Talk:Bessemer process

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject History of Science (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Costing[edit]

Such steel when rolled into bars was sold at £50 to £60 a ton. The earliest Bessemer converters produced steel for £7 a ton, although they priced it initially at around £40 a ton.

Conversion into approximate modern prices might be interesting. What was a pound sterling worth in 1855? --Brion
You can work it out from the figures already in the article and the reference they are linked to. No point adding umpteen conversions over the article as it is clutter. - Sitush (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

William Kelly[edit]

I have deleted a line that mentions this man. The editor claimed that Kelly had not patented his process, but other sources on the 'Net say that he had done so, and was later forced by declining fortunes to sell his patent to Henry Bessemer. Still others say that Kelly managed to convince authorities that he had been developing his process in secret, beginning from a time before Bessemer came out with his.

Therefore, I think it really is going a bit far to state flatly that Kelly invented it but didn't get the credit. It is, after all, a bit unclear.

And it's going even further to say that Bessemer stole the idea from Kelly, as one source I found on the 'Net said.

Added back mention of Kelly. Encyclopedias Britannica and Americana, along with many other verifiable sources credit Kelly as having independently discovered the process of blowing air through molten pig iron to burn out the carbon and improve the iron or convert it to steel. There were two ways to protect an invention, which Kelly, a college trained metallurgist, had been working on since 1847. One way was to get a patent, and be subject to patent infringement and the other was to keep the process a trade secret, which Kelly did. When Bessemer suddenly discovered the process and patented it in Britain and the US, Kelly also applied for and received a patent. US courts granted Kelly a renewal and not Bessemer. The patents were licensed by the same steel producers in the US, so there was not a big patent battle bewteen rival steel works. Bessemer got his name on the process, and most of the royalties. Kely later claimed English workers at his Kentucky iron works had relayed details on the process to Bessemer, who in his autobiography said he knew very little of iron metallurgy in 1854.Edison 22:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Replacement[edit]

There needs to be a paragraph explaining why the Bessemer process is no longer used; the article has a link to Linz-Donawitz process, which is a redirect, but it's not apparent in this text why Bessemer's invention is now of historical interest only. -Ashley Pomeroy 14:42, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


Date Patented[edit]

I have not edited the date, though I am currently looking at a US History book that says it was patented in 1856. I have found at least one error in this book before so this may be the case, but could someone please find a trusted source? Obviously this US History book had a different source, and I can't determine which is more accurate.

"personally i thought this process was still used?"

References[edit]

The offsite link is dead, and the site is impossible to navigate when Javascript is turned off. Perhaps it should be pulled. -David Landgren 2006-07-18

Hot Air[edit]

What kind of compressor provided the hot air? Did the air come through the axle? Did it bubble? --72.128.33.115 12:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Carnegie[edit]

this is completely off this topic but wasn't there also a guy names Andrew Carnegie or something like that who helped introduce the Bessemer process? He made a fortune off of the making of steel. He was one of the richest men of his time. Very generous and giving also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.183.211 (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2007

I added a section on the introduction of the Bessemer process in America, and mentioned Carnegie's involvement.

Geneadamic???[edit]

Google has never heard of this word! Citation needed. Why would anyone try to double the efficiency of the long-obsolete Bessemer process in 2007? Suggest removing the sentence unless it's cited/referenced. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.0.175.61 (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Lawsuit?[edit]

Our article tacit knowing mentions a lawsuit filed against Bessemer by patent licensees who couldn't get his process to work. Is this for real? Should it be covered here? --FOo 22:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

A biography I read of Bessemer last year said that the process worked great with the ore from some locales, but in other regions the ore had different impurities and the quality of the product was lower, until research showed how to handle the impurities (such as a special lining material in the vessels to react with the impurities (whatever they were). Lawsuits sound plausible. But it should be researched and sourced to a reliable source. Edison 06:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Beginnings[edit]

I don't know whether this is the right place to add this, but the Bessemer process as I understand it was started at Whitecliff near Coleford, near to where I live, and an old Barn (shed) that use to exist at the top of Cinder Hill Coleford, Gloucestershire, also was used for experientation. A housing estate built some years later, is called Bessemer Close. The name Mushet (Robert) is linked with the early smeltering processes. R.M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.33.62 (talk) 22:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Robert Mushet's Father, David, briefly (6 months) ran the Whitecliff Furnace, but it ceased production in 1816, some 39 years before the Bessemer Process was invented. The experiments he carried out in the barn by his house, and then later at Darkhill, were sucessful in producing refined iron direct from the blast furnace, without the need for a separate refinery. The process did actually produce some steel, but it was unrelated to the Bessemer Process.Obscurasky (talk) 18:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC) gay

Patent Battles[edit]

The Henry Bessemer page has an interesting sub-section, in its Bessemer Process section, called 'Patent Battles'. It needs expanding/citations, but I think it would be worth lifting for inclusion in this page too. Any thoughts? Obscurasky (talk) 23:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

'Preserved' examples?[edit]

According to the caption of one of the Geograph pictures of the Sheffield example, there are only three converters left in the world -- of which this article illustrates two. It would be appropriate to mention this fact (if true) and indicate where the examples are. It would also not be unreasonable to write a little history on each.

How many converters were built? 10's, 100's, 1000's?

EdJogg (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

History Reverts[edit]

I've reverted some of the information added to the History section by 81.141.122.0 - Bessemer did loose tens of thousands of pounds trying to find the solution to initial problems with the Bessemer Process, but it was not due to his lack of scientific training as he spent the money employing some of the country's best scientists.

I removed the reference to the 'introduction of high pressure air' from Robert Forester Mushet's solution, as this was already part of the Bessemer Process, not an inovation by Mushet.

I removed 'correctly conducted' from 'correctly conducted scientifically valid' as for something to be 'scientifically valid' it goes without saying that it must also be 'correctly conducted'. Obscurasky (talk) 12:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism[edit]

What is it about this page that attracts so much vandalism? Have people got it in for Henry Bessemer? Obscurasky (talk) 22:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

It's probably on some schools syllabus at the moment. Seen the same problems in batches on other historical pages. Just have to keep smiling and reverting. Sigh. EdJogg (talk) 23:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

how does the air get in there?[edit]

is it blown in fron holes near the bottom? CorvetteZ51 (talk) 11:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

The information you are looking for is in this section of the article. In short, yes, it is blown in through holes in the bottom of the converter. The Seeker 4 Talk 12:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Dowlais[edit]

I have checked citation footnote 11 and appreciate that the source referred to does indeed say that Dowlais was the first business to license Bessemer's process. However, pp.175-76 of Bessemer's | Autobiography says that the first was W & J Galloway & Sons & that they then relinquished their rights in order to go into partnership with him in his Sheffield steelworks. How do we square this circle? Sitush (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

No response to my query above but I would add that I've now found more sources suggesting that Dowlais was not the first and, furthermore, I note that the source for Dowlais says "This is a first, incomplete draft of the paper." I therefore believe the statement in this article to be incorrect. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
While I don't know the answer to the question, I would say that the autobiography does look more credible than the current source. As such, I would support changing the text. Wizard191 (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I have changed it now - there is lots of support available from historians about the point but, of course, they may be relying on the autobiography themselves. I'll come back to this article when I have more time as it really doesn't do its subject justice (nor does that for Bessemer the man). - Sitush (talk) 15:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Missing?[edit]

The initial article puzzles me. Pig Iron from the blast furnace was, and still is, shipped around the world as bulk cargo in large blocks.

In the article it is clearly stated that "molten iron" is poured into the converter for the "blow". So just where was the Pig Iron again rendered molten so that it could be poured into the converter. Are there a couple of lines missing?

Could the Bessemer Converter have been a more refined version of the blast furnace using coke mixed with Pig Iron to render the Pig Iron molten for the "blow"?AT Kunene (talk) 12:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Does this article assist you at all? There are other sections on the same site (steel, cold rolling etc) If it does help, then maybe this WP article needs amending slightly. - Sitush (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Importance[edit]

The section on "Importance" states:

"Industrial steel also made possible the building of giant turbines and generators thus making the harnessing of water and steam power possible. The introduction of the large scale steel production process paved the way to mass industrialisation as observed in the 19th-20th centuries.[citation needed]"

But water and steam power were harnessed effectively long before mass produced steel. Water power has been used since prehistoric times, and there is a nominally 100hp water wheel made of iron and wood running at Quarry Bank Mill. Richard Trevithick pioneered high pressure steam power long before mass produced steel: 1801 for the first passenger carrying trip by high pressure steam loco.

Moreover, the British industrial revolution began in the 18th century: the Bessemer converter was a product of the process of mass industrialization, not a cause of it.

Surely this should be re-written or perhaps just deleted? - steel was an important part of the process of mass industrialization, not a cause.

I'll probably be deleting it before long. Have had it in my sights since my last editing session on this article & I intend to return to do some large scale work on the whole thing. The section you refer to incredibly POV and has huge holes in it, which is why I inserted the citation requests last month. I think it best to give someone a chance to prove their point but I'd be astonished if they can. - Sitush (talk) 07:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)