AMOS PEASLEE BROWN Amos P. Brown, Professor of Geology and Mineralogy at the University of Pennsylvania, and a member of the Institute since 1888, died at Atlantic City, Oct. 9, 1917. An extended biography, by his classmate and lifelong associate, Witmer Stone, was published in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 57'(1918), from which the following brief extracts have been taken. For want of space, we must omit reference to Professor Brown's extensive and valuable work on botany, zoology, paleontology, and physiology, to the latter of which sciences lie applied the methods of microscopic crystallography with striking success. Amos Peaslee Brown was born in Germantown, Philadelphia, on Dec. 3, 1864, the son of Amos Peaslee and Frances Brown, and the fourth child of a family of seven sons and two daughters. His earliest education was received at a small private school, but in the autumn of 1877 he entered the Germantown Academy. Deciding to take a scientific course in college he did not study Greek, and dropped Latin in his last years at school. He was thus able to graduate in June, 1852, entering the University of Pennsylvania the following autumn. He took the Towne scientific course, specializing in mining engineering after the sophomore year. He studied mineralogy under Prof. George A. Koenig, chemistry under Prof. Frederick A. Genth, physics under Prof. George F. Barker, astronomy under Prof. E. Otis Kendall, civil engineering under Prof. Lewis M. Haupt, mathe-matics under Prof. Henry W. Spangler and botany under Prof. Joseph T. Rothrock. He graduated in June, 1586, receiving the degree of B. S., and was chosen to deliver the bachelor's oration at the commencement at the old Academy of Music. He remained at the University another year, taking the post-graduate course in mining, and received the degree of E. M. in June, 1887. Soon after graduation, Brown secured a position as aide on the Second Geological Survey of Pennsylvania, under Ashburner, his first work consisting in the compilation of data respecting the coal-mining operations of the State. This occupied a year, mostly in the field, followed by office work in Pittsburgh. Finishing his work in the bituminous region in June, 1885, Brown returned to Philadelphia and accepted a position under Mr. Benjamin Smith Lyman, who had undertaken a survey of the New Boston and Morea coal lands in Schuylkill County, near Pottsville. The survey was a private enterprise, but the map was afterward published by the State Geological Survey. This work kept Brown in the field until late in the autumn, while the actual drawing of the map was. done in Philadelphia in the winter. In the following spring Mr. Lyman engaged in a survey and report on the "New Red" formation of Bucks and Montgomery Counties, in which Brown again acted as his assistant and prepared an account of the igneous rocks of the district, which accompanies Air. Lyman's report. His name appears on both the Bucks County map and that of the Morea anthracite district.. In the early autumn of 1889, before the Bucks County survey was completed, Brown left Mr. Lyman to accept a position as instructor in mining at the University of Pennsylvania, under his old professor, Dr. Koenig, and here lie remained for practically the rest of his life. In 1890 lie was instructor in mining and metallurgy; in 1892 professor of mineralogy and geology in the auxiliary department of medicine, which he held until the abolishment of the department in 1898. On March 5,1895, he became assistant professor of mineralogy and geology in the college faculty, and full professor in the spring of 1903, a position which he continued to hold until the spring of 1917, when he was forced to resign on account of failing health. From the autumn of 1892, after Dr. Koenig's retirement from the University, Brown took over the entire direction of the department, teaching in all branches of the subject-mineralogy, geology, lithology, crystallography, mining, and metallurgy. Soon after his return to the university he began studying for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, which was conferred upon him on June 16, 1893.
The stresses in the materials surrounding an underground opening are dependent upon the virgin stress field, the geometry of the opening and changes in boundary conditions as mining progresses. For most underground openings, especially in coal mines, roof bolts are installed to help stabilize the opening. While most parameters in roof bolt design and installation have been thoroughly investigated, the effect of the initial stress field on the effectiveness of roof bolts has not been recognized. This paper summarizes the results of investigation of the effect of the initial stress field on the performance of mine roof bolts. Roof bolt installations are duplicated in the laboratory utilizing conventional roof bolt frame, commercial roof bolts and shells, mine torque wrench, and encapsulated rock specimens for anchorage. A special and primary feature of the laboratory setup is the addition of a loading system for generating confining stresses within the rock surrounding the anchor. For this preliminary study, different levels of hydrostatic stress fields were induced at the anchorage specimen, instrumented roof bolts were installed in the usual manner, and the bolt load loss-with-time observed. Statistical analysis of data showed that the stress field at the anchorage horizon has a considerable influence on the mine roof bolts, i.e. the higher the stress level, the higher the anchorage efficiency.
DURING the last quarter-century it has gradually become apparent that the science of metallog-raphy must deal not alone with the constitu-tion and structure of metals and alloys, but with the correlation of chemical composition, constitution, thermal treatment, mechanical treatment, structure, and temperature, with their physical and mechani-cal properties. The development of technique in microscopy, etch-ing, thermal analysis, and general physical measure-ments has been no small factor in the progress of metal-lographic science. This development has been largely incident to the study of alloy systems and impurities in metals and alloys. About 270 binary, 40 ternary and 3 quarternary alloy systems have been investigated to date. Only preliminary investigations have been made on most of these systems, and much work remains to be done in this direction. In Vol. I of The Metallographist, January, 1898, we find the following definition of metallography as offered by F. Osmond: Metallography, generally, speaking, signifies the structure of metals and of their alloys. The science is not confined to the use of a single instrument, the microscope for instance, whose manipulation requires a certain training, giving rise, therefore, to a specialty and to specialists. In reality we begin by using our eyes in the examination of metals and when they show us all that they can see, we provide them with lenses of increasing magnifying power, until we are stopped, at about 2000 diam¬eters, before the mysteries of the ultra-microscopic. But the naked eye and the optical instruments are only an incomplete means of investigation; They take, so to speak, a first inventory; the indications furnished by the visible characters, form, color or luster must be controlled by chemical analysis, micro-chem¬istry and crystallography, by the determination of physical and mechanical constants, in a word, by all the available means for the differentiation and identification of bodies. In the same issue of The Metallographist, A. Sauveur epitomizes the results in the field of metallography up to that time (1898). The last decade has witnessed an activity in metallurgical researches which has probably no parallel in the history of the science, owing to the strictly scientific spirit with which they have been conducted. Scientists in all metallurgical countries have taken hold of the industrial metals, and are applying to them the scientific methods of investigation of this highly scientific age. Witness the work of Sorby, Abel, Muller, Osmond, Howe, Martens, Arnold, Wedding, Roberts-Austen, H. Le-Chatelier, Charpy, Ledebur, Behrens, De Benneville, and others. The metals and their alloys are being dissected, and the high-power objective, that wonderful instrument of modern researches, is revealing to us their intimate structure, throwing a flood of light upon their constitution, chemical and physical, the prac-tical as well as the theoretical value of which could hardly be overestimated. Their physics, hitherto much neglected, is being minutely investigated. Their thermal behavior is being ascer-tained with a precision rendered possible only by the extremely delicate pyrometer of H. LeChatelier. Their magnetic, prop-erties, their electric conductivity, their diffusion, their physical and mechanical properties in general, are being investigated with a degree of accuracy never before attained. The chemist is energetically at work, in his endeavor to establish the true chemical relation between the metals and their impurities, and successful excursions are being taken into the, domain of their proximate compositions. As Mr. Osmond has aptly said, modern science is treating the industrial metal like a living organ-ism, and we are led to study its anatomy, i.e., its physical and chemical constitution; its biology, i.e., the influence exerted upon its constitution by the various treatments, thermal and mech-anical, to which the metal is lawfully subjected; and its path-ology, -i.e., the action of impurities and, defective treatments upon its normal constituents."
Biographical Notices
Recent Advances in Metallography