick.........121 H. E. McKinstry......... 116 R. H. Clarke.......... 123 D. H. McLaughlin........ 118 J. D. Forrester for M. H. Gidel . . 11.4 W. H. Newhouse......... 123 G. M. Fowler......112. 116. 121 R. H. Sales.......... 116 L. C. Graton..........121 Edward Sampson......... 122 R. D. Hoffman.........120 J. 8. Stevenson.......... 117 I. B. Joralemon.........121 L.B.Wright........... 112 Question 2—What Are Some of the Chemical and Physical Characteristics in Certain Beds within a Limestone Formation that Determine Their Favorable or Unfavorable Aspects as Reservoirs for Ore and Other Introduced Minerals? Drscussion by: G. W. Bain....... 127 G. M. Fowler....... 131 C. H. Behre, Jr. ..... 131 L. C. Graton....... 128 J. S. Brown. ...... 126 G.. F. Loughlin...... 128 E. L. Bruce ....... 129 R. H. Sales........ 129 R. H. Clarke...... 130 A. K. Snelgrove....... 130 Question 3—Are There Any Criteria by Which One Can Determine When Mining Operations Have Reached the Roots of an Ore Deposit? Discussion by: J. M. Boutwell...... 139 G. B. Langford..... 139 T. M. Broderick..... 138 . G. F. Loughlin...... 135 E. Y. Dougherty..... 137 R. H. Sales...... . 134 G. M. Fowler....... 132 F. A. Thomson..... 136 I. B. Joralcmon...... 132 Edward Wisser:..... 140 General s. F. Kelly................. . ...........145 References...............................146

Jan 1, 1941

By Open-Hearth Steel

I received a telegram yesterday from Mr. J. H. Nead saying that he regretted circumstances had come up which prevent his attending the meeting, but that arrangements have been made and Mr. T. S. Washburn, of Inland Steel, will act as the Co-Chairman in his stead. We are sorry, of course, that he cannot be here at this conference. We have, therefore, asked Mr. James J. Bowden, chief metallurgist of Republic Steel Corporation, Cleveland, to act as Chairman and Mr. Tom Washburn to act as Co-Chairman. I will turn the meeting over to these gentlemen at this time.

Jan 1, 1940

By L. Adler

Any design of a mine roof in bedded deposits which ignores differential deflections at the supports can quickly lead to dangerous overstressing. As illustrated by the typical case presented on page 1029, if one support deflects only 0.1 in. more than its neighbor, stresses 50 pct higher than anticipated will result. Previous studies1-3 have assumed that the mine roof acts like a beam clamped at both ends, with no deflection or slope&apos; at the supports (Fig. 1). Essentially this assumes:5* ?A = ?, = ?b and dA = dB = 0. However, a host of conditions can cause differential sag or deflection at one support, and even an apparently trivial deviation can have major consequences in the beam: variations in spacing, size, and material of supports; local settlement due to floor heaving or lower mine openings; non-uniformity in wedging or bolt tensioning.8 In one particular instance concrete pillars, poured in place, shrank away from the roof upon setting.&apos; When understood and controlled, differential sag becomes a definite advantage, permitting the transfer of loads from one support to another. Where one support is a bolt or prop and the other a pillar or rib, the load on the former can be reduced while the load on the pillar or rib is increased. This means two things: 1) savings can be effected by using smaller artificial supports such as props and bolts and 2) loads can be increased in the rib to induce eventual failure for longwall caving. In this last respect, another factor underlying coal bumps becomes understandable. The design of a mine roof by beam theory assumes that when a bedded formation is homogeneous, iso-tropic, and elastic, it will act like a uniformly loaded beam, fixed or clamped at both ends,6 s in Fig. 1.&apos;" These are important assumptions. The uniform load is the weight of the beam itself or its body load. For a beam of unit width, this load becomes per foot: w = yhb. w = uniform load y = specific weight, lb per ft3 h = depth or thickness of beam, ft b = width of beam, ft Since b = 1, w - yh [ 1 ] A beam fixed at both supports is statically indeterminate to the second degree, that is, two equations in addition to those for static equilibrium are required to determine the reactions at the supports. These equations result from the geometry. From statistics: ^F,= 0;RA + RB — wL = 0 [2] wU S,M0 = 0 ; MB H------------MA — RBL = 0 [3] it Using superposition in which the left support is kept intact and the right one resolved into an active force and moment, we obtain from Fig. 2:" ?b = ?m + ? b2 + ?B3 = 0 dB = dB1 + dB2 + dB3 / wU Ma RBL \ V d°=(-r+-2—r)-zr [5] Where: Subscripts refer to position on axis of beam R = force, lb M = moment, ft-lb w = uniformly distributed load, lb per ft L = span, ft 0 = slope, radians d = deflection, ft E = Young&apos;s Modulus, lb per ft" 1 = Moment of inertia about the neutral axis, ft4 Solving Eqs. 2 through 5 for the four unknown reactions, we obtain: 2 L3 Fig. 3 is obtained by plotting MA and M, vs d, and then plotting RA and R, vs d, and adjusting their scales to coincide with MA and M, vs d,. It should be noted in Eqs. 6 and 7 that as dB increases, MA increases the same amount that Mn decreases. Eqs. 8 and 9 show a similar relationship between RA and R,. Proof that MA is the maximum absolute moment occurring in the beam is as follows: where M, = moment at x wx-When where M,., = maximum positive moment Eqs. 6 and 8 into above: For small dn: MA> M,,,

Jan 1, 1960

ALEXANDER, JOHN S, M,&apos;74-6,&apos;81-3 ASHBURNER, C A, M, &apos;85-7 ASMUS, GEORGE, Dl, &apos;78-80 BACON, D H , M, &apos;00-2 BAYLES, JAMES C , M,&apos;80-2,&apos;91-3 P, &apos;84-5, V,&apos;88-9 BIRKINBINE, JOHN, M, &apos;83-5, V, &apos;S7-J, P, &apos;91-2 BLAIR, THOMAS S , M, &apos;74-43 BLAKE, WILLIAM P , V,&apos;71-4,&apos;76-7,&apos;05-6 BLANDY, JOHN F, V,&apos;71-3,&apos;78-9 BLOW, A A, C, &apos;05-7 BOWIE, A J , JR, V,&apos;93-4 BRAMWELL, J H , A1, &apos;89-91 BROOKS, THOS B , M, &apos;72 BRUNTON, D W , V, 97-8 BUCK, STUART M , M, &apos;83-5 BURDEN, JAMES A, V,&apos;80-1 BURNHAM, WILLIAM, M, &apos;82-4. CAMPBELL, H H, M, &apos;93-5 CHAMBERLAIN, H S , V, &apos;96-7 CHANNING, J PARKE, V,&apos;08 CHRISTY, S B , V. &apos;91-2, &apos;07-8 CHURCH, JOHN A, M, &apos;79-8l,&apos;94-6, V, &apos;07-8 COGSWELL, W B, V, &apos;74-5,&apos;86-7

Jan 1, 1910

ALEXANDER, JOHN S, M,&apos;74-6,&apos;81-3 *ASHBURNER, C A, M, &apos;85-7 ASMUS, GEORGE, Dl, &apos;78-80 BACON, D H , M, &apos;00-2 BAYLES, JAMES C , M,&apos;80-2,&apos;91-3 P, &apos;84-5, V,&apos;88-9 BIRKINBINE, JOHN, M, &apos;83-5, V, &apos;S7-J, P, &apos;91-2 BLAIR, THOMAS S , M, &apos;74-43 BLAKE, WILLIAM P , V,&apos;71-4,&apos;76-7,&apos;05-6 *BLANDY, JOHN F, V,&apos;71-3,&apos;78-9 BLOW, A A, C, &apos;05-7 BOWIE, A J , JR, V,&apos;93-4 *BRAMWELL, J H , A1, &apos;89-91 BROOKS, THOS B , M, &apos;72 BRUNTON, D W , V, 97-8 BUCK, STUART M , M, &apos;83-5 *BURDEN, JAMES A, V,&apos;80-1 BURNHAM, WILLIAM, M, &apos;82-4. CAMPBELL, H H, M, &apos;93-5 CHAMBERLAIN, H S , V, &apos;96-7 CHANNING, J PARKE, V,&apos;08 CHRISTY, S B , V. &apos;91-2, &apos;07-8 CHURCH, JOHN A, M, &apos;79-8l,&apos;94-6, V, &apos;07-8 COGSWELL, W B, V, &apos;74-5,&apos;86-7

Jan 1, 1910

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1910

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1910

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION TO OCTOBER, 1904 Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1910

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1917

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1917

LIST OF THE MEETINGS OF THE INSTITUTE AND THEIR LOCALITIES FROM ITS ORGANIZATION Transactions Number Place Date Vol Page I Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1871 I 3 II Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 I 10 III Troy, N Y November, 1871 I 13 IV Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 I 17 V New York, N Y * May, 1872 I 20 VI Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 I 25 VII Boston, Mass February, 1873 I 28 VIII Philadelphia, Pa * May, 1873 II 3 IX Easton, Pa October, 1873 II 7 X New York, N Y February, 1874 II 11 XI St Louis, Mo * May, 1874 III 3 XII Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 III 8 XIII New Haven, Conn February, 1875 III 15 XIV Dover, N J * May, 1875 IV 3 XV Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 IV 9 XVI Washington, D C February, 1876 IV 8 XVII Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, V XVIII Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 V 9 XIX New York, N Y February, 1877 v 27 XX Wilkes-Barre, Pa * May, 1877 vi 3 XXI Amenia, N Y October, 1877 vi 10

Jan 1, 1910