I N D U S T R I A L A N D ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
March, 1!324
319
NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE Gas-Tight Stirrer Editor OJ Lndustriat and Engineering Chemistry: In the November issue of THISJOURNAL there appears on page 1134 a description of a gas-tight stirrer, closely resembling a type described by me some two years ago.’ As I have had considerahle experience with such stirrers I venture to point out that there are certain disadvantages attaching to the type illustrated in your journal, which do not apply to the stirrer in the accompanying drawing. I n my experience the use OF a parallel shaft kept gas-tight by a packing gland leads to excessive friction with a resulting increase in the power required to drive the stirrer. I n the type shown by the accompanying drawing the shaft is provided with a conical shoulder which exactly fits the conical bearing, so that when the pulley is screwed onto the other end of the shaft it enters a similar cone and thus draws the two cones into close contact. This secures a gas-tight bearing without the use of any packing gland. The second point is that in the figure described by Holm a long length of steel shaft and the packing gland are exposed to whatever gas may be in the flask. This means that if corrosive gases are being used the metal parts will be quickly attacked. It will be seen that this difficulty .is overcome in my stirrer by making the lower part of the glass stirrer conical, and grinding it into contact with a corresponding outer cone on the bearing, so that nothing but glass or ebonite comes in contact with the gas or liquid in use. These small changes make all the difference between a stirrer which will give much trouble in operation and one which will run for long periods without attention. H. G. BECKBR 15, YORIC ROAD RATHMINES DUBLIN, IRELAND Decembe- 4, 1923 1
P!oc. Roy. Dublin SOL.,16, 334 (1921).
.......... Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: In reply to Mr. Becker’s letter, we first wish to point out that the probkm of securing a gas-tight seal is quite different from obtaining a seal against a liquid, such as is the case in the inverted type of stirrer he uses. We have not been seriously hampered by any of the objections voiced, but realize that with highly corrosive gases and liquids objections may be raised to almost any apparatus that is not made wholly of glass. The form and material of such an apparatus is best determined by the nature of the work in question. GEORGEE. HOLM GEORGER. GREENBANK RESEARCH LABORATORIES. DAIRYDIVISION BUREAU O F ANIMALINDUSTRY WASHINGTON, D. C. January 8, 1924
Amino Acid Distribution in Proteins of Wheat Flours Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: I would like to point out that the problem on “Amino Acid Distribution in Proteins of Wheat Flours,” which R. J. Cross and R. E. Swain discuss in THIS JOURNAL, 16,49 (1924), had already been discussed by M. J. Blish in THISJOURNAL, 8, 131 (1916). Cross and Swain make no reference to this paper, but their findings are essentially identical with the findings of Blish. R. A. GORTNER UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ST. PAUL, MI”. January 9, 1924
.......
Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: Dr. Gortner is entirely right. Proper reference to the paper by Blish should have been made in our paper. The paper by Blish was entirely overlooked by us in our review of the literature. This may have been due in part to the fact that the review of the paper in Chemical Abstracts makes no mention of the analysis of proteins of different varieties of wheat, but deals wholly with other points brought out in the investigation. R. J. CROSS R. E. SWAIN STANFORD UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA February 1. 1924
Professional Protection Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry: During the past eighteen years I have had inquiries from a number of consulting chemists, which indicated that other men in actual practice had had experiences similar to my own. I have in mind the fact that consulting chemists are continually promoting sales for the builders of machinery and equipment, without receiving from them any financial recognition. This matter of “professional protection” is OF considerable importance and it is queer that mention of it should have been omitted from codes of ethics issued by chemists. In the professions of architecture and engineering there are, I believe, well-established practices. The advertising brokers seem to have adopted the 15 per cent commission as the basis of their business, and clients are informed that any publicity medium (magazines, etc.) that does not grant a 15 per cent commission to the advertising broker throws the burden of the commission on the client, and the client is then called on to pay definitely 15 per cent to the broker. The consulting chemist who promotes the sale and use of a certain appliance, machine, or apparatus, or who instals laboratories for clients is properly entitled to recognition in a substantial way. The client should know that a 15 per cent protection is accorded the consulting chemist and the client should further know that this 15 per cent does not have any influence on the price. Consulting chemists, many of them, have come to me and said that one machine builder offered the following plan: A machine is offered for sale direct to the consumer for, say, $1000. If this machine is recommended to the consumer by a consulting chemist, the machine builder will add 15 per cent
