Search Documents

By John Hays Hammond

Discussion of the paper of John Hays Hammond, presented at the Chattanooga meeting, October, 1908, and published in Bi.-Monthly Bulletin., No. 24, November, 1908, pp. 1171 to 117S. PROF. HENRY Louis, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, En j. (communication to the Secretary'`) :-I welcome Mr. Hammond's paper as an. attempt to give definiteness to the best modern professional practice. Such a codification of our professional ethics is urgently needed, seeing how widely the views of mining engineers differ on some of the point-,. raised, for example, I have no hesitation it) performing a class of work, as to which Mr. Hammond seems to entertain some doubts, and, on the other hand, I strongly condemn a practice which he appears to recommend. I have not the least hesitation in making reports for vendors of mining properties, and am constantly doing so; . the best justification for this practice may be found in the fact that such reports have been repeatedly accepted by buyers as giving a correct representation of the facts of the case, which is all that should be demanded from any report. On the other hand, Mr. Hammond advocates that mitring engineers should take payment for their reports tin shares of a company to be floated upon the basis of such reports. I hold that this is ethically wrong, as even the most honest of men is liable to be unconsciously biased under these conditions. Indeed, I go much further, and maintain that a mining engineer who re¬ports or advises upon mining properties should never hold any-mining shares at all, or be himself interested in any mine,' and this has been my consistent practice for many years. A man who holds shares in a mine, and is called upon to report upon a neighboring property or a similar mine, can never be wholly unbiased, and even if lie could be, he would always lay himself open to the suspicion that he was giving a favorable report so as to-enhance the value of the property in which he himself is interested, or an unfavorable report so as to stifle competi-

Jun 1, 1909

By J. F. Smith, J. R. Ogren, N. J. Magnani

The uapor pressrcres of magnesium over binary alloys of magnesium with twelve of the yare-earth eletnetzts have been measured by the Knudsen effuion method in the temperature range 675° to 910°K. These vapor-pressure measurments were combined with data concerning the tevtrlitzul magnesium solubility and the vapor pressure of pure magnesinm to evaluale the standuvd free energies of pluase jormation. These free-etzergy values indicate that the CsCl structures of the heacy rave earths tend to be somewhat less stable than those of the light rare earths. This dif-]eying- behaviov covrelates with differences which have been obsevz~ed in other alloy systetns wherein a phuse appeurs, disappeavs, or changes crystal stvucture as the atomic number of the rare-earth com-ponent is changed. This behauior also appears to correlate with the struclurul rariations within the rare-earth elements themselves, and it is speculated that cariations in the spatial extent of the 4f orbitals are responsihle. STUDIES of the phase relationships and crystal structures in the binary systems between rare-earth metals (lanthanons) and magnesium are extensive but far from complete. However, the currently available information1-10 does produce a rather interesting pattern. This is illustrated in Table I. If one excludes europium and ytterbium from consideration because of their generally atypical behavior, it can be seen from the table that the phase relationships in the magnesium-rich regions show a distinctly different pattern for the lighter lanthanons as compared to the heavier lanthanons. For the lighter lanthanons, LnMg2 phases occur from lanthanum to gadolinium with the cubic MgCu2 structure, LnMg3 phases occur from lanthanum to terbium with the BiLi3 structure, and magnesium-rich phases occur from lanthanum to gadolinium with stoi-chiometries between Ln5Mg42 and LnMg12. In contrast, for the heavier lanthanons, those LnMg2 structures which have been examined have the hexagonal MgZn2 structure, LnMg3 phases have not been observed beyond terbium, and the magnesium-rich phases occur with the a manganese structure near a stoichiometry of Ln5MgZ4. The heavy lanthanon-magnesium systems thus appear to be analogous to the Y-Mg system""2 wherein YMg has the CsCl structure, YMg2 has the MgZn2 structure, and the region Y4Mgz5-Y5Mg24 has the a manganese structure, and no other intermediate phases are observed. Similarity in alloying behavior between yttrium and the heavy lanthanons occurs commonly, and on this basis it seems likely that LnMg2 phases will be found with the MgZn2 structure in the binary systems of dysprosium, thulium, and lutetium with magnesium when the appropriate investigations are made. In the case of the magnesium-rich phases of the lighter lanthanons, only the Ce-Mg phase relationships have been investigated thoroughly and in detail, and until similar investigations are made for the other systems there will remain questions as to which magnesium-rich stoichiometries represent equilibrium phases and what systematic variations occur in the sequence from lanthanum to gadolinium. Thus the data in Table I show that only the LnMg phases occur with the same crystallographic structure throughout the sequence from lanthanum to lutetium. It was speculated that the relative stability of these LnMg phases might vary from one lanthanon to the next in such a way as to presage the differences which occur among the more magnesium-rich lanthanon-magnesium phases. On this basis the present investigation of the thermodynamics of phase formation was Gndertaken for the LnMg phases. PROCEDURE AND RESULTS A generalized phase diagram for the lanthanon-rich portion of a lanthanon-magnesium alloy system is shown in Fig. 1 where ß represents a high-temperature bcc

Jan 1, 1968

By Jack White

W. I. Garms-—The authors state that when they added 11 tons of balls to the 45 pct volume ball load, the power needle did not budge. The question arises as to whether any increase in capacity accompanied the 11-ton addition. It is hardly conceivable that all of the balls making up the l l-ton addition were sterile. However, as the work done in the ball mill is not by kilo-watthours per se or balls per se but by kilowatthour-balls, it is possible that the kilowatthourballs in the mill before the ll-ton addition had a different amperage, voltage or robustage than those in the mill after the addition and that the overall outcome was that equal work was done before and after the addition. The authors can keep the efficiency that they got with the 45 pct volume 1-in. ball charge and get additional capacity by putting more kilowatthourballs to work in the form of the addition of 11 tons of 2-in. balls to the present ball charge, and subsequent makeup additions by weight of 20 pct 2-in. balls and 80 pct 1-in. balls. J. F. Myers (authors' reply)-—Mr. Garms points his finger at the 11 tons of "sterile" balls added to the Tri-cone mill. A fact so interesting to us that we felt it should be reported. Clearly, ball slippage at the existing mill speed prevented any further transfer of power from the shell to the ball mass. We agree that the kilowatthourballs would increase, were we charging rough 2-in. balls as suggested by Mr. Garms. The assumption is, of course, that we would get a corresponding increase in work done. Our reported data (CIME meeting, Vancouver, 1946) shows a gain of work accomplished of 7.6 pct as we decreased the ball size from 2 in. to 1% in. and a further gain of work accomplished of 2.1 pct when we went from 1 % in. to 1 in. The small ball results reported by H. R. Banks at Chapman Camp are also very convincing. In the case of 2-in. balls they would take the conventional ball path and start cascading. They would thus destroy the classifying pool over the "foot" of the

Jan 1, 1951

By Jack White

W. I. Garms-—The authors state that when they added 11 tons of balls to the 45 pct volume ball load, the power needle did not budge. The question arises as to whether any increase in capacity accompanied the 11-ton addition. It is hardly conceivable that all of the balls making up the l l-ton addition were sterile. However, as the work done in the ball mill is not by kilo-watthours per se or balls per se but by kilowatthour-balls, it is possible that the kilowatthourballs in the mill before the ll-ton addition had a different amperage, voltage or robustage than those in the mill after the addition and that the overall outcome was that equal work was done before and after the addition. The authors can keep the efficiency that they got with the 45 pct volume 1-in. ball charge and get additional capacity by putting more kilowatthourballs to work in the form of the addition of 11 tons of 2-in. balls to the present ball charge, and subsequent makeup additions by weight of 20 pct 2-in. balls and 80 pct 1-in. balls. J. F. Myers (authors' reply)-—Mr. Garms points his finger at the 11 tons of "sterile" balls added to the Tri-cone mill. A fact so interesting to us that we felt it should be reported. Clearly, ball slippage at the existing mill speed prevented any further transfer of power from the shell to the ball mass. We agree that the kilowatthourballs would increase, were we charging rough 2-in. balls as suggested by Mr. Garms. The assumption is, of course, that we would get a corresponding increase in work done. Our reported data (CIME meeting, Vancouver, 1946) shows a gain of work accomplished of 7.6 pct as we decreased the ball size from 2 in. to 1% in. and a further gain of work accomplished of 2.1 pct when we went from 1 % in. to 1 in. The small ball results reported by H. R. Banks at Chapman Camp are also very convincing. In the case of 2-in. balls they would take the conventional ball path and start cascading. They would thus destroy the classifying pool over the "foot" of the

Jan 1, 1951

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 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

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 1 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, 1871 1 3 2 Bethlehem, Pa August, 1871 1 10 3 Troy, N Y November, 1871 1 13 4 Philadelphia, Pa February, 1872 1 17 5 New York, N Y May, 1872 1 20 6 Pittsburg, Pa October, 1872 1 25 7 Boston, Mass February, 1873 1 28 8 Philadelphia, Pa May, 1873 2 3 9 Easton, Pa October, 1873 2 7 10 New York, N Y February, 1874 211 11 St Louis, Mo May, 1874 3 3 12 Hazleton, Pa October, 1874 3 8 13 New Haven, Conn February, 1875 3 15 14 Dover, N J May, 1875 4 3 15 Cleveland, 0 October, 1875 4 9 16 Washington, D C February, 1876 4 18 17 Philadelphia, Pat June, 1876, 5 3 18 Philadelphia, Pa October, 1876 5 9 19 New York, N Y February, 1877 5 27 20 Wilkes-Barre, Pa May, 1877 6 3 21 Amenia, N Y October, 1877 6 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 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

By George Sachs, S. M. Clark, George Espey

he tendency of a commercially drawn cartridge case to crack in the mercury test and the relation of cracking tendency to residual stress retained after drawing were studied. The fourth drawpiece (next to the final) of caliber 0.30 cartridge cases produced by Frankford Arsenal were selected as test pieces. These exhibited an exceptionally high cracking tendency, making a detailed study possible. To obtain fast cracking in the mercury test, about 0.0015 to 0.003 in. must be removed from the wall thickness of the drawpiece by pickling, and it must be subjected to the mercury test immediately after washing. Removal of the adhering mercury by annealing and subsequent squeezing of the case in a vise was used to reveal definitely the presence or absence of cracks. Various lots of apparently identically fabricated cases were shown to possess a different cracking tendency. Machining off or boring a hole in the base gradually reduced and eventually eliminated the cracking tendency. On the contrary, shortening of the wall (body) reduced the cracking tendency only if the wall became so short that the cracking zone was directly affected. By boring out the base and pickling from the outside and then splitting the resulting rings, it was possible to determine the approximate stress distribution in the base and in the adjacent part of the wall. Small compression stresses were present in the core and the major part of the base, while the surface of the base and the adjacent wall contained high circumferential tensile stresses. On the contrary, the wall when parted from the base contained only insignificant residual stress. The conception is advanced, that the stress distribution in a drawn cartridge case corresponds fundamentally to that of a tube (wall) shrunk on a disk (base). Such a stress distribution results from the tendency of the base to recover elastically by an increase in diameter from the biaxial compression during drawing while the wall exhibits little tendency to change its diameter after progressing through the die. This is confirmed by measurements which show the base diameter to be slightly larger than the wall diameter.

Jan 1, 1945

By H. L. TERWILLIGER

THOSE of us who have been following rock drilling work for the last 15 or 20 years can recall some of the problems that were encountered with the old piston type of rock drill and the solid steel which it used. There was frequent trouble in keeping a straight hole in badly broken ground when using the ordinary four- point bit that had a flare on the wings of about 14". The drill steel, when pounding down its hole, would follow the line of least resistance and draw away from the desired line when it encountered a weak side in the ground through which it was drilling. Some would overcome the difficulty by making long winged bits to prevent the steel crowding over; this would relieve the troubles to a great extent. There was trouble with the rifling of drill holes and inability to drill round holes in some ground. The cure for these ills was to use the "X" bit, rather than the crossbit. The "2" bits were brought out in an effort to make it easier to drill a round hole in bad ground. Most of these troubles were before the days when the mechanical drill sharpener was in as common use as it is today. It was not until the introduction of the Leyner type of rock drill, requiring hollow steel that the users of rock drills found themselves confronted with more difficult prob- lems than they had ever encountered before with drill steel because the steel had to stand more severe service.

Jan 1, 1924

SUDBURY ore processed by International Nickel Co. of Canada Ltd. was recovered for many years as two mill concentrates, one primarily of copper, and the other mixed pentlandite-pyrrhotite, But, Since iron content of the nickeliferous pyrrhotite concentrate was ten times its nickel value, capacity of smelting was limited by the need for slagging the excess iron. A process for recovering the iron con- tent was developed after some years of research and a $20-million plant was constructed to employ the new method. Built near Copper Cliff, Ont., the plant started operation early in 1956, scheduled for separate treatment of 365,000 tons of pyrrhotite each year. It is only the first unit of an installation which will have a capacity of more than 1 million tons per year of pyrrhotite. By early 1958, production totaled more than 200,000 long tons of 68 pct Fe pellets containing 0.003 pct P, 1.5 pct SiO2, 0.01 pct S, and 0.15 pct Ni.

Jan 8, 1958

By Edward O’Toole

THe Pocahontas district occupies the extreme southern end of West Virginia, principally McDowell, Mercer and Wyoming counties, and a part of Tazewell county, in southwestern Virginia. The first record of the coal field is a report by Prof. J. P. Lesley, of Pennsylvania, about 1880, in which he mentions a coal opening at the upper end of Abbs Valley, Tazewell county, Va. C. R. Boyd, a mining engineer of Wytheville, Va., published a series of articles in 1881, mentioning coal on Indian Creek, Tazewell county, and on Horse Pen creek, which coals, he stated, extended toward the Ohio River. He also mentions the Abbs Valley coal reported by Lesley. In 1881, F. J. Kimball (who became president of the Norfolk & Western R. R. in 1883)) after examining the Scott mine in Abbs Valley, went northward across Abbs Valley Mountain to the place now known as Pocahontas, where he located what has since been called No. 3 vein of Pocahontas coal. In November, 1882, Jed Hotchkiss and others prepared a cross-section of the Flat Top Mountain coal measures, some notes on which were published by Mr. Hotchkiss, between 1880 and 1892, under the title of " The Virginias.' In May, 1881, the Norfolk & Western R. R. was organized through the purchase of the Atlantic, Mississippi & Ohio R. R., an old line running from Norfolk, Va., to Bristol, Tenn., with branches from Petersburg to City Point and from Glade Springs to Saltville. At that time, charters had been granted for three railroads tributary to the New River Valley, but their proposed routes would indicate that the promoters were concerned with minerals, timber, and a connection with the Chesapeake & Ohio R. R., rather than the development of any coal in the Pocahontas district. One of them was projected to extend up Bluestone River a short distance, but not far enough to reach the coal in the Bluestone Valley, and a little grading was done for a narrow-gage road between New River Station and a point in Giles county, Virginia, near the West Virginia line. All charters and railroads in this district were acquired by the Norfolk & Western R.R.

Jan 1, 1925

By Charles Austin

IN an earlier series of studies on 18-8 stainless steel at 600°, 700°, and 800°C.1 one pretreatment was used throughout; viz., 15 min. in hydrogen at 950°C., followed by an air quench. Several manufacturers of this alloy since have expressed doubt as to the suitability of the temperature employed, recommending instead the more customary Strauss treatment as promising superior results. In this subsequent investigation on the effects of the temperature of pretreatment several interesting points have arisen, which are described in this paper. Previous work on our equipment had shown a marked difference between alloys of "similar chemical composition" that had been manu-factured by different companies. Accordingly, one mill-bar length was selected from which to prepare all specimens. It could then be assumed that any marked differences in creep characteristics would be due to effects resulting from variations in the pretreatment of the alloy. The material was furnished by the Allegheny-Ludlum Steel Co. in the form of 5/16-in, dia. rod, finished by air cooling from a mill anneal at 1950°F. (1066°C.). It was analyzed only for the elements shown: carbon, 0,07 per cent; chromium, 18.73; nickel, 9.46; manganese, 0.40. Three pretreating temperatures were chosen, the specimens being held for 15 min. in hydrogen at either: (1) 1150°C., to conform to the recom-mended Strauss treatment; (2) 950°C., to compare with the results of previous tests; or (3) 750°C., to initiate precipitation of carbides in the material before testing. As the test cross sections were only 1/8 -in. dia., air cooling followed the annealing treatment. These treatments per-mitted two direct comparisons: (1) between the 1150° and 950°C. treat-ments to indicate the effect of grain size when all carbides were probably in solution at the start of the test; and (2) between the 950° and 750°C. treatments to indicate the effect of carbide "nucleation" for similar grain sizes.

Jan 1, 1940