Discussions - Of Mr. Field's Paper on the Condition and Action of Carbon in Iron and Steel (see p. 559)

William Metcalf, Pittsburg, Pa. (communication to the Secretary*): I am greatly pleased that some one has at last reached what I have long regarded as the only rational explanation yet given of the reasons why steel hardens. Mr. Field claims originality; and doubtless he is entitled to it, but not to priority, mhich must be granted to Prof. John W. Langley.' The difference between them is that Langley says " Tension, probably molecular," and Field says " Tension, probably atomic "; in either case the vital thing after solution is tension. Mr. Field's argument carries with it the idea of increase of density with hardness; if he mill study the facts farther he will observe that the case is just the reverse; that is, the greater the hardness the less the specific gravity; it was just this fact that led Langley to his conclusion, in mhich I have always concurred. Field agrees with Langley that the first requisite for perfect hardening is complete solution of the carbon, not combination; and all of the facts agree with this conclusion. The fact that increase of hardness causes reduction of density was first brought to my notice some 40 years ago, when Major William Wade was testing Jones & Laughlin's cold-rolled iron, and I mas his assistant. We found the well-known increase of tenacity, compressive strength, torsional resistance, and hardness. Specific-gravity tests showed that the cold-rolled iron was less dense than the hot-rolled bars. Major Wade was so surprised at this result that he gave me a lot of samples to weigh, saying that he was not satisfied with