September, 1926
INDUSTRIA L A.VD E.VGI,VEERIXG CHEMISTRY
985
NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE Relation between the Cost of Research and the Cost of Publication As chairman of the Subcommittee on Publication of the Committee of One Hundred on Research, of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, it has occurred t o me that it might be of interest t o find out approximately the relation between t h e amounts spent for research and the cost of the publication of the results. For this purpose I addressed a letter t o each author of a paper in the Journal of the American Chemical Society and Industrial and Engineering Chemistry For the April issues of t h e current year, asking for a n approximate estimate of the cost of the article, including: ( a ) T h a t portion of your salary during the period when you were working on t h e research which you think niay fairly be charged as a part of the expense of the preparation of the article. ( b ) Any special expense incurred for equipment or materials. ( c ) The proportional part of t h e cost of the upkeep of your laboratory which might reasonably be charged as a part of the cost. The response has been very cordial and general. Twenty authors of papers in. each journal gave me their estimates. For the Journal of the American Chemical Society the estimates covered I72 pages, with a total of $26,138, or $152 per page. For Industrial and Engineering Chemistry the estimates covered 151 columns, with a total of $46,352, or $307 per column. The estimates varied from $5.50 t o $540 per page for the Journal of the American Chemical!Society and from $20 to $4000 per column for Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. Evidently such statistics must not be pressed too far, but i t seems probable t h a t the totals and averages are rather below than above the actual costs. From the Treasurer’s report for 1925, the Journal of the American Chemical Society contained 3190 pages and cost $46,578.50, or about $14.60 per page. Industrial ana Engineering Chemistry contained 2636 columns and cost $72,006, or about $27.30 per column. The authors were asked whether the space allowed them was adequate for the proper presentation of their results. Fourteen authors of articles i n t h e JournaL of the American Chmical Society and five authors of articles i n Industrial and Engineering Chemistry desired more space. It is evident t h a t the need of additional funds for publication is felt much more keenly by writers for t h e former journal. It can scarcely be questioned t h a t articles which will have a far-reaching and permanent effect on the development of our science are more likely to appear in t h a t journal and t h a t the authors, as a class, receive less adequate remuneration for their work. On the average, a n interval of 4.1 months elapsed between the receipt of a n article by t h e editor of the Journal of the American Chemical Society and its publication. The interval for Industrial and Engineering Chemistry was, on the average, 2.3 months. For the latter journal, very few articles were held more than two months and little improvement could be expected for a monthly publication. Delays are due chiefly to three causes: 1-Inadequate funds for the publication of all suitable material submitted. The delay could be remedied during the first eight or nine months of the year by sending t o the printers, each month, a l l articles t h a t are ready and publishing smaller numbers during t h e last months of t h e year,-if the b;dget requires, It costs
no more t o publish an article at one time of the year than another and every one desires prompt publication. 2-Necessity of returning articles t o authors t o be shortened. The remedy for this is partly in the hands of the authors. Undoubtedly, some articles are improved by a briefer presentation. There is a very general feeling, however, t h a t t h e abbreviation has been carried too far. So far as this is true, the only remedy is additional funds for publication. It is very evident that these are urgently needed. In spite of the rigid limits for space set by the editors, our authors evidently prefer the large circulation given t o articles published in our journals t o the more adequate space permitted by those of a more limited circulation. 3-Delay of papers in the hands of associate editors. This has, very likely, been aggravated by the feeling on the part of these men, all of whom are busy and serve without compensation, t h a t the publication will be delayed for the first reason and prompt return of a paper is unnecessary. Such delays should, of course, be made as short as possible. We seem justified in the conclusion t h a t contributors t o our journals furnish us, free gratis, articles which have cost for their preparation at least ten times the sum required for their publication. The prestige of our journals depends on the excellence of the articles contributed to them and we are in no position to pay for them even a small fraction of what they have cost. In Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, especially, authors and firms often hesitate to publish material which may be of value to their competitors and the public is under great obligations to those who have the wisdom to see the advantages to be gained from cooperation. We certainly owe t o these authors and to the institutions and firms which they represent more adequate and prompt publication than they now receive. How can this be secured? It is very poor economy for us to promote research, as we are now doing, and refuse to furnish the means of making the work t h a t is done of value to the world. W. A. hTOYES URBANA, ILL. July 10, 1926
Knock Suppression with Colloidal Metal Solutions Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: I n a recent paper by George I,. Clark and Walter C. Thee [THISJOURNAL, 18, 528 (1926)l appears the interesting statement t h a t “the strong lead lines and the absence of lead compound bands show t h a t the metallic lead atoms, or the process of decomposition of the tetraethyl lead molecule, is the effective agent in the reaction propagation. . .” This observation corroborates results obtained by the writer in 1917-1918, which have until now remained unpublished, and which may aid slightly in the work toward the solution of the problem. The experimental work upon which the following is based was done by the writer while engaged, in collaboration with Thomas Midgley, Jr., in the search for antiknock materials in what was then t h e Research Laboratory of the Dayton Metal Products Co., Dayton, Ohio, later absorbed by General Motors. Only scanty laboratory notes are available for reference, and at the present time no facilities are at hand for further experiments, so t h a t these remarks are necessarily brief. The principal fact here t o be recorded is the discovery by the writer t h a t finely divided metals do exert a positive repressing action upon detonation of gaseous mixtures in gasoline engines.
.
INDUSTRIAL A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
986
A large number of metals were tried; all the common ones, and several of the rarer. They were used in the form of colloidal solutions prepared according to Bredig’s well-known method of arcing between poles of the material immersed in kerosene. Particles of many degrees of subdivision were obtained by this process, the coarser ones being separated by filtration before the solutions were tested. The test apparatus was a single-cylinder Delco-light plant, of the same type as that described by Midgley. The tests were carried out by first running the engine on loudly knocking kerosene, then switching t o one of the solutions of the various metals in the same kerosene. There were apparent differences in catalytic activity among the different metals a t the same approximate degree of subdivision, colloidal copper giving a t that time the most promising results. However, i t seemed very probable t h a t the activity of any one metal must be largely a function of its degree of dispersion. No exact determinations of particle size were made a t that time. The writer has always felt that the difference between the striking effect of tetraethyl lead and that of a colloidal solution of any one of a number of metals must be principally, if not solely, one of degree. The chance conditions of the experiments conducted by the writer brought about a very positive knock suppression with the colloidal solutions that were used; the most potent solution held the metal in the highest degree of dispersion. A more elaborate method of preparation would have given a still higher degree of subdivision and no doubt a stronger knocksuppressing effect. The metal in molecular dimensions was the next logical step, and as applied by Midgley and Boyd, it represented the ultimate degree of fineness and solved the practical end of the problem. The writer believes t h a t the further investigation of the activity of finely divided metals in promoting the smooth combustion of gas-engine mixtures will produce important results. It is quite possible that metals other than lead, in organic or other co‘mbination, will yield such “supercolloidal” metallic mists in the combustion chamber as t o provide even superior carriers of oxygen or “de-ionizers,” and will disclose the ultimate knock suppressor. The study of knock suppression with colloidal metals would, also, simplify the problem since there is no previous decomposition of the catalyst t o be taken into account. ALANR. ALBRIGHT 1618 BEVERLY ROAD
N. Y. BROOKLYN, June 30, 1926
Factors Influencing the Corrosion of Iron Pipes Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: There appeared in the April issue of THISJOURNAL a n article under the above title by John R. Baylis. Mr. Baylis has obtained remarkable and valuable results by his systematic treatment of the Baltimore city water supply, but in this article we believe t h a t he has made several statements to which exception should be taken. In the first place we do not believe that he has correctly interpreted the corrosion literature t o which he refers. For example, Mr. Baylis states t h a t “it has been assumed by several writers t h a t the p H of the water between about 5 . 5 and 9.5 has no influence on corrosion rates.” It is a fact t h a t in Cambridge water, which is relatively soft, changes in p H over the range specified by Mr. Baylis do not affect the corrosion rate appreciably when these changes in p H are brought about by the addition of sulfuric acid or sodium hvdroxide. These limitations are clearly specified in the paper t o which reference is made.’ 1
THISJOURNAL, 16, 665 (1924).
Vol. 18,No. 9
The tests on which these statements are based were run by passing natural water past commercial steel plates and through steel pipe. and in many cases extended for periods of over a month. We therefore feel t h a t they approximate conditions of service with the Cambridge water supply at least as well as the tests reported by Mr. Baylis’ approximate conditions with the Baltimore supply. We recognize as well as Mr. Baylis t h a t harder waters may, and do, cause very different results. Determinations of soluble ferrous iron form the basis of most of Mr. Baylis’ argument, b u t unfortunately important details regarding the experimental method which he used were not given in the paper. We have been hoping t o learn these details from Mr. Baylis, but unfortunately lack of time has not permitted him to give them to us. In view of the importance of his results, we believe t h a t these details should be printed. Otherwise, it is difficult t o agree with him on the validity of his conclusions. Mr. Baylis states that “the problem in treatment of water to prevent corrosion is t o produce conditions nearest ideal for the precipitation of all the products of corrosion at the point where corrosion is taking place-that is, where every tendency to corrode will quickly form insoluble compounds.” We believe t h a t this is one of the problems and that another, of major importance, is to cause these insoluble compounds t o adhere t o the metal surface on which they are precipitated. R . P. RUSSELL W. G. WHITMAN RESEARCH LABORATORY OP APPLIED CHEMISTRY MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CAMBRIDGE, MASS. July 26, 1926
A. C. S. Acrostic AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY A. D. 1876 Id A ho Ver M ont Tenn E ssee Neb R aska M a I ne Wis C onsin A1 A ska K a N sas North C arolina Was H ington Conn E cticut Wyo M ing Miss I ssippi Mi C higan Alab A ma Co L orado Mis S ouri I O wa South C arolina Ar I zona New M E xico Mon T ana New Y ork
Del A ware North D akota New J E rsey Cal I fornia W. Vir G inia 0 H io K e n T ucky G E orgia Minn E sota Illi N ois
.
Okla H oma D. Col U mbia Virgi N ia I n D iana Flo R ida Massachus E t t s South D akota N. Hamp S hire Or E gon Pennsyl V ania N E vada Arka N sas U T ah Mar Y land Loui S iana Rhode I sland T e X as
Composed and dedicated to the AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY by Calixte
F. Bousquet, Los Angeles, California. This acrostic illustrates well the national character of our SOCIETY, being composed of fifty letters, each one selected from names of states, territory, and federal district.
Note-On page 875, August issue, we reviewed Webre and Robinson’s book on Evaporation and quoted a price of $6.00. The publishers advise that the price has been advanced t o $8.50 a copy.
