Search Documents

By T. Egleston

THE direct process for the manufacture of iron which is principally used in the United States, in New York and New Jersey, is called the Jersey forge, the Champlain forge, the Catalan forge, the Bloomary forge or fire, and sometimes a Forge fire. Dr. T. Sterry Hunt, who has discussed the process as applied to the beach sands of Canada as well as to ores, in the Report of the Canadian Geological Survey for 1867-69, has shown that the name of Catalan forge is incorrect, as this process in no way resembles the Catalan, but is really the old German bloomary modified by long use in this country. Dr. Hunt gives the probable history of the introduction of the process into the United States, and a series of historic citations of great interest relating to it. Not¬withstanding the improvements which have been made in the construction of the furnace and its greater output, the process to-day, in all its essential features, is carried out as Karsten described it. It should now be known as the American Bloomary. The name of Jersey or Champlain forge or fire is not sufficiently distinctive. The name of Bloomary, by which the process is usually distinguished, is objectionable, not because it is incorrect but because it is indefinite, as the Knobbling fires, which are a very slight modification of the Walloon process, for making blooms either from pig iron or by sinking scrap, are also called Bloomaries, and although Knobbling fires are only used in a few localities where charcoal pig is made, and special grades of charcoal-refined blooms are required, one does not, without an explanation, know whether the blooms are being manufactured from ore or pig. The name Forge fire is equally indefinite, as it might just as well apply to any of the five direct methods of making blooms which have been in use in Europe, but which have now mostly gone out of date. The Dame of American Bloomary, however, is the one which most completely describes it, and is the one least open to objection. The names of German, Jersey, and Champlain bloomary are too local, and these adjectives are thought unnecessary by those who use the process, and we shall not therefore describe it under any of these names, but as the American Bloomary process. * Read at the Montreal meeting, September, 1879.

Jan 1, 1880

By Charles H. Jacoby

A decision was made by the management of International Salt Co. in 1960 to eliminate all waste products which were entering the waters of Lake Seneca. This was to be accomplished by the injection of waste slurries into an abandoned brine cavity. The effluent from the cavity was to be treated and used for the manufacture of salt or disposed by deep well injection into the Cherry Valley limestone. After several years of research and design, a construction permit was granted by the state of New York; the injection, recovery, and disposal wells were constructed and after a public hearing an operational permit was issued. A summary of the operational results of the system is given.

Jan 1, 1974

By E. A. Sondreal, P. H. Tufte

Flue gas desulfurization when burning western U.S. coals can be expected to be easier to achieve and less costly than when burning higher sulfur eastern and central coals. However, western coals cannot generally be burned in compliance with federal and state new source emission standards without some degree of control. Western coals and lignite represent about 20% of total U.S. recoverable reserves with 90% of that strip minable, and their production is predicted to increase from the 60 million tons mined in 1973 to 300 million tons in 1985. Most will be used for electric power generation, where low sulfur content is a paramount concern. Western coals are predominantly below 1% sulfur; low compared with typical values of 2 and 3% for eastern and central coals. Coal cleaning for removal of sulfur is not commercially practiced on Western coals, which typically contain half organic and half pyritic sulfur. A fraction of the pyrite sulfur could possibly be removed, but the

Jan 1, 1976

By William Vietti

WEST TEXAS and New Mexico has been overshadowed by the develop-ment in East Texas to such an extent that the area has been placed on a settled production basis by most of the operators. Considerable develop-ment work on both proven and unproven acreage remains to be carried on, but the incentive, a ready and profitable market, has been lacking. The main characteristics of the fields in this area are so well known that they are not described again in this paper, which thus resolves itself into a statistical review of the more important production features of the area. Proration has been in effect during the year and has been rigorously applied with the full cooperation of all producers. Proration in West Texas and New Mexico is based in the more pro-ductive fields on a potential and acreage distrbution of the allowance to the individual wells or acreage units. Potentials are determined generally by a short production test of from 1 to 4 hr.; and the hourly rate is multiplied by 24 to obtain the 24-hr. production or rated potential of the separate wells. The potential values thus set up have been questioned by many production men who are not willing to concede that the instantaneous (hourly) capacity of a well to produce is its potential capacity for a day with all other wells in the pool producing at their capacity. However, the potential of a well determined as above remains its chief rating as a measure of the permeability in place and as an indication of the possible reserve feeding that well. , The acreage factor has made it unnecessary to overdevelop properties in order to obtain an allowance proportionate to neighbors who are willing to drill an excessive number of wells on a piece of acreage in the hopes of a quick drainage and a corresponding profit. Proration has resulted in an orderly development of many of the pools in this area on the base as out-lined above, resulting in more reasonable spacing of wells and the more even withdrawal of oil and the ensuing expectation of high recoveries.

Jan 1, 1933

YEAR OF ELECTION 1913. FRANK DAWSON ADAMS, Montreal, Canada. 1921. WILLIAM CUTHBERT BLACKETT Sacriston, Durham, England. 1923. GELASIO CAETANI Rome, Italy. 1920. HENRY STURGIS DRINKER Merion Station, Pa. 1933. KARL EIKERS NEW YORK, N. Y. 1922. FEDERICO GIOLITTI Torino, Italy. 1906. SIR ROBERT A. HADFIELD London, England. 1928. JOHN HAYS HAMMOND New York, N. Y. 1921. FRANK WILLIAM HARBORD London, England. 1917. HERBERT HOOVER Washington, D. C. 1905. HENRI LECHATELIER Paris, France. 1931. WALDEMAR LINDGREN Cambridge, Mass. 1921. C. McDERMID London, England. 1913. EZEQUIEL ORDONEZ Mexico City, Mexico.

Jan 1, 1934

PROF RICHARD ÅKERMAN Stockholm, Sweden PROF RICHARD BECK Friberg, Germany ANDREW CARNEGIR New York, N.Y. DR. JAMES DOUGLAS New York, N.Y. PROF HATON DE LA GOUPILLIERE Paris, France SIR ROBERT A. HADFEILD London, England PROF HANS HOFFER Leoben, Austria PROF HENRI LOUIS LE CHATELIER Paris France M FLORIS OSMOND Paris, France ALEXANDRE POURCEL Paris, France JOHN E. STEAD Middlesborugh, England DR. ING H. C. EMIL SCHROEDTER Dusseldorf, Germany JAMES M. SWANK (Associate) Philadelphia, Pa. PROF DIMITRY CONSTANTIN TSCHERNOFF St Petersburg, Russia PROF TSUNASHIRO WADA Tokyo, Japan CHARLES D WALCOT Washingtion D.C.

Jan 1, 1917

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES OF LOCAL SECTIONS New York LOUIS D. HUNTOON, Chairman. ARTHUR S. DWIGHT, Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. E. MALTBY SHIPP. Treasurer. GEORGE F. KUNZ, W. De L. BENEDICT. Boston ROBERT H. RICHARDS, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. AUGUSTUS H. EUSTIS, Secretary-Treasurer, 131 State St., Boston, Mass. TIMOTHY W. SPRAGUE. HENRY A. WENTWORTH. Columbia F. A. THOMSON, Chairman. GEORGE W. RODDEWIG, Vice-Chairman. LYNDON K. ARMSTRONG, Secretary-Treasurer. P. O. Drawer 2154, Spokane, Wash. R. S. McCAFFERY. S. H. RICHARDSON.

Jan 5, 1914

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES OF LOCAL SECTIONS New York LOUIS D. HUNTOON, Chairman. ARTHUR S. DWIGHT, Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. E. MALTBY SHIPP. Treasurer. GEORGE F. KUNZ, W. DE L. BENEDICT. Boston ROBERT H. RICHARDS, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. AUGUSTUS H. EUSTIS, Secretary-Treasurer, 131 State St., Boston, Mass. TIMOTHY W. SPRAGUE, HENRY A. WENTWORTH. Columbia F. A. THOMSON, Chairman. GEORGE W. RODDEWIG, Vice-Chairman. LYNDON K. ARMSTRONG, Secretary-Treasurer, P. O. Drawer 2154, Spokane, Wash. R. S. McCAFFERY. S. H. RICHARDSON.

Jan 3, 1914

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES OF LOCAL SECTIONS New York LOUIS D. HUNTOON, Chairman. ARTHUR S. DWIGHT, Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. E. MALTBY SHIPP, Treasurer. GEORGE F. KUNZ. W. DE L. BENEDICT. Boston ROBERT H. RICHARDS, Chairman. ALBERT SAUVEUR, Vice-Chairman. AUGUSTUS H. EUSTIS, Secretary-Treasurer, 131 State St., Boston, Mass. TIMOTHY W. SPRAGUE, HENRY A. WENTWORTH. Columbia F. A. THOMSON, Chairman. GEORGE W. RODDEWIG, Vice-Chairman. LYNDON K. ARMSTRONG, Secretary-Treasurer, P. 0. Drawer 2154, Spokane, Wash. R. S. McCAFFERY, S. H. RICHARDSON.

Jan 4, 1914

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES OF LOCAL SECTIONS New York L. W. FRANCIS, Chairman, WILLARD S. MORSE, Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. P. A. MOSMAN, Treasurer. LOUIS D. HUNTOON. WILLIAM A. POMEROY. Boston HENRY L. SMYTH, Chairman. ALFRED C. LANE, Vice-Chairman. AUGUSTUS H. EUSTIS, Secretary-Treasurer, 131 State St., Boston, Mass. ROBERT H. RICHARDS,. ALBERT SAUVEUR. Columbia F. A.. THOMSON, Chairman. GEORGE W. RODDEWIG, Vice-Chairman. LYNDON K. ARMSTRONG, Secretary-Treasurer, P. O. Drawer 2154, Spokane, Wash. R. S. McCAFFERY, S. H. RICHARDSON.

Jan 12, 1914

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES OF LOCAL SECTIONS New York L. W. FRANCIS, Chairman, WILLARD S. MORSE, Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. P. A. MOSMAN, Treasurer. LOUIS D. HUNTOON. WILLIAM A. POMEROY. Boston HENRY L. SMYTH, Chairman. ALFRED C. LANE, Vice-Chairman. AUGUSTUS H. EUSTIS, Secretary-Treasurer, 131 State St., Boston, Mass. ROBERT H. RICHARDS, ALBERT SAUVEUR. Columbia F. A. THOMSON, Chairman. GEORGE W. RODDEWIG, Vice-Chairman. LYNDON K. ARMSTRONG, Secretary-Treasurer, P. O. Drawer 2154, Spokane, Wash. R. S. McCAFFERY, S. H. RICHARDSON.

Jan 11, 1914

NEW MEMBERS. The following list comprises the names of those persons who became members during the months of July and August, 1913: Members. ALDERSON, VICTOR C., Prest. of Colorado School of Mines :.Golden, Colo. ALLEN, JOSEPH W., Secy. & Treas. International S. & R. Co;, 42 Broadway, New York, N. Y. AMMON, ROBERT, Chief Sampler B. & M. Reduction Wks., Anaconda Copper Min.Co., Great Falls, Mont. BARBER, RAYMOND J., Min. Engr 234 Newbury St., Boston, Mass. BARDWELL, EARL S., Genl. Concen rator Foreman Boston & Mont. Reduction Plant, Great Falls; Mont.

Jan 9, 1913

By C. E. Lesher

Coal has been fighting a rear-guard action since the last World War. The battle against competitive fuels has been largely guerilla warfare with more sniping within the ranks than of organized opposition. Oil and natural gas are the fuels that over these twenty odd years have driven coal backward and out of many profitable markets. Now, somewhat timidly, the coal industry is trying a new weapon; namely, Research, or let us more properly say, Organized Research. Engineers have been designing this weapon for many years, supported by those interested in coal, including some coal producers. A part of this pioneer work has been Fundamental Research, the Ph.D. kind that is over the heads of most of us. Another part has been aimed at immediate objectives and realizable profits, the practical, man-in-the-street sort. That is Industrial Research. Enough has been accomplished to make a fair exhibit, but whether this new weapon will have sufficient fire power to rout the opposition, whether the industry will really go into production and use it, the next few years will tell. Need foR Coal Research To utter "Research" is to use the modern magic word; to conjure up the miraculous—rubber from weeds; radar; magnesium from sea water; yes, even gasoline from coal. Research is a very general term. It means something different to every man. What is the coal industry seeking with its research; or what should it seek? And, specifically, how is it going about the job; and is it taking the best way? There are many who say that Coal has been asleep at the switch, while Oil and Gas have been taking the energy business. In an organized way this is true. Large-scale, privatelyfinanced research is just started in the Pennsylvania anthracite industry, and it is still a dream for bituminous coal. What has been done so far collectively is purely defensive; as, for instance, to improve mechanical devices for burning coal so as to be able to recover markets for house-heating fuel long since abandoned to oil and gas. To appreciate just how seriously bituminous coal has slipped back in the national economy in the past 2 5 years, one has only to recall that, in the last war the Navy required for its operations all the high-grade, low-volatile coal that could be produced, and that anthracite was withdrawn from the middle and northwest markets to keep the eastern seaboard warm. All coal was "rationed" by zones, if not to individuals. Now the Navy, the Armed forces and the Merchant Marine are propelled by oil and gasoline. Gasoline and heating oil are rationed to individuals. Production of all coal in this country in 1918 reached the historic figure of 678,200,-000 tons, and in 1943, after 25 years, it is expected to reach a special wartime total of 660,000,000 tons. Meanwhile, production of crude oil this year may exceed 1 ,500,000,000 bbl., and like that of natural gas, reach four times the amount produced in 1918.

Jan 1, 1944

By C. E. Lesher

Coal has been fighting a rear-guard action since the last World War. The battle against competitive fuels has been largely guerilla warfare with more sniping within the ranks than of organized opposition. Oil and natural gas are the fuels that over these twenty odd years have driven coal backward and out of many profitable markets. Now, somewhat timidly, the coal industry is trying a new weapon; namely, Research, or let us more properly say, Organized Research. Engineers have been designing this weapon for many years, supported by those interested in coal, including some coal producers. A part of this pioneer work has been Fundamental Research, the Ph.D. kind that is over the heads of most of us. Another part has been aimed at immediate objectives and realizable profits, the practical, man-in-the-street sort. That is Industrial Research. Enough has been accomplished to make a fair exhibit, but whether this new weapon will have sufficient fire power to rout the opposition, whether the industry will really go into production and use it, the next few years will tell. Need foR Coal Research To utter "Research" is to use the modern magic word; to conjure up the miraculous—rubber from weeds; radar; magnesium from sea water; yes, even gasoline from coal. Research is a very general term. It means something different to every man. What is the coal industry seeking with its research; or what should it seek? And, specifically, how is it going about the job; and is it taking the best way? There are many who say that Coal has been asleep at the switch, while Oil and Gas have been taking the energy business. In an organized way this is true. Large-scale, privatelyfinanced research is just started in the Pennsylvania anthracite industry, and it is still a dream for bituminous coal. What has been done so far collectively is purely defensive; as, for instance, to improve mechanical devices for burning coal so as to be able to recover markets for house-heating fuel long since abandoned to oil and gas. To appreciate just how seriously bituminous coal has slipped back in the national economy in the past 2 5 years, one has only to recall that, in the last war the Navy required for its operations all the high-grade, low-volatile coal that could be produced, and that anthracite was withdrawn from the middle and northwest markets to keep the eastern seaboard warm. All coal was "rationed" by zones, if not to individuals. Now the Navy, the Armed forces and the Merchant Marine are propelled by oil and gasoline. Gasoline and heating oil are rationed to individuals. Production of all coal in this country in 1918 reached the historic figure of 678,200,-000 tons, and in 1943, after 25 years, it is expected to reach a special wartime total of 660,000,000 tons. Meanwhile, production of crude oil this year may exceed 1 ,500,000,000 bbl., and like that of natural gas, reach four times the amount produced in 1918.

Jan 1, 1944

GENTLEMEN : Herewith are transmitted the reports of your Treasurer and the Chairmen of your standing committees on Admissions, Membership, Papers and Publications, and Library for the calendar year 1931. To these reports you are referred for further details of the year's activities. Finances.-Depressed industrial conditions prevailing throughout the year were reflected in a substantial decline in current revenue. Aside from interest on sundry special funds (but including that from the Life Membership, Library, and General Reserve Funds) total receipts amounted to $168,274, compared with $194,636 in 1930. The principal items of decrease were $17,000 in advertising income from the monthly magazine MINING AND METALLURGY, and about $9,600 in dues and initiation fees. Of this shrinkage $4,000 is accounted for by decrease in the number of new members enrolled; and $5,600 by diminished income from current dues and arrearages. This naturally has coincided with an \ increase in delinquency and "drops" or suspensions for nonpayment of dues. The decline in advertising income, amounting to 38 per cent as compared with that of 1930, in general paralleled the experience of all technical and trade publications; and it is problematical whether 1932 will show as large a return from advertising as did 1931.

Jan 1, 1932

This Committee, formerly known as the Membership Committee, had its title changed as above by the new Constitution which was adopted February, 1928. During the year 1928, 607 applications for membership were submitted to the Committee for its action; and after careful consideration 601 were recommended to the Board of Directors for election to the various grades. Of this number 597 accepted election and became members during 1928. The changes in the membership resulting therefrom are set forth in tabular form on the following page. The Rocky Mountain members, who now appear in this list for the first time, were added pursuant to the action taken at the Annual Meeting

Jan 1, 1929

By Eugene S. Perry

The oil and gas industries in Montana continued through the year of 1937 with but little change. No new fields were discovered, and production of old fields did not vary greatly. No outstanding wildcat wells were drilled. Perhaps most notable were extensions in the western part of the Kevin-Sunburst field. Acid treatment of wells in the Kevin and Pondera fields continued with gratifying results.

Jan 1, 1938

By Gen-Hua Shi, William Boyle, Richard E. Goodman

This keynote paper calls attention to two critically important issues relating to selecting supports for excavations in hard rock. The first is the proportion of the ultimate sliding volume that needs to be stabilized by the support system. Some excavations can be imagined to liberate very large rock volumes, whose weight can not be assigned to supports without severe economic penalty. Using the keyblock principle, it is argued that only the most critically oriented and finite blocks right on the periphery of the opening have to be supported; if these are retained by the support system, or by self resistance due to friction on the sliding faces, then the blocks behind will remain in place. As all concepts, this one has bounds and limits. Since the keyblock analysis for rock engineering is very new, these limits are not yet understood ... The second issue is the degree to which possibly stabilizing forces associated with the in-situ stress field ought to be accepted as support for potential keyblocks. It is shown that the initial stress can be effective in stabilizing rock wedges whose faces are nearly perpendicular to the excavation surface. It is too early to decide this issue but important to consider it.

Jan 1, 1982

The four papers making up this symposum have been prepared especially for those who have no knowledge of seismograph prospecting. To many people mathematics is a formidable subject, and many are discouraged from studying seismograph prospecting under the mistaken assumption that the mathematical requirements are severe. In the papers presented here there is not a single mathematical equation. We believe that considerable competence in dealing with some of the most important problems of this work can be attained without any mathematical training whatever. At the present time, there is a real need for interpretation of results by persons thoroughly competent to bring geologic experience and imagination to bear on data that are subject to multiple interpretation from a strictly physical viewpoint. Likewise, those charged with the responsibility of planning seismograph exploration campaigns would do well to become familiar with as much as possible of the technical aspests of the work. They would then be in better position to judge of its success in individual cases. It has often been said that the seismograph is a new structure-finding tool for the geologists to use. Using a tool and using its product are two different things. One does not use an automatic screw-threading machine when he buys a box of screws at the hardware store. Neither does the geologist

Jan 1, 1940

The four papers making up this symposum have been prepared especially for those who have no knowledge of seismograph prospecting. To many people mathematics is a formidable subject, and many are discouraged from studying seismograph prospecting under the mistaken assumption that the mathematical requirements are severe. In the papers presented here there is not a single mathematical equation. We believe that considerable competence in dealing with some of the most important problems of this work can be attained without any mathematical training whatever. At the present time, there is a real need for interpretation of results by persons thoroughly competent to bring geologic experience and imagination to bear on data that are subject to multiple interpretation from a strictly physical viewpoint. Likewise, those charged with the responsibility of planning seismograph exploration campaigns would do well to become familiar with as much as possible of the technical aspests of the work. They would then be in better position to judge of its success in individual cases. It has often been said that the seismograph is a new structure-finding tool for the geologists to use. Using a tool and using its product are two different things. One does not use an automatic screw-threading machine when he buys a box of screws at the hardware store. Neither does the geologist

Jan 1, 1940