Search Documents

By S. D. Thompson

An AIME transaction by P.L. Allsman (1960), "Analysis of Explosive Action in Breaking Rock," contains many useful concepts applicable to blast design. Of special interest was the derivation of a heave blasting burden formula, which is important in establishing the maximum burden. Unfortunately, its derivation contains a fundamental error and then a compensating one. This formula was: [bImpulse _P d At max =nwuwu where: bmax = maximum burden in m (ft). P= average detonation pressure in N/m2 (lb per ft2). A= duration of the average detonation pressure in sec. n= 3.1416. w= specific weight of rock in N/m3 (lb per ft3). u= minimum velocity that must be imparted to the rock in m/sec (ft per sec). d= borehole diameter in m (ft).] The derivation used the impulse-momentum principle, with a 0.3 m thick (1 ft thick) radius of rock mass being acted on by an explosive impulse. However, the rock weight was not converted to mass by dividing by the gravitational constant. This mistake can be verified by checking the units in the formula, which resolve into m1/2-sec instead of meters. Adding the gravitational constant corrects this: [P d Atbmax =gu g = gravitational constant equal to 9.81 m/sect (32.2 ft per sec2).] If the minimum velocity is now taken as 0.3 m/sec (1 ft per sec), as was recommended, excessively large burdens result. Any appropriate rock velocity should be capable of throwing the rock mass a minimum distance so that the swell needed for breakage can occur. Unless the burden is extremely small and the bench height is very high, it is unlikely that a velocity of only 0.3 m/sec (1 ft per sec) will be sufficient. A review of the literature indicates that average rock velocities observed by camera studies typically range from 15 to 30 m/sec (50 to 100 ft per sec) (duPont deNemours and Co., 1977; Tansey, 1979). On this basis, a minimum rock velocity of about 15 m/sec (49 ft per sec) would be expected and not 0.3 m/sec (1 ft per see). When a velocity of 15 m/sec (49 ft per sec) is inserted into the corrected formula, the results approximate those of the original formula with a velocity of 0.3 m/sec (1 ft per sec). The errors were approximately self-compensating [(9 = 1.24)]. ? References Allsman, P.L., 1960, "Analysis of Explosive Action in Breaking Rock," Transactions, AIME, Vol. 217, pp. 475-476. E. I. duPont deNemours and Co., 1977, Blasters' Handbook, 175th Anniversary Edition, Dupont, Wilmington, DE, pp. 233. Tansey, D.O., 1979, "The DuPont Sequential Blasting System," CIM Bulletin, Vol. 72, July, p. 80. Thompson, S.D., 1981, "Critical Review and Revision of Surface Blasting Practice," MS thesis, West Virginia University, pp. 308-316.

Jan 1, 1986

By Kermit Allen

Historically, major natural gas transmission companies have been faced with the problem of meeting peak demands when the source of natural gas is located hundreds of miles away from the marketing area. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.'s position was further complicated when offshore gas supply wells were shut-in during hurricane alerts. Transco's solution to this problem was the construction of salt storage wells adjacent to their pipeline near Eminence, Miss. Storage caverns were constructed using conventional solution mining methods. Two 13 3/8-in.-diam cased wells were completed and a 1,000,000-bbl cavern was leached at an interval of 5700 to 6700 ft at the base of each well. The two caverns have a usable storage volume of 2.0 billion cu f t and each well has a deliverability rate of 375 million standard cfd. The caverns are unique in that brine is not used for product displacement-all brine has been removed from the caverns. Natural gas is stored at a maximum pressure of 4000 psia. During withdrawal the cavern pressure drops to a minimum of 1225 Asia-the volume of gas between these two pressures becomes "usuable or top gas." The Eminence storage terminal is located on the Eminence salt dome about 30 miles north of Hattiesburg, Miss. Construction began in July 1968 and was completed in October 1970.

Jan 1, 1972

By W. C. Phalen

Introduction............................... 100 Production and Exportation of Phosphate Rock.............. 101 Methods of Conservation........................ 101 Introductory Note........................ 101 Mechanical Methods of Conservation............... 103 Grades of Brown Phosphate Rock............... 106 Preparation of Phosphate Rock for Market, with Phases of Conservation Involved..................... 106 Removal of Overburden.................... 106 Methods of Mining...................... 107 Reworking Deposits..................• 107 Working "Cutters"................... 109 Washing and Drying..................... 111 Conservation of Fines .................... 113 Chemical Methods of Conserving Phosphate Rook.......... 113 Application in the West.................... 113 Chemistry of Process.................... 114 Substitutes for Phosphate Rock..................... 115 Natural Substitutes........................ 115 Phosphatic Limestone..................... 115 Apatite, Nelsonite and Other Minerals Containing Phosphate ... 116 . Apatite in Virginia................... 117 Guano........................... 118 Greensand (Marls)...................... 118 New Jersey....................... 118 Kentucky........................ 119 . Tennessee........................ 120 Alabama........................ 120 Excrement.......................... 120 Bones............................ 121 Artificial Substitutes....................... 121 Basic Slag......................... 121 Phosphate Rock Reserves....................... 122 Florida............... 122 .

Jan 1, 1918

By R. F. Sheldon

Largest uranium deposit in the Northwest is Dawn Mining Co.'s Midnite mine on the Spokane Indian Reservation. The orebodies lie along the contact of granite and metamorphosed sedimentary rock and are controlled by faults and shear zones near the granite contact. In the oxidized zone the deposits consist mainly of the secondary uranium mineral meta-autunite; sooty uraninite and primary uranium minerals are known to occur at greater depths. Elevations in the mine area range from 2500 to 3500 ft. The rolling hills and low, rounded mountains are covered with grass and evergreen trees. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT Original showings were discovered with a geiger counter in the spring of 1954 by prospectors Jim and John LeBret. High radioactivity in several schist outcrops was found due to scaly coatings of a greenish-yellow, fluorescent mineral, later identified as meta-autunite. Prior to this time autunite was not known to occur in the state of Washington, and no significant uranium deposits had been found in the Pacific Northwest. Outcrops in the area were few, and most of the ground was mantled with 2 to 10 ft of overburden, but three other radioactive zones were discovered by prospecting the ridge southward along the strike of the schist near its contact with granite for three quarters of a mile. Midnite Mines Inc. was formed

Jan 1, 1960

By Friedrich Wellmer

INTRODUCTION The Ramsbeck Pb/Zn Mine is located in the northern Sauerland area of West Germany, 150 km N of Frankfurt and 120 km E of Cologne. This is a vein deposit which has been worked from the middle of the 19th century to 1974. About 15 million tons of ore were mined and milled. The ore district contains several vein deposits and is roughly 14 km in length and 4 to 5 km in width. The host rocks are strata of Lower Middle Devonian age. The strata strike 60° to 70° NE and where overturned have a dip steeper than the veins (Fig. 1). The galena-sphalerite mineralization is in quartz veins, which are mineralized where they cut the "Main Ramsbeck Quartzite" horizon, a very competent host rock. Vein structures strike at 65º to 75º, dip about 20° to 25º SE and cut the quartzite at approximately 60 m intervals. The main or "steep veins" within each vein structure dip at 10º to 80° SE with an average of 30° and are offset by thrust faults dipping 5º N to 40° S with an average of 5º S. "Flat veins" usually weakly mineralized occur in the thrust faults between the "steep veins", thus forming the overall step-like vein structure. The mineralization is very irregular and changes a- long strike and down dip. It consists of thin veins of pure sphalerite and galena with quartz and pyrite. The thicknesses of the pure sphalerite and galena veins

Jan 1, 1977

By Charles Pack

Die castings may be defined as metal castings made by forcing molten metal, under pressure, into a metallic mold or die. It is necessary to keep this definition in mind to avoid confusing this process with other permanent-mold casting processes. The fundamental principles of the process have been known and practised many years. The simplest application is embodied in the modern linotype machine in which molten metal (usually tin-lead alloy) is forced under pressure into a metallic mold. The pressure is derived from a piston and cylinder immersed in the molten metal. Progress in the art of die casting may conveniently be divided into three groups: Machine for imparting pressure to the metal, material for the die or mold, casting alloys. The problem of delivering molten metal under pressure into a die is comparatively simple, when dealing with low-fusing-point alloys, as the alloys of lead and tin, but it is much more complicated when dealing with metals of higher fusing points, such as the alloys of zinc, aluminum, and copper. Although the art of die casting is comparatively new and, to a large extent, unknown, the records of the patent office are replete with patents on the subject. Fig. 1 shows the Underwood machine patented in 1902; this is probably one of the first machines designed for the production of commercial die castings. The relation of this machine to the linotype casting machine is clearly apparent. A cylinder and piston are immersed in the molten metal, the application of power to this piston forcing the molten metal, under pressure, into the mold or die. The Doehler machine, Fig. 2, patented in 1907, is based on the same general principles. This machine is used to a large extent at the present time, throughout the United States, for the production of zinc, tin, and lead alloy die castings. In the machine shown in Fig. 3, patented by Doehler in 1910, compressed air is used for forcing the metal into the die. In Fig. 4 is shown another of this type of machine. Here compressed air is applied to the surface of the molten metal to force it into the die. In a machine patented by Chandler in 1914, shown in Fig. 5, the

Jan 1, 1919

By F. C. Hull

The grain size of a metal or alloy is one of the most important factors determining its properties. In steels, for example, grain size affects hardenability, toughness and machinability; in brasses, grain size is related to hardness and deep-drawing quality. In the field of heat-resistant alloys, grain size has a marked effect on ductility, creep and endurance strength. In order to determine these effects, as well as to control the properties of materials, many accurate and rapid measurements of grain size must be made. This paper presents a new and improved method for the estimation of grain size. Usual Methods OF EvaluatiNg Grain Size A frequetly used method of estimating grain size is that of comparing the image of a polished and etched specimen on the ground-glass screen of a metallographic microscope with standard grain-size charts. Several types of standards are available for use with different classes of microstructures. Geometric Grids.—The Metals Handbook' has a series of hexagonal grids ranging in size from ASTM No. I to 8. Idealized Grain Networks.—Idealized grain.boundary networks for ASTM grain sizes I to 8 are included in the American Society for Testing Materials Tentative Standard E 19 - 39 T, standard Micrographs & Metals Handbook and ASTM Tentative Standard E19-3gT contain micrographs of hypo-eutectoid and hypereutectoid steels ranging in grain size from No. I to 8. The grain size of annealed brass (diameter of the average grain in millimeters) is obtained by comparison with 10 micrographs of varying. grain size in ASTM Tentative Standard E 2-39 T. A handicap to accurate evaluation of grain size by this method is the fact that it is difficult to compare photographs in a dimly lighted room with the image on the ground-glass screen, or, if the general illumination is increased so that the printed standards may be clearly seen, the contrast of the image of the unknown is decreased. It is easier to estimate grain size by comparing a micrograph of the unknown with the grain-size standards. However, photographing every specimen on which the grain size is desired is too costly in time and materials to be practicable. For hardened steels, the Shepherd or Jernkontoret fracture grain-size standards are very accurate and useful, but this method obviously cannot be applied to ductile alloys such as brass, stainless steels and austenitic heat-resistant alloys. Jeffries' method for grain-size measurements consists of counting the number

Jan 1, 1948

By F. C. Hull

The grain size of a metal or alloy is one of the most important factors determining its properties. In steels, for example, grain size affects hardenability, toughness and machinability; in brasses, grain size is related to hardness and deep-drawing quality. In the field of heat-resistant alloys, grain size has a marked effect on ductility, creep and endurance strength. In order to determine these effects, as well as to control the properties of materials, many accurate and rapid measurements of grain size must be made. This paper presents a new and improved method for the estimation of grain size. Usual Methods OF EvaluatiNg Grain Size A frequetly used method of estimating grain size is that of comparing the image of a polished and etched specimen on the ground-glass screen of a metallographic microscope with standard grain-size charts. Several types of standards are available for use with different classes of microstructures. Geometric Grids.—The Metals Handbook' has a series of hexagonal grids ranging in size from ASTM No. I to 8. Idealized Grain Networks.—Idealized grain.boundary networks for ASTM grain sizes I to 8 are included in the American Society for Testing Materials Tentative Standard E 19 - 39 T, standard Micrographs & Metals Handbook and ASTM Tentative Standard E19-3gT contain micrographs of hypo-eutectoid and hypereutectoid steels ranging in grain size from No. I to 8. The grain size of annealed brass (diameter of the average grain in millimeters) is obtained by comparison with 10 micrographs of varying. grain size in ASTM Tentative Standard E 2-39 T. A handicap to accurate evaluation of grain size by this method is the fact that it is difficult to compare photographs in a dimly lighted room with the image on the ground-glass screen, or, if the general illumination is increased so that the printed standards may be clearly seen, the contrast of the image of the unknown is decreased. It is easier to estimate grain size by comparing a micrograph of the unknown with the grain-size standards. However, photographing every specimen on which the grain size is desired is too costly in time and materials to be practicable. For hardened steels, the Shepherd or Jernkontoret fracture grain-size standards are very accurate and useful, but this method obviously cannot be applied to ductile alloys such as brass, stainless steels and austenitic heat-resistant alloys. Jeffries' method for grain-size measurements consists of counting the number

Jan 1, 1948

By Mehl, Robert F.

IT has been shown by numerous studies that the orientations of new metal crystals are determined by the orientations of the crystals in the original matrix, whether these new crystals are formed by recrystalliza-tion, by precipitation from solid solutions, or by transitions in the solid state. The orientations of crystals formed by recrystallization of cold-worked worked metals that bear preferred orientations are occasionally simply related to the initial preferred orientation; often, however, the relation-ship is not simple, but complicated and obscure in origin.1 The orientations of crystals formed by precipitation from solid solu-tions have been shown by many studies in this and other countries to be determined by the orientation of the crystals of the solid solution stable at the higher temperatures, though here again complicated cases have been found and no general theory is available .2 Related to this latter class

Jan 1, 1934

A special meeting of the Alaska Mining and Engineering society, held at Perseverance Mine of the Alaska Gastineau Mining Co. on Mar. 17, 1017, was attended by 46 members and about 80 guests, among whom were members of the Alaska Territorial Legislature. After an interesting trip through the mine in the afternoon, the members and guests assembled for dinner at the Perseverance Dining Room. After the dinner G. T. Jackson, assistant manager of the company, as president of the society, called the meeting to order. After the reading of the minutes, he welcomed the guests and then gave a short history of Perseverance Mine. B. L. Thane, manager of the company, briefly out-lined its general organization. The following papers were read-by members of the society and members of the staff of the Perseverance Mine: "The Organization of the Mine Staff and the Methods of Mining," by B. B. Nieding, Mine Supt.; "Tramming Equipment and Costs," by R. R. Van Valkenburgh; "The Surveying of the Mine," by R. L. Healey, Mine Engineer; "The Electrical Equipment of the Mine," by W. S. Pullen, Supt., of Power Supply; "The System of Mine Accounting, "by E. J. Doherty, Mine Accountant; and "The Mine Buildings," by D: J. Argall, Asst: Mine Supt. M. T. Tolch, Transportation Supt., described briefly the general transportation of the ore to the mill and the equipment used.

Jan 6, 1917

The Institute conducts jointly with the American Society of Civil Engineers, 'American Society of Mechanical Engineers and American Institute of Electrical Engineers, certain activities as listed below, and is joint owner with them if certain properties. United Engineering. Trustees, Inc. When Mr. Carnegie made his gift which made possible a home for the engineering societies, a separate corporation was organized to act as a holding company and to manage the common property. This was long known as the United Engineering Society but the name has now been changed to one which more nearly reflects the real function of the corporation. It holds title to the Engineering societies Building and to various funds placed in its charge and is managed by a Board of Trustees of which three are chosen by each of the four societies, American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Institute of Electrical Engineers and American Society of Civil Engineers, which own equal and undivided interests in the property. The land and building cost two million dollars. The interest of each of the Founders societies, aside from especial trust funds, is now valued at $493,352. The A. I. M. E. trustees are Arthur S. Dwight, J. V. N. Don and George D. Barron. The President of the Board is Francis Lee Stuart and the Secretary, Alfred D. Flinn.

Jan 1, 1929

By J. B. Mackintosh

Some months ago I received a sample of a highly crystalline product occurring in the hearth of the shaft-furnace used in smelting the roasted niccoliferous pyrrhotite at Mr. Joseph Wharton's works near the Gap Mine, Lancaster County, Pa. Mr. Wharton first observed this product in cavities in the concretions in these furnaces about the year 1870, and published a description of it in that year.* Thinking that it might show some analogy to meteoric iron, he sent the present sample to Mr. George a F. Kunz, who turned it over to me, with the request that I should analyze it at my convenience. The results do not show the expected analogy, because the sulphur in meteoric iron is combined as FeS., while in this product there is only one-sixth the necessary amount of sulphur, which, however, seems to be combined with all the metallic elements present, forming a sub-sulphide of definite composition. I am informed by Mr. Wharton that he has had for a long time the sample which I have analyzed, and that it probably is about the same age as that which he first described. It is worthy of note that the material does not show any signs of oxidation, but that the crystals preserve a brilliant metallic lustre. The first two analyses, made by Mr. J. Voigt, are those given by

Jan 1, 1888

GRAHAM BRIGHT,* East Pittsburgh, Pa.-Bee-hive coke ovens are usually located at the mines, where the gases from the ovens are not strongly objectionable because the communities are not thickly built up. The byproduct oven will naturally he located near centers of industry, to which the coal can be brought from different directions and desirable mixtures can be made; where also the byproducts can be readily marketed, while the gas can be utilized for industrial and domestic purposes. Not much thought seems to have been given to the gases escaping from the byproduct coke oven, which are more or less objectionable in thickly populated sections. When the byproduct oven shall have been more widely installed, this question is likely to become serious, and it will be necessary to apply remedies. May I ask what has been done, or is going to be clone, in this direction? S. A. Moss, ? Lynn, Mass.-One cause of escaping gas is that the gas exhausters do not supply the proper suction. If a satisfactory regulating governor is applied and the correct kind of gas exhauster is used, the trouble will be eliminated. J. I. THOMPSON,? Pittsburgh, Pa.-The hoppers Co. has made a careful study of the question of smoke prevention. The smoke caused by the operation of the byproduct coke ovens is infinitely less than that caused by bee-hive ovens.

Jan 11, 1918

By Spruille Braden

My attendance at this seventy-fifth Anniversary banquet of the A I M E is for me a homecoming, It means renewing associations with old friends, breathing again 'the invigorating mining atmosphere in which I was born and reared, and being among those who remember with affection and esteem the man from whom I inherited a name so intimately linked to-the mining profession Tonight, like a prodigal son strayed from mining into the far countries of diplomacy, I return, to eat and be merry over the fatted calf on this pleasurable occasion , While there is no riotous living in modern diplomacy, you are no doubt convinced that neither did I suffer a mighty famine in those far lands When I entered the Foreign Service, a few mining friends, viewing diplomats as sartorial perfectionists, or "striped pantsers" preoccupied with the art of cookie pushing, no doubt thought me a lost soul Conversely, some of my new colleagues at first looked upon me captiously and later as a reformed character, because they believed all miners to be rough customers, attired in muddy boots and given to direct action and equally direct or even explosive speech In point of fact, these two professions have much in common I do not have in mind the parallel cynicisms that "a miner is a liar with a hole in the ground" and "a diplomat a man sent abroad to lie for his country " I do

Jan 1, 1947

By Fred D. DeVaney

Probably no ferrous metallurgical process has ever found such ready acceptance and rapid expansion as the pelletizing of iron ores. The process was first commercialized in the early 1950's and since then it has grown to the point where the amount of material pelletized worldwide will approach 100 million tons in 1971. The term agglomeration is used to describe any process by which fine material is formed into larger shapes or agglomerates and includes, in addition to pelletizing, such processes as sintering and briquetting. Sintering cannot be used to efficiently agglomerate iron materials containing a high percentage of 100-mesh fines but the method has been widely used over many decades for agglomerating flue dust, mill scale and iron ore finer than 3/8 in.

Jan 1, 1971

By T. A. Rickard

Among the names which won a world-wide fame during the golden age of the early fifties, Bendigo and Ballarat were to Australia, what the Yuba and Grass Valley were to California. The map of Victoria did not for a long time show the name of old Bendigo;* for this first and more distinctive name was replaced with the more English Sandhurst, just as the alluvial diggings gave place to quartz mining. Towards the close of last pear, steps were taken to give back the old name, as associated with the early days of rich alluvium, and more suggestive than the application taken secondhand from an English military academy. History. The first discovery of gold? in this district, was made in the autumn of 1851 ; but there has never been any certainty as to the day or the man. At that time the country around Bendigo Creek was a part of the Ravenswootl sheep-run, and its resemblance to the Forest Creek district (now Castlemaine), induced the first prospecting. It was late in November when the "rush" broke out; the shepherds left their flocks; the sylvan solitudes were disturbed by * The name of Bendigo is said to have been derived from a hut-keeper on the Ravenswood sheep-run, who on account of his fondness for " fisticuffs " was nicknamed Bendigo, after the prize-fighter of that name. It is not aboriginal, as is often supposed, but Spanish ; and equivalent to our Benedict. There must always be some confusion between the two names of Sandhurst and Bendigo; the town, and with it the gold-field, having been three tinies named. Several other old familiar names have been likewise unfortunately replaced by second-hand English ones; so that an old digger talks of Forest Creek when he means the modern Castlemaine, Mt. Ida for Heathcote, Growler's Creek for Bright, etc. I shall use the names Sandhurst and Bendigo interchangeably. The first discovery of gold in Australia, was made by E. H.Hargraves, February 12, 1851, near Bathurst in New South Wales. In August of the same year the discovery at Buninyong, near Ballarat, inaugurated the first of a series of rushes to the Victoria gold-fields.

Jan 1, 1892

By R. W. Raymond

In my paper on " End-Lines and Side-Lines in the Mining Law," read at the New York meeting of February, 1889 (Trans., xvii., 787), I discussed certain points involving the rights of a locator, B, who had located and surveyed a piece of ground, X + Y, of which only Y was properly subject to location, X being already held by another claimant, and had applied for and received a patent, granting X + Y, " excepting and excluding X." The paper concluded with the following questions : " Is there any difference in effect between the grant to him of Y simply and the grant of X + Y, ' excepting and excluding X' ? Why should any mining locator stake out his boundaries upon another location, and thus appear to assert a claim which he immediately withdraws? What is the legal force of such boundaries, established upon the land of another?" After calling attention to the fact that the entrance upon another's land for such a purpose is a trespass, and the principle that no trespasser can create by his trespass any right which he would not have without it, I reserved to another occasion a review of the history of the absurd practice of imaginary boundaries for mining claims, and a discussion of their legal effect. This practice is founded, of course, in the regulations and decisions of the United States General Land Office. There is nothing in the Revised Statutes which hints at it. On the contrary, the terms of Section 2322, giving to a locator " the exclusive right of possession and enjoyment" of the surface of his claim, seems clearly to forbid the use of that surface for the boundary-stakes of another locator. But the Act of 1866, though it provided for the issue of patents upon payment to the Government of so much per acre, and really by implication (as I have always believed) involved the absolute grant of the surface, was not so construed by the courts generally, or by the Land Office. Surveys were laid one over another in inextricable confusion, and the United States sold at $5 per acre the

Jan 1, 1890

By L. J. Murphy

The production of crude oil in the United States is exceeding consumption by one-quarter million barrels per day and, with the possibilities of West Texas, this condition of overproduction, unless controlled, is likely to continue for some time. The resulting low price of oil has caused the operator to observe closely his lease operating costs. The installation of more efficient and reliable machinery has followed and it can well be said that the art of producing oil is on the threshold of a new era. In this advancement electricity has played a leading part. This paper covers only the problem of electricity as applied to lease operation and does not consider other phases of the industry, such as drilling and pipe-line pumping, in which electric power has been utilized economically. In considering electrification of pumping wells, the first question the operator asks is whether or not his costs will be reduced and the second question is whether or not the production will be increased. The third question, although in effect it is closely allied to the first, is the cost of power. The last question can be answered only after a thorough analysis of operating conditions and a study of the power rates prevailing in the particular field under consideration. Within the past few years, the power companies have realized the desirability of a steady 24-hr, pumping load, have made their rates for oil-field service particularly attractive, and in general have shown splendid cooperation in assisting the oil companies in the satisfactory application of electric power to their leases. When everything is taken into consideration, the first cost is practically the same for electric drive as for gas engines when pumping on the beam with individual motors. This cost, at prevailing prices, should aver-age approximately $2200 to $2400 per installation when using 15 to 35-hp., two-speed pumping equipment, including motor and control, countershaft, motor house, belt, installation charges, and a prorated portion of the cost of transmission lines and transformers for serving a number of wells. Since there is practically no difference in the cost of the two installations, it is evident that electricity, to justify its consideration, must have a lower operating cost or produce more oil.

Jan 1, 1928

By C. P. Sandberg

C. P. Sandberg, London, Eng. 1 think we should all be grateful to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and to their chemist, Dr. Dudley, for spending so much time and money in order to solve an important question; nor are me less indebted to the public spirit which leads them to impart tlie experience thus gained. In Europe nothing similar has hitherto been done, either by a company or by any private individual. In England the great railway companies employ their engineers in other ways, and do not keep a chemist or specialist to study rails; bat even if they did they would probably not publish the results. The chief professional engineers are so occupied with their private practice of railroad construction generally, that they cannot be expected to devote their time and energies to so special a question. The German Railway Union has, in my opinion, missed the real object of its elaborate researches by falling into the error of specifying costly, impracticable tests for rails—tests at the same time which do not infallibly expose the impurities that may be in the rails under examination. There has, therefore, been nothing done on this side of the Atlantic in the way of exhaustive study to determine the best composition for steel rails. America should consequently have full credit for the enlightened example which she has set. I wish, however, to make a few remarks on Dr. Dudley's second paper,—& paper which follows very much upan the same lines of argument as the first red three years ago, upon which I have previously touched in my pabr on the same subject read at the meeting in August last. If Dr. Dudley had discovered a new metal he could hardly, I think, have taken wore pains to prove that he was correct in his first formula for the best chemical colnposition of steel rails. But I hare seen so much done in the way of proof by experiment that I am inclined to think that almost anything can be proved by experiments and by satnples. If Dr. Dudley would only give up his formula, which would not suit any country—not even America—

Jan 1, 1881

C. P. Sandberg, London, Eng. 1 think we should all be grateful to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and to their chemist, Dr. Dudley, for spending so much time and money in order to solve an important question; nor are me less indebted to the public spirit which leads them to impart tlie experience thus gained. In Europe nothing similar has hitherto been done, either by a company or by any private individual. In England the great railway companies employ their engineers in other ways, and do not keep a chemist or specialist to study rails; bat even if they did they would probably not publish the results. The chief professional engineers are so occupied with their private practice of railroad construction generally, that they cannot be expected to devote their time and energies to so special a question. The German Railway Union has, in my opinion, missed the real object of its elaborate researches by falling into the error of specifying costly, impracticable tests for rails—tests at the same time which do not infallibly expose the impurities that may be in the rails under examination. There has, therefore, been nothing done on this side of the Atlantic in the way of exhaustive study to determine the best composition for steel rails. America should consequently have full credit for the enlightened example which she has set. I wish, however, to make a few remarks on Dr. Dudley's second paper,—& paper which follows very much upan the same lines of argument as the first red three years ago, upon which I have previously touched in my pabr on the same subject read at the meeting in August last. If Dr. Dudley had discovered a new metal he could hardly, I think, have taken wore pains to prove that he was correct in his first formula for the best chemical colnposition of steel rails. But I hare seen so much done in the way of proof by experiment that I am inclined to think that almost anything can be proved by experiments and by satnples. If Dr. Dudley would only give up his formula, which would not suit any country—not even America—

Jan 1, 1881