Philadelphia Paper - Discussion on Steel Rails. Virginia Meeting

as 1866, I wish to assure both these gentlemen that I had not seen the section when I designed mine, :md even if I had, I should not have then dared to put it forth as a standard for English rail makers; tind the soundness of my opinion has a simple but conclusive proof in the statement made concerning the extra price which was at that time required for their production. I need not say that I highly approve of the original Welch section, for it is in principle similar to the design which I made ufteen yeam subsequently; and from a professional point of view I would fully concecle to Mr. Welch the credit of first designing the modern steel-rail section. From com- mercial, matter of tict, and practical point of view, he was, however, before his time by many years; or to put it in another way, rail making was ten years behind its time when the new metal steel was first introduced for rails. If his design has been incorrectly identified with my name (as the sections are similar in principle, though they differ in thickness of flange and web), I beg to say (1st) that I much regret the misun- Understanding which has arisen through no fault of niine, aud (2d) that no confusion has been intentionally created by me. It is a pity that the section designed so long ago has not been made public at an earlier date, as it would make a really goal stand- and pattern, anil even now be quite equal to present requirements. In conclusion, I wish to say that I have never desired to claim any invention or novelty by the publication of my sections; they Were put forth as being such as English railmakers could and would produce at the ordinary market. price, and as being the best and most suitable to be so obtained. Had Mr. Welch or Mr. Holley put forward theirs ten or fifteen years ago, I should have been the first to recommend theru. In fact I should have been glad to see their narnes associated with rail patterns in their own country, in the same way as mine has been. PROFESSOR RICH. AKERMAN, STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN: i AGREE with your (Mr. Sandberg's) views that it is too early yet to stipulate only one definite chemical composition in the rails. Such a stipulation, I think, might he justified, if it were not for the manganese; but this metal changes the properties of the iron aud steel in tho same direc- tion ae carbon, silicon. and phosphorus, by increasing its tensile strength, stiffness, hardness, and brittleaess. If the iron and steel does not only contain carbon and manganese but also phosphorus,