Search Documents

By H. D. Newell

Jan 1, 1938

By C. W. Andrews

The various methods of by-product coke-manufacture have been quite thoroughly discussed in a number of papers recently published, and I think it would possibly be of interest and value to discuss the growth and probable future of the byproduct coke industry, rather than details of manufacture. The first by-product coke-plant in the United States, consisting of 12 ovens, was put in operation at Syracuse in January, 1893. This installation was followed by one at Johnstown, Pa., in 1895; one at Dunbar, in 1896, and one at Glassport, in 1897. The plant at Syracuse was primarily intended to supply the owners with ammonia for their alkali-works. At Glassport, for the first time, gas was sold for illuminating purposes, although it was mixed with water-gas to make it marketable. The New England Coke & Gas Co. started the plant in Boston in 1899, which was destined to change the whole trend of the establishment of by-product plants, since it manufactured for the first time illuminating-gas suitable for sale without enrichment. This was accomplished by dividing the gas on the battery into two portions. One portion, consisting of the richer part of the gas, was saved for sale, while the remaining, or leaner, portion was used in the battery. This idea was originated by Dr. Schniewind, of the United Coke & Gas Co. The coke was used for domestic, industrial, and locomotive fuel, as its sulphur-content was too high to make it suitable for use in the foundry. The successful operation of this plant led to the building of additional plants at points where the production of illuminating-gas could be sold to advantage and where there was a fair market for the coke-output. The following list of illuminating-gas plants in order of construction will give a good idea of the rapid growth of this method of combined gas- and coke-manufacture: Hamilton, Ohio; Detroit, Mich.; Camden, N. J.; Baltimore, Md.; Chester, Pa.; Milwaukee, Wis.; Duluth, Minn.; Geneva, N. Y.; Chicago, Ill.; Indianapolis, Ind. In addition to these there are now under construction plants at Muncie, Ind.; Joliet, Ill., and Waukegan, Ill., all of which will produce illuminating-gas and metallurgical coke.

Jan 1, 1913

By C. F. Cockrell, K. K. Humphreys, H. E. Shajer

It is quite conceivable that the question of using coal or an alternate fuel in the future by large industrial consumers may be decided on the basis of possible profitable utilization of flyash. Accordingly, the Coal Research Bureau at West Virginia University has been attempting to develop new uses for this waste material. This effort has resulted in the development of a process for producing flyash-based face brick and other structural materials which generally exceed published specifications for competitive clay-based materials. These structural materials, containing up to 97% waste coal ash, can be produced from flyash derived from most coals without regard to the physical or chemical properties of the coal ash. Preliminary production cost estimates indicate that face brick can be manufactured at a rate of 9000 brick per hr or more with a resultant gross profit of over $24.00 per thousand brick. Plant payout time for a plant of this size would be only about 1.2 years assuming a market price of approximately $55.00 per thousand, a well established figure for comparable clay brick. With flyash production expected to more than double in the next 15 years, there is an increasing need for a practical and Profitable method for the utilization of large tonnages of this material (see Table I listing total flyash production of utilities in each state of the U.S.). Present industrial and governmental physical and chemical restrictions, particularly for use as a lightweight filler or pozzolanic material, have limited the use of flyash considerably. For those ashes which have met the required standards, utilization is not always assured because of lack of promotion and poor public acceptance. Less than 6% of the total flyash production in the U.S. was sold in 1962. The remainder was dumped in disposal areas at costs as high as $2.42 per ton.' It is quite conceivable that in the near future the question of using coal or an alternate fuel by large industrial consumers may be decided on the basis of the possible utilization of flyash. To help insure future coal demands, the Coal Research Bureau at

Jan 1, 1968

Jan 1, 1932

Jan 1, 1946

Jan 1, 1946

Jan 1, 1970

[ ]

Jan 1, 1938

Jan 1, 1908

Jan 1, 1965

By W. Rostoker

LAVES and Wallbaum1 and more recently Duwez and Taylor' have reported on the occurrence of a family of intermediate phases having the composition Ti2X, where X may be Cu, Ni, Co, Fe, or Mn.

Jan 1, 1953

[ ]

Jan 1, 1938

By Joshua Pelleg, G. M. Lindberg

THERE are three reported investigations of self-diffusion in niobium. Lundy et al.1 found their self-diffusion data well represented by the equation

Jan 1, 1970

Jan 1, 1954

H. M. HOWE, Bedford Hills, N. Y.-We may clear the matter very easily, at least to a very great extent, if we look at these islands of ferrite that occur in steel castings as simply corresponding to the ferrite ghosts in steel forgings, representing the differentiation that takes place in the solidification off the molten mass. In that solidification you have dendritic crystals forming and in between those dendrites you have con-

Jan 12, 1919

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1916

By F. L. Misaqi

The total amount of radon-222 released into the atmosphere by the US uranium mines and mills is only an infinitely small fraction of the total amount of radon released by the top layers of soil with a high concentration of uranium, such as is found in Grants, N. M. Even when compared to areas where mineable deposits of uranium are unknown, the amount of radon released by all US mining and milling operations is still relatively insignificant. Of course, higher local concentrations of airborne radioactivity may be observed around stockpiled ore and

Jan 8, 1976