Iron and Steel Division - Factors Affecting Deformation and Rupture of Metals at Elevated Temperatures

IT is with an unusual degree of personal satisfaction that I find myself in a position to pay tribute to the memory of Henry Marion Howe. One could not have spent any length of time in the presence of Dr. Howe without profiting intellectually. I do not hesitate to say that my years of association with him were the most stimulating of all my years of metallurgical study. He always impressed one with his own eager search for knowledge. Never dependent on the written word alone he sought information from anyone whose opinion he valued. His ability to piece together bits of apparently conflicting data from various sources so as to build up a logical hypothesis was unique. A small slight man with the intellect of genius he would have gone to the top in any endeavor he undertook and it was fortunate for metallurgy that its study attracted him as it did. Howe was a modest man. I like to recall an incident which left a lasting impression with me. The lab- oratory in his home, "Green Peace," was in the basement and access was by way of stairs leading down from his secretary's room. In using these stairs my attention was attracted many times to an ordinary cardboard shoe box which reposed on the shelf above the landing. It was crudely labeled on its side in black ink "Vanity Box." My curiosity was aroused to the point that I finally asked his secretary what it was. With some amusement she took the box from its shelf on the stairway, opened it and showed me its contents—numerous letters, from the foremost men of science of every civilized country throughout the world, commending his "Metallography of Steel and Cast Iron." I recall that in reply to one who thought there was not enough of Howe's own researches in his book he wrote, "Primarily I am a writer, secondarily an investigator." Howe wrote to make his readers think. No one ever strove harder than he to be right but above all, whether his viewpoint proved ultimately to be right or wrong, he was always content if by his stand, he provoked a reader to take the next step along the path to greater knowledge. I doubt that he was ever afraid to be wrong for he was always secure in the thought that his effort was guided by a sincere search for the truth. One continually searching for truth is entitled to occasional excursions up the wrong alley. A glance backward to the metallurgical confusion of some thirty to forty years ago, or need one go back so far, provides convincing proof of what a host of companions one may have in a common acceptance of ideas which the future will prove to be wholly untenable. Well over a hundred years have passed since investigators have interested themselves in the effect of increasing the temperature of iron and steel on their mechanical properties. We are told by Charles Walrandl in "Industrial Annals" for June 11, 1822, that bend tests, conducted in a Russian steel works of Prince Demidoff, on steel bars "highly heated" and bent during cooling became brittle when bent at an iris blue color. He concluded, "That when steel is heated to a temperature between 473°F and 662°F the mettle was more brittle between these limits than at a much lower or at a much higher temperature." It was a curious bit of information recognized as true to this day and still not explained satisfactorily. In 1878 Charles Houston in Annales de Mines associated this brittleness with an increase in tensile strength at 572°F. When this relatively low temperature is exceeded it is recognized that steel becomes weaker as temperature is increased up to the melting point, where no strength of practical importance remains. It is easy to believe, in fact it goes without saying, that this weakening as the temperature of a metal is increased is the result of the motion of the atoms making up the metal, a motion which itself is evidence of the temperature increase. However, if we are considering iron or steel we find that this decrease in strength is not a steady one, for, besides the increase in strength just referred to, one comes to a temperature, the critical temperature, where results of tests indicate the metal to be extremely weak and then as temperature increases to become sensibly stronger again. This apparent anomaly was made the subject of the first Howe Memorial Lecture, delivered by Albert Sauveur in 1924. It may be of interest to review these findings of Sauveur. He used two methods of investigation. One involved the twisting of bars. The bars were heated in an