Search Documents

By Carl Zapffe

The manganese ore reserves of Lake Superior, because of their location and nature, have recently achieved a rnarked degree of importance as compared with the world's manganese reserves. To appreciate fully the significance and the adequacy of this reserve, one should understand how such ores are used, where obtainable, the quantity used, possible avenues for increasing use or application, and the chemical and physical characteristics of the available ores. Only with those data at hand, is it possible to arrive at a convincing answer to the question whether the reserves of manganiferous iron ores are adequate to satisfy the annual demand of the presently known iron ores for the full life of the latter. That they should last is vital; and to ascertain whether they will last was the purpose of the present investigation, which marks the first attempt to study these Lake Superior reserves. The Lake Superior region possesses and supplies the full assortment of iron ores needed for the conversion of ore into pig iron and steel ingots and castings. These ores are named bessemer, low-phosphorus and high-phosphorus non-bessemer, manganiferous and siliceous; and to include the term aluminiferous would be in keeping with the most recent nomenclature adopted by some dealers. About 35 or 40 years ago, perhaps less, most of the Lake Superior ore which is being used today was the material then considered either useless or too poor for immediate use; perhaps it was considered no more than a future reserve. An examination of the analyses of ores and the guarantees in the sales of those older times convince one that the opinions of those days must have been governed by only small differences in analyses. Some grades of ores used today in substantial amounts were used most sparingly only one or two decades ago. The relative quantities of the different ores used are ever changing; and, bit by bit, the metallurgy and the opinions are ever changing and the prejudices against certain ores and practices decrease. This is unquestionably more pronounced for the manganiferous ores than for any other kind. If, when using the present data for manganiferous ores, we will only be content to make allowances for the same experiences other kinds of ores

Jan 1, 1927

By W. Crafts, J. L. Lamont

Secondary hardening in tempering has long been recognized as a typical characteristic of steels containing large amounts of carbide-forming alloys. These steels, when quenched and tempered, tend to soften somewhat after tempering at low temperatures, and to reharden at intermediate tempering temperatures before finally softening to low hardness. This behavior in tempering has been studied by many investigators, chiefly with respect to thc secondary hardening of high-speed steels. The initial softening has usually been ascribed to decomposition of martensite and growth of iron carbide particles. The secondary hardening has been explained by formation of fresh martensite from residual austenite, formation of very fine alloy carbide particles and by precipitation hardening of metallic compounds in the ferritic matrix. However, factors derived for the calculation of tempered hardness in low-alloy steels1 indicated only a tendency toward retarded softening rather than a discontinuous rehardening. A study was, therefore, made to determine whether fresh martensite from residual austenite and precipitation hardening are essential to rehardening and the degree to which tempered martensite could be rehardened by precipitation of alloy carbides. The mechanism of carbide rehardening was also investigated to determine the nature of the process. The causes of secondary hardening in high-speed steel have received serious consideration for about thirty years. Among the earlier workers Bain and Jeffries2 in 1923 recognized residual austenite as a significant factor, but in addition, emphasized the effect of the formation of alloy carbide particles of "critical" size. They conceived that freshly quenched martensite forms low-alloy iron carbide at low tempering temperatures; with further tempering the iron carbide is then modified by alloying elements that can diffuse most readily at intermediate temperatures (850°F); and that the iron carbides grow in size by coalescence so that the steel tends to lose hardness. At higher tempering temperatures carbide stability rather than alloy availability becomes the controlling influence and in high-speed steel "iron-tungsten carbide is the most stable one and forms to the elimination of the earlier formed carbides. . . . The iron-tungsten carbide particles reach approximately the size for critical dispersion after a short reheat at II00 F." This concept, the formation of alloy carbide nuclei, redissolving of the iron carbide, and diffusion of carbon to the alloy carbide, was restated for vanadium steel in 1932 by Houdremont, Bennek, and Schrader. Subsequent studies have confirmed that iron carbide changes to alloy carbide at 1000 to IIOOOF, but the mechanism of the process has received little consideration.

Jan 1, 1949

By H. D. Hibbard

At the beginning of a Henry M. Howe lecture it seems fitting to refer to Howe's great contributions to steel metallurgy, and particularly to the literature thereof. Most of my predecessors in this role have been able, from their association with him, to give direct testimony as to his great services; but although connected with him for years in a business way, I am less familiar with what might be called his academic side, except as it is embodied in his utterances, written and oral. Howe was adept in his genial way in extracting information in any line which, at the time, was of interest to him. In a technical lecture one expects as a rule new knowledge-—something about recent advances relating to the subject. On this occasion, however, I will ask you to go back with me to the primary department of steel lore, as the title of my lecture shows, to review the more fundamental features in that field for the purpose of seeking some gaps which we can fill and so give the subject renewed interest. In thus going back one must inevitably repeat many familiar facts, but that seems to be necessary in order to reach a clear understanding of the unrecorded matters. The full interpretation of a steel analysis is at present unattainable, though much progress toward that end has been made. The ultimate analysis, giving the percentages of the five commonly determined elements, does indeed usually give a fair idea of what the steel is, and is ordinarily enough, with knowledge of its history and physical condition, to enable it to be assigned to some purpose or use for which it is reasonably suitable. Rut discrepancies arise. Every maker and every User of steel knows, from at least occasional examples in his own experience, that the ultimate analysis is insufficient by itself to enable one to tell positively, from its interpretation, either the mechanical properties of the steel or its adaptability to the purpose for which it was made. Further, if, while having the specified composition, it is abnormal or unsatisfactory, why it is so. Good, bad and indifferent steels may have substantially the same ultimate analysis.

Jan 1, 1928

By V. N. Krivobor

The study and use of low-carbon manganese steels have been curiously neglected in the general history of developments in alloy steels. Hadfield1 made an extensive study of manganese-iron-carbon alloys about 1886, which culminated in the wide application and use of Hadfield austenitic manganese steel. His alloys were nearly all high in carbon, as compared with the steels discussed in this paper, and he found a marked tendency toward brittleness in the alloys of medium and low manganese content, that is, below 7 per cent. manganese. As a result, there has been a widespread prejudice against the use of manganese steels containing between 1.0 to 3.5 per cent. manganese with comparatively low carbon. Steels of this composition have never been studied adequately in comparison with other alloy steels, and have had litttle use in practice. In a very recent paper by Sir Robert Hadfield2 the following statement appears: 6L... manganese-iron alloys with little or no carbon do not seem to offer any practical employment; they only become valuable in the presence of quite high percentages of carbon, 0.90 to 1.50 percent." The results of the present investigation are so contrary to the findings of Hadfield that the writers feel fully justified in presenting the preliminary report incorporated in this paper. Previous Investigations As early as 1886 the Terre Noire CO.3 in France produced alloys containing up to 2.5 per cent. of manganese, using ordinary low-grade

Jan 1, 1927

By C. K. Leith

ManGanese is one of the minerals which is principally consumed in countries other than origin. Nearly 85 per cent. of the world's production is used by the United States, England, Germany and France, and roughly a third of the total is used by the United States alone. On the other hand, over 85 per cent. of the world production comes from Brazil, Russia, India, the Gold Coast of Africa and the Sinai Peninsula. It follows from this fact that practically all manganese moves across international boundaries in raw or alloy form, and much the larger part of this inovement is for considerable distances and is occan bornc. There is no indication that any one of the principal consuming countries can develop even approximately adequate supplies of its own. Under abnormal war conditions, with high prices and changes in metallurgical methods, only 35 per cent. of the needs of the United States was met from local sources, and under our recent tariff only 11 per cent. There are thousands of manganese deposits scattered about the world, but only a very few which can figure largely in supplying requirements on a modern scale. The known reserves, together with highly probable extensions and explorations now under way, indicate no shortage from a world standpoint for many deeades to come. The production and marketing of manganese is going steadily into fewer and stronger hands. The steel industry uses over 90 per cent. of all the manganese mined and is acquiring control of a considerable part of the production in all of the principal fields—the Germans in Nikopol, the English in India and Gold Coast, the Americans in Georgia, India, Gold Coast and Brazil. Some of the controlling companies arc of international scope. Concentration of commercial control is a notable tendency. A natural consequence is the growing uneasiness of smaller consumers the world over about their ultimate supplies and desire to know more definitely how and where manganese supplies will be controlled in the future. The sources of supply are few cnough to warrant the belief that more or less monopolistic elements of control arc not impossible.

Jan 1, 1927

By M. Cohen, W. J. Harris

The recent application of lineal analysislt2 to the austenite-martensite reaction has made possible a quantitative study of the kinetics of this transformation during rapid cooling. Martensite range curves can thus be constructed to portray the onset of the reaction at Ma and its subsequent progress as a function of temperature down to and below the ambient. It now seems in order to investigate other aspects of the martensite transformation, using this quantitative method of approach. One of the least understood characteristics of the austenite-martensite reaction is that of stabilization which has been defined by Troiano and Greninger3 as 'la lowering of Ma, resulting from aging, without change in chemical composition of the parent solid solution." In other words, if the hardening quench is arrested at a predetermined subcritical temperature (TA) for a sufficient period of time, more austenite may be retained at a given lower Or reference temperature (Tr) than if the steel had been cooled directly and rapidly to Tr in the first place. For the purposes of the work at hand, the extent of stabilization produced by the isothermal treatment at Th is measured explicitly in terms of the excess austenite (6) that exists in the steel at T,, over and above the amount that is normally present after direct quenching to T,. T, is conveniently taken to be room temperature, but this choice is not essential and is sometimes undesirable. The holding temperature (TA) may be above or below M,, and still cause stabilization depending upon the themistry of the austenite. stabilization has been found to occur in the presence of bainite4 and of martensite6,6,7,8 as well as in the absence of either,g The phe-nomenon of stabilization is not concerned with (and may even be obscured by) ferrite formation or any other type of phase change occurring at T~ that alters the chemistry of the remaining austenite. Such a structural change would obviously influence the martensite transformation during subscquent cooling. Stabilization, however, is more subtle; it appears to manifest itself without detectable variation of the austenite composition, whether in the presence or absence of transformation products. There are relatively few direct references to stabilization in the literature. The stabilizing effect of room temperature aging and tempering on the subzero transformation of retained austenite has been clearly shown in plain carbon,6,8 low alloy6s7.8 and high alloy tool steels.10'5 ssa- with the as-hardened steel, the degree of stabilization increases with tempering time and temperature through

Jan 1, 1949

By H. Eyring, J. W. Fredrickson

Many theories have been advanced to explain the phenomena of elastic and plastic deformation. The object of this report is to present a mechanism for deformation, not radically differing from existing theories, but embodying.certain principles and concepts of these theories. This proposed theory cannot be the complete answer to the age-old problem of deformation but it is believed that it will be a step further in the proper direction. The plastic properties of solids have recently been reviewed by Seitz and Read.' ZenerZ has reviewed and correlated the existing work on the anelasticity of metals. With these and others3'4'5 resent theories of deformation are well-known. Of the many theories now extant, those receiving most attention have been proffered by Griffith,6 Becker,l Smekal,8 Polanyilg Orowanlo and Taylor.'' Although differing quite widely in details, these theories are based more or less on a common principle of flaws or dislocations that exist in the crystal lattice. The effect of stress concentrations surrounding a flaw or crack has been treated most recently by Fisher and Hollomon.12 The various authors differ as to the exact nature of the flaws or dislocations, the causes of their appearance, or the manner in which they initiate slip. All of the theories agree that the number of dislocations increases with progressing deformation. It is universally agreed that the shearing process is not a simple gliding of ideally perfect atomic lattice planes. It is also agreed that the "macroscopic" process of gliding, or slip, is brought about by the spreading of a large number of locally initiated "glide steps" through the whole crystal. The occurrence of these "glide steps" is closely related to the presence of some kind of deviations from the "ideal" lattice structure, even in the undeformed crystal. These deviations are overcome ''one at a time," in a manner of speaking, due to some stress-concentrating effect.13 Proposed Theory Many solids show a continuously increasing deformation if subjected to a constant load of suitable magnitude in an extended range of temperature for a sufficient time. This deformation, or flow, may be said to be due, in general, to the tendency of the atoms or molecules in an elastically stressed body to readjust themselves in such a way that if the deformation were kept constant, a release of stress would take place. If rupture does not occur, this process of relaxation causes the rate of flow to obtain a final constant value, as shown in the curve (Fig I) obtained by Taylor and Quinney.14 In this state the release of stress by relaxation exactly counterbalances the increase due to the elastic strain on the test pieces.

Jan 1, 1949

By L. D. Jaffe, D. C. Buffum

The importance of temper brittleness in alloy steels has long been realized in Europe. In the United States recognition of its importance has developed within the last several years. Many brittle failures encountered in parts made of alloy steel are undoubtedly attributable, wholly or in part, to temper brittleness. These failures have occurred particularly at low temperatures, under shock loading, and in the presence of notches, restraints and combined stresses. It has been almost universally accepted that plain carbon steels are not susceptible to temper brittleness. As a result, considerable effort has been expended in attempts to discover the manner in which alloying elements introduce temper brittleness. It is desired to raise the possibility that plain carbon steels are not only susceptible to temper brittleness, but are much more susceptible than alloy steels, in the sense that they embrittle much more rapidly. It is suggested that previous views, (that plain carbon steels are not susceptible), are based upon an erroneous interpretation of the experimental results. Interpretation of Previous Data For many years the standard criterion for susceptibility of a steel to temper brittleness consisted of comparison of the energy absorption, in a notched-bar impact test at room temperature, of specimens that had received two heat treatments.' One specimen (or group of specimens) was quenched, tempered, and quenched from the temper. The other specimen (or group) differed only in having received an embrittlement treatment, which might consist of a slow cool from the tempering temperature, or of an isothermal hold in the range 45w550°C subsequent to quenching from the temper. If the energy absorption of the specimen receiving the embrittlement treatment was lower than that of the specimen not given this treatment, it was said that the steel was susceptible to temper brittleness. If the energy absorptions were the same, it was said that the steel was not susceptible. Several investigators2J found that plain carbon steels showed negligible difference in energy absorption in such tests (at least when their manganese content was below 0.60 pct), and concluded that plain carbon steels are not susceptible to temper brittleness. Recently the deficiencies of the criterion mentioned above have been pointed out.'-= The criterion now generally used for susceptibility to temper brittleness retains the heat treatments used in the earlier scheme, but instead of the notched-bar impact tests being made only at room temperature, they are made over a range of temperatures, covering the transition from ductile to brittle fracture. If the transition temperature of the specimens receiving the embrittlement treatment is higher than those

Jan 1, 1949

By Albert Sauveur

My first paper dealing with the theories of the hardening of steel by rapid cooling was published in the Transactions of this Institute in 1896— 30 years ago-under the title "The Microstructure of Steel and the Current Theories of Hardening," hence, also, the title of the present paper. It was extensively discussed and was, I believe, one of the starting points of many subsequent papers and discussions of the same subject, dis-cusssions which at times became almost violent and which led to the formation of different schools such as the "Carbonists" and the "Allo-tropists." Some of the older members of the Institute, who took part in the debate or who were interested observers, will, I am sure, have kept a vivid remembrance of it. The controversy gradually quieted down, apparently for lack of ammunition, without any side acknowledging defeat. Recently, however, interest in it ha been revived through the claims of some that these vexed questions had at last been solved. In an effort to ascertain if possible the prevailing view of those best qualified to express an opinion a questionnaire was submitted to the following gentlemen: J. 0. Arnold Sir Robert Hadfield Edgar C. Bain W. H. Hatfield Carl Benedicks Samuel L. Hoyt N. Belaiew Kotaro Honda H. M. Boylston Zay Jeffries Harry Brearley H. Le Chatelier G. K. Burgess H. H. Lester William Campbell Francis F. Lucas H. C. H. Carpenter John A. Mathews Pierre Chevenard A. McCance P. Dejean Albert Portevin C. A. Edwards Walter Rosenhain F. Giolliti Bradley Stoughton G. Grenet F. C. Thompson Leon Guillet

Jan 1, 1926

By Charles Y. Clayton

A study of the literature shows that the greater part of research work on annealing of cold-worked iron has been for the purpose of studying the effect on grain-size and properties other than hardness. No reference has been found of experimental work of the same nature as that explained in this short paper. The material used throughout was Vismera iron, an iron containing 0.03 carbon and made several years ago by the Inland Steel Co. One-half inch stock was cut into cylinders % in. long. The cylinders were then compressed for 60 sec. in a Reihle testing machine under loads as indicated below: CoMPressiON, Average Length, Series Pounds Inches 1 10,000 0.693 2 15,000 .599 3 20,000 .501 4 25,000 .426 5 30,000 .378 6 35,000 .351 7 40,000 .311 Fig. 1 shows these cylinders after compression. Each series consisted of 17 specimens lettered 0, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, P, Q and R. One specimen of each series was reserved for study of the properties in the cold-worked condition. The other specimens were annealed in a Hump furnace for 1/2 hr. at the following temperatures: TEmpeRa- TempeRa- Letters tuRe,° C. LettERs tuRe °C. B............................... 250 J.............................. 650 C............................... 300 K............................. 700 D............................... 350 L.............................. 750 E............................... 400 M............................. 800 F................................ 450 N............................. 851 G............................... 500 0. . :........................... 900 H............................... 550 P.............................. 950 I................................ 600 Q............................. L000

Jan 1, 1926

By J. B. Bassett, E. S. Rowland

The experimental work reported herein firas inspired by the publication of a paper by Grange and stewart, in which it was suggested that at low chromium contents the effect of this element on the Ma point was greater than at higher chromium contents, It was argued that, if a small increase of chromium in solution in austenite caused a sharp lowering of the M, point, it might lead to an explanation of occasional unsolved stress cracking of SAE 52100 during heat treatment. Commercial hardening is carried out at temperatures of incomplete solution, leaving carbides available to enrich the austenite during any inadvertent increase in temperature, such enrichment of the austenite in chromium content would lower the M, point nearer room temperature where cracking is more likely to occur. According, it was decided to investigate the effect of chromium, in quantities between o and 2 pet, on the M, point of commercial steels. Fig I summarizes the data available on chromium steels. For purposes of comparison, the M, temperature values were corrected by means of the Grange and Stewart formulas to (I) Hypoeutectoid compositions: 0.50 pct carbon and 0.80 pct manganese (z) Hsereutectoid compos-sition': 1." pet carbon and O.35 pct manganese. Only the steels having compositions reasonably close to these corrected values were included, because large adjustments inevitably introduce increased error such as are experienced in using the formula. The straight lines of Fig I were drawn by the authors. These data obviously do not settle the question Of the effect Of chromium On the Md Oint, particularly at low chromium contents. While it is fairly well established that chromium causes the M, to be lowered when present in quantities of I pet Or more, Grange and Stewart1 have suggested that in small amounts (less than 1 pet) it is more effective in lowering the Ma point, while Klier and Troiano2 have suggested that in small amounts it is less effective in lowering the Ma point. Payson and Savage3 concur with Klier and Troiano and further suggest that the effect is not linear at these concentrations. Rose and Fischer4 report that small amounts of chromium actually raise the Ma point of a 0.20 carbon steel. Material Two series of 35 Ib induction heats were melted for this work, the analyses of which are given in Table I. One series was aimed at 0.50 pct carbon and 0.80 pct manganese with chromium additions in 0,25 pet increments from o to 1.5 pct with a single heat at 2.0 pct Cr. This series was considered necessary because the commercial heat treatment of SAE 52100 does not generally introduce more than about 0.60 pct carbon in solution in the austenite. The high

Jan 1, 1949

By H. M. Boylston

Metallic manganese was first produced in 1773, by Sven Rinmann, a Swedish mineralogist. In 1799, William Reynolds, of Ketley, England, obtained a patent on the use of manganese dioxide in the manufacture of steel, and in 1808 an English patent was granted to John Wilkinson covering the use of manganese ore, or manganiferous ore, as an addition to iron ore in the blast furnace for the production of a superior grade of pig iron. Karsten showed in 1816 that manganese increased the hardness of iron without decreasing its malleability or toughness, while it caused pig iron to be more white in fracture and more fusible. The first practical application of manganese to steel-making, however, is attributed to Josiah Heath who discovered in 1839 (less than 90 years ago) that manganese conferred upon steel the properties of being more easily worked and welded under the hammer. When Bessemer invented the pneumatic process of steel-making which now bears his name he was at first successful because, as it afterward developed, he was using a Swedish pig iron high in manganese. When his supply of this material ran out, he used a low-manganese pig from English sources and failed signally to produce a steel which could be rolled, while his Swedish licensees were continuing their successful application of his method. And it was not until Robert Mushet, in 1856, suggested the addition of manganese in the form of spiegeleisen to the molten product of the converter that success again came to Bessemer. In 1866, William Siemens patented the use of ferromanganese as an addition to molten steel to counteract the bad effects of sulfur. It was in 1888 that Robert Hadfield published at some length his account of the effect of manganese as an alloying element in steel and described the unique properties of the now famous Hadfield manganese steel containing about 12 to 14 per cent. manganese and 1.25 per cent. carbon. Function or Manganese in Steel-making Bessemer's failure at one period of his experimental work to make steel which could be forged successfully was due to the fact that the

Jan 1, 1927

By W. P. Sykes

In connection with a study of tungsten steels, Honda and Murakamil reported an investigation of the system iron-tungsten. This report included a tentative equilibrium diagram, photomicrographs of various alloys in the series, and qualitative measurements of hardness and magnetic properties. The present investigation originally had as its object the study of the hardness and tensile properties of a series of carbon-free iron-tungsten alloys. But, as the work progressed it became evident that the system possessed other features of interest, so the scope of the investigation was enlarged. Materials The iron powder used in preparing the alloys was obtained as follows : Iron oxalate was precipitated from a ferrous-sulfate solution by the addition of a solution of oxalic acid. This oxalate, after thorough washing, was ignited to iron oxide, which after reduction in hydrogen at about 1000" C. yielded iron powder containing but about 0.2 per cent. iron oxide and about 0.005 per cent. carbon. Tungsten metal in the form of powder, such as is used in the manufacture of filaments for incandescent lamps, was the other constituent. This material analyzed 99.8 per cent. tungsten and contained no carbon. The metal powders, in the desired proportions, were mixed by tumbling and formed, under pressure of 20 tons per sq. in., into rods 3/8 by 3/8 by 10 in. To form the alloys without contamination, sections of the pressed rods were placed on alundum slabs and heated in an alundum tube wound with a tungsten resistor and packed in heat-insulating material. While the resistor was heated, a stream of hydrogen was continually passed through both the tube and the case containing it. The tungsten winding on the tube, as well as the material heated within the tube, was thus protected from oxidation. Such a furnace will operate constantly for several days at temperatures up to 1500' C. and for shorter periods

Jan 1, 1926

By Robert S. Williams

NO new ferrous alloys have been produced in the last five or six years that are as outstanding contributions to civilization as were the high-speed steels of the early part of the century or the stainless steels announced at the close of the World War. There have been, however, many developments of major importance having to do either with modifications of existing alloys or with new methods of treatment of older iron or steel alloys. Only a limited number of these new developments can be discussed and their selection does not necessarily imply that these are the most important but merely that they are of general interest rather than perhaps of greater importance in highly specialized fields.

Jan 1, 1939

CHARLES KIRCHHOFF, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. HERBERT M. BOYLSTON, Secretary, Abbot Bldg., Cambridge, Mass. John Birkinbine, J. Esrey Johnson, Jr., Felix A. Vogel, William H. Blauvelt, William Kelly, Leonard. Waldo, James Gayley, Richard Moldenke, William R. Walker, Henry D. Hibbard, Joseph W. Richards, William R. Webster. Henry M. Howe, E. Gybbon Spilsbury, Frederick W. Wood. Robert W. Hunt, A. A. Stevenson, It will be noted that the various interests of the iron and steel industry are authoritatively represented on this Committee by producers of raw materials (iron ore, coke, and other fuels, refractories, etc.) and of finished materials, by consumers, consulting metallurgists, and educators. The primary duties of the Committee are to secure important papers on iron and steel, to promote their discussion, to organize lively and fruitful meetings, and otherwise to foster the interests of the large number of members of the Institute connected with the iron and steel industry in its many phases. Its success during the past year has been noteworthy. Through its instrumentality many valuable papers were presented at the Cleveland and New York meetings, followed by animated and productive discussions, while the attendance of iron and steel men at both meetings was remarkably large and representative.

Jan 5, 1913

CHARLES KIRCHHOFF, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chair-man. A. A. STEVENSON, Vice-Chair-man. HERBERT M. BOYLSTON, Secretary, Abbot Bldg., Cambridge, Mass. John Birkinbine, J. Esrey Johnson, Jr., Felix A. Vogel, William H. Blauvelt, William Kelly, Leonard Waldo, James Gayley, Richard Moldenke, William R. Walker, Henry D. Hibbard, Joseph W. Richards, William R. Webster. Henry M. Howe, E. Gybbon Spilsbury, Frederick \V. Wood. Robert W. Hunt, A. A. Stevenson is appointed an additional Vice-Chairman of the Committee. He will serve as Acting Chairman during the absence abroad of Professor Sauveur.

Jan 7, 1913

Attention is called to the changes in officers of the Committee, whereby Albert Sauveur becomes Vice-Chairman, and Herbert M. Boylston, Secretary. Three new members of the Committee have been added, as follows : J. Esrey Johnson, Jr., William Kelly, William R. Walker. The death of Dr. F. WV. C. Schniewind is a severe personal blow to the members of the Committee, as well as a loss on the technical side that will be hard to fill. During the absence of Mr. Kirchhoff in Europe the activities of the Committee will be under the charge of Professor Sauveur.

Jan 4, 1913

CHARLES KIRCHHOFF, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. HERBERT M. BOYLSTON, Secretary, Abbot Bldg., Cambridge, Mass. John Birkinbine, J. Esrey Johnson, Jr., Felix A. Vogel, William H. Blauvelt, William Kelly, Leonard Waldo, James Gayley, . Richard Moldenke, William R. Walker, Henry D. Hibbard, Joseph W. Richards, - William R. Webster. Henry 1%1. Howe, E. Gybbon Spilsbury, Frederick W. Wood. Robert W. Hunt, A. A. Stevenson, The Board of Directors of the Institute has authorized the holding of a meeting under the auspices of the Iron and, Steel Committee in New York City, October 16 and 17, 1913. Gratifying responses have been received to the request of the Committee for contributions, the following papers being already assured: 1. H. M. Howe, Equilibrium Temperature for A, in Carbon Steel. 2. H. M. Howe, The Divorcing of the Eutectoid in Meteorites. 3. H. M. Howe and A. G. Levy, Determination Of the Position of Ae3, in Carbon-Iron Alloys. 4. G. .K Burgess, J. J. Crowe and H. S. Rawdon, Thermal and Microscopical Examination of Professor Howe's Standard Commercial Steels. 5. H. Dl. Hove, Discussion of the Existing Data as to the Position of Ae3,. 6. J. H. Hall, Shock Tests of Cast Steel. 7. H. F. Miller, Jr., The Design of Regenerators for Open-Hearth Furnaces. 8. E. Stütz, Paper on the "Scoria Process." 9. Albert Sauveur, Mayari Steel. 10. Felix A. Vogel, Briquetting. 11. J. E. Johnson, Jr., Paper on " Cast Iron."

Jan 6, 1913

CHARLES KIRCHHOFF, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. A. A. STEVENSON, Vice- Chairman. HERBERT M. BOYLSTON, Secretary, Abbot Bldg., Cambridge, Mass. John Birkinbine, J. Esrey Johnson, Jr., Felix A: Vogel, William H. Blauvelt, William Kelly, Leonard Waldo, James Gayley, Richard Moldenke, William R. Walker, Henry D. Hibbard, Joseph W. Richards, William R. Webster. Henry M. Howe, E. Gybbon Spilsbury, Frederick W. Wood. Robert W. Hunt, A. A. Stevenson is appointed an additional Vice-Chairman of the Committee. He will serve as Acting Chairman during the absence abroad of Professor Sauveur. For the meeting of the Institute which is to be held in New York City, Oct. 16 and 17, 1913, the following papers are now assured

Jan 7, 1913

By Wm. A. Haven

As soon as the likelihood of American participation in the war was established, and in spite of the fact that we can produce almost as much as all other countries combined, the demand for prompt deliveries of iron and steel products from American factories began to exceed their utmost capacity, and, after fifteen months of practically full operation, has continued to do so. Therefore, it would seem worth while to review some of the aspects of the supply and demand for steel as well as the efforts that are being made to bring them into balance. It is still being debated as to whether the situation should be defined as a real shortage that will persist through the emergency period or as a temporary one than can be relieved by less drastic measures than a Government-sponsored program of expanding existing plants and building new ones.

Jan 1, 1942