Work of the Committees on the “International Standards for the Analysis of Iron and Steel.”

Abstract

HE histpry of the orgatiizatioii ailtl work of tliese coiii-T xnittees up to the preseiit \.ear is 1)riefly as follows : In the summer of I S M it \vas the fortune of the present \niter to present the subject of tlie tlesirnl)ilit>, of establisliiii~ a :jet of samples of steel ~vliicli shonld IE :irial!.zeti tvitli cztre:m care. in order that they niiglit l~ecoiiie stniidnrtls to ivliicli scieiitific and coniniercial analyses of iron :itit1 steel could be subsequeiitl!. referred ; also, that greater unif iriiiit?. i i i the results of ntial!ws might be brought about, since t i w e staiitlartls would h : i r towards analjtical tnetliods soine\vh;it the positioii \vhicli tlic original units of weight and leiigth. the grain aiirl nieter, or tlie pound and yard, do to the mechanical arts. T h e plan met with heart). cooperation , ivith tlic result that coniniittees were appointed iri Slveden, Gerniaiiy. Frauce, Eiixland, and America to receive the material arid necessary analyses were executed These committees were cotistitiitetl a s follon 111 Sweden, Prof. Richard iikerniaii : in C;erinati>-, \)y the authority of the niitiistcr of pii1)Iic works, the execution of the analyses has been entrusted to the Konig-liche Clieiiiisch 'I'echnischen ~ersuchungsaiistalt, i n Iierliii : i i i France, >loris. Fertl. l K e a d hefoic the \Vorld'i C o i i~r c .

Reference samples in geology and geochemistry

“…The seven members of the American Committee on International Standards for the Analysis of Iron and Steel met on February 19, 1890, and decided that, rather than begin work on international standards, they should make a preliminary study of methods for determining carbon because of the many discrepancies and differences of opinion. Thereafter, reports of the Committee on International Standards appeared (Langley, 1892(Langley, , 1893Langley andDudley, 1894a, 1894b), as did papers on the need for standard methods by Dudley and Pease (1893) and by Jiiptner (1896). Dudley and Pease (1893, p. 502) pointed out that lack of agreement among different chemists working on the same sample "is no new state of affairs.…”