Discussion of Mr. Webster's paper (p. 766)

Henry D. Hibbard, High Bridge, N. J. (Communication to the Secretary): There is one chemical factor which has not been considered in the author's tabulation of tests, but which is none the . less important because it cannot be practically estimated, and that is the element oxygen. This element has been, and probably will continue for some time to be, one of the great causes of the continual discrepancies between the chemical and physical properties of steel. Probably oxygen occurs, in important proportions, only in soft steel, such as that which we are now considering. In this steel its physical effect is to diminish tensile strength and elongation. The percentage of oxygen in the steel, under working-conditions that are as uniform as possible, is likely to vary inversely as that of the manganese, or perhaps, and more probably, it may bear even an inverse geometrical ratio to the manganese-content. At all events, to follow the author's plan, the line representing the loss of strength due to oxygen is probably a curve. Plotted by itself, the line would probably be straight; that is, the decrease in strength would be proportional to the increase in oxygen, but if the results were superposed on the percentages of manganese, they would give a curve, because the percentages of oxygen increase faster than those of manganese decrease. Were the oxygen-line to be developed and added to the diagram, it would seem that the manganese-line should then be straight. Due allowance for the effect of oxygen, therefore, would modify two features of the paper. It would increase the figure for the strength of pure iron from 38,000 to about 45;000 pounds per square inch, and it would straighten out the manganese-curve. The manganese-line in the paper is curved between 0.50 and 0.20 per cent. Above 0.50 per cent. it is straight, which may be ascribed