Uniform Nomenclature Of Iron And Steel.

A discussion of the paper published in Bi-Monthly Bulletin, No. 20, March, 1908, pp. 227 to 237, and No. 22, July, 1908, pp. 615 to 620. PROF. HENRY M. HOWE, New York, N. Y. (communication to the Secretary *) :-Mr. Hibbard's definition of steel would be the best yet offered were it not for its one defect, the vagueness or equivocalness of "fusion-process." Puddling is surely in one sense a fusion-process, and so are the charcoal-hearth or knobbling-processes. But what he says suggests the following definition, which seems to me a good one: " Steel: any variety of iron which is usefully malleable at least at some one temperature, and is either cast when molten into a malleable mass, or if not so cast can be much hardened by sudden cooling." It is not necessary in a definition that quantitative bounds should be set up, for instance, that the exact height at which dwarf apple-trees cease and standards begin, or at which hills cease and mountains begin, should be stated. These quantitative measures are proper for specifications and contracts, but are not necessary for purposes such as the present. HENRY D. HIBBARD, Plainfield, N. J. (communication to the Secretary t) :-Professor Howe's criticisms of my definition of steel are not, it seems to me, well founded, for the . following reasons: The term "fusion-process" has been used during the past quarter or half century to distinguish the crucible, Bessemer and Siemens-Martin processes from the puddling- and cementation-processes, and probably no one at all conversant with the art of iron-metallurgy would now mistake its meaning. Moreover, no steel-metallurgist is in doubt of the meaning of the term "hardened? as applied to steel. If it were really necessary to describe what is meant by the term then it would