EXHIBIT S-51 INVOICE JOE A. MOSTELLER CARTERSVILLE, GEORGIA Sold to: Woodward Iron Company, Woodward, Alabama Georgia soft brown ore JUNE 26, 1947. Sold to: Woodward Iron Company, Woodward, Alabama. Georgia soft brown ore JUNE 26, 1947. DEAR MR. DELLINGER: Confirming our telephone conversation of September 29, we have concluded not to burden you with a visit to Georgia at this time. My travel schedule is so full these days that my call to you on Monday, September 7, was a little previous according to developments later in conference here. Enclosed are copies of two letter reports on the tests carried on at the University of Minnesota Mines Experiment Station on the sample of "umber" ore which you shipped to the station-the one dated July 26, by H. H. Wade, metallurgist, and the other dated September 20, by E. W. Davis, director. It is evident from these reports that this material can probably be agglomerated either by sintering with proper fuel or pelletized if uniform moisture can be maintained. In either case the cost will be high. Mr. Davis also points out other factors such as fuels, markets, etc., which must be investigated, and we agree that all these must be definitely determined before much more is done. There is a well-known scarcity of domestic manganese ore or manganiferous iron ore and, consequently, the 6 percent manganese in agglomerated "umber" ore is attractive. Silica and alumina are a little high by today's standards but it is the phosphorous content which puts this product into the class of openhearth slag. The average blast furnace gets open-hearth slag for practically no cost and it is generally used in the blast-furnace burden on account of its manganese content. But it carries an average of about 1.25 percent phosphorus and, consequently, the blast-furnace man demands low phosphorus in his ore. Some years ago we had to abandon a low-cost mine on account of this openhearth slag competition, and except for the great demand for iron ore, conditions today are much the same. From other information, part of which you furnished, it appears that the phosphorus in this sample greatly exceeds the district average. Perhaps this sample was not representative, but on the other hand, perhaps the "umber" horizon has seldom been run for phosphorus. We would appreciate hearing from you after you have had time to digest this information. Then, perhaps it will be opportune for us to confer with you and the others in Cartersville. DEAR MR. JOHNSTON: We have not had as much time to devote to the sample of Cartersville, Ga., iron ore as I had hoped, but several small tests have been made and possibly the results may be of interest to you at this time. A sample of the crude ore had the following analysis: Percent Fe‒‒‒‒‒‒ Percent Mn---. Percent SiO: 43.91 5. 13 7.42 A sample of sinter made from a mixture of the above crude ore, coke, and water had the following analysis: Percent Fe-- Percent Mn_. Percent SiO,-- 53. 39 6. 11 8.94 The sinter produced in this test was quite fragile and further tests should be made to determine best sintering conditions. A sample of crude ore was put into a construction-plate type of hydraulic classifier in which a rising water velocity of 13 inches per minute was maintained. The results of the separation in the classifier were as follows: Classifier feed--- Percent weight Percent Fe 43.91 44. 06 43.85 The iron content of the classifier product and overflow were so nearly alike that there seemed to be little hope of making a desirable concentration by simple classification. A sample of crude ore was mixed with flue dust from Ashland, Ky., and sintered producing fair sinter. A second test was made using a mixture consisting of three parts of flue dust and one part of Cartersville ore. To this mixture 30 percent of 4 mesh returns from the previous test was added. The sinter in this second test was a little fragile and looked as though additional fuel would have been better. The assay of this sinter was as follows: Percent Fe----. Percent Mn. Percent SiO 2-~ 57.83 2. 17 9.04 Several pelletizing tests were made. The damp ore was rolled into balls in a small drum, then placed in an alloy basket and fired in a gas-burning pot furnace. Good pellets were made but the procedure for controlling the moisture and forming the pellets needs further investigation. A sample of the pellets had the following analysis: Percent Fe.. Percent Mn__. Percent SiO2 51.40 6. 19 8. 14 An exhibition sample of the pellets was sent to you. It was later found that the batch of pellets from which these were taken had picked up some magnetite concentrate in the balling operation. The exhibition sample will therefore contain more iron than the figure indicated in the above analysis. From the tests made to date it seems perfectly feasible to make sinter from this ore, using fine coke as a fuel or by mixing the ore with flue dust containing some excess of coke. The problems would be largely mechanical ones connected with the proper handling of this fine, wet, sticky material. To pelletize this ore would offer some problems also, but it appears as though a useable product could be made either by balling or by extrusion. No further work can be done for a while as the experiment station is closing for a short vacation period. DEAR VERNE: We have made several tests on the sample of Georgia iron ore which you submitted sometime ago and the results of these tests were reported to you on July 26. Since that time the ore has been reexamined and some additional assays made. New analyses to be reported are as follows: This ore is soft and is high in moisture and ignition loss. It has very fine structure, and in water, the coarser lumps break down into a fine mud, most of the particles of which would pass a 100-mesh screen. From the nature of the ore any improvement in the analysis or structure by gravity concentration methods appears unlikely; the test results confirm this conclusion. However, the analysis of the crude material is not too bad and if the structure could be improved, a high phosphorous, high manganese furnace ore could be produced that might be of value to some operators. The analysis of the agglomerated product would be about as is shown above if the sample submitted is representative of a considerable amount of ore in the deposit. If anything further is to be done regarding this property, this fact should be established by extensive sampling. It will require a careful investigation of markets, fuels, and freight rates to determine the most economical method for the operation of this property. Undoubtedly, as mined, the ore is very wet and muddy at times and transportation will probably be expensive and difficult. This means that the agglomerating plant probably should be placed near the mine rather than at the blast furnace and this seems to preclude the use of flue dust as fuel. If the property is located where natural gas is available the ore can be agglomerated by pelletizing in a furnace having combustion chambers and no solid fuel would be required. In general, it appears that a careful study of markets for agglomerated ore of the above analysis should be made, and if the results of this study are favorable, a more complete study of the property should be made, including accurate sampling and tonnage estimates. At that time, it may be desirable to submit a larger sample of representative crude ore for further agglomerating tests. Very truly yours, E. W. DAVIS, Director. |