Search Documents

By H. M. Chance

Jan 1, 1887

By J. C. Bradley

THE relation of annealing temperature to conductivity of copper wire has been determined. Conductivity hard was 98.26 per cent. After a 10-min. heating at 200°C. it was 98.69. By annealing 10 min. at 300° C. a large increase, to 100.93, occurred. Maximum conductivity, 101.15, was attained after a 500° C. anneal; thereafter it decreased to 100.53 after a 950° C. anneal. If copper is gassed the decrease is much more than this. Materials and Methods The work was done on high grade electrolytic copper, 99.942 per cent. copper plus silver, silver 0.0008 per cent. It was hot-rolled to >/4 in., then cold drawn to 0.080 in. The wire was cut into 25 5-ft. lengths and numbered 1 to 25 as cut. Four samples were tested hard. The others were wound into 5-in. diameter coils. For the 100° C. heating a coil was put into water, the water brought to boiling, and the wire kept at this temperature for 10 min. For the higher temperatures the coils were placed in envelopes of sheet copper, a little water added, and the envelopes sealed by folding over the edges twice, and hammering them together. This kept the air out very well. The envelope and wire 'were brought to the desired temperature; this was maintained for 10 min., then the whole was water-quenched.

Jan 1, 1927

By Morris M. Fine, Norwood B. Melcher

It is out of the question, at this time, to select any one prereduction process as superior to the others. It is apparent that several share a basic similarity and that within the groups listed in Part 1, the reduction vessel is sometimes the only significant variable. Claims as to the virtues of one machine over another are difficult to substantiate: one may be rapid, another thermally frugal. Based on published data, however, all seem to be performing adequately. It would appear that processes based on carbonized pellets are most applicable to foundry iron at low production rates. Adaptation to large scale manufacture of blast furnace hot metal or to agglomeration of fine concentrates at the mine site is much less likely.

Jan 8, 1966

Jan 1, 1967

By H. O. Hofman

Jan 1, 1896

By Alfred V. de Forest

We are now assembled in this hall for the eighteenth lecture in honor of the memory of our greatest American metallurgist, Henry Marion Howe. Many of his most intimate contemporaries, led, as was fitting, by Professor Sauveur, have described his vital accomplishments in three fields: as a leader in technical industrial development; in theoretical research; and finally as a teacher and source of inspiration for nearly two generations of students. In 1914 Professor Howe had retired from active teaching, but maintained his laboratory at Columbia University under the care of Arthur G. Levy, with whom he published many of the papers that later were incorporated into his last book, " The Metallography of Steel and Cast Iron." My position at the time was that of personal assistant to Professor Campbell—no pay, no duties, but the great privilege of preparing specimens, taking pictures and attending to some of the current consulting work. Whenever possible, I visited Howe's laboratory to chat with Levy and gather ideas about the wonderful field of metallography—in which I was a rank amateur, rescued by the quiet enthusiasm of Donald Smith of Princeton from an instructorship in civil engineering. Levy let me act as a fly on the wall during the Professor's occasional visits. Busy as he was, Professor Howe took the time and trouble to encourage my interest, as he had done for hun- dreds of others. He told me how he went about gathering his own information speculating as to causes, considering experiments, and verifying his conclusions. I ventured to mention some tests I had run on the irregular stretching of wires of different metals. He read the small volume I had prepared of ill-assorted facts and fancies and remarked: "Nobody cares for your theories or the history of your tests. Describe what you found as briefly as possible and perhaps I can help you to publish." Curiously enough, among my discards were some autographically recorded load-versus-electrical-resistance measurements. Taken with inadequate knowledge and equipment, these curves did not reproduce consistently, but if the relationship between strain and resistance had then been explored, the latest type of strain gauge might have been in useful service for the past 25 years. Professor Howe was a gifted teacher, perhaps because he was primarily an ardent and assiduous student. His own eagerness to learn and his willingness to revise and extend his opinions constantly encouraged those of his environment to be diligent and painstaking in the pursuit of knowledge. In honoring his memory, I also wish to bring to mind the kindly, humorous and quiet Levy, and join his name again, as it was for too brief a space in the past, with that of many-sided Henry Marion Howe. Factors oF Impact Strength The subject chosen for the Howe Memorial Lecture by Dr. Gillett last year

Jan 1, 1941

By Alfred V. de Forest

We are now assembled in this hall for the eighteenth lecture in honor of the memory of our greatest American metallurgist, Henry Marion Howe. Many of his most intimate contemporaries, led, as was fitting, by Professor Sauveur, have described his vital accomplishments in three fields: as a leader in technical industrial development; in theoretical research; and finally as a teacher and source of inspiration for nearly two generations of students. In 1914 Professor Howe had retired from active teaching, but maintained his laboratory at Columbia University under the care of Arthur G. Levy, with whom he published many of the papers that later were incorporated into his last book, " The Metallography of Steel and Cast Iron." My position at the time was that of personal assistant to Professor Campbell—no pay, no duties, but the great privilege of preparing specimens, taking pictures and attending to some of the current consulting work. Whenever possible, I visited Howe's laboratory to chat with Levy and gather ideas about the wonderful field of metallography—in which I was a rank amateur, rescued by the quiet enthusiasm of Donald Smith of Princeton from an instructorship in civil engineering. Levy let me act as a fly on the wall during the Professor's occasional visits. Busy as he was, Professor Howe took the time and trouble to encourage my interest, as he had done for hun- dreds of others. He told me how he went about gathering his own information speculating as to causes, considering experiments, and verifying his conclusions. I ventured to mention some tests I had run on the irregular stretching of wires of different metals. He read the small volume I had prepared of ill-assorted facts and fancies and remarked: "Nobody cares for your theories or the history of your tests. Describe what you found as briefly as possible and perhaps I can help you to publish." Curiously enough, among my discards were some autographically recorded load-versus-electrical-resistance measurements. Taken with inadequate knowledge and equipment, these curves did not reproduce consistently, but if the relationship between strain and resistance had then been explored, the latest type of strain gauge might have been in useful service for the past 25 years. Professor Howe was a gifted teacher, perhaps because he was primarily an ardent and assiduous student. His own eagerness to learn and his willingness to revise and extend his opinions constantly encouraged those of his environment to be diligent and painstaking in the pursuit of knowledge. In honoring his memory, I also wish to bring to mind the kindly, humorous and quiet Levy, and join his name again, as it was for too brief a space in the past, with that of many-sided Henry Marion Howe. Factors oF Impact Strength The subject chosen for the Howe Memorial Lecture by Dr. Gillett last year

Jan 1, 1941

By L. V. Wade

Abstract-US Bureau of Mines efforts under longwall research programs to develop the capability to predict support requirements for longwall/shortwall support systems are discussed. Ground control studies are being conducted in conjunction with several longwall/shortwall demonstration projects. Geologic, support performance, and strata behavior are being documented on these projects. A hypothesis is presented for the prediction of support requirements.

Jan 11, 1978

By J. V. W. REYNDERS

IN THE remarks which I am about to make concern¬ing the safety work of the Bureau of Mines, I want first of all to disengage myself from a disposition, which is frequently in evidence, to give spectacular emphasis to the hazards of mining operations. It is of the' utmost importance to the industrial welfare of our country that the enormous annual requirement of fuel be produced and be made available in our economic activities, with a minimum of distress and hardship. The safety of coal mining is a condition with which. we are all concerned in a fundamental way. And yet we should not rush to accept hastily conceived notions that laxity among employers in respect to safety measures exists to any outstanding degree. In fact in a large number of instances, the precautionary efforts of min¬ing companies, directed to the elimination of accidents are beyond all criticism, albeit the industry suffers in reputation from the carelessness of, its less effi¬cient constituents. The Bureau of Mines has been a leading influence in disseminating the doctrines of safety, in securing the cooperation of the miners themselves, and in stirring up ' the laggards, both among the employers and the employed. It is much to the interest of well-conducted mine operations that the industry, as a whole, observe safety regulations to the utmost.

Jan 1, 1925

By Richard E. Chism

Some years ago, when I was seeking an illusive fortune and gaining a precarious existence in the primeval forests of Brazil, there penetrated, even to my headquarters in that far-off land, the story of a new-found mining district, where mountain peaks were ribbed with silver, and valleys teemed with virgin gold. Such were the stories that caused hundreds of men to seek their fortune in Sierra Mojada, and to return heaping curses, loud and deep, upon the vivid imaginations that had evolved the glittering fiction. Nevertheless, the rumors had some foundation of truth. The ribs of silver exist, if not the placers of gold; and a flourishing town, of some three thousand people, with two leading mining companies and several smaller ones, in operation, represents what was permanent in the excitement of 1879. Geographical Situation. The town of Sierra Mojada is situated in the State of Coahuila, Republic of Mexico, in latitude 27' 24' N., and longitude 26' 40' W. of Washington, 4' 36' W. of the City of Mexico, and 103' 43' TV. of Greenwich. It lies about 70 miles, in an air-line, N. E. of Escalon station, on the Mexican Central Railroad; but by the present wagon-road, which makes a long detour to turn the mountain range, the distance to the station is about 105 miles. The nearest towns are Huajuquilla, in the State of Chihuahua, about 125 miles due west, and Cuatro Cienegas, in the State of Coahuila, 112 miles to the eastward. Between these points and the town of Sierra Mojada, and to the north of this town, the country is an immense desert, entirely uncultivated, almost uninhabited, and very little known. This

Jan 1, 1887

DEFENSE Materials Procurement Agency has been moving rapidly to encourage copper industry expansion programs. Although copper production is at a high level, a shortage exists on a world-wide basis as well as on the domestic scene. Projected expansion programs will not ease this current demand for most of them are 2 to 5 years off. Refining facilities are adequate but there is a shortage of ore and scrap, and it is for this reason that the expansion programs are directed at developing more sources of supply. The domestic expansion programmed thus far and understood to have been arranged with price escalation should the domestic price go to 271/20, were summarized by American Metal Markets as follows (dates of announcement are given in parenthesis: .1-Copper Cities Mining Co.'s, $15,000,000 expansion near Miami, Ariz., to be operating about 1954. DMPA will buy 22,500 tons of copper a year up to a given amount on an agreed price of 23¢ per pound, with some exceptions and depending upon salability at a higher price to other purchasers in the U. S. (September 25th). 2-An RFC loan of $60,000 to North Butte Mining Co. to be paid off on the basis of deliveries at a purchase price of 241/20 per pound (September 25th). 3-A $25,000,000 expansion program by Phelps Dodge to provide 38,000 tons per year by late 1954. DMPA would purchase it at a price of 22¢ per pound up to 112,500 tons providing other purchasers in the U. S. will not pay a higher price (September 26th). 4-Anaconda Copper Mining Co. $40,000,000 expansion in Nevada to provide more than 30,000 (might be increased to 45,000) tons per year. DMPA would purchase the copper at 250 per pound for a limited period of time if it is not salable to industrial users at above this price. Production would start around 1953 (November 14th).

Jan 1, 1952

By J. C. Reed

CINNABAR was discovered in southwestern Arkansas on Little Missouri River in sec. 1, T.7S., R.26W., in April, 1930, and near Antoine Creek in sec. 28, T.6S., R.23W., some 15 miles farther east in May of the same year. It was not, however, until June, 1931, that cinnabar was identified as such in a specimen from the original discovery area sent to W. M. Weigel1 by Walter F. Hintze of Murfreesboro. Almost simultaneously2, in July, 1931, Moritz Norden of Hot Springs identified specimens from the Antoine Creek area as cinnabar. Immediate interest in the district followed the identification of cinnabar and by January, 1932, the district was known to extend as a mineralized belt about one mile wide trending east-northeast from sec. 13, T.7S., R.27W., in Howard County-across central Pike County and into Clark County to sec. 19, T.6S., R.23W., thence extending southeast into sections 33 and 34 of the same township. Since then, cinnabar has been found in sec. 6, T.7S., R.22W., thus giving a total east-west length to the district of approximately 30 miles. Interest focused mainly on the two discovery areas, with the result that mining development has progressed most rapidly in those localities. In the Antoine Creek area the Arkansas Quicksilver Co. has done con-siderable exploration work and has retorted the high-grade ore so .obtained. In the Little Missouri area the Southwestern Quicksilver Co. has had a 12-ton rotary furnace in more or less continuous operation since April, 1932, and has been the largest producer in the district.

Jan 1, 1935

By J. C. Bradley

THE relation of annealing temperature to conductivity of copper wire has been determined.1 Conductivity hard was 98.26 per cent. After a 10-min. heating at 200° C. it was 98.69. By annealing 10 min. at 300° C. a large increase, to 100.93, occurred. Maximum conductivity, 101.15, was attained after a 500° C. anneal; thereafter it decreased to 100.53 after a 950° C. anneal. If copper is gassed the decrease is much more than this. MATERIAL AND METHOD The work was done on high grade electrolytic copper, 99.942 per cent. copper-plus silver, silver 0.0008 per cent. It was hot-rolled to 3 in., then cold drawn to 0.080 in. The wire was cut into 25 5-ft. lengths and numbered 1 to 25 as cut. Four samples were tested hard. The others were wound into 5-in. diameter coils. For the 100° C. heating a coil was put into water, the water brought to boiling, and the wire kept at this temperature for 10 min. For the higher temperatures the coils were placed in envelopes of sheet copper, a little water added, and the envelopes sealed by folding over the edges twice, and hammering them together. This kept the air out very well. The envelope and wire were brought to the desired temperature; this was maintained for 10 min., then the whole was water-quenched.

Jan 1, 1927

By Thomas T., Read

ALTHOUGH the first colonists in the area that is now the A United States, whether Spanish, French or English in nationality, were usually keenly interested in the possibilities of mineral wealth, it is a curious and interesting fact that none of them happened upon the mineral deposits that eventually were to make this the greatest mineral-producing country; up to 1800 it would probably have been rated as rather poor in minerals. Spanish explorers traversed the southeastern United States with- , out finding the Appalachian gold deposits that aroused so much interest in the early nineteenth century; Coronado sought in vain for the seven golden cities of Cibola; and the important gold \ deposits of California were not discovered until the political sovereignty of the region had passed from Mexico, which had held it for three centuries. The French also held Canada for nearly two centuries (and the British for another century) without finding the mineral deposits in Ontario and Quebec that now are so important. Though they knew of the copper of the Keweenaw peninsula, the lead ores. of Wisconsin and Missouri, and the coal of Illinois in the seventeenth century, these deposits were all too remote for exploitation. In the area held by Great Britain, iron smelting was planned at Jamestown as early as 1619 and was actually begun at Lynn, Mass., in 1643. The industry grew slowly, at first, but had reached considerable importance before the Revolution. Commercial bituminous coal mining began about 1750 in Virginia but anthracite mining in Pennsylvania was not started until 1800. As a result there was naturally little interest in the technical aspects of mineral prodnction here before 1800 by any except the few people who were actually engaged in it. Students of natural science were much interested in minerals, however. The activities of those who rank as geologists are so thoroughly covered in

Jan 1, 1941

[Secretary's Note.—The following official tables, prepared by the government of the State of Nuevo Leon, and presented to the Institute at the fifth seseion of its Mexican meeting, held at Monterrey, November 26, 1901, present in compact form a general summary of the mineral and metallurgical industry of the State for the preceding calendar year, together with a statement of the railway-shipments of ores from January 1 to October 31, 1901, which, in the absence of direct official mining and metallurgical statistics (not yet available for that year), clearly indicates an increased activity and productiveness of these industries. In other words, the mines are reported to have yielded in 1900 a total product of 83,960,169 kilos of ore; whereas, the railway is reported to have carried, in 10 months of 1901, a total of 108,318,647 kilos of ore. At this rate, the railway-shipments for 1901 mould amount to nearly 130,000,000 kilos. It is, of course, possible that the railwaystatistics include other freight than ores, or that they include duplications, such as would be involved in the record, first of certain ores transported, and afterwards of the " base bullion " produced therefrom. An accurate comparison is therefore impossible ; yet, after making all reasonable allowances for such items as have been named, it seems safe to infer that the mining and metallurgical industry of this State accomplished in 1901 a substantial progress.]

Jan 1, 1902

By Alfred V. de Forest

WE are now assembled in this hall for the eighteenth lecture in honor of the memory of our greatest American metallurgist, Henry Marion Howe. Many of his most intimate contemporaries, led, as was fitting, by Professor Sauveur, have described his vital accomplishments in three fields: as a leader in technical industrial development; in theoretical research; and finally as a teacher and source of inspiration for nearly two generations of students. In 1914 Professor Howe had retired from active teaching, but maintained his laboratory at Columbia University under the care of Arthur G. Levy, with whom he published many of the papers that later were incorporated into his last book, "The Metallography of Steel and Cast Iron." My position at the time was that of personal assistant to Professor Campbell-no pay, no duties, but the great privilege of preparing specimens, taking pictures and attending to some of the current consulting work. Whenever possible, I visited Howe's laboratory to chat with Levy and gather ideas about the wonderful field of metallography-in which I was a rank amateur, rescued by the quiet enthusiasm of Donald Smith of Princeton from an instructorship in civil engineering. Levy let me act as a fly on the wall during the Professor's occasional visits. Busy as he was, Professor Howe took the time and trouble to encourage my interest, as he had done for hundreds of others. He told me how he went about gathering his own information speculating as to causes, considering experiments, and verifying his conclusions. I ventured to mention some tests I had run on the irregular stretching of wires of different metals. He read the small volume I had prepared of ill-assorted facts and fancies and remarked: "Nobody cares for your theories or the history of your tests. Describe what you found as briefly as possible and perhaps I can help you to publish." Curiously enough, among my discards were some autographically recorded load-versus-electrical-resistance measurements. Taken with inadequate knowledge and equipment, these curves did not reproduce consistently, but if the relationship between strain and resistance had then been explored, the latest type of strain gauge might have been in useful service for the past 25 years. Professor Howe was a gifted teacher, perhaps because he was primarily an ardent and assiduous student. His own eagerness to learn and his willingness to revise and extend his opinions constantly encouraged those of his environment to be diligent and painstaking in the pursuit of knowledge. In honoring his memory, I also wish to bring to mind the kindly, humorous and quiet Levy, and join his name again, as it was for too brief a space in the past, with that of many-sided Henry Marion Howe. FACTORS OF IMPACT STRENGTH The subject chosen for the Howe Memorial Lecture by Dr. Gillett last year

Jan 1, 1941

University of Alabama University, Alabama Mining and Metallurgical Society WILLIAM R. HIGGS, President ROBERT E. MEAD, Secretary J. R. CUDWORTH, Faculty Sponsor MILTON H. FIBS, Counselor University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona Miners' Society LEE BLESSING, President R. W. CORY, Secretary E. P. MATHEWSON, Faculty Sponsor B. R. HATCHER, Counselor University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, California Student Chapter, A.I.M.E. ARCHER WARNE, President ROBERT JOHNSTON, Secretary E. K. SOPER, Faculty Sponsor EMILE HUGUENIN, Counselor Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado Student Chapter, A.I.M.E. J. Ross REED, President ANDREW PERRY, JR., Secretary J. BURNS READ, Faculty Sponsor A. W. NEWBERRY, Counselor

Jan 1, 1936

By Edward C. Jeffrey

The use of coke in metallurgy, to any important degree, dates from the middle of the 18th century. Its utilization came most opportunely for European civilization. The forests of Europe, except in the most remote and inaccessible regions, had been largely fed, in the form of charcoal, into the smelting furnaces. For a hundred years—the middle of the 17th to the middle of the 18th century—there .was a stationary condition of population corresponding to the exhaustion of European forests. This situation, which was particularly evident in Great Britain, was due to the fact that the forests had been depleted and the practical utilization of coke had not begun. The coking industry is essential for our metallurgical industries, which in turn are basal to healthy economic progress. But coke is of great importance, not only on its own account, but for its byproducts, which enter fundamentally into all the arts of peace and war. The dyestuff industry and the manufacture of explosives are intimately connected with one another, as was shown by the recent war. The subject of coking coal, therefore, is well worthy the serious attention both of practical industry and the scientific investigator. The most valuable coking coals, from the metallurgical standpoint, are derived from the coals of highest ranks. Coals, for example, that have a carbon ratio of from 70 to 80 per cent. yield the most valuable coke for the blast furnace. The difficulty of investigating these coals, however, is great, for they are rather friable and delicate and possess a high carbon content, which makes them difficult to manipulate. They present, on account of their high carbon content, a considerable degree of opacity when examined, in thin sections, under the microscope. The tenderness of structure and blackness of such high-grade coking coals as those of Connellsville and the Pocahontas region make them extremely difficult to investigate. Two of my colleagues, who are taking part in this discussion, will describe the valuable results that have been reached by studying coal by the methods of the mineralogist. Doctor White and Doctor Thiessen have studied the structure of coal as determined from thin sections that

Jan 1, 1925

Jan 1, 1967

By L. W. Blau

THE entrance of geophysics and geochemistry into petroleum engineering may be viewed with apprehension by some engineers. They may not remember the time when "practical oil men" opposed the invasion of engineers into the field of petroleum production. By their excellent contributions they established themselves. In the popular mind, engis veers are practical men whereas physicists and chemists are suspected of being theoretical. It will be best to annihilate this misconception right now at the beginning of a closer relationship between petroleum engineers. geophysicists, and geochemists.

Jan 1, 1943