Search Documents

G. F. LOUGhlin,* Washington, D. C.—With reference to Mr. Bain's paper: The scarcity of adequate geologic data on building stone reflects, among other things, a lack of interest on the part of geologists. It has been one of my duties to attend to matters relating to building stone and other structural materials that have come to the U. S. Geological Survey, but for several years my principal administrative and other duties in the Section of Metalliferous Deposits have prevented me from giving structural materials the attention that they deserve. I have felt that investigations relating to structural materials should be assigned to someone else, but thus far nobody with a sufficient interest in the subject has come forward; further, the specific calls for these investigations have been so few and far between that it has not seemed practical to draft any one for the job. The general situation is such that steady and substantial progress in the application of geology to the utilization of structural materials is not likely to be made unless someone with keen interest in the subject takes the initiative. If the start is once made, I know from experience that cooperation from the more progressive members of the quarry and building industries will be readily forthcoming. Mr. Sales' suggestions are all constructive and most welcome. A thorough, detailed discussion of them might be as long as his manuscript, but could largely be summarized with the one word "amen" qualified by the alibi that a chronic shortage of funds and therefore of personnel has prevented us from carrying out some of his suggestions already. A few of them might call for an Act of Congress before we could undertake them, and one or two, such as the preservation of mine maps, with which I heartily agree, would call for much additional space as well as clerical and supervising help. Several items in Mr. Sales' paper—for example, the question of balance between the scientific and more directly practical studies and the surveys or resurveys of the larger and smaller mining districts—have been covered in my contribution to the symposium. The suggestion of frequent reviews of progress in the study of ore deposits is excellent and can be followed without serious diversion from projects already on the Survey's program. Brief reviews by Survey men have been published in periodicals, and the contributions by several of them to the Lindgren Volume1 may also be cited as serving this purpose to some degree. The practice of publishing short papers by Survey men in outside journals rather than in Government reports is largely the result of experience and expedience. Our printing funds are limited, and considerable time must elapse between the transmittal of a paper and its publication. Time is saved therefore by sending papers to outside journals, and the editors of those journals are usually glad to receive them. Members of the Survey would doubtless prefer to have the products and byproducts of their official work appear in official Survey publications if conditions were more favorable. If we were left entirely to ourselves the balance between the more scientific and the more directly practical studies would be somewhat better than it is, but the

Jan 1, 1935

By Reno H. Sales

The present-day application of geological knowledge to mine operations owes much to Survey activities. Early publications covering developed deposits at Comstock and Eureka in Nevada, and Leadville in Colorado, aroused great interest in mine geology among mine owners and operators. In later years personal contacts between Survey geologists, notably Lindgren, Spurr, Emmons, Weed, and Ransome, to name only a few, and mine managers, mine superintendents and mine foremen, brought directly home the importance of geological mapping and study in connection with mine operations. However, the Survey had recognized from the beginning that it was not practicable, either from the viewpoint of cost or policy, to supply direct help to the miner. The situation was met by many large mining companies through the organization of geological departments to deal with problems of geology which concerned not alone the every-day mine operation but also the life expectancy of the ore deposit. The mine owner therefore looked to the mine geologist to apply the "laws of ore deposition" in estimating the future of his mine. The examination of outside properties also became a duty of the company geologist where replacements were needed or where expansion of operations was contemplated. And finally, out of this situation there developed the independent consulting geologist, specializing in geological examinations of prospects, mines, and mining districts, whose duties included the highly important but often difficult task of appraising ore reserves and ore possibilities. Thus, while it may be considered by many that the work of the mine geologist overlaps that of the Survey geologist, their respective fields of endeavor are not in conflict. The appearance of the mine geologist has lessened in no manner the need of intensive field and research work by the Geological Survey and related organizations.

Jan 1, 1935

By Reno H. Sales

The present-day application of geological knowledge to mine operations owes much to Survey activities. Early publications covering developed deposits at Comstock and Eureka in Nevada, and Leadville in Colorado, aroused great interest in mine geology among mine owners and operators. In later years personal contacts between Survey geologists, notably Lindgren, Spurr, Emmons, Weed, and Ransome, to name only a few, and mine managers, mine superintendents and mine foremen, brought directly home the importance of geological mapping and study in connection with mine operations. However, the Survey had recognized from the beginning that it was not practicable, either from the viewpoint of cost or policy, to supply direct help to the miner. The situation was met by many large mining companies through the organization of geological departments to deal with problems of geology which concerned not alone the every-day mine operation but also the life expectancy of the ore deposit. The mine owner therefore looked to the mine geologist to apply the "laws of ore deposition" in estimating the future of his mine. The examination of outside properties also became a duty of the company geologist where replacements were needed or where expansion of operations was contemplated. And finally, out of this situation there developed the independent consulting geologist, specializing in geological examinations of prospects, mines, and mining districts, whose duties included the highly important but often difficult task of appraising ore reserves and ore possibilities. Thus, while it may be considered by many that the work of the mine geologist overlaps that of the Survey geologist, their respective fields of endeavor are not in conflict. The appearance of the mine geologist has lessened in no manner the need of intensive field and research work by the Geological Survey and related organizations.

Jan 1, 1935

By B.S. Butler

If geology is to continue to serve the mineral industry with increasing effectiveness as it has done in the past, there must be a steady output of better and better trained geologists and engineers with broader geological background. It may seem that the education and technical training of geologists belong entirely to the universities and colleges and has nothing to do with either Government surveys or the mining industry, outside of these activities furnishing a field for future work for the geological student. It will take but the most casual look, however, to see the large influence of Government surveys in education. Geological Maps Geological maps are essential tools in teaching geology, without which the instructor would be lost. Maps are produced by mining and oil companies, by university workers and by other individuals and institutions, but nearly all of the comprehensive maps, and most of the maps of small areas that are available, are directly or indirectly the work of public surveys. Such surveys in the past have been the only organizations with the continuity of effort and funds necessary to carry out projects that must combine the work of many individual geologists over long periods. Have we all the maps we need and of the quality we need? I believe that all who have used general maps, like the geological maps of the world, the maps of 'North America and the United States, maps of the several states and of smaller areas, appreciate fully the value of the maps as they are but realize also the value of greater accuracy, which can come only by more detailed work; and there are many areas of which we have no adequate maps. Other Helps I have chosen to emphasize maps as a help in preparing the young geologist to go out from the schools with some background of what has been accomplished and some outlook of what is yet to be done. Maps, however, are scarcely more essential to the teacher than many allied helps. What would the teacher of economic geology do if the work by Government surveys along that line were to be blotted out? We may

Jan 1, 1935

By B. S. Butler

If geology is to continue to serve the mineral industry with increasing effectiveness as it has done in the past, there must be a steady output of better and better trained geologists and engineers with broader geological background. It may seem that the education and technical training of geologists belong entirely to the universities and colleges and has nothing to do with either Government surveys or the mining industry, outside of these activities furnishing a field for future work for the geological student. It will take but the most casual look, however, to see the large influence of Government surveys in education. Geological Maps Geological maps are essential tools in teaching geology, without which the instructor would be lost. Maps are produced by mining and oil companies, by university workers and by other individuals and institutions, but nearly all of the comprehensive maps, and most of the maps of small areas that are available, are directly or indirectly the work of public surveys. Such surveys in the past have been the only organizations with the continuity of effort and funds necessary to carry out projects that must combine the work of many individual geologists over long periods. Have we all the maps we need and of the quality we need? I believe that all who have used general maps, like the geological maps of the world, the maps of 'North America and the United States, maps of the several states and of smaller areas, appreciate fully the value of the maps as they are but realize also the value of greater accuracy, which can come only by more detailed work; and there are many areas of which we have no adequate maps. Other Helps I have chosen to emphasize maps as a help in preparing the young geologist to go out from the schools with some background of what has been accomplished and some outlook of what is yet to be done. Maps, however, are scarcely more essential to the teacher than many allied helps. What would the teacher of economic geology do if the work by Government surveys along that line were to be blotted out? We may

Jan 1, 1935

By M. N. Short

It is almost self-evident that the student of geology depends for his education in geology only in small measure upon his own observation. His chief sources of information are lectures and personal instruction from teachers, and the geological literature. Of these, the literature is by far the most important. The total geological knowledge available to the geologist of today is substantially that which is on the printed page, and no more than that. There are many geologists of outstanding rank who during the course of a busy and useful professional career have accumulated valuable geological knowledge. This, however, is never available to the profession, owing to the disinclination of these geologists to write or to the refusal of their employers to allow the results of their work to be published. With the passing of these geologists, their accumulated knowledge is irretrievably lost. In many mining districts the operating companies are not averse to the publication of geological information gathered by their engineering and geological staffs, but for various reasons this information is not published. However, when a public survey geologist goes into the district this information is placed at his disposal and eventually is published. But for the intervention of a disinterested public scientist, this information would have been buried in company files. In the last analysis, the teachers themselves depend largely upon the printed page for the knowledge they pass on to the student. Without geological literature, then, the instruction of geological students would be almost impossible. There is no .question that, as a whole, geologists who are on the public payroll have to their credit far more contributions to literature than have either teachers or professional geologists, whether the latter be independent or in the employ of private corporations. The very fact that geologists are upon the public payroll places them under obligation to make available to the public the results of their endeavors. They must either prepare these results for publication or they must furnish data or otherwise aid their colleagues to publish their results. The success or failure of a public geological survey depends entirely on the

Jan 1, 1935

By M. N. Short

It is almost self-evident that the student of geology depends for his education in geology only in small measure upon his own observation. His chief sources of information are lectures and personal instruction from teachers, and the geological literature. Of these, the literature is by far the most important. The total geological knowledge available to the geologist of today is substantially that which is on the printed page, and no more than that. There are many geologists of outstanding rank who during the course of a busy and useful professional career have accumulated valuable geological knowledge. This, however, is never available to the profession, owing to the disinclination of these geologists to write or to the refusal of their employers to allow the results of their work to be published. With the passing of these geologists, their accumulated knowledge is irretrievably lost. In many mining districts the operating companies are not averse to the publication of geological information gathered by their engineering and geological staffs, but for various reasons this information is not published. However, when a public survey geologist goes into the district this information is placed at his disposal and eventually is published. But for the intervention of a disinterested public scientist, this information would have been buried in company files. In the last analysis, the teachers themselves depend largely upon the printed page for the knowledge they pass on to the student. Without geological literature, then, the instruction of geological students would be almost impossible. There is no .question that, as a whole, geologists who are on the public payroll have to their credit far more contributions to literature than have either teachers or professional geologists, whether the latter be independent or in the employ of private corporations. The very fact that geologists are upon the public payroll places them under obligation to make available to the public the results of their endeavors. They must either prepare these results for publication or they must furnish data or otherwise aid their colleagues to publish their results. The success or failure of a public geological survey depends entirely on the

Jan 1, 1935

By George W. Bain

The good work of the surveys supported by the different branches of the government needs little mention to geologists but is underappreciated by people at large. Geologists and engineers realize their usefulness and yet even from this group one hears occasionally an undercurrent of discontent about their work or the distribution of it. The very fact that discontent arises within and without this group and has drawn attention of legislative bodies of the country in the present time of stress means that a large number of people do not receive or do not realize that they receive benefit from these public works. This seems to be a clear indication that more than the relations between government surveys and the mining industry is involved and that if the mining industry is interested in continuation of the work of these surveys on the past scale they must consider the other survey divisions and their activity. Also, relations between government surveys and certain specialized types of mining have not been as close as they should be. I have been employed in almost the entire range of fields offered to geologists and have studied closely the feeling of people towards geological service. Recently it has been a pleasure to be closely associated with men who were as deeply interested in civic welfare and affairs of state as in the financial success of a large industry developing natural resources. Previously I had seen service in a national survey, a state survey, summer employment by a large mining company exploring new property and detailed geological work for a large corporation. Major responsibility as a college instructor has left me free to view each of these assignments in unprejudiced fashion and at the same time study the relation of government surveys to large natural resource industries, average industrial and construction work and service to nongeologists and laymen. Considerations Governing Geologic Public Service Three groups of people must be satisfied by the surveys if dissatisfaction is to be dispelled. First there is a large group of people who pay taxes to support the government activities and must receive some service

Jan 1, 1935

By George W. Bain

The good work of the surveys supported by the different branches of the government needs little mention to geologists but is underappreciated by people at large. Geologists and engineers realize their usefulness and yet even from this group one hears occasionally an undercurrent of discontent about their work or the distribution of it. The very fact that discontent arises within and without this group and has drawn attention of legislative bodies of the country in the present time of stress means that a large number of people do not receive or do not realize that they receive benefit from these public works. This seems to be a clear indication that more than the relations between government surveys and the mining industry is involved and that if the mining industry is interested in continuation of the work of these surveys on the past scale they must consider the other survey divisions and their activity. Also, relations between government surveys and certain specialized types of mining have not been as close as they should be. I have been employed in almost the entire range of fields offered to geologists and have studied closely the feeling of people towards geological service. Recently it has been a pleasure to be closely associated with men who were as deeply interested in civic welfare and affairs of state as in the financial success of a large industry developing natural resources. Previously I had seen service in a national survey, a state survey, summer employment by a large mining company exploring new property and detailed geological work for a large corporation. Major responsibility as a college instructor has left me free to view each of these assignments in unprejudiced fashion and at the same time study the relation of government surveys to large natural resource industries, average industrial and construction work and service to nongeologists and laymen. Considerations Governing Geologic Public Service Three groups of people must be satisfied by the surveys if dissatisfaction is to be dispelled. First there is a large group of people who pay taxes to support the government activities and must receive some service

Jan 1, 1935

By G. F. Loughlin

Nearly 55 years have elapsed since the U. S. Geological Survey was organized. During this period the mineral industries have grown from infancy or early childhood to well developed maturity, and some mining industries appear to be declining. Decline in mining is even more conspicuous in certain districts, or even states, than in any mining industry as a whole, and discoveries or developments of important new districts have been very few in recent years. Our reserves of most metals and nonmetals are adequate for many years of normal production, subject to changes in rate of exploitation that may be caused by foreign competition and by changes in technology and market conditions; but the declining production of many districts and the scarcity of important new discoveries to compensate for them is cause for some apprehension. It is likely that future production will depend to a considerable extent on deep exploration and on the thorough examination of places in and adjoining existing districts where significant outcrops are lacking and only apparently insignificant geologic features offer encouraging clues—more so than on the discovery of entirely new districts. Even the possible discovery of new districts, which have escaped the intensive search by the nontechnical prospector, must be dependent on geologic information. There is therefore no need for argument as to the value of geology to the mining industry; and the need of continuing to advance the science. The U. S. Geological Survey's past contributions to mining geology, as expressed in its official reports and other publications, are recognized by Ransome in his historical review of mining geology in the Lindgren volume.' These contributions have helped to form the basis of modern mining geology, which has grown rapidly in the last 25 years. This growth has witnessed the organization and maintenance of geologic staffs by mining companies in several districts, and their detailed work, together with the fact that nearly all of the larger mining districts have

Jan 1, 1935

By G. F. Loughlin

Nearly 55 years have elapsed since the U. S. Geological Survey was organized. During this period the mineral industries have grown from infancy or early childhood to well developed maturity, and some mining industries appear to be declining. Decline in mining is even more conspicuous in certain districts, or even states, than in any mining industry as a whole, and discoveries or developments of important new districts have been very few in recent years. Our reserves of most metals and nonmetals are adequate for many years of normal production, subject to changes in rate of exploitation that may be caused by foreign competition and by changes in technology and market conditions; but the declining production of many districts and the scarcity of important new discoveries to compensate for them is cause for some apprehension. It is likely that future production will depend to a considerable extent on deep exploration and on the thorough examination of places in and adjoining existing districts where significant outcrops are lacking and only apparently insignificant geologic features offer encouraging clues—more so than on the discovery of entirely new districts. Even the possible discovery of new districts, which have escaped the intensive search by the nontechnical prospector, must be dependent on geologic information. There is therefore no need for argument as to the value of geology to the mining industry; and the need of continuing to advance the science. The U. S. Geological Survey's past contributions to mining geology, as expressed in its official reports and other publications, are recognized by Ransome in his historical review of mining geology in the Lindgren volume.' These contributions have helped to form the basis of modern mining geology, which has grown rapidly in the last 25 years. This growth has witnessed the organization and maintenance of geologic staffs by mining companies in several districts, and their detailed work, together with the fact that nearly all of the larger mining districts have

Jan 1, 1935

By William M. Agar

Now that both the national and state legislatures are seeking ways of reducing expenses, the appropriations for geological investigation and for the study of mineral resources have been greatly reduced and in some cases entirely stopped. Is this policy justified? The sums saved by these reductions are always small. If the work accomplished by these surveys has no intrinsic value to the community, but is only an interesting way of spending some of the people's money when that money is plentiful, there should be no surveys at any time. If, on the other hand, they perform a necessary function, it is indeed foolish and short-sighted to save these paltry sums to the detriment of the community. It is not my purpose to undertake a general justification of geological surveys. Rather, 1 wish to call attention to the work of one state survey that has been discontinued, and to indicate ways in which the work was valuable to the people, even though that state's mineral resources are not very important, and why it should be continued. Though at one time in Connecticut's history iron mining and smelting were important, and copper was mined in appreciable quantities in two localities, it is many years since it could be regarded as a mining state. At present Connecticut stands far down among the states in the value of its mineral products. Granite for architectural and structural purposes, trap rock, clay, agricultural lime, feldspar and quartz, together with a few other nonmetallic minerals, are produced in appreciable quantities, but the natural resources of the state consist at present much more largely in its attractive scenery, woods, lakes, shore line, and in the opportunities that these offer for rest and recreation. Is the prosecution of geological work in such a state a waste of the taxpayer's money? Or can it be that though it was formerly valuable, the work is now completed? The only way to answer these questions is to review the geological work done in the past and to consider the type of information the people want, as reflected in the requests that have been received by the director of the survey in the last few years. There have been two periods during which Connecticut has supported geological work within its borders. The first began in 1835 when Percival

Jan 1, 1935

By William M. Agar

Now that both the national and state legislatures are seeking ways of reducing expenses, the appropriations for geological investigation and for the study of mineral resources have been greatly reduced and in some cases entirely stopped. Is this policy justified? The sums saved by these reductions are always small. If the work accomplished by these surveys has no intrinsic value to the community, but is only an interesting way of spending some of the people's money when that money is plentiful, there should be no surveys at any time. If, on the other hand, they perform a necessary function, it is indeed foolish and short-sighted to save these paltry sums to the detriment of the community. It is not my purpose to undertake a general justification of geological surveys. Rather, 1 wish to call attention to the work of one state survey that has been discontinued, and to indicate ways in which the work was valuable to the people, even though that state's mineral resources are not very important, and why it should be continued. Though at one time in Connecticut's history iron mining and smelting were important, and copper was mined in appreciable quantities in two localities, it is many years since it could be regarded as a mining state. At present Connecticut stands far down among the states in the value of its mineral products. Granite for architectural and structural purposes, trap rock, clay, agricultural lime, feldspar and quartz, together with a few other nonmetallic minerals, are produced in appreciable quantities, but the natural resources of the state consist at present much more largely in its attractive scenery, woods, lakes, shore line, and in the opportunities that these offer for rest and recreation. Is the prosecution of geological work in such a state a waste of the taxpayer's money? Or can it be that though it was formerly valuable, the work is now completed? The only way to answer these questions is to review the geological work done in the past and to consider the type of information the people want, as reflected in the requests that have been received by the director of the survey in the last few years. There have been two periods during which Connecticut has supported geological work within its borders. The first began in 1835 when Percival

Jan 1, 1935

By Hugh M. Roberts

The important place in the economic life of the country that is occupied by the United States Geological Survey and the various state surveys is appreciatcd by most members of our Institute. To the public at large, the functions of these surveys are no doubt largely unknown, and taken for granted. Possibly a realization of the value of the work of these government branches is brought home most fully to that group of our members whose duties as examining engineers and mining geologists take them to mines and prospects in many different parts. The examining engineer or geologist is usually seeking for a judgment on the value of an enterprise from the standpoint of the useful minerals that may or may not be present; he must also attempt some prediction as to future market prices. On his opinion rests the determination of the expenditure of money, which rendered into other language means the expenditure of human effort. An opinion on an exploring venture or the reasoning out of the probable extensions of an orebody requires among many other things a background of knowledge covering the geologic horizons not only of an immediate area but of the surrounding area, a knowledge of the structural geology and of the causes that have operated to form the ores as they are. The great storehouses of this knowledge are the statistics, reports and maps issued by the various geological surveys. They supply the groundwork for additional observations. To these, reference is always made when going into a new district. The technique of work in the field and laboratory, and to some extent the hypotheses that underlie our methods of approach, have been formed by men such as Van Hise, Leith, Kemp, Spurr, Emmons and Lindgren, who developed their powers in the service of the geological surveys. In addition to whatever originality of thought, or power to observe facts and analyze them, may be our portion, we require, in the application of the arts and sciences, a knowledge of what has already been done. We stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before, and the extent of our vision often depends upon the thoroughness with which we form earlier work into one whole and make use of it.

Jan 1, 1935

By Hugh M. Roberts

The important place in the economic life of the country that is occupied by the United States Geological Survey and the various state surveys is appreciatcd by most members of our Institute. To the public at large, the functions of these surveys are no doubt largely unknown, and taken for granted. Possibly a realization of the value of the work of these government branches is brought home most fully to that group of our members whose duties as examining engineers and mining geologists take them to mines and prospects in many different parts. The examining engineer or geologist is usually seeking for a judgment on the value of an enterprise from the standpoint of the useful minerals that may or may not be present; he must also attempt some prediction as to future market prices. On his opinion rests the determination of the expenditure of money, which rendered into other language means the expenditure of human effort. An opinion on an exploring venture or the reasoning out of the probable extensions of an orebody requires among many other things a background of knowledge covering the geologic horizons not only of an immediate area but of the surrounding area, a knowledge of the structural geology and of the causes that have operated to form the ores as they are. The great storehouses of this knowledge are the statistics, reports and maps issued by the various geological surveys. They supply the groundwork for additional observations. To these, reference is always made when going into a new district. The technique of work in the field and laboratory, and to some extent the hypotheses that underlie our methods of approach, have been formed by men such as Van Hise, Leith, Kemp, Spurr, Emmons and Lindgren, who developed their powers in the service of the geological surveys. In addition to whatever originality of thought, or power to observe facts and analyze them, may be our portion, we require, in the application of the arts and sciences, a knowledge of what has already been done. We stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before, and the extent of our vision often depends upon the thoroughness with which we form earlier work into one whole and make use of it.

Jan 1, 1935

By F. W. McNair

WITHIN the last twenty-five or thirty years the actual operations of the great mining industry have passed almost wholly under the charge of men trained in the technical colleges. It follows that the industry is profoundly influenced for good or ill by the character of the training which the college graduate receives, and the relations existing between the industry and the colleges. This fact seems to be generally recognized, as evidenced, for example, by the existence of a Committee on Technical Education created some two or three years ago by the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America. In 1921 this committee rendered a very able and. extremely well poised reports of technical education as applied to the prospective mining engineer. It deserves the attention of every one interested in the effectiveness of engineering training. That the importance of the relation between the mining industry and the engineering colleges is recog-nized is evidenced also by the mass of criticism, usually adverse, which is proffered to and often hurled at the colleges by those in the industry. The man inn the field sometimes goes so far as to say that engineering educa-tion is hopelessly inefficient and its product worthless, while the college worker sometimes complains that the demands of the industrialist are too numerous and conflicting to be met, and adds that they would' best be ignored. Between these extremes, there seems to be a general consensus of opinion that the training of the would-be engineer can be, and. ought to be, made much better than it now is.

Jan 4, 1923

By C. W. MacGregor

IN the testing of materials there exist various methods of recording graphically the behavior of a material subjected to tensile stress. Prob-ably the most common method is to plot the tensile stress So, obtained by dividing the load P by the original area of cross section AO at the start of the test, as a function of the strain ?o, which is obtained by dividing the ?Lo or the change in the gauge length by the original gauge length Lo. A list of the symbols used here is given in Table 1. This method, while it has proved useful in the routine testing and comparison of various materials, does not have a very sound physical basis, as was first pointed out by P. Ludwik1, and consequently does not afford a very deep insight into the true physical behavior of the material under stress. Among the objections to this method may be mentioned: (1) that by dividing the load P at any stage of the test by the original area Ao a fictitious stress is obtained, which does not actually exist; (2) that the strain ?o = ?Lo /Lo is not an exact expression for the true strain for large values of ?Lo in per cent of Lo; (3) that when necking starts the strain varies considerably along the gauge length and the above expression no longer gives the true strain existing at any point on the outside of the bar; and (4) that the axial strain varies over the cross section of the necked portion and ?o does not represent an average of these strains over the cross section. Stresses taken from such a diagram would be only approximate and, if used to compare results of a test on a given material under simple tension with results obtained under combined stresses, certain errors would he thus introduced. In order to overcome some of these objections, various methods have been suggested, both as to the quantities to be measured and as to their graphical representation. In some cases the so-called "true stress," obtained by dividing the load P by the actual area of cross section A existing when the load P was applied, is plotted as a function of the strain

Jan 1, 1937

By Harold L. Lovell

The extensive heterogeneity of coal is a fact long recognized by scientists and engineers. However, until recent years the practical implications of such heterogeneity have more often been realized from an undesirable experience than from knowledge or forethought. Variations in the properties of coal, even within the same seam, eventually lead to procedural modifications in mining, handling, preparation and utilization. The concepts considered here propose an enhanced application of information, detailing these properties, realizing the uniqueness of any given coal seam but the practicality of a common approach. Coal preparation practice has been designed primarily for the control of ash and sulfur content to meet market specifications which are similarly specified, Other physical characteristics of size and friability are also commonly employed and, to a lesser extent, properties which are implications of rank. The consideration of petrographic data as indicators of origin, thus total physical and chemical properties, has generally been overlooked as a realistic tool in-the exploitation of coal as a resource. The evolution of descriptive techniques, whether petrographic, physical, or chemical, capable of universal application with any rank of coal, is still beset with problems.

Jan 1, 1968

At the University Club, New York, Jan. 23, Chairman George E. Hale and other officers of the National Research Council, gave a dinner to officers of the national engineering and other societies. About thirty persons were present, including officers of the National Research Council, the four Founder Societies, American Society for Testing Materials, Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., Illuminating Engineering Society, United Engineering Society, and Engineering Foundation. Letters were received from the Western Society of Engineers, which also had been invited. Gano Dunn, vice-chairman of National Research Council, was toastmaster. The proposed permanent organization of the National Research Council and possible methods of connection with the national engineering societies, either directly or through Engineering Foundation, were outlined. It was suggested that not only the four Founder Societies be represented in the Engineering Division of National Research Council, but also that the other national engineering societies be admitted to membership. It was proposed that the Engineering Division should have a chairman who should be an engineer of wide reputation and of the highest professional attainments who should devote his whole time to the establishment and development of the Division. Methods of organizing industrial research were discussed. At a subsequent meeting of the National Research Council, an invitation was issued to each of the national societies to form a research committee encouraging that committee to become active in the promotion of research within its respective field. Due recognition is to be given each committee in the general organization of the National Research Council. Dr. H. M. Howe, in a very interesting and comprehensive address, told of much important work that had been clone by the various sections of the Research Council, as that of mechanical engineering in developing the often rather nebulous devices for helping win the war and putting them in such form that they could be of direct use to the military service. The section on metallurgy, till lately under Bradley Stoughton and now under G. H. Clevenger, did much valuable work in the improvement of helmets and body armor and made very extensive ballistic tests with refractory steels for this purpose. Important work was done in investigating the fatigue of metals and results of great moment were achieved. The committee on ferro-alloys, under J. E. Johnson, Jr., did important work in effecting economy of manganese in steel manufacture with a view to reducing the necessity for importation of manganese ore, thus releasing ships for other purposes. , The section on electric welding has accomplished valuable results in the development of electric welding for ships, a new branch of industry of very great promise.

Jan 3, 1919

By James P. Dr. Kimball

SULPHUR is always present in mineral coal of every variety. In the oxidized state it may exist as sulphuric acid in combination with a base. In the unoxidized state it exists in combination with iron as bisulphide of iron. It is also supposed by some chemists to exist in unknown combinations with the organic elements of the coal. This supposition requires the demonstration as a fact that certain coals yield more sulphur than what may exist in a free state, or what belongs to recognized combinations, not only with the accompanying iron but with other inorganic bases abundantly occurring in coals, but which unfortunately are very rarely estimated. This practically as well as theoretically important question it is at present impossible to decide, simply for want of available thorough ultimate coal analyses including the ash. Such analyses, at the best imperfect, are laborious and intricate, and therefore seldom made, the much simpler proximate analyses, so-called, being resorted to by most chemists for technical purposes, and commonly substituted for more scientific work even in the laboratories of government surveys. And it is unfortunate enough that few ultimate analyses are extended to the composition of the ash, much less to its relation to the original constitution of the coal. Sulphur chiefly occurs in most coals in the form of yellow pyrites (pyrite) and white pyrites (marcasite), both minerals, characterized by differences in crystalline form and in physical properties as well as in color, but having the same chemical composition (FeS2). No coal is entirely free from one or both of these dimorphous forms of bisulphide of iron. It may be disseminated through the mass so as to be invisible, in plates or scales between the laminæ of the coal, or in conspicuous segregations or nodules, sometimes of considerable dimensions. Coals greatly differ as to the proportion of sulphur which they contain. They also differ as to the relative proportion in which its several forms of combination occur. Such qualitative and quantitative disparities are scarcely, if at all, more marked in separate coal seams of a uniform type than in different parts of one and the same coal seam, whether it be considered locally as constituted of several

Jan 1, 1880