Search Documents

By Sydney H. Ball

I. INTRODUCTION. DURING the past 50 years the attention of mining-men has been turned to Africa, and within the past decade prospecting-expeditions sent into Central Africa have resulted in the opening-up of several mines. Having recently spent two years in the Belgian Congo for the Société Internationale Forestiere et Miniere du Congo, it is our purpose to outline briefly the mining-conditions in that part of Central Africa. Before it became, in 1908, a Belgian colony, this region was known as the Congo Free State. II. LOCATION AND AREA. The Belgian Congo lies in southwestern Central Africa, west of the continental divide, is illustrated in Fig. 1. It has a coastline of but 20 miles on the Atlantic, but widens rapidly eastward to points 5° north and 14° south of the equator. Its area is 908,000 sq. miles, which is almost one-quarter that of the United States and Alaska, or more than one and one-half times that of Alaska. Stated in other terms, its area is nearly one-third that of the United States, exclusive of Alaska and the insular possessions, or more than that of all the United States east of the Mississippi river. III. TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE. From north to south, Africa is made up of three topographic elements: 1, the Atlas mountains, a highly-accentuated region

Apr 1, 1910

By Charles Y. Clayton

A study of the literature shows that the greater part of research work on annealing of cold-worked iron has been for the purpose of studying the effect on grain-size and properties other than hardness. No reference has been found of experimental work of the same nature as that explained in this short paper. The material used throughout was Vismera iron, an iron containing 0.03 carbon and made several years ago by the Inland Steel Co. One-half inch stock was cut into cylinders % in. long. The cylinders were then compressed for 60 sec. in a Reihle testing machine under loads as indicated below: CoMPressiON, Average Length, Series Pounds Inches 1 10,000 0.693 2 15,000 .599 3 20,000 .501 4 25,000 .426 5 30,000 .378 6 35,000 .351 7 40,000 .311 Fig. 1 shows these cylinders after compression. Each series consisted of 17 specimens lettered 0, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, P, Q and R. One specimen of each series was reserved for study of the properties in the cold-worked condition. The other specimens were annealed in a Hump furnace for 1/2 hr. at the following temperatures: TEmpeRa- TempeRa- Letters tuRe,° C. LettERs tuRe °C. B............................... 250 J.............................. 650 C............................... 300 K............................. 700 D............................... 350 L.............................. 750 E............................... 400 M............................. 800 F................................ 450 N............................. 851 G............................... 500 0. . :........................... 900 H............................... 550 P.............................. 950 I................................ 600 Q............................. L000

Jan 1, 1926

By Howard N. Eavenson

AN analysis of the bituminous coal situation by an authority who traces the production, mining, safety, markets and labor trends in comparison with other fuels. BEFORE 1918 the production of coal experienced a steady growth, with slight recessions in ouput in only twelve years (1837, 1841, 1852, 1855, 1861, 1874, 1876, 1889, 1894, 1905, 1909, 1914), and in each of these cases the loss was recovered in the following year and the increase continued. In each decade the output was doubled. Prices, while not high, allowed some profit. In 1918 during World War I, an output of 580 million tons was reached and with the exception of 1923 this total was not again reached until 1942, in World War 11. Losses of output in this period were much greater than ever before; in 1932 the total was 270 million tons less than in 1918 or 1923, and the loss after 1923 was not recovered until 1942. The greatest output was 631 million tons in 1947.

Jan 1, 1950

By Paul Billingsley

THE development of the North Lily ground, which lies in the East Tintic district, Utah,. about half a mile northwest of the famous Tintic Standard mine, was undertaken by the International Smelting Co. on purely geological reasoning. The geologic theory on which this work was based resulted from several years' intensive study of the East Tintic district by the geological department of the International Smelt-ing Co., who were, during this period, indebted to many for valuable suggestions that were adopted and became part, of the gradually maturing concept. For example, E. J. Raddatz, president of the Tintic Standard Mining Co., first called attention to the significance of rhyolite alteration; J. W. Wade, assistant manager, contributed greatly to our knowledge of the great Tintic Standard orebodies; and so on all along. the line. In short, the ultimate theory embodies the aggregate experience and thought of all those most familiar with the area in question. The problem in brief was this: is the Tintic Standard deposit an isolated occurrence of ore, or are other ore deposits to be found in the vicinity? If the latter is the case, where can these others be looked for? The difficulty of the problem lay in the fact that most of the area is covered by rhyolite; beneath which lies the limestone in which the orebodies occur; so that the available evidence as to the structure of the formations, and, their mineralization; is of the slightest. The sav-ing features of the case, by means of which it proved possible to solve the problem, are three in number first, the rhyolite is pre-mineral and hence has been exposed to alteration by the mineralizing agencies; second, certain persistent dikes and fissures are con-tinuous through the rhyolite into the limestone below; and third, the extensive underground workings of the Tintic Standard gave a good basis for study of the sub-rhyolite structure and the occurrence of ore. The rhyolite overlies the Tintic Standard orebodies, and over them shows a large patch of brownish altera-tion. This patch proves to be due to chloritization and sericitization, which has spread out from certain zones of dikes, pebble-dikes and fissures. The dikes are com-posed of a light fine-grained rock which has been altered to an aggregate of quartz, alunite, and magnetite. They can be traced southwest to a common center in Big Hill, the entire mass of which is composed of the same material. The pebble-dikes, which consist of a mass of rounded pebbles, mainly quartzite, in a matrix ranging from the same quartz-alunite-magnetite rock as above to almost pure vein quartz, are closely asso-ciated with these light dikes, but in general extend farther northeast. They thus represent a specialized phase of the intrusive action of which Big Hill is the center. The brown chloritized rhyolite, then, is an alteration product due, in all. probability, to emana-tions closely associated with this phase. Since it coin-cides geographically with the Tintic Standard area of highly altered limestone, with its many great ore-bodies, it has been concluded, that it is the expression in the rhyolite of activities which have also altered and mineralized' the underlying limestone.

Jan 4, 1927

By F. G. Miller, E. B. Wilson

In 1972, coal mine productivity was in steady decline and labor and maintenance costs were spiralling upward. Yet, despite this sad state of affairs, nowhere in the US at that time was there a comprehensive and coordinated coal research and development plan in the offing. The Bureau of Mines had not yet been charged with such a responsibility, and industry was content to rely on machinery manufacturers for innovations. It was during this period that Bethlehem Steel Corp. determined that a new approach to coal mining research was needed for the industry as well as for the company itself. After studying Bethlehem's own mining practices, the state-of-the-art of mining research elsewhere, and development work by manufacturers, a comprehensive research package was presented to company management in late 1972. The ideas and experience of many operating and management personnel in the company contributed to the formulation of the final plan as approved.

Jan 10, 1976

By John S. Brown

The northeastern United States embraces that area of the Appalachian Mountains, and adjacent territory, beginning on the south at the Potomac River. It thus extends from the flat-lying Paleozoic terrane of the Appalachian plateau on the west, across the folded Paleozoics of the Great Valley and adjacent ridges (Paleozoic and Precambrian), over the Piedmont and New England metamorphic complex (mixed Paleozoic and igenous rocks), broken by the great Triassic rift remnants, onto the subdued coastal plain of Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments. Although not noted as a metal mining region, the area does contain numerous substantial and several outstanding mines, chiefly of the more prosaic metals, particularly iron, zinc, and copper, as well as many minor occurrences of these and a few additional items. These deposits occur to some extent in every subdivision of the area. The region to date (1966) has produced almost 500,000,000 tons of medium to lowgrade iron ore, especially magnetite, including ilmenitic magnetite; 50,000,000 tons of highgrade zinc ore; and 5,000,000 tons of lowgrade copper. In the past, it has yielded small amounts of chromite and nickel, and at present is a large producer of titanium. Precious metals are conspicuously absent, and so also are the Tertiary or Mesozoic igneous phenomena so commonly associated with mines of the West. Hence, a survey of the extensive mineralization · of this region should be instructive

Jan 1, 1968

By Kenneth R. Hancock

Iron oxides are unique in that they are the only significant colored mineral found in a natural state suitable for use as a pigment after it has been pulverized to pigmentary size. The current world production of iron oxide pig¬ments is estimated by the author to be between 450,000 and 550,000 tons based on 1969 data. The fact that highly colored natural deposits of iron ore are found throughout the world ac¬counts for its use in prehistoric man's artistic cave paintings. These early artists did not realize that they had established man's first paint test fence which now has some 20,000 years of exposure. In addition to abundance, constituting about 7 % of the earth's crust, iron oxides have the advantages of low cost, permanency, and are not toxic. Through the centuries, succeeding civilizations have utilized iron oxides as a major source for decoration and protection when coloring was desired. In the last century the chemical industry has improved on nature by developing a complete range of synthetic iron oxide pigments which surpass the pigments pro¬duced from natural iron ores in uniformity, color quality, and chemical purity. In the United States alone, the combined production of natural and synthetic iron oxides produced sales of over $28,000,000 in 1970 (Stipp, 1970). Nomenclature With the increasing importance of the syn¬thetic iron oxides it is necessary to make a distinction between the natural or mineral pig¬ments and the synthetic pigments. Natural pigments are those products which are derived from selected ores and should not be confused with iron ores mined for steel production. Iron ores that are mined for steel must be capable of being mined and reduced to iron on a com¬mercial basis. These ores are selected on the basis of iron content and processing economics. It is therefore unusual when iron ores for steel production are suitable for use as mineral pig¬ments. Natural pigment ore sources are se¬lected for their special physical-chemical prop¬erties and can command a premium price. Synthetic pigments, and in this instance iron oxides, are those pigments produced from basic chemicals. Through chemical synthesis pig¬mentary sized particles are produced as opposed to comminution, the major procedure common to all natural iron oxide pigments.

Jan 1, 1975

By James Terry Duce

In order to facilitate interpretation of the data in this chapter, we print the following excerpts from circulars to authors, compiled by Mr. Frank A. Herald when he was Vice-chairman for Production of the Petroleum Division: Generally in Table 1 the unit for presentation of data is a field. For our purposes a field is defined as the whole of a surface area wherein productive locations are continuous. Such unit commonly includes and surrounds nonproductive areas. Such unit commonly includes a great variety of geologic conditions-—several units of continuous productive reservoirs of distinctly different structure and of distinctly dzerent stratigraphy. Therefore it is hoped that our authors will subdivide "field" so as to enable students to make analyses that may have scientific and/or commercial value. As to each space in the tabulation, it is either (1) not applicable, (2) the proper entry is not determinable, (3) the proper entry is determinable, but not determinable from data available to the author, (4) the proper entry is determinable by the author. In spaces not applicable, the author will please draw horizontal lines; in spaces where the proper entries are not determinable, the author will please insert x; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable but not determinable from data available to the author, the author will please insert y; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable by the author he will, of course, make such entries. Generally, y implies a hope that in some future year a definite figure will be available. Inability to determine precisely the correct entry for a particular space should not lead the author to insert merely y. Contributions of great value may be made by the author in many cases where entries are not subject to precise determination. In such cases the author should use his good judgment and make the best entry possible under the circumstances. For many spaces, the correct entries represent the opinion of the author (for example, "Area Proved") and in such cases the entries need not be hedged to such extent as in cases where the quantities are definite yet can be ascertained only approximately by the author. In cases under definite headings but where figures are only approximate, the author may use 2. For example, if the total production of a field is known to be between 1,800,000 and 1,850,000, the author may report l,8x,xxx; or if the production is between 1,850,000 and 1,900,000, the author may report 1,9xx,xxx. Where a numeral is immediately to the left of x or y, such numeral represents the nearest known number in that position. As to quantity of gas produced from many fields the question will arise as to whether the figures should include merely the gas marketed or should include also estimates of gas used in operations and gas wasted. Although rough approximations

Jan 1, 1937

By James Terry Duce

In order to facilitate interpretation of the data in this chapter, we print the following excerpts from circulars to authors, compiled by Mr. Frank A. Herald when he was Vice-chairman for Production of the Petroleum Division: Generally in Table 1 the unit for presentation of data is a field. For our purposes a field is defined as the whole of a surface area wherein productive locations are continuous. Such unit commonly includes and surrounds nonproductive areas. Such unit commonly includes a great variety of geologic conditions-several units of continuous productive reservoirs of distinctly different structure and of distinctly different stratigraphy. Therefore it is hoped that our authors will subdivide "field" so as to enable students to make analyses that may have scientific and/or commercial value. As to each space in the tabulation, it is either (I) not applicable, (2) the proper entry is not determinable, (3) the proper entry is determinable, but not determinable from data available to the author, (4) the proper entry is determinable by the author. In spaces not applicable, the author will please draw horizontal lines; in spaces where the proper entries are not determinable, the author will please insert x; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable but not determinable from data available to the author, the author will please insert y; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable by the author he will, of course, make such entries. Generally, y implies a hope that in some future year a definite figure will be available. Inability to determine precisely the correct entry for a particular space should not lead the author to insert merely y. Contributions of great value may be made by the author in many cases where entries are not subject to precise determination. In such cases the author should use his good judgment and make the best entry possible under the circumstances. For many spaces, the correct entries represent the opinion of the author (for example, "Area Proved") and in such cases the entries need not be hedged to such extent as in cases where the quantities are definite yet can be ascertained only approximately by the author. In cases under definite headings but where figures are only approximate, the author may use x. For example, if the total production of a field is known to be between 1,800,000 and 1,850,000, the author may report 1,8xx,xxx; or if the production is between 1,850,000 and 1,900,000, the author may report 1,9xx,xxx. Where a numeral is immediately to the left of x or y, such numeral represents the nearest known number in that position. As to quantity of gas produced from many fields the question will arise as to whether the figures should include merely the gas marketed or should include also estimates of gas used in operations and gas wasted. Although rough approximations

Jan 1, 1938

By Frank A. Herald

Generally in Table 1 the unit for presentation of data is a field. For our purposes a field is defined as the whole of a surface area wherein productive locations are continuous. Such unit commonly includes and surrounds nonproductive areas. Such unit commonly includes a great variety of geologic conditions-—several units of continuous productive reservoirs of distinctly different structure and of distinctly different stratigraphy. Therefore it is hoped that our authors will subdivide "field" so as to enable students to make analyses that may have scientific and /or commercial value. As to each space in the tabulation, it is either (I) not applicable, (2) the proper entry is not determinable, (3) the proper entry is determinable, but not determinable from data available to the author, (4) the proper entry is determinable by the author. In spaces not applicable, the author will please draw horizontal lines; in spaces where the proper entries are not determinable, the author will please insert x; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable but not determinable from data available to the author, the author will please insert y; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable by the author he will, of course, make such entries. Generally, y implies a hope that in some future year a definite figure will be available. Inability to determine precisely the correct entry for a particular space should not lead the author to insert merely y. Contributions of great value may be made by the author in many cases where entries are not subject to precise determination. In such cases the author should use his good judgment and make the best entry possible under the circumstances. For many spaces, the correct entries represent the opinion of the author (for example, "Area Proved") and in such cases the entries need not be hedged to such extent as in cases where the quantities are definite yet can be ascertained only approximately by the author. In cases under definite headings but where figures are only approximate, the author may use 2. For example, if the total production of a field is known to be between 1,800,000 and 1,850,000, the author may report 1,8xx,xxx; or if the production is between 1,850,000 and 1,900,000, the author may report 1,9xx,xxx. Where a numeral is immediately to the left of x or y, such numeral represents the nearest known number in that position. As to quantity of gas produced from many fields the question will arise as to whether the figures should include merely the gas marketed or should include also estimates of gas used in operations and gas wasted. Although rough approximations may be involved, our figures should represent as nearly as possible the total quantity of gas removed from the reservoir. Wile we have not provided a column for showing the thickness of the productive zone, generally the difference between average depth to bottoms of productive wells

Jan 1, 1935

By James Terry Duce

In order to facilitate interpretation of the data in this chapter, we print the following excerpts from circulars to authors, compiled by Mr. Frank A. Herald when he was Vice-chairman for Production of the Petroleum Division, and revised in 1939. Generally in Table 1 the unit for prescntation of data is a field. For our purposes a field is defined as the whole of a surface area wherein productive locations are continuous. Such unit commonly includes and surrounds nonproductive areas. Such unit commonly includes a great variety of geologic conditions—several units of continuous productive reservoirs of distinctly different structure and of distinctly different stratigraphy. Therefore it is hoped that our authors will subdivide "field" so as to enable students to make analyses that may have scientific and /or commercial value. As to each spacc in the tabulation, it is citller (1) not applicable, (2) the proper entry is not determinable, (3) the proper entry is determinable, but not determinable from data available to the author, (4) the proper entry is determinable by the author. In spaces not applicable, the author will please draw horizontal lines; in spaces where the proper entries are not determinable, the author will please insert x; in spaces where the proper entries are detcrminable but not detcrminable from data available to the author, the author will please insert y; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable by the author he will, of course, make such entries. Generally, y implies a hope that in some future year a definite figure will be available. Inability to determine precisely the correct entry for a particular space should not lead the author to insert merely y. Contributions of great value may be made by the author in many cases where entries arc not subject to precise determination. In such rases the author should use his good judgment and make the best entry possible under the circumstances. For many spaces, the correct entries represent the opinion of the author (for example, "Area Proved") and in such cases the entries need not be hedged to such extent as in cases where the quantities are definite yet can be ascertained only approximately by the author. In cases under definite headings but where figures are only approximate, the author may use x. For example, if the total production of a field is known to be between 1,800,000 and 1,850,000, the author may report 1,8xx,xxx; or if the production is between 1,850,000 and 1,900,000, the author may report 1,9xx,xxx. Where a numeral is immediately to the left of x or y, such numeral represents the nearest known number in that position. As to quantity of gas produced from many fields the question will arise as to whether the figures should include merely the gas marketed or should include also estimates of gas used in operations and gas wasted. Although rough approximations

Jan 1, 1939

By C. K. Leith

GENERAL GEOLOGY OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR IRON-BEARING AND COPPER-BEARING SERIES. THE geology of the Lake Superior region is of general interest, both from an economic and a scientific standpoint. The presence of large and rich iron- and copper-deposits has made a knowledge of the geology of the region necessary for purposes of exploitation and exploration. The ores of the region are contained in rocks of pre-Cambrian age, 'pith for most of the country up to recent years have usually been referred to as « crystalline schists " or " crystalline complex;" and regarded principally as metamorphosed basement-unit upon which the sedimentary rocks, beginning with the Paleozoic, were laid down. In the Lake Superior re¬gion this pre-Cambrian complex presents an unusual variety of rocks with determinable relations. It has been possible, with the large expenditures which-the magnitude of the iron-mining industry warrants, to work out their stratigraphy to a larger extent than has been possible in almost any other area of pre-Cambrian rocks. The real complexity of Lake Superior geology, the confusion of names and the multiplicity of reports covering small parts of the region, are such that interested persons, other than. geologists directly engaged in the work, may well hesitate to attempt to comprehend the geology of the region as a whole. The following paper is a somewhat elementary outline of the geology of the Lake Superior region with special reference to new developments not yet covered in published reports. Geological information concerning the region has been gath¬ered by mining companies, and by the geological surveys of Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ontario, Canada, and the United States.. Perhaps in no other part of the country have the mining men themselves spent such large sums in purely geological work. This has made possible the publication of ,reports and maps by the State and Government surveys in much less time and at far less cost than would have been otherwise possible. The. U. S. Geological Survey is the only organization which has covered all of the region on the United 'States side of the boundary, and as its reports include the in¬formation gathered by the mining companies and State organi

Mar 1, 1905

By JOHN JERMAIN

In my opinion, the explanation of the fuel-requirements involving the conception of heat available and necessary above a critical temperature, as advanced by Johnson 1 and elaborated by Howe, Raymond and others,2 affords a theoretically correct basis for such an accounting. It is the purpose of this paper to set forth a first crude attempt to construct a formula which shall show quantitatively the relation between the various factors affecting fuel-economy, and afford a means of comparing the enormous amount of data on the fuel-consumption of various blast-furnaces, at various times and under various conditions of operation. I have also applied this formula to a large number. of individual cases, and have, by its means, compared the furnace-practice of several important iron-making districts. II. DERIVATION OF FORMULA FOR FUEL-REQUIREMENTS. The general expression for the fuel-requirements of the blast-furnace, which I believe to be theoretically correct as to form, is as follows Carbon per ton of iron = Heat per ton of iron necessary in hearth above Tc./Heat per pound of carbon available in hearth above Tc. XFactor of rate of driving. +Carbon dissolved by CO2 of flux. +Carbon dissolved incidental to reduction of ore. + Carbon dissolved in pig-iron. (NOTE.-Tc = critical temperature.) Since, according to Johnson's theory, fuel-economy is usually limited by heat available and necessary in the hearth, rather than by the total heat supplied and necessary, we may write Carbon needed in hearth = Hn/Ha in which Hn is the heat per ton of iron necessary in the hearth above some critical temperature, and Ha is the heat per pound of carbon available in the hearth above this same critical tem¬perature. 1 Trans., xxxvi., 454 (1906). 2 Trans, xxxvi., 792 to 798 (1906) ; Trans, xxxvii., 216 to 237 (1907).

May 1, 1911

By James Terry Duce

In order to facilitate interpretation of the data in this chapter, we print the following excerpts from circulars to authors, compiled by Mr. Frank A. Herald when he was Vice-chairman for Production of the Petroleum Division, and revised in 1939. Generally in Table 1 the unit for prescntation of data is a field. For our purposes a field is defined as the whole of a surface area wherein productive locations are continuous. Such unit commonly includes and surrounds nonproductive areas. Such unit commonly includes a great variety of geologic conditions—several units of continuous productive reservoirs of distinctly different structure and of distinctly different stratigraphy. Therefore it is hoped that our authors will subdivide "field" so as to enable students to make analyses that may have scientific and /or commercial value. As to each spacc in the tabulation, it is citller (1) not applicable, (2) the proper entry is not determinable, (3) the proper entry is determinable, but not determinable from data available to the author, (4) the proper entry is determinable by the author. In spaces not applicable, the author will please draw horizontal lines; in spaces where the proper entries are not determinable, the author will please insert x; in spaces where the proper entries are detcrminable but not detcrminable from data available to the author, the author will please insert y; in spaces where the proper entries are determinable by the author he will, of course, make such entries. Generally, y implies a hope that in some future year a definite figure will be available. Inability to determine precisely the correct entry for a particular space should not lead the author to insert merely y. Contributions of great value may be made by the author in many cases where entries arc not subject to precise determination. In such rases the author should use his good judgment and make the best entry possible under the circumstances. For many spaces, the correct entries represent the opinion of the author (for example, "Area Proved") and in such cases the entries need not be hedged to such extent as in cases where the quantities are definite yet can be ascertained only approximately by the author. In cases under definite headings but where figures are only approximate, the author may use x. For example, if the total production of a field is known to be between 1,800,000 and 1,850,000, the author may report 1,8xx,xxx; or if the production is between 1,850,000 and 1,900,000, the author may report 1,9xx,xxx. Where a numeral is immediately to the left of x or y, such numeral represents the nearest known number in that position. As to quantity of gas produced from many fields the question will arise as to whether the figures should include merely the gas marketed or should include also estimates of gas used in operations and gas wasted. Although rough approximations

Jan 1, 1939

President MRS. HARRISON SOUDER Smith Paramus Road Ridgewood, N. J. First Vice-president MRS. ROBERT HURSH 10 Kilburn Road Belmont, Mass. Second Vice-president MRS. ERLING L. JORGENSEN 95 Knollwood Rd. Short Hills, N. .1. Third Vice-president MRS. PERCY E. BARBOUR 1R(; Riverside Drive New York, N. Y. Fourth Vice-president MRS. C. B. MURRAY 2040 Stearns Rd. Cleveland, Ohio

Jan 1, 1938

By VlNTON H. CLARKE

Diamond-drill blasthole sloping has now been used for a long enough time to permit us to discuss fairly its problems from the ore-breaking angle and to attempt to peer into its future. To do this we have gathered information from many properties through questionnaires. The operators have indicated fairly well in their answers what they think of the method. The many variations of methods have by now been fairly well developed, and performance rates and. mining costs are well established at each property. All this can be laid down on paper with fair completeness. Now. knowing all this, what will the future of the method be? To attempt to look into the future of a mining method immediately brings to light many problems and variables. For instance: why were diamond drills used in the first place? What has the cost trend been? In what type of deposit has the method proved most advantageous? What will the future cost of diamonds be? What are the possible substitutes?

Jan 1, 1949

By E. T. Knight, John D. Gill

IN ITS capacity for service to the public the oil industry is truly gargantuan. But it is only in this respect that the industry is the voracious, many-headed, many-armed and many-handed creature it has been so often painted by those who know it not too intimately and only from the outside. Contrasted sharply with the immensity of the service rendered is the relatively modest share of the national income which has gone to those who provided the tools and the mental and manual labor with which the service was performed. No doubt the relative meagreness of the re- ward was the result of a combination of fortuitous circumstances respecting the nature and accessibility of the industry's raw material and the extensive development and application of the most advanced technology, spurred by an intense competition.

Jan 1, 1940

[Note.—The paper of Mr. W. H. Hoffman (Glen Summit, October, 1891; Trans. xx., 602), on "Practical Results in the Magnetic Concentration of Iron-ore," together with a paper by the same author (Baltimore, February, 1892; Trans. xxi., 126), on "Granulating Magnetic Iron-Ores with thesturtevant Mill atCroton Magnetic Iron-Mines, N. Y.," and also the papers Presented at this meeting,

Jan 1, 1893

By David Turnbull

STAFF: Editor, Gerhard Derge Carnegie Institute of Technology Schenley Park Pittsburgh 13, Pa. Editorial Assistant, M. A. Redmerski Production Editor, Otto T. Johnson THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: J. S. Smart, Jr., President; C. C. Long, Past-President; K. L. Fetters, Vice President; T. D. Jones, Treasurer; R. W, Shearman, Secretary. PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE OF THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: C. L. McCabe, Chairman; H. L. Bishop, K. L. Fetters, J. J. Harwood, W. A. Krivsky, F. C. Langenberg, R. E. Lund, W. O. Philbrook, L. L. Seigle, R. L. Smith, and F. L. Vogel. Review and selection of monuscripts is under the supervision of the following Publications Committees: Extractive Metallurgy Division: C. L. McCabe, Chairman; R. E. Lund, Vice-Chairman; D. H. Baker, Jr., W. A. Krivsky, R. A. Lewis, Paul Queneau, A. S. Russell, R. E. Shinkoskey, W, W. Stephens, and M. E. Wadsworth. Institute of Metals Division: L. L. Seigle, Chairman, Paul A. Beck, I. I. Bessen, J. 0. Better-ton, Jr., J. B. Clark, R. S. Davis, A. E. Dwight, R. W. Fountain, R. B. Gordon, C. D. Graham, Jr., R. W. Guard, J. C. Gurland, E. L. Harmon, J. J. Heger, A. A. Hendricksan, M. Herman, J. N. Hobstetter, H. H. Johnson, Jr., R. R. Nash, T- N. Rhodin, R. H. Richman, W. Ros-toker, P. G. Shewmon, C. W. Spencer, L.SIifkin, J. K. Stanley, C. D. Starr, and H. C. Stumpf. Iron and Steel Division: H. L. Bishop, Chairman; R. E. Boni, F. C. Langenberg, J. B. Wagstaff, and T. V. Wainwright. Published bimonthly by the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc., 29 West 39th Street, New York 18, N. Y. Telephone: PEnnsylvania 6-9220. Subscription $20 per year for non-AIME members in United States and North, South, and Central America; $25, foreign; $5 for AIME members. Single copies, $4.00, single copies foreign, $5.00. The AIME is not responsible for any statement made or opinion expressed in its publications . . . Copyright 1961 by the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. . . . Registered cable address, AIME New York .. . Indexed in Engineering Index, Industrial Arts Index, and Chemical Abstracts . . . Second class postage paid at New York, N. Y., and Ann Arbor, Mich. Volume 221, Number 3.

Jan 1, 1962

By C. S. Smith

It is the policy of The Metallurgical Society to provide, in the TRANSACTIONS OF THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY OF AIME, a prompt and accurate medium for publication of reports of significant new research in both the scientific and engineering aspects of metallurgy. Papers submitted to the Society are judged by competent reviewers according to established criteria for technical merit, accuracy, originality, and presentation. STAFF: Editor, Dr. Gerhard Derge; Editorial Assistant, M. A. Redmyrski; Staff Coordinator, James J. Burke. THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: W. R. Hibbard, Jr., President; J. C. Kinnear, Jr., Post-President; John Chipman, Vice President; T. D. Jones, Treasurer; R. W. Shearman, Secretory. PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE OF THE METALLURGICAL SOCIETY: A. W. Thornton, Chairman- Dennis Carney John Chipman J. C. Fulton J. H. Hollomon H. H. Kellogg, A. E. Lee, R. Moddin, J. D. sullivan, and D.' Swan. Review and selection of manuscripts is under the supervision of the following Publications Committees: Extractive Metallurgy Division: T. B. King, Chairman; S. J. Dickenson, R. P. Hermsdorf, R. Schuhmann, Jr., and P. T. Stroup. lnstitute of Metals DM lion: Robert Maddin, Chairman. F. Lincoln Vogel, Jr.. Vice chairman. W. A. Backofen R. W. Boliuffi J. H. Bechtold' M. B. Bever R: S. Busk C 6. Goetzel poul Gordon C. D. Grobom, Jr., Robert F. Hehe-mann R. I. Joffee F. i. Joumot Jr. lrvin R. Kromer, A. J. Leno. Horold Morgolfn, C. J. McHargue, Russell A. Meussner, J. B. Newkirk, H. W. Paxton, G. E. Pellissier, I. S. Servi, Alon U. Seybolt, A. J. Shaler, and Jack Washburn. Iron and Steel Division: J. C. Fulton, Chairman. T. B. King, F. C. Laogenberg, W. O. Philbrook, and T. 0. Winkler. Publishod bimonthl by the American Institute of Mining Metollurgicol and Petroleum Engineers Inc., 29 West 39th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Telephone: PEonylvanie 6-9220. Subscription $20 par yew for non-AIME members in United States and North, South and Control Americo $25 foreign; $5 for AIME members. Single copies, $4.00, single copios foreign $5,00. The AIME is 1958 by the Amarican mode or opinion axpressed in it* publications ... Copyright by the Amarican lnstitute of Mining, MataIlurgicol, and Petrolum Engineers, Inc,. . . Reg. istered cable address AIME New Yark ... Indexed in Engineering Inderx, Industrial Arts ...Index and Chemicol Number5. Absrtracis . . . Second class postage paid at New York,Indor. N. Y., Industrialond Ann Arbor, Mich.

Jan 1, 1959