accuracy, but in Exercise A they do not show that their powers of observation have been much cultivated, for the majority of the candidates who were supplied with pure sulphur found impurity which was not present.

In connection with Exercise C the results were very poor. Nearly all the candidates used a form of apparatus in which a volume of water supposed to be equal to the volume of gas produced was syphoned off and measured. The varied and usually erroneous results obtainable with this form of apparatus in the hands of careless experimenters are well illustrated by the answers of one set of 28 candidates who all used it. Of these, two obtained approximately the correct amount of gas, three rather too little, and the remainder from two to five times the correct amount.

STAGE 2.

Results 1st Class, 90; 2nd Class, 226; Failed, 88; Total, 404. Notwithstanding that a large proportion of the candidates secure marks sufficient for a pass, the work is not well done.

In spite of the precise instructions given by the Examiners, only about half the candidates made a separate examination of the soluble and insoluble constituents of the mixture. Zinc in Mixture II. was missed by about 90 per cent. of the candidates, while a very large number found chlorine in Mixtures I. and II. This was often traced to the common mistake of the thoughtless worker, which consists in dissolving the substance in hydrochloric acid and then testing for a chloride.

In the quantitative exercise the most common mistake was in the identification of the gas, which was nitrogen. Nearly half the candidates reported it to be ammonia, notwithstanding that they used an apparatus for collecting it filled with water.

The equations to be found in the written paper were often ludicrous, and there is too much uncertainty about the formulæ of common things, especially salts of silver.

Report on the Examinations in Metallurgy.

THEORETICAL.

STAGE 1.

Results 1st Class, 48; 2nd Class, 55; Failed, 42; Total, 145.

The standard of attainment in this stage is similar to that of last year. It is, however, encouraging to observe that the gradual improvement exhibited during recent years continues to be maintained, there being but few really worthless papers among the failures.

In making sketches, the candidates generally showed great weakness; not only was the execution poor, but often the parts of furnaces were confused and drawn entirely in wrong proportions.

Another point to which the attention of the teachers in a few schools is called, is the failure of their students to grasp the fact that metallurgical processes are not identical with assay methods, but are concerned with materials in large quantities, and under conditions in which cost is the controlling factor. Hence, for example, sodium carbonate, however useful it is in assaying operations, would be precluded from use in a blast furnace on account of its cost alone.

The attention of teachers is again called to the reprehensible practice followed by a large number of candidates of selecting the questions they attempt to answer from Sections I. and II. only. Specialising at this early stage can only result in an imperfect and unsatisfactory knowledge of

elementary metallurgy, and cannot be too strongly condemned. Even to those who propose entering into, or are already engaged in, iron and steel works, it is essential that they should have an acquaintance with the metallurgy of the other metals.

The remarks which follow on the answers to individual questions are confined to those only which call for special comment.

SECTION I.

Q. 2. Explain the terms "welding" and " annealing as applied to metals, and "dressing" as applied to ores. Give an example of each of these operations.

Many good answers, but in too many cases the term "dressing," even when correctly explained, did not appear to be understood, the examples given of the process being quite wrong. The simple crushing of gold ores in a stamp battery was often cited as an example, as was the case last year, no reference being made to the subsequent operations which constitute the real dressing of the ore.

Q. 3. What flux or fluxes would you use respectively when smelting :(a) an ore with a siliceous gangue, (b) one with a calcareous gangue in a blast furnace, in order to obtain a fusible slag? State your reasons for using these fluxes.

Fairly well answered as a rule. The advantages of the use of two fluxes in increasing the fusibility of slags in each case were known to only one or two candidates.

Q. 4. State the principles on which the manufacture of coke from coal depends. Describe the working of a charge of coal in any oven known to you.

There were too many weak answers to this simple question. The principles were generally very imperfectly stated, and the descriptions of the working of a charge were poor, and if carried out in practice would result in the combustion and not the coking of the coal.

SECTION II.

Q. 6. Give an account of the composition and general characters of the chief iron ores. Why cannot Cleveland iron ore be used for the production of Bessemer pig iron?

Not generally attempted. Great ignorance was displayed of the compositions and characters of the ores found in this country. Clayband ore seemed to be almost unknown, and only one candidate correctly explained why Cleveland ore was unsuitable for the production of Bessemer pig iron. Q. 7. Describe and make a sketch of a basic open hearth furnace. Give a description of the lining.

Only a few good answers, the sketches being as a rule very poor, and representing text-book forms of old furnaces.

SECTION III.

Q. 9. Name the chief re-agents in use at works for the precipitation of gold from its solutions. Give the reactions which take place in each case.

Very few answers and all poor.

Q. 10. Describe and make a sketch of a modern hand-worked reverberatory furnace for the chloridising roasting of silver ores.

Only eighteen answers, and eleven failed to obtain any marks. Only one candidate had a satisfactory knowledge of the form and construction of this simple furnace. By some candidates the furnace was drawn with a concave bed and a tap-hole, showing that they were quite ignorant of the

operation of chloridising roasting. All students in this stage ought to be able to make a sketch of the hand-worked four or five hearth reverberatory furnace required in this question.

Q. 11. How would you treat an ore of the following composition for the extraction of the lead it contains?

Give the chemical reactions which take place.

Only two correct answers. In the majority of the answers it was proposed to flux the calc spar, whereas it should be separated by dressing, and the dressed product then treated in a furnace of the Flintshire type.

Q. 12. State the principles and chemical reactions on which the processes for the extraction of mercury from its ores depend.

Great weakness shown in the answers. Instead of a statement of the principles, the process and plant were usually described; the plant given being in every case an obsolete form of furnace and condenser, now only of historic interest. Answers of this character are never awarded marks.

SECTION IV.

Q. 14. Describe and make a sketch of a water-jacketed blast furnace for smelting copper ores. Why are water jackets used? There were only four good answers to this question, but it was not attempted by many candidates. The modern water jacket furnace is of such great importance and in such extensive use that every student, even in Stage 1, should be acquainted with its form and the principles on which it is constructed, and there can be no valid excuse for the ignorance shown by the candidates from some of the schools in their answers to this question. Q. 15. Describe the process of refining tin. State the changes which take place in the operations.

Several candidates omitted the operation of liquation which is essential before the metal is "boiled" or tossed."

66

Q. 16. Name the common alloys in which zinc is an important, but not the chief constituent. Give their compositions and industrial

uses.

Some fairly good answers. In the others the compositions given were too often mere guesses, as were also the industrial uses of the alloys.

STAGE 2.

Results 1st Class, 27; 2nd Class, 73; Failed, 39; Total, 139.

The number of candidates taking the examination in this stage was considerably greater than last year, 139 papers having been received, as compared with 115 in 1905.

The general standard reached was on the whole better than last year, in fact, many of the answers to questions in this stage were more complete and showed a wider knowledge of the subject than some in Stage 3. That the identification of samples of ores and metallurgical products still leaves much to be desired will be evident from the fact that typical samples of ganister were frequently described as limestone, galena and cerussite as grey iron, brass as copper, and white iron as copper matte.

Some of the sketches were good, but as a rule they were poor and inaccurate. In not a few instances, the same mistakes occurred in a number of papers from the same school, which indicates either that inaccurate diagrams or faulty text books are employed for teaching.

In the identification of specimens, also, similar mistakes often occur throughout an entire school. Such mistakes cannot be coincidences, and appear to indicate that a limited number of specimens only are shown the

students. It cannot be too strongly impressed upon teachers, that not only should an ample supply of specimens be provided for the students, but they should be afforded facilities for actually handling them.

A striking point revealed by the examination is the ignorance of many of the candidates of the composition of the more common alloys. German silver, in several instances, was described as an alloy of silver and copper; soft solder as a mixture of lead and zinc or tin and zinc, and ferro-nickel as a steel containing 5 per cent of nickel.

SECTION I.

and

Q. 21. Distinguish between the following metallurgical terms :-(a) "Malleability" and "Ductility"; (b) "Forgeability "Weldability"; (c) Give characteristic examples of each.

In most cases this question was answered correctly; a few candidates, however, confused the terms "Forgeability" and " Weldability" and in two instances the candidates thought that an essential feature of welding was that the metals should be cold.

Q. 22. How much brown iron ore (2 Fe2O3, 3 H,O) will be required to convert one ton of a gangue of the following composition into a mono-silicate slag?

Atomic weights: Fe=56, Ca=40, Si=28, C=12. Only three of the 31 candidates who attempted this question obtained a correct result, several lost a few marks for arithmetical errors, but the majority failed to obtain good marks either from their not knowing the general formula for a mono-silicate or from their attempting to produce one with Fe,O, in its composition.

Q. 23. Describe, with the aid of sketches, a modern water-bottom gas producer and give the approximate composition of the gas you would expect to obtain from it.

Forty-two candidates attempted this question, and in a few instances good sketches and descriptions were given, but the majority of the answers were poor. Some candidates thought the producer they described would give a gas mainly composed of either hydrogen or carbon dioxide, while several considered that nitrogen would not enter into its composition at all.

Q. 24. Name and briefly describe the six specimens submitted to you. Although the specimens were perfectly typical ones, no less than 70 candidates failed to obtain half marks. The specimens, which were of a simple character, were :-Iron Pyrites, Ganister, Blue Metal, Galena and Cerussite, White Iron, and Brass. As was pointed out in last year's Reports, it is still evident that facilities are not afforded the students in many institutions for recognising ores, metallurgical products, and materials. In addition to adequate facilities for handling specimens at schools, the students should be encouraged to make collections of their own. They should also be taught to make rough tests for the hardness of the materials with a pocket knife, then such mistakes as describing ganister as limestone, blue metal as blast furnace slag, and brass as chromium are hardly likely to occur. A small pocket lens would aid the students greatly in identifying specimens.

From the answers given to this question, it is evident that very little attention is given to this important branch of the subject in the majority of schools.

SECTION II.

Q. 25. Describe fully, with the aid of sketches, an ordinary Whitwell

hot blast stove.

A few good answers were given to this question, but the majority were weak. Some students gave the original form of Whitwell stove, while others described the old pipe stove. Some of the sketches were good.

9291.

L

Q. 26. Give an account of a modern automatic method for charging a blast furnace smelting iron ores. Make a sketch of the appli

ances.

The same remarks apply to this question as to a similar one set last year. In many cases the ordinary "cup and cone" was described as an automatic method for charging a blast furnace. Several candidates from one school described with sketches an ordinary bucket elevator for this purpose. It is hardly possible that a number of mistakes of this nature can be due entirely to the imagination of the students.

Q. 27. In what respects does the Thomas-Gilchrist or differ from the Bessemer or "acid" process? verter used for the basic process.

basic" process Describe a con

Some really good answers were given by candidates who were evidently well acquainted with modern steel works practice. On the whole this question was well done.

Q. 28. Classify the processes employed in the manufacture of steel. State the principles and chemical reactions on which each is based.

This question, like the last, was often well answered and good marks were obtained by many of the candidates who attempted it. The chemical principles and reactions were, however, too frequently omitted.

SECTION III.

Q. 29. Describe and make a sketch plan and elevation of a simple cyanide plant for the treatment of sands.

Generally speaking, this question was answered in an unsatisfactory manner; the majority of the sketches were poor and the descriptions inaccurate. In several instances the strengths given for the cyanide solutions were quite wrong. A few candidates gave a very good description of the chemistry of the process.

Q. 30. State the principles and chemical reactions on which the "parting" of gold and silver bullion by sulphuric acid depends. Give an outline of the operations.

Some of the candidates evidently understood the principles of the process, and gave the chemical reactions accurately, but others gave details of methods employed for parting bullion in a laboratory for assaying purposes, substituting sulphuric acid for the ordinary nitric acid parting mixtures. The use of white iron vessels for parting was generally omitted.

Q. 31. How would you treat an ore of the following composition, in order to obtain marketable lead and silver :

Not well done by the majority of those who attempted this question. everal candidates suggested the concentration of the lead by means of Wilfley, and other concentrators, in spite of the high percentage of cerussite present.

In several cases, where treatment of the ore in a blast furnace was suggested, the addition of iron ore as a flux was omitted.

Q. 32. How may the silver in a pyritic silver ore be made soluble in water and in brine respectively?

How may the silver solutions be treated for the production of the metal in ingots ?