Search Documents

By HENRY FA

HENRY FAY (communication to the Secretary*).-In reply to the discussion of my paper, I wish to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to the Chairman and the various gentlemen who have taken part. I regret that others have not offered criticism, for honest differences of opinion often lead to the truth, and suggest new lines of work. An experiment has been made which bears on Prof. Sauveur's discussion and which helps to emphasize the conclusion that cementation is not a factor in the hardening of: the surface. Dr. Langenberg, of the Watertown Arsenal, has heated for me, in vacuo at 1,000° C., a piece of the metal containing a hard surface. The microstructure shows uniform distribution of carbon throughout the metal, showing that no carbon has been added to .the surface and heating in vacuo has prevented any oxidation of the surface.

Jan 6, 1917

By Henry Fay

THE erosion of guns is a complex problem which can be solved only by a detailed study of all the factors involved. In the present paper it is proposed to submit the results of observations and experiments which have extended over several years. Certain facts have been established and preliminary reports have been published.' Conclusions have been reached since then which, it is believed, are worth presenting for the purpose of promoting discussion, and with the hope that ultimately the whole truth will be known. The particular phase of the problem which will be presented here is the hardening of the inner surface of the gun tube. It has been known for a long time that after firing a large caliber gun for some time, the surface of the metal becomes hard and brittle, cracks, and wears away.2 The character of this phenomenon may be learned by an examination of some results which are typical, obtained from a detailed study of a 12-in. gun. The gun was trepanned and rings representing various sections of the gun were cut out for examination. The first ring represented the metal at the muzzle end, and the other rings were removed at approximately 120, 240, 325 and 337 in., respectively, toward the breech end. The appearance of the surface of the metal in the different sections is shown in Fig. 1. The greatest amount of wear and maximum amount of hard surface layer was found in section marked E, which is nearest the powder chamber and at the beginning of the rifling; the maximum amount of cracking in D; the maximum amount of copper deposition in C. Section B showed heat cracks on both lands and grooves, and section A showed heat cracks on the driving edge of the lands only. There was much flow of metal in both sections E and D, and there was progressively less effect noticeable toward the muzzle end. The polished cross-section of these same pieces is shown in Fig. 2. The

Jan 12, 1916

By Henry Fay

LAWRENCE ADDICKS, New York, N. Y., (communication to the Secretary *).-There are two points regarding gun erosion on which I want to say a few words: The first is about the analogy to hardening of wire by drawing and the second the possible role played by thermal conductivity of the metal. The ductile metals do not necessarily become brittle when cold-worked as it is possible to draw copper from 3. in. in diameter soft rod down to the finest hair wire without annealing. This results, as stated in the paper, informing a hardened core with a very hard skin. The electrical conductivity is depressed some 3 per cent. and the tensile strength nearly tripled. A soft copper wire 0.08 in. in diameter and 6 in. long may be twisted 150 or more turns before the wire will snap under torsion. A hard-drawn wire will break after perhaps a dozen twists, the skin breaking down at one spot. Just wiping the wire with a cloth clamp with dilute nitric acid has a remarkable effect in increasing the number of twists without appreciably lowering the tensile strength, showing the skin to be very thin. On the other hand, pickling the rod, from which the wire is to be drawn, in dilute nitric acid also greatly increases the number of twists which can be applied to the resulting wire. This indicates that the copper oxide scale produced when the wire bar is rolled hot is more or less rolled into the rod and may have much to do with the skin effect. We also know that if the conditions of drawing are not correct, the heat of deformation in the die may produce quite an annealing effect. The application of this analogy to what occurs in a gun to produce the effects noted offers some difficulty. The second point is that as the temperature of the surface of the gun bore has undoubtedly a great deal to do with the amount of erosion, one natural remedy would be to conduct the heat away fast enough to keep this temperature within desired limits. This brings up the question of the thermal conductivity of the metal of which the gun is made. We know that the conductivity of pure metals is greatly altered by alloying and that the alloy is usually, though not always, lower in conductivity than the metal before alloying. This is interesting when it is considered that the high-nickel and manganese-steel alloys show greater erosion as stated. Would it not be instructive to study the question from the point of view of heat conducted away from the eroded surface?

Jan 3, 1917

By Henry Fay

THE CHAIRMAN (ALBERT SAUVEUR, Cambridge, Mass.).-In forcing us to face and to discuss the important question of erosion of steel guns, Prof. Fay is performing a public service. His investigation has been fruitful and his results illuminating and suggestive. It is not in a spirit of adverse criticism, therefore, that I venture a few remarks suggested by his paper, but rather to add my mite to the discussion in the hope that it may not be entirely without value. Prof. Fay considers it conclusively demonstrated that the hard layers forming in the inside of guns of large calibers after they have been fired a number of times consist of martensite. Still, he admits that he never was able to detect in the hard layers the structural characteristics of martensite. This leads him to conceive the existence of amorphous martensite. We may well hesitate before accepting this theory on the strength of the evidence offered. Martensite, as we know it, is essentially a crystalline condition assumed by a close association of iron and carbon, possibly if not probably of the nature of a solid solution. Lacking this crystalline character we are hardly justified in calling it martensite on the ground, merely, of its being very hard.

Jan 4, 1917

By A. E. Bellis

THERE is a wide difference of opinion among rifle experts in the matter of barrel steel, and the relative importance to the life of the barrel of the steel's composition, heat-treatment, structure, and physical properties. In order to promote discussion, which it is hoped may lead to the discovery of the source of 'some of the traditional beliefs on the subject, the results of some tests are presented here, with data on heat-treating, physical tests, and erosion. The detailed metallographic study of this steel is given in another paper.1 The conclusions from these tests should be capable of wider application than their direct bearing on the barrel-steel problem. The Government specifications for barrel steel for model 1903 rifle (Springfield) call for carbon 0.50 to 0.60 per cent., manganese 1.00 to 1.29 per cent., silicon under 0.25 per cent., sulfur under 0.06 per cent., phosphorus under 0.08. per cent. The minimum physical requirements are: Tensile strength,- 110,000 lb. per sq. in. (7733 kg. per sq. cm.); yield point, 75,000 lb. per sq. in (5472 kg. per sq. cm.); elongation, 20 per cent.; reduction of area, 45 per cent. Material fulfilling these requirement's gives practically no failures when proof-fired, with charge of 70,000 lb. per sq. in. pressure, which is 40 per cent. in excess of the service charge. The turning and drilling operations show up any seams or laps such as accidentally occur even in- the best heats of open-hearth steel, so that' faulty stock is practically all eliminated before proof-firing. These physical requirements are met either by rolling billets at, a proper temperature clown to the form of tapered barrel blanks or by heat-treating bars that have been upset to enlarge the breech section. The transformation temperature of this steel, on heating, is around 1350° F. (732° C.), varying somewhat with the composition and the rate of heating. The actual treatment of the barrel blanks, as carried out by different

Jan 7, 1919

Jan 1, 1951

Jan 1, 1949

Jan 1, 1893

Jan 1, 1966

Jan 1, 1913

Jan 1, 1967

Jan 1, 1955

Jan 1, 1905

Jan 1, 1965

Jan 1, 1906

Jan 1, 1904

Jan 1, 1956

The following list of corrections has been compiled from the thirty-five volumes, with some additions: VOLUME I. Page 160. The first two sentences of the second paragraph should read as follows : " For No. II we find that 2.33 percent. A1,08 take 4.07 per cent. 8109, leaving 3.48 per cent. 8102 free, which requires 3.25 per cent. CaO." Page 160, line 14, 3.79 should be 3.25; and in the 15th and 18th lines, 48.44 should be 46.98. VOLUME VI. Page 59. The discharges of the miners' inch per second, given as .2624 and .2499 cubic feet, should be .02624 and .02499, respectively. The discharges per minute, hour, etc., are correctly given. VOLUME VIII. Page 214. 16th and 25th lines, ferric carbonate should be ferrous carbonate. Page 486, 16th line, 10,000 should be 5,000. [ ]

Jan 1, 1907

Jan 1, 1912