90
T H E J O L ‘ R N A L O F I R D r S T R I A L A N D ELVGILVEERING C H E M I S T R Y
r
~
EDITORIALS ~
THE INVENTION OF CELLUL0ID.l
4
Never has t h e Perkin Medal been better awarded t h a n t o John Wesley H y a t t . H e created a distinctly American industry, chemical i n i t s very essence, although t h e inventor never claimed t o be a chemist. H e not only invented t h e fundamental principle on which this i m p o r t a n t industry is based, b u t he gave his fertile inventire genius a n d t h e better p a r t of his life t o t h e development of t h e m a n y details which built u p t h e technique of cellulaid. T h e technique of celluloid is strikingly different from t h a t of rubber a n d all other plastics. This explains why rubber technologists ordinarily fail when t h e y a t t e m p t celluloid manufacturing. I t provides a n excuse why t h e hard rubber concerns of this country failed t o see t h e coming importance of celluloid when t h e new material was offered t o t h e m . I believe i t was R u d y a r d Kipling who, in one of his writings, refers t o a fisherman who was specially successful because “he could think as a cod-fish would think.” I have observed in meeting celluloid or rubber manufacturers t h a t t h e former cannot t h i n k b u t “celluloid,” a n d t h e latter “rubber,” a n d are much at sea when t h e y are confronted with t h e technique of a new plastic. T h e history of t h e discovery a n d industrial development of celluloid b y H y a t t has been described in detail b y E. C. Worden, in “ T h e Nitrocellulose I n d u s t r y , ” Van n’ostrand, New York, 1911. I m a y mention here, from conversations with t h e inventor himself, t h a t celluloid a n d t h e celluloid industry with all t h a t i t implies, after all m e a n t merely a big parenthesis in t h e life of H y a t t in his quest of a perfect billiard ball which would replace t h e expensive ivory article. This is so t r u e t h a t even during his later years, when he is well in t h e seventies, h e has spent considerable t i m e in t h e s t u d y of other plastics in his effort t o still further perfect billiard balls. Celluloid a n d t h e celluloid industry are by, no means t h e only inventions which H y a t t has t o his credit; t h e famous H y a t t Roller Bearing which has developed into a large a n d successful manufacturing enterprise, his methods of water purification (with Isaiah S. H y a t t ) , his process for crushing sugar cane, a n d his m a n y other patents testify t o t h e abundance a s well as t h e diversity of his inventive achievements. T h e invention o€ celluloid is a n excellent example of how sometimes i t is a real advantage for a m a n of genius n o t “ t o know too much;’’ not t o be hampered b y too much book knowledge if t h e latter t e n d s t o petrify t h e mind into a too one-sided point of view. I n all his work Hyatt’s keen observing mind was his sole guide. H e tried things for himself. He did not rely overmuch on what others told him t o be t h e facts, or on what was written in books. He wanted t o be his own “authority.” He h a d found b y ex* The Perkin Medal for valuable researches leading t o the establishment of industries was awarded on January 23rd t o Mr Hyatt. report of the meeting is published in this issue of THISJ O U R N A L .
A full
5‘01. 6, NO. 2
I
perience t h a t there are m a n y things printed in books a n d chemical treatises “ t h a t ain’t so.” He t h u s discovered t h e i m p o r t a n t fact, on which t h e whole celluloid industry is based, t h a t a mixture of nitrocellulose, camphor a n d a small amount of alcohol, when properly prepared, becomes thermoplastic. I n other words. it becomes soft when heated, can be molded in a hydraulic press, a n d after cooling t o ordinary atmospheric pressure. i t becomes again hard a n d strong. His predecessors all used nitrocellulose in presence of relatively large amounts of solvents, a n d used a solution, or a relatively soft mass, from which t h e solvents were left t o evaporate. This not only meant a considerable loss of solvents, b u t restricted enormously m a n y possible technical applications. T h e mass shrunk i n t h e a c t of drying, a n d rapid molding mas impractical, if not totally impossible. Some of his predecessors h a d even used camphor in their solutions, although H y a t t knew nothing a b o u t this until i t came out later in his p a t e n t suits. B u t his predecessors h a d used camphor merely as a n y other solvent. T h e y h a d failed t o observe or t o grasp t h e great technical importance of t h e fact t h a t camphor could make a solid solution with nitrocellulose a n d produce a thermoplastic mass. This seemingly simple observation might have left very little imprint on a n y other b u t t h e actively constructive mind of a H y a t t . H e saw right a w a y t h a t from t h a t moment on, he could employ purely mechanical means for molding rapidly a n d effectively, a n d develop t h e technique of nitrocellulose plastics, for purposes never dreamt of before. T h e principle was simple a n d t h e available methods seemed simple enough. B u t as usual. when one tries a process commercially,it was found t h a t there were endless details which conspired t o render t h e industrial a n d commercial development a far more difficult problem t h a n t h e mere discovery of the new principle in t h e laboratory. Here t h e whole problem might have suffered shipwreck in t h e hands of a n y other m a n t h a n H y a t t . T h e whole technique of celluloid mas t h e n developed painstakingly by him, in all i t s endless details. Special machinery was invented, new methods were conceived. All this is shown b y t h e numerous subsequent H y a t t patents. It is a n axiom t h a t t h e test of a valuable invention is t h a t i t should be infringed, or attacked b y those whose thinking cells are passive until some inventor arouses t h e m o u t of their mental drowsiness. H y a t t . in his p a t e n t suits, h a d plenty of experience of t h e kind. Fortunately, his financial backers could afford t o defend his rights in t h e absurdedly long a n d expensive p a t e n t litigation, which is a proverbial characteristic of t h e inefficient administration of t h e p a t e n t laws of this country. I believe i t was George Westinghouse who reminded us t h a t every successful invention passes through three
Feb., 1914
T H E J O U R N A L O F I N D L - S T R I A L A N D E N G I N EERILVG C H E M I S T R k’
stages: T h e f i r s t , when i t is said: “Such a thing is absurd or impossible.” T h e secoiid stage, after t h e p a t e n t descriptions have become public, a n d have given others th; means t o imitate a n d t r y t o find loopholes in t h e p a t e n t claims, begins when i t is said: “ T h e thing is not new.” And j i t i a l l y , after t h e usefulness of t h e invention has become so obvious a n d t h e details connected therewith have penetrated through t h e h a r d skulls of t h e laggards. t h e n it sounds: “There is no invention a t all.” Lawyers are great i n this game. Hyatt’s invention went through every one of these three stages a n d were i t n o t for t h e Perkin Medal, m a n y of us might have forgotten t h a t there ever was such a m a n as H y a t t , a n d t h a t there mas a time when celluloid did not exist, or involved very difficult problems. His patents were assailed on t h e ground t h a t others before him h a d used solvents a n d camphor in con.junction with nitrocellulose, b u t i t was studiously omitted t h a t his predecessors h a d used these ingredients under entirely different conditions, for entirely different purposes, a n d could not produce in t h a t way, H y a t t ’ s valuable technical effect. T h e r e r y solvents which proved a bar t o a n y i m p o r t a n t applications for molded plastics, H y a t t did away with, when he con.ceived his thermoplastic mass. Some of t h e early drawbacks i n t h e technical applications of H y a t t ’ s discovery were none other t h a n chemical experts with which his financial backers surrounded him. H y a t t knew n o chemistry, b u t he knew well observed facts intimately connected with t h e details of t h e work h e h a d undertaken. His knowledge of nitrocellulose was obtained piece-meal b y his own experimenting. Facts found in books he accepted only after he h a d verified them. It so happened t h a t he frequently noticed t h a t printed statements did not agree with his own observations. One of t h e chemical experts insisted t h a t “cellulose was cellulose,” regardless of t h e source of supply, provided i t was sufficiently purified, a n d t h a t nitrocellulose made from a n y kind of pure cellulose h a d t h e same properties. H y a t t knew better when he found t h a t t h e article
c
91
made from ramie, t h e strongest a n d most expensive cellulose, was incomparably superior t o t h a t obtained from cheap cotton or cheap pulp cellulose. Some chemical experts also made t h e positive statement t o his backers, t h a t his process would surely lead t o terrific explosion because he was heating in a hot press nothing less t h a n guncotton, which was known t o be a violent explosive. Though H y a t t s t a t e d t h a t he h a d been using his process for quite a time a n d still was alive, i t was objected t h a t this was simply due t o sheer good luck which would cease a t some t i m e ; if ever i t happened t h a t b y accident or carelessness, t h e heat in his presses rose a little higher, a violent explosion was bound t o occur, a n d this n-ould be t h e e n d of t h e celluloid industry. These arguments were not b y a n y means without logic. ,4t t h a t time, it is doubtful whether a n y chemist who knew t h e chemical properties of nitrocellulose would not have thought i t t h e height of folly t o heat this substance under pressure. H y a t t not being a chemist, preferred ’to t r y a n d see for himself what would occur. H e took a good-sized block of celluloid a n d heated i t in t h e hydraulic press a t a temperature f a r superior t o t h e relatively low temperatures he was using in practice. H e tells me t h a t he was sufficiently impressed b y all the.threatening talk of t h e chemical experts t o screen himself from t h e press b y means of several thicknesses of cross boards behind which he could peep on a n d see what was going t o occur. After t h e temperature rose t o t h e point when t h e celluloid began t o be destroyed, the block s t a r t e d sizzling on account of t h e emission of gaseous products. But he continued t h e experiment until he made sure t h a t nothing worse occurred t h a n t o spoil t h e material. T h e pessimistic chemical experts h a d failed t o t a k e into consideration t h a t t h e introduction of such a large proportion of camphor h a d profoundly modified t h e properties of nitrocellulose. T h e y h a d also over-. looked t h e fact t h a t soluble nitrocellulose is not nit r a t e d so much as t h e more explosive higher nitrated cotton. L. H . BAEKELASD
ORIGINAL PAPERS THE C O M P O S I T I O N OF P A I N T V A P O R S B y HENRY4 GARDIER~
Received December 18, 1913
Freshly painted surfaces give t o t h e surrounding air a .peculiar odor. I n closed rooms, this odor is pronounced. Its nauseating effects are well known. Painters are in t h e habit of stating t h a t t h e vapors of fresh paint have a “ l e a d y smell.” This is probably d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t white lead is used as t h e base upon which t h e majority of paints are prepared. The painter has therefore always associated this pigment with t h e characteristic odor of fresh paint. Some cases of illness among painters have been ascribed t o t h e effects of paint vapors. People occupying freshly decorated sleeping rooms which are n o t well ventilated, have a t 1
D C.
Assistant Director, The Institute of Industrial Research, Washington,
times complained of illness from t h e same cause. E. C. Baly’ examined spectroscopically t h e vapors from basic carbonate-white lead paint, a n d found el-idences of metallic lead therein. The vapors from basic sulfatewhite lead paint or zinc oxide paint. when examined in a similar manner, showed t h e absence of metallic constituents. Some cases of lead poisoning among painters could be ascribed t o t h e vapors from basic carbonatewhite lead paints, if lead compounds could actually be found present in such vapors. Xrmstrong a n d Klein,? after conducting a n elaborate series of tests, concluded t h a t lead is not present in t h e vapors from white lead paint. b u t t h a t t h e toxic effects produced by such vapors are due almost entirely t o t h e volatile cubstances given off b y t h e turpentine present. 1 2
The Ozl a n d Colouv Trades Journal, May 6, 1911, p 1518 J . S C. I , 34, 320 (1913)
