The Iron Age 1922-01-19: Vol 109 Iss 3

THE IRON AGE New York, January 19, 1922 ae ees meee ‘pounded has been—“is electric steel really as d as crucible’? Our answer has been in some case and others probably no. Electric steel, using certain materials and melting practice, may be no bet- ter than open-hearth or Bessemer steel and, on the other hand, using other materials and melting practice, it may easily be the equal of the finest steel made. Be this as it may, the basic electric furnace has established itself as a formidable competitor of the time-honored crucible wherever tool steel is made, and it seems opportune to review in a brief some thoughts gathered in a rather long crucible, though a necessarily shorter, electric experience. This experience covers the manufacture of almost every variety of alloy t by both processes, including a large tonnage eed steel made in 3- and 6-ton heats in the furnace and, last but not least, a large tonnage ht carbon tool steel, which for the purpose of r is probably the most important; for it is in ifacture of this steel, unclouded by alloys, that a true comparison can best be made. [he motive for writing the paper is a disinterested one, for we have no furnace to sell nor have we one to The choice of a melting medium for the inufacture of tool steels is now confronting some nuf rs of this commodity and, if these notes proper selection, the purpose of this paper served. To those who already have made a a select r are not, for other reasons, confronted by but are tool steel makers, this article may t merely as a presentation of conclusions in intimate contact with both furnaces in he more or less inspired claims of furnace P’ BABLY one of the questions most frequently co ce Jc the Crucible for Steel Castings t, tool steel manufacture, probably does nelude steel castings. This branch has, ess nt e small bearing on the purpose of the - per erefore the following brief mention is made. ats ” en to the lot of both of the writers to 4 rience with the delivery of crucible steel ee » Ca nd the passing therefore of the crucible 9 f the steel trade seems something of a 50 ome That it is passing there can be no longer _ t; the following figures clearly show the nstrate also that the electric furnace, 05 ‘Seelieg irily the cause, has secured all the high- b 15 a t relinquished: 50 ee States only 1729 tons of crucible steel cast- Qe VOL. 109, No. 3 3 Crucible and Electric Tool Steel pe Some Aspects of Choice in Their Manufacture—Electric Furnace a Sealed Crucible—Operating Conditions Compared in Detail BY W. J. AND S. STUART GREEN* ings were made in 1920, as against 20,550 tons of crucible steel castings in 1912, a falling off of almost $2 per cent indeed in 1919 the situation was even worse, when only 1009 tons of crucible steel castings was made, a falling off of something like 95 per cent, which of course means approxi mate extinction In 1920 the electric furnace made in the United States 155,196 tons of steel castings, thereby surpass ing the largest crucible tonnage ever made These figures are taken from the statistics of the American Iron and Steel Institute and were published by the writers in graphic form in an article appearing in THE IRON AGE, Oct. 27, 1921. They would seem to furnish reliable indication of the rejection in America, in no uncertain fashion, of the crucible for the manuv- facture of steel castings. We regret our inability to secure accurate figures covering the production of steel castings in Great Britain, but those we have seem to indicate a similar, though by no means so drastic a, condition. It appears therefore that in the manufacture of steel castings the crucible has already very largely given way to the electric furnace, which latter has inciden- tally secured additional tonnage elsewhere. There can be no question in face of these figures, representing as they do so strong an adoption of the electric furnace, of the satisfactory quality of electric steel for this pur- pose. Indeed, the writers can see one or two possible advantages in favor of the electric steel, totally aside from the strong economic reasons, which latter undoubt- edly have played so large a part in its adoption. These reasons will be more fully touched in connection with tool steel production. The Crucible and Tool Steel The very much weakened position of the crucible in the steel casting industry is not exactly the condition to-day existing in the tool steel branch, in which the crucible still retains much of its old time dominance, particularly in Sheffield. The reasons for this are pos- sibly to be found in the following. The steel casting industry, by reason of smaller commercial outlay re- quirements, became very much more competitive than the tool steel branch, with its necessarily costly ham- mers, rolling mills, etc. Competition suggested cheaper steel-making methods and these were tried. The con- verter and the open-hearth secured a portion of the cheaper work but did not succeed to the high grade end in spite of the somewhat easier quality requirements of castings as against tool steel. The electric furnace, however, could produce cheaper steel] than the crucible by virtue of its greater efficiency and its quality proved to be fully satisfactory, as has been shown before. A deluge of work was diverted to the electric furnace and 201 ene ae eran ie ee x a. pine tee ” > On Small Lots, Delivered from Merchants’ Stocks, New York City The following quotations are made by New York | On a number of articles the base price only is " City warchouses it being impossible to name every size. ij : The wholesale prices at which large lots ; he thar : : — : — : 2 ots a AS there are é 3 SU rs ose , rement d . are be then consumers whose oe nents | by manufacturers for direct shi pment from n ' ar t <} sant , navwu + war 21? ar y a - 4.0 are not sufficiently heavy to warrant their placing oOr- | given in the market reports appearing in a pr , ders with manufacturers for shipment in carload lots | part of THE IRON AGE under the general head 7 from mills, these prices are given for their convenience. | “Iron and Steel Markets” and “Non-ferrous Meta g a er ic a a kD - Iron and Soft Steel Bars and Shapes Brass Sheet, Rod, Tube and Wire Bars: Per LI BASE PRICE Refined bars, base price .... esses ne vkus . 2.638¢. High brass sheet LEVON OS OO WSS CORES OS 17%4ec. to Swedish ee. eee ener ee EUOCC.. EA DEBEE WING iio v6 kdad ok a0 6eo men 17 “4c Soft steel bars, base price .........eee-seeeee 2.53¢. Brass rod Cee ecesecccerrseseeececens 14% c. t ‘ Hoo} i, EIS rise scent ieee eee LOC. PASE TUDO, DEONOE dic dé cccccndaa deen 26° c. t eg base price . i a aera eae oe ac 3.l3c. Brass tube, seamless .........ccecece 18t6c. t Beams and channels, angles and tees Copper tube, Seamless .occccicacvscsvaccecves Ds K 36 Ss ONG MARSOC, DONE «6c 5c cesta . 2.63¢ ‘ . 7 . : , .- oo Channels, angles and tees under 3 in. x m at See V4 UMhen DABS ceocecseceseesseeeeeseseeeseeeeses 2 53c. oneet copper, hot rolled, 24 0Z., 21 1c, per i | Cold rolled, 14 oz. and heavier, 2c. per Ib. adv t rolled Merchant Steel Per I Tin Plates Tire, 1% x %% in. and larger ; sean , 2. 50 Bright Tin Coke—14-20 (Smooth finish, 1 to 2% x 14 in. and larger).. 2.70 Grade Grade 7 Femes Toe calk, % x 3 in. and larger 3.20. “AAA” “ar 80 Ib... .$6.05 ‘oe calk, ¥% 3 in. and larger................ 3,20 Pn I bog an i Cold-rolled strip, soft and quarter hard. .6.20¢. to 7.20¢. 14x20 14x20 oe a lb. o. 6.15 ' Open eart} spring stee] ; a AS ao .55de. to 6c eae ee ss 6.25 Shafting and Screw Stock: . - $10.00 $8.50 IC. 6.40 aaa 15 PK.. Limo 10.00 | i. 7.40 .O Haus ° ° ° ° ° eee °° >. 204 -=uPr ° o 4 ot : Squares, flats and hex 5. 95¢e IXX.. 18.00 11.50 IXX. 8.40 5.1 ; {Mal ’ i ‘ s i . . . ° rwWwy 7 & 9 oc " Standard cast steel, base price.........cseeeee- 12.00c, wees aan F 00 IXXX.. 9.40 ys Ce MORAL. wins ss. wale We eleadaene en ees .17.00c. AAAA.. 20 15.01 A 10. 40 5 Special cast steel EN Ea er . Terne Plates 8-lb. Coating 14 x 20 Tank Plates—Steel 1 Se Sh bbs 004 8s 64.5 49600 Ee eee ae eee ° UU } , ina BIR os cee oad ee hos ie nate oat ee 2.6 BET i sini wince saiuale inten! ace Sa as ine wi oearcne a 20 Bk 5 Sask icki hin Selena Garey aim Abe eet anita cane Sheets RE NOD 2c sie 5S nee no Rik ce Ka knee oe 10.00 Blue A f ed Per Lt rin ME AO Ssnwhwswacn ee eer we Ae ee er ee ee ee er eee es Ro east aAT at aca hat il Sie See. GE cts bdcevessdesadcebebaeadesaueeee 40¢ J 3.38¢ 3.63c. : “9 : ca dees e AAD CES Ree eee a 4 on Coppe : INO. 10 wcccvcvensesecceveces cone .-0-48C. TO 5./0C. — : I, sd od seanbdeeden Whe ckeehee tee eek “lectrolvtic a a Electr lytic Peete e teen eee e eee tree ee ee eens ns LOGE REE SCC dae UN Aha eke ERE Sees Tr Teer Lo 4 C. Soft Stee Blued Stove R., O Pass Pipe oe Spelter and Sheet Zine Per t rer lu r , » F IS IE on. 0 sip we ie nen ices ook 6t4e. t ee: Se OG DD ican e'ealan ube Wee wee B.80C. as aaee Sheet zinc, No. 9 base, casks .......... 10%4c. ope! Oe 2s GRE IEE «stcnecstasnatebeca 3.80¢. 4.10¢ No. 26 ‘ (ks wee bes bes Ree eh eee 4.15c. Lead and Solder* i a al 4.00c. AObc.. AMOTICAN- OIF TAG. «ii c0dibsdsesessinkss 5%c. to 64. ; Ray epee ee : 2. nr RN iO ico ieee sk haat ita a Ne el seme. tot ¢ No. 28 and lighter, 36 in. wide, 10c. higher. Solder, % and % guaranteed ..........ccceeess 27¢ Se NE bas: aia tc clei kw em ee eed tetat ew a 20¢ Galvanized Per Lt Refin MEI xc drc) a: ardnebe, eae eealsnes aioe es 21] PS vce eR es RSE DEES LSRECREEL RID 3. to 4.10¢ *Pric es of solder indicated by private brand vary POO EUs ius ec eee 4.10c. to 4.25¢c ing to composition. an Ta A i i ee eg Ae .25¢e. to 4.40c. Babbitt Metal Nos. 22 and 24..... i euiie ce cha hele 4.40¢ to 4.9 c Best grade, per kids aie care taneus vekveuweod es S Pits SO és Kan secneenk es eee wee 1.55c. to 4.70c. Commercial grade, per Ib...........eeeeee cee AUC DALY ancckhesiveawame tact amaen ie 4.70c. to 4.85c. Grade D, per Ib....... Kins cece Rew ae wees Fae 4.85c. to 5.00c. <9 SS cnc sV se ee se oe aes sews h eae eee 4.85¢. “0 ao antimony 0. 30 a aa iS ke tee wee D.00¢C. tO 0.0UC. aoe ss _ oe Sd abby Se aa : "t RRS Ss ose haedeas toc. to f \ “afoot vhter. 36 in. wide, 20¢. highes PETE e rere eee (iwerexdansieawn 64ec ‘ Aluminum Welded Pipe No. 1 aluminum (guaranteed over 99 per cent Standard Steel Wrought Iron pure), in ingots for remelting, per lb.....27 Black Galv Black Galv Old Metals Sa tala ae ¥% -in. Bu uae tS % in. Butt... —56 40 ”-In. oo = : Prices are generally unchanged, although % in. Butt —61 oie A72-1n, DULL. . ae > s very quiet. Dealers’ buying prices are nomi! 1-3 in. Butt.. —63 —49 | 2-in. Lap..... —27 —10 ¢ojow.. 3%-6 in. Lap. —60 —46 214-6-in. Lap. —30 —15 t 7-8 in. Lap... —56 —34 | 7-12-in. Lap.. —23 — % rl . — 20 | ~ ° 44 OF 9-12 in. Lap.. —55 —33 Copper, heavy crucible.............. cccccccces thee ; Copper, heavy wire ..... heir eae RRe eam biiaws Sones ware Copper, light and bottoms ....... Fae vaseeuenes 8.2 BASED PrICE* ON No. 9 GaGE AND CoarssR PerLb. Brass, heA@vy .......eceeee: htt odeeeenase —_—ee 75c. Brass, light .......... ee cocvercosecoessessees rign M451 ° 16s beea@ en's ee of : se Annealed soft eee... .8.75¢e. Heavy machine composition............esee+:: { Gal\ aniead annealed 450c. No. 1 yellow brass turnings .........ceeeeee: OV waive LiZeUu alll aictu eeee ee ee ° ° -« . = ~~ . yy Coppered basi 4 25. No. 1 red brass or composition turnings ....-- “0 ypere eee sted sare eee ithawio ke 4.25 : 9 15 Tinned soft Bessemer ke eh ees ee ee re o./0c, Lead, MONGG cc cddidesedosncdheaweaRedan eoecces 550 j ae De RSs wen kncacveeusiawe name wens wecaeaeen 2.0 : 2.50 . *Regular extras for lighter gage Zinc. Coeeeeeeseeeeeseeseseeseeseseeeeseeeeee® P ED 1855 THE IRON AGE New York, January 19, 1922 Crucible and Electric ‘Tool Steel VOL. 109, No. 3 43 Some Aspects of Choice in Their Manufacture—Electric Furnace a Sealed Crucible—Operating Conditions Compared in Detail BY W. J. AND S. STUART GREEN* \BLY one of the questions most frequently inded has been—‘‘is electric steel really as is crucible’? Our answer has been in some ind others probably no. Electric steel, using erials and melting practice, may be no bet- ypen-hearth or Bessemer steel and, on the i, using other materials and melting practice, sily be the equal of the finest steel made. ; as it may, the basic electric furnace has ed itself as a formidable competitor of the nored crucible wherever tool steel is made, seems opportune to review in a brief some gathered in a rather long crucible, though a rily shorter, electric experience. This experience manufacture of almost every variety of alloy y both processes, including a large tonnage eed steel made in 3- and 6-ton heats in the furnace and, last but not least, a large tonnage carbon tool steel, which for the purpose of is probably the most important; for it is in facture of this steel, unclouded by alloys, that nparison can best be made. tive for writing the paper is a disinterested have no furnace to sell nor have we one to The choice of a melting medium for the of tool steels is now confronting some s of this commodity and, if these notes proper selection, the purpose of this paper served. To those who already have made are not, for other reasons, confronted by but are tool steel makers, this article may t merely as a presentation of conclusions in intimate contact with both furnaces in ne more or less inspired claims of furnace Che Crucible for Steel Castings t, tool steel manufacture, probably does nelude steei castings. This branch has, > small bearing on the purpose of the refore the following brief mention is made. fallen to the lot of both of the writers to erience with the delivery of crucible steel ind the passing therefore of the crucible of the steel trade seems something of a That it is passing there can be no longer t; the following figures clearly show the nonstrate also that the electric furnace, ssarily the cause, has secured all the high- o relinquished: 1 States only 1729 tons of crucible steel cast- 201 ings were made in 1920, as agaimst 20,550 tons of crucible steel castings in 1912, a falling off of almost 92 per cent indeed in 1919 the situation was even worse, when only 1009 tons of crucible steel castings was made, a falling off of something like 95 per cent, which of course means approxi mate extinction. In 1920 the electric furnace made in the United States 155,196 tons of steel castings, thereby surpass ing the largest crucible tonnage ever made These figures are taken from the statistics of the American Iron and Steel Institute and were published by the writers in graphic form in an article appearing in THE IRON AGE, Oct. 27, 1921. They would seem to furnish reliable indication of the rejection in America, in no uncertain fashion, of the crucible for the manu- facture of steel castings. We regret our inability to secure accurate figures covering the production of steel castings in Great Britain, but those we have seem to indicate a similar, though by no means so drastic a, condition. It appears therefore that in the manufacture of steel castings the crucible has already very largely given way to the electric furnace, which latter has inciden- tally secured additional tonnage elsewhere. There can be no question in face of these figures, representing as they do so strong an adoption of the electric furnace, of the satisfactory quality of electric steel for this pur- pose. Indeed, the writers can see one or two possible advantages in favor of the electric steel, totally aside from the strong economic reasons, which latter undoubt- edly have played so large a part in its adoption. These reasons will be more fully touched in connection with tool steel production. The Crucible and Tool Steel The very much weakened position of the crucible in the steel casting industry is not exactly the condition to-day existing in the tool steel branch, in which the crucible still retains much of its old time dominance, particularly in Sheffield. The reasons for this are pos- sibly to be found in the following. The steel casting industry, by reason of smaller commercial outlay re- quirements, became very much more competitive than the tool steel branch, with its necessarily costly ham- mers, rolling mills, etc. Competition suggested cheaper steel-making methods and these were tried. The con- verter and the open-hearth secured a portion of the cheaper work but did not succeed to the high grade end in spite of the somewhat easier quality requirements of castings as against tool steel. The electric furnace, however, could produce cheaper steel than the crucible by virtue of its greater efficiency and its quality proved to be fully satisfactory, as has been shown before. A deluge of work was diverted to the electric furnace and Neen nnn nen en ete ee oy MO ETFO igimegneneee rere January 19 2()2 THE IRON to-day opinion is general that its product is fully satis- factory for the most exacting casting. While this seems to have been generally agreed upo so far as castings are concerned, a similar light of in- quiry is now, for reasons not very different, being turned on tool steel production by its manufacturers. The inquiry seems to be somewhat along the following lines: “Is well made electric tool steel fully the equal of crucible tool steel, and if so, what economic advan- tages does the electric furnace possess?” No direct answer is attempted by the writers to this question, though their opinion will be readily gathered. Before opinions are offered, however, the following figures rep resenting, as they do, facts, might be wholesome. They indicate a growing confidence, the world over, in electric a . 2 : : steel. The hgures represent castings and ingots com OlT ed ub of Electric Steel Output in Tons \ All Countrie United States Great Britain 19 182,919 mee ——=*tits we 02,431 69,412 22,354 t 9 §8 168,918 50,049 19 R46.26 } } 122.54 1918 1176.07 11,364 The Age of Crucible Steel The fact that crucible steel is now within two dec ades of its second century of birthdays is one without precedent. Indeed there is no other type of furnace whose life is even half that of the Huntsman process. This of course, is intended to cover commercial produ tion only and not the weak speculative production of laboratory quantities in India and elsewhere, and it ; also refers to the production of liquid steel. Cast steel became synonymous for crucible stee and exist as a trade term to some extent to-day though the march of progress has rendered this term now almost obsolete bs Bessemer steel being every bit as much entitled to the tern is is erucible. The uninformed buyer, however, still specifies “Warranted Cast Steel” and has no doubts as to what he want ind f course s ipplied with crucible steel. Such remarkable longevity of a steel-making process must have a reason or reasons to | eep 1t 1n so important a position for so great a number of years. Was the reason a_ steel-making monopoly? Undoubtedly for more than half its existence it did enjoy such a fortu- nate position. This monopoly played a tremendous part in its development, an enormous advantage enjoyed by no subsequent steel-making process. Articles of com merce were made from crucible steel solely by virtue of its monopoly, such as shovels, locomotive tires, etc., but this class of trade it lost with the birth of the new and cheaper steel-making methods. Among other monopo lies it, of course, had the tool steel trade, and it is only { in very recent years, with the birth of the electric fur nace, that this monopoly has been really questioned If the crucible is to-day holding a large part of th: tool steel trade solely by virtue of a monopoly, it has now a very precarious hold indeed, for the last 10 year have brought forward a vigorous competitor. But annot be doubted that this monopoly of more than 100 vears does account for a fair portion of the trade it enjoys to-day. With the monopoly of crucible steel seriously threat- ened there can be no question that, did the crucible possess any commercial advantages over its new com- petitor, it would still continue to hold its very important position in the industry. This, however, it does not; indeed, it cannot claim equality. Its competitor is the most economic steel-melting medium yet known in the utilization of fuel energy, while the crucible is probably the most wasteful. The labor cost per ton of steel is also an important commercial factor in which the cru- cible must give way to the electric furnace. It is not opportune in an article of this sort to exhaustively dis- cuss this last question and it is therefore its importance should not be overlooked. Is Crucible Steel Peerless Is crucible steel a peerless steel? place in the industry is secure, its wastefu operation is adequately neutralized, its mono This is unquestionably the keystone of t} If crucible steel cannot be duplicated ity by any known melting medium, its pres cannot be assailed, neither will its markets The question has therefore resolved We have seen that if equality uct is shared with the electric furnace, the cru bow to its more efficient competitor, possess advantages. crucible, as the leader of fine steel production, position. commercia fore a strong probability, if the electric fu regularly and with ease produce a steel th the crucible. The views of two practical steel makers, worked both furnaces, may therefore be of som: in reviewing this important question. tion of quality is one of many phases intend to deal only with those strictly Lathe tests, microscopical physical tests, that are of value in defining qu: It has long been the write? perience. be attempted. tion, however, that analysis alone means as an indicator of quality. wish to more urgently deal with being the The particular p) melting practice in both cases which have be¢ he contrary, weaken discussion therefore melting practice it some survey of the abilities of ea admit such practice. Difference in Quality Limited to Furnace Practice Inasmuch whether they be accorded exactly to commercial y differences of quality can be production of liquid steel and the casting thereof if admitted, simplifies very much the problem. once agreed that all electric steel, if rum competition with crucible steel, shall be acc actly the same care, treatment and advantages working down A survey of the subject will show that ences between the quality of crucible steel and steel must occur in the liquid steel or the cas thereafter. The steel roller, is therefore the or ny way be held responsible n the quality of the two steels, differences imposed by the nature of the furna introduced tive who can in influence stock, and second, in his melting practice. As casting practice, both crucibl is distinctly capable of duplication ated daily in many large plants, a very large p' ‘f crucible steel being ladle cast and a large tool steel being cast in small ingo square and up, it, must be apparent that an) in quality cannot arise from that source and fore be well left out of these considerations It would seem therefore reasonably certal! differences that might exist in the qualities and electric tool steel must be introduced in t ing places only: I.—In the selection of melting stock. II.—In the melting practice employed. ary 19, 1922 Inherent differences imposed by the furnace ed, crucible or electric. ng narrowed the question to the three points ted above, the subject can be carefully looked a degree of accuracy and the deductions :gainst known facts where required. three subjects, for more careful discussion, are nged with any idea of order of importance, as them could be vital to the success of eithe1 It will be seen also that no great attempt is investigate “mysterious virtues,” sometimes this day, advanced in favor of the crucible, for us that while such things might well have ister a century ago, it is extremely questior lav, for the mysterious is very frequently illu I. Selection of Melting Stock election of melting stock, or raw materials, is serious responsibility, and it is noteworthy that early history of the crucible its melters used crimination, amounting to almost a fetish in ection. The crucible held out no glamor of refining, no illusionary manufacture of silk proverbial sow’s ear, and they were therefore racted from the straight and narrow path. Only) put in the “weigh-pan” will be found in the iibap vas the dominating thought and guided them E the direction of the best steel-making Swedish Bh _ blister bar, Swedish white irons and, of course, n tool scrap. The fact that this industry was en- a most complete monopoly largely assisted in Rs choice, admitting the free use of somewhat ex eA e materials, having no keen competition to fight, ee possibility of being supplanted by any less costly BS i, since it was the only steel-making process Raw Material Costs rucible therefore started out with the slogan, kes quality to make quality.” This slogan we j suggested was possibly inspired by its complete § ly of the entire industry, and to the fact that no ring” in the shape of refining possibilities had or rawn across its track. It used the best possible FB s for its first quality product (we are concerned rs paper with no other) and, to a large degree, has etained with remarkable fidelity this foundation a Chemical guidance at the inception of this Be was entirely non-existant and its absence i rands of steel-making irons, some attaining ful reputations. § fine old brands come to our minds of the : ora type and, it might be said here, that soon “a tinct qualities of Swedish irons were to be b ash and Walloon. These two irons, though Bs substantially identical, varied very much in ng over some old records, we find Walloor a ting as much as 28s. per hundred weight, while Be vas as low as 9s. 6d. per hundred weight. Cost : : facture appears to be largely responsible for a W alloon process being much more expensive Bo fuel was concerned, the fuel being, of course, 9 2 lypical of quality, brought to bear on the pro- P first quality crucible steel, the Walloon iron, Bi f the chemical similarity of Lancash and in ts very much higher price, was very freely manufacture of “warranted best cast steel” a effield crucible steel makers. Swedish white g irons held sway over gray irons, and so, all ‘hI the selection. i tly nature of these melting materials is em- y the necessity of reducing to pot size by ill and shear, all this material, but, for the reason before stated, the trade was then well ir this further great expenditure. The situa- THE IRON AGE 203 tion is now changed by the arrival of its competitor, which does not require such an expenditure, in fact prefers larger stock for its reduced surface advantage. The fine brands of steel-making irons became standards from which no departures were made; materials were blended into private mixtures and these surrounded with a certain amount of secrecy, which very probably offers full explanation for such intangible claims of “mysterious virtues.”’ These private brands certainly did much, however, to build up individual reputations, which have been very jealously guarded, in some cases for more than a century. It will be seen that, in so far as the selection of raw materials was concerned, the crucible used only the best obtainable without regard to price. It faithfully and consistently maintained high standards and, with a few notable exceptions, does so to-day. On such a founda- tion, with 180 years of connection and 120 years abso- lute monopoly, it is not hard to see some reason for the tenacity of its hold on the tool steel business. It is well indeed to turn on the light of inquiry and see how far these things hold to-day. Raw Materials for the Electric Furnace Turning to the electric furnace, it is at once ap- parent that exact duplication of the melting stocks of the crucible is easily possible by the simple expedient of charging exactly the same materials. It is evident therefore that the electric furnace need take no second place in the question of native purity and natural body of melting stock. It must be admitted, however, that in the early days f the electric furnace this duplication was not at- tempted, it not being born with a silver spoon in its mouth as was its venerable competitor. It was not born and raised under the kindly wing of monopoly, as was s rival, neither did it hold the powerful connection such as is carried by any institution almost 200 years old. What was worse, it had from its inception doubt ful claims of remarkable refining properties, making possible the manufacture of the finest tool steel from any old kind of scrap, so long as it was steel. These claims, inspired no doubt by the spur of keen competi- tion and the apparent necessity of finding some striking advantage to recommend its adoption and the conse- quent scrapping of the crucible, did incalculable harm at the outset. No particular attention was deemed neces- sary, or given to the selection of melting stock, the idea eing, charge the furnace and then turn on the refining tap. Never, indeed, could the electric furnace seriously ompete with the crucible while shoddy was its charge yr such an outlook held sway. This situation, happily, has now been largely recti- fied; elaborate refining, clever chemical manipulations, etc., now find no place in the manufacture of first grade tool steel. “Only what is in the weigh-pan will be in he finished steel” is now as largely recognized in the new industry as it is in the crucible. Considering the furnace as but 10 years old commercially it will prob- ably be admitted that not much time has been lost in tuning up to crucible pitch. + The writers carefully outlined three standard grades electric tool steel qualities, both as to selection of melting stock and melting practice, in an article pub- lished in THE IRON AGE Sept. 15, 1921, of which just a brief quotation as to melting stock of first quality steel is taken: Ox tior Well under manganese and phosphorus final specification American Swedish, rolling mill tiror ingot iron or similar stock being desirable, except as here- after provided Charge shall contain not less than 106 per cent of washed metal or Swedish carbonizing iron...... . and not less than 20 per cent but up to 40 per cent of heavy electric furnace tool scrap........ replacing to amount used, stock described above. There can be no question that where such melting SO Oa sr a 7 oe el ee ee nee 204 THE IRON AGE stock is used the crucible has not the slightest lead, and such materials are used and have been used for some time. Fuller details as to mixture standardization and designing can be obtained from the article, as can an outline of the cheaper grades. The standard mixtures and qualities of the crucible, which have done so much to build up its reputation, are to be found in just as complete a form in the tool steel electric furnace. Con- tinuity of product and standard quality grades are no longer the monopoly of the crucible, but are shared possibly to an equal degree by its youthful competitor. It is agreed,. therefore, that a full equality in the selection of melting stock is already shared in some quarters by the electric furnace and where not, can be, by the simple duplication of crucible charges. The ex- ception to this is in favor of the electric furnace, which does not require its stock reduced to pot size; indeed, prefers larger material, and so secures a valuable com- mercial and possibly some slight metallurgical advan- tage. If. Melting Practice The whole purpose of the crucible process, in so far as melting practice is concerned, is to bring by melting fusion the whole contents of the weigh-pan into one perfect blend of finished steel. Once this fusion is complete and clearly melted, the contents of the pot are killed by what is known as a killing fire, the correct casting temperature attained; then the melting process is complete. No manipulation of slags and no refining is possible and the process is thereby saved this com- ' plication, possessed by other melting mediums. The blend is made in the weigh-pan and substantially no other change can be made thereafter. The melter’s concern is largely correct melting and killing, correct casting temperatures and, lastly, due care of his furnace and his pots. He has also the executive control of his crews and also the care of his molds and their correct setting up, but this only indirectly, as of course the molders are directly responsible. He is only rarely called upon to design mixtures though in some cases he is required to act as “weigh-up,” in which case he personally weighs his own melting stock, according to mixtures supplied him. The process is carried out in a sealed crucible with the flame not in contact with the metal of which more will be said later. The conditions in the pot are mildly oxidizing at the start, as can be gathered from the drop in carbon experienced in the Sheffield white pot, and gradually change to mildly reducing as the heat progresses. While this early, mildly oxidizing condi- tion also occurs when using graphite pots, it is not so apparent, for in the later stages this pot throws con- siderable carbon which is absorbed by the steel and therefore obscures any early loss. Incidentally the amount of carbon thrown in this fashion is not always under perfect control. Simplicity of the Crucible Process Summarizing the foregoing, it will be seen that sim- plicity characterizes the melting practice of the cru- cible in so far as chemical reactions and manipulations are concerned, which is significantly one of the strengths of the process. It holds no rewards for ingenious oper- ation, offers no attractive short cuts and tolerates no detours. This has safeguarded the process to quite an extent and, in these days when its monopoly has van- ished, is valuable indeed in assisting it to continue a hold on the tool steel business. The electric furnace from the first held out won- derful refining abilities; the furnace was compared with the chemist’s casserole, and these were mistakenly recognized as great advantages over the crucible. Shoddy could be refined and made tool steel. This mis- taken idea led to a very complete development of refin- ing methods, slags and manipulations, but these, all January 19, 1929 right in their place, such as in third grade quali: competing with the watered stock of the crucible third grades, will not do in the manufacture of first ~ tool steel. The electric furnace of to-day, however, recog ies this to quite a large degree and is operated in the m: facture of tool steel exactly as a large and effi crucible. Its melting practice is most remarkably that of the crucible. To briefly quote from our ar of Sept. 15, 1921, regarding first quality electric : steel melting practice: “Positively no ore additions, mill scale or boiling of any kind tolerated no slag shall be taken off (ex; the bare metal to oxidation). Every attempt should be to duplicate crucible conditions in melting pra Electric a Repetition of the Crucible It will be seen therefore that the modern thoug! electric tool steel production, in so far as melting ; tice is concerned, represents an almost exact repeti of crucible practice. The heat is not boiled, slags not taken off, the quality is in the charge, which has been selected with the same care as the crucible. Chemi cally the conditions are also most remark synonymous. The electric furnace, when following the lines lined, is in the initial stages like the crucible, mildly oxidizing. It is oxidizing to about the same degree as the Sheffield crucible, as can be noted by the similar three to five point drop in carbon in melting down. Again, like the crucible, the conditions change to reduc- ing; a slag is formed covering the metal and forming liquid seal, very much as Huntsman used himself in his early manufacture of crucible steel. This seal is ably supported by tight furnace doors and the strongly re- ducing atmosphere of the furnace. This is the only steel-making process that does not require oxygen to burn its fuel, and it must be seen therefore that the crucible can make no claims for virtues accruing from a sealed crucible which are not fully shared by the elec- tric furnace. The electric furnace, when run along to steel lines, can in effect be nothing other than a large efficient, sealed crucible, and its melting practice i readily and successfully amenable to duplication, with the possible advantage in favor of the electric furnac of stronger reducing conditions. The case for equality of electric melting practice seems to be strong, repre- senting as it does so faithful a duplication of th crucible. a Ill. Inherent Differences of the Two Furnaces As to inherent differences resulting from the varia- tion of the types of furnaces employed, crucible or elec- trie, this has necessarily been touched in the foregoing. from which deductions might be taken. We must con- fess that we can see no difference except in size and efficiency. Probably the strongest and most important clain ever made for the crucible is the fact that the steel is melted in a sealed crucible and is therefore untouched by flame. How far the electric furnaces duplicate this has already necessarily been suggested, but the follow- ing thought analyzes the position somewhat more fully The Bessemer, open-hearth and crucible processes 4! require the mechanical delivery of air in large quant! ties to the hearth of the furnace, in order to make po sible fuel consumption. In the Bessemer, the fue! being silicon, and that being found only in the very compos! tion of the metal, it is apparent that no protection ¢a” be offered the steel against the ravages of oxidatio?. The open-hearth also requires large quantities © air throughout the process to burn its fuel, oil or 225 4° the case may be. An attempt is made to protect the metal from this strongly oxidizing flame to some exte"t by carrying a slag at the later stages of the operatio”. ary 19, 1922 effectual this is against so consistent and strong lizing flame is apparent by a glance at the ap- - alloy loss when present in the scrap or added furnace and the extremely oxidized condition of . When one considers the enormous volume of cessarily introduced into the very hearth of the , the failure to provide any complete protection t surprising. » crucible furnace also requires a large and steady » of air to burn its fuel, whether it be coke, gas and this has also to be introduced right in the of the furnace. Its flame is an oxidizing one and io much damage to the steel if no protection could red. Protection is, however, supplied to a very ng degree. The steel is inclosed in a crucible top of the steel is at the later stages covered . flux inside the pot and the crucible mouth is by a lid or cap. It will be seen that the protec- ainst flame is almost complete; is, in fact, com- vere it not that several times during the melting the lid must needs be opened and the condition teel investigated by the introduction of a potter , for the purpose of adding certain alloys or The degree of oxidation resulting from this slight, but that it does exist can be seen from rht loss of easily oxidized alloys experienced such are added. It is certain, however, that its tion far exceeds that of the Bessemer or open- and this, together with its careful melting election, ete., easily explains its dominating posi- a tool steel producing unit heretofore. Comparison of the Fuels e electric furnace, which now contends for a share honors of the tool steel business, is very fortu- y placed in this respect, for it does not require air ygen to burn its fuel. Its fuel possesses the strik- idvantage of being capable of employment in a ‘ reducing atmosphere, or for that matter any phere. Vast quantities of air have not to be y supplied to the furnace; in fact, none at all red, therefore the protection problem is almost y solved. No crucible need be furnished, though itter of fact, a furnace having the major charac- of a crucible is supplied, and those leaks, by f taking the lid off, in this case opening the nd also such as occur from a furnace that is , are taken care of in a very complete fashion. ngly reducing atmosphere is maintained from ‘ in the operation, right away to tapping, a il of a controllable viscosity is furnished and r slag is itself strongly reduced, carrying an f carbon available and ready for any stray hat may perhaps come along. This is quite ypen-hearth and some idea of its effectiveness rathered from the almost complete recovery of of one per cent of vanadium in the scrap een charged. In the direct addition of alloys, f course, losses due to the volatile nature of the loss is almost negligible, and speaking ely, certainly not any more than the crucible. : foregoing the electric furnace is indeed tical purposes a large sealed crucible, and lifferences are to be found, they are in the even greater protection in the case of the nace. It is difficult to find, therefore, any ‘ferences that would to any measurable de- e quality of the steel, providing the electric run along the lines suggested. We have t to assume that the case was covered by eding points. Conclusions has been outlined and the various points s they appear to the authors. If what we S correct, the electric furnace bids fair to THE IRON AGE 205 supplant the crucible to a greater degree than hereto- fore, though it is possible, never completely. A strong case seems to have been made for the electric furnace, which argues the fuli ability of that furnace to readily and successfully duplicate in quality—“warranted best crucible steel.” The case has been dealt with on the premises of three major deciding factors, the investiga- tion of none of which seems unfavorable to the electric furnace. Though these represent the frank opinions of the writers, it is, of course, possible that their findings are not justifiable; of this, however, the reader must be the judge. If the case is admitted, it seems certain that the electric furnace must assume the dominating position in the industry, by virtue of its powerful economic ad- vantages, which possess so attractive a commercial value. The passing of the crucible seems analogous to the passing of the dreadnought. Whatever the future holds, however, that grand old pioneer, the crucible, has left high standards and marks on the sands of time that will not be effaced. American Pig Iron Association Addressed by 5 % d Colonel Richards Retiring officers of the American Pig Iron Associa- tion were re-elected at the annual meeting held at the William Penn Hotel, Pittsburgh, Jan. 12. Theodore Friend, Clinton Iron & Steel Co., Pittsburgh, continues as president of the association; John A. Penton, Pen- ton Publishing Co., Cleveland, secretary; and Col. F. B. Richards, M. A. Hanna & Co., Cleveland, treasurer. An interesting talk on the European financial situa- tion by Colonel Richards was a feature of the meeting. It was the speaker’s idea that if the war debt of Eu- rope to this country is ever to be paid, it would be necessary for this country to cut down the bill materi- ally and to fund the remainder by long-time bonds. Europe insisted, the speaker said, that it spent most of the money borrowed in the United States in this country, and that, as it paid war-time prices, it was entitled to some rebate. Colonel Richards thought that by remitting or writing off a part of our claims upon European nations, which had borrowed from us, with a corresponding remission by those nations in - their claims upon others, including Germany, the situation in Europe would mend more rapidly than would be possible by insistence upon full payments. There was discussion of freight rates which resulted in a motion empowering the president to appoint a committee of one or two to go to Washington to pre- sent the claims of the association that freight charges on pig iron from all centers of production to consum- ing points are so high as to hamper business. German Hardware in Damascus WASHINGTON, Jan. 17.—Practically all the hard- ware and tools being sold in Damascus are of German manufacture, the low exchange value of the German mark favoring the introduction of German goods in spite of the fact that the reappraisement system now being practised by the Syrian customs authorities has the effect of increasing the duty on some kinds of German goods to as much as 50 per cent ad valorem while the legal duty is only 11 per cent ad valorem. This control by Germany of the market in Damascus is set forth in a report on “Metals and Hardware” re- ceived by the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Com- merce from Consul Charles E. Allen, dated Dec. 3, 1921. There is a brisk demand for all kinds of small hard- ware, the report states, the machine-made foreign product, on account of its greater symmetry, attractive- ness and, latterly, cheapness, having begun to force the ill-formed, though durable, local hand-made product out of use. The making of tools, nails and all kinds of small hardware by hand is still an important local in- dustry, but it is daily becoming increasingly difficult to compete with the foreign industry. In fact. the re- port points out, it can only do so because time has not yet come to have any value in Damascus. CO Pe ae a ~ 206 THE IRON AGE PATENT BILL PASSED House Approves Measure Which Will Be Urged in the Senate WASHINGTON, Jan. 17.—The Lampert patent bill, which has the strong support of engineering societies and industrial interests of the country, passed the House Thursday by a vote of 198 to 36, and efforts are now being made to get it through the Senate. The bill is now before the Senate Committee on Patents and it is hoped it will be put through and enacted into law at an early date. While it was supported by a large majority in the House, the measure also was the source of considerable opposition at the hands of such members as Majority Leader Mondell and Representative Madden, chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. The general atti- tude of those opposing the measure was based on the ground of the necessity for so-called economy, and the contention that the legislation provided should be taken care of in the Lehlbach classification bill providing for salary adjustments throughout the Government service, but carrying less increases for Patent Office employees than allowed by the Lampert bill. The Lampert bill provides for increases in per sonnel as follows: One law examiner; 26 assistant examiners and 21 clerks, aggregating 48 additional employees. Increases in salaries are made as follows: Commissioner of Patents, from $5,000 to $6,000; first assistant, from $4,500 to $5,500; second assistant, from $3,500 to $5,000; examiner-in-chief, from $3,500 to $5,000; solicitor, from $2,750 to $5,000: chief clerk, from $3,000 to $4,000; law examiner, from $2,750 to $4,000; principal examiners, from $2,700 to $3,900; first assist- ants, from $2,400 to $2,900, $3,100 and $3,300: and sec- ond assistants, from $2,100 to $2 500 and $2,800. In order to cover the additional cost of conducting the Patent Office by reason of increased salaries, the bill provides an increase in the fees. Practically all of AL TOMOBILE PRODUCTION IN 192] More Than One Million Tons of Steel Used Considerably Less Than in 1920 Estimating the average weight of iron and steel pe. passenger automobile at 1500 lb. and the average weight per truck at 2250 lb., the total amount of iron and stee] used in automobile construction during the year was apparently about 1,175,000 gross tons. This is approxi- mately 9 per cent of the year’s output of rolled and forged steel. The figure is based on a total production amounting to 1,680,000 cars and trucks, of which 145,000 or 8.63 per cent were trucks, and the remainder pas- senger and other light cars, according to the National Automobile Chamber of Commerce. The total figure is 1 reduction of 24 per cent from the 1920 output. Passengers to the number of 6,000,000,000 are said to be carried annually by motor cars. This compares with 1,100,000,000 carried by the railroads of the United States annually, and with 1,418,000,000 carried by the rapid transit (elevated and subway) lines of New York, n the year ending June 30, 1921. Freight annually handled by motor truck is given as 1,200,000,000 tons, which compares with 2,290,000,000 tons of freight car- ried by the railroads, this being the average of 1917 ind 1918. It stated that the wholesale value of the cars and cks produced in 1921 was $1,222,350,000, a reduction if 45 per cent from 1920. The value of automobiles was stated at $1,088,100,000, or $702 per car, a reduc- tion of 21% per cent from the $897 average of 1920. The wholesale value of motor trucks produced is given as $134,250,000, an average of $968 per truck, or a re- luction of 24 per cent from the $1,273 average of 1920. Tire casings amounting to 19,379,000 were produced, together with inner tubes to the extent of 24,157,000 and solid tires numbering 377,000. The figures given show an approximate total of 10,000,000 automobiles registered in the United States, of which 9,000,000 are cars and 1,000,000 are trucks. January 19, 1999 the work on a patent is done when the applica first made, and the initial fee is $15. The se fee upon the granting of the patent, under the | law, is $20. The Lampert bill raises the first fe $15 to $20, and it is estimated that it will bri: the Treasury over $500,000 annually. It is d to be the only piece of legislation in the way ot increase that not alone pays for itself but wil revenue into the Treasury. It was this feature bill that played an important part in destroy; argument of those who opposed it on the grou: economy. The measure also gained strength it omitted the Federal Trade Commission ride: The extreme importance of the legislation ha repeatedly poin